Template talk:Dalek stories

TV movie? Frontier in Space

Since the TV movie begins on Skaro, features the voice of the Daleks, and the Daleks are mentioned by name later, is there any reason why it shouldn't be included? Similarly why isn't Frontier in Space listed? Any objections if I add them? 23skidoo 04:10, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

They are Appearances so they should be added Dark Lord Xander 04:19, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I goofed and forgot to include the TV movie with Frontier or if someone took it out. I've added the TV movie to the template (again?) at any rate. 23skidoo 05:11, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Pandorica?

Should "The Pandorica Opens" be counted as a minor appearence instead? I would venture to say "The Big Bang" is, also. They're not the major villians of the episode. Glimmer721 17:13, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

Bad Wolf - Major?!

I think Bad Wolf should be a minor appearance. True, they are the cliffhanger at the end, but that is also what happens in both Frontier in Space and Army of Ghosts, and both of those are minor... -184.45.111.41^{talk to me} 19:30, May 24, 2013 (UTC)

What makes a "Dalek story"?

I wanted to open up a debate about removing certain stories due to the questionable criteria of what qualifies as a "Dalek story", as opposed to a television story that features the Daleks.

By the reasoning that I understand from other "villain story templates" (pat pending), a "(villain) story" is one where said enemy has a major role in which the story does not work without them, or, plain simple, they are the sole antagonist. Stories in which they serve as a cameo appearance or as a minor threat, or appear only through archive footage, are instead put on their complete appearance pages.

As such, I have listed a handful of stories I believe should not be on the "villain story template" for the following reasons;

• Cameo: The Space Museum • Doctor Who • Army of Ghosts • The Wedding of River Song • Hell Bent
• Minor player: The Five Doctors • The Waters of Mars • The Pilot
• Archive footage/Images: The Man from MI.5 • The Wheel in Space • The Lie of the Land

I eagerly await a counter argument for this debates, Sincerely, BananaClownMan 04:34, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't think they can be said to be minor players in Doctor Who, Army of Ghosts and The Pilot; even if in all cases they are only briefly-onscreen, they are crucial to the unfolding of the plot. Regardless, the Wiki did away many years ago with parenthetical notes in appearances list like "(cameo)" because they were too ambiguous, and I agree with this. IMO, it's much simpler for all appearances to be listed than to quibble endlessly. I can see an argument for excluding the "archive footage"/"images" category, but the rest I strongly feel should stay. Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 04:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

I understand your reasoning, but this template would only serve to duplicate the work done at Daleks - list of appearances, if we don't come up with some definition which takes into account how the template is used. Also, in my opinion, having difficulty in defining something doesn't mean we should give up trying. As an example, the biological definition of a species is endlessly debated, but most biologists would agree that that it's worth having a definition for. The consequences of defining a "Dalek story" are obviously much less impactful than all that, but that should also make it an easier task to complete. And "quibbling" can be avoided/reduced by having as robust a delineation method as possible. Danochy ☎ 06:54, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

A point well made by User:Danochy. BananaClownMan 07:15, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Alright, User:BananaClownMan has called for me to make a ruling. Indeed, I've had time to ponder this.

Danochy makes a good point about it still being valuable to create a working definition even when the exact boundaries are blurry; but another thing about debatable definitions is that (unless there are other concerns such as lack of space — not really an issue here) it is generally best, when in doubt, to have as wide a definition as is reasonably possible. People who don't feel that X story "ought to count" can just see it and ignore it; while people who would want such a story listed would risk not being aware of its existence if it were left off the template.

As such, I remain disinclined to authorise the removal of things like The Pilot from the template.

However: I don't think there can be a more 'robust', less ambiguous criterion than "does at least one living, authentic Dalek play a part in this story". This excludes most cases of archive footage. As such, The Man from MI.5, The Wheel in Space and The Lie of the Land can be removed from the template. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 02:08, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Series 13 appearances

I'm somewhat struggling to see why Once, Upon Time and The Vanquishers are absent from this list. Sure, the Daleks only physically appear for a matter of seconds in both, but they're important narratively speaking to both episodes. Given their explicit mention in the note at the top of the template, I thought it'd be best to raise the matter here first. Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 23:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. This seems to be going against the ruling above, unless I'm misreading the situation.
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 07:09, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Daleks in Colour listed under Fourteenth Doctor era

Yes, Daleks in Colour is released during the Fourteenth Doctor era, but it is not a Fourteenth Doctor adventure, but rather an alternate version of The Daleks. In my opinion, it is equivalent to an animated or reconstruction version of a missing episode, and should not be included at all. However, if we were to include it, then it should be labelled as an alternate version of The Daleks and not have its own separate entry as a Fourteenth Doctor adventure, which it is not. SirSX3 ☎ 05:26, 30 December 2023 (UTC)