Talk:Amy Pond (Ganger)

Could this article be merged back into the original?
Since the Ganger Amy was essentially being controlled by the real Amy - shouldn't this article be merged back with the original Amy article, seeing as how the real Amy and the ganger Amy were the same people? -- MisterRandom2 19:52, May 28, 2011 (UTC)

Was she being controlled? Additionally, the grounds for the deletion of this article are ridiculous. A lack or knowledge does not mean the page should be deleted. She was ganger, fact. Alternations do need to be made though.Skittles the hog-- Talk 19:54, May 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Gangers are supposed to be controlled by the originals - with the exception of what happened in TRF/TAP. So, the REAL Amy has been unconscious and controlling her clone this whole time, while being unaware of her true state. That's why the Ganger version kept seeing visions of the eye patch lady. -- MisterRandom2 19:58, May 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * And there's also the fact that if the Ganger Amy was a real independently functioning clone, the Doctor wouldn't have just arbitrarily destroyed her. Not after all that business about how independent Gangers should be treated like humans. -- MisterRandom2 20:01, May 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Plus when Ganger Amy is destroyed the real one wakes up, quite obviously surprised to find herself there. And why would the Doctor tell her they were coming to find her if she was an independent clone that would forget everything when destroyed? TemporalSpleen 20:27, May 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * That's exactly it: plastic Amy is really just a physical extension of real Amy, which is why the real Amy wakes up when the plastic ganger is destroyed. (No idea why the TARDIS didn't fixate that one, though.)


 * I'm now trying to go back to The Impossible Astronaut to see what's going on, but even during their very first meeting with the president Amy is fake-pregnant, so she must have been plastic already at that point. Hack59 21:36, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

That makes sense, but it is still a different character, albeit very loosely.Skittles the hog-- Talk 19:59, May 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, but for the sake of simplicity and organization it would probably be better. -- MisterRandom2 20:01, May 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * And before anyone gets started with a "But we have a separate page for the Auton Rory!" argument - that's different because the real Rory was dead/erased from the time line and the Auton version really was a separate character. The Ganger Amy IS the real Amy - just not physically. She's an avatar of the real Amy - who is alive and has (presumably) been unconscious this whole time. -- MisterRandom2 20:13, May 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Agreed, as Ganger Amy was not a sepperate soul. It was Amy's - I repeate, REAL Amy's - consiousness controlling an avatar, hence why she kept seeing Madame Kovarian - glimpses of where she really was. A body is not a character, the soul is the character. Ganger Amy was an avatar being controlled by Amy as she, in her original body, was asleep controlling the avatar. As soon as her avatar was destroyed, she woke up in her natural body. It's the same character in a different body. The argument is pointless, really - unless one believes a "character" is the body, not the soul. 90.199.247.156 02:39, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * No, there needs to be a seperate page, There were two amy timelines now, one where she is with the Doctor, and one where she is in the hospital pregnant. To avoid confusion let's keep it seperate. Just like there was a Jennifer Lucas, and a Jennifer Lucas (Ganger), they had completely different traits and beliefs. We cant have one Jen page that says "Jennifer wanted peace between the Gangers, but Jennifer's ganger wanted chaos" it won't work. Keep it as is. Landisnicholas 11:32 May 30 2011 (EST)
 * That's different. The Jennifer Ganger was clearly defined as a different character than the original Jennifer. The Amy Ganger was NOT a different character than the real Amy. -- MisterRandom2 16:40, May 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * That's different. The Jennifer Ganger was clearly defined as a different character than the original Jennifer. The Amy Ganger was NOT a different character than the real Amy. -- MisterRandom2 16:40, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

I agree, this page should be deleted because the Ganger Amy is just a host body used by the real Amy. We don't know the specifics yet, but we know enough. Bigredrabbit 10:41, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

Deletion
Firstly, all the information should be copied back to the orginal Amy Pond page. Secondly, we do not know when she became a Ganger, so to start with 'America' is guesswork. She could have became a Ganger at any point in her life. However, if people really want this page, then all the information should be moved to the orginal place and all that should be added is a couple of sentences about the last scenes from "The Almost People". Mini-mitch\talk 19:55, May 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Nope. She was a ganger. This is a different character. Why should it be deleted? Because of a lack of knowledge?Skittles the hog-- Talk 19:56, May 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * So do you know when she became a ganger? No. It was never mentioned in the episode. Until we do know, all the copied and pasted information about Amy Pond should be placed back into the article apart from the information we know about the last few scenes from the Alomst People. This page is guesswork and speculation, one fans guess at when the Ganger was created. If people think she became a Ganger before she met the Doctor, you are suggesting they can dd it to the page. Does that seem fair? No. Because it's speculation which should not, be added to articles. It's is pure speculation to say she became a Ganger in America. The only information that should be on this page is info we know. Not what we guess. Mini-mitch\talk 20:01, May 28, 2011 (UTC)

Your stating what I already have. I was just clearing up that your "deletion" tag was unjustified.Skittles the hog-- Talk 20:04, May 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * You can tell when I feel very passioate about a subject, I do apologise. So should the information copied from the Amy Pond page be put back until we know exactly when she was take? It is speculation otherwise. If I'm wrong I will hold my hands up and the information can be re added. Mini-mitch\talk 20:08, May 28, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I have noticed you get a bit passionate :), not that its a bad thing! Yeah, put the info back and we'll have to make some sort of summary here.Skittles the hog-- Talk 20:10, May 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * I admit that Amy's ganger wasn't a seperate and individual character, but that doesn't mean the page should be deleted. River's diary isn't a character, but still has it's own page, likewise the sonic screwdriver. The Tardis Index file has multiple pages on objects and tools, that's what the Ganger was, and that's why I believe the page should stay.

Geek Mythology 14:35, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

Connection to the Original
Based on the Doctor's comment when Amy mentioned that 'Eyepatch Lady', it seems to me that those occasions where Amy saw her were occasions where she was 'connected' to the original her and was able to see what she was seeing right then as she was examined in her prison. Since the Eye-Patch Lady only started appearing in "Day of the Moon", Amy must have been replaced at some point while she, Rory and River were on the run from the FBI (Hence accounting for the pregnancy anomaly; Amy was pregnant, but the Ganger wasn't, so the TARDIS was confused by the 'connection' between Amy and the Ganger causing Amy to read as pregnant but not pregnant).

Of course, that still leaves questions about the implications of Amy's apparent daughter regenerating and the reference in the prequel to them holding the DOCTOR'S child prisoner, but I think that accounts for when Amy was switched neatly enough...MarcusSLazarus 20:39, May 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Amy is already fake-pregnant in the very first episode during their first encounter with the president. Essentially she must have been plastic for the entire season thus far, or otherwise it must have happened during the opening desert scene. Hack59 21:40, May 29, 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually in the prequel the Dorium just says that the Doctor will be furious that they are taking somebody's child. It could very easily be Amy's child that they are after, -- 00:54, May 29, 2011 (UTC)


 * The way I see it, Amy was abducted/cloned first, and then became pregnant. If the Flesh duplicated her exacty, surely it would duplicate the pregnancy as well??


 * River said that Time-Lord anatomy was a miracle, and that whole armies would rip worlds apart for one cell. Putting emphasis on just one cell, it seems plausable to me that somehow Eye Patch Lady did get a single cell, and used it to impregnate Amy, in order to create another (half) time-lord, and thus lots more cells. Hence, the child IS the Doctor's. Geek Mythology 23:04, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

Something to think about
The Gangers can't go anywhere near water, can they. But in The Impossible Astronaut, Ganger Amy drank some wine. Is this just a production error or something else? BroadcastCorp. 08:05, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

The doctor explicitly states that he wanted to see gangers in there early days. Therefore, Amy is a more advanced ganger and can likely go near water.

Also as Amy stated she was pregnant at the end of Episode 1 but denied it at the end of Episode 2 it is possible that that was the real Amy in Ep1 that drunk the wine and she was replaced by her Ganger-self sometime during episode two when they were seperated for something like three months. The person aboved also presents a good possible explanation. Looq 11:16, May 29, 2011 (UTC)

Changes
Erm, not really complaining as such, but just wondering what was wrong with my changes that meant they had to be undone? Geek Mythology 10:04, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

Amount of stories

 * Surely the table should say in Appearences, The Impossible Astronaut, Day of the Moon, The Curse of the Black Spot, The Doctor's Wife, The Rebel Flesh and The Almost People
 * Suchfunboy 09:45, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, she has been a ganger since Day of the Moon at the latest. However, some users want to wait until the next episode to write this up so your edit will probably be reverted.Skittles the hog-- Talk 11:20, May 31, 2011 (UTC)