User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-26845762-20170222025243/@comment-4028641-20170307212724

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-26845762-20170222025243/@comment-4028641-20170307212724 SOTO wrote: Well, I'm open. If you want slightly separate rules for image validity, by all means suggest away. (At least we can be generally assured that illustrations are not pictures of the actors, by the way.)

...screenshots from TV trailers would be strictly forbidden, and the cover to Doctor Who - Series 3 (soundtrack) is not an in-universe picture of the Doctor and Martha. What differentiates some of the images you'd like us to be able to use, and other promotional imagery? Can the same sort of logic apply to images of Bernice Summerfield, who has many in-universe depictions (and never looks the same)?

I think it's all about what images we do and don't have. Let's take this on a story basis just for ease of examples right now. We have plenty of in-universe images for any comic or TV story. So of course we wouldn't use an image from an audio story's cover for their profile image or anything like that. For comics, we would never try to use a cover's art for a character or event.

But for Audio and Prose we often are left without in-text illustrations. Bernice Summerfield is a character who is heavily illustrated in comics and audio covers which often represent events true to the narrative. So allowing illustrative promotional art printed in DWM but only for concepts where there is no other example of in-universe visual depiction is no different than accepting File:Bex (Tecnophobia).jpg when we should never accept an image of Martha that looks anything like that.

sorry if it I'm retreading explored grounds; my point is that the rules for including DWM article illustrations would be no different from the practice of accepting Big Finish Audio images. A last-cast-situation which we only do for the necessity of illustration.