More actions
JohnVeness (talk | contribs) (→Twitter video: new section) |
|||
| (57 intermediate revisions by 38 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ArchCat}} | |||
== Time Lord vs Gallifreyan == | |||
Surely Jenny is Gallifreyan and not yet Time Lord? Because it seems the only way to become a Time Lord to go through the academy, which of course, Jenny has not done. Even the Doctor says she isn't. Yes, he refers to seeing them through her, but surely that's just from most Time Lords being Gallifreyan, therefore he can still see them through her. [[User:Ben Moore512|Ben Moore512]] [[User talk:Ben Moore512|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:20, September 23, 2018 (UTC) | |||
:The new Big Finish box set has confirmed that Jenny is a Time Lord. Garundel scans her DNA and says that he has seen it before (when meeting the Doctor in an earlier Big Finish play). It seems that the semantics of going to the Academy aren't considered by these newer releases. --[[User:Revanvolatrelundar|Revan]]\[[User_talk:Revanvolatrelundar|Talk]] 17:13, September 23, 2018 (UTC) | |||
:: Oh well. Maybe she's a Time Lord because her DNA is completely copied from the Doctor, not just the Gallifreyan parts. [[User:Ben Moore512|Ben Moore512]] [[User talk:Ben Moore512|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:16, September 23, 2018 (UTC) | |||
:Or because modern writers (quite rightly in my opinion) are junking the "Academy graduates get genetic alterations to make them full Time Lords" idea just like they junked Looms. Which, you know, quite right in my opinion. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 09:44, June 4, 2019 (UTC) | |||
Per [[Tardis:Discussion policy]], article talk pages are for discussing the '''editing''' of an article, not for speculation or opinion. [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 04:59, June 5, 2019 (UTC) | |||
: Some of the posts in this discussion may have veered into speculation as part of this, but the point of this section ''is'' to discuss a point of editing in the article. Namely, Ben Moore512 feels that we oughtn't identify Jenny's species as "Time Lord" in the article. Revan and I argued against this suggestion. All in the business of editing.--[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:27, June 5, 2019 (UTC) | |||
== Rename == | |||
I'm not sure I'm in favour of this rename. Yes, theoretically she might qualify as a primary topic — but a lot of fans' primary associations with the name "Jenny" ''are'' going to be [[Jenny Flint|the "Paternoster Gang" Jenny]], whose last name doesn't strike me as that well-known outside committed fandom. Additionally, in terms of searchability, I surmise that most people will tend to Google "Doctor's Daughter Jenny", not just "Jenny". We have here a very rare case where the [[T:DAB]]-mandated story-title dab doubles as the descriptor for the character that most people would be looking for; I think it is a stroke of luck we shouldn't discard out of hand. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 15:12, 20 June 2021 (UTC) | |||
: Yeah, I agree with all of the above. I think there would be a loss in searchability and conciseness if the proposed change were to go through, as outlined in Scrooge's reasoning. [[User:Danochy|Danochy]] [[User talk:Danochy|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 06:45, 21 June 2021 (UTC) | |||
:: I agree with the above as well. While I think the Doctor's daughter probably would be who the majority of people would be looking for if they just searched "Jenny", I don't think it would be ''enough'' of a majority to justify the rename. The name is just a bit too common to direct to one character. At least with the dab, those searching for the character will know for sure they have the right Jenny. [[User:LauraBatham|LauraBatham]] [[User talk:LauraBatham|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 08:22, 21 June 2021 (UTC) | |||
::: Considering these points, I do feel as if keeping the dab now is best. <div style="background-color:#0E234E; border: solid 0.5px gold; display: inline; white-space: nowrap;">[[doctorwho:user:Epsilon the Eternal|<span style="background:#0E234E; color:white"><code>Epsilon</code></span>]][[doctorwho:user talk:Epsilon the Eternal|📯]] [[doctorwho:special:Contributions/Epsilon the Eternal|📂]]</div> 11:11, 22 November 2021 (UTC) | |||
How come the move was carried out anyway, despite a full consensus here? [[User:Danochy|Danochy]] [[User talk:Danochy|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC) | |||
== Twitter video == | |||
The link https://twitter.com/georgiaetennant/status/957666470233870337 no longer works. Has anyone archived the video? --[[User:JohnVeness|JohnVeness]] [[User talk:JohnVeness|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 18:47, 18 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 18:47, 18 June 2024
 |
Archives: #1 |
|---|
Time Lord vs Gallifreyan[[edit source]]
Surely Jenny is Gallifreyan and not yet Time Lord? Because it seems the only way to become a Time Lord to go through the academy, which of course, Jenny has not done. Even the Doctor says she isn't. Yes, he refers to seeing them through her, but surely that's just from most Time Lords being Gallifreyan, therefore he can still see them through her. Ben Moore512 ☎ 16:20, September 23, 2018 (UTC)
- The new Big Finish box set has confirmed that Jenny is a Time Lord. Garundel scans her DNA and says that he has seen it before (when meeting the Doctor in an earlier Big Finish play). It seems that the semantics of going to the Academy aren't considered by these newer releases. --Revan\Talk 17:13, September 23, 2018 (UTC)
- Oh well. Maybe she's a Time Lord because her DNA is completely copied from the Doctor, not just the Gallifreyan parts. Ben Moore512 ☎ 17:16, September 23, 2018 (UTC)
- Or because modern writers (quite rightly in my opinion) are junking the "Academy graduates get genetic alterations to make them full Time Lords" idea just like they junked Looms. Which, you know, quite right in my opinion. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 09:44, June 4, 2019 (UTC)
Per Tardis:Discussion policy, article talk pages are for discussing the editing of an article, not for speculation or opinion. Shambala108 ☎ 04:59, June 5, 2019 (UTC)
- Some of the posts in this discussion may have veered into speculation as part of this, but the point of this section is to discuss a point of editing in the article. Namely, Ben Moore512 feels that we oughtn't identify Jenny's species as "Time Lord" in the article. Revan and I argued against this suggestion. All in the business of editing.--Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 17:27, June 5, 2019 (UTC)
Rename[[edit source]]
I'm not sure I'm in favour of this rename. Yes, theoretically she might qualify as a primary topic — but a lot of fans' primary associations with the name "Jenny" are going to be the "Paternoster Gang" Jenny, whose last name doesn't strike me as that well-known outside committed fandom. Additionally, in terms of searchability, I surmise that most people will tend to Google "Doctor's Daughter Jenny", not just "Jenny". We have here a very rare case where the T:DAB-mandated story-title dab doubles as the descriptor for the character that most people would be looking for; I think it is a stroke of luck we shouldn't discard out of hand. Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 15:12, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, I agree with all of the above. I think there would be a loss in searchability and conciseness if the proposed change were to go through, as outlined in Scrooge's reasoning. Danochy ☎ 06:45, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- I agree with the above as well. While I think the Doctor's daughter probably would be who the majority of people would be looking for if they just searched "Jenny", I don't think it would be enough of a majority to justify the rename. The name is just a bit too common to direct to one character. At least with the dab, those searching for the character will know for sure they have the right Jenny. LauraBatham ☎ 08:22, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- Considering these points, I do feel as if keeping the dab now is best. 11:11, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
How come the move was carried out anyway, despite a full consensus here? Danochy ☎ 00:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Twitter video[[edit source]]
The link https://twitter.com/georgiaetennant/status/957666470233870337 no longer works. Has anyone archived the video? --JohnVeness ☎ 18:47, 18 June 2024 (UTC)