User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-1317169-20121202170842/@comment-88790-20121231060432

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-1317169-20121202170842/@comment-88790-20121231060432 Mini-mitch wrote: Tangerineduel wrote: It is the combination of the two that I too am concerned with.

Will the continuity section just form another sub-heading of the References section? So we'd have Story connections and Universe connections.

This seems go to me, although we will need to be stricter on what exactly 'continuity' is. At the moment:


 * Amy mentions the Daleks. (TV: Victory of the Daleks etc)

That is not continuity, that just a reference. Continuity would be if she went:


 * Amy mentions the first time she encountered the Daleks.

Continuity should a direct link to another story. Anything else should be references. So the first example here, with Amy and the Daleks, would go into references, since she is only mentioning the Daleks.

The second example, again with Amy and the Daleks, would go under continuity, as she is directly mention another story (Victory), and would go under continuity.

This is what lead me to suggest we just get rid of Continuity entirely. As for much of continuity we have to make a judgement to find the connections between stories.

As I demonstrated above many points in the continuity sections aren't links between stories, but someone's just added that "this story takes place in France, the Doctor also visited France in these stories".