Based on/adapted into[]
Okay, three users (counting myself) have engaged on this conversation, so continuing the conversations originally present on User talk:OncomingStorm12th#Adding to the Infobox story and User talk:Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived#Infobox story:
- Scrooge MacDuck I see your point about the broader language actually presented to readers, but what I'm thinking is: is it vital that we put this information on the infobox? Spyfall (short story) is not a retelling of the TV counterpart in the same sense we use "|novelised =", or even in the sense of "|adapted into =" (as used, for example, on Jubilee (audio story).
- What I mean to say is: can't we simply mention in the lead of this page (and ditto for the following Fact Files that each short story recapped the events of X (TV story)? I mean, if we have to use a somewhat akward sentence like "as a sort of mini-novelisation" just to make an analogy to a term we use for other stories, it means that we're dealing with something far-removed enough to not even try to associate them (directly) at all.
- So my proposal is that we drop these infobox connections altogether and slightly rewrite the lead. What do you think? OncomingStorm12th ☎ 18:44, September 27, 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not sure. See, "mini-novelisation" seems a much more appropriate to me than it seems to be to you. We are dealing with stories which A) have the same title, or nearly the same title, as the TV story they're based on; B) have the same plot; C) are primarily designed as a substitute for having seen the TV episode. That's very much like a novelisation to me.
- And sure, there's an additional bit of narrative info to each through the perspective being shifted to a diary. But lest we forget, Doctor Who in an Exciting Adventure with the Daleks and The Romans are both written as in the first person as diaries.
- I think the also-not-exactly-detailed photonovelisations should also be remembered as precedents here. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 19:09, September 27, 2020 (UTC)