Talk:Thirteenth Doctor/Archive 1
 |
This page is an archive. Please do not make any edits here. Edit the active conversation only. |
|---|
Infobox image
I have uploaded four options for Thirteen's infobox image, taken from her brief time on screen so far. Feel free to add more suggestions, but I'm fairly sure these are the only reasonable choices (again, very little screen time).
Please indicate which image(s) you think work best, and why.
Obviously, this image will be replaced once Thirteen has her proper debut episode.
Thank you.
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 21:52, December 25, 2017 (UTC)
- I like #3 the best.BananaClownMan ☎ 22:42, December 25, 2017 (UTC)
- The episode has debuted, therefore the image should be replaced. User:Animan2001 ☎ 01:01, October 11, 2018 (UTC)
- And then next week someone else will try to add another image. That's why we're waiting. We don't add a new image after every episode. We will probably call for image ideas after a few episodes have aired so there are enough suggestions.
- And the image that keeps getting added doesn't fit our guidelines for infobox images, which is why I keep removing it and citing Tardis:Guide to images. Shambala108 ☎ 00:13, October 11, 2018 (UTC)
Page protected
I am temporarily protecting this page from new and unregistered users. There is a determined effort to announce this Doctor as the fourteenth. However, we decided (back when the War Doctor fiasco cropped up) to not use the new numbering system, which would A. cause a lot of work to correct/clean up and B. cause confusion with things like "The Thirteenth Doctor was the fourteenth incarnation of the Doctor."
When the protection is lifted, there should be no more potential edit wars over whether this Doctor is fourteenth or not. She isn't, on this wiki.
When I have more time, I will add the pertinent forum discussions applying to this situation. Shambala108 ☎ 22:30, March 19, 2018 (UTC)
Sex v Gender
Regeneration is a biological process, so it's a change of sex not gender. Gender is what's between your ears, sex is what's between your legs. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.34.74.15 (talk). Posted on April Fools' Day
- Nonetheless, all previous examples of Time Lords regeneration across biological sex show that they don't stick to their old gender and get dysphoria — instead, they embrace the gender corresponding to their new physical form. See the General's 11th incarnation and the Master's Missy incarnation. So it's most likely both a change of sex and gender.--Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 13:58, July 14, 2018 (UTC)
Undated / Companionless travels
What's the difference? Why are some sources put as undated and others in the main section of companionless travels? Surely all should be put in companionless travels. Ben Moore512 ☎ 15:15, May 27, 2018 (UTC)
- I agree. --Borisashton ☎ 16:45, May 27, 2018 (UTC)
- Hmmm... I agree that it is a mess currently, especially given that undated events are a subcategory of companionless travels, which is generally not the case. However, I disagree that they are all necessarily companionless travel. I'm not sure what editors adding them thought, but now looking about the result, I am getting the following distinction: "undated events" are short encounters, in one case just one photo, whereas "Companionless travel" present some mini-stories. When something happens, it is easier to determine the absence of companions. I do not however, believe that the information from Rose (novelisation) is sufficient to file the incident under "companionless travels". If anything, it would be safer to leave all these as undated events, at least for now. I mean (and it is only half a joke): how can we be sure that the giant frog is not a companion after Kevin? But more seriously, there may be a companion running in front of the Doctor who was simply cut off in the photo. Amorkuz ☎ 18:24, May 27, 2018 (UTC)
Death section
Ok, obviously the whole page will have some major edits in the coming weeks, but is there a specific reason for Contents (short story) being given as the death of the 13th Doctor? Been a while since I read that specific poem or any of the others from the collection it's in, but it seems odd to be specifically mentioned here. ThomasRWade ☎ 20:22, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
