User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-7302713-20130409112511/@comment-26975268-20130411000743

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-7302713-20130409112511/@comment-26975268-20130411000743 Well, you have just successfully created a new word: bluelinking. Congratulations. :)

First things first, we don't only record what's different in the DWU, but also what's the same. Much of the information in our articles is just common sense to most people, yet they're still there, and they still have sources.

Take a look at Amelia Earhart. We all know that she's a pilot, but yet we can't write it in the article. All we can record is that she disappeared in 1932, and that Diane Holmes speculated that she might have gotten lost in time. You might question why she deserved an article with only one piece of info about her that can be found at Wikipedia. The reason is: she's mentioned, and therefore she's part of the DWU, and therefore she deserved a page. It's not the most crucial of pages; we could get along without it. But yet I still created it.

The context of holiday was something like "after going on holiday," right? That one's certainly debatable. Broadly speaking, it's a bit too general to create a proper article. If we started an article about every instance of people going on holiday, it'd start to get too list-like.

On the other hand, we're given a lot of insight into holiday/vacation destinations. Off the top of my head, we can talk about
 * 1) Where the posh of London went for Christmas (TV: Turn Left)
 * 2) How leasure planets were planets made or engineered specifically for their use as holiday destinations. (TV: Midnight)
 * 3) How San Francisco was a popular vacation destination, (TV: 'The Fires of Pompeii'')
 * 4) How beaches were too. In fact, the Tenth Doctor took Martha Jones on vacation to Nacre, a planet with seemingly endless beaches. (PROSE: Breathing Space)
 * 5) We can also go through the instances where the Doctor or his companions warn people to go on holiday to protect them from an oncoming disaster. (TV: Doctor Who, Turn Left, The Fires of Pompeii, just to name a few.

...Okay, I'm stopping myself before I veer off-topic again. At the moment, we don't have much on tablets aside from Kizlet's. Kizlet's tablet might actually be a useful page that could talk about all its capabilities. If I were in your place I'd change "...picks up a tablet which..." to "...picks up a tablet which..."


 * Paranoia: There's plenty of things in the DWU that induce paranoia. I could easily create the page, I suppose, although I'd have to do more research so that the article's not just a list of things that cause paranoia.


 * Obedience: Kizlet has her tablet, the Third Doctor had his obedience spray, the War Lords had their glasses and the Ice Warriors had their brain-racks. Ooh, and the Ood were "conditioned to serve."


 * Conscience: Naa, too subjective to create a proper page. I'd get rid of that link.


 * As I demonstrated above, IQ deserves a page, which I might just create sometime soon.

You should also probably note that there doesn't necessarily have to have your definition of 'significance' to the story to be linked there. We run like a business here; we want people to click on obedience, and find out about how obedience fit in to Classic Who, or comic stories, or prose. Then, from there, they click on more links. Trust me - before I was editing here, I would get addicted to reading the articles here. That's just the nature of wikis; we want people to get lost in the wiki (in the good sense).

Honestly, as we've all said above, if you see a link, either leave it alone or, better yet, create the article. I rarely remove redlinks, but you can do it if it's entirely subjective or way too broad, like if someone redlinked happiness.