Howling:Bernard Horsfall - always Goth?: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
This seems to me to be a topic more suitable for the talk pages of the articles concerned. Mind you, there's no great harm in sounding out opinion here, first, before you decide what to say on those talk pages. --[[Special:Contributions/89.241.69.221|89.241.69.221]]<sup>[[User talk:89.241.69.221#top|talk to me]]</sup> 21:44, June 9, 2013 (UTC) | This seems to me to be a topic more suitable for the talk pages of the articles concerned. Mind you, there's no great harm in sounding out opinion here, first, before you decide what to say on those talk pages. --[[Special:Contributions/89.241.69.221|89.241.69.221]]<sup>[[User talk:89.241.69.221#top|talk to me]]</sup> 21:44, June 9, 2013 (UTC) | ||
I agree. Its the same with colin baker playing another time lord called maxil in the arc of infinity. Some writer said it was the sixth doctor in disguise. Why cant people just accept these are simply actors being re casted. We don't need an in0univere reason. See my separate howling discussion for more detail on in-universe subject. --[[User:Coop3|Coop3]] [[User talk:Coop3|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:37, June 28, 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:37, 28 June 2013
The articles for Goth and Gulliver state that "Gulliver" was always just Goth pretending. Is that correct? I know that in a later short story the Doctor returns to the Land of Fiction and meets Gulliver-who-turns-out-to-be-Goth, but that's surely not the same as saying Gulliver is Goth in "The Mind Robber" as well?!86.171.106.117talk to me 14:15, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
It might be the same for those who accept the short story. It cannot be for those (such as me) who've never even heard of the thing. In "The Mind Robber", as far as I'm concerned, Gulliver had the same status as the other characters from fiction that also appeared.
Having just (for the first time) looked at the 2 articles, I'd be inclined to say that they're too definite that the two were always the same. It would seem an instance where the rider "according to some accounts" (or "according to one account", if the singular is more appropriate) ought to be used.
This seems to me to be a topic more suitable for the talk pages of the articles concerned. Mind you, there's no great harm in sounding out opinion here, first, before you decide what to say on those talk pages. --89.241.69.221talk to me 21:44, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
I agree. Its the same with colin baker playing another time lord called maxil in the arc of infinity. Some writer said it was the sixth doctor in disguise. Why cant people just accept these are simply actors being re casted. We don't need an in0univere reason. See my separate howling discussion for more detail on in-universe subject. --Coop3 ☎ 23:37, June 28, 2013 (UTC)
