User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-24894325-20170121220436/@comment-5918438-20170122064940

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-24894325-20170121220436/@comment-5918438-20170122064940 T:BOUND aside, now this discussion has begun you are bound by T:POINT not to act on your opinions while this is ongoing.

To be clear about the use of, that is the correct infobox for a vehicle. It is not saying that the TARDIS is an object, but she is unequivocally a vehicle.

Now, this isn't a philosophical discussion about what is and isn't a living thing within the Doctor Who universe. In fact, this is almost purely a technical issue. is used because of the parameters it provides. It's "type" is a Type 40 TARDIS. It used to say it was "used by" the Doctor, and I don't know when or why that was removed.

An actor variable could feasibly be added to this infobox, if necessary, as there are a number of objects who are/become sentient, and are performed by someone in their story.

Now within the category tree, this are both individuals and vehicles. "I'm not trying to say that all TARDISes are individuals. I'm trying to say that the Doctor's TARDIS is an individual." No, there is a clear flaw in this logic. Regardless, it's not a question or one or the other, at least in regards to definition of the topic. It's about which infobox it makes the most sense to use.

And one last note: I haven't read that short story, but I do know that in The Doctor's Wife, the "Ship" in question calls all the TARDISes in the TARDIS graveyard her "sisters".