Talk:Now on the Big Screen in Colour!

Deletion?

I disagree. As shown at Black Dalek (Dr. Who and the Daleks), this illustration features new information of interest to covering the Cushingverse. And And Introducing... gives us a clear precedent for having pages about illustrations if we have something to say about them. What harm is done by having the page, I ask you?

(Depending on whether the suggestion at Thread:232095 of partnering with a separate Dalek Movies Wiki is successful, and generally on how that thread resolves regarding our coverage of the Cushingverse, this position may change. But within the purview where ours is the only Wiki to collect information about that continuity and its own nooks and crannies, I feel like this page is mildly useful. And, again, I see no harm in having it around. It's niche, but so are a lot of pages on the Wiki.) --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 19:08, December 12, 2019 (UTC)

But it's not a story, it's a poster with no narrative, and there's nothing in this page really. Why have you added it as an appearance on pages like that? OS25🤙☎️ 21:43, December 12, 2019 (UTC)

This is not a story, it's a poster. The way we deal with those is as image files. Shambala108 ☎ 23:32, December 12, 2019 (UTC)

It nevertheless contains new narrative information (the Black Dalek's pyro-flame)! NOTVALID information, sure, since the Wiki decided posters weren't valid sources; but so? The Black Dalek (Dr. Who and the Daleks) page already bears an {{Invalid}} tag. I don't understand why you're privileging some invalid sources over others. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 06:59, December 13, 2019 (UTC)

Because it's not a story, it's an image made to advertise Doctor Who and the Daleks. Any page that wants to reference the non-narrative element can do so by saying "one poster for Doctor Who and the Daleks featured blablabla" with an image attached. OS25🤙☎️ 13:09, December 13, 2019 (UTC)

Sure, but how do we cite that information in the body of an article, if there's no page to point to? Shambala didn't just delete the page, but also the relevant information at Black Dalek (Dr. Who and the Daleks). --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 15:01, December 13, 2019 (UTC)

"A poster for blah-blah-blah stated that such-and-such." Include an image of the poster. Shambala108 ☎ 15:18, December 13, 2019 (UTC)

But you can only do that in the BtS section, not the Biography. Which seems wrong to me. Black Dalek (Dr. Who and the Daleks) is already an {{invalid}} page as a whole, why should information from one specific type of invalid source (posters) be segregated even further? Can things be double-invalid now? --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 15:24, December 13, 2019 (UTC)