Forum:Operationalising the Infinity Doctors discussion

Because the thread was getting overlong, I've split apart what was originally at Forum:Is The Infinity Doctors canon?. Now, that thread is archived, and contains only the discussion about how we were going to proceed with it.

This thread picks up from the "Housekeeping" section of that thread and contains discussion about how we're going to operationalise the conclusions reached in the earlier thread. 22:03: Mon 20 Aug 2012

Housekeeping
I've considered doing a cleanup to add the "in a parallel universe" references, but there's a few things I'm not clear about. There's several lines which cite two sources (one of them The Infinity Doctors), and it's not clear (without me reading the stories myself) if Infinity adds something, or if that universe has events similar to the "main" DWU (and so I could remove the Infinity Doctors cite, and the line would remain accurate). This happens on Omega, Qqaba, Pandak, Eutenoyar, Chapterhouse, The Doctor, Gallifreyan history, The Gallifrey Chronicles (novel) and I.

Given that Sontar (The Infinity Doctors)'s lead is sourced to Infinity Doctors, will that need a complete rewrite? -- Tybort (talk page) 17:29, July 30, 2012 (UTC)

To answer briefly:
 * Re-reading/viewing/hearing the stories yourself is obviously the preferred method for (re)writing any articles.
 * You almost certainly cannot just remove the Infinity Doctors citation on any point and it remain accurate. Everything from TID will have to be prefaced with the phrase, "In another universe . . ." or something similar.
 * As for Sontar, well, I dunno about complete rewrite, but see the point above. The goal here is to make it absolutely clear we're talking bout something from TID, which does not occur in the mainstream DWU, but rather in a pocket universe of it.  Think Pete's World or Donna's World, not the universe of the Peter Cushing movies.  22:31: Wed 01 Aug 2012


 * The vast majority of these references appear in other sources with just as much or more information than they had in The Infinity Doctors, so yes, you could just remove the Infinity Doctors citations and remain completely accurate. It's kind of ridiculous to remove the citations in such cases, though; they're citations, they're in parentheses and everything. We never read the parenthetical citations as part of the "in-universe" text, so they can remain as they are. It may be useful or at least interesting to know that a certain character is mentioned in a certain text, even if the text isn't considered canonical (yes, that's the proper word) by the wise sages of this wiki.


 * Remember, the goal here isn't to strip the wiki of all information that doesn't pass muster in the Panopticon debates; the goal is just to figure out which section of the article the information goes into. If you find yourself deleting parts of an article based purely on its canonical status, you're doing it wrong. It's much better to include more information and risk possibly filing it in the "wrong" category than it is to simply delete things willy-nilly. It may conceivably be useful to alert the readership if a source seems dubious; it is not useful to pretend the source doesn't exist at all (unless it's fanfic or the like). -- Rowan Earthwood ☎  18:04, August 4, 2012 (UTC)


 * But Infinity Doctors' current canonical status (on the wiki) is that it IS part of the DWU, but in an "Infinity Doctors" universe, not a notdwu affair. -- Tybort (talk page) 18:36, August 4, 2012 (UTC)
 * I think Rowan is sort of agreeing with the basic gist of this very long debate, but somehow isn't understanding my very last post. So let me back up a bit. The compromise reached in this thread is that TID is a DWU story, but one that happens in an alternate universe. For this reason, any in-universe citation of events from the book must be prefaced with language like "According to events in another universe..."  And then the point must be anchored by (PROSE: The Infinity Doctors), so that it's crystal clear to our readers from where the factoid came.


 * So you absolutely cannot strip from the text of our articles.  As has been proved by several quotes upthread, TID is the DWU through a lens of Parkin's creation.  You should never assume that events described in TID will be the same as described in other works.  The Gallifrey of TID is not the same as the Gallifrey of the mainstream DWU.


 * In the end, there was no debate about which section of the article TID references went. They are firmly to be a part of the main, in-universe portion of the article.  But they are to be set off by an "according to this universe" phrase at the beginning and a standard citation at the end. There are many, many topics on which TID is the only source, so we do have to clearly indicate that it's something in the TID pocketverse, not the DWU proper.


 * Incidentally, I'd disagree that we shouldn't consider deleting "facts" from TID. Especially if you, like Tybort, are an editor who hasn't actually read TID, I don't have any problems with you deleting statements from TID wholesale.  The reason is that most people haven't actually read the work.  They're depending on detailed summaries from the DW Reference Guide or the Discontinuity Guide or wherever.  As I said above the best way to rewrite an article is to go back to the original text.  So if a few factoids get deleted in the process of complying with the conclusions of this debate, well, that's cool.  There are a lot of statements on this wiki, not just ones about TID, which need to be pruned so that they can be replaced by people who have freshly experienced the stories.  The memory cheats our editors as much as it cheats anyone in fandom. Sometimes you have to burn a part of the forest in order to ensure healthy growth.


 * I think Rowan is wrongly assuming that any and all statements which currently exist on the wiki about TID are correct, and therefore worthy of preservation. This is certainly not the case.  Almost no story other than perhaps Lungbarrow has been so wrongly represented on this wiki than TID.  Frankly, we could do with a "clean slate" on the articles from which to then re-add the material after having gone back to this particularly vexing original source.   17:21: Tue 14 Aug 2012


 * That makes sense, but since there are still lots of references to TID which are correct and verified from other sources, perhaps the thing to do is to move sentences/facts cited to TID and another source to the relevant talk page, until they can be verified in the other source. For example, at Qqaba, I was able to separate the info that's verified in COMIC: Star Death from the TID material, but if I didn't have access to Star Death, it would have made sense to place most of the material on the talk page, so that someone who has access to the relevant sources could verify what is and isn't confirmed in sources outside of TID.


 * It also might be useful to keep a list of affected articles here or on another housekeeping page, so that we can keep track of what work has been done and what still needs attention. —Josiah Rowe ☎  04:01, August 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * Incidentally, I just created The Infinity Doctors universe. (Well, actually Lance Parkin created it. I just made a page on this wiki about it.) I don't, however, know how to italicize the page title, so that it reads "The Infinity Doctors universe", as Tardis1963 suggests. —Josiah Rowe ☎  04:56, August 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * I've already listed the articles in question right at the top of . -- Tybort (talk page) 16:02, August 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * As you know a bit about Qqaba, Josiah, could you sort out suitable "main universe" sources on Supernova?


 * Also, I notice Rutan Host has this way of sourcing...


 * They could also speak by forming vocal apparatuses (PROSE: The Infinity Doctors) which gave them a harsh, tinny, male voice (TV: Horror of Fang Rock).


 * Is there an easy way of rearranging that to suit the "one universe-ing", or should that really only be touched by a person that's more familiar with the book? -- Tybort (talk page) 00:19, August 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * (The double-sourcing with TID is also on Savar). -- Tybort (talk page) 00:30, August 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * Few more questions: I know this would take a while to check, but is Daniel Joyce's name insinuated in non-Infinity Doctors sources, or is it simply "the Doctor's father"?


 * And is Apeiron referred to as a Time Lord founder in one of the EDAs as well? -- Tybort (talk page) 23:09, August 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * Is Patience's massive wall of italics speculation insinuating that only The Infinity Doctors refers to her as the Doctor's wife? -- Tybort (talk page) 23:14, August 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * I did as much as I can simply adding "an alternate universe" where it was easy. I promise this is the last questions for a while.


 * The explanation of Omega on Triumvirate can easily be reworded to sources like The Three Doctors and Remembrance of the Daleks, right?


 * The way Centro is worded, I'm guessing he was described in the lead was in Infinity rather than Chronicles? -- Tybort (talk page) 23:46, August 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * The bit at supernova is actually taken care of between The Three Doctors, Remembrance of the Daleks and COMIC: Star Death. TID synthesized the sources into a single account, but the material is all there in those three stories. I'll check some of the others if & when I have time. —Josiah Rowe ☎  01:47, August 17, 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't The Infinity Doctors universe be written from a real world perspective like Doctor Who universe is? As it is, we can't even bold the topic name in the lead. If we wrote it from the perspective the majority of the article bears, I think clarity would be improved. 21:59: Mon 20 Aug 2012