Talk:List of future Big Finish releases

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Merge[[edit source]]

How come the Big Finish stuff gets a seperate "future releases" page. Why not just merge it with List of future releases?? --DCLM 19:35, April 23, 2019 (UTC)

Probably because of the sheer volume of upcoming Big Finish releases and rumours. Whereas there’s only really a handful of non-BF stuff so it’s easier to navigate if they’re separate. SarahJaneFan 20:05, April 23, 2019 (UTC)

I mean, look at the amount of footnotes. This page has more than double of footnotes than the "non-BF releases". Merging would only make non-BF future releases harder to navigate through. OncomingStorm12th 22:26, April 23, 2019 (UTC)

Why existence?[[edit source]]

Another thing I don't quite understand is why does this and the other "future releases" page even exist? Doesn't that kinda break the "no spoilers" policy that says we can't add stuff that hasn't been released yet? --DCLM 20:31, April 23, 2019 (UTC)

I believe that spoilers are okay in Out of Universe articles as long as they’re spoiler tagged. SarahJaneFan 21:29, April 23, 2019 (UTC)
That is absolutely not true. The only pages where spoilers are allowed are series pages, which I guess this is considered. No other out-of-universe articles are allowed to have spoilers. Shambala108 21:50, April 23, 2019 (UTC)

CV question[[edit source]]

Hello, I saw this line under Audio in Jane Slavin CV "2020, Audio, Romana, DOCTOR WHO: THE LOST STORIES, Big Finish, Tom Baker."

Do you know if this means that she played another incarnation of Romana or it just confirms what we all knew that she play Romana in soundhouse Sessions as Lalla and Tom never record together?

(I ask here because I think it's relevant to this page). [[1]] 109.186.182.122talk to me

Iris Wildthyme and Friends[[edit source]]

Has the coming "Iris Wildthyme and Friends" range not been added to this page for an official reason, or has it just been overlooked so far? -- Noneofyourbusiness 15:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

I had assumed it had already been added frankly. Feel free to add it! I'm honestly quite excited for the more explicit defining of the Magrsverse with these releases. 15:10, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Done. This is my first time using this template. -- Noneofyourbusiness 15:09, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

On a certain story removed from this list[[edit source]]

Should we mention said story anywhere on this wiki? I know we have some coverage of other unreleased stories, and that particular one is pretty notable as the first performed story (as far as I know) in the DWU to be fully completed but ultimately unreleased. Or is there some reason it doesn’t qualify? Or is it too soon to call either way? NightmareofEden 18:45, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Not quite the first, actually. But the announcement mentioned "at this time"; best to let this settle a little while. Once we pass the planned release date, it should probably get an invalid page. Scrooge MacDuck 19:22, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
I think in this instance readers would benefit from having this represented on the wiki with a full page for the unproduced (or unreleased) story.
I understand the caution, and definitely agree that in the absence of a clear statement like the one we got, that we'd do well to wait. Making sure not to fall afoul of T:SPOIL in the case of a potentially late release is important.
That said, Big Finish is being quite clear that this release — ready though it might have been for release — is not on the roster. They have no plans to release it, so the story should join others of its kind.
×   SOTO  contribs ×°//]   °|💬| {/-//:\\ 21:30, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Ech, I suppose that does make sense. I guess I was putting undue weight on that "at this time", which is probably just a weasel word allowing them to hypothetically back out later, but clearly not indicative of the current intent.
I join User:SOTO in clearing the page for creation as {{unprod}} or {{invalid}} (depending on what we decide is more appropriate; precedent in this area is understandably quite scarce). Scrooge MacDuck 21:35, 14 May 2021 (UTC)