Talk:Jack Harkness

	Archives: #1, #2

Jack's Timeline

Shouldn't the burial of Jack in 27 AD and reappearance in the early 20th century in Exit Wounds appear not at the end of the timeline but at the beginning? I realize this means Jack crosses his own timelines but it's odd to read of his activities in Torchwood in the 1900s without acknowledgment that his team unearthed a later version of him back then.69.125.134.86^{talk to me} 16:29, December 17, 2012 (UTC)

N-no, no it shouldn't... OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 16:40, December 17, 2012 (UTC)

Policy question

I have a question about policy regarding comments by actors. In explaining why Jack is immortal, John Barrowman stated:

""Now you're really getting me into the fan boy stuff here, it takes us all the way back to the first time Jack actually died and came back to life because we thought it was the time, uh.uh .the TARDIS that him brought him back to life. But it was..you know .because of the death you know from the Dalek, that all happened and it was Rose. It turns out that his blood is actually alien blood. So there's more to him than we ever thought. So it is his blood that keeps him alive, it was not time. You know there's all those questions now which NEED to be answered".

- JB, Dragon Con 2012, Starting at the 12 minute mark. [1]

Are insider comments by the actor considered noteworthy to add to the Skills and Abilities (Immortality) or Other Matters section of Jack's wiki? It appears to subvert canon and rewrite his known history.

Thanks. ~ ~ ~ ~ kpattersonraven

For future reference, these kinds of questions can be asked at The Panopticon, since it's a policy question. It will gain more attention there. Also, don't add spaces between the tildes (so ~~~~ instead of ~ ~ ~ ~), as it's unhelpful.

To answer your question though, according to T:SOURCES, only narrative sources are allowed for information on in-universe pages such as this. What John Barrowman says happened is irrelevant to the article. Anyways, read through Tardis:Valid sources, and you'll get an answer much more in-depth than I can possibly give you.

But, specifically, no, actors' comments on their characters cannot go in the main body of an in-universe page, and they cannot be used as sources for information on the character. Hope that helps!
--SOTO ☎ 06:55, April 2, 2013 (UTC)

Deaths, buried under Cardiff

Jack was buried underneath Cardiff in 27AD and released in 1901, which means he was buried for 1874 years.

Presuming that it takes him four minutes to be revived each time he dies of things which don't require his entire body to re-grow itself (based on how long it took him to revive after Suzie shot him), and that it takes him six minutes to suffocate (brain death occurs roughly four minutes after loss of consciousness), he dies 52.595 times per year.

That means he died 98.563.030 times while buried underneath Cardiff. --DCLM ☎ 16:38, October 31, 2015 (UTC)

So technically we can calculate how many times Jack has died. Shall we put it on the main page? perhaps as "it can be estimated that Jack has died.....Snivystorm ☎ 22:05, December 19, 2015 (UTC)

This debate was left unfinished. I'd very much like some other voices on this topic. To me, this makes sense, and I propose an edit on this topic. --DCLM ☎ 15:37, December 8, 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, all this seems to me like speculation. Can we really be sure it took him four minutes to revive after Suzie shot him? Can we really be sure it takes him the same time to come back to life every time he dies? Can we be really sure he kept coming back to life while burried? OncomingStorm12th ☎ 15:57, December 8, 2016 (UTC)