Talk:The Doctor: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
 
(384 intermediate revisions by 85 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk Page}}
{{subpage tabs}}
{{ArchCat}}
{{ArchCat}}
== Infobox Image Update ==
Hello. Is there any possibility of updating the images used for both the [[Twelfth Doctor]] and the [[Thirteenth Doctor]]'s for ones that are more appropriate? I guess I get the "eyebrows" thing so that image isn't *too* bad I suppose (still think better could be done), but surely the [[Thirteenth Doctor]] deserves an image of herself in her actual clothing rather than the image currently in use which is from her opening story ''[[The Woman Who Fell to Earth (TV story)|The Woman Who Fell to Earth]]'' and displays her still wearing the ragged and battered remains of her previous incarnation's clothing? I hope you'll take these suggestions under advisement. Thank you for reading. --[[User:Alan-WK|Alan-WK]] [[User talk:Alan-WK|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 02:19, January 13, 2020 (UTC)


== Ok, this is chaos ==
== The Timeless Child ==
So, obviously there will have to be some changes. For starters, the Jo Martin Doctor added to More Ambiguous section of the Doctor's incarnations. Other than that, how big a rewrite are we looking at and how much should be kept to other pages like[[Timeless Child]]?--[[User:TheOneTrueJack|TheOneTrueJack]] [[User talk:TheOneTrueJack|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:00, March 1, 2020 (UTC)


There seems to be no consistency on whether we use promotional pictures or screencaps for the individual Doctor articles, and for the collage on this page. For example, [[First Doctor]] has a promo image, [[Seventh Doctor]] has a screencap, and [[Tenth Doctor]] has something which looks like a screencap but I'm pretty sure is actually a high-quality image from the Doctor Who website and not technically a capture from an episode. We're going through [[Eleventh Doctor]] images like a bucket of popcorn - why do we really need one from the latest story he was in? It's not even a particularly good picture. Do we actually have a policy on this sort of thing?--[[User:The Traveller|The Traveller]] 11:38, January 22, 2011 (UTC)
:Well, as far as ''I'' can put it together, it's the 8 Timeless Child regenerations, at least 5 more, the 8 Morbius regenerations, Ruth, 4 more, Hartnell - Matt, Capaldi - Present. We know that the Timeless Child regenerations and the Morbius ones can't be the same cycle as the Doctor was kidified after each 13, so it seems. So Jodie is not, ''at least'' the 27th Doctor now.--[[User:HarryPotterRules1|HarryPotterRules1]] [[User talk:HarryPotterRules1|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:16, March 1, 2020 (UTC)
::We do have a policy on this. We don't use promotional pictures on in-universe articles whatsoever. I'm sure that ''all'' of the images on each Doctor's page are screencaps. But I agree with you that the Eleventh Doctor's page needs ''one'' image that stays. I thought that there was no problem with the original one from The Eleventh Hour (the one that represents him on this article's image). The image should be put back and kept that way. --[[User:The Thirteenth Doctor|The Thirteenth Doctor]] 12:39, January 22, 2011 (UTC)
:::I'm almost certain that the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth and Tenth Doctors have images which aren't screencaps. I assume a "screencap" is an image captured directly from an episode. Take the First Doctor article - while it's clearly William Hartnell in character as the First Doctor, that image never appeared in ''[[An Unearthly Child]]''. You can tell just by looking at pictures whether or not they're screencaps. Screencaps tend to be lower-resolution, may have motion blur, and in the case of the classic series might have video noise. Perhaps they're not promotional images, but they're certainly photographs, which are clearly of higher quality than screencaps.--[[User:The Traveller|The Traveller]] 17:41, January 22, 2011 (UTC)


== Moving ==
::If we take it that The Timeless Child was at the start of Time Lord society and for whatever reason was never cryogenically frozen or forced into the future. Then it stands to reason that he/she is as old as Time Lord society. In The Ultimate Foe who we used to call The Sixth Doctor says that they've been around for 10 Million years. Now if we take The Eleventh Doctors life of 1100 years as a measure for a standard regenerations life span as this was the longest and seemed to die of natural causes. Then at MINIMUM The Doctor has had 9,091 lives which are not including any that were cut short by falling off any cliffs or mother figures experimenting on them. --[[User:Thebobbrom|Thebobbrom]] [[User talk:Thebobbrom|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:53, March 2, 2020 (UTC)


I feel it would be more proper to move Richard Hurndall's name up into the section where the canon Doctors are listed, after all he did portry the First Doctor in "The Five Doctors" replacing the late William Hartnell.[[User:Startrekandmore|Startrekandmore]] 03:04, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
::It seems like the Thirteen lives rule was put in place much later on. So that wouldn't apply to the Timeless Child incarnations --[[User:TheOneTrueJack|TheOneTrueJack]] [[User talk:TheOneTrueJack|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:24, March 1, 2020 (UTC)


== Typo I can't fix ==
:::Except we can't call any of those before Hartnell any variant of the [number] Doctor. Cause if we do that we'll have to re-route, in no exaggeration, the "''ENTIRE''" Wikia from scratch. --[[User:Danniesen|DCLM]] [[User talk:Danniesen|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:29, March 1, 2020 (UTC)


====Connections With Earth:====
::::Well obviously we can't do that. The Morbius Doctors can be referred to as such, and the Timeless Child incarnations can be included in the [[Timeless Child]] page. But should they both (as two sperate groups) be put in the More Ambiguous section of the Doctor's incarnations? And how much should the main Doctor page talk about them? {{Unsigned|TheOneTrueJack}}
collegues => colleagues


Well, that's the thing. I don't believe the Doctor ''is'' bound to the 13 lives. The Timelords just sort of "kid-i-fied" the Doctor again when he reached the end of his 13 "lives"; that's what the whole Brendan stuff was. The Doctor believed he was bound to the 13 "lives" because he didn't remember anything before hand. But, in actuality, he wasn't bound to it at all. So it could literally be the 8 on the table plus 5 more - then kid-i-fied  and made to forget - then the 8 morbius, Ruth and 4 more - then Kid-i-fied and made to forget - then Hartnell onwards and the Timelords only gave the "new" cycle to the Doctor to hide their lie.--[[User:HarryPotterRules1|HarryPotterRules1]] [[User talk:HarryPotterRules1|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:46, March 1, 2020 (UTC)


[[User:Flowtron|Flowtron]] 16:52, May 9, 2011 (UTC)
:That would make sense if the Time Lords didn't have to restore the Doctor's regeneration ability in ''[[The Time of the Doctor (TV story)|The Time of the Doctor]]''. Though if they restored the Doctor's original ability, it ''would'' explain the ambiguity of how many regenerations the Doctor has now.--[[User:WarGrowlmon18|WarGrowlmon18]] [[User talk:WarGrowlmon18|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:55, March 1, 2020 (UTC)


== Doctor Descriptions? ==
::The Brendan stuff was a cover-story to hide the truth about the Time Lords' beginning. Brendan, his parents, the Sergeant etc. never existed. They were images layered on top of the real truth. --[[User:Danniesen|DCLM]] [[User talk:Danniesen|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:00, March 1, 2020 (UTC)


Is it really a good idea to describe the Doctors based on past incarnations? Especially when itgets more detailed, like this quote from the description of the thenth doctor.
::: The Timeless Child could regenerate indefinitely. But THE DOCTOR was limited to 13 lives. That's not really a matter of perspective. It was seen that the Doctor could only regenerate 12 times. This means that the limitation of 12 regenerations was also bestowed on the Doctor, or maybe perhaps after they "stopped" being the Timeless Child. --[[User:Danniesen|DCLM]] [[User talk:Danniesen|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:02, March 1, 2020 (UTC)


"a cross between his Fourth and Ninth incarnations. He displayed hints of the Seventh with the style of the Fifth"
::::That's my point. ''Did'' they restore it? I believe the Doctor was bound to the 13 body limits because he ''believed'' he was. He actually ''wasn't'' - he just thought he was because he believed he was a Timelord, when he isn't - he's something different. The Timelords gave him a "new" cycle to hide the truth of what he was - constantly and continually able to regenerate.--[[User:HarryPotterRules1|HarryPotterRules1]] [[User talk:HarryPotterRules1|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:04, March 1, 2020 (UTC)


The previous Doctors had varied and unique personalities with variety of aspects and traits each, and to put them all together like this is just confusing. I don't know quite what would result from blending 4, 9, 7 and 5 together, but I would not say confidently that it would be 10. I personally think it would be best to describe them based on their personal traits rather than the traits of others.
:::::The Doctor IS a Time Lord. You can't get around that. However as the Seventh Doctor said "I'm far more than just another Time Lord". And he WAS limited down. That's what they did, as other media stories have explained was done at some point to the Time Lord race. --[[User:Danniesen|DCLM]] [[User talk:Danniesen|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:09, March 1, 2020 (UTC)


Yeah, in my opinion it is. If you look at it from a different angle, they're all but one single person, and looking for similarities between them is a good way to back that up. But if you like, you can also describe each of them as one different person as well.
::::::: No, wrong. We know now that the Doctor is ''not'' a Timelord. The Doctor is an entirely different species who was studied by the ''original'' Timelord/Shebogan to create regeneration. The Doctor only ''believed'' she/he was a Timelord. --[[User:HarryPotterRules1|HarryPotterRules1]] [[User talk:HarryPotterRules1|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:18, March 1, 2020 (UTC)


{{SUBST:Template:LoosedAngel Sig}} 19:26, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
:::::::: I'm up with Harry. The Doctor is not a Timelord anymore, but the "ancestor" species of the Time Lords: a Timeless Child (not official name but just to make it clear). --[[User:Con Carne|Con Carne]] ([[User Talk:Con Carne|''Di la verdad, o cobras...'']]) 10:09, March 2, 2020 (UTC)


: The English (grammar) in the part describing about the 10th Doctor is very poor, but I can't correct it as the article is protected. Can someone do this? [[Special:Contributions/82.42.249.145|82.42.249.145]] 20:32, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
:::::::::No. The Doctor was MADE into a Time Lord. Also whoever changed the page, please don't just change it without a conclusion to this. Con Carne, don't just make a change this major. It needs proper discussion. You and Harry agreeing, doesn't alone make it so. We need proper consultation that admins also join in on before we can just decide something this major. --[[User:Danniesen|DCLM]] [[User talk:Danniesen|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 10:19, March 2, 2020 (UTC)


== "He's not dead yet" ==
This is a discussion for the Board of Discussions. I'll make a thread. --[[User:Danniesen|DCLM]] [[User talk:Danniesen|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 10:21, March 2, 2020 (UTC)


Okay, why in the name of Raxacoricofallapatorius does this article refer to the Doctor in past tense? I mean, the creators have not confirmed his "death by astronaut" as the final timeline, and if he did die for the last time, that would undoubtedly result in a fan war. [[Special:Contributions/203.105.91.88|203.105.91.88]] 07:13, June 23, 2011 (UTC)
:Just one thing, it wasn't me, I haven't changed anything in the article. :( --[[User:Con Carne|Con Carne]] ([[User Talk:Con Carne|''Di la verdad, o cobras...'']]) 11:49, March 2, 2020 (UTC)


ALL articles are in past tense per [[Tardis:Manual of Style]].----<u>[[User:Skittles the hog|Skittles the hog]]--<small>[[User talk:Skittles the hog|Talk]]</small></u> 08:00, June 23, 2011 (UTC)
::I know, that was my bad. I didn't looks properly. Sorry about that. I DID change my statement to say "whoever changed the page". Sorry for the mistunderstanding. --[[User:Danniesen|DCLM]] [[User talk:Danniesen|<span title="Talk to me"></span>]] 11:53, March 2, 2020 (UTC)


== Part Human on His mother's side ==
== How did you make the docpic slideshow? ==
The 1996 TV Movie states that the Doctor's mother is human. Has this been stated anywhere else? -- [[User:Deb1701|Past and Future Companion]]


Not in the TV shows.[[User:Icecreamdif|Icecreamdif]] 19:59, July 23, 2011 (UTC)
How did you make the slideshow feature/template entitled "docpic" inside the infobox? I'd like to achieve something similar for a wiki I'm working on. [[User:JustWilhelm|JustWilhelm]] [[User talk:JustWilhelm|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 10:10, July 27, 2020 (UTC)


== Main Image ==
== "The Doctor's Species" ==


Why was the main image removed? Right now, out of the images that are still being considered for the Master, one of them uses all the TV images, two of them use all the images, and one of them uses images of Masters that have appeared in an entire story and only in a visual medium. If we go by the precedent of any of those choices, we would still need to have all eleven Doctors.[[User:Icecreamdif|Icecreamdif]] 21:36, July 26, 2011 (UTC)
I agree that we should keep the "the doctor's species" under their species but why isn't there also "Time Lord" as well. Although the Doctor started life as whatever species they were when Tecteun found them, since Hartnell -> Whittaker, they have been bound to the thirteen incarnation cycles with two hearts and should unequivocably be called a time lord since being changed into one by the time lords using the chameleon arch (as hinted at by those Brendan scenes). {{unsigned|Cptjackhotness}}
:Hi! If [[The Doctor's species]] were the page about the species of the Timeless Child, you would be correct, but it's not. That's "[[Timeless Child's species]]". The page [[The Doctor's species]] is an overview detailing all the conflicting accounts of whether the Doctor is a Time Lord, a human, half-human, a member of the Timeless Child's species, etc.


: According to [[User talk:Skittles the hog|Skittles the hog]], the Master image discussion was also for the layout of the images on top of which Masters to use. It didn't come across to me either, but that's what they said. -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 21:56, July 26, 2011 (UTC)
:Also, it's not evident that the Brendan scene corresponds to a [[chameleon arch]] specifically. It could just as easily have ''just'' been a deaging/mindwiping process. According to ''[[The Timeless Children (TV story)|The Timeless Children]]'' the [[Shobogan (species)|Shobogan]]s became the [[Time Lord]]s when [[Tecteun]] spliced DNA of the Timeless Child into them, so it's a perfectly valid interpretation that the Timeless Child was the original two-hearted binary-vascular-systemed species, and it's the Shobogans who were altered to resemble the Doctor, not the other way around. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 13:26, 12 January 2021 (UTC)


Well, since all the versions of the Master's main image that had 11 Masters have been rejected, I don't think the exact same format could really be used for both the Doctor and the Master anyway.[[User:Icecreamdif|Icecreamdif]] 22:05, July 26, 2011 (UTC)
== Usage of "Dr. Who" ==
Okay, seeing as my edits on ''[[TV Comic]]'' stories have been questioned, I shall explain why I am using the name "Dr. Who" and how policy backs me up on this.


== Family ==
As a bit of context, the names "First Doctor" and "Second Doctor" were never used in the characters' original televised runs. The only times they are used are in stories such as [[PROSE]]: ''[[The Eight Doctors (novel)|The Eight Doctors]]'' and other works by [[Terrance Dicks]]. (see more about Dicks' naming conventions over at [[Forum:Is using "First Doctor", "Second Doctor" etc in-universe?]], however, me linking this does not mean I agree with the conclusion.)<br>These names have been retroactively applied to these characters, despite evidence from the television stories directly contradicting this, perhaps most notably in [[TV]]: ''[[The Power of the Daleks (TV story)|The Power of the Daleks]]'' when the "Patrick Troughton" Doctor mentioned that the "[[regeneration]]" he undertook was a restorative feature of [[The Doctor's TARDIS|his TARDIS]] and that he had ''used it before'', meaing that Troughton was not playing the "Second Doctor". (This also means there have been "Pre-Hartnell Doctors" from pretty early on folks!). A precedent notably seen over on [[Talk:Tzim-Sha#Rename]] and the various talk pages of [[Amy Pond]], is that the name that the characters actually use to refer to themselves as takes precendent. So, in the case of the Doctor, this policy applies. We, as the rule abiding users, should use [[The Doctor (title)|the name, the ''title'' that the Doctor chose for himself]], which is in most stories, "the Doctor". In the case of ''[[TV Comic]]'', "the Doctor" is short for "Dr. Who", so this indicates to me that "the Doctor" should be the name that is most widely used, and "Dr. Who" for his name in place of the regular usage of "[insert number here] Doctor", in sources that actually state that "Dr. Who" is the Doctor's full name of course. This also would be mean that "[insert number here] Doctor" would be acceptable if substantiated by the respective source.


Didn't his father made an appearance by the name of Ulisses? [[Special:Contributions/95.93.73.119|95.93.73.119]] 02:32, July 27, 2011 (UTC)
Now, the argument has been made that "Dr. Who" is not as clear cut as "the [insert number here] Doctor", however, the aforementioned precedent I cited comes into play here. (Additionally, adjectives can be used to adequately describe which "Dr. Who" the source is talking about.) Due to the ruling by admin @[[USer:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]]...
{{quote|Where you are correct is that '''with all the conflicting accounts of what this fellow calls himself, we should probably strive to use the names given by each individual sources in individually-sourced statement'''. Information from [[COMIC]]: ''[[4-Dimensional Vistas (comic story)|4-Dimensional Vistas]]'' does belong on this page, sorry. But a paragraph sourced to that story should refer to him as "the Time Meddler", not "the Monk". And so on.|@[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]]}}
...as stated at [[Talk:The Monk/Archive 1#Article made from whole cloth]], accompanied by the polcies given by [[Tardis:Valid sources]], we should use the name of the character as given within the story, regardless of whether or not another story uses a different name. The Doctor refers to himself as "Dr. Who"? That is the name we use. An example of this, as aforementioned admin @[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] gave at [[User talk:Danochy]], is [[COMIC]]: ''[[4-Dimensional Vistas (comic story)|4-Dimensional Vistas]]'', which uses the name "[[The Monk|The Time-Meddler]]" to refer to [[the Monk]] as "The Time-Meddler" was the name given in the source; this name is perfectly acceptable for use so long as it is cited by its respective story, despite "the Monk" being a more well-known name. There is an exception to this, which is that the character's best known name should be used in infoboxes, for clarity. I, admittedly, did not know this, however as soon as it was brought up, I immediately backtracked and switched "Dr. Who" for "First Doctor" becuase I wanted to follow the policies exactly


: [[Ulysses]]. But yes, it looks that way. It also seems to be another mention of the Doctor's half-human parentage. -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 06:52, July 27, 2011 (UTC)
Furthermore, I am also backed up by [[Tardis:Neutral point of view]], which states quite clearly at the top of the page...
{{quote|Media doesn't matter. One of the most important aspects of this wiki is that '''all media have equal weight here.''' Television is not the most important source of information on this wiki. That which is said in a short story in [[Doctor Who Annual 1967|the 1967 ''Doctor Who Annual'']], or a ''[[Faction Paradox (series)|Faction Paradox]]'' audio drama, is just as valid as the latest episode of [[BBC Wales]] ''[[Doctor Who]]''.|[[T:NPOV]]}}
...therefore, the names retroactively applied to the Hartnell and Troughton Doctors ''do not'' supersede "Dr. Who".


==Multiple images in main image==
Despite this, I am ''not'' advocating for the name "Dr. Who" to be intergrated into the pages of sources that do not use it. Even so, this change being implemented into the pages of television and other notable sources will obviously require a Forum thread, owing to the controversial nature of this proposed name change. Additionally, a name change towards certain incarnations of the Doctor may be beneficial, seeing as [[The Timeless Children (TV story)|certain major plot threads]] state that William Hartnell's Doctor was not the first. Another note against the current naming of the Doctors is that their names are barely even substantiated by any [[Tardis:Valid sources|valid sources]], so perhaps a new naming style like with the Monk may actually be the best course of action. [[The Doctor (An Unearthly Child)]], [[The Doctor (Planet of the Spiders)]], etc will likely be better for compliance with [[T:NPOV]]. I am rambling though, and this is really its own separate discussion that of course should be brought to the Forums when @[[User:CzechOut|CzechOut]] works out the problems, so I'll stop talking about this and focus on this little facet of the problem that ''can'' be resolved without much effort or discussion.
There's been a fairly lengthy discussion on [[Talk:The Master]] concerning whether or not to use all the images of a Time Lord's incarnations or just a few or one or two to define the article.


On species articles we tend to use just one image such as [[Dalek]], despite them changing their outward appearance fairly often.
I will mention however, as my actions are well within policy, and I only changing the names in stories published by ''[[TV Comic]]'', which again, unambiguously uses the name "Dr. Who". I suspect that my actions will continue to be correct despite certain objections held by editors, but do remember, [[Tardis:You are bound by current policy]] and [[Tardis:Canon policy]] apply, in case if anybody is thinking that them simply objecting to this on a talk page will be enough to overturn policy or that if ''[[TV Comic]]'' is non-canonical. <div style="background-color:#0E234E; border: solid 0.5px gold; display: inline; white-space: nowrap;">[[doctorwho:user:Epsilon the Eternal|<span style="background:#0E234E; color:white"><code>'''Epsilon'''</code></span>]][[doctorwho:user talk:Epsilon the Eternal|📯]] [[doctorwho:special:Contributions/Epsilon the Eternal|📂]]</div> 14:51, 7 June 2021 (UTC)


Should we continue to use an image like this one; [[:File:Eleven-doctors.jpg]], which was previously on the page prior to this discussion.
:I largely agree with the direction of these edits, but don't forget about [[T:DOCTORS]]. On the page for a TV Comic story, I agree that we should use the name for the Doctor used in that story, with the exact incarnation number specified in the lede or the notes section; but on other pages, it's important for comprehensability's sake that each Doctor be identified by incarnation, [[T:NPOV]] be damned. I'm partial to "the first Dr. Who", myself. – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 20:31, 7 June 2021 (UTC)


Or, like the images on [[the Master]]'s and [[Rassilon]]'s articles should we include not just TV but other portrayals like comic strips, audio/novel covers etc to truly reflect what this wiki covers? --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 15:45, August 15, 2011 (UTC)
:: Yep, I'm in 100% agreement with N8 here. Specify "First Doctor" or "First Dr. Who" where necessary for the sake of clarity, specify "Dr. Who" or "The Doctor" (as appropriate to the text) following the initial numerical identifier.
*Forgive me, but aren't the eleven canonical Doctors already depicted on screen and film? There aren't any canon Doctors that only appear in books or comics. --[[User:Dr.Kermit|<span style="color: #00C;">'''Doctor Kermit'''</span>]]<sup>([[User talk:Dr.Kermit|<span style="color: #93C;">'''Complain.'''</span>]])</sup> 15:56, August 15, 2011 (UTC)


::What I meant is that we could have instead of a TV depiction of any of Doctors 1-11 there could be a comic or cover-based depiction of any of the Doctors 1-11. Say the [[Seventh Doctor]] in his linen suit from the NA days or the [[Eighth Doctor]] from DWM comics, or even the 1-6 from MA covers etc. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 16:18, August 15, 2011 (UTC)
:: Also, is the quote where 2 mentions having regenerated before really in the TV serial? I'm certain it originated in the [[1993]] [[The Power of the Daleks (novelisation)|novelisation]]. I.e. it's a reference to [[The Doctor (The Brain of Morbius)]]. In fact, Epsilon, your argument against numbering falls apart when you consider ''[[The Brain of Morbius (TV story)|The Brain of Morbius]]'', as the same logic would suggest we can't even refer to [[Tom Baker]]'s Doctor from that era as the [[Fourth Doctor]]! [[User:Danochy|Danochy]] [[User talk:Danochy|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:49, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
:::That bit in the novelization was based on a deleted scene from the original script. But even then, for a long time it was thought that Ian coined the title "the Doctor" and passed it along to other companions via word-of-mouth. (For instance, the First Doctor on TV never really referred to himself as "the Doctor".) So even if there were any number of incarnations before Hartnell, he still would have been the "First Doctor". – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|]]) 20:58, 7 June 2021 (UTC)


We should probably use images from the TV show where possible, just because an actor portraying a character looks better than a drawing of the character. Since its the same incarnations in the TV show as anywhere else, it makes most sense to just use the TV images in the infobox.[[User:Icecreamdif|Icecreamdif]] 21:32, August 15, 2011 (UTC)
:::: No, no, I am pretty sure it was mentioned in the television serial. And actually, the Fourth Doctor shouldn't be used on Baker's Doctor, as up until ''[[The Deadly Assassin (TV story)|The Deadly Assassin]]'', he wasn't the Fourth Doctor, especially as ''[[The Brain of Morbius (TV story)|The Brain of Morbius]]'' literally showed that he had multiple incarnations ''before'' Hartnell. So "Fourth Doctor" is really not a good name. As for the "Dr. Who" bit, if an incarnation is to be used, it should be styled as "first Dr. Who", in accordance with [[Tardis:Doctors]], though I would still prefer ditching the numbering system in accounts where it is blatantly untrue. As for what the Doctor calls himself, there is a f deal of evidence to show that he refers to himself as "the Doctor" and "Dr. Who". <div style="background-color:#0E234E; border: solid 0.5px gold; display: inline; white-space: nowrap;">[[doctorwho:user:Epsilon the Eternal|<span style="background:#0E234E; color:white"><code>'''Epsilon'''</code></span>]][[doctorwho:user talk:Epsilon the Eternal|📯]] [[doctorwho:special:Contributions/Epsilon the Eternal|📂]]</div> 21:16, 7 June 2021 (UTC)


:Can we have a GIF file that changes from 1 Doctor to another and scroll through all? -- [[User:Deb1701|Future Companion]]
:::::It's nice that you're "pretty sure" it was mentioned, but I am absolutely certain that [http://www.chakoteya.net/DoctorWho/4-3.htm it wasn't.]


::GIFs aren't really good to use, they're limited in the colours that are used to create a GIF and if you want something detailed it ends up taking up a lot of space / takes a significant time to load. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 14:28, August 16, 2011 (UTC)
:::::I've said this to you before: the ''single purpose'' of every wiki is to be legible and usable, and all the other rules are in service of that goal. So if a rule makes a wiki less legible or usable, it bends. (Check out [[Talk:Interference - Book Two (novel)|Interference - Book Two]] if you want to see this in action.) What would it look like if we got rid of [[T:DOCTORS]] and the numbering system? What did it look like on ''[[The Power of the Daleks (TV story)|The Power of the Daleks]]'' after [[Special:Diff/3110042|your edits to it]]? Every user would have to hover over every instance of "the Doctor" or "Dr. Who" to see what dab term was pipe switched away. And that would be neither legible nor usable.


If we must have images of every single incarnation of a Time Lord, then we should just use the image that was already there. Otherwise, we can show just the Eleventh Doctor, or show both the First and Eleventh Doctors as was discussed for the Master.[[User:Icecreamdif|Icecreamdif]] 22:02, August 17, 2011 (UTC)
:::::Whether "Fourth Doctor" is a good name has nothing to do with what he called himself or how it fits with [[T:NPOV]], and it has ''everything'' to do with the fact that "Fourth Doctor" is his ''[https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=fourth+doctor universally recognized]'' name. If [[T:DOCTORS]] breaks [[T:NPOV]], [[T:DOCTORS]] wins ''every single time''. You're doing nothing but hurting your case and wasting your time by complaining about numbering rather than focusing on more limited compromises that might be actually achievable. – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 12:31, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
:Just as at [[companion]] and now [[the Master]], I would prefer the image be ''representative'', not ''exhaustive''.  I do think Smith should get pride of place and positional dominance, but I don't think we need all 11, since the article is chock full of the 11, anyway. The infobox need only summarise.  {{user:CzechOut/Sig}}&nbsp;<span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">'''21:57:35 Thu&nbsp;'''18 Aug 2011&nbsp;</span>


How about we use four images. The First Doctor from the black & white era, one of the Doctors from 3-7 for the classic color era (maybe the fourth since he was probably the most popular), the eigth doctor from the TV movie, and the Eleventh as the current one and representing the new series.[[User:Gowron8472|Gowron8472]] 07:19, August 19, 2011 (UTC)
:::::: I am once again in agreement with Nate. Changing the name to "Dr. Who" in the comic plot summaries is all well and good, but changing it on actors pages is pretty pedantic (and the redirect just plain pointless). Yes in the 60s, William Hartnell was not known as the "First Doctor", but this wiki is not being read in the 60s, it is being read in the 21st century and the people of the 21st century know him as the First Doctor (and have done for decades). And changing all accounts of "the x Doctor" to "Dr Who" or "the Doctor" (such as The Power of the Daleks edit) is massively confusing and unhelpful.
:I don't see anything wrong with using pictures of all 11 Doctors, aside from aesthetics. And arguing "this doesn't make the page look pretty" (AKA aesthetics) is not a very good argument. --[[User:Bold Clone|<span style="color:darkblue">'''Bold'''</span>]] [[User Talk:Bold Clone|<span style="color:gold">'''Clone'''</span>]] 18:59, August 21, 2011 (UTC)


Well, the decision on the Master's page has sort of set a precedent for not using every incarnation of a Time Lord in the infobox, hasn't it.[[User:Icecreamdif|Icecreamdif]] 04:03, August 22, 2011 (UTC)
:::::: P.S. Apologies, Epsilon for not replying to your message on my talk page. When I saw that you had created this thread, I figured this would be a more appropriate place to put my thoughts. [[User:LauraBatham|LauraBatham]] [[User talk:LauraBatham|<span title="Talk to me"></span>]] 12:59, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
:Again, the discussion of the Master's images was basically either "the pictures aren't relevant," or "the pictures don't make the page as pretty." I thought we just should have left it that way--show the canon images of the Master. --[[User:Bold Clone|<span style="color:darkblue">'''Bold'''</span>]] [[User Talk:Bold Clone|<span style="color:gold">'''Clone'''</span>]] 14:47, August 22, 2011 (UTC)


:What about adding a picture of each beside their entry under "The Doctor's incarnations" section? -- [[User:Deb1701|TARDIS 1701]]
:::::: I’m no expert on wiki policy, but I would agree that there’s a need for the wiki to be easily legible and usable by readers. Referring to the Doctor as Dr Who specifically in the context of TV Comic stories seems reasonable, but renaming all the Doctors as variants of [[The Doctor (An Unearthly Child)]] would be potentially difficult for readers to navigate and put this wiki out of touch with 99% of discussion around Doctor Who where the Doctors are referred to by those familiar numbers. I don’t think the [[The Timeless Children (TV story)|recent developments]] changes this at all, as a [[War Doctor|previous revelation]] also altered the numbering of the Doctors’ incarnations but the norm of referring to Eccleston’s Doctor as the Ninth Doctor, Tennant’s as Tenth, Smith’s as Eleventh etc has remained the same. [[User:SherlockTheII|SherlockTheII]] [[User talk:SherlockTheII|<span title="Talk to me"></span>]] 16:54, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
:Been there, done that; it didn't work. I am actually the person who removed the pictures. --[[User:Bold Clone|<span style="color:darkblue">'''Bold'''</span>]] [[User Talk:Bold Clone|<span style="color:gold">'''Clone'''</span>]] 02:56, August 25, 2011 (UTC)


Okay, I didn't even know this discussion existed. Now I do. We really should use all of the incarnations. He's the main character! [[User:BroadcastCorp|BroadcastCorp]] <small>([[User talk:BroadcastCorp|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/BroadcastCorp|contribs]])</small> 12:41, August 25, 2011 (UTC)
: Yeah, I'm sorry, Epsilon, but dabbed page names for [[First Doctor]] onwards are simply never going to happen. And infoboxes should use a name that is specific to the page we are linking. If we had some other in-universe moniker specific to the Troughton Doctor, then perhaps it would be worth weighing that option… but we ''cannot'' start putting just "Dr Who", or indeed "The Doctor", in the |doctor= field of infoboxes. This helps no one whatsoever.


[[file:TheFiveDoctors.jpg|thumb|250px|right|As CzechOut said, we really should use "fresh" images, and most of these are fresh. I think it looks brilliant, and this should be featured on the main page.]]
: Using "Dr. Who", and refraining from using "First" or "Second", makes sense for ''plot summaries'', as well as for the writing of paragraphs cited to these stories. Yes, plot description of, say, ''[[The Highlanders (TV story)|The Highlanders]]'' should not mention "the Second Doctor", just "the Doctor" or "Dr Who". But that doesn't mean that the legibility essentially real-world constructs such as infoboxes (whether it be the story's infobox or the actors') should be compromised — nor that it is ''false'' to refer to the man in ''The Highlanders'' as the Second Doctor in an in-universe sense. He ''is'' in fact "the Second Doctor" — albeit "according to some accounts". Thus, while we must not give the impression that the story uses this name, "the Second Doctor lived through these events" is a valid statement within the wider the DWU.  
:Actually, I've been thinking about it, and actually, we don't need all the Doctor. There, I said it. We should just have five, like the on at [[the Master]]. Here is my image suggestion:


*'''Smith''' dominates the design, because he is the current Doctor, and this is from [[DW]]: ''[[The Impossible Astronaut]]'', where he says "Space, 1969". Best moment in my opinion.
: The thing about [[T:NPOV]] is that it mostly applies to what statements we make about the DWU, not how pages are named. Because pages cannot truly have several names at once, we ''necessarily'' have to "prioritise" one version over another when a character has several valid names. T:NPOV still has its place in terms of making sure that, for example, it is not "TV by default" that wins this assessment, rather than the name that actually makes the most sense and best reflects DWU sources in ''aggregate''. But it is not inherently a T:NPOV breach to say Troughton was the Second Doctor just because ''some'' stories number the Doctors differently. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:51, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
*'''Baker''' (Tom not Colin) is at the bottom left hand corner. I just had to include him. He played the Doctor for so long, so he's got to be on this image. The screenshot is from [[DW]]: ''[[The Deadly Assassin]]'' (thanks [[User:CzechOut|CzechOut]])
:: I am endorsing what Scrooge MacDuck, LauraBatham and NateBumber have said, above. Standardisation is necessary on a wiki (and universe) of this size, especially where characters as central as ''the Doctor'' are concerned.
*'''Hartnell''' is the black-and-white one. I included him because a) he's the original and initial Doctor (and, in a way, his true appearance) and b) it shows that the Doctor has appeared in black-and-white, and not all in colour (bit similar to the Master image, CzechOut had to use a comic Master to show they exist). This screenshot is from [[DW]]: ''[[The Ark]]''.
*'''Tennant''' and '''Eccleston''' are the ones at the bottom-right hand-corner. I felt they needed to be included, as they are the most recent Doctors. I included Eccleston because this Doctor was the one after the Time War, I just felt we needed to show that. I chose Tennant because he's very well-known, he's played the Doctor for about five years or minus one year. Every fan knows him, not saying he's typecast, but I think as he's also recent (like Eccleston) he needs to included.


Many thanks to CzechOut, who inspired the design, and added some of the images I've needed. So... what do you make of the image? [[User:BroadcastCorp|BroadcastCorp]] <small>([[User talk:BroadcastCorp|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/BroadcastCorp|contribs]])</small> 08:12, August 26, 2011 (UTC)
:: Also of note, as to why [[T:DOCTORS]] trumps any [[T:NPOV]] arguments: even with the last decade of ''Doctor Who'' on ''television'' firmly renumbering the Doctor's incarnations, in one way or another, "Twelfth Doctor" is a title, not always an accurate description.


:I like the design, the only thing I would chnage is the Tenth Doctor. I would replace it with the Eighth Doctor. At the moment, the image is has to much of the New series in it, and I think two Old Series plus to New Series, with the Eighth Doctor (who current exists in neither the old or new series.)  
:: This is where capitalising Twelfth, by convention, happens to also give the right idea: he is not necessarily the Doctor's twelfth incarnation, but he is, by most sources and common understanding, the "Twelfth Doctor". We decided in 2013 to stick with this and not confuse things, and we are not going back on that. The wiki would unfortunately be quite illegible.{{User:SOTO/sig}} 08:35, 9 June 2021 (UTC)


:Also, keep the basic design (one big, two squares and two smaller ones), but chnage them about. Maybe put the squares and smaller squares at the top of the page? Or out the two smaller squares in between the squares.
== Fugitive Doctor Placement (Infobox) ==


:Keep the Eleventh as the main image, then have the First and Ninth Doctor as the big squares and the Fourth and Third as the smaller squares.  
After [[Once, Upon Time (TV story)|Once, Upon Time]], should the [[Fugitive Doctor|Fugitve Doctor]] be moved from "Others/Unplaced Incarnations" to "Widley Accpeted"? That story does confirm her to be a pre-Hartnell incarnation that worked for [[The Division]]. Or should we wait until this era is done, on the off chance they show an actual regeneration/transition. Perhpas even from her to the [[First Doctor|The First Doctor]], somehow.


:Nice work though! [[User:Mini-mitch|MM]]/<small>[[User talk:Mini-mitch|Want to talk?]]</small> 09:48, August 26, 2011 (UTC)
[[User:TheOneTrueJack|TheOneTrueJack]] [[User talk:TheOneTrueJack|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:59, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
:: "Widely accepted" is really for the "main line-up", as it were, not just for characters who are "definitely the Doctor" in their portrayal. No one is denying [[The Doctor (Contents)]] counts, but they don't belong.  I suppose, if there were a direct regeneration into Harntell, the question could be raised of slotting Martin in that row, but so long as she remains, as it were, "free-floating" without a number or explicit precise placement, she doesn't belong there. <span style="color: #baa3d6;font-family:Comic Sans;">[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']]</span> <span style="color: #baa3d6;">[[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|]]</span> 22:11, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


Thanks. But replacing the Tenth Doctor image is a bit of a tough one. As these are five images, the images won't be equal, if you know what I mean. As he's the second most recent incarnation I think he should be featured. [[User:BroadcastCorp|BroadcastCorp]] <small>([[User talk:BroadcastCorp|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/BroadcastCorp|contribs]])</small> 09:52, August 26, 2011 (UTC)
== Defaulting to the most recent incarnation with the tabbed infobox images ==
{{User:Bongolium500/Sandbox 7}}At almost exactly the same time as [[User:Scrooge MacDuck]] closed [[Tardis:Temporary forums/Archive/Replacing docpic]], I finalised a mock-up of a potential solution to allow us to keep the chronilogical ordering of tabs while having the [[Fourteenth Doctor|most recent incarnation]] selected by default, shown to the right (and on [[User:Bongolium500/Sandbox 7]]). Pretty much, the image listed earliest in the gallery is always the one that is selected by default. CSS can then be used to move this tab to the end of the row when the page is viewed. Therefore, the image for the most recent incarnation can be listed first and is then simply moved to the end by CSS. Currently, and temporarily, this is done by wrapping the infobox in a <tt><nowiki><div></nowiki></tt>, but a new infobox field could easily be added to allow this to be enabled on any infobox. The only issue I can think of is with mobile: CSS doesn't work there so the images will be displayed in the order they're listed, regardless of any changes made to their order with CSS. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|<span title="talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:02, 3 February 2023 (UTC)


:We have the first incarnation and the Eleventh. They should be in. Then we have the Ninth Doctor, who was the first "New Series" Doctor, so he should be included. That means we should not have the Tenth Doctor, it should not matter if they were most popular or most recent,  since we have the current. The would strongly advise replacing the Tenth with the Eighth, so it's not New Series heavy. With having the Ninth/Eleventh and First/Fourth, we have a equal and fair number for fans of either the old or new series.
: If the mobile issue is deemed to large, I have another potential solution which would avoid it using JavaScript. However, this would cause the first tab to initially be selected before jumping to the last tab during page load which may also be undesirable. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|<span title="talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:08, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
[[file:5Doctorsv2.jpg|thumb|right|250px|Slithly similar to the Master picture layout, expect the main image is underneath (indicating last/latest, and the 11th is the latest incarnation, and divided the two bigger Doctor images with two smaller one.]]
:The point is, we should have two from each series, plus the Eighth Doctor, so I really think you should replace either the Tenth or the Ninth Doctor with the Eighth. So as to balance the image out. [[User:Mini-mitch|MM]]/<small>[[User talk:Mini-mitch|Want to talk?]]</small> 09:58, August 26, 2011 (UTC)


:What's wrong with showing all the incarnations, aside from "it doesn't make the page pretty"? --[[User:Bold Clone|<span style="color:darkblue">'''Bold'''</span>]] [[User Talk:Bold Clone|<span style="color:gold">'''Clone'''</span>]] 15:20, August 26, 2011 (UTC)
:I'm fully in support of this. [[User:Cousin Ettolrhc|Cousin Ettolrahc]] [[User talk:Cousin Ettolrhc|<span title="Talk to me"></span>]] 22:27, 17 November 2023 (UTC)


::That is great work BroadcastCorp.
== I still don't understand why… ==
::I also think the Eighth Doctor should be included as he's often forgotten, yet his appearance TV wise bridges the two 'Wilderness years'. I'd suggest getting rid of Nine/Ten and putting Eight in there, or get rid of just Ten or Nine and replace with Eight.
::The infobox is a summary of the page, so we don't ''need'' to have all the images, plus we've had the all images in one box, which is kinda what lead us to this discussion. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 15:42, August 26, 2011 (UTC)


Can't you put a bit of a spin on it. Not much, just so it's not the exact same layout as [[the Master]]'s image.--{{User:Skittles the hog/sig}} 16:54, August 26, 2011 (UTC)
…the infobox images for each Doctor are completely different from those used on the individual pages? [[User:WaltK|WaltK]] [[User talk:WaltK|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:06, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 
 
== Fourteenth Doctor tab pic ==
We'll definitely find better images as the specials progress, but for right now I'd like to propose we make the Fourteenth Doctor tab's pic on this page be [[:File:14 never here.png|14 never here.png]]. Just a better aspect ratio and look at the character than what we have right now. -- [[User:MattTheNerd42|MattTheNerd42]] [[User talk:MattTheNerd42|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:48, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 
: I don't think this suggested image is suitable at all. The subject of an image needs to be clearly visible when it's a thumbnail and most of the image is the TARDIS exterior. [[User:Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon|Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon]] [[User talk:Jack &#34;BtR&#34; Saxon|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
 
== Article picture aspect ratios ==
 
The aspect ratios for the pictures of Doctors 1 - 13 are the same, but 14 and 15 have different sizes. If someone knows how to make them equal to the others, I suggest they do so. [[User:Wozza123|Wozza123]] [[User talk:Wozza123|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 18:19, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 
: NGL I think we should seize this opportunity to overhaul most, if not all, of the images. They all have that annoying "crop out the forehead" crop that is not necessary now (or even ever, technically, people just misunderstood what counted as part of a person's face) and the overall resolution of a lot of these images are also low. {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 21:12, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 
== Matching individual article pages ==
 
:: Shouldn't the images be the same as on the individual incarnation pages? {{User:Aquanafrahudy/Sig}} 22:14, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 
::: I think Aquanafrahudy has a good point. Would be nice to update them all to match their respective pages. [[User:FractalDoctor|FractalDoctor]] [[User talk:FractalDoctor|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:03, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 
:::: As I did on the other version of the Wiki, I've gone ahead and updated the infobox gallery so that each Docpic matches their respective Docpic on their page. When we make a decision on 14 and 15's final images, we can then update this one to match. Surely this just makes sense. We could maybe crop them all in due course so they're all the same aspect ratio too? — [[User:FractalDoctor|Fractal Doctor]] [[User talk:FractalDoctor|<span title="Talk">•</span>]] 21:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 
::::: This has now been undone, so I guess I'll instead second Aquanafrahudy's suggestion above. Personally, I'm not even sure ''why'' the images here would be different to the ones on each individual page. At the very least, these images really could do with updated versions because most are very poor quality and haven't been updated with higher quality ones since 2014. I notice not only have myself and Aquanafrahudy mentioned it, but WaltK also raised the question back in November 2023 too. — [[User:FractalDoctor|Fractal Doctor]] [[User talk:FractalDoctor|<span title="Talk">•</span>]] 18:42, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
 
:::::: Just to add: on the page for [[The Master]], each image used in the infobox correlates / is the same as the one used on each individual incarnation's respective page. Not sure why the Doctor is different then in this respect. — [[User:FractalDoctor|Fractal Doctor]] [[User talk:FractalDoctor|<span title="Talk">•</span>]] 19:24, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
 
Bringing this back because I feel it's a valid discussion to have. Not sure why the images on this page wouldn't mirror those on each respective Doctor's page... especially since several are very low-quality, 6 is a promo photo (I think), 8 is a different aspect ratio, War is weirdly framed/cropped, some images are different sizes, 12 is just outright unflattering, 14 is quite dark, etc. <font face="Maven Pro" color="#000000">— [[User:Fractal|Fractal]] [[User talk:Fractal|<span title="Talk">•</span>]]</font> 20:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
 
: I agree but I think [[User:SOTO]] is opposed. It would be good to hear why. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|☎]] 20:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
 
:: Radio silence. I know infobox images aren't the biggest priority of the Wiki, but ones for major characters are, and it's silly that we have a newly refreshed Wiki which we showcase as being modernised and up to date... and not only do the infobox images here not match their respective Doctor pages, but they're also of very low quality, and we've been stuck with them for literally years now. <font face="Maven Pro" color="#000000">— [[User:Fractal|Fractal]] [[User talk:Fractal|<span title="Talk">•</span>]]</font> 18:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
I am strongly opposed to having the [[Tardis:Galleries|tabbed gallery]] on <code><nowiki>[[The Doctor]]</nowiki></code> match the individual incarnation pages, but I ''am'' in support of revamping our image selection here.
 
I see no reason not to showcase different images on each of these high-visibility pages, especially as image discussions for the individual Doctors will often come up with really good runner-ups (and/or variant images for two different eras, within that Doctor's life: <code>ex. [[Eighth Doctor]], [[Eleventh Doctor]]</code>).
 
That said, '''since we no longer use {{tlx|docpic}}, ''we are no longer constrained like we were way back in 2013'''''. So yes, we should at the very least be using higher-quality ''versions'' of these images, and I'm not sure we (necessarily) need to restrict them all to exactly the same dimensions, either.
 
I'll post a proposal shortly with some suggestion '''replacement images''' (again, ''not'' in favour of doing the hasty thing and just overriding them with images agreed upon by discussion ''for those incarnations' pages''). '''''Then we can build as a community from there.''''' And ultimately come to a decision on the new roster.
 
Time for some progress on this, certainly.{{User:SOTO/sig}} 01:51, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
: Now posted below.{{User:SOTO/sig}} 05:51, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
 
== New infobox images! (2024 edition) ==
{{Infobox Individual
|name = The Doctor
|image = <gallery>
Doctor smug CaveofSkulls.jpg|1
TwoWarGamesB.jpg|2
Third Doctor Spearhead from Space.jpeg|3
FourZygons.jpg|4
FiveWoodsB.jpg|5
SixAttackC.jpg|6
SevenLeftLookingSN.jpg|7
EightTimeWarA.jpg|8
The_Warrior_in_the_Barn.jpg|War
Ninth Doctor mourns Time War The End of the World.jpg|9
Tenth doctor main2.jpg|10
Eleventh Doctor Closing Time.jpg|11
Twelfth Doctor Witch's Familiar 2.jpg|12
Thirteenth welcome aboard (AITUK).jpg|13
SadFourteen.jpg|14
Dr Who staring down Toymaker.png|15
</gallery>
|alias = [[Aliases of the Doctor|'''''see list''''']]
|species = The Doctor's species
}}
As explained above, '''we're now looking to revamp our image roster for the main [[The Doctor|Doctor]] page'''. This has gone largely unchanged since 2013, apart from the addition of more recent incarnations of course...
 
Here is my proposal. I've had this on the [[User:SOTO/docpic2|back burner]] for a good while. Time to start this off. I've included a sample infobox with the actual tabs, so you can get a good sense.
 
And here is a regular gallery, which you can all add to. The only real rules are '''1.''' that it cannot be what's already used on the incarnation page (I suppose, unless you're ''concretely'' proposing swapping them around...), and '''2.''' that Classic Doctors should be in '''4:3''', while New Who Doctors' images should at least ''approximate'' modern aspect ratios.
 
Fittingly, ''I'' thought, in my proposal, I elected to make Eight's image a middle ground between the dimensions used for Classic Who and New Who.
 
Well. Let the games commence...{{User:SOTO/sig}} 05:51, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
 
=== Gallery ===
<gallery>
Doctor smug CaveofSkulls.jpg|1 (A)
First_Doctor_in_the_Chase_Quizzical.jpeg|1 (B)
TwoWarGamesB.jpg|2 (A)
The_Enemy_of_the_World_Second_Doctor_5.jpg|2 (B)
The_Enemy_of_the_World_Second_Doctor_4.jpg|2 (C)
Third Doctor Spearhead from Space.jpeg|3 (A)
Third_Doctor_in_the_Lab_Spearhead.jpeg|3 (B)
3rdDoctorProposal.jpg|3 (C)
3proposal1.png|3 (D)
3proposal_(4).jpg|3 (E)
3proposal_(10).jpg|3 (F)
3proposal_(8).jpg|3 (G)
3proposal_(5).jpg|3 (H)
3proposal_(2).jpg|3 (I)
FourZygons.jpg|4 (A)
Fourth_Doctor_smile.jpg|4 (B)
Fourth Doctor grins at camera.jpg|4 (C)
Fourth Doctor looks to camera.jpg|4 (D)
FiveWoodsB.jpg|5 (A)
5thdoctorimage1.jpg|5 (B)
5thdoctorimage2.jpg|5 (C)
5thdoctorimage3.jpg|5 (D)
5thdoctorimage4.jpg|5 (E)
5thdoctorimage5.jpg|5 (F)
5thdoctorimage6.jpg|5 (G)
5thdoctorimage7.jpg|5 (H)
5thdoctorimage8.jpg|5 (I)
5thdoctorimage9.jpg|5 (J)
SixAttackC.jpg|6 (A)
6 Two Doctors 2.jpg|6 (B)
6 Two Doctors 3.jpg|6 (C)
6 Two Doctors 4.jpg|6 (D)
6 Revelation 1.jpg|6 (E)
6 Revelation 2.jpg|6 (F)
6 Two Doctors 1.jpg|6 (G)
6docpic01.jpg|6 (H)
6docpic02.jpg|6 (I)
6 Attack 1.jpg|6 (J)
6 Revelation 5.jpg|6 (K)
6 Revelation 4.jpg|6 (L)
6 Revelation 3.jpg|6 (M)
6 Timelash 1.jpg|6 (N)
6 Timelash 3.jpg|6 (O)
6 Dilemma 1.jpg|6 (P)
6 Mysterious 1.jpg|6 (Q)
6 Mindwarp 1.jpg|6 (R)
6 Vervoids 1.jpg|6 (S)
SevenLeftLookingSN.jpg|7 (A)
Thedocpage7.jpg|7 (B)
Thedocpage7a.jpg|7 (C)
Thedocpage7b.jpg|7 (D)
Thedocpage7c.jpg|7 (E)
Thedocpage7d.jpg|7 (F)
Thedocpage7e.jpg|7 (G)
Thedocpage7f.jpg|7 (H)
EightTimeWarA.jpg|8 (A)
Docpic8b.jpg|8 (B)
EightTimeWarD.jpg|8 (A2)
Mcgannsuggest1.jpg|8 (C)
Docpic8.jpg|8 (D)
Eighth Doctor cravat Doctor Who.jpg|8 (E)
Eight and Grace on a motorcycle.jpg|8 (F)
Night03.JPG|8 (G)
Eight on Gallifrey.jpg|8 (H)
Guardian of the Edge 8 B.jpg|8 (I)
Docpic9e.jpg|War (A)
DoctorHurtWide.jpg|War (B)
Docpagewar3.jpg|War (C)
The Warrior in the Tower of London.jpg|War (D)
The Warrior in the Barn.jpg|War (E)
War Doctor sees innocent Gallifreyans suffering.jpg|War (F)
Docpic9d.jpg|War (G)
Ninth Doctor mourns Time War The End of the World.jpg|9 (A)
Everybody lives.jpg|9 (B)
Nine docpic 1.jpg|9 (C)
Nine docpic 2.jpg|9 (D)
Nine docpic 3.jpg|9 (E)
Tenth doctor main2.jpg|10 (A)
Eleventh Doctor Closing Time.jpg|11 (A)
Docpic12b.jpg|11 (B)
ElevenGoodbye.jpg|11 (C)
Twelfth Doctor Witch's Familiar 2.jpg|12 (A)
Capaldi Magician's Apprentice.jpg|12 (B)
Capaldi Under the Lake.jpg|12 (C)
Capaldi Under the Lake 3.jpg|12 (D)
Capaldi Under the Lake 1.jpg|12 (E)
Capaldi Woman Who Lived.jpg|12 (F)
Thirteenth welcome aboard (AITUK).jpg|13 (A)
ThirteenLooksOut.jpg|13 (B)
Thirteen talks to Tegan and Ace.jpg|13 (C)
Thirteen and the TARDIS in UNIT HQ.jpg|13 (D)
SadFourteen.jpg|14 (A)
Fourteen docpic 1.jpg|14 (B)
Fourteen docpic 2.jpg|14 (C)
Fourteen docpic 3.jpg|14 (D)
Fourteen docpic 4.jpg|14 (E)
Dr Who staring down Toymaker.png|15 (A)
Kate Lethbridge-Stewart and the Fifteenth Doctor.jpg|15 (B)
Kate Lethbridge-Stewart and the Fifteenth Doctor (cropped).jpg|15 (C)
Fifteenth Doctor inside the TARDIS EoD.jpg|15 (D)
Fifteen outside But First... Coffee.jpg|15 (E)
Fifteen in TLoRS.jpg|15 (F)
The Fifteenth Doctor looks at Rogue.jpg|15 (G)
The Fifteenth Doctor wells up.jpg|15 (H)
The Doctor pleads to Lindy.jpg|15 (I)
Fifteen crying 2.jpg|15 (J)
15thdoctorpic1.jpg|15 (K)
15thdoctorpic2.jpg|15 (L)
</gallery>
 
=== Discussion ===
I think most of these are all right, but I'm not a fan of the picture of the War Doctor given that most of it is wall. [[User:Jack|Jack]] [[User talk:Jack|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 10:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
 
:Thank you, SOTO, for setting this up. You've convinced me that it'd be best to use different images from those on respective Doctor pages, for the sake of variety. I like all of your proposed images, apart from those for 8 and War. I feel the one for the War Doctor is too much background, and the picks for 8 are just too dark. I wonder if there'd be a consensus on whether the image for 8 should be from the 1996 TV Movie, or the 2013 minisode, or if it'd be split. I would argue the TV Movie might have better options, brighter imagery, and is the basis for his definitive looks, but I can also see value in showcasing him from later in his life as depicted in the 2013 minisode too.
 
:I have added a couple of images. Granted, they're not all "facing to the left" but we have previously established that this is more of a preferred guideline unless there are better alternatives that don't adhere to this. <font face="Maven Pro" color="#000000">— [[User:Fractal|Fractal]] [[User talk:Fractal|<span title="Talk">•</span>]]</font> 11:33, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
 
:: In the original 2013 discussion, we established that Eight should have his TNOTD look here, for the sake of having both represented.
 
:: It is worth noting that Paul McGann himself disliked his original look, and wanted something like his ''Dark Eyes'' look after seeing Eccleston in his leather jacket. In ongoing Big Finish (and, notably, [[TV]]: {{cs|The Power of the Doctor (TV story)}}, meaning his TVM look is now in the ''minority'' on television), this is what he looks like.
 
:: That said, yes, that minisode is rather dark. "8 (B)" has slightly better lighting. I'm not opposed to going for a TVM screenshot this time, so long as it's an improvement, though it is a shame. (''Power'' would be perfect, but that's only a mental construct.){{User:SOTO/sig}} 15:44, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
 
::: In particular, I quite like "8 (C)".{{User:SOTO/sig}} 15:46, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
 
:::: Of those available, I like "8 (C)" even though it's similar to the image we have on the Eighth Doctor page... are there rules against artificially brightening an image, even just slightly? If we could do that, a screencap from the 2013 minisode would work IMO. It's just harder to 'read' if we use dark images.
 
:::: And fair enough regarding equal representation and McGann's own thoughts - it's nice that he's been able to evolve his costume, even if only via Big Finish covers etc. We all know Colin hated his costume but he's been stuck with that ever since, barring rare variants like the blue one. I think, for McGann, "8 (B)" would work if we could tweak and brighten it slightly. <font face="Maven Pro" color="#000000">— [[User:Fractal|Fractal]] [[User talk:Fractal|<span title="Talk">•</span>]]</font> 16:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
 
::::: I've adjusted the lighting slightly on that image. (Compare at [[:File:Docpic8b.jpg]], where the full file history is available. Note that the original version, by [[User:CzechOut]], was ''highly'' colour corrected. I've done a subtler job this time, I feel.){{User:SOTO/sig}} 18:31, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
 
Added some more images of the War Doctor. IMHO some of these are good candidates for the Infobox on his own page. {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 17:41, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
: I think "War (E)" is ''by far'' the best one yet!{{User:SOTO/sig}} 18:16, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
::I agree, "War (E)" is great. <font face="Maven Pro" color="#000000">— [[User:Fractal|Fractal]] [[User talk:Fractal|<span title="Talk">•</span>]]</font> 18:55, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
 
{{Infobox Individual
|name = The Doctor
|image = <gallery>
Doctor smug CaveofSkulls.jpg|1
TwoWarGamesB.jpg|2
Third Doctor Spearhead from Space.jpeg|3
FourZygons.jpg|4
FiveWoodsB.jpg|5
SixAttackC.jpg|6
SevenLeftLookingSN.jpg|7
Mcgannsuggest1.jpg|8
War Doctor sees innocent Gallifreyans suffering.jpg|War
Ninth Doctor mourns Time War The End of the World.jpg|9
Tenth doctor main2.jpg|10
Eleventh Doctor Closing Time.jpg|11
Twelfth Doctor Witch's Familiar 2.jpg|12
Thirteenth welcome aboard (AITUK).jpg|13
SadFourteen.jpg|14
Dr Who staring down Toymaker.png|15
</gallery>
}}
Here's how it looks with "8 (C)" (best TVM option, IMO), by the way. I'm hoping for some good submissions for the Seventh Doctor, to cap it off. I was having trouble sourcing high-quality screenshots for him.
 
EDIT: Trying out "War (F)" at the same time; another candidate I really like.
 
EDIT 2: A really cool feature of "War (F)" is that it matches the Ninth Doctor's eyeline! So you have the devastation on Gallifrey behind War, and then switch to the Ninth Doctor haunted by that memory (actively telling Rose about the Time War). This one has my vote!{{User:SOTO/sig}} 19:08, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
 
: If McGann's thoughts are playing even a minor role in image selection, I think it's only fair to consider Colin Baker's as well so I've added a couple of options without The Coat. [[User:Jack|Jack]] [[User talk:Jack|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 19:32, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
 
{{Infobox Individual
|name = The Doctor
|image = <gallery>
Doctor smug CaveofSkulls.jpg|1
TwoWarGamesB.jpg|2
Third Doctor Spearhead from Space.jpeg|3
FourZygons.jpg|4
FiveWoodsB.jpg|5
SixAttackC.jpg|6
SevenLeftLookingSN.jpg|7
Docpic8b.jpg|8
War Doctor sees innocent Gallifreyans suffering.jpg|War
Ninth Doctor mourns Time War The End of the World.jpg|9
Tenth doctor main2.jpg|10
Eleventh Doctor Closing Time.jpg|11
Twelfth Doctor Witch's Familiar 2.jpg|12
Thirteenth welcome aboard (AITUK).jpg|13
SadFourteen.jpg|14
Dr Who staring down Toymaker.png|15
</gallery>
}}
:: (And here's with alternate Time War McGann. I think it rather works, as well!!){{User:SOTO/sig}} 23:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
::: Oh, and I like "6 (E)" best among the non-rainbow ones, although I'm hesitant about using a one-time outfit for this.
 
::: McGann is a special situation, in that 2/3 of his TV appearances and ''multiple eras of Big Finish'' have him in his ''Dark Eyes'' getup. This is a significant (though not overwhelming) portion of his appearances across the EU; more prominent, even, than Eleven's 7B look, which he ''also'' lived and died in, in the end.{{User:SOTO/sig}} 02:06, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
 
:::: @[[User:SOTO|SOTO]] well you've forgotten [[WC]]: {{cs|Shada (webcast)}}. The "TV Movie" outfit appears in two television-based stories (yes, ''Shada'' should count as television, it's a visual serial you can literally get on Blu-ray) and the "war" outfit appears in two television-based stories. {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 02:15, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
 
::::: Oh and also I think it would be better if we just used 4:3 aspect ratios for all the images. It'll be consistent then, and deadspace can be more easily removed. Especially for late Chibnall ers and beyond, as the aspect ratio is now ''wider'' than 16:9 as anamorphic lens are being used. {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 02:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
 
:::::: Compare '15 (B)' and '15 (C)', for example. {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 02:32, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:: I wouldn't be opposed to cropping them all to 4:3! That's probably the right idea.
 
:: Certainly, the current aspect ratio (as demonstrated in your 15 pics) needs to be cropped down to match the others. Beyond that, I do like your images from ''Rogue''; "15 (H)" in particular. (Since Fifteen has so many outfits, I don't think we ''should'' constrain ourselves to one particular look for him.)
 
:: I think "8 (F)" and "15 (B)" — in their current crops, certainly — should be disqualified, as they both prominently feature ''two'' characters. We should assume an unknowledgeable reader is going through this infobox (and has already seen the [[Thirteenth Doctor]], a blonde woman, two incarnations back). I do think the War Doctor image with several obscured background characters is fine, for the record, as he's ''clearly'' the subject of the image.{{User:SOTO/sig}} 06:18, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
::: "15 (C)" is another good one, and demonstrates 4:3 for modern Doctors well. But I won't be the first to say this: ''[[Shada (webcast)|Shada]]'' just ''looks bad'' in a modern context. And it would be odd to use an animated screenshot for just this one Doctor, when he ''has'' appeared extensively enough in live-action, to match the others.
 
::: (That said, if one of the Doctors were to be represented by a non-live action image, it ''should be'' the Eighth Doctor, who's famously much more of an EU Doctor. ...Actually, should we consider using a comic image? 👀){{User:SOTO/sig}} 06:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:::: (Whether [[WC]]: ''[[Shada (webcast)|Shada]]'' should count as television is a ''whole other kettle of fish'', best reserved for [[T:FORUM|the forums]]. But I will concede that there's an argument to be made that there's a 50/50 split, yes.){{User:SOTO/sig}} 06:28, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
 
::::: I do agree ''Shada'' doesn't look great but I feel it should still be ''technically'' considered. But there are definitely better images to choose from.
::::: Also, TBQH ''Shada'' is not really that different from the animations of missing episodes, except for the animation quality being worse. But that's for another time. (And technically ''Night'' is a webcast but people wrangled some way it could be covered as a "(TV story)".) {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 06:32, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
 
I wouldn't be opposed to cropping them to 4:3, so they're all the same proportion and we can focus in on each Doctor's face. I would oppose the use of Shada for the 8th Doctor, as I think we should stick to live action for consistency, even if a particular character has been used more in expanded universe material. We're also not considering any animated images for Troughton's Doctor even though a lot of his era is now retroactively animated. For McGann, I like 8 (A) and 8 (B). I'm also not huge on 15 (F-J) because of how dark and shadowy the images are. [While I'm here, may I also suggest that 10 (A) could be a great image for the 10th Doctor's own page - the discussion over on his Talk page just stopped dead in its tracks, and he could really do with an update] <font face="Maven Pro" color="#000000">— [[User:Fractal|Fractal]] [[User talk:Fractal|<span title="Talk">•</span>]]</font> 10:52, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
 
: SOTO, a couple may need a little tweak/crop, but I've added some options for McCoy's Doctor to the gallery for consideration <font face="Maven Pro" color="#000000">— [[User:Fractal|Fractal]] [[User talk:Fractal|<span title="Talk">•</span>]]</font> 11:12, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
 
:: Also added a couple more options for other Doctors :) <font face="Maven Pro" color="#000000">— [[User:Fractal|Fractal]] [[User talk:Fractal|<span title="Talk">•</span>]]</font> 11:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
 
::: Added '8 (I)', but I don't think it should count given it's a mental manifestation, like how we don't use that one image of [[Charlotte Pollard]] from a dream sequence in that Titan comic book. {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 12:56, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
 
:::: Added some more. I strongly feel that we shouldn't use images where the Doctor's forehead is cropped out, it looks ugly and makes it hard to discern their characteristics. I also fully agree with Epsilon's suggestion that all images should be cropped to 4:3 (and have cropped my suggestions accordingly). My current preferences are as follows:
::::* 1 - B
::::* 2 - C
::::* 3 - E
::::* 4 - A
::::* The image of 5 is fine.
::::* 6 - I or P is probably best
::::* 7 - H
::::* 8 - C. I get the desire to showcase NotD, but it's really crappily lit for infobox images. Perhaps ::::a Big Finish cover?
::::* War - D, by a long way.  
::::* 9 - C, then E.
::::* 10 - That one's fine
::::* 11 - A
::::* 12 - F, then C
::::* 13 - C
::::* 14 - Probably B, but there's not much between that and the others.
::::* 15 - C
:::: - {{User:Aquanafrahudy/Sig}} 22:37, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:: As much as I love my original "2 (A)", "2 (B)" and "2 (C)" are magnificent! Those slot in remarkably well with "1 (A)" and "3 (A)"!
 
:: And there are some smashing suggestions for the [[Third Doctor]] (do remember, my friends, that we can discuss changing the Doctors' ''individual pages'' if a really good suggestion just doesn't mesh well with the other images in the gallery...), but ultimately I'm not sure "3 (A)" can be beaten for such a line-up. I know it's my own suggestion, but I'd be saying the same thing if the roles were reversed here... Some serious competition, though, for sure.
 
:: Also, looking again on my phone with the night filter on, I'm realising that "15 (G)" through "15 (J)" might also be too dark, at least unmodified.
 
:: I don't think we should seriously entertain "8 (I)", personally, on the basis that ''that isn't the real Eighth Doctor''.
 
:: "6 (H)" is '''very nice'''. My vote, at this stage, would be between that and the original "6 (A)", ultimately in favour of H as the best option.
 
:: As for 7, I '''really''' like "7 (D)", "7 (F)" and "7 (G)". And I oppose my own suggestion for 7, now we've got many better options. As to which one I like the ''most'', I'll have to try them each out in context...
 
:: (I would like to stress that we need to take a holistic view when choosing our final candidates. '''Please do explain ''why'' you like a certain candidate, if at all possible, ''especially'' in relation to your other preferred candidates''', so we can do something better, in the end, than a simple [[tally]].)
 
:: (Think variety. Think cohesion. Think eyeline matches, if that's what's important to you. Maybe the Seventh Doctor's eyeline being higher than the others is what you ''want''. Maybe it takes you out of it...){{User:SOTO/sig}} 02:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
::: Oh, and we dismissed it last time, but I don't see why we shouldn't at least ''consider'' some Big Finish covers. I know the general rule we follow (for good reason) is that we only use covers when no other sources are available to illustrate something... but consider this: the only TV/WC source we have for McGann's ''Dark Eyes'' look is (some are arguing) too dark to meet our requirements.
 
::: Also, of course, the big reason to use TV sources for the other Doctors, apart from visual consistency, is that ''those are all from their original eras''. "McGann's era" is a nebulous concept, and you could even argue that his era didn't end until 2013, and actually overlapped with other Doctors. Or indeed that it's still ongoing, since we are still exploring new eras and new companions!{{User:SOTO/sig}} 02:09, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:::: Oh! "6 (K)" is also nice. 14's options are very nice, but dark.
 
:::: For 13, it's between A and C for me, with a preference for A. I just think it's framed very well, and captures her energy. To be honest, I think we should use whichever one isn't selected here for [[Thirteenth Doctor]].{{User:SOTO/sig}} 06:31, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
:: I really love the new options for 5! Wowza. For 15, I would vote K and L over A. These are much better options, as they're from his actual era.
 
:: (Please don't let my request for expanding your thoughts dissuade you from contributing, by the way! All contributions welcome.){{User:SOTO/sig}} 22:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
 
Of the options we have available, my preferences are:
 
* '''1B''' - captures Hartnell well, nicely framed too
* '''2C''' - mirrors Hartnell smiling, nicely framed, reads well with good lighting
* '''3C or 3G''' - slightly more serious Pertwee, head fully in frame, well lit
* '''4A or 4B''' or 4C - all of these are great, and I'd suggest we use one on the Fourth Doctor page too
* '''5A or 5G''' - just personal preference, no real argument, most shots of 5 are good here
* '''6H or 6I or 6P''' - I prefer seeing 6 in his usual costume, all three of these are well framed, and I like that he's smiling in them
* '''7C or 7F or 7H''' - hard to choose, if 7H then it could be slightly more cropped
* '''8C''' - again, could be slightly better cropped, but well lit and well framed
* '''WarG''' - I like WarE but Tennant is sharing the frame, WarG is dark but lit well and shows the anguish of his incarnation
* '''9A''' - slightly haunting, cuts off his head a little but I think 9C is a bit dark
* '''10A''' - it's just a great image, and I wish we also had a better one for the Tenth Doctor page too [discussion there has stalled]
* '''11A or 11B''' - both showcase Smith's face well, and both are nicely framed
* '''12A''' - it's just the best lit one out of the selection, in my opinion
* '''13C''' - maybe cropped better, well lit, good framing, second place goes to 13A
* '''14?''' - no preference, they're all a bit dark for my liking
* '''15?''' - also no preference, they're all a bit dark and murky for my liking, I'd only rule out 15A because it's not really from his era but *''shrug''* <font face="Maven Pro" color="#000000">— [[User:Fractal|Fractal]] [[User talk:Fractal|<span title="Talk">•</span>]]</font> 12:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
 
: Of the 15 ones, I'd say 15 (C) sticks out to me as the best option (although I ''do'' wish people would start using PNGs more over JPGs...). [[User:Cookieboy 2005|Cookieboy 2005]] [[User talk:Cookieboy 2005|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 15:11, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 15:11, 24 December 2024

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

Infobox Image Update[[edit source]]

Hello. Is there any possibility of updating the images used for both the Twelfth Doctor and the Thirteenth Doctor's for ones that are more appropriate? I guess I get the "eyebrows" thing so that image isn't *too* bad I suppose (still think better could be done), but surely the Thirteenth Doctor deserves an image of herself in her actual clothing rather than the image currently in use which is from her opening story The Woman Who Fell to Earth and displays her still wearing the ragged and battered remains of her previous incarnation's clothing? I hope you'll take these suggestions under advisement. Thank you for reading. --Alan-WK 02:19, January 13, 2020 (UTC)

The Timeless Child[[edit source]]

So, obviously there will have to be some changes. For starters, the Jo Martin Doctor added to More Ambiguous section of the Doctor's incarnations. Other than that, how big a rewrite are we looking at and how much should be kept to other pages likeTimeless Child?--TheOneTrueJack 21:00, March 1, 2020 (UTC)

Well, as far as I can put it together, it's the 8 Timeless Child regenerations, at least 5 more, the 8 Morbius regenerations, Ruth, 4 more, Hartnell - Matt, Capaldi - Present. We know that the Timeless Child regenerations and the Morbius ones can't be the same cycle as the Doctor was kidified after each 13, so it seems. So Jodie is not, at least the 27th Doctor now.--HarryPotterRules1 21:16, March 1, 2020 (UTC)
If we take it that The Timeless Child was at the start of Time Lord society and for whatever reason was never cryogenically frozen or forced into the future. Then it stands to reason that he/she is as old as Time Lord society. In The Ultimate Foe who we used to call The Sixth Doctor says that they've been around for 10 Million years. Now if we take The Eleventh Doctors life of 1100 years as a measure for a standard regenerations life span as this was the longest and seemed to die of natural causes. Then at MINIMUM The Doctor has had 9,091 lives which are not including any that were cut short by falling off any cliffs or mother figures experimenting on them. --Thebobbrom 23:53, March 2, 2020 (UTC)
It seems like the Thirteen lives rule was put in place much later on. So that wouldn't apply to the Timeless Child incarnations --TheOneTrueJack 21:24, March 1, 2020 (UTC)
Except we can't call any of those before Hartnell any variant of the [number] Doctor. Cause if we do that we'll have to re-route, in no exaggeration, the "ENTIRE" Wikia from scratch. --DCLM 21:29, March 1, 2020 (UTC)
Well obviously we can't do that. The Morbius Doctors can be referred to as such, and the Timeless Child incarnations can be included in the Timeless Child page. But should they both (as two sperate groups) be put in the More Ambiguous section of the Doctor's incarnations? And how much should the main Doctor page talk about them? The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheOneTrueJack (talk • contribs) .

Well, that's the thing. I don't believe the Doctor is bound to the 13 lives. The Timelords just sort of "kid-i-fied" the Doctor again when he reached the end of his 13 "lives"; that's what the whole Brendan stuff was. The Doctor believed he was bound to the 13 "lives" because he didn't remember anything before hand. But, in actuality, he wasn't bound to it at all. So it could literally be the 8 on the table plus 5 more - then kid-i-fied and made to forget - then the 8 morbius, Ruth and 4 more - then Kid-i-fied and made to forget - then Hartnell onwards and the Timelords only gave the "new" cycle to the Doctor to hide their lie.--HarryPotterRules1 21:46, March 1, 2020 (UTC)

That would make sense if the Time Lords didn't have to restore the Doctor's regeneration ability in The Time of the Doctor. Though if they restored the Doctor's original ability, it would explain the ambiguity of how many regenerations the Doctor has now.--WarGrowlmon18 21:55, March 1, 2020 (UTC)
The Brendan stuff was a cover-story to hide the truth about the Time Lords' beginning. Brendan, his parents, the Sergeant etc. never existed. They were images layered on top of the real truth. --DCLM 22:00, March 1, 2020 (UTC)
The Timeless Child could regenerate indefinitely. But THE DOCTOR was limited to 13 lives. That's not really a matter of perspective. It was seen that the Doctor could only regenerate 12 times. This means that the limitation of 12 regenerations was also bestowed on the Doctor, or maybe perhaps after they "stopped" being the Timeless Child. --DCLM 22:02, March 1, 2020 (UTC)
That's my point. Did they restore it? I believe the Doctor was bound to the 13 body limits because he believed he was. He actually wasn't - he just thought he was because he believed he was a Timelord, when he isn't - he's something different. The Timelords gave him a "new" cycle to hide the truth of what he was - constantly and continually able to regenerate.--HarryPotterRules1 22:04, March 1, 2020 (UTC)
The Doctor IS a Time Lord. You can't get around that. However as the Seventh Doctor said "I'm far more than just another Time Lord". And he WAS limited down. That's what they did, as other media stories have explained was done at some point to the Time Lord race. --DCLM 22:09, March 1, 2020 (UTC)
No, wrong. We know now that the Doctor is not a Timelord. The Doctor is an entirely different species who was studied by the original Timelord/Shebogan to create regeneration. The Doctor only believed she/he was a Timelord. --HarryPotterRules1 22:18, March 1, 2020 (UTC)
I'm up with Harry. The Doctor is not a Timelord anymore, but the "ancestor" species of the Time Lords: a Timeless Child (not official name but just to make it clear). --Con Carne (Di la verdad, o cobras...) 10:09, March 2, 2020 (UTC)
No. The Doctor was MADE into a Time Lord. Also whoever changed the page, please don't just change it without a conclusion to this. Con Carne, don't just make a change this major. It needs proper discussion. You and Harry agreeing, doesn't alone make it so. We need proper consultation that admins also join in on before we can just decide something this major. --DCLM 10:19, March 2, 2020 (UTC)

This is a discussion for the Board of Discussions. I'll make a thread. --DCLM 10:21, March 2, 2020 (UTC)

Just one thing, it wasn't me, I haven't changed anything in the article. :( --Con Carne (Di la verdad, o cobras...) 11:49, March 2, 2020 (UTC)
I know, that was my bad. I didn't looks properly. Sorry about that. I DID change my statement to say "whoever changed the page". Sorry for the mistunderstanding. --DCLM 11:53, March 2, 2020 (UTC)

How did you make the docpic slideshow?[[edit source]]

How did you make the slideshow feature/template entitled "docpic" inside the infobox? I'd like to achieve something similar for a wiki I'm working on. JustWilhelm 10:10, July 27, 2020 (UTC)

"The Doctor's Species"[[edit source]]

I agree that we should keep the "the doctor's species" under their species but why isn't there also "Time Lord" as well. Although the Doctor started life as whatever species they were when Tecteun found them, since Hartnell -> Whittaker, they have been bound to the thirteen incarnation cycles with two hearts and should unequivocably be called a time lord since being changed into one by the time lords using the chameleon arch (as hinted at by those Brendan scenes). The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cptjackhotness (talk • contribs) .

Hi! If The Doctor's species were the page about the species of the Timeless Child, you would be correct, but it's not. That's "Timeless Child's species". The page The Doctor's species is an overview detailing all the conflicting accounts of whether the Doctor is a Time Lord, a human, half-human, a member of the Timeless Child's species, etc.
Also, it's not evident that the Brendan scene corresponds to a chameleon arch specifically. It could just as easily have just been a deaging/mindwiping process. According to The Timeless Children the Shobogans became the Time Lords when Tecteun spliced DNA of the Timeless Child into them, so it's a perfectly valid interpretation that the Timeless Child was the original two-hearted binary-vascular-systemed species, and it's the Shobogans who were altered to resemble the Doctor, not the other way around. Scrooge MacDuck 13:26, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Usage of "Dr. Who"[[edit source]]

Okay, seeing as my edits on TV Comic stories have been questioned, I shall explain why I am using the name "Dr. Who" and how policy backs me up on this.

As a bit of context, the names "First Doctor" and "Second Doctor" were never used in the characters' original televised runs. The only times they are used are in stories such as PROSE: The Eight Doctors and other works by Terrance Dicks. (see more about Dicks' naming conventions over at Forum:Is using "First Doctor", "Second Doctor" etc in-universe?, however, me linking this does not mean I agree with the conclusion.)
These names have been retroactively applied to these characters, despite evidence from the television stories directly contradicting this, perhaps most notably in TV: The Power of the Daleks when the "Patrick Troughton" Doctor mentioned that the "regeneration" he undertook was a restorative feature of his TARDIS and that he had used it before, meaing that Troughton was not playing the "Second Doctor". (This also means there have been "Pre-Hartnell Doctors" from pretty early on folks!). A precedent notably seen over on Talk:Tzim-Sha#Rename and the various talk pages of Amy Pond, is that the name that the characters actually use to refer to themselves as takes precendent. So, in the case of the Doctor, this policy applies. We, as the rule abiding users, should use the name, the title that the Doctor chose for himself, which is in most stories, "the Doctor". In the case of TV Comic, "the Doctor" is short for "Dr. Who", so this indicates to me that "the Doctor" should be the name that is most widely used, and "Dr. Who" for his name in place of the regular usage of "[insert number here] Doctor", in sources that actually state that "Dr. Who" is the Doctor's full name of course. This also would be mean that "[insert number here] Doctor" would be acceptable if substantiated by the respective source.

Now, the argument has been made that "Dr. Who" is not as clear cut as "the [insert number here] Doctor", however, the aforementioned precedent I cited comes into play here. (Additionally, adjectives can be used to adequately describe which "Dr. Who" the source is talking about.) Due to the ruling by admin @Scrooge MacDuck...

Where you are correct is that with all the conflicting accounts of what this fellow calls himself, we should probably strive to use the names given by each individual sources in individually-sourced statement. Information from COMIC: 4-Dimensional Vistas does belong on this page, sorry. But a paragraph sourced to that story should refer to him as "the Time Meddler", not "the Monk". And so on.@Scrooge MacDuck

...as stated at Talk:The Monk/Archive 1#Article made from whole cloth, accompanied by the polcies given by Tardis:Valid sources, we should use the name of the character as given within the story, regardless of whether or not another story uses a different name. The Doctor refers to himself as "Dr. Who"? That is the name we use. An example of this, as aforementioned admin @Scrooge MacDuck gave at User talk:Danochy, is COMIC: 4-Dimensional Vistas, which uses the name "The Time-Meddler" to refer to the Monk as "The Time-Meddler" was the name given in the source; this name is perfectly acceptable for use so long as it is cited by its respective story, despite "the Monk" being a more well-known name. There is an exception to this, which is that the character's best known name should be used in infoboxes, for clarity. I, admittedly, did not know this, however as soon as it was brought up, I immediately backtracked and switched "Dr. Who" for "First Doctor" becuase I wanted to follow the policies exactly

Furthermore, I am also backed up by Tardis:Neutral point of view, which states quite clearly at the top of the page...

Media doesn't matter. One of the most important aspects of this wiki is that all media have equal weight here. Television is not the most important source of information on this wiki. That which is said in a short story in the 1967 Doctor Who Annual, or a Faction Paradox audio drama, is just as valid as the latest episode of BBC Wales Doctor Who.T:NPOV

...therefore, the names retroactively applied to the Hartnell and Troughton Doctors do not supersede "Dr. Who".

Despite this, I am not advocating for the name "Dr. Who" to be intergrated into the pages of sources that do not use it. Even so, this change being implemented into the pages of television and other notable sources will obviously require a Forum thread, owing to the controversial nature of this proposed name change. Additionally, a name change towards certain incarnations of the Doctor may be beneficial, seeing as certain major plot threads state that William Hartnell's Doctor was not the first. Another note against the current naming of the Doctors is that their names are barely even substantiated by any valid sources, so perhaps a new naming style like with the Monk may actually be the best course of action. The Doctor (An Unearthly Child), The Doctor (Planet of the Spiders), etc will likely be better for compliance with T:NPOV. I am rambling though, and this is really its own separate discussion that of course should be brought to the Forums when @CzechOut works out the problems, so I'll stop talking about this and focus on this little facet of the problem that can be resolved without much effort or discussion.

I will mention however, as my actions are well within policy, and I only changing the names in stories published by TV Comic, which again, unambiguously uses the name "Dr. Who". I suspect that my actions will continue to be correct despite certain objections held by editors, but do remember, Tardis:You are bound by current policy and Tardis:Canon policy apply, in case if anybody is thinking that them simply objecting to this on a talk page will be enough to overturn policy or that if TV Comic is non-canonical.

14:51, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I largely agree with the direction of these edits, but don't forget about T:DOCTORS. On the page for a TV Comic story, I agree that we should use the name for the Doctor used in that story, with the exact incarnation number specified in the lede or the notes section; but on other pages, it's important for comprehensability's sake that each Doctor be identified by incarnation, T:NPOV be damned. I'm partial to "the first Dr. Who", myself. – n8 () 20:31, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Yep, I'm in 100% agreement with N8 here. Specify "First Doctor" or "First Dr. Who" where necessary for the sake of clarity, specify "Dr. Who" or "The Doctor" (as appropriate to the text) following the initial numerical identifier.
Also, is the quote where 2 mentions having regenerated before really in the TV serial? I'm certain it originated in the 1993 novelisation. I.e. it's a reference to The Doctor (The Brain of Morbius). In fact, Epsilon, your argument against numbering falls apart when you consider The Brain of Morbius, as the same logic would suggest we can't even refer to Tom Baker's Doctor from that era as the Fourth Doctor! Danochy 20:49, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
That bit in the novelization was based on a deleted scene from the original script. But even then, for a long time it was thought that Ian coined the title "the Doctor" and passed it along to other companions via word-of-mouth. (For instance, the First Doctor on TV never really referred to himself as "the Doctor".) So even if there were any number of incarnations before Hartnell, he still would have been the "First Doctor". – n8 () 20:58, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
No, no, I am pretty sure it was mentioned in the television serial. And actually, the Fourth Doctor shouldn't be used on Baker's Doctor, as up until The Deadly Assassin, he wasn't the Fourth Doctor, especially as The Brain of Morbius literally showed that he had multiple incarnations before Hartnell. So "Fourth Doctor" is really not a good name. As for the "Dr. Who" bit, if an incarnation is to be used, it should be styled as "first Dr. Who", in accordance with Tardis:Doctors, though I would still prefer ditching the numbering system in accounts where it is blatantly untrue. As for what the Doctor calls himself, there is a f deal of evidence to show that he refers to himself as "the Doctor" and "Dr. Who". 21:16, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
It's nice that you're "pretty sure" it was mentioned, but I am absolutely certain that it wasn't.
I've said this to you before: the single purpose of every wiki is to be legible and usable, and all the other rules are in service of that goal. So if a rule makes a wiki less legible or usable, it bends. (Check out Interference - Book Two if you want to see this in action.) What would it look like if we got rid of T:DOCTORS and the numbering system? What did it look like on The Power of the Daleks after your edits to it? Every user would have to hover over every instance of "the Doctor" or "Dr. Who" to see what dab term was pipe switched away. And that would be neither legible nor usable.
Whether "Fourth Doctor" is a good name has nothing to do with what he called himself or how it fits with T:NPOV, and it has everything to do with the fact that "Fourth Doctor" is his universally recognized name. If T:DOCTORS breaks T:NPOV, T:DOCTORS wins every single time. You're doing nothing but hurting your case and wasting your time by complaining about numbering rather than focusing on more limited compromises that might be actually achievable. – n8 () 12:31, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
I am once again in agreement with Nate. Changing the name to "Dr. Who" in the comic plot summaries is all well and good, but changing it on actors pages is pretty pedantic (and the redirect just plain pointless). Yes in the 60s, William Hartnell was not known as the "First Doctor", but this wiki is not being read in the 60s, it is being read in the 21st century and the people of the 21st century know him as the First Doctor (and have done for decades). And changing all accounts of "the x Doctor" to "Dr Who" or "the Doctor" (such as The Power of the Daleks edit) is massively confusing and unhelpful.
P.S. Apologies, Epsilon for not replying to your message on my talk page. When I saw that you had created this thread, I figured this would be a more appropriate place to put my thoughts. LauraBatham 12:59, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
I’m no expert on wiki policy, but I would agree that there’s a need for the wiki to be easily legible and usable by readers. Referring to the Doctor as Dr Who specifically in the context of TV Comic stories seems reasonable, but renaming all the Doctors as variants of The Doctor (An Unearthly Child) would be potentially difficult for readers to navigate and put this wiki out of touch with 99% of discussion around Doctor Who where the Doctors are referred to by those familiar numbers. I don’t think the recent developments changes this at all, as a previous revelation also altered the numbering of the Doctors’ incarnations but the norm of referring to Eccleston’s Doctor as the Ninth Doctor, Tennant’s as Tenth, Smith’s as Eleventh etc has remained the same. SherlockTheII 16:54, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm sorry, Epsilon, but dabbed page names for First Doctor onwards are simply never going to happen. And infoboxes should use a name that is specific to the page we are linking. If we had some other in-universe moniker specific to the Troughton Doctor, then perhaps it would be worth weighing that option… but we cannot start putting just "Dr Who", or indeed "The Doctor", in the |doctor= field of infoboxes. This helps no one whatsoever.
Using "Dr. Who", and refraining from using "First" or "Second", makes sense for plot summaries, as well as for the writing of paragraphs cited to these stories. Yes, plot description of, say, The Highlanders should not mention "the Second Doctor", just "the Doctor" or "Dr Who". But that doesn't mean that the legibility essentially real-world constructs such as infoboxes (whether it be the story's infobox or the actors') should be compromised — nor that it is false to refer to the man in The Highlanders as the Second Doctor in an in-universe sense. He is in fact "the Second Doctor" — albeit "according to some accounts". Thus, while we must not give the impression that the story uses this name, "the Second Doctor lived through these events" is a valid statement within the wider the DWU.
The thing about T:NPOV is that it mostly applies to what statements we make about the DWU, not how pages are named. Because pages cannot truly have several names at once, we necessarily have to "prioritise" one version over another when a character has several valid names. T:NPOV still has its place in terms of making sure that, for example, it is not "TV by default" that wins this assessment, rather than the name that actually makes the most sense and best reflects DWU sources in aggregate. But it is not inherently a T:NPOV breach to say Troughton was the Second Doctor just because some stories number the Doctors differently. Scrooge MacDuck 17:51, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
I am endorsing what Scrooge MacDuck, LauraBatham and NateBumber have said, above. Standardisation is necessary on a wiki (and universe) of this size, especially where characters as central as the Doctor are concerned.
Also of note, as to why T:DOCTORS trumps any T:NPOV arguments: even with the last decade of Doctor Who on television firmly renumbering the Doctor's incarnations, in one way or another, "Twelfth Doctor" is a title, not always an accurate description.
This is where capitalising Twelfth, by convention, happens to also give the right idea: he is not necessarily the Doctor's twelfth incarnation, but he is, by most sources and common understanding, the "Twelfth Doctor". We decided in 2013 to stick with this and not confuse things, and we are not going back on that. The wiki would unfortunately be quite illegible.
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   08:35, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Fugitive Doctor Placement (Infobox)[[edit source]]

After Once, Upon Time, should the Fugitve Doctor be moved from "Others/Unplaced Incarnations" to "Widley Accpeted"? That story does confirm her to be a pre-Hartnell incarnation that worked for The Division. Or should we wait until this era is done, on the off chance they show an actual regeneration/transition. Perhpas even from her to the The First Doctor, somehow.

TheOneTrueJack 21:59, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

"Widely accepted" is really for the "main line-up", as it were, not just for characters who are "definitely the Doctor" in their portrayal. No one is denying The Doctor (Contents) counts, but they don't belong. I suppose, if there were a direct regeneration into Harntell, the question could be raised of slotting Martin in that row, but so long as she remains, as it were, "free-floating" without a number or explicit precise placement, she doesn't belong there. Scrooge MacDuck 22:11, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

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

At almost exactly the same time as User:Scrooge MacDuck closed Tardis:Temporary forums/Archive/Replacing docpic, I finalised a mock-up of a potential solution to allow us to keep the chronilogical ordering of tabs while having the most recent incarnation selected by default, shown to the right (and on User:Bongolium500/Sandbox 7). Pretty much, the image listed earliest in the gallery is always the one that is selected by default. CSS can then be used to move this tab to the end of the row when the page is viewed. Therefore, the image for the most recent incarnation can be listed first and is then simply moved to the end by CSS. Currently, and temporarily, this is done by wrapping the infobox in a <div>, but a new infobox field could easily be added to allow this to be enabled on any infobox. The only issue I can think of is with mobile: CSS doesn't work there so the images will be displayed in the order they're listed, regardless of any changes made to their order with CSS. Bongo50 22:02, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

If the mobile issue is deemed to large, I have another potential solution which would avoid it using JavaScript. However, this would cause the first tab to initially be selected before jumping to the last tab during page load which may also be undesirable. Bongo50 22:08, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm fully in support of this. Cousin Ettolrahc 22:27, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

I still don't understand why…[[edit source]]

…the infobox images for each Doctor are completely different from those used on the individual pages? WaltK 20:06, 16 November 2023 (UTC)


Fourteenth Doctor tab pic[[edit source]]

We'll definitely find better images as the specials progress, but for right now I'd like to propose we make the Fourteenth Doctor tab's pic on this page be 14 never here.png. Just a better aspect ratio and look at the character than what we have right now. -- MattTheNerd42 17:48, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't think this suggested image is suitable at all. The subject of an image needs to be clearly visible when it's a thumbnail and most of the image is the TARDIS exterior. Jack "BtR" Saxon 17:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Article picture aspect ratios[[edit source]]

The aspect ratios for the pictures of Doctors 1 - 13 are the same, but 14 and 15 have different sizes. If someone knows how to make them equal to the others, I suggest they do so. Wozza123 18:19, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

NGL I think we should seize this opportunity to overhaul most, if not all, of the images. They all have that annoying "crop out the forehead" crop that is not necessary now (or even ever, technically, people just misunderstood what counted as part of a person's face) and the overall resolution of a lot of these images are also low. 21:12, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Matching individual article pages[[edit source]]

Shouldn't the images be the same as on the individual incarnation pages? Aquanafrahudy 📢 🖊️ 22:14, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
I think Aquanafrahudy has a good point. Would be nice to update them all to match their respective pages. FractalDoctor 01:03, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
As I did on the other version of the Wiki, I've gone ahead and updated the infobox gallery so that each Docpic matches their respective Docpic on their page. When we make a decision on 14 and 15's final images, we can then update this one to match. Surely this just makes sense. We could maybe crop them all in due course so they're all the same aspect ratio too? — Fractal Doctor 21:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
This has now been undone, so I guess I'll instead second Aquanafrahudy's suggestion above. Personally, I'm not even sure why the images here would be different to the ones on each individual page. At the very least, these images really could do with updated versions because most are very poor quality and haven't been updated with higher quality ones since 2014. I notice not only have myself and Aquanafrahudy mentioned it, but WaltK also raised the question back in November 2023 too. — Fractal Doctor 18:42, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Just to add: on the page for The Master, each image used in the infobox correlates / is the same as the one used on each individual incarnation's respective page. Not sure why the Doctor is different then in this respect. — Fractal Doctor 19:24, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Bringing this back because I feel it's a valid discussion to have. Not sure why the images on this page wouldn't mirror those on each respective Doctor's page... especially since several are very low-quality, 6 is a promo photo (I think), 8 is a different aspect ratio, War is weirdly framed/cropped, some images are different sizes, 12 is just outright unflattering, 14 is quite dark, etc. Fractal 20:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree but I think User:SOTO is opposed. It would be good to hear why. Bongo50 20:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Radio silence. I know infobox images aren't the biggest priority of the Wiki, but ones for major characters are, and it's silly that we have a newly refreshed Wiki which we showcase as being modernised and up to date... and not only do the infobox images here not match their respective Doctor pages, but they're also of very low quality, and we've been stuck with them for literally years now. Fractal 18:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I am strongly opposed to having the tabbed gallery on [[The Doctor]] match the individual incarnation pages, but I am in support of revamping our image selection here.

I see no reason not to showcase different images on each of these high-visibility pages, especially as image discussions for the individual Doctors will often come up with really good runner-ups (and/or variant images for two different eras, within that Doctor's life: ex. Eighth Doctor, Eleventh Doctor).

That said, since we no longer use {{docpic}}, we are no longer constrained like we were way back in 2013. So yes, we should at the very least be using higher-quality versions of these images, and I'm not sure we (necessarily) need to restrict them all to exactly the same dimensions, either.

I'll post a proposal shortly with some suggestion replacement images (again, not in favour of doing the hasty thing and just overriding them with images agreed upon by discussion for those incarnations' pages). Then we can build as a community from there. And ultimately come to a decision on the new roster.

Time for some progress on this, certainly.
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   01:51, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Now posted below.
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   05:51, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

New infobox images! (2024 edition)[[edit source]]

As explained above, we're now looking to revamp our image roster for the main Doctor page. This has gone largely unchanged since 2013, apart from the addition of more recent incarnations of course...

Here is my proposal. I've had this on the back burner for a good while. Time to start this off. I've included a sample infobox with the actual tabs, so you can get a good sense.

And here is a regular gallery, which you can all add to. The only real rules are 1. that it cannot be what's already used on the incarnation page (I suppose, unless you're concretely proposing swapping them around...), and 2. that Classic Doctors should be in 4:3, while New Who Doctors' images should at least approximate modern aspect ratios.

Fittingly, I thought, in my proposal, I elected to make Eight's image a middle ground between the dimensions used for Classic Who and New Who.

Well. Let the games commence...
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   05:51, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Gallery[[edit source]]

Discussion[[edit source]]

I think most of these are all right, but I'm not a fan of the picture of the War Doctor given that most of it is wall. Jack 10:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, SOTO, for setting this up. You've convinced me that it'd be best to use different images from those on respective Doctor pages, for the sake of variety. I like all of your proposed images, apart from those for 8 and War. I feel the one for the War Doctor is too much background, and the picks for 8 are just too dark. I wonder if there'd be a consensus on whether the image for 8 should be from the 1996 TV Movie, or the 2013 minisode, or if it'd be split. I would argue the TV Movie might have better options, brighter imagery, and is the basis for his definitive looks, but I can also see value in showcasing him from later in his life as depicted in the 2013 minisode too.
I have added a couple of images. Granted, they're not all "facing to the left" but we have previously established that this is more of a preferred guideline unless there are better alternatives that don't adhere to this. Fractal 11:33, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
In the original 2013 discussion, we established that Eight should have his TNOTD look here, for the sake of having both represented.
It is worth noting that Paul McGann himself disliked his original look, and wanted something like his Dark Eyes look after seeing Eccleston in his leather jacket. In ongoing Big Finish (and, notably, TV: The Power of the Doctor [+]Loading...["The Power of the Doctor (TV story)"], meaning his TVM look is now in the minority on television), this is what he looks like.
That said, yes, that minisode is rather dark. "8 (B)" has slightly better lighting. I'm not opposed to going for a TVM screenshot this time, so long as it's an improvement, though it is a shame. (Power would be perfect, but that's only a mental construct.)
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   15:44, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
In particular, I quite like "8 (C)".
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   15:46, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Of those available, I like "8 (C)" even though it's similar to the image we have on the Eighth Doctor page... are there rules against artificially brightening an image, even just slightly? If we could do that, a screencap from the 2013 minisode would work IMO. It's just harder to 'read' if we use dark images.
And fair enough regarding equal representation and McGann's own thoughts - it's nice that he's been able to evolve his costume, even if only via Big Finish covers etc. We all know Colin hated his costume but he's been stuck with that ever since, barring rare variants like the blue one. I think, for McGann, "8 (B)" would work if we could tweak and brighten it slightly. Fractal 16:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
I've adjusted the lighting slightly on that image. (Compare at File:Docpic8b.jpg, where the full file history is available. Note that the original version, by User:CzechOut, was highly colour corrected. I've done a subtler job this time, I feel.)
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   18:31, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Added some more images of the War Doctor. IMHO some of these are good candidates for the Infobox on his own page.

17:41, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

I think "War (E)" is by far the best one yet!
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   18:16, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
I agree, "War (E)" is great. Fractal 18:55, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Here's how it looks with "8 (C)" (best TVM option, IMO), by the way. I'm hoping for some good submissions for the Seventh Doctor, to cap it off. I was having trouble sourcing high-quality screenshots for him.

EDIT: Trying out "War (F)" at the same time; another candidate I really like.

EDIT 2: A really cool feature of "War (F)" is that it matches the Ninth Doctor's eyeline! So you have the devastation on Gallifrey behind War, and then switch to the Ninth Doctor haunted by that memory (actively telling Rose about the Time War). This one has my vote!
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   19:08, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

If McGann's thoughts are playing even a minor role in image selection, I think it's only fair to consider Colin Baker's as well so I've added a couple of options without The Coat. Jack 19:32, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

(And here's with alternate Time War McGann. I think it rather works, as well!!)
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   23:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Oh, and I like "6 (E)" best among the non-rainbow ones, although I'm hesitant about using a one-time outfit for this.
McGann is a special situation, in that 2/3 of his TV appearances and multiple eras of Big Finish have him in his Dark Eyes getup. This is a significant (though not overwhelming) portion of his appearances across the EU; more prominent, even, than Eleven's 7B look, which he also lived and died in, in the end.
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   02:06, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
@SOTO well you've forgotten WC: Shada [+]Loading...["Shada (webcast)"]. The "TV Movie" outfit appears in two television-based stories (yes, Shada should count as television, it's a visual serial you can literally get on Blu-ray) and the "war" outfit appears in two television-based stories. 02:15, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Oh and also I think it would be better if we just used 4:3 aspect ratios for all the images. It'll be consistent then, and deadspace can be more easily removed. Especially for late Chibnall ers and beyond, as the aspect ratio is now wider than 16:9 as anamorphic lens are being used. 02:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Compare '15 (B)' and '15 (C)', for example. 02:32, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
I wouldn't be opposed to cropping them all to 4:3! That's probably the right idea.
Certainly, the current aspect ratio (as demonstrated in your 15 pics) needs to be cropped down to match the others. Beyond that, I do like your images from Rogue; "15 (H)" in particular. (Since Fifteen has so many outfits, I don't think we should constrain ourselves to one particular look for him.)
I think "8 (F)" and "15 (B)" — in their current crops, certainly — should be disqualified, as they both prominently feature two characters. We should assume an unknowledgeable reader is going through this infobox (and has already seen the Thirteenth Doctor, a blonde woman, two incarnations back). I do think the War Doctor image with several obscured background characters is fine, for the record, as he's clearly the subject of the image.
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   06:18, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
"15 (C)" is another good one, and demonstrates 4:3 for modern Doctors well. But I won't be the first to say this: Shada just looks bad in a modern context. And it would be odd to use an animated screenshot for just this one Doctor, when he has appeared extensively enough in live-action, to match the others.
(That said, if one of the Doctors were to be represented by a non-live action image, it should be the Eighth Doctor, who's famously much more of an EU Doctor. ...Actually, should we consider using a comic image? 👀)
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   06:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
(Whether WC: Shada should count as television is a whole other kettle of fish, best reserved for the forums. But I will concede that there's an argument to be made that there's a 50/50 split, yes.)
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   06:28, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
I do agree Shada doesn't look great but I feel it should still be technically considered. But there are definitely better images to choose from.
Also, TBQH Shada is not really that different from the animations of missing episodes, except for the animation quality being worse. But that's for another time. (And technically Night is a webcast but people wrangled some way it could be covered as a "(TV story)".) 06:32, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't be opposed to cropping them to 4:3, so they're all the same proportion and we can focus in on each Doctor's face. I would oppose the use of Shada for the 8th Doctor, as I think we should stick to live action for consistency, even if a particular character has been used more in expanded universe material. We're also not considering any animated images for Troughton's Doctor even though a lot of his era is now retroactively animated. For McGann, I like 8 (A) and 8 (B). I'm also not huge on 15 (F-J) because of how dark and shadowy the images are. [While I'm here, may I also suggest that 10 (A) could be a great image for the 10th Doctor's own page - the discussion over on his Talk page just stopped dead in its tracks, and he could really do with an update] Fractal 10:52, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

SOTO, a couple may need a little tweak/crop, but I've added some options for McCoy's Doctor to the gallery for consideration Fractal 11:12, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Also added a couple more options for other Doctors :) Fractal 11:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Added '8 (I)', but I don't think it should count given it's a mental manifestation, like how we don't use that one image of Charlotte Pollard from a dream sequence in that Titan comic book. 12:56, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Added some more. I strongly feel that we shouldn't use images where the Doctor's forehead is cropped out, it looks ugly and makes it hard to discern their characteristics. I also fully agree with Epsilon's suggestion that all images should be cropped to 4:3 (and have cropped my suggestions accordingly). My current preferences are as follows:
  • 1 - B
  • 2 - C
  • 3 - E
  • 4 - A
  • The image of 5 is fine.
  • 6 - I or P is probably best
  • 7 - H
  • 8 - C. I get the desire to showcase NotD, but it's really crappily lit for infobox images. Perhaps ::::a Big Finish cover?
  • War - D, by a long way.
  • 9 - C, then E.
  • 10 - That one's fine
  • 11 - A
  • 12 - F, then C
  • 13 - C
  • 14 - Probably B, but there's not much between that and the others.
  • 15 - C
- Aquanafrahudy 📢 🖊️ 22:37, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
As much as I love my original "2 (A)", "2 (B)" and "2 (C)" are magnificent! Those slot in remarkably well with "1 (A)" and "3 (A)"!
And there are some smashing suggestions for the Third Doctor (do remember, my friends, that we can discuss changing the Doctors' individual pages if a really good suggestion just doesn't mesh well with the other images in the gallery...), but ultimately I'm not sure "3 (A)" can be beaten for such a line-up. I know it's my own suggestion, but I'd be saying the same thing if the roles were reversed here... Some serious competition, though, for sure.
Also, looking again on my phone with the night filter on, I'm realising that "15 (G)" through "15 (J)" might also be too dark, at least unmodified.
I don't think we should seriously entertain "8 (I)", personally, on the basis that that isn't the real Eighth Doctor.
"6 (H)" is very nice. My vote, at this stage, would be between that and the original "6 (A)", ultimately in favour of H as the best option.
As for 7, I really like "7 (D)", "7 (F)" and "7 (G)". And I oppose my own suggestion for 7, now we've got many better options. As to which one I like the most, I'll have to try them each out in context...
(I would like to stress that we need to take a holistic view when choosing our final candidates. Please do explain why you like a certain candidate, if at all possible, especially in relation to your other preferred candidates, so we can do something better, in the end, than a simple tally.)
(Think variety. Think cohesion. Think eyeline matches, if that's what's important to you. Maybe the Seventh Doctor's eyeline being higher than the others is what you want. Maybe it takes you out of it...)
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   02:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Oh, and we dismissed it last time, but I don't see why we shouldn't at least consider some Big Finish covers. I know the general rule we follow (for good reason) is that we only use covers when no other sources are available to illustrate something... but consider this: the only TV/WC source we have for McGann's Dark Eyes look is (some are arguing) too dark to meet our requirements.
Also, of course, the big reason to use TV sources for the other Doctors, apart from visual consistency, is that those are all from their original eras. "McGann's era" is a nebulous concept, and you could even argue that his era didn't end until 2013, and actually overlapped with other Doctors. Or indeed that it's still ongoing, since we are still exploring new eras and new companions!
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   02:09, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Oh! "6 (K)" is also nice. 14's options are very nice, but dark.
For 13, it's between A and C for me, with a preference for A. I just think it's framed very well, and captures her energy. To be honest, I think we should use whichever one isn't selected here for Thirteenth Doctor.
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   06:31, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
I really love the new options for 5! Wowza. For 15, I would vote K and L over A. These are much better options, as they're from his actual era.
(Please don't let my request for expanding your thoughts dissuade you from contributing, by the way! All contributions welcome.)
×   SOTO contribs ×°//]   💬| {/-//:   22:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Of the options we have available, my preferences are:

  • 1B - captures Hartnell well, nicely framed too
  • 2C - mirrors Hartnell smiling, nicely framed, reads well with good lighting
  • 3C or 3G - slightly more serious Pertwee, head fully in frame, well lit
  • 4A or 4B or 4C - all of these are great, and I'd suggest we use one on the Fourth Doctor page too
  • 5A or 5G - just personal preference, no real argument, most shots of 5 are good here
  • 6H or 6I or 6P - I prefer seeing 6 in his usual costume, all three of these are well framed, and I like that he's smiling in them
  • 7C or 7F or 7H - hard to choose, if 7H then it could be slightly more cropped
  • 8C - again, could be slightly better cropped, but well lit and well framed
  • WarG - I like WarE but Tennant is sharing the frame, WarG is dark but lit well and shows the anguish of his incarnation
  • 9A - slightly haunting, cuts off his head a little but I think 9C is a bit dark
  • 10A - it's just a great image, and I wish we also had a better one for the Tenth Doctor page too [discussion there has stalled]
  • 11A or 11B - both showcase Smith's face well, and both are nicely framed
  • 12A - it's just the best lit one out of the selection, in my opinion
  • 13C - maybe cropped better, well lit, good framing, second place goes to 13A
  • 14? - no preference, they're all a bit dark for my liking
  • 15? - also no preference, they're all a bit dark and murky for my liking, I'd only rule out 15A because it's not really from his era but *shrug* Fractal 12:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Of the 15 ones, I'd say 15 (C) sticks out to me as the best option (although I do wish people would start using PNGs more over JPGs...). Cookieboy 2005 15:11, 24 December 2024 (UTC)