Talk:Eliza

Clarifying Cwejen status
Might I suggest that the article lead emphasize the original source that says Christine is a Cwej? It's none of the four stories cited in the lead, and it's confusing. As written, it suggests that BotW or Dead Romance are saying that she's a Cwej, and they absolutely do not. An earlier edit suggested this was The Five Christinas, but this claim was removed from the page and replaced with a more in depth discussion of the story. Having not read the story, I can't comment, but if it's the case that this is the first place her being a Cwej is mentioned, I'd suggest that we highlight this fact. Najawin ☎  08:19, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, it originates in The Five Christinas, which de facto presents her as a Cwej by having her be present in a situation where five female Cwejen have been pulled together from across time and space due to… something-or-other; I forget the details. That being said, it's building on the mention in Dead Romance that Christin was grown from a "standard human template" in the Great Houses' databanks, which I think it is fair to argue was a literary antecedent to the proper introduction of the Cwejen, even if I am doubtful that it was the intent upon introducing the Cwejen to retcon Christine as having been one (since BotW says nothing of the idea of female Cwejen, a much later confabulation). Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 08:24, 28 October 2022 (UTC)


 * That's what I gathered from the prior edit. The current configuration is super confusing to me as a reader who hasn't read the Cwej series stuff. Again, the people who are actually up to date will know best on how to present the material, but I think that if you mention her being a Cwejen in the lead it should (also) be sourced to the first story in which she's stated to be one (imo). And the standard human template/Cwej nuances strike me as useful to discuss. As a reader who's not up to date on the issue. I fully admit my own limitations here. Najawin ☎  08:30, 28 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I have now added the correct citation after the statement, it must have been missed in the expansion where I changed some things around in the article. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎  08:33, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Rename
Tardis:Character names says "the titles of articles about individual characters should be the name by which the character was most commonly known in the Doctor Who universe." This character is exclusively called "Eliza" in the majority of her appearances, but I've hesitated to use that name for the page, since she's not called Eliza in her first appearance – Eliza (Dead Romance) just wouldn't make any sense! However, it now occurs to me that due to her status as a main character of a spinoff range, she may merit primary topic status, similar to Abby or Ruth. Thoughts? – n8 (☎) 14:19, 7 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I'd say she qualifies for primary topic status. No other Eliza in the DWU even has two appearances, as far as I can tell, let alone being a recurring character. 14:33, 7 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I support this rename, as long as a redirect exists from Christine Summerfield Cousin Ettolrhc ☎  16:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)


 * This seems reasonable enough and a correct application of Tardis:Character names. Additionally, I can't see any other recurring Elizas in Elizabeth. Therefore, I will perform this rename to Eliza, keeping Christine Summerfield as a redirect. Bongo50   ☎  20:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)