Forum:Canonicity of Dalek Annuals
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Forums → Archive index → Panopticon archives → Canonicity of Dalek Annuals
I have access to the Dalek Annuals and similar publications and while I have come across some contradictory information (in terms as it has been changed), the rest of it I am hesitant to source as I am not sure if the old annuals are considered canonical. Are they? Trak Nar Ramble on 06:18, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
- I've just had a look through our Tardis:Canon policy, it doesn't mention the annuals, at all (so no help there).
- However, the annuals (I think) pioneered some things that went on to be featured in the Dalek Empire audios (transolar discs came from them didn't they?) (I'm guessing here as the Dalek Annuals are something that currently does not sit on my shelf).
- Anyways, what is in the canon policy that is counted are the various TV Action and the like which are kind of on the same footing (again they're only something I've seen in passing, not on my shelf).
- As for integrating potentially contradictory material, handle it like anything else that is contradictory 'one account states that...' or something like that.--Tangerineduel 12:55, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
- the Doctor Who Universe has no official canon. (as touched upon in the canon policy. Nicholas Briggs has said that he got specific inspiration from the Dalek Annuals and intended the first season as a loose adaptation, with some changes, i.e. instead of a brother trying to help his sster, a man trying to help his lover. and a wider scope. anyway, the '60's spin-off stuff in general contains a lot of stuff just about impossible to reconcile, like I said the Whoniverse has no hard and fast canon policy. --Stardizzy2 17:24, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, good to know. Time to expand upon some articles, then... Trak Nar Ramble on 04:25, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, while reading through The Dalek World annual, there were some things mentioned that could be added to the Dalek article, but I am hesitant to do so as the information is really stretching it in terms of believeability. For example, page 70, panel 1 says "Did you know, due to the lightness of the metal, a DALEK weighs only two an a half Earth pounds?" I can see the mutant itself weighing only a couple pounds, they are roughly the size of a house cat. But with the casing combined? In the same annual, it says that the casing contains over nine-thousand components and eleven miles of wiring. And then in Daleks in Manhattan, when the two workers are shown struggling to lift three panels from Dalek Thay's casing, that seems to contradict that. Though, one could also say that the light-weight materials was a property of older Dalek models. Either way, some of the information just seems silly. However, since the annuals are considered "canon" enough to be used for references, then I shall use from it what I can, regardless of how implausible some things sound. Trak Nar Ramble on 10:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
