Talk:Cybermat: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(→‎Image: new section)
mNo edit summary
Tag: sourceedit
 
Line 6: Line 6:
== Categories ==
== Categories ==


I know that there isn't any definite information, but right now cybermats are in both the cyborgs and robots category.  These are two different things and I don't think they should be in both. The references in the article seem to indicate that they are cyborgs, so should I delete the "robots" category?  [[User:Mandalore74|Mandalore74]] <sup>[[User talk:Mandalore74|talk to me]]</sup> 18:20, October 25, 2011 (UTC)
I know that there isn't any definite information, but right now cybermats are in both the cyborgs and robots category.  These are two different things and I don't think they should be in both. The references in the article seem to indicate that they are cyborgs, so should I delete the "robots" category?  [[User:Mandalore74|Mandalore74]] <sup>[[User talk:Mandalore74|talk to me]]</sup> 18:20, October 25, 2011 (UTC)


== Image ==
== Image ==


Is it really necessary to have two pictures of cybermats in the infobox? These aren't like Time Lords who have regenerated, and we are not sure if they are like the Cybermen who are from different universes. Really, this would be the same as if we had an image from both ''The Daleks'' and ''Victory of the Daleks'' in the Dalek infobox. Besides, once we establish that we are going to have multiple cybermat images in the box, why should it be these two? What about the cybermats from ''Revenge of the Cybermen'', or the ones from that video game? Apart from Time Lords and things that we know existed in more than one universe, we should just have one main image.[[User:Icecreamdif|Icecreamdif]] <sup>[[User talk:Icecreamdif|talk to me]]</sup> 18:12, October 29, 2011 (UTC)
Is it really necessary to have two pictures of cybermats in the infobox? These aren't like Time Lords who have regenerated, and we are not sure if they are like the Cybermen who are from different universes. Really, this would be the same as if we had an image from both ''The Daleks'' and ''Victory of the Daleks'' in the Dalek infobox. Besides, once we establish that we are going to have multiple cybermat images in the box, why should it be these two? What about the cybermats from ''Revenge of the Cybermen'', or the ones from that video game? Apart from Time Lords and things that we know existed in more than one universe, we should just have one main image.[[User:Icecreamdif|Icecreamdif]] <sup>[[User talk:Icecreamdif|talk to me]]</sup> 18:12, October 29, 2011 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:50, 13 March 2015

Mentions[[edit source]]

When I was watching the Rebel Flesh the 11th doctor Ganger and the doctor talked about Cybermats and I thing in the box thing with the picture and apperances and stuff it should list mentions and have that episode listed like in other articels like the sonic screwdriver article with the mentions list of one.

Categories[[edit source]]

I know that there isn't any definite information, but right now cybermats are in both the cyborgs and robots category. These are two different things and I don't think they should be in both. The references in the article seem to indicate that they are cyborgs, so should I delete the "robots" category? Mandalore74 talk to me 18:20, October 25, 2011 (UTC)

Image[[edit source]]

Is it really necessary to have two pictures of cybermats in the infobox? These aren't like Time Lords who have regenerated, and we are not sure if they are like the Cybermen who are from different universes. Really, this would be the same as if we had an image from both The Daleks and Victory of the Daleks in the Dalek infobox. Besides, once we establish that we are going to have multiple cybermat images in the box, why should it be these two? What about the cybermats from Revenge of the Cybermen, or the ones from that video game? Apart from Time Lords and things that we know existed in more than one universe, we should just have one main image.Icecreamdif talk to me 18:12, October 29, 2011 (UTC)