This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 |
I've wondered this with a lot of TV-shows, but what is the difference between for example "LOST: Season 3" and "Doctor Who: Series 3"? Can't be because in America there are tons of episodes in their TV shows as I even have The Sopranos on DVD, and it is a 12-episode season/series, and says "Series 1/2/3/4 etc" on the box. I'm just wondering because, I even have some of classic Doctor Who DVDs, but they were never called season (on the box I mean), they just have the story titles. But what is the difference between a TV show having 'series' and 'seasons'? The classic Doctor Who would be better suited for serials as we all know because thats what they were, even mentions it on the article I believe. Charlr6 ( talk) 13:27, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Close. American broadcast television (versus cable television) is organized into an annual season running roughly from mid-September to mid-May. The majority of broadcast television programs make their debuts during a given season, generally in the fall; we're in that premiere period right now. A few shows (and we do use series as a synonym for show for reasons long lost in the vapors of time), are termed "mid-season replacements" (although mid- can be used a bit loosely). They start later, as failed series are removed from the schedule and replaced. We're about to see the axe fall on a couple early and spectacular failures which must already be replaced on the schedule (who in his right mind thought a series about a mafia doctor would be successful?) A good example of a successful mid-season replacement that I believe you're getting in the UK is Castle, which started in February, 2009 and is now one of ABC's most popular scripted dramas. An average full season runs in the neighborhood of 22-24 episodes, while a mid-season replacement generally runs around 10-12 episodes. During the summer, the networks either rerun programming, or increasingly, show limited-run series or unscripted/reality programs. I know ABC has a seven-episode spring/summer series in the works that will begin in late spring, and is an adaptation of a European series. The broadcast networks have also flirted with shortened or split seasons a bit, as they did with Lost, but that's been less than a resounding success.
Cable is a different story. Their big season is the summer, when broadcast is in rerun/garbage mode (as I call reality TV.) TNT and USA began the push for new, quality scripted dramas in the summer (you should still get The Closer, which just ended here, and Burn Notice, for example.) Now we have a number of cable networks: AMC, A&E, SyFy and more running scripted drama during the summer season. Sometimes it's all you can do to keep up during the summer; much of the most innovative programming is coming from cable (The Walking Dead, Mad Men, The Closer, etc.) although the networks are catching on (Person of Interest being a great example.) Cable series are shorter in length, generally 13-16 episodes, are allowed to run their full seasons unless they're a spectacular failure, and increasingly, run short winter seasons of 5 or 6 episodes. They also do limited run series, like The Hatfields and McCoys, which was a huge and unexpected hit from a minor cable channel and starred Kevin Costner. Then there's HBO, Showtime and Starz! (which recently took over production of Torchwood in collaboration with the BBC); their programming starts whenever it suits them, but is still described in terms of seasons (long story why they probably used series on The Sopranos; I'm sure it's all in the article herein.) Cable is drawing more and more established actors from film because of the creativity and opportunity to create characters long-term, as well as the opportunities for actresses "of a certain age".
And then there's networks like BBC America who import programming; we get Doctor Who the same day as you do, but a few hours later for reasons that should be obvious. It's not simple, but it's a big country spread across six time zones, we have a huge number of cable channels in addition to the four primary broadcast networks, and the market is tremendously competitive. We'll never see the days of ER pulling 32 million viewers a night again because there is so much choice. These days, 10-12 million viewers is a big success. -- Drmargi ( talk) 12:40, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Doctor Who/Archive 22 | |
---|---|
No. of seasons | 26 (1963–89) plus one TV film (1996) |
Doctor Who/Archive 22 | |
---|---|
No. of series | 34 series in total, including 26 in original run (1963–89) and 7 in revival (2005–present), excluding one TV film (1996) |
( ←) To quote this talk page archive "for some reason the term "season" has become the standard in Doctor Who fandom, dating at least back to Jean-Marc Lofficier's Programme Guide (first pub. 1981) and widely used since then."; there is an FAQ on the Talk:List of Doctor Who serials that says
It does seem to be a problem that this article doesn't explain this, so I can understand why people are confused. Edgepedia ( talk) 14:44, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Doctor Who/Archive 22 | |
---|---|
No. of seasons | 26 (1963–89)
[nb 1] plus one TV film (1996) |
What about some sort of footnote within the infobox, perhaps? — sroc ( talk) 11:42, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Has protection of this article ever been considered, given the very frequent vandalism the page received from unconstructive edits? Rafmarham ( talk) 17:03, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Just a quick note, please do not add Jenna Louise Coleman as the current companion in the infobox until after her first appearance as a series regular. Currently, there is no companion, so the infobox should reflect this. Thanks. drewmunn ( talk) 20:57, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Sonic, you made a very good point. 173.195.2.249 ( talk) 03:29, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
On the subject of Companions, does it strike anyone else that these paragraphs have become far too detailed? For example, it's not unusual in any tv series for characters to make return appearances after an absence, but someone has used this to go on at length about the late Ms. Sladen and Billie Piper, even adding the detail about Bad Wolf from 2005, which is irrelevant. This needs a good cleaning up. Takers? ZarhanFastfire ( talk) 07:18, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
As a big fan of Doctor Who and a follower of this thread for some time, I was wonder if the community could do me a favor. We are in need of an impartial Admin over at the Tau Epsilon Phi information page. There has been huge controversy over some NPOV issues. If an Admin is available who could please stop an edit war it would be much appreciated for your time. I realize this may not be the proper place for this request but I am turning to fellow fans for help.
Cherrio — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.174.57.25 ( talk) 15:47, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
In the new series, Daleks come in a range of colours; the colour of a Dalek denotes its role within the species.
Apart from the Black Dalek, I do not recall when significance has been explicitly given to different roles for colours of Daleks--but then I have not seen every episode made since 1963 (and yes, they came in different colours in the 60s too, viz., the films featuring "Dr. Who") so it's a bit tricky to verify and therefore challenge the unsourced assertion above. Does anyone know anything more about this? ZarhanFastfire ( talk) 04:10, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
As per a discussion above, I've just rewritten/jiggled the companions section. I felt it was too long, and focussed way too heavily on companions and plot aspects of the 2005+ series. The new version is far from perfect, but I feel it condenses much better the contents of the main article. Please feel free to improve, and expand the sections on classic companions. We shouldn't give unnecessary weight to the new series, although some extra emphasis should be put on the current companion. I think extension of classic details shouldn't increase overall length too much, but some extra is probably needed to round it off a little (loads of companions, possibly notable, aren't even mentioned). I've tried to keep listing to a minimum, but it was quite difficult when cutting out so much of the padding. Some linguistic poking may help the sections that are list-ish currently, so that'd be appreciated. Thanks! drewmunn talk 18:21, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey, it seems as if this page has a bit more activity to it than the Yeti (Doctor Who) or Great Intelligence pages and I was just wondering if anyone would be able to assess the quality of those two pages. Sorry for taking up your time on here with this, but thanks in advance if you can help. Just trying to help improve their quality is all. Comics ( talk) 06:19, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Forum content collapsed |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
GenreI was just passing by and noticed that the genre for Doctor Who is listed as only sci-fi drama, where as some pages such as the Supernatural (U.S. TV series) has multiple genres listed. The reason I bring this up is that, especially recently, the show has been covering many different genres in different episodes. Obviously, in terms of Supernatural, the genres are present in almost all episodes across the series, compared to Doctor Who, where they are much more fleeting, however, I still think that it's something that should be mentioned under genre, perhaps simply as "Multiple additional genres throughout". -- 194.83.93.50 ( talk) 14:39, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
(christine) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.110.24.6 ( talk) 23:25, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Referenced by The ClashIn The Clash's song "Remote Control" (on their self-titled album; the US version, maybe the UK version also, I don't know) features Joe Strummer singing "Gonna(?) be a Dalek/I am a robot/I obey," starting at about 2:30 into the song. I'd add the reference but I probably don't have enough other edits to be able to edit the page. 66.31.19.45 ( talk) 07:35, 2 May 2013 (UTC)forgoodforall
|
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 |
I've wondered this with a lot of TV-shows, but what is the difference between for example "LOST: Season 3" and "Doctor Who: Series 3"? Can't be because in America there are tons of episodes in their TV shows as I even have The Sopranos on DVD, and it is a 12-episode season/series, and says "Series 1/2/3/4 etc" on the box. I'm just wondering because, I even have some of classic Doctor Who DVDs, but they were never called season (on the box I mean), they just have the story titles. But what is the difference between a TV show having 'series' and 'seasons'? The classic Doctor Who would be better suited for serials as we all know because thats what they were, even mentions it on the article I believe. Charlr6 ( talk) 13:27, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Close. American broadcast television (versus cable television) is organized into an annual season running roughly from mid-September to mid-May. The majority of broadcast television programs make their debuts during a given season, generally in the fall; we're in that premiere period right now. A few shows (and we do use series as a synonym for show for reasons long lost in the vapors of time), are termed "mid-season replacements" (although mid- can be used a bit loosely). They start later, as failed series are removed from the schedule and replaced. We're about to see the axe fall on a couple early and spectacular failures which must already be replaced on the schedule (who in his right mind thought a series about a mafia doctor would be successful?) A good example of a successful mid-season replacement that I believe you're getting in the UK is Castle, which started in February, 2009 and is now one of ABC's most popular scripted dramas. An average full season runs in the neighborhood of 22-24 episodes, while a mid-season replacement generally runs around 10-12 episodes. During the summer, the networks either rerun programming, or increasingly, show limited-run series or unscripted/reality programs. I know ABC has a seven-episode spring/summer series in the works that will begin in late spring, and is an adaptation of a European series. The broadcast networks have also flirted with shortened or split seasons a bit, as they did with Lost, but that's been less than a resounding success.
Cable is a different story. Their big season is the summer, when broadcast is in rerun/garbage mode (as I call reality TV.) TNT and USA began the push for new, quality scripted dramas in the summer (you should still get The Closer, which just ended here, and Burn Notice, for example.) Now we have a number of cable networks: AMC, A&E, SyFy and more running scripted drama during the summer season. Sometimes it's all you can do to keep up during the summer; much of the most innovative programming is coming from cable (The Walking Dead, Mad Men, The Closer, etc.) although the networks are catching on (Person of Interest being a great example.) Cable series are shorter in length, generally 13-16 episodes, are allowed to run their full seasons unless they're a spectacular failure, and increasingly, run short winter seasons of 5 or 6 episodes. They also do limited run series, like The Hatfields and McCoys, which was a huge and unexpected hit from a minor cable channel and starred Kevin Costner. Then there's HBO, Showtime and Starz! (which recently took over production of Torchwood in collaboration with the BBC); their programming starts whenever it suits them, but is still described in terms of seasons (long story why they probably used series on The Sopranos; I'm sure it's all in the article herein.) Cable is drawing more and more established actors from film because of the creativity and opportunity to create characters long-term, as well as the opportunities for actresses "of a certain age".
And then there's networks like BBC America who import programming; we get Doctor Who the same day as you do, but a few hours later for reasons that should be obvious. It's not simple, but it's a big country spread across six time zones, we have a huge number of cable channels in addition to the four primary broadcast networks, and the market is tremendously competitive. We'll never see the days of ER pulling 32 million viewers a night again because there is so much choice. These days, 10-12 million viewers is a big success. -- Drmargi ( talk) 12:40, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Doctor Who/Archive 22 | |
---|---|
No. of seasons | 26 (1963–89) plus one TV film (1996) |
Doctor Who/Archive 22 | |
---|---|
No. of series | 34 series in total, including 26 in original run (1963–89) and 7 in revival (2005–present), excluding one TV film (1996) |
( ←) To quote this talk page archive "for some reason the term "season" has become the standard in Doctor Who fandom, dating at least back to Jean-Marc Lofficier's Programme Guide (first pub. 1981) and widely used since then."; there is an FAQ on the Talk:List of Doctor Who serials that says
It does seem to be a problem that this article doesn't explain this, so I can understand why people are confused. Edgepedia ( talk) 14:44, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Doctor Who/Archive 22 | |
---|---|
No. of seasons | 26 (1963–89)
[nb 1] plus one TV film (1996) |
What about some sort of footnote within the infobox, perhaps? — sroc ( talk) 11:42, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Has protection of this article ever been considered, given the very frequent vandalism the page received from unconstructive edits? Rafmarham ( talk) 17:03, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
Just a quick note, please do not add Jenna Louise Coleman as the current companion in the infobox until after her first appearance as a series regular. Currently, there is no companion, so the infobox should reflect this. Thanks. drewmunn ( talk) 20:57, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Sonic, you made a very good point. 173.195.2.249 ( talk) 03:29, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
On the subject of Companions, does it strike anyone else that these paragraphs have become far too detailed? For example, it's not unusual in any tv series for characters to make return appearances after an absence, but someone has used this to go on at length about the late Ms. Sladen and Billie Piper, even adding the detail about Bad Wolf from 2005, which is irrelevant. This needs a good cleaning up. Takers? ZarhanFastfire ( talk) 07:18, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
As a big fan of Doctor Who and a follower of this thread for some time, I was wonder if the community could do me a favor. We are in need of an impartial Admin over at the Tau Epsilon Phi information page. There has been huge controversy over some NPOV issues. If an Admin is available who could please stop an edit war it would be much appreciated for your time. I realize this may not be the proper place for this request but I am turning to fellow fans for help.
Cherrio — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.174.57.25 ( talk) 15:47, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
In the new series, Daleks come in a range of colours; the colour of a Dalek denotes its role within the species.
Apart from the Black Dalek, I do not recall when significance has been explicitly given to different roles for colours of Daleks--but then I have not seen every episode made since 1963 (and yes, they came in different colours in the 60s too, viz., the films featuring "Dr. Who") so it's a bit tricky to verify and therefore challenge the unsourced assertion above. Does anyone know anything more about this? ZarhanFastfire ( talk) 04:10, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
As per a discussion above, I've just rewritten/jiggled the companions section. I felt it was too long, and focussed way too heavily on companions and plot aspects of the 2005+ series. The new version is far from perfect, but I feel it condenses much better the contents of the main article. Please feel free to improve, and expand the sections on classic companions. We shouldn't give unnecessary weight to the new series, although some extra emphasis should be put on the current companion. I think extension of classic details shouldn't increase overall length too much, but some extra is probably needed to round it off a little (loads of companions, possibly notable, aren't even mentioned). I've tried to keep listing to a minimum, but it was quite difficult when cutting out so much of the padding. Some linguistic poking may help the sections that are list-ish currently, so that'd be appreciated. Thanks! drewmunn talk 18:21, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Hey, it seems as if this page has a bit more activity to it than the Yeti (Doctor Who) or Great Intelligence pages and I was just wondering if anyone would be able to assess the quality of those two pages. Sorry for taking up your time on here with this, but thanks in advance if you can help. Just trying to help improve their quality is all. Comics ( talk) 06:19, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Forum content collapsed |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
GenreI was just passing by and noticed that the genre for Doctor Who is listed as only sci-fi drama, where as some pages such as the Supernatural (U.S. TV series) has multiple genres listed. The reason I bring this up is that, especially recently, the show has been covering many different genres in different episodes. Obviously, in terms of Supernatural, the genres are present in almost all episodes across the series, compared to Doctor Who, where they are much more fleeting, however, I still think that it's something that should be mentioned under genre, perhaps simply as "Multiple additional genres throughout". -- 194.83.93.50 ( talk) 14:39, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
(christine) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.110.24.6 ( talk) 23:25, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Referenced by The ClashIn The Clash's song "Remote Control" (on their self-titled album; the US version, maybe the UK version also, I don't know) features Joe Strummer singing "Gonna(?) be a Dalek/I am a robot/I obey," starting at about 2:30 into the song. I'd add the reference but I probably don't have enough other edits to be able to edit the page. 66.31.19.45 ( talk) 07:35, 2 May 2013 (UTC)forgoodforall
|