Talk:List of Doctor Who television stories

Animation block
As of right now all the 60s seasons tables on this list has either a “story partially missing” block (yellow) or a “story completely missing” block (red) or both, with the affected stories’ columns coloured in one or the other, but would it be possible to add a new block that informs people that a particular story has been animated, and giving it a third colour (potentially green or blue)? Doesn’t need to override the current colour, it can just be as an extra notice on the respective columns, which tells you “hey, this story is still missing, but it has been animated so you can watch it anyway”. —Danniesen ☎  10:50, 3 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I like this idea. Which column would you propose this new colour indicator be added to? Bongo50   ☎  22:36, 3 January 2023 (UTC)


 * See, that’s where I’m stuck. I don’t know how we could and should implement this. It could very easily become ugly to look at if done wrong. Would a format work which is something similar to a "Triangle" in the corner of an Excel column? Danniesen ☎  22:52, 3 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't think that'd be impossible to do, although I'm not personally sure how to attack it. I also don't think it'd work on mobile (which accounts for 66% of our readers so can't be neglected). Perhaps a really thin additional column could be added to one side of the table where this indicator goes? Bongo50   ☎  23:06, 3 January 2023 (UTC)


 * That was my initial thought as well, although I worried that it might be too clunky and wouldn’t look good, so I didn’t bring it up at all. Or perhaps something at the top of each column. Danniesen ☎  00:53, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Television stories
Given that the very first line of this article is "This is a list of Doctor Who televised stories", I propose that the webcasts and home videos are removed. By definition, they don't belong here. Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon ☎  20:32, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * They have in the past been under discussion and were agreed to feature on the list. Danniesen ☎  21:08, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * The discussion from two years ago wasn't closed by an admin as far as I can tell. Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon ☎  21:10, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * In that case, it’s still an ongoing discussion and shouldn’t be changed until closed, as far as I’m aware are the rules. Danniesen ☎  21:12, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I haven't removed them since you made me aware of the discussion. Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon ☎  21:14, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * No no no… I’m aware. No worries. I’m just pointing it out. Danniesen ☎  21:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Numbering
Currently, the pages for Heaven Sent and Hell Bent are numbered separately and The Haunting of Villa Diodati, Ascension of the Cybermen and The Timeless Children are numbered as a three-parter.

As of today, this page numbers Heaven Sent and Hell Bent as a two-parter and The Haunting of Villa Diodata as separate from the Ascension of the Cybermen and The Timeless Children. Which is it? I can't find much of a discussion about either. Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon ☎  18:47, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Heaven Sent and Hell Bent used to be listed as a two-parter, and I'm not quite certain how that suddenly got changed. In any case, this was just a reversal back to that. As for Haunting being first part of a 3-parter, those others being Ascension and Timeless, this was a debate started by User:Tellymustard at some point, something I personally agree with, but this never came to a consensus and somehow still stayed as a 3-parter. This is something I corrected until that debate has reached a conclusion. —Danniesen ☎  18:53, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Actually, correction… I first tried to start that debate by pointing out Chibnall's own word on the matter when the relevant DWM came out, but it didn’t gather much attention. But Tellymustard acted it out without debate. Danniesen ☎  18:56, 11 January 2023 (UTC)