User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-197.86.143.126-20200606192351/@comment-45692830-20200606204015: Difference between revisions
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
So I have no real interest in this case one way or the other. What little interest I do have is keeping this thread honest. | So I have no real interest in this case one way or the other. What little interest I do have is keeping this thread honest. | ||
| Line 9: | Line 8: | ||
Out of curiosity, did Holmes ever comment on the War Chief/Master issue? | Out of curiosity, did Holmes ever comment on the War Chief/Master issue? | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|The Panopticon/20200606192351-197.86.143.126/20200606204015-45692830]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 22:18, 27 April 2023
So I have no real interest in this case one way or the other. What little interest I do have is keeping this thread honest.
There's a rather glaring hole in the bits of the argument concerning their only being one stolen TARDIS, and that's The Monk. All of your arguments saying that there's only one renegade Time Lord or only one stolen TARDIS imply that The Monk is also an incarnation of The Master, as does Doctor Who: The Game of Time & Space, which you referenced.
Since this is obviously absurd from a modern viewpoint, these arguments must be also dismissed as well (since it means that Hulke and Dicks thought The Master and The Monk were the same character). Instead we understand that these things are artifacts of a specific era of Doctor Who that has been superseded, and not necessarily binding on our view of the DWU today.
This leaves us with Hulke's interview, additions to novelizations, the Faction Paradox connection (which if you check the edit history at the wiki was contentious and it's not clear why they actually kept it in), and your discussion of the arguments "against".
Out of curiosity, did Holmes ever comment on the War Chief/Master issue?
