Talk:William Hartnell (in-universe)

Question
Should this page be merged with the William Hartnell page, since it's all but confirmed they're the same person?
 * Please don't forget to sign your posts. "All but confirmed" is not the same as "confirmed". Shambala108 ☎  13:16, June 24, 2014 (UTC)
 * It should definitely not be merged. This is the page about the in-universe character, not the real-world actor.  They are kept separate per T:POV. &mdash; Rob T Firefly - &#916;&#8711; - 17:58, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

Rename suggestion
Is there anything connecting the account from AUDIO: Pier Pressure and the account from COMIC: Whodunnit? that complies with T:NO RW? Danochy ☎  05:54, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure either. Surely a reference to "W. Hartnell" should just be attributed to William Hartnell as the name already exists in the DWU; not to "Billy" whom we already didn't have enough data on to link to the accounts we already had of an in-universe "William Hartnell". Scrooge MacDuck ☎  07:13, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Amorkuz did think even that was "speculation", but imo linking W. Hartnell and William Hartnell is pretty reasonable. Danochy ☎  08:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)


 * The reason I linked "W Hartnell" and "Billy" is because they're both meant to be a 20th century William Hartnell. As they're both intended to be the same real world individual, I thought it was a simple matter of logic to call these two the same. And frankly, not saying these two are the same because of some overly pedantic application of T:NO RW is counterproductive to the readers of this Wiki, who can easily understand these two are the same, but would have to go to different pages because Oh tHiS VeRsIoN UsEs a nIcKnAmE AnD MiGhT NoT Be hArTnElL. (There's a reason this Wiki is a laughing stock.)
 * If we were to move the information to COMIC: Whodunnit? to the William Hartnell from TV Century 21, the page would end with the character's biography being inexplicably being a hundred years in the past. 📯 📂 09:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Nevertheless these are both clearly intended to be William Hartnell. Why Hartnell is active in 2065 in TV Century 21 is not for us to puzzle out, but you of all people are surely familiar with the variety of Paul Magrs characters whose biographies are inconsistent, yet who do remain the same individual from one story to the next. Just as one hypothesis, we know the in-universe Peter Cushing appeared in movies created well after his death thanks to time travel; is it unthinkable that the same is true of Hartnell? Scrooge MacDuck ☎  09:45, 11 May 2021 (UTC)


 * ...in that case, can we do the obvious thing and just merge Billy as well? Seeing as Billy is a well known nickname for people named William, and with Whodunnit? giving explicit evidence that Hartnell existed in the 20th century. 📯 📂 10:09, 11 May 2021 (UTC)


 * While I'm sure it could have been conveyed in a more polite manner, I think you might be correct here Epsilon. Having re-evaluated my position, I was probably being too pedantic in this instance. I don't necessarily buy the "intention" argument per se (that is, there are some cases where intention isn't conveyed through the story in an obvious-enough manner), but I think if the reader/listener are able to see that the two are the same character without any BTS input, then yes, that should be enough to say they are the same character. I'm sure there would be many caveats to this point of view, however.


 * Lastly, with that in mind, I'd have to agree with the proposed merger with William Hartnell (Lady Penelope Investigates the stars of the Sensational new film Dr. Who and the Daleks!). All the best, Danochy ☎  10:46, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry for my rudeness. Nothing personal, I'm just a little tired of T:NO RW's usage in general on the Wiki. Sorry for any offence; I genuinely wouldn't want to cause any. 📯 📂 11:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Apology accepted :) Also apologies for the pedantry - T:NO RW certainly does have a place, I just think I was slightly on the wrong side of the line here. Danochy ☎  12:01, 11 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Can this matter be resolved yet? 📯 📂 15:22, 2 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Bumping the discussion. 📯 📂 14:18, 11 January 2022 (UTC)