User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-1272640-20161223201024/@comment-1432718-20170915023922

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-1272640-20161223201024/@comment-1432718-20170915023922 This thread has remained open long enough with no input. Based on User:CzechOut's explanation of the guidelines at Tardis:Valid sources as well as the information he posted about authorital (i.e. production) intent, Scream of the Shalka is found to be an invalid source for in-universe pages.

I would like to point out and quote something that User:OncomingStorm12th said: OncomingStorm12th wrote: Except validity/inclusion are hardly (if ever) about consensus or majority. It is about evidence. And, right now, as I see it, User:CzechOut has stronger evidences that it wasn't meant be DWU than anyone else has evidence that it was. This is absolutely on the nose. Some policies do not require consensus or majority.

And I want to stress something CzechOut mentioned in his first post. Tardis:Valid sources gives us a nice little list summarizing the "four little rules", but anyone participating in an inclusion debate needs to be aware of the entire policy page.

In addition, it is not the place of users to decide (or even ask) the question of whether any consensus or decision is reached. Doing so can give new users the impression that a decision has been reached, and they may act on that supposed decision. Leave the question of consensus up to the admins. It will make for a smoother process.