Talk:Second-and-a-Half Doctor

Deletion ?

It's all well and good that it's already been deleted, but — why? Thread:184791 confirms that although we deem it invalid because it fails Rule 1, we do give coverage to Devious the BBC home video release, though not to the completed YouTube production. There's plenty enough in the BBC-released material to document this Doctor like any other invalid incarnation. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 12:32, July 21, 2020 (UTC)

To be honest, I'm of the same mind. It's weird that we give full coverage to other things that fail rule 1 but not to topics from Devious just because the complete thing (which we don't cover anyway) is fanfiction.

There are lengthy discussions about whether to keep the page at Talk:Second-and-a-Halfth Doctor, all of which occurred prior to the thread linked above which should overrule any verdict given in those previous debates. --Borisashton ☎ 12:41, July 21, 2020 (UTC)

It did not tell me that it had been deleted - probably because the deleted page had “Halfth” instead of “Half” - otherwise I would not have recreated. If it is not allowed on the site, for whatever reason, it should not have still been red linked on the main story page. Xx-connor-xX ☎ 12:55, July 21, 2020 (UTC)

I would be more than happy for this page to be deleted, due to the lengthy discussions in the past (which I have no recollection ever having been part of - so I was surprised to find a comment from me on the subject four years ago!).

However, as this page is not to be covered shouldn’t all of the characters specific to this one story be unlinked? And shouldn’t the actors who only appeared in this story be unlinked too (and in the case of David Clarke have his page deleted)? Xx-connor-xX ☎ 13:07, July 21, 2020 (UTC)