Talk:Gia Kelly

Infobox

Does Jenna Coleman belong in the infobox? Having one's face Photoshopped onto an image of an existing character surely doesn't count as an acting job. I think this scenario is more like Shirley Bassey's picture being used for Iris Wildthyme; it doesn't earn her a place in the infobox as an actor. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 11:23, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

There is an argument to be made about her being a photo model for the book; compare how we treated characters like Rose Noble before her television debut. Oh, and Barbara in Wonderland.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

12:42, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm unconvinced by that. Barbara Lord was photographed in character to appear in that story. This is just Jenna Coleman's face being pasted onto a photo from the '60s. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 12:50, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, Jenna Coleman never acted as Gia Kelly or Anne Chaplet. If even acting as a character through narration in, say, an audiobook doesn't count, there's no way this should. Danochy ☎ 20:30, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

I would agree it does imply that Coleman has otherwise acted as these characters, although as Epsilon has pointed out there are some articles which have taken a similar approach in the past. Similarly, I have noticed some articles in a similar position regarding archive audio. Barack Obama's article for instance credits Obama himself as the voice actor, although clicking on the name would direct you to the behind the scenes section. That seems like a good model to follow if we must have Coleman's name listed as actor to emphasise that, while yes, her image is used, she never actually performed any scenes as these characters.

It is difficult, as to my knowledge we don't have a precedent for actor image being edited and replaced with another actor in an illustration. I do think there's justification for Coleman's image to be in these infoboxes though, perhaps we could change the tab titles to "human" and "Clara Oswald splinter"? BlueSupergiant ☎ 20:59, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Thread:141930 at User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon II is of some relevance, though it had no resolution. Najawin ☎ 21:39, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

The argument for Rose Noble and Barbara in Wonderland, as well as characters like the Morbius Doctors and the Leader, in comparison for the Clara Oswald splinters does differ significantly in one respect; photoshopping. Unlike the aforementioned characters, whom all required a person to be brought in and pose for a photograph, the characters that were made to be overlapped by Clara after The Name of the Doctor - namely Bettan, Anne Chaplet, Sarah Clark, Rachel Jensen and Gia Kelly - have just had their original actor's faces edited with pre-existing images of Clara to make them resemble Jenna Coleman, with Anne Chaplet even going as far to just be a photo of Coleman. With this in mind, I do believe Jenna Coleman should not be listed as an actress for the characters, as she did not act for them in any regard. However, I think the images should remain, just relocated somewhere out the infobox. BananaClownMan ☎ 10:38, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't think we should be removing the images from the infoboxes, that was never the issue here. It's whether or not see should say "Jenna Coleman played x", which we shouldnt, but the policy is slightly muddled on the topic hence why I originally added her.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

13:08, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Then let us abandon policy and just use the basic information of whether or not Coleman actually did anything to portray these characters in anyway, which she did not by all accounts and definitions, thus meaning she should not be listed as an "Other actor" for the parts. BananaClownMan ☎ 19:29, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

By all accounts and definitions?

depict (someone or something) in a work of art or literature

That's her face, isn't it? Seems like she's doing some portrayal. Najawin ☎ 20:48, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

I rather think the issue is that Jenna Coleman isn't doing anything. She didn't model for it and inarguably isn't doing any acting. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 21:04, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Sure. Again, I think the thread I referenced offers some insight on how we might approach this, but it's a slightly different issue. The issue is definitely muddled though. Najawin ☎ 21:42, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Just checked out Thread:141930. It was about what counts as an appearance by a character if it is just archived footage, which has no bearings on this subject, which is about whether a photoshopped image of Clara over a pre-established character counts as Jenna Coleman being listed as one of their actors. Which the current sway of the debate is in the negative. BananaClownMan ☎ 07:04, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't say no bearing. You're dealing with whether the indirect appearance/invocation of an entity, be it IU or OOU, is classified the same as the direct invocation. Definitely not the precise same subject, no, nor did I ever pretend it was. But I do think there's some insight to be drawn. Najawin ☎ 07:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

No insight. Coleman's image was superimposed on pre-existing scenes via photoshopping. No acting required, so that removes her credentials under Epsilon the Eternal's modelling rule of an actor being brought in to model for the character. That is where the majority are in agreement on this talk page, with the unresolved issue now being what to do with the Coleman images. My proposal; We relocate them into the biography subpage with the description, "X as a Clara Oswald splinter. (PROSE: X)", just like it is on Sarah Clark's page. BananaClownMan ☎ 08:15, 27 February 2024 (UTC)