# Talk:World Enough and Time (Star Trek: New Voyages)

I think the Doctor Who episode has got to take this slot. john k (talk) 03:03, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

As I've already said: Why? This article has existed for 8 hours, while the Star Trek one for almost a year for an episode that aired a decade ago. This is nowhere near the primary topic. -- AlexTW 09:16, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Doctor Who is a proper TV show seen by millions of people around the world. The other is a web series. john k (talk) 12:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
This still does not make it the primary topic. See WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and especially WP:BUTIDONTKNOWABOUTIT. -- AlexTW 12:13, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
I won't insist that the Who episode is already the primary topic, though I think it's certainly damned close on usage, and almost certainly will win the long-term significance argument as well. What is absolutely certain is that the Star Trek episode is not primary usage. Given the fame of the poem that's being quoted, I'm not sure it was ever primary usage for the phrase. If you want to make this page a disambiguation page, I'd be fine with that as a compromise. john k (talk) 12:21, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Also, I've been Wikipedia-ing for like 14 years now. Please don't patronizingly tell me to review policies. john k (talk) 12:22, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Given that the Doctor Who episode aired a mere 19 hours ago, not even a full day, that therefore means that the Star Trek episode does indeed currently stand as the primary topic. Perhaps it may "win" it, yes. But most certainly not right now. I argued a in a similar manner as you when I was arguing that Bill Potts (Doctor Who) was the primary topic. Realistically, a better solution would be to disambiguate this article with its series name, and create a disambiguation article detailing other usages of the term "World Enough and Time", given that you just offered another topic yourself. And there's an audio adventure episode titled the same as well. So, perhaps there's no primary topic at all.
And no offence, but I don't care how long anyone's been here. If I need to link a policy or guideline, I will, whether an editor has been here for an hour or a decade. Now, if I'd posted a standard warning template on your talk page, then it would make sense to comment on that. -- AlexTW 12:28, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
No, it doesn't mean that at all. On usage, the Doctor Who article, despite airing less than 24 hours ago, is already pretty clearly way ahead of the Star Trek fan film. I get more than 4x the number of google hits for "'World Enough and Time' 'Doctor Who'" than I do for "'World Enough and Time' 'Star Trek'". That certainly means the Star Trek fan film isn't the primary topic, at the very least. On long-term significance, harder to say, since the Who episode just aired. But it seems pretty clear to me that Doctor Who (the 50+ year old TV series and flagship BBC show) has considerably more long-term significance than Star Trek: The New Voyages (a fairly obscure fan-made web series), which I think is a perfectly appropriate thing to consider, since there's no hard and fast rules for primary topics. If the upcoming Star Trek series had an episode titled the same thing as a Big Finish audio, I'd argue for the former being the primary topic pretty much immediately, too. Anyway, I enjoy arguing about this, but I think we can both agree to compromise about a disambiguation page? john k (talk) 14:00, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
I think a disambiguation page would be sensible, with both episodes and To His Coy Mistress. Miyagawa (talk) 19:54, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
There's surely no case to be made that this is the correct article for this page, yes. I suspect the Doctor Who episode is going to be the overwhelming majority of actual searches, but if people disagree with that claim a disambiguation page is straightforwardly the other viable option. Winter's Tulpa (talk) 23:41, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
@Winter's Tulpa: Guessing you didn't read the above conversation at all. Yes, one may get four times the number of results back, but again, the results are seriously flawed here given that the episode only just aired, which you yourself recognize, John. I agree with making an all-encompassing disambiguation article to cover all instance of "World Enough and Time", yes. -- AlexTW 01:18, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
I don't think a Star Trek fan film is ever going to pull back into first place though. So I'm still inclined to think putting the DW episode here is more reader-friendly. Winter's Tulpa (talk) 01:25, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
Disambigutation done, as that seems to be the consensus here. -- AlexTW 01:26, 26 June 2017 (UTC)