Talk:Friend from the Future (TV story)

Webcast?
I thought this was a TV story, first being broadcast on Match of the Day, and then later being released to the internet. --Borisashton ☎  11:43, April 16, 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, this seems to be the case. If no one disagrees, I think we can move this up to a Template:Speedy rename. OS25 (Talk) 04:08, April 18, 2017 (UTC)
 * It's been a week now since my original comment and nobody has objected. I'll change the template to a Speedy rename. --Borisashton ☎  09:14, April 23, 2017 (UTC)
 * Well... given that it was in fact broadcast on TV (as it says on the page) I see no reason why it shouldn't be dabbed TV story. --DCLM ☎  09:38, April 23, 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this page really needs moving. The title, as it stands, is objectively inaccurate. 217.43.40.225talk to me 10:19, May 1, 2017 (UTC)
 * 217, Moving it is up to the admins, and any attempt to create the story under a different dab term will be deleted (again). And Borisashton, you can't use a speedy rename tag if the rename is under discussion. See Template:Speedy rename. Shambala108 ☎  14:00, May 1, 2017 (UTC)
 * There shouldn't be a discussion. It wasn't a webcast. 217.43.40.225talk to me 14:27, May 1, 2017 (UTC)
 * We have discussions like this to not be dictators, democracy is the way to go rather than be declarative, bossy and ignorant. Snivystorm ☎  14:38, May 1, 2017 (UTC)

Except this isn't a matter of opinion. It is undeniable that this thing was first shown on television. It's not the sort of murky thing that would require a vote. CoT    ?  14:49, May 1, 2017 (UTC)
 * Shambala said the admins are taking care of it and this is a discussion, which implies to me that they are voting so... Snivystorm ☎  14:56, May 1, 2017 (UTC)
 * Wrong, I"m trying to prevent any non-admin from moving the page or creating a version of it with the TV story dab term. Shambala108 ☎  15:49, May 1, 2017 (UTC)


 * Shambala is right, no non-admin user should attempt to move this page. An admin interested in sorting the issue out will get to this eventually, likely when the inclusion debate is closed. OS25 (Talk) 16:30, May 1, 2017 (UTC)
 * Inclusion debate? 217.43.40.225talk to me 18:21, May 1, 2017 (UTC)


 * Though you've already found it, here a link for others who'd like to discuss whether this story is valid. Amorkuz ☎  18:27, May 1, 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, sorry, I got confused. I thought we were literally debating whether to include or delete the page. I see. I'm not sure why it WOULDN'T be valid, myself, but I suppose if people think it isn't we do need a debate. 217.43.40.225talk to me 18:29, May 1, 2017 (UTC)

Ok so the page itself refers to this as a TV story many times. The title of this page is the only part which assumes otherwise, including the CATEGORIES of the page! 217.43.40.225talk to me 18:34, May 1, 2017 (UTC)


 * Indeed, it would seem at this point that there is little debate to be had that this isn't a TV story. However, you must be patient and understand that we must allow the admins to find time to look into and fix this case. Renaming pages is a very complex and often annoying process. OS25 (Talk) 19:13, May 1, 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, of course. I'll wait. Sorry if I seemed impatient. 217.43.40.225talk to me 19:44, May 2, 2017 (UTC)

Validity
Anyone wishing to argue for or against the story being valid should see Thread:214342. OS25 (Talk) 20:45, April 16, 2017 (UTC)