Bureaucrats, content-moderator, emailconfirmed, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Administrators, threadmoderator
85,404
edits
More actions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
::Well, I wholly disagree with that, and am going to delete that prefix, pending more discussion. DWDVD is ''highly'' confusing. It implies anything to do with the DVD. If I saw DWDVD, I would think it might mean a documenary or a commentary or really anything that was on the DVD. We have two sketches, two, that fall into this hypothetical special category. I ''really'' think we can live with calling them just DW. Speaking as a pedant, it's being way, way, ''way'' pedantic to make up a prefix for two sketches that hav ethe same name. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the citation, [[DW]]: ''[[Meanwhile in the TARDIS]]''. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} <span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''03:34:54 Sat '''11 Jun 2011 </span> | ::Well, I wholly disagree with that, and am going to delete that prefix, pending more discussion. DWDVD is ''highly'' confusing. It implies anything to do with the DVD. If I saw DWDVD, I would think it might mean a documenary or a commentary or really anything that was on the DVD. We have two sketches, two, that fall into this hypothetical special category. I ''really'' think we can live with calling them just DW. Speaking as a pedant, it's being way, way, ''way'' pedantic to make up a prefix for two sketches that hav ethe same name. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the citation, [[DW]]: ''[[Meanwhile in the TARDIS]]''. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} <span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''03:34:54 Sat '''11 Jun 2011 </span> | ||
Let's look at what we're talking about here. Here's the full text of the page that Rob created: | |||
:The [[Tardis:list of prefixes|prefix]] '''DWDVD''' indicates the information cited comes from [[Doctor Who universe|in-universe]] material presented on [[BBC DVD]] ''[[Doctor Who]]'' releases which wasn't previously broadcast elsewhere, such as ''[[Meanwhile in the TARDIS]].'' | |||
:This prefix is ''not'' intended to refer to deleted scenes or other DVD-exclusive material that does not fit within [[Tardis:Canon policy]]; these are not citable references on this wiki and therefore do not require a prefix. | |||
:This prefix is also ''not'' intended for use on DVD-exclusive material presented with a [[Tardis:Point of view|real-world point of view]], such as documentaries, commentaries, or info text. For the correct prefixes for those items and others, see [[Tardis:List of prefixes]]. | |||
Okay, so un-broadcast in-universe material. But not deleted scenes. Don't know why not, actually. I'm not sure we've ever definitively ruled on the question of the canonicity of deleted scenes, have we? And would this mean the in-universe thing about Davros on the re-issued ''Remembrance'' would get this prefix? Or would it be [[DOC]]? Would the in-universe docos on ''[[Planet of the Daleks]]'' and ''[[Frontier in Space]] be [[DOC]] or [[DWDVD]]? Is the Jaggeroth bit on ''City of Death'' BBCDVD or not? Any time a documentary producer gets a little creative about the perspective of his or her work, it's gonna cause questions about whether a certain thing fits under DOC or DWDVD. See, this prefix highlights a problem area I'd rather just stay away from. If there's no prefix, there's no definition. If there's no definition, there's less chance of awkward, essentially unanswerable, questions about pseudo-in-universe material that litters DVD releases. | |||
I think it's ''far'' better to Just let ''Meanwhile'' be a part of the overall content of series 5, as it was intended to be. There's no question ''at all'' that it's meant to be a part of the overall narrative of the season, is there? I mean instinctively we just ''know'' it's every bit as much DW as the episodes that got broadcast. This attempt to make it a separate kind of DW is a false division that's only going to take us down the primrose path to a lot of questions about ''other' DVD content. | |||
More than that, I think the prefix will be harmful to the useful organisation of ''other'' information from the DVDs. Most of what Rob wrote is explaining what the prefix is ''not''. That's problematic. Cause that means people are '''certainly''' going to mistake it for those things. The most natural thing this prefix ''seems'' to describe are the documentaries on the DVDs. If we allow this prefix, we're going to start seeing slow "prefix creep" from DOC and DCOM to DWDVD. | |||
In my mind, I can't work out why there's a need for this new prefix whatsoever, and I think it'll do more harm than good. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} <span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''04:13:08 Sat '''11 Jun 2011 </span> | |||