Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
| ||Archives: #1|
New Adventures content Edit
Why is there so little content from the New Adventures included in this article and yet so much covering the Seventh Doctor's Big Finish Productions stories? I'm completely certain there is a lot more information that could be added from the books. --Confirm Nothing...Deny Everything talk to me 22:32, May 10, 2012 (UTC)
- For no reason than that they aren't very heavily read. BFA is at this point, much more popular that NA. (Their also much better) OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 01:24, May 11, 2012 (UTC)
- A very poor reason, and not particularly true either.
And it's 'they're', not 'their'.
"Seemingly none of the other Doctors liked him except Ten". Edit
Given The Eight Doctors was made eight years before Rose, does it have any insinuation at all of what the "modern" Doctors thought? Also, did the Tenth Doctor mention the Seventh at all during Time Crash? I thought he was only fanboying over Davison (and in a meta way, the Davison era)... -- Tybort (talk page) 16:16, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
- I removed that comment before I saw your post. I think the person posting the comment was mixing up the Fifth and Seventh. Shambala108 ☎ 16:37, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
The Seventh Doctor is not well-liked by his predecessors or successors. This is most likely due to his dark, manipulative nature. In that respect, the Seventh greatly disliked the Fifth Doctor, calling him "bland, and not even one of the good ones"; in his psyche, he chained up the Fifth Doctor, who served as his conscience. The Tenth Doctor also did not like this incarnation, when talking to Wilfred in The End of Time, saying he "got worse; tricked people into taking their own lives". – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 18.104.22.168 (talk).
- Well, that's still extremely speculative. You can't just say things like "seemingly" because that leaves the impression that you aren't entirely sure and what you are saying is speculative. At most, I only know of two Doctors not liking 7, and those were 5 and 8. Those, along with any others you could find, are all that should be mentioned if any. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 01:55, July 22, 2013 (UTC)
Big Finish timeline Edit
I'm doing some cleanup on the sequence of events in some late Big Finish adventures. For example, it is pretty obvious that some of them take place later than others because on some covers, he is shown as he was in season 26, on others he is in season 26 attire but noticably older, and on others he looks as he did in the TV movie. JagoAndLitefoot ☎ 01:15, August 13, 2013 (UTC)
- I know this sounds nit-picky, but covers are out of universe and can't be used to date in-universe articles. Covers aren't necessarily done by the same person who writes the story. The stories can only be dated according to narrative information. Shambala108 ☎ 01:21, August 13, 2013 (UTC)
- The TARDIS console sounds are also a bit different in ones using the TV movie TARDIS interior (and older Doctor on the cover) from ones using season 26 interior (with younger Doctor on the cover), so this is actually noticable within the audio itself as well.
- Also, regardless of that, I think non-narrative clues can also be used for dating the different adventures if no narrative ones are given (or rather, not for definitive dating, but simply for the order in which they are presented in the article; even if we do not specify that stories happened in a given order, we obviously need to present them linearly). Hell, release order in itself is one big non-narrative clue, but we usually assume that stories happen in release order if not otherwise specified. So unless we use a script to set the order randomly each time the page is loaded, order based on non-narrative sources where no other source for sequence of events is given is better than order based on no source whatsoever. JagoAndLitefoot ☎ 01:26, August 13, 2013 (UTC)
- The thing is, the wiki decided a short while back, at Forum:Timeline deletion, to remove timelines from pages, as it involved way too much speculation. In fact, we have a whole dedicated section for timelines at Theory:Index, which is separate from the main namespace.
- Each Doctor has a section called "undated adventures" for the stories that we can't place without speculation. This was a wiki-wide decision. Shambala108 ☎ 02:03, August 13, 2013 (UTC)
- Fair enough, although in the case of most Seventh Doctor solo adventures, they can be more or less dated to some period of his life without speculation, by the TARDIS console they use if nothing else. I actually deleted some sentences that try to make an exact timeline out of this page even when it's purely speculative, e.g. "After defeating the Cybermen...". etc. JagoAndLitefoot ☎ 02:24, August 13, 2013 (UTC)
Why aren't the DWM comic (with Frobisher and Olla) there. The Doctor couldn't have been with him without Mel or Ace.
Page protected Edit
Let me just say, though, that we decided some time back to remove timeline sections from story pages because the placement of stories often required speculation, which we avoid on this wiki. (See Forum:Timeline deletion) Therefore, it doesn't matter the exact order of events on the Seventh Doctor page, as long as they are roughly in order.
One last thing, BananaClownMan, I've already warned you once to stop tagging other users' good faith edits as vandalism. Perhaps you need to review Tardis:Vandalism policy.
Story placement Edit
Firstly, I would like to reiterate Shambala108's sentiment. I am a new user and far less prolific and experienced than you. Please do not dismiss my work in an insulting way such as calling it vandalism: it is clearly not, and regardless of whether you agree with its validity, it is an addition to the wiki, rather than a reduction. Also, I would have appreciated you giving me the courtesy of leaving me a message on my talk page before reverting my edit the first, second or at very least third time, either giving reasons for your reversion, or, more favourably, discussing with me why I made the edit.
The edit I have repeatedly made to the Seventh Doctor page pertains to the chronological placement of the Seventh Doctor's adventures. The televised order of these adventures was being adhered to; however, the production order of the stories (and, in actuality, the intended broadcast order) is a far more sensible and accurate chronological sequence. As stated at various TV story pages, errors and changes occurred when the episodes were aired in the new order imposed by the producer, and not intended by the production team. Various errors of continuity and production simultaneously occur if Season 25 is ordered in-narrative in the order of broadcast (see The Greatest Show in the Galaxy (TV story) under section Production Errors). Also, various dramatic decisions are rendered pointless or otherwise altered if Season 26 is ordered in order of broadcast (the new costume for 7 dramatic reveal, foreshadowing of Ghost Light becoming a continuity reference, etc.).
The order of information, as stated by Shambala108, is not meant to be eternally definitive. However, it can only be to the benefit of this wiki to order these stories as accurately as possible. And given there is a more accurate in-narrative order, as detailed in my edits, I can see no reason for this page to not adopt the ordering system I detail. RogerAckroydLives ☎ 10:30, July 24, 2015 (UTC)
- Dear RogerAckroydLives,
- Apologies, I have been busy as of late with my educational needs, and have had little time for diplomacy. However, before I begin, I would like to point out that communication is a two-way street, and you, RogerAckroydLives, could have easily contact me about this, as you did when I was on my way to address this this morning.
- Now, on to the issue, I'm afraid that episode broadcast order is set in stone, unlike other forms of media in the Whoniverse, which has some leeway. Take, for example, Night Terrors, which was set to be fourth episode of the 2011 season. It features Amy in her "Ganger clothes", and subtle foreshadow(ing?) to(of?) The Rebel Flesh. Should it's placement, and, indeed, any other episode that was rescheduled post-production, be brought into question?
- As for why I as under the impression it was vandalism was because the same edits weren't being made to Ace's page, and, like you said, a lack of understanding for the reasons it was continuously being edited, as I thought it was like guy insisting the Monk and the War Chief were the Master, which also happened on the WikiQuote page.
- Now, I suggest you take this point up on Panopticon, where more people can get involved and this issue can be solved diplomatically.
- Thank you for your earnest reply. I apologise for not contacting you, but had hoped that my edit summaries were reason enough to accept my work not as vandalism but as a purposeful edit, regardless of your personal understanding of it.
- As to your claim that my edit is an encouragement of a reversion to production order over broadcast order, I understand your claim, but think it has no relevance. Of course, if I could, I would attempt to reorder episodes into intended broadcast order rather than actual broadcast order. However, stories such as Castrovalva, Night Terrors and others were retroactively altered to fit into true broadcast order (Castrovalva can hardly be set later in the season, given how it was altered to become Five's post regenerative story, and Night Terrors features various changes, such as the Data File on the Doctor's death day and the nursery rhyme, which "fit it in" to its broadcast placement). However, the Seventh Doctor stories were not changed whatsoever: simply rearranged to suit the time of broadcast (one part of Silver Nemesis to air on 25th anniversary, Fenric to air in October, due to horror elements). Therefore I believe we are talking about separate issues.
- Again, I apologise for not editing Ace's page: it was me intention to do so, but I have not yet achieved it. I will happily broach it in a thread on The Panopticon.
- Yours sincerely,
- I apologise for my breach of policy; I intended to clarify your meaning, and therefore did not remove your original wording and instead suggested what you might mean.
- Please see the thread I have created at the Panopticon: it has had little response so far, but currently supports my sentiment. If, when the week of protection is over, the overwhelming response to the thread is in my favour, will you consider allowing my system to take precedence over yours (for use on the Seventh Doctor and Ace pages)? Even if this is only temporary, it would be a sensible solution to our disagreement.
- Best Wishes,