Clear lines need to be drawn Edit
At first glance, it looks like this question is not relevant. And up until very recently I would have agreed with its CFD status.
However, one persistent IP has stated that every story name must be linked to Tardis Data Core. In some cases, he/she hasn't even answered a question, instead simply adding a link to the article at Tardis Data Core. It now appears to be site Policy that these links are compulsory.
So, if this website is now constantly adding links to TDC, then TDC's policies become valid. Especially since TDC's policies differ with DWA's policies. Someone here may ask a question about 'canon', get the proper "The BBC has never stated a definitive answer on Doctor Who's canon" response. But then that response may contain a link to a TDC article, which does have a canon, and may even state that story x "doesn't count" or "isn't part of the Doctor Who Universe"......Another possibility is someone asking a question with more than one 'correct' answer. DWA will give both positions equally(as we should). However the links to TDC will link to two articles, one of which is described as "correct", and the other as not being "part of the DWU".
In short, this is contradictory. DWA will give a fair, unbiased asnwer. But that answer will contain a link to TDC, which is clearly prejudiced against certain stories, and certain guides. Speaking of which, DWA counts what people like Russell T. Davies or Steven Moffat say in interviews or promotional material as "Real", TDC doesn't
Dimensions in Time is a classic case. If someone asks about DIT, we will give a fair, balanced asnwer. However, we must now link to TDC's DIT article, which states that it's "non-canonical". I also read that pages' archived discussions, which are pretty alarming, to say the least.
So, if we are linking everything to TDC, then it is fair for people to ask about TDC's policies. Is this site shackled to TDC, or do we have our own identity? And if the former, can we realistically hope to maintain our "There is no clear word on what is or is not canon" line when we are linking everything to a website that does have its own canon policy? Master of Spiders (talk) 14:11, February 15, 2014 (UTC)
Excuse me Spiders, it is not "one persistent IP has stated that every story name must be linked to Tardis Data Core." It is site policy which I have also tried to remind you of multiple times now, as stated at DWA:REF. The policy of using the reference templates was discussed out in the open forums when you were still an admin and had plenty of chances to complain. As you did not then, and it is policy now, you must follow all policy as it is currently written. Appeals for change must be made in the appropriate spot, as outlined at DWA:POLICIES#If_You_Find_A_Problem_With_The_Policies. I will not discuss the issue of following the rules as agreed upon by everyone who could be bothered taking part in the conversation. If you want to argue against the referencing templates, go to the forums to do so, but you are walking a very, very fine line at the moment with not using them.
As for the idea that linking to a site automatically means we must follow their policies: that is completely ludicrous! Us linking to TDC is no different from TDC linking to IMDb. As TDC is not bound by the policies laid out at IMDb, we are not bound by the policies laid down at TDC. We are only bound by the local rules of this site which were all made through community discussion. We differ from TDC on many policies, including, but not limited to, the way we format story titles (we quote while they italicise), we do not penalise for using non-British English (a policy only just decided upon, as you should remember), and spoiler policy (or lack thereof). That doesn't mean that TDC isn't a good source of information to send readers to. In fact, because of the difference in article style here and there, TDC becomes a very good place to send readers with more broad questions, especially those which are borderline DWA:VAGUE. These links also allow readers of questions we do have answers to to find out more information on the subject which they were asking about. In the end, it's about giving the readers the best information possible on the topic they're asking about.
Now onto the idea of "canon". Because of our looser article format which allows people to ask more specific questions and therefore get a range of answers from more sources (with all those sources being stated, of course!), DWA can afford to have a looser list of valid sources than TDC, which because of its set-up needs to establish boundaries of what information can and can't be included in normal articles to prevent their encyclopaedia from falling into absolute chaos. Most of the stories they put outside the boundaries of inclusion are those which would also be used only as an interesting note in our answers, such as the note about the "Scream of the Shalka" (webcast) and "The Curse of Fatal Death" Doctors in What actors have played the Doctor. TDC does include most licensed stories as part of the DWU, as we do here, and gives information from all stories when they conflict, as is also the policy here. The tiny minority of stories which we could include information from but they wouldn't actually benefit more from the link than if they didn't, as readers would then find out why some consider there to be a problem with a stories validity. However, those articles, like the one found at "The Curse of Fatal Death" and "Dimensions in Time", do still give all the information you need about plot, references, story notes, etc. They are simply a better source than us for long articles about vague topics!
Finally, on your question "Is this site shackled to TDC, or do we have our own identity"; yes, we do have our own identity. We are not "shackled to TDC", and in fact they don't want to link up with us because our standard of information isn't high enough. If anything, getting to a standard where we could establish a more bilateral relationship with not only the biggest Doctor Who wiki but also one of the biggest wikis on Wikia could only be of benefit to us, but even if we did, that wouldn't mean we are under their control any more than one country is under the control of another country after establishing trade links. But getting that bilateral relationship is unlikely to happen, and we have been running ourselves completely independently from Tardis since this wiki began, and I can't see any need for that to change in the future. We are our own wiki, free to decide our own policies and style. If you feel bad about not getting to contribute to the process of policy formation here, then you are the one who needs to pay more attention to the discussions going on. Don't blame our policies on Tardis when you failed to contribute to the discussions yourself. Imamadmad (Contact me) 00:54, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
Now, onto the topic of this question: Considering it is both asking about canon, which we don't allow, and the main subject of the question is something other than the TV show Doctor Who or its spin-offs from all media or the processes in which the TV show or its spin-offs from all media were produced (DWA:DWU), this question should be deleted, and unless somebody makes a good argument otherwise in the next few days, this question will be deleted. Imamadmad (Contact me) 00:54, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
You seem to have missed the point. So I'll spell it out:
1)It is now site policy(though no actual consensus was ever established, but that's another issue) to link all story titles to their TDC articles.
2)Using IMDB as an analogy is irrelevant. DWA doesn't link to IMDB. DWA doesn't link to Wikipedia. DWA doesn't link to Shannon Sullivan's website. DWA does link to TDC, to the point where if someone doesn't add links, they are reprimanded, and threatened.
3)So, in every answer space that has a story title, there will be a big blue link to the TDC article. Not to an IMDB article, or any other website's article. And this is now site policy. So, it is only natural that visitors to this website will believe that DWA and TDC are more than just sites where one links to another. Why after all would we have to link all story names, if it's just like linking to IMDB?
4)And yet, TDC refuses to link to DWA.
5)May main concerns are a)thee whole 'canon', 'Doctor Who Universe' idea. The BBC has never stated that anything is or isn't canon. And this website maintains that position, But TDC very clearly have their own Canon Policy. So, anyone following one of the compulsory/site policy links to TDC will get an article dictated by TDC's Canon Policy, and where they will likely refer to things as "non-canonical" or "not part of the Doctor Who Universe". it's not just that these sort of statements are governed by their own internal policy, rather than anything the BBC has ever stated......it's that we at DWA have no 'canon' policy. So someone will read a response here, get one answer, then follow the Big Blue Link to TDC, and get a contradictory answer there, which is governed by TDC's internal Canon Policy. It becomes s confusing mess. And as long as we have to make Big Blue Links to a website that ahs their own sel-contained Canon Policy, it will confuse visitors to this website
6)People like 89 have also not even answerd questions. if someone asks a question, rather than giving the answer, they simply type in "See [TDC article link]". This website is Doctor Who Answers, not just a series of links. If you want the answer to also have the Big Blue Link, then fine. But we must actually answer the question the people ask.
So, as long as we continue to link everything to TDC with Big Blue Links, it is only natural that people will believe this website is connected/linked to TDC. And the IMDB idea doesn't work as we don't make Big Blue Links to TDC. And as long as TDC has a Canon Policy, and we don't, visitors to this website who click on the Big Blue links will be confused by the contradictory information that they read. And as long as people "Answer" questions with nothing more than a Big Blue Link to TDC, people will believe this website is somehow submissive to TDC.
This website isn't only about DW stories. We have also answered questions about real-world things, like why David Tennant left, or BBC Canon Policy(which doens't exist), etc. Answering real-world questions relating to Doctor Who is a very big part of DWA. However TDC believes that "only stories count", and even have a banner stating just that.
If people ask about DWA, we will answer them. However, due to the Big Blue Links, and the compulsory "you must link all story names to TDC" then it is only natural that people will think asking about TDC is no different than asking about DWA. Especially since one Admin has spent far more time working on the TDC ref templates than answering questions or taking part in Forum discussions.
In short, you can't have it both ways. You can't make it compulsory to link all titles to TDC in Big Blue Letters, you can't have IPs giving non-answers trhat amount to just a Big Blue link to TDC, you can't threaten people when they don't link everything to TDC.....
....and then expect visitors to this website such as the IP who posted this question not to believe that we can answer questions about TDC policy(which differs significantly from DWA policy).
So again, as the original title is.....We need to firmly establish exacty what the relationship between DWA and TDC actually is. You can not have it both ways. And you can't just delete questions like this one. DWA is going down a very dangerous and self-destrutive road. And merely deleting questions like this are simply denial. Master of Spiders (talk) 05:07, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
- In reply to MOS' post above,
- 1) Thread:46182 shows the discussion regarding whether or not to reference books, episodes, movies, etc. The discussion went on until 17th September 2013. During that time MOS you could have posted your concerns about this change in policy. However since there were no objections the policy was implemented. You had four months to post regarding the decision to use the referencing templates, however you did not.
- 2)MOS: Using IMDB as an analogy is irrelevant. DWA doesn't link to IMDB. DWA doesn't link to Wikipedia. DWA doesn't link to Shannon Sullivan's website. DWA does link to TDC, to the point where if someone doesn't add links, they are reprimanded, and threatened.
Imamadmad: As for the idea that linking to a site automatically means we must follow their policies: that is completely ludicrous! Us linking to TDC is no different from TDC linking to IMDb. As TDC is not bound by the policies laid out at IMDb, we are not bound by the policies laid down at TDC.
Seems to me that Imamadmad never said we are linking to IMDB so your second point is void.
- 3) We link episodes, etc. so that the asker can look for more information regarding their question.
- 4) DWA links to TDC because we are not keeping encyclopaedic information regarding the series on this wiki. TDC does not have to link to us anymore then we have to link to them. We link to them since we don't store information about DW on our local wiki.
- 5) Canon is a term used to describe something that is officially supported. Anything that has appeared in an official episode of Doctor Who is considered canon. Now anything else, fan speculation, stories, etc. are not considered canon as they are not officially backed by BBC.
- 6) Questions which are too broad to be answered are usually linked to Tardis since it contains more information.
- 7) Which sysop are you referring to by saying: "Especially since one Admin has spent far more time working on the TDC ref templates than answering questions or taking part in Forum discussions."?
- In short I see nothing wrong with the question. Yes it could have been posted at Tardis but it wasn't. There were two choices, 1: Describe what canon is and describe why it is not considered canon, or 2: Contact a sysop and have them deal with it.
06:21, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
- 1)Ideas in theory, and actual practices offer differ considerbaly. As the best-known example, Communism in theory is a perfect society. But reality is something qutie different. Clearly this topic needs to be re-opened as the reality has shown.
- 2)Imamadmad said that DWA linking to TDC is no different than TDC linking to IMDB. However, TDC's links to IMDB are in their "External links" section. not in Big Blue Letters in the main answer space. And again, it's what the person gets when they link there.
- 3)Again, the problem is that the "more information" is predicated on a totally different idea than what we have at DWA.
- 4)We have nearly 12 000 questions here. There's information on pretty much everything, both in-universe and real-world. A simple "Search" can show that. This website has existed fro some years, and been contributed to by hundreds, if not thousqadsn, of users. But that's not the point. Again, the point is that TDC have their own "Canon Policy" that copntradictsDWA's approach to the issue of 'canon'.
- 5)I agree with this statement 100%. However, the people at TDC clearly do not, as they have a TDC Canon Policy. Which contradicts what you and I have just agreed on.
- 6)There is nothing too broad, except for things like 'What happened in [episode]?' which a recent discussion agreed on to delete such questions. But again, why TDC? There's Dr Who Guide, Wikipedia etc. etc.
- Sorry, but you have again avoided the issue. Let me state it again:
- It is now DWA policy to link every answer to TDC, not as an external link, but as part of the main body of the answer. So naturally people will click the link, and when they get there, they don't just get "more information". They get a website with a clearly defined Canon Policy, which has come down on one side of various contentious issues, often declaring that one story is "not aprt of the Doctor Who Universe" or "non-canonical". They explicitly state that "only stories count", and don't consider real-world information to be a "valid source". And these policies are completely incompatible with DWA policies. We both agree that there is no canon, and that all officially licensed stories count. This site has also always given real-world information, and what Russell T. Davies or Steven moffat have said is given important measure. And of course we answer questions about DWA site Policy.
- However, we are now linking every answer to TDC which a)have their own Canon Policy, even referring to stories as "non-canonical" and "non-DWU", b)does not consider real-world evidence to be a "valid source", and we are not linking as External Links, we are linking in big blue letters as the main answer. In some cases, not even giving a proper answer, simply giving a TDC link. Is it any wonder that people are asking about TDC on DWA?
- And this question is not a "canon" question. It is a question about TDC policies. On DWA/. Which is perfectly understandable under the circumstances. Circumstances that need to be discussed again. As the reality of the situation has shown all too clearly. Master of Spiders (talk) 07:32, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
On TDC, right at the top of the article on "Dimensions in Time", there is a large panel that reads:
- You can believe this subject is a part of the Doctor Who universe. But we don't.
Thus, although they clearly state their opinion, they also clearly state that the reader is free to hold a differing opinion.
It might make some sense for you to argue that, in an appropriate part of our policy page, we ought to have a statement that links to other sites are intended only to make further information available to our users & don't imply that we endorse or seek to follow the policies of those other sites.
That, however, isn't what you're arguing & what you are arguing is sheer bunkum. You ought to have noticed by now that several people have posted contributions disagreeing with you but not one person has so far posted any contribution agreeing with you. As Oliver Cromwell wrote to the synod of the Church of Scotland on August 5 1650:
- I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken.
Please note that, by referring to this, I am not endorsing or seeking to follow the policies of Oliver Cromwell. --184.108.40.206 08:07, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
It's funny that ytou complain about personal attacks, but then refer to something as "sheer bunkum".
I agree that if we continue to reference TDC articles, we definitely need something telling users that we don't endorse anything on TDC, it's just another perspective.
But again, oen of the main issues here is this:
Imamadmad tagged the question as a CFD, because it's unrelated to Doctor Who. However, questions asking about DWA are answered here. So, we only answer questions about Dr Who( and DWA).
And yet, we must link everything to TDC. Not to IMDB or another Wiki. TDC. And not as 'External Links' or 'See Also' links, as Big Blue Letters that stand out in the answer. If someone doesn't link to TDC, they are called out on it.
So the obvious question is: If it is DWA site policy to link everything in big bold blue letters in the main answer space to TDC articles, then how can TDC be unrelated to DWA? because if we are linking everything to TDC then TDC is very much related to DWA. This is further compounded by TDC's ideas such as:
As for "you may believe...", the point is still that they are making a pronouncement on canon. And as per TDC's canon policy, any and all articles must be treated accordingly. Whether they state that someone else is free to form their own Doctor Who Universe is irrelevant. They have a canon policy, and all their articles must adhere to that canon policy.
I feel I must also add what i felt was obvious here.
Do not look at this through the yes of Master of Spiders, or 89, or Corey Chambers or Imamadmad...
Imagine you are a newcomer to this website. You ask a question about Doctor Who.
You get a response that gives an answer. You also get a big bold blue link to an article. Clicking on it, you get a different answer, one that is defined by a Canon Policy. First, you wouldn't immediately realise that it's not even the same website. Second, since you assume this is an expert answer, you would take the "non-DWU" status very seriously. And when you see that every answer links to TDc articles, you would obviously draw the conclusion that this site is somehow part of TDC. Master of Spiders (talk) 09:56, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
If you read what you yourself wrote, you'll see that you said:
- It's funny that ytou complain about personal attacks, but then refer to something as "sheer bunkum".
You said "something" (my emphasis), not "someone". That is, you already know that the phrase "sheer bunkum" was not directed at a person but at a thing.
Furthermore, I did not "complain about personal attacks". What I said was that it was the kind of thing you might have said was a personal attack. The difference may have escaped you; nevertheless, there is a difference.
Also, you persistently call the links "big bold blue" links. That's not how they appear on my screen. Blue, yes; they are that colour. They are, however, in the same size of type as normal text & they are not in bold face. --220.127.116.11 10:13, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
You also claim that a user, new to this site, "wouldn't immediately realise that it's not even the same website." That would be true only of a user entirely new to the Internet &, even for such a user, only for a very short time. To claim that it's true for most users, even when new to this site, is grossly insulting to those users. It has about the same merit as claiming that they'd think the pages they reached by clicking on links in (say) Google search results were Google pages. It's a fatuous argument & you should (& probably do) know that it's a fatuous argument. --18.104.22.168 10:27, February 16, 2014 (UTC)
"insulting", "fatuous". No, no personal attacks from 89....
Anyway, you still only argue around the edges.
Again, any user coming to DWA as a new user would quickly come to the conclusion that DWA is, at the very least, closely affiliated with TDC. And that same user would get conflicting evidence at DWA and the canon-policy-driven TDC. If you want the links, fine. However, as it is now, it's a mess. And it leads to self-cntradictory statements. An idea I have, and it's not necessarily a final version. Instead of linking as we do now(which creates questions like this one), we can link in another way.
As it is now(hypothetical question):
Q: Which story did the Ninth Doctor regenerate in?
- This creates an immediate problem. One that 89 refuses to acknowledge. But as this question shows, the problem is there.
A suggested alternative(with same hypothetical question):
Q: Which story did the Ninth Doctor regenerate in?
A: The Parting of the Ways
External Links: "The Parting of the Ways" at TARDIS Data Core, an external wiki.
The discussion above is not about whether the question should be deleted, but rather about whether DWA should link to Tardis. That's a question for the forums. Take it there, please.
In the meantime, let's examine how the question, Why does the TARDIS data core not consider "Dimensions in Time" canon?, violates at least two DWA rules.
|This site covers the science fiction TV show Doctor Who and its licensed spin-offs in various media ... it is a matter of opinion whether any story or set of stories should be accepted [as canon]. Questions relating to this cannot be answered & will be deleted.||Questions not relating to the Doctor Who Universe or the production of Doctor Who and its related spin-offs will be deleted.|
Both of those rules say that the question will be deleted. Not "the question may be deleted". Not "the question will be referred to a talk page for further discussion". They both say "will be deleted". Equally, DWA:NOCAN gives an explicit list of things that we cover here. It says nothing there about unlicensed wikis. This site, by established rule, does not cover other fan sites. It covers officially licensed stories, and to a lesser extent, those who produce those stories. No exceptions are given in our rules.
The question, Why does the TARDIS data core not consider "Dimensions in Time" canon?, obviously has nothing to do with stories, nor anything licensed, but is rather about an unlicensed fan website.
It thus unambiguously offends several rules of the wiki, and so it is now deleted. This talk page will survive until 0000 Thursday the 20th of February 2014, after which time it, too, will be deleted. If you want to "lifeboat" your comments above into a new forum thread, feel free to do so.
This page deletion should not be taken as a comment at all on the correctness of DWA linking to Tardis. It is solely about the page question, not about the only tangentially related discussion in the above section.
- I've had my difference with Czechout but on this I'm in full agreement. I don't know if this has been suggested but maybe a "NOT TARDIS DATA CORE" policy should be put in place just like there's a "NOT BBC" policy. I know there is cross-pollination between TDC and DWA but ultimately to answer this question requires one to be a representative of TDC. So I support deletion and recommend that a policy be specified that can be cited excluding discussions of non-DWA fansite policies. 22.214.171.124 02:48, February 17, 2014 (UTC)