User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-1432718-20200505204802/@comment-6032121-20200505223120

You write that “the only reason that these stories are considered valid is because they were written by Doctor Who writers”. Well, no. The reason they're considered valid is that they were released on the BBC website, and thus, pretty clearly licensed.

You also write: “these writers were simply showing fans how to make their own stories by writing their own fan-fiction in the same format and on the same site, the only difference is who they are.”

That is factually incorrect. As I said and linked to before, the BBC website itself collected and pointed out these specific stories. They got an official release on the actual BBC website, and a release set aside from all the unsorted fan submissions. For that reason if none else, they belong on the Wiki in one form or another.

The question is thus, "did the authors mean for these stories to be set in the DWU". That they went about it the same way the prospective clients of the Comic-Maker app, namely the fans, might go about making fanfiction is, while perfectly plausible, an unsupported assumption about the writers' state of mind. Further, even if it were true, how does that mean the stories fail Rule 4? If I write a fanfiction today, then unless I'm marking my story as an AU or something, I'm going to intend for it take place in the DWU. Obviously. Fanfiction is forbidden on the Wiki because it's unlicensed, not for nebulous Rule 4 reasons.

So we're reduced, I think, to guessing at the Rule 4 intent on the basis of the stories themselves. You think the "reused props" indicate intent that this not take place in the real DWU, but I've attempted a rebuttal of that idea, and countered the fact that at least one of the stories is a straight-up sequel to a TV story, pretty clear intent that the story is meant to take place in the DWU. Please address those points, since I have addressed yours.