Talk:Doctor Who in the United States and Canada

Doctor Who Mid‑importance

	Doctor Who portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Doctor Who, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Doctor Who and its spin-offs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Doctor WhoWikipedia:WikiProject Doctor WhoTemplate:WikiProject Doctor WhoDoctor Who articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Howard DaSilva introductions

Since Howard DaSilva introductions are voiceovers over the original video, not additional video sections, how in the world would material be cut in order to accommodate them? Ken Arromdee 20:15, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The opening introductions are voiceovers, but the teasers provided at the end were composed out of edited clips from the following episode. I presume the cuts were made to accomodate these. I'll add something to clarify that. —Josiah Rowe 21:07, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The opening introductions would sometimes include edited clips from the previous episode beyond the usual cliffhanger recap. It was years before some of us in the US saw the episodes in their entirety. The best example of a cut scene (which most of us had read about in the novelisation of Robot but hadn't gotten to see) was Tom Baker's trying on three wild costumes before settling on the bohemian attire of his first few seasons.User:MarnetteD | Talk 02:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TJ Lubinsky?

Is this guy's contribution really noteworthy? Who exactly is he, and how did his decision to broadcast previously unseen episodes in Florida affect the programme's nationwide profile? His inclusion seems a bit odd to me. —Josiah Rowe 00:48, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm interpreting that bit correctly, ~~his station was the first to show stories in episodic format.~~ If that's the case, he seems notable to me. I not, then, er, you're right. Oh, look: TJ Lubinsky!--Sean Black ^Talk 00:57, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, never mind. I don't really care either way (although, I'm working on that stub..).--Sean Black ^Talk 01:03, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave him in the article for now to give whoever put him in a chance to respond. (I could search through the article history and find out who that is, but I'm too lazy.) Oh, and I know for a fact that several PBS stations were airing Doctor Who in episode format in the 1980s, so whatever he did in the '90s isn't that.—Josiah Rowe 01:19, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I thought it said "80's", hence the strikeout.--Sean Black ^Talk 01:22, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Checked the history, it's been there since the inital revision by Khaosworks.--Sean Black ^Talk 01:25, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Turns out Khaosworks brought it over from the main Doctor Who article. It first appears there in this edit, by an anon user; although that could be somebody who has since registered a username. —Josiah Rowe 01:37, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've had very little to do with this article since I imported it from the main page, so I can't speak to the veracity (or lack thereof) of the information. If there's doubt, remove it, I say. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 01:53, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Lubinsky's gone, and I rewrote the surrounding sections a bit. I also added a mention of the two PBS stations that still broadcast Doctor Who, according to This Week in Doctor Who. —Josiah Rowe 04:16, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I know this is a very late addition to this discussion, but, as I remember it the thing that he is most noted for is that his PBS station was the first to air episode one of Pertwee's The Invasion of the Dinosaurs. PBS was resistant to showing any black and white episode of Dr Who, at all, for a long time. When they finally did start it was in the omnibus edition format so without the episode breaks we had to guess where the cliffhangers happened. Even so, they still refused to show the B&W Pertwee episodes if the bulk of the story was in color. This only affected the viewing of this story and Planet of the Daleks, but you should have tried to make sense of the continuity of the latter story without episode 3. When TJ aired the Invasion episode it was quite a coup, whether it was strictly legal to show it was, I think, up for debate. Maybe some wiki member from Florida that encounters this could fill us in.User:MarnetteD | Talk 02:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Much much later but Planet of the Daleks was always a bit chaotic in the US because the black & white episode three confused a lot. The original compilation excised it; however there was also an episodic version which included it but instead omitted six! A replacement full set was sent over but an engineer assumed the black & white three was an error so wiped it and renumbered the episodes accordingly. In the early 1990s Lubinsky managed to get a full episodic version into circulation, albeit by a time when most PBS stations were no longer taking new episodes. I assume Lubinsky was someone who had the knowledge to spot the errors in the prints and contacted the BBC to obtain the correct ones. (By the time he got Invasion 1 it was also circulating in the UK via a satellite station so I presume he made a standard purchase.) Timrollpickering (talk) 02:48, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to recall that the PBS station in Buffalo, New York (WNED) was (one of?) the earliest broadcasters of Dr. Who in the United States -- Isn't it true that some of the Pertwee episodes were restored as a result of 3/4" home videotapes taken from these broadcasts? In any case, I thought that the material broadcast by WNED weren't the DaSilva versions, but I'm not 100% sure of this. Comments/suggestions? (Also, some information on the Canadian broadcast history would be interesting, either as an addendum to this article or as an article of its own...!)

When the Canadian Space (TV channel) went on the air in 1997 they aired Doctor Who daily. They tried to save money though by only buying and airing the black and white episodes from the Hartnell and Troughton era which was a boon for fans like me who had never actually seen them before (WNED and TVO had only ever airedthe colour episodes) but wasn't exactly a ratings grabber so they dropped it after a year. Type 40 (talk) 16:37, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First aired in 1975?

I can find numerous posts over the years from various people in rec.arts.drwho who note that they watched it as early as 71/72 (most seem to say 72) on WPHL CHannel 17 in Philadelphia. Apparently stripped 5 days a week on weeknights ... someone on the RT forum noted that episode 6 of Inferno aierd on Monday 18 September 1972. Was Philadelphia the only place to air in 1972? Text of article says 1975 ... Nfitz 19:53, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen a few other references to Pertwee episodes being aired in the US as early as 1972-73; apparently it was an unsuccessful attempt and the next US airings didn't occur until PBS started airing the Tom Baker episodes ... but I'm pretty sure that happened after 1975, perhaps as late as 1977 or so. However I do believe Canadian television stations resumed airing Doctor Who (it had been shown by the CBC in the mid-60s) around 1975; these were the reedited versions narrated by Howard DaSilva. 23skidoo 23:14, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely watched Dr. Who on PBS in the Greater Washington D.C. area as a child. I am not sure of the dates, but I graduated from high school in 1975, so it had to be before then.--168.236.43.89 (talk) 20:17, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Boston market for Dr. Who in the late 70s and early 80s was WGBH/PBS Ch. 2 not WSBK/Ch 38. That can be confirmed by a check of old uucp posts that finds a 1984 comment that WGBH was announcing the acquisition of the Peter Davison episodes. I can't remember Dr. Who ever appearing on 38 nor can I find any reference for it. --Kathygnome (talk) 20:23, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To my knowledge, the return of Doctor Who to Canadian television (after the CBC run of the sixties) began on TV Ontario (Ontario Public Television) circa 1976. I started watching these in 1977, and I can attest that these were NOT the DaSilva versions. TVO started by showing Pertwee era episodes, filling the programs out to 30 minutes with their own commentary on the episodes by Dr. Jim Dator. I seem to recall that they originally ran selected episodes from the Pertwee era, not necessarily in the proper sequence. By 1977-78, they were showing the last Pertwee season (the last half, at least, in the proper order), and the Tom Baker episodes began running (in order) in the fall of 1978. The first Baker season episodes were given commentary by Science Fiction author Judith Merrill -- after this season, the commentary was dropped. Thereafter, TVO generally broadcast approximately a years worth of 'new' material each season, with re-runs for the rest of the year. TVO did some odd things with the middle Baker years, running some seasons together and dropping a number of serials from seasons 14 and 15. They then proceeded through the rest of Tom Baker, Peter Davison and Colin Baker. TVO then ran the first season of Sylvester McCoy in the spring of 1989, and then stopped showing Dr. Who.--209.202.70.226 12:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I don't think TVO ever ran the Sunmakers or the Underworld. And TVO definitely was not airing the Time-Life Da Silva packages. Type 40 (talk) 16:13, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Popularity

As I've read this article, I've noticed a lot of claims that really could use some sort of reference. Here's one: "The program became a part of 1980s geek chic, as popular as Star Trek was in the 1970s". The "as popular as Star Trek was in the 1970s" bit seems an especially inflated claim, if for no other reason than DW was, with limited exceptions broadcast on PBS. It may have developed a respectable presence in the minds of general science fiction fans, but was it really so present in the minds of the general American viewing public as Star Trek? Understand, I'm not trying to propagate the old, "Which is better: ST or DW?" argument that has its roots in the 80s, but I just think that the statement above needs either reference or further qualification. CzechOut 21:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Viewership

Claims as to the popularity of the show really could use some backing up, because they're currently quite vague. For instance, what does this statement: "Once the series ceased production in 1989, the number of stations carrying Doctor Who naturally dropped, although the program's popularity had been waning in the United States for some years," really mean? Is there any way of injecting actual viewing figures (either in terms of the number of people, or the number of stations showing the program) into the article? Was it on the wane throughout the country, or has the author injected his or her own local bias into the article? DId fewer and fewer stations carry the show because it was truly less popular, or had BBC Worldwide/Lionheart started asking more money for the show than a similarly-sized fanbase could reasonably raise using the old pledge drive financial model? Understand, I don't know the answers to these questions, myself, which is why I'm adding to the discussion here instead of just editing the article. But it does seem like these questions have not been addressed by the article.

"As most stations were in the practice of purchasing the omnibus "movie versions" . . ." Do we know it was really most stations? Or is this the author's local understanding of the show creeping in again?

Another point the article fails to address is why Maryland and Iowa public television are still able to air the classic series. Might investigating why it's still on the air there lead to greater clarification over what the whole financial model was for bringing the original series of Doctor Who to the United States? CzechOut 22:06, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of those times when I wish I hadn't left my DWM collection at my parents'... From memory DWM did an issue in 1998 heavily devoted to the show in America - everything from the original Cushing movie release over there through to the 1996 TV movie and beyond. My memory of the details of the decline is roughly as follows:

PBS stations are financed by viewer donations/sponsorship/pledges or whatever the term is (it's not something we have in the UK). This means that show needed to bring in enough money to be viable.

In the late 1980s the number of episodes produced per year dropped. Once those became "Whovies" that meant there was only four new pieces of material each year.

Widespread videoing meant many fans already had older episodes on tape and so weren't tuning in and paying to see them broadcast again.

At the same time BBC Lionheart (or whoever) were raising the price.

Consequently the show was becoming a loss maker for the PBS stations and many looked to drop it.

In the early 1990s the Sci Fi channel was set up. One of the original producers/commissioners or whatever knew that there was strong demand amongst US Who fans to see the surviving Hartnell and Troughton episodes which hadn't had the best distribution, whilst the PBS stations were focusing on the color years. So he arranged to purchase a package of all the existing Hartnell & Troughtons, which he did not think would compete with PBS.

Unfortunately he subsequently moved on from the channel before it launched and his successors decided differently and though the Tom Bakers would be a better investment - so did a direct swap with the BBC (and ridiculously got a package from Robot 1 to Androids of Tara 3!).

PBS stations, looking for a way to get out of the series, told fans that the Sci Fi Channel had an exclusive deal and dropped the series.

The ratings on the Sci Fi Channel were quite poor for the same reasons as on PBS and the show was soon dropped there as well.

By 1998 only four PBS stations were still showing the series, all with Who fans "on the inside" keeping it going.

If anyone can either find that DWM or wants to have a bash at turning this into something for the article then feel free. Timrollpickering 18:08, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sliders paragraph

User:MarnetteD removed a paragraph detailing the complicated relationship between Fox/Universal/Sliders/DW and its impact on the failure of the 1996 telefilm to generate an ongoing American series. Her reasons were that the paragraph was speculative, unsupported and boring. While I'm perfectly prepared to discuss how to improve the article, the Sliders connection is, I feel, an important one to mention in any serious documentation of why DW failed in 1996 in America. As the claim was in fact cited originally, however, I'm reverting the article.CzechOut 02:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An additional citation has been added to better clarify where Sliders stood in 1996.CzechOut 02:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where was the claim cited originally? Certainly not in the text as written, nor in the edit summary line where it belongs. Can you give us a source: be it an interview (TV, Magazine, newspaper or online) with a Fox or Universal executive or anyone involved in the decision making process regarding the two shows that proves the assertion made. The additional citation only mentions Sliders travails. It was written a full six months after the Dr Who movies airing and doesn't mention it at all. With his usual style and grace khaosworks has tinkered with the entry to try to make it work with the article but it is still only speculation, which is not to say that the notion doesn't have some merit it just is not proven as it currently stands. It may well go to the ongoing dilemma of whether Wikipedia is an encyclopedia or another fan websiteUser:MarnetteD | Talk 07:59, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, the citation that links to A Brief History of Time (Travel) article on the TVM does talk about Universal backing Sliders over Doctor Who, but it's not stated precisely why (and certainly not stated that it was because Doctor Who might prove competitive with Sliders), so I excised those portions to make it hew closer to what the citation actually said, which is simply that Universal chose to back the wholly-owned Sliders instead of Doctor Who when push came to shove. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 08:14, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are clearly similar concepts, though; were there any behind-the-scenes struggle for support between the two series (and I'm not sure yet if that's the case), it's hard to imagine their similarity not being a contributing factor. --Aderack 20:19, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's as may be - it's still not a piece of information we can verify, or at least no citation of any sort is provided. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 22:34, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is the first I'd ever heard of Fox backing Sliders over Doctor Who. All the literature I've seen on this stated it was Space: Above and Beyond that was supported in lieu of a new Who series.

Not very likely - Space had already been cancelled by the time the Doctor Who TVM aired! (GLG, 11/09/06)

My recollection from the time is that it was Sliders vs Doctor Who. Type 40 (talk) 16:10, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ratings?

Should there be a section added about ratings for the new series? There has been some media reports about the ratings on Sci-Fi. which seemed to drop for the first few weeks, then go up, then drop again ... 23skidoo 03:44, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Series 1 DVD details

Do we really need to have the full saga of how the BBC announced that Series 1 would be sold on DVD in the US before they finalized the arrangements with Sci Fi, and then delayed the US DVD release accordingly? After I converted all those references into cite.php format, it occurred to me that perhaps the whole thing could be summarized more succinctly, without spelling out every date and step along the way. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a whack at it. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 07:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. I've just changed "released on schedule" to "released as scheduled", which I think flows a bit better from the previous sentences. Otherwise, a nice condensation. Like a gentle spring rain. (OK, that means it's time for me to sleep.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Series 2

Will Series 2 with David Tennant be shown on SciFi? I can't imagine that it wouldn't be, as it seems unfair to give America twenty seconds of Tennant and then cancel the show. How about The Christmas Invasion? The beginning of New Earth doesn't make much sense without it.

SciFi cuts

I've been noticing some rather obvious cuts for time in the SciFi broadcast. Wikipedia lists the running time for the original BBC broadcasts at 45 minutes. How long are the SciFi broadcasts? Am I missing much? -Anþony 08:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The runtime on the Sci Fi channel is about 41 minutes give or take 10-15 seconds so you are missing about 4-5 minutes (This may not apply to The Christmas Invasion whose 60 minute run time was spread out over an hour and a half). I can recommend getting access to the DVD's because I found that the missing material for the ninth Doctor almost always contained something worth seeing. The extras and the commentary are also worth seeing. This editing for commercials will still apply when the episodes show up on BBC America next month, although they may cut out different scenes than the Sci-Fi channel did. MarnetteD | Talk 11:05, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

4 PBS broadcasters?

According to Outpost Gallifrey the WCET (TV)/CET press release says "WCET is currently one of 4 PBS broadcasters in the US airing the classic series" but I can't find this in either the PR on the CET Website, or the one they link to achieved on Yahoo! Groups. Can anyone else find this statement? --GracieLizzie 20:48, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TransAmerican Broadcasts

The article states: "In fact, until the Sci Fi Channel aired the 2005 series episode "Rose" on cable, no other episode had been made available to multiple American markets simultaneously, by any method of legal broadcast"... but I know this to not be true.

Sometime in the 90's the SciFi Channel ran the Classic series in it's half-hour serialized format as part of the daytime line up, along with Dark Shadows. While I have a clear memory of these broadcasts, I can find no reference to support my memory. Can anyone help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Otherland71 (talk • contribs) 13:22, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct Otherland71. In the mid 1980's during the early days of cable television WOR from New York aired Tom Baker episodes on Saturday mornings. Then when the Sci Fi Channel began broadcasting in 1992 one of its offerings was Doctor Who. The only episodes that they broadcast were Tom Baker's first four seasons. I can't remember whether they left in the Howard da Silva intros or not but they never showed any other Doctors episodes. Later when BBC America began broadcasting in 1998 they repeated this pattern of showing Bakers first four seasons. MarnetteD | Talk 15:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Who in Canada

Is there enough information to justify a separate article for Canada? Type 40 (talk) 16:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not, harder to keep track of things that way. Incidentally, it began airing from the beginning, in order, in Canada on YTV starting in September of 1989. Unfortunately the only reference I have other than memory is this: [1] --HKMarks(T/C) 01:52, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And Canadian and American histories are closely intertwined as many Canadians in border areas would have seen Doctor Who on PBS stations and many Americans in boarder areas would have seen the show on CBC or TVOntario. 67.68.49.66 (talk) 06:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

needs major cleanup

A lot of the things that are now in the past have been written as if they were happening in the present or even the future, someone with some time should give the article a good cleanup to fix this sort of thing.76.226.129.213 (talk) 00:04, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BBC America's Editing

I think it should be noted somewhere that BBCAmerica edits down any episode over 45 minutes (60 minutes, 75 minutes) to fit an hour broadcast that includes 10+ minutes of commercials. At times, as in The Waters of Mars, it creates a very different, abbreviated version of the original episode. The only exception is The End of Time, Pts. 1 & 2 which BBCA airs in one 3 hour block. There could be edits here, too. I haven't seen the original on DVD.

Other U.S. networks might have done this as well but I don't know, I wasn't watching before Series 7. I just discovered this for myself when it seemed like some of the episodes had plotholes and I discovered that there were quite a number of episodes from the Davies era that were longer than 45 minutes and had to be squeezed into this time slot. 64.134.71.74 (talk) 22:26, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They were all shown in their full length the first time that they were aired. Later edited versions have been airing since 2006 and are not that notable. Especially given the fact that they exist in DVD, blu-ray and streaming versions. This info is readily available all over the internet. Remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a chat room.MarnetteD | Talk 22:32, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Doctor Who in Canada and the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20051201024349/http://www.cbc.ca/planetofthedoctor/tb_gallery.html to http://www.cbc.ca/planetofthedoctor/tb_gallery.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:36, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Doctor Who in Canada and the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140522142134/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPybv_pzK_s to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPybv_pzK_s

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:54, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Found different youtube url for video. Cheers, Dresken (talk) 20:19, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Doctor Who in Canada and the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:57, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]