FANDOM


  • CzechOut
    CzechOut closed this thread because:
    Consensus to change was (lukewarmly) established. Tangerineduel offered strongest defence of a particular change, so NOTDWU is now NOTVALID. Inline instances have already been changed by bot; categories to follow at a later date.
    20:05, November 12, 2015

    I think to avoid confusion we should change the NOTDWU prefix. Right now the suggestion is that it stands for "Not within Doctor Who Universe." The issue is that something being "in universe" is a concept which basically means "is canon," both of which are not what the invalid policy goes for. We're not judging if something goes within the Doctor Who Universe, but rather if it's a valid story. Universe-checking is a final step in the process, but it's far from the entire concept. When we say that the TV version of Shada is not valid, for instance, we're not saying that it doesn't fit within the universe but rather that (as others have agreed on the site) it's not really a story, per sey. Same for P.S. and Dr Who and the Turgids. Another good example is the charity books, which mostly do fit within the universe, but are still unofficial fan works. Same for Faction Paradox and some of the BBV works. Then there's the role playing books and games, including Worlds in Time which we don't consider valid due to the difficulty in writing the concrete events, but still clearly have placements within the universe than each fan can interpret for themselves. Keeping the NOTDWU prefix just confuses our policies to new users. I would suggest INVALID.

    I also realize that this would mean the reworking of categories as well, but I think that we still need to do it.

      Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I agree with your points but I don't honestly see the need for a rework, after-all this prefix only encompasses three things. Honestly I'd argue that this prefix doesn't need to exist in the first place.

      Honestly I cannot understand it's purpose. It seems, at it's core, to be a prefix that denotes a piece third-party of work that has been de-canonized by something considered to be canon or something that was never supposed to be canon in the first place. But if that's the case then there are a tonne of other books, BFAs and other spin-off media such as Zygon: When Being You Just Isn't Enough that should be in this category.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • That's just the thing, that's not the point of the prefix at all. The point is to denote a difference between stories which we have deemed invalid. Z:WBYJIE is still a valid story because they had the rights to use the Zygons, as discussed in a previous forum. We don't dabble in canon on this site anymore because it's a complex concept which isn't what we're looking to cover for many stories we discount.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • OttselSpy25 wrote: That's just the thing, that's not the point of the prefix at all. The point is to denote a difference between stories which we have deemed invalid. Z:WBYJIE is still a valid story because they had the rights to use the Zygons, as discussed in a previous forum. We don't dabble in canon on this site anymore because it's a complex concept which isn't what we're looking to cover for many stories we discount.

      Well I suppose all of this just furthers your argument then, honestly. I'm not exactly a "newcomer" to the site as suggested in the OP but this was still the first time coming across that prefix and that is what I assumed it to mean aha.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Another point to make is that there are many stories which are set within different universes but are still valid stories. Further confusing the prefix.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Another issue: There are a lot of stories that aren't technically set in the Doctor Who universe (although I suppose it depends on how TARDIS defines "Doctor Who universe") such as, Rise of the Cybermen and Infeno. So the "NOT DWU" prefix being used for "invalid" stories is rather confusing, and probably should be changed to "INVALID".

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Sabovia wrote: There are a lot of stories that aren't technically set in the Doctor Who universe (although I suppose it depends on how TARDIS defines "Doctor Who universe") such as, Rise of the Cybermen and Infeno.

      I would argue that in Rise of the Cybermen, there are scenes set in the original universe too, such as the scene with Jackie in The Age of Steel. Furthermore, in both of the aforementioned stories, the characters originate from the DWU. That is enough to make them valid stories. A story being set in another universe but with DWU characters in it definitely does not exclude them from being a valid source. If that's the case, we'd have to nitpick things like The Doctor's Wife, which is set in a pocket universe... it's attached to our universe (hurray!) yet it's officially not our universe (boo!).

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Thefartydoctor wrote:

      I would argue that in Rise of the Cybermen, there are scenes set in the original universe too, such as the scene with Jackie in The Age of Steel. Furthermore, in both of the aforementioned stories, the characters originate from the DWU. That is enough to make them valid stories. A story being set in another universe but with DWU characters in it definitely does not exclude them from being a valid source. If that's the case, we'd have to nitpick things like The Doctor's Wife, which is set in a pocket universe... it's attached to our universe (hurray!) yet it's officially not our universe (boo!).

      I wasn't questioning whether or not those stories should be counted as valid — they obviously are. I was questioning why the "NOT DWU" prefix is being used for non-valid stories.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • You're confusing what DWU actually means. It does indeed play a part in the setting of a story but it also entails the main characters. However, let me give you a non-Doctor Who example:

      There was once a collaboration between Casualty and Holby City fittingly called "Casualty @ Holby City". The majority of the episodes were set in the A&E (the setting for Casualty) but the attending medical people were from the series Holby City. If we were to place the occasional Holby City scenes to one side, let me ask you: is that a valid story from a Holby City point of view?

      Of course it is, because although it's not set in their usual setting, the characters still originate from their own respective time and space. Let's link this with the story Inferno. We're not using "NOTDWU" as the prefix because the Doctor and other main characters originate from the DWU. The setting here is irrelevant in categorising this story.

      It's a bit of a random way I went around this but that's how I see it.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • It's also not a brilliant example because Casualty and Holby are set in the same universe but it makes my point hehe ;D

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I just wrote a well-structured response to the latest posts, and when I clicked post the whole thing just dissapeared. Holy Rassilon is that amazingly frustrating. Ugh...

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • The concept that stories being valid can relay entirely on if they are set within our Doctor Who universe or if they feature characters from our universe is an interesting one, which of coarse quickly begins to collapse like swiss cheese being poked by a child.

      The problem is that we do occasionally allow pages on this wikia which are not meant to be set within our universe, but are still valid stories. "Yes," you retort, "but all of those feature characters from our universe. So they are DWU centered." At first gland, that might appear true, but there are exceptions.

      Imagine, for instance, there was a prequel to stories featuring universe hopping which were set in the alternate universes. A prequel to Inferno or Battlefield set in the "other world" without hints of the Doctor or his universe. That's not a theoretical example, we do have a story like that: Tardisode 5. Set in Pete's World, it featured Ricky Smith as its only main character. That's not the only example either -- Prelude Blood Heat is also like this. Then there's The Infinity Doctors, set in an alternate timeline according to our policies. Those are just a few examples, but there are many.

      In fact, the Doctor Who Unbound series came very close to being valid on this wikia. There is a Doctor Who Sixth Doctor audio, The 100 Days of the Doctor, which featured a mention of one of the Unbound Doctors by the Sixth Doctor after he and Evelyn accidentally slip into an alternate universe. At the time of the discussion, it was not known if this scene was actually depicted, and it was agreed that if it was, that meant that every Doctor and story in the series had to be "alternate universes" instead of "invalid." As it was just a throwaway line in the end, our policies did not change. Despite this, that shows the thin line here: something can be set in an alternate universe and still be valid on this wikia, and there is a strong difference between an invalid and "alternate universe." In fact, you could argue that the Cushing Doctor, the Unbound Doctors, the Curse of Fatal Death Doctors, and the Shalka Doctor are all one Titan Comics cameo away from being "valid" sources (which would be a game changer as our "invalid" template features an image from one of those stories).

      Furthermore, and this is an important note, not all of our invalid stories are the way they are because of their universal classification. It is pretty clear that Shada, P.S., Worlds in Time, The Dark Dimension, The Monsters Are Coming!, Whoisdoctorwho.co.uk, Dr Who and the Turgids, Mission to Venus, Judoon Monsoon and even some of the #WeLoveTitans comics are clearly meant to be set inside the Doctor Who Universe. They're not alternative timelines or dimensions, few of them were disqualified due to story, and all of them are invalid and thus marked by the prefix proclaiming that they are not set within the Doctor Who Universe.

      Let me repeat that one more time. Our policy states that there is no Doctor Who canon. We don't care about if something is "canon" or "non-canon" or contradictory or silly or old -- it's all about if it's a valid story or not. We don't argue if something fits inside the universe, because that's not our bother and we will never have the answers. That's something that fans themselves have to decide for themselves.

      And yet our prefix loudly declares "this isn't set in the DWU. We decided this, we know better than you." And that's the opposite of our policy, what we've worked for years to back away from. So let's change it.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Looking over the pages, I'm not actually even convinced that we need a template for invalid stories. I feel like the template at the top of the page covers it, I think that we can call Daleks Versus the Martians a COMIC and sleep at night. It would make for far less obnoxious layouts.

      Of coarse, we would still need to fix the categories...

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I think what you're saying is just common sense. But I don't agree that things like TARDISODE 5 are difficult to classify. There's a reason it was accepted it as a valid source and that's because it's a prequel to a valid source. The Doctor, Rose and Mickey soon pop into that parallel world and make everything better. Prequels are no problem here. In which case, my "retort", as you so kindly put it, would still ring a true analysis of a true source.

      What I'm saying is this: use common sense. Rise of the Cybermen is a valid source because a Doctor and companions from the DWU have specifically entered/fallen into a parallel universe. It's one of the first things that happens (and is explained) in the episode. Furthermore, since TARDISODE 5 is a prequel to one of these Pete's World stories, it's therefore attached to the episode and counts as a valid source. It's common sense. Never has the saying "mountain out of a molehill" been more valid haha.

      We need the NOTDWU prefix for stories like the Unbound series that feature Doctors not related in any way to the real Doctor's timeline. They do not originate from our universe, nor do they habitate within it. If there were a story set entirely in an alternate reality and without any DWU characters, then it comes under the NOTDWU category. This is because it's not in the DWU. If RTD's planned spin-off Rose Tyler: Earth Defence went ahead and we saw Rose and team battling alien threats on Pete's World, that would be allowed as a DWU story, simply because Rose, Jackie and TenTwo originate from the DWU.

      It's not that difficult, it really isn't. Getting rid of or altering this little prefix is just going to cause more confusion haha. It does a pretty good job as it is without us meddling and changing everything.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Thefartydoctor wrote: I think what you're saying is just common sense. But I don't agree that things like TARDISODE 5 are difficult to classify. There's a reason it was accepted it as a valid source and that's because it's a prequel to a valid source. The Doctor, Rose and Mickey soon pop into that parallel world and make everything better. Prequels are no problem here. In which case, my "retort", as you so kindly put it, would still ring a true analysis of a true source.

      Your missing the point entirely. What universe the story is set in has noting to do with its classifacation as valid or not. If the writer of The Infinity Doctors has said "it's an alternate universe," the book would still be as accepted as valid as it is now. NOTDWU stories are not, according to our policy, stories that aren't set in our universe. They're stories we don't deem valid, sometimes because the writers didn't mean for it to be set in the Doctor Who continuum whilst not clarifying it to be an alternate reality/dimension. And, as mentioned above, if any of the "NOTDWU" Doctors were to be clearly clarified as "alternate dimension Doctors" in an audio or comic, then that Doctor would be pulled to a valid position, meaning that a Doctor not from our universe would still not be a NON DOCTOR WHO UNIVERSE Doctor. Not all invalid stories are meant to be set in an alternate continuum, and not all of our alternate dimension stories are invalid. That means that, practically, the prefix and the category are just always going to be wrong the way that they are.

      The fact that you continuously reference the universal setting of a story as the primary function of invalid stories means that it's just more clear that this prefix is confusing, and yes, difficult. And if wanting our prefix to represent our policies is "meddling" and "changing" too much, then I guess you can call me a renegade.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Okay, I see your point. So under this tag, Unbound would be AUDIO rather than NOTDWU because it's a licensed work. I get your point now. It is a fair point that it's evidently confused me.

      It seems to me that there are two meanings to "Doctor Who Universe". There's the actual setting of the "Whoniverse", and the actual œuvre of work that is valid. I see that now. In which case, there's a decision:

      • Change the entire NOTDWU and go through the whole rigmarole of updating everything.
      • Accept that people will use it wrong from time-to-time and have others correct it.

      I work for the Welsh Wiki and I tend to follow your regulations.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I think that if something's wrong we should fit it, no matter how much changing it takes. Most of the issues can be fixed with a bot.

      Weather we remove the prefix and just use the AUDIO/COMIC/TV prefixes in it's place is another worry I suppose. Either way, the various categories (NOTDWU stories, etc) would have to be fixed.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • TheFartyDoctor: "Accept that people will use it wrong from time-to-time and have others correct it." And who do you nominate for that troublesome job?

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Actually I was inferring that it is all of our responsibilities to take the good work that has been done by other contributors and make it better, whether that be through rephrasing, or grammar checks... and so on. It's not one person's job, it's all of our jobs. Every now and then, we all stumble across something a bit squiffy that doesn't sound right hehe.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Well, yeah, of coarse that's true. But I don't see how that hinders us trying to fix this obvious problem, is the thing.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I was only adding my two pence worth because evidently I misunderstood what you meant but it'd be nice to see the resolution so that I can carry it over to the other Wiki. :)

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I would say that using the tag INVALID would be best, as it describes precisely what these stories are- invalid.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Moved to Thread:182006

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • MystExplorer
      MystExplorer removed this reply because:
      Not relevant
      23:08, October 8, 2015
      This reply has been removed
    • Moved to Thread:182006

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Please start another thread on that issue. This one should just be about the NOTDWU prefix.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I agree with Ottselspy25 in their first post.

      NOTDWU is a somewhat counter-intuitive name for a prefix / template.

      I also agree that Doctor Who Universe is a term that's used elsewhere synonymous with "Doctor Who canon" and using the NOTDWU could be confusing for new users and could lead people to look for DWU to work out the difference. And while the Doctor Who universe page is fine in itself, it doesn't really explain the difference between what we do on this wiki and the Doctor Who universe term in general.

      So as INVALID, while straight to the point, it does have multiple definitions, I'd suggest NOTVALID. That way there is a clear distinction between Valid and NOTVALID.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • NC - not covered? UNBOUND even?

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • NC could also be seen as saying "not canon", which is not what the intention is.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I quite like 'UNBOUND'. It sort of gives the idea that they're adventures that are floating in the Who-sphere out there completely detached from the Whoniverse. I really like it.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • That's the one of the problems with UNBOUND tho -- our policies still don't have anything to do with the 'Whoniverse,' and furthermore it again connects itself with a series based in "alternate continuums." There are many complex ideas and reasons that go into our policies, and I think that we should just go simple: 'INVALID' or 'NOTVALID' are the best choices in my eyes.

      Also I should note that this prefix is obviously taken from the series Doctor Who Unbound. I would suggest against naming the prefix after a story or series -- stories in or out of our invalid grouping are constantly fluctuating, and we could see a day that any story we consider invalid suddenly becomes valid on the site.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • If you were to choose 'INVALID', I think INV would look quite cool.

      "When the Doctor's attempt to communicate with the Master was discovered, he was shot by a Dalek energy beam and regenerated into his next incarnation. (INV: The Curse of Fatal Death)"

      Don't you think? :)

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • That could work, yeah.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • While we're on the topic, can we discuss if we even need the prefix? If our invalid policies only count towards if we write about them in in-universe sections, then surely COMIC, PROSE, and AUDIO will suffice? I feel like the template is enough to get the idea that we don't consider the story valid across.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • You might raise a good point there, that perhaps COMIC, PROSE, etc would tell us something more specific if it's already clear that it's an invalid source.

      I happen to disagree with that stance, though. I think it's incredibly useful to emphasise that a story is not a valid source despite being in parentheses. The thing is, if you put the regular prefixes which we use for valid sources, readers might assume that the invalid stories are on the same level. In my opinion, TV, COMIC, PROSE and AUDIO should remain prefixes for valid stories only, and anything outside of that should use a prefix that tells us it's invalid.

      NOTVALID, INVALID or INV instead of NOTDWU? This, I feel I can stand by, actually. The DWU, after all, is hard to define, and we do not seek to be an authority on what is or isn't part of it. Is a story set outside of the main universe a DWU story, anyway? It is much clearer to use one of the new proposed prefixes. I would got for NOTVALID, myself.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • If we got rid of the prefix, we'd need a PLAY one as well.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Don't we already? I recall there being one at one point?

      We'd also need one for films that premiere in cinemas, which we kinda already need for The Doctor's Meditation.

      The reason I think that we should go without the prefix (but with the categories) is that I think that the concept of something being invalid is far less concrete than many here seem to believe it is. It isn't a completely solid idea that all fans must subscribe to -- it's a mostly technical ruleset which is used to tell if a story can be written about on the site. This can include things beyond "canon" (which is still evidently the mindset of most users and policies around the invalid workings), including if the book let's you choose your own path, to if you are the main character of the story, to if the story is even a complete narrative. We can hardly expect every person seeking info to abide by or care about what we deem valid. We can put that Curse of Fatal Death tag at the top, put in a paragraph explaining why it's not included in in-universe, narrative sections, and then leave well-enough alone.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Should be either NOTVALID or INVALID but not INV.

      INV doesn't tell anyone anything and requires new users to actually search out what it means, which in my experience they don't do.

      Mind you, I'm not saying we need to change NOTDWU. Just saying which of the proposed changes would work.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I support INVALID, personally.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Shambala108 wrote: Should be either NOTVALID or INVALID but not INV.

      INV doesn't tell anyone anything and requires new users to actually search out what it means, which in my experience they don't do.

      Mind you, I'm not saying we need to change NOTDWU. Just saying which of the proposed changes would work.

      I agree. TD has some reservations about INVALID because that word has lots of connotations, as I understand it, though I will admit INVALID, as a typical single word, is a bit more visually pleasing. There's nothing wrong with that more jolting feel, though, if what we want to get across is that it's an invalid source. I feel NONVALID is pretty apt.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I support keeping it as NOTDWU myself, but I appear to be outnumbered.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • What is your reasoning? This is a community discussion; don't be afraid to bring up your points. Even if a majority of those participating disagree right now, we should be exploring all possibilities, and their benefits.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • This would be change for the sake of change. I see no reason it shouldn't stay the same.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I wouldn't say it's "change for the sake of change." It's change because the title itself is counterproductive to the core beliefs of our policies and extremely confusing.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Quest?on wrote: If we got rid of the prefix, we'd need a PLAY one as well.

      SP, standing for "STAGE PLAY," does indeed exist -- which is odd tho, because under our current policy all stage plays are invalid and thus should only use NOTDWU.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I'm bumping the article because it's starting to die down.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I support INVALID being used in place of NOTDWU.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • This conversation has died, so let's wrap things up with a few parting comments:

      • SP is merely detritus from previous bot moves. Its WhatLinksHere report clearly shows it to be almost exclusively used outside the main namespace — in discussions and whatnot. Indeed, a few acronyms related to ranges are still around because they were the basis of bot moves, and they were not deleted at the end of those moves. The original acronym move was, at the time, a very complicated, multi-day affair. A few, minor things got lost in the shuffle. I think DAN still exists too, and is, I think, on SOTO's removal list. Existence is not the same thing as policy.
      • While I personally disagree that NOTDWU is confusing in any way, I also don't particularly care if it changes. And while there are respondents to this thread whose passion runs about as hot as "if it ain't broke, why fix it", no one seems steadfastly opposed to the notion of a change, either. Furthermore, no no one has a particularly convincing or heartfelt defense of INVALID. So we'll be going with Tangerineduel's suggestion of NOTVALID. In fact, the switch has already happened.
      • It's important, for technical reasons, to be able to distinguish between those stories which are valid and those that aren't. NOTVALID isn't just an acronym; it's a vital hook that a bot or DPL can use to generate useful lists. COMIC, TV and the several other acronyms have the meaning "this is a story that happened in the indicated meaning and is valid". We therefore will not be polluting that message, or making it harder for automated processes to distinguish between valid and invalid stories. An invalid audio is NOTVALID. It is not AUDIO.
      • Categories are of a lesser priority, and will be changed as time permits.
      • Despite OS25's declaration that it was "another good example" the story which appears in a charity work has nothing whatsoever to do with NOTVALID. NOTVALID, precisely like NOTDWU before it, is only for licensed works. We simply don't cover charity works — a point that was agreed a long time ago, but we have to keep cleaning up. So, yes, you will find that some people have added a few charity works here and there, but these should be deleted. They are not invalid; they're effectively banished, as Forum:Charity anthology short stories has made clear since 2011. Charity works are fan fiction, period, and we don't do that here. Other wikis are available. :)
        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.