Talk:Fourteenth Doctor

Fourteenth Doctor

Gallery

Appearances

Talk

Cowards?

you are cowards – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.228.4.131 (talk).

For doing what?

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

22:48, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your inaccurate assessment. May you have a blessed day. —Danniesen ☎ 19:14, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

It's not a suit

Its a waistcoat – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jijones (talk • contribs) .

Thanks for pointing it out! I'll correct it now.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

23:06, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Is this the 14th Doctor?

Can we really be sure that this is the Fourteenth Doctor? We still don’t know what happened and there was a lot of talk about degenerating in this episode. Tennant might not be the Fourteenth Doctor any more than the Master was. <—-spoiler content was removed. —->. 73.132.191.69^{talk to me} 04:10, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

There's a BBC press release/website post that calls him the 14th. If they change it later we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. For now he's the 14th. Najawin ☎ 04:16, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Oh com'on, we all knew it would end up being David. They simply had no other choice considering how low the franchise has fallen over the years. XD--ModestyElyonLane ☎ 08:10, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

That's kind of besides the point, ModestyElyonLane.. TheGreatGabester ☎ 14:17, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

It’s also wildly inaccurate despite people continuing to cry about it. Danniesen ☎ 10:18, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Vortex Butterfly

I'm a little confused; how's the 'Vortex Butterfly' quote relevant? That's referring to the number of possible incarnations, not about 'revisiting' faces. TheGreatGabester ☎ 12:07, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

It refers to the fact that the Doctor will have more than 12 regenerations, so it's become tradition to quote it on the page for every incarnation produced by a regeneration after the Doctor's twelfth. Whether that's a good tradition is another matter. – n8 (☎) 16:03, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Paisley Tie

Appearance section states he is wearing paisley tie but it just isn't. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alanogue (talk • contribs) .

Current main image

The current main image is from the 60th anniversary preview. I thought images from previews weren't allowed? WaltK ☎ 02:41, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

And now it's from the comic? How are images settled upon? Surely a grab from the Centenary special is the most obvious? FractalDoctor ☎ 23:17, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Right now, in terms of officially released stories, COMIC: Liberation of the Daleks seems to be the best available image for an infobox. I'm sure it'll become a TV screenshot after the next episode, though. Cookieboy 2005 ☎ 23:59, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

I don't quite understand the logic behind replacing the still with the comic image; why is it the best available image, exactly? Because he's wearing a more neutral expression, or something? I can't think of any other reason not to use a still from the episode. TheGreatGabester ☎ 17:24, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

I agree. It might be because pictures where the subject is looking left are preferred, but that's by no means a requirement. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 17:26, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

I suggest you guys read Tardis:Guide to images and Help:Image cheat card; in short, it's a combination of a. the character facing left, b. it being a non-blurry image (the best images we can get from Power unfortunately are cropped in and don't look great resolution-wise), c. a neutral expression (something the Doctor lacks in Power, as y'know, his face is scrunched up in confusion). While usually images are chosen from a character's primary story medium, which usually is television... this isn't yet the case, as the Fourteenth Doctor's only story so far is a comic, and a scene at the end of another Doctor's episode doesn't really count.

The page will more than likely use a television screenshot eventually, but from the images available currently, the comic image is superior. In an ideal world we'd use a promotional image, but unfortunately this Wiki has weird policies that no other rational Wikis have, and we can't even change the policies as our policies are currently performing a Catch-22.

TL;DR: television ≠ (automatically) best image for an infobox.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

17:33, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

You needn't make such a suggestion because I've already read it.

a) Shambala said at Talk:Dodo Chaplet that looking left is "no big deal".

b) File:Fourteenth Doctor.jpg, for example, can hardly be described as "blurry".

c) The pictures for the First Doctor or Second Doctor aren't neutral.

I'm not saying that the current image is inappropriate, but that an image from the TV series would be no worse than this one. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 18:16, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

I much prefer the previous image, the one from the television episode. I don't see what was wrong with it? DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 18:26, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Regarding points a. and c., they're exceptions to the rules; but that's just it, they're exceptions. Under some circumstances images of characters facing right are allowed or having non-neautral expressions, yadda yadda, but they are not the standard as laid out by the policies.

Justifying a television screenshot just because it's a television screenshot regardless of quality on the basis that "oh but on this page an exception has been made" is counterintuitive. The comic illustration best satisfies the rules, even if we don't agree with them, and we unfortunately need to abide by those rules.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

18:53, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Another perspective: you guys are saying "why is the comic illustration better", but can I ask you, why is the television screenshot better?

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

18:56, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

My two cents: there seems to be some confusion over whether this is a requirement/rule that needs to be strictly enforced, or merely a guideline. It would seem important for everyone to be on the same page. (I don't claim to know the answer, I'm a newcomer to the wiki.) TheGreatGabester ☎ 19:07, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

A screenshot from the television story is by no means required to be the image. Nor is it the best we have. Besides, we don’t usually use post-regeneration images when more options are available. —Danniesen ☎ 19:11, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

In that case, further protracted and opinionated arguments about which image is better will probably take place. Maybe it makes sense to 'default to' the comic image for now, if it fits the guidelines the best; still, these guidelines seem a bit arbitrary and overly-fussy, if you ask me. TheGreatGabester ☎ 19:27, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

I think the rule at actual stake here is the "primary medium is preferred" rule that recently vexed us on the matter of Bernice Summerfield. I think at this stage it's fair to argue that comics are the Fourteenth Doctor's "primary medium": it's the only one in which he's yet headlined a story. An image from a story where this Doctor is the main character should prima facie be preferred to one from a story where he only has a short cameo appearance at the very end. Obviously, if ("if") the Fourteenth Doctor were to star in full-length TV stories in the future, a screenshot from these would clearly take precedence over the comic image — but until then? I think it's a fair argument to make. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 19:23, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

TheGreatGabester; these guidelines seem a bit arbitrary and overly-fussy, if you ask me... trust us, we know. We’re working on changing that. Unfortunately, for the time being, certain... obstacles... are making it a tough task to deal with. ——Danniesen ☎ 00:42, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Hopefully things should open up for change on Monday or Tuesday. The holiday meant no progress on that front was happening today. Najawin ☎ 00:50, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

I understand; we've been dealing with similar administrative issues over at Stranger Things Wiki recently. TheGreatGabester ☎ 21:23, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Surely there's a more suitable image that isn't from the comic now? It looks jarring when compared to the others. Nosbig 12:53, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

First Actor to Play Multiple Numbered Incarnations

Surely it should be pointed out that this is the first instance of an actor playing two mainline numbered incarnations. I feel like that has some significance in that the Fourteenth Doctor is a mainline Nth Doctor in a way the Curators, alternate Doctors and Shalka/Fatal Death aren't. IRegisteredForTimelines ☎ 05:19, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

This is noteworthy, yes. I have added it to the page in the BTS section. I already added this on List of Doctor Who television stories a good while ago. Danniesen ☎ 10:27, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

It's a tweed overcoat, not a trenchcoat.

Looks more as an overcoat of tweed instead of a trenchcoat. I zero know why people mistake it for a trenchcoat. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:81.152.178.69 (talk • contribs) .

Corrections to add

There are corrections to add.

The Fourteenth Doctor wore a double-breasted overcoat of navy-blue tweed, not a trenchcoat.

The Fourteenth Doctor's waistcoat and trousers be made of maroon and turquoise tartan, not brown.

The Fourteenth Doctor wore a teal tie in Liberty of the Daleks.

The Fourteenth Doctor's tie be of charcoal grey tweed.

Not Sure About This Line

The third of the Doctor's "skinny man" iterations

The line kinda feels to me to be somewhat vague and unhelpful. In 'skinny man incarnations' is it referring to the Ten, Meta Ten and Fourteen, Ten, Post Journey's End-Ten and Fourteen, or Ten, Eleven and Fourteen, or something else. Cause if Ten, Meta Ten and Fourteen,

If the first, I believe Meta Ten shouldn't really be considered 'An incarnation of the Doctor'. If the second, prior wiki precedent pretty explicitly classes Post JE-Ten and Pre-JE Ten as the same incarnation, which'd make Fourteen the 'second' not 'third', since the regeneration was aborted. And if it's the third, it just seems like a vague and unhelpful descriptor as what distinguishes those three as 'skinny men' over Two or Five or Eight for instance. And if something else, what? IRegisteredForTimelines ☎ 08:35, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

It's in reference to the Doctor Who The Official Annual 2024 feature The Strange Case of the Skinny Man, which highlights that the Fourteenth Doctor is the third Doctor in total to have the David Tennant body, after the Tenth Doctor and the Meta-Crisis Doctor, and refers to them all having the "skinny man" body as being unique. BananaClownMan ☎ 09:13, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Ah I see, there's a source behind it. That makes more sense as to why its there though I still contest that the wiki itself doesn't consider Meta 10 to be on the same level as the Tenth or Fourteenth Doctors (To the point where he's not even mentioned on the main overview of the Tenth Doctor's page, nor does he appear in the incarnation box among the 'widely accepted' incarnations) so I do think it should still be worth a discussion for the sake of consistency with regards to what degree of significance is attached to the Meta Crisis Doctor in relation to the numbered incarnations.I think at the very least the overview should treat the Fourteenth Doctor's appearence more in the abstract rather than directly quoting said source, acknowledging the point that this is indeed the third product of a regeneration to possess the Tennant face but distinguishing between the Meta-Crisis Doctor and the Tenth Doctor proper. IRegisteredForTimelines ☎ 10:15, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Conflicting opinions

Okay, so me and @BananaClownMan have been reverting each other's edits for a short while now, and to not risk an edit war, I'm taking it to the talk page. Not for the first time.

1. First of all, @BananaClownMan has added instances of where the Thirteenth Doctor has considered and/or risked regenerating. I don't feel these should be here because they're not references to the Fourteenth Doctor, just the potential of regeneration. Furthermore, as it is pretty clear the Fourteenth Doctor is not a typical regeneration given the stuff going on with his clothes, he couldn't have been anticipated so it means these references are all the more tenuous.
2. Secondly, I disagree with the section about The Power of the Doctor, as not only is it a bit over-detailed for something that doesn't even feature this incarnation of the Doctor (and using {{main}} to link to The Master's Dalek Plan/Thirteenth Doctor's regeneration is more elegant as it allows for lots of detail on those pages) I feel the way it's written veers too close to "Master-Doctor" territory.
3. Thirdly, the way BCM phrased the section about A Letter from the Doctor isn't in-keeping with T:VS as it mentions concepts such as "First Doctor's renewal" with those exact words, which weren't used in the story itself.
4. Fourth, he's removed my expanded section on Under Control because it "uses too many semi-colons". It doesn't, that's how you phrase multi-clause sentences in a list.
   EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝
   22:54, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Got to admit, it's a little hard not to take that opening a little personally, especially with a previous discission brought up, and with the time taking to hyperlink and scrub over it. It does come across as unneeded sarcasm, and a little hostile at a gut reaction. But, with that out the way, explanation time

1) Every Doctor currently has such moments listed on their pages under "A day to come" because regenerating would result in the next incarnation. However, I do see the potential for irrelevance. In fact, I've thinking about dividing the information since the Doctor's regenerations were given their own event pages; moments of potential regeneration going on the regeneration pages, while balant examplrs of future incarnations remaining on the Doctors' pages. For example, all the hints to the Tenth Doctor's regeneration throughout the 2009 specials going on the regeneration page, but him meeting the Eleventh Doctor while dreaming in COMIC: To Sleep, Perchance to Scream staying on the Eleventh Doctor page.

1.5) I still don't know what you mean by this, as the Fourteenth Doctor is, by all accounts, an incarnation true. Not only do we see him emerge from the Thirteenth Doctor's regeneration, but Russell T Davies himself as confirmed him to be the fourteenth incarnation, as opposed to the Tenth Doctor revisited.

2) I have no idea what this "Doctor-Master" is, but the version I am advocating just covers what happened, how it happened, why it happened and how it got undone. And all those just go over how the Master forced himself into being the incarnation succeeded the Thirteenth Doctor, thus hijacking the fourteenth incarnation for himself for a few hours. The version you currently advocate cuts out the Spy Master for the generic term "the Master", includes the Daleks and Cybermen despite their small role in the overall event, and absconds the details in how the process was reversed.

3) I believe we covered this previously with regards to the Toymaker in GAME: Double Danger ^[+]Loading...{"page":"44","1":"Double Danger (game)"}. Though I am reminded that I still need to participate my thoughts on your forum about this. After all, are we, as an encyclopaedia website, a place people come to research information, to skirt away naming something because the source material, though highly implies it, does not name it outwrite, even when we know what is being referenced?

4) I'll admit, that was a bit of an abbreviation. Though the structure could have worked with regular commas just a well and some information cut for space, I didn't have time to rewrite it as I had to leave for my bus to work, and just put "To many semicolons" because I lacked time to go into detail, but I didn't want to leave it blank, as that felt rude to do.

I hope you find these explanations satisfactory. Sincerely, BananaClownMan ☎ 10:22, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

I am sorry if my remark about Talk:First Doctor struck you the wrong way. I do feel we've been butting heads recently, and we should strive to talk our issues out between each other.

I do feel your suggestion to place the instances of potential regeneration and such on regeneration pages has a lot of merit and would be a much better place go document this information than the "A day to come" sections. I support your proposal there.

With the Fourteenth Doctor, you misunderstand me; I am not saying he isn't a "true" Doctor, but I do not believe the regeneration is natural. That's pretty textual in most of Fourteen's appearances as he's consistently questioning his old face and his clothes inexplicably changing.

With the Master-Doctor, I am just very wary of anything that could lead to heated discussions like the ones that took place on the Wiki a year ago.

With Double Danger (game) and the usage of names not used in sources that theyre being cited to, @Scrooge MacDuck has reiterated on Tricey that you must stick to what the sources say. It is policy and had to be followed. If you don't like it, surely the best course of action would be for you to open a thread at Forum:The Panopticon. (For the record, I let the Toymaker instance slide as the connection will be... unambiguous very soon and it feels redundant to change something that will inevitably get changed back in a very short amount of time.)

As for the final point, I disagree that commas would have worked just as well. That's why I used semi-colons, which is grammatically correct. But to remove all that expanded detail that clarifies the events of the story just because of your opinions on the grammar, I don't feel that was justified.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

02:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

In my opinion, including every mention of a possible death/regeneration in the "Days to come" is asinine, because it is inconsistent in stories that regeneration will/won't assuredly result in the same "next incarnation" every time. For instance, if the Eighth Doctor hadn't regenerated in the specific circumstances seen in Night, the War Doctor would not have been born. We know this.

Speculating about the Spy-Master being a replacement 14th incarnation is just that, speculation. It begs the question - is this page about the blank concept of a fourteenth incarnation of the Doctor, or the specific person who WAS this incarnation? Because it seems to me that it is the latter. If that's the case, we don't need the inclusion of other people who would claim to be the fourteenth Doctor, or if we do include those things it should be a passing mention. OS25🤙☎️ 18:28, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Well put @OS25; this page isn't The Doctor's fourteenth incarnation, it's the Fourteenth Doctor; likewise, we do not have paragraphs of details about TCofD Nine/SotS Nine/War/Rose Nine on each other's pages. We may briefly state "there were multiple ninth incarnations who succeeded the Eighth Doctor", but only briefly.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

18:40, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Infobox image

Forgive my lack of suggestions (yet) but I'm just here to say, I hope we can finally update the infobox image soon with a suitable picture of live action 14th Doctor. — Fractal Doctor @ 21:24, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

I'd imagine we're going to wait until all three specials have been broadcast. WaltK ☎ 00:05, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

It’s done, figured since he’s the current onscreen Doctor, it was about time we had an actual live action image of him. RikuLynch ☎ 06:36, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Not without discussion and certainly not a promo image rather than a shot from an episode. It took the Thirteenth Doctor up until the end of Series 11 or 12 to replace the image of her post-regeneration, I'm sure we can wait another 2 weeks. StevieGLiverpool ☎ 07:31, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Correct things about the Fourteenth Doctor

The Fourteenth Doctor's coat be an overcoat of navy blue tweed. Not a trenchcoat.

The Fourteenth Doctor's waistcoat and trousers be maroon and turquoise tartan, not brown.

The tie be charcoal grey tweed.

Can you please add this to the file. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.151.252.93 (talk).

Potential New Profile Image

I've noticed some discussion about potentially changing the profile image for the 14th Doctor, so here's one I think might work. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by TARDIS91 (talk • contribs) .

• 

  Current

• 

  1. 1
• 

  1. 2
• 

  1. 3
• 

  1. 4
• 

  1. 5
• 

  1. 6
• 

  1. 7
• 

  1. 8
• 

  1. 9
• 

  1. 10
• 

  1. 11
• 

  1. 12
• 

  1. 13
• 

  1. 14

Creating a gallery so people can add potential images.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

16:27, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

2 gets my vote StevieGLiverpool ☎ 21:37, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

I vote 5, but I like them all. -- MattTheNerd42 ☎ 18:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

If it must be changed, I would vote for 2. Frankly though, bar them being a live action depiction of 14 rather than comic form, none of the suggested images so far are as good as the current infobox. Snivy ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦ 18:52, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

My choice would be number 1 TARDIS91

A lot of the images look unnecessarily compressed to me, as though adhering to the old image policy. Cookieboy 2005 ☎ 16:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Doesn't help that the BBC makes accessing the 4K versions incredibly difficult.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

16:53, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Have some more options. WaltK ☎ 19:21, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Introducing #12 as an option. This one will be controversial, but technically justifiable: this image, despite being a promotional image, was used in Whotopia: The Ultimate Guide to the Whoniverse ^[+]Loading...["Whotopia: The Ultimate Guide to the Whoniverse (reference book)"], so it does come from a valid source. So it's fair game, and, as it's not a screenshot but a photo, it has better composition, lighting, clarity, etc. Now, some in the future may not realise this image's source and try to add promo images not used in valid sources on pages, but that's a general misunderstanding of the image policies we regularly encounter anyway.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

19:59, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Although one detractor in my opinion is the lack of bokeh (the out of focus background that gives subject separation).

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

20:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I love #1 but I suspect him facing right will probably mean it isn't used mumble mumble grumble. I think the others are quite dark and murky. — Fractal Doctor @ 20:09, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

A lot of the proposed images really lack dynamic range; as you said, they're quite murky. The 4K versions of the episodes won't just have better picture resolution, but have better colour. I really think we need to get screenshots from a source better than YouTube or iPlayer as the compression to 720p/1080p ruins the footage.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

20:14, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree. I tried a few places for screenshots and they're all a bit murky, unless we artificially tweak one (can we do that?). Also, so many shots of 14 are with other characters, such as Donna, or in darkened scenes. I haven't got access to screencaps of The Giggle yet but I wonder if there are any good moments from the daylight scenes in Bristol or something decent from an INT. TARDIS scene? I'm just thinking brightness will help. — Fractal Doctor @ 20:23, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

As it turns out, the recent batch of scenes from The Giggle uploaded onto YouTube have been in 4K (finally) so I'm adding #13, taken from the scene atop UNIT HQ. Has natural lighting, good bokeh, and Fourteen is facing left. The only detractor IMO is that he's missing some parts of his costume, such as the tie and coat.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

19:08, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

It's a shame - I found a couple of potential shots from near the end of "The Giggle" too but 14 is without his tie/coat, which I feel are sort of iconic to his general look. Nice to have an option of 14 shown in daylight though. — Fractal Doctor @ 21:28, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Added another screencap to the gallery of proposed infobox pics (#14). — Fractal Doctor @ 22:20, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Has the image policy changed? Iirc, focussed crops like the image in the infobox and #4 are what we should be aiming for rather than these wider images with dead space on the sides. Unless it is now different (which would mean the other Doctor articles need changing). Snivy ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦ 22:26, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

The image policy has changed a little, yes. — Fractal Doctor @ 22:49, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

You misunderstand @Snivystorm; the whole point of overhauling the image policies was to not have super cropped in photos like #4. We shouldn't be cropping out hair and the bust of the character, and in terms of photo composition, having some breathing room is a good thing.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

23:36, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

What has it changed to then? I've checked T:Images but it appears there's now no reference to infobox images before (ie: Fourth Doctor's cropped image compared to the shoulder cropped version and all the criteria outlining why the former is better than the latter). I'm guessing #2 is the way forward? Snivy ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦ 22:06, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

My choice in this order would be 1>6>5. I like 1 the best because he's actually smiling rather than looking stressed out like the other two.

Forum:Temporary forums/Overhauling image policies#Conclusion: "Infobox images for in-universe characters should be cropped around the head, but can and generally should include the full head, not crop out the chin and hair. In some cases going as low as the shoulder can be justified". As parts of Fourteen's costume should be displayed, a photo including Fourteen's shoulders and upper chest is a good thing.

#2 isn't a good image as it crops out Fourteen's hair and is a bit washed out in terms of colour.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

22:29, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

first mentioned

this doctor was first mentioned by the curator in the day of the doctor- guest – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 109.146.85.114 (talk).

The concept that the Doctor would revisit faces was, but the Fourteenth Doctor specifically wasn't.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

18:55, 13 December 2023 (UTC)