User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-1293767-20151029072618/@comment-27501528-20160106112247

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-1293767-20151029072618/@comment-27501528-20160106112247 RogerAckroydLives wrote: I do think we're starting to go in circles. Before this debate was resumed, I think there were only two potential policies being considered:

a). We use a three part system: if an episode ends with TBC, is followed by another story within the same run of episodes, and that follow up is written by the same person (with co-writing counted), then those episodes are part of the same story.

b). We use a basic system: if an episode is "X (part y)" then we merge it like all other serials.

These were the ideas being considered when we "took a break". What seems to be resurfacing is half-formed versions of these. I believe that the majority were supporting a), but a number of admins had expressed support for b). The problem with B) is sort of the inverse of the using-TBC-cards-as-automatic-proof problem, where it breaks apart stories that have always been considered multi-part stories, with no evidence to the contrary (i.e. Empty Child/Doctor Dances) just for the sake of having a consistent system (unless I've misunderstood the system).

A) sounds much more workable, but leaves AGMGTW/LKH as a single story (again, unless I've misunderstood), which I'm still unsure of - mainly because every other source calls it two seperate stories. Out of interest, do we know on what basis other sources (wikipedia, radiotimes, etc) class it as two stories?