Board Thread:Inclusion debates/@comment-1432718-20200905235227/@comment-6032121-20200910015144

Good sleuthing! Confirmation from the horses' mouth that Doctor Who? is parodical is certainly nice to have, even if I think its Rule-4-failing-ness has never really been in doubt. But Quinn & Howett describing their Who work as parodical in toto can only be an overgeneralisation. There's nothing parodical about COMIC: A Religious Experience or COMIC: The Test of Time.

Nor do mentions of "comedy strips" mean much of anything, I'd say. Comedy isn't parody; the likes of TV: The Lodger, COMIC: A Rose by Any Other Name or, indeed, "The Feast of Steven" are unambiguously comedies.

As for what that means in Wiki terms… the final decision rests with an admin, but being that a sweeping statement from Quinn or Howett about all their Who work being parody can clearly only be a generalisation, I don't think that should be sufficient to hold The History Tour to be in breach of Rule 4. It's just comedic.