Trusted
6,455
edits
Tag: 2017 source edit |
No edit summary Tag: 2017 source edit |
||
Line 293: | Line 293: | ||
Finally, I ''do'' think that ''P.S.'' should be valid, however I do not think that this is the thread for it, as I do not think it is a deleted scene. However I have not watched it, so my opinion there is of low worth. [[User:Cousin Ettolrhc|Cousin Ettolrahc]] [[User talk:Cousin Ettolrhc|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 07:36, 7 May 2023 (UTC) | Finally, I ''do'' think that ''P.S.'' should be valid, however I do not think that this is the thread for it, as I do not think it is a deleted scene. However I have not watched it, so my opinion there is of low worth. [[User:Cousin Ettolrhc|Cousin Ettolrahc]] [[User talk:Cousin Ettolrhc|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 07:36, 7 May 2023 (UTC) | ||
::I am with Ettolrhc on most of their point. I do think some of these should be valid but not under rule four by Proxy. I think some of these deserve a forum to debate it they are deleted scenes of not and whilst I would like the pilot to be valid it would be very hard to do as I don’t know which versions we would cover or not. But the ones that I think should be valid I would argue are not deleted scenes and this is thus not the place to debate it. [[User:Anastasia Cousins|Anastasia Cousins]] [[User talk:Anastasia Cousins|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:30, 8 May 2023 (UTC) | ::I am with Ettolrhc on most of their point. I do think some of these should be valid but not under rule four by Proxy. I think some of these deserve a forum to debate it they are deleted scenes of not and whilst I would like the pilot to be valid it would be very hard to do as I don’t know which versions we would cover or not. But the ones that I think should be valid I would argue are not deleted scenes and this is thus not the place to debate it. [[User:Anastasia Cousins|Anastasia Cousins]] [[User talk:Anastasia Cousins|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:30, 8 May 2023 (UTC) | ||
:So. This is an interesting one. My opinion on this is that deleted scenes pass rule one, as T:VS does not say "Only complete works of fiction count" but "Only works of fiction count", and if a work is not a work of fiction, then it must be a work of non-fiction, and none of the examples above seem to pertain to this description. Please correct me if I am wrong. My opinion is also that officially released deleted scenes, such as the Journey's End and Remembrance of the Daleks ones above, should pass rule three because, well, they've been officially released. Right. Let's tackle the cases above individually. Remembrance of the Daleks: I '''do not support''' the validation of this scene, because for 4bp you need ''clear authorial intent'', and I do not think that misremembering something counts as clear authorial intent. Again, please correct me if I am wrong. Journey's End: This, I think, is by far the clearest, either by rule 4 or 4bp, both seem pretty clear to me. I '''support''' validation. P.S.: '''Support''' validation. Nothing much more to say, except that this isn't really a deleted scene, so should've been left for a speedround or something. Still, no matter (probably). The pilot episode: I do think that this is clear authorial intent. We should probably cover this as an alternate timeline, though, and have pages like the Doctor (The Pilot Episode) etc. I '''support''' validation. [[User:Aquanafrahudy|Aquanafrahudy]] [[User talk:Aquanafrahudy|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:56, 9 May 2023 (UTC) |