Trusted
8,511
edits
Forum:Deleted Scenes and Rule 4 By Proxy: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Forum:Deleted Scenes and Rule 4 By Proxy (view source)
Revision as of 21:28, 9 May 2023
, 9 May 2023→Discussion
No edit summary Tag: 2017 source edit |
Tag: 2017 source edit |
||
| Line 294: | Line 294: | ||
::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) | :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) | ||
::To clarify, the reason why ''[[P.S. (webcast)|P.S.]]'' ''has'' to be treated as a deleted scene is because there was a debate on this already, and it was ruled to be one. Unless there's new evidence to dispute this ruling not present in these original discussions [[T:POINT]] applies. R4bp isn't applicable for this, since that can't make it not a deleted scene. If we pushed ''P.S.'' to another thread, it just wouldn't get discussed - it would violate T:POINT to do so. You have to treat it as a story that ''solely'' violates R4 (through being a deleted scene) but now passes it through R4bp in order to get it validated. But, as stated, it's non obvious that this is true. Tangerine has stated that he thinks deleted scenes also violated R3, and Czech was definitely gesturing to R3 worries as well. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC) | |||
