More actions
Time Lord?
I know that sources differ on the whole Time Lords/Gallifreyans thing, but seeing as some sources are very clear on not all Gallifreyans being Time Lords -- I.M. Foreman pops to mind, and even in the Moffat era, Listen suggests that the Doctor had to become a Time Lord -- shouldn't we be a little more cautious about calling Granny Two and Granny Five Time Lords with unknown names?
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 20:53, December 2, 2018 (UTC)
- We list all the other relatives of the Doctor as Time Lords, so I don’t see why their grandmothers should be an exception. Also, I’m sure Time Lords run in families, as in, relatives of Time Lords will be Time Lords. Ben Moore812 ☎ 21:35, December 2, 2018 (UTC)
- I agree that multiple sources do says Time Lords and Gallifreyans aren't interchangeable. As SOTO pointed out, we have IU proof that not all Gallifreyans are Time Lords, and that not all Time Lords are Gallifreyans (Ace, for example). Doing something "wrong" for all other relatives doesn't mean we should persist on the error. It means we should go back and fix all the other "mistakes". Also unless we have a source for "relatives of Time Lords will be Time Lords", it becomes speculation, which isn't really a valid source, now, is it? All in all, I think we should take them off the "Time Lord" categories until such proof is given in a story. OncomingStorm12th ☎ 22:47, December 2, 2018 (UTC)
- To sum up, User:SOTO and User:OncomingStorm12th are right: we don't put information on in-universe pages that doesn't come from the stories. Out of universe info and speculation are not valid for in-universe articles. Shambala108 ☎ 23:28, December 2, 2018 (UTC)