Talk:Orla'ath

Image
I would be against putting the image from Nightvisiting on this page because Orla'ath never looked this way, never looked like a human. Amorkuz ☎  23:50, October 29, 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed. However, I'd also argue that we should not have an actor on this page's infobox. Anastasia Hille was not portraying Orla'ath, she was acting as the Lankin. OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:07, October 30, 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, good point. Why didn't I think of that! I mean I removed her appearance, of course, she cannot have an actor without an appearance. Amorkuz ☎  00:17, October 30, 2016 (UTC)
 * This depends on the credits. If Hille is credited as Orla'ath, then the actress should have her name in the infobox. --DCLM ☎  22:10, October 31, 2016 (UTC)
 * No it should not. Take The Black Hole (audio story) as an example. Rufus Hound is credited as Pavo. However, if you take a look at Pavo's infobox you won't see Rufus' name on it. Why? Because Rufus was not playing Pavo. He was playing the Monk. Similarly, Anastasia Hille should not be on this page's infobox. Why? Because Hille is not playing Orla'ath. She is playing a Lankin branch. OncomingStorm12th ☎  22:32, October 31, 2016 (UTC)

I dsagree. The actress was portraying Orla'ath. Just as much as Charlie and Miss Quill are portraying their characters. --Xx-connor-xX ☎  14:50, November 3, 2016 (UTC)
 * The crucial difference is that Charlie is really a Rhodia prince, Quill is really a Quill rebel, whereas this "Orla'ath" is a branch of Lankin. Orla'ath was never on Earth. She never had human appearance. This wasn't her. This wouldn't be the first time credits are used for misdirection. For instance, Norman Stanley is stated as playing the Master even though he looked like a telephone mechanic and was credited as a telephone mechanic in Terror of the Autons. Similarly, Alex Macqueen is stated as playing the Master despite being credited as "The Other Doctor" in UNIT: Dominion. What matters is the final truth, not the temporary disguise. Amorkuz ☎  16:24, November 3, 2016 (UTC)
 * The difference is that the crediting changed once we found out real identities. For instance, Anthony Ainley's character's real identity was hidden with another name, until the point where where his character was revealed as the Master, at which point the crediting changed to reveal his true character. This is not the case here. --DCLM ☎  16:37, November 3, 2016 (UTC)
 * The example of Norman Stanley above shows that it doesn't matter. He only appeared in one story, in which he was credited as "Telephone mechanic". Amorkuz ☎  16:43, November 3, 2016 (UTC)


 * Oh, sorry, apparently I missed the example of OncomingStorm12th, which should have been enough on its own. Amorkuz ☎  18:28, November 3, 2016 (UTC)

Dating
What is the evidence that she is from 21st century? Amorkuz ☎  19:05, October 31, 2016 (UTC)
 * There's no evidence to suggest that she isn't from the 21st century and I think until we have a reason to believe that she is from another time it should remain as it is. SarahJaneFan ☎  21:41, October 31, 2016 (UTC)
 * I removed the 21st century individuals category, because, you're right, there's no real indication that Charlie and Quill were taken from the 21st century. The Doctor brought them in his TARDIS to 21st century Earth, possibly just because of his known affection for Earth around that era. And it's a rift in space and time that the Shadow Kin come through. 21:44, October 31, 2016 (UTC)
 * The TARDIS is a time-space machine. Just because the Doctor left Charlie and Miss Quill on the 21st century, it doesnt mean that Orla'ath is as well. Also, we should have information based on what we can prove, not what we can assume. OncomingStorm12th ☎  21:47, October 31, 2016 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Until and unless a story gives us more information, we have no reason to assume that the massacre of Rhodia took place in the 21t century. 22:29, October 31, 2016 (UTC)