Trusted
34,029
edits
Forum:Non-valid Continuity sections, categories, and prefixes: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Forum:Non-valid Continuity sections, categories, and prefixes (view source)
Revision as of 20:34, 7 May 2023
, 7 May 2023→Discussion
Tag: 2017 source edit |
OttselSpy25 (talk | contribs) Tag: 2017 source edit |
||
| Line 254: | Line 254: | ||
::::So I really don't think it's a good enough issue to postpone a decision here. | ::::So I really don't think it's a good enough issue to postpone a decision here. | ||
:::Dude. We have another week on this thread. We can discuss some formatting changes to clear up Czech's one qualm. The sky will not fall. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:09, 7 May 2023 (UTC) | :::Dude. We have another week on this thread. We can discuss some formatting changes to clear up Czech's one qualm. The sky will not fall. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:09, 7 May 2023 (UTC) | ||
There is quite the relation between my dislike of non-DWU and admins saying that non-valid stories are not "continuous with the rest of the DWU." The relation is that the admin is saying that non-valid stories are not continuous with the rest of the DWU, when this isn't true. Hell, I was just touching up ''[[Audio Visuals]]'', a page about a series which has extensive continuity with the rest of the extended universe. | |||
As per your statement that because some stories fail rule 4, those stories don't deserve continuity sections, I ''again'' refer you to the long detailed opening post I made which has not been disputed in any way by what you have found here. Hell! I'll just post part of the OP again. | |||
Now personally, I have many reasons I think "no continuity sections on non-valid pages" is not a justified rule. Here they are: | |||
# I do not see "continuity sections" as a place to analyze the ''Doctor Who'' canon. I see them as a place to discuss connections to other stories. | |||
# Even if stories are not meant to be set inside the ''DWU'', two stories which aren't ''DWU'' can still have connections. For instance, if the Cushing films were still non-valid, I think it would be fair to say that ''[[Daleks' Invasion Earth 2150 A.D. (theatrical film)|Daleks' Invasion Earth 2150 A.D.]]'' has continuity to ''[[Dr. Who and the Daleks (theatrical film)|Dr. Who and the Daleks]]''. | |||
# I think that non-valid pages have continuity to to valid stories. For instance, ''[[Strax Saves the Day (webcast)|Strax Saves the Day]]'' references the Morbius Doctors (from ''The Brain of Morbius'', not Matt Smith) | |||
# Not all stories are non-valid for breaking Rule 4, aka "not being set inside the Doctor Who Universe". Rule 4 is, realistically, the part of our rules which is closest to asking "Is this canon?" And indeed when admins explain this rule I usually see them say "Non-DWU stories can't have DWU connections." But what about stage plays? Fiction invalidated for having narrative quirks? etc? They still have continuity surely! | |||
# Every time I visit a non-valid story page which is even remotely fleshed out, it almost always has some section of the article that's being used as a continuity section. Sometimes it's in Notes, sometimes References. It's a load bearing part of our pages, we simply need them, people are going to write down that information anyways. | |||
# Not all readers of Tardis Wiki come to read in-universe biographies. Some come to just research ''Who'' history. If someone comes to read about the stage play ''[[Doctor Who and the Daleks in Seven Keys to Doomsday (stage play)|Doctor Who and the Daleks in Seven Keys to Doomsday]]'', they'll likely want to read the continuity section... Except there isn't one! We can't just assume that all people who read the wiki care about some fringe rules that only exist on our website. It makes for a very unhelpful design. | |||
So ''AGAIN'' in my opinion continuity sections do not exist to analyze the Doctor Who canon. They exist to discuss connections between stories. Even stories which fail Rule 4 have continuity. | |||
And I personally don't think you've raised any issues here which justify the forum being extended by a week. Sorry, ''dude'', sorry ''bruh'', but I think I have ever right to feel quite tired of these ''ghost arguments'' from years before we formed our current policy. [[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]][[User Talk:OttselSpy25|🤙☎️]] 20:34, 7 May 2023 (UTC) | |||
