Forum:David Campbell and others' upgrade to companion: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(Created page with "{{Forumheader|Panopticon}} <!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> David Campbell, Samantha Briggs, [[Marco Po...") |
m (Sorry for having to do this, but I'm being forced to change my sig, and clean up after it, by Wikia Staff) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{archive|Panopticon archives}}[[category:policy changers]][[category:category issues]] | ||
<!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> | <!-- Please put your content under this line. Be sure to sign your edits with four tildes ~~~~ --> | ||
[[David Campbell]], [[Samantha Briggs]], [[Marco Polo]], [[Bret Vyon]] and other, more obscure characters, like ones from "[[The Keys of Marinus]]", have now gotten upgraded to single adventure companions of their respective Doctors. can we get a consensus for/against this? to me it really does seem like stretching the definition of companion (and beyond) its utmost limits.--[[Special:Contributions/24.61.10.36|24.61.10.36]]<sup>[[User talk:24.61.10.36#top|talk to me]]</sup> 22:41, January 30, 2012 (UTC) | [[David Campbell]], [[Samantha Briggs]], [[Marco Polo]], [[Bret Vyon]] and other, more obscure characters, like ones from "[[The Keys of Marinus]]", have now gotten upgraded to single adventure companions of their respective Doctors. can we get a consensus for/against this? to me it really does seem like stretching the definition of companion (and beyond) its utmost limits.--[[Special:Contributions/24.61.10.36|24.61.10.36]]<sup>[[User talk:24.61.10.36#top|talk to me]]</sup> 22:41, January 30, 2012 (UTC) | ||
:I agree. There seems to be a general pattern of expansion of any term unti it becomes meaningless. (cf. C. Northcote Parkinson on committology). It would be nice if the list were trimmed. [[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] <sup>[[User talk:Boblipton|talk to me]]</sup> 01:54, January 31, 2012 (UTC) | |||
::There should be reverted, no way are they companions - they are allies. It was just one User who started to add the navbox and the categories to the pages - some of which I reverted - then another User came along and started to do the exact same thing, so I was fighting a loosing battle. | |||
::I have already suggested to [[User:Tangerineduel]] that with the random individuals being added to the categories of companions, allies and enemies, we completely strip the categories so we have nothing in them and we have a discussion, per Doctor, of who is a companion, ally and enemy. It will be time-taking, but we may finally get somewhere. [[User:Mini-mitch|MM]]/<small>[[User talk:Mini-mitch|Want to talk?]]</small> 09:45, January 31, 2012 (UTC) | |||
==Archivist's notes== | |||
This was part of a series of threads in late 2011/early 2012 which eventually resulted in the dramatic thinning of companion categories and the complete elimination of "x Doctor allies" and "x Doctor enemies" categories. See also [[Forum:Enemies, intention and association]], [[Forum:What makes an ally and an enemy?]] and [[Forum:What counts as an enemy?]] {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}20:25: Wed 02 May 2012 </span> | |||
Latest revision as of 03:24, 28 August 2012
Forums → Archive index → Panopticon archives → David Campbell and others' upgrade to companion
David Campbell, Samantha Briggs, Marco Polo, Bret Vyon and other, more obscure characters, like ones from "The Keys of Marinus", have now gotten upgraded to single adventure companions of their respective Doctors. can we get a consensus for/against this? to me it really does seem like stretching the definition of companion (and beyond) its utmost limits.--24.61.10.36talk to me 22:41, January 30, 2012 (UTC)
- I agree. There seems to be a general pattern of expansion of any term unti it becomes meaningless. (cf. C. Northcote Parkinson on committology). It would be nice if the list were trimmed. Boblipton talk to me 01:54, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
- There should be reverted, no way are they companions - they are allies. It was just one User who started to add the navbox and the categories to the pages - some of which I reverted - then another User came along and started to do the exact same thing, so I was fighting a loosing battle.
- I have already suggested to User:Tangerineduel that with the random individuals being added to the categories of companions, allies and enemies, we completely strip the categories so we have nothing in them and we have a discussion, per Doctor, of who is a companion, ally and enemy. It will be time-taking, but we may finally get somewhere. MM/Want to talk? 09:45, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
Archivist's notes[[edit source]]
This was part of a series of threads in late 2011/early 2012 which eventually resulted in the dramatic thinning of companion categories and the complete elimination of "x Doctor allies" and "x Doctor enemies" categories. See also Forum:Enemies, intention and association, Forum:What makes an ally and an enemy? and Forum:What counts as an enemy?
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 20:25: Wed 02 May 2012
