User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-5692737-20180206150757/@comment-5692737-20180207055806

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-5692737-20180206150757/@comment-5692737-20180207055806 Amorkuz wrote: Now, before this conversation can go any further, it is necessary to make sure that it does not violate T:POINT. The relevant quote is: You may open up discussions on matters that have already been decided only when you have arguments which have not formed a part of that discussion, or other, precedent discussions on the same topic.

Therefore, as a point of order, I would kindly request the OP to list which parts of his original post provide new arguments heretofore not present in the Vienna discussions. The previous discussion was held mainly in 2013, when statements from Big Finish, where Vienna is openly called a spin-off, didn't exist, as well as the statement from the author himself, Jonathan Morris. Where those two popped up, there was barely any discussion, so the thread was closed, while completely ignoring the authorial intent and new promotional goals from the company, where the series is a spin-off.

And in the previous thread there wasn't any mention of the fact, that producer's statement, where he did not see it as a Doctor Who spin-off, contradicts his another statement, where he calls it a spin-off!

So while Wiki is clinging onto the producer's statement, which contradicts his another statement, Big Finish to this day continues to promote Vienna as a spin-off, and the author himself still believes that stories set in the same universe'.