Talk:The Eight Doctors

Doctor Who Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Novels: Sci-fi Low‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Science fiction task force.

Untitled

The Doctor uses the name John Smith on numerous other occassions, in both the original series and the current one. Digifiend 13:15, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

It has been suggested that this article b merged with ==Doctor Who spin-offs==, please voice views below, thankyou -- Mrmccollough (talk) 17:34, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Oppose - There are several articles that do not need separate pages, this is not one of them. Stuart DD _{contributions} 20:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Oppose - There are separate pages for each range of books, comics, and audioplays, as well as individual pages for most of the individual releases. The proposer doesn't seem to have sought ought all of these pages and made the same proposal there, but presumably he intends all of these articles to be merged, rather than just this one. Also, he hasn't tagged the other article, and has used merge instead of mergefrom and mergeto, so I have to guess that this is the one he intends to remove. (As silly as it would be to have separate articles for every book except the first of the EDAs, it would be even sillier to have the general Doctor Who spinoffs information merged into an article about this one book.) If I'm wrong in these assumptions, I apologize. At any rate, any such merger would require throwing away a huge amount of information. As the parent page is already poorly organized and too long; adding even a brief mention of each individual book would only make the problem worse. Also, given that the proposal isn't formatted properly (notably there's no merge template on the other page--also, instead of a link to the parent article, there's a malformed Wikitag that looks like it was supposed to be a section heading), and looking over the proposer's handful of previous edits ([1]) and proposals ([2]), I'm not sure the proposer completely understands what he's suggesting. If he really does want this merger to be considered, here are some suggestions:

Add the merge (or, better, mergefrom) template to the target page.
Replace merge with mergeto here.
Replace the description here to have a proper link rather than a malformed section heading.
Explain what should be done with all of the content on the page to be removed. Should this article be converted into a series of sections in the spinoffs article? Rewritten into a single section, paragraph, or list entry? Merged in with existing paragraphs? A concrete proposal is ideal, but not necessary.
If only this one article is intended to be merged, explain why; is The Eight Doctors less notable than, say, Cold Fusion? Does its article have less information? Alternatively, if you intend to merge all of the individual articles, the proposal's discussion almost certainly belongs on the parent page, and you need to make a list of all of the pages to merge. Also, is it just the individual novels, or do the articles on each range, on OVAs, etc. need to be merged as well?
Either way, to explain why the separate article[s] should not exist, and how they should be merged, look at the page on merging.

Fix the formatting; you're more likely to get consent if your discussion has a proper link to the page instead of a malformed attempted section heading. Proper English helps as well. --75.36.141.22 (talk) 18:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This has been around long enough - close with result OPPOSEStuart DD _{contributions} 12:36, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Return to 76 Totters Lane

Is it worth mentioning in the Continuity section that this book is yet another return to the scrapyard from the first episode? Is it worth mentioning in that story's article, along with the two televised returns (Attack of the Cybermen and Remembrance of the Daleks)? --75.36.141.22 (talk) 18:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that was a useful continuity reference. Stuart DD _{contributions} 12:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Eight Doctors. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20140304110925/http://www.magnetopia.org/cloisterlibrary/eigh.htm to http://www.magnetopia.org/cloisterlibrary/eigh.htm

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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) 19:45, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]