Talk:Doctor Who? running joke

Prop delete

This doesn't deserve a page of its own, because the topic does not admit itself of concise definition. I vaguely know what the page is trying for, but the examples given aren't all of the same type. For instance, what's going in in The War Machines is different from the quick pre-credit "stinger" Jackie gives before The Christmas Invasion starts. WOTAN's "Doctor Who" was in deadly earnest (and a production error, by the admission of the director). Meanwhile, Jackie's bit was, we're told by RTD in a commentary, a bit of a lighthearted Christmas pun.

But therein lies the rub.

How do you actually define the difference between a perfectly ordinary question and a "joke"? In Black Orchid, it's completely reasonable for Madge to ask "Doctor who?" when she's being formally introduced to the Doctor. That's not a "joke" or a "gag" or anything more than the perfectly obvious thing to do in that social situation. A similar thing happens in The Gunfighters. Bat misunderstands the Doctor and so asks, "Doctor who". That the Doctor then sort of agrees to that name isn't an indication that he's being called "Doctor Who", but rather that he's just attempting to speed away from the issue of being assigned a name.

In order to register most of these instances as "jokes", you almost have to go to a behind the scenes source who tells you, "Yes, that was a deliberate play on the name of the show." Even the "eggiest" of them — probably a tie between Jackie's TCI one, the Brig's replacement in The Five Doctors, and the one in "A Girl's Best Friend" — can be read as perfectly reasonable questions. It's only because we know the behind the scenes info on how those lines came to be inserted that we don't hear them as ordinary bits of conversation.

I also think that by including a definite article in this page's title, we're implying something that simply isn't true. There is no single, running joke involving the question "Doctor Who?" To the extent that the words "Doctor" and "Who" ever occupy consecutive spaces in dialogue — which is far too infrequently to be considered "running" —  they aren't ever used in quite the same way. Jackie's already well familiar with the Doctor before she says "Doctor Who"; The first Doctor's obviously musing so as to solve the "mystery" of the name "Dr. Foreman", Bat Masterson hasn't heard the name "Caligari", etc. There is therefore no single, running joke.

This page should therefore be deleted, its observations relegated to the pages of the individual serials/episodes from which they're drawn. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 17:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Is this debate still open? Are waiting for more people to give their opinons? Should it be closed by an admin? CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 18:10, February 5, 2010 (UTC)

Support deletion

• CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 17:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC), per above.
• Agree. This information is already in part discussed in the Doctor Who article and anything else can be incorporated into it prior to this page's deletion. --Tangerineduel 06:55, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Oppose deletion

--Catkind121 19:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC) (Why it gives information ion this re ocurrence)

It deserves it's own page as it's the longest running joke in the show's history. --AKR619 00:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

It's so nice to have a list of whenever this occurence happens--210.49.251.226 11:46, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Several of the instances of the joke listed here really don't seem to actually be examples of this. For example, if people just say "Who is the Doctor," or "Doctor, what was it?" then it really isn't an exammpple of this. If nobody objects, I am going to remove everything where nobody actually says "Doctor who?" The title of the page may also have to be changed, as with the ending of The Wedding of River Song, it doesn't seem to be a joke anymore.Icecreamdif ^{talk to me} 22:43, October 2, 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it should be deleted. We are an encyclopaedia about Doctor Who and the Doctor Who 'running joke' is basically the foundation of the the entire show. This page is documenting one of the biggest questions in the show's history and fundamental to the readers/viewers/fans understanding of the Doctor. Also, given that as of the events of The Wedding of River Song, the Doctor Who 'running joke' is actually something that is not just a joke, but is actually something part of the Doctor Who Universe, which we should be documenting. On a side note, it should not be really called "The Doctor Who running joke" since it has been established that it is not actually a 'joke' any more, but something more concrete within the Doctor Who Universe. MM/Want to talk? 17:43, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

• Whether the content deserves a page of its own is something that can be debated. But deleting it, is not the solution. If the conclusion is that it is not something that deserves its own page, the included information needs to be merged somewhere and the page title redirected (so attributions for all the content remains connected). - 87.211.75.45^{talk to me} 15:26, July 24, 2013 (UTC)

Merge with The Question?

Given that the "Doctor Who?" question is now something with in-universe significance, shouldn't this be merged into The Question? (I would remove the ones that aren't literally "Doctor who?", though). 94.75.90.48^{talk to me} 00:22, February 19, 2012 (UTC)

It's generally forbidden to just remove a maintenance tag without discussion, but in this case, the motion is flawed from the outset. We simply can't merge an out-of-universe and an in-universe article, on principle. The Question and the running joke are two separate things. They might be related, but they're ne'er to be joined. See Forum:The Question for more.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 17:09: Sun 19 Feb 2012 

This article should mention its connection to The Question - I suspect "The Girl in the Fireplace" comment belongs there not here. -- Beardouk ^{talk to me} 23:26, July 14, 2012 (UTC)

What About Cushing?

Should this article mention the Peter Cushing movies, in which the human inventor of the Tardis is actually named "Dr. Who?"

Clean-up

This article is better than it used to be, but it still needs to be cleaned up. We need to get rid of examples that really have nothing to do with the article. For example, the following quotation:

In Flesh and Stone, the first joke is between The Doctor and River Song as they're standing on the beach. The Doctor asks River about the identity of the man she was sent to Stormcage for killing and he asks, "Who?" It turns out she was actually sent to prison for killing The Doctor. The second joke is when Amy wants to have a one night stand with The Doctor, so as they're sitting on her bed she tells him, "I was alone in the dark and I nearly died. It made me think...about what I want. About who I want."

Aside from the fact that it's poorly written, it seems to me that neither example is truly an example of the running joke. I have gained opposition from 75.141.226.87 who claimed that

Both times "who" is in reference to The Doctor. The first is a joke because The Doctor is answering his own question, the second is blatantly about him and funny because The Doctor doesn't realize this.75.141.226.87

Because of this opposition, I've decided to ask the public. Anyone else have a counter-argument (or an argument for my case)? SmallerOnTheOutside ☎ 05:02, December 29, 2012 (UTC)

Please, someone comment on this. I find this article to be really inconsistent on what it includes. It needs a major clean-up, but, first, we need to discuss what should and what shouldn't be included on this page. SmallerOnTheOutside ☎ 19:15, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

I think this article should cover not only the ideal of "the Question", but also the question itslef; "Doctor Who?" The main page should dictate the in-universe mentions of the question (Whether it was a joke or not) and the behind-the-scenes section should explain how it started, how people reacted, when it stopped and started off and on; such and such. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 20:26, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Agreed. But if you'll look at the example I gave above (which I deleted from the page 'bout an hour ago) in my post from a month ago, you'll see that a lot of the so-called references to this joke, especially in the Tenth and Eleventh Doctor sections, were included only because they had the word "who" in it that's in reference to the Doctor. Things like Character 1: "The Doctor"; Character 2: "Who?", I'll accept but things like Amy: "About what I want... About who I want..." has nothing to do with the running joke, in my opinion. What is your opinion of things like that? SmallerOnTheOutside ☎ 20:54, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

Well, I could see how it's mot part of the main running gag, but it's definitely a pun on the title itself. I would put those instances in behind-the-scenes.

Just to be clear on what I said that I'm in the opinion that this page and The Question should be merged. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 22:24, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

I think that it makes sense for the Question to be about the in-universe subject about which the Silence have religious beliefs, and for this page to be about the out-of-universe ways in which the TV programme Doctor Who has played in dialogue with the ambiguity of its title and the name of its protagonist. I don't think that every incidence of the question "Doctor who?" is necessarily related to this cosmological "first question" which must never be answered.

As for things like Amy saying "...who I want", that seems to me to fall into the category of the programme (or its scriptwriters) playing with the "is his name Who?" question, which would fall under the purview of this page. In that scene, Amy is saying "I want Who", meaning the Doctor. It's not just a relative pronoun. —Josiah Rowe ☎ 23:27, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

What I'm saying is that "The Question" is Doctor Who?. We can move out-of-universe info off into the "Behind-the-scenes" section, there's no real reason to have two pages on the exact same thing, even if one is in-universe and one isn't. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 23:50, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

I hear that, but I disagree with the implication that every usage of "Doctor who?" is an example of "the Question". "The Question" is an idea with specific meaning in the religious beliefs of the Silence. It seems to be a bit like the name and understanding of God. An encyclopedia can have an article on the concept of God and also have articles on God as understood in different religions. It's not necessarily the same thing. —Josiah Rowe ☎ 03:14, February 1, 2013 (UTC)

Torchwood

I've only seen the 3rd and 4th season of this, I recall Jack Harkness making vague references pertaining to the Doctor (I think he maybe even said 'doctor' somewhere, not sure) but I don't recall if the joke came up.

Does anyone know if it did? Maybe in the 1st or 2nd series? +Yc 00:15, April 15, 2013 (UTC)

Prop delete redux May 2013

Returning again to the proposed deletion added by CzechOut on 21 May 2013.

I still think the page should be deleted and information incorporated into the Doctor Who article.

Yes, the page has improved, but it's still essentially a set of bullet points. In the Doctor Who#"Doctor Who? section of the article the information is presented in a much more encyclopaedic format than on this page.

I think the information on this page (such as the additional info from DVD commentaries/infotext) be added to the Doctor Who page.

Deleting this page would allow us to have better coverage of this topic within the context of Doctor Who as a whole on the main page of the subject rather than tucked away here as a series of bullet points. --Tangerineduel / talk 14:51, June 3, 2013 (UTC)

Are this very hard to understand? The joke is not the question itself, but the fact that this question is asked by almost all companions in all incarnations in the least apropriate moment. No need for deleting this page.– The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.75.104.164 (talk).

Could you clarify your statement?

From what I gather your contention is that it's asked by most companions at least once?

This information can and likely will be retained but framed within the larger context of Doctor Who it could also be included on the companion page. --Tangerineduel / talk 16:00, June 12, 2013 (UTC)

I'm still fundamentally opposed to this article's existence. "Doctor Who" is not a "joke". There are times when it has been used as a gag, sure. But it's definitely not a joke from the end of series 6 all the way up to at least the 50th anniversary special. And it's not used in the least bit ironically in any original story up to Target's tentative steps towards original fiction. When you read a story from the 1960s, the character is called Doctor Who. Period. That's just his name. Today, thanks largely to Peter Davison, we kinda think that's silly: he's just "the Doctor", we say to ourselves. But within dozens, if not hundreds, of different narratives that this wiki counts as valid, including several televised episodes, there's no hint of irony or humour about it.

Equally, a lot of the instances on this page are very, very far reaches. Here's just a random selection:

• In The Keys of Marinus, when Ian was a suspect for murder, he was told to find someone to speak for him at the tribunal. He said he knew someone in the city, and when asked, "Who is he?" he replied, "Who?", smiled, and continued, "He's a Doctor."
• In An Unearthly Child, Barbara also referred to the Doctor as "Doctor Foreman", to which Ian replied, "That's not his name. Who is he? Doctor who? Perhaps if we knew his name we might have a clue to all this."

These are just perfectly ordinary questions that everyone asks. They aren't "jokes". They're just lines which show that the characters are ordinarily curious. If someone tells you, "Don't worry, I'm a doctor", an ordinary response is, "Oh yeah? Doctor who?" I mean, that's everyday speech, not a deliberate gag.

See the problem is that this article has come to be "A listing of every instance of the words "Doctor" and "Who" in close proximity of each other in a Doctor Who script". That's not the same thing as "The Doctor Who? running joke".

It's also a bit of a stretch to call it running in any sense, since there is only two legitimate televised gags from The Underwater Menace to Survival: Bessie's license plate and the gag Terrance Dicks hates in The Five Doctors with Colonel Chrichton. The article barely has any for the period anyway, since the overwhelming majority are completely ordinary interrogatives that naturally would have occurred given the conversational situation.

At the end of the day, the reason this article needs to go is that it just doesn't have a clear title. It's not a legitimate topic. Listing every instance of "doctor" (or synonyms) appearing close to "who" (or synonyms), is a very bad idea. See, jokes are deliberate. We would have to know for certain that the writer actually was making a pun. And we just don't know that, normally. Certainly we don't know it for the majority of items on this list. Any deliberate puns we can adequately note, with appropriate sourcing, on story pages. Otherwise most of this information should just be filed away under "wishful fan thinking".
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍  20:07: Sun 22 Sep 2013

I've read a couple books about the history of Doctor Who that refer to it as the "Doctor Who Running Joke." I don't actually have the books on me, as I'm at work right now, but I can look them up when I get home and cite them. That being said, if the opinion of the individual matters, when I first discovered this site I liked the fact that there was a page that referenced all the instances that "Doctor Who?" was used in-universe. If it's not a running joke, what would you call it? The "Doctor Who?" Usage List? The "Doctor Who?" Metaphysical Reference Guide? Those all read rather cumbersome, don't you think?

As for knowing whether the writers were deliberately making a reference, I'm not sure that matters either. There are plenty enough references in the Classic series to make the argument that they're more than incidental; do you want to say it's a coincidence that the "wizardly" name the Third Doctor chooses in The Daemons, Quiquaequod, is made up of three different forms of the word "Who" in Latin? The revived series is a little more heavy-handed in making sure the audience gets the reference, that's all.

Sorry, just offering an opinion from a different angle. I'll post later with the citations from those books I mentioned. TARDIStraveler ☎ 11:37, October 3, 2013 (UTC)

Okay, one of my Who books is out on loan, but I do still have Doctor Who, A History: Celebrating Fifty Years by Alan Kistler (which is a phenomenal read by the way, highly recommend it if you can find it). I'm quoting from page 22, chapter entitled "The Hero with No Name":

In An Unearthly Child, Susan attends Coal Hill School under the alias Susan Foreman, apparently taking the surname from the fact that the TARDIS is parked in I.M. Foreman's scrap yard (some tie-in novels proposed that I.M. Foreman was a fellow Time Lord and friend of the Doctor). Naturally, Ian later addresses the girl's grandfather as "Dr. Foreman." The Doctor responds in confusion, "Eh? Doctor who?" This became a running joke in several episodes across the decades. While "Doctor Who" was originally meant to be the character's alias, it instead became a question for the audience.

I hope this helps to convince that the page should be left as is. TARDIStraveler ☎ 11:06, October 4, 2013 (UTC)

Quotes from reference books are essentially making an interpretation of what's in the stories. It's not proof of what the author intended. As CzechOut has said above most of the 'doctor who?' questions are a result of the Doctor's name.

The reference books' analysis would be fine to help construct a paragraph on the Doctor Who page but it can't be used to justify this page's existence. --Tangerineduel / talk 08:03, May 31, 2014 (UTC)

Remove delete template?

Can this page have the delete template removed? This discussion happened years ago, and so whatever the verdict was no action has been taken. Tankingmage ☎ 18:04, November 8, 2013 (UTC)

Not years ago. If you scroll up a bit, the topic just above yours is a renewal of the deletion discussion, this time based on the events of The Name of the Doctor (TV story) and the idea of "Doctor Who?" being an in-universe question. This discussion is still quite current. Shambala108 ☎ 18:31, November 8, 2013 (UTC)

I would remove the template. I don't agree that "The Bells of Saint John establishes that the Doctor does view "Doctor Who" as a name for himself after all." All it establishes that the Doctor likes hearing the question.Movsar ☎ 14:25, November 23, 2013 (UTC)

• It's now March 2014 and no one has commented since. Is it still current discussion? 68.146.70.124^{talk to me} 16:46, March 31, 2014 (UTC)

Since the entire page is in question, does that mean no new edits are to be made on it? Because in the Pond Life (comic story), there's another reference I'd like to update where Rory asks River, "A date?! With who?!" and she responds, "'Who', indeed" with the text on a frame in which the TARDIS has just appeared beneath it. Also, it looks like the deletion discussion hasn't been commented on since May. Mewiet ☎ 21:21, July 25, 2014 (UTC)

It's now been a year since the template has been put up. Clearly there is no serious attempt at consensus on this one way or the other. For that reason I'm going to take the delete template down. It has now been more than half a decade (indeed, the entire Matt Smith era has elapsed) since deletion was first proposed, and nothing has happened. I think under any reasonable criteria that indicates "keep by default." 68.146.52.234^{talk to me} 05:02, November 13, 2014 (UTC)

It is against policy to remove a delete template unless some kind of consensus is reached. If you think this issue needs more attention, you might perhaps want to bring it up at Board:The Panopticon, where it will get more attention. Shambala108 ☎ 05:09, November 13, 2014 (UTC)

It's 15 months later. I'm new here so I don't know all the rules. Can I just do one or the other, delete and merge the page or delete the template?? LogicIsCool ☎ 16:19, February 8, 2016 (UTC)