User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-31010985-20190928203157/@comment-31010985-20191004192653

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-31010985-20190928203157/@comment-31010985-20191004192653 There is absolutely nothing in wiki policy that invalidates stories on the basis of them being published by self-publishers. Even if there were, these stories would not immediately ruled out because as much as you claim it is fact Amorkuz, whether Arcbeatle is a self-publisher is a matter of contention. Merriam Webster's definition of self-publish is "to publish (a book) using the author's own resources". As Arcbeatle is a company, by this definition at least they are not. I feel any other arguments along this line would be verging on off topic until/unless a forum thread is made in favour of banning self-published stories and then another thread is also passed that determined Arcbeatle to be a self-publisher.

But all that aside, am I missing something here? The only release of the three stories that has been accepted as the official release by everyone who has commented on it is the anthology release. (The individual releases proposed as release dates was widespread but not absolute.) As has already been established, ISBNS are not compulsory for digital releases and to the best of my knowledge 10,000 Dawns: The Book Club Collection is neither available in print nor in posession of an ISBN. Therefore, any talk of ISBNs to determine anything to do with the stories we're actually talking about is irrelevant.