Talk:Dalek variants

Out of Order
I think the article should be re-ordered. It skips eras all over the place, dealing with 1970s Daleks and then jumping to more recent Daleks. I haven't watched all of these older stories, and I don't have any reference books, so I can't do it myself; however, someone with more knowledge must do an overhaul. 76.18.4.243 (talk) 19:50, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Must they? Perhaps you should read the article again. The focus is on the various Dalek types, not the chronological history of their appearances in various media. It tracks the development of the main variants in a logical manner and only 'skips eras' (if I understand correctly what you mean by that) where nothing of any note regarding the Dalek variants occurred. Further, although the article failed WP:GA review, the matter you have raised did not figure among the reasons. If you still feel that your proposal has merit then you should discuss your rationale for it here. I believe a change of the magnitude you are suggesting would certainly warrant debate and the establishment of a clear supporting consensus before it was implemented. Bowdenford (talk) 00:12, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Dalek variants. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.longleatcyberman.com/TussaudsDalek/Home.html

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 06:36, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Bowdenford (talk) 07:47, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Dalek variants. 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/20150622150702/http://www.dwasonline.co.uk/node/760?cat=node%2F758 to https://www.dwasonline.co.uk/node/760?cat=node%2F758
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://nzdwfc.tetrap.com/archive/tsv61/sevenkeys.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://nzdwfc.tetrap.com/archive/tsv44/darkdimension.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160808043653/http://www.thedoctorwhosite.co.uk/dalek/types/ to https://www.thedoctorwhosite.co.uk/dalek/types/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:01, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Addition to Dalek variants
In the section General design/Casing, it should be mentioned that Dalekanium is also referred to in Day of the Daleks (1972).Malcolmlucascollins (talk) 03:38, 31 August 2018 (UTC)


 * It doen't appear to be the same stuff. In Day of the Daleks the term is used to refer to an extremely volatile explosive. I'm not going to attempt discussing a rationale for that as it crosses into an in universe perspective. Suffice to say it's yet another example of the programme's fact/continuity/history checker going AWOL during the screenplay read-through. Be that as it may, the substance in Day of the Daleks has no relevance to Dalek variants, the subject of this article. Nowhere does "dalekanium" require capitalisation unless at the start of a sentence, btw, in the same way that "plutonium", "aluminium" and "polytetrafluoroethylene" don't. Sprite96 (talk) 08:39, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Date auditing
Hi, could we please let the system work as intended? Both bots and editors need to know when dates were audited. Chaos would ensue if there were no system to show when that process happened. Thanks, Dawnseeker2000  15:02, 8 November 2020 (UTC)