Talk:K9 (TV series)

K9 Adventures or K-9 Adventures?

Will the dash be in the title or not? The Independant uses the dash, as does the PR from Jetix Europe, but the Times doesn't and there is no dash on the new K9's body. GracieLizzie 11:14, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I've moved the page, as the PR uses the dash, if it's later proved to be K9 and not K-9 then feel free to move it back.GracieLizzie 11:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

If you'd like, the dash is more like a dot and could be stylized as "K·9" to set the page apart. Thetardispig55 (talk) 18:45, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

The character is "K9", but, how I read it, the show is "K·9". Thetardispig55 (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Animated?

Although the first paragraph of the Times article refers to an "animated series", later in the article Bob Baker says that the programme will be "CGI animation mixed with live action". But most of our references to this programme call it a "computer-animated series" or similar. Should we change that? (I'm about to go on wikibreak, so can't {{sofixit}} right now.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:40, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

What channel will this air on?

Is it just going to be on 'Jetix' (which i've never heard of) or is it going to be anywhere else? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wiggstar69 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

If it's a hit, I'd imagine the BBC would have first refusal on the terrestrial broadcast rights, as Jetix (formerly Fox Kids Network by the way) is Sky Digital exclusive. Digifiend (talk) 12:37, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

canon

is the show canon in relation to Doctor Who?(Black Dalek 10:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)). I am thinking that this would be in the same situation of the Star Trek animated series being canon in Star Trek.

My thinking of K-9 Adventures is that it probably takes place in a different version of the Whoniverse.--The Shadow Treasurer 07:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I suspect it's out of continuity as well. It's description reminds me of the horrible Star Wars spin-off cartoon Droids: The Adventures of r2d2 & c3po. It featured Artoo & Threepio, but they were owned by totally different masters. The notion that they were ever owned by Captain Antilles was tossed out. Since the folks making this show don't have the rights to anything else Doctor Who related, all of that will have to be left by the wayside for legal reason. They apparently can't even use the same look for the character, after all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.66.146.231 (talk) 22:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, there's no canon in Doctor Who, so you can decide for yourself whether it "counts". —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:22, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

USA?

Are there plans to bring this to the US, as of yet? I certainly hope it is. It would be a good way to boost the popularity of the Doctor over here.

K9 is the new name

The show seems to have been simply renamed "K9" according to Outpost Gallifrey and another source I found on google. Andral 16:53, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

United Kingdom?

I don't see anything in the article to justify the {{UK}} tag? As this is being produced in the Australia, funded by Australian money and broadcast first on an Australian station, shouldn't this be adjusted?--DeadlyAssassin (talk) 23:22, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

It may be co-funded by an Australian network, but the series is being produced by Jetix Europe, headquartered in the UK. — Edokter • Talk • 00:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

It is also being made by Park Entertainment, based in London. (see first sentence under "Production") Etron81 (talk) 16:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Mark V?

Is this K-9 Mark V (or higher)? Being Mark IV introduces significant continuity issues. Is any 'version' indicated at all?--Jeffro77 (talk) 13:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I do not know of any "version" being mentioned at all in any promotional material or news items. I would be rather surprised if the series mentioned it at all! (Etron81 (talk) 16:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC))

The model is a Mark IV, since thats what it says on his safe in SJA episode, "the lost boy". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiggstar69 (talk • contribs) 16:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

What it states in SJA has no bearing on this series, however. This series is being produced completely independently of the BBC and will most likely have little, if any, references to Doctor Who or the other spinoffs. (Etron81 (talk) 17:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC))

Looking for help writing an article about the spin-offs and crossovers of this series

I am writing an article about all of the series which are in the same shared reality as this one through spin-offs and crossovers. I could use a little help expanding the article since it is currently extremely dense and a bit jumbled with some sentence structures being extremely repetitive. I would like to be able to put this article into article space soon. Any and all help in writing the article would be appreciated, even a comment or two on the talk page would help. Please give it a read through, also please do not comment here since I do not have all of the series on my watch list. - LA @ 16:58, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Dates

At separate points the article states "a July 2008 debut is planned" and "Production is due to start in July 2008" but both can't be true CoW mAnX (talk) 21:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Latest K9 image

I was going to upload the new image of K9 from the Doctor Who News Page, but it occurred to me that in the absence of clear sourcing it would be difficult to write up a nonfree use rationale. It's true that the photo is, at the moment, unreplaceable by a free equivalent. But since the source of the photograph, taken on set, is not clearly given in the DWNP item, I'm unsure whether a fair use rationale would stand muster. In time there will be a press packet, and we can use {{press kit rationale}}. Until then, we can just point readers to the DWNP via the footnote. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:31, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Could we use this one as it's obviously an advertisement putout by park entertainment? If we used it, woudl we have to use the whole thign or coudl we just cut out the cast photo for illustration in the page?.

Also, there have been a number of different K-9 images associated with this project over there years - coudl we create a gallery of them supported by a section on Bob Baker's long development of a K-9 series? Etron81 (talk) 17:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Hm... I'm of two minds on that. On the one hand, that image was indeed made for promotional usage at MIPTV by people associated with the programme. On the other hand, I happen to know from (second-hand) personal connections that it was released by mistake — you'll note that it's been removed from Bob Baker's website. This image was a mock-up that wasn't meant to be released to the public — the cast are apparently not in costume, and the K9 photo was taken with a fisheye lens, distorting the prop's shape. I hear that a better promotional image will be released soon.

Now, for Wikipedia's purposes I suppose it would be possible to write up a rationale justifying the use of that image, sourced to the Doctor Who News Page. Come to think of it, I probably shouldn't be part of that decision, since I'm the editor who uploaded the image there and hence have a conflict of interest. (John Bowman uploaded the image I was discussing above; I suppose an argument could be made that as one of the News Page editors I've got a COI regarding any use of that source, but since it's pretty widely used as a source for Doctor Who articles I generally just try not to use articles I posted myself.)

Speaking of which, if someone else would like to fill out the reference for the last footnote, so that it's in line with the other credited items from the [former] Outpost Gallifrey News Page and [current] Doctor Who News Page, I'd appreciate it. :) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:32, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Now that the MIPTV ad has been released, coudl we take a screen cap of K-9 (and other cast) from there for identification and illustration? Etron81 (talk) 16:27, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I suppose so. Incidentally, when incorporating mention of the trailer, rather than merely citing the YouTube page it would be good to cite Bob Baker's website, the Doctor Who News Page and/or other secondary sources which have covered the trailer (e.g. Wired, Airlock Alpha) to verify that the trailer is in fact legitimate (as presumably anyone could set up a YouTube account under the name "K9OFFICIAL"). See here for explanation.

Since I've been covering this for the Doctor Who News Page, which I think broke the story on the trailer, I'll let others take the lead here to avoid the appearance of COI. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:46, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Anyone care to do this? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 03:54, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I meant to do it, but real life got in the way - I'll try to do it tonight, but if someone else gets there before me, I won't be too put out... Etron81 (talk) 12:13, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Done! Etron81 (talk) 00:13, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

The pic is great — good job! Could you also add some text about the trailer (you know, that it was released for MIPTV, etc.)? I'd do it myself, but I feel weird citing myself. :) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:51, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Done! Etron81 (talk) 15:23, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Etron — looks good. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 16:30, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Still Going Forward?

I picked up Doctor Who Magazine #405 last week, and there's an article in it stating that K-9 will be returning to series three of The Sarah Jane Adventures. He will be out of the black hole vault, and be appearing in at least half of the episodes of series three. There is no mention made of the solo series in the article, one way or the other. The fact that K-9 will be appearing on a regular basis aboard an already established childrens series would seem to indicate the solo program may not be happening after all. Anyone have anything else on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.66.146.49 (talk) 15:16, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought the same thing. However, the continuity of both shows seem to have no relationship with each other, so the decisions made by the BBC probably won't affect the cartoon... if there ever is one. Ray and jub (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:49, 25 March 2009 (UTC).

The K9 series isn't a cartoon — it's live action with added CGI. But you're right that there's no narrative connection between Sarah Jane Adventures and K9. However, K9 is definitely going forward; about half of the first 26-episode series has been filmed in Australia, and Bob Baker is trying to sell the series to international broadcast networks at MIPTV. It's still on schedule to air on Jetix/Disney XD in the UK and Network Ten in Australia in late 2009. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 15:59, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Oops. Maybe I should try reading the actual article first. Ray and jub (talk) 16:05, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Latest DWM - NEWS!

The Doctor Who News Page is reporting that the latest DWM has news that John Leeson will be voicing K-9 throughout this series and that transmission will be in Sring 2010 in Australia - does anyone have a copy of this issue to cite properly? Etron81 (talk) 23:00, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Also, it's on Disney XD in the UK tomorrow afternoon, advertised as a "sneak peak" to a series due in early 2010. 90.198.228.222 (talk) 21:10, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

"Broadcast" magazine bit

I've removed the following from the article: "According to a report in Broadcast magazine, the BBC opted out of involvement in order to focus on their own Doctor Who spin-off, Torchwood." Broadcast doesn't make their archives available to the public on the web; I'm guessing that this was the article originally referenced, but it's available only to subscribers. If anyone has access to the original article, either on the web or in a library, and can verify that this claim was in the article and provide a full citation, we can restore it. But frankly it seems to me like someone got their wires crossed. I found this summary of the Broadcast article in the archives of the Doctor Who News Page, and it doesn't mention Torchwood; instead, it mentions that the BBC "is already committed to a number of spin-off projects". This was before any of the plans for The Sarah Jane Adventures had been announced, so I suspect that the editor who first added this back in 2006 thought the BBC rep was talking about Torchwood, when in fact he was thinking about SJA but couldn't mention it. After all, Torchwood and K-9 are aimed at very different audiences, but there's a lot more overlap between the intended audience of K-9 and Sarah Jane. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:47, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Remi Broadway in Episode 14

I made an edit of Remi Broadway appearing as Robin Hood in episode 4 changing it to episode 14 as that is how the episode in question The Last Oak Tree is now placed. The episode 4 description was based on what it says on Broadway's website and obviously they have not taken into account the change of episode order for The Last Oak Tree.--The Shadow Treasurer (talk) 20:20, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

World wide broadcast premiere dates

Ip(s) have been adding various dates to this column in the episodes section - is there any way to verify them? They are very cofusing currently with one episode having two dates and one episode apparently being skipped - are some regions airing out of order?

Can someone with access to the various TV schedules verify these dates? Etron81 (talk) 18:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I think there should be only 1 date in the "Worldwide Premiere" column - I have done this a few times and someone's addedd addtional ones back. My opnion is that the Worldwide premiere shoudl list the date of the first broadcast anywhere in the world, with the country/broadcaster noted. I also think that a UK date column and an Australian date column would be good as well, as they are the countries of origin. Etron81 (talk) 17:38, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

UK showtime

UK TV GUide is listing that K-9 will be starting in the UK on April 3, but does not list any episode titles - is there any listings on the UK Disney XD site? (I cannot check myself as they geoblock that site for us outside the UK) Etron81 (talk) 20:22, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Characters

Shouldn't articles be created for the other main characters as well as a 'list of K-9 minor characters' page, like it's done for Torchwood and The Sarah Jane Adventures? 109.158.138.99 (talk) 15:53, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

DVD Releases

The R2 complete box set supposedly released as an exclusive via the "Who Shop" appears to be mythical. The footnote/reference number 29 does not link to details of such a release. There is no evidence it ever existed. The R2 releases are two box sets, with no exclusives. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.111.13.78 (talk) 09:12, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Suggested move to "K9 (TV series)"

K9 seems to be the preferred spelling.

I have already compiled a list of sources for this on the K9 talk page.

Of particular note are:

• The official K9 webiste
• The official K9 facebook page

--Liam McM (Talk|Contribs) 23:56, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 23 November 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) feminist (talk) 02:05, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

---

K-9 (TV series) → K9 (TV series) – Correcting title to match K9 (Doctor Who). For over four decades, the character has been consistently named K9 in official sources. Secondary sources are mixed – especially if parent show Doctor Who is involved – but within this series itself, there is no use of "K-9" whatsoever, as John Leeson is credited as "Voice of K9". O.N.R. ^(talk) 00:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

• Support per consistency and the nominator's rationale. ╠╣uw [talk] 17:50, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.