Well, to answer that question even to myself, I need to understand what is the purpose of having a page. Put another way, what is the difference between having a separate page and having one collector page containing all the content that would have been on separate pages otherwise. I find your approach of applied theorizing, i.e., talking about specific things we have, not abstract concepts, quite useful.
Let's look at the last table, for instance. And since the DVD conventions are in a flux and they are secondary not primary releases, let us drop the analogy to them. I think we already agreed that the left column is comprised of series: each release is a separate series. Names are Series N (range) with a redirect from the marketed name, I agree. So I drop the whole column. Further, by the emerging numbering agreement,
- The First Doctor: Volume One is Series 9 of The Companion Chronicles range
- Short Trips: Volume 1-4 are Series 1-4 of The Short Trips range.
Further let me remove from the table several box sets that are not part of any series (don't even have a number in their range), so have nowhere to be put other than their own page anyway:
For these we agree that no dab term is needed, right? Moreover, a close observation shows that
- The Fourth Doctor Box Set is stuck between 2.06 and 3.01 in the Lost Stories range without a number and is supplied with the following NB: Please note this box set is a standalone, and is not included in any of the Lost Stories season subscription packages. So it's not part of any season, clearly (note the word "season"). I remove it from the table too.
- The Companion Chronicles: The Specials is stuck between 6.01 and 6.02 in The Companion Chronicles range without a number. Removed from the table
- Philip Hinchcliffe Presents looks like it's part of The Fourth Doctor Adventures range. But it is between 3.08 and 4.01 while itself having number 1. The reason is that this release constitutes its own range, which we can dab (range). Removed from the table.
- The Worlds of Big Finish follows 4. in the Sherlock range but has no number. Removed.
| Box Sets | Anthologies |
|---|---|
|
Now you look at that. Every single item in the right column is a release in the Main range, which has no seasons or series. So they get their own pages according to both of us. Not much is left. The 5 Benny boxes,
are numbered 01-05 in Bernice Summerfield - Box Sets range. Admittedly, it's a weird range as it continues with the New Adventures numbered 1-2. I think this would require some thinking. But still these five look like Series 1-5 to me.
And, lo and behold, it turns out that we disagree on... at most two boxes:
- The First Doctor Box Set
- The Second Doctor Box Set
numbered 2.01 and 2.02 in The Lost Stories range. You want them to have individual pages (they don't at the moment). I want them not to have pages because they are part of Series 2 of The Lost Stories. Would I prefer to continue arguing about 2 boxes or try to converge on a consensus? The latter. What is the best kind of argument? Equality. We have a very similar box set for Tom Baker in this range soon after that is marketed without a number. But would it be fair to Hartnell and Troughton to treat them differently? No, I don't think so. (There is actually a real non-marketing difference in that Baker's set has full cast audios while Hartnell's and Troughton's seemingly are closer to companion chronicles in nature.) So, in the interests of equality, I concede that these two box sets should be given their own pages.
I plan to inventorise where things are the way we propose and where not. I think it helps to know the amount of work before deciding whether to close the thread (which I know I cannot do).
One more thing: future proofing. What if BF releases another box set within a series within a range? It seems to me that this is unlikely to happen. Virtually all recent released and announced box sets are marketed as Volume 1 or Series 1. This seems to be BF's preferred format for box sets for the foreseeable future.