Talk:Companion: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Tag: sourceedit
No edit summary
Tag: sourceedit
Line 16: Line 16:


:The "behind the scenes" section of this article actually goes into depth on this point. You can find an explanation of the wiki's stance there. The forums are also full of companion debates, if you're interested, but they're not really eye-opening.--{{User:Skittles the hog/sig}} 01:37, February 4, 2016 (UTC)
:The "behind the scenes" section of this article actually goes into depth on this point. You can find an explanation of the wiki's stance there. The forums are also full of companion debates, if you're interested, but they're not really eye-opening.--{{User:Skittles the hog/sig}} 01:37, February 4, 2016 (UTC)
::Presumably Liz Shaw went home each night, after her shift at UNIT.  Is she just an "associate"?  Where does K9 fit in this?  Another "associate"?  Kamelion?
::If you were a long time viewer, you wouldn't have been thinking about any of them as "companions" in the seventies - the women were "assistants".  In the sixties they were mainly thought of as the Doctor's friends, although the word companion was used now and again.[[Special:Contributions/165.225.76.56|165.225.76.56]]<sup>[[User talk:165.225.76.56#top|talk to me]]</sup> 13:08, August 23, 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:08, 23 August 2017

Archive.png
Archives: #1, #2

Tegan *narrowly* beating Clara in calendar time

Removed reference to Clara Oswald here:

In terms of calendar time that the public would have perceived a character as being a regular on Doctor Who, the winner is Tegan, clocking in at thirteen days shy of three years from her first regular appearance in Logopolis on 28 February 1981 to her last regular appearance in Resurrection of the Daleks on 15 February 1984. She only very narrowly defeats Clara, who is some four weeks short of three years as a regular character.

Because 1. Narrowly defeating is still defeating, and 2. In what way would Clara's cameo in The Snowmen count as a "regular appearance" to most people? Surely by most proper measurements she became a regular beginning with The Bells of Saint John in March 2013, making her run as a regular two years, seven months and 21 days? -- Tybort (talk page) 21:15, November 29, 2015 (UTC)

  • On Point 1: In terms of it being extraneous information, I can't dispute that, though it had sat unchallenged for years when Sara Jane was in the #2 spot. Addressing Point 2: Clara Oswin Oswald, the Victorian nanny, is considered the same character by dint of her status as a "splinter" of the original Clara (note that this very wiki defines the relationship accordingly). I'll go ahead and clean the rest of the section's clutter up. {{SUBST:User:Dangerdan97/Sig}} 13:48, November 30, 2015 (UTC)


What constitutes a companion?

For me it is clear... A companion has their own room in the Tardis. Everyone else I would consider an associate regardless of how close or long the association was. I am a long time viewer and fan of the show, but I am certainly no wiki expert here. But I have never considered either the brigadier or Rvier Song a companion. And I do not believe either one had their own room in the Tardis. Martek 00:27, February 4, 2016 (UTC)

The "behind the scenes" section of this article actually goes into depth on this point. You can find an explanation of the wiki's stance there. The forums are also full of companion debates, if you're interested, but they're not really eye-opening.--Skittles the hog - talk 01:37, February 4, 2016 (UTC)
Presumably Liz Shaw went home each night, after her shift at UNIT. Is she just an "associate"? Where does K9 fit in this? Another "associate"? Kamelion?
If you were a long time viewer, you wouldn't have been thinking about any of them as "companions" in the seventies - the women were "assistants". In the sixties they were mainly thought of as the Doctor's friends, although the word companion was used now and again.165.225.76.56talk to me 13:08, August 23, 2017 (UTC)