Talk:List of incomplete Doctor Who serials

Page format discussions

I changed the opening because none of the '60s episodes exist in the form that they were transmitted. All the black and white episodes exist only as 16 mm copies. The originals were on quad tapes. The current opening is more exact with regards to what the list contains Davhorn 18:13, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Efforts to locate specimens of missing episodes are ongoing as of 2005. Please check your attic.

Just a query - would anyone consider Shada to be an incomplete story? - Zaphod Beeblebrox 12:46, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It's not incomplete in the same way as the others here - Shada was never finished. This listing is for serials that were completed, but have bits missing. Perhaps this could do with a name change. --khaosworks 02:34, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Should there be any discussion of the BBC Radio Collection/Audio releases of Doctor Who CDs? Specifically I'm thinking in terms of what has been released (bonuses in the Daleks Masterplan and Marco Polo sets, extra discs in the Daleks and Cybermen collector's tins)?

I don't see why not. Try writing it up and then let the hounds of hell... uh... rest of us rip it... uh... edit it to a consensus form. :) --khaosworks 03:51, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hey - it's an approach that's worked well in the past - I know I've created a couple of Who-related articles in the past that were soon polished up and brought up to a very good standard by others very soon afterwards. - Zaphod Beeblebrox 08:13, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I'm going to give this a go. But now I'm curious about 'scope' - should I limit it to "Incomplete Doctor Who Serials released by BBC Audio" or "Audio Releases of Incomplete Doctor Who Serials" (would this include the unofficial reconstructions?) or "Doctor Who Releases by BBC Audio" (the last of which could arguably include soundtracks, 1990s tapes, all of the MP3 CDs to date (Tales from the Tardis 1 & 2, Daleks Masterplan MP3 CD), the new Pescatons release, both releases of Death Comes to Time, etc etc)?!? In any case, I generally have only the CDs from the late 90s onwards (but I'm not done yet, even given the fact that The Crusade and The Ice Warriors are yet to be released as I write this (1 April 05)) - obviously I wouldn't put it past wikipedians to add information about the earlier cassette tape editions. My personal preference is leaning toward "Doctor Who Releases by BBC Audio" but I didn't want it to look like one huge advertisement for their CDs.... Thoughts?

Have a look at Doctor Who spin-offs. That article started out as a couple of paragraphs on the main page and got shifted to its own article, and has expanded to the point where I think it's time to spin off some of the sections. You might consider - and this is a bit of a big project - using the "Audio" section as a start off point and writing a whole new Doctor Who audios article, which would include Big Finish, BBC, etc. You don't have to put in stuff you don't know, of course - the rest of us should be able to fill in the blanks. Oh, and get yourself a Wikipedia account so we can get to know you rather than as a series of IP addresses. It helps with credibility. :) --khaosworks 14:09, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Alright alright, picky picky. I've avoided account creation because I've found it easier to make legitimate edits without logging in on any number of pages. Anyway, I'm still leaning towards more of a generic Doctor Who audio releases article (which could include the soundtrack CDs, and even the old effects LP/cassette from the 70s). And then possibly do a breakdown by 'studio'? For example: "Audio releases under the BBC Radio Collection banner" "Audio releases under the BBC Audio banner" "Audio releases by Big Finish" etc. --JohnDBuell 16:28, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Like I said, go ahead. We'll start mucking about with it soon enough after the first draft. --khaosworks 17:37, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Okay, Doctor Who audio releases is now 'live.' Have fun. Share and Enjoy. There's still all of the 'lost' soundtracks and Big Finish productions to add, as I noted on its talk page. --JohnDBuell 05:49, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Page Redesign

I, Mollsmolyneux, have redesigned the List of incomplete Doctor Who serials page. To view it please Click Here. Please leave any comments you have about the page on My Talk Page and tell me if you think I should put the page on. -- Mollsmolyneux 20:05, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Colourised "Ambassadors"

Does anyone know more about the project to colourize Ambassadors of Death Part 4? It seems a bit odd to credit it to "a colleague of Ian Levine" — does the person working on this want to remain anonymous or something? I'm not really au fait with the world of Doctor Who restoration (the Restoration Team, et al.) — if someone else is, please update the entry accordingly. It would also be good if we could give a citation for whoever's doing the restoration, rather than merely linking to the preview file. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:36, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

He does wish to remain anonymous. A copy with sections of the episode colored was sent to the RT, but it was not deemed good enough for release in its present condition. Don't know what happened after that. Davhorn 20:13, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Has the effort been discussed in any reliable sources (in this context, these would include Doctor Who Magazine and the like)? If not, we probably shouldn't even mention it, especially if the person wants to remain anonymous and it's not likely to lead to commercial release. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 23:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

The only places I've seen it has been on various forums, like the RT's forum and Levine's forum. I don't subscribe to DWM or any other magazine, so I don't know about those... Davhorn 23:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Use of English

I noticed some mistakes, such as the use of "color" instead of "colour". This is a British show and a particular link that I corrected refers to a British article ("Putting colour back in the Doctor's cheeks"). Would be nice to see things spelt correctly, not the use of "American English" which is very improper. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.34.114.43 (talk) 22:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)