Trusted
8,473
edits
Forum:Temporary forums/Validity debate: Scream of the Shalka: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Forum:Temporary forums/Validity debate: Scream of the Shalka (view source)
Revision as of 18:44, 18 February 2023
, 18 February 2023→Discussion
Time God Eon (talk | contribs) Tag: 2017 source edit |
Tag: 2017 source edit |
||
| Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
I also support validating ''Scream of the Shalka'' and related works. [[User:Time God Eon|Time God Eon]] [[User talk:Time God Eon|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 18:29, 18 February 2023 (UTC) | I also support validating ''Scream of the Shalka'' and related works. [[User:Time God Eon|Time God Eon]] [[User talk:Time God Eon|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 18:29, 18 February 2023 (UTC) | ||
:I ''think'' I support validation? I have procedural qualms with not having dissenting voices, and would really like to see the threads where Shalka was previously ruled invalid. But I have resigned myself to my quixotic quest of being the only person who thinks these things matter. Like. I strongly suspect that even with the old threads and people arguing I'd still support validity, iirc what was in those threads. (Same thing with Death Comes to Time. I distinctly remember ''that'' validity debate, and if R4bp wasn't used I really doubt the ensuing validity debate would have convinced me that it was invalid, had we brought up the old threads + people argued it was invalid.) But as a procedural matter it rubs me the wrong way. Can we leave it at that? It's a view that's gotten me attacked in previous threads, and I'd prefer to avoid that. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 18:44, 18 February 2023 (UTC) | |||
