Board Thread:Inclusion debates/@comment-24894325-20170302225328/@comment-5918438-20170304064138

I don't really see the need to discuss every story that is obviously not intended to be set in the DWU. Sometimes, a story just breaks rule 4, and there's no discussion needed unless someone wants to contest that with new compelling evidence to the contrary. Don't mistake the recent surge in inclusion debates for a need to discuss each and every story.

In this case, The Corridor Sketch fails already be being a parody. We don't need to discuss every parody. If it falls under "parody", which has been discussed, it can be safely assumed to be invalid, without extraordinary evidence suggesting otherwise.