Talk:The Master: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(restoring info that was deleted)
No edit summary
 
(464 intermediate revisions by 83 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{ArchCat}}
{{ArchCat}}


== Soon to be unlocked, but don't change section heads please ==
== How to refer to each incarnation of the Master ==
As noted at [[Forum:The Master - 1 article#Closing]], we're close to restoring this article to a normal state in which people can more or less freely edit it.  References to individual incarnations shall now be done through the following templates:
<dpl>
category=The Master templates
columns=2
</dpl>
More will be added automatically to this list as they are created.  Click on any of these for usage details, but basically the way we'll now connect to this page is to write something like this:
:<pre>The [[Fourth Doctor]] faced his final challenge: a confrontation with {{Ainley}} atop the [[radio telescope]]. ([[TV]]: ''[[Logopolis (TV story)|]]''</pre>
which yields:
:The [[Fourth Doctor]] faced his final challenge: a confrontation with {{Ainley}} atop the [[radio telescope]]. ([[TV]]: ''[[Logopolis (TV story)|Logopolis]]'')


If you need to make the ''the'' capitalised, then type {{tlx|Ainley|c}}.  These links, be they {{tlx|delgado}}, {{tlx|Ainley}} or whoever will go directly to the section of this article dealing with that version of the character.
Well, I think some of us were hoping it'd be simpler, but the fact that [[Talk:The Master (The TV Movie)]] discussion and [[Talk:The Master (The Keeper of Traken)]] are going on at the same time with seemingly different ideas made me think we should just discuss this. '''This is not necessarily meant to be a discussion to determine a name or page title for each Master; those should still happen on their talk page. This is just a discussion on having consistency between them.'''


'''It is therefore extremely important that you do not alter the section headers on this article at all.''' Change what you want about the text, but '''please leave the section titles as they are.''' {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}} 16:39: Sat 17 Nov 2012</span>
This long comment started as something I was going to write for [[Talk:The Master (The TV Movie)]], with me saying I think it should either be both [[Tremas Master]] and [[Bruce Master]], or both [[The Master (The TV Movie)]] and [[The Master (The Keeper of Traken)]], for consistency. …But then in the latter case, arguably some of the others should also use disambiguation terms. I personally think that for the "main" Masters (i.e. those not ambiguous or from another reality) should either all use descriptions for page titles, with the ''possible'' exception of [[The Master (Terror of the Autons)]] (the reason for which is currently discussed on [[Talk:The Master (Terror of the Autons)|his talk page]] and should remain there), or all use disambiguation terms, with the exceptions of [[Decayed Master]], [[War Master]], [[Missy]] and [[the Lumiat]]. Having any other sort of mixed arrangement would just be confusing. ''Please note'' I am not saying the wiki ''must'' subscribe to the above dichotomy, just that I think it needs to be discussed. But there's another problem:


== Trail of the White Worm/Oseidon Adventure ==
Initially I too subscribed to the story dab pattern, for neutrality. But the problem is, the incarnations still need a name to be referred to with in articles to specify them. We can't say "The Doctor met [[the Master (Dominion)]]." in an article. It'd have to be something like "The Doctor met the [[Reborn Master]]." This means even if they're not page titles, descriptive names are necessary anyway. There are a few proposed names that work well enough with their story titles, like "Traken Master" (from ''[[The Keeper of Traken (TV story)|The Keeper of Traken]]'') or "Spy Master" (from ''[[Spyfall (TV story)|Spyfall]]''). But for most of them, a different name is needed to maintain an [[Tardis:In-universe perspective|in-universe perspective]], and because the text of the wiki will be using these names to identify the incarnations, it makes sense to me to have them be the page names anyhow, regardless of what they actually are. I am not 100% against using names on pages and disambiguation terms for (most) titles, which is essentially the status quo, but I think the page title should reflect how the character is almost always referred to on the wiki…
Just thought i'd mention that this story takes place in the year 1979 not 1976, it's on the cover blurb and mentioned in the story. Cheers :-D [[Special:Contributions/82.26.212.148|82.26.212.148]]<sup>[[User talk:82.26.212.148#top|talk to me]]</sup> 10:23, November 24, 2012 (UTC)


P.S Article is looking good![[Special:Contributions/82.26.212.148|82.26.212.148]]<sup>[[User talk:82.26.212.148#top|talk to me]]</sup> 10:26, November 24, 2012 (UTC)
Last note, this is a bit pedantic, but I think it makes a difference: I think descriptive names which are derived from a name themselves should use quotes— basically, "Tremas" Master instead of Tremas Master, "Bruce" Master instead of Bruce Master, and "Saxon" Master instead of Saxon Master. This not only reads better to me, for example alleviating concerns that "Bruce Master" sounds like, and probably is, some guy's name, but also better conveys the reasons those names are being used. Currently quotes are variably used for all descriptive names (particularly with coverage of ''[[Masterful (audio story)|Masterful]]'' you might see something like "the 'Young' Master"), but I think that's too difficult to read and that is the best way to use them. [[User:Chubby Potato|Chubby Potato]] [[User talk:Chubby Potato|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 05:02, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
: As previously mentioned at [[Talk:Fugitive Doctor]], on no account should we use quotes for the actual page names (e.g. it is and will remain [[Decayed Master]], not [["Decayed" Master]]). This interferes with searchability and is ungainly besides. Big Finish's own box set titles don't say [[The War Master (series)|''The "War" Master'']], either; nor do the ''Masterful'' credits from which we derive the proposed [[Saxon Master]], [[Reborn Master]] or [[Tremas Master]] renames use such quotation marks.


:::Can i bump this? I just took a look at the back cover and it definately says 1979. [[User:Bruce96|Bruce96]] [[User talk:Bruce96|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 12:35, December 11, 2012 (UTC)
: This point aside, my intuition thus far is that we use quotation marks when pipe-linking dabbed [[The Master (Something)]] pages for clarity — precisely to emphasise that something is a nickname which isn't really that page's proper title. For example, [[the Master (Terror of the Autons)|the "UNIT era" Master]]. This is informal practice and that discussion would be in a position to reform it, though, myself, I think it's intuitive enough. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 11:19, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
::::Well the article is freely editable now. However, please be mindful of the fact that back cover blurbs are not [[T:VS|valid sources]]. What counts is the actual narrative itself.  If you can confirm, '''by listening to the narrative''', that the year is 1979, by all means please change the article. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}} 18:57: Tue 11 Dec 2012</span>
::Scrooge, you're drawing an equivalence between quite unlike things. Of course we don't use [["Fugitive" Doctor]] or [["Decayed" Master]], since those names are straightforwardly descriptive of each character in their entirety. But there ''is'' a straightforward difference between those names and names which are based on identities used only temporarily by the characters. "Missy" is not an alias in the same way that "Harold Saxon" is.


== In-universe block-thing ==
::I very much like Chubby's suggestion. This is what it would take for me to get on board with some otherwise-repulsive suggestions: it makes "Bruce Master" sound less like the name of my next-door neighbor, and it suitably contextualizes the conjectural leap we're making in incarnation naming. In particular, I disagree with the idea that this would interfere with searchability in any way. Quote marks work fine in the search bar, and now that Fandom has made search work better with redirects, typing the same name without quotes will return the same result in a transparent fashion. Neither search nor precedent is an argument against this proposal. – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 14:47, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
Gotta say, not a big fan of the ''huge-annoying-page-breaking-space-taking-in-universe-1990's'' box. Mainly because it, well, is a ''huge-annoying-page-breaking-space-taking'' box. Also it fails to reference ''[[Destiny of the Doctors]]'', which annoys me. I don't think the box is really needed, and if it is, then it really doesn't need to be that ''huge''. Also no one has messed with this page or the links in weeks, why is it still locked? [[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]] ([[User Talk:OttselSpy25|talk to me, baby.]]) 01:46, December 11, 2012 (UTC)
: Okay, so looking back, it's not as bad as I thought. However, a note on your new block at {{Delgado}}... You can't really say "the Big Finish audios" because the Terserus Master appeared in the recent Fourth Doctor series as well ([[Trail of the White Worm (audio story)]]...) [[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]] ([[User Talk:OttselSpy25|talk to me, baby.]]) 01:56, December 11, 2012 (UTC)
::So you went from hating to kinda liking the sidebar in 10 minutes flat?  Colour me confused.  [[User:Shambala108]]  seemed to rather like it, so I'll be leaving that one in.  As for the "It's all about Delgado" block, it's absolutely fair to say that "the Big Finish Master" is ''always'' what you're calling the "Tersurus Master", but is in fact just a degenerated form of Delgado.  No matter what audio you're talking about, it's always Beevers playing essentially the ''Keeper of Traken'' guy.  {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}} 02:03: Tue 11 Dec 2012</span>


== {{{voice actor}}} variable ==
::: I'm not a fan of the quotation marks. Whilst I can understand why people might want to use them for Tremas, Saxon and Bruce, I'm 100% against using them for the Reborn Master; "reborn" is an adjective, just like "decayed", so I don't see why it would be treated any differently. [[User:Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon|Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon]] [[User talk:Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:48, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
I note that the {{{voice actor}}} variable was changed away from [[Geoffrey Beevers]] to be [[Alex Macqueen]], with a reasonable interpretation of the variable given in the page history. However, although I understand that reason, it's important to point out a feature of the {{tlx|Infobox Individual}} that was not there at launch, but ''has'' been there for many months.  There's {{{voice actor}}}, which displays as "main voice actor" and {{{other voice actor}}}, which displays as "other voice actors".
::::No one has suggested using them for the Reborn Master. I would also be opposed to such a thing. – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 21:16, 17 January 2023 (UTC)


In the case of most Time Lords, we've generally opted, by virtue of forum discussion, not to fill in ''any'' actor information. This is because we can generally leave the actor stuff to the individual incarnation pages. So we '''do not''' want these variables used at all on [[the Doctor]] or [[Romana]], for instance.
I would choose [[Bruce Master]] over [["Bruce" Master]], [[Saxon Master]] over [["Saxon" Master]], [[Tremas Master]] over [["Tremas" Master]], [[Keller Master]] over [["Keller" Master]], etc. Aesthetics aside, the key problem here, which I'm surprised people are overlooking, is that placing quotation marks around part of a name ''does not actually communicate "this name is unofficial"'' in any clear or intuitive way. They could just as easily be read as some sort of quotation from some unspecified in-universe or out-of-universe source, or as in-universe nicknames (since quotation marks commonly signify a nickname when used for some but not all component words in a name; for example Punished "Venom" Snake from Metal Gear). With or without them, the wiki would still be making the same arbitrary call to employ the alias / host's name ''as an adjective'' when it was never used as such officially. That's OK by me - there's some objective, factual basis to describing Roberts's character "the Bruce Master", Simm's "the Saxon Master", etc - but if we're doing it, we should commit to doing it properly, in a way that gives the reader an uncluttered, consistent experience. Quotation marks are just confusing and distracting in this context. If a name is deemed so dodgy that it requires quotation marks, then we should just continue to disambiguate by debut appearance. [[User:PintlessMan|PintlessMan]] [[User talk:PintlessMan|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:40, 17 January 2023 (UTC)


However, since we've decided to put everything about the Master on one page, there's a need for the infobox to actually include the various actors.  In this case — or indeed in the case of any character played by multiple actors — {{{voice actor}}} means what it says on the tin: "'''''main''''' voice actor", i.e., "the one who's performed the role more times than anyone else".  {{{other voice actor}}} can then be used for people who are additionally heard on audio in this part.
My vote would go to: ''The "Bruce" Master'', ''The "Tremas" Master'' and ''The "Saxon" Master'' - with quotation marks as shown. To me, this indicates they are ''The Master'' but that there are sub-names to differentiate and distinguish them. Conversely, I wouldn't use quotation marks for ''The War Master'', as there are countless examples of that name being used widely across various releases. [[User:FractalDoctor|FractalDoctor]] [[User talk:FractalDoctor|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:34, 18 January 2023 (UTC)


In the case of [[Fourth Doctor]], there's no need for the {{{voice actor}}} variable at all, because the main voice actor is the same as the main televisual actor. Here, though, it's not so straightforward — and, one could argue, it's not at all clear that the relatively minor televisual actor [[Geoffrey Beevers]] would have become the main audio actor.  {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}} 19:08: Tue 11 Dec 2012</span>
: I can’t believe I forgot to comment on this earlier. I am in support of [[“Bruce” Master]] and its ilk (with obvious exceptions for the War Master and the Decayed Master). While I personally find the premise of quotation marks in the link name to be aesthetically unappealing, it goes a long way in assuaging the concerns of those more skeptical about these sort of names. Likewise, it ''is'' how they’ve historically been used in-line. [[User:NoNotTheMemes|NoNotTheMemes]] [[User talk:NoNotTheMemes|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 13:09, 22 March 2023 (UTC)


== Intro changes ==
:: I would very much like to throw my two cents into this conversation. I think that whenever possible, we should note what number regeneration each Master is, much like the Doctor or the General. We obviously don't know for all of them, but we do know the numbers for a few. The [[Decayed Master]] is the [[Thirteenth Master]], the [[Tremas Master]] is the [[Fourteenth Master]], the [[The Master (First Frontier)|First Frontier Master]] is the [[Fifteenth Master]], the [[The Master (The TV Movie)|Bruce Master]] is the [[Sixteenth Master]], the [[The Master (The Fallen)|Preacher Master]] is the [[Seventeenth Master]], and the [[Reborn Master]] is the [[Eighteenth Master]]. If we wanted to guess (even if we're not absolutely certain) we can even assume that the [[War Master]] is the [[Nineteenth Master]] and the [[Saxon Master]] is the [[Twentieth Master]]. I just think it makes things more orderly on here, which is something we could definitely use given the convoluted history of this character. -- [[User:MattTheNerd42|MattTheNerd42]] [[User talk:MattTheNerd42|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:40, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
I thought at first that [[user:Crashsnake|Crashsnake]]'s changes to the intro were merely grammatical/punctuation maladies, but on closer inspection of [http://tardis.wikia.com/index.php?title=The_Master&diff=1292910&oldid=1292908 the diff], there are significant contentual differences.  I understand much of what Crashsnake is trying to do — namely simply reduce the overall size of the lead — but he's introduced a couple of innovations I can't support, and a number of grammatical and punctuation errors that are simply easier to revert than to attempt to integrate. Basically, there wasn't anything actually ''wrong'' with what was there before, so it's easier to revert to the base and let Crashsnake try again.


There are only two points of substantive change that Crashsnake made, and I disagree with both of them.
:::What's your source for the numbering? [[User:Aquanafrahudy|<span style="font-family: serif; color: pink" title="Hallo." > Aquanafrahudy</span>]] [[User talk: Aquanafrahudy|<span title="Talk to me">📢</span>]]  17:47, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
::::Whether stolen bodies even ''count'' is significantly controversial, but the problem is that if they do, then (depending on accounts) no numbering can be relied upon. In ''[[Mastermind (audio story)|Mastermind]]'' and ''[[Short Trips: The Centenarian]]'' a post-TVM Beevers Master steals a number of bodies for varying periods of time, in just the same way he stole Roberts's. If we counted them all, then Macqueen might be, like, the Thirty-First.  


*The first graf absolutely should end on "evil".  The removal of the line, "Both the Doctor and the High Council agreed that [the Master] was evil" is disagreeable, because it's perhaps the most extraordinary thing about the Master.  There are ''very'' few beings the Doctor has ''ever'' described as actually, literally, no-euphamism-involved, '''evil'''. It ''should'' be the thing we lead with — especially because it's literally true from several different scripts involving several different Doctors. 
::::Moreover, BF only inconsistently acknowledge the events of ''[[First Frontier (novel)|First Frontier]]''; the ''[[Dust Breeding (audio story)|Dust Breeding]]'' account bypasses it entirely, claiming that Ainley was reverted directly to Beevers. (This implies that Tipple in the TVM was a stolen body he acquired at some point — but we cannot assume that there was just ''one'' in that gap, so it doesn't necessarily "make up" the numbers with a different-but-equivalent "Fifteenth Master"!) Then, of course, there's the accounts where it's Ainley who's placed on trial, like ''[[The Eight Doctors (novel)|The Eight Doctors]]'', which would make your count come up one short, making Roberts the Fifteenth…


*The removal of the line "or perhaps because it was simply in the Doctor's nature to try and  heal people" is understandable because it appears to be speculation.  However it is ''the Master's'' speculation in ''The Sound of Drums'', it is the apparent truth of ''Last of the Time Lords'', and it's explicitly something Ten says to Simm in ''The End of Time''. 
::::Also, some accounts claim that the Decayed Master was just a decayed version of Delgado, making ''Delgado'' the Thirteenth Master as well. Covering them on the same page is obviously not desirable, but we can't just act as though Beevers was the only possible Thirteenth candidate. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 18:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
{{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}} 19:40: Tue 11 Dec 2012</span>


== Main Actor? ==
:::::And the Preacher Master can't be the Seventeenth Master, because [[The Master (The Curse of Fatal Death)]] is. Well, he could be an alternate incarnation, but it's clearly not so straightforward as it seems. [[User:Aquanafrahudy|<span style="font-family: serif; color: pink" title="Hallo." > Aquanafrahudy</span>]] [[User talk: Aquanafrahudy|<span title="Talk to me">📢</span>]] 18:18, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
For characters who have had different actors portraying them, what is this wiki's policy on the actor or actress that goes in the main portrayal box? Is it the person who plays them longest, the person who plays them first, or the person who is currently playing the role? For example, Roger Delgado is listed in the box on The Master's page right now and he was the first actor to play him, but Johm Simm most recently portrayed him and Anthony Ainley played him the longest. (Similarly on Kate Stewart's page, Beverly Cressmen is listed as the main actress, even though Jemma Redgrave played her most recently.) [[User:Mewiet|Mewiet]] [[User talk:Mewiet|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 04:27, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
: It's who played him the most (Time, not years, so Delgado may match Ainley. [[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]] ([[User Talk:OttselSpy25|talk to me, baby.]]) 12:54, January 3, 2013 (UTC)


==Paul McGann==
I don't think it's really possible to assign numbers. The waters are too murky. At this point, even if Sacha Dhawan showed up again on screen and proclaimed "I am the Xth Master" it would ''still ''be arguable. Also, even if we did have one or two numbers, nobody ever refers to them as such - nobody says "I loved the Twelfth Master" in the same way we might say "I loved the Twelfth Doctor" for example — [[User:FractalDoctor|Fractal Doctor]] [[User talk:FractalDoctor|<span title="Send a space-time telegraph">@</span>]] 21:07, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
When was the master played by [[Paul McGann]]? I don't see any mention of it on his page. [[User:Cult_Of_Skaro|Cult Of Skaro Here.]]|[[User talk:Cult_Of_Skaro|Communicate here.]] 17:08, February 1, 2013 (UTC)
: When the Master was trying to swap bodes with the Doctor for a few frames Paul McGann indeed played the Master . [[Special:Contributions/139.55.37.109|139.55.37.109]]<sup>[[User talk:139.55.37.109#top|talk to me]]</sup> 19:10, February 1, 2013 (UTC)
:: That's too trivial to mention in the infobox. —[[User:Josiah Rowe|Josiah Rowe]] [[User talk:Josiah Rowe|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 03:13, February 7, 2013 (UTC)


==Dominion Doubts==
: Not sure I completely agree there. If a new Master was introduced as "[Numeral] Master", we don't have the right to reject that name even if it doesn't sit well with other sources that depict more or less incarnations of the Master up until that point.
I believe the "Dominion Doubts" section needs to be edited, but since it is unclear I thought it should be discussed here. But the fact that the Master is using the TARDIS formerly belonging to Goth indicates that it can't be set before The Deadly Assasin. Certainly at the very least it must be stated that it is not a pre-Delgado incarnation (the fact that the Master knows the code string that refers to some of his UNIT era stories also backs this up). [[Special:Contributions/219.90.190.144|219.90.190.144]]<sup>[[User talk:219.90.190.144#top|talk to me]]</sup> 16:19, February 6, 2013 (UTC)
: We shouldn't make up incarnation numbers, but if one ever officially exists, we should use it. (Maybe as "according to one account".)
:Please provide details — quotations from the script, if possible — about how we know it's Goth's TARDIS. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}} 17:56: Sat 16 Feb 2013</span>
: We don't elect to not use "[[Fourteenth Doctor]]" even though he is technically the sixteenth (inc. War Doctor and the VanityTen) or perhaps the the thirty-third (inc. Timeless Children, Fugitive Doctor, "Morbius" Doctors). {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 21:16, 28 August 2023 (UTC)


== Early incarnations ==
::Fair points. I did say it would be debatable though, not that we should dismiss it immediately out of hand. In such an instance, I think "according to one account" would work. In any case, I doubt this would ever happen, unless it's done jokingly (similar to Smith's Doctor telling Clyde he could regenerate 507 times). — [[User:FractalDoctor|Fractal Doctor]] [[User talk:FractalDoctor|<span title="Send a space-time telegraph">@</span>]] 21:50, 28 August 2023 (UTC)


There's a suggestion that Alex Macqueen could be playing a pre-Delgado version of The Master. But I seem to recall that there *are* no pre-Delgado incarnations, and that the idea of "The Dark Path" is that the Master's future incarnations are used up trying to escape from.. what is it, a black hole? Soemthing like that, anyway. Unfortunately this is one of those hard-to-track down books.... Hopefully somebody in the know can comment? [[Special:Contributions/86.168.250.252|86.168.250.252]]<sup>[[User talk:86.168.250.252#top|talk to me]]</sup>
== Defaulting to the most recent incarnation with the tabbed infobox images ==
:Don't know about the rest of your post, but the first sentence is a violation of [[Tardis:Spoiler policy]]. You cannot post any information about unaired/unpublished stories '''anywhere''' on the wiki (with the exceptions of the [[Series 7 (Doctor Who)|Series 7]] page and [[Howling:The Howling]]). [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 03:43, April 15, 2013 (UTC)


After the end of The Name of the Doctor (series7 e14), is the Doctor also the Master?
Although tabs haven't yet been implemented here yet, following the discussion at [[Tardis:Temporary forums/Archive/Replacing docpic]], I have a potential way to let us have the tabs listed chronologically but with the most recent incarnation selected by default which I have presented at [[Talk:The Doctor#Defaulting to the most recent incarnation with the tabbed infobox images]]. It could easily be applied here as well. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|<span title="talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)


== The Master's fate in ''The End of Time'' ==
== Tabbed gallery ==
Just because the Master was engulfed by the same white light as Rassilon and the Time Lords in ''The End of Time'' when the Time Lords were sent back into the end of the Time War doesn't necessarily mean that the Master was sent with them, especially since the Master wasn't using the link to stay out of the time lock as the Time Lords were in the first place. Saying that the Master did indeed go with them into the Time War as well just because he was last seen being engulfed by the same white light, would be like saying that at the end of the universe humanity used the Cybermen's technology to become the Toclafane just because the Toclafane's energy bolts looked similar to the Cybus Cybermen's in ''The Army of Ghosts''/''Doomsday''. [[User:TroopDude|TroopDude]] [[User talk:TroopDude|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 18:54, July 2, 2013 (UTC)
I note this page still needs a tabbed gallery. The Doctor page works well starting from the first known incarnation, so maybe the Master should follow suit (except with "A", "B", "C", etc.) [[User:FractalDoctor|Fractal Doctor]] [[User talk:FractalDoctor|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:08, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
: Indeed. Done, though as stated in my thread closure, the option of switching out this or that image is of course available. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 13:25, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


== Aliases ==
:: Thanks, [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']]. Is the absence of a certain [[The Master (The Destination Wars)|Destination Wars Master]] on purpose? [[User:FractalDoctor|Fractal Doctor]] [[User talk:FractalDoctor|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:00, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
I've noticed a tendency of The Master to go by aliases that employ the word Master in differ languages. In the [[The Daemons]], the Master poses as Vicar Magister and in [[The Time Monster (TV story)]] he goes by Professor Phasciluz[not sure of spelling, but it's Greek, as [[Jo Grant]] points out. {{unsigned|Tepheris}}


: Thascalos, I believe. These are pointed out on the wiki on the list of [[aliases of the Master]], rather than the main character page. -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 18:08, July 28, 2013 (UTC)
: As I just finished telling [[User:Jack "BtR" Saxon]], it's "on purpose" in the sense that I was sticking with his absence from {{tlx|masterpic}} and with the basic precedent of not including the "according to one account" pre-Delgado incarnations established by the prior decision against including Brayshaw on the template. Also, aside from his controversial existence, it stands to reason that we don't want a somewhat "random" incarnation like Dreyfus to be the perennial default thumbnail instead of Delgado. All of this is in line with Jo Martin & friends not being represented on [[The Doctor]]. But Jack argues that we ''do'' include the also-controversial John Hurt at The Doctor, so perhaps we could consider the place of the pre-Delgado Masters on this one. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 14:02, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


== "Light at the End" placement? ==
This might be too outlandish an idea but just a thought I had, that could solve that (here and on other pages) - would it be possible to have a secondary tabbed gallery maybe further down the page, containing miscellaneous/somewhat ambiguous incarnations. I'm guessing it would have some pushback, and could be viewed as confusing, but it's just a suggestion.


Does anyone have a sense of where ''Light at the End'' fits in the Master's timeline? The Master is played by Beevers, but does he fit in the gap between ''Deadly Assassin'' and ''Keeper of Traken'', or is it the "Tremas lost" version from ''Dust Breeding'' and ''Master''? (I haven't listened to ''Mastermind'', so I'm not clear on whether the post-''Mastermind'' incarnation is an option or not.) In ''Light at the End'' he pulls the Doctors from multiple points in the Doctor's timestream, so we can't go from that. Thoughts? —[[User:Josiah Rowe|Josiah Rowe]] [[User talk:Josiah Rowe|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 05:34, October 25, 2013 (UTC)
I do think this page should begin with Delgado because of the reasons you stated. Worth noting that we do include Hurt in the tabbed Doctor gallery, and we include the Lumiat in this one (as well as others). The only difference with Dreyfus is that he's pre-Delgado and so instead of being mid-gallery, he'd be eternally at the beginning/the default starting image, and I completely understand why a lot of people wouldn't want this. (I wouldn't want this either, but is there an alternative, other than just leaving him out?) [[User:FractalDoctor|Fractal Doctor]] [[User talk:FractalDoctor|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:09, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
:Answering my own question: on re-listening, I caught the detail that the Master says he hasn't met Nyssa yet, so clearly it's between ''Deadly Assassin'' and ''Keeper of Traken'' for him. Will add to article accordingly. —[[User:Josiah Rowe|Josiah Rowe]] [[User talk:Josiah Rowe|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 05:23, October 26, 2013 (UTC)
:: Well, as I said, the alternative would be to start with [[William Hughes]], thus sandwiching him away. But I would find it hard to justify including these two and not other alleged pre-Delgado Masters e.g. the War Chief, and that might get very controversial very quickly (I would be willing to bite the bullet of including Peter Butterworth, but I don't think many people would! This is just what we have the "no controversial information in infoboxes" rule of thumb for.)  
::Exactly. Moreover, it is explicitly stated that he crosses his own timeline. This might a key to re-read the whole of the appearances of the "Beevers" in the audios...--[[User:HarveyWallbanger|HarveyWallbanger]] [[User talk:HarveyWallbanger|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 10:43, October 30, 2013 (UTC)


== Why didn't the Doctor recognise the Master in Utopia? ==
:: As regards a more thorough gallery of incarnations, this sounds like a very good use of the proposed usage of galleries on in-universe page, which is currently against policy but ''is'' one of the proposals currently rising through the Temp Forums propositions table. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 14:12, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
In [[The Sound of Drums (TV story)]] the Doctor says he can tell if someone is a Time Lord. Why didn't he recognise the master in [[Utopia (TV story)]]? Was it to do with the master not realising he was a time lord? [[User:Tankingmage|Tankingmage]] [[User talk:Tankingmage|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:26, October 31, 2013 (UTC)
:That is pretty much what we are to assume. The chameleon arch in the fob watch basically hid the Master's "Time Lord-ness" from the Doctor until the watch was opened. [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:34, October 31, 2013 (UTC)


== Only two paths after Survival, not three? ==
::: I don't think the likes of the Monk and the War Chief are comparable to the likes of Parker and Dreyfus. With the Monk and the War Chief, there are conflicting accounts on whether or not they are the Master. There's no such confusion with Parker and Dreyfus. [[User:Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon|Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon]] [[User talk:Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:15, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


I know this is a big ol' can of worms, but it seems like a bit of an over-complication. While both Dust Breeding and Prime Time contradict the Virgin New Adventures, they don't really contradict each other.  
Fair enough, [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge''']].  


First off, it seems like Big Finish's Ace dramas are meant to link with the BBC Ace novels. Dust Breeding directly references  Storm Harvest while Prime Time itself references the "Daleks on Kar-Charrat" from The Genocide Machine.
I'm probably opening a huge can of worms (and maybe not in the best suited place) by asking about the War Chief and what the evidence is for and against him being an incarnation of the Master, but I think it's worth noting that Dreyfus' incarnation was invented as, and specifically designed to be an earlier incarnation of the Master, and I think there's a debate about that warranting inclusion. I've just had a look at your back-and-forth with [[User:Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon|Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon]], and both of you raise good points. I think it's a debate to be had though at some stage, and good note about the upcoming galleries discussion. That could solve some issues down the line.


Second, one story shows the Master escaped from Cheetah World but still in his Trakenite body. The other story shows the Master after his Trakenite body has been destroyed. The two are not incompatible.
(I wrote this before seeing Jack's response just now. I'm sitting on the fence and viewing both sides, but ultimately I'm siding with Jack's reasoning here, if I'm honest.) [[User:FractalDoctor|Fractal Doctor]] [[User talk:FractalDoctor|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:17, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


So I'm really wondering why these are treated as incompatible stories when they seem to be a part of the same continuum? [[User:Constonks|Constonks]] [[User talk:Constonks|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 05:35, January 5, 2014 (UTC)
:::: @Jack, they're not exactly the same situation, sure, but there are certainly accounts by which lights no such persons as Parker or Dreyfus's Masters could have existed (''[[The Dark Path (novel)|The Dark Path]]'' positing that Koschei didn't call himself "the Master" yet by the time he left Gallifrey is the obvious one). [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 14:19, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


== Can we get rid of these info boxes? ==
Tangential question: is Parker meant to be the same incarnation as the 'child' we saw in [[The Sound of Drums (TV story)|The Sound of Drums]] flashback, or not? [[User:FractalDoctor|Fractal Doctor]] [[User talk:FractalDoctor|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:21, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


Okay, for a long time we've had these long, boring, out-of-place info boxes in certain sections of this page which address stories from an out-of-universe perspective. One question.
:: On the whole I'm less concerned about specific cases than about what a giant can of worms pre-Delgado Masters are, such that starting the infobox at Delgado just seems like the cutoff point that will cause the fewest headaches. It's a line in the sand, not a natural boundary, but it's a common-sense sort of line in the sand that readers will easily grok as saying "we're starting with Delgado for IRL reasons/sanity" rather than a judgment-call statement of "such-and-such pre-Delgado Masters count more than such-and-such pre-Delgado Masters". A full gallery elsewhere on the page, if the Temp Forums pass that reform, would then sound like quite an attractive proposal to supplement it.


''Why?''
:: (Re: Parker/Hughes… that's another controversial one. Per recent BTS quotes, it seems that yes, but that's ambiguous in the stories themselves, particularly as they have some conspicuous physical differences e.g. eye colour. So that's another area of possible contention.) [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 14:19, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


Okay, a few things that I would like to note. When we first created these, they stretched out the pages we put them on and were a total eye sore. They ripped apart any organization that the page had picture-wise, and cut the page so strangely that you would rather go read something else then look at it for another second. That was then. Now, with the new wiki system, it's far worse, because the multiple boxes push each other around even ''further'' down the page. Go look at the ''Dominion doubt'' box. Half-way through the page. A useless waste of space for a box that has little point.
I'm not gunna die on this hill, and I'd be happy to wait until the Temp Forum discussion happens regarding a potential alternative before continuing this debate.  


I might have liked these a little bit if they were used when they should be (Dominion actually isn't that bad info wise), but they're mostly not. ''Making sense of the 1990s'' contains information which could '''''very''''' easily be transferred into "accounts" and "sources" in an easily read-able fashion. Instead, the author has slammed a college paper into a very slim table, which is both unattractive an unnecessary.
I also note here that there may even be [[The Master's early life#The Dreyfus Master|a hint of Big Finish muddying the waters]] themselves anyway, or subtly trying to retcon a few things in light of IRL events surrounding Dreyfus and his positioning anyway? [[User:FractalDoctor|Fractal Doctor]] [[User talk:FractalDoctor|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:26, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


Also they're ''amazingly informal''. "Susan turned the TCE on the Delgado Master in his TARDIS — and it fried him. Extra crispy." Really? '''''Really?''''' "Extra crispy?" Every time I read that sentence I head-but my computer. ''Every time.'' It's not just that they are informal, but they are also ''not funny.''
If the preacher (who appears in half as many stories as Dreyfus) and the Asian child (who is apparently not even intended to be a mainline Master) are included, there's no justification for excluding Dreyfus. Including pre-Delgado incarnations is no more "opening a can of worms" than including post-Delgado ones. I think we should either stick with major TV incarnations (as on [[The Doctor]]) or include the lot, not this weird middle ground. [[User:PintlessMan|PintlessMan]] [[User talk:PintlessMan|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:32, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


So, in conclusion, the boxes are out-of-place, unattractive, and insanely informal and unfunny. At very least, the only one not entirely pointless or filled with very specific interpretations of one source is the Dominoes box, the rest (and probably even that) need to go. [[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]] ([[User Talk:OttselSpy25|talk to me, baby.]]) 18:37, January 5, 2014 (UTC)
:It has been nearly half a year with no further discussion. Again, given the inclusion of the Preacher and the Child, there is no excuse for excluding the Inventor, an actual mainline Master who is named "The Master", appears as the main Master in multiple stories, and is explicitly positioned prior to Delgado. Can we please get this resolved now? [[User:PintlessMan|PintlessMan]] [[User talk:PintlessMan|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:46, 8 July 2023 (UTC)


I totally agree with you. I've never been a fan of the boxes, but I saw how, in the case of Dominion, it could clarify how that incarnation of the Master is at odds with the timeline. I 100% think that we should revert back to a "account/source" method like you suggest, but maybe we should wait until next month for clarification on the MacQueen front, with his appearance in Dark Eyes 2, which hopefully might shed some more light on things. I think we're better approaching this with an "everything must be changed" stance rather than leaving one of these silly boxouts still in place. --[[User:Revanvolatrelundar|Revan]]\[[User_talk:Revanvolatrelundar|Talk]] 18:51, January 5, 2014 (UTC)
:: No we cannot. To begin with, it is non-trivial that his "being named 'the Master' and appears as the main Master in multiple stories" is operative with regards to why he should be included, but not Hughes/Parker or Butterworth or Brayshaw or Magnus.  


:Well, considering how much work went into creating the boxes, I don't think it's helpful or useful to use words like "obnoxious, unfunny, boring" or "silly". I do agree that they mess up the look of the page by squashing text and photos to the left. However, I think the information they contain is pretty important. We do need a way to let new users know how/where we've placed various incarnations of the Master; otherwise, we would have to constantly revert edits. There has to be a way to include this info without compromising the look of the page. But I agree with Revan that we ought to wait until the new release comes out. [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:40, January 5, 2014 (UTC)
:: But more importantly, I still think there is no reason to include Dreyfus here if we do not include Jo Martin at [[The Doctor]] (she explicitly the Doctor by name, explicitly before the currently-earliest incarnation in the gallery, and [[Origins (comic story)|has begun appearing as the lead in her own stories]]). And I don't believe we should do ''either'' of those things. There is a long-standing policy of keeping controversial in-universe information out of infoboxes (hence "[[The Doctor's species]]" being used in all Doctors' species field). Although it can be bent on a case-by-case basis, I think setting things such that incarnations whose very ''existence'' is highly dependent on contradictory accounts, like any of the pre-Delgado Masters or the various pre-Hartnell Doctors, would appear as the ''page's default thumbnail'' in categories and Google searches, would be in stark violation of the spirit of that policy. How recurring the Inventor or Fugitive might become doesn't enter into it. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 11:30, 9 July 2023 (UTC)


::Didn't mean to offend the creators of the boxes. I agree that the content in the boxes ''is'' important, but that that information could very easily be converted to an in-universe context or be put in the behind-the-scenes section once the tone was corrected. It in no way ''needs'' to be where it is.
:::I personally think that the CoFD Master should get a look in, although the question of exactly where to place him is something of a conundrum. [[User:Aquanafrahudy|<span style="font-family: serif; color: pink" title="Hallo." > Aquanafrahudy</span>]] [[User talk: Aquanafrahudy|📢]] 11:59, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
::And holding off the discussion for now is fine. [[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]] ([[User Talk:OttselSpy25|talk to me, baby.]]) 22:10, January 5, 2014 (UTC)


I can't see anything in-universe to take from the "It's all about Delgado" box. "Making sense of the 1990s" explains things from a behind the scenes perspective because of the confusion. That said, the "one account" stuff is already present, so I'm not sure what you guys are suggesting to revert or transfer to the in-universe writing. Not sure either way about how to approach "Dominion doubt", but again, the in-universe text explicitly specifies it's after Ainley but before the Time War Master. -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 23:00, January 5, 2014 (UTC)
::::On the other hand, of course, we ''could'' place him between Bruce and Preacher. [[User:Aquanafrahudy|<span style="font-family: serif; color: pink" title="Hallo." > Aquanafrahudy</span>]] [[User talk: Aquanafrahudy|<span title="Talk to me">📢</span>]] 16:46, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
:Darwin has indeed made these sidebars more difficult to work with. They worked better in a fixed-width environment.  Their CSS needs to be adjusted to make them work in this changed environment, but as they currently affect only one page, they were kinda low on the repair list. 


:Far from pointless, '''sidebars''' — they aren't infoboxes — are a standard convention of publishing.  Pick up any magazine or newspaper and you will see a sidebar — information not written in the same voice as the main article which amplifies a point made in the main article. Such sidebars are often deliberately written in a lighter style so that it's clear to the reader that they are conveying a different type of information. And lest you think that it's not something that applies to digital media, [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-25613847 here's a BBC news report] published today that contains a sidebar.  
== Relationship between Master and Meddling Monk ==


:Sidebars are a tried and true piece of design. The fact that they are unusual for this wiki doesn't make them "stupid", "ugly" or — what was the word that's sine been removed from this page? — "obnoxious".
I see this site now uses FASA narrative as valid. And it contains something that may settle the controversial issue once and for all.
Peter Butterworth's character in The Time Meddler is said to be the Master, but then we also have a "Meddling Monk" in Follow That TARDIS!, plus Rufus Hound in Big Finish Audios. So, how can Butterworth be the Master, AND Hound be a Time Lord unambiguously separate from the Master called "the Meddling Monk"?


:I ''strongly'' disagree that the information could be conveyed as effectively using the "one account suggests" routine that we typically do.  The history of the Master is really confusing at certain points: post-''Frontier in Space'', post-''Survival'' and now around ''Dominion''. We need to help our readers understand these trouble spots.  And, I think, this is one case that where clarity '''does not come''' from sticking ''only'' to an in-universe voice. Furthermore, I think it's important that we don't bury this information in the BTS section, but put it close to where the body of the article starts to get confusing.
The FASA narrative explictly states that in 1066(The Time Meddler) the Master '''disguised himself as the Meddling Monk'''. And that this wasn't one of his(the Master's) best schemes.
So, in the same way David Morrissey in The Next Doctor wasn't actually The Doctor, Peter Butterworth in The Time Meddler/The Daleks' Master Plan WAS NOT ACTUALLY THE MEDDLING MONK. He was the Master disguised as the Meddling Monk.


:It's '''critical''' that we '''prominently''' explain why this wiki thinks the Delgado incarnation includes the versions played by Pratt and Beevers.  That assertion is '''not at all clear''' to even the moderately knowledgeable fan. And yet it's a really important concept to get your head around, if you're going to understand how to read and edit articles on the the wiki relative to the Master. Equally the place of the ''Dominion'' master is obscure.  But, like Revan suggests, we might soon be able to drop that box altogether, if new narratives give us greater certainty. {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}} 23:49: Sun 05 Jan 2014</span>
So, while there may be a Mortimus/Meddling Monk separate to the Master, the guy in The Time Meddler/The Daleks' Master Plan was NOT the Meddling Monk. It was the Master DISGUISED AS the Meddling Monk. {{unsigned-anon|197.87.143.20}}
: Oh good, you again.


I strongly agree. Not only cringe inducing, unfunny and amateurish they are very jarring and give far too much emphasis to the least seen or heard, least popular elements of Doctor Who rather than the mass media mainstream Who series. It reeks of fanwank.{{Unsigned|Flying Tiger Comics}}
: Well, ''according to one account'', yes. (Though it's reading the text against itself to imagine that in FASA's account there is such a thing as a real Monk who simply is not the one who actually appears in ''The Time Meddler''.) But ''according to other accounts'' it was in fact a distinct guy in ''Time Meddler''. There are ''conflicting accounts'', and this is not a problem, this is not something that needs to be "settled", it's just a fact. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 09:33, 7 July 2023 (UTC)


: Flying Tiger Comics, regardless of the tone of these sidebars, we are not getting rid of them just because they give emphasis to an unpopular or not widely seen or out of print element of the DWU. Especially when the whole point of them is a result of how confusing and messy the post-''Frontier in Space'' and pre-''Utopia'' and ''The Sound of Drums'' history of the Master's timeline is. It's not like the Seventh and Eighth Doctors have any clearer history or continuity following their television runs.
== "Quote marks" ==


: The policies of this site assert that ''Doctor Who'' has no canon, and that we treat prose, comic, audio and televised ''Doctor Who'' on equal terms. That is, we give equal weight to the New Adventures, Mike Tucker and Robert Perry's novels, John Peel's novels, Big Finish and ''Doctor Who Magazine''. (See [[T:CAN]], [[T:IU]] and [[T:NPOV]]) -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 14:44, May 10, 2014 (UTC)
We finally ditched the quote marks from [[The Doctor|"The Doctor"]], post-fork, should we do the same here? × [[User:Fractal|Fractal]] [[User talk:Fractal|<span title="Talk">•</span>]] 21:01, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 
: Yes. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:27, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
== Separate articles for the Master's incarnations ==
Why dont we have seperate articles for the master's incarnations like we do romana's {{unsigned-anon|58.97.200.18}}
: This site's policy page [[T:MASTER]] (via discussion on [[Forum:The Master - 1 article]]) explains the reasoning. Basically, we have no distinct way of disambiguating or numbering the incarnations ''to'' make separate articles, especially for non-performance Masters.
 
: We do, however, have a special form of template for each "type" of Master, like {{tl|Delgado}}, {{tl|Frontier}} and so forth (as well as instructions on how to operate these templates) which is outlined on T:MASTER. -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 13:30, January 25, 2014 (UTC)
 
== Reverted edits ==
 
I have reverted the edits made by [[user:41.133.47.166]] to this page and [[Magnus]], [[The War Games]] and [[the War Chief]]. Several months ago this user tried to make his point on several talk pages, but failed to provide convincing evidence per this wiki's rules. I reverted the edits and suggested he try the forums; as he did not do so, I've reverted his edits again. [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:22, January 29, 2014 (UTC)
 
== Removed from personality section ==
 
: When he turned into the human [[John Smith (Master)|John Smith]], the Master was still somehow deeply aware of his dark nature and troubled by it. As his true self, this incarnation had a far more darker and evil side to him than most of his other selves. He seemed to enjoy being mysterious about his true identity and enjoyed giving his enemies riddles as to who he truly was. Also compared to his other selves, this incarnation was far calmer and well spoken, which made him sound more sinister. ([[AUDIO]]: ''[[Master (audio story)|Master]]'')
 
While we can have some leeway in ''calling'' him "evil" unlike other pages of this wiki due to all of the quotes in the lead, "sinister" and "evil side" doesn't clearly explain his personality very well.
 
: This Master, unlike his successors, seems to want the respect and approval of a physician, this is evident when hallucinating his greatest fear, he imagined a giant version of the Doctor towering over him and laughing. ([[TV]]: ''[[The Sea Devils]]'')
 
I've not seen The Sea Devils, but this sounds either awkwardly-worded or outright speculation. -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 22:31, February 18, 2014 (UTC)
:I haven't seen ''The Sea Devils'' in a while, but it sounds more like ''The Mind of Evil'' when his greatest fear was revealed to be the Doctor. But it doesn't matter, because you're absolutely right, it's complete speculation to connect "a physician" with the Doctor. [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:42, February 18, 2014 (UTC)
 
== Question ==
 
What's with the giant picture?!? --[[User:Reikson|Reikson]] [[User talk:Reikson|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 06:43, March 2, 2014 (UTC)
 
==Adding MacQueen to the Picture==
Now that Alex Macqueen has appeared as The Master three times, and probably more soon, could we add his image to the rolling picture at the top? '''[[User:AdricLovesNyssa|Adric♥Nyssa]]'''∩''[[User_talk:AdricLovesNyssa|Talk?]]'' 20:34, March 30, 2014 (UTC)
 
== Could someone please fix the image sizes? ==
 
I apologize if this has already been done but could someone fix the image sizes they are distracting and blocks up a huge portion of the page.[[User:MrAnonymous|MrAnonymous]] [[User talk:MrAnonymous|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 05:19, April 21, 2014 (UTC)MrAnonymous
:I'm not seeing a problem. Could you be more specific? [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:13, April 21, 2014 (UTC)
 
I'm not seeing a problem either, and what size should they be and what size are they supposed to be? I always make images 200pxl [[User:Masterpwn|Masterpwn]] [[User talk:Masterpwn|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:41, April 21, 2014 (UTC)
 
Sorry about that I was looking at the page with Internet Explorer and I guess it made the pictures look massive. I just looked at it with fire fox and they were fine.[[User:MrAnonymous|MrAnonymous]] [[User talk:MrAnonymous|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 15:39, April 21, 2014 (UTC)MrAnonymous
:Yeah, wikia decided a little while back that it would no longer support IE, so if you use it, things won't necessarily look right. (I had to stop using IE for wikis because it would always crash.) [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:56, April 21, 2014 (UTC)
 
== Alex McQueen Chronology ==
 
Just something I was wondering after I listened to Dark Eyes 2 and Unit: Dominion. We know from Dark Eyes 2 that the McQueen version of the Master was saved from "his predicament" from the Time Lords, and given an mission, but we don't know when this mission takes place in his Timeline in relation to Dominion. It could take place afterwards for all we know, and not before, as this wiki states. Surely by Occam's Razor we should assume that since Dominion was released first, it happened first, for both the Doctor and the Master. --[[Special:Contributions/89.101.153.65|89.101.153.65]]<sup>[[User talk:89.101.153.65#top|talk to me]]</sup> 10:53, May 1, 2014 (UTC)
 
Why is Anthony Ainley listed as main actor other actors have played him for equally significant periods of time most notably his original actor Roger Delgado so I don't see why they should be listed as just Other TV actors.
 
:In Eyes of the Master, the Doctor makes the "Hello, You" quip, which the Master seems to 'get', as well as talking about wondering if he was going to run into the Seventh Doctor. These things would seem to tacitly indicate that Dominion comes before Eyes of the Master from the Master's POV.[[User:Cousin Zagreus|Cousin Zagreus]] [[User talk:Cousin Zagreus|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:37, December 4, 2014 (UTC)
 
==17 incarnations==
In the bottom of the page it is said that "That hasn't stopped at least one non-narrative source from trying, though. The 2010 edition of REF: Doctor Who: The Visual Dictionary indicates that the Master played by John Simm is the seventeenth form. According to this theory, Derek Jacobi would be the sixteenth, Eric Roberts the fifteenth, and Anthony Ainley/Gordon Tipple the fourteenth. However, there's no narrative evidence to support any of the Visual Dictionary claims."
I actually think that this is true, given that in the beginning of Doctor Who: The Movie, the Seventh Doctor narrates and he tells that the Master had used up all of his regenerations, having lastly been Exterminated by the Daleks. Given that a Time Lord have 13 incarnations this would mean that Anthony Ainley/Gordon Tipple IS the 14th, Eric Roberts IS the 15th, Derek Jacobi IS the 16th, which would mean that John Simm indeed IS the 17th. I want to hear your opinions on this, as I see this as the truth. I always say that the John Simm one is the 17th. --[[User:Danniesen|DCLM]] [[User talk:Danniesen|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:06, June 19, 2014 (UTC)
 
== Gordon Tipple ==
If Paul has a box for his brief moment as the Master, Gordon deserves to be properly listed in a box of his own too.{{Unsigned-anon|71.172.143.100}}
 
== The name 'Koschei' ==
 
The article states that the master was originally called 'Koschei'. (I see in the Archivessomeone else brought this up earlier, but it was ignored, but still...) The article then goes on to use the word 'Koschei' approximately 50 times in the first few paragraphs. Things from stories like [[The End of Time (TV story)]], [[The Glorious Dead]], [[Master (audio story)]] etc. are attributed to 'Koschei'. "Koschei looked into the untempered schism", "Koschei left Gallifrey" etc. It is overkill for somone trying to convince others(and probably him/herself) that the Master was originally called 'Koschei'.
 
However, this is all completely wrong. In the novel [[The Dark Path]], the [[Second Doctor]] learns that there is another TARDIS where he is. He panics, fearing that his people(not yet named 'Time Lords') have come to hunt him down. Later, he learns that the owner of this TARDIS is called 'Koschei'....and continues to panic thinking it's just one of his people sent to hunt him down. Later, only after having 'Koschei' described to him, does he start to think it could be his old friend. And it's only when they meet face-to-face does he realise that 'Koschei' is indeed his old friend. His introductions to Jamie also make this clear beyond any resonable shadow of doubt that '''Koschei is a new name for this character as of the Dark Path, a name that the Doctor is totally unfamiliar with'''.
 
Now, no doubt, some people will immediately point to [[Divided Loyalties]] as supposed "proof". Now, let's see....Adric, Nyssa and Tegan all have nightmares where real events from their past are mixed up with fiction. These nightmares are clearly upsetting and confusing them. Then, the Doctor falls asleep, the next Chapter is clearly entitled '''DREAMING''' in big bold letters. Within this '''dream''' a character called 'Koschei' appears. Various other things that totally and utterly contradict established continuity occur, including various self-contradictory events. After this Chapter, the Doctor wakes up, and remarks on the "weird nightmare" that he has just had. Shortly after this, it is revealed that both a)the Doctor and his companions are within [[The Celestial Toymaker]]'s Dreamscape and b)The Celestial Toymaker states outright that he is the one responsible for giving them those anguishing nightmares.
 
Now, based off that, we have two usages of 'Koschei'. One a real event where the '''Second Doctor''' has never heard the name 'Koschei' before, and the other a "Weird nightmare" full of self-contradictory oddities where a character called Koschei appears within what is unambiguously shown to be a dream, and '''only''' within this unambiguous dream sequence.
 
And yet, Tardis Data Core not only states that The Master was originally called 'Koschei', but even deceptively tries to make it look as though [[William Hughes]] in [[The Sound of Drums (TV story)]], the flashback sequence in [[Master (audio story)]], and various references in stories like [[The Time Monster (TV story)]], [[The Glorious Dead]], [[The Claws of Axos (TV story)]] etc. were all referring to and/or showing a character called 'Koschei'! "Koschei' does not appear in [[The Sound of Drums]] etc. In fact, 'Koschei' does not even appear in [[Divided Loyalties]], because that is unquestionably a '''nightmare''' that [[The Celestial Toymaker]] creates for the Doctor. The one, real occurrence of the Master as 'Koschei' in in [[The Dark Path]], where it is also unambiguously clear that '''Koschei is a new alias that the Doctor has never heard before The Dark Path'''.
 
As long as this article continues to state that the Master was "originally called Koschei", and the word 'Koschei' is used dozens of times in the opening section, then this article is at best simply wrong and at worst someone pushing their personal beliefs on everyone else. [[User:Master of Spiders|Master of Spiders]] [[User talk:Master of Spiders|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 06:28, August 11, 2014 (UTC)
 
== Is this actually necessary? ==
 
"Mister Saxon", meanwhile, is an anagram of "Master No. Six". Although there is no clear evidence to indicate that this was intentional, John Simm was the sixth actor (not including Derek Jacobi) to portray the character of the Master.
 
So, there's no indication that the production team ever thought of it, but more importantly '''it is not even true'''. "Mister Saxon" has other anagrams such as 'smears toxin', 'senators mix', 'matrix noses', 'extra is moss', 'Stream in sox' and 'Rani most sex'. Any of which could be said to be far more relevant than something that was never the intention of the people who made the show, and more than that isn't even true in the first place. [[User:Master of Spiders|Master of Spiders]] [[User talk:Master of Spiders|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 09:05, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
:I completely agree. The key sentence is "there is no clear evidence to indicate that this was intentional". Therefore it is not relevant to the article. [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:06, October 9, 2014 (UTC)
 
==Woman in the Shop==
Has it been overtly implied that the Mistress was the one who gave Clara the Doctor's phone number, or is that still just speculation at this point? –[[User:Nahald|Nahald]] [[User talk:Nahald|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 04:22, November 2, 2014 (UTC)
 
==(Spoilers)Dark Water==
(Just a heads up this is Pcthomas2. So if there's an issue just shoot it to my talk page.)
Just wondering, are we going to merge the Missy article with this page? I mean she even said who she was.
:This issue is currently being addressed at [[Thread:164874]]. [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:11, November 2, 2014 (UTC)
 
== Originally called Koschei? ==
 
With all the 'Missy' editing going on, someone has reinserted that the Master was "originally called Koschei". This has been definitively debunked as fanon some time ago. And yet, it keeps coming back. However the article is now locked. [[User:Master of Spiders|Master of Spiders]] [[User talk:Master of Spiders|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 08:59, November 2, 2014 (UTC)
 
:References to the Master as being called "Koschei" appear in [[PROSE]]: ''[[The Dark Path (novel)|The Dark Path]],'' ''[[The Face of the Enemy (novel)|The Face of the Enemy]],'' and ''[[Divided Loyalties (novel)|Divided Loyalties]],'' all of which are considered [[T:VALID|valid sources of in-universe information by this wiki]]. &mdash; [[User:Rob T Firefly|Rob T Firefly]] - '''[[User talk:Rob T Firefly|&#916;]][[Special:Contributions/Rob T Firefly|&#8711;]]''' - 22:16, November 2, 2014 (UTC)
::To him being called that yes, but the contested part is it being his ''original'' name. [[User:JagoAndLitefoot|JagoAndLitefoot]] [[User talk:JagoAndLitefoot|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:43, November 2, 2014 (UTC)
 
Indeed. The point is that in The Dark Path, it is explicitly stated that when the Doctor learns that one of his people is in the area, he panics, feeling that it's someone come to take him, and put him on trial. He later learns that this other one of his people is called 'Koschei' and he ''still'' panics, not knowing who it is, but again fearing he's come to collect him. The name 'Koschei' is used several times in front of the Doctor. It's only when he comes face-to-face with this 'Koschei' that he realises who 'Koschei' is, and it's clear in the introductions, particularly when the Doctor introduces his best friend to Jamie, that 'Koschei' is a new name for this character. So, the '''first time''' that the Doctor has ever heard the name 'Koschei', and specifically when it is referred to the character we know best as 'The Master' is in a story set during Season 5. Over 200 years after the Doctor has left Gallifrey. And please check the title of the Chapter of Divided Loyalties where the name 'Koschei' is sued, as well as the Fifth Doctor's comments about this sequence in the next Chapter. [[User:Master of Spiders|Master of Spiders]] [[User talk:Master of Spiders|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 04:39, November 3, 2014 (UTC)
 
:Yep, so this discussion has been ignored. It's actually quite laughable that someone feels the need to push the incorrect fanon information that the Master was "originally called Koschei". [[User:Master of Spiders|Master of Spiders]] [[User talk:Master of Spiders|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 12:05, November 4, 2014 (UTC)
 
Have some patience. You have waited a day since your last post. [[Talk:Unnamed planet (State of Decay)|Some discussions]] have been rolling on for over a year without activity. The users involved in this discussion may not have logged on since you published your reply. --{{User:Skittles the hog/sig}} 13:37, November 4, 2014 (UTC)
 
well you see, the article used to state that the Master was "originally called Koschei". This was discussed, and then those three inaccurate words were removed. Some time later, the whole 'Missy' issue came up, causing some disruptive editing. The article was then locked because of the 'Missy' issue. And then, after it was locked, the inaccurate "originally called Koschei" nonsense was reinserted. So yeah, that is pushing a piece of fanon as fact, and it has been discussed before. [[User:Master of Spiders|Master of Spiders]] [[User talk:Master of Spiders|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:06, November 4, 2014 (UTC)
 
:Yes, you have already said that. My reply was just pointing out that you've waited one solitary day before saying "this discussion has been ignored". It hasn't, it's ongoing, and you need to allow time for it pan out.--{{User:Skittles the hog/sig}} 16:30, November 4, 2014 (UTC)
::MOS, you base your disbelief of the Master's original name entirely upon ''The Dark Path'', and '''the Doctor's''' reaction to the name.  What do you make of '''the Master's''' reaction to the name in ''The Face of the Enemy''? According to my read of the book, the Master suggests to Ian that he was indeed originally called "Koschei".  Would you be okay with the phraseology, "whose original name may have been Koschei"?  {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}} 17:48: Tue 04 Nov 2014</span>
 
:::There is nothing in Face of the Enemy that says that the Master was originally called Koschei. Only that the master was called Koschei around the time of The Dark Path, and that the alt-universe Master is still called Koschei at the time of Face of the Enemy. It's said that The Dark Path was the defining event that led to him being The Master(which actually contradicts several other stories, but that's not the point here). Only it never says his original name was Koschei. Again, the only thing we know about the name Koschei is that he was calling himself that at the time of The Dark Path, and that it was not a name that the Second Doctor recognised. [[User:Master of Spiders|Master of Spiders]] [[User talk:Master of Spiders|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 09:26, November 6, 2014 (UTC)
 
== Picture Of Missy ==
A picture of missy should be added to the infobox{{Unsigned|Danyal123}}
 
== Please Add a Pic for Missy ==
 
Can someone please add a pic of Missy to the rotating template? I realize it was blocked after Dark Water so no one would keep adding Missy, but this has backfired now. Whoever can unlock the page, please do so Missy can be added!!!{{Unsigned|73.46.156.195}}
 
 
 
== Picture Box ==
 
 
Can someone change the john simm master from what it is just now of him being strapped to a chair, to something where he is posing or doing something evil. Would just make it look better. --[[User:Coop3|Coop3]] [[User talk:Coop3|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:59, November 11, 2014 (UTC)
 
== Legacy of the Daleks ==
So, having recently reread this, it doesn't actually state that Delgado and Pratt are the same incarnation of the Master. Page 226 sees Susan using the TCE on the Master's device, while he's still using it, and Susan running back into the Master's TARDIS, seeing an explosion of energy on the scanner, and assuming the Master has died. Page 241 then sees Goth on Terserus, running into the Master, now played by Pratt. Timewyrm Exodus established that regenerations can go wrong, and I think there's a case to be made for such a case happening here. The explosion of energy Susan sees could as easily be the result of regeneration energy as from the Master's device exploding.
[[User:Cousin Zagreus|Cousin Zagreus]] [[User talk:Cousin Zagreus|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 04:27, November 28, 2014 (UTC)
:Given this information, can we get rid of that "It's all about Delgado" box, as it's inaccurate at best and misleading at worst? [[User:Cousin Zagreus|Cousin Zagreus]] [[User talk:Cousin Zagreus|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:28, December 1, 2014 (UTC)
 
In legacy of the Daleks, the Doctor immediately recognises the Master. The Master in LOTD behaves like Delgado, and if memory serves correctly was described as looking like Delgado. It is possible that it's a post-Delgado master who is suspiciously similar to Delgado. However, the Beevers/Tremas merging creates a Master who takes on Delgado facial features that Tremas never had. The Pratt/Beevers/Ainley/Roberts/Preacher Masters all say and do things that Delgado says/does, while other incarnations such as Simm do not. The at-the-time-canon Scream of the Shalka has the Roberts essence loaded into and android who resembles Delgado(because it's the same incarnation).
 
While there is wiggle room, it seems overwhelmingly likely that Pratt is Delgado, and therefore so are Beevers, Ainley and Roberts.{{Unsigned-anon|197.86.170.187}}
:Harvest of Time states that the Master goes in for a certain look when regenerating or stealing bodies if he can manage it, so the fact that Ainley's incarnation shares similar visual cues with Delgado's doesn't really mean much of anything in that regard. The evidence still supports Delgado and Pratt being separate incarnations more than it does the opposite.[[User:Cousin Zagreus|Cousin Zagreus]] [[User talk:Cousin Zagreus|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 15:44, December 4, 2014 (UTC)
 
:Additionally, as recent as issue DWM 480, official publications refer to Delgado and Pratt as separate incarnations.[[User:Cousin Zagreus|Cousin Zagreus]] [[User talk:Cousin Zagreus|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 18:28, December 4, 2014 (UTC)
 
Doesn't ''Harvest of Time'' actually show the Pratt/Beevers Master on the Sild ship (it's been a while since I read it)? If that's the case then the book specifically states that each Master on the ship is a different incarnation, meaning that we have another in-universe source that states Delgado and Mr. Crispy are two different incarnations, leading to a changing of how the article is structured. --[[User:Revanvolatrelundar|Revan]]\[[User_talk:Revanvolatrelundar|Talk]] 18:31, December 4, 2014 (UTC)
:It does indeed, on page 220 of the paperback release. The indication on page 209 is that there are four hundred and seventy(ish) distinct incarnations of the Master, from multiple potential timelines, housed within the Sild ship. Since ''both'' the Delgado incarnation and the Pratt incarnation are present, this suggests that they are distinct and separate incarnations.[[User:Cousin Zagreus|Cousin Zagreus]] [[User talk:Cousin Zagreus|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:57, December 4, 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:27, 14 March 2024

Archive.png
 Archives: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8

How to refer to each incarnation of the Master[[edit source]]

Well, I think some of us were hoping it'd be simpler, but the fact that Talk:The Master (The TV Movie) discussion and Talk:The Master (The Keeper of Traken) are going on at the same time with seemingly different ideas made me think we should just discuss this. This is not necessarily meant to be a discussion to determine a name or page title for each Master; those should still happen on their talk page. This is just a discussion on having consistency between them.

This long comment started as something I was going to write for Talk:The Master (The TV Movie), with me saying I think it should either be both Tremas Master and Bruce Master, or both The Master (The TV Movie) and The Master (The Keeper of Traken), for consistency. …But then in the latter case, arguably some of the others should also use disambiguation terms. I personally think that for the "main" Masters (i.e. those not ambiguous or from another reality) should either all use descriptions for page titles, with the possible exception of The Master (Terror of the Autons) (the reason for which is currently discussed on his talk page and should remain there), or all use disambiguation terms, with the exceptions of Decayed Master, War Master, Missy and the Lumiat. Having any other sort of mixed arrangement would just be confusing. Please note I am not saying the wiki must subscribe to the above dichotomy, just that I think it needs to be discussed. But there's another problem:

Initially I too subscribed to the story dab pattern, for neutrality. But the problem is, the incarnations still need a name to be referred to with in articles to specify them. We can't say "The Doctor met the Master (Dominion)." in an article. It'd have to be something like "The Doctor met the Reborn Master." This means even if they're not page titles, descriptive names are necessary anyway. There are a few proposed names that work well enough with their story titles, like "Traken Master" (from The Keeper of Traken) or "Spy Master" (from Spyfall). But for most of them, a different name is needed to maintain an in-universe perspective, and because the text of the wiki will be using these names to identify the incarnations, it makes sense to me to have them be the page names anyhow, regardless of what they actually are. I am not 100% against using names on pages and disambiguation terms for (most) titles, which is essentially the status quo, but I think the page title should reflect how the character is almost always referred to on the wiki…

Last note, this is a bit pedantic, but I think it makes a difference: I think descriptive names which are derived from a name themselves should use quotes— basically, "Tremas" Master instead of Tremas Master, "Bruce" Master instead of Bruce Master, and "Saxon" Master instead of Saxon Master. This not only reads better to me, for example alleviating concerns that "Bruce Master" sounds like, and probably is, some guy's name, but also better conveys the reasons those names are being used. Currently quotes are variably used for all descriptive names (particularly with coverage of Masterful you might see something like "the 'Young' Master"), but I think that's too difficult to read and that is the best way to use them. Chubby Potato ☎ 05:02, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

As previously mentioned at Talk:Fugitive Doctor, on no account should we use quotes for the actual page names (e.g. it is and will remain Decayed Master, not "Decayed" Master). This interferes with searchability and is ungainly besides. Big Finish's own box set titles don't say The "War" Master, either; nor do the Masterful credits from which we derive the proposed Saxon Master, Reborn Master or Tremas Master renames use such quotation marks.
This point aside, my intuition thus far is that we use quotation marks when pipe-linking dabbed The Master (Something) pages for clarity — precisely to emphasise that something is a nickname which isn't really that page's proper title. For example, the "UNIT era" Master. This is informal practice and that discussion would be in a position to reform it, though, myself, I think it's intuitive enough. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 11:19, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
Scrooge, you're drawing an equivalence between quite unlike things. Of course we don't use "Fugitive" Doctor or "Decayed" Master, since those names are straightforwardly descriptive of each character in their entirety. But there is a straightforward difference between those names and names which are based on identities used only temporarily by the characters. "Missy" is not an alias in the same way that "Harold Saxon" is.
I very much like Chubby's suggestion. This is what it would take for me to get on board with some otherwise-repulsive suggestions: it makes "Bruce Master" sound less like the name of my next-door neighbor, and it suitably contextualizes the conjectural leap we're making in incarnation naming. In particular, I disagree with the idea that this would interfere with searchability in any way. Quote marks work fine in the search bar, and now that Fandom has made search work better with redirects, typing the same name without quotes will return the same result in a transparent fashion. Neither search nor precedent is an argument against this proposal. – n8 (☎) 14:47, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm not a fan of the quotation marks. Whilst I can understand why people might want to use them for Tremas, Saxon and Bruce, I'm 100% against using them for the Reborn Master; "reborn" is an adjective, just like "decayed", so I don't see why it would be treated any differently. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 20:48, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
No one has suggested using them for the Reborn Master. I would also be opposed to such a thing. – n8 (☎) 21:16, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

I would choose Bruce Master over "Bruce" Master, Saxon Master over "Saxon" Master, Tremas Master over "Tremas" Master, Keller Master over "Keller" Master, etc. Aesthetics aside, the key problem here, which I'm surprised people are overlooking, is that placing quotation marks around part of a name does not actually communicate "this name is unofficial" in any clear or intuitive way. They could just as easily be read as some sort of quotation from some unspecified in-universe or out-of-universe source, or as in-universe nicknames (since quotation marks commonly signify a nickname when used for some but not all component words in a name; for example Punished "Venom" Snake from Metal Gear). With or without them, the wiki would still be making the same arbitrary call to employ the alias / host's name as an adjective when it was never used as such officially. That's OK by me - there's some objective, factual basis to describing Roberts's character "the Bruce Master", Simm's "the Saxon Master", etc - but if we're doing it, we should commit to doing it properly, in a way that gives the reader an uncluttered, consistent experience. Quotation marks are just confusing and distracting in this context. If a name is deemed so dodgy that it requires quotation marks, then we should just continue to disambiguate by debut appearance. PintlessMan ☎ 21:40, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

My vote would go to: The "Bruce" Master, The "Tremas" Master and The "Saxon" Master - with quotation marks as shown. To me, this indicates they are The Master but that there are sub-names to differentiate and distinguish them. Conversely, I wouldn't use quotation marks for The War Master, as there are countless examples of that name being used widely across various releases. FractalDoctor ☎ 00:34, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

I can’t believe I forgot to comment on this earlier. I am in support of “Bruce” Master and its ilk (with obvious exceptions for the War Master and the Decayed Master). While I personally find the premise of quotation marks in the link name to be aesthetically unappealing, it goes a long way in assuaging the concerns of those more skeptical about these sort of names. Likewise, it is how they’ve historically been used in-line. NoNotTheMemes ☎ 13:09, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
I would very much like to throw my two cents into this conversation. I think that whenever possible, we should note what number regeneration each Master is, much like the Doctor or the General. We obviously don't know for all of them, but we do know the numbers for a few. The Decayed Master is the Thirteenth Master, the Tremas Master is the Fourteenth Master, the First Frontier Master is the Fifteenth Master, the Bruce Master is the Sixteenth Master, the Preacher Master is the Seventeenth Master, and the Reborn Master is the Eighteenth Master. If we wanted to guess (even if we're not absolutely certain) we can even assume that the War Master is the Nineteenth Master and the Saxon Master is the Twentieth Master. I just think it makes things more orderly on here, which is something we could definitely use given the convoluted history of this character. -- MattTheNerd42 ☎ 17:40, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
What's your source for the numbering? Aquanafrahudy 📢 17:47, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Whether stolen bodies even count is significantly controversial, but the problem is that if they do, then (depending on accounts) no numbering can be relied upon. In Mastermind and Short Trips: The Centenarian a post-TVM Beevers Master steals a number of bodies for varying periods of time, in just the same way he stole Roberts's. If we counted them all, then Macqueen might be, like, the Thirty-First.
Moreover, BF only inconsistently acknowledge the events of First Frontier; the Dust Breeding account bypasses it entirely, claiming that Ainley was reverted directly to Beevers. (This implies that Tipple in the TVM was a stolen body he acquired at some point — but we cannot assume that there was just one in that gap, so it doesn't necessarily "make up" the numbers with a different-but-equivalent "Fifteenth Master"!) Then, of course, there's the accounts where it's Ainley who's placed on trial, like The Eight Doctors, which would make your count come up one short, making Roberts the Fifteenth…
Also, some accounts claim that the Decayed Master was just a decayed version of Delgado, making Delgado the Thirteenth Master as well. Covering them on the same page is obviously not desirable, but we can't just act as though Beevers was the only possible Thirteenth candidate. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 18:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
And the Preacher Master can't be the Seventeenth Master, because The Master (The Curse of Fatal Death) is. Well, he could be an alternate incarnation, but it's clearly not so straightforward as it seems. Aquanafrahudy 📢 18:18, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

I don't think it's really possible to assign numbers. The waters are too murky. At this point, even if Sacha Dhawan showed up again on screen and proclaimed "I am the Xth Master" it would still be arguable. Also, even if we did have one or two numbers, nobody ever refers to them as such - nobody says "I loved the Twelfth Master" in the same way we might say "I loved the Twelfth Doctor" for example — Fractal Doctor @ 21:07, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Not sure I completely agree there. If a new Master was introduced as "[Numeral] Master", we don't have the right to reject that name even if it doesn't sit well with other sources that depict more or less incarnations of the Master up until that point.
We shouldn't make up incarnation numbers, but if one ever officially exists, we should use it. (Maybe as "according to one account".)
We don't elect to not use "Fourteenth Doctor" even though he is technically the sixteenth (inc. War Doctor and the VanityTen) or perhaps the the thirty-third (inc. Timeless Children, Fugitive Doctor, "Morbius" Doctors). 21:16, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Fair points. I did say it would be debatable though, not that we should dismiss it immediately out of hand. In such an instance, I think "according to one account" would work. In any case, I doubt this would ever happen, unless it's done jokingly (similar to Smith's Doctor telling Clyde he could regenerate 507 times). — Fractal Doctor @ 21:50, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Defaulting to the most recent incarnation with the tabbed infobox images[[edit source]]

Although tabs haven't yet been implemented here yet, following the discussion at Tardis:Temporary forums/Archive/Replacing docpic, I have a potential way to let us have the tabs listed chronologically but with the most recent incarnation selected by default which I have presented at Talk:The Doctor#Defaulting to the most recent incarnation with the tabbed infobox images. It could easily be applied here as well. Bongo50 ☎ 22:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Tabbed gallery[[edit source]]

I note this page still needs a tabbed gallery. The Doctor page works well starting from the first known incarnation, so maybe the Master should follow suit (except with "A", "B", "C", etc.) Fractal Doctor ☎ 11:08, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Indeed. Done, though as stated in my thread closure, the option of switching out this or that image is of course available. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 13:25, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, Scrooge MacDuck. Is the absence of a certain Destination Wars Master on purpose? Fractal Doctor ☎ 14:00, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
As I just finished telling User:Jack "BtR" Saxon, it's "on purpose" in the sense that I was sticking with his absence from {{masterpic}} and with the basic precedent of not including the "according to one account" pre-Delgado incarnations established by the prior decision against including Brayshaw on the template. Also, aside from his controversial existence, it stands to reason that we don't want a somewhat "random" incarnation like Dreyfus to be the perennial default thumbnail instead of Delgado. All of this is in line with Jo Martin & friends not being represented on The Doctor. But Jack argues that we do include the also-controversial John Hurt at The Doctor, so perhaps we could consider the place of the pre-Delgado Masters on this one. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 14:02, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

This might be too outlandish an idea but just a thought I had, that could solve that (here and on other pages) - would it be possible to have a secondary tabbed gallery maybe further down the page, containing miscellaneous/somewhat ambiguous incarnations. I'm guessing it would have some pushback, and could be viewed as confusing, but it's just a suggestion.

I do think this page should begin with Delgado because of the reasons you stated. Worth noting that we do include Hurt in the tabbed Doctor gallery, and we include the Lumiat in this one (as well as others). The only difference with Dreyfus is that he's pre-Delgado and so instead of being mid-gallery, he'd be eternally at the beginning/the default starting image, and I completely understand why a lot of people wouldn't want this. (I wouldn't want this either, but is there an alternative, other than just leaving him out?) Fractal Doctor ☎ 14:09, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Well, as I said, the alternative would be to start with William Hughes, thus sandwiching him away. But I would find it hard to justify including these two and not other alleged pre-Delgado Masters e.g. the War Chief, and that might get very controversial very quickly (I would be willing to bite the bullet of including Peter Butterworth, but I don't think many people would! This is just what we have the "no controversial information in infoboxes" rule of thumb for.)
As regards a more thorough gallery of incarnations, this sounds like a very good use of the proposed usage of galleries on in-universe page, which is currently against policy but is one of the proposals currently rising through the Temp Forums propositions table. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 14:12, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
I don't think the likes of the Monk and the War Chief are comparable to the likes of Parker and Dreyfus. With the Monk and the War Chief, there are conflicting accounts on whether or not they are the Master. There's no such confusion with Parker and Dreyfus. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 14:15, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough, Scrooge.

I'm probably opening a huge can of worms (and maybe not in the best suited place) by asking about the War Chief and what the evidence is for and against him being an incarnation of the Master, but I think it's worth noting that Dreyfus' incarnation was invented as, and specifically designed to be an earlier incarnation of the Master, and I think there's a debate about that warranting inclusion. I've just had a look at your back-and-forth with Jack "BtR" Saxon, and both of you raise good points. I think it's a debate to be had though at some stage, and good note about the upcoming galleries discussion. That could solve some issues down the line.

(I wrote this before seeing Jack's response just now. I'm sitting on the fence and viewing both sides, but ultimately I'm siding with Jack's reasoning here, if I'm honest.) Fractal Doctor ☎ 14:17, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

@Jack, they're not exactly the same situation, sure, but there are certainly accounts by which lights no such persons as Parker or Dreyfus's Masters could have existed (The Dark Path positing that Koschei didn't call himself "the Master" yet by the time he left Gallifrey is the obvious one). Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 14:19, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Tangential question: is Parker meant to be the same incarnation as the 'child' we saw in The Sound of Drums flashback, or not? Fractal Doctor ☎ 14:21, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

On the whole I'm less concerned about specific cases than about what a giant can of worms pre-Delgado Masters are, such that starting the infobox at Delgado just seems like the cutoff point that will cause the fewest headaches. It's a line in the sand, not a natural boundary, but it's a common-sense sort of line in the sand that readers will easily grok as saying "we're starting with Delgado for IRL reasons/sanity" rather than a judgment-call statement of "such-and-such pre-Delgado Masters count more than such-and-such pre-Delgado Masters". A full gallery elsewhere on the page, if the Temp Forums pass that reform, would then sound like quite an attractive proposal to supplement it.
(Re: Parker/Hughes… that's another controversial one. Per recent BTS quotes, it seems that yes, but that's ambiguous in the stories themselves, particularly as they have some conspicuous physical differences e.g. eye colour. So that's another area of possible contention.) Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 14:19, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm not gunna die on this hill, and I'd be happy to wait until the Temp Forum discussion happens regarding a potential alternative before continuing this debate.

I also note here that there may even be a hint of Big Finish muddying the waters themselves anyway, or subtly trying to retcon a few things in light of IRL events surrounding Dreyfus and his positioning anyway? Fractal Doctor ☎ 14:26, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

If the preacher (who appears in half as many stories as Dreyfus) and the Asian child (who is apparently not even intended to be a mainline Master) are included, there's no justification for excluding Dreyfus. Including pre-Delgado incarnations is no more "opening a can of worms" than including post-Delgado ones. I think we should either stick with major TV incarnations (as on The Doctor) or include the lot, not this weird middle ground. PintlessMan ☎ 16:32, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

It has been nearly half a year with no further discussion. Again, given the inclusion of the Preacher and the Child, there is no excuse for excluding the Inventor, an actual mainline Master who is named "The Master", appears as the main Master in multiple stories, and is explicitly positioned prior to Delgado. Can we please get this resolved now? PintlessMan ☎ 23:46, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
No we cannot. To begin with, it is non-trivial that his "being named 'the Master' and appears as the main Master in multiple stories" is operative with regards to why he should be included, but not Hughes/Parker or Butterworth or Brayshaw or Magnus.
But more importantly, I still think there is no reason to include Dreyfus here if we do not include Jo Martin at The Doctor (she explicitly the Doctor by name, explicitly before the currently-earliest incarnation in the gallery, and has begun appearing as the lead in her own stories). And I don't believe we should do either of those things. There is a long-standing policy of keeping controversial in-universe information out of infoboxes (hence "The Doctor's species" being used in all Doctors' species field). Although it can be bent on a case-by-case basis, I think setting things such that incarnations whose very existence is highly dependent on contradictory accounts, like any of the pre-Delgado Masters or the various pre-Hartnell Doctors, would appear as the page's default thumbnail in categories and Google searches, would be in stark violation of the spirit of that policy. How recurring the Inventor or Fugitive might become doesn't enter into it. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 11:30, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
I personally think that the CoFD Master should get a look in, although the question of exactly where to place him is something of a conundrum. Aquanafrahudy 📢 11:59, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
On the other hand, of course, we could place him between Bruce and Preacher. Aquanafrahudy 📢 16:46, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Relationship between Master and Meddling Monk[[edit source]]

I see this site now uses FASA narrative as valid. And it contains something that may settle the controversial issue once and for all. Peter Butterworth's character in The Time Meddler is said to be the Master, but then we also have a "Meddling Monk" in Follow That TARDIS!, plus Rufus Hound in Big Finish Audios. So, how can Butterworth be the Master, AND Hound be a Time Lord unambiguously separate from the Master called "the Meddling Monk"?

The FASA narrative explictly states that in 1066(The Time Meddler) the Master disguised himself as the Meddling Monk. And that this wasn't one of his(the Master's) best schemes. So, in the same way David Morrissey in The Next Doctor wasn't actually The Doctor, Peter Butterworth in The Time Meddler/The Daleks' Master Plan WAS NOT ACTUALLY THE MEDDLING MONK. He was the Master disguised as the Meddling Monk.

So, while there may be a Mortimus/Meddling Monk separate to the Master, the guy in The Time Meddler/The Daleks' Master Plan was NOT the Meddling Monk. It was the Master DISGUISED AS the Meddling Monk. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 197.87.143.20 (talk).

Oh good, you again.
Well, according to one account, yes. (Though it's reading the text against itself to imagine that in FASA's account there is such a thing as a real Monk who simply is not the one who actually appears in The Time Meddler.) But according to other accounts it was in fact a distinct guy in Time Meddler. There are conflicting accounts, and this is not a problem, this is not something that needs to be "settled", it's just a fact. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 09:33, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

"Quote marks"[[edit source]]

We finally ditched the quote marks from "The Doctor", post-fork, should we do the same here? × Fractal • 21:01, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 21:27, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://tardis.wiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Master&oldid=3739007"