Talk:Walking in Eternity

Executive Action
Would anyone be willing to open a forum debate regarding valid coverage for Executive Action? Marvel has since endorsed the elements introduced in this story. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎  22:01, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think this makes sense. It's never been proposed, let alone permitted, for fanfics to gain valid coverage simply because their events were later referenced/endorsed in a valid source; otherwise we'd be giving valid coverage to Time Rift and the like. The fact that Marvel referenced the story is noteworthy, but it doesn't give it a claim to validity. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 22:05, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I did not say that the only reason for valid coverage was because it had been referenced later. Lance Parkin is a close friend of Alan Moore, it seems to me that it is a no-brainer that he sought out Alan's consent to use all of his characters (Wardog, Cobweb, Zeitgeist, and Fascination). Aside from those the only other elements are a single reference to Gallifreyans and Gallifrey which, if the recent ruling about small references not invalidating the whole work is to be believed, I don't see what is stopping this story from being valid? DrWHOCorrieFan ☎  22:32, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Hanging Chads is another story that could have a reasonable coverage case. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎  06:51, 31 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Re: Executive Action: interesting thought. I wouldn't call it a "no-brainer" — I tend to think that if Moore had authorised it there would have been a disclaimer to that effect. But it's worth a thread, I suppose.


 * What's Hanging Chads 's claim? Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 13:03, 31 August 2023 (UTC)


 * You have an active tendency to misquote people. I did not call Hanging Chads a no-brainer, as is suggested in your last comment. There's no interest in me replying to someone with an argument if said person doesn't respond after that (as you did after I posted my argument for Executive Action). The comment I've made is showing my support if anyone else ever wants to start a discussion, I'll add my arguments there. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎  16:51, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, you were replying to Executive Action. I feel like your reply could have been above Hanging Chads. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎  16:52, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Corrie, if nobody else thinks your argument is a slam dunk, or nobody else really cares, they're not necessarily gonna make the thread for you. Be the change you want to see on the wiki. Najawin ☎  16:57, 31 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Unlike you, I am not present in every single discussion on this site and find it hard to bother myself to actively engage for the most part, so I do not think I am the best possible person to create the thread. If nobody else cares enough it will simply go unchanged. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎  17:00, 31 August 2023 (UTC)