Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doctor Who story chronology


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was no consensus to delete, default to keep. I would not be surprised to see the article back at AfD, though, if the sourcing problem is not addressed within a reasonable period of time.

Doctor Who story chronology

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Prodded with the reason: "This has the potential to be very large (there are well over a hundred books out already) and does not provide anything that can't be found elsewhere in categories and other articles.". Prod was removed, and a less than civil comment added by the author to my talk page for which he was warned, though he removed the warning. Also, I suspect an attempt to fit the books into the tv series chronology may count as WP:OR. Jamoche 05:09, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment.  AfD addresses the content of the article, not editor behavior, such as alleged incivility or removing a warning on his talk page. Those do not belong on this page and serve only to obscure the real question of whether or not the article should be deleted according to WP policies and consensus.  (Besides, the editor's comment to you was only slightly uncivil, mostly just annoyed about the PROD and wanted you to remove it; there're much worse civility issues than that happening many times every day on Wikipedia.) --Parzival418 Hello 05:49, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll strike that out. It's not why I AfD'd - I think the prod was valid. --Jamoche 05:53, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you, well done; I appreciate your good faith decision on that. I'm not ready with a comment on the AfD itself yet, I need to consider it for a bit.  --Parzival418 Hello 06:15, 29 July 2007 (UTC)--Parzival418 Hello 06:15, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Neutral It depends on whether or not these episodes are notable.  Looks to me like the real world coverage comes from fan sites.  Correct me if I'm wrong Corpx 06:44, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment There are real world sources for the TV episodes, books and audios (see Chronology of the Doctor Who universe and my comment below). The problem is that this page is trying to combine different sources into a single chronology, which can't be done without violating WP:OR. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clarify page title to disambiguate. I've learned a lot about this from the discussion below, so I'm changing my comment to keep. My prior comments follow here, and are struck out.  Here are my reasons for the change to "keep":
 * This article does not duplicate the other Dr. Who articles, it approaches the subject from a different direction, providing additional value.
 * WP:OR is not sufficient grounds for deletion, when if the article can be improved, WP:OR removed and WP:NPOV and WP:V satisfied. According to further discussion below, it looks like that could be possible with this article.  Before deleting on grounds of WP:OR, the article should be tagged for references and editors should have the chance to bring it up to standards.
 * The length of the article is not a reason to delete, per WP:NOTPAPER - we have many long articles not being AfD's due to length.
 * The title of the page should be changed to disambiguate from Chronology of the Doctor Who universe. This article is about the stages of Dr Who's life, not the chronology of the story/universe, so it should be titled appropriately.  DAB tags should be added to both articles.
 * The long and involved discussion on this page shows that this topic is of interest to many editors and readers. If after additional work it turns out that WP:OR cannot be fully removed from the article, it can be AfD'd later.  But so much information has come up from this discussion, that editors have a solid basis to dig in and provide WP:Reliable sources for the article.  Items that can't be sourced can be moved to the talk page while sourcing is in process.   Deletion now, after so much new info about sources has come up, would be premature.  --Parsifal Hello 02:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 *  'Neutral. Keep or Merge into Chronology of the Doctor Who universe.   Now that I've had a chance to review these articles, I see that this article does not exactly duplicate other similar articles.  The difference is that in this one, books and radio/audio episodes are listed in addition to TV and film.  That is valid information that does not appear elsewhere, so either we should keep this article, or we could merge it into the film/TV chronology article.  The two pages have in common the idea of listing the stories in chronological sequence as they occur in the story, rather than as they were broadcast or printed (since Dr Who involves time travel, that is an important distinction). Unless there is a WP policy reason for deletion, the article should stay.  That said, it may be preferable to merge it into Chronology of the Doctor Who universe, although there might be reasons to keep them separate. Regarding the nominator's comment that This has the potential to be very large - that is not a reason to delete, per WP:NOTPAPER - we have plenty of very long articles.  I don't know enough about the stories to make that determination.  If they are not merged, and this one is kept, then they should be clearly disambiguated.    --Parsifal Hello 07:18, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I have re-edited my comment to change to Neutral because after reading the further discussions here, I realize I don't have enough knowledge of this surprisingly complicated topic to make an informed choice. Now I want to watch the DVDs though,... how will I find any time to edit Wikipedia?  Maybe I could watch them and then go back to the past to re-edit my comment in this debate after I am more familiar with the topic.  That probably won't work though, so I'll keep my comment at neutral. --Parsifal Hello 03:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Changing to Neutral — see below. Reluctant delete or redirect to Chronology of the Doctor Who universe. The notability of the episodes isn't the issue — there are plenty of reliable sources about Doctor Who episodes, novels, and audios (e.g. the I, Who series of guides, AHistory, etc.)  The problem is that it's not really possible to say definitively what order the stories take place in.  It's fine when you're dealing with the Missing Adventures, which say on their covers "This story takes place between such-and-such and so-and-so".  But if you're going to try to place the audios and novels in together with the TV stories, you'll have to use some criterion to determine, for example, whether Time of Your Life comes before or after The Holy Terror.  Both are set in the same period in the Doctor's life (after the trial, before he meets Mel "for the first time"), but to determine which comes first is original research.  This is just one example of the sorts of determinations you'd have to make in constructing this list.  Unfortunately, there's just no way to make those determinations without violating Wikipedia's rules on original research.  Dominique Boies (a fan) has a list of the sort you're looking for here, but there's no place for that in Wikipedia's article space.  As an aside, you're always free to copy the content of this list into your own user space (at something like User:Victory93/Chronology), and use it to navigate Wikipedia's Doctor Who articles. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:48, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Addendum: This list already engages in original research by stating that The Infinity Doctors takes place before "An Unearthly Child" — Lance Parkin deliberately made the placement of TID in the Doctor's life story unclear (it could be a future Doctor who's returned to Gallifrey — yes, I know it's been destroyed, but it hadn't been when Parkin wrote the book). Similarly, how do we know that The Murder Game takes place after Invasion of the Cat-People?  The order you suggest is the one on my bookshelves, but that's hardly a reliable source. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:59, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Neutral — I've changed my mind, per the argument by DHowell below. The structure he suggests might make it possible to construct this list without violating WP:NOR; it would be difficult and time-consuming, but not impossible.  I still have concerns that it would be quite difficult to avoid original research in this article, but now I see how it could be done.  —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The list may not be perfect but no article on wikipedia is. Nick mallory 09:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Its full of origional research and is not needed, don't merge into the other well writen page either, it would just make it worse. The books and so on are not considered cannon with the rest of the Whoniverse so merging wouldn't fit.--Wiggstar69 11:38, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment This page is a different type of chronology then Chronology of the Doctor Who universe, its the order the stories were made rather the order of the time the stories were set in.--Wiggstar69 13:54, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's interesting - I may have misunderstood that from looking at the article. If it's the order the stories were written rather than the time they were set in, that would make it easier to keep the list it would  not be original research, ie publication dates can be verified.  Do you have the books or any way you can confirm this?  The publishing info could be added to the article as references.  So far we have not heard from the writer of the article, hopefully he'll show up soon and clarify his view on this too.  --Parzival418 Hello 18:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's not quite right — it's not the order the stories were written, it's the order they took place in in a fictionally constructed life of the Doctor. Most Doctor Who novels and audio plays are set "between" episodes of the television series.  Some state explicitly on their covers or in CD inserts where (in the Doctor's life) they are set.  To take an example from the list at Doctor Who story chronology, the novel The Sorcerer's Apprentice (published in 1995) is set between the television stories Marco Polo and The Keys of Marinus (aired in 1964).  The problem is that a) some works don't say exactly where they're set, requiring original research to determine exactly where they fit, and b) while the novels and audios generally indicate where their stories are set with regard to the television series, they almost never indicate where they might be set with regard to each other.  So (looking at the bottom of the list as it stands now), the novel World Game and the framing device of the audio Fear of the Daleks are both set after the events of the television story The War Games, but placing one before the other is completely arbitrary.
 * The audio dramas already have a Big Finish Doctor Who chronology, because (with a very few exceptions) every audio play indicates where it's "set" with regard to the television series. A similar list could be made for the Virgin Missing Adventures, which also indicate their "placement" in the series' continuity; and the placement of the Virgin New Adventures and Eighth Doctor Adventures is obvious and uncontroversial (with, again, a few exceptions such as the aforementioned Infinity Doctors).  However, the Past Doctor Adventures did not state their placement explicitly, and while the placement of some is clear from the text (I mean really clear, as in the characters saying "We just left such-and-such a planet") others could take place anywhere in a season, so placing them definitively between two television stories is original research.
 * As for "canon" — Doctor Who has no officially established canon (as noted in canon (fiction)), so no one can really say what is and isn't "canonical". That's not a good reason to delete this page; however, the fact that it can't be constructed without resorting to original research is. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:04, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I created this page to show all of the Doctors life in order from when he was young to today. It shows not just the television stories but the expanded universe. I want people to know that in the Doctor Who universe theres not just Daleks and Cybermen but there is also others like Krill and the scourge. Also that the Doctor did not just travel with Rose and Sarah and others but also with others like Evelyn and Frobisher. I just wanted show what happened to the Doctor in his entire life from start to finish. This page has no relation to the page: Chronology of the Doctor Who universe as that page tells the years that the Doctor has visited from BC to AD. Victory93 30/7/2007
 * I understand that, Victory93, but do you understand why it's impossible to create such a page without violating Wikipedia's ban on original research? What basis does one use to say, for example, whether the Sixth Doctor traveled with Frobisher or Grant Markham or Evelyn first?  What about the Eighth Doctor — do the Big Finish Eighth Doctor audios take place before the Eighth Doctor Adventures, after them, or in a parallel universe?  Some fans slot them in the gap between The Eight Doctors and Vampire Science (while Sam is at that Greenpeace rally), while others put them in the period when the Eighth Doctor and Sam are separated (before Seeing I).  Some fans choose to ignore the Big Finish stories altogether, while others ignore the novels.  Putting them all together, while an enjoyable fan exercise (already taken to great lengths here, among other sites), can't be done without recourse to original research.  —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 02:49, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Redirect (or delete) per Josiah Rowe, would be mostly highly contentious OR Stephenb (Talk) 09:28, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Brave attempt to start a chronological list including both TV series and books, but poorly executed, and the list could get huge. However, I think it will never be completed. --Edokter (Talk) 09:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Putting aside the whole in-universe thing, I hope, we can evaluate this as an attempt to do something like List of Doctor Who stories by publication or air date. I'm not sure that serves any encyclopedic purpose. We already have List of Doctor Who serials, List of Doctor Who novelisations, List of Doctor Who audio releases, everything under Doctor Who books, and so forth. Those are encyclopedic. A combined list, though, doesn't exactly tell us anything. Fundamentally unencyclopedic; fancruft, in a word. --Dhartung | Talk 10:28, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not disagreeing with your "delete" comment, since my position on this is "neutral". But I don't see how this particular list could be considered "fancruft" or "unencyclopedic" (a not well-defined term in general), when all of the lists you named could be considered forms of fancruft as well.  There are many such articles in Wikipedia, for all sorts of series of TV and books, and lots of it is there only by and for fans.  So it's fancruft... so what?  The main point is that if it's not WP:Verifiable or if it's WP:Original research as noted by some above, those would be valid reasons for deletions.  But "unencylopedic" is too general a term that does not have a policy definition so should not be a reason for deletion of an article.  --Parzival418 Hello 18:09, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete, unfortunately. It's not a bad idea, but for all the reasons put forth by Josiah Rowe, it's just impossible to do without original research. --Brian Olsen 20:30, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Should we finish this off? Thats 9 people saying 'Delete' to one person asking for it to be kept. Wiggstar69 22:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note - Some !votes have changed since the above comment, based on additional information added below. --Parsifal Hello 02:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Note to closing administrator: If this page is deleted, if policy permits, please userfy it to preserve the work of the creator of the page, Victory93.  I don't know if he realized that his work could be lost by deletion when he made the page.  He might be able to use the formatting and content in some other context if he can resolve the WP:OR issues with it.  Thanks.  --Parzival418 Hello 01:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I doubt he'd be able to resolve the issues, but I've always found its polite to leave the page remaining under a user page.--Wiggstar69 08:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Look I have done nothing wrong. This page has taken me a while to make and I'll be just sad if it's gotten rid of. I use up all of my spare time to make this and I have to ask permission to use the internet. Plus if there is anything wrong with it you can always edit it rather than just delete. I mean you allow other Doctor Who related pages and you worry about this one I mean I found this other page with just a few writing and no one worries about that. Is there at least anything I can do to make sure this page dosen't get deleted. I would appreciate that. Plus I was already thinking of improveing the page and I would love to try it out. Victory93 31/7/2007
 * Victory93, Perhaps it would be accepted at this Dr Who wiki, where there doesn't seem to be a Chronology article. Totnesmartin 08:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe, is it official to wikipedia. Victory93 31/7/2007 (continued on Victory93's talk page)


 * Note to closing administrator: This page I created is about the Doctors life from start to today. I have looked at other pages of Doctor Who and none of them fit the exact information as of this page. This page may be long but truth is that other pages that may not refer to Doctor Who are alos very long. Some people may say that this page will never be completed but they are wrong. I will use up all my spare time in completeing this page and I will show those that arn't arguing on this page about the Doctor Who saga but for those that just like to look up about Doctor Who for fun and information what it's all about. You can trust me on this. Victory93 31/7/2007
 * Weak Keep My first inclination was to vote Delete because it didn't appear to be a true chronology; I envisioned that as the different times that the doctor visited, maybe that's what it is; maybe it's a list of the order in which episodes were telecast. Either way, no dates, which are the chron in the chronology. However, Dr. Who has a loyal following and the author is working on this.  Victory93, save this to your harddrive, just in case.  Mandsford 01:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * See Doctor Who story chronology for a list of times the Doctor has visited. This was meant to be "the story of the Doctor's life", including not only the TV stories but the novels and audio plays which have been set "between" different TV stories.  The problem is that you can't do that without resorting to original research. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:10, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you mean Chronology of the Doctor Who universe, Josiah. --Brian Olsen 07:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I do. Sorry — it's late, and I just got back from seeing The Police.  My brain is slightly addled.  Or slightly more than usual, anyway. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Keep Yes this page is about the Doctors life. From his youth of an old man to his old young self portrayed by David Tennant. This page is to show all the Doctor Who stories in order of the Doctors life and his companions. It is still progress of being completed so I would much ablige if it didn't get deleted as it is not finished plus there isn't another page like this one so it is not violating anything and some of the info I'm getting help from the official Doctor Who website, Outpost Gallifrey and Big Finish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.59.22.86 (talk • contribs) (Victory93, as explained in this comment)
 * Delete. May stray into original research and much of the material is (or can be) adequately covered elsewhere. Dbromage 00:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Victory93 - if that previous comment was yours, please log-in to your account, then re-edit the comment to add your correct signature at the end. You need to be logged-in to use your Wikipedia name, that's to make sure nobody can impersonate you.  --Parsifal Hello 08:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment If Victory93 (assuming the IP comment was posted by him)  is getting help from the official Doctor Who website or other WP:Reliable sources, that could clear up the question of WP:Original research, by making the information WP:Verifiable.   Also, it seems like from Victory93' comment that the title of the article needs to be clarified if it is kept, to refer to the life story of the Doctor, not the chronology of the episodes.


 * Victory93, can you tell us more about how the official Doctor Who website or the others are helping? Do you have references or links you could add to your article to show that the information is based on the official version from the publisher?  That would make a difference to being able to keep the article. --Parsifal Hello 08:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I strongly suspect that Victory93 means that he is using information from those sites, and not that anyone officially connected with the sites is assisting him. --Ckatz chat spy  08:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You might be right, then again, even if he's only using information from there - if it is a reliable source, that could make the difference in whether or not original research is happening. Let's see what Victory93 says about it when he replies.


 * Delete. There should be some recognition of the effort involved, but this page unfortunately fails to meet the criteria for being kept. It overlaps existing articles, it requires OR and theories to place many of the non-television stories, it is really just a big list, and it is likely to devolve into an extensive collection of speculation. --Ckatz chat spy  08:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * If his information is supported by new references from the publisher, then it would not be speculation. There are many lists on Wikipedia, the questions here are - does this particular list have support from references, and does it duplicate other lists or provide different information?  If it's organized by the age of the Doctor rather than the chronology of the episodes, then it does not overlap the others, so the bottom line is, is it original research?  Without new references, apparently it is OR.  But if the publisher's website provides new sourced information, we should consider that in making the determination.  --Parsifal Hello 08:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Comment Keep This page that I created does not duplicate other lists. Plus it is not harming anyone or any other page on Wikipedia. Victory93 2/8/2007
 * That should not be a reason to keep. See WP:HARMLESS Corpx 09:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Comment Victory93, please clarify if you wrote the earlier comment that begins with "Yes this page is about the Doctors life." If so, you will have to retract one of your "Keep" votes. If that is not you, please indicate this as well as there are strong parallels between both entries. Thank you. --Ckatz chat spy  09:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Yes that was me and yes it is about the Doctors life but story chronology of the Doctor's life and his companions which there isn't a page like this in Wikipedia.Victory93 2/8/2007

Comment there seems to be a lot of confusion about the purpose of this list. the Doctor's time travel adventures are run sequentially on television. There two kinds of Dr Who novels: simple novelisations of the TV series (published out of sequence, sometimes many years after the original broadcast); there are also novels of adventures never seen on or proposed for television. All of these novels are published out of chronological order, from the Doctor's point of view. This list we're discussing is an attempt to string all stories (TV, book or whatever) into the order that the Doctor experiences them. Example (all made up, but just to illustrate):
 * We see:


 * 1965 - A TV episode has the First Doctor travelling back in time to meet Abraham Lincoln in 1860.
 * 1970 - A Third Doctor TV episode is set in the present (1970).
 * 1975 - The Lincoln story is novelised.
 * 1995 - A novel appears of an adventure that never appears on television - the Second Doctor meets napoleon in 1800.
 * The Doctor sees:


 * A visit to Lincoln;
 * A visit to Napoleon;
 * An adventure in 1970.

This is a very simplified version of course but it explains the point, I hope. Totnesmartin 10:49, 2 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment — about sources: several websites do exist which have constructed this sort of "timeline of the Doctor's travels". The most comprehensive and thoroughly updated is the Doctor Who Reference Guide; there's also the Canon Keeper's Guide to Doctor Who at Outpost Gallifrey (which hasn't been updated in a few years), and the incomplete Doctor's Timeline at whoniverse.org.  All of these are written by fans, and may or may not meet the standards of WP:RS — none of them would be uncontroversially reliable.  The BBC does not have a list of this sort, incorporating the non-TV media with the episodes and serials of the TV show.  It's true that the fan pages could be used as sources for the list, but the problem is that they contradict each other, especially in the areas like the Sixth, Seventh and Eighth Doctors, where there is more material from the spin-offs than from the television series.  It might be possible to construct a list that pointed out that certain data points are unclear, or noted "such-and-such a source places this story here, but so-and-so places it there", but that would be awfully difficult to do without straying into original research. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Not only do the sources that Josiah Rowe noted above exist, which while "written by fans" were as well-researched and peer-reviewed as many printed published books (especially the Outpost Gallifrey one, which shows six primary researchers and acknowledges dozens of other people involved in vetting the information), there also exist published books which can be used as reliable sources for this article, including Lance Parkin's AHistory, the About Time series by Lawrence Miles and Tat Wood, and The DisContinuity Guide, and I, Who. Where sources agree about where stories belong in the Doctor's timeline, they can unequivocally be put in their proper place in this article. Where they don't, NPOV can be applied and the stories can be listed separately from the main chronology, indicating where the different sources place them. Perhaps the best approach is to split this into sections for each incarnation of the Doctor, with each section containing an ordered list of stories which can be ordered from reliable sources, and an unordered list of stories with explanations of how the different sources treat them with respect to the Doctor's timeline. Simply put, there are enough reliable sources to improve this article without necessitating original research, and so it should not be deleted. DHowell 22:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: DHowell's suggestion has swayed me — I've changed my !vote from "delete" to "neutral". I still think it would be very difficult to avoid original research in an article of this kind, but DHowell's model shows that it might not be impossible.  (COI disclaimer: I'm one of the "dozens of other people" credited on the Outpost Gallifrey page, so I shouldn't be involved in the determination of whether it's a reliable source or not.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: I've also changed my !vote (mine changed from "neutral" to "keep"). I've learned a lot about the topic since the AfD started.  My initial comment was one of the earliest, but with the considerable added information I now believe that the article should at least be kept for a while so editors can work on sourcing the information.  Information that is not sourced will have to be removed, but some of the information in the article can certainly be sourced, so it's too soon to delete the entire article just because all the sources have not yet been found.  We have many articles that are tagged unreferenced and not deleted while editors work to improve them.  Also, as has been clarified in the discussions above, this article does not duplicate any other way of organizing the Dr. Who information so it can be a valuable article once it is supported by proper references.  Meanwhile, info that does not have sources can be specifically tagged with fact or moved to the talk page while sources are located.  --Parsifal Hello 02:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.