User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-1272640-20170106043421/@comment-28349479-20170106045231: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
m
Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)
(Bot: Automated import of articles)
 
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7/-/-))
 
Line 1: Line 1:
'''User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-1272640-20170106043421/@comment-28349479-20170106045231'''
Now '''this''' is an inclusion debate I can get behind!
Now '''this''' is an inclusion debate I can get behind!


Line 7: Line 6:


Oddly enough, the original decision to exclude Phoenix Court appears to have been done in a complete absence of anyone who'd actually read the trilogy, meaning the series was judged based on cobbled-together online reviews instead of any real familiarity with the source material. I think that's a pretty funny way to decide inclusion debates, especially when it's a matter as small as three books involving a character who's mostly doing her own thing nowadays anyway. I see no reason for Phoenix Court to be invalid.
Oddly enough, the original decision to exclude Phoenix Court appears to have been done in a complete absence of anyone who'd actually read the trilogy, meaning the series was judged based on cobbled-together online reviews instead of any real familiarity with the source material. I think that's a pretty funny way to decide inclusion debates, especially when it's a matter as small as three books involving a character who's mostly doing her own thing nowadays anyway. I see no reason for Phoenix Court to be invalid.
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude>
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20170106043421-1272640/20170106045231-28349479]]</noinclude>
Tech, Bots, Bureaucrats, emailconfirmed, Administrators
231,276

edits

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