User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-45692830-20200510214412/@comment-6032121-20200511011113

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference

That's not a bad thought — but what if a hypothetical story mentioning some of Tardis's page did so not to emptily repeat pages that really do exist, but rather to purport the existence of pages on the in-universe Wiki which we do not actually have? (e.g. pages for all the characters of the fictional third Cushing movie) Clearly such facts should then be recorded on the Tardis Data Core (The Zygon Isolation) page, but wouldn't they stick out oddly if we did not allow ourselves to also list the other pages that existed on the in-universe Wiki?

Again, this is only a hypothetical. I doubt we'll ever get to a point where the Tardis Data Core (The Zygon Isolation) page mentions more than a dozen in-universe pages, at the most.

But even if we did — while the "recursion" you fear would be strange, is there really a reason why it would be so undesirable as to warrant special policymaking? Even in the most ghoulish scenario imaginable, I doubt any significant fraction of our 81,870 pages (and counting) could ever be mentioned within the DWU. Not in a work that'd pass Rule 1, anyway. If someone's willing to curate it, it wouldn't really do the Wiki tangible harm to have a page largely consisting of a list of articles which also really exist on our very Wiki. It'd just be one more eccentricity for us to relish and for some outsiders to lightly mock.

…Also, I can't help but wonder, for all that this policymaking discussion is engaging and fascinating (which it is!), if this is the best place to do it. You say yourself that you "care more about having this discussion and coming down with a firm policy on it than [about] any particular resolution" — I'm assuming by resolution you mean resolution on this thread on the specific matter of confirming The Zygon Isolation's validity. I'm no admin, as I was reminded by Shambala earlier, but that certainly sounds very much like we've drifted into an off-topic discussion.