Talk:List of future releases

Coverage

there are one or two things on this page that have been realeased. Eudfgshjfhbjsdhfgdjsiu (usertalk:Eudfgshjfhbjsdhfgdjsiu) 6 April, 2020, 2:54

Should the upcoming Arcbeetle The Minister of Chance novel be added? I know this site has hang-ups about that series but knowing Arcbeetle they are going to lean heavily into the connections with Doctor Who. I think the fact that they're able to create a novel for the series shows that the legal issues that this site is concerned with aren't that problematic. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 09:32, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Whether they lean into the Who connection or not, we will cover the book if it's fully licensed, albeit as {{invalid}}; it is only because of the alleged legal issues that the audio series is not currently covered in some capacity. If new data on the Minister's legal status do in fact come to light as a result of this release, and clear up the prior suspicions that the Minister was to some degree a BBC-owned character and therefore illegally used in the audios, there will be no argument against creating pages for the audio series and, yes, the book. Although whether they're valid will perhaps be a discussion of its own. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 09:36, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll add it to the page because I don't think there's any possibility that Arcbeetle would publish something that isn't fully licensed. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 09:41, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Historical question

For fact-finding purposes, I would like to know when and where it was decided to allow this page and List of future releases. Does anyone remember where the discussion took place? Thanks Shambala108 ☎ 01:35, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Hm. Good question. I think there was a discussion in the Forums clarifying all this — though it's hard to be sure in the current state of affairs.

That being said, as SOTO's ruling pointed out, Tardis:Who writes policy does allow for community consensus to emerge even outside the Forum. The de facto endorsement of this page and its BF-centric little sibling by the community for several years does, I think, justify their explicit addition to Tardis:Where spoilers are allowed. No time like the present, there — I'll go take care of that. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 23:41, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Books

Hi, can upcoming books published by BBC Children's Books or BBC Books also be added to their respective pages as well as here; i.e. BBC Children's Books and BBC Books (2022).

Thanks. Doc77can ☎ 22:11, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

UNIT spin-off

I'm not entirely sure that the source cited for this is entirely reliable. The original source was a mirror rumour, which historically haven't always been terribly reliable, and I think other sources took that and reported on it and then other sources reported on those prior sources, leading to some sources saying it was officially confirmed. I think that we should wait until we have official confirmation of this, as opposed to just a rumour. Aquanafrahudy 📢 12:04, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

This specific The Mirror article you are mentioning here was specifically written by Nicola Methven who has been known as being very reliable with her obtained information. If it’s written by Nicola Methven, you can trust that it’s not just something made up. Danniesen ☎ 18:45, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Okay, then. I had assumed that it was just a rumour. Sorry. Aquanafrahudy 📢 18:49, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Well, there’s always a chance it could not be true, and if it had been any other The Mirror writer, I wouldn’t believe it, but Nicola Methven has been known to be a reliable writer. Danniesen ☎ 18:54, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

New evidence: Redgrave knows nothing about a Unit spin off, unless she's lying through her teeth, which is perfectly possible. [1] Is this enough evidence to remove it, do you think? Aquanafrahudy 📢 15:40, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Actors are usually contracted under an NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement), which means that they legally can’t say anything, which means that if the spin-off exists, she has to deny knowledge of it (if it hadn’t been announced) and deny that she’s in it. Basically she can only remain oblivious no matter what. Danniesen ☎ 16:14, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Good point, didn't think of that. Aquanafrahudy 📢 17:33, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

All of the back-catalogue on iPlayer

Do you think that this is notable enough to be documented on here? Aquanafrahudy 📢 08:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Exercising caution in "dummy dates"

So, I'm not exactly sure what the exact logistics behind them are but, on internet shopping sites like Amazon, when an item they've listed gets cancelled from release, there's a chance that the listing will still turn up in search results, where it will still be listed as an upcoming release with what I like to call a "dummy date". Nine times out of ten, the dummy date will be an unrealistically long time in the future. The item I just removed from the Titan graphic novel release section, an untitled Doctor Who one-shot by Jody Houser set for release on 2 January 2079, is a blatant example of this. I strongly suspect the The Many Doctors Collection collection in the same section, with its scheduled release half a decade from now, is also a dummy date for an item that has clearly been cancelled. WaltK ☎ 10:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure what we can do really. We don't know for certain something has been cancelled, maybe it's just been delayed, and if it just ends up on this page for eternity (or as long as the listing exists) with a far-off date, that's not a huge problem. Maybe a footnote saying that the release has maybe been cancelled, or that the dummy date is obviously not real, could help? Danochy ☎ 11:00, 29 May 2024 (UTC)