Toggle menu
Toggle personal menu
Not logged in
Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits.

Talk:Tasha Lem

Discussion page
Revision as of 23:54, 29 January 2014 by 68.146.70.124 (talk) (→‎Species: new section)

Theory she mentions dying to the Daleks multiple times, has an ambiguously sexual relationship with the Doctor and can pilot the Tardis

Is it possible this is actually River Song?The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.253.76.102 (talk).

No. Evan Norton 07:24, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
that's just silly. of course not. Allisonbn 02:29, December 28, 2013 (UTC)
Allisonbn please read Tardis:No personal attacks. There is no need to insult an editor or his idea. Shambala108 02:48, December 28, 2013 (UTC)
It looks like she is an unknown incarnation of River Song - Lem is Mel backwards, and Tasha is short for Natasha, which translates into "Born on Christmas". Moffat wouldn't miss this opportunity. Nitrobg 12:05, December 28, 2013 (UTC)
For now at least, this is just speculation, and as such belongs only on Howling:The Howling. Thanks. Shambala108 15:46, December 28, 2013 (UTC)

I know there's been some speculation that Tasha was originally meant to be River. If there's any truth to that, it may have only been very early on. Maybe at the story outline stage. Because a close examination of the episode reveals that River couldn't possibly have filled Tasha's role. It wouldn't make sense for River to be head of the Papal Mainframe, much less for her to be Dalek-ized. I also can't see her threatening to destroy an entire planet (especially one with a human colony on it). So apart from a few lines of dialogue and a somewhat flirty relationship with the Doctor, the two characters don't really have much in common. Slughorn42 02:45, December 30, 2013 (UTC)

Species

In the infobox it says her species is human. First, we don't know that, especially given her ability to not age. Second, even if she was human, by the end of the episode she's a Dalek puppet, so shouldn't that be her species. Or, at least, "former human"? 68.146.70.124talk to me 23:54, January 29, 2014 (UTC)

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.