|
|
| (46 intermediate revisions by 28 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{Talk}} | | {{ArchCat}} |
|
| |
|
| == Enemy == | | == Story numbering == |
| | According to every official Doctor Who guide where the stories are all numbered, [[A Good Man Goes to War (TV story)|A Good Man Goes to War]] and [[Let's Kill Hitler (TV story)|Let's Kill Hitler]] are both listed as two separate stories rather than one 2-part story. The same goes for [[The Girl Who Died (TV story)|The Girl Who Died]] and [[The Woman Who Lived (TV story)|The Woman Who Lived]]. I can see how the mistake was made with the latter two since they both share similar titles, but for the two series 6 episodes, there's nothing between them to indicate that they're two parts of one story, so what's the reasoning behind it? |
|
| |
|
| I was wondering, could we add the enemy to the infobox? Because we already have the enemy confirmed as the "Tessalecta" (or however you spell it). [[User:TheTARDIScontroller|TheTARDIScontroller]] 14:46, August 20, 2011 (UTC)
| | PS, the Wikipedia pages for the episodes all have them numbered correctly, so if you need help figuring out what the numbers are, that's the best place to look. [[User:Kahler Bill|Kahler Bill]] [[User talk:Kahler Bill|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:27, May 9, 2016 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| :It's not confirmed until the episode broadcasts. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 15:13, August 20, 2011 (UTC) | | :This matter is under discussion at [[Thread:183627]]. [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:34, May 9, 2016 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| == Full cast list == | | == Janitor/Cleaner/Teselecta == |
|
| |
|
| The full cast list had been confirmed:
| | Okay, I am seriously confused and would LOVE to know this one piece of information. |
|
| |
|
| http://doctorwhotv.co.uk/lets-kill-hitler-cast-gallery-24623.htm
| | In this episode, the teselecta first appears as a janitor or cleaner. The person playing this cleaner is uncredited, but I realised that I knew their face from somewhere, and when I was watching part of [[Aliens of London (TV story)|Aliens of London]] today, I realised that the soldier who shoots Porkins the Alien is played by the same guy. Does anyone know who he is, why he is not in the uncredited cast section and why he has appeared in two Doctor Who stories (that I know of)? Is he a friend of the cast and crew, or just someone who happens to be in the area many times? I NEED TO KNOW!!! (thanks!) [[User:LawOfTheSeas|While other places may have mice or mosquitoes, we have... DRAGONS! (LawOfTheSeas)]] [[User talk:LawOfTheSeas|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:16, April 14, 2018 (UTC) |
| | |
| (go to the bottom of the article)
| |
| | |
| [[User:DuduDoctor|DuduDoctor]] 08:07, August 23, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :Again, these things can change upon broadcast, which is why we wait until the broadcast of the episode before adding things like this. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 14:59, August 23, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == And Hitler? ==
| |
| | |
| Can someone fix this statement "the greatest war criminal in the Universe. And Hitler". First of all the period should be a comma and it's Adolf Hitler not And Hitler
| |
| | |
| :Read it again. It means that the Doctor meets the greatest war criminal in the Universe, and he also meets Hitler. Two different people. [[User:DuduDoctor|DuduDoctor]] 08:10, August 24, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| Well, this is the official synopsis and it's left as its own sentence for emphasis, not to be grammatically correct.--{{User:Skittles the hog/sig}} 10:15, August 24, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| I'm glad that someone besides me cares about conjunctions being used to join clauses without periods in between, even if that person doesn't care to sign his posts. However, it's much funnier with the period. [[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] 22:08, August 24, 2011 (UTC) | |
| | |
| :I used to care, being a Grammar Nazi and all (hah, how about that?), but it's acceptable to now. It's fine, and that's how it's supposed to be anyway. [[User:ProtoKun7|ProtoKun7]] 19:34, August 27, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == broadcast ==
| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| when will the episode be broadcast? | |
| | |
| It will be broadcated on Saturday 27th August, 18:00 (I think...) [[User:Nafoute|Nafoute, R. C. with a P. in the M.]] 09:29, August 25, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Locked? ==
| |
| | |
| I don't think this article should be locked, and instead semi-protected. Do you not trust users and only admins? I really want to edit this article. Could it just be semi-protected instead? That would be more plausible. [[User:BroadcastCorp|BroadcastCorp]] <small>([[User talk:BroadcastCorp|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/BroadcastCorp|contribs]])</small> 12:31, August 25, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :It seems to be standard procedure here to lock the article for the week before broadcast. Write the changes and hold them for 60 hours. [[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] 12:41, August 25, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ::This is because of our [[Tardis:Spoiler policy|spoiler]] and [[Tardis:Protection policy|protection polices]]. If you want to edit the page, you can leave your edits/suggests here on the talk where we will review them and add them to the page, judging that they are inside the polices. I do apologise to your for any inconvenience, angry or upset this may cause you. [[User:Mini-mitch|MM]]/<small>[[User talk:Mini-mitch|Want to talk?]]</small> 12:48, August 25, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| It's not that you aren't trusted, it's just that registered users in general (myself included) are liable to adding spoilers. I'm not sure what changes you actually what to make that don't offend [[Tardis:Spoiler policy]]. The article as it now stands is exactly how it should look prior to broadcast.--{{User:Skittles the hog/sig}} 13:15, August 25, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| Rumors. [[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] 13:21, August 25, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :::Well, you're talking about the practical side of things, MM, and how a user can respond to a locked page. Looking in it in those terms — ''put it here and we'll review it for suitability'' — does tend to make it unintentionally seem like we don't trust our users.
| |
| | |
| :::So let me say this quite firmly: '''It's not a matter of not trusting our users. It's a matter of not trusting ''Moffat'', RTD, the BBC, and anyone else making our favourite shows.''' They all routinely lie to the press, or the press that is ''usually'' right (like DWM) get it wrong, and we're left with egg on our faces. This is an encyclopedia. Our goal is to report accurately on '''the past'''. It is '''not''' our job to predict or describe '''the future'''.
| |
| | |
| :::This policy derives from the experience in series 5 where ''The Vampires of Vemice'' had a "confirmed" name of ''The Vampires From Venice'' just a few days before broadcast. When it turned out to be ''The Vampires '''of''' Venice''', we had to scramble around and change all the links that had been made. It also comes from the experience with ''The Pandorica Opens'', which no one knew was actually the name of a painting in the DWU. Thus, we had to scramble and change references to the TV story to ''The Pandorica Opens (TV story)'' in order to comply with [[tardis:disambiguation policy|disambiguation policy]]. Moreover, it comes from the '''many, many''' times that DWM have apparently been speaking with the authority of the production company, but then turned out to be completely wrong — such as when they recently told us that [[Esther Drummond]] was actually Esther Katsui.
| |
| | |
| :::The goal of the [[tardis:spoiler policy|spoiler policy]] — which is what's locking this article — is to prevent people from wasting a lot of time with misinformation apparently supplied by a reliable source. While it's very unlikely that the name of this well-publicised ep will change at broadcast, it ''is'' possible that ''Let's Kill Hitler'' is the name of a book or movie in the episode. Personally, I think the article has been created '''prematurely'''. I don't even think it should exist in a locked form at this point. I think it shouldn't be started until — at the earliest — the credits roll on the premiere broadcast on BBC One. That way, it will have been possible to have seen the title flash on the screen.
| |
| | |
| :::Think of this policy as the "Peter Davidson Rule" — after the time when [[Peter Davison]] was famously said to be Peter ''Davidson'' on the cover of DWM, prior to the transmission of his first episode. If DWM can make a typo with such a well-known actor — and on a cover that proclaimed them an award-winning magazine, no less — then they simply cannot be trusted as accurate spellers. Spelling is at the very heart of a wiki, because links depend upon having the precisely correct spelling of a topic. Waiting until an episode is broadcast won't completely eliminate our spelling errors, but it does give us at least the '''chance''' of getting the article name correct from the start.
| |
| | |
| :::Thus, the basic principle at work here is that mistakes are minimised if the episode page is closed until it's possible that someone will have '''actually seen''' the story. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} <span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''13:21:11 Thu '''25 Aug 2011 </span>
| |
| | |
| :::[This message has been attempted two times, both times encountering an edit conflict. Apologies if it doesn't flow from the previous comment as originally intended.]
| |
| | |
| Czechout, it seems to me that the reasons you cite for locking the main articles about stories until they actually run is a good idea. If it is not already some place in to which people can be referred, it would be a good idea to write it up and place it. [[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] 22:55, August 25, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Main image to be an episode still ==
| |
| | |
| [[File:Doctortophatstill.jpg|thumb|Here is the one I had in mind.]]
| |
| I think until tommorow, we should add an episode still for the main image, don't you agree? Here's one I had in mind: [[User:BroadcastCorp|BroadcastCorp]] <small>([[User talk:BroadcastCorp|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/BroadcastCorp|contribs]])</small> 16:03, August 26, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| I'd rather wait 24 hours than add a low quality image. It's not like there's any rush to create a superb pre-broadcast article. This should just sit as the framework, ready for the post-broadcast edits to flood in.--{{User:Skittles the hog/sig}} 16:07, August 26, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| I don't mean to argue with you Skittles, but 1) I sorta agree with BroadcastCorp and 2) Honestly, that pic he put up is actually really good quality. [[User:TheTARDIScontroller|TheTARDIScontroller]] 00:30, August 27, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| :Just wait; there's only a day to go, and it's not like there's a rush, is there? --[[User:Bold Clone|<span style="color:darkblue">'''Bold'''</span>]] [[User Talk:Bold Clone|<span style="color:gold">'''Clone'''</span>]] 01:31, August 27, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| Just to note, I wasn't knocking the actual "quality" of the image - as in, how non-blurry, grainy etc. it was, but rather the content. I'm sure there will be many, many images that better sum up the episode.--{{User:Skittles the hog/sig}} 07:10, August 27, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Semi-protect this article? ==
| |
| | |
| This article deperately needs to be semi-protected, or for short, protected. It's a high traffic page. I'm depending on an admin to do this. [[User:BroadcastCorp|BroadcastCorp]] <small>([[User talk:BroadcastCorp|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/BroadcastCorp|contribs]])</small> 20:24, August 27, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| :Nope, the new Torchwood story didn't, so we've decide to see what happens to this page when it's not protected straight after broadcast. There never any need to single out new and unregistered Users. This is to make every one feel equal and feel they can edit the page. [[User:Mini-mitch|MM]]/<small>[[User talk:Mini-mitch|Want to talk?]]</small> 21:20, August 27, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Gun ==
| |
| | |
| Now I may be wrong, but I'm sure that the gun that hittler pulls out of his belt, is a standard german officers lugar, but when rory is holding it, its a revolver, is that a production error, or did I just miss see it? [[User:General MGD 109|General MGD 109]] 21:17, August 27, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| : Actually no, Hitler draws the revolver. Why Hitler would carry a revolver that looks like a British model, no idea, nor do I remember Hitler ever carrying a side arm.[[User:Var'jhar'rai|Var'jhar'rai]] 02:28, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Silence ==
| |
| | |
| Okay for one how has the doctor forgotten about the silence? he just never figured out what they are and what they wanted and secondly if it isn't already noted Mel(ody)/River had already killed the Doctor [[User:Cory Jaynes|Cory Jaynes]] 01:59, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Production errors ==
| |
| | |
| The entry on production errors is wrong. The gun in use is a revolver, not a semi-automatic, which means the empty brass stays in the drum instead of ejecting the spent brass. Hitler fires his shots, the doctor then removes the brass from the drum, effectively unloading the revolver. The brass we get to see in the unloading scene is actually empty. [[User:Var'jhar'rai|Var'jhar'rai]] 02:31, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Revelations on The Silence ==
| |
| | |
| I gotta say, I'll be watching with a bit of amusement to see how the wiki handles updating and creating articles involving The Silence after what we learned about its real nature today. Not saying it outright due to spoilers. [[Special:Contributions/99.60.84.136|99.60.84.136]] 02:35, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
| |
