User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-1783865-20200302103744/@comment-27321963-20200331003640: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<div class="quote"> | <div class="quote"> | ||
Scrooge MacDuck wrote: | Scrooge MacDuck wrote: | ||
| Line 6: | Line 5: | ||
You've just explained why the Curator is in the "more ambiguous" section, yet... in all your suggested templates he is in the "unplaced" section? | You've just explained why the Curator is in the "more ambiguous" section, yet... in all your suggested templates he is in the "unplaced" section? | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|The Panopticon/20200302103744-1783865/20200331003640-27321963]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 21:17, 27 April 2023
Scrooge MacDuck wrote: It's not "spin-offs" per se, but rather characters who might be spinoffs (or something) rather than regenerations. The Curator is a future Doctor somehow, but the mechanics themselves aren't known; could be at some point the Doctor ascends to being an Eternal or whatever. If we ever have something to confirm that the Curator is most definitely the Doctor (rather than a future-spinoff) and that he came into being as a regeneration, we'll move him.
You've just explained why the Curator is in the "more ambiguous" section, yet... in all your suggested templates he is in the "unplaced" section?
