FANDOM


  • Shambala108
    Shambala108 closed this thread because:
    Decision reached.
    02:29, April 6, 2017

    I know it's consense that we ditch Doctor Who prefixes on stories/products that have it as a prefix. (Doctor Who: The Adventure Games, et al.)

    Apparently, we're also doing it for Torchwood as a prefix. (Torchwood: Outbreak)

    However, what I don't understand is: why are we not removing UNIT from article pages? Why aren't we naming Extinction simply Extinction (audio anthology)?

      Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I think the major difference here is that UNIT is not the name of an established franchise, in the same way as Doctor Who or Torchwood. Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't we had this discussion before?

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • As a matter of fact, it is the name of a (short-lived) audio series which came before UNIT: The New Series. Despite that, both audio series are unrelated (aside from both focusing on UNIT members)

      As for this discussion being held before, I could not find it, so, if it has, sorry.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I believe what Bwburke meant is that Torchwood is in it of itself a franchise: comic stories, audio stories, novels, and of course the television series, all under that banner. "UNIT" is, for the most part, an element in Doctor Who, and stories under the Doctor Who banner. These three "anthologies" as we somewhat incorrectly call them are the only things with that prefix.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Well, but the weird thing is: we do ditch the "UNIT" from The Coup (audio story) and further stories. I mean, I'm not entirely against the use of "UNIT" as a prefix, but, in this case, I believe it should be removed.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Ha, good find. I am not entirely against it, either. Let's let this discussion play out.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I'm in favour of removal.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Well that's everyone who's replied so far in favour.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I'm in favour of removal.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • So, considering almost a month has passed by, and no one else opposed to the removal (no one replied, even), could an admin please draw a decision on this?

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Discussions have gone on for far longer in the past, with longer gaps, as well. This only really went on for one day. Now we've brought it back into public attention, let's see if anyone else joins, and let it come to its natural conclusion.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • It's pretty standard for Big Finish to refer to their releases as "Series: Title." See Gallifrey: Intervention Earth.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Yep, and I somehow missed this discussion when it first appeared. So thanks for waiting. And, yes, there was a discussion before, Thread:193754. I'm glad that other editors return to this topic.

      In that old thread, I had a more elaborate proposal for determining titles of individual stories and planned to extend it to boxsets after stories are done. Please feel free to comment.

      But the short version of my proposal as far as this discussion is concerned was that the name of the BF range should not be part of the page name. The only story with the "UNIT" prefix is Dominion, so I proposed to remove "UNIT" from its name. I certainly intended to extend this proposal to UNIT boxsets.

      However, I would like to point out a subtle difference that has appeared after both my and OncomingStorm12th's proposals: in Silenced "UNIT" plays a different role. UNIT is the thing being silenced.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Amorkuz wrote: in Silenced "UNIT" plays as different role. It seems part of the title, as the object being silenced.

      Are you sure about that? It wasn't how I interpreted it. It could just be the easiest way to convey the literal meaning of the word "silence" instead of only referring to the monster.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • But no one was "silenced" in the boxset in the literal meaning of the word. Killed, yes. Memory erased, yes. Brain washed, yes. But silenced? No.

      It is clearly a pun with double meaning. It is especially significant that this title uses a participle where all other titles had nouns.

      Having said that, I'm not saying we must keep the prefix here. Just that it is worth special consideration.

      UPD: Well, if you're willing to stretch it, one could say that Sam and Osgood were kinda silenced in the last story. They're members of UNIT, so, as I said: UNIT Silenced.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Without spoiling its title, the next UNIT anthology to come is also UNIT: [adjective].

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • WJDTwGL
      WJDTwGL removed this reply because:
      I'm a dumby lol
      19:23, December 20, 2016
      This reply has been removed
    • Yes, it's called Past Participle and used as an adjective.

      "Participle: a word having the characteristics of both verb and adjective; especially : an English verbal form that has the function of an adjective and at the same time shows such verbal features as tense and voice and capacity to take an object"

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I don't think we should consider the nature of the word that comes after UNIT in this decision. Regardless of it being a noun, an adjective, a verb, a pronoun, or whatever else, the simple truth is: "UNIT" remains a prefix. It should not affect our decision, as it definitely would not affect the naming of the story in a Torchwood or Doctor Who audio.

      If an anthology was refered by Big Finish as "Doctor Who: Silenced" or "Torchwood: Silenced", what would we name it (keeping in mind what we've done for all audios and anthologies so far)? We would name it's page "Silenced (audio anthology)". So why would UNIT be any different.

      Look at Broken (audio story). No one here would think of naming this page "Torchwood: Broken", even though the "Torchwood" prefix is stated both on it's oficial page and on it's cover.

      UNIT plays the exact same "role" on names as Torchwood: to give buyers a general idea to which range the story/anthology belongs. Nothing else.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Before these weird recent titles, I was in complete agreement with you. (On a side note, what we've done for other anthologies is not necessarily consistent.) Also, I agree with you 100% regarding Torchwood. There are many other prefixes used over the years.

      I also want to agree with you on the new UNIT anthologies, the only ones that might stand out. But does it play the same role? Compare: "UNIT: The Coup" with "UNIT - Shutdown". The latter can be read as a noun phrase: "UNIT shutdown" (like school shutdown). The former cannot possibly be read this way. All of the new titles can form a meaningful phrase if the dash is omitted (it is a dash on the website but just a linebreak on the CD box): UNIT extinction, UNIT shutdown, UNIT silenced, etc. I think it would be wrong to pretend that nothing is changed.

      On the other hand, this change is so subtle and, seemingly, far from being decisive in the title. It's an additional flavour to the title, an aftertaste, not the main attraction at all. So perhaps, we can still omit the prefix without losing much.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • But that's the thing: there are many examples of stories on all media which makes absolutely no sense until you actually watch/read/listen to the story.

      Look at ...ish (audio story). Does it make any sense, with or without a prefix? No.

      The same goes on to Broken (audio story) itself. Until you actually listen to this: what is broken? An arm? A leg? A chair? A relationship? A metaforical way to say "broken heart"? In this case, with or without the "Torchwood" prefix, the title is simply ambiguous

      Now, looking at prose: Oh No It Isn't! (novel). Without a prefix: what isn't? With a prefix: (Bernice Summerfield: Oh No It Isn't) so, is it Bernice Summerfield or not?

      A final example, on TV: Detained (TV story). Without a prefix: who's detained ? With a prefix: (Class: Detained) so, is a class being detained?

      My point is: the titles of stories/anthologies don't need to necessarily form a meaningfull sentence without a prefix. Some titles don't form it even with a prefix. The point of a title is being something eye/ear-catching, so we can remember it, or be interested in it. That's what Extinction, Shutdown and Silenced are: something a bit ear-catching, which gets the buyers interested in listening to these anthologies, so they can understand what is going on.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I think, in the end, we actually agree. You are saying that the titles do not always make sense on their own. I am saying that whatever sense they make, the additional meanings brought by the prefix are not worth fighting for.

      So, yes, I agree that all UNIT stories and boxsets (old and new) should be named without the prefix "UNIT". Then the rules described in that old thread would finally explain the names of all Big Finish audio stories on this wiki.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Incidentally, regarding spoilers, I always thought that they refer to stories, so discussing the name of a boxset, which is demonstrably not a story (for instance, it does not necessarily require a dab term), should, in principle, be allowed as long as no details of the stories in it are revealed.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Amorkuz wrote: I think, in the end, we actually agree. You are saying that the titles do not always make sense on their own. I am saying that whatever sense they make, the additional meanings brought by the prefix are not worth fighting for.

      So, yes, I agree that all UNIT stories and boxsets (old and new) should be named without the prefix "UNIT". Then the rules described in that old thread would finally explain the names of all Big Finish audio stories on this wiki.

      Being very honest, I misread your previous post, and though that you were "in favour" of keeping the prefixes. Now, with this clarification, I must say: yes, we indeed agree.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Perhaps; I won't give a yes or no, because I haven't thought it through or looked into it. But the name of a box set can easily give away plot details. If I had spoiled the name of UNIT: Silenced, it's quite likely one might make the association between the wordplay in the title and the Silence.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Yeah, with that I must agree: boxset names can give away plot details as much as story names (some might give plot details, while ohters don't), so we should probabbly let them off the thread anyway.

      "UNIT: Extinction" won't lead anyone to think about Autons, but SOTO's example is a good one where the title can lead to details.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Didn't think of that. Indeed, minor spoilers are possible. Good point.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Also the Bernice Summerfield novels in order from The Doomsday Manuscript to The Glass Prison are actually Bernice Summerfield and ... story title.

      So these are titles that need to be added to the titles as they are and in the same vain as Doctor Who and...

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • OncomingStorm12th wrote: Yeah, with that I must agree: boxset names can give away plot details as much as story names (some might give plot details, while ohters don't), so we should probabbly let them off the thread anyway.

      "UNIT: Extinction" won't lead anyone to think about Autons, but SOTO's example is a good one where the title can lead to details.

      Spoilers don't matter, because we can't discuss it until it's released. It simply makes no sense to use "spoilers" as an attempt to regulate article titles.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • DENCH-and-PALMER wrote: Also the Bernice Summerfield novels in order from The Doomsday Manuscript to The Glass Prison are actually Bernice Summerfield and ... story title.

      So these are titles that need to be added to the titles as they are and in the same vain as Doctor Who and...

      I won't give an official opinion on this because it's irrelevant to the discussion, but there's a possibility that the pages will be moved. Let's focus on the UNIT prefix for now.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Yes, indeed. So, off with the prefixes?

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Amorkuz wrote: Yes, indeed. So, off with the prefixes?

      I'm in favour of removing the prefixes.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • It would seem to be a natural extension of the "Doctor Who" decision.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I'm in favour of removing them from all but UNIT: Dominion, as that's more of a Doctor Who story set around UNIT than a UNIT story involving the Doctor, as I recall was decided in the previous debate about this.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Could you, by any chance, post a link to the previous debate? I was not aware there was one.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I will try and find it, although if Bwburke94 couldn't find it then it might be a bit tricky

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • As t turns out, I couldn't find the discussion either in the backlogs of the panopticon or the matrix archives, sorry about that, although the debate definitely ended with the UNIT prefix being kept for Dominion for its ambiguous position within both franchises, so the general "Doctor Who" prefix was used instead.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Well, at least someone remembers what was happening in that discussion. That's already something. I was always wondering how it happened.

      One thing to note is that BF changed the description of the Dominion story. It used to be UNIT: Dominion, and now it's Doctor Who - UNIT: Dominion (for instance here all the links have been changed but the lead still has no DW prefix; actually here it is even clearer).

      Another relevant thing, to my mind, is that at that time Dominion was the pinnacle of the UNIT audio series, so to say. The regular series ended. The box set was a special of a different format. No new stories were forthcoming.

      What I don't know (was before my time) is which range Dominion was originally marketed in. It is still in the "Special Releases" range, mind you. Was it in the "UNIT" range from the very beginning is what I don't know. If it wasn't, then "UNIT" was needed to connect the special release to the UNIT range. In such a setting, its description as a special DW release that also concerns UNIT made sense.

      But now it is in the UNIT range, so this special note is not needed anymore. We acknowledge this by wedging this story between the last old UNIT story and the first new UNIT story in the infobox. (Note that, unlike the BF website, we do not provide any other navigation in the infobox for this story.) The lead clearly paints it as a UNIT story. It feels like things have changed significantly.

      And Gallifrey range mentioned above is a very good example in more ways than one. It also started as single-story CDs named "Gallifrey: <name of story>" by BF. Then, from Season 4, it switched to multi-story boxsets. Finally, from Season 7, we have single-story boxsets exactly identical to Dominion in composition. And these are also called "Gallifrey: <name of story>" by BF. We, on the other hand, call all three types of stories in the Gallifrey range "<name of story> (audio story)", consistently dropping the prefix "Gallifrey".

      So why is "Gallifrey" dropped for single-story Gallifrey range boxsets but "UNIT" is not dropped for single story UNIT range boxset? However it was marketed originally, it is now firmly in the UNIT range for both BF and Wikia.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Are you all thinking of Thread:193754? That discussion is still open, so no conclusion was ever reached. The only other discussion I can think of, Forum:Doctor Who prefix in titles and its continuation Thread:117218, make no mention of UNIT.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Yes I think that was the thread actually. It being open is then most likely the reason the UNIT prefixes haven't been changed.

      As these conversations have reached mostly identical points, would it be okay for an admin to archive the other, older thread? It really serves no purpose anymore due to all BF ranges except UNIT having their prefixes dropped anyway.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • I respectfully disagree that the other thread serves no purpose. In fact, these two threads are related but have different though overlapping scopes. This discussion only discusses several specific prefixes (I counted four) and suggests to drop them for both stories and other pages. Thus, such a discussion would have to be repeated for any new range BF will come up with.

      Thread:193754 proposes to codify a policy consistent with how we currently codify all existing BF ranges (modulo the only exception of Dominion). Such a policy would then be applicable to all future BF ranges too. However, that thread only concerns stories because the situation with audio anthologies is slightly different when one considers all existing prefixes rather than just the most popular ones.

      To give a concrete example that is discussed in that thread but is not covered in this thread, there is a difference in how the pages 1963: Fanfare for the Common Men and The Destroyer of Delights are named: the former features the prefix "1963", whereas the latter does not feature the prefix "Key 2 Time". The policy proposed in that thread explains this and, hence, provides a guide how to name pages for stories from similar mini-arcs in the future.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • So since all the references were to Thread:193754, which was very much after the UNIT: Dominion page was created, does anyone remember why it was named UNIT: Dominion instead of just Dominion?

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Amorkuz wrote: I respectfully disagree that the other thread serves no purpose. In fact, these two threads are related but have different though overlapping scopes. This discussion only discusses several specific prefixes (I counted four) and suggests to drop them for both stories and other pages. Thus, such a discussion would have to be repeated for any new range BF will come up with.

      Thread:193754 proposes to codify a policy consistent with how we currently codify all existing BF ranges (modulo the only exception of Dominion). Such a policy would then be applicable to all future BF ranges too. However, that thread only concerns stories because the situation with audio anthologies is slightly different when one considers all existing prefixes rather than just the most popular ones.

      To give a concrete example that is discussed in that thread but is not covered in this thread, there is a difference in how the pages 1963: Fanfare for the Common Men and The Destroyer of Delights are named: the former features the prefix "1963", whereas the latter does not feature the prefix "Key 2 Time". The policy proposed in that thread explains this and, hence, provides a guide how to name pages for stories from similar mini-arcs in the future.

      I concede defeat on this particular reply.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Yeah, remove them for me.

        Establishing interface with the TARDIS
    • Well, I've been asked to close this thread, so I will do so.

      Most of the posters here have reached a consensus. In addition, arguments from similar posts in the past, particularly at Forum:Doctor Who prefix in titles, give two good reasons for making the suggested change: ease of alphabetization using {{Titlesort}} and ease of using auto-suggest.

      Therefore, this thread is closed, and whatever changes are needed can be implemented.

        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.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+