Talk:Doctor Who: Podshock
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Podcasting, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's knowledge of notable podcasts, and podcast-related information. If you would like to participate, don't hesitate to join! |
| Unassessed | This article has been rated as Unassessed-Class on the assessment scale. |
 |
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. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class. |
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] better
Just a quick thanks to the unknown user who added the correspondants section, and to Tim! who added categories.
Let's keep making this page better. Liyster 00:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
If someone would include links to pocast rankings of Podshock. It would be inappropriate for me (being affiliated with the podcast) to do so based on wiki etiquette and conflicts of interest. This may help in the notability criterion.
I've heard that issue 1 of SciFi Now reviews Podshock. Can someone confirm?
[edit] Notability Rationale
Could whomever placed the notability tag please revisit this article in its current form and state whether notability has been established? The article is quite different from its April form. CzechOut 07:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- I've deleted the notability thing, since it's a fully notable subject.--Rambutan (talk) 07:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Popularity
Regarding the statement that "Although Podshock was once the most prolific of the Doctor Who themed podcasts, its popularity has been in steady decline since July, 2007", the reference given is to iTunes, but iTunes does not allow the claim to be measured or verified. ---- The Missing Hour (talk) 18:45, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Itunes ratings can be easily skewed or forged altogether. There is no documentation whatsoever to prove 'success' based upon iTunes ratings; therefore this statement is irrelevant and should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.199.56.202 (talk) 20:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Outpost Gallifrey
Page currently says:
-
- Although Outpost Gallifrey officially ceased as a portal website on December 1, 2007, the most popular parts of the website still continue and the site continues to support the podcast.
This needs citation and amplification. OG is just a portal now. It's merely a conduit by which some of the features of the old site can be accessed. Lyon said "All good things must come to an end, and so it is with Outpost Gallifrey", and "Outpost Gallifrey as you know it is dead", and " . . . while the Outpost itself goes away . . ." I mean, those are pretty definitive statements. Since there is no Outpost, how can it have a relationship with any one podcast? It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me. And this notion of "the site" is a falacious one as well. There is no single Outpost anymore. Gallifreyone.com is just the conduit by which people now get to DoctorWhoNews.com and DoctorWhoForum.com and other sites. Any claim that OG supports DW:P needs to have a better. referenced explanation of how that could be.
Perhaps the whole OG/DW:P relationship should simply be viewed historically, as that's the only thing that can be clearly cited (via a link to the last archived form of OG). Something like, "In 2007, Podshock enjoyed a unique relationship with Outpost Gallifrey. It was the only Doctor Who podcast the site sanctioned, just prior to the devolution of the site caused by the withdrawal of it's founder, Shaun Lyons."CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 04:42, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
