User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-43908-20150311013943/@comment-1827503-20151016233400
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-43908-20150311013943/@comment-1827503-20151016233400 I proposed option 1 because none of the other options seem satisfactory.
- Option 2: According to what Revan said above, there is in-universe evidence that prose Romana regenerated from Ward's Romana, so having the page "Romana III" switch from covering one to the other could be confusing. Furthermore, this would be indicating that we treat audio stories as more valid than prose stories, which is not the case.
- Option 3: We did not merge K9 Mark 2 with any other K9 article, despite it sharing its number with K9 Mark II. Why would we do this for Romana but not for the tin dog associated with her first two incarnations?
- Option 4: I admit that "Trey" is a valid name for Landau's Romana, per Ward's Romana referring to her future incarnation as Trey. However, the character is commonly known as Romana, and the name "Trey" is not unique in meaning "the third" within the DWU because of Trey Korte. Furthermore, this would continue to indicate that we treat prose stories as more valid than audio stories, which is not the case.
- Option 5: This is similar to the approach we take with the Master, but in the case of the Master we have no numbering to fall back on.
The other thing I'd like to bring up at this time is that whatever decision we make should become official policy. This may also be an opportunity to rewrite T:ROMANA and T:DOCTORS to cover the issues brought up by the two "third Romanas" and the War Doctor.
