Forum:Should Doctor Who (1996) be Doctor Who (TV story)?

OttselSpy25 has put forward the notion that Doctor Who (1996) be re-disambigged to Doctor Who (TV story). It's certainly technically possible, and on the face of things, it seems consistent with our own internal structures. Are there objections?

Note that this is not a general thread looking for a better name. Doctor Who (1996) was agreed by fairly lengthy consensus, so we're not generally looking for a better name. The question is only being brought forward because we've changed the way the rest of the story titles work since we agreed the (1996) thing. It certainly would be easier for template creation and bot operation without the (1996) exception. So is there any reason why (TV story) would be a bad idea? 22:42: Sat 29 Sep 2012
 * I think Doctor Who (1984) should be redisambigged too. There's a page for another comic series at Doctor Who (IDW), so the 1984 page should be listed as Doctor Who (Marvel) to be consistent.


 * I think we should leave it as is as the 1996 label makes it very clear what we are referring to. Mostly just because the title is also the name of the base series, to minimise confusion i think it's best to not have it sited like the rest of the episodes. This is about maximising clarity for new readers rather than sticking to formats if sticking to formats will diminish clarity. However, if it must have a dab name change, i think "TV Movie" will be best. Imamadmad ☎  10:44, September 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * My immediate inclination was to agree with Imamadmad, that the 1996 label is a good differentiator.
 * But on further consideration and looking at dab pages like Doctor Who (disambiguation) the TVM is listed under "story names", and as it's a story that was on TV, then the TV story dab term is reasonable and in-keeping with our policies and with the other dabbed stories.
 * As long as we, as we've done with the others maintain the redirect, then I see no reason to oppose it. --Tangerineduel / talk 14:45, October 1, 2012 (UTC)