User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-45692830-20200511054726/@comment-6032121-20200511151756

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
< User:SOTO‎ | Forum Archive‎ | The Panopticon/@comment-45692830-20200511054726
Revision as of 23:46, 27 April 2023 by SV7 (talk | contribs) (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5))
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

While this is true, Doctor Who (The Thief of Sherwood) and other such pages have existed as dabbed for ages. If the information is minor enough that it can be stored on a "In the DWU" section on the real world page, fair enough, but that is clearly not the case with the in-universe Doctor Who for one — and are we really going to dab the real-world Doctor Who page? Is that even feasible at this point, with all the links pointing to it?

Additionally, we don't actually have a real-world-focused page about our own Wiki. Perhaps we should, actually, inasmuch as we are a licensed Doctor Who product, just about, or at the very least our home page is.

Also, a note I made on the other thread which has yet to be repeated here: if a page like Tardis (The Zygon Isolation) materialises to refer to the website seen in the webcast, that'll require some sort of edit/exception to T:TARDIS, won't it?

And @Najawin, I think your concerns about whether we can conflate "Doctor Who Magazine" and "DWM" on a single in-universe pages without breaking T:NO RW are interesting but I think that might be taking it a smidge too far. We also assume any mention of "the BBC" are to be documented in the "In the DWU" section of British Broadcasting Corporation, as opposed to, say, referring to the Bed and Breakfast Corps. Same thing here, I think.