Doctor Who vs. "Doctor Who (2005)

[Tara]

Am I the only one using this DB who doesn't STRONGLY feel that the 2005-present edition of Doctor Who is NOT a new series or "re-envisioning" of any sort, but is, in fact, the same series, picking up where it left off with Season 27?

The writers of the show seem to think it follows the same continuity. They have said so on many occasions, regardless of how the DVD packages are labeled.

I hate having to have two separate entries for the show in my media player. There is one and only one Doctor Who series, and the Eccleston/Tennant episodes are part of it.

Couldn't we have the new episodes listed both ways, so people could display them as they see fit?

[Coco]

To be perfectly honest I do agree with you about it being one series, but it'll never be listed that way on this site. The BBC markets it as a separate seires, plus pretty much every single site does it this way as well. Switching it would upset A LOT of people and adding them to the other doctor who record would go against our no duplicate rule as well as upset some people since they'd look for a season 27+ and not find it.

There is pretty much no chance we'd change the way we list it.

[Tara]

Thanks for your quick reply.

I understand the thinking behind the "no duplicates" rule, but shouldn't this be an exception?

That is, unless there was a way to add an alternate season-list feature (sort of like how XBMC users can choose to sort some shows by DVD-order rather than air-date order), this rigid application of one and only one way to sort the seasons forces at least a large minority of users to settle for the way which others have chosen to sort them, when one can clearly make the case for either method as being the "legitimate" way.

[Coco]

No this shouldn't be an exeception. There are current 0 allowed exceptions to the duplicate rule and I highly doubt there ever will be an exception to it. Duplicates are just bad practice all around. It is currently entered the "legitimate" way, the network that makes the show markets it this way. Making exceptions is almost always a bad idea because you never get everyone to agree to the exact same thing which just causes disputes so you need firm rules.

Even if exceptions were made I really doubt this would get one. Basicly everyone universally agrees to list it this way. There was some debate when they started up in 2005 with a few people labeling at as season 27 but almost nobody does anymore.

[ShavenYak]

I can understand where Tara's coming from - there's a big difference between the new Doctor Who and, say, the new Battlestar Galactica or the new Knight Rider. Doctor Who is the same story, the same main character, quite literally picking up where it left off before. But, it's the BBC's baby, and they've chosen to restart the season numbering. If thetvdb.com listed it as a continuation of the old series, it would cause massive confusion.

I think a good solution would be for media center developers to provide some sort of option for users to group related series together.

[Tara]

Yeah, this wouldn't be such a burr in my saddle if media players like XBMC (or Plex, in my case) were a little less rigid about maintaining exactly what's in the TVDB. You're probably right that the correct solution is to make the clients more flexible, rather than complicate the database.

[Coco]

If you're using XBMC you could always just make an nfo file and change the data to be the way you want. Of course it would mean you'd have to edit it every time a new show was added for that series as it wouldn't match up with our site but you could do it.