Tech, emailconfirmed, Administrators
38,086
edits
Talk:Doctor Who: Lockdown!: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
→Fan Gallery and their licensing
PoolsideJazz (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tag: 2017 source edit |
Tag: 2017 source edit |
||
| Line 846: | Line 846: | ||
I think the comparison to charity anthology releases is a fair one. Some of those have multiple licensed characters / concepts but because the entire project as a whole isn’t licensed all of the stories are (rightfully) viewed the same. [[User:PoolsideJazz|PoolsideJazz]] [[User talk:PoolsideJazz|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:11, 24 November 2020 (UTC) | I think the comparison to charity anthology releases is a fair one. Some of those have multiple licensed characters / concepts but because the entire project as a whole isn’t licensed all of the stories are (rightfully) viewed the same. [[User:PoolsideJazz|PoolsideJazz]] [[User talk:PoolsideJazz|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:11, 24 November 2020 (UTC) | ||
::Right, sorry again, then. But please see my admin-hat-on clarification regarding charity anthologies. There ''is no such thing'' as a "licensed" charity story, because the very definition of a charity story (as we define the term when excluding them) is "a story that's not a commercial product and instead promotes charity". If that ''weren't'' the case we'd find ourselves failing to cover the likes of [[TV]]: ''[[Time Crash (TV story)|Time Crash]]''. This does not necessarily ''prevent'' us from not covering a ''Fan Gallery'' story even though it's fully-licensed; this is quite a novel situation. But the precedent of "fully-licensed charity stories we nevertheless exclude" isn't valid because there ain't no such thing. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:17, 24 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
