Talk:Doctor Who/Archive 18

Books
Could you add

to the See also section? This will place this box on the right (it might be neccessary to add - at the bottom of the See also section to avoid some overlapping with the section below. Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 04:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Don't those just do the same thing as other existing things (The Doctor WHo one th same as the current doctor who template, the seasons one the same as the episode article) 188.221.79.22 (talk) 20:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. I didn't really understand the comment above. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:13, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Number of Actors portraying the Doctor
Im brand new so please forgive if its come up before.

In the card listing those actors portraying teh Doctor, should Richard Hurndall (played teh First Doctor in "The Five Doctors" 1983 television broadcast to replace the deceased William Hartnell) and Peter Cushing (played the Doctor in the two 1960s Feature Films) be included? CaptBassett (talk) 01:27, 9 January 2010 (UTC) Thanks, CaptBassett —Preceding unsigned comment added by CaptBassett (talk • contribs) 01:27, 9 January 2010 (UTC)


 * See List of actors who have played the Doctor. DonQuixote (talk) 05:36, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Doctor Who's Original Planet
I was searching Doctor Who as in the character, not the show. Is there another page? And if not, what is his planet?--WinifredJ (talk) 03:56, 25 January 2010 (UTC)WinifredJ
 * Here you go: Doctor (Doctor Who) Etron81 (talk) 05:49, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Northern Hemispheric Bias
The article states the new fifth series of Doctor Who appears "in spring 2010". For the edification of wikipedia editors, only the Northern Hemisphere experiences the conjunction of Spring, and the good Doctors appearance in his new series.I trust there's little time delay in the show being broadcast in the Southern Hemispheres Autumn, and hopefully the electricity will flow Southwards at a regular gallop following the force of gravity and other laws established by Imperial decree.Any chance the months are stated instead of the Northern season, or is this a cry of unreason for the season?Ern Malleyscrub (talk) 14:14, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Since the program is a product of, and primarily produced for, the UK, referencing the release by the seasons in that location makes sense. Also, since, IIUC, the BBC has only narrowed the projected air date to a "season" which does not necessarily reflect a "quarter", we are kind of stuck with it. - J Greb (talk) 15:19, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

History Section
The Time Lords might travel through time in any order they please, but a wikipedia article should have correct chronolgy in it's history of any subject.The article talks about the series falling popularity and 1990s then discusses Mary Whitehouses 1970s issues. If an Australian has to clear this up, noses will be out of joint, I'm sure.Please tidy up the long and complex history of the series.A brief overview of major developments may precede this section, but must be obvious as an introduction to the history of the series.Thank you.Ern Malleyscrub (talk) 14:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I take it you are refering to Doctor Who whch is followed by Doctor Who, yes?
 * To be fair, the "History" section is a general overview of the production history - the in-house nuts and bolts. "Public consciousness" covers the topic of the reception and lasting impact the show has had. These are different, if related, topics. Yes, the two could be blended together, but at the cost of focus over the section. This is especially true when you consider that "Public consciousness" runs from issue to issue, not in strict chronology. - J Greb (talk) 15:34, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Zainab Masood, more tabloid rumours
The sun says Zainab Masood from eastenders is going to play a villian in the new series, just to warn people to be aware but dont add it until we get a more reliable source.--Lerdthenerd (talk) 09:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

About Doctor Who in different countries
The series was also shown in Ukraine (twice on ICTV in 2008 and on QTB since February, 22nd 2010). Please, add this information to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Severnyi (talk • contribs) 13:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It is done.--Severnyi (talk) 00:20, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

The Doctor is back: Easter 2010
The BBC has confirmed the return of the Doctor on easter 2010. - --84.142.217.34 (talk) 19:43, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


 * And it looks like we have a target date for changing the logo - just after Easter, when the 1st episode has aired. - J Greb (talk) 12:02, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Just for the record, BBC America announced (and it can be sourced) that the US will get the new series beginning on April 17. I'm not sure how that's going to affect what's going on here, but given the constant changes here and on the episode lists page, I thought a heads up was in order. --Drmargi (talk) 15:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Title Card
Hey, just to point out that the Title card is the one used from 2007, rather than 2005 is written —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjohnson553 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * As they're virtually indistinguishable, I think it would be too confusing to put 2007. In any case, it will no doubt be replaced with the Moffatt era title card when the new series starts.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:58, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It should probably be changed now anyway, since the new logo is now is official branding for the series and is currently in use in advertisements. There are some remnant items with the old logo that came out in the last week or so -- a novel and an audio, plus Doctor Who Adventures magazine hasn't changed over yet -- but otherwise the new logo is in place. 68.146.81.123 (talk) 14:48, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Doctor Who Wii game
The sun has recently reported that the BBC has signed a £10 million deal with Nintendo to release Doctor Who games for the Wii and DS. I intend to start a new article on this under a sub-page of ym own user-page and was hoping for people to keep an eye out for more news on this and help me out. I'll post a link to the sub-page when it's ready. Looneyman (talk) 13:50, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I've been bold and created the sub-page. You can find it here. Looneyman (talk) 14:17, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Side note
This is a side note regarding the slow motion edit war over "series" and "season".

Right now there is a discussion well under way trying to come to a consensus over which term to use regarding the show's 1963-1989 run. Editing the article on that word choice while the discussion is on going is disruptive editing and continuing it can result in this article being protected, one or more of those continuing to edit war in the article getting blocked, or both.

IIUC, the Bold edit was to change from "season" to "series". Once that was Reverted, the change needs to be Discussed. This is standard BRD method. If the consensus is to use "series" through out the article, then it can be changed. Otherwise, the status quo holds.

- J Greb (talk) 14:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I thanks for your comments. I note that you do not seem to have been involved in editing this article recently.  Perhaps you would like to make a contribution to the discussion now.  Martin Hogbin (talk) 15:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

45mins?
Seen as this is BBC with no adverts i make the shows that aren't 25mins to be 55mins. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.181.244 (talk) 18:48, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The BBC might not have adverts during broadcast but broadcast times are usually chosen to be slots like 6.20pm-7.05pm. 45 minutes is the correct length as can be verified by simply watching an episode. Regards  So Why  18:55, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * In Countries with ads, episodes are (I believe) run at 60 mins with ad breaks. However, as pointed out above, 45 mins is the standard on the BBC - which is after all what it is made for and where it is shown first.  It's not like it's made for ads and they simply show it without ads - they make it without ads, and in other places the ads are added to bring it upto the full hour. 188.221.79.22 (talk) 10:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes and no--it's always been made with an eye towards sale to commercial broadcasters, and in the '60s used to include fades to black to facilitate breaks. MartinSFSA (talk) 10:56, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Broken Links
I have just run a WP:CHECKLINKS on this article, and it has identified and tagged references 20, 63, 64,70, 73 and 94 as being dead - we eb il oo bi l  ( talk ) 18:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Have you tried The Wayback Machine? Rodhull  andemu  18:19, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Ooh, never seen that before. I'll have a look - we eb il oo bi l  ( talk ) 18:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

List of Dr Who Exhibitions/Museums is missing the Exhibition at Longleat
I don't know anything about editing Wikipedia articles, but I noticed a piece of info missing, and wanted to bring it to someone's attention.

There was a Dr Who Museum/Exhibition at Longleat Safari Park from 1973-2003 - more details here - http://www.drwhoexhibitions.co.uk/longleat.htm

Rob 86.180.212.228 (talk) 22:58, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It's in the linked article here. I think it belongs there since its no longer open, and this article should perhaps list exhibitions connected with the current series. Rodhull  andemu  23:01, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Series or season
This is a British programme and the normal British word for a set of programmes is 'series'. What is the justification for using the normal US term 'season'? Martin Hogbin (talk) 14:48, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing your talking about the 1963-1989 series, back then the term season was and is still used to refer to the all the series of the classic run, it was even used and still being used by the BBC as well and it also helps to distingush the classic series 1-5 from the new series 1-5. Pro66 (talk) 15:26, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It's series in the UK.--Michig (talk) 15:28, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes it is series in the UK but the classic run used the term season. Pro66 (talk) 16:12, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Not as far as I remember. I watched most of them when I was a kid, and they were never referred to as 'seasons'. 'Season' was always an American term that was barely heard in the UK until probably the 80s. In the UK 'season' was used to refer to a channel's entire programming over a period of time.--Michig (talk) 16:38, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Michig, i advise you to look at the orginial series one page at the dr who website for the classic series which the bbc has used the term season rather then series and i also want you to look at the Doctor who enclopedia (edited by fans) article for the orginial series which ironically call it season one rather then series one. In the uk we may say series instead of season BUT seeing that the bbc and fans call the first 26 series of the programme as seasons then we are gonna go by season. Pro66 (talk) 16:58, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The wikis are totally irrelevant. The BBC page is describing these series decades after the fact.--Michig (talk) 17:27, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. Our article may not be great, but I think it explains the difference. It seems to be a longstanding convention here that it is "series" for the UK and "season" for the US, and I see no reason to depart from that, whatever the BBC want to call early episodes. WP:MOSTV is inconsistent, referring to both interchangeably, so I wouldn't place much reliance on that. Rodhull  andemu  17:36, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Regardless, the bbc calls all the series in the classic series as seasons no matter when they started to call it they still call it season 1-26 we are not in a place to disagree with them over their programming and Michig the wikis are of some relevence as those are edited by fans who refer series 1-26 as seasons. Pro66 (talk) 17:52, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

There is no doubt that the normal British word for a set of episodes is 'series'. The question is whether there is some special reason why some series of the Dr Who were referred to as seasons. Martin Hogbin (talk) 23:24, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The BBC's website is visible worldwide. It is doubtless written by younger people who do not understand such subtleties, but perhaps are aware that US TV series (with which, perhaps, they are more familiar) are chunked into seasons rather than series. Looking at the link above, there seems to be no obvious reason for such chunking. It's not as if the BBC are now trying to sell these into an American market, because as far as I know, many early episodes no longer exist since the tapes were wiped. Just put it down to cultural barbarism as "Seasons" in US television tend to be driven by the ratings sweeps, which fortunately do not happen in the UK. Rodhull  andemu  23:36, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree. Can anyone give any reason, apart from this website, why we should use the US rather than UK term?  Martin Hogbin (talk) 23:40, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * What snobs! Seasons on US TV are driven by the calendar, not some sort of cultural barbarism, and are highly regular.  Ratings "sweeps" periods identify subsets of time where program ratings are used to set advertising rates for the next time period.  At least know what you're talking about before you look down your long European noses at US TV.  Drmargi (talk) 00:34, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your corrective input, but that does not address the issue at hand, which is whether UK television programmes should be "chunked" into "series" or "seasons". I've already offered a reason why "season" is irrelevant to the early Dr Who broadcasts, and that is simply that they were not described as such at the time, and any later imposition of such a description is just irrelevant. That the BBC now describe these story arcs, sets of episodes, whatever, as "seasons" is irrelevant. I repeat: "there seems to be no obvious reason for such chunking", and ourselves imposing this structure is speculation. If an august body such as the BFI does so, fair enough; but we should absolutely not do so. Rodhull andemu  00:51, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Doctor Who series are referred to as "seasons" by fandom because of Jean-Marc Lofficier's highly influential Doctor Who Programme Guide, first published in 1981. He used the term "season," and it seems to have stuck. The convention was followed by David J. Howe and Stephen James Walker's Doctor Who:The Television Companion which when first published by BBC Books was referred to as "The Official Guide to Every TV Story" and is the source for the BBC website mentioned above. --Pawnkingthree (talk) 01:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * All very well, but we are an an encyclopedia, with standards and a Manual of Style. There's no particular reason why we should pander to fandom, simply because they do not use the formal language and structure which are the norms here. It does not matter whether we are discussing Quantum chromodynamics or Pikachu; what matters is that we provide an educational resource devoid of bias, however that is defined. In this particular case, we should go with the norm, and not attempt to apply novel or extraneous definitions. Rodhull  andemu  01:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * If it's to be regarded as purely a MOS issue then fair enough, but personally I would regard it as a WP:RS issue - if the sources go with "season" rather than "series", then so should we.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 01:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The question is twofold; there is the general consensus here that UK television programmes deal with "series" and US talk about "seasons". And there is the overall balance of [WP:RECENTISM|recently available sources]] that may talk about UK programmes as having "seasons"; however, this is not historically consistent, whatever the BBC says on its websites. They are not an encyclopedia, and as pointed out above, the people who write their website are not necessarily geared up to the outfall when an academically-directed enterprise tries to make sense of what they actually meant to say. Rodhull  andemu  01:34, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * As you seem to have made up your mind, and (judging by your edit summary) are irritated by what I've put forward, I'll bow out now and see what other editors have to say.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 01:54, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I suppose I was the one who set this off by reverting to "season" from "series" so I should probably put a comment in. In reality this comes down to one issue, really: reliable sources. As the BBC are, well, the BBC, they are pretty much considered the last word as far as these things go around here. Stating that "this is an encyclopedia" is not a valid argument one way or the other. If a reliable source can be provided to say that the classic series had series, I'd say that there'd be an argument for changing it. However, until one can be provided it should remain the way the BBC puts it. Lost on Belmont (talk) 02:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Does anyone dispute either of these statements?


 * 1) This article should be written in British English.
 * 2) The standard British English term for a set of episodes is 'series'. Martin Hogbin (talk) 10:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't dispute the first point, but there are uses of 'Season' in the UK. I should know, I live in the UK. Looneyman (talk) 10:52, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, there are occasional uses of many non-British terms in the UK but the normal British term for a set of episodes is a series. Do you not agree? Martin Hogbin (talk) 11:07, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

The situation has been explained above: Jean-Marc Lofficier used the term 'season' in relation to DR Who series, this usage was followed by the book 'Doctor Who:The Television Companion' and this became the basis for the BBC web site. There is nothing anywhere saying that the BBC have now decided to use the term 'season' in general to mean 'series', or that they have made a decision to use the term in specific relation to Dr Who. It is simply a US term that has crept into a BBC web site. The standard UK word is 'series' and that is what we should user here. I have changed it. Martin Hogbin (talk) 13:13, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I've reverted it for the time being. The problem is that you still haven't established that this was what was used during the original run. You haven't yet provided any proof that the BBC is wrong and, at east for the time being, they are the most reliable source. Lost on Belmont (talk) 13:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It does not matter what term was used during the original run, although it was undoubtedly 'series' just because this was, and still is, the British word for a set of episodes. What matters is that we stick to the standard used throughout this article to use British English.  The BBC web site is not a source in this respect, it makes no claim that the normal British term has changed to 'season' it just happens to use this word (for reasons explained above).  If you want to use a non-standard British English term it is necessary to show that this is the term normally used in a specific case.  No one has even attempted to do this.  The header at the top of the article asks us to use British English, that is what we must do, irrespective of the BBC.  Martin Hogbin (talk) 13:58, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You have provided speculation as to why the BBC refers to the classics as seasons, not proof. And your comment It does not matter what term was used during the original run is basically to say that current convention of naming is series. Yet your argument of the BBC not being reliable because it is recentism would fly in the face of this. Together, your argument is boiled down to I don't like it and I want it this way. You still need to provide a source that series is the correct term for these instances. (Don't take this as an attack against you or your opinion. This is merely an attempt at making sure that everything can be verified. If you can provide a source then yes, this should be changed and so should all other references to season wikiwide.) Until you provide this I am going to revert. I suggest we take a vote for series or season or possibly get a third opinion to avoid an edit war. Lost on Belmont (talk) 14:29, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I do not need proof of anything, there is already a recorded consensus to use British English throughout this article. I have explained that the word 'series' was and still is the British English word for a set of episodes.  Do you doubt this? Several native British English speakers have confirmed that here and elsewhere.  On what basis do you challenge this?  Martin Hogbin (talk) 15:48, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You misunderstand. I do not argue with the fact that series is the term most used in British English. This, I am certain, all parties can and will agree on. My argument is context. If the BBC decided to (or decides to) go against the normal usage of series for season, then the proper term in this instance would be season, whatever the norm might be. If the BBC called them seasons when they were made and aired, then season is the proper term. If the BBC used the term series when they were made and aired, but later decided to retroactively call them seasons (which would be utterly bizarre if true) then it should go with the norm and the term originally used. The problem is that while the general usage is series, you have not provided any proof that the BBC followed this. So far, your opinion of the BBC website aside, the BBC are calling them seasons. To go against this a reliable source needs to be cited saying that they were indeed called series and that series is the proper term.

I present a similar American situation. Railroads owned by Samuel Insull provided a service called Merchandise Despatch. The proper American spelling is "dispatch". However, going by "proper" American English to refer to this as ''Merchandise Dispatch" is wrong even if it does follow the local rules because the proper term, as given by the railroads, was spelled with an "e".

So far, the proper term for the classics is seasons, as put forth by the BBC. If the current situation presented by the Beeb can be proved wrong with a reliable source, I will switch my stance on this. My argument is not about British vs. American, it is about reliable sources and that is all. Your argument against seems to be that the BBC is not a reliable source in this matter. Lost on Belmont (talk) 16:27, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree as Doctor who is produced by the BBC and the BBC says season and most fans say season (including me who is a native british english speaker) i rather go with the use of season but if its proven otherwise in a reliable source then like lost on belmont only then i will switch. Pro66 (talk) 16:34, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Allow me to play Devil's Advocate. While there are innumerable sources proving the term season was used by the producers in the '80s and '90s, and apparently exclusively used by reference works and fandom during these decades, what if it is demonstrable that series was the term in the '60s? Would that make the common usage of season for '60s episodes also recentism? MartinSFSA (talk) 17:00, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Ultimately we should go with what our sources tell us. The classic run has consistently been labelled, by both fans and more importantly the production office who made the show, as being divided into seasons, not series, since at least the early 1980s if not earlier. Whether we particularly like this is ultimately irrelevant. Yes, series is the traditional term in British Englsh overall (and as a native speaker myself its how I'd generally split things up, but I've always known Doctor Who to be an exception since I started watching it as a child in the early 90s) but for historical reasons (something to do with the show being filmed and broadcast in a manner similar to the traditional US production model where the show was being broadcast with episodes from that season still being filmed rather than the more traditional British method of getting everything 'in the can' so to speak) season has become associated with this show in particular and has the official imprimatur of the production crew. If the production office say that Warriors of the Deep through to The Twin Dilemma form Season 21, and we can verify that this is the preferred sourced terminology, then that's what we should go with over and above linguistic prescriptiveness. -  Chrism  would like to hear from you 17:39, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

We have some progress, we seem to agree that we must use British English in this article and that the normal British English term for a set of episodes is a 'series'. Does anyone disagree with this?

The argument thus appears to be that because a BBC web site uses the term 'season' one of two things must be true:


 * 1) At some time the word 'season' was standard in British English. This is just incorrect, as can easily be verified.
 * 2) The BBC made a decision, for some reason, to refer to some (or all) of the series of Dr Who as seasons. This should be possible to verify, and by this I mean that there should be a source that tells us that the BBC made a decision to use the word 'season' and preferably gives us a reason why this decision was made. The fact that the word 'season' is used on one BBC web site does not verify this fact.  The onus is on those who want to use a non-standard term to show that this term is the preferred term in the UK (because the article is agreed to be in British English) for this specific case.  If this evidence cannot be provided then 'series' is the term that we must use. Martin Hogbin (talk) 19:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes this is a British show with British terminology. However as has been pointed out the British production, distribution, and transmission/broadcast company refers to the classics as seasons. I see it as the onus being on those who want to apply the rule rather than acknowledge the exception. I can't find any archives of websites from the 1960s to see what the Beeb advertised it as in the first instance and i watched it on tvo as a child so those promos i saw are irrelevant to this discussion. I tried gnews but all i kept finding were "NAME, a doctor who did ..." type articles from the 1960s and 1970s. If the BBC website, a reliable source, is to be accused of WP:RECENTISM then someone should be able to supply a proof to back up such claim. The argument that the BBC website is programmed for a worldwide audience that is more familiar with the use of "season" is negated but the explicit use of the term "series" on the website for the episodes from 2005-2010. And by the way Dr(.) Who is not the same character as Doctor Who. Sure the redirect is done for simplicity of use for the common reader but for the more informed fan Dr Who refers to Dr. Who (Dalek films), the alternative character from the 1960s films that bares only a passing similarity beyond name to the character from the BBC programme.  delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 21:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You say, 'the British production, distribution, and transmission/broadcast company refers to the classics as seasons', what is the evidence for this, is it just one website? Martin Hogbin (talk) 23:27, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that would be a long way of saying BBC as a whole. I do not live in UK so i have never had in my possession a physical piece of promotional material about Doctor Who from BBC. If you want to get into tiny details then 2005 could be argued to be a season since it was produced by BBC Cymru Wales with money from CBC. The 2008 series' on bbc.co.uk showing the use of "series" . The Doctor Who Classics website on bbc.co.uk for the the First Doctor showing the use of "season" . The 2010 series on bbc.co.uk showing the use of "series" . And if you want to get uber picky about this then how about the BBC archives "The Genesis of Doctor Who" wherein it is spoken of as, "A series of stories linked to form a continuing serial; thus if each story ran for 6 or 7 episodes there would be about 8 stories needed for 52 weeks of the serial." And yes this does raise a different matter as way back when the series was in pre-production and early promotion it WAS called Dr. Who. The Radio Times article makes use of "series" in speaking of the forthcoming première  but the language used there is the same as it would be in Canada or United States (ie "series" is interchangeable with "show" or "programme", not "season", in that context).
 * Not that the following are all considered reliable but
 * http://www.doctorwho-episodes.com/ ,
 * http://epguides.com/DoctorWho/ ,
 * http://homepage.ntlworld.com/john.seymour1/ukbookguide/Series/DoctorWho/index.html, and
 * https://www.zoklet.net/totse/en/ego/science_fiction/dwpgv3.html
 * all use "season" for the classics and if they include the current programme speak of it by "series", while
 * http://www.doctorwhoepisodeguide.com/
 * refers to all of them as "series" but begins numbering over again with the 9th Doctor, and then there is
 * http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Contrib/SciFi/DrWho/
 * which is from UK and uses "season" for the entire show. And i know how much it is hated to cite Wikipedia itself but this featured list is just too good to not mention
 * List of Doctor Who serials
 * as it demonstrates what i am saying and shows there is an established treatment for this issue. If anything a customised infobox with the paramater "num_serials" would be appropriate; the list here on WP uses the term and it is how BBC first internally spoke of and publicly promoted Doctor Who. As to when BBC changed to speak of the classics as "seasons" i have not found, so it could be as long ago as 1963. To claim WP:RECENTISM in the BBC's use of "season" without specific proof is simply an opinion. delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 03:01, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that detailed response. You demonstrate clearly that the term 'season' is very widely used.  This is not surprising since it is the normal US term for a set of episodes.  It is, however, not relevant to this discussion, where the claim is that, for some, as yet unexplained, reason the BBC decided to officially refer to some of the earlier series as 'seasons' but later ones as 'series'.  There is absolutely no evidence of an official policy decision by anyone to refer to some of the series as seasons.


 * There is already an established and recorded consensus to use British English throughout this article. The only reason that we might consider using a non-UK term is that it was officially designated by the BBC.  There is no evidence whatsoever that this is the case. Martin Hogbin (talk) 08:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The fact that the BBC have consistently used the word season over series for, at the very least, the duration of my life time would seem fairly conclusive evidence that a decision was made at some point. We may not have a minute of the meeting or what have you, but we have the results of it. -  Chrism  would like to hear from you 14:09, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You say that, 'the BBC have consistently used the word season over series for, at the very least, the duration of my life time'. What is your evidence for this? Martin Hogbin (talk) 17:22, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Various licensed books (none of which I currently have me with at this house unfortunately), including the 25th Anniversary book 25 Glorious Years from 1989 and 1998's Television Companion all refer to seasons, along with the previously mentioned Programme Guide. Independently produced books also use the term, as has been pointed out further up the discussion. The current BBC website consistently uses seasons and has done as long as I can remember. A quick look at the wayback machine such as here shows that they;ve been doing this for at least several years. That seasons has been and continues to be used in this specific context is consistent with the evidence. Can I prove that series hasn't been used? Well, no, I can't prove a negative but then again nobody has actually presented any evidence whatsoever that series was the normal term used. Having shown evidence that seasons is regularly used and has been for sometime, the onus is on you to show that series is regularly used. Anything else is OR.

To use a slightly weird example, we have the article Parliament of Ghana. Now strictly, since Ghana uses a presidential system of government where the head of state is elected seperately from the legislature, Congress or some such similar term would be more accurate, Parliament strictly referring to the legislature in a parliamentary system of government. Yet the constitution of Ghana calls it a Parliament, and our sources call it a Parliament, so thats what we call it, over and above how the term is traditionally defined. The term series is the most traditional term in British English yes, yet our sources tend to show that season is preferred in this specific instance. That therefore is what we should go with. The point of an encyclopedia is to show how the world is, not how we may like it to be. That's the whole point of our policies relating to sourcing and verifiability. -  Chrism  would like to hear from you 18:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

As no-one has mentioned the WikiProject Doctor Who Manual of style yet, I'll quote from the "Terminology" section: "Although against UK convention, the term "season" is accepted usage for the classic series."--Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Doctor Who Manual of style seems to have been written by one person, with a tiny amount of help from one other and an IP. Martin Hogbin (talk) 13:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Just a note, the Manual of Style was discussed in the talk pages before it was codified on the WikiProject page by the above people. DonQuixote (talk) 13:55, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Fine so the Dr Who MoS is just a repeat of the opinions of the people here. Martin Hogbin (talk) 17:22, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Here's a source to consider: The History of Broadcasting in the United Kingdom, vol. 5: Competition, published in 1995 by Oxford University Press - contains "Single espiodes of the different Dr. Who stories were usually conceived of in 'seasons' of twenty-six episodes, each lasting twenty-five minutes, and their titles reflect shifts in preoccupation." - this is referring to the very early programmes from the 1960s, so is a fairly convincing argument for using 'season' as it seems to have been specifically used at the time. See also the next page which again refers to 'seasons'. 'Series' is the correct term in general for British English articles but in this case, if they called them 'seasons' at the time, let's go with it.--Michig (talk) 19:06, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Martin, in saying that none of the websites i mention in my detailed response are relevant because of typical American tendencies you make a bit of a misrepresentation. Four of Six independent sites cited make use of "season" for the classics and speak of the current episodes by "series", which is what most everyone else here is saying. Or to put it in different words, the majority of sites regarding episodes of Doctor Who that i could find respect the terminology in use by the BBC since as far back as any of us can recall or/and prove. The book cited by Michig speaks of seasons at the bottom of page 425 and i would consider Oxford University Press to be a reliable publisher. The exception to the typical use of the British "series" has clearly been shown from both primary sources and colloquial usage over many years. If you really want to use "series" then i feel the onus is on you to prove cause for it, after all you are requesting a change from the accepted standard for this subject matter. delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 01:06, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * lost, I do not say that 'because of American tendencies you make a bit of a misrepresentation', indeed I do not claim that any particular form of English is better than any other. The point is that there is a long-standing and recorded consensus to use British English in this article.  Martin Hogbin (talk) 08:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not saying that you said what you are saying i said you said. Simply, i said it. In no way was a quoting you. I was describing your actions. Sites that respectfully use both "season" and "series" regarding the classic and current episodes respectively can not be accused of being American simply for their use of the word "season". If that were the case then bbc.co.uk would be irrelevant for its use of "season". Just because i do not live in UK does not mean i don't know the difference between a North American season and a British series. Even the great online retailer Amazon.com acknowledges the difference between the classic seasons and the current series.  If the use of "season" truly is completely and absolutely irrelevant to television programming in UK at the current time and throughout history then someone should tell the folks who run the Doctor Who classics section of bbc.co.uk :P From the information so far presented here the terminology regarding the classics appears to have been: Serials (1962-3) → Seasons (sometime later 1960s) → Series (by 1973) → Seasons (?-2010).  There was, from what i understand, a rather long standing consensus prior to your motion for change that "season" be used for 1-26 and series for 27-32 (1-6). In case it is not clear, i am not American. I am going to have to agree with Rodhullandemu that this is lame, though i do disagree with the comparison to Coronation Street et al. as this has been considered an exceptional circumstance and to say it is wrong simply because it is not the established normal used by contemporaries is unfair. If you wish to refer to me in a shortened form the commonly used and accepted abbreviation is delirious not "lost". My personal opinion is, "What is a British programme doing using 'seasons'?" So i started googling and reading; for Doctor Who it is more common to speak of the classics as seasons by Brits and Americans alike. If you wish to avoid any pretence of neologism then may i repeat my call for num_serials.  delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 19:57, 7 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, this really is getting into storm in a teacup territory. I have unearthed my "Doctor Who 10th Anniversary Special" edition of the Radio Times, from 1973, which throughout refers to "series"; the "Guinness Television Encyclopedia" from 1995 does not mention "seasons". However, this is more an issue about style issues than reliable sources; whatever those sources state, we reserve the right here to apply consensus in a (perhaps futile) attempt to enforce uniformity. This idea that UK television programmes should be demarcated by "seasons", as opposed to "series" appears to me to be a neologism that, although and perhaps supported by sources, is not reflected in any other long-running UK television programme, such as Coronation Street, The Bill, or Eastenders. "Season" is an American import and irrelevant to the way UK networks/stations schedule their programmes. Rodhull  andemu  01:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The Season 17 trailer seems to use both: Etron81 (talk) 22:48, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I just realised that "season" in this case would probably refer to the Fall TV season Etron81 (talk) 22:53, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

It is important that we do get this right
Contrary to what some may think, I am not adamant that we must use the term 'series' throughout this article. What I do believe we must do is have a proper and recorded rationale for using whatever term that we decide to use, to avoid endless further discussion on the subject in the future. At present there are two factors which I believe are not disputed by anyone. These are:


 * There is a consensus, in accordance with general WP policy and based on the fact that the series originated in the UK, to use British English throughout this article.
 * The normal UK term for a set of programmes is 'series'.

On this basis the proper term to use throughout the article is the 'series' and in order to depart from that default position we need to show that there is a special reason why the term 'season' is more appropriate here. Two possible reasons would be:


 * The BBC decided to use the word 'season' to apply to some or all sets of of the Dr Who episodes.
 * There was widespread usage of the term 'season' with reference to Dr Who in the UK at some relevant time

An invalid reasons to depart from the current consensus to use British English is:

Of course there are! Many web sites use American English, especially in the world of media. There is no reason why they should not do so, they can use whatever language they like. This simply shows that sites that choose to use American English use American English terms. There is no reason for us to copy them here because we have already agreed to use British English for this article.
 * There are many web sites that use the word 'season' with reference to Dr Who.
 * However many of these sites are British. They're not using American English, they're using a word that is historically used in this context even by British English speakers. The argument doesn't really hold. Nobody is arguing we should use an American English term; the argument is that we should use the term customarily used in British English in conjunction with this show. -  Chrism  would like to hear from you 16:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You think that British English speakers have always (or at some time) used the word 'season' specifically in relation to sets of Dr Who episodes? Why do you think this is?
 * I have added two sections below relating to this possibility.


 * The statements claiming the consensus to use British English are valid. Regarding your (Martin's) statement "An invalid reasons to depart from the current consensus to use British English is: There are many web sites that use the word 'season' with reference to Dr Who." it appears that there is a fundamental setting aside of the existing consensus as found at WP:WHO/MOS that has already established the use of "season" as a specific exception to the standard use of British English in relation to the classics. The established consensus is not what you are presenting it to be. For ease of review see Talk:Doctor Who/Archive 6, as well as the use of "series" in the talk archive and the use of "season" in the talk archive.
 * The WP:WHO/MOS (currently) reads:
 * Season: A year's worth of episode broadcasts from the classic series. Although against UK convention, the term "season" is accepted usage for the classic series. Its first usage in an "official" tie-in appears to have been in the first Programme Guide in 1981; prior to that there appears to have been no particular convention. In the new series, they changed to use "series" and reset the numbering.
 * Series: A year's worth of episode broadcasts from the new series. Note that this can also be used to refer to the show as a whole, though this may occasionally be confusing to readers. In these cases, use instead either "show" or "programme."
 * Each of the sub-section headings you created below are definitive, to the point of dismissing the counter-heading. A more impartial styling would be "Examples of 'season' / 'series' used 'by the BBC' / 'in common usage'." Pointedly dismissing all common usage that takes place outside the UK does not show a neutral and open approach to the discussion. Doctor Who is shown and has fans all over the planet. Many people outside of the UK, including myself, recognise and use the British terminology for British shows, and in the case of Doctor Who also use the exception to the standard British terminology regarding the classics (which is a new approach on my part since joining this discussion). The evidence thus far submitted, both accepted and rejected, shows that there is no definitive, continuous-from-the-beginning official or colloquial preference in terminology. The closest to that is the 29 years (1981-present) of the use of "season" by the BBC and the majority of the global fandom.


 * In a similar vein the show Law & Order: UK makes use of the term "series" even though the origin of the show is American. Here in Canada series one of Law & Order | UK contains 13 episodes, six of which were broadcast months before their British transmission. In the UK those 13 episodes are split over two series. I do not recall ever hearing of "season one" of Law & Order | UK here in Canada. My point being that just because something comes from outside the UK does not mean it de facto dismisses relevant convention and accepted usage regarding its British-sourced subject matter. delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 09:31, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

The BBC decided to use the word 'season' to apply to some or all sets of Dr Who episodes
As stated above this would be a valid reason to use 'season' here. There is some evidence that this might be the case. If we can find reliable sources to show that the BBC did make a decision to use the term 'season' then that would be an interesting fact in itself which we should show in the article (to prevent further arguing if for no other reason). Martin Hogbin (talk) 13:43, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Evidence the BBC did use the term 'season'
Michig quotes The History of Broadcasting in the United Kingdom, vol. 5: Competition, published in 1995 by Oxford University Press - contains "Single espiodes of the different Dr. Who stories were usually conceived of in 'seasons' of twenty-six episodes, each lasting twenty-five minutes, and their titles reflect shifts in preoccupation." - this is referring to the very early programmes from the 1960s, so is a fairly convincing argument for using 'season' as it seems to have been specifically used at the time.

Current BBC web site,

Evidence the BBC did not use the term 'season'
Rodhull quotes: "Doctor Who 10th Anniversary Special" edition of the Radio Times, from 1973, which throughout refers to "series".

"Guinness Television Encyclopedia" from 1995 does not mention "seasons".

There was widespread usage of the term 'season' with reference to Dr Who in the UK at some relevant time
It is also claimed that this might be the case

Does it really Matter?
Regardless of what they were called during the classic series, they are referred to as seasons NOW (probably to avoid confusion with the number reset for the new series) - just look at the website. 188.221.79.22 (talk) 10:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC) The BBC website refers to the modern era as series, but to the classic era as seasons (I think this is because they refer to the classic era as the "classic series", but that is my own viewpoint) - we eb il oo bi l  ( talk ) 12:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - Steven Moffat, the current Executive Producer for Doctor Who, seems to refer to them as series (DWM 417, Production Notes)
 * I guess in 'The Great Scheme of Things' it does not matter that much, but we are supposed to be an encyclopedia with a degree of consistancy in our terminology. There is a long-standing and recorded consensus here to use British English in accordance with WP policy.  We should therefore stick to the British term, which is 'series' unless there is a compelling reason not to do so.  So far no one has given sufficient reason to depart from the established consensus. Martin Hogbin (talk) 15:40, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * And i again repeat, there is an established consensus to use "season" as an exception to standard British English. It is found in the WP:WHO/MOS. You are the one most adamant to ignore its existence, evidenced by almost every comment you have made in this discussion. You need to recognise the consensus to use British English is not being challenged but that the consensus to use this exception to British English is what we are here discussing. And if i may point out, "encyclopedia" is the American spelling of the British "encyclopædia" or "encyclopaedia". The degree of consistency used should recognise both British English and that the BBC has used "season" for the better part of 3 decades in this context (in speaking of the now-classic era) and most of the world has followed the BBC's lead in this. It was "season" before this discussion was started. You have not given a compelling reason to change. We should stick with "season" per the BBC, majority colloquial usage on a global level over decades up to the present day, and the previously existing consensus. delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 18:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:MOS is a guideline. Verifiability is policy. There have been several reliable sources given that the series first shown in 2005 is commonly called series 1, and that first shown in 1975 is commonly called season 22. We are quoting the sources. The existing consensus is expressed in WP:WHO/MOS and no evidence has been given to change it. Edgepedia (talk) 19:42, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * If you have evidence that the BBC, and by that I do not mean a single website, have use 'seasons' consistently for 3 decades please add it to the appropriate section above. Martin Hogbin (talk) 19:58, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Martin there comes a point where the circle is no longer fun to go around. I have begun to feel like the Lady with the Spinning Head. If you want to change the terminology used you should be presenting your case not having everyone else mount a defense which you simply challenge and dismiss. The onus is on you to show cause for the use of "series" as you are the one requesting the change. The first time this was discussed, which was used to form the MOS, it was simple. Nothing has officially changed since then. I see no proof that it is in error. I will not and can not give an accounting of the mysterious ways that the BBC has decided to describe the collections of episodes on each day of the past 47 years. This appears to be an original of the species in the annals of British television. In the absence of proof of a change it is reasonable to believe that no change occurred and then was reversed, thus unless and until someone finds something official between 1981 and the present that shows the use of "series 23" it is reasonable to believe it was called "season 23" in 1986 just as it is today.
 * Just because one website, which is rather official by the way, says so does not mean simply by your saying that it is insufficient make it so in the eyes of others. As one such person i am comfortable saying that Doctor Who is a collection of stories for boys and girls of all ages and from all lands and that many of us look to bbc.co.uk for information on Doctor Who. Is it more popular than WP? I don't known. I presented other sites and you dismissed all of them as being irrelevant Americanisms, even the site with a .ac.uk domain.
 * The revert that used WP:ENGVAR and WP:RETAIN as reasons to put the infobox back to "series" failed to acknowledge the consensus found in the Doctor Who MOS and if not for it being a very contentious edit i would have long ago undone said edit. Instead, i am here discussing this. When i look at the world of Doctor Who i do not see this as a great issue that will affect my enjoyment of the programme but i too feel it is important to get it right.
 * Let me ask you this, Where is your evidence that the BBC refers to the 26th grouping of episodes as "Series 26" ? "The Guinness Television Encyclopedia" is not something i would automatically consider reliable in this as there is the reasonable presumption that they applied their own Manual Of Style. At bare minimum we have shown you cause for the presumption of historical use of and confirmation of the present day use of "Season 26" from an official source as well as the many examples of colloquial usage cited by myself and a few of our fellow editors. If that is not enough for you ...
 * The carousel is closed, the children have gone, and night has fallen. Can we please put this to rest? We appear to be running to stand still and i am feeling numb. U2 song links courtesy of me and my Achtung Baby just to be a little delirious :D  delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 06:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * If you want to stop discussing this subject that is fine with me but some editors here believe that the current terminology in this article is incorrect. Perhaps you could provide a link to where the consensus to use 'season' was reached. Martin Hogbin (talk) 19:25, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * This appears to be the discussion unless I missed a different one in my search Etron81 (talk) 19:50, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Martin, so far in this discussion users such as Chrism, Pawnkingthree, Lost on Belmont, Delirious, 188.221.79.22 and me (total of 6) would prefer to use season or suggest to use season over series due to the BBC website (bbc being producer/broadcaster/distrubter) calling the classic series 'seasons' rather then 'series' and along with the fandom British or gloabally calling it seasons which the WP:WHO/MOS reflects that fact, so far the only people that have believe the terminology to be incorrect and would want to change that is you and two other people (total of 3 people) and so far all i have seen you say is that season is american and series is british. I am sorry but the majority of the people in this discussion and the website of the show along with most fans disagree with you and i think thats enough consensus enough and if you want to see previous consesus im pretty sure others would happy to supply it. Pro66 (talk) 19:59, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. The only question really to be asked here now is: Does anyone dispute that there is a consensus here for using 'season'? It's seems unlikely that we are going to get everyone to agree on which should be used, so we go with WP:CONSENSUS. I think it would be useful to add something to the article to the effect that the episodes were conceived as 'seasons' - Briggs confirms this.--Michig (talk) 20:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Once more, with feeling i point out another example. The online Radio Times guide to Doctor Who makes use of "season" for the classics and "series" for the modern episode groupings. See An Unearthly Child and Rose → The Parting Of The Ways . This would be a second example of the BBC usage of "season" and "series". As i have said above i live nowhere near the British Library to be able to go read the print version of the various issues as is suggested by User:217.35.252.97 in the section below and it appears that they are not available online. The discussion in Project Talk Archive 15 (September 2007) is more comprehensive than the one i found earlier in Talk Archive 6 of this page (August-October 2006). Both of them resolve to the use of "season". delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 00:31, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I accept that there is a majority of editors her now who would prefer to use the term 'season', but that is not a acceptable reason to do so any more than it would be acceptable for those editors to change the name to 'Dr Whom'. There is a need to show that the term 'season' was intentionally and consistently used by the BBC to describe the sets of episodes; this has not been done.
 * I have read the earlier discussions on the subject and it would seem that one of the major reasons for preferring the terminology 'seasons' is that 'series' makes descriptions harder as the whole thing is also a series. This may be true but we cannot change facts just because they make life hard.
 * I also note that the whole 'season' thing is debunked here, where it says, The twenty-six separate runs of Doctor Who were never referred to as "seasons" by anybody until Jean-Marc Lofficier misused the term in his Programme Guide in 1981. Rather than being corrected in later editions to the more correct "series", it was adopted by the "super-fans" and eventually spread throughout TV as the Yuppie generation gradually took control of the airwaves. The term "season", in British TV at least, was used to describe the entire output of a particular channel over a certain part of the year. "Seasons" generally ran from the New Year to Easter, from Easter to mid-summer, from mid-summer to autumn, and from autumn to Christmas. Individual shows, including Doctor Who, were always referred to as serials or series, and each new run of Doctor Who was announced on air as being "a new series", never "a new season". Technically speaking, Doctor Who was a series of serials.
 * I am taking this discussion to the Doctor Who MoS. Martin Hogbin (talk) 16:55, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Didn't i mention num_serials a couple of times already? And site a source from the BBC circa 1963. Clearly the 1981 "error" has received widespread acceptance even from the BBC. This you quote was mentioned in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Doctor Who/Archive 15. The thing to keep in mind is that the statement made on that website which you are quoting is no more verified than if i were to copy it and produce a counter-argument on my website. Citing unsourced original research from a person or website that does not satisfy WP:RS is not the most compelling stance, but i do appreciate that you have begun to look into this yourself.  delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 22:13, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * To grasp the level of opinion this site represents, with its unidentified author and complete lack of sources for its contentions, scan down to the discussion of the numbering of the Doctors near the bottom of the page. That should nicely clear up any questions regarding the reliability of this particular source.  (BTW, count me in as in favor of the use of seasons even if I am a lowly American.) Drmargi (talk) 22:25, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Dr Who Manual of Style

 * According to the WP:WHO/MOS,
 * Season is A year's worth of episode broadcasts from the classic series. Although against UK convention, the term "season" is accepted usage for the classic series. Its first usage in an "official" tie-in appears to have been in the first Programme Guide in 1981; prior to that there appears to have been no particular convention. In the new series, they changed to use "series" and reset the numbering.


 * and


 * Series is A year's worth of episode broadcasts from the new series. Note that this can also be used to refer to the show as a whole, though this may occasionally be confusing to readers. In these cases, use instead either "show" or "programme."


 * Apart from an unsigned comment on the Dr Who MoS page, from Martin Hogbin asserting that this is not justified, This seems fairly solidly to accept the anomally. Frankly, life is too short - even for a Time Lord - for this discussion to go on for much longer, and I would suggest it is in the best interests of all to live by the MoS and leave the word Season in place within this article, even if it does smack of Americanisation. Meanwhile, I'm going back to watching today's episode! Regards, Lynbarn (talk) 17:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The only real reason for this is the myth that "season = america, series = Britain" - is there actually a source for that ANYWHERE? 188.221.79.22 (talk) 13:35, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Radio Times
The Radio Times magazine, the weekly television listings magazine from the BBC has been going since 1923. It should be a simple matter to visit the British Library and read what the Radio Times had to say every time a new series of Doctor Who started. I'd bet that the magazine says "New series" every time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.35.252.97 (talk) 22:54, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow
So you just wasted almost an entire discussion page deciding wheither doctor who uses series or season?

As of today, it's season for 1963-1989, and series from 2005-2010.

Let's hope this is over, it's April now and, above in the radio times bit, it's still going on! --77.99.231.37 (talk) 15:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * This is not the full discussion. It spans 3 pages and 4 sections. From here the saga moved to The project MOS talk page, then at my suggestion was relocated to  Doctor Who Project talk page and then there is a RfC on this, on the same page. Happy reading :S  Here's a spoiler; as of writing this the result is no change - keep WP:WHO/MOS as it was - seasons 1-26, series 1-6.  delirious  &amp;  lost  ☯ ~hugs~ 13:07, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh right, sorry. --77.99.231.37 (talk) 13:56, 25 April 2010 (UTC)