Talk:Dateline (series)

One page
I created one page for Dateline 2066 and Dateline 2088/89 because, despite the separate publishers, in my opinion they're clearly extensions of the same idea and not different enough to merit separate pages. But I could be persuaded otherwise, if someone has strong feelings. – n8 (☎) 20:32, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * While the two Engale iterations of Dateline are obviously one and the same, I'd probably seperate them from their TV21 counterpart (although both should be mentioned on each other's pages). Engale's Dateline was much more comparable to TV21's cover stories in that there was one longer article, usually one or two smaller articles as well, which tied-in to the events of the comic strips within the issue. They were also illustrated with colour screenshots or promotional images of well-known characters from the Anderson supermarionation series.


 * 2066 was predominantly black-and-white with a focus on smaller but shorter articles, as many as ten on one page. Crucially and the main reason why I think the split should occur, is that it was unconcerned with happenings elsewhere in TV21. It was uncommon for a recurring character original to the magazine (e.g. Bandranaik) to make appearances and when he did it was in just one of these many articles. As far as I can remember, there was never any appearances from well-known characters from television such as Tempest or the Tracy brothers never mind news which tied in to the strips on an issue-to-issue basis.


 * The purposes of the Engale's and TV21's Dateline were similar in that they offered reports from each magazine's futuristic setting but they were otherwise completely distinct. Adding in the difference in publisher and the gap of over twenty years justifies seperate pages in my view. Borisashton ☎  21:32, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * We have ample precedent on the wiki of series which have significantly changed in colour, format, structure, release date etc but remain a singular series due to their shared name - Doctor Who chief among them! I find it hard to imagine that the Action 21 writers didn't see themselves as continuing Dateline 2066 into the 80s, and one day when I have time to put in the effort, it might be worth revisiting just how independent those 2066 stories really are. But as long as the link between the TV21 and A21 series is made clear and explicit, I'm not opposed to a page split. What would you suggest it be called? Putting 2089 stories on Dateline 2088 (series) would be a bit strange, but so would a Dateline (series) page which excludes 2066. – n8 (☎) 17:48, 5 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Absolutely we should mention them both on each other's pages. I'd say Dateline 2088 (is there a need for a dab?) with a redirect from Dateline 2089 isn't a terrible idea but the other options would be Dateline 2066 and Dateline (A21 series) or Dateline (TV21 series) and Dateline (A21 series). Borisashton ☎  21:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I reckon the dab is necessary. We may or may not end up having the page in question but there is such a thing as an in-universe "Dateline 2088" feature in the in-universe periodical, after all. Scrooge MacDuck ☎  21:20, 23 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Ah, true. In that case I'd go with "Dateline (TV21 series)" and "Dateline (A21 series)" for the matching title format. Borisashton ☎  22:05, 23 April 2021 (UTC)