Talk:Doctor Who#Tables

I think a note is necessary to let people know that not all episodes/stories are included (Shada) to avoid confusion and misuse of the episode and story counts displayed on this page. Spectritus (talk) 10:12, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:Not necessary. Shada wasn't completed so doesn't exist for the purposes of an episode count, even though it's been subsequently reconstructed. U-Mos (talk) 10:21, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::It was later completed and broadcast in an animated form and is still a Doctor Who serial. Spectritus (talk) 10:24, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:This is an infobox. It's point is to provide a brief summary of the article. While footnotes can be useful, there is no need to introduce complications for the sake of it. (If you are going to complicate matters, why stop at Shada? There are further edge cases and complications around the number of stories and episodes that warrant mention as much as Shada.) Bondegezou (talk) 10:32, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::Yes, but the episode and story counts were changed to exclude Shada and this change should be mentioned somewhere. Spectritus (talk) 11:29, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:::Not that it justifies adding the footnote, but when and by whom were the counts "changed to exclude Shada{{-"}}? – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 11:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::::@Rhain What I meant is that it should be said somewhere that some episodes aren't included. Spectritus (talk) 13:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:::::That's a different sentence entirely, and not at all what your proposed footnote suggested. In any case, I still think it's unnecessary; it's implied that the counts are for main episodes only, not supplementary ones. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 13:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC) {{User:Rhain/watching}}

::::::@Rhain All 6 episodes of Shada are main ones. Also, the episode count is supposed to show all episodes. Spectritus (talk) 15:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:::::::None of those episodes were finished or broadcast because they were abandoned. They were later adapted and released as separate productions. DonQuixote (talk) 16:54, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::::::::@DonQuixote Shada has always been and always will be a main Doctor Who serial. It may not originally have been completed and broadcast but it has been. And to confirm this even more, it's listed as part of season 17 on BBC iPlayer. Spectritus (talk) 17:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::Unfinished productions are nothing new. The only new bit is that these specific episodes were later adapted into different media. [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/UnfinishedEpisode tvtropes/UnfinishedEpisode] DonQuixote (talk) 17:20, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::Shada is no longer unfinished. And as I said before, the number of episodes field is supposed to display all episodes. Spectritus (talk) 17:51, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::::Yeah, no. It's literally unfinished. What you're referring to are adaptations. There's at least five different adaptations: narration (VHS), audio drama (Big Finish), two different animation projects and a novelisation. None of which are the original work. DonQuixote (talk) 19:23, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::::@DonQuixote The BBC made an animated version which is basically what the live-action version would have been but animated. The reason for the choice of animation is probably because the cast members had considerably aged and Denis Carey had passed away. Spectritus (talk) 19:29, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::::::Seriously, dude. It's an adaptation. The original work was never completed. Also, see List of Star Trek: The Original Series episodes where the original pilot was actually completed but never broadcast as part of the programme. Again, unfinished and unbroadcast works are nothing new. You wanting to treat this work differently from other works is WP:OR. DonQuixote (talk) 19:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::::::Funnily enough, you don't even have to look at a different series for another example—Doctor Who{{'}}s "pilot" was also completed but never broadcast (for almost 30 years), yet that isn't counted either. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 22:00, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::::::@DonQuixote I understand that it's not included. All I'm saying is that it should be said somewhere. Spectritus (talk) 22:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::It's already mentioned in prose. The infobox is for quick information without any complications. Complicated history can be mentioned in the article body. DonQuixote (talk) 22:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::::::::@DonQuixote What do you mean by "in prose"? Spectritus (talk) 22:52, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::::See Shada (Doctor Who), for a start. DonQuixote (talk) 22:57, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::::::::::@DonQuixote Why can't it be mentioned on the series' page? People who don't know about Shada won't check its page. Spectritus (talk) 23:00, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::::::It's listed and mentioned at List of Doctor Who episodes (1963–1989) and Doctor Who season 17 DonQuixote (talk) 23:04, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::::::::::::@DonQuixote It should be mentioned on the series' main page. Spectritus (talk) 23:13, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::::::::Unless there's significant coverage, no, it doesn't have to be mentioned in every article. DonQuixote (talk) 23:17, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::::::::::::::Most people will just look at the series' main page, hence the fact it's the main page. Therefore, it should be mentioned on the main page, whether it's in the infobox or not. Spectritus (talk) 12:27, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::::::::::::::::Based on due weight, it's not that important to the history of the programme. DonQuixote (talk) 16:28, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::::::::::::::::@DonQuixote The episode count is important information. Spectritus (talk) 00:19, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

::{{od|::::::::::::::::::::::::}} Of course it is; that's why it's mentioned twice in the article (including the infobox). If the reader wants to know which episodes are included in the count, they can do so here and here. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 00:24, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

:::@Spectritus If there's isn't significant coverage, then you just have to accept the fact that most people don't care about Shada and that it's just trivia. DonQuixote (talk) 01:11, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

::::@DonQuixote Alright. Spectritus (talk) 10:31, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

:I agree with the above editors, it is not necessary. Include this note as prose. WP:DROPTHESTICK. -- Alex_21 _TALK 21:35, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::@Spectritus Again: WP:DROPTHESTICK. There is clearly a lack of consensus here. -- Alex_21 _TALK 03:56, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

:::@Alex 21 Alright. I was just wondering, is Resurrection of the Daleks counted as 2 or 4 episodes? Spectritus (talk) 11:30, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

::::Two, per its infobox and episodes table. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 11:40, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::@Rhain Okay, thanks. Spectritus (talk) 11:42, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Can somebody familiar with this stuntman on the Show help us to find sources and add them to the article? Bearian (talk) 21:52, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I've done a short edit on the canonicity of the 1960s Peter Cushing film, both here and at Dr. Who (Dalek films). But I'm no expert and it would be good if someone looked the edits over and reworded them if necessary. Adpete (talk) 07:45, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Any list or comment about The Doctor's companions in the early days is incomplete without mention of Leela (Louise Jamieson) who travelled with the fourth Doctor. PaulBartleyD (talk) 00:56, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

:WP:SOFIXIT. -- Alex_21 _TALK 01:27, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

• She's certainly not missing from the actual list. Besides the first three (Susan, Barbara, and Ian), the section on this article mentioned three "notable companions" from the classic series—Romana, Sarah Jane, and Jo—which seems logical as each appeared in at least three seasons. I've added a few more long-running companions (which coincidentally results in at least one per Doctor). – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 02:30, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

This is a big sentence anyway, but the comma after "and they are reincarnated" should not be there. Arguably, this sentence should be broken up for clarity. "The transition from one actor to another is written into the plot of the series with the concept of regeneration into a new incarnation, a plot device in which, when a Time Lord is fatally injured, their cells regenerate and they are reincarnated, into a different body with mannerisms and behaviour, but the same memories, explaining each actor's distinct portrayal, as they all represent different stages in the life of the Doctor and, together, they form a single lifetime with a single narrative." Brandonlicata (talk) 23:31, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

:{{Done|Fixed}}, and rephrased a little too. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 23:34, 13 April 2025 (UTC)