Talk:Series 3 (Torchwood)

The rumours on this page is getting out of hand. Is it not getting to the point now that anyone can put anything down, potentially even vandalism, because there is no citation?

"Jacks parents are to have a starring role"

"Katy Manning is to reprise her 70s role as Jo Grant"

Both statements are as vaild as the majority of so-called rumours on this page. I respectfully put it to the mods of this wiki that unless a source can be cited that the rumour is not allowed. This should not only include Torchwood, but the forthcoming DW specials and also any future SJA.

Smokin Fish 23:39, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I like reading the rumours they are intertaining and fun Catkind121 10:54, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Since when was that the point of them? Bad Wolf Bad Wolf 14:09, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I've protected the article page from unregistered user edits and will soon make some additions to our layout policy page or somewhere regarding rumours. --Tangerineduel 13:56, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Asking editors to source their rumors shouldn't be too much of a request. If the rumor is actually out there in the wild and can be sourced then I would say it's valid to let it stay.  If the rumor isn't sourced by the contributing editor, then it should go.  Just my $0.02.  --Raukodraug 19:43, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Rummors
Some of teh rummors are so stupid like jacks dosn't die i agree rumores are getting out of hand. Darth Vader601 17:14, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I think we need to organise rumors into

Trailer based rumors and common rumors like water of mars has been organised into what do you reckon?

Assassin of death 14:22, 2 June 2009 (UTC)Assassin of death


 * I'd go with how it's worded on the Waters of Mars article 'Speculation based on trailer etc' (or something similar, only because anything from the trailer is information, unless it's extrapolation based on what's in the trailer (which is basically guessing, so any of that we can get rid of), but yeah sounds like a good idea, anything to whittle down the rumours. --Tangerineduel 15:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes that will work better.

does anyone mind if the owen and tosh rumors are removed as it has ben announced they will not appear.

Assassin of death 09:32, 3 June 2009 (UTC) Assassin of death


 * Go right ahead, I mean those two were just vague guesses anyway, unless you want to try and find a source that states it. --Tangerineduel 11:57, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Have now started work on spliting rumors into two section as mentioned above hopefully this will help Assassin of death 12:03, 3 June 2009 (UTC) Assassin of death

Story numbering
I took out the story numbering in the infobox for now, as we don't know yet whether this is a single 5-part story, or 5 interconnected stories. If it's only a single story - with 3 writers - then it should only have a single story number. (Shades of the Trial of a Time Lord argument). 23skidoo 14:17, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Descriptions of the series and comments by RTD seem to imply that this is a single, 5 part story. --Raukodraug 18:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Episode number
I thought you might just want to put somewhere that there were originally going to be 13 episodes, but it was cut to 5.Source --Sgtcook 19:55, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Episode title
Are you sure about that? Day one - Day five? Since there's already an episode called Day One, it doesn't make sense.