Tardis talk:ParentPage

Big Finish and overt sexuality

This page currently states "Nothing made by Big Finish Productions or AudioGo contains swearing or overt sexuality or gory sound effects." However there are a couple of exceptions to that general rule, even among their DWU productions. Graceless is adult-level with sex scenes and swearing, and BF's own pages for the stories carry the warning "NOTE: Graceless contains some adult material and is not suitable for younger listeners." The documentary release Benjamin & Baxter carries the same warning due to frank discussions of sexuality. — Rob T Firefly - Δ∇ - 18:05, May 25, 2014 (UTC)

Drug use in Torchwood

The infobox says TW has no drug use. However, although children are not generally considered to be a drug, surely the 456 using them as such would count as an instance of drug use, just as much as fictional drugs (e.g. emotion patches in DW: Gridlock)? -- Sorceror Nobody ☎ 14:39, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

Nudity In Doctor Who

The Time of The Doctor. Enough Said. ŚPASTIC FRIDGE ☎ 00:46, January 23, 2015 (UTC) ŚPASTIC FRIDGE 11:45 Friday 1/23/2015

• That's not nudity. Compare to Game of Thrones or Sense8. THAT's nudity. Nothing was shown, and it was treated as a gag and the only time we saw Clara and the Doctor nude was when they were covered with holographic clothing. They did film a scene where the two hugged before remembering the Doctor was technically nude, but they cut that. Not the same at all. 68.146.52.234^{talk to me} 23:03, November 30, 2015 (UTC)

Just a question of tone

Thinking of the similarities between DW and LOTR, it strikes me how much more 'pugilistic' the tone is between the DW-themed Parent Page and the LOTR at http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/LOTR:ParentPage and makes me wonder- is it necessary to be so off-putting? One might think the page goes out of its way to give pause to parents before introducing them to DW. Your point about the hiatus novelizations is quite valid; but there's quite a wide swath of more 'canonical' materials that are, by and large, 'mostly harmless' (with apologies to Douglas Adams fans). Would a 'yes, but' tone work better here than a 'we don't serve their kind here' Star Warscantina-bartender prohibition you open up with? Under normal circumstances, I'd think navigating pre-teens safely around DW would be more like getting Bilbo to Rivendell, than bringing Frodo to Mount Doom.... Bhcarlibrary ☎ 19:00, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

Can you be more specific in your claim of "pugilistic"? I've looked at both the LOTR page and our page, and, really, they're too different to compare, in my opinion. Our page tries to give useful information to parents on every aspect of the published/released DWU. In addition, it strives to make quite clear that this site is not completely child-safe or child-friendly, and parents must be cautious. If you have any specific complaints, I'd like to hear them, and so would the admins who wrote this page. Thanks. Shambala108 ☎ 19:45, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

Bong reference

I don't recall any occasion in any media that I have seen where the Doctor has ever looked for a bong or anything of that nature. Unless this actually happened in a story or novel that I missed then I stand corrected. Otherwise it's a poor example to use. 68.146.52.234^{talk to me} 23:04, November 30, 2015 (UTC)

Clicking the word bong in that example (or, indeed, this sentence) brings up the relevant article of this wiki, which explains its appearance in the Doctor Who universe. — Rob T Firefly - Δ∇ - 05:43, December 7, 2015 (UTC)

The link wasn't visible when I checked, and I see now that it is referenced in an obscure novella, so I stand officially corrected. 68.146.52.234^{talk to me} 23:03, January 20, 2016 (UTC)