Talk:Return of the Cybermen (audio story)

Is it invalid?

I appreciate that we are still without our usual method of discussing still things, so I just want to note my thoughts here for when we can open the discussion on whether or not this actually is an invalid source. I'm guessing that it's been tagged as invalid based on Rule 4, but John Dorney has already indicated on Twitter that his intention with the story was to fit it in alongside Revenge of the Cybermen, going so far as scripting a post-credits scene explaining the disruption to this story - which he has even shared on there. His comments indicate that it didn't make the final cut only because it was felt to be a bit too silly and distracting from the serious tone of the story, rather than because of any aspect of continuity. With an authorial intent that the events did infact happen between the pre-existing stories, the fact that occurrence of stories with commonality (like the two Human Natures) doesn't itself rule out, and no indication I can find that the production team attempted or intended to separate the story - I have to call into question whether it is actually invalid. JDPManjoume ☎ 11:46, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

I completely agree and can see no good reason for it to be invalid. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 11:58, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

I agree; there's no real reason for it to be any more or less valid than The Doomsday Contract or the rest of The Lost Stories. Since the tag was added without explanation or discussion, I'm pretty sure the invalidity tag can be removed without discussion, too - but ideally we'd get a thumbs up from an admin first! – n8 (☎) 12:39, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Consider that up to be thumbsed! I'm not sure what User:Vincent VG was thinking. Even before we go into the clear evidence that actually Return was in fact meant to fit in with Revenge through nondescript timey-wimey shenanigans… let us be clear: discontinuity, even intentional discontinuity, with specific past stories is not a marker of invalidity (or else, we'd have to kick out Genesis of the Daleks!).

I suppose the fact that this story was presented as a reconstitution of a story-that-never-was might imaginably draw comparisons to the now-infamous How The Monk Got His Habit. But that is an argument you could make about every Lost Story. The current practice is clearly that we do not follow such lines of thought as concerns this specific range; and the authorial comments from John Dorney about Return bear this out. There's no reason to single out Return in this way.

I've removed the tag. If Vincent has a more thorough rationale, he (or anyone else) can bring it to an exclusion debate once we have Forums again. Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 15:17, 17 March 2021 (UTC)