Tech, emailconfirmed, Administrators
38,395
edits
Talk:How The Monk Got His Habit (short story): Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Talk:How The Monk Got His Habit (short story) (edit)
Revision as of 11:59, 20 November 2020
, 20 November 2020→Real or a joke?
| Line 95: | Line 95: | ||
From what I can tell, there is a debate over whether this is real or a joke. OK, I personally lean towards it being a joke, but don’t think it’s quite so blatantly a joke as the so-called "Alternative Script Extracts from Dalek". But I also fail to see why either way should effect its validity status, simply where it fails rule 2 or rule 4. But, most importantly, could we not simply ask somebody involved and solve this whole issue? --[[User:NightmareofEden|NightmareofEden]] [[User talk:NightmareofEden|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:30, November 20, 2020 (UTC) | From what I can tell, there is a debate over whether this is real or a joke. OK, I personally lean towards it being a joke, but don’t think it’s quite so blatantly a joke as the so-called "Alternative Script Extracts from Dalek". But I also fail to see why either way should effect its validity status, simply where it fails rule 2 or rule 4. But, most importantly, could we not simply ask somebody involved and solve this whole issue? --[[User:NightmareofEden|NightmareofEden]] [[User talk:NightmareofEden|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:30, November 20, 2020 (UTC) | ||
:You weren't necessarily to know because the "[https://tardis.fandom.com/f/p/4400000000000082913/r/4400000000003070540 (not-so-)Massive Irretrievable Data Loss] from the botched Forum move swallowed the closing post, but '''this has been debated to death and there has been a ''specific'' ruling that [[T:POINT]] applies very strongly in this matter'''. These Monk debates got nasty, they got overcomplicated, and most importantly they got ''long''. | :You weren't necessarily to know because the "[https://tardis.fandom.com/f/p/4400000000000082913/r/4400000000003070540 (not-so-)Massive Irretrievable Data Loss]" from the botched Forum move swallowed the closing post, but '''this has been debated to death and there has been a ''specific'' ruling that [[T:POINT]] applies very strongly in this matter'''. These Monk debates got nasty, they got overcomplicated, and most importantly they got ''long''. | ||
:Right now our ruling is "The short story is covered as invalid because it's ''presented'' as 'something that never was', which we rule to fail [[Tardis:Valid sources|Rule 4]]. We remain agnostic on whether the text of the short story was originally written for the alleged novelisation, or if said novelisation project never existed." And this is not to change unless some proper, copper-bottomed '''new evidence''' comes in. | :Right now our ruling is "The short story is covered as invalid because it's ''presented'' as 'something that never was', which we rule to fail [[Tardis:Valid sources|Rule 4]]. We remain agnostic on whether the text of the short story was originally written for the alleged novelisation, or if said novelisation project never existed." And this is not to change unless some proper, copper-bottomed '''new evidence''' comes in. | ||
:(And as to that — I like the instinct of going directly to the source, but the problem is that Mr Harness deleted his Twitter account some time ago, so we cannot! And I believe even before then, inquiries had been made which remained unanswered.) --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:56, November 20, 2020 (UTC) | :(And as to that — I like the instinct of going directly to the source, but the problem is that Mr Harness deleted his Twitter account some time ago, so we cannot! And I believe even before then, inquiries had been made which remained unanswered.) --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:56, November 20, 2020 (UTC) | ||
