User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-1272640-20161223201024/@comment-27343779-20161226164116

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-1272640-20161223201024/@comment-27343779-20161226164116 Shalka sure is a special case but I suppose that we could basically say the same about the currently invalid story He Jests At Scars: it shares all the main DW Universe stories up to Trial of A Time Lord.

But I agree that Paul Cornell's intentions at the time are difficult to know for certain. I could not find a quote from him or other authorities from then explicitely saying that it was not as valid as the upcoming show (though he obviously never would have said that if he wanted people to be interested in the webcast).

Thinking about it again, I think rule 4 should be based on the way it is currently regarded since Sympathy for the Devil changed from a purely unbounded intention to a valid alternate universe thanks to the recent Bernice Summerfield stories. With the current rule 4, it should remain invalid forever and it would be inappropriate.

Should we take this new way of thinking, then I am positive that Cornell deemed Shalka as "unbound" at some point after the fact.

I still am of the opinion that the related articles should remain like they are now. But I would change my opinion with an explicit statement about it being equally valid, like Moffat frequently does with the 7th and 8th doctor novels. I think that for Shalka we must take a real world POV and not an in-universe one.