Talk:The Doctor/Archive 1

Time Lords a race?
Are the Time Lords a race, cause some sources e.g. REF: Doctor Who: The Encyclopedia says that they are but various sources mentioning before the Time War e.g. DW: The Invasion of Time seem to suggest that they are more of a society? Which of it is it to be? Or is it not certain?

Also is under the Infobox Race category is a Female Time Lord called a Time Lady because humans are sometimes called Man and a male human is also called a man but women is not a species name so is Time Lady?--Skittles the hog 19:43, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Romana also made references to Time Tots. See my comment in the Master discussion for thoughts on the Time Lords as a race.

Alternate Doctors
Im not sure enough to change the article but does anyone remember something in Timewrym Revelation suggesting that the alternate Doctor in Inferno and Face of the Enemy was one of the versions shown to the Doctor in the War Games. Im not sure though bc it has been ages since i read revelation --Amxitsa 21:07, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Individual Doctor articles
Is there any plan already laid out somewhere for how to approach articles for the individual Doctors? Or is this being left up for an enterprising soul to tackle at will?

Either way, I may have some time to contribute to such things... UncleMikey 23:53, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Individual articles on each incarnation of the Doctor are certainly intended to be a part of the project, and the tasks are pretty much up for grabs. The only set requirement is that, as with all articles on characters, planets, alien species, and so forth, the articles be written from a "Whoniverse" point-of-view, that is, written as they would appear to a person living in the Doctor Who universe who would accessing the articles from say, the TARDIS Index File, the Matrix, or some tome in the Library of St. John the Beheaded.

--Freethinker1of1 18:27, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Fifth Doctor (also Known as the First Doctor)
Can someone explain this comment please - it says "see below" but I can't see anything below that explains why the Fifth Doctor is the First Doctor?


 * Good question, short of anyone being able to provide a logical explanation of what this means then i suggest we just delete the numbers in brackets --Amxitsa 10:43, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I've removed the items in question. They looked to be the usual sort of smart-alecky edits and vandalism made by people who have nothing else to do with their time. --Freethinker1of1 16:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Italics
Why are some of these lines and paragraphs itaicised?


 * It might imply that it's from a spin-off, but I'm not entirely sure. I say we should just turn it to regular text. Azes13 23:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, an early idea in this Wiki that any references that were not directly from the TV series (eg books, audios, comic-strips etc) would be written in italics. However, (as demonstrated here) it was felt that this distinction would not be obvious and so was abandoned. --Mantrid 06:26, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Change main pic?
instead of main picture, perhaps:


 * one of the First Doctor, one of the Tenth Doctor, side by side


 * just one of the Tenth Doctor


 * no main photo and simply photos to the left of all the Doctors, including the minor Doctors, but smaller than the pictures in the main entries for any given Doctor. --***Stardizzy*** 20:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

pictures of the Doctors
update: I plan on uploading small portraits of each Doctor side-by-side with their mini-profile as with Pertwee. I have had some trouble re-sizing the portraits. --***Stardizzy*** 20:28, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I think tht the current image should be replaced by a similar one but without the 'Doctor Who' Logo. Taccer 07 00:20, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

side articles to this one (aside from individual Doctor articles for the Big Ten)

 * the Doctor's aliases


 * the Doctor's name


 * information about the Doctor's early life (unless we add this to the First Doctor article)


 * the Doctor's age (with a table giving all the ages he has given for himself according to story)


 * all the untold adventures that happened in various incarnations (with exception of those we know happened in a given regeneration, even if we didn't see them)


 * all the figures (most of them from real Earth history) he has mentioned having met


 * the Doctor's skills, talents, abilites


 * I like all of these - should they be included in this article (some of them would be quite short), or separate articles? --Sofaman 04:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Aliases of the Doctor currently exists, I'm pretty sure there's a list (though I can't find it) of Earth historical figures who've met / been mentioned by the Doctor.
 * Everything else could be combined into a 'Further Information on the Doctor' article. Some of the information wouldn't stretch to a full article, some would probably have a home in Inconsistencies and Retcons (the Doctor's age for instance which when mentioned in Time and the Rani is 953, in Vampire Science it's something like 1,012 then in Aliens of London it's back to 900 etc. --Tangerineduel 13:06, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I've added a paragraph to Aliases of the Doctor, making a note about his unrevealed given name. --Sofaman 10:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Question
I was wondering, if the Doctor can only regenerate 12 times, and I think that has been said before, what will happen once there have been 12 Doctors?


 * Nobody knows. Maybe the producers will finally kill him off if the show starts to get bad ratings. Maybe thanks to the Last Great Time War the rule will be nullified. We shall just wait and see. (BTW, 12 regenerations = 13 Doctors.) 17:35, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


 * The producers will probably find a way to keep it going. To quote someone on a forum "They can either ignore the rule, or end a brilliant show because of Time Lord biology" Jack's the man - 14:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Seeings how we are only at the tenth doctor and to my knowladge the 12 regenerations hasn't been mentioned in the new series it is likley that they may ignore it or give the doctor a new set of regenerations some how (Like the master) as i don't think they will want to end a popular show Dark Lord Xander 02:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's been well-discussed that when and if the show survives long enough for it to be an issue, they'll come up with a workaround. It is worth noting that incoming producer Steven Moffat did in fact do a workaround (granted in a joking fashion) in The Curse of Fatal Death where he gave the Doctor a 13th regeneration and turned the Doctor into Joanna Lumley... 23skidoo 01:14, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Well at this rate it looks like there may only be twelve Doctors since the Doctor used up one regeneration without changing and puring it into his severed hand later to be poured into Donna and use the regenerative energy to grow a new, half-human Doctor. So will there only be twelve incarations? Opinnions?
 * Well at this rate it looks like there may only be twelve Doctors since the Doctor used up one regeneration without changing and puring it into his severed hand later to be poured into Donna and use the regenerative energy to grow a new, half-human Doctor. So will there only be twelve incarations? Opinnions?

Names
Someone added the novel or audio-established real names for The Rani, The Master and The Monk -- without providing the sources. I removed them for that reason (so I wouldn't clutter this core article with Fact tags) but also because it was irrelevant to the current discussion (the article is about the Doctor, not them) and, importantly, because while the BBC hasn't made a hard-and-fast rule as to what is canon, nonetheless none of these names have been established on TV and may be contradicted by the TV series in the future and such iffy info shouldn't be in the lead paragraph of this article. 23skidoo 01:12, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

As long as they are on the Deca page and their individual pages i don't see a problem with removing it Dark Lord Xander 01:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC)


 * As far as canon goes see Tardis:Canon policy. Though with regards to the article it wasn't really necessary. --Tangerineduel 13:51, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed Dark Lord Xander 14:56, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Half-human
The Doctor is half-human on his mother's side. It has been stated in dialogue and has not been explicity retconned. Whether we like it or not, he is half-human. But my edits to the infobox keep getting reverted.--The Traveller 22:55, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The Doctor article refers to the Doctor as a whole (or ones that aren't 1 - 10). The Eighth Doctor claims to be half-human, but when you actually research it it becomes quite murky. The half-human bit can be noted on the Eighth Doctor article page but not The Doctor page.


 * Doesn't TV series canon override other media?--The Traveller 17:08, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * No. See also Tardis:Canon policy. --Tangerineduel 17:25, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

The movie didn't just say that the eighth doctor was half human, it said that the doctor was half human. The movie is canon, and this should be mentioned.

Out of universe notes
My understanding is it is acceptable to do this so long as the information is separated (in this case by italics). It's vital to have this information in such an important article, especially with regards to things like Lungbarrow. The only alternative is to create a Footnotes section for this. If someone wants to do that, I'm fine for it, but there are plenty of articles with these real-universe notes.23skidoo 23:05, 7 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The indented italicised out of universe notes are fine. --Tangerineduel 12:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * not to me. --Stardizzy2 17:51, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Summary of my recent edits

 * Cut down on some of the blah-de-blah wordiness, especially in regards to the Doctor's connection with Earth.
 * Put the Ten Doctors summary first, rather than the more arcane stuff.
 * Put Tenth Doctor references in past tense.
 * Cleaned up the sections
 * Cut and pasted the discussion of the Doctor's name to Aliases of the Doctor (one part) and Behind the Scenes (another part).
 * Removed information on the Doctor's childhood (will cut and paste it in later) into First Doctor, where it belongs. --Stardizzy2 18:00, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Third Doctor's Picture
I dont know what it is doing in the middle of the page, (well, kind of next to the first doctor) Should it be removed or other pictures added? (TARDY the TARDIS 07:18, 10 October 2008 (UTC))

11
"The Eleventh Doctor will appear in the 2008 christmas special called The Next Doctor. He will be played by David Morrisey" Removed. He's playing a character called the Doctor, but absolutely nothing has confirmed this means he's playing the Eleventh Doctor. For all we know he could just think he is the Doctor or something. Add it back when it's confirmed, 'cause it hasn't been yet. --Golden Monkey 21:37, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Matt Smith
There's a promo pic of the new Doctor...he looks bizarrely pale, which I assume just means it's a bad picture, but shouldn't it be somewhere on here? --Golden Monkey 18:40, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I would have asumed the picture of him in an allyway would be used instead of him in front of a white backdrop. Also, Wouldn't it look better if the pictures were aranged: Top row-Doctors 1-4 Mid row-Doctors 5-7 Bottom row-Doctors 8-11? I don't know how to fix that. --65.205.146.204 01:08, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I have replaced it with an image like you suggested. I think it looks better (at least the picture of Matt Smith doesn't have to be stretched).--The Traveller 15:03, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * It is an improvement, the old image (of Matt Smith) was (I think) just a tight shot, on a white-ish background which didn't give much perspective. The new one looks better, but I don't think we're going to get it perfect, just because 11 pics is always going to leave us with some dead white space in the image. --Tangerineduel 15:39, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Remember in-universe style
Please remember that the style of this Wiki is to maintain in-universe style whenever possible, so references to Matt Smith should be restricted to either Behind the Scenes or italicized inserted text. Also, the Eleventh Doctor has not appeared on television yet, and it's a long way till January 2010 (meaning it's even possible another actor could be cast -- remember what happened with Voyager's Captain Janeway). As such, I'm not even in favor of including Matt Smith's photo in the infobox yet (perhaps elsewhere in the article) and there should be no reference to the Doctor's 11th regeneration until it actually occurs and the character actually appears on screen because in the Whoniverse the Doctor is still on his tenth incarnation. 23skidoo 22:49, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Three Incarnations
In The Gallifrey Chronicles, Marnal makes note that the Doctor has three ninth incarnations. The popular interpretation of this is well known.

However. There were also three Eighth Doctors in the Ancestor Cell. At the end, in a single scene there is the Doctor, the Dust Doctor and Grandfather Paradox, who was at the time, the Doctor's future self. (Along with everyone else's.)

What makes it really interesting, however, is that the Tenth Doctor also had three incarnations. The Doctor, the Meta-Crisis Tenth Doctor, and the DoctorDonna.

I'm curious to see if this pattern continues with the Eleventh Doctor.--TheOmnius 05:23, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Pathetic creature
What pathetic creature typed under the Tenth Doctor:

"He was also noted to be very good looking, skinny and unintentionally rude".

92.8.49.130 19:50, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if this was mentioned before
Hey, does anyone else notice that as the regenerations go on, the doctor's age, (Like, how old the actor is) declines?

MK 00:32, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Not counting Hartnell at 55, let's look at the actor's ages at first playing the part. The age of the actor at first regenerating (although Pertwee and Eccleston didn't have a just regenerated scene): 46, 51, 40, 30, 44, 37, 41, 34, 26. I Guess it looks generally like that but... --Nyktimos 01:09, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I think you forgot one of the actors, you only have ten ages but these include the first and eleventh doctors Americanwhofan 04:54, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * It's Colin Baker's age at 41 (in between Peter Davison's 30 & Syvlester McCoy's 44). Time Lord Enthusiast 06:33, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I just think it generally looks like that. Mr kmil 01:28, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * In statistical terms, you'd not be able to assert with a reasonable degree of confidence that there is an inverse correlation between starting age of the actor and the number of his regeneration. You would if you looked at only Doctors 10 and 11, but if you take all 11 guys, no, there's really not much of a relationship at all between starting age and regeneration number.  While the majority of actors have been younger than their predecessors, it's not an overwhelming majority.  As it stands, there's only a 3:2 chance that the next Doctor will be younger than the predecessor.  However, if we take the past as prediction — which you can't really do with something so subjective as casting — there are better odds (6:5) that the next Doctor will be 41 or older.  The average actor hasn't exactly been "young".    Indeed, the average age is 40.5.


 * Oldest: 1
 * Older than previous: 3, 6, 7, 9
 * Younger than previous: 2, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11


 * What is interesting is that there's a 100% correlation between an actor being older than his predecessor and the number of his Doctor being divisible by the number 3 — every third Doctor is older than the guy who came before. Matt Smith's age is making this one an easy call that doesn't really require any math, but the only obvious numerical pattern in the ages suggests that the 12th Doctor will be older than the 11th.   Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  03:07, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

It does track with the original concept of regeneration, when it was only termed "renewal", that the Doctor would get younger when his body wore out. It should also be noted that there was another mythological figure said to get younger with age: Merlin. Monkey with a Gun 04:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Doctor's marriages
I added this to the Family section. It's possible he was blowing smoke to Ood Sigma, but if we take him at face value, then The End of Time (or at least the Children in Need preview clip) says he married Queen Elizabeth I, solving the mystery of why she called him an enemy in the Shakespeare episode. He also made a remark about having been married at the end of Blink, which I added. Have there been any novels or audios in which the Doctor wed anyone? What about the original Human Nature novel? The existence of Susan as his granddaughter (ignoring the Cartmel masterplan variant) could suggest a "Mrs. Who" existed at one point, but this is not necessarily so, since begetting offspring does not require wedlock. 23skidoo 03:44, November 21, 2009 (UTC)

Eleventh Doctor
We may not know much about him yet, but he has been introduced, so can we include him now? --Golden Monkey 20:14, January 2, 2010 (UTC)

And do we have to describe him as annoying after about five seconds of screen time? Cannon881 22:49, January 15, 2010 (UTC)


 * I found him incredibly annoying and if his personality is all like that, its the end of Doctor Who watching for me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--WarGrowlmon18 22:52, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Please save this sort of discussion for fan forums and places like The Howling. Talk pages are for discussing improvements or changes to articles. Save personal opinions regarding actors, characters or crewmembers for other forums. Thanks. 23skidoo 19:42, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

"Probably adopted"
Re: Susan. I get that there are conflicting reports if we're incorporating expanded universe, Cartmel Masterplan, etc., but I felt the use of this term pushed things too far in one direction, so I took it out. 23skidoo 19:42, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

"On his Mother's side?"
The Doctor isn't realy half human on his mother's side, it was a joke.
 * Maybe. But there's evidence to contradict that in Doctor Who (1996). Most notably, the Master seems to conclude the same thing due to the need of a human eye to open the Eye of Harmony within the TARDIS. At minimum, the topic is certainly still open to question. Spreee 20:30, January 24, 2010 (UTC)Spreee
 * Also, remembering this wiki incorporates novels, audios, comics etc. this topic has in fact been touched upon. The Big Finish audio The Apocalypse Element suggests the existence of companion Evelyn Smythe's eye-scan was the reason why a human eye was needed in the movie. The IDW comic The Forgotten indicated that for whatever reason the Eighth Doctor was under the partial effects of the chameleon arch when he made the half-human claim. And according to Russell Davies (in Writers Tale: The Final Chapter) there was going to be a line of dialogue in either Stolen Earth or Journey's End directly addressing the controversy, but it was cut. Among the many rumors involving Series 5 is that Moffat may touch on the issue, but that's yet to be confirmed. 68.146.81.123 14:57, May 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * The chameleon arch theory doesn't really make sense though. The doctor hadn't been back to the TARDIS since his regeneration. If he had used a chameleon arch it would mean that he wouldn't have been able to regenerate. Also, the reason that he "died" was because of different timelord physiology, specifically that he had 2 hearts. In Human Nature, it was clearly shown that John Smith only had 1 heart, and the eighth doctor was able to remember that he was a timelord (after the regeneration trauma wore off). Even if all of that could be explained away, the tenth doctor said that he had never used a chameleon arch before, and the seventh doctor would not have had any reason to usue a chameleon arch just to teleport the master's ashes to gallifrey. Whether you like it or not, the doctor is half human.Gowron8472 02:21, July 14, 2010 (UTC)

The doctor can be female...
I just noticed this. In some news articles it was stated that the eleventh doctor could be a woman. Many fans said that it was impossible, that the doctor is male BUT, there is evidence that he can be female. After regenerating into the eleventh doctor, when he feels his hair he thinks he's a girl, then when he feels his adam's apple, he knows he isn't. If the doctor believes he can take on the female form, doesn't that mean that it is possible he can be female instead of male, and shouldn't this be noted on the page? Mc hammark 21:41, April 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * It's already covered in the article on regeneration. --Nyktimos 07:07, April 12, 2010 (UTC)

Proper Style?
This relates to style more than continuity. I was taught that it was appropriate to speak of characters in books or stories in present tense because the story is always going on in the book, so it's not really completely in the past (or that's a good way to remember the rule, at least). From the web: ''Write about literature in the present tense unless logic demands that you do otherwise. (Even though a story is written in the past tense, we say that the main characterwrites to her brother because she thinks she knows something important. Even though Robert Frost is long gone, we say that Frost suggests or uses or says. And in his poems, we say that a phrase or word suggests or means or implies something (all present tense verbs). However, Frost moved his family to England and he died in 1963, etc.). (I personally believe this is applicable to writing about fiction in any format, not just "literature", but also video, graphic stories, etc., unless logic demands that you do otherwise'')

I was reading 'The Doctor's Incarnations' section and was disturbed by the Eleventh Doctor being referred to as if he was a past occurance, then realized none of the Doctors should technically be referred to in past tense according to this general guideline. This article is not prose, in which third person omnipresent is the rule, it is a report on a fictional setting. Now, I'm not exactly sure how that translates to a series of canon events (not my call), but the descriptions of the Doctor's Incarnations should at least be in present tense: "The First Doctor is", "The Tenth Doctor shows". It makes more sense, from a strictly speaking-of-fiction standpoint, and even in universe the Doctor has crossed his own timeline so many times I'm sure the First is still kicking around in the future somewhere despite his on-screen end.

I don't think it's wise for me to make such a major edit myself, as I have no account here; it will likely be spurned. Someone who cares about this article, please do the wiki a favor, because I hope the Eleventh Doctor continues to be "quite smug about his abilities and exhibit a renewed youthful enthusiasm for adventure". Unless you lot (i.e. people who know more about Doctor Who than I) are already plotting the Doctor's final death. I suppose then it makes sense to refer to all his incarnations as over and done.... 173.19.13.88 08:44, May 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * All in-universe articles on this wiki are written in the past tense (see our Tardis:Manual of Style for more info). --Tangerineduel 13:57, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

Intelligence
An important aspect of the doctor but I don't think it's mentioned at all. Should some info be put here, do you think? About his knowledge areas and such?

American Actors considered
Was Gene Wilder ever considered as a possible Doctor in his younger years?

Time Lords can extend their regeneration number?
I added a "[Citation needed]" superscript to the end of the first paragraph under "Regeneration". Since when can The Doctor extend the number of time he can regenerate? When was this stated? Who stated it?


 * - Macgyver89 00:18, June 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * The Timelord High Council offered the Master a new cycle of regenerations to retrieve the Doctor from the Death Zone in The Five Doctors. Wibbly-Wobbly 01:50, June 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I'll add that to the article and remove the superscript :)


 * - Macgyver89 19:38, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup
I've put this up for a cleanup. It still has quotes throughout it, promo images etc which all have to be removed. The Thirteenth Doctor 17:34, September 1, 2010 (UTC)