Talk:2000 AD crossovers

Expanding

First step is to integrate the information from the 2000 AD timeline and then swap that for a redirect and then check all the information that is on the 2000 AD entry is also here then slim that down and point it here. Then it needs more details how the universe came together (as I believe some stories were tweaked to fit, etc.) and tie it more strongly into the various entries we currently have here. (Emperor 18:36, 14 September 2006 (UTC))

I've now brought over the timeline data from the separate entry - it needs further wikifying and the tale end needs tidying (rewriting to fit the format and references made to specific information) but it is looking solid (Emperor 00:02, 18 September 2006 (UTC))

Sorry guys, but IMHO the entire concept of this page is flawed and is not in anyway fixable. Others may disagree. At any rate I've put up for an AfD vote. Artw 16:58, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

If you nominate an article for deletion then you should at least say something about why. Simply saying "this page is flawed" without any explanation is just not adequate. Nobody can defend the page if you don't say what the problem is, so any vote is pointless. Richard75 22:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC) Oops. Found it here. Never mind. Richard75 22:55, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Citation needed

"...this was official editorial policy in the comic's early years..." I know I read this either in an interview or in one of David Bishop's Thrill Power Overload articles, but I can't remember where. If anyone knows then please fix this. Richard75 21:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

OK good stuff. When the 2000 AD site is back up I'll bump the Wikipedia help thread and see if I can get the Hive Mind working on tracking that down. If all else fails I could drop David Bishop a note via MySpace but I doubt it would need that. (Emperor 00:35, 22 September 2006 (UTC))

Things are looking good - I'd suggest dropping a note into this thread and get some other eyes to look it over and throw in some thoughts. I'd be happy to do that if everyone else thinks its looking solid. (Emperor 23:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC))

Move

The result of the deletion discussion was keep, but there did seem to be a consensus to move the page to "2000 AD crossovers", and I agreed to this myself in one of my edits in support of keeping. Also one of the last contributions to the discussion was not familiar with the topic and thought the name was confusing as it suggested a physics or history article. Therefore I have decided to move the page, but otherwise not changed anything. Richard75 16:06, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Good stuff. We need to tweak it slightly so it fits it better in its new home and then I think it needs more details and extra facts - it does appear that there is a shared fictional universe for a number of stories but it needs quotes, facts, etc. I'll also throw it open on the 2000 AD forum to get more ideas and input. Feel free to discuss any changes here first before doing anything major to the entry. I'll have a read through and a ponder. (Emperor 17:25, 29 September 2006 (UTC))

I've edited the opening paragraphs and some other bits so that it fits the new title better. Nothing huge. Richard75 16:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Pseudonyms

Is the K. Edwards pseudonym relevant to crossovers? The names Cal Mahilton and Keef Ripley were both used to conceal from the reader that they were writing crossover stories, but Edwards just seems to be a normal pseudonym. Richard75 16:19, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

It was relevant before the move from 2000 AD Universe. It probably doesn't work as it is. Perhaps it is worth moving to the main 2000 AD entry? (Emperor 16:29, 25 February 2007 (UTC))

Good idea; done. Richard75 18:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Extraneous detail

Do we really need this paragraph? (Currently the second paragraph under sub-heading "Comparisons.")

"Indeed, Strontium Dog's Britain resembles the present far more than the chronologically earlier Judge Dredd's, despite occurring later: there is a democratic Britain and a Scottish Executive with a police service, not a Judge-ruled Brit-Cit and dependent Cal-Hab. While mutants are a hated underclass spawned by global nuclear war in both series, they both show mutants only coming into being after a specific nuclear conflict that takes place at conflicting dates. It is near impossible for the two to actually take place in the same universe. However, it is unlikely the time-travel link was a serious attempt at world-building and continuity, rather than simply a means of having two popular characters meet."

I think it goes into a lot of detail for one particular story, which is only mentioned in the preceding paragraph as an example, and interrupts the flow of the article. I would leave in the last sentence but delete the rest. The rest probbaly belongs in the Strontium Dog article rather than here. Richard75 18:04, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

It does kind of underline the extreme sketchiness of the case for a single universe. Artw 18:10, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

It is a little too much based on opinion. I'd say keep it tight. (Emperor 19:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC))

Zancudo

Zancudo appears to be a sequel to Ant Wars, bringing that earlier story into Dredd continuity. Maybe. Jacob 04:17, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Caballistics and Necronauts

What about these two series? I'm sure I picked up a reference to Necronauts in one of the early Caballistics. Any ideas? Kelvingreen (talk) 18:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Caballistics has lots of references to other stories, including stories outside 2000 AD. Might be worth adding a paragraph about it.Richard75 (talk) 13:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there are references to the operations of UNIT from Doctor Who, Delta Green, and others. I mention Necronauts specifically because it is written by the same person, so it's much easier to see them as part of the same universe. Kelvingreen (talk) 23:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Burning Heart?

It was planned originally to be a crossover between Judge Dredd and Doctor Who but the idea was scrapped after the movie did poorly. Worth noting or for the wrong article?--DrWho42 (talk) 20:47, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it's worth briefly mentioning in the 2000 AD crossovers section, since even though it didn't happen, the Doctor is such an iconic figure in British SF. I've put it in. Richard75 (talk) 14:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.gallifreyone.com/review.php?id=ma-30
  • In 2000 AD crossovers on 2011-05-25 06:57:38, 404 Not Found
  • In 2000 AD crossovers on 2011-06-10 04:58:48, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 04:59, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://mysql.rebellion.co.uk/~twothousand/?zone=dredd&page=timelines
  • In 2000 AD crossovers on 2011-05-25 06:57:56, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
  • In 2000 AD crossovers on 2011-06-10 04:59:05, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'

--JeffGBot (talk) 04:59, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Both fixed. Richard75 (talk) 14:03, 10 June 2011 (UTC)