Talk:Series 10 (Doctor Who 2005)

Please note that, per Tardis:Spoiler policy, spoilers may not be posted on this talk page. Spoilers are only allowed on the Series 10 page itself.

Source contradictions

A problem has occurred on who has written the sixth episode of the Series. French CV on Laurent Maurel says that said episode was written by <removed per Tardis:Spoiler policy>. A different source, namely Radio Times, had labelled <removed per Tardis:Spoiler policy> as co-writers of said episode. What do we do in such case? --DCLM ☎ 20:30, February 1, 2017 (UTC)

Can someone help explain this? --DCLM ☎ 14:03, February 5, 2017 (UTC)

<removed per Tardis:Spoiler policy> is the director. 82.3.146.201^{talk to me} 18:02, February 6, 2017 (UTC)

You can't just conclude it like that. Radio Times says differently. --DCLM ☎ 18:15, February 6, 2017 (UTC)

And why would the CV list the director over the writer? --DCLM ☎ 18:17, February 6, 2017 (UTC)

He's a director, it says h's the director and he's not the writer... conclusive. 82.3.146.201^{talk to me} 18:24, February 6, 2017 (UTC)

It does not say so. --DCLM ☎ 19:46, February 6, 2017 (UTC)

Radio Times says so, I'd rather go with RT saying a director with directorial experiences is directing it rather than a quite self-run site saying that a director is writing it. 82.3.146.201^{talk to me} 19:58, February 6, 2017 (UTC)

I can't see that. I've read it up and down. Can't see it. And in any case, why didn't you add <removed per Tardis:Spoiler policy> as the director? --DCLM ☎ 11:35, February 7, 2017 (UTC)

The Sun

Going to put this here so there's a record: The Sun is not a valid source for real world articles. Any post on this page that uses The Sun as its source will be removed. Shambala108 ☎ 03:24, April 6, 2017 (UTC)

Series 10 page

There is a need to clear up a couple of things regarding this page and Tardis:Spoiler policy.

• Everything posted to the series 10 page must have a source. Anything that doesn't have a valid source will be removed. Repeated adding of unsourced material even after it has been removed is a violation of Tardis:Editing policy and could lead to a block.
• Do not, I repeat, do not post spoiler information in edit summaries. Edit summaries are visible to everyone; posting spoilers in the edit summary violates Tardis:Spoiler policy. Repeated violations of this nature could lead to a block.

Thanks for your attention. Shambala108 ☎ 00:11, April 11, 2017 (UTC)

"First three parter since series 3?"

Doesn't last series' Face the Raven, Heaven Sent, and Hell Bent constitute a three parter? TheTARDIScontroller ☎ 07:12, April 15, 2017 (UTC)

No. Face the Raven, though connecting to Heaven Sent and Hell Bent, is a single-story. Heaven Sent leads into Hell Bent. Those two are a two-parter. --DCLM ☎ 14:37, April 15, 2017 (UTC)

Leak

Admins... Episode 3 has apparently been leaked on iTunes under the name of the previous episode Smile. Be careful. --DCLM ☎ 12:27, April 29, 2017 (UTC)

Well, Spoiler policy here is don't create an article for the episode until 8.30pm (it finishes airing at 8.10pm, and that's the next bottom of the hour). I'm sure if anyone posts it early it'll be deleted and appropriate action taken.  Digifiend  Talk  PR/SS  KR  MH  Toku  JD  Garo  TH  CG  UM  Logos  CLG  DW  15:01, 29/4/2017 

Just thought I should alert you. :D --DCLM ☎ 16:32, April 29, 2017 (UTC)

Source contradictions 2

DWM 512 and the Radio Times source gives two different answers as to who wrote episodes 6 and 7. -- Tybort (talk page) 09:13, May 6, 2017 (UTC)

What?

I split up the three-parter into three single parters (which is what they are) and I return 1 hour later to find the page protected and my edits reverted. Can somebody please correct the episode table please. Mysterious Editor ☎ 10:48, May 6, 2017 (UTC)

The claims were unsourced. Even if something is true it needs sources. Plus, it was only partially true. --DCLM ☎ 11:42, May 6, 2017 (UTC)