Talk:BBC New Series Adventures

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Revision as of 11:26, 28 June 2024 by Shnupbups (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Merge proposal

A merge has been proposed for this article. Please share your opinions at the linked page. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 21:06, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

both external links go to the same page. Americanwhofan 19:34, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
That's right. The merge was completed and both links are redirect pages. That just leaves all the pages that use the old links to be updated.--Nyktimos 19:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)


audio books

The whole table is in the article twice. Americanwhofan 11:02, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Changed Layout

I've changed the layout of this page to include future releases. The section includes future Quick Reads, Audio Books and the announced Eleventh Doctor novels. Is this ok with everyone? Matta jr 02:38, December 26, 2009 (UTC)

  • Looks OK. I have given the article further revision to remove redundancy (we don't need the chapter numbers explained multiple times). We also don't need a future releases section - just rolled it into the main lists. I also tightened the intros to each section and added some additional information. 23skidoo 14:42, January 20, 2010 (UTC)
  • I think it's worth considering having a 'placeholder' image for upcoming books/audios until official covers are released - possibly just a black box with the new Who logo to match the dimensions of existing novels? It would hel[ maintain the spacing and layout of the page, they look kinda squished for upcoming titles. Ponk 14:51, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

What about The Moorcock novel?

Isn't the Michael Moorcock novel considered part of this series? If so, it should be included in the chart. If not, there should at least be a link to the article. 68.146.64.9 18:40, January 13, 2011 (UTC)

I'm also wondering the same thing about those new 2 in 1 books. Surely they fit into this as well. Unlike Moorcock's novel however, there is nothing about the 2 in 1 books on the wiki. TheCoud'veBeenKing 08:33, July 1, 2011 (UTC)

Lead

When I encountered it, the lead had these two grafs:

Behind the chapter numbers in the books are symbols similar to the "Gallifreyan writing" seen in the series. The same symbols appear on the spines, and are referred to as Gallifreyan numbers by fans. The recurring patterns in the symbols suggest that Time Lords count in base seven, although a recurring error means that the symbol for 13 is accidentally replaced by the symbol for 11 every time it should appear. This system is not continuing beyond the Tenth Doctor novels.
To date, all NSA releases have utilized photographs of the lead actors as part of the cover design, returning to a practice last used by Target Books during the Peter Davison era.

I'm not really understanding the importance of these points. The first graf isn't worded in a particularly clear way, to my mind. Are we really trying to take something canonical by the page decorations in a book? Seriously, I don't think we can assert that Time Lords count in base-7 based on a series of page decorations that have a logical flaw in them. Moreover, if they're not in the Eleventh Doctor range, they're not a ubiquitous feature of the range, and shouldn't be mentioned in the lead. This info might be re-purposed for inclusion elsewhere in the article, but it's certainly not lead-worthy.

As for the second graf, well, that's just reaching. It's hardly significant to the lead that these books share something in common with a few 1980s Target Books. Especially when that connection is so tenuous. Yes they're photographic, but the thing about the Davison era stuff is that it was drawn directly from the episodes in question, without any sort of manipulation, aside from maybe color balance. These are wholly new works with some original photographic elements. They have much more in common with Big Finish covers than Davison Target covers. In any event, characterising the covers is worth putting in the article, but probably in the body of the article rather than the lead.

  • Please sign your comments. I agree the bit about the photo covers doesn't need to be in the lead, but it does need to be in the article because it is a notable superlative, although having said that it is more accurate to cite the Past Doctor and Eighth Doctor Adventures lines in this regard because they used photos of McGann and the other Doctors as part of their design. 68.146.80.110 17:18, November 4, 2011 (UTC)
Sorry. The first post above was by me on 17 October 2011. Note that if you do come across the odd unsigned post, it's generally a good idea to use {{unsigned}}.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 17:31: Fri 04 Nov 2011 

What about the upcoming past Doctor novels?

What's being done with regards to the three past Doctor novels that have now been announced? (Shada, and the new works by Reynolds and Baxter) It's not going to be accurate to call the New Series Adventures. Have they been designated under a new line? 68.146.80.110 17:18, November 4, 2011 (UTC)

No determination has yet been made. At the moment, we're waiting for more details. We likely won't know for sure what to call them until publication. They clearly won't be NSAs, but we don't yet know what to call them. That said, my guess is that Shada will logically be PROSE, because that designation doesn't apply only to Target novelisations, and this is the first time the story has been officially novelised..
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 17:31: Fri 04 Nov 2011 

Twelfth Doctor Novels

I was just wondering if the delay in adding the Twelfth Doctor novels set to be out this week is because you guys are waiting to verify if they are NSA or not? Tivis014 ☎ 16:07, September 8, 2014 (UTC)

  • It likely had to do with the wiki's policy of not releasing information on stories (televised or otherwise) that haven't been released yet. 68.146.52.234talk to me 20:35, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Engines of War

What's the status of Engines of War? For what it's worth Broadway Books in North America is marketing it as part of the same series as the Twelfth Doctor NSAs. 68.146.52.234talk to me 20:34, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

NSA references in the actual show

Aside from the already mentioned connection between The Monsters Inside and Boom Town, are there any other references to the NSA novels in the show itself? Danfun64 ☎ 22:33, September 6, 2015 (UTC)

I'm not actually convinced that's the show referencing the books. It seems much more likely that that RTD told the people writing the books about the line and suggested that they write the book around it. Do we have any sources which confirm if the book or the episode were made first? OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 23:20, September 6, 2015 (UTC)
I don't have chapter and verse in terms of a source, but according to notes I have compiled (I believe taken from Doctor Who Magazine), on Feb. 3, 2005, the decision was made to add a reference to the novel while filming a scene for Boom Town. Monsters Inside was published in may, so even if this information is incorrect it would have been physically impossible for someone to "write around" an episode that wasn't even completely written yet only a few months earlier. 68.146.52.234talk to me 02:24, September 10, 2015 (UTC)

ISBN numbers

Problem with the ISBN numbers, at least for the recent novels, they only are for the UK editions and not the Broadway Books editions which carry different numbers. 68.146.52.234talk to me 02:24, September 10, 2015 (UTC)

Audiobooks in the wrong order

The Eleventh Doctor audiobook The Gemini Contagion was released on the 14th of March 2011 (14-03-11), and the audiobook The Hounds of Artemis was released on the 5th of May 2011 (05-05-11), but they're displayed the opposite way round in the table. Is there a reason for this, or is this a mistake? AveryLychee ☎ 08:30, November 10, 2018 (UTC)

Specials vs "Past Doctors New Novels"

Where did the term "Past Doctors New Novels" come from? Has it ever been used to describe these books in their release; The Wheel of Ice, Harvest of Time, The Drosten's Curse and In the Blood, or was it made up by someone on this site in lieu of an actual title?

I think that Wikipedia currently handles this situation far better. It leaves out the first three releases entirely - as they have nothing to do with the "New Series". And they count The Coming of the Terraphiles, The Silent Stars Go By, Dark Horizons, Engines of War (which appears to be left off this page), In the Blood and At Childhood's End as special releases (given that they are the releases, often much larger in size, that were released solo).

I think that we should have a separate table - under the Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, Twelfth and Thirteenth stories, for "Special releases" featuring; The Coming of the Terraphiles, The Silent Stars Go By, Dark Horizons, Engines of War, In the Blood and At Childhood's End. While also finding a separate page for; The Wheel of Ice, Harvest of Time and The Drosten's Curse. Xx-connor-xX ☎ 22:09, July 13, 2020 (UTC)

2 in 1 Books

Why are the Eleventh Doctor 2 in 1 Books listed here? They weren't published by BBC Books, but by BBC Children's Books which is a separate imprint owned by a different publisher. So how can they be apart of the NSA line? Doc77can ☎ 01:12, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

These books are recorded on both pages. Perhaps it is an error and they need to be removed from NSA. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎
This problem is also present with some of the anthologies listed. To me, these are examples of a broader issue with the page in that there is not a clear definition of what the series it tries to present is. Bongo50 ☎ 17:39, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

What is an NSA?

So my concerns here come in two parts. Firstly, what is a New Series Adventure? Where does the name come from, is it a real term or a fan term derived from previous ranges like Past Doctor Adventures? Whatever the case, the term doesn't seem to be used commonly, if at all, on official products we deem to be in the range. So at the very least this page should discuss the term somewhere and where it came from. But regardless of what we call it, this series does exist, and we do need a page for it, which brings me to the next point...

What is a New Series Adventure? At the very least, I think we can agree that all NSAs are under the Penguin Character Books' imprint, BBC Books. Everything from The Clockwise Man-Combat Magicks certainly are NSAs. Are the upcoming BBC Books novels in this range? Probably, but it'd be more out of convenience than any official mention of a continuing range, I'd imagine. For that matter, how have we decided what the BBC New Series Adventures#Specials are? Is there something in the production or marketing that makes us think they are separate from the main range, whatever that may be? Or is it simply the fact the lead isn't the current Doctor?

Then we come to the audiobooks, which have retrospectively been grouped on the page The Doctor Tales (series), named after the re-releases of the stories as "Tenth Doctor Tales", "Eleventh Doctor Tales", etc. That's a series name I'm somewhat hesitant over, but that's by the by. The pertinent question is, were these ever referred to as NSAs, or as part of the same series? For all intents and purposes they are definitely a range of as sort, but on the face of it seems to be an otherwise unnamed one, published by BBC Audio, and grouped by fans as NSA audios.

Then we have the anthologies, which is a mix of BBC Books and BBC Children's Books publications, separate imprints; The 2 in 1 books, which should really have a page of their own; "Past Doctors New Novels", which is clearly a fan-made term; and then Other "New Series" ranges which have been excluded for some reason, emphasising the inconsistencies of how we define an NSA.

I have some ideas as to how I'd restructure this page, but I'd like to see if anyone has any new perspectives, or even new information, to bring to the table first, to help us define some sort of series here. But anything would be better than what we have now, which seems to be wiki editor opinion being passed off as a factual name and grouping for a series. Danochy ☎ 10:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree that this page needs a serious overhaul. At the moment it's just a hodge-podge of various "New Who" books, anthologies and audios. I'm away from home right now, but, when I'm back, I'd like to have a look through the various books I own that could be argued to have a place on a page like this to try and identify any common patterns. Bongo50 ☎ 15:39, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi Bongo, that's a very good idea. Hopefully we can find some something. Surely the term NSA has been used somewhere official, even if it is a wiki-derived term. Speaking of which, I checked the edit history, and this page was originally titled "BBC Tenth Doctor Adventures" and "BBC Ninth Doctor Adventures", before the two pages were merged in May 2009. This same change happened over at Wikipedia three years earlier, in July 2006. The discussion here and here are pertinent to this, though I haven't had time to read through them thoroughly yet. Notably, the first discussion sourced the term from OutPost Gallifrey, sadly linking to a now-defunct page. But anyway, this could be useful for a discussion of the origin of the term, which may have been perpetuated by Wikipedia. Danochy ☎ 05:42, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
The only place I could find where the term 'New Series Adventures' was used officially was in the Fact File for The Long Game, which can be found on the BBC Website both here and here, under the section about Kronkburgers. Though I have a feeling that may have itself been derived from a wiki... Shnupbups ☎ 21:32, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Good find! Worth mentioning for sure, when we work out a way to discuss the name on this page somewhere. But you're right, the fact file looks like it was created around 2010, maybe earlier, but after the term became commonplace in Fandom, I dare say. Danochy ☎ 11:57, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
I would like to say that I've not forgotten about this but that compiling the information I wanted to compile is taking longer than expected. Bongo50 ☎ 21:01, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
I've made a forum post outlining my issues with the page, and proposed changes to be made, which can be found here. This should ideally help get momentum going for a rework of the page, and perhaps the wiki as a whole when it comes to defining New Series Adventures. Future discussion should perhaps move there. Shnupbups ☎ 11:26, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://tardis.wiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:BBC_New_Series_Adventures&oldid=3820061"