Talk:Lake Silencio

Spoiler
It isn't a spoiler, the name of the lake is revealed, in Let's Kill Hitler, when the Doctor finds out he's going to die. --MrThermomanPreacher 15:49, August 29, 2011 (UTC)

Restored.-- 16:13, August 29, 2011 (UTC)

The page has been deleted again, this time without a reason why. Could Mini-Mitch please explain why he deleted this page? -- Bold  Clone  14:56, August 31, 2011 (UTC)


 * Because it's a lake, that's all we know. People keep on adding "River Song killed the Doctor here", which we have no proof of. So i deleted it to stop the mindless speculation being added. MM/ Want to talk? 14:59, August 31, 2011 (UTC)

Restored the page. You can't delete a page just because it is vandalised.-- 15:06, August 31, 2011 (UTC)


 * @MM:It's a lake, that's all we know. Therefore, we need to create a page to place that info on.
 * @MM:River is confirmed to kill the Doctor. The death of the Doctor is a fixed point in time and space. So we know that the Doctor will die; we also know that River Song will kill him. Since the Doctor was killed at the lake, we therefore know that River killed (will kill) the Doctor at this lake. We have proof that River will kill the Doctor at the lake, and it is mindless to remove that correct information.
 * @StH: Thanks for the restoration. :) -- Bold  Clone  15:08, August 31, 2011 (UTC)

River?
What proof does anyone have that River Song was not the astronaut? The astronaut killed the Doctor at the Lake--FACT. We know that River killed the Doctor--FACT. Therefore, River is the astronaut that killed the Doctor--FACT. What "proof" is there otherwise? -- Bold  Clone  15:24, August 31, 2011 (UTC)

Lack of negative oproof is not the same as positive proof.Boblipton 15:36, August 31, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I would rather wait for more on screen evidence until you make a conclusion.-- 15:38, August 31, 2011 (UTC)
 * @Boblipton:We have positive proof. We also have a lack of negative proof. We know that the Doctor dies--we saw that. We also know that River was the one to kill him (Let's Kill Hitler). Can you prove that wrong? -- Bold  Clone  00:09, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * We know that someone in a spacesuit shot him twice. Everyone thinks it's River. That doesn't mean it is. Ever see a newspaper retraction? Boblipton 00:41, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * So...you're saying that River murdered a man, and everyone is mistaken when they claim she killed the Doctor, including the Teselecta. -- Bold  Clone  01:22, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * No. I'm not saying that. But given the evidence we have, including eye witnesses, a good lawyer could get her off. But that's not the gist of my point. Attend, please. I am not saying she didn't kill the Doctor. I'm saying that the evidence we need to put it on the page is not present. This keeps getting said again and again and we keep getting it wrong. How much of your time did you spend correcting false 'information' concerning the Silence being a species? I know that I rewrote the section on the Doctor teaching River how to fly the TARDIS in light of the last episode. Such gaffes will happen from time to time anyway, but it is the official policy of this wiki that we depend on what we see onscreen. Did you see Sydney Wade's face at Lake Silencio? I didn't. Until we do, or the face of someone credited onscreen as River Song or Melody Pond or whatever she's called, then it is not a fact. It's speculation. Boblipton 01:47, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * We KNOW that the Doctor dies. FACT. We saw that happen. We KNOW that River will kill the Doctor. FACT. (Or at least as far as we know from the current story.) What MORE do you need? As far was we know, River was in the suit because she was the one that killed the Doctor. Until we get any more info that prove me wrong, we need to stick with the facts. -- Bold  Clone  23:22, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * You never read any murder mysteries, did you? Boblipton 23:28, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * You didn't answer me. As far as we know, River was in the suit. That is what the episodes have shown, and that is what we need to display until we have further information. -- Bold  Clone  23:35, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * What exactly was wrong with the comprimise solution that others had put up? - It made clear that we haven't seen under the visor yet, so we can't be sure; and it even noted that the data download said River did it - putting "someone" whilst noting that data seems by far the most sensible soution, especially when we have a main writer that likes to play around with our expectations Baziel 23:46, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks reasonable to me, Baziel. Now, pardon me please, while I try to answer Bold Clone.
 * As far as we can tell, I was in the suit. We have no direct evidence that any one individual was in the suit and an implication that no one was in the suit.
 * 1: In "Day of the Moon" the Doctor asks if the suit could move by itself. No answer.
 * 2: Extraneous issues abound. Why was a Silence present?
 * 3: No one but the Doctor had any chance to see a face in the suit.
 * 4: River has never said she killed the Doctor at Lake Silencio.
 * It's easy enough to build up scenarios in which River did not kill the Doctor at Lake Silencio, ranging from taking the blame for some one else to a conspiracy with the Doctor to cover his tracks while we goes after the Silence. After all, why bother to send someone else when he's dead, even if he's playing poker with you at the moment.
 * You may argue that these are all speculations, and you would be right. However, as someone who has read hundreds, if not thousands of murder mysteries, the technique of writing them is to make sure that some one else looks guilty. Usually they wind up dead by chapter 4. River certainly qualifies for that. She died, what, three years ago?
 * Building a scenario in which River did not kill the Doctor at Lake Silencio is speculative. However, saying that she absolutely, positively did is also speculative. Sorry.Boblipton 23:51, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Based of the current information we have, we need to say that River killed the Doctor. As far as we know, River was the one who did it. Those are the facts, it is speculation to say otherwise. That is what the story says, and we would be doing a shoddy job of being "the most accurate Doctor Who wiki" if we did not. -- Bold  Clone  15:03, September 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * 4: River has never said she killed the Doctor at Lake Silencio.
 * It's easy enough to build up scenarios in which River did not kill the Doctor at Lake Silencio, ranging from taking the blame for some one else to a conspiracy with the Doctor to cover his tracks while we goes after the Silence. After all, why bother to send someone else when he's dead, even if he's playing poker with you at the moment.
 * You may argue that these are all speculations, and you would be right. However, as someone who has read hundreds, if not thousands of murder mysteries, the technique of writing them is to make sure that some one else looks guilty. Usually they wind up dead by chapter 4. River certainly qualifies for that. She died, what, three years ago?
 * Building a scenario in which River did not kill the Doctor at Lake Silencio is speculative. However, saying that she absolutely, positively did is also speculative. Sorry.Boblipton 23:51, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Based of the current information we have, we need to say that River killed the Doctor. As far as we know, River was the one who did it. Those are the facts, it is speculation to say otherwise. That is what the story says, and we would be doing a shoddy job of being "the most accurate Doctor Who wiki" if we did not. -- Bold  Clone  15:03, September 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Building a scenario in which River did not kill the Doctor at Lake Silencio is speculative. However, saying that she absolutely, positively did is also speculative. Sorry.Boblipton 23:51, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * Based of the current information we have, we need to say that River killed the Doctor. As far as we know, River was the one who did it. Those are the facts, it is speculation to say otherwise. That is what the story says, and we would be doing a shoddy job of being "the most accurate Doctor Who wiki" if we did not. -- Bold  Clone  15:03, September 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Was it said in the episode "River Song killed the Doctor by Lake Silencio?" No it didn't. It could be she killed the Doctor in what he believes, kills him for what he is (what she told him in AGMGTW). It could also be a red-herring. We don't know who's in the suit, to to say it's River Song is speculation and against the MOS. MM/ Want to talk? 15:08, September 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Bold Clone, you keep repeating that we know this. Please look up the words "know" and "believe" in the dictionary. We know facts. Should later episodes show that River did not murder the Doctor, would it then cease to be a fact? The statement "River killed the Doctor" is not a a statement of fact. It is a reasonable inference that you believe. I do not dispute the reasonableness of the inference, but I do dispute its factuality.
 * Also, please do not argue your case by repeatedly telling me what "we know." I don't know this, so this is a false statement, and the repetition serves no purpose but to annoy me and and make me write these posts which, undoubtedly, annoy you. I'm not here to annoy you and don't like doing it. I fully expect that by the end of the season we will see what happens at Lake Silencio from a different viewpoint. Let us be patient. Boblipton 15:18, September 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, please do not argue your case by repeatedly telling me what "we know." I don't know this, so this is a false statement, and the repetition serves no purpose but to annoy me and and make me write these posts which, undoubtedly, annoy you. I'm not here to annoy you and don't like doing it. I fully expect that by the end of the season we will see what happens at Lake Silencio from a different viewpoint. Let us be patient. Boblipton 15:18, September 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, please do not argue your case by repeatedly telling me what "we know." I don't know this, so this is a false statement, and the repetition serves no purpose but to annoy me and and make me write these posts which, undoubtedly, annoy you. I'm not here to annoy you and don't like doing it. I fully expect that by the end of the season we will see what happens at Lake Silencio from a different viewpoint. Let us be patient. Boblipton 15:18, September 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * As far as we know, she did it. Facts are facts until they are disproven--that is the very nature of science.
 * River killed the Doctor, and the Doctor died at the lake. forgive me if the logic is to much for you. I am aware that there are thousand and one different possibilities--for all we know, Amy killed the Doctor, but River took the blame for it. Or River killed Rory, she was put in jail by the Doctor for trying to undermine her own timestream, and Steven Moffat himself was in the suit. But based off the current story information, you cannot legitimately remove the info. At best, you could say "a figure in a spacesuit killed the Doctor, and the Teselecta believed it was the Doctor." (The reason I removed it earlier is that it still seems speculative to me.)
 * And I'm sure you're right--we will see the Lake again, from a different perspective. So let's just wait--and until then, we go with twhat the story has told us--River killed the Doctor. -- Bold  Clone  15:36, September 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * It's not being added to the page, it's speculation to say that River Song killed the Doctor there. Until we a solid proof of who killed the Doctor at the lake, we leave it a "a figure". Not River Song. End of. It's against the MOS to added speculation. Instead of trying to pieces together different pieces, we let it play out and go with what we know. We don't know who killed the Doctor at the lake. MM/ Want to talk? 15:39, September 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * It's speculation to say that River did not kill the Doctor. Yeah, let's just play it out with what we know--we know that she killed the Doctor. We also know when he died. As far as we know from the facts, she did it. Why can't you understand that logic? -- Bold  Clone  15:46, September 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * I am afraid, Bold Clone (sorry for misspelling your name earlier; it's hard to see the space with the contrast between the colors) that you will have to accept as a fact that the wizards will not accept as that River killed the Doctor until they see it with their own eyes. As for your analysis of what science is, might I suggest reading Henri Bergson? There are some good translations around. Boblipton 15:56, September 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * I am afraid, Bold Clone (sorry for misspelling your name earlier; it's hard to see the space with the contrast between the colors) that you will have to accept as a fact that the wizards will not accept as that River killed the Doctor until they see it with their own eyes. As for your analysis of what science is, might I suggest reading Henri Bergson? There are some good translations around. Boblipton 15:56, September 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Can't we just wait and see?
 * It's 5 weeks. Then we're likely to find out for sure who kills him.
 * Until then we just leave it until we've got definite proof. --Tangerineduel / talk 16:56, September 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed, it should remain "unknown" until it is definitely shown on screen (probably at the end of the series). Much as I am offended by Bold's misappropraition of 'Science' here, I'll ignore it and simply suggest that this is a fictional universe; it's not governed by science or logic but by the ideas of a writer who simply wants a good story - that makes it an art - therefore there aren't really any facts, only opinions and interpretations of what is shown. Baziel 18:13, September 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed, it should remain "unknown" until it is definitely shown on screen (probably at the end of the series). Much as I am offended by Bold's misappropraition of 'Science' here, I'll ignore it and simply suggest that this is a fictional universe; it's not governed by science or logic but by the ideas of a writer who simply wants a good story - that makes it an art - therefore there aren't really any facts, only opinions and interpretations of what is shown. Baziel 18:13, September 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * @TGD: We already have proof--it's like on the River Song page: "The Doctor would later discover from the Teselecta data records that the man she killed was himself, and that he died on 22nd April 2011 at 5:02pm in Utah, at Lake Silencio. (DW: Let's Kill Hitler)" Those are two facts--River killed the Doctor (Or at least everyone thinks it was River, and for that matter they also think it was the Doctor who died, instead of a Ganger, and Lake Silencio, instead of a digital reality--really, if you're going to deny the Teselecta's claim on the grounds that they could be wrong, you might as well discount everything else in DW on the grounds that they could be wrong...especially the regeneration limit.), and that the Doctor died at the lake. Really, it's not hard to put two and two together--DW's 5-year-old fans can figure out what that's implying. Based off of the best current in-universe infromation that we have at the moment, River was the one in the suit. Yes, the info may change, but that's the beauty of a wiki--if things change, we can admit we were wrong and adjust the page to accomedate new info; that's what we should ahve done with the Little Girl/River issue, acknowledge the explicit implication, and accept it on the grounds that it was the best factual in-universe explanation. The Doctor is murdered by River, and we saw the Doctor get murdered. Therefore, River was the one in the suit. It's logical--not one of you can deny that. So why are you all so unwilling to bend to the facts? -- Bold  Clone  20:15, September 2, 2011 (UTC)