User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-188432-20130514042227/@comment-188432-20130515192736

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-188432-20130514042227/@comment-188432-20130515192736 SOTO, please stop confusing the issue by quoting from portions of T:VS that specifically have to do with Rule 4 debates. This isn't about Rule 4 at all. No one is questioning whether, if this were a story, it would count. Obviously it would count, if it were a story. This is about whether it's a story. That's it.

For clarity, here's the bit from T:VS that this discussion is concerned with, quoted in its entirety.

Rule 1 may seem redundant or just plain unnecessary. It's not. There are a lot of things about the DWU that aren't, in themselves, narratives. Most obviously, the thoughts of someone on the production team can't be used to write an in-universe article. But there are plenty of other disqualified circumstances. Sometimes you'll find a piece in a magazine written as if it's "real life" journalism about events in the DWU. Or you may encounter a game in an annual which sets up the puzzle using the Doctor or his companion. Or there may be information about a DWU character on the back of a playing card or in the packaging on a toy. None of this counts.