Talk:Dimensions in Time (TV story)/Archive 1

	This page is an archive. Please do not make any edits here. Edit the active conversation only.

Reconising

(This came from Producton Errors Section)
Susan does not recognise the Sixth Doctor as the Doctor nor does Ace recognise the Sixth Doctor as hers, yet Victoria recognises the Third Doctor, Leela recognises the Seventh Doctor and the Brigadier recognises the Sixth Doctor as an 'old friend' although this doesn't happen after the Seventh regeneration and Dragonfire. However, the Doctor recognises some their own future companions: the Sixth Doctor remembers Ace although he hasn't met her and the Third Doctor recognises Mel never having met her either. Similarly, Nyssa and Peri show no surprise at meeting each other, even though they never met on the original series.

The illusion theory hits a snag, however, during scenes in which the Doctor is seen with more than one companion; could Ace's consciousness be split between two different people? Similarly, at least one companion, Romana II, is seen on her own and she doesn't actually encounter a Doctor. Romana not encountering a Doctor makes sense considering her Doctor, the Fourth, isn't directly involved in events; this is contradicted somewhat by Leela encountering a Doctor, however, these three errors could be explained by the Rani by changing the Time Line, or Romana may not have been taken out of time and placed in the loop, if the novels are taken into account, she and Leela should both be on Galifrey, which explains how Leela knew which companion she was in, where the unspecified K-9 model are from

Release at home

"This story was produced on condition that it would never be repeated or released on VHS or DVD." This has to be a error, right? Considering that the companies did not even start developing the DVD format until 1993 and didn't see its first release until 1995, I doubt that they would be able to say it couldn't be released on DVD. Surely the sentence should say "This story was produced on condition that it would never be repeated or released on VHS." TJ Spyke 23:50, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

A tweak in wording is definitely in order, but does anyone have a good source on what the agreement was? I imagined it wasn't in respect to format, just that it couldn't be repeated or given any home release. Checking Wikipedia, they say the agreement was that "it could never be repeated or sold on a home video for profit". --Nyktimos 22:20, July 19, 2010 (UTC)

Oh yes it is:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/classic/episodeguide/index_az.shtml

http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/classic/episodeguide/dimensionstime/

Thank you for providing these links.

Link to BBC's ep guide has been added to the external links section of page. --Tangerineduel / talk 13:14, July 29, 2012 (UTC)

So the BBCs OWN WEBSITE lists Dimensions in Time under their Classic Series Episode Guide, gives it its own review, treats it exactly the same way it does everything from An Unearthly Child through to the The TV Movie, and yet you STILL won't accept it into your "Doctor Who Universe" theory? This clearly isn't about logic, common sense, or valid cources. it's about your personal prejudices. If the BBCs Official Doctor Who Website includes it as part of the Classic Series then it is obviously retarded not to include it as part of the same saga and refer to the Doctor as non-canonical41.133.0.68^{talk to me} 13:47, July 29, 2012 (UTC)

You can see on this archived discussion Forum:Is Dimensions in Time canon and the forum discussions that link away from it that we as a community have discussed this before. --Tangerineduel / talk 13:54, July 29, 2012 (UTC)

So the discussion of a small group of people on an internet site is a greater authority than the BBC themselves? The OFFICIAL Doctor Who Website lists Dimensions in Time along with all the other First-to-Eighth Doctor tv serials under the "Classic Series Episode Guide". it has its own OFFICIAL BBC pages as part of the Series Proper. Those same BBC pages that list those particular episodes as part of the Doctor Who Universe that you kept pointing to.

And, yet, your "community discussion" carries greater weight than Official BBC Policy!

The only real objection was that "because Eastenders exists as a tv show within the Doctor Who Universe the characters can't interact with then". What a load of crap that is. That removes Assimilation2 from the DWU. Actually that removes Doctor Who ITSELF as anyone who has seen Remembrance of the Daleks would deuce from your so-called "discussion".

The BBC regards DWU as being official and part of THEIR "Doctor Who Universe". Clearly what YOU consider to be a "Doctor Who Universe" it COMPLETE:Y different to the way the BBC use the term. You still haven't adequately explained the way that you actually do use the term! But then the few times you did adequately explain your rationale, you immediately contradicted it!! To paraphrase Paul Cornell's oft-cited blog....If you say something is or isn't part of the Doctor Who Universe, you're yelling a battle cry, not stating the truth. Because there is no truth here to find. And you're trying to assume an authority that you do not have. In the end, you're just bullying people' – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 41.133.0.68 (talk).

I regret that you feel alienated by our decision making process. However, the only way we have of making decisions is to start a discussion and hope that people will join in. If they don't, then we can only go with what obtains in that discussion. This is a standard practice across all wikis, and is not really peculiar to us. If you dislike this method, it's entirely possible that wiki editing may not be for you.

We're not "yelling a battle cry". We're not trying to "assume authority". We're just trying to find a few, reasonable boundaries so that we know how to write our articles.

It is not unreasonable to say that Dimension in Time is an invalid source, for reasons that have been given to you already at Tardis talk:Canon policy
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 19:56: Sun 29 Jul 2012 

I've got to say that our anonymous friend #41 has a point here. Not that drawing the lines of what is and isn't part of the Doctor Who universe for our own internal purposes is invalid: to the contrary, it's necessary for what this wiki is trying to do. (We can't describe the contents of the Doctor Who universe unless we have some idea of what is and isn't part of it.)

But he or she is correct that our arguments for excluding Dimensions in Time are rather weak, and that logically Assimilation² would be excluded by the same principle. (Star Trek has been referred to as a television show on Doctor Who, just as EastEnders has.) Rowan Earthwood is also correct in the point he made over at Tardis talk:Canon policy; the absence of rights for home video release is not the same as the thing being unlicensed in the first place. And the fact that the 2013 sections are inconsistent with EastEnders' own continuity is really irrelevant to the question of whether it's part of the Doctor Who narrative.

If we're honest, we should admit that the real reason we've put DiT outside our fences is that it's not very good, and we're a bit embarrassed by it. And unlike other not-very-good bits of Doctor Who, it stands alone, so it's easy for us to kick it out without ruffling too many feathers. But logically, we don't have much ground to stand on with this decision. —Josiah Rowe ☎ 05:59, July 30, 2012 (UTC)

I've been saying we don't have a real reason for this for years! Our little anon definetly has a point. I've always found the argument that "Eastenders is a tv show in the DWU" to be quite a silly reason. Think about it, the only time we ever see an episode of Eastenders, it features two chareactors, but neither of them are in this episode. For all we know, the eastenders chareactors seen here aren't really in the show. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 21:42, August 3, 2012 (UTC)

The other thing is that when Dimensions in Time aired, Eastenders was not eastablished as a show within the so-called "Doctor Who Universe". THAT only happened over a dacde later. But you want to know the real reasons that people on this "fan" wikia don't want to include Dimensions in Time as part of their "Universe"?

1)It makes fun of Season 6B. See, that is because the Second Doctor and Jamie were older in The Two Doctors. But here, we have a 50-something Carole Ann Ford playing a 15/16-year-old Susan, travelling with the Furst Doctor, Ian and Barbara. We have a much older Third Doctor who recognises Mel. We have a much older Fourth Doctor travelling alone(and someone made a page on that which was deleted by the same humourless people). We have an older Fifth Doctor travelling with an older Peri and Nyssa. We have an older Mike Yates working for UNIT. The Seventh Doctor and Ace are with K9. If the pond life had to make a "Season 6B" to accomodate the Two Doctors, imagine all the fanwank they would need to come up with for this. This is following the advice of MST3K..."It's just a show and I should really just relax". Not write crappy "guides" which explain "continuity errors". And yes, Dimensions in Time IS part of the BBC's Official Classic Series Episode Guide

2)It kills off their lies. First "that the show was cancelled in 1989/90". No it wasn't. The production rights ahd been sold off to a non-BBC company, who were having troubles getting the show off the ground. But that's NOT cancellation. The next lie is that "the Virgin New Adventures are/were the official continuation of the series, overseen by the final production team, and carrying out the planned Season 27 storylines". Bullshit. JNT stated he never paid any attention to the books. What we have with Dimensions in Time is the actual produce(JNT) crafting a show featuring th actual actors portraying the actual characters, not words on a page. And, for all intents and purposes, the Doctor and Ace could have travelled directly from Perivale to the Cutty Sark. This is CLEARLY sstating "the show has NOT been cancelled, it's just going through behind-the-scenes problems. And NOTHING HAS HAPPENED SINCE SURVIVAL, regardless of what any other medium may claim". But it's the official attitude here to push the lies. Ace is still the companion in Dimensions in Time, and she's still the same Ace she was at the end of Survival. Sylvester Mccoy is the Doctor, the same Doctor he was at the end of Survival. This is a message saying "Please be patient, Doctor Who will return soon". Which means that anything callin itself the "official Doctor Who" released between December 1989 and November 1993 is NOT official Doctor Who. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 137.158.153.203 (talk).

Okay, a few points. 1) You know that the last season of Doctor Who was going to also be the last produced by JNT right? So whether he read the books or not is irrelevant to if the books are made in the way the show would. And Ace travelled with the Doctor for a long time after the show ended.

Furthermore, neither of youre points seem to have anything to do with why it shouldn't be canon. So what if the show might have still been in production, that's unimportant (As well as inaccurate, I think...) And you kind of sound like you're joking for #1. All Multi-doctor specials have that problem, you know... OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 11:28, August 10, 2012 (UTC)

1)If you want to know what would have happened in Season 27, then watch "Endgame" or listen to Series 2 of Big Finish's "Lost Stories". NONE of that corresponds with shit like Timewyrm or Cat's Cradle or... And the point was the Virgin people said that the books were "overseen by the last production team", so JNT having nothing to do with them is important. He was the alst producer. He was totally uninvolved with the books. Yet they claim the books were "overseen by the last production team". Get it?

2)Ace was supposed to have been written out in the second story of Season 27. So having her "travelling with the Doctor for a long time after the show ended" is NOT "the way the series was planning to go". In addition the Doctor HIMSELF was supposed to regenerate at the end of Season 27, NOT have more than 50 adventurs, which would have had Mccoy playing the Doctor until about 2005, had the books been "the way the show was planning on going after Season 26".

3)Dimensions in Time IS canon. It is lisedt on the BBC's official Classic Seris Episode Guide. JNT said it is canon. It is the Doctor Who story set after "Survival". The point wasn't that Dimensions in Time is not canon, because it IS canon. The point is that Dimensions in Time illustrates that the VNA are NOT canon.

4)Yes, it was a joke. Multi-Doctor stories are fun, enjoyable tv. Sadly, some lonely people feel the need to overanalyse the stories, and create insane "fan theories" to explain away "continuity issues". i feel sorry for people like that.– The preceding unsigned comment was added by 137.158.153.203 (talk).

You mean people like the BBC? People like Terrance Dicks? Look, whether or not it was a joke is irelovant. And we're not going to just make the virgin books non-cannon just for that (And I agree they are mostly crap) We really shouldn't bring stuff like this into the discussion. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 12:52, August 10, 2012 (UTC)

Yep. As OS25 says, removing the Virgin novels from our list of valid sources is a completely different issue, and shouldn't be brought up here. If you really want to make that case, please start a new discussion at Forum:Panopticon (though I don't think you're likely to get very far). Similarly, discussions of the (BBC-supported) Season 6B theory and the (completely unsupported, and introduced here in order to make a point about our policies) "Season 18B theory" belong elsewhere. This is a discussion about whether Dimensions in Time, on its own merits, should be included. I happen to think it should, but dragging in other issues isn't going to help the argument. —Josiah Rowe ☎ 17:15, August 10, 2012 (UTC)

(edit note)I've undone the edit by the IP user. Unless it is proven otherwise in a new community discussion, Dimentions in Time is still considered non-canon by this wiki.     ǝsʞpɐןǝ  (talk page)  17:54, 10/08/2012

Yes, of coarse. Should we move this to a forum? OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 23:40, August 10, 2012 (UTC)

Common Sense

It is sad that any point will have the people here fixating on one minor sidepoint, and missing the central issue. Also, referring to that guy as "our little anon" is offensive. But anyway, the main point of this post if this:

Picture it. 1993. There has been no new Doctor Who on television since December 1989. The 30th anniversary is coming up. The BBC contacts Producer John Nathan Turner. Do you think they said "Hello. John. Would you be interested in writing a special non-canonical Doctor Who episode for the 30th anniversary"? Do you think they contacted Tom Baker and said "Tom. Any chance of returning for the 30th anniversary? But you will have to settle for playing a non-canonical Fourth Doctor!" Did they conatct Kate O'Mara and ask her if she would be willing to return to play "a non-canonical Rani"? Did Sophie Aldred return to play "a non-canonical Ace"? Did anyone think "Hmmm. Eastenders has never been mentioned in Doctor Who before now. BUT twelve years from now the show will be mentioned in a revived Doctor Who tv Show. Therefore, including characters from eastenders, clearly means this episode is not set in the Doctor Who Universe!"? Of course not! It was the Doctor Who 30th anniversary Special! NOT "a non-DWU", "non-canonical" adventure featuring "non-canonical" characters! – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 137.158.153.203 (talk).

Well, technically, most of the cast were contacted to do "a Doctor Who special" for The Dark Dimension, which was scuttled, so what they were told when they signed and what they ended up doing were two different things. And there are certainly cases in which the production team at the time intended something to be "proper Doctor Who", the continuation of the story that began with An Unearthly Child, but subsequent events made it so the production didn't "count" (e.g. Scream of the Shalka, which Paul Cornell later referred to as "my 'Unbound'"). So the original intent isn't the be-all and end-all. That said, it's not unimportant either.

And I agree that the EastEnders continuity problems are a very weak argument for exclusion. —Josiah Rowe ☎ 07:53, August 17, 2012 (UTC)

P.S. Please sign your posts, 137. You can do it by typing four tildes, like so: ~~~~, or by clicking on the button that looks like this in the edit window: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/josiahrowe/button_sig.png. It's just helpful for us to see who's saying what. —Josiah Rowe ☎ 07:53, August 17, 2012 (UTC)

I am very sceptical about anything Paul Cornell says. There is evidence that th so-called "new series" under RTD was already very much in the works BEFORE Scream of the Shalka. In addition, Cornell is one of the co-writers of the Discontinuity Guide. And then there's the oft-mentioned Blog(full of factual errors). Hopefully this won't deteriorate into a "How reliable is Paul Cornell?" now...

Whatever the case. These are the facts:

1)The BBC made a 30th anniversary special, which aired on the BBC. It starred various people(Pertwee, Baker, Davison etc. etc. etc.) who were playing their roles from the tv show, NOT "non-canonical versions of their tv roles.

2)The official BBC websites Classic Series Episode Guide includes "Dimensions in Time".

3)JNT stated that it is canon.

4)Short stories have been connected to it. The "solution" here is apparently to state that THOSE are also "non-DWU" which is sad....

5)The reasoning for NOT including it is: a)it features Eastenders characters. But this was 12 years BEFORE "Eastenders" was mentioned in DW, so it was hardly "established that Eastenders exists as a tv show". Using the same "logic", all sorts of problems then exist for Star Trek, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy etc. etc. b)the cast signed on for one showing. But that's the EXACT SAME THING as nearly all 60's Who. Using this line of reasoning only "An Unearthly Child"(the first episode, not the other 3) and "Evil of the Daleks" are "DWU adventures" from the 60's! And even then 'Evil' isdebatable, as the repeat was included in the storyline... c)It's not very good. That's point-of-view. That would exclude things like "Love and Monsters" and "Twin Dilemma" from canon as well. And anything written by Kate Orman. d)It doesn't make much sense. It does if you follow it. But would that exclude "Ghostlight"? e)It contradicts "continuity". It doesn't, but that would exclude the TV Movie(half-human) and MANY others.

There is no reason other than prejudice. It's a Dr Who story, made by the BBC. Nobody EVER stated it was "a non-DWU adventure" or the characters were "non-canonical versions". 137.158.153.203^{talk to me} 08:35, August 17, 2012 (UTC)