User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-25421326-20200308132630/@comment-1432718-20200508045235

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-25421326-20200308132630/@comment-1432718-20200508045235 So if At Childhood's End (novel) is the only "new" evidence proposed, then there is no change in the validity of Death Comes to Time (webcast). I realize that some of the posters here are new, but we take author/publisher comments about their own work as part of determining whether a work passes rule #4. As Forum:Inclusion debate: Death Comes to Time stated, the author/publisher didn't consider this story to be part of the DWU. I suggest reading through the quotes posted by User:CzechOut.

Some of the misunderstanding here seems to come from the idea that in-universe material is what determines validity. That is not true on this wiki.

A novel written by someone else doesn't count as new evidence. We don't allow new works to make previous valid stories invalid, and we don't allow new works to make invalid stories valid.

I know everyone was hoping the use of the word "canon" in the original debate would allow for the original ruling to change, but even back in 2012 the ideas of validity were there, even though the terminology hadn't been finalized yet.

This story is still invalid, and please keep in mind Tardis:You are bound by current policy and Tardis:Do not disrupt this wiki to prove a point. Thanks.