User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-2.26.183.189-20170416191252/@comment-4028641-20170416232213

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-2.26.183.189-20170416191252/@comment-4028641-20170416232213 The definition of what we call "an advertisement" in the case of something being invalid is not "Any product meant to make you want another product."

Look at the Tardisodes. Those were all meant to entice you into seeing series 2. Are those ads? Are those invalid on the principal of encouraging the viewer to see another product?

When it was decided that trailers were not stories, it wasn't done under the idea that we could stretch that definition as far as possible.

Right now I'm getting both on my computer, and I'm going to try and figure out how it goes and I'll explain it in detail.