Talk:Silver Nemesis

Prince Edward

For the record, Prince Edward really was approached to appear in this story but the BBC were rebuffed. I don't understand why this was information was removed. It is equally true that an actress resembling the Queen was used instead. This is on the 1988 documentary, the DVD and is mentioned numerous times in places like Doctor Who Magazine. Revenge of the Cybermen (talk) 20:29, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

It was removed because Prince Edward is a living person, and your addition was unreferenced; see WP:BLP.

Also, DVD episode commentaries do not count as reliable sources. However, DW Magazine might, in certain circumstances, be considered reliable: so if it is explicitly mentioned in there, then you need to reference it; see WP:REFBEGIN. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. That the medium is an audio commentary is irrelevant because it is an official production on an official DVD. What you are saying is that even if the people who actually produced the programme say something on audio and on the record, we have to ignore it. Yet if someone produces any old book as a secondary source, that can go in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Revenge of the Cybermen (talk • contribs) 20:53, 20 August 2010

Please read WP:RS which describes what constitutes a reliable source: you will see that not all books are reliable. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:05, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

That's exactly what I'm saying. Chris Clough discussing the work he directed on the record is more reliable than a book authored by someone who was not involved. Revenge of the Cybermen (talk) 21:07, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

He also states it in the documentary which can be directly cited. DonQuixote (talk) 22:48, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I might have thought a DVD commentary by production staff to be reliable. At the very least if it's cited as such, we know where the information comes from and can decide for ourselves. WikiuserNI (talk) 22:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Synopsis

This should be changed to reflect the broadcast version, not the 1993 extended version. The latter was never broadcast and has since been superseded by the DVD release that comprises the episodes as broadcast. Otherwise, we should include cut scenes in other story articles. Revenge of the Cybermen (talk) 20:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

That is correct. It also needs to be trimmed a great deal per WP:PLOT. MarnetteD | Talk 20:47, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Anton Differing

The info about him not knowing about the show is not notable nor is it encyclopedic. There were numerous actors who appeared on the Classic series who had neither seen or heard of it. This is even true of those who were on the show in the 80's. In the 60's it is even more non notable a)not everyone had a television b)TV broadcasts occurred mostly in the evenings and actors schedules are such that they were often busy during the hours that TV was on. While we as fans like every bit of minutiae that does not apply to everyone. MarnetteD | Talk 20:47, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

The fact that Anton Diffring had never heard of DW is highly notable because it is typically the first thing anyone who worked on SN says about him. As a result, he had no idea what the story was about. But as it seems that you are determined to police this article I suppose there is no point in my trying to insert it. But I am glad we agree about the synopsis. Revenge of the Cybermen (talk) 20:50, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

You need to read the wikiguidelines for editing in the welcome message on your talk page. There is a consensus built up over time of what is and what is not appropriate for an encyclopedia as opposed to a fan site. Again, in this instance it is not uncommon for actors to have seen the show throught the Classic series history. Beryl Reid also did not understand the show. These are actors not Dr Who fans and just because it is mentioned once or twice on the DVD does not make it encyclopedic. MarnetteD | Talk 21:05, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Fan consternation

I feel that this info does not have encyclopedic value. Fan forums do not meet WP:RS guidelines. It also boils down to the fact that their disgruntlement is overstated. They still have the VHS and, no doubt, down the road another DVD release with their preferred version (ala the upcoming "Revisitations box set") may well occur. Other and opposing thoughts are welcome but we need to get consensus beofre this info can go in the article. MarnetteD | Talk 20:25, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, but the "Continuity" section reads as much the same, although that's par for the course for most classic Who stories. WikiuserNI (talk) 18:03, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Against deletionism

That was the edit summary used to mass revert some changes designed to cut down on the trivia/fancruft in this article. It was also used to revert some prose and renaming/rearranging of the sections, designed to turn this article from a list of facts into something a lot easier to read.

As the changes I made were bit by bit, might any dissenting editors discuss each one before mass reverting. WikiuserNI (talk) 10:50, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree with this statement. It has been recommended before that "User:Revenge of the Cybermen" read up on what is and is not appropriate per WIkipedia's MoS for editing. This is an encyclopedia not a fan forum. There is a Dr Who wikia which is perfect for these items but they do not belong here. MarnetteD | Talk 11:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)