Talk:River Song: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
m (Protected "Talk:River Song": out of an abundance of caution this page is locked until 1900 UTC 18 May 2013 per Thread:130517 (‎[edit=sysop] (expires 19:00, May 18, 2013 (UTC)) ‎[move=sysop] (expires 19:00, May 18, 2013 (UTC))))
No edit summary
Tag: 2017 source edit
 
(138 intermediate revisions by 38 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{ArchCat}}
{{ArchCat}}


==Cook Yourself a Time Lord==
== Revisiting the split pages decision ==
 
Almost ten years ago, [[Forum:River Song incarnations or full page?|it was decided]] that River incarnations were to be all merged under a single page. However, more recent decision led me to propose we split the River pages again into new incarnations. They are as follow:
So there've been a couple of edits to the intro section recently about how River came to have some of her "Time Lord-y" qualities, such as superhuman strength and regeneration. Obviously, this is at least in part due to having been conceived in the vortex. The intro right now states that as the only cause. However, ''[[A Good Man Goes to War (TV story)|A Good Man Goes to War]]''strongly implies that she had been or later would be further augmented by the Silence. For example, this exchange:
* Put simply, [[River Song]] is a name that applies '''only''' to her third incarnation. It's as wrong to call the baby Amy gave birth to, or the young girl that was Amy and Rory's childhood friend "River Song" than it would be to call the incarnation of the Doctor who fought in the Time War by "Twelfth Doctor", "the Curator" or "War Curator", even though these are all names used by future versions of him. In fact, this was one of the reasons I argued so hard that [[the Eleven]]'s incarnations absolutely ''could not'' have a single page a few years ago. The same surely applies to River.
 
* As has been done with several Time Lords recently, splitting their incarnations into a single page allows better coverage ''and'' readability.
: DOCTOR:Doesn't make sense! You can't just cook yourself a Time Lord.
* Naming the majority of pages regarding this character would be extremely easy (something which was argued otherwise in the original discussion). It's very explicit that River/Melody had three incarnations:
: VASTRA:Of course not, but you gave them one hell of a start and they've been working very hard ever since.
** From birth to the [[User:OncomingStorm12th/Little girl (The Impossible Astronaut)|little girl]] from ''The Impossible Astronaut'' we see regenerating on the streets of New York
 
** [[User:OncomingStorm12th/Mels Zucker|Mels Zucker]], who grew up alongside her parents
The Biography section seems to give a more balanced account, indicating that the conception in the vortex gave her the "potential" for those abilities. Since I think everyone can agree on that at least, I'm going to copy the line from this section to the intro as well for the time being. Further thoughts?[[User:Spreee|Spreee]] <sup>[[User talk:Spreee|talk to me]]</sup> 20:30, April 27, 2012 (UTC)Spreee
** [[User:OncomingStorm12th/River Song|River Song]] her third and final incarnation
 
* Now, that only leaves the problem of whether to use "Melody Pond" to her first incarnation or the overall page. As Mels also uses the name on her deathbed, and River Song also uses her real name on [[A Good Man Goes to War (TV story)]] to reveal her true identity, I'd vote for keeping [[Melody Pond]] for [[User:OncomingStorm12th/Melody Pond|the overall page]], while using "little girl" for the first incarnation (as she was credited as such).
Thank you. It should noted that even the Time Lords couldn't just cook a Time Lord every time, even with all the ingredients: exposure to the Untempered Schism over billions of years;  building of time ships involving inventing neutron stars; genetic manipulation by Rassilon; a  billion years of cultural history; training at the Academy; linkage to a TARDIS via the Rassilon Imprimatur...  and not every Gallifreyan was a Time Lord. It's like looking at australopithecus and saying it has the potential to graduate Sandhurst in fifteen million years. I don't believe that River is a Time Lord or Time Lady, but she has many of the marks of one and is as close to one as we're getting -- at least until the 2012 Christmas Special, about which I have some hopes and suspicions. "Part Time Lord" would probably be closer, but given  her ''sui generis'' nature, it's probably best to point and say "Look! It's a River Song." [[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] <sup>[[User talk:Boblipton|talk to me]]</sup> 21:05, April 27, 2012 (UTC)
* Mind you, it wouldn't be the first time we use credits/conjectural names for a Time Lord splitting, as per [[Renegade Time Lord (The Eleven)]]. And, like that page, the bad term also happens to describe the exact subject we're talking about, as River/Melody was also ''the'' Impossible Astronaut.
 
===Age at the Library===
Okay. Stop and think. River's hair had darkened by then and she had a few winkles. It makes sense it toke place years after her last meeting with the version of the Doctor married to herself.- ([[Special:Contributions/173.167.179.77|173.167.179.77]]<sup>[[User talk:173.167.179.77#top|talk to me]]</sup> 18:01, May 15, 2012 (UTC))
 
She said herself that she changed her age "Just to mess with people", but really just a way of explaining how she looks older in Silence in the Library.
 
== Bisexuality ==
 
We've got a little edit war going on over mention of River's bisexuality. I think that regardless of Moffat's tweets on the subject, there's a clear implication in ''Silence in the Library''. She as much as says that she fancies everyone on the expedition except Mr. Lux. I don't think that there's another way to take that exchange. Plus, she comes from the same century as Jack, and it's been made clear elsewhere that people from the 51st century just don't think in the same straight/gay binary that people from the 21st century tend to. —[[User:Josiah Rowe|Josiah Rowe]] <sup>[[User talk:Josiah Rowe|talk to me]]</sup> 01:20, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 
: "I don't think that there's another way to take that exchange." There are as many ways to take that exchange as there are viewers of that exchange. Personally I took it to mean that she found Lux annoying and uncooperative (as much of the audience probably did) and was happy to conceal his face in his helmet as a way of ignoring him. "I don't fancy you" does not by any stretch of the imagination mean "I fancy everyone else." And it's a pretty big generalization to assume that all people of a given century behave in the exact same way. [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] <sup>[[User talk:Shambala108|talk to me]]</sup> 05:06, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 
Here's the full exchange:
:RIVER: Anita, unpack the lights. Other Dave, make sure the door's secure, then help Anita. Mr. Lux, put your helmet back on, block the visor. Proper Dave, find an active terminal. I want you to access the Library database, see what you can find about what happened here a hundred years ago. Pretty Boy, you're with me. Step into my office.
 
:LUX: Professor Song, why am I the only one wearing my helmet?
 
:RIVER: I don't fancy you.
In this context, I think that yes, "I don't fancy you" means "I fancy everybody else" (at least, everybody else on the survey team). Yes, she was also doing it to ignore and annoy Lux, but the surface meaning is clear.  And since we've got the author ''confirming'' that that was what was meant in that scene, I'm not sure what our justification for ignoring it is. —[[User:Josiah Rowe|Josiah Rowe]] <sup>[[User talk:Josiah Rowe|talk to me]]</sup> 05:23, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 
:Put it in the behind the scenes section with a source pointing to the information that confirms it. As mentioned on the [[Forum:Using official twitter pages as a source?|forums]] Moffat lies a lot on his twitter.
:I think sexuality shouldn't be mentioned at all, write what is there in the stories, not the 21st century interpretation of what you see there. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 14:48, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 
::I assume that by "sexuality shouldn't be mentioned at all" you're referring only to this particular case? Because it would be pretty hard to rewrite [[Jack Harkness]] and remove all references to sexuality. —[[User:Josiah Rowe|Josiah Rowe]] <sup>[[User talk:Josiah Rowe|talk to me]]</sup> 18:23, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 
:: While the remark can be implied as indicating a sexual interest in everyone else, that is a broad and generous -- in some senses of the word -- interpretation.  It might simply be a mean-spirited crack. It might be intended to to set off the Doctor. Given the generally omnisexual orientation of the era -- when humans go out in the universe to dance with everyone -- I would expect the language to reflect that with a general weakening of the already weak sexual meaning of ''to fancy'' -- according to the Free Online Dictionary, it's the seventh definition as a noun and nowhere in the formal list as a verb currently. I won't cite my proper dictionaries, since they are American English, but Patridge gives it as the third definition, behind "hold a high opinion of". In any case, given the lack of direct evidence in wiki-approved sources -- no narrative evidence other than the weak quote -- it ranks to my mind as gossip. I've worked hard with the generous cooperation of a lot of people here to keep the River Song page as short as possible, since it's a brilliantly written character, one that once had three separate pages.
 
::However, as I have a tendency to do, I digress. We have the statement from ''Silence in the Library''. We have the auctorial statement -- and I have argued elsewhere in regards to ''The Infinity Doctor'' that auctorial statements about their intentions don't really impress me. Given that River lies, that Moffat lies and that even if Moffat is not lying it's not proof under the rules of this wiki, it should '''definitely''' not appear anyplace but possibly "Behind the scenes" and even there's it's got one possible source.  That's not enough to get into a decent newspaper, who like to have three sources.
 
::In addition, it gets into issues of current sexual politics that I'm not anxious to have it there at all.  Is it enough to say that you wouldn't kick someone out of bed or must you actually occasionally do something about it to have a sexual orientation? I believe that talk is one thing, but you are what you do. We have direct evidence of Jack Harkness' sexual activities, what with Ianto and a daughter.  All we know directly about River are a statement as Mels that she wanted to marry the Doctor, some sultry looks and heavy petting with him. Outside of that, no direct evidence.
 
:: of these make me feel that it's a question that we should avoid, like issues of the relationship of Romana and the Fourth Doctor or the way the Third Doctor took Jo Grant's leavetaking so hard. However, I strongly suspect that Tangerineduel's sugegstion is going to be seen as an acceptable compromise. [[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] <sup>[[User talk:Boblipton|talk to me]]</sup> 02:14, May 22, 2012 (UTC)
:::We're getting off track trying to extrapolate to some larger "policy" from this discussion.  Sexuality obviously can and should be covered by the wiki — not just because of ''Torchwood'', but also because of Benny, Ace, Dodo, and a myriad of scenes running throughout the, well, [[Virgin Books|''Virgin'' Books]] ranges. The policy which applies here is [[T:NOT SFW]]. If sexuality is in the narratives of the DWU it can, will and ''should'' be discussed. 
 
:::So this discussion is ''clearly'' about just this ''one'' incident, this ''single'' episode.  "Did River Song declare her bisexuality with this line?" is the only question before us.
 
:::If the line were delivered "I don't fancy ''you''", then we might have more to talk about here.  With that emphasis, River ''would'' more strongly be suggesting that she fancied the other people.  But Kingston delivers the line flatly and matter-of-factly: "I don't fancy you". Either way, though, I think you have to take the larger context of the episode into consideration.  River's simply being an ass to Lux, because '''she doesn't like Lux'''.  I don't think she's making some sort of revelation about her sexuality.  She's just doing what she can to cut the guy down a notch.
 
:::Consider this scenario.  Man walks into a bar.  Man asks for a beer.  Every other patron is drinking a beer, too.  Bartender brings a perfectly chilled shot of quintuple-filtered vodka instead.  Man asks the bartender why he's the only one drinking vodka.  Bartender says, "You look like you've had a rough day.  You deserve something special." 
 
:::Does that mean that the others ''aren't'' equally worthy of special treatment, or that the others ''didn't'' have a rough day?  Not really — not, even, ''at all''.  It means that the bartender is answering the man's question somewhat evasively, because she's trying to come across as helpful and ingratiating so that she can get a bigger tip.  She's trying to show the man that she can "read" her patrons — something that increases the bartender's "worth" to the man.  She's not actually '''telling the truth''' — which is that her distributor gave her a deal on this "special" vodka, and she's therefore able to offer it for free so as to encourage guest loyalty.
 
:::In the same way, River's just trying to mess with the guy's mind, especially since Lux seems to be the kind of guy who isn't all that sexually successful. She's just doing what sexually potent women do when they want to humiliate a man.  This is plain, simple emasculation — not River flying the rainbow flag.
 
:::(By the way, what Steven Moffat says here doesn't matter to the main part of this article.  In my view, it's a mistake to try to apply something from [[Forum:Is The Infinity Doctors canon?|the ''Infinity Doctors'' thread]] to this argument.  Steven Moffat isn't the copyright holder to ''Silence in the Library'', and, in any case, this isn't an inclusion debate. There are therefore no grounds to violate [[T:CAN]]'s clear assertion that ''only'' narrative sources are valid for the writing of in-universe articles.) {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}16:25: Wed&nbsp;23 May 2012&nbsp;</span>
 
:: 'Twasn't my intention to drag in ''The Infinity Doctor'', Czechout.  My mention was simply to make the point that I try to consistently apply a standard of auctorial intent doesn't matter. Others may wish to apply it on a case-by-case basis. [[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] <sup>[[User talk:Boblipton|talk to me]]</sup> 18:39, May 23, 2012 (UTC)
 
:::Well, if (as it seems) the majority of active users don't think that the "I don't fancy you" line implies that she fancies the other members of the party, then I suppose the matter of her bisexuality can be moved to "Behind the scenes". I do think that it deserves mention there, though.
 
:::And, as an aside, I'd question whether we can or should extrapolate anything from the probable semantic evolution of the word "fancy", especially since it's reasonable to assume that we're getting the TARDIS-translated diction anyway. Realistically, it's unlikely that any language spoken in the 51st century would be comprehensible to a speaker of 21st century English; it would be the equivalent of someone from the 10th century BC understanding us. If we're going to work with the meanings of words, we have to do so in the context of a contemporary viewer's understanding. And in that context, the first definition given in the [http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/fancy?q=fancy Oxford Dictionary online] (make sure you're in the "World English" version) is:
::::1 ''British informal'' feel a desire or liking for:
::::*''do you fancy a drink?''
::::find sexually attractive:
::::*''I really fancy him''
 
:::I think it's pretty unarguable that that is the sense in which River is using the word; though I reluctantly concede that it's possible not to draw the conclusion that she fancies everybody else in the party. (Again, that was what I thought on first viewing, and it's still my reading of the exchange; but apparently I'm in the minority on this, and I won't push any further for in-universe inclusion.) —[[User:Josiah Rowe|Josiah Rowe]] <sup>[[User talk:Josiah Rowe|talk to me]]</sup> 19:37, May 23, 2012 (UTC)
 
:: A reasonable point, but there's weakening in terms of not only what the words mean but when they are said. I'm reminded of George Carlin's routine about the Seven Words You Can't Say on Television... taboo word, taboo subjects... heck, even today ''Doctor Who'' is limited in what it can say by being a pre-watershed show as opposed to what has gone on in ''Torchwood''.  I recall thinking while watching ''Let's Kill Hitler'' when Mels said she wanted to marry the Doctor, that it was a euphemism, even though it set up the jokes that followed.
 
:: We all know that the task of writing and editing is far more complicated than the hoped for easy flow of words that results.  Thanks for opposing my position with logic, care and good humor. [[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] <sup>[[User talk:Boblipton|talk to me]]</sup> 21:01, May 23, 2012 (UTC)
 
:::Hmmm.  Forgive me, but I've just ''gotta'' say it.  Does the fact that Bob thanked Josiah for opposing "with logic, care and good humor" imply that Bob doesn't think the rest of us do that? I don't really think Bob thinks that, so he's kinda inadvertently proven my point.  We often say things in pointed reference to a single person that can be incorrectly assumed to apply the ''opposite'' to the group of people to which the hypothetical person belongs.
 
:::I think Josiah's right in his interpretation of what the word "fancy" means.  She ''is'' saying that she doesn't find him sexually attractive.  Given that ''Silence'' is written and performed for a primarily British audience "fancy" ''does'' unmistakably mean "find sexually attractive". And I also think that she's making him feel inferior by suggesting that she fancies everyone else.  But I just don't think she's telling the truth.  She's being hyperbolic.  As we found out in ''The Wedding of River Song'', River is an habitual liar.  And its a basic facet of the character that she is an incurable tease. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}22:32: Wed&nbsp;23 May 2012&nbsp;</span>
 
As the editing war started between Josiah Rowe and me, I thought it was appropriate to note that he behaved in a gentlemanly fashion throughout. Rest assured I shall never say that about Czechout -- out of consideration for others, of course. [[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] <sup>[[User talk:Boblipton|talk to me]]</sup> 23:37, May 23, 2012 (UTC)
 
:You call that an editing war? Flea bitings, Lipton, flea bitings! (Can you tell I'm watching along with the Wife in Space, and just re-watched ''Deadly Assassin''?) —[[User:Josiah Rowe|Josiah Rowe]] <sup>[[User talk:Josiah Rowe|talk to me]]</sup> 02:23, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 
===Vortex Manipulator===
River bought in ''The Pandorica Opens''. AND she had it in later stories; the Doctor doesn't come to get her (unless it's for her birthday). The logical explanation is that it is the first adventure she has with it following her date to see the starriest night in the universe. Anybody care to disagee with me here? If so, look over the episode again and again; if the Doctor doesn't pick her up, she ALREADY has the device, making "Rebooting the Univerese" the first adventure she had with it. The outfit she was wearing was even the same as in ''First Night'' when she went on that date; think about it, PLEASE! ([[Special:Contributions/173.167.179.77|173.167.179.77]]<sup>[[User talk:173.167.179.77#top|talk to me]]</sup> 21:26, June 15, 2012 (UTC))
 
I think we covered this over in the forums -- forgive me if I can't recall where precisely. River might have picked up another manipulator, but the wacky hypothesis I offered is that since ''The Pandorica Opens''/''The Big Bang'' the DWU is actually an alternative universe brought into existence by her remembering the Doctor back into existence. '''Reality is what Amy Pond remembers it as being'''. If Mom remembers River as having a vortex manipulator to shlep through all space and time, then that's what happens all right. However, since we currently don't have hard information, it doesn't belong on the front page. [[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] <sup>[[User talk:Boblipton|talk to me]]</sup> 12:18, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 
== Tenth Doctor companion or not? ==
 
I've noticed a lot of back and forth about her status in the past and I was hoping we could sort it out. I checked through the archives and didn't find a similar discussion, so hopefully this isn't retreading old ground.
 
Given that River has apparently shared more than one adventure with him (I believe Steven Moffat has said that her adventure with him at the Bone Meadows or Asgard was with Ten) there's certainly an argument for it. I think that given that she spends as much (or more) time with the Doctor in ''Forest of the Dead'' as Donna does, she might at least be considered as one of his single-adventure companions. [[User:Memnarc|Memnarc]] <sup>[[User talk:Memnarc|talk to me]]</sup> 10:27, June 17, 2012 (UTC)


I agree there's an argument for it and my first impilse is "what's the trouble? Contrariwise, I also think that the category "companion"  is a lollipop offered for a good boy or girl, given the arguments that roar over it. Criteria for "companion"  include star-line credits, a long-term contract, travelling in the Doctor's TARDIS, knowing who he is and being a friend of his. Therefore the Master qualifies as a companion! Of course, the producing body (BBC, DWM and Big Finish among them) never use the word, so we can toss the Master.... if we like. Can we not say as much about River? If so where's te objectivity that defines a fact?[[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] <sup>[[User talk:Boblipton|talk to me]]</sup> 11:58, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
As always, feel free to make any further suggestions and/or edit my sandbox pages. [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:52, 26 July 2021 (UTC)


== The Eternity Clock - When? ==
: I am in support of this split. I agree that [[Melody Pond]] should go to [[User:OncomingStorm12th/Melody Pond|the overall page]] as it was used by all incarnations to a degree. [[User:Bongolium500|Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500)]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 18:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)


I'm wondering if the placement of the Eternity Clock in her timeline/history is incorrect as she is in Stormcage when the Doctor phones her at the beginning. She then escapes and has her adventures in time and space with him. Unless I'm incorrect, this should be placed post-"killing" the Doctor.
:: I don't have a problem with the split, and I agree that Melody Pond would be best for the overall page name. [[User:LauraBatham|LauraBatham]] [[User talk:LauraBatham|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 07:47, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Tell me what you think?
[[User:Thefartydoctor|<font color="blue">The</font><font color="silver">Farty</font><font color="red">Doctor</font>]] [[User talk:Thefartydoctor|<small><sup><font color="green">Talk</font></sup></small>]] 23:28, August 3, 2012 (UTC)
:Wait, I just read it was placed there because of her clothes... ignore my comment haha XD
:[[User:Thefartydoctor|<font color="blue">The</font><font color="silver">Farty</font><font color="red">Doctor</font>]] [[User talk:Thefartydoctor|<small><sup><font color="green">Talk</font></sup></small>]] 23:29, August 3, 2012 (UTC)


== Species ==
::: I also think this is a good idea, but why not use Melody Pond for both the main page ''and'' her first incarnation? "Little girl" will have to be dabbed anyway, so why not use [[Melody Pond (The Impossible Astronaut)]] instead? [[User:Danochy|Danochy]] [[User talk:Danochy|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 12:39, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
:::: I think 'Little Girl' is better for the incarnations navigation template. It accords both with the credits of the episode, with dialogue to an extent (the characters do call her "the Little Girl" for lack of a better term at some points in the script of ''[[The Impossible Astronaut (TV story)|The Impossible Astronaut]]''/''[[Day of the Moon (TV story)|Day of the Moon]]''), ''and'' with how non-Wiki-editing fans would usually speak of her if discussing River's incarnations. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 12:50, 29 July 2021 (UTC)


Why is River listed as Human instead of Human Plus, as she is described as in "A Good Man Goes to War"? [[Special:Contributions/75.141.237.131|75.141.237.131]]<sup>[[User talk:75.141.237.131#top|talk to me]]</sup> 23:28, October 7, 2012 (UTC)
::::: With the template, sure, but [[:Template:Rassilons|templates needn't use just page names]]. The name "Melody Pond" is more accurate than "little girl" in that regard, especially in light of her other appearance (albeit as a [[The Flesh|Flesh]] clone for most(?) of her on-screen time) where her identity as Melody is quite important. Also I just realised that her first appearance is actually [[Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut)]] which rather throws a spanner in the works for that dabbing. [[User:Danochy|Danochy]] [[User talk:Danochy|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 13:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
:If you're referring to the infobox, there's a very simple reason. The "species" variable in the infoboxes can only take one name. If more is added (say, adding Time Lord to Human), it creates a redlink that in most cases will never be made into an article. Therefore, we put the original species name in most of the cases, and River/Melody was human before she was mucked around with. [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:49, October 7, 2012 (UTC)


::I'm not talking about adding Human and Time Lord as two different species in the same slot, I'm talking about putting in simply, "Human Plus." And what is the harm in creating a page that explains what Human Plus is? [[User:Mewiet|Mewiet]] [[User talk:Mewiet|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:33, October 10, 2012 (UTC)
: When I was thinking on how to title the first incarnation page, I cycled through <nowiki>[[Little girl (The Impossible Astronaut)]], [[Melody Pond (The Impossible Astronaut)]] and [[Melody Pond's first incarnation]]</nowiki>, but went with the former because it was the only one of these to already exist. In all honesty, I'm happy with either options.
: As for the technicality of [[Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut)]].... yeah, it's not optimal. Using DPL, the only match for a page dabbed with a prequel is [[Silent (Prequel to The Impossible Astronaut)|Silent (Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut))]], so we ''could'' go with <nowiki>[[Little girl (Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut))]] or [[Melody Pond (Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut))]]</nowiki>, but I half-think we "overlook" this mistake, in order to achieve a simpler dab and avoid the double parenthesis. [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:20, 29 July 2021 (UTC)


:::Well, first of all, human plus is not a species. If you only include "human plus time lord" then what about all the other "human plus" species? And if you include all the different "human pluses", then you are no longer talking about only one species.  
:: Of course [[Melody Pond's first incarnation]] is a good option if we want to avoid the dabbing dilemma. But otherwise I'm also happy to overlook the prequel or to otherwise consider it a ''part'' of the TV story for the purposes of dabbing the character. [[User:Danochy|Danochy]] [[User talk:Danochy|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:08, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
:::There is really no need to get so specific in an infobox. It is a brief summary that should encourage readers to read the article. It '''is''' stated in the article that she is human plus time lord, so the information is available. [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:27, October 11, 2012 (UTC)


== A Night in Darillium timeline ==
::: Okay, hold the phone, where exactly did we get [[Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut)]] from ''anyway''? On the BBC website this is called [https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00fxf06 ''The Prequel to Episode 1'']. That title's not going to win any awards, but we do have precedents for using such "functional" titles like we would normal titles, such as ''[[The Novel of the Film (novelisation)|The Novel of the Film]]'', so… why don't we call this thing [[The Prequel to Episode 1 (webcast)]]? Granted I'm not ''thrilled'' about the prospect of [[Little girl (The Prequel to Episode 1)]] but it wouldn't have any double-parentheses.


Can we move the "A Night in Darillium" to the undated events section? River says in Forest of the Dead that the last time she saw the "real Doctor" was a Night in Darillium.
::: But… We also need to discuss the option of [[the Little Girl]]. There are other "little girls" in the DWU, but she ''is'' the only one whom the Doctor & friends referred to, for several months, over the course of  ''[[The Impossible Astronaut (TV story)|The Impossible Astronaut]]''/''[[Day of the Moon (TV story)|Day of the Moon]]'', as ''the'' Little Girl. Interestingly, the adult River Song herself uses "the Little Girl" several times in dialogue in ''[[Day of the Moon (TV story)|Day of the Moon]]'', which is interesting if we want to talk self-identification…


"The last time I saw you—the real you, the future you, I mean—you turned up on my doorstep with a new haircut and a suit. You took me to Darillium. To see the Singing Towers. Oh, what a night that was. The towers sang, and you cried. You wouldn't tell me why but I suppose you knew it was time. My time. Time to come to the Library. You even gave me your screwdriver."
::: Now granted, "The Little Girl" isn't intended to be, or presented as, a "the" name in quite the same way as "The Doctor" or even "[[The Editor]] — but I would point to [[The Woman (Hell Bent)]] and [[The Woman (The End of Time)]] as precedents for using the credited "the Something" descriptor as a page name even though it's unlikely the characters would introduce themselves with "Hello, I'm usually referred to as the Woman". Also, the way we titled our page about [[Tzim-Sha]] "[[Tim Shaw]]" for quite some time, for as long as we lacked certainty on the spelling of "Tzim-Sha", is precedent for the idea that when the other potential names are unviable,- we do sometimes use the name Team TARDIS give an entity, even if we have reason to suspect the entity called itself something else. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:26, 29 July 2021 (UTC)


But we also know that at a certain point River starts meeting the Doctor younger and younger. A Doctor who knows her less and less well. She fears the day that she meets a Doctor who doesn't know her. From what we've seen of how her timeline works the Night in Darillium isn't the last time she sees the Doctor before the events of the Library, it's the last time she sees a Doctor who she's married to. A Doctor who knows her and loves her. A Doctor who would cry knowing her death was coming. A Doctor who'd show up on her porch with a haircut and a new suit and take her out on a date.
:::: I would much rather the prequel name stay as it is, to be honest, and just bend the first appearance dabbing rule (if we were to go down that road). There are a lot of "episode 1"s, making the searchability pretty poor. Though we could always name it "Prequel to The Impossible Astronaut", such as it is on imdb. [[User:LauraBatham|LauraBatham]] [[User talk:LauraBatham|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 02:07, 30 July 2021 (UTC)


The River Song at the Pandorica and Byzantium has already experienced Darillium, because the Doctor that River Song meets during these events doesn't yet love her and wouldn't show up on her doorstep. Heck, he probably doesn't even know where her doorstep is. [[User:Anoted|Anoted]] [[User talk:Anoted|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:34, April 20, 2013 (UTC)
::::: I think that the Prequel(s) current name(s) just come from a lack of title cards, and if they're Prequels to release X, instinctively they're titled <nowiki>[[Prequel (release X)]]</nowiki> (that's certainly what I did when creating a few of the recent Big Finish ones)
::::: Now, as for using The Little Girl as a title... well, as you pointed you it could work, as precedent exists, but I think that works well enough '''''in the lack of any other names'''''. Like, if it was a random unnamed Time Lord Little Girl we saw regenerating, and then later in a spacesuit etc, I'd 100% agree with you. But as soon as we learn that Little Girl is actually Melody Pond/River as a little girl (sans capital letters), I personally think the argument looses strength a bit. Right now, I'm leaning either for [[Little girl (The Impossible Astronaut)]] (no capital letters), or [[Melody Pond's first incarnation]], to circumvent the dabbing issues. [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 02:23, 30 July 2021 (UTC)


: The anecdote about Darillium itself puts the lie to the idea that it's a steady progression where he knows her less and less. We know that the River at the Pandorica and the Byzantium are actually earlier than some, as she knows of them to ask the Doctor. Darillium is just what she said - after everything else, except for the part where she didn't realise she'd crossed with it, during [[Night and the Doctor]].--[[User:ComicBookGoddess|ComicBookGoddess]] [[User talk:ComicBookGoddess|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 02:18, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
:::::: Well not ''this'' is a coincidence if I ever saw one. Big Finish has recently released a webcast (''[[The Story of the Diary of River Song (webcast)|The Story of the Diary of River Song]]'') which recaps a lot of River's adventures and her timeline and, little do we know, they mention both of their previous incarnations. Aside from referring the River by her birth name of Melody Pond, River herself calls her second incarnation [[Mels Zucker]] (the full name), while her first incarnation is called (guess what) [[Little girl (The Impossible Astronaut)|little girl]].
:::::: Now, I'll not give any rulings, given I was the one to start the discussion, but this serves as a quite nice food for thought, and a bump in the talk page as well. [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:41, 3 August 2021 (UTC)


::The Darillium anecdote doesn't really test the idea of River seeing a younger and younger Doctor after a certain point. According to River, after the events of Demon's Run (the time she returns, not the time she's born), every time she meets the Doctor she's meeting a younger Doctor. Ostensibly this means that her timeline goes Demon's Run, Lake Silencio (as a guest, not as a killer), Pandorica, Byzantium, wine with mum and dad in their backyard, the Library. Nothing she says means that Darillium ''can't'' be before Demon's Run. Demon's Run is where the Doctor discovers who River is, and so the Doctor at Demon's Run isn't really her Doctor. Her Doctor has always known who she is, has known who she is longer than she has. Her Doctor has always loved her. Remember, she marries the Doctor the ''second'' time she meets him. The Doctor she knows and loves has always been her husband. So Darillium is perhaps the last time she sees the Doctor who is her husband. When she shows up at Demon's Run she realises that the Doctor who is her husband is no longer the Doctor she sees. This makes Darillium the last adventure she has with the Doctor before Demon's Run. The events of the Angels Take Manhattan is slightly more problematic as we're using her being pardoned as a timeline indicator that this comes after the events of the Byzantium. But this is an adventure with a married River and Doctor so that's really not likely. You can consider her being in prison after her being pardoned a continuity error or you can see it as a result of following the Doctor's casual nexus. Either way, the way we currently have these events listed isn't correct. [[User:Anoted|Anoted]] [[User talk:Anoted|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 15:27, May 10, 2013 (UTC)
::: I now notice that a few days ago, [[User:SOTO]] standardised prequel naming via bot, so now we have [[Prequel to The Impossible Astronaut (webcast)]] instead of the clunky [[Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut]]. That means that we can now safely and unambiguously have the "First Melody" at [[Melody Pond (Prequel to The Impossible Astronaut)]], and more generally:
* [[Melody Pond]]
** [[Melody Pond (Prequel to The Impossible Astronaut)]]
** [[Mels Zucker]]
** [[River Song]]
::: Is this approach agreeable for everyone? [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:46, 13 October 2021 (UTC)


:::Scratch that, the River in Angels Take Manhattan is also now a professor. Darillium isn't an issue on it's own, but when you throw the Angels Take Manhattan into the mix her whole thing gets really screwed up. Because the events of Angel means that she isn't seeing the Doctor in reverse order after the events of Demon's Run. She has multiple adventures with a Doctor who knows her less and less after the events of Demon's Run, but she also still has adventures with the Doctor who is her husband. I think this discussion should probably be move to [[Theory:Timeline - River Song]], though because we do really have a page for this. [[User:Anoted|Anoted]] [[User talk:Anoted|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 15:59, May 10, 2013 (UTC)
:::: I'm fine with that. [[User:LauraBatham|LauraBatham]] [[User talk:LauraBatham|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:52, 13 October 2021 (UTC)


:I guess the only thing we know for sure, is the events/meetings happen for the DOCTOR in the order they are broadcast. The only exception is the minisode "[[Last Night (TV story)|Last Night]]" which partially shows the 11th Doctor's last night with River before she heads to the Library. -- [[User:Deb1701|Future Companion]]
::::: Agreed. I think we can move forward with this. <span style="color: #baa3d6;font-family:Comic Sans;">[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']]</span> <span style="color: #baa3d6;">[[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]]</span> 10:23, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
::Most of River Song's timeline is fairly easily understood and it's all documented at [[Theory:Timeline - River Song]]. The one problem is The Angels Take Manhattan. Not counting that story, River's assertion that she meets a continuously younger Doctor from Demon's Run until her death makes perfect sense. The Angels Take Manhattan contradicts earlier continuity assertions. It's not surprising that Angels Take Manhattan came out after the CON episode in which River laid out her timeline. I'm really inclined to think that this is due to error or the writer's changing their minds. The idea of River meeting a consecutively younger Doctor after a certain point packs a good emotional punch but trying it down the way they did tied them in to only showing a younger River, which means not being able to explore at all a River who's out of jail, a River who's a professor--any of that. I think Moffat regretted expressly setting up River's timeline so that Byzantium was immediately followed by the Library and so added this in. The punch of her seeing a Doctor who doesn't really know her is still fully there, but there's then a nice surprise, a bit of relief when she once again has an adventure with a Doctor who knows her. It may make the times when he doesn't know her more poignant because she never knows what she's going to get. The only thing that really directly contradicts this is the River Song:Her Story, and for all we know Moff considers that non-canon or incomplete. [[User:Anoted|Anoted]] [[User talk:Anoted|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:53, May 11, 2013 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 10:23, 14 October 2021

Archive.png
 Archives: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6

Revisiting the split pages decision[[edit source]]

Almost ten years ago, it was decided that River incarnations were to be all merged under a single page. However, more recent decision led me to propose we split the River pages again into new incarnations. They are as follow:

  • Put simply, River Song is a name that applies only to her third incarnation. It's as wrong to call the baby Amy gave birth to, or the young girl that was Amy and Rory's childhood friend "River Song" than it would be to call the incarnation of the Doctor who fought in the Time War by "Twelfth Doctor", "the Curator" or "War Curator", even though these are all names used by future versions of him. In fact, this was one of the reasons I argued so hard that the Eleven's incarnations absolutely could not have a single page a few years ago. The same surely applies to River.
  • As has been done with several Time Lords recently, splitting their incarnations into a single page allows better coverage and readability.
  • Naming the majority of pages regarding this character would be extremely easy (something which was argued otherwise in the original discussion). It's very explicit that River/Melody had three incarnations:
    • From birth to the little girl from The Impossible Astronaut we see regenerating on the streets of New York
    • Mels Zucker, who grew up alongside her parents
    • River Song her third and final incarnation
  • Now, that only leaves the problem of whether to use "Melody Pond" to her first incarnation or the overall page. As Mels also uses the name on her deathbed, and River Song also uses her real name on A Good Man Goes to War (TV story) to reveal her true identity, I'd vote for keeping Melody Pond for the overall page, while using "little girl" for the first incarnation (as she was credited as such).
  • Mind you, it wouldn't be the first time we use credits/conjectural names for a Time Lord splitting, as per Renegade Time Lord (The Eleven). And, like that page, the bad term also happens to describe the exact subject we're talking about, as River/Melody was also the Impossible Astronaut.

As always, feel free to make any further suggestions and/or edit my sandbox pages. OncomingStorm12th ☎ 16:52, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I am in support of this split. I agree that Melody Pond should go to the overall page as it was used by all incarnations to a degree. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 18:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
I don't have a problem with the split, and I agree that Melody Pond would be best for the overall page name. LauraBatham ☎ 07:47, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
I also think this is a good idea, but why not use Melody Pond for both the main page and her first incarnation? "Little girl" will have to be dabbed anyway, so why not use Melody Pond (The Impossible Astronaut) instead? Danochy ☎ 12:39, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
I think 'Little Girl' is better for the incarnations navigation template. It accords both with the credits of the episode, with dialogue to an extent (the characters do call her "the Little Girl" for lack of a better term at some points in the script of The Impossible Astronaut/Day of the Moon), and with how non-Wiki-editing fans would usually speak of her if discussing River's incarnations. Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 12:50, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
With the template, sure, but templates needn't use just page names. The name "Melody Pond" is more accurate than "little girl" in that regard, especially in light of her other appearance (albeit as a Flesh clone for most(?) of her on-screen time) where her identity as Melody is quite important. Also I just realised that her first appearance is actually Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut) which rather throws a spanner in the works for that dabbing. Danochy ☎ 13:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
When I was thinking on how to title the first incarnation page, I cycled through [[Little girl (The Impossible Astronaut)]], [[Melody Pond (The Impossible Astronaut)]] and [[Melody Pond's first incarnation]], but went with the former because it was the only one of these to already exist. In all honesty, I'm happy with either options.
As for the technicality of Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut).... yeah, it's not optimal. Using DPL, the only match for a page dabbed with a prequel is Silent (Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut)), so we could go with [[Little girl (Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut))]] or [[Melody Pond (Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut))]], but I half-think we "overlook" this mistake, in order to achieve a simpler dab and avoid the double parenthesis. OncomingStorm12th ☎ 22:20, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Of course Melody Pond's first incarnation is a good option if we want to avoid the dabbing dilemma. But otherwise I'm also happy to overlook the prequel or to otherwise consider it a part of the TV story for the purposes of dabbing the character. Danochy ☎ 23:08, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Okay, hold the phone, where exactly did we get Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut) from anyway? On the BBC website this is called The Prequel to Episode 1. That title's not going to win any awards, but we do have precedents for using such "functional" titles like we would normal titles, such as The Novel of the Film, so… why don't we call this thing The Prequel to Episode 1 (webcast)? Granted I'm not thrilled about the prospect of Little girl (The Prequel to Episode 1) but it wouldn't have any double-parentheses.
But… We also need to discuss the option of the Little Girl. There are other "little girls" in the DWU, but she is the only one whom the Doctor & friends referred to, for several months, over the course of The Impossible Astronaut/Day of the Moon, as the Little Girl. Interestingly, the adult River Song herself uses "the Little Girl" several times in dialogue in Day of the Moon, which is interesting if we want to talk self-identification…
Now granted, "The Little Girl" isn't intended to be, or presented as, a "the" name in quite the same way as "The Doctor" or even "The Editor — but I would point to The Woman (Hell Bent) and The Woman (The End of Time) as precedents for using the credited "the Something" descriptor as a page name even though it's unlikely the characters would introduce themselves with "Hello, I'm usually referred to as the Woman". Also, the way we titled our page about Tzim-Sha "Tim Shaw" for quite some time, for as long as we lacked certainty on the spelling of "Tzim-Sha", is precedent for the idea that when the other potential names are unviable,- we do sometimes use the name Team TARDIS give an entity, even if we have reason to suspect the entity called itself something else. Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 23:26, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
I would much rather the prequel name stay as it is, to be honest, and just bend the first appearance dabbing rule (if we were to go down that road). There are a lot of "episode 1"s, making the searchability pretty poor. Though we could always name it "Prequel to The Impossible Astronaut", such as it is on imdb. LauraBatham ☎ 02:07, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
I think that the Prequel(s) current name(s) just come from a lack of title cards, and if they're Prequels to release X, instinctively they're titled [[Prequel (release X)]] (that's certainly what I did when creating a few of the recent Big Finish ones)
Now, as for using The Little Girl as a title... well, as you pointed you it could work, as precedent exists, but I think that works well enough in the lack of any other names. Like, if it was a random unnamed Time Lord Little Girl we saw regenerating, and then later in a spacesuit etc, I'd 100% agree with you. But as soon as we learn that Little Girl is actually Melody Pond/River as a little girl (sans capital letters), I personally think the argument looses strength a bit. Right now, I'm leaning either for Little girl (The Impossible Astronaut) (no capital letters), or Melody Pond's first incarnation, to circumvent the dabbing issues. OncomingStorm12th ☎ 02:23, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Well not this is a coincidence if I ever saw one. Big Finish has recently released a webcast (The Story of the Diary of River Song) which recaps a lot of River's adventures and her timeline and, little do we know, they mention both of their previous incarnations. Aside from referring the River by her birth name of Melody Pond, River herself calls her second incarnation Mels Zucker (the full name), while her first incarnation is called (guess what) little girl.
Now, I'll not give any rulings, given I was the one to start the discussion, but this serves as a quite nice food for thought, and a bump in the talk page as well. OncomingStorm12th ☎ 16:41, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
I now notice that a few days ago, User:SOTO standardised prequel naming via bot, so now we have Prequel to The Impossible Astronaut (webcast) instead of the clunky Prequel (The Impossible Astronaut. That means that we can now safely and unambiguously have the "First Melody" at Melody Pond (Prequel to The Impossible Astronaut), and more generally:
Is this approach agreeable for everyone? OncomingStorm12th ☎ 21:46, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
I'm fine with that. LauraBatham ☎ 21:52, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Agreed. I think we can move forward with this. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 10:23, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://tardis.wiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:River_Song&oldid=3186192"