User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Matrix Archives
XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:121558
I thought Leela wasn't human, either that, or I'm just having an idiot episode.
- Memnarc
She's human. The Doctor often instructs her on the developments of her ancestors (i.e. humans) on their travels.
- SOTO
Yes, she is very much human.
With the question firmly answered, the thread will now be closed.
(To the original poster: In future, please ask such questions at Board:The Reference Desk.)
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:127390
What exactly is the Nightmare Child the Doctor refers to in the End of Time part 2 where he is telling the Master what he will unleash on the Earth if the Time Lock is broken. He has also made refersnce to the Nightmare Child when he sees Davros again. "I saw your ship fly into the Jaws of the Nightmare Child in the Gates of Elithium." Thank you in advance to whoever answeres this question.
- Anoted
This should help for starters
- SOTO
We can't really answer your question beyond what's written at Nightmare Child. Anything past that, you'll have to bring to The Howling, the only place on our wiki where speculation is allowed.
We have t been given very much specific information, so you can speculate, but not here.
I do hope, however, that Nightmare Child gives you a satisfactory answer.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:128231
In a few episodes, Daleks seem to count down in "rols," rather than in seconds. Any info on what that actually means?
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:138227
I'm sure there may be an answer for this one somewhere, but I've missed it even tho I've searched from many sites. So why doesn't the Doctor save the victims of the Weeping Angels, when they are sent to another time? Would it create a paradox and if it would, then why?
- I Like Bow Ties Bow Ties Are Cool
It is a fixed point in time. There is no way to change it.
- Tybort
I don't recall "fixed point in time" said anywhere in Blink or Manhattan. Not every single moment in history is a fixed point. I think The Wedding of River Song outright said they could be manufactured given the right ingredients so to speak.
Also, was this created on The Matrix Archives?
- I Like Bow Ties Bow Ties Are Cool
I assume it would have to be considering that The Doctor would have helped all of them right?
- Tybort
I don't remember if I'm extrapolating from an interview Moffat gave to clear things up or going by the narrative, but I think, at least in The Angels Take Manhattan, a complex paradox was created during the "landing lights" situation just to reach 1938, and, once another complex paradox was created to stop Rory from dying in Winter Quay, access to Amy and Rory became impossible.
- I Like Bow Ties Bow Ties Are Cool
You are right. I try not to g to deep though. I normally just watch the shows for fun. Normally.
- SOTO
Tybort wrote: Also, was this created on The Matrix Archives?
Yup! This thread should be at The Reference Desk, but I'm not sure if I'm allowed to move threads.
To answer the question, though, I'm pretty sure the Doctor is able to save victims of the Angels without damaging time. He did, after all, save himself and Martha in the TARDIS in Blink.
However, as proven in Angels, if the Doctor were to see an older version of the victim or read about his time stuck in the past, he could not change the past. That would create a paradox.
- It's already happened. Rory, you've just witnessed your own future. [...] If Rory, got out, it would create a paradox.
The reason the Doctor couldn't save Amy and Rory is because several paradoxes had already occurred in 1930s New York. Why he couldn't pick them up at a later time in a different place and then just make a fake tombstone is left unanswered in the script. I suppose Amy's afterword must have clinched it.
The reason he didn't take Billy with him in Blink is because he needed him to add the easter egg to the DVDs. Without him staying behind, the plan would never work and the TARDIS would never arrive.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:145565
I was wondering, is the valeyard still still in the doctors future?
There have been villains similar and and that fake meta-crisis doctor made reference, so I was wondering if that was still a thing or if he has jut been discontinued or maybe retconned out of the series?
- Scrooge MacDuck
…for reasons that escape me, this isn't closed despite being in the Matrix Archives. Could someone get on that?
(Oh, and for the record, user from five years ago: the Valeyard hasn't been retconned per se, but his nature has always been ambiguous, with many contradictory statements in many equally-valid media about where he came from and who created him. It can safely be said that the Valeyard exists. It cannot be safely determined how, and we're unlikely to ever have a clearer answer.)
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:169345
So there's 3 theory's about what happens to the master after survival, there's the one where he tries to find a new regeneration cycle (the Virgin New Adventures version),there's the one where the Tremas master persists (the BBC Books version) and there's the one where the Tremas master is lost/ the one where The Keeper of Traken is undone (the Big Finish version). I think that the most explainable would be the Virgin New Adventures theory but the BBC Books theory is good but there's a big gap and no explanation to cure of Cheetah virus.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:170581
What about ones like Red leech poison, Clive Finch, [[The End of Time]], Amy Pond (Ganger)? Or [[:Category:Villains navigation templates]] and Category:Fruits from the real world? For those, someone could come along and think those are viable articles to create.
Thing is, it's called Special:WantedPages, not [[Special:WantedPagesExceptSomeArentReallyButOnlyLookLikeTheyreWantedButYouCantTellTheDifferenceJustByLookingAtThem]]. Or something like that. I know it's not a big thing, but the ones that won't go away are like...a stain on a carpet that you scrub and scrub and can't get out. Or as though you were working on the next site edit badge and you needed 100 edits and you had 99 and that last one wasn't being credited.
It's probably a bit OCD on my part, but I get a peculiar (nay, eldritch) satisfaction from making articles for all the wanted pages with 8 links. Then 7 links. Then 6. Did I mention I have no life? :)
Anyhoo, sorry for ranting. Build high for happiness. ----Ebyabe (talk) 02:05, February 21, 2015 (UTC)
- Shambala108
Please just stick to normal in universe and real world pages and stop worrying about templates, user pages and the like. It's against policy for non admins to alter other people's user pages or forum posts, and you should never alter templates if you don't know why the Redlinks are there.
Even so, it's still useful as a guide for writing articles. There's absolutely nothing wrong with your style of editing-by-Wanted-Pages, and if you use that list extensively, you'll soon come to recognise the false positives and get to the genuine substance it affords.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:211405
ive been researching about the krontep I know they do not have ships but what do they use for weapons
They're mostly just hand-to-hand fighters without any great knowledge of advanced weaponry. This line is instructive:
- Yrcanos: We must find some weapons. Some of those that turn one's enemies to slime. We must kill all who stand between us and victory. We'll grind every last slug beneath our feet, yes?
And then a whole lot of the serial turns on Yrcanos' search for weapons.
The Mentors are pretty much the ones who have the most advanced weaponry in the story, things Yrcanos calls "liquifiers", but that's probably not what they're really called.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:217995
How do we treat Mrs. Potts in cast sections and appearance sections in infoboxes? Is she a recurring character given her pictures appearing in The Pilot, Knock Knock and as a flashback in Oxygen and then later she appears in person in The Lie of the Land, even though it's imagined by Bill.
- OncomingStorm12th
In my opinion, Bill's mom is yet to appear to Doctor Who.
So far, we've only seen pictures of her, and, on The Lie of the Land, all we see is Bill's imagination of her mum. A picture is not an individual, neither is Bill's imagination.
It's not much different from Clara "appearing" on Heaven Sent or Amy on The Time of the Doctor. The Doctor imagination of his companions aren't the companions themsevels; neither should be Bill's imagination of her mother.
- OttselSpy25
But that's the thing. If you visit Amy Pond - list of appearances, you'll find The Time of the Doctor listed. Same for Clala. Adric - list of appearances proudly points to TV: Time-Flight.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:226098
In the page of the novel Harvest of Time it is said that that book is "the ninth original Doctor Who novel not to feature the incumbent Doctor since the series revival". Which are the first eight novels? I couldn't find them (except for the first, The Wheel of Ice)
But that's super tenuous. So I've changed all four of the novels in that not-quite-series so that it avoids that obscure way of counting.
If you're interested, the "nine" came from a slight confusion of a statement made by the Editorial Director of BBC Books back in 2011, as reported by doctorwhonews.net at http://www.doctorwhonews.net/2011/07/dwn210711121508-bbc-books-harvest-of.html
What seems to have happened is that someone misread that statement and thought that all the books the Editorial Director was talking about were original, when in fact he was saying the "all-original" books started after Shada — what we would come to know as The Wheel of Ice.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:231740
I posted in the archives by accident.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:246879
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:247941
A number of ushers and I have been having separate discussions about the number of images on articles, and I think it’s time we come up an official rule for image use, since it has transpired that there is no official wiki policy on image numbers, only a guideline layout out by CzechOut to User talk:Forgetful 10th doctor fan#Hat images in 2013: "Just because we allow one picture per section doesn't mean that a picture a section is a required. In fact, it's often a bad idea to use one pic a section, if the sections are relatively brief. You need to stand back and look at the article as a whole. Pictures shouldn't flood the frame, but instead have plenty of room to breathe." Even users that govern this rule have reportedly disagreed with it.
Now, one of the deciding factors in only having one image per section is in order to reduce load time for pages, since it has been claimed by User talk:Shambala108 on User:Jack "BtR" Saxon's Talk Page that "a lot of people visit the site on cell phones and other mobile devices", and the load time for them can be "especially long". I myself do not have such issues with my mobile device, but I am able to believe a small number of individuals do when factoring in that some people do not have superfast connection speeds. However, phone technology has really advanced since 2013, and will continue to advance in the coming years, so the problem of loading time is not the biggest of deals in this argument, though a valid point to be made.
But, there is one upside to a restriction on images; "too many bakers can spoil the cake". Image overflowing has been an issue, but I have a solution; zigzagging images so that no two images are on the same side in a row, and having only one image per story entry for the long articles that cover multiple stories in a single section, such the Doctors, the companions, and the rogues gallery.
Speaking of the Doctors, since they are the character with the most appearances in the franchise, I believe they are the exception to the "rule", since they are undeniably long pages. The sections on their appearance definitely need an image for a visual reference for the readers to have. Not to mention that there are a number of "sub-sections" in the physiological profile sections; are they to be applied to this "one-section" rule of thumb. I would like to make the case that images that display important moments be prioritised on the biography section, such as the moments before and after regeneration, the moment they meet or invite aboard a new companion, the Doctor facing a main adversary, or when the Twelfth Doctor returned to Gallifrey.
- Jack "BtR" Saxon
I agree that the limitation rule should apply only to the very longest pages, such as the Doctors'.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:247943
A number of ushers and I have been having separate discussions about the number of images on articles, and I think it’s time we come up an official rule for image use, since it has transpired that there is no official wiki policy on image numbers, only a guideline layout out by CzechOut to User talk:Forgetful 10th doctor fan#Hat images in 2013: "Just because we allow one picture per section doesn't mean that a picture a section is a required. In fact, it's often a bad idea to use one pic a section, if the sections are relatively brief. You need to stand back and look at the article as a whole. Pictures shouldn't flood the frame, but instead have plenty of room to breathe." Even users that govern this rule have reportedly disagreed with it.
Now, one of the deciding factors in only having one image per section is in order to reduce load time for pages, since it has been claimed by User talk:Shambala108 on User:Jack "BtR" Saxon's Talk Page that "a lot of people visit the site on cell phones and other mobile devices", and the load time for them can be "especially long". I myself do not have such issues with my mobile device, but I am able to believe a small number of individuals do when factoring in that some people do not have superfast connection speeds. However, phone technology has really advanced since 2013, and will continue to advance in the coming years, so the problem of loading time is not the biggest of deals in this argument, though a valid point to be made.
But, there is one upside to a restriction on images; "too many bakers can spoil the cake". Image overflowing has been an issue, but I have a solution; zigzagging images so that no two images are on the same side in a row, and having only one image per story entry for the long articles that cover multiple stories in a single section, such the Doctors, the companions, and the rogues gallery.
Speaking of the Doctors, since they are the character with the most appearances in the franchise, I believe they are the exception to the "rule", since they are undeniably long pages. The sections on their appearance definitely need an image for a visual reference for the readers to have. Not to mention that there are a number of "sub-sections" in the physiological profile sections; are they to be applied to this "one-section" rule of thumb. I would like to make the case that images that display important moments be prioritised on the biography section, such as the moments before and after regeneration, the moment they meet or invite aboard a new companion, the Doctor facing a main adversary, or when the Twelfth Doctor returned to Gallifrey.
- LauraBatham
I would also like to add that maybe the TV story pages should be an exception to the "one image per section" rule. Not so much the Classic stories, as their plots are divided into sections and can therefore have an image per episode (which is plenty), but the revived series TV stories have lengthy plots with no interruptions and it just looks odd only having one picture. Two or three evenly spaced pictures for these sections might be better, depending on the length of the plot description. Maybe for big sections like this we should have a "one picture per x amount of paragraphs" policy?
We have a bunch of image policies, some for uploading images, some for using images. I've collected all at Thread:148148 for ease of locating them.
A couple of things that I think aren't actually spelled out on any policy page: we already do expect images to be on alternate sides of articles (the zig-zag mentioned by User:BananaClownMan). We do not allow columns of images, meaning text with images on both sides.
The "one image at most per section" is a guideline, because we have tons of different type pages with different lengths. It's not feasible to come up with a concrete policy declaring how many images should be allowed on a page.
And User:BananaClownMan completely misses the point of the rule when he says Doctor pages (and other popular pages) should be the exception. These pages are the reason for the guideline: because otherwise we would have over a hundred articles on such pages. (I have recently cleaned up The Master for having 125+ images.)
It's easy for the average user/visitor to the site to not care how difficult it is for heavy-image pages to load, but it's something that has to be considered. It's better to have a few quality images than a bunch of images overloading the page.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/The Matrix Archives/Thread:249624
Hi. I wanted to know whether it's okay or not to create an article about the new thing that's coming soon, which has now been officially revealed on BBC's Doctor Who site and YouTube channel, or if we need to wait until it has been released...
- RingoRoadagain
the game ?
- Danniesen
I wouldn't spoil what it was. Hence my way of wording my question...
Also, Board:The Matrix Archives is for closed threads. Do not post new threads here thanks.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY Warning: Display title "User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Matrix Archives" overrides earlier display title "The Matrix Archives/New thing".
