Talk:P.R.O.B.E. (series): Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Portents of Doom placement == | == Portents of Doom placement == | ||
For fear of edit warring, I am taking the discussion of upon which table ''Portents of Doom'' should be placed to this page. Basically put, the disagreement comes to this. First, [[User:EBP]] adds ''Portents of Doom'' to the "live action features" subheading. I, not noticing this, then add it to the "PROBE Case Files shorts" subheadings. User:EBP notices this, and then removes their original contribution. Then, [[User:Scrooge MacDuck]] reverts this, I delete it again, my rationale being that it doesn't make sense to have it written twice (and not actually noticing that it had been placed in the "live action features" subheading before my edit), then Scrooge removes it from the "PROBE case files" subheading, reinstating it in the "live action features" subheading. However, I feel that both BBV's decision to market it as one of the PROBE Case Files and the fact that it is only twenty minutes and therefore more of a short than a feature means that it is better suited to the "PROBE case files shorts" subheading. {{User:Aquanafrahudy/Sig}} 12:06, 15 October 2024 (UTC) | For fear of edit warring, I am taking the discussion of upon which table ''Portents of Doom'' should be placed to this page. Basically put, the disagreement comes to this. First, [[User:EBP]] adds ''Portents of Doom'' to the "live action features" subheading. I, not noticing this, then add it to the "PROBE Case Files shorts" subheadings. User:EBP notices this, and then removes their original contribution. Then, [[User:Scrooge MacDuck]] reverts this, I delete it again, my rationale being that it doesn't make sense to have it written twice (and not actually noticing that it had been placed in the "live action features" subheading before my edit), then Scrooge removes it from the "PROBE case files" subheading, reinstating it in the "live action features" subheading. However, I feel that both BBV's decision to market it as one of the PROBE Case Files and the fact that it is only twenty minutes and therefore more of a short than a feature means that it is better suited to the "PROBE case files shorts" subheading. {{User:Aquanafrahudy/Sig}} 12:06, 15 October 2024 (UTC) | ||
: BBV's website frequently lists "connected releases" on series pages, so I don't think the fact that it appears on the ''Case Files'' page is determinative. Rather, what strikes me is that its listing is as ''[https://bbvproductions.co.uk/products/probe-portents-of-doom-video-download PROBE: Portents of Doom]''; contrast actual ''Case Files'', whose name is listed in the format ''[https://bbvproductions.co.uk/products/probe-case-file-21-for-the-hell-of-it-video-download PROBE CASE FILE 21: For The Hell Of It]'' etc. And besides, it physically ''isn't'' a ''Case File'' — it doesn't have the framing device that gives that series its name, of consisting of in-universe footage from Giles's video diary case files. The fact that it's only a featurette and not a feature does make it slightly awkward to list it under "features"; perhaps we should create a separate "special releases" table? But I don't think it's correct to deem it simply a longer ''Case File''. I fully expect that the next actual ''CF'' will carry on the numbering from ''For The Hell Of It'' without counting ''Portents''. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 12:19, 15 October 2024 (UTC) | : BBV's website frequently lists "connected releases" on series pages, so I don't think the fact that it appears on the ''Case Files'' page is determinative. Rather, what strikes me is that its listing is as ''[https://bbvproductions.co.uk/products/probe-portents-of-doom-video-download PROBE: Portents of Doom]''; contrast actual ''Case Files'', whose name is listed in the format ''[https://bbvproductions.co.uk/products/probe-case-file-21-for-the-hell-of-it-video-download PROBE CASE FILE 21: For The Hell Of It]'' etc. And besides, it physically ''isn't'' a ''Case File'' — it doesn't have the framing device that gives that series its name, of consisting of in-universe footage from Giles's video diary case files. The fact that it's only a featurette and not a feature does make it slightly awkward to list it under "features"; perhaps we should create a separate "special releases" table? But I don't think it's correct to deem it simply a longer ''Case File''. I fully expect that the next actual ''CF'' will carry on the numbering from ''For The Hell Of It'' without counting ''Portents''. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 12:19, 15 October 2024 (UTC) | ||
:: It does explicitly say "PROBE CASE FILE 29: Portents of Doom", though, if you look on its page. Fair point on the title, but I do think it is intended to be a part of the actual Case Files range. And it does sort of have the same conceit, if you stretch. It does open with Giles reminiscing about the adventure, and the framing device does appear to be him telling it, even if most of the content isn't diegetic. {{User:Aquanafrahudy/Sig}} 15:44, 15 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 15:44, 15 October 2024
Portents of Doom placement[[edit source]]
For fear of edit warring, I am taking the discussion of upon which table Portents of Doom should be placed to this page. Basically put, the disagreement comes to this. First, User:EBP adds Portents of Doom to the "live action features" subheading. I, not noticing this, then add it to the "PROBE Case Files shorts" subheadings. User:EBP notices this, and then removes their original contribution. Then, User:Scrooge MacDuck reverts this, I delete it again, my rationale being that it doesn't make sense to have it written twice (and not actually noticing that it had been placed in the "live action features" subheading before my edit), then Scrooge removes it from the "PROBE case files" subheading, reinstating it in the "live action features" subheading. However, I feel that both BBV's decision to market it as one of the PROBE Case Files and the fact that it is only twenty minutes and therefore more of a short than a feature means that it is better suited to the "PROBE case files shorts" subheading. Aquanafrahudy 📢 🖊️ 12:06, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- BBV's website frequently lists "connected releases" on series pages, so I don't think the fact that it appears on the Case Files page is determinative. Rather, what strikes me is that its listing is as PROBE: Portents of Doom; contrast actual Case Files, whose name is listed in the format PROBE CASE FILE 21: For The Hell Of It etc. And besides, it physically isn't a Case File — it doesn't have the framing device that gives that series its name, of consisting of in-universe footage from Giles's video diary case files. The fact that it's only a featurette and not a feature does make it slightly awkward to list it under "features"; perhaps we should create a separate "special releases" table? But I don't think it's correct to deem it simply a longer Case File. I fully expect that the next actual CF will carry on the numbering from For The Hell Of It without counting Portents. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 12:19, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- It does explicitly say "PROBE CASE FILE 29: Portents of Doom", though, if you look on its page. Fair point on the title, but I do think it is intended to be a part of the actual Case Files range. And it does sort of have the same conceit, if you stretch. It does open with Giles reminiscing about the adventure, and the framing device does appear to be him telling it, even if most of the content isn't diegetic. Aquanafrahudy 📢 🖊️ 15:44, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
