Template talk:Doctor Who

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Doctor Who Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Doctor Who, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Doctor Who and its spin-offs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Would it be okay to change this so that the subcategories are a bit more obvious? Also, what about the DVD releases article? :) --JohnDBuell 05:34, 21 December 2005 (UTC) How about:

	Doctor Who
Doctor Who main pages	History | The Doctor | Theme music | Missing episodes Spin-offs | Audio releases Doctor Who in America | Doctor Who Confidential | DVD Releases
Doctor Who lists	Supporting characters | Spin-off companions | Aliens | Villains Robots | Planets | Items | Serials | Producers | Celebrity appearances
Featured Articles	Doctor Who | Dalek | Doctor Who missing episodes | TARDIS

Someone would have to work on spacing.... :)

Contents 1 Portal 2 Serials, etc 3 Spoofs 4 Episodes by date 5 K-9 Adventures and Sarah Jane Investigates 6 Torchwood De-Classified 7 Big Finish audios

[edit] Portal

The current template's link at the top says Doctor Who, which links to the portal. However, if I was just an anonymous viewer using Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, I would click on the link (expecting to go to Doctor Who) and end up at the portal. From the portal, there is no obvious link to Doctor Who. For this reason I would like to change the link at the top to go to Doctor Who, but include a link to the Portal as well. How should this be done? Thelb⁴ 08:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Serials, etc

I think the Serials list is one of the most important, and deserves a point of priority up with spinoffs, audios and DVDs.

For that matter, I'm dissatisfied with the categorization in general; it's nice to know which articles are Featured, but do they deserve their own section? If we list Dalek, why not Cyberman or other major alien articles?

I'll stew on this a bit and see if I can come up with something better. Suggestions welcome! Radagast 23:10, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

How about —Whouk (talk) 12:12, 8 March 2006 (UTC):

Doctor Who
Doctor Who main pages
History | The Doctor | Serials | Missing episodes Dalek | Cyberman | TARDIS Theme music | Audio releases | DVDs | In America
Doctor Who lists
Supporting characters | Spin-off companions | Monsters and aliens Villains | Robots | Planets | Items | Producers | Celebrity appearances
Related programmes
Torchwood | K-9 and Company Doctor Who Confidential | Totally Doctor Who
Portal

I've made a minor adjustment to the spacing of the "related series" section. I'm slightly sad to lose the featured articles, but I suppose it's really tooting our own horn a bit. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 14:20, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I liked the FAs, but we were already duplicating one entry in the box and that was only going to increase ;-) —Whouk (talk) 21:38, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Given that K9 & Company never made it to a series (yet!), oughtn't it to be "Related productions"? Angmering 18:47, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

How's "BBC spin-offs"? Productions is a bit wider than the official BBC productions I was trying to restrict it to, but you're quite right about K-9 and Company. —Whouk (talk) 21:38, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

"BBC spin-offs" could be read to include things like Slipback and Death Comes to Time (both produced under BBC auspices). How about "Related television programmes"? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 23:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Just "related programmes" should be enough, I think. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 23:51, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

OK. Is there a consensus for this version now? I see Tim has moved the portal link to its own line in the template itself. Should we do this? I'm keen to keen the box as short as we can. —Whouk (talk) 08:46, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

There are also self reference issues lumping-in portal in with main space articles. Tim | meep in my general direction 08:50, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

That's true. Having the blue background at the bottom of the box actually looks quite good.

Separate issue - should the DVDs article move the Lists section? —Whouk (talk) 09:13, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

You could move "Monsters and Aliens" and "Celebrity Appearances" to a line together. They certainly share some common themes. (ahem.) --Aderack 01:05, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spoofs

As not all of the spoofs are programmes (although I realise that's all but one), and as it is a big list, could we put Doctor Who spoofs in the lists section rather than related programmes? It would fill out the celeb appearances line too and would leave the bottom section for italicised titles. Any views one way or the other? —Whouk (talk) 18:14, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:25, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Episodes by date

What exactly are the criteria for inclusion in this template? List of Doctor Who episodes by date seems kind of sketchy to me - it's a little fancrufty, and it's got an ongoing merge discussion. --Brian Olsen 19:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] K-9 Adventures and Sarah Jane Investigates

This is more a heads-up than a call for discussion, although if anyone wants to discuss it they can: the consensus at the Doctor Who WikiProject is that it's premature to put these programmes in the template at this time. (I mention it here because four different editors have tried to put Sarah Jane Investigates in the template today.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Since it's been confirmed in the latest Doctor Who Magazine, the consensus seemed to be to add Sarah Jane Investigates now. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 16:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Torchwood De-Classified

I've added this to the Related Programmes section of the template. It was broadcast after the early morning repeats of Torchwood on BBC3. It's only a 10 minute programme and the listings show only 3 episodes. I would have thought there would be an episode of T D-C after every episode of Torchwood. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zaphod Beeblebrox (talk • contribs) 07:25, October 23, 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether this should be in the infobox or not: the question is whether it's going to be significant enough to merit an article of its own. Three ten-minute episodes make a fairly marginal case, IMO. I think I'll remove it for now, but if an article is created and maintained, it can be restored. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 23:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Big Finish audios

Hey, just wondering: is there a particular reason the Big Finish Who range isn't linked off the panel? It's a pretty significant hunk of material! Arguably, it's about as significant as the books -- especially given its much broader exposure of late, with the BBC7 transmissions (and commissions!). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.139.9.136 (talk • contribs) 04:49, 21 November, 2006 (UTC).