Talk:War Doctor

	Archives: #1, #2

Narrative proof of the name: Doesn't it being in the credits of "Night of the Doctor" qualify as proof enough? Kamen Rider Phantom ☎ 22:11, November 23, 2013 (UTC)

Doctor's Death

I'm just curious, the War Doctor died of old age did he not? (I mean he did die because his body became too old and weak to function anymore) Since he and the 1st are would be the only two to have gone in that manner, is that enough to make the page, in a trivia section perhaps? Moogleknight24 ☎ 13:32, November 24, 2013 (UTC)Moogleknight24

Hang on, doesn't he say something like "Of course", when he realises he's regenerating? I assumed that to mean that he no longer needed to be a Warrior, so the Sisters of Karn's potion no longer applied.86.178.203.198^{talk to me} 17:29, June 29, 2014 (UTC)

Hurt as ninth Doctor

For me things are clear. Hurt is the ninth Doctor. There is multiple evidence for that. I'll try to stay chronological.

1) Episode "The Name of the Doctor": "Introducing John Hurt as the Doctor"

2) Webisode "Night of the Doctor": McGann regenerates into Hurt. Hurt credited as the War Doctor.

3) Just as Hurt is about to press that red crystal in the Special Tennant and Smith say: "All those burying you in my memory. Pretending you didn't exist. Keeping you a secret even from myself. Pretending you weren't the Doctor when you were the Doctor more than anybody else. You were the Doctor on the day it was impossible to get it right. But this time you don't have to do it alone". This quote shows two things. First - newer Doctors admit Hurt is the Doctor. He always was but subsequent incarnations tried to keep a memory of him hidden. They were ashamed of what he did. Secondly - they understood whatever decision he made was a bad one. They decided to press that button together. This means they were ready to kill Daleks and Time Lords. Doesn't it make them not worthy of the title "Doctor" too? That's why I'm against all those word games with "Doctor", "War Doctor", "Warrior".

4) "This time it's three of us"

5) Smith: "Gallifrey High Command, this is the Doctor speaking", Tennant: "Hello! Also the Doctor, hear me?", Hurt: "Also the Doctor. Standing ready".

6) "All twelve of them.", "No Sir - all thirteen!" (Hurt and Capaldi among them).

7) Smith addresses Hurt as Doctor.

8) Hurt knows he'll only remember trying to destroy Gallifrey. "But for now, for this moment I am the Doctor again". It just shows he alone, internally didn't consider himself as the Doctor. It was his conciousness that made him throw away his title.

9) Hurt regenerates into Eccleston.

10) All Doctors stare at Gallifrey. Hurt among them. Why would he be there if he wasn't the Doctor?

11) End titles. Hurt credited as the Doctor.

12) Hurt's face appears after McGann's and before Eccleston's.

Each of us has their own views but I think it's common sense if Hurt is acknowledged as the ninth Doctor. An encyclopaedia should show things as they are. It should be logical, not philosophical. There shouldn't be room for interpretation. Only facts. And facts say Hurt is the ninth incarnation of that particular Time Lord who calls himself "the Doctor". Even if it means a lot of work changing titles of articles, altering redirections I think it should be done. Otherwise - what's the point of maintaining the Tardis Data Core?

EDIT: I just read the announcement from CzechOut. Probably no one gives a damn what I think but I appreciate there are others who think of Hurt as a true Ninth incarnation. Just wanted to say one more thing. CzechOut says it's only Smith's Doctor who is fully aware of the whole situation. I want to ask then - from what point of view is this Wikia written? Other Wikias about about franchises - for example Star Trek or Star Wars are written as if everything they describe happened in the past. Obviously we can't write about things that WILL happen in the series. I feel that leaving things as they are because of past incarnations' ego is not right. Jamjumetley ☎ 15:03, November 24, 2013 (UTC)

Word of God (Steven Moffat) says that numbering will be unaffected. Merchandise will probably refer to Hurt as the War Doctor. And CzechOut is right, Eccleston and Tennant's Doctors do consider themselves to be 9 and 10 - and likewise, Smith's incarnation believed for the majority of his life that he was the 11th to use the name "Doctor". They know of the Hurt incarnation's existence but don't remember that he accepted the name. Thus the War Doctor will not be called the Ninth Doctor.  Digifiend  Talk  PR/SS  KR  MH  Toku  JD  Garo  TH  CG  UM  Logos  CLG  DW  15:29,24/11/2013 

Jamjumetley, I have a suggestion for you. Browse the wiki to get an idea how many times the NuWho doctors are referred to by number. Most of the time they're not even linked, which would make them harder to find. The act of changing all the nines to tens, etc. is just way too much work for the editors of this wiki, when there is so much other work to be done. Shambala108 ☎ 15:54, November 24, 2013 (UTC)

I know I'm a pain in the backside and my moaning will probably not change anything but I'll try anyway ;)

About Moffat. I believe that what we see in episodes is in force. Not what even Moffat says in the interviews. The reason is he's a producer and he'll say anything to keep a secret until the premiere. He even admitted during the after party on BBC3 he can finally stop lying :)

About the memory. All subsequent Doctors know Hurt is their past incarnation. The only thing none of the Doctors (except for Smith's) won't remember is that they all saved Gallifrey. Eccleston, Tennant and Smith didn't believe they were 9, 10 and 11. They just refused to acknowledge Hurt. That has changed and Smith's Doctor doesn't hide his ninth incarnation any more. That means Capaldi is the last incarnation and it will be a major thing in the series to show what the producers will come up with to justify giving him additional regenerations. Hurt's not outside of the twelve regenerations limit.

@Shambala108 Then let's admit openly that the only reason for not updating things is that it's too much of a work to change all that. Otherwise it's a bit like not telling the whole truth.

And sorry for writing initially in the archive section ;) Jamjumetley ☎ 16:20, November 24, 2013 (UTC)

Jamjumetley, the War Doctor is the ninth incarnation. He doesn't need to be the Ninth Doctor, because we already have a Ninth Doctor (the technical tenth incarnation). "Doctor" and "incarnation" are not necessarily the same thing. The "Ninth Doctor" is the title and so is the "War Doctor." The latter involves special circumstances, whether it's from the Doctor's own perspective or the audience's. I do feel it should be noted that their incarnations differ from their titles on their individual pages, but leaving their titles/aliases as War and Nine makes perfect sense. Mewiet ☎ 16:36, November 24, 2013 (UTC)

Jamjumetley, please don't twist my words, especially after you admit reading Czechout's explanation of policy. I just wanted you to see the magnitude of the task you are setting others. Shambala108 ☎ 16:55, November 24, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry if you misunderstood me Shambala108. It wasn't my intention to twist your words. Hope you don't hold grudge against me. I probably didn't voice my opinion clearly. It doesn't help that the whole case is complicated though...

Mewiet, I really understand all of that. I really do. I view your idea as a good compromise. It might resolve some confusion. The problem is that the word "Doctor" can refer to the character (then all portraying actors are the Doctor) or specific incarnation.

I saw an article today about what Moffat said ("Wait a moment! You said you disregard his words!" - you might say). It's a bit different now because he doesn't have any secrets at the moment. Of course nothing's written in the stone but... it feels sound ;) He said:

He has no more ever called himself the 11th Doctor than he would call himself Matt Smith. The Doctor doesn’t know off the top of his head [what number he is]

If you worry about such things, and I do, then I specifically said John Hurt’s Doctor doesn’t use the title. [Matt Smith's Doctor] is in his 12th body but he’s the 11th Doctor, however there is no such character as the 11th Doctor – he’s just the Doctor – that’s what he calls himself.

The numbering doesn’t matter, except for those lists, that you and I have been making for many years, he said. So I’ve given you the option of not counting John Hurt numerically – he’s the War Doctor.

Paul McGann turns into John Hurt so they’re not the same incarnation, said Moff. He used up another regeneration and I’ll expect he’ll be in trouble shortly – you can’t break rules laid down in the Deadly Assassin.

Source: http://metro.co.uk/2013/11/24/doctor-who-steven-moffat-clears-up-the-whole-doctor-regeneration-problem-sort-of-4199592/

Taking all that into consideration - the numbering is artificial. The title is only a symbol. In reality they all are just different stages of the same person. Frankly - that's what I always thought. They are ALL the same entity - the Doctor.

Sorry for stirring things up :P Jamjumetley ☎ 18:12, November 24, 2013 (UTC)

I am not an editor of this wiki but I would like to point out it wouldn't be a lot of work if you have access to a bot. Just make sure you change 11 -> 12 before changing 10 -> 11. Oni Dark Link 15:23, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

Not true, because as I pointed out above, there are tons of number uses that are not linked. The bot can't find those and know which ones to change and which ones not to change. Shambala108 ☎ 16:02, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

That's weird. I've never before encountered a bot that can only change links. Most of the ones I've seen just do a search and replace for the phrase in the entire mainspace of the wiki. Oni Dark Link 00:15, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

BBC official site calls him "The War Doctor" --Silent Hunter UK ☎ 17:58, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

But Hurt IS the Ninth Doctor, this is a fact. And as such all the numbering in this wiki NEEDS to be changed to reflect this. If he comes after Eight, then he is the Ninth. Thus Eccleston is now and for all time the Tenth Doctor. Not going through the entire wiki to correct this would be intellectually dishonest. Doug Exeter ☎ 06:40, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

That's a cop-out. The fascts are the facts.Doug Exeter ☎

Just because it means a lot of work doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. If people didn't do stuff because it requires a lot of work, where would humanity be? Should we just stop researching a cure for cancer because it means a lot of work?Doug Exeter ☎ 06:40, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

But he's still the Ninth Doctor.Doug Exeter ☎ 06:40, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

But he still comes after Eight, making him the Ninth, Eccleston the Tenth, and so onDoug Exeter ☎ 06:40, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

Steven Moffat confirmed that the War Doctor is NOT the ninth Doctor after the episode caused so much controversy. If you like to number him, he would be considered an "8.5". He may have been the Doctor for about ten minutes, but nobody remembered it at first. The events in The Day of the Doctor were not remembered, and the War Doctor will keep his title because it causes the least conflict. I would've actually imagined that this would be settled after Moffat made it clear that he is just the War Doctor. Technically, he shouldn't even be called the War Doctor, a better name would just be The Warrior, but that is his official title, that is what he was credited for. Masterpwn ☎ 12:22, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

Dialogue from The Time of the Doctor actually calls David Tennant "number 10" and Matt Smith "the Eleventh Doctor" as I recall, so that's in-universe evidence that the numbering and titling still holds after Night and Day establishes John Hurt as a sort of eight-and-a-halfth Doctor. It's a complicated issue, and he IS addressed as "the Doctor" by some (and credited as only "the Doctor" in TDOTD), but he's a locked away secret and not counted in the numbering system according to his "eleventh body".

Only a tiny fraction of people would have taken to renumbering Eccleston, Tennant and Smith as "Ten", "Eleven" and "Twelve", because they're not and probably never will be referred to as that. And I don't think any admin is seriously going to consider pushing the RTD and Moffat era Doctors up a place, when on top of what's been said before, on Thread:145998, User:CzechOut refers to "tons of other narratives where Ten and Eleven are said to be, or proclaim themselves to be, their respective numbers" (I'm not that familiar with non-TV work, so I'm afraid I can't verify which ones. The Tenth Doctor page used to cite The Age of Ice I think though before we just got rid of the confusing "was the xth incarnation" in light of The Night of the Doctor and The Name of the Doctor)

And the BBC website still considers them "the Tenth Doctor" and "the Eleventh Doctor" (note how this link shows the David Tennant Doctor illustrated with his Day of the Doctor-era hairstyle. So it's not like it's out of date.) -- Tybort (talk page) 13:19, April 8, 2014 (UTC)

Oncoming Storm

Acording to the ninth doctor the daleks in the time war knew him as the oncoming storm. So wouldn't Oncoming Storm be one of the war doctors alias's?– The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.155.150.230 (talk).

No. We already have a page for the Doctor's many aliases here: Aliases of the Doctor. Shambala108 ☎ 03:03, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

"The Other Doctor"

Although it is correct that the BBC website uses the name "War Doctor" for the character, it should be noted in "Behind the Scenes" that some marketing, such as the recently announced action figure as well as some media-circulated cast lists for Day of the Doctor, identify the character by the name The Other Doctor. I'm not suggesting this article be moved because we must go with what the BBC says (that goes ditto for any thought of moving this to Ninth Doctor), but it's still an important fact worth noting in the article. 68.146.70.124^{talk to me} 15:09, December 10, 2013 (UTC)

Per Tardis:Valid sources, merchandise and trading cards are not valid sources for the in-universe sections of articles. It can be added to behind the scenes, but until/unless he is named "the other Doctor" in in-universe sources, this name will be removed from the in-universe portion of the article. (68 this is not aimed at you, but rather the editors who keep adding this name to the lead.) Shambala108 ☎ 01:07, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Sorry about that! Aurablase ☎ 01:20, December 11, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, in my note above I also said it should be in Behind the Scenes. So far I am aware of three occasions where "Other Doctor" has been used: the trading card set included with the Day of the Doctor's North American DVD/Blu-ray release; the action figure; and apparently some TV listings and promotions issued by the BBC itself have used the name. I personally think, since all of the above would have had to have been finalized weeks if not months prior to the broadcast of The Night of the Doctor, the use of The Other Doctor was due to the powers that be not being aware that NOTD would dub him the War Doctor. Of course the closing credits of DOTD are no help because Hurt is simply credited with the others as The Doctor. And of course it's always possible "Time" will tell if at the end of the day Hurt is officially dubbed the Ninth Doctor (see what I did there?).68.146.70.124^{talk to me} 17:21, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Other history

Isn't there other history for this Doctor that's hinted at during the series? The one I'm thinking of is the Tenth Doctor's exchange with Davros, in which he says, "I saw your command ship fly into the jaws of the Nightmare Child. I tried to save you." Should this be mentioned in this article?

The Warrior

The Eighth Doctor specifically requests that his next incarnation be given the traits of a warrior and I believe Clara also refers to the War Doctor as a warrior. Is this worth including in the article, or perhaps in the list of the War Doctor's aliases on the aliases of the Doctor page? Memnarc ☎ 00:28, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

Makes more sense to me that this incarnation would refer to himself as "The Warrior". I have no idea why people thought that "War Doctor" made sense as his title.– The preceding unsigned comment was added by 78.150.199.214 (talk).

Question

Uh... in "The Time of the Doctor", the Doctor refers to the War Doctor as "Captain Grumpy" during the sunrise/sunset scene.

Should that be included in the "Legacy" section? --Reikson ☎ 02:42, December 28, 2013 (UTC)

Original timeline

In my opinion, it's clear from Day of the Doctor that the Doctors changed history by saving Gallifrey. Ten says "you're not actually suggesting we change our history". Because "the timelines are out of sync" or whatever, War and Ten retain the memory of the original timeline, in which Gallifrey was destroyed and the Doctor explicitly remembers doing it. It doesn't really make sense because surely the Moment would always have opened the time fissures, but I think that is the intention. I think there should be two sections in the article for "original timeline" and "altered timeline".--The Traveller ☎ 11:40, January 6, 2014 (UTC)

I don't know. I for one, believe that Gallifrey all always saved by the Doctor — it's just that all the successors of the War Doctor believed that Gallifrey fell that day. It's a circular paradox if you think about it — and event occured only because it occured. Here's my reasoning:

• The events of The Day of the Doctor lead to the events of The Time of the Doctor.
• Madam Kovarian and her order try to prevent the events of Time (the events of Series 5).
• The Doctor reboots the universe and creates the cracks.
• The Time of the Doctor.
• The events occur over and over again.

See what I mean? TheMostBoringManInTheWorld (talk) 12:37, January 6, 2014 (UTC)

I know it doesn't make logical sense, but that's not new for Moffat. The Doctor's memory being wrong because the timelines are "out of sync", while obviously pseudo-technobabble nonsense, definitely implies that history is being changed, but only the most recent Doctor will remember the new timeline. It's not that the Doctor saw that Gallifrey was no longer there and assumed he had destroyed it: he specifically remembers destroying it, which is not what happens in The Day of the Doctor. In the original timeline, he was alone in the barn ("this time you won't have to do it alone") so the future Doctors couldn't have helped him.--The Traveller ☎ 11:20, January 7, 2014 (UTC)

Well, Moffat certainly does seem to love all of this... timey-wimey stuff.

I don't think you seem to understand the out-of-sync part of the story. Remember when in Series 5 and 6 whenever the Doctor met River Song they didn't meet in order? River was married to the Doctor but the the Doctor still wasn't? That's out of sync. The old show seemed to imply that the Time Lords have some sort of a syncronising machine — whenever the Master and the Doctor met, there never is a situation when the Doctor says "Hey, didn't I kill you on Trenzalore?" and the Master replied "Where the heck is that?" — they always met in order.

It's been a law in Doctor Who since the old show that whenever two or more versions of the Doctor met up, only the latest and the newest version of him has memory of the events — that's why only the Third Doctor remembers the events of The Three Doctors and only the Fifth Doctor remembers the events of The Five Doctors. It's not because the events never occured before, it's because the Doctor is out of sync.

Since we got that cleared up, there are some scenes in The Day of the Doctor that are clear proof that the events of the special always happened — when the Eleventh Doctor sees the time portal he states "I remember this... of course,... this is where I come in," which is clear proof is that the events always happened and that it's the one and the same timeline. TheMostBoringManInTheWorld (talk) 18:32, January 7, 2014 (UTC)

Character portrait

What is it with the images being all super-stretched out? Is it supposed to be like that? Personally I think it looks terrible. Would look nicer if it was just square. Near-sighted Jedi ☎ 02:40, April 6, 2014 (UTC)

Character portrait 2

The "character portrait", or infobox image, seems to violate one tiny thing in the image policy: it is not looking towards the article. Just thought I'd point that out. -- Your Lawful Superior, Lord 12:38, July 26, 2014 (UTC)