Board Thread:Inclusion debates/@comment-4028641-20170222073756/@comment-4028641-20170225041229

Thefartydoctor wrote: Regarding the invalid tag, don't you think the onus is on us to prove it valid rather than someone to prove it's invalid? I'm just wondering that maybe a non-Who source is invalid first and then proven valid, don't you think? The invalid tag should maybe be left on until a conclusion is met, in my personal opinion.

That might seem like the most logical choice, but it just makes more sense to treat this as any other story. This is what we do for most opened validity discussions.

Thefartydoctor wrote: And regarding your individual character articles, I believe that this Wiki has a kind of unspoken rule on that. And actually, someone in this comment thread already mentioned it somewhere. I thought we only created pages about the Who characters and about those who directly come into contact with Who characters. That's why we have certain pages for certain Star Trek personnel but not all of them.

The rule is, I believe, that we create pages for all characters who appear in crossover materials. So if a Star Trek character had a small role in AssimilationxAssimilation but didn't meet the Doctor, we'd still have a page on them. We'd just only have info from the crossover and nothing else.

The question comes down to how many of these characters are relevant to the story. Technically you could have pages on Shaggy, Homer Simpson, and many other characters just based off of the fact that they're in the background of the web-short. But at the same time, I wouldn't go as far as to say that we should pretend that they're not there at all. Maybe we would want to go down the messy, obvious route of just having pages on everyone who appears in the story.