User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-33695797-20200703215633/@comment-33695797-20200704000351: Difference between revisions

It actually does provide quite a bit of new information and uses the case studies to explain these. I should make it clear the case studies aren't just plot summaries; they're examples of TARDIS functions using specific incidents. For example, "The M4 Incident" doesn't just tell you what happened in ''[[The Runaway Bride (TV story)|The Runaway Bride]]'', it tells you what happens in context of how the TARDIS was able to fly in 3-dimensional space and why this happened. There are detailed illustrations of unseen TARDIS interiors (including Missy's and an unused one), new information about TARDIS components and particular stories, as well as explanations for things the TV series failed to explain— for example, that Susan did indeed come up with the name TARDIS, and then it came into common use on Gallifrey, explaining various reasons the [[TARDIS control room]] changed appearance across the classic series, or providing an explanation that a Time Lord's later regenerations output more energy than the earlier ones, potentially causing more damage to the TARDIS (hence why the First Doctor's regeneration was calm while the Tenth, Eleventh and Twelfth's were so explosive). Plus a lot more explanations for things we didn't really know. It's kind of difficult to explain though, and if you're curious I'd recommend reading a preview on Google Books to get a grasp of it.

Also, Najawin, I agree with your points, and that probably should be discussed elsewhere, including that thread. It is of my personal opinion that in-universe material, even that not presented narratively (like ''[[The Dalek Dictionary]]''), should be valid, but that's a huge policy discussion for another time.