Template talk:Doctors

John Hurt

Can someone add the John Hurt version to the template?

Stick John Hurt's Unknown Doctor in the bottom row. We don't know what regeneration he is, or even if he's a full doctor (or an in-between incarnation), but it was confirmed onscreen he was A doctor.86.174.188.161^{talk to me} 20:53, May 18, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, it's only confirmed by the credits that he's the Doctor. The actual narrative makes very clear that he's not the Doctor. Removing from template.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍  16:34: Sun 19 May 2013

Trust Moffat to make this such an enigma -he's the Doctor, but he's not A DOCTOR. 11 did clearly state they were definitely the same person ("He's me, there's only me here, that's the point...") , but not worthy of the title 'Doctor' ("I said he was me, I never said he was the Doctor... he's the one who broke the promise"), but it depends what we decide the box is counting - is it the Time Lord himself, or just the versions who 'Kept the promise' of the Doctor? If we're going to be pedantic, then the Valeyard, Dream Lord and the Watcher aren't really the Doctor either - the Watcher was a projection, the Dream Lord a psychic state of consciousness and The Valeyard an in-betweener. Hurt's "Doctor" was at least confirmed by himself to be the same Time Lord, just unworthy of being considered the Doctor. 86.174.188.161^{talk to me} 17:33, May 19, 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. The narrative actually makes it very clear that he is the Doctor; just not called by that name. He is the same individual being as "the Doctor," but even the other Doctors reject him for what he did. The template is supposed to list the different forms of the person known as "the Doctor". Hurt is still a form of the same person, even if he isn't called "the Doctor". 11 himself says: "He's me, there's only me here, that's the point..." Hurt IS the same being named "the Doctor", but for some reason, he has lost the right to use the name "Doctor". Thus he belongs on the template because 11 specifically says "He's me." Can someone add him back in? --Bold Clone 19:38, May 19, 2013 (UTC)

Considering that we have now specifically seen John Hurt's character regenerate from the Eighth Doctor, would that now qualify "The War Doctor" to be added to this template?? Geek Mythology ☎ 16:16, November 15, 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Unfortunately, we need an admin to ulock the page. Movsar ☎ 14:10, November 16, 2013 (UTC)

Since he's very obviously an incarnation of The Doctor, regardless of the alias he goes by (same as The Watcher, The Valeyard, and the Dream Lord), I'm in agreement that he needs to be added. Mewiet ☎ 21:40, November 21, 2013 (UTC)

The Curator

It's very obvious that he is a future incarnation of the doctor due to context and dialogue. The Curator even says it is likely that he is the Doctor. It's pretty easy to tell that the Curator is meant to be a very distant future incarnation of the Doctor. Here is my version of it. Evan Norton ☎ 18:11, November 24, 2013 (UTC)

Where's Eleven?

For some reason, I can see Eleventh|11 in the source code, but it seems to be entirely overlapped by Twelfth|12 in the actual template?Liam Mars ☎ 20:42, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

This is because the template is squashed. I've made a fixed version here, if an admin would care to update it. (The page is locked so only admins can edit). -- RansomTime 21:01, December 25, 2013 (UTC)

The Other

Is there any chance of getting The Other onto this list? (either before 1 or at the back) TheChampionOfTime ☎ 01:22, February 20, 2016 (UTC)

Actually, would this work? The Champion of Time ☎ 22:46, April 14, 2016 (UTC)

To answer my own question, no it wouldn't! The Champion of Time ☎ 04:22, April 15, 2016 (UTC)

Future incarnations

Can we add future incarnations, such as "Dr. Smith", "Merlin", Muldwych, The Doctor (The Blue Angel), The Doctor (Seven Keys to Doomsday), The Doctor (Party Animals), etc.? Otherwise, there's a noticeable bias towards televised stories. --Pluto2 (talk) 17:59, January 10, 2017 (UTC)

Personally, I think that Merlin is the only one we should really add. That way we could balance Classic and New incarnations in the bottom half; three for each. OS25 (Talk) 19:38, May 9, 2017 (UTC)

To go beyond this suggestion, why not include

• three from Classic Who (The Watcher, The Valeyard, and Merlin),
• three from Wilderness Who (The Other, The Doctor (Party Animals), and The Relic), and
• three from New Who (Meta-Crisis, Dream Lord, and The Curator)?

It's hard to not see it as a T:NPOV violation that the "More ambiguous" section includes the Dream Lord but not any of the many, many non-TV Doctor incarnations. – N8 ☎ 00:45, October 21, 2019 (UTC)

The template looks unbalanced now

12 and 13 now making a second row looks unbalanced. Could the template be changed to be like template:Doctor comics with 1 to 8 on the first row and War to 13 on a second row? LegoK9 ☎ 18:09, December 29, 2017 (UTC)

Seconded. Wouldn't be that hard -- just move the <br /> from before 12 to after 8. I know the intention is to represent that 12 is the start of a new regeneration cycle, but the template is already out-of-universe (courtesy of the previously-noted bias towards televised "More ambiguous" incarnations, a blatant violation of T:NPOV) and the distinction between NuWho and Classic would not only make the template look better but also be far more useful than the distinction between different regenerative cycles. (Of course, McGann wouldn't really belong in Classic, but that's neither here nor there.) – N8 ☎ 19:12, December 29, 2017 (UTC)

For clarity's sake, the image to my right is how, in my experience, the template shows up in ns0, otherwise known as the main namespace (where the articles are). Is the above request because of a problem in the article namespace, or due to a perceived problem arising from the difference in font in the template namespace? Does it look different on other devices/browsers?
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 17:26, October 21, 2019 (UTC)