Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Doctor Who

As seen in archive 37, we had previously agreed that we could use the videos from the channel "Doctor Who: Classic | FULL EPISODES" as ELs. However, I have found out after linking them that they may perhaps fall under Wikipedia:ELNO point 7: Sites that are inaccessible to a substantial number of users, such as sites that work only with a specific browser or in a specific country. Any thoughts @Pokelego999 and @User:UniProbe62, since both of you were part of the consensus last time? Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 07:41, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Was unaware of this stipulation until now. If it falls under the guideline perhaps removing them may be for the best, especially since I forgot that channel indeed is America-locked. This is admittedly not my area of expertise though, so if others have reasons to keep it let me know. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:21, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps some may be kept in some form, because I do know the main youtube channel also has some of the serials in full. I however do not know whether the videos are also region locked. Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 03:53, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Turns out: no. Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 03:56, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Ehhhh maybe? For people who are in the US, it is extremely helpful, and I personally would argue that, since there isn't a more-accessible alternative, it would be okay to keep it for those that can take advantage of it. On that note, however, if there are full serials on the main channel that are accessible worldwide, obviously those would be infinitely preferred to something that is region-locked. Apart from that though, I don't really see any harm caused by including a region-exclusive link as opposed to including nothing at all.

(Also, sorry for getting to this a bit late, I'm not good at Wikipedia notifications.) UniProbe62 (☎) 03:36, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

No problem on the response timing. Unfortunately, the only one available worldwide seems to be "Mission to the Unknown", which is linked next to prose. I would argue however that the best option may be to remove it altogether (in spite of the work I put in to adding them all). Doctor Who is British and English Wikipedia has a substantial number of non-american users (especially indian users), which, if they would be/are interested in the articles, would have inaccessible content for a large portion of theoretical users. If we would add more links for users in other regions (such as iPlayer), it would just create clutter. Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 04:14, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

Was just thinking about this discussion and it seems we have come to a standstill. It seems there are 2(ish) options atp, and I now don't know which I prefer.

1. Remove the ELs for failing WP:ELNO

1b. Remove the ELs for failing WP:ELNO and integrate them into prose

2. WP:IAR: The ELs should be kept in spite of failing WP:ELNO, because linking a place to watch may be helpful.

2b. Add iPlayer links because we might as well if we are serving the serials for Americans.

I don't know how to go forward on this anymore, so lets see if we can reach a consensus. Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 09:56, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

I'm fine with any option except 1b; I don't think YouTube uploads are worth mentioning in prose unless mentioned by reliable sources. If we're concerned about clutter, one possible solution could be to combine the two links in one bullet:

• The Daleks on BBC iPlayer (UK only) and YouTube (US only)

I'm mostly apathetic, though, so happy to leave this to others. (FWIW, this ping didn't work—notifications aren't sent without a new signature.) – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 00:02, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Doing a bit of research, I can find a bit from Bleeding Cool, a somewhat trivial mention in general and the 2 rediscovered DMP episodes in specific, Gizmodo (also about DMP) and Nerdist Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 04:46, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

The DMP articles are great but only apply to that serial, and the Nerdist article is good but not universal—it doesn't cite that The Daleks is on YouTube, for instance, or when it was uploaded. Mentioning iPlayer makes sense (it's a British show, most serials were added at once, and several sources discussed it) but adding individual American-exclusive YouTube dates to prose feels a bit indiscriminate. External links, at least, are a different story. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 05:00, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

@Pokelego999 @UniProbe62 @SkywalkerEccleston @Thebiguglyalien and @Glimmer721. Pinging for final consensus, since all of you have some level of interest in this. Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 01:23, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

@XCBRO172 I would say no. For example, compare the Classic Who YouTube channel to BBC iPlayer, which also has many episodes and is also region-locked. Most people would agree not to use BBC iPlayer as an EL. SkywalkerEccleston (talk) 01:29, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

I think I would agree now, having seen the "The Daleks on BBC iPlayer (UK only) and YouTube (US only)" formatting proposal. Every single part of it just feels... wrong, especially for example putting in an official iPlayer link like that. We don't do that when it comes to other shows, why would we suddenly do that here? (It just feels... advertise-y, in a way. Very abnormal for Wikipedia.) And, knowing that in practice the YouTube link is logically identical to an iPlayer link (they're both a commercial video on a video streaming service that is (monetarily and accessibly speaking) free to people in one region, but locked to everyone else), I think I have to (admittedly reluctantly) reverse my previous position and say I think they should be removed. Apart from edge cases like for example the university recreation of Mission to the Unknown, I don't see why we should start including links to official, commercial sources to watch a television show, when we haven't ever done that before. While it may not fail the "Is it social media" test, it absolutely fails the "Is it advertising" test (at least to me). Even if it's technically not a "paid" thing* it's still a commercial source that's monetized, which I don't think is something that is (or should) be included on Wikipedia (although that is a fascinating open point of debate). For now though at least, I think they should be removed until further notice.

*[Also insert rant about iPlayer technically being a paid service if you count the licence fee but in practice just coming off as free anyway here] UniProbe62 (☎) 06:08, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Concurred here with Eccleston and UniProbe. I just don't feel like it'd be in line with how we handle it on other parts of the site, and bar Mission to the Unknown, are best off removed. If other worldwide copies become available we can add them to the article then. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:12, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Infobox Doctor Who doctor § First/last appearance and tenure. Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:13, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

This is a notice that there is a draft for the CBeebies animated spin-off at Draft:Untitled Doctor Who spin-off until such a time that it is ready for inclusion in the mainspace. All are welcome to come help nurture the article's development there. -- Alex _talk 07:51, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

The idea of starting a draft crossed my mind after making this edit today—then I thought to myself, "I'm sure Alex has it handled." Barely an hour later, I was proven right. Many thanks! – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 11:11, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Haha, no worries! I just used the paragraph from the Whoniverse article, had to make sure we didn't have some hidden draft already. -- Alex _talk 05:15, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

Just wanted to ask around here for some more consensus. I am planning to partially overhaul Enlightenment to bring it more in line with our current GAs and the footnote mentioning series numbering caught my attention. The footnote is present on virtually every serial after Shada (until Survival), mentioning Shada's numbering situation, except for Full Circle. I personally feel that the footnotes should be removed for all articles other than Shada itself and possiblely The Leisure Hive, as it seems trivial elsewhere. Anyone else have any thoughts? Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 02:26, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

I would agree with removing it from those articles. It's also already mentioned at List of Doctor Who episodes (1963–1989), meaning there's a note that covers all of those serials anyways. -- Alex _talk 02:46, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

I'd also support its removal. I understand why it was added, but it's likely only more confusing for unfamiliar readers. If they want to see the full list of story numbers, we have an article for that, as Alex mentioned. – Rhain ☔ ^he
_him 22:07, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, I can see it being worthwhile to mention at Shada and The Leisure Hive, but elsewhere I believe it is unnecessary and confusing for readers unfamiliar with the series. Those curious have the episode list to explain the numbering debacle, but I doubt most readers will be aware of Shada's numbering confusion if they are just wanting to read about a given story. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 23:25, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Also I just realized that the same should apply to Trial of a Time Lord and Time and the Rani for number discrepancies. Yes I am a nerd -XCBRO172 (How could you tell?) 20:02, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

@XCBRO172 I would concur with this, assuming sourcing exists to discuss it. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:23, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Hello! I wanted to propose the idea of improving The Impossible Planet and The Satan Pit to GA status in light of the recent announcement of The Satan Pit's theatrical release. I do not have as much time as I used to and am stacked in projects right now because of college, so I would appreciate even just one editor as a helping hand to help with this project. This is not a super heavy project, being this would likely be one article a piece (Or less if more help), and would like be a pretty fun and fitting nomination given what's going on right now.

Feel free to ping me down below if you'd be interested in handling one of the articles! I can also help with source-searching, copyedits, etc if need be so even if you're a newer editor I'd be very happy to help in any way I can with moving this project forward. Thank you for reading! Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 04:24, 29 September 2026 (UTC)