User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-1783865-20200302103744/@comment-858615-20200303103825: Difference between revisions
(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: | ||
<div class="quote"> | <div class="quote"> | ||
TheOneTrueJack wrote: | TheOneTrueJack wrote: | ||
| Line 8: | Line 7: | ||
Calling her 'Ruth' or 'Ruth Clayton' in that box is proably a fair combination of recognisability, on-screen accuracy and straightforwardness. | Calling her 'Ruth' or 'Ruth Clayton' in that box is proably a fair combination of recognisability, on-screen accuracy and straightforwardness. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|The Panopticon/20200302103744-1783865/20200303103825-858615]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 21:20, 27 April 2023
TheOneTrueJack wrote: I'll start with an obvious one, although it's only tangentially related. Now that the Jo Martin Doctor has been 100% confirmed as a previous incarnation, she should be added fully to the "incarnations of the Doctor" box. Probably under More Ambiguous, although I would personally make a case for her under Widely Accepted. We should also come up with a proper moniker for her. Although we could wait until an official source does that.
Even if she's not confirmed as a previous incarnation, she seems a safe enough bet as an incarnation that I agree she's ripe for the 'More Ambiguous' part of that box.
Calling her 'Ruth' or 'Ruth Clayton' in that box is proably a fair combination of recognisability, on-screen accuracy and straightforwardness.
