Forum:BBV and canon policy: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
m
Robot: Automated text replacement (-[[Eighth Doctor - Timeline +[[Theory:Timeline - Eighth Doctor)
m (Forum:Prefix simplification-related edit BFDWU --> NOTDWU)
m (Robot: Automated text replacement (-[[Eighth Doctor - Timeline +[[Theory:Timeline - Eighth Doctor))
Line 175: Line 175:
:::If the creator of the universe himself is saying, directly, it "isn't really the Dotor Who Universe at all", why are we arguing with him? It just seems easier to believe Miles and go with the BBC-approved timeline than to refer to things that are clearly set in at least an ''alternate'' DWU ''as if'' they were things that happened in the "real" DWU. It's awfully misleading to slip a FP ref into the middle of an article about a DWU topic, because it won't convey to the average reader the notion that '''this statement is true if and only if you deem the events of ''The Ancestor Cell'' non-canonical.''' The truth of the matter is that that FP at Mad Norwegian and other companies is absolutely '''not''' a part of BBC-approved continuity. It's quite different from the Benny stuff, I think, which is simply the further adventures of an ex-companion. It was Miles saying "screw you" to BBC Books. We ''can't'' treat it as just another corner of the DWU. '''In no way, should (Mad Norwegian and beyond) FP be referenced in DWU articles.'''
:::If the creator of the universe himself is saying, directly, it "isn't really the Dotor Who Universe at all", why are we arguing with him? It just seems easier to believe Miles and go with the BBC-approved timeline than to refer to things that are clearly set in at least an ''alternate'' DWU ''as if'' they were things that happened in the "real" DWU. It's awfully misleading to slip a FP ref into the middle of an article about a DWU topic, because it won't convey to the average reader the notion that '''this statement is true if and only if you deem the events of ''The Ancestor Cell'' non-canonical.''' The truth of the matter is that that FP at Mad Norwegian and other companies is absolutely '''not''' a part of BBC-approved continuity. It's quite different from the Benny stuff, I think, which is simply the further adventures of an ex-companion. It was Miles saying "screw you" to BBC Books. We ''can't'' treat it as just another corner of the DWU. '''In no way, should (Mad Norwegian and beyond) FP be referenced in DWU articles.'''


:::We would definitely need to create new language within [[tardis:canon policy]] to explain this, however. Especially since [[Faction Paradox]] ''is'' canonical, but the lines referred to by the acronym FP are not. Articles like [[Hellfire Club]], Timeship and rather incredibly [[Eighth Doctor - Timeline]] really bug me, because they claim a mixture of FP and DWU sources which imply a consistent narrative that simply doesn't exist. The timeline article really has me shakin' my head, because, as ''[[Toy Story]]'' appears in the Mad Norwegian version of ''[[Dead Romance]]'', it can't include language that identifies the Doctor or any other BBC elements (or if it does, it does so quite illegally). And its original printing was in a charity publication, so there was ''never'' any BBC license employed. It's '''fan fiction''' written by a published author, who then later repurposed it in such a way that he could publish it in his own line of books.
:::We would definitely need to create new language within [[tardis:canon policy]] to explain this, however. Especially since [[Faction Paradox]] ''is'' canonical, but the lines referred to by the acronym FP are not. Articles like [[Hellfire Club]], Timeship and rather incredibly [[Theory:Timeline - Eighth Doctor]] really bug me, because they claim a mixture of FP and DWU sources which imply a consistent narrative that simply doesn't exist. The timeline article really has me shakin' my head, because, as ''[[Toy Story]]'' appears in the Mad Norwegian version of ''[[Dead Romance]]'', it can't include language that identifies the Doctor or any other BBC elements (or if it does, it does so quite illegally). And its original printing was in a charity publication, so there was ''never'' any BBC license employed. It's '''fan fiction''' written by a published author, who then later repurposed it in such a way that he could publish it in his own line of books.


:::No, I fully admit that Faction Paradox existed within the DWU at one time. But its storyline concluded with ''The Ancestor Cell'' and that's as far as we should go with it. Anything else is doing a disservice to our readers. There's a [[w:c:factionparadox:Main Page|Faction Paradox Wiki]], desperately in need of contributions. I say we shunt all our stuff there and stick a link on our main page with all the other "related" wikis. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}
:::No, I fully admit that Faction Paradox existed within the DWU at one time. But its storyline concluded with ''The Ancestor Cell'' and that's as far as we should go with it. Anything else is doing a disservice to our readers. There's a [[w:c:factionparadox:Main Page|Faction Paradox Wiki]], desperately in need of contributions. I say we shunt all our stuff there and stick a link on our main page with all the other "related" wikis. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}
Bots, Bureaucrats, emailconfirmed, Administrators
765,429

edits

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.