Talk:TV21

DC to TV21
Most prefixes for magazines or comics material on this wiki use either an abbreviation for the title (TVA, TVC, DWM, TWM, IHP, DWC, DWCC, RT etc.) or rarely a publisher (IDW) which mirrors audios or direct-to-video releases (BBV, MB, BFA, RP) TV 21 was an in-house abbreviation for TV Century 21 from its very first issue, long before it was officially changed.

Most of the time this is in part because the series name was Doctor Who or there were multiple series. In this case the series was The Daleks. To keep the prefix simple in explaining what it is and isn't, it would be easier if I didn't have to write:
 * Dalek Chronicles is not to be used for anything that actually carried the words "Dalek Chronicles" on its original printing, particularly things that predated and introduced characters and concepts that appeared in the TV21 comic. It only refers to The Daleks as published in TV Century 21, not to any Doctor Who Magazine continuations of the series.

--Nyktimos 04:11, March 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Whoa. We gotta think about this one.  You've spread this message around in various places and I don't really get it.  There's no such thing as a "DWM continuation" of the TV21 stuff; they only reprinted the stuff from the 1960s.  The reason the DC prefix stood as an "oddity" amongst comic prefixes is that it is one.  There's no DWU material in TV21 aside from what later became known as DC, and it's the Marvel UK name that's "stuck" amongst most fans.  Put more simply, TV21 is indivisible from DC.  All you've done is trade one initialism for another. Not sure why you bothered with the work.


 * Your rationale of using what was at best a Souvenir Press subtitle as a basis for continuing to use the DC prefix for some stuff published in the 1960s is, I think, highly confusing. Moreover, it's bogus.  None of that Souvenir stuff should be given the DC prefix. It makes no sense to label anything DC based upon the — at this point, 40+ years after the fact — rumored content of The Curse of the Daleks, which incidentally included Souvenir's editor as a producer.  I can't even wrap my mind around how shaky that is.  It's like saying I'm gonna call this thing a "tigotohopper" because a merchandiser who made toys during series 1 happened to be the editor of a semi-official reference book in 2001 — and he said that they were trigotohoppers.


 * Besides, I'm not personally of the opinion that stage plays are valid references according to our canon policy, because it's not a recorded medium. There's no no guaranteeing what actually appeared on stage, unless you were physically present at the performance.  Even then, it's all hearsay, not verifiable content.    For all we know, references to "based on the Dalek Chronicles discovered and translated by Terry Nation" only appeared in the script or on advertising, and didn't actually appear in the performance itself — even if it was a line of dialogue in a script that we may have gotten our hands on.


 * Personally, I would never have made this move. But since you've already made the switch, I'd suggest DC be deleted.  If  Detective Comics ever get a portion of the DW comics license, then we can resurrect it.    Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  20:50, March 5, 2010 (UTC)