Talk:Clara Oswald

	Archives: #1, #2, #3

Why is this talk so inactive

Why?– The preceding unsigned comment was added by Orangerichard56 (talk • contribs) .

Two reasons:

• First of all, when a talk page gets too long, its contents get archived. The previous conversations for this page have been archived to a page that you can reach by clicking the "archive" button at the top of this page. Keep in mind that there should be no posts added to a page once it has been archived. If you want to start a new post, or add to an existing one, you start a new one on this page. You can read more about archives at Tardis:Archiving policy.
• Second, on this wiki, talk pages are for discussing the editing of an article, not for general conversation about the topic. So at the moment, no one has any issues with the editing of the page. You can read more about talk pages at Tardis:Discussion policy.

Thanks! Shambala108 ☎ 14:46, November 2, 2013 (UTC)

Clara is NOT part of Testimony

I tried editing the wrong entry into the wiki, which was promptly undone again. It is a common misconception that Clara is part of Testimony, but it is incorrect, and here is why:

1. The Doctor says that Clara is "in my head", which is true for a hallucination, and is definitely wrong for a Testimony avatar.

2. Bill does NOT transform into Clara, she is standing in a very different place. Bill is standing to the right of the Doctor, Clara in front of the Doctor. And as Nardole proves, it is not customary for Testimony to change one avatar into another to represent two people. Instead, they would just summon another avatar. If Clara had been a Testimony avatar, she would have stayed until the end, just like Testimony Bill and Nardole did. Instead, because Clara appears as a hallucination, she disappears the moment Bill distracts the Doctor. Also, if Testimony Bill had transformed into Testimony Clara, the episode would have shown the standard transition that happens every time a Testimony avatar changes shape. Every time a Testimony avatar changes appearance in Twice Upon a Time, we see this animation. There is no such transition when Clara appears, and also not when she disappears.

3. Clara can't be part of Testimony, because she was already extracted from her final moment before death. It can't be done again.

If you disagree, let us discuss this here, rather than constantly undoing each other's versions on the actual page.

Bowsmountainer ☎ 21:06, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say you have quite misunderstood the scene, although I appreciate your coming onto this talk page to discuss it. "You're in my head" is clearly part of the set of lines as "You're back… You're in my head… All my memories". What the Doctor is saying is that Clara is once more present in his mind. Not that the Clara he's talking to right now is "just in his head".

Beyond that, yes, the scene is shot weirdly, but that's just because they filmed Jenna Coleman on a greenscreen away from all the other actors, and so couldn't get her in the same angle as Bill to show the transition effect. The Twice Upon a Time novelisation makes it clear that Clara is very much a part of Testimony now, and suggests that she eventually managed to escape her original death with the Raven, instead dying later in completely different circumstances from which the Testimony extracted her. Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 21:11, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

So, just answer me this question: is there any piece of evidence at all in the episode itself (not the novelisation), that suggests Clara is a Testimony avatar? There isn't. There is no animation to show she is part of Testimony. There is no mention of her in assocation with Testimony. And now, here is another question: is there any evidence that Clara is a hallucination? Yes, there is plenty of evidence to show that, as I have explained above. I think you are ignoring the line "You're in my head". If he was just referring to his memories being back, he would have something like "All my memories are back in my head". But no, he directly speaks to Clara, and tells her that she is in his head. Because she is a hallucination in his head.

Yes, part of the reason why the scene is shot weirdly is because Jenna Coleman wasn't available. But I don't see the relevance here. What matters is the final product, not the initial. Yes, the real world affects what happens in the episode. Eccleston didn't want to return at the time, and therefore wasn't included in Day of the Doctor. What matters is that he didn't want to appear, and therefore didn't appear in the 50th. We're not going to pretend that he did appear in the 50th, are we? The same is true here. Perhaps Clara was initially intended to appear as a Testimony avatar. But Coleman couldn't, and so instead appeared as a hallucination.

And this doesn't answer why there is no animation of Bill turning to Clara or Clara to Bill. The fact that Jenna Coleman's scene was shot later is no excuse there; there were still many months between when that scene was shot and Christmas. There is no excuse for not including that transition if Clara did appear as an avatar. Of course, there is a different explanation for why there was no such animation.

So, let us summarize the evidence for and against Clara being an avatar vs. Clara being a hallucination. Evidence for Clara being an avatar: none. Novelisations differ from the TV show, and what we are discussing here is the TV show. So what is said in the novelisation is of no relevance here. Evidence against Clara being an avatar: There is no animation from Bill to Clara, or from Clara to Bill. This animation was present for every change in appearance of a Testimony avatar. There is no reason for Bill to change into Clara, Testimony would just summon a new avatar. Clara doesn't stay until the end, which a Testimony-Clara would do. There is no explanation for how it is even possible for Clara to be part of Testimony, since she was already extracted from the end of her timeline. Clara and Bill stand in different locations.

Evidence for Clara being a hallucination: The Doctor says that she is in his head. Her hair blows in a wind that doesn't exist. The lighting is not quite right. Yes, there are real-world reasons for this, but it is the final product that matters, and in the final product she does look like a hallucination, and not like a Testimony avatar. The Doctor has had billions upon billions of hallucinations of Clara, so him hallucinating Clara again is not unusual for him at all. The hallucination disappears the moment Bill speaks again, distracting him. That's the kind of thing hallucinations do, but not what glass avatars do. Evidence against Clara being a hallucination: you have a different interpretation of what the Twelfth Doctor meant by saying "You're in my head". The Twelfth Doctor is know for his directness, saying exactly what is going on, rather than being metaphorical about it.

Unless you are able to provide some counterpoints to the above, and more than just referring to behind the scenes reasons for ignoring what happened in the final product, and saying you have a different interpretation of it, I think you are just going to have to accept that the evidence shows that Clara did appear as a hallucination, not as an avatar. Bowsmountainer ☎ 22:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

I find many bits of this this wall of text extremely baffling. For example: "the Doctor has had billions upon billions of hallucinations of Clara"? What in the name of Osiris are you even talking about? The only thing that could maybe kind of fit that description are his "mind palace" scenes in Heaven Sent, but that's not him actually hallucinating her into a real-world backdrop, he's just imagining her speaking to him, quite aware that it's all just imagination that he's controlling. He's imagining what she would say, not randomly hallucinating her out of nowhere.

The bit about her head swaying in a "nonexistent" wind also puzzlesme. Why shouldn't there be a gust of wind? It's an open battlefield. The Doctor's own hair seems russled a little bit, too.

Mostly, though, there is nothing in the TV version to preclude Clara being Testimony even if that's not the only hypoethtical plausible conclusion. And the novelisation (also a valid source) shows that she was. So that's what we're going with. Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 22:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

In Heaven Sent, the Doctor hallucinates about Clara again and again and again. He imagines what she would say, just like he imagines what she would say in Twice Upon a Time. Even in the scenes where he isn't in his mindpalace, he talks to Clara, even though she is not there.

If you watch the footage of her, her hair blows quite a lot, while 12's hair (which by this point is also rather long) hardly moves.

I don't know why you are ignoring all the arguments that I make that preclude her being Testimony. I've listed them above, I don't want to repeat them. To me, it does not seem like an accurate representation of what is going on in that scene, to say she is definitely a Testimony avatar, and definitely not a hallucination, despite all that suggests otherwise.

So how about the following: the wiki entry is changed to mention both explanations, and that there is reason to believe either of them. That she appears on the battlefield, and briefly talks to the Doctor. But that it is unclear whether she appears as a Testimony avatar, or as a hallucination. Can we agree to that? Bowsmountainer ☎ 22:28, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Imagining what she would say is not at all the same thing as hallucinating (and as for him talking to her as though she were there even in the "real world", I always understood that to be force of habit leading him to expect her to be there behind him; not him visually hallucinating her presence). If your argument is that he is imagining Clara being there intentionally, rather than hallucinating her presence, that is something entirely different, and perhaps more plausible, although I still don't believe it myself.

I've edited the section slightly in light of those concerns, to cite the hard fact of Clara being Testimony exclusively to the novelisation, while being neutral about Clara's nature in the sentences cited to the TV story only. However, without anything explicitly deeming Clara an imagined vision, or a hallucination, or whatever, to actually go out and say she might have been any of those things would be speculation. Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 22:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Time Lord?

Clara was on galifrey as an echo at one point but isnt it that all claras get brain pattern and genetic pattern meaning she must be human or idk ther is no information to explain either way she could of not been born ther and just appeared for that moment 79.68.241.70^{talk to me} 19:02, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

The way I understand it is that after jumping into the Doctors timeline, her personality and likeness where really all that was the same between the different versions of Clara. When she sees the Doctor steal the TARDIS, it is likely that incarnation of Clara was either an average Gallifreyan, or Time Lady. 71.60.37.160^{talk to me} 07:04, December 2, 2013 (UTC)

That is my understanding as well, supported by the evidence that Oswin Oswald and Clara from Snowmen are both physical beings. The scattering creates many copies with the same likeness, similar name, similar personality, and an inbuilt instinct to trust and help the Doctor. Therefore that version of Clara is, biologically, Gallifreyan. Whether she has graduated from the Academy and is a Time Lord, is a question that cannot be answered, as there is not enough information given. 76.115.85.249^{talk to me} 04:26, January 5, 2014 (UTC)

Wanna know what that means? It means there is (or might be) also an Alzarian!Clara, Trakenite!Clara, Trion-ese!Clara, and other Clara Echos in all humanoid species on most planets. (Of course since Clara Prime was an human- specifically the 2015's human Clara, all the non-human human-looking species have only one Echo Clara each.) Maybe the Doctor has already travelled with Echo Claras or relatives of Echo Claras, but he does not know it. As in one flashback scene Clara replaced Leela of the Sevateem, Leela herself might actually be just Seevateem!Clara, just with a fake-tan, auburn dye, and going by an "honorary" nickname she may have gained after doing something in a rite-of-passage. Or as the human Clara Echos all happen to have the Oswald last name, maybe it's actually Clara "Leela" Oswald and her father David "Sole" Oswald, but they do not know they have a surname + are always going by honorary names. Or maybe if Leela is Clara it does not mean Sole is Dave, as even if Clara's biological father has to be same or similiar in all echos, some (or all) of the Claras might have been raised by a "father" that was not biological. (Plus, not only Sole looked a bit too old to see it perfectly, but faces can get longer with time. He's the one with white hair in the page image, right? He could as easily TOO just have a fake-tan and bleached, longer hair and beard, possibly just because of their different lifestyles, or because dying your hair and wearing fake tans is a Sevateem!Oswald's thing. And for Leela not caring for children as much as Clara does, maybe Sevateem women just do not care for children, or just most child Sevateem are always off doing something like studying stuff or catching preys. Any differences in facial features or build are either to: 1) Sevateems having a rougher lifestyle and different techs than your regular 2015's human, 2) Being played by Louise Jameson and not by Jenna Louise Coleman due to the latter not being born yet, 3) The appearances of various characters might be semi-simbolic and not actually what the character looks exactly like, think like how Kingdom Hearts fangirls often change Organization XIII's personality, and also change their eye colors\heights\face\skin colors to match their fanon personalities better. --Kaylabaraonda ☎ 13:34, March 22, 2014 (UTC)

This is speculation, and as such only belongs on Howling:The Howling. Per Tardis:Discussion policy, talk pages are for discussing the editing of articles, not for discussing subjects that can only be answered with speculation. Thanks. Shambala108 ☎ 13:43, March 22, 2014 (UTC)

So apart from the idea that there may in fact be a Clara on every planet the Doctor's visited, meaning a Clara for every (humanoid) species, we know for sure that there is a human Clara and dalek Clara, but we also know there's a gallifreyan Clara, so why can't we put "Gallifreyan" in the species box to join "Human,Dalek"? Just because we saw her as a Dalek longer than we saw her as a Galliffreyan doesn't mean we can't ignore her being a Gallifreyan. Otherwise, just keep her species only Human. The problem is the "born and died, lived a million lives" line. If Clara entered the timestream and was split apart or just kept traveling and was a single person the whole time, then she would be Human. If she were born on a planet save the Doctor, then that echo becomes that species. If the second theory is correct, then Clara was born on Gallifrey and was a Gallifreyan. If the first theory is correct, then she was always only Human, in which case she was converted into a Dalek. So which is it? Steed ☎ 02:31, July 23, 2014 (UTC)

Most of her clips have her appearing in a place, but then Victorian Clara Oswin Oswald, for instance, is shown growing up: as an infant, as a child, and eventually as an adult. It's difficult to tell if that's meant to imply that she spontaneously appears as an adult sometimes or if that was a creative choice on the part of the video editors. But we do know she didn't just appear as a fully fledged adult with pre-set memories in every case. We don't know if she was born literally or if "born" refers to the echoes popping into existence as we've never seen anyone pregnant or giving birth to an echo. Baby!COO could've appeared as an infant and been adopted into a family. We simply don't know because we only ever saw a woman holding her as an infant and then her growing up at that residence. For that matter, a human infant Clara could've appeared on Gallifrey and been adopted and raised there, making her a citizen of Gallifrey and in that sense, Gallifreyan, but still biologically human. Or she could be a visitor to the planet. Her clothes raise a question in my mind: can they be definitively pointed to as Gallifreyan? Other than anything her clothes or location might imply, there's nothing that proves that echo's species. Mewiet ☎ 03:20, July 23, 2014 (UTC)

Since we don't have any story evidence that Clara's a Time Lord, we do not put it on articles. In addition, if all we can do is theorize about her possible species, then the discussion here has to end, per Tardis:Discussion policy, and can be moved to Howling:The Howling if anyone would like to further speculate. Shambala108 ☎ 03:30, July 23, 2014 (UTC)

Memory

It wasn't really clear in The Day of the Doctor if Clara retained her memories of past incarnations after The Name of the Doctor. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by DraconisWombat13203 (talk • contribs) .

She probably had them wiped or only retained very small accounts

they have to be in some shape or form the same person since clara vaguely recalls saving the doctor but does not remember where so we must assume she retained very little All Hail Aslan ☎ 18:43, January 11, 2014 (UTC)

Suggest

Suggest Moving of the other lives section to part of her history since they happend to her in her life Silence Fall ☎ 17:07, December 29, 2013 (UTC)

Library Clara

How do we know the Echo-Clara that was seen in the Library was the same one that got made into a Dalek, Oswin Oswald? Am I forgetting something? Were they wearing the same clothes or what? --86.29.7.17^{talk to me} 05:07, January 2, 2014 (UTC)

Definatly positavely All Hail Aslan ☎ 18:45, January 11, 2014 (UTC)

Correction to name needed

All references to "modern" Clara need to have the name "Oswin" removed as it is not her middle name as clearly stated in Bells of Saint John. So "Clara Oswin Oswald" was not born in 1989, but "Clara Oswald" was. If she has a middle name we've yet to learn it. 68.146.70.124^{talk to me} 23:02, January 5, 2014 (UTC)

Did Clara go to university?

I noticed this page says "Clara wanted to travel after university." The reference for this is listed as The Bells of Saint John, however I'm quite sure this fact was never established on screen in any episode. Was this mentioned in a book or other type of media, and if so can we have the correct reference? --121.45.249.181^{talk to me} 15:29, January 19, 2014 (UTC)

How could she get a job as a teacher if she didn't go to university? Nicolas Keough, co-author of Element 23:12, August 11, 2014 (UTC)

Per T:NO RW, the Doctor Who universe isn't the same as the real world. We can't apply real world standards to events in the DWU.

Also, please note that Tardis:Signature Policy requires that your signature link to your user page and your talk page. If your signature is customized, please fix it so it complies with this policy. Thanks. Shambala108 ☎ 23:20, August 11, 2014 (UTC)

In "the Rings of Akhaten" an image of Clara dressed in Cap-and-Gown and tossing her cap is shown on a display in the Tardis. The image appears during the Doctor's "she is/she can't be/she's not possible" monolougue. When the image appears on the display the Doctor says "she is." This indicates that she is probably a university graduate.

Clara and Twelve - a bit early?

Isn't it a bit early to be declaring Clara Oswald a Twelfth Doctor companion? Yes, she is present at his regeneration, but that does not necessarily mean she will end up travelling with him. And per T:SPOIL and T:OFF REL, we can't really say such a thing until she see her travelling with him in months' time.

If you'd like to discuss {{companions of the Twelfth Doctor}} specifically, please go to Template talk:Companions of the Twelfth Doctor. --SOTO (☎/★\♆) 22:46, January 31, 2014 (UTC)

Comment

There is some missing information here.– The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.122.226.10 (talk).

There is probably missing information for all the pages on this wiki. You have to be more specific.

Also, please read Tardis:Discussion policy. Most of your talk page edits have been removed for violating this policy. Shambala108 ☎ 19:25, February 26, 2014 (UTC)

Where is Clara's comic stories in her History? Nicolas Keough, co-author of Element 21:47, September 8, 2014 (UTC)

Nicolas, Shambala108 already warned you about your signature a month ago. Please add links to your User page and user talk page at Special:Preferences.  Digifiend  Talk  PR/SS  KR  MH  Toku  JD  Garo  TH  CG  UM  Logos  CLG  DW  02:06, 9/9/2014 

Comics/prose

shouldn't Clara's page include her comic and novel adventures?– The preceding unsigned comment was added by PurpleSnitch6 (talk • contribs) .

Yes. Please add them if you can.--Skittles the hog - talk 18:11, September 29, 2014 (UTC)

If I had access to Clara's comic and novel adventures I'd gladly add them. Thing is, I thought they were already included before? Has someone been removing them? I notice that Gwen Cooper's page is missing her comic and novel adventures and I could have sworn they were there before. Again, if I had access to those I'd add them too.

--Confirm Nothing...Deny Everything ☎ 17:20, May 11, 2015 (UTC)

Clara's Abilities

Shouldn't the fact that Clara does tae kwon do be referenced as an ability in that section. It was mentioned in Robot of Sherwood although we have never seen her engaged in battle.--190.163.85.33^{talk to me} 05:12, October 12, 2014 (UTC)

Clara's Infobox

Shouldn't Clara's infobox be focused on just the original Clara Oswald, rather than also including all of her copies? Despite being copies of the original, both Oswin Oswald and Clara Oswin Oswald were separate entities. Adding them all to the same infobox makes it crowded and confusing for newer viewers. 66 Seconds ☎ 15:54, November 8, 2014 (UTC)

Story Placement

Flatline

The Instruments of War - the Doctor tries to take Clara to the Frost Fair, mentions the Doctor "fitting in her purse" therefore after Flatline

Silhouette - If Silhouette came before TIoW, because they visited the Frost Fair in Silhouette, why would the Doctor try to take Clara there (albeit in another century) later?

Is this correct?– The preceding unsigned comment was added by Purplehead (talk • contribs) .

One Personality Section

The personality section needs a cleanup. We've already established that the real Clara and all the echoes are one person. Therefore, the personality section should NOT be split into three. For crying out loud, it's been nearly two years at this stage. They should all be combined into one section. The interests section is also redundant and needs to be implemented into the personality section. Also, the similarities page could be removed.– The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joe Devaney (talk • contribs) .

Please remember to sign your posts. Also, it is customary on this wiki for users who bring up suggestions on discussion pages to wait for discussion before making any changes, especially when it comes to removing large sections of information. Shambala108 ☎ 14:20, March 19, 2015 (UTC)

=

cIara you with matt Smith

DOCTOR!!!

So the Doctor page has many linked pages for each Doctor, linked by one infobox. Couldn't we unmerge and do this with Clara's page? because characters like Winnie Clarence have one paragraph where it would be more appropriate to have a page just for her. Especially if there is a reocurring Clara echo later it would be more appropriate not to have just one tiny section of a Clara page. After all, the Doctor played by Colin Baker in the same as the Doctor played by John Hurt, yet they have separate pages with one umbrella page encompassing it called "The Doctor".

My idea that I am suggest is to have pages such as:

Clara Oswin Oswald Winnie Clarence Oswin Oswald Gallifreyan Echo (The Name of the Doctor)

and of course:

Clara Oswald

In this Clara Oswald page, there would be an infobox with links to

Oswin, Winnie, Clara, Gallifreyan, etc.

This would look similar to the Doctor's infobox.

I think that Clara's page is even more deserving of separate pages than the Doctor because the Doctor has one life with 13 faces whereas the Claras have different lives and they don't remember their past lives.

47.55.222.162^{talk to me} 22:27, September 7, 2015 (UTC)

I actually think that this is a discussion can be reopened. As I recall, a recent comic clearly set up that the different Claras are not one in the same. Very clearly. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 22:31, September 7, 2015 (UTC)

I agree. Where can we do this?– The preceding unsigned comment was added by 47.55.222.162 (talk).

I'd be happy to just have one page called Clara's echoes and then giving each named echo liked Oswin Oswald, Clara Oswin Oswald, and Winnie Clarence their own sections. It gets very long and tedious to tack them onto the bottom of Clara's own page. I'd rather them have their own and just have Clara's page link to theirs. Mewiet ☎ 01:43, October 26, 2015 (UTC)

I'm still hoping for a page for each echo, because technically they are different people in the universe, whethter or not they have similar names/perosnalities/faces. 47.55.222.163^{talk to me} 14:24, November 22, 2015 (UTC)

This may be worth revisiting once Series 9 plays out. I agree the major splinters deserve their own pages because a) this article is long enough as it is and b) each splinter so far encountered in any substantial way has had unique personalities and personal histories. We know from Name of the Doctor that none of them just materialized fully formed. Each splinter lived a complete life. I agree it's not possible to do an article for each. For example, the unnamed splinter in the Summer Falls book, or the numerous ones illustrated in the comic strip. But those three, at least, deserve their own. Unless Series 9 undoes Clara's death in the remaining episodes (I'm not violating spoiler rules as I don't know) the only way Jenna Coleman will likely be able to return to the series in future is as a splinter, and I'll be very surprised if someone doesn't write a novel about such an encounter too, meaning if either happens that character will need her own page anyway, so may as well get the ball rolling now! 68.146.52.234^{talk to me} 14:27, November 27, 2015 (UTC)

Template idea

Echoes of Clara Oswald

– The preceding unsigned comment was added by Purplehead (talk • contribs) .

Please see Thread:121062, where it was decided that Clara would have one article. Shambala108 ☎ 15:33, November 22, 2015 (UTC)

• We don't need an article for every single one but the question must be reopened once Series 9 ends as there are at least 3 viable articles possible as Oswin, Clara Oswin and Winnie all have backstories and other information that can make articles. Frankly, if this wiki allows there to be a Man with chips article then we look stupid not having separate ones for the major and well-defined splinters. 68.146.52.234^{talk to me} 14:39, November 27, 2015 (UTC)

The thread Shambala has linked to explains why it was decided one page was the way to go. Man with chips is not a good comparison. He is one character - he gets a page. Clara/Oswin/Winnie etc. are all one and the same - she gets one page.--Skittles the hog - talk 14:56, November 27, 2015 (UTC)

By that logic, then, there should be only one Doctor page instead of Thirteen or so, correct? After all it's all the same man. Considering the fact the series itself has emphasized how Clara became more like the Doctor, the echos could just as easily be called regenerations, right? 68.146.52.234^{talk to me} 15:33, December 13, 2015 (UTC)

Secret Adventures?

Why is that one section called Secret Adventures? What was secret about them or was there an "erased from history" storyline I missed? 68.146.52.234^{talk to me} 14:34, November 27, 2015 (UTC)

Paragraph breaks

Eeek! Where did all the paragraph breaks go? 68.146.52.234^{talk to me} 21:43, January 17, 2016 (UTC)

I think an editor misinterpreted the cleanup message at the top of the page about "we do not need three or more paragraphs per story", and instead of making the writing more concise, they removed all of the paragraph breaks. I've fixed it. P&P talk contribs 22:10, January 17, 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. If time permits I'll dive in and do some trimming. Some stories deserve more detailed coverage than others. 68.146.52.234^{talk to me} 13:59, January 21, 2016 (UTC)

Splinters or echoes

I'll be honest, this is the only place where the term "splinter" is really used to describe Clara's many incarnations. "Echoes" seems to be the more often used term. What's the call - do we stick with splinter or change the term to echo here? 68.146.52.234^{talk to me} 13:59, January 21, 2016 (UTC)

Valid point - 'echoes' is used in The Name of the Doctor whereas splinters is not, so echoes is the more accurate term. I say change. KingOrokos ☎ 14:24, January 21, 2016 (UTC)

Sarah Louise Madison

I'm trying to add this name but due to there not being an article on this person yet the template won't accept it. Madison played the "Time Zombie" version of Clara in "Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS" and should be included alongside Sophie Downham in the actors list. 68.146.233.86^{talk to me} 13:39, April 15, 2016 (UTC)

Have you tried doing it without the ref tag? That seemed to mess it up somehow. —Phil | Talk 16:06, April 15, 2016 (UTC)

Main aliases

Is there any reason why Winnie Clarence is the only "Main alias" listed in the infobox and not "Oswin Oswald" and "Clara Oswin Oswald"? Actually, since those two - and Winnie - were echoes, I don't think it's accurate to list any of them as "aliases" as they were technically different people, especially Winnie given the events of the comic strip. 23skidoo ☎ 05:33, May 6, 2017 (UTC)

Dating Clara's era

Clara joins the Doctor in The Bells of Saint John, which we know to take place in 2013. The leaves in the episode are brown and the trees almost bare, so it's autumn 2013. From For Tonight We Must Die, we know that she is dead by October 2016.

We see Clara have two Christmases (The Time of the Doctor and Last Christmas). These can take place in 2013, 2014 or 2015. However, Clara Oswald and the School of Death tells us that The Zygon Invasion/The Zygon Inversion has happened by September, 2015 (in keeping with it happening two years after The Day of the Doctor). As such, The Time of the Doctor must be 2013 and Last Christmas must be 2014, meaning...

• 2013: The Bells of Saint John through to The Time of the Doctor
• 2014: Into the Dalek through to Last Christmas
• 2015: The Magician's Apprentice through to The Zygon Invasion (Face the Raven doesn't necessarily take place in Clara's time)

The fact that Kate seems to meet the Doctor for the first time in The Power of Three is irreconcilable with Clara's timeline. The Power of Three takes place between 2016 and 2019, but Clara has two Christmases after meeting UNIT and is dead by late 2016. -- Saxon 16:22, June 8, 2018 (UTC)

Non-heterosexual

Clara's page itself says the following: "Clara's sexual orientation was suggested to be bisexual, though this is not explicitly stated". Kissing a girl doesn't mean that she isn't straight. -- Saxon (✉️) 23:21, October 4, 2020 (UTC)

Have you read The Day of the Doctor (novelisation)? Najawin ☎ 23:23, October 4, 2020 (UTC)

Or Clara and the TARDIS (home video)? Epsilon (Contact me) 23:25, October 4, 2020 (UTC)

Yes and yes. -- Saxon (✉️) 23:26, October 4, 2020 (UTC)

Then you know that she expressed interest in Kate Stewart. Call it romantic or sexual, it's of the relevant type.

'Am I to understand, from this apparently random collection of words, that you thought this Kate person was ... attracted to you?'[...]'And then you concluded that she had to be an alien duplicate. I see.'

'No, I concluded maybe we should get a drink sometime. But when I thought about it something was wrong. Because when we first met, she'd barely looked at me. People don't suddenly start fancying you out of nowhere, because you happen to hang around for a bit. Except in romcoms. Written by stalkers.'

So she was clearly receptive to another woman being interested in her.Najawin ☎ 23:33, October 4, 2020 (UTC)

Is that any more convincing than the case for Craig Owens or Grisenko being non-heterosexual because they seemed receptive to being kissed by the Doctor? -- Saxon (✉️) 23:37, October 4, 2020 (UTC)

Vaguely positive reaction to a kiss ≠ genuinely wanting to go on a date with somebody. And that's without going into Nina or Ashildr. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 23:42, October 4, 2020 (UTC)

Substantially? One is not pulling back in a way that shows you're deeply uncomfortable, the other is not only not discouraging the more subtle, long form, mode of interaction, it's actively being receptive and wanting to go along with it. Combine that with the other pieces of evidence and it's really quite strong. Note that I'm not saying she'd necessarily call herself bisexual, that's an identity. But for our purposes of "not heterosexual", she fits the bill. Najawin ☎ 23:46, October 4, 2020 (UTC)

Have you seen Closing Time and Cold Blood? That's not an accurate representation of what happened in either scene. "I could kiss you." / "If you insist.". I interpreted Clara's comment in the novelisation of The Day of the Doctor as a joke when I read it, but I concede that there do seem to be a lot of suggestions that she isn't heterosexual, even if I personally don't believe it. -- Saxon (✉️) 23:51, October 4, 2020 (UTC)

This is well after Craig accepts that the Doctor is a bit nuts. Interpreting that in such a way is stretching. Note here that I'm not advocating for Amy to be included in the category, even though there are a few suggestions as to that (and I stress, few). Clara is a case where there's a variety of textual evidence revolving around multiple different women. Najawin ☎ 23:56, October 4, 2020 (UTC)

Okay, putting my admin hat on. Clara Oswald is almost exactly the type of character for whom we need the vague Category:Non-heterosexual individuals. Basically the first thing she was introduced saying is that her first kiss was a girl, and she has made a point of enjoying how much she enjoyed kissing several female historical figures since then, and had that moment in Clara and the TARDIS. And she once considered going on a date with Kate. Clara belongs in the category, even if people are free to make up their own headcanons. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 00:00, October 5, 2020 (UTC)