Talk:TARDIS key

Proposed Deletion

Well, not deletion, exactly: merger. Unfortunately, we don't have a "proposed merge" template. but Article should be deleted. It's unnecessary, as the information is properly in The Doctor's TARDIS article already. The pictures in this article are highly suspect as original fan art. The prose is almost entirely factually wrong. (The assertion that Jon Pertwee developed the "original" TARDIS key is funny, though!) As the key and the TARDIS are fairly indivisible things, it's not really worth the effort at this point to rewrite this article from scratch. Propose redirection of TARDIS key to The Doctor's TARDIS#Key. 13:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Oppose merge

If you look at normal wikipedia, there is a seperate article for the TARDIS key which is very comprehensive and lengthy. Including such information with the general TARDIS article would overload it, it would be more proffesional and user friendly to have a seperate article about the key with mutual links to and from the main TARDIS page. 09/05/09

There isn't actually a TARDIS key article on Wikipedia, there's a section of their TARDIS article Wikipedia:TARDIS#Doors_and_lock.

Also to remember Wikipedia's page is presented out-of-universe, while this wiki's is in-universe, with (what could be included on the Doctor's TARDIS page) a Behind the Scenes section for behind the scenes information.

Please remember to sign your edits using either four tildes: ~~~~ or by pushing the button that looks like a signature above the text box. --Tangerineduel 15:58, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

It needs clean-up, yes, but this deserves its own article. Monkey with a Gun 08:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Support merge

• CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 13:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC), per above.
• --Tangerineduel 14:27, 21 April 2009 (UTC) - Though I'm not sure what there is to merge as the article is pretty much totally lacking in references to supports its clams.

Well, I suppose I mean "redirect the name of the article to the section in the Doctor's TARDIS article" — not an actual merge. I don't even think the pics are genuine production art. Seems awfully fannish to me. CzechOut ☎ | ✍ 20:35, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Oppose merge

I have just completed a major overhaul of this article which I feel remedies a lot of the earlier problems with its content. I feel the TARDIS key has enough information unique to it to justify its own article; this data is all valid and useful, but would not really fit into the main TARDIS article. Rob T Firefly 18:01, November 21, 2009 (UTC)

Should there be a note about the plot holes?

Something has been bothering me for a long while. Fathers Day introduced the MASSIVE plot hole that the Dr could call the TARDIS using a small bit of power (cell battery) and the key. How many times has the Dr being seperated from the Tardis been a big plot point? It should be noted in this entry that this is a function of the key, and introduces a plot hole. Kgk4569 ☎ 12:07, April 24, 2016 (UTC)

Not really. The scene specifically refers to the wound in time created during that specific episode's paradox, leading to the exterior being thrown out of the wound. It's not as simple as "the TARDIS key calls the TARDIS to him from any location with the help of a mobile phone battery". -- Tybort (talk page) 14:29, April 24, 2016 (UTC)

It never specifies that this has to specifically do with the wounding. The Doctor just claimed that he could call the Tardis back, no conditional statements. That this is a plot hole is a safe assumption until told otherwise. It makes sense that the Time Lords would have some sort of Tardis recovery mechanism. Think about it, you are flying about space and time, your ONLY salvation is the Tardis. Without it you are utterly stranded, likely incapable of communicating with any life forms (due to the translation circuit being derived from the Tardis), and your ship can disguise itself rendering it difficult to find at times. Most people have trouble finding their car in a parking lot, imagine trying to find one in a parking lot the size of a planet (or even space), and it could be disguised as any other car, or a lamp, or a toilet, or a bus stop. It is a logical precaution. Kgk4569 ☎ 21:15, April 24, 2016 (UTC)

Constellation

I have seen on numerous sites that the constellation on the back of the ankh key is supposed to be Kasterborous. Apparently it comes from the wikipedia article which sources that statement with REF: The Making of Doctor Who (1972 edition). Sadly, I couldn't found the words "constellation" or "kasterborous" in my copy of that book.

Is it actually mentioned anywhere in a source book or a story or is it just a case of wikipedia vandalism ?RingoRoadagain ☎ 16:13, December 8, 2018 (UTC)