Forum:Formatting the Doctors

I think that we should discuss the formatting of each of the individual Doctors' pages. A lot of them have sections in different orders, some are subsections of other sections. I think we should devise an order in which each of these sections should go. Have a look at the contents section on each of the Doctors' pages and you'll see what I mean. The Thirteenth Doctor 13:13, June 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * We should focus on making the articles in-universe, fully in-universe. Some sections like 'unrecorded adventures' just seem to be a place to dump information that hasn't been incorporated into the article.
 * I think we need to seriously look at 'Key life events', it's especially bad for the new series it's become a list of stories except written in-universe - maybe even getting rid of this section across all articles.
 * I've done a quick edit, removing 'profile' making Biography the first heading.
 * The Companions section on the Fourth Doctor article seems a little surplus to requirements, it's not really about the Fourth Doctor or really his relationship with them, it's more a summary of their time with the Fourth Doctor, referencing them.
 * Clothes and impact on later incarnations on the Fifth Doctor article should be integrated into the article, both would probably be better in 'Psychological profile'.
 * 'Mysteries and Discrepancies' seems to be 'Discontinuity, Plot holes and errors' by another name and a little bit more in-universe. Some of the info could be integrated into the article better. On the First Doctor article it seems well researched, though on many others its devolved into the sort of stuff we used to see in 'discontinuity' sections on the story articles.
 * The Tenth Doctor article needs a good cull of information and big re-structure a lot of the sections read like condensed plot summaries. --Tangerineduel 15:01, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think the "Key life events" sections are near-useless for not just the Doctor's incarnations, but for almost everyone. They seem to fall into four categories:
 * Most classic companions, non-TV characters, and one-story characters who have this section have nearly empty lists (Ben Jackson).
 * Most characters who had two separate runs in continuity have a list of "bookend appearances" with synopses (Liz Shaw, Jamie McCrimmon).
 * Most new-series characters, Doctors included, and some of the classic Doctors have a huge list of randomly-selected appearances with attached synopses (Fifth Doctor, Martha Jones).
 * A tiny handful of characters with complicated timelines have somewhat useful lists (Sam Jones, Fitz Kreiner, and maybe River Song if "River Song's Timeline" were rewritten), but even there I don't think much would be lost by scrapping it. (Look at The Master, Sarah Jane Smith, and Bernice Summerfield, which seem to do fine without it.) --Falcotron 03:19, June 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with this. There doesn't seem to be anything in the "Key Life Events" sections that couldn't be better conveyed in a simple biography. Rob T Firefly 07:39, June 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * Alrighty! Feel free to go forth and integrate the information in the Key Life Events section into the article or remove it, I think we should do this across all articles, not just the Doctors articles. --Tangerineduel 13:50, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

Can we get this discussion up and going again? I really do think we should have the same order and names of headings. I mean the third, sixth and eighth Doctors don't have any mention on their appearance, which actually surprised me for the sixth. I can draw up a sample page if you want, then link it here? --The Thirteenth Doctor 18:11, June 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ok, I've created a basic page with sections explaining what each is specifically for. Here it is. As for the key life events, I've tried to make it clear that it is for major life events, such as regenerates from previous incarnation, is joined by companion, companion dies/leaves etc. The Thirteenth Doctor 20:49, June 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with the basic idea however there is often a tendency often with formats like this to try and stick rigidly to a structure which sometimes can mean information is added in just so it can fulfill part of the structure, or other information is forced into certain subheadings.
 * Key life events should not be a part of any article, as discussed above it's more or less a list of stories. Even with that sort of notation...those sorts of things should be the focus of certain sub-headings rather than collected at the bottom of the article. The First Doctor's article seems to work without it.
 * I would caution against enforcing/using companions as a sub-category as most of the Doctors travelled alone at some point. Also, some articles, the Fourth Doctor article which has a companions section becomes just a summary of each companion's travels with the Doctor, the focus should be on the Fourth Doctor and his interaction with his companions (as the focus of the article is the Fourth Doctor).
 * I think the information available should determine the sub-headings to a degree, the First Doctor article would be fairly hard to cram into the format, as would the Sixth Doctor's. Using your guide as a guide rather than set in concrete "format" perhaps also linked/in addition to the Tardis:Guide to writing Individuals articles. --Tangerineduel 06:25, June 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Perhaps calling it the format is a bit strong. If it was more of a guide than a rulebook (like the pirate code ;D ) then it could work. I think the key life events should stay in some form. Perhaps renaming it to timeline and just linking to the main timeline article for that Doctor.
 * For the sub-categories of companion, that too was just one example. Such as for the tenth Doctor. He'd have subheadings for travels with Rose, Martha, Donna and then one for travels alone. Like you said above, this should be more of a guide.
 * I'll update the page making sure it is clear that it is just a guide and taking into account the things you said. --The Thirteenth Doctor 09:48, June 28, 2010 (UTC)