User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-1783865-20200302103744/@comment-5791028-20200307200211: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(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:
'''User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-1783865-20200302103744/@comment-5791028-20200307200211'''
I just want to point that the Eleventh and Twelfth Doctor articles refer to them as the "final incarnation of the Doctor's original regeneration cycle" and "first incarnation of a new cycle" respectively. Since it turns out that isn't the case, should they be reworded?
I just want to point that the Eleventh and Twelfth Doctor articles refer to them as the "final incarnation of the Doctor's original regeneration cycle" and "first incarnation of a new cycle" respectively. Since it turns out that isn't the case, should they be reworded?
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude>
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|The Panopticon/20200302103744-1783865/20200307200211-5791028]]</noinclude>

Latest revision as of 21:19, 27 April 2023

I just want to point that the Eleventh and Twelfth Doctor articles refer to them as the "final incarnation of the Doctor's original regeneration cycle" and "first incarnation of a new cycle" respectively. Since it turns out that isn't the case, should they be reworded?