Talk:The Year That Never Was

Rationale
See Talk:Skirmish at Tranquil Repose. This kind of article needs to be rooted out of this wiki. Except in very rare cases articles should not be created for events or things that have no names. Battles in particular do not deserve their own names/pages unless the name is given in a primary source. This article is essentially describing a battle, or, more precisely, recounting the events of Last of the Time Lords.  Czech Out  ☎ | ✍  07:23, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Against Deletion

 * The evil dude - Again, another important event that deserves its own article. This was the whole setting for an episode, don't forget. There is nothing wrong with the names on all the articles you've prop deleted, so why don't you quit while you're ahead.
 * Tangerineduel 07:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC) This is an important event that did happen. Also there is The Story of Martha coming out later this year which details Martha's time during this year, which will hopefully help to bolster the information.
 * Dark Lord Xander 09:10, 29 July 2008 (UTC) whats the point of having a wiki about doctor who if we don't have articles on important events
 * Because when you start pulling names out of thin air, you're on a very slippery slope towards fancruft. It's never called "the year that never was" and especially not "The Year That Never Was".  It's oxymoronic to call it the "year that never was", cause it quite clearly was a year to the key participants.  The Story of Martha may not turn out to be quite so centered on Last of the Time Lords as we might imagine; the solicitation indicates merely that it's a Martha-centric book, not a time period-specific book.  In any case, that's a future release, and can't be used as a rationale for keeping a page around.    What's weird, to me, is that all this stuff could quite easily be covered by having a proper article on Harold Saxon, but we've instead chosen to just make that a subsection of aliases of the Master.  A biography of Harold Saxon which included a subsection covering this ground would be far more acceptable.  So no need to lose this work, but it really forms the basis for a Harold Saxon entry.  Then, if you wanted to link to the information using this somewhat poetic phrase, you could.  Indeed, I wouldn't mind moving this page to the year that never was then transferring the contents of this page to a subsection called Harold Saxon, then redirecting the year that never was to Harold Saxon.  Wikipedia obviously has no such page, and when they refer to the topic, they invariably put it in quotes: "the year that never was".  That seems preferable, to me.  It acknowledges general fan usage of the term, but at the same time makes it clear that it's not a real, nor wholly applicable, designation.   Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  20:24, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Except this article is more to do with everything that occurs rather than just Harold Saxon. As for the title, this wiki is written past tense as a sort of 'looking back from the end of the universe' sort of thing, so the title is correct, it was a year that never was (I suppose if you wanted to be very specific it should be 'the year that never was, except for those who were on the Valiant during the time flip flop'). I'm not sure what you're saying about fancruft, the article is well written, has references, or perhaps it's the part in the article that says; Fancruft is a term sometimes used in Wikipedia to imply that a selection of content is of importance only to a small population of enthusiastic fans of the subject in question. Which is kinda the definition of most of the articles outside of the TV story and major aliens on this wiki. --Tangerineduel 14:31, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Steed 15:49, 1 August 2008 (UTC) - The Year That Never Was is a definite event. The show does seem to revolve around time travel, doesn't it?
 * Objection withdrawn. Turns out, it is an event named on screen.  Jack uses the phrase at the conclusion of Last of the Time Lords.  Still think it should be The year that never was more than The Year That Never Was, but that's a minor complaint.  Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  00:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

trimmed
I took out a detailed summary of a lot of the plot of Last of the Time Lords better put in the article itself. --Stardizzy2 20:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC)