Forum:Big Finish CD extras prefix

Forums → Archive index → Panopticon archives → Big Finish CD extras prefix

This thread has been archived.

Please create a new thread on the new forums if you want to talk about this topic some more.
Please DO NOT add to this discussion.

Should we have a prefix for the CD extras on Big Finish audios, in the vein of DCOM? The CD extras occasionally contain production info worth citing in real-world articles and behind the scenes sections. — Rob T Firefly - Δ∇ - 12:25, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

What's the alternative? Citing them by the cd they appear on? Boblipton ^{talk to me} 12:29, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

The alternative is to just cite them as AUDIO, AUDIO, or whatever other prefix the audio story has, but since those are in-universe prefixes meant to refer to the story content it doesn't fit. We already cite info from DVD commentaries, which are intrinsically part of the story's release medium but not in-universe content, by using (DCOM: Story Name), it seems to me that we should be doing the same with CD extras. — Rob T Firefly - Δ∇ - 13:32, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

So, what would everyone think about getting it started as BFCDE? — Rob T Firefly - Δ∇ - 06:45, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

I'll go with that. TemporalSpleen ^{talk to me} 08:03, October 31, 2011 (UTC)

Right, since there seems to have been no objections I've put up BFCDE and added it to Help:Prefixes. — Rob T Firefly - Δ∇ - 02:51, November 5, 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I keep forgetting to respond to this thread. Deleted your creation cause I actually do have an objection to BFCDE. Problem for me is that it's a confusion conflation of two existing prefixes, AUDIO and AUDIO. I'd prefer something that is a bit more distinctive, like

• BFEX
• BFDOC
• BFINT, or just INT, to indicate interview

There's also the issue of whether we actually need another prefix at all, since there's no particular reason why DOC wouldn't work, since it's not specifically for video documentaries.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 03:12: Sat 05 Nov 2011 

I think DOC would be semantically awkward; seeing (DOC: A Town Called Fortune) seems confusing to me ("there's a documentary called 'A Town Called Fortune?'") rather than a specialized prefix that explains what it is as a bonus which doesn't have its own title, included with the cited story's release, like DCOM. The CD Extras seem also to be a very specific sort of production, while not a full-blown programme like Doctor Who Confidential or Torchwood Declassified there's still a certain cohesive formula and style to them. Informal chat, interview, a bit of music, boom. There's even something of a "title sequence" with Nick Briggs' modulated voice shouting "CD EXTRAS!" in your ear at the start. For these reasons I feel they merit their own prefix.

As for the abbreviation, I think BFCDE would work the best and is sufficiently different than what exists at BFC or BFDE; in my opinion nobody would look at BFCDE and expect to find Cybermen or Dalek Empire there, or vice versa. If you really don't dig BFCDE, though, there are the other options. As CD Extras span multiple Big Finish product ranges and are a distinctly BF thing, I feel they should at least start with BF, and I think BFEX is the most suitable out of those you suggested. — Rob T Firefly - Δ∇ - 03:39, November 5, 2011 (UTC)

Should we, if we're suggesting the need for a separate prefix actually have a section on the article for the CD extras? The information, if any is covered is currently covered in the Notes section of the article.

So couldn't we link it just as [[AUDIO]] or [[DOC]]: ''[[Heroes of Sontar#Notes|Heroes of Sontar CD Extras]]''? --Tangerineduel / talk 15:30, November 5, 2011 (UTC)

Well, it seems to me the point of the prefix system is easy linkage. If you start suggesting to people they need to do a section link and a pipe trick just to cite something, I think we'll see a decline in proper citations. Plus, if you start suggesting that we need to have a section for notes about the extras, I think that would open the floodgates to sections on TV stories for episode commentary notes. And I don't think we really want that.

So we're back, I think, to just picking a solid prefix. THe BFCDE thing just doesn't work for me, cause when I look at it, I think it looks like it's trying to say both BFC and BFDE. I don't see the "CD" at first glance, perhaps because I don't think of audio as something that comes from a CD.

So if you're amenable to BFEX, that's going in a direction I can live with. However, I'd toss this out. What about the simpler, three-letter, BFX? It's one less letter to type, and it jumps out a bit more.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 04:05: Sun 06 Nov 2011 

Additionally to your first point, as with DCOM or PCOM the useful info in a story's CD extras is not always about the story in question. I started thinking about this whole thing after listening to the extras on A Town Called Fortune, in which mention is made by Maggie Stables of some of the events which led to her getting cast as Evelyn Smythe; this stuff would be good for us to cite and add to Maggie's article as well as the behind-the-scenes section of Evelyn's, but would not be as helpful if we just stuck it all in the story's article and left it there.

BFX is neat, I like it. — Rob T Firefly - Δ∇ - 05:06, November 6, 2011 (UTC)

BFX is easy and simply marks it out as different on first glance and immediately separates it from BFA and also other four letter prefixes. --Tangerineduel / talk 16:07, November 6, 2011 (UTC)

Cool. Well, let the suggestion breathe until say the 12th, and if there are no objections by then , BFX it'll be.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 20:49: Mon 07 Nov 2011 

Archivist's notes

BFX did in fact become the prefix for extras found on BF CDs.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 20:35: Tue 01 May 2012