|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| ==Story numbering==
| | {{ArchCat}} |
| I took out the story numbering in the infobox for now, as we don't know yet whether this is a single 5-part story, or 5 interconnected stories. If it's only a single story - with 3 writers - then it should only have a single story number. (Shades of the Trial of a Time Lord argument). [[User:23skidoo|23skidoo]] 14:17, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
| |
| ::[http://io9.com/5296969/torchwood-still-saving-the-uk-before-the-us Descriptions of the series] and comments by RTD seem to imply that this is a single, 5 part story. --[[User:Raukodraug|Raukodraug]] 18:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Episode number ==
| |
| | |
| I thought you might just want to put somewhere that there were originally going to be 13 episodes, but it was cut to 5.[http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/tv/2507880/BBC-ditched-Torchwood.html Source] --Sgtcook 19:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Episode title ==
| |
| | |
| Are you sure about that? Day one - Day five? Since there's already an episode called Day One, it doesn't make sense.
| |
| ::I might be making an assumption hear, but since the whole Series carries the title of ''Children of Earth'' then the individual episode titles of ''Day One'', ''Day Two'', etc may in fact best be considered sub-titles, such as ''Children of Earth: Day One'', ''Children of Earth: Day Two'', etc. --[[User:Raukodraug|Raukodraug]] 02:57, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| Making pages for each individual episode is just the same as if you made a page for each individual classic Doctor Who episode.
| |
| | |
| ==Series 3 as a Single Story==
| |
| Currently Series 3 is being treated as a single story, but shouldn't the three Radio plays that came out this week also be considered part of Series 3, just like [[TW]]: [[Lost Souls]] is considered part of Series 2? I'm thinking that the information on this page should be moved to a [[TW]]: [[Children of Earth]] page and that this page should be revised to be a proper Series 3 page along the lines of the [[Series 2 (Torchwood)]] page. --[[User:Raukodraug|Raukodraug]] 03:04, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| Totally agree.. Each episode should have its own entry. [[User:Smokin Fish|Smokin Fish]] 14:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| Audio dramas are not considered part of the TV season, so should be treated separately. Lost Souls wasn't considered part of Series 2 - what is the source for that claim??? [[User:23skidoo|23skidoo]] 15:04, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
| |
| :Well, these aren't CD based Audio Dramas. They are radio plays produced and aired on BBC Radio. As for my source it is simply that [[Lost Souls]] is currently listed on the [[Series 2 (Torchwood)]] page and that both that radio episode and that the three new radio episodes all have Series 2 listed in their infoboxes by previous editors. I tend to be inclined to treat them as part of the series seeing as how they air on the BBC (yes, radio, but they still air). Whether that is the correct interpretation or not can be discussed though.
| |
| :My primary concern in this is consistency of the Series pages. The fact that the [[Series 3 (Torchwood)]] page has an episode infobox and is completely inconsistent with the [[Series 1 (Torchwood)]] and [[Series 2 (Torchwood)]] pages is what I'm mostly wondering about. Before I go and make a significant edit to bring it all in line I wanted to open a bit of discussion --[[User:Raukodraug|Raukodraug]] 02:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
| |
| ::There needs to be something a bit more substantial, such as an announcement by the BBC that these audios are actually part of the season. The Paul McGann audio adventures are being broadcast by BBC Radio as well, but that doesn't mean they constitute a Season 27+ . I haven't seen CoE here in Canada yet, so if the miniseries features characters introduced in the audios, or reference the events featured, then that changes things a bit. Or if they're included in the DVD release. [[User:23skidoo|23skidoo]] 16:47, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Date for Start of Children of Earth on Space in Canada ==
| |
| | |
| Space is airing Children of Earth starting the 20th of July at 10pm ET/ 7PM PT. Then on the 25th they are airing Planet of the Dead. If you don't believe me, there is a banner on the Space website here [http://www.spacecast.com]
| |
| --[[User:Lilmiss paradox|Lilmiss paradox]] 04:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ==Coincidence==
| |
| On the radio times cover Ianto is standing on a block marked 4, he died in episode 4. Rhys was standing on the block marked 5 could he die in episode 5?!
| |
| | |
| ==Consistency==
| |
| Edited the page to match the format for the [[Series 2 (Torchwood)]] page. Some of the additional material focused on '''Children of Earth''' television story makes it feel a little bulky, but the page was such a departure from its predecessors that I wanted to start getting it organized. --[[User:Raukodraug|Raukodraug]] 14:39, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| | |
| ==Jack==
| |
| At the moment, the article states "except Jack who can't die.". But he can, and does with remarkable regularity. He simply doesn't stay dead. Without getting into a Highlander based monologue on immortality, surely he's more infinitely-resurrected-Jack, rather than Can't-die-Jack?
| |
| | |
| ==Redundancy of words==
| |
| | |
| I'm not allowed to edit this article, so would someone address the line
| |
| | |
| "''Children of Earth'' was broadcast in five episodes broadcast over five consecutive nights."
| |
| | |
| It'd be far easier on the eye of it was "''Children of Earth'' was broadcast as five episodes over consecutive nights."
| |
| | |
| The use of consecutive surely removes the need to say five twice....
| |
| | |
| [[User:Whqttt|Whqttt]] 21:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :whoops. I will fix it. --[[User:Stardizzy2|Stardizzy2]] 21:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Date ==
| |
| * Can I just say that the newspaper also referred to Day Two as a Wednesday, making Day Five a Saturday; now why would children be in school on a Saturday in Day Five? So I think that Ianto's newspaper got the date entirely wrong. [[User:MercM|MercM]]
| |
| | |
| | |
| People, lets all remember what happened in [[Aliens of London]], the first episode Rose and scenes in the next two episodes were set in the year 2005, however when the Doctor drops off Rose home in [[Aliens of London]], he miscalculated 12 hours for 12 months, so Aliens of London was broadcast in 2005, yet was set in 2006. This precedent has continued for a long time, such as [[The Stolen Earth]] being broadcast in 2008 and set in 2009, and Torchwood has been shown to follow this precedent as it intertwined in the episode the Stolen Earth making every Torchwood episode one year ahead of broadcast date, so Children of Earth is broadcast in 2009, hence it is set in 2010.
| |
| | |
| I know Rhys did say 44 years from 1965, but this has been attributed to a continuity error, and as such should not be considered canon. [[User:MercM|MercM]]
| |
| :How the heck can an episode not be canon? I know that since Aliens of London, stories took place a year in the future, there is nowhere in this series that says otherwise than Rhys's statement. If The Stolen Earth was set sometime in April or May, then that would mean that Children of Earth is set four or five months later. That is enough time. -- [[User:Matthew R Dunn|Matthew R Dunn]] 16:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ::I think MercM is suggesting that what Rhys said isn't canon. (Where has it been stated that it's a continuity error? By that I mean an official source) See also [[Forum:Timeline Clarification Questions]] and [[Forum:"Children of Earth" takes place in late 2009: confirm/deny?]] for discussions related to this issue. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 16:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| * And neither is the newspaper, it claimed to be on a Wednesday, so Day Five would be Saturday, yet children were shown to be in school. So the newspaper is a continuity error, making it's evidence null and void. [[User:MercM|MercM]]
| |
| | |
| * Hmm, best explanation that I've heard for the children going to school on a Saturday is that they were ordered to by the government, so many (not all, as was shown) did. Alternatively, it does seem much more likely that a paper would have misprinted a day of the week rather than skip an entire year. It just looks to me like there isn't any hard evidence to suggest 2010 as the year, whereas we do have several pieces of on-screen evidence suggesting that the setting is 2009. Just because [[Aliens of London]] was set a year after it was broadcast doesn't mean that every story from there forward has to be set a year in the future of its broadcast date. [[User:Spreee|Spreee]] 20:22, 13 August 2009 (UTC)Spreee
| |
| | |
| ==Aliens and enemies==
| |
| Although it could be argued otherwise, I believe in the context of the story and the context of Torchwood itself -- in that these three individuals were involved in direct attempts to destroy the organization and kill its members -- I believe it is justified to list Johnson, Frobisher and Green as enemies so I added them to the list. [[User:23skidoo|23skidoo]] 15:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ==POV statement==
| |
| The paragraph about the season being controversial and loved and hated was unacceptable (not to mention it can apply to any season of TW, SJA and DW) and has been deleted. If you're going to make a statement like that, you need to quote reputable media reviews to back it up. [[User:23skidoo|23skidoo]] 01:24, December 22, 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Cracks? ==
| |
| | |
| Has the 456 event been erased by the cracks & where do the cracks fit into Torchwood?
| |
| | |
| == Cracks? ==
| |
| | |
| Has the 456 event been erased by the cracks & where do the cracks fit into Torchwood?
| |
| | |
| | |
| [[User:The-captain|The-captain]] 22:07, August 12, 2010 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :Please don't use these pages for discussions not relating to the article itself. Use the forums for this. If you continue to do so, it can be considered vandalism. [[User:Mc hammark|Mc hammark]] 22:17, August 12, 2010 (UTC)
| |
| :I didn't write this. I wrote something about whether we should make mention of the cracks on this page. I have changed my password,
| |
