User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-43908-20150311013943/@comment-188432-20150829213439

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-43908-20150311013943/@comment-188432-20150829213439 Well, see, I'm not even sure, really, why this forum is necessary. Not that I want to discourage people talking, but this sort of thing happens all the time in Doctor Who. We don't create separate pages for Mel or Six or whoever just because stories give fundamentally different opinions about them.

I mean, one of the biggest things is the basic nature of the Doctor, as a gestalt character, himself.

Is he a sexual creature or not? Some books say one thing, most stories say another. Whether he's sexual or not is obviously fundamental to his character. But we don't really hold forum discussions on whether we should have First Doctor (An Unearthly Child) or First Doctor (Lungbarrow).

And, yanno, some authors have gotten the basic physical description of characters wrong/different. But if one author says the Fourth Doctor has green eyes and another says blue, we don't really say that there are two different Fourth Doctors.

My point is just that there might be a number of ways in which these two interpretations are compatible, no matter what the creators say. Cases like this are exactly why we stress narrative evidence on this wiki.