Trusted
25,401
edits
Tag: 2017 source edit |
Tag: 2017 source edit |
||
Line 142: | Line 142: | ||
:::: Right, look at it this way. If it were the first episode that the Doctor popped up in then we would call it a Doctor Who spin off, and cover it in its entirety. So why should we do any different for when it's the second episode? Also, let us note that rule 4 does not state "it must be intended to be set in the DWU", but it does state "if it's not intended to be in the DWU then it's not allowed". And here there's certainly no reason to suspect that it ''wasn't'' intended to be set in the DWU. (I was going to say more, but I remembered [[T:BOUND]] just in time.) [[User:Aquanafrahudy|<span style="font-family: serif; color: pink" title="Hallo." > Aquanafrahudy</span>]] [[User talk: Aquanafrahudy|<span title="Talk to me">📢</span>]] 06:58, 7 September 2023 (UTC) | :::: Right, look at it this way. If it were the first episode that the Doctor popped up in then we would call it a Doctor Who spin off, and cover it in its entirety. So why should we do any different for when it's the second episode? Also, let us note that rule 4 does not state "it must be intended to be set in the DWU", but it does state "if it's not intended to be in the DWU then it's not allowed". And here there's certainly no reason to suspect that it ''wasn't'' intended to be set in the DWU. (I was going to say more, but I remembered [[T:BOUND]] just in time.) [[User:Aquanafrahudy|<span style="font-family: serif; color: pink" title="Hallo." > Aquanafrahudy</span>]] [[User talk: Aquanafrahudy|<span title="Talk to me">📢</span>]] 06:58, 7 September 2023 (UTC) | ||
::::::the question to me is wether “Doctor Who is intended to be set in the universe of Roland Rat” and “Roland Rat is intended to be sweet in the Universe of Doctor Who” are the same thing? I would say yes they are the same. Of course I could see a solid argument for them meaning different things. [[User:Anastasia Cousins|Anastasia Cousins]] [[User talk:Anastasia Cousins|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 12:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC) | ::::::the question to me is wether “Doctor Who is intended to be set in the universe of Roland Rat” and “Roland Rat is intended to be sweet in the Universe of Doctor Who” are the same thing? I would say yes they are the same. Of course I could see a solid argument for them meaning different things. [[User:Anastasia Cousins|Anastasia Cousins]] [[User talk:Anastasia Cousins|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 12:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC) | ||
So far, the arguments for covering more than just episode 2 have not been particularly strong. Just responding to what I see as the main arguments and points made so far: | |||
# "''I would say, in the lack of evidence to the contrary, that it's probably intended to be set in the general wider DWU.''" In the absence of evidence you can say anything is intended to be set in the DWU. This is not a strong argument and also the reason why we have policies (such as the one I mention in point 2. which needs to be defined). Frankly, I don't think the answer to the question of whether they were intended to share a universe is knowable - that's a very fan-ish way of considering media which I very much doubt anyone involve in Roland Rat considered. | |||
# "''The precedent is quite clear: elements that debuted in crossovers with the DWU are DWU elements.''" As Cgl1999 pointed out, and has been conceded by Aquanafrahudy, the precedent is very much the opposite. The conclusions to both cited threads point out that this is not sufficient to allow coverage. I bring this up again, because I think this is an important point which needs to be discussed in another thread which considers this policy decision more broadly. It's a complex issue, because there are cases where crossover-debuting concepts might be considered DWU, but it would probably be dependent on narrative connections to DWU concepts or in the light of further DWU-associated content. | |||
# "''Why, after all, should we cover Time and the Rani but not these?''". Well I think you can answer that question, but on a surface level, we have two cases. Firstly, Roland Rat debuted in 1983, and a variety of Roland Rat characters debuted in an episode which happened to feature the Doctor. Conversely, there is a direct line of non-spin off episodes with the same main character which tie AUC to TatR. Seems like false equivalence to me. | |||
# "''Considering this series' lack of documentation, I think it does [serve a useful purpose]".'' There is nothing stopping people from documenting this series in a place one would actually expect to find the information. Make a Roland Rat wiki and then you can cover all of his appearances all the way back to 1983, which Tardis wouldn't be able to cover. It doesn't need recognition of some tenuous DW connection for the series to finally become public record. | |||
Those are my arguments against covering the full series. Episode 2, of course, should be covered in its entirety, but I don't think anyone is disputing that at this point. A good overview on [[Roland Rat: The Series (series)]] would also do no one any harm. [[User:Danochy|Danochy]] [[User talk:Danochy|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:18, 10 September 2023 (UTC) |