Template talk:Dalek stories

message: I'm not sure that categorising them by Doctor is aesthetically pleasing. It's useful, sure, but it winds up, as you can see, with a gap where the Eighth Doctor stuff should be (barring audio plays). How about something on the lines of what is being done for the audio plays, like this? --khaosworks 01:24, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
Dalek television stories
The Daleks | The Dalek Invasion of Earth | The Chase | Mission to the Unknown | The Daleks' Master Plan
The Power of the Daleks | The Evil of the Daleks | Day of the Daleks | Frontier in Space | Planet of the Daleks | Death to the Daleks
Genesis of the Daleks | Destiny of the Daleks | Resurrection of the Daleks | Revelation of the Daleks | Remembrance of the Daleks
Dalek | Bad Wolf | The Parting of the Ways | Army of Ghosts | Doomsday | Daleks in Manhattan | Evolution of the Daleks
Doctor Who serials
:I agree with you, khaoswork. it looks better that way- also, is Bad Wolf a dalek story? Sean 22:30, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Borderline, but since the Daleks are there throughout, just behind the scenes, and actually have dialogue, I'd say so. No less than Frontier in Space. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 22:57, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What about the Fox movie? Granted they only have a cameo at the beginning, but if you read between the lines it could be argued that the Master and the Daleks might have conspired together. 23skidoo 16:41, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "If you read between the lines" says it all, really. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 22:43, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unnamed Section

message: I don't think we are going to get past this stale at the moment. I would like to find a way that we can sort it out. Now, Without discussing the actual arguments (in this section). Are any of these ideas useful -
:Would a moratorium on discussion for (eg a week) help?
:Is a simple vote on the inclusion of the episode in question acceptable? 
:Are there any other ideas on settling this?
::GraemeLeggett 10:49, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does it actually matter?  Not really.  Morwen - Talk 11:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reaching an agreement on definition

message: What about adding a "minor appearances" section to the template, like on the newly created UNIT Stories? It would avoid the constant adding and deleting of "The Five Doctors," and we could include "The Space Museum" as well. (And possibly others I haven't thought of.) --Brian Olsen 18:13, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor appearances?

message: Why has this suddenly sprung up on the template? - NP Chilla 20:15, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Oncoming Storm?? 

message: Is this going to be under Third Doctor stories or minor appearances? It's currently under both. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.32.48.236 (talk) 20:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frontier in Space 

message: I originally put this in the minor appearance as in the episode, it is a minor appearance. Their appearance is similar to that of Frontier in Space - having a significant presence but don't appear much in the episode himself. While I know the template header says "stories", that's just to prevent a PoV by using "serial" or "episode". 82 also suggested in edit summaries, why we don't we split the First Doctor articles into the episode titles - basically because the BBC have given the serials overall official names.
I've got no objections against the forward slash for new series stories in two-parts, by the way. Just an objection against "Army of Ghosts" being a major appearance because its following episode is. Will (talk) 23:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, don't make scarecrows. The point's irrelevant, a Cyberman appears in the pre-credits sequence. The lack of Cybermen is because Cybus are building them, and we see that happening throughout the episode. Crane collects the homeless guys, converts them, they crash the Tyler residence. In Army of Ghosts, though, we have no idea at all that the Daleks are in the sphere. We only find out the second the Doctor does. Bad Wolf, though, is up for interpretation: their actual presence is around five or six of the episode, but that's due to Davies' use of dramatics. The Master only appears for five minutes in Utopia (again, written by Davies), but you wouldn't dream of not calling it a Master story. Will (talk) 23:45, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Army of Ghosts" as a minor appearance 

message: If this is a reference to the picture in The Journal of Impossible Things then that is a REALLY minor reference isn't it? If that is going to be on here, so should "Invasion of the Bane" for the Dalek picture in SJS's attic. --GracieLizzie 23:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it refers to the flashback to the "Dalek" episode - but I don't think we should have flashbacks in the template.  StuartDD 20:39, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Human Nature? 

message: A while ago the template featured this under minor appearances, but now it's gone altogether. I don't know what role Dalek appearances played in that story because I haven't seen it. i just wondered if anyone could tell me the details of the demotion - or, for that matter, why it was initially included.
* A Dalek appears briefly during a flashback when the Brigadier regains his memory. I think it should be listed as a minor appearaance. Is there not also a similar brief appearance during the regeneration in Logopolis? 68.146.47.196 15:50, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, that's right. I've added them both to a template. Might start an edit war, but that's boldness for you. (I'm the anonymous guy who stated this section, incidentally. I always forget the four tildes.) 85.92.173.186 22:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mawdryn Undead?

message: Why is Frontier in Space in the main list and not  under "minor appearances" - there appearance on screen amounts to two very brief scenes, and is only as a lead into the next story.  It isn't really any more "major"  an appearance that the cliffhanger at The Space museum leading into the Chase - which also features Daleks.  188.221.79.22 (talk) 22:24, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The Daleks were the employers of the Master who himself was the employer of the Ogrons.  So it's not a literal "appearance", but it's an "appearance" in the sense that they were behind the whole plot of the serial. DonQuixote (talk) 14:38, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frontier in Space - not a minor appearance? 

message: The End of Time, in my view, qualifies as a minor appearance by the Daleks — not because of the saucers in the preview for Part Two (thank you, Maccy69, for correcting my impetuosity), but (having reviewed the episode) because of Donna's flashbacks in the final seconds of Part One, where we (briefly) glimpse the crazed Caan and exploding Dalek Supreme from "Journey's End". These images would surely justify this story's inclusion on the template if we are going with the rationale that flashbacks from previous stories count as "minor" appearances. If Logopolis is considered such an appearance simply for that one-second vision of a Dalek (re-used from Destiny of the Daleks, I think) saying "Doctor", and Mawdryn Undead counts because of the Brigadier's memory recall (meanwhile, in "Human Nature", the "appearance" in question is nothing more than a sketch in John Smith's journal), then, by reasonable extension, The End of Time should be included also since, as with the Brigadier, Donna's memories are returning to her. Of course, who knows whether or not there will be an unequivocal Dalek appearance (whether minor or not so minor) in the second part, in which case the addition could not be debated, but I believe that the story already satisfies the criteria for inclusion if the examples mentioned above are to remain on the template.
The problem, I suppose, is that some of the minor appearances are more minor than others, some (e.g. Logopolis, Mawdryn Undead) being mere flashbacks using recycled footage, others (e.g. The Five Doctors, "The Waters of Mars") being specially shot, fleshed-out parts. The End of Time is currently on the Davros stories template (Davros also appearing in flashback at the end of Part One); I don't see why it cannot also be considered a minor Dalek appearance for this reason. SuperMarioMan (talk) 19:51, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there was no sign of any Daleks in Part Two, but the point about Part One still stands — it contains a brief flashback just like Logopolis and Mawdryn Undead, so should be included on the template. SuperMarioMan (talk) 20:04, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

text: The flashback in question lasts exactly 0.2 seconds, this doesn't even constitute any appearance. Freeze-frame flashbacks that do not have any connection to the story should not be included.  — Edokter • Talk •  21:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see how 0.2 seconds can be considered too short to even be minor (minor doesn't exactly have a lower limit), nor do I see how this flashback was any less connected to the story than all the other minor appearances that are simply flashbacks. 90.210.193.88 (talk) 22:30, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: ''The End of Time''?

message: Don't the Daleks technically count as the enemies in the series 5 finale? It might be thought to be an unreliable website, because, of course, it can be changed by anyone, but the Doctor Who Wiki considers the Stone Dalek to be one of the two main enemies in the episode, therefore 'The Pandorica Opens/The Big Bang' belongs in the 'Eleventh Doctor' section, not 'minor appearances'. Boushenheiser (talk) 17:23, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Series 5 finale status 

message: Semi protected for three days. If involved parties cannot agree on which stories are minor appearences, it is going to be fully protected permanently.  — Edokter (talk) —  22:30, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi protected 

message: Is The Day of the Doctor really a minor appearance? Daleks are central to the plot.--Codenamecuckoo (talk) 10:22, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: There are so many other elements in this episode which could be categorised as 'central to the plot' that I believe categorising it as a minor Dalek appearance is correct. The Daleks don't actively drive the primary narrative threads in this story, their involvement introduces little new to any of the story arcs, they are no more central to it than the Time War, the Time Lords or the conflicted War Doctor, and their on-screen time is fairly limited. Bowdenford (talk) 13:00, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  The same can be said of Time of the Doctor then, which should be moved to the minor appearances, too. 68.146.70.124 (talk) 02:28, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

text: I think the question to be asked is: what constitutes a minor appearence. My definition is when they have no influence on the plot. For instance, the Cyberman head in "Dalek". In "The Day of the Doctor", they are a driving plot element; billions of them are attacking Gallifrey. Screen-time is not the sole criterium here. -- User:Edokter  19:13, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Day of the Doctor 

message: See here, here and here for discussions regarding this edit and subsequent edits regarding the template structure. Bowdenford (talk) 09:04, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Template Structure

message: Do you reckon this would maybe be a good idea for the templates, and instead split the "Minor Appearances" into 2 groups, a "Minor Appearances" one (which includes scenes which were specially filmed for that episode) and a "Archive" one (which only includes episodes in which only previously filmed footage was used), if you get my drift?
Example; like this.
:I understand what you are driving at but don't believe there is any advantage to sub-dividing the category as proposed. I don't think the meaning of 'archive' in this context will be readily apparent to most readers, and following the serial/episode links still won't provide an easily accessible explanation. Even if the difference between two types of minor appearance is clear, will it be of any particular interest or improve article navigation for the majority of users? My feeling is that the case for that has yet to be made. Bowdenford (talk) 11:05, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Including episodes on the basis of which archive footage they use sets a bad precedent that would quickly lead to hundreds of articles being cluttered with almost completely irrelevant templates. I think we should really be talking about whether minor appearances should be included at all. —Flax5 18:49, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split Group