Theory:Doctor Who television discontinuity and plot holes/The Unquiet Dead

You are exploring the Discontinuity Index, a place where any details or rumours about unreleased stories are forbidden.
Please discuss only those whole stories which have already been released, and obey our spoiler policy.

This page is for discussing the ways in which The Unquiet Dead doesn't fit well with other DWU narratives. You can also talk about the plot holes that render its own, internal narrative confusing.

Remember, this is a forum, so civil discussion is encouraged. However, please do not sign your posts. Also, keep all posts about the same continuity error under the same bullet point. You can add a new point by typing:

* This is point one.
::This is a counter-argument to point one.
:::This is a counter-argument to the counter-argument above
* This is point two.
::Explanation of point two.
::Further discussion and query of point two.

... and so on. 

• The Doctor states that Rose is 19. She should be 17 or 18, as she was born in 1987 and was picked up in 2005, making her 17 or 18 years old.

It is possible that the Doctor simply got it wrong.

Jackie's sign in The Aliens of London said she was 19.

No, the claim that she was born in 1987 is wrong.

Rose wasn't born in 1987, when they visited that year in Father's Day the baby Rose was several months old so she was probably born in 1986.

When/where exactly does it say Rose was born in 1987? Certainly not in one of the first 3 episodes! The missing person posters of Rose in Aliens of London suggest she was 19 when she went missing. In Dalek Rose herself says she should be 26 in 2012, meaning she was 19 in 2005. The only inconsistency is in the unjustified assertion that "she was born in 1987"!