FANDOM


  • CzechOut
    CzechOut closed this thread
    03:37, March 11, 2013
    The answer to this question was agreed to be yes. Therefore, we no longer allow categories like "worked/acted on such and such a TV show". All these categories have been eliminated. Please do not replace them.

    When they first were implemented on the site, the connections to other media franchises categories were for series that really had a significant impact on Doctor Who. For instance, Worked on All Creatures Great and Small matters because there's a pretty big connection betwen All Creatures and Doctor Who, thanks to the centrality of the JNT/Johnny Byrne/Peter Davison creative triangle. You just wouldn't have gotten the Davison era without the working relationships established on All Creatures. Similarly worked on Sea of Souls and worked on Born and Bred described working relationships of direct relevance to the shape of series 1. Likewise Worked in the Life on Mars franchise has a huge relevance to the Moffat era.

    But Worked on The Bill? Actors who appeared in the Young Ones? Worked on Where Eagles Dare? These describe co-incidences of employment.

    It's quite clear to me that category bloat has well and truly set in.

    Categories are not meant to be substitutes for writing the body of articles. We should not be allowing the category section to be much, much longer than the body of the articles themselves.

    Bernard Kay is the poster child for this phenomenon. It's clear that the editors have simply abandoned any attempt to write a good article, in favour of using the category system as a way to just list this actor's C.V. What's especially unforgivable here is the fact that DWU material has been fobbed off to a category. The categories include Big Finish Doctor Who voice actors — but no attempt is made in the article to explain what roles Bernard Kay had in Big Finish.

    I think the time has come to look hard at the list of categories under connections to other media franchises and decide which are truly important and which are not. The time is definitely upon us to stop the creation of new categories in that part of the category tree.

    In addition to deciding which of the current categories should be destroyed, we should also make it a rule that you cannot add any of these categories without mentioning the role they had in that franchise within the body of the article. It leaves readers hanging to just say, "Oh yeah, they were in Press Gang without also saying what their role was.

      Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • All right, you win. I'll stop adding the "worked on" categories to articles. From now on, I'll limit myself to writing articles for people who are working in the DWU for the very first time. At least that way I probably won't be reprimanded for trying to make the wiki as accurate and comprehensive as possible. Slughorn42 20:37, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • This isn't a move against you personally. The absolute explosion of subcategories of connections to other media franchises is hardly your own fault.

      It's simply time to take a step back and look at what's happening to figure out if it makes sense.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Wow, that's a lot of categories.

      First question. What are they for?

      The intro on the category page doesn't really enlighten me, only makes me want to ask why?

      "organise people who worked on any part of the DWU franchise, who also worked for one of the other television franchises listed below".

      Okay, why and why should we care?

      By not splitting it down into DW, TW etc it seems like we're caring more about the fact that they worked on Star Wars than DW, or TW or whatever.

      Some categories seem needlessly vague like Category:Worked on Sherlock Holmes adaptations‎…right. I can think of at least 4 different Holmes adaptations off the top of my head and we're lumping all of those into a single category ??

      The categories don't really tell me anything, they're kinda interesting on their own, but to be really interesting I'd like an article dedicated to it, to explain why it's notable that these people were in these series and how it's relevant to DW.

      Blake's 7 isn't the best example, though it should be the best example of cast / crew crossover.

      As for deciding what categories to keep, I think there needs to be 2 different points of connection to DWU in order to create a category of "Worked on". So that would mean two different crew members worked on a show or an actor and a writer. But not 2 actors. This would mean pairing back the Worked On/Actors who appeared in to just worked on (if you're an actor you are working on a series not just appearing in it). Pairing back the categories also would make this category and its sub-categories a little less confusing as at the moment "actors who appeared" and "worked on" are both in the :Category:Connections to other media franchises which makes it a little confusing as to what you're looking at.

      By having this crew/actor or writer/crew requirement it should help us to thin down the categories a little bit.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • It does seem abit against what this wikia is going for to me. We've removed things from BBV which aren't related to the DWU, and these categories are just more blatant examples of that.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Now this is a conversation I would like to bring back up.

      It should go - they serve no real purpose than to link a handful of people to other work they have done - most of these are non notable roles.

      All notable roles should be included in the body of the article - does it really matter if we don't say who else worked on the same franchise? Their pages will have the information.

      I don't really think knowing who all worked on 'The Bill' helpful - unless they were a major character in which case it can be added to the relevant actor's page.

      Do I care who else worked on the program? Nope. Not unless they were in a close partnership within the program - in which case it can be noted on all the actor's pages...

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Now that I've thought about it, I guess the categories probably should go. It can be fun from a trivia perspective but the more categories we add to a given actor's page, the more cluttered and messy it begins to look.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I personally find it interesting to link seemingly unconnected people. It's really cool trivia. Still, if we are to get rid of them, we need to keep the ones where cast that worked closely in Who work together again in another series.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • There are some actor pages where the category box is longer than the article itself. I'd be in favor of getting rid of these categories.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Old Jack's Boat, for example, while totally unrelated to Who, has RTD, Bernard Cribbins, and Freema Aygeman working close together once again. This is significant. Connections that are merely incidental, while interesting, are not necessarily notable and worth all the extra space.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • So since we have agreement in principle that these things have gotten out of hand, we now need to decide whether to

      • get rid of them all (easy)
      • figure out a set of criteria by which to keep some of them (harder)
        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • It's easier to get rid of them and then to enforce the rule for the future, and since any important information can be said on the individuals pages, I can't see any reason to keep these categories, especially when most will probably only end up with a few people in each if we go with only strong connections.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Get rid of them all.

      Shambala108 has hit it on the head; when the category box is longer than the article's we're prioritising the wrong things.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Anyone wishing to oppose the notion of deleting all categories of this ilk, you've got a week to register your counter-argument.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Last call for additional comments.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Just to clarify, we'd be getting rid of all of them?

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Yes. That's the current motion on the table, most recently by Tangerineduel, with support by Imamadmad, Slughorn42, Revanvolatrelundar, Mini-mitch and Shambala108. Unless you're reading the thread differently than I am.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Nope, just making sure I understand. Considering the length of the cat box, after more thought, I'm for it too. It's interesting, but not worth the clutter.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Ok. It's been a week and the categories are still up. Any particular reason?

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Yes.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Do they take awhile to delete?

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Hearing no other comments long after the stated closure date, this discussion is deemed resolved to the following effects:

      1. All subcategories of :category:connections to other media franchises, as well as that category itself, shall be deleted by bot, and all members of those categories shall have the categories removed. If expedient, the categories may be create-locked to prevent re-creation.
      2. Neither these categories, nor anything like them, may not be re-created unless there be community consensus to reverse this judgment. Any attempt to do so will be viewed as a violation of T:BOUND.
      3. This decision does not mean that real world articles about television shows with close Doctor Who ties need be deleted. However these pages, like All Creatures Great and Small and Born and Bred, will need to be updated, because various DPL calls will no longer function after category removal. Users can help with this process by accessing Special:TagsReport, selecting dpl, and removing the DPL statements.
        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.