Tech, emailconfirmed, Administrators
38,351
edits
Forum:The LEGO Dimensions Conundrum, Reconsidered: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Forum:The LEGO Dimensions Conundrum, Reconsidered (edit)
Revision as of 11:38, 29 February 2024
, 29 Februaryno edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 558: | Line 558: | ||
::: If you're referring to {{cs|Endless Awesome (webcast)}}, that's probably not meant to be taken very seriously - when trailers were validated, I specifically left that one as invalid while validating stuff like {{cs|New Adventures Await! (webcast)}}. (I will also note that I ''personally'' think the game should be valid, but obviously that's just my opinion) [[User:Cookieboy 2005|Cookieboy 2005]] [[User talk:Cookieboy 2005|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:36, 29 February 2024 (UTC) | ::: If you're referring to {{cs|Endless Awesome (webcast)}}, that's probably not meant to be taken very seriously - when trailers were validated, I specifically left that one as invalid while validating stuff like {{cs|New Adventures Await! (webcast)}}. (I will also note that I ''personally'' think the game should be valid, but obviously that's just my opinion) [[User:Cookieboy 2005|Cookieboy 2005]] [[User talk:Cookieboy 2005|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:36, 29 February 2024 (UTC) | ||
:::: @Najawin: Well hold on. This quote from Jack seems predicated on "Jack is momentarily noticing that everything is made of bricks ''in contrast to how it usually is''", so it seems if taken at face value to be in line with "this is the real DWU which has temporarily been turned into plastic somehow", more than "this is an alternate DWU where everything is made of bricks and always was", no? (I would read it as more of a fourth-wall joke than anything — not unlike if the first appearance of a black-and-white monster in the colour era had the Doctor quipping "huh, is it me or do you look… brighter?" — but the point is the same however seriously you take the line.) | |||
:::: But in any event, I'm mostly stepping in with my admin hat on to say '''yes, we can admit the evidence of the e-mail, come on'''. If you want to be extremely technical about it, there is an argument that we technically can't "believe" Ottsel's account of his original email…?… But this does not disqualify him from making statements about ''somebody else'' said, so the reply, which is what we care about, is kosher. More broadly there would be no procedural quibbles whatsoever to be had if Ottsel reached out to a serious online documentary resource e.g. the blog of a trusted fandom historian, and reposted the email there; and I think it would be very silly to demand that extra step when we all agree that it's a straightforwardly possible chain of events. T:WIKIFY OWN ultimately exists as a policy on sourcing ''personal details'' in situations where the interested party has an incentive to lie due to the nature of showbiz e.g. actors giving their height or their birthday inaccurately. A Wiki user reporting on the results of asking policy-related questions to a wholly-unrelated DWU creative, ''about the work and their intentions with it rather than the DWU creative themself'', simply is not the intended use-case. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:37, 29 February 2024 (UTC) | |||
