Talk:Ground Zero (comic story)

The "Notes" section
...is very very poor. Ace is not "apparently killed". She dies. She ceases to be. She is no more. This is a deliberate and final end to the life of Ace. Ace's death is referenced by the Eighth Doctor in several DWM comic stories, as well as the forward to the Endgame (graphic novel). The bit about "This comic can be viewed as the first alteration to the timeline which is resolved in COMIC: The Glorious Dead." is the worst kind of fan fiction imaginable. That is another entire story arc, which has no bearing whatsoever on Ground Zero. There are very good reasons why Ace dies here, and the only possible options are to accept why it happened the way it did, or delude yourself with nonsense like what the "Notes" section says. It is unlikely that whoever wrote that actually believed it. It is thus false information designed to deceive newbies who are looking for the truth. It needs to be corrected yesterday.


 * It's not fanfiction; there are differing accounts of Ace's fate, and this is how the wiki deals with them, by treating them equally. Shambala108 ☎  02:59, July 3, 2014 (UTC)

Mentioning how different stories give different fates for Ace is not fan fiction. But trying to resolve the conflicting fates yourself is fan fiction. The fact is it is very well known why DWM killed off Ace in Ground Zero(thereby intentionally contradicting one other range), and as things stand now, the article is not properly explaining that, and resorting to deceptive measures to try and hide that fact.

Found these quotes (should they be included?)
Then-Doctor Who Magazine Editor Gary Gillatt explained this in DWM 240, citing the different resurrections of Abslom Daak in Emperor of the Daleks! and Deceit, and the conflicting Silurian stories Final Genesis and Blood Heat. He stated "...As a result, we concluded things would be much simpler if the Marvel strip followed its own path."

Then, in DWM 242 Gillatt stated "The bottom line is that Marvel's Doctor Who comic strip has been going strong since 1979. With seventeen years of our own continuity to draw upon we see no need(or feel any obligation) to try and shoehorn another publishing company's characters and concepts into our own".