Forum:These title card articles: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
m (Robot: Automated text replacement (-{{Forumheader|Panopticon}} +{{Archive|Panopticon archives}})) |
m (Sorry for having to do this, but I'm being forced to change my sig, and clean up after it, by Wikia Staff) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
The page might be interesting for the first and second doctor episodes, but by the third doctor, it gets pretty repetitive. It might make more since if there was just one of each version of the title cards, but as it is now, the article is too repetitive.[[User:Icecreamdif|Icecreamdif]] 17:59, October 10, 2010 (UTC) | The page might be interesting for the first and second doctor episodes, but by the third doctor, it gets pretty repetitive. It might make more since if there was just one of each version of the title cards, but as it is now, the article is too repetitive.[[User:Icecreamdif|Icecreamdif]] 17:59, October 10, 2010 (UTC) | ||
::It's pretty harmless to leave around, but I do find it odd that it's not complete. It's extraordinary weird to me that the one time in the Pertwee era where we'd ''need'' a title card — part 1 of ''Invasion of the Dinosaurs'' versus the other parts — isn't actually on the list. There are other gaps in the "classic" series as well, which somewhat muddy the point of the page. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} | ::It's pretty harmless to leave around, but I do find it odd that it's not complete. It's extraordinary weird to me that the one time in the Pertwee era where we'd ''need'' a title card — part 1 of ''Invasion of the Dinosaurs'' versus the other parts — isn't actually on the list. There are other gaps in the "classic" series as well, which somewhat muddy the point of the page. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}'''16:35:44 Sat '''11 Jun 2011 </span> | ||
Revision as of 04:31, 28 August 2012
Forums → Archive index → Panopticon archives → These title card articles
These list of title cards articles such as Doctor Who title cards. Are they even necessary? I can understand if the images are used on the respected pages they're intended for but do we really need list articles about them? If not then we should put them up for deletion. --Victory93 23:03, October 9, 2010 (UTC)
- The article is interesting, the earlier stories perhaps more so than the later ones. The notes on which font is used could be backed up either with citation or examples of the font which is being cited that the title cards use.
- I think it's useful article. The images help to illustrate the concept of 'title cards' and show the use of the title cards throughout Doctor Who. --Tangerineduel 11:34, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, its more of a nice feature that a necessary one.--Skittles the hog 17:00, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
The page might be interesting for the first and second doctor episodes, but by the third doctor, it gets pretty repetitive. It might make more since if there was just one of each version of the title cards, but as it is now, the article is too repetitive.Icecreamdif 17:59, October 10, 2010 (UTC)
- It's pretty harmless to leave around, but I do find it odd that it's not complete. It's extraordinary weird to me that the one time in the Pertwee era where we'd need a title card — part 1 of Invasion of the Dinosaurs versus the other parts — isn't actually on the list. There are other gaps in the "classic" series as well, which somewhat muddy the point of the page.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 16:35:44 Sat 11 Jun 2011
- It's pretty harmless to leave around, but I do find it odd that it's not complete. It's extraordinary weird to me that the one time in the Pertwee era where we'd need a title card — part 1 of Invasion of the Dinosaurs versus the other parts — isn't actually on the list. There are other gaps in the "classic" series as well, which somewhat muddy the point of the page.
