Talk:Doctor Who

Doctor Who (final version) received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which on 25 December 2023 was archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Doctor Who article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31: 2 months

Doctor Who is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 16, 2004.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 4, 2004	Featured article candidate	Promoted
March 1, 2007	Featured topic candidate	Not promoted
July 3, 2009	Featured article review	Demoted
February 9, 2013	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
April 9, 2013	Good article nominee	Not listed
September 6, 2013	Peer review	Not reviewed
November 1, 2013	Good article nominee	Not listed
November 26, 2013	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on August 5, 2013.
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 23, 2007, November 23, 2009, November 23, 2010, November 23, 2015, and November 23, 2023.
Current status: Former featured article

Doctor Who Top‑importance

	Doctor Who portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Doctor Who, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Doctor Who and its spin-offs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Doctor WhoWikipedia:WikiProject Doctor WhoTemplate:WikiProject Doctor WhoDoctor Who
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Media franchises Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media franchises, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to media franchises on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Media franchisesWikipedia:WikiProject Media franchisesTemplate:WikiProject Media franchisesmedia franchise
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Top‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television: British High‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the British television task force (assessed as Top-importance).

BBC High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks for WikiProject BBC:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary)
Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing
Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House
Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland
NPOV : Criticism of the BBC (See comments)
Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles
Other : *Restructure the category
- Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes
- Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible
- Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC
- Return Dad's Army to a Good article. (See comments)
- Reassess BBC following improvements to article.

Science Fiction High‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cardiff Mid‑importance

	Wales portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cardiff, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cardiff-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CardiffWikipedia:WikiProject CardiffTemplate:WikiProject CardiffCardiff
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wales Low‑importance

	Wales portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wales on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WalesWikipedia:WikiProject WalesTemplate:WikiProject WalesWales
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Other talk page banners

This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2010 and 2013.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 6 times. The weeks in which this happened:

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Wikipedia:WikiProject Doctor Who/Manual of style
Muir, John Kenneth. Critical History of Doctor Who on Television. McFarland & Co, Inc. 2007 ISBN 978-0-7864-3716-0
Gouchera, Wendy. "Keeping Doctor Who's secrets". Computer Fraud & Security. vol. 2008, iss. 9, Sep. 2008, pp 13–15.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

"Doctor Who heals US networks". Variety. 8 February 2008.

WikiProject Doctor Who has an RfCBEFORE

WikiProject Doctor Who has a local discussion for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Svampesky (talk) 17:23, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons or Series

I had always thought of doctor whonas having seasons, but then the episode list in Wikipedia has series. Is doctor who made up into seasons or series? Wikipedia can't seem to be consistent with this. 101.119.84.124 (talk) 14:39, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Doctor Who/Style advice DonQuixote (talk) 14:55, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Season is the American term and series the British term. For Doctor Who, the original run (1963–1989) used the term "season". The BBC decided to use the term series when the show was revived to get more people to discover the show and avoid confusion with the seasons of the original run. Spectritus (talk) 10:16, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oldest living cast members table

Is it a good idea to add an oldest living cast members table to the page or on a seperate page ? Spectritus (talk) 14:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from trivia (see WP:TRIVIA), why is it any important? DonQuixote (talk) 14:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. I just thought it could be interesting. Spectritus (talk) 15:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

International

Add Antarctic to countries/continents broadcast.

American Forces Antarctic Network

The American Forces Antarctic Network (AFAN) at McMurdo Station began television broadcasts on November 9, 1973.

"It's most likely that the series was marketed and distributed to AFRTS via Lionheart, who had the distribution rights throughout the US and its territories during the mid-1980s, and therefore any "sales" to AFRTS could have been included under all other sales recorded as being to the "United States". "

Tom Baker Doctor Who "The package of 22 "movies" aired during 1986 only" https://broadwcast.org/index.php/Armed_Forces_Network#Doctor_Who_on_the_AFRTS_Networks

It's plausible that AFAN included the series in its programming lineup during its operational years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.185.77.31 (talk) 00:51, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@104.185.77.31 Interesting. I don't know. Let's wait for someone else. Spectritus (talk) 10:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly interesting, but I'm afraid we'd need something a little more concrete than "most likely" or "plausible", and a more reliable reference to go alongside it. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 22:06, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on lead

A few quick thoughts on the lead. The description of the different doctors paragraph seems to suffer from some recentism, and the mention of Guinness World Records appears promotional. Sdkb ^talk 07:11, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly what parts of the lead do you think violate recentism (which, for what it's worth, is only an essay)? Is the Guinness World Records sourced properly? -- Alex_21_TALK 08:09, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think giving only info about recent Doctors does. And my issue with the Guinness mentions isn't sourcing so much as WP:BALASP. Sdkb ^talk 14:00, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I agree that it has "only info about recent Doctors". There are only three mentioned: the first, the incumbent, and the first woman. That part seems fairly logical to me. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 00:35, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Episode and story count note

I think a note is necessary to let people know that not all episodes/stories are included (Shada) to avoid confusion and misuse of the episode and story counts displayed on this page. Spectritus (talk) 10:12, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not necessary. Shada wasn't completed so doesn't exist for the purposes of an episode count, even though it's been subsequently reconstructed. U-Mos (talk) 10:21, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was later completed and broadcast in an animated form and is still a Doctor Who serial. Spectritus (talk) 10:24, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is an infobox. It's point is to provide a brief summary of the article. While footnotes can be useful, there is no need to introduce complications for the sake of it. (If you are going to complicate matters, why stop at Shada? There are further edge cases and complications around the number of stories and episodes that warrant mention as much as Shada.) Bondegezou (talk) 10:32, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but the episode and story counts were changed to exclude Shada and this change should be mentioned somewhere. Spectritus (talk) 11:29, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not that it justifies adding the footnote, but when and by whom were the counts "changed to exclude Shada"? – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 11:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rhain What I meant is that it should be said somewhere that some episodes aren't included. Spectritus (talk) 13:27, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a different sentence entirely, and not at all what your proposed footnote suggested. In any case, I still think it's unnecessary; it's implied that the counts are for main episodes only, not supplementary ones. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 13:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

[reply]

@Rhain All 6 episodes of Shada are main ones. Also, the episode count is supposed to show all episodes. Spectritus (talk) 15:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of those episodes were finished or broadcast because they were abandoned. They were later adapted and released as separate productions. DonQuixote (talk) 16:54, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DonQuixote Shada has always been and always will be a main Doctor Who serial. It may not originally have been completed and broadcast but it has been. And to confirm this even more, it's listed as part of season 17 on BBC iPlayer. Spectritus (talk) 17:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfinished productions are nothing new. The only new bit is that these specific episodes were later adapted into different media. tvtropes/UnfinishedEpisode DonQuixote (talk) 17:20, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shada is no longer unfinished. And as I said before, the number of episodes field is supposed to display all episodes. Spectritus (talk) 17:51, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, no. It's literally unfinished. What you're referring to are adaptations. There's at least five different adaptations: narration (VHS), audio drama (Big Finish), two different animation projects and a novelisation. None of which are the original work. DonQuixote (talk) 19:23, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DonQuixote The BBC made an animated version which is basically what the live-action version would have been but animated. The reason for the choice of animation is probably because the cast members had considerably aged and Denis Carey had passed away. Spectritus (talk) 19:29, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, dude. It's an adaptation. The original work was never completed. Also, see List of Star Trek: The Original Series episodes where the original pilot was actually completed but never broadcast as part of the programme. Again, unfinished and unbroadcast works are nothing new. You wanting to treat this work differently from other works is WP:OR. DonQuixote (talk) 19:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Funnily enough, you don't even have to look at a different series for another example—Doctor Who's "pilot" was also completed but never broadcast (for almost 30 years), yet that isn't counted either. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 22:00, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DonQuixote I understand that it's not included. All I'm saying is that it should be said somewhere. Spectritus (talk) 22:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's already mentioned in prose. The infobox is for quick information without any complications. Complicated history can be mentioned in the article body. DonQuixote (talk) 22:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DonQuixote What do you mean by "in prose"? Spectritus (talk) 22:52, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Shada (Doctor Who), for a start. DonQuixote (talk) 22:57, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DonQuixote Why can't it be mentioned on the series' page? People who don't know about Shada won't check its page. Spectritus (talk) 23:00, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's listed and mentioned at List of Doctor Who episodes (1963–1989) and Doctor Who season 17 DonQuixote (talk) 23:04, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DonQuixote It should be mentioned on the series' main page. Spectritus (talk) 23:13, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there's significant coverage, no, it doesn't have to be mentioned in every article. DonQuixote (talk) 23:17, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most people will just look at the series' main page, hence the fact it's the main page. Therefore, it should be mentioned on the main page, whether it's in the infobox or not. Spectritus (talk) 12:27, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Based on due weight, it's not that important to the history of the programme. DonQuixote (talk) 16:28, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DonQuixote The episode count is important information. Spectritus (talk) 00:19, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it is; that's why it's mentioned twice in the article (including the infobox). If the reader wants to know which episodes are included in the count, they can do so here and here. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 00:24, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Spectritus If there's isn't significant coverage, then you just have to accept the fact that most people don't care about Shada and that it's just trivia. DonQuixote (talk) 01:11, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DonQuixote Alright. Spectritus (talk) 10:31, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above editors, it is not necessary. Include this note as prose. WP:DROPTHESTICK. -- Alex_21_TALK 21:35, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Spectritus Again: WP:DROPTHESTICK. There is clearly a lack of consensus here. -- Alex_21_TALK 03:56, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]