Talk:Global Conspiracy? (home video)

NOTVALID?
I don't understand why this is labelled NOTVALID. It's definitely intended to be funny, and some of the details don't match other stories, but neither of those is a reason. Is it supposed to be like The Curse of Fatal Death? It doesn't seem to be a parody, just a funny sequel. Fwhiffahder ☎  23:53, December 18, 2016 (UTC)
 * I was going to suggest that in cases like this, where individual, stand-alone "stories" are in question, it's best to ask the editor who put the invalid tag, as some of these cases aren't covered in Tardis:Valid sources and it can be hard to find any discussion on the subject. It turns out I'm the one who added the tag (almost two years ago), and though I obviously can't remember why, it is most likely because the creator of the page gave it Category:Parodies and pastiches, which are NOTVALID. Shambala108 ☎  01:34, December 19, 2016 (UTC)
 * Should it be recategorized and have the NOTVALID notice removed, then? Fwhiffahder ☎  03:07, December 19, 2016 (UTC)
 * We still have to consider Rule 4. I don't know about authorial intent, but reviews and such seem to consistently call it a spoof or parody.
 * ...Oh yeah, and so does the BBC:
 * Global Conspiracy? (11 mins) Spoof written by and starring Mark Gatiss
 * Also, it seems from these searches, and from that BBC Shop page, that this is actually called Global Conspiracy?. 03:42, December 19, 2016 (UTC)
 * The title card indeed calls this "Global Conspiracy?". 03:43, December 19, 2016 (UTC)
 * Having now actually seen the story, I now agree that there's no real reason to consider this invalid. It is a bit tongue in cheek, but so's The Unicorn and the Wasp. I understand where the reviewers were coming from, though, of course, as from a completely out-of-universe perspective, any sort of fictional documentary is already a spoof of the genre. 05:31, December 19, 2016 (UTC)
 * Any objections to this being made valid? That means editors are free to add information from this story to all the character pages, regarding where they are decades later, their account of the events from their perspective if not already sufficiently covered by Green Death itself, and what's been going on in their lives.
 * This also becomes an additional account of Jo's history after the Doctor, because it says she and Cliff fell out in the 80s, which agrees with what Genocide tells us. 00:24, December 21, 2016 (UTC)
 * I have no objections. - Sir DENCH-and-PALMER   ☎  12:24, December 21, 2016 (UTC)