Talk:Dodie Golightly/Appearances

Mystery Lady
As someone who has now listened (and read) the Mystery Lady series I can firmly say that these are ten individual stories which make up a larger arc rather than one massive ten hour story. On the Mofibo website they are clearly listed as "Series One Episode One", "Series One Episode Two", etc. RadMatter ☎  13:49, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * What I would compare this series to is Series 3 of Torchwood. All of those episodes are given generic names; Children of Earth: Day One, Children of Earth: Day Two, and all tell one long story but are clearly intended to be viewed as individual parts with their own narrative beginning, middle and end. RadMatter ☎  13:59, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I mean, the author refers to the story as a novel. And while most of the episodes have distinct dramatic beats and settings, so too do the chapters of a book. With Torchwood, that's five hours of television, a lot of content, and it wouldn't make sense to cover it on one page. But here, I think covering this in 10 different pages would be a real hindrance for the wiki, especially since they're all just titled "Episode 1" and so on. These would be pretty slim to stand by themselves, because they're all just chapters rather than individual stories. A novel is a different medium than TV, and I don't think this story was too massive or complicated for its medium. It's normal for audiobooks to be more than just 10 hours. Definitely though, of course, this should be an (audio story). CoT     ?  14:08, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * This story may have been intended to be a novel, but no physical novel has ever been released. What has been released is a series of episodes - framed rather like a television series - and the production company that has released it, Storytel Original, repeatedly refers to it as such. These individual releases are the same length as each of Paul's other works; Baker's End, Brenda and Effie, etc. RadMatter ☎  14:14, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Right, but I perceive this as being a serial situation. We wouldn't separate The War Games into separate pages, or most of the audio stories we cover. I think the interpretation of these needing separate pages would be stronger if they had individual titles. I'd say these are different than Magrs' other audio stories, because while this one does have a cast of two actors, it very much is in the format of an audio book, so it takes longer to get through plot for a variety of reasons. And also, at the end of the day, I just don't think it makes sense to make ten different story pages when one will do. It's largely the same characters across these episodes, and I think it'd be very cumbersome to cover this story on character pages if it were divided into ten tiny parts which would each get a couple sentences most. CoT     ?  14:25, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * This is not simply narrated like an audiobook.


 * This series is performed by two actresses - one playing Dodie and one playing Cassandra, and it is certainly similar to the other audio stories from Magrs (albeit with a smaller cast). There is a theme tune after the first few paragraphs or so (similar to New Who running the titles after setting up the story) and music is performed throughout. The actresses also do individual voices for all the characters.


 * I can relieve your concerns about "ten tiny parts" as I have already completed three in word and they have plenty of plot information, references and continuity notes. There's also the individual synopsises created by Storytel for each release, which isn't done for individual chapters. RadMatter ☎  14:33, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

The reason anyone on this wiki knows about this story in the first place was my discovery of it, and as it happens I also have a running draft of Mystery Lady (audio story) that I was planning on finalizing in the near future. In a sense, this has been, as I informed you when I told you about it... my turf. But that doesn't matter completely, I don't wanna be a jerk about that. I'm aware of all those things you describe, and they're all common to audio books. And, for serialized storytelling, it's not uncommon for episodes to have individual descriptions. It just doesn't make sense, from a readership or an informational standpoint to cover this in ten parts. This is a relatively obscure piece, and covering it as if it's some massive thing just gives it an incredibly different vibe than covering it as a single ten-part story. CoT    ?  14:44, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Of course, though, it's very neat to see you taking such an interest in this story! :) CoT     ?  14:48, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * This story being covered in ten parts would be the same as if The Brenda and Effie Mysteries was commissioned for television and they did one book per series therefore stretching Never the Bride out for so many parts. There is no "series" (which Mystery Lady is described as repeatedly) if it was a single story.


 * Your point of view confuses me as you have the page named "audio story" but the whole purpose of your argument for it being an individual story is that Magrs called it a novel? RadMatter ☎  14:51, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * My point of view was always that this is a ten part audio story, which is important to note because of all the audio accoutrements we've discussed. And, as far as I'm concerned, there is no series -- that's just a quirk of the context. The fact that this was written as a novel points to this being a single story.


 * For what it's worth, I think if they did make Brenda and Effie into a TV series there'd be a fair chance that the first series would only cover the first book. I also think they'd give episodes individual names. Never the Bride, while we're mentioning it, is a whole other story, because I think there's a real possibility that it could be covered as a short story anthology... but that's not here or there. I understand you've already put lots of work into making drafts for individual episodes, but I really do think that this is best covered in a single page, and that page could be great if we worked together. I literally was on the verge of creating the page this week. CoT     ?  15:11, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * The view I have is that it is an audio series (which it is called in all its available places on Storytel) adapting Magrs' written "novel" that hasn't been published elsewhere. Each individual part is scheduled like an hour-long television episode - with an individual synopsis and a theme tune, and these are called episodes too. Not all television episodes are given individual names; take BBC's recent It's A Sin which was in five parts and (like here) only called "Episode 1", "Episode 2", etc. RadMatter ☎  15:22, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If this story is ever released as a physical novel I think that it should absolutely be covered on a single page, but the audio adaptation should be covered as individual parts as intended. RadMatter ☎  15:24, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

In a way, this story is also simultaneously published as a novel, through the script which one may read instead of listening. The copyright section in it doesn't seem to place it as a novel or short story.

Looking around the Storytel website (which is, I think, not the best designed), I see that there's a variety in what the various parts of Mystery Lady are called. Looking at the actual titles of the episodes, they're not "Mystery Lady - Episode 1", they're "Mystery Lady S01E01". On browser, when you open up the section for individual episodes, there're a series of labels at the bottom (Genre, language, runtime), and the final one seems to be series, which says "Storytel Original: Mystery Lady: 1" (with the number at the end signifying which episode it is). When I go in the app, this same series label says "Part 1 of Storytel Original: Mystery Lady". I think the official and interchangeable use of the word "part" is telling. CoT    ?  15:37, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you have brought that up as the individual parts of Baker's End and The Brenda and Effie Mysteries are listed in a similar fashion at the bottom of their pages; The King of Cats being Baker's End 1, The Woman in a Black Beehive being The Brenda and Effie Mysteries: 1, etc. RadMatter ☎  15:48, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I didn't think to check. And besides, that's a different situation because those were made by Bafflegab (those are full cast stories, with lots of intent obvious at all angles that they are distinct stories; if you're saying that's evidence of the protocols of this streaming service, I'd imagine I could find a counter-example). It's funny, there's also lots of Big Finish Dr Who stories on Storytel, and speaking of those... I believe there are a fair few examples there that we can treat multi-part audio stories as a single story, even if they have opening credits (things like Blood of the Daleks even have separate physical releases between parts). CoT     ?  15:57, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I don't think that it is a different situation at all. Regardless of who produced the stories they are all listed on Storytel as individual releases with the exact same credentials. The only think that fails in the favour of Mystery Lady is the lack of individual names for each story (but who is to say Episode One, Episode Two, etc. can't be the titles?). RadMatter ☎  16:03, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Well for one, those 'titles' don't seem to be used anywhere, and if they are they it's only interchangeably. Storytel bought the rights to those Bafflegab audios, but they produced Mystery Lady themselves, so that's a whole world of difference in Storytel's authority over one or the other. Also, I think a lot more 'fails' for Mystery Lady because we have intention for it to be a single story. I get what you're gesturing at, but it might make sense to take a break from this discussion and come back with fresh brains and time to ponder a longer response, if its needed. I won't do anything on the wiki about this until the discussion's over. CoT     ?  16:13, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree with taking time for others to get involved in the discussion. But as it stands my opinion is that these are individual adaptations of a Paul Magrs novel (which was created for this specific project). This release is repeatedly called a series by Storytel and is presented as having separate episodes, those episodes are listed in the exact same way as the Baker's Street and Brenda and Effie individual episodes are, these stories are performed by actors rather than simply narrated, and are formatted to have a beginning, middle and end to each installment. RadMatter ☎  16:20, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Those last two points are neutral facts. Beginnings, middles, and ends appear (and can be perceived) in any unit of storytelling. This random website talks about how chapters of a book have those, and viewers of 20th century Dr Who will note that many episodes of those serials have beginnnings, middles, and ends. Additionally, looking at the publisher's sparse website, it looks like they themselves view what they're doing as taking the books of authors and turning them into a serialized audio story (which I guess is loosely what you were saying about adaptation, but the modus still seems singular). CoT     ?  16:40, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I have a terrible feeling the following two cents are just going to confuse everything even more, but we have a precedent for a series containing a single story (or close enough). And while Mystery Lady may have episodes, as was highlighted above, so does The War Games.


 * Equally, however, I do think the Torchwood precedent is not without merit. It all comes down to practicality, in my opinion. For example, not having listened to the thing: how many unnamed characters do we have in each part? If there were an unnamed librarian in Episode 1 and a different unnamed librarian in Episode 5, for example, that might be a good argument for split coverage, because then we'd get to do Librarian (Mystery Lady - Episode One) and Librarian (Mystery Lady - Episode Five), or something, rather than the more ungainly, and less pipe-trickable, Librarian 1 (Mystery Lady)/Librarian 2 (Mystery Lady). Scrooge MacDuck ☎  16:43, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I haven't finished the third episode, but the first two don't have many unnamed characters referenced. There is an unnamed man in the first (who I believe will likely be given a name later on due to his prominence). There IS an unnamed Director in the first episode and then an unnamed Director in the second (both for different television shows). RadMatter ☎  16:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Oh! Sorry Radmatter, I'd misinterpreted your saying you'd completed three in word to mean you'd heard the whole series and had already made drafts of pages for the first three episodes. I've almost read the whole thing, and yes, all the important characters are named, and there are a lot of them and not many unnamed side characters. As the novel's story progresses and characters are introduced, there's less need for momentary faceless background characters. I had to check for the directors, and yep, there does seem to be a line mentioning a director in one scene of Part 2, but he's a non-entity to the story. In terms of practicality, I think far more ungainliness would come from having to give the many recurring characters episode-by-episode lists of appearances than would come from needing to title the pages [TV show 1 director] and [TV show 2 director] or even [Director 1 (Mystery Lady)]. CoT     ?  17:12, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

The first two episodes can be seen at my sandbox; User:RadMatter/Sandbox 1‎‎. Not sure why the infoboxes aren't displaying (they appear as normal in preview). RadMatter ☎  17:32, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Having listened to the entirety of Mystery Lady, albeit a while ago, let me throw in my support for Mystery Lady (audio story). In contrast with their Brenda and Effie page, the episodes have the same cover, same title. All that's different is "episode", which the Storytel app clearly regards as synonymous with "part". (If I was feeling cheeky, I'd suggest that "S01E01" stands for "Story 1, episode 1".) It seems clear to me that it's a single story in ten chapters or parts, not a series of ten distinct stories. – n8 (☎) 20:46, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Brenda and Effie was by Bafflegab so them having different covers doesn't impact what Storytel chose to do with the stories they produced themselves. RadMatter ☎  20:56, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I mean, just as a point of information,
 * And, for serialized storytelling, it's not uncommon for episodes to have individual descriptions.
 * Coming from it at a serialized podcasting point of view, it's also not uncommon for you to view the individual episodes as being worthy of covered in their own right, and the entire thing being viewed as one continuous story. With that said, the lack of names for each does suggest some level of authorial intent. Not that I think it technically speaking matters here, but it is what it is. Some sort of table is probably sufficient? But idk what wiki policy actually is. Najawin ☎  21:55, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Personally, I prefer having individual pages for each episode, as it would make citing the sources much easier. If the series were to be cited by episode, then one could locate information without issue, as opposed to citing the series as a whole, meaning you'd have to listen to ten hours worth of content. 📯 📂 16:27, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Exactly, Epsilon.


 * Earlier I compared these releases to Series 3 (Torchwood), but actually they are most similar to Series 4 (Torchwood). The main overarching plot of "Miracle Day" is similar to what is happening with the Book of Terror's stories coming to live. Every episode there is a divergent to the story where our main three meet a new bunch of side characters and have other adventures. One episodes they are investigating a murder mystery at a television magic show, the next they are facing the terrifying legend of the Moth Woman, and in another there are suspicions about alien robot androids!


 * If these releases all had their own unique names there would be no discussion about the fact that they deserve individual pages, but because they are given Episode One, Episode Two, etc. it somehow makes them all one story? RadMatter ☎  16:41, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I've removed myself from this discussion, but answering your last point: literally, yes? That's the precedent used everywhere on the wiki. If Blood of the Daleks parts 1 and 2 were given different names, they'd be on separate pages, too! – n8 (☎) 16:56, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I said "unique names", their episode numbered names are generic but they are not the same names. RadMatter ☎  16:58, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Yeah, as I said during my first incursion into this discussion, policy-wise there is wiggle room here if "Episode Two" and so on are spelled out literally as individual episode titles (however generic), rather than the various episodes being called "Mystery Lady - Part 1" or the like. Both options are feasible. And with authorial intent being such a toss-up, the question is what is more practical.


 * From everything that's been said (particularly Rad's comment immediately before Nate's latest one), I am coming round to the idea that on balance, pages for individual episodes are probably better. I'm going to give two to three days' window for people to bring new arguments to the opposing view (that we should go with a single page), and after that, give the go-ahead to the creation of the individual episode pages.


 * After all, if we later decide that we want them merged after all, we'll just be able to turn the links to individual episodes into redirects to section of the merged page, similar to what we do for Hartnell-era episodes. Scrooge MacDuck  ☎  17:19, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me, two to three days will give me time to complete the rest. RadMatter ☎  17:22, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Epsilon, I dispute your point about difficulty of listening to ten hours of content to track down a single reference, due to the simple fact that searchable digital scripts are included with each purchase. This means it's actually much easier to track down references in Mystery Lady than in other audios we afford a single page, like the two-hour-long no-script-provided Blood of the Daleks previously mentioned.


 * I advocate still for a single page solution, but seeing as everyone seems somewhat entrenched, may I suggest an Interference-style compromise? Due to similar concerns about searchability and title differentiation, it was decided that Interference - Book One (novel) and Interference - Book Two (novel) wouldn't be merged for the sake of their "References" and "Continuity" sections, but Interference (novel) was still created to represent the narrative continuity and (perhaps) authorial intention between the two parts or episodes. This precedent hasn't been employed anywhere else, and the overuse of the (novel) dab term still leaves much to be desired, but it might slice the "Gordian knot" in this context: for instance, it would allow Director 1 (Mystery Lady)/Director 2 (Mystery Lady), which seems very preferable to Director (Episode One)/Director (Episode Two) from a disambiguation standpoint. – n8 (☎) 17:46, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Or, scratch that - looking at the website, it seems like the full title of the first part is actually Mystery Lady - S01E01. So the one-page-per-story approach (without the Interference precedent) would entail Director (Mystery Lady - S01E01) et al. – n8 (☎) 17:54, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, Nate himself, whatever he wanted to advocate, has dug up evidence that the production company's view is that we are dealing with a "Season 01" with "Episodes". I say go ahead with the creation of the individual pages. Scrooge MacDuck ☎  14:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I am completely bewildered that this was your takeaway. There is not a single source for the word "Episode" used in conjunction with Mystery Lady. There is "S01E01", but what the letters stand for is completely ambiguous. In comparison, what isn't ambiguous is that as TheChampionOfTime observed, the app very explicitly defines each audio as "Part 1" etc. I am therefore forced to place rename templates on every page with "Episode" in the title. The fact that this point was raised explicitly a number of times and never answered or addressed once, and yet these pages were still created with completely speculative titles is nothing short of gobsmacking. – n8 (☎) 17:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No ambiguity in "Original title: Mystery Lady - Season 1". And the word "Episode" must have been used somewhere, and I am currently looking for it, as I haven't plucked it out of thin air. RadMatter ☎  17:47, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd love to see it; the only names I can find are "Mystery Lady - S01E01", "Storytel Original: Mystery Lady: 1", and "Part 1 of Storytel Original: Mystery Lady".
 * But the fact that it needs to be searched for rather defeats the purpose. The titles still need to be changed to match what's clearly bolded as the title on each page, ie Mystery Lady - S01E01. – n8 (☎) 18:19, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I couldn't find Episodes anywhere, so I agree that there needs to be a name change. It obviously stands for "Episodes", with the S01 being confirmed to be "Season 1", so over the past couple of months I've convinced myself that these were the titles. RadMatter ☎  18:41, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, yeah, to be clear, my ruling was in favour of the fact that we are dealing with episodes in a season, not about the specific titles proposed by RadMatter. They do indeed need to be the ones actually used on the website, Mystery Lady - S01E01 and so on. Scrooge MacDuck ☎  19:24, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, you had said (and continue to say) "episodes". Any feedback on my proposal? – n8 (☎) 19:55, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Don't understand this comment when Scrooge has already ruled and I also agreed to the change? RadMatter ☎  19:59, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * How can I be more clear? – n8 (☎) 20:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I don't think it's controversial to say that individual entities within a Season, identified as "S01E01," S01E02" and so on, are small-E "episodes" — even if the word Episode is not actually in their titles. Heck, we have no trouble calling individual parts of Hartnell serials "episodes" (cf. the redirects such as An Unearthly Child (episode)), so this isn't even necessarily taking a side in the previous question of whether each episode should have its own page.


 * Anyway, what proposal are you referring to? If you mean going with Mystery Lady - S01E01 (audio story) and so on, then yeah, I'm in favour. That'll make for some instantly legible citations, too. "(AUDIO: Mystery Lady - S01E01)" is a lot more useful than "(AUDIO: Episode One)" or "(AUDIO: Mystery Lady)". Scrooge MacDuck ☎  20:00, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The proposal being the compromise I suggested in the entire second paragraph of my reply at 17:46 on March 11. But as RadMatter says, it's a moot point, you've already ruled. – n8 (☎) 20:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

The three already existing pages have had all the links changed so are ready for name changes. RadMatter ☎  20:56, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Aaah, the Interference idea. Well, the thing is that as I recall, before the UCP move, we had a thread going, meant to square away the weirdness of the Interference treatment. I hardly want to add more of that! And while "Director 1 (Mystery Lady)" would have beaten "Director (Episode 1)", surely "Director (Mystery Lady S01E01)" is enough to obviate confusion. Scrooge MacDuck  ☎  22:42, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that characters without clashing names should still have (Mystery Lady) while those with clashing names, who usually only appear in single episodes, can have the more specific names of (Mystery Lady S01E01), etc. The main character of Cassandra appears in all installments, and subsequent releases in other series, so Cassandra (Mystery Lady) works better than (Mystery Lady S01E01). RadMatter ☎
 * Ah… fine. There is technically precedent for that at Talk:Andy Stone (The Dalek Book), even if it's a precedent I personally find untidy. Scrooge MacDuck ☎  22:55, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Just to clarify something that was posted above about a month ago: there is no such thing as someone having "turf" on this wiki. No one has ownership of any page, and anyone is free to edit any page they wish. Shambala108 ☎  00:14, 16 March 2021 (UTC)