Talk:The Master/Archive 6

	This page is an archive. Please do not make any edits here. Edit the active conversation only.

Requesting Redesign of Out-of-Universe templates again

<Admin note: this page was archived due to its extreme length. The following discussion has been added to the current page as it is still under discussion.>

Sense the discussion on MacQueen has finally come to a close, I want to reopen discissions on the infoboxes which trail the side of the page. Rather than re-explain my position, I'll let me-from-the-past do it:

We could certainly find a way to link to a section which details the out-of-universe divergences with a correct tone. Just make a template that says something like "Confused? Check out this in-universe explanation!" and links to something in the Behind the scenes section that details the divergences. We can help readers understand the out-of-universe confusion without breaking our Article's focus and splitting the page in half. As a graphic designer, I must say that what we have set-up right now is nothing more than an eye-sore, and as multiple people have pointed out, it gets worse when you try and read the darn things. I cringe every time I read the "extra-crispy" joke, half because it's not funny and out of the tone we aim for, and half because I've read that book, and I'm not certain that analysis is entirely accurate. Looking at how the 2015 Wikia update effects the template and article makes it clear that what we are doing right now is simplynot acceptable by any means. It splits the reader's concentration, breaks the point of the site, and makes the set-up of that section a total mess, which is a big problem because Ainley is only on the most important Masters of all time, and the most interesting to read about. We should be filling that section with interesting details, treasure troves of images, and in-depth coverage, but we can't, because this ugly-box is blocking any of that from working.

I think that covers it. To me these boxes are a real eye-sore, more so when you actually try and read them. They remind me of the picture captions on that one Transformers wiki -- where they're trying to be funny but instead it feels really out-of-place. I think that, as suggested above, we can easily turn these into behind-the-scenes sections (without the eye-bleeding humour) and then have a template the suggests readers to check out individual sections. Quick box, easy idea, doesn't break our style. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 11:38, September 1, 2015 (UTC)

Seb

Could Seb be counted as a companion of Missy? Because I think at he should be included in the Companions section. --Commander Awesome (AKA TheCrazyWeirdo) (Talk - Contribs) 21:49, September 28, 2015 (UTC)

Order of 'After Cheeta World'

It makes the most sense to order the subsections in 'After Cheeta World' as 'Tremas Persists' first, 'Finding new regenerations in the past' second, and 'Tremas Lost' third. This is because it makes a lot more sense to finish off the Tremas stories before we go into other incarnations. You wouldn't put 'Day of the Daleks' after 'Planet of the Spiders' on the Third Doctor's page, now would you? To people who do not realize this, this will not disrupt the Master templates. That would only happen if I changed the link. It's really frustrating to have so many revert this simple edit and to have to take it to the talk page, where no one will reply because no one ever replies to anything on this wiki anymore. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 13:00, October 1, 2015 (UTC)

If there is not controversy by the end of the year, I will swap the sections accordingly. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 06:28, December 3, 2015 (UTC)

Harvest of Time

I have removed many of the sections claiming that the Master was abducted out of time, because they seem to be based off of the asumption that all the Masters which we know of must be featured in The Harvest of Time. I'm currently searching through the book to find out which incarnations are directly refered to. I'm going to start listing them off, if anyone would like to help that would be grand.

It was no version of the Master that the Doctor recognised. A young man in a business suit, beardless, with a mop of boyish hair. His face, what the Doctor could see of it, seemed friendly and plausible. The face of a politician, the kind of man people would find it easy to trust. ‘He could almost be you,’ the Master commented.Clearly meant to be Simm

This was a female version of the Master: still alive, if this ghastly state counted as life. Like the corpse, she also wore a frilled black outfit. Her hair was black, veined in white, combed back from her forehead. Unlike the Doctor’s present companion, her face was beardless. The mask hid most of it. But he recognised something in her cheekbones and brow, a family likeness that was clearly intentional.Everyone's first intentions will be to claim that this is Missy. However, as the book predates Missy, this can not be confirmed.

These are the only two direct connections I could find. This, and another to a decaying Master who dies in captivity -- clearly not one we know so far. I'll continue my hunting later. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 02:21, October 3, 2015 (UTC)

Norman Stanley

Would it be fair to say that Norman Stanley (the "Telephone Mechanic" which installs the telephone which strangles the Doctor) briefly plays the Master in Terror of the Autons episode three? After the scene in question, the mechanic enters the Autons' bus at about 17:30, and takes off a latex mask, revealing himself as the Master. This appears to be a similar situation to Anthony Ainley playing the Master under heavy make-up and a pseudonym (both in the credits and in-story) and Delgado briefly playing Farrel after the Master puts him in a mask at the end of episode four of Autons. -- Tybort (talk page) 14:41, October 17, 2015 (UTC)

Oh yea, it's plainly obvious that the repairman is the Master. I'm actually shocked that this hasn't been referenced on the site before. I figured the reason we left it off was that we had left off similar cases on the template (Paul McGann played the Master in the TV movie for a few shots for instance). In my opinion, we need to redesign these templates so that there can be multiple "main" actor variables while still keeping to the custom search tool that no one uses (seriously, anyone ever do that?). We clearly could do it with the "Other Actor(s)" section so I don't see why this isn't possible. I would say that Gordon Tipple, Paul McGann, and Norman Stanley are the only actors that deserve to go as "other actors." OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 15:26, October 17, 2015 (UTC)

But surely every disguise of the Master is actually a separate Time Lord? – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 197.88.60.232 (talk).

Uhh.... OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 15:55, October 17, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't know either. But either way, my question can be summed up as "Does Stanley portray the Roger Delgado incarnation in Terror of the Autons as well as Delgado himself?" Anything involving redesigning infoboxes and the issue of Paul McGann is kind of out of my depth here, and I'm not sure how I feel either way, and I've seen the TV movie. -- Tybort (talk page) 15:59, October 17, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, he does. I'm not sure if he should be added to the infobox tho, is the other issue. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 16:24, October 17, 2015 (UTC)

Yana

Surely a seperate page should be made for the Professor Yana identity created by the Chameleon Arch? John Smith has one after all. --MrThermomanPreacher ☎ 19:16, January 18, 2016 (UTC)

Yana

Surely a seperate page should be made for the Professor Yana identity created by the Chameleon Arch? John Smith has one after all. --MrThermomanPreacher ☎ 19:19, January 18, 2016 (UTC)

I think it should stay in the same sense we haven't got individual master pages. DENCH-and-PALMER ☎ 19:24, January 18, 2016 (UTC)

Eleventh Doctor Comics

The internet appears undecided on whether the version of the Master in Titan's 11th Doctor comics is the Roger Delgado incarnation or a (presumably) post-Macqueen and pre-Jacobi incarnation. I was wondering whether this point had been settled.109.145.16.227^{talk to me} 18:16, June 11, 2016 (UTC)

The incarnation that has appeared so far has been the Delgado version, however the story has shown that the Master was also present during the "Cyclor event", hinting at a Time War incarnation. I have my theories on what will end up happening in the comic (and who the Master will be revealed as being), but until we have concrete proof in the comic, we can't add anything to the Master article. --Revan\Talk 18:31, June 11, 2016 (UTC)

Just to clarify to other readers: the Master featured in The Judas Goatee is indeed Delgado. We are seeing, in that comic, the repercussions of the Master's previous actions. Meanwhile, the Master seen in the rest of the comic is the Time War Master. OS25 (Talk) 16:39, April 22, 2017 (UTC)

Premiership

Do we know how long Harold Saxon served as Prime Minister? It seemed as if he got onto the Valiant pretty quickly after the election.

Delgado Master

Shouldn't the section on the Delgado Master be labelled something other than Thirteenth Master now that Big Finish has shown that Beevers was the Thirteenth Master before his accident?

We still can't confirm that Beeves wasn't playing Delgado at this point. Besides, what would we call the Delgado Master?BananaClownMan ☎ 10:37, August 19, 2016 (UTC)

Actually, Beevers is most definitely not playing Delgado. The only reason Delgado is known as the 13th is because of Legacy of the Daleks. To say that Big Finish have secretly recast an incarnation of the Master just because of a novel which they themselves have contradicted many times is a bit reaching. In the scenes on Terserus, Beevers is not acting like Delgado, he's just being his usual Master with a dose of youthful naivety. I say that unless there is anything from Big Finish that actually says that Beevers is Delgado we shouldn't say that Big Finish say that Beevers is Delgado. CoT ? 00:01, August 20, 2016 (UTC)

Just want to point out for new users that no headings are to be changed during this discussion. If it's determined that they need to be changed, only an admin can change them, as this article's headings are dependent on templates. Shambala108 ☎ 02:36, August 20, 2016 (UTC)

While that may be true for some headings, no template links to the section titled "thirteenth incarnation". Nonetheless, no changes should be made concerning this matter while there is still a discussion going on.

Other headings in the "appearances" sections are named after the Master's aliases. The two aliases that encapsulate Delgado's master for me are "Emil Keller" and "Victor Magister". According to Mind of Evil, he spent several months going by Keller. According to Who Killed Kennedy, the general public knew him as Magister. Therefore, I would call the heading either "Emil Keller" incarnation or "Victor Magister" incarnation. CoT ? 03:46, August 20, 2016 (UTC)

Those alias titles mostly ably because that Master (Tremas/John Smith/Yana/Harold Saxon) used it to define their time, expect Number Tremas, who used it once, but it was his stolen body. Delgado changed aliases like the seasons, so perhaps a title that reflects his appearance like Pratt and Gomez, or one that reflects his time like Roberts and Macqueen.BananaClownMan ☎ 12:53, August 20, 2016 (UTC)

It stands to reason that each incarnation of the Master should have its own page, just like the Doctor does, since there are so many of them. It'll be easier for the readers, myself included, to pick on each given Master, and we also won't have to scroll down that much to get info for Missy.

Doesn't this make sense? Shouldn't this be the way it is supposed to be?– The preceding unsigned comment was added by HighlanderFan83 (talk • contribs) .

Considering that we used to have separate pages and went through a lot of work to merge them into one, we are not splitting them up. There is even an attempt to merge all the Romana pages into one. So on this wiki, we are tending toward one page for each Time Lord, with the Doctor the only exception. Shambala108 ☎ 14:56, November 25, 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough. However, I have to let you know that it is a huge mistake, in my opinion. This character's history is suchh a detailed mess, it just can't make sense of the discrepancies and inconsistencies coherently.– The preceding unsigned comment was added by HighlanderFan83 (talk • contribs) .

That mess is exactly why we merged all the pages. It's not always easy to figure out which Master appears in some stories, and we don't know all of his numbered incarnations the way we do the Doctor's. Shambala108 ☎ 15:12, November 25, 2016 (UTC)

How come the Master's page isn't set up like the Doctor's?

Where each incarnation has their own page with one large homepage. Xx-connor-xX ☎ 23:32, January 2, 2017 (UTC)

T:MASTER is a good starting point if you want to know why we made this decision. Forum:The Master was the original discussion on this.
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 00:03, January 3, 2017 (UTC)

Doesn't stop it from being a genuinely bad idea. I spend far too long in this page when really, all I want is to look on a specific incarnation, and that's it.

What political party was Saxon allied with? Was he labour or tory? Mc1934 ☎ 12:07, March 26, 2017 (UTC)

This is many years overdue, but I must also agree that documenting the Master in this way is way too cumbersome and makes it incredibly hard to look up. I can think of at least two better alternatives:

• Label the individual Masters by actor (e.g. The Master (John Simm), The Master (Sacha Dhawan), and so on).
• Label them by story debut (e.g. The Master (Utopia), The Master (Spyfall), and so on).

WaltK ☎ 16:13, August 27, 2020 (UTC)

Whilst I personally agree that we should split, a recent thread decided otherwise. It is far too soon to poke that hornets' nest again, and you'd need new evidence/perspective to do so, lest you find yourself in violation of T:POINT.

In any event, the amatter naming the individual Master pages isn't really the problem. T:DAB — that is to say, dabbing by debut — works perfectly well. It is instead deciding which Masters get individual pages, due to disagreements between valid sources on whether Pratt & Beevers are playing a disfigured Delgado or the next Master after Delgado, on whether whatever Ainley did to get control of Tremas's body can be likened to a regeneration or if he's still Beevers "underneath", etc. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 16:19, August 27, 2020 (UTC)

Template:Masterpic

Currently the image listing for Template:Masterpic appears to have some errors in it. Would it not be more productive to list the Masters in chronological order as dictated by the article The Master? There seems to be no reason why Macqueen and Jacobi are out of sequence, nor Pratt, Ainley and Roberts repeated. The listing below removes repeats and includes all Masters regardless of medium (TV, AUDIO, COMIC) as the wiki recognises all officially licensed stories as equal value.

Current listing	Proposed listing
Eight-Year-Old	Eight-Year-Old
Delgado	Delgado
Pratt	Pratt
Ainley	Beevers (crop image)
Roberts	Ainley
COMIC: The Glorious Dead	Roberts
Jacobi	COMIC: The Glorious Dead
Pratt	AUDIO: Mastermind (crop image)
Ainley	Macqueen
Macqueen	Comics "Asian Child" (use image)
Roberts	Jacobi
Simm	Simm
Gomez	Gomez

NickM98 ☎ 06:08, July 8, 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately any page which uses a template to cycle through several different images really isn't up for debate. This is because there are strict technical requirements for the images in order to make them cycle correctly various desktop browsers, and the solution we use behaves slightly differently on the browsers that FANDOM supports. Moreover, in several places -- on both desktop and mobile -- images are chosen by the software to represent the article. With our multiple-image changer, that image is the first one in the stack. As it is illogical for The Master to be represented by the child version -- who never even had a line, much less a minute's worth of screen time -- he was deliberately removed from the stack. This makes Delgado the representative image for The Master on mobile devices, which is sensible, since he originated the part.

Also, your listing of the current images doesn't take into account the point of the slideshow. The way the code is designed, it's meant to be kind of like the current incumbent having a dream about their past. The notion is that the incumbent actor be the most dominant, and different, former actors are cycled in between images of the incumbent. So they're going to be out of order, anyway.

This is easiest to illustrate with {{docpic}}, because the Doctor has easily-understood numbers for incarnations. In Safari, at least, the order goes something like this: 12 1 12 2 1 12 3 1 12 4 1 12 5 4 12 6 5 12 4 7 6 5 1 12 8 7 12 6 8 War 8 12 8 9 War 12 8 10 9 12 8 11 10 12 9 11 10 12 10 11 12 11 ... and then it continues repeating from 8 through 12 or a while, but gives overwhelming precedence to 10-12.

In other words, the effect is a halting progression, at best -- which gradually becomes more superimposition as the thing continues.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍  17:51: Mon 18 Sep 2017

In fully understand the progressive countdown-style order in which the code forces the images to appear, I am not suggesting that this be changed.

Using {{docpic}} as an example, in the list found on the edit page, each face is listed in chronological order (1, 2, 3, 4, etc.) with no unnecessary repeated images or mixed-up list order. This is all I am proposing for {{masterpic}}, a simple re-ordering of the existing list on the edit page as suggested above so that during the countdown montage of the final template, the order (relative to how the template shows each image) is correct. NickM98 ☎ 05:16, January 19, 2018 (UTC)

Missy

I recently edited Missy's abilities with her actions in dodging a Dalek's laser and knocking down the Master and the Doctor in "The Doctor Falls when I saw that John Simm's Master was labelled a "decent brawler" after attacking the Twelfth Doctor. Out of interest, why was this changed? Himelover567 ☎ 00:57, August 25, 2017 (UTC)

Abominable Showmen. That shouldn't be there.

Guys come on. Abominable Showmen is clearly drawn as a fun side-story, not to be taken seriously. It's obviously non-canon. Same for Doctor Twelfth. Don't mix it up with the main story, it's just confusing. Either include it in a different section or don't include it at all.– The preceding unsigned comment was added by David Kibasennin (talk • contribs) .

I strongly suggest you read the message left for you by User:Amorkuz on your talk page at User talk:David Kibasennin. You are new to this wiki and therefore you don't yet understand how we define what stories we count. Shambala108 ☎ 05:23, October 30, 2017 (UTC)

Note for everyone's attention. The validity of Titan Back-ups, including The Abominable Showmen, was decided by the community at Thread:177099. The validity of the Dr. Men books, including Dr. Twelfth, was decided by the community at Thread:215070. Anyone interested in how validity is decided on the wiki is welcome to peruse the debates (the former is more extensive). However, based on these decisions, please refrain from removing information originating from these stories. Amorkuz ☎ 09:53, October 30, 2017 (UTC)

Recent edits

One editor voiced their concerns regarding recent changes to the page, specifically requesting the in-universe information based on which things have been moved around. I additionally point out that these changes removed at least two important pieces of information: one regarding the duration of the Master's stay at a certain place, and the other regarding the Master being given a new regeneration cycle by the Time Lords. The latter is a bit of a biggy. So its removal cannot stand. The other editor requested the changes to be discussed here on the talk page first. I would appreciate it if the request is obliged. Amorkuz ☎ 22:52, January 14, 2018 (UTC)

the master's execution as seen in the flashback in th emovie happens before Lungbarrow (novel). in lungbarrow the doctor is given his mission to get the master's remains leading into the movie. but Master (audio story) is set after the new adventures (death from the VNAs appears, chris,roz and bernice are referenced etc) yet is also set before the movie. which means that the doctor didn't complete his mission because otherwise the movie would have happened. and he wouldn't be the seventh doctor at all anymore. it shows that the doctor made the deal with death ten years ago to give the master a human life. so in a way master creates a ‘reprieve’ for both the doctor and the master, though in the end the doctor must get back on course with his mission of bringing the master's remains to galiifrey so that the movie can happen

even though Mastermind (audio story) and Eyes of the Master (audio story) are both made by big finish they contradict each other. in eyes of the master the master says the last time he encountered the doctor was in the movie. and they both know about the ‘predicament’ he was in which means it was him getting stuck in the eye of harmony.

in The Sound of Drums the master says that the time lords resurrected him to fight in the time war and in eyes of the master the time lords have resurrected him to fight the daleks but even he knows that they're trying to prepare him for something bigger. it's obvious that big finish was trying to link to the sound of drums when they made eyes ofthe master. the only other way it could be is if somehow offscreen he dies AGAIN before the time war and the time lords resurrect him AGAIN. seems to me that's really really unlikely and even the page for eotm mentions sound of drums under continuinty

i put the thing about the hatchling project clones from Interference - Book One (novel) before eyes of the master because theyre bothe with the 8th doctor and both are about the master being under the control of the time lords but really it could go anywhere if someone has a better idea as long as it goes somewhere intsead of being deleted

also i fixed some language issues like ‘due to the Time Lords' belief that he would be the perfect warrior due to’ and ‘given a new lease of life’ (which is nicely poetic but not actually specific and could just mean ‘the time lords showed the master that life was really worth living which made him a happier person’) and those keep getting revertedHomelessForsakenBetrayed&Alone ☎

Thank you for engaging in a discussion, which is much preferred over edit reversal. I will let this discussion run its course until a mutually agreeable solution is found. I would like to point out just two things. It would be easier for us to understand your findings if proper grammar (capital letters at the beginning of sentences, apostrophes etc.) is used also on the talk page. Your fellow editors deserve the same courtesy as shown towards readers of the page. Secondly, "seems to me that's really really unlikely" is not an argument accepted on this wiki. Doctor Who universe is, unfortunately for those of us who care about continuity, significantly discontinuous. There are multiple contradicting accounts, alternative explanations, etc. of same events. Just the fact that you cannot reconcile the text (direct quote) of one story with the text of another story, does not mean one of them gets rejected. This is one of the reasons why timelines in general have been banned from the main namespace and relegated to a special sandbox. Amorkuz ☎ 23:29, January 14, 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about the grammar. I know about contradictions and all. That’s why i’m trying to get how eyes of the master contradicts mastermind etc in there instead of skipping over it to make it seem like it doesn’t contradict. What i mean about it being unlikely is not just that if doctor who was real it would be unlikely for the same thing to happen twice. But that it doesn’t make any sense for the big finish writers who have definitely seen the new series to write something about the master that matches what the new series says exactly without it being the same event.HomelessForsakenBetrayed&Alone ☎

The Doctor and the Master are both time travelers, and it has been proved by the likes of Doorway to Hell and Vampire of the Mind for them to meet out of sequence, not until the Doctor and River Song. So Master and Lungburrow don't need to flow into each other. I have listen to Eyes of the Master again, and find no such comment, the closet being that the Master remembers being in San Francisco. The predicament could also easily be the state he was left in at the end of Mastermind. And it is not clarified if he was indeed resurrect into Alex Macqueen; he only says he was "rescued".BananaClownMan ☎ 23:49, January 14, 2018 (UTC)

Actually i think the word is 'plucked.' There is no 'predicament' at the end of Mastermind (audio story). Rather, the master is free and in possession of his tardis, and importantly the doctor knows nothing about his current whereabouts anyway. The doctor and the master are both time travellers, but more importantly they're both time lords. Which means that it's not normal for them to meet out of order. In Doorway to Hell (comic story) the master actually ASSUMES that the 12th doctor is the newly-regenerated 4th. Meeting out of order doesn't just happen randomly. If it did then the master also would have no way of knowing whether the 'predicament' was something the doctor was even aware of yet. I can't really double check eotm for whether he really does say that san francisco was specifically the last meeting but if not then it makes more sense. Still doesn't fit with mastermind of course but it would fit the DWM comic version. I know eotm doesn't say the word "resurrected" specifically. Using the exact same language as the sound of drums would be trite. However: the original series showed the master running out of regenerations. In the sound of drums he has a new regeneration cycle and says that it was given to him by the time lords after the original series so that he could fight the daleks in the time war. In eyes of the master (written by people who watch and generally try to follow the new series) he has a new regeneration cycle and says that it was given to him by the time lords so that he could fight the daleks, and that they are preparing him for something bigger. It is obviously a reference. HomelessForsakenBetrayed&Alone ☎

Many Time Lords meet out of sync with the Doctor, take the Monk and the Rani for example. And even though Mastermind ends with him free, he is still stuck in a dying body. And there is no evidence to suggest that Eyes of the Master is referencing The Sound of Drums; its pure speculation to say that at this stage.BananaClownMan ☎ 00:27, January 15, 2018 (UTC)

You're just repeating the same things that i have already addressed. I have already demonstrated that barring exceptional circumstances, the master and doctor meet in order. To call the connection between eyes of the master and the sound of drums "pure speculation" is patently false when i have already shown that the two accounts match exactly and the former cannot have been written without knowledge of the latter. My edit said,

...a "predicament"...which he claimed the Time Lords had rescued him from. The Master believed that the Time Lords were "softening [him] up for something." (AUDIO: Eyes of the Master) The Master would later claim that they had only resurrected him because he would be a perfect warrior for a Time War. (TV: The Sound of Drums)

There is absolutely no speculation there. It relates precisely what the stories say, in the most logical order based on both what the writers probably intended AND the most obvious understanding of what the stories mean. The only other way to write the article without making it clunky and nonsensical would be to say that 'if the Time Lords really were softening him up for something, we have no idea what' and to speculate that 'the Master must have run out of regenerations a second time, only to be granted a new regeneration cycle by the Time Lords once again, who wanted him to fight the Daleks for them again. This would be the equivalent of making a page called Molly (The Night of the Doctor) because it's "speculation" to say that the Molly mentioned in that story is the same Molly as in Dark Eyes, and not some other companion who coincidentally shares the name. HomelessForsakenBetrayed&Alone ☎

I am not repeating myself, I am mearly countering something you said: I say time travelers can meet in the wrong order, you say Time Lords cant, I bring up evidence to the contrary.

You're new here, arn't you? In that case, let me inform you of something I had to learn thd hard way: this wiki is very specific when it comes to wording. In fact, if memory serves, when Dark Eyes 2 came out, the ressurection was placed just above Macqueen, but when Dark Eyes 3 went into further detail about Macqueen's backstory, it was moved back to the Time War subsection due to the word choise of "rescued from a predicament" went against "Time Lord ressurection". Maybe if you should track down thd one who edited the pagd that day and get there 2 cents in this?BananaClownMan ☎ 11:26, January 15, 2018 (UTC)

So you're just defending the current state of the page on the grounds that whoever made it that way must've had a good reason? It was this edit here. The reasoning that gives is that the previous version of the page implied that the Macqueen Master was actually the incarnation who fought in the war. Which was a legitimate issue with the page, and as we know now, it was the child Master and the Jacobi Master who fought in the war. In fact, later down the page Macqueen's Master is erroneously conflated with the Master who fought in the Time War some more. But my edit didn't say that Macqueen actually fought in the war. It just said that it was the reason the Master was resurrected (or rather, that the Master himself claims that).HomelessForsakenBetrayed&Alone ☎

You've kind'a answered your own question there; we do not, at this stage, know if Macqueen was involved with the war, just that he is being "softened up" with the Eminence before he went rogue and started doing his own thing. Hence why the wiki only covers the "rescued from a predicament" part on his section and the "resurrected by the Time Lords" bit in the Time War section; because we simply don't have undeniable confirmation that it was Macqueen that was resurrected for the war, we only know that he was rescued to fight the Daleks. The Sound of Drums explicitly states that was resurrected for the war, hence why it is placed in that subsection, while Eyes of the Master is placed separate due to it lacking concrete proof the Master is talking about the Time War. Since it took the 50th anniversary for the Doctor's involvement in the war to be clarified, perhaps we'll find out in 2021, but until then to say which Master it was (Macqueen, Child, Jacobi) that was resurrected.BananaClownMan ☎ 18:34, January 15, 2018 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting that Macqueen was involved in the war. Only that he was resurrected for the purpose of what would become the Time War. The fact that he goes rogue in the intervening time is irrelevant. Of course he only works towards his own ends, not those of his supposed backers. He's the Master. Even during the Time War itself, that's precisely what he does, so you can't use that as any kind of evidence. Eyes of the Master has already confirmed that Macqueen was the one resurrected, and the question of which Master/Masters was/were involved in the war itself is completely separate. This is the only sensible reading of the story, and is assumed by other pages on this wiki like Eyes of the Master (audio story) and Nevermore (audio story). The fact that this page ever said anything different is only an editing artefact from fixing the incorrect information that Macqueen was the one who actually fought in the war. HomelessForsakenBetrayed&Alone ☎

James Dreyfus as the Master

Is there any reason why we’re counting him as the first incarnation? I mean, I know Big Finish kind of marketed him as the first Master, but in a recent Vortex, where a listener asked if Dreyfus was meant to be the First Master and Nick Briggs states that he doesn’t actually know, makes me think should we separate his incarnation from the information about the Sound of Drums Master? And if we were, we could simple list him as the “Inventor” incarnation, like Delgado is listed as “Unit Enemy.” Ben Moore512 ☎ 21:42, August 2, 2018 (UTC)

Interesting and fair point: There's no in-universe source for Dreyfus being the first Master. In the absence of additional evidence, I'd be in favor of this change. – N8 ☎ 21:56, August 2, 2018 (UTC)

Please, implement this change. It is against the validity rules to accept anything but non-speculative in-universe info. Amorkuz ☎ 21:30, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

Incarnation's number

In Girl Power! it is reaveled that the Master died 18 times before becoming Missy, but that doesn't mean he had 19 incarnations so far as treated in his page.

In the tv Movie it is said that the Master was executed in his final incarnation (presumably his 13th one). But he came back from the dead as a Deathworm morphant he swalload in his 13th incarnation, as described in The Eight Doctors. So, he didn't regenerate! He just kept stealing bodies to survive. And that would mean that Eric Roberts' Master still is the 13th Master! This is reinforced by the Master in Mastermind being played by his 13th incarnation actor: Geoffrey Beavers.

That being said, shouldn't this the correct incarnation's number?

• Bald Incarnation: 14th
• Child Incarnation: 15th
• YANA/War Master: 16th
• Harold Saxon: 17th
• Missy: 18th

Wesley701 ☎ 20:59, September 6, 2018 (UTC)

Before Roberts’ Master, there is a prose only incarnation, the Tzun Master. The Master had been infected with the Tzun and was shot by Ace, causing him to regenerate because the Tzun gave him that ability. This is the 14th Master. Eventually, the body fails and the Master goes back to his Trakenite body leading to Dust Breeding, Master, Mastermind and the TV Movie. Ben Moore512 ☎ 21:44, September 6, 2018 (UTC)

Images

I don't know what is going on with this page, but there were over one hundred images (yes you read that right). It's a massive understatement to say that's too many for one article. We generally want at most one image per section, but that doesn't mean "add an image to every section". We don't allow columns of images, or images all pasted on the same side of the article. These kinds of things happen when there are too many images. Also keep in mind that images cause page-load times to increase.

I've removed all but one of the images from this page (I kept the first image, of the Master as a child). Some of the images I removed can be judiciously re-added, but there really shouldn't be more than 10-20 for the whole page. Shambala108 ☎ 23:37, November 14, 2018 (UTC)

Restructure proposal: Parent Tab Template

Hi, i hope i am not repeating a previous proposal but couldn't we use a "Parent Tab Template" at the top as is used on some wikis with lengthy article (e.g. the main characters from the One Piece like there).

The template containing the same subsections as {{Template:Master stories}} and covering the content of the Master stories in the same way:

• Earliest
• Dreyfus
• Delgado
• Decayed
• Ainley
• VNA
• Roberts
• Macqueen
• Titan
• Jacobi
• Simm
• Gomez
• Incarnation unclear

RingoRoadagain ☎ 19:01, October 10, 2019 (UTC)

Don't forget Tipple! But that aside, sounds like a good idea to me. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 19:07, October 10, 2019 (UTC)

I think should have put a link to the template so here is the [current] version. It currently puts Tipple under "Incarnation unclear" fyi.RingoRoadagain ☎ 19:15, October 10, 2019 (UTC)

I’ve been experimenting with this ideas in my sandbox: User:BananaClownMan/Sandbox/The Master (Deathworm Morphant), if you want to see.

BananaClownMan: since he existed prior to merging with the Morphant, I would, if I were you, limit the "The Master (Deathworm Morphant)" page to the Eric Roberts body onwards, but have the Gordon Tipple Master who hatched the original scheme and got executed by the Daleks as a different page. That page could simply be located at Old Master, which is what he's credited at in the TV Movie, as I recall. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 22:42, October 10, 2019 (UTC)

Oh it is, I just covered pre-“regeneration “ stuff. I got pages for each Master on a template.BananaClownMan ☎ 22:45, October 10, 2019 (UTC)

Time to make a page for each incarnation, this page is getting overly big

This page obnoxiously big and with no reason. Don't you think it is about time to separate the master into incarnations pages just like the Doctor and Romana? Since PROSE: Girl Power!, we already know the number of each incarnation: 1- William Hughes/ James Dreyfus. 2 to 11- Unknown. 12- Assumed to be Roger Delgado. 13- Peter Pratt/ Geoffrey Beevers/ Anthony Ainley/ Gordon Tipple. A period with a lot of body stealing- Eric Roberts and others. 15- Alex Macqueen. 16- Child master from the comics. 17- Derek Jacobi. 18- John Simm. 19- Michelle Gomez. 20- Sacha Dhawan. The only Master here that we are not 100% sure is Delgado. It would help us to organize it better. What do you think? DenisLuiz ☎ 22:19, January 5, 2020 (UTC)

I think the wiki did that before, but since merged them back into one. Alkonium ☎ 22:24, January 5, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, personally I'd support resplitting (though not in the way suggested by DenisLuiz, we are way less sure about numbering than you think), but it'd need a forum thread at least, I think. A specific decision was made, after long and arduous discussion, to merge all the Master pages. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 22:28, January 5, 2020 (UTC)

Before we get head over heels about this, we should consult the archives for prior discussions on this issue first. Also, perhaps someone could link us to any previous forum threads regarding merging/splitting the Master pages. Editors are best knowing why the page has been merged for so long before we go opening discussing and end up repeating already visited ground, therefore leading us back here and leaving our efforts mute and fruitless. Snivy ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦ 22:32, January 5, 2020 (UTC)

Isn't this what we right now are largely trying to get our heads around on Thread:181963? --DCLM ☎ 22:47, January 5, 2020 (UTC)

Not really. Thread:181963 (…hey, did you ever notice it has 1963 in its number, that thread?) did involve us digging up data about which Master incarnation is which, but per the OP it's about how to fix up the Template:Master_stories template. t has no authority to resplit the page, even if it'll be an interesting point of reference if and when we do. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 22:52, January 5, 2020 (UTC)

<edit conflict>

No, that thread is about the template, not about splitting up the page into several. There is a much easier solution than undoing the major effort from a few years ago to combine the incarnations into one page: cut the information on the page. Character pages are, and have always been, about the character; they are not plot summaries. Any story needs no more than two or three sentences on the character page; if a reader wants to know more, they can click on the cited story (that's how wikis are supposed to work - you go from one page to another to get the information you want). There will be no splitting of the page as long as this easier solution exists. Of course it's no fun to clean a page, but that's not a reason to split the page. I will later post all the previous discussions that User:Snivystorm mentioned. Shambala108 ☎ 22:58, January 5, 2020 (UTC)

Where exactly in policy does it say that about the "no more than two or three sentences" thing? It's always seemed to me that the point of character pages and Biography section was precisely to have the unified biography, gathering all the sources, in one place, without having to read through massive plot summaries in which the character under question may only be very secondarily featured. And especially for longer stories, it's perfectly possible for major biographical information about a character to not be especially plot-relevant. (i.e. a character momentarily reminiscing about their childhood)

And anyway, there are other reasons than the sheer length of the unified The Master page to want to split it. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 11:53, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

I think that is not happening at all. Look at the spymaster section. Two episodes and four paragraphs. It is hard to read this page, everything is so messy, it does need a huge trim that I only think is achievable via splitting.DenisLuiz ☎ 12:43, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

We just CAN'T split because it would require among other reasons that we know exactly when and where in the Master's timeline each incarnation fits, and we simply don't. All we know is that William Hughes played the Master as a child and the grown up version is likely, but not for sure, James Dreyfus's version. Then there are 11 following that we haven't seen. Then Roger Delgado's version which may or may not be second-last or last. From there one following versions are jumbled messes (with our only stern knowledge being that we know Peter Pratt and Geoffrey Beevers played the one and the same) until we eventually get to the "asian child"-version that regenerates into Derek Jacobi's Master. Jacobi turned into Simm and Simm is 99% certainly the one that turns into Michelle Gomez's Missy. Then now we have Sacha Dhawan's Master who we are 99% certain followed Gomez's Missy. --DCLM ☎ 13:36, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

I'm afraid this is true of the Doctor pages as well; there are multiple stories that cram in loads of detail about the episodes beyond just two sentences, especially big episodes like season finales or regeneration episodes. If this policy is true, then many articles on the wikia are going to need major rewriting to meet this one paragraph/two sentences idea. Snivy ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦ 13:29, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

If we were to remove information down to two sentences, though, this Wikia would cease to be informational, and therefore cease to work as a Wikia. --DCLM ☎ 13:41, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Danniesen and Snivystorm that this "two or three sentences" policy sounds entirely counterproductive to our encyclopedic purpose, and that if it is policy, we must either rewrite most any character page on the Wiki, or, more probably, change that policy ASAP.

Danniesen, I don't think the timeline problem is as much of a hard stop as you make it sound. Indeed, one of the advantages of having separate pages for all the Masters would precisely be that we would no longer have to jump through an increasing number of hoops to write a single, linear biography of the Master, which is what we have to do for now. DenisLuiz's original proposal in this particular thread to use numbers is impossible for the reasons you cite, but I don't see what's stopping us from making The Master (Terror of the Autons), The Master (The Deadly Assassin, and so on, precisely without having to venture a guess as to the "proper" order. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 16:53, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

Well, we'd have to come up with a consistent dab term. I was thinking the story title would work, but there is the issue of both Jacobi and Simm's respective incarnations premiering in Utopia. Anyway, I agree with prior statements that we should look to previous discussions on this topic, and see both sides of the argument, taking into account the context of the situation when they were discussed. Chubby Potato ☎ 18:38, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

The issue of Jacobi has been brought up before, and Big Finish has provided us with an answer: in his case we have a specific incarnation name — War Master. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 18:59, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

We could just use my Sandbox page, like this one, as templates; using fan nicknames with the "Conjecture" tap to explain away the out-of-universe names. Heck, all we have to do is remove the "User:BananaClownMan/Sandbox/" title to make it official.BananaClownMan ☎ 19:39, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

We absolutely need to split these incarnations between different pages. The page currently is difficult to navigate and digest - which should not be occurring for a wikia. --Bpste1 ☎ 07:15, January 10, 2020 (UTC)

I agree with everyone wants the page to be splitted. The Master deserves it as the Doctor and Romana, even if his timeline and incarnations are messy. We can have the general page for him and every other regeneration/incarnation we have not enough information, and specific pages for the thickest ones. Now, about the naming: I'd go with the official names where they exist ("War Master", "Missy"), where they can be acceptable ("Spymaster"? "Harold Saxon"?), then with the story names. I guess the page for the young Master could be "First Master" or "Master I" following the Doctor or Romana.--HarveyWallbanger ☎ 16:14, January 12, 2020 (UTC)

I agree that it would be appropriate for this debate to be reopened in the Panopticon. Since the conclusion of the last thread, we’ve had two new television Masters, one of whom has a distinct name (Missy), and the other of whom can be uniquely identified by his debut episode. The title “War Master” has also been given to the Jacobi Master, resolving the difficulty in interpreting The Master (Utopia). That said, debate threads are a bit contentious right now, so maybe it would be best to postpone it. – N8 (☎/👁️) 17:20, January 12, 2020 (UTC)

I'm on the same line as NateBumber. I think it's a debate we might want to have, but not right now when there are so many others going on and causing strife; and if we're going to have it, it must be had in the forums, not on this talk page, surely.

At any rate, @HarveyWallbanger, I don't think First Master would fly for the Sound of Drums kid, because many sources agree that the Master only started calling himself that at a later point in their life, not in their first incarnation. I don't rightly know what we'd call it, except First Magnus if the War Chief proposal goes through. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 17:30, January 12, 2020 (UTC)

About the identity of the First Master, Destination War states that the Dreyfus incarnation was the first to use the name Master. Whether he is or not the first incarnation is unknown. I would say we should separate the page this:

Widely accepted:

First regeneration cycle:

-1: Dreyfus and supposed earlier incarnations;

-Unknown: Unknown incarnations of the first cycle;

-UNIT enemy: Delgado;

-13: Pratt/ Breeves when not possessing a body;

Bodies of the Thirteenth Master:

-Tremas: Ainley;

-Bruce: Roberts;

-Other: Tipple, Tzun and other incarnations in the body-hopping period;

Second regeneration cycle:

-14: McQueen;

-Titan: Child War Master;

-War Master: Jacobi;

-Saxon: Simm;

-Missy: Gomez

-Spymaster: Dhawan;

More ambiguous:

-The War Chief

-Others that I may not remember.

I think having the incarnations of the body-hopping period separate but yet specified to not be part o the 13th Master would solve a lot of problems that may cause disagreement. I think we should get a topic in the Panopticon right after The Timesless Children airs, so we can properly discuss this DenisLuiz ☎ 15:32, February 12, 2020 (UTC)

This conversation should be happening in a forum thread not a talk page especially this was a decision that was previously reversed. --Borisashton ☎ 00:57, February 13, 2020 (UTC)

The Spy Master

Right now, the page pretty much says the Master seen in Spyfall regenerated from Missy. It would seem this is the case with the destruction of Gallifrey, but I don't believe the identity of Dhawan's Master in relation to other incarnations has been specified yet. Chubby Potato ☎ 05:57, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

I think it has. It's complicated, but I think it has. --DCLM ☎ 10:48, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

How so? Did I miss something or is it just what is most likely? Is it speculation? Chubby Potato ☎ 18:32, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

This appears to be pure speculation. Spyfall never made it clear as to whether Dhawan's Master follows Missy or not. I think correction needs to be made to the following line which currently appears in the article: "Despite her apparent death at the hands of her past self, Missy found a way to change into their twentieth incarnation". The writer offers Girl Power! as their source, but this is merely a source for the number of incarnations and has nothing to do with whether Dhawan's Master follows Gomez's. Perhaps this Master should be moved under "Undated events" until we get a better idea of where he fits in? 66 Seconds ☎ 22:02, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

I think it's more speculative to make up elaborate possibilities for how the Spy Master could possibly be before Missy than to assume he comes after her, especially considering that per OOU material, his being the next Master is considered to be the self-evident authorial intent.

I do, however, agree that the "twentieth incarnation" line is speculation (Missy lists a certain number of deaths and rebirths, but even without going into "are there some offscreen regenerations between Gomez and Dhawan?" which is another distinct possibility, there's no evidence that this matches number of incarnation, since the Master may have triggered regenerations without dying like Romana, and also went about stealing bodies to better himself post-TV Movie without the previous host having necessarily died) and should be removed. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 22:10, January 6, 2020 (UTC)

Based on the major inconsistencies present in the episode, including the claim that Gallifrey exists in a "pocket dimension" when it hasn't since before Hell Bent, I'd say Chibnall isn't exactly caught up on his modern Who. I don't think the question of "What happened with Missy" is on his mind, and I certainly don't think we're supposed to assume this regeneration exists out-of-order. Until a piece of media suggests otherwise, presuming this Master is the most current is really our only answer. Basically, we should look at this in the same way we do a comic Master which ignores a novel Master, and so on. OS25🤙☎️ 03:10, January 7, 2020 (UTC)

Image

Why on the image is missy the latest when she isn't. Anymore – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cyberdalek12 (talk • contribs) .

Because a new image hasn't been suggested and implemented yet. Feel free to proffer a replacement. Danochy ☎ 03:46, January 9, 2020 (UTC)

You must suggest your image ideas here first; don't make any changes to the page itself until a consensus is reached on the image. You must also make sure to follow our image rules at Tardis:Image use policy and Tardis:Guide to images. Shambala108 ☎ 03:52, January 9, 2020 (UTC)

Is Missy really the nineteenth incarnation?

If you look at the phrasing in the Girl Power! short story, it is more likely she is the eighteenth. Hear me out, there wasn't a death between Crispy and Tremas, he just changed his body. Missy writes that she died and then becomes a woman, died and then becomes human, died and then steals a body. The only time the Master actually dies and then steals a body was on the TV movie. Follow this:

Born (became 1), Died (became 2), Died (became 3), Died (became 4), Died (became 5), Died (became 6), Died (became 7), Died (became 8), Died (became 9), Died (became 10), Died (became 11), Died (became 12), Died (became 13- Crispy Master- TV: The Deadly Assassin), Died (Actually died, executed by the Daleks- TV: Doctor Who), Took over some bloke's body (Deathworm Morphant- TV: Doctor Who), Died (Killed by the Ravenous, granted a new live cycle by the Time Lords, became 14- Bald- AUDIO: Day of the Master), Died (became 15- War Child- COMIC: The Organ Grinder), Died (became 16- The War Master- COMIC: Fast Asleep), Became a human (AUDIO: The Heavenly Paradigm), Stopped being a human (TV: Utopia), Died (became 17- Saxon- TV: Utopia), Died (became 18- Missy- TV: The Doctor Falls), Became a woman, Ruled!

That is actually important because when the Master regenerates into the Bald incarnation at the end of AUDIO: Day of the Master, he is in the body of his 13th incarnation, even after stealing the bodies of Tremas and Bruce. The audio continuity and the proses (aside from three) do not seem to consider the Tzun Master canon (AUDIO: Dust Breeding, PROSE: The Eight Doctors), and since it was very well established in and AUDIO: The Two Masters that Breeves is 13th, there is no reason to believe Missy is 19th. DenisLuiz ☎ 02:52, January 23, 2020 (UTC)

This was actually discussed at Thread:181963#61 onward, though it was determined it generally is impossible to number the incarnations. Perhaps these numbers should be removed. Chubby Potato ☎ 03:19, January 23, 2020 (UTC)

I doagree that removing the numbers is the safest bet. DenisLuiz 03:22, January 23, 2020 (UTC)

When are you going to add the spy master to the master slide show because he's after missy it has been confirmed Eudfgshjfhbjsdhfgdjsiu ☎

why is the spy master not on the slide show because he is after missy it has been confirmed

Spy Master

Why is the spy masters image not added onto the slide show main image. Clarklloyd (talk page) 20:14, April 25, 2020 (UTC)

Forum thread re splitting the Master page

Please note that Thread:269689 has been closed and it has been ruled that we will not be splitting the pages. Thanks to everyone who participated at that thread and here on the talk page. Shambala108 ☎ 04:01, June 7, 2020 (UTC)

How many Masters?

Just out of curiosity, across all media, how many Masters are there, including ones from other continuities like Shalka or Sympathy for the Devil? Also included are people like The Man with the Rosette and The Magistrate. I get..

Roger Delgado, Norman Stanley(Telephone Man), Peter Pratt, Geoffrey Beevers, Anthony Ainley, Gordon Tipple, Eric Roberts, Derek Jacobi, John Simm, William Hughes, Michelle Gomez, Sacha Dhawan.

But then...

Alex MacQueen, James Dreyfuss, Stream(Hollows of Time)

Shalka Master, Curse of Fatal Death Master, Mark Gatiss

The Asian Child(Titan Comics), the Street Preacher, whoever Delgado was regenerating into in Doorway to Hell.

'Basil Rathbone', (apparently an incarnation AFTER 'Basil Rathbone' in Happy Endings) 'Koschei'(Dark Path), The Magistrate, The War King, The Man With the Rosette

Big Finish stated there there are effectively FOUR Geoffrey Beevers..the 'whole' man in The Two Masters, the one in The Keeper in Traken(mentioned above), the one in Dust Breeding and the one in Mastermind.

Also two Eric Roberts...the TV Movie one, and a splinter.

And the John Simm in The End of Time is a resurrected ghoul version of the Sound of Drums one. Essentially a new "life".

The 'deathworm' and the 'morphant' have two different origin stories.

If Derek Jacobi is a War Master in Big Finish as an adult, then the fact he was found as a baby as Yana means there are two Derek Jacobi Masters(excluding the Shalka android).

Don Maestro, Richard

Multiple sources indicate that the War Chief is the Master. Which means that Magnus(Flashback) is also the Master. But then, that makes Kriegslieter from Exodus the Master as well.

Plus, the Koschei from The Dark Path never used that name before. So, the Koschei in Divided Loyalties is a different character.

The FASA Role Playing Game and the Game of Time & Space Board Game say that the Peter Butterworth Monk/Time Meddler is the Master. However, the "other Monks"(eh?) Rufus Hound, Graeme Garden, and the two characters called 'Mortimus'(one knew the Doctor from the Academy on Gallifrey, the other didn't) were not intended to be the Master.

Any more? And try and make sense of that.– The preceding unsigned comment was added by 197.86.143.126 (talk • contribs) .

"Making sense" of the Master's timeline, while a hoot and a half, isn't really something that falls under the purview of this Wiki. Arguably the number of people who have played the Master might be something for behind-the-scenes purposes, though it's a bit, well, trivial.

The "unique" incarnation of the Master used in The Radio Waves

(presumably due to an issue with clearing Ainley's likeness) could be added to the roster. Conversely, an illustration from Birth of a Renegade uses Ainley's likeness to illustrate the Master from the time the Doctor left Gallifrey, which, odd as the coincidence might be, can only be an unrelated incarnation.

If you're going to use "implied" Masters like Stream and the Man with the Rosette in this count, you should probably count both incarnations of Pavo as well. Additionally, there may be more than one incarnation of "the War King" — the one played by Philip Madoc and the long-bearded old man who is depicted in illustrations of The Book of the War (novel) and doesn't much resemble Madoc.

Your list of NOTVALID Masters overlooks the Winning Designs version.

If you're going to include stuff not covered as valid, or not covered as "the Master", by our Wiki's T:VS, you also might as well include Masters from unlicensed-but-arguably-"canonical" stories, like the Itzy Friedman Master in Time Rift or the two incarnations from the Sci-Fi Sea Cruise films. But at that point, we're moving far beyond the realm of things that a list for our BTS sections could be expected to count, and the project exceeds the limits of what can reasonably be expected to have any impact on this Wiki. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 14:06, June 12, 2020 (UTC)

There's also Koschei (Inferno Earth) from The Face of the Enemy, an alternate version of Delgado. He also does a bit of body-jumping in the Eighth Doctor's DWM run. The reason Yana was found as a baby was due to the Chameleon Arch. All in all, I think this chart by User:LegoK9 might answer your questions. As far as I can tell, it contains anyone that is, was, or could be the Master. Chubby Potato ☎ 20:48, June 12, 2020 (UTC)

All the respect in the world to LegoK9, but this is far from complete. It doesn't have the Pavos, it doesn't have the Winning Designs Master, it doesn't even have either incarnation of the War Chief — not to mention the unlicensed-but-"canon" Masters like Friedman. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 21:29, June 12, 2020 (UTC)

I thought it might be missing some, though I don't know enough about the more obscure Masters. Once again, just more proof that the Master's timeline is a huge mess. Chubby Potato ☎ 22:06, June 12, 2020 (UTC)

Here's another attempt(though also incomplete): [1]. 197.86.143.126^{talk to me} 06:45, June 13, 2020 (UTC)

The Master's name?

So, I was watching The Deadly Assassin, and I noticed in the scene when the Master's threatening the Doctor for the sash, the Doctor says something like, "don't do it (hard to decipher word that sounds like a name)". Is there anyone that could confirm what he's saying, cause this might give us the Master's name. Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived ☎ 20:02, July 28, 2020 (UTC)

He says "Engin". -- Saxon (✉️) 20:05, July 28, 2020 (UTC)

About the identity of the First Master, Destination War states that the Dreyfus incarnation was the first to use the name Master. Whether he is or not the first incarnation is unknown. I would say we should separate the page this: Widely accepted: First regeneration cycle: -1: Dreyfus and supposed earlier incarnations; -Unknown: Unknown incarnations of the first cycle; -UNIT enemy: Delgado; -13: Pratt/ Breeves when not possessing a body; Bodies of the Thirteenth Master: -Tremas: Ainley; -Bruce: Roberts; -Other: Tipple, Tzun and other incarnations in the body-hopping period; Second regeneration cycle: -14: McQueen; -Titan: Child War Master; -War Master: Jacobi; -Saxon: Simm; -The Lumiat: Gina McKee; -Spymaster: Dhawan; -Missy: Gomez

I think having the incarnations of the body-hopping period separate but yet specified to not be part o the 13th Master would solve a lot of problem Jason O'Connor 20:07, July 30, 2020 (UTC)Thedoctor1000Jason O'Connor 20:07, July 30, 2020 (UTC)

Thread:269689 establishes that the page will not be split. Similarly, The Lumiat strongly suggests that Missy is after Simm pre Lumiat and The Dark Path has him call himself both Koschei for most of the narrative and "Master" at the end while being his Delgado incarnation. Suffice it to say that the continuity is muddled. Najawin ☎ 20:57, July 30, 2020 (UTC)

In Doctor Who and the Terror of the Autons, it is stated that the Master's name is multisyllabic, and and unpronouncable for humans. It is also of course necessary at this time to point out that in The Dark Path, the Doctor fails to recognise the name Koschei. And it is clear that he has never heard of a Time Lord with this name before The Dark Path. So,m while we an say that the Master was using the name "Koschei" before he took the name "Master", Koschei is clearly and unambiguously NOT his 'real name'. 197.83.246.23^{talk to me} 10:49, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

T:POINT applies here. This is a discussion completely unrelated to whether or not your view that The War Chief = The Master is true, I'm merely pointing out that The Dark Path calls into question the chronology put forth by the previous user. Najawin ☎ 10:54, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

And who said that that had anything to do with it? I was making a point.By the way,. there is also nothing at all in The Dark Path to say that the Master there was "in the Delgado incarnation". 197.83.246.23^{talk to me} 10:57, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

You were making a point entirely unrelated to the discussion? And I draw your attention to the cover of the book. Najawin ☎ 11:02, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

See [2]. I quote "Unlike that which obtains at w:c:starwars, packaging for merchandise is not a valid source here.". 197.83.246.23^{talk to me} 11:05, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

That's a fun one. "Merchandise" in this instance refers to toys and such, not books. Covers aren't valid source in and of themselves, but they can provide context for the valid source of the book. Similar to a publishers' summary. As discussed at Talk: The Zygon Isolation (webcast) (and I'm sure elsewhere, this is just one I remember), publishers' summaries are things that are at the "might be valid but discuss it with the community first" level. Najawin ☎ 11:15, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

And you are the one who decided that? [3] "Merchandise" simply means" goods to be bought or sold" or "branded products used to promote a film, pop group, etc., or linked to a fictional character; merchandising." Both of which perfectly describe The Dark Path. And you're saying that this [4] accurately describes the narrative contained inside? 197.83.246.23^{talk to me} 11:46, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

It's specifically talking about packaging for merchandise? Which a cover isn't, if we go with that notion of merchandise? It's part of the merchandise itself under that definition? Regardless, Forum:Should we still be trying to cover merchandise? shows a clear distinction in thought between narrative and non narrative merchandise, even if nothing came of the discussion. Similarly, this very page has the Delgado Master listed as the one who was involved in The Dark Path. So clearly it's taken to be in some sense illustrative. Najawin ☎ 11:58, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

It's doing nothing of the sort. I believe you are deliberately interpreting something in the way that would back up your position.

and where does it say on this very page that the Master in The Dark Path is Delgado? You mean where you just said so above? 197.83.246.23^{talk to me} 12:25, July 31, 2020 (UTC) 12:21, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

It very clearly is. See the continued interest in covering Novels and DVDs but not "licensed food". Regardless, by "this page" I didn't mean the talk page, but the main page for The Master. It has The Dark Path under his Delgado incarnation. Najawin ☎ 12:30, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

So? Who put it there? And pages can, and are, corrected. That's the point of a wiki where people can edit, and correct misinformation. But tell me where in the narrative it says that the character in The Dark Path is in the "Delgadp incarnation". 197.83.246.23^{talk to me} 12:32, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

Why are you suggesting I have to say it's in the narrative, when I'm arguing that cover art can function similar to a publishers' summary? That makes no sense. Najawin ☎ 12:36, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

And see the cover of Doctor Who and the Day of the Daleks. Should this wiki include that in the plot summary? Cover art is just that. It is not narrative. 197.83.246.23^{talk to me} 12:38, July 31, 2020 (UTC) 12:38, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

I've never once suggested it was narrative nor belonged on its own merits in a plot summary. You seem to not understand my point. Najawin ☎ 12:44, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

So, it's a picture on the cover of a book. 197.83.246.23^{talk to me} 12:47, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

That's an awfully reductive statement to make. So it represents a picture that someone chose to put on that story. Why did they choose it? We can learn something from thinking about that question. Does it immediately mean that it was Delgado in the story? No. But it does suggest some level of authorial intent that causes community discussion. I don't know if community discussion took place regarding this book. But that's the standard we should think of. Najawin ☎ 12:56, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

Except, as has been made clear, this wiki uses narrative, not authorial intent. If it used authorial intent, then Stream (The Hollows of Time), The War King and the Man with the Rosette would not all have their own articles. 197.83.246.23^{talk to me} 14:06, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

I direct you to the discussion at Talk: The Zygon Isolation (webcast). It's a little more nuanced than that. Najawin ☎ 14:17, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

Suggested changes to the page image

By this page's own admission, The Curse of Fatal Death exists in an alternate future for the Doctor. Given that this is the case, should this not also warrant Pryce's Master's actions to be moved to the alternate timelines section? It is also my belief that Pryce should be removed from the page's main image; that image should be reserved for the main timeline. After all, no one would dream to suggest including the many alternate Doctors on the Doctor's image.

On a separate but similar note, if we are including Masters from the comics (as indicated by the incarnation between Roberts and Pryce) then should this page not also include the Child Master from the Time War comics, which we know to be the incarnation preceding Jacobi? It seems to me to be an odd exclusion from an otherwise thorough page. Jenn Ravensong ☎ 19:51, October 9, 2020 (UTC)

Curse of Fatal Death is an alternative future for the Eighth Doctor relative to Series 1, but that's not the same thing as being an alternate timeline in the in-universe sense, as opposed to any number of other potential temporal phenomena, which could affect the Doctor differently from the Master.

While a reasonable headcanon, there is no confirmation of exactly what is up with the Curse material in valid sources. If there were, it wouldn't be a question of infoboxes, anyway: we'd (re-)split the Pryce Master to his own page, like the Gatiss Master. But valid sources, if anything, point away from it. After all, Missy remembers the events of Curse.

As for the "War Child", note that there was never any diktat on the {{Masterpic}} template to include every Master ever, although there does seem to be a loose precedent that every TV incarnation should be there. After all, {{Doctorpic}} doesn't have every unlaced incarnation ever. I could actually see a case for including Muldwych or Jo Martin, but we don't want every Morbius Doctor in there, or whatever. So while it may be the War Child is "important" enough to warrant inclusion, it's not a mere matter of "oversight".

In any event, all of this really belongs at Template_talk:Masterpic. Please take your concerns there if you have more thoughts on the matter. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 21:02, October 9, 2020 (UTC)