Trusted, emailconfirmed, threadmoderator
41,285
edits
Talk:Timeless Child: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
→Context from old books
NateBumber (talk | contribs) (New section: Context from old books) |
Tag: 2017 source edit |
||
| Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
:[[Richard Francis Burton]] once guessed that the [[Great House]]s ([[PROSE]]: ''[[The Book of the War (novel)|The Book of the War]]'') of the Time Lords ([[PROSE]]: ''[[Lungbarrow (novel)|Lungbarrow]]'', et. al) had achieved the power of regeneration by modifying themselves with the "taint" of the [[Yssgaroth]], ([[PROSE]]: ''[[The Book of the War (novel)|The Book of the War]]'') much like how the account involving [[Tecteun]] and the Timeless Child involved the former taking biodata from the child and applying it to Time Lord DNA. ([[TV]]: ''[[The Timeless Children (TV story)|The Timeless Children]]'') Indeed, the vampires active in the universe were searching for a [[Child-That-Was-Taken]]. ([[PROSE]]: ''[[Out of the Box (short story)|Out of the Box]]'') | :[[Richard Francis Burton]] once guessed that the [[Great House]]s ([[PROSE]]: ''[[The Book of the War (novel)|The Book of the War]]'') of the Time Lords ([[PROSE]]: ''[[Lungbarrow (novel)|Lungbarrow]]'', et. al) had achieved the power of regeneration by modifying themselves with the "taint" of the [[Yssgaroth]], ([[PROSE]]: ''[[The Book of the War (novel)|The Book of the War]]'') much like how the account involving [[Tecteun]] and the Timeless Child involved the former taking biodata from the child and applying it to Time Lord DNA. ([[TV]]: ''[[The Timeless Children (TV story)|The Timeless Children]]'') Indeed, the vampires active in the universe were searching for a [[Child-That-Was-Taken]]. ([[PROSE]]: ''[[Out of the Box (short story)|Out of the Box]]'') | ||
Contra Tybort, I think this ''is'' relevant to the page, since it contextualizes the Timeless Child storyline in what was previously established about the non-Gallifreyan origin of regeneration, which is surely relevant to the Child's "legacy". But I'm open to other points of view, so I'm hoping to hear input from other users. – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 15:36, 17 January 2023 (UTC) | Contra Tybort, I think this ''is'' relevant to the page, since it contextualizes the Timeless Child storyline in what was previously established about the non-Gallifreyan origin of regeneration, which is surely relevant to the Child's "legacy". But I'm open to other points of view, so I'm hoping to hear input from other users. – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 15:36, 17 January 2023 (UTC) | ||
: No, it is an entirely separate account to how the Time Lords first regenerated, and anything to the contrary is, to quote the behind the scenes section, "a fan theory". That is why it's irrelevant to a page on the Timeless Child from series 12. | |||
: Also in my mind (and maybe discussions to the contrary in regard to including Faction Paradox can clear this up), equating Great Houses with the reference in the [[Virgin New Adventures]] is itself a violation of [[Four little rules|rule 2]] (which is how I also described ''Out of the Box'' in [[Special:Diff/3389523]]), given how [[Mad Norwegian Press]] is not a BBC licencee. The term biodata isn't even mentioned in ''The Timeless Children'' that I'm aware of. -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 17:00, 17 January 2023 (UTC) | |||
