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

Forum:Canonicity of ''I Am the Doctor''

The Cloisters
Revision as of 15:21, 2 September 2008 by Stardizzy2 (talk | contribs) (New page: {{Forumheader|Panopticon}} ==canonical or whut?== personally I consider ''I Am the Doctor'' obviously non-canonical and not worth considering as such. but I wanted to hash this. like I...)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
IndexPanopticon → Canonicity of ''I Am the Doctor''
Spoilers are strongly policed here.
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.

canonical or whut?

personally I consider I Am the Doctor obviously non-canonical and not worth considering as such. but I wanted to hash this. like I said, I don't consider this even remotely canon for the following reasons:

  • No one at the BBC (or any of the other license-holders, i.e. the estate of Terry Nation, which owns part of the copyright for the Daleks, AFAIK) authorized it.
  • John Peel, the author of this book, has made definitive statements regarding how the Eighth Doctor regenerated, etc. not as speculation in the form of a nonfiction, but as Whoniverse fact. this makes the book a kind of fan fiction.
  • As an un-authorized fictional story, I think this falls under the category of un-canonical fiction, just like The Doctor and the Enterprise. (hey, who can sure for sure that the Fourth Doctor didn't actually meet Captain Kirk, right?)

I would argue for not including this in the Wiki at all, if not for the fact that I believe in this Wiki listing this as aWho-related book, albeit un-official. like The Doctor and the Enterprise.


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