Talk:Tenth Doctor/Archive 1

- sorry, couldn't help myself. 125.60.243.84 08:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * No, he needs Time Lord clothes. You know, robes, big ol' shoulders, stuff like that. Valeyard with the proper clothes. Azes13 14:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I know... someone needs to Photoshop the two pictures then. Might be nice for an April Fools joke.

Give and take away
Okay 2 questions one where is the Master storyline on this page and secondly can we please take away the episode names on the pages it makes the article character to seem more real.--The 10th Doctor 01:01, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Episodes names are listed for reference so that people can see where the information came from specifically. (Also handy if there's something you want to actually see, and don't know what episode it was brought up in.) The Doctor is a fictional character. This is a wiki for a show about fictional characters and stories. Trying to make the articles "seem more real" defeats the entire purpose of having a reference guide. --Colleyd 17:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

If they want a refrence they can go to wikipedia the episod enames are unnecessary.--The 10th Doctor 00:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC) And I still don't see the Master storyline (I would do it but I'm not really good with words).--The 10th Doctor 00:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


 * If they were to go to wikipedia, how pray tell would they find the specific story if not for the story titles?
 * Listing the story references is the method used on the TARDIS Wiki (and in is used in one fashion or another on all the science fiction/fantasy wikias). --Tangerineduel 13:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


 * We could, I suppose, always develop another method of referencing. Something similar to Wookieepedia's referencing system (sources at the bottom) could be made, with ref links to the mentions. I see 10th Doctor's point, and the episode titles do clutter up articles and occasionally make them hard to follow. At least ref links like [1] are easier to bypass. Anyway, that's another topic for the forums, not an article talk page.
 * As for the Master storyline, you can always try to write it yourself. Inevitably, someone else will come along and fix your mistakes. 14:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay and thanks I am glad you agree with me Ghelae and if someone will fix my mistakes I'll write it to the best of my ability.--The 10th Doctor 21:50, 12 October 2007 (UTC) Could we please put the refrences at the bottom of the page instead of right there on the episode's discription PLEASE?--The 10th Doctor 22:33, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Like I said, use the forum. 14:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Season finale section
Out of curiosity who urgraded the Master section it is better than what I said.--23:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * You can find out; by using the History button, to compare and see the differences between the various edits on the pages. --Tangerineduel 13:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Done
I put the refrences on the bottom. What do you think?--The 10th Doctor 22:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Reverted the edit. It didn't maintain any of the sources/links to the sources, what was in the edit was a glorified list, it didn't link the sources to what was in the text. --Tangerineduel 14:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

You fool! Just kidding. Why? It makes no sense to change it it looked way better with the refrences at the bottom. Don't make me come after you.--The 10th Doctor 21:46, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Alright I've redone it but don't erase it just because it's in red try to make it able to be clicked on know what I mean. If not tell me and don't immediantly delete. Go to my user page or here and tell me your reasons before you get rid of the refrences at the bottom.--The 10th Doctor 22:08, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Reverted. All it looked like was a lackluster episode list with no regards as to what they're referencing specifically. --Colleyd 22:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't make me hurt you STOP! It looks two times better.--The 10th Doctor 01:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Enough!
Okay, founder coming out of a prolonged lurk mode to put a stop to this. The page has been reverted and is now protected for the time being from further edits except by sysops. The 10th Doctor has been temporarily blocked. A wiki by its very nature may undergo edits based solely on people's individual tastes and preferences, but when "edit wars" start over a single page it detracts and distracts from the wiki as a whole and generates a negative mood among its contributors, who should act as colleagues, not rivals. Please play nice, guys. --Freethinker1of1 02:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Return of the 10th Doctor
Okay how about this since no refrences on the bottom of the page how about people look up the episode names on list of appreances that is what it is there for?--The 10th Doctor 31 October 2007


 * No. The list of a appearances is what it says on the title, a list of appearances of a given character/monster. It doesn't directly tie what is written to a story. --Tangerineduel 06:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Well is there anything we can do to get rid of those episode names?--The 10th Doctor 1 November 2007


 * Negative. Episode names provide a valuable resource for those reading the wiki. In my time at this site, you have been the only person I've seen to express the desire in removing them. No one else appears to have any problems with them. You at one point said the reason you wanted to remove them was so that you could make a print out of the page. If that is the cause, then you really only seem to be wanting to change it for your own usage, and not for the betterment of the wiki itself. --Colleyd 05:14, 2 November 2007 (UTC)Woof

Okay yeah that is what I wanted to do at first but know I want to help the article and I'm not the only one I know 15 people who want to change it literally but they do not have a profile on this site.--The 10th Doctor 13:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * This system works, because it gives the reader a chance to read more information about what happened in a given episode. AnimeNoKyouran 03:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

why dont you have a decimal point system e.g Smith And Jones would be (DW:3.01) and The Runaway Bride would be (3.X) or something like that. You could put and R in front for the 'revived' series so Smith and Jones would be something like (DW:R3.01)? You could try it with the over scroll coming up with the name. (TARDY the TARDIS 12:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC))

The Doctor has a new idea
Instead of getting rid of episode names or putting them on the bottom how about this. Instead of putting the episode names beside episodes descreption how about we do it like this.

Rose
Episode information. What do you think of this idea?--The 10th Doctor 01:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Also known as?
So under "Also Known As" it says the Doctor has also used the names John Smith, James McCrimmon and Sir Doctor Of TARDIS. Just wondering if the idea to reference alias's in articles has been brought up?

I know John Smith happened during Human Nature/Family of Blood, and Sir Doctor Of TARDIS was Tooth and Claw. But what about James McCrimmon? (a homage to Jamie I'm guessing?) Onio 21:50, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * All the information about the aliases should probably be kept on this page. --

Editing
I have put the Family of Blood storyline in the article if anyone can put more detail (I'm not good at that) that would be great and also more detail on the episode in which the Tenth Doctor met his Fifth incarnation. On characteristics I think you should put the Family of blood thing in there. The Master Chief-117 19:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Can someone please put more detail on the Human Nature/Family of Blood and the episode with the Fifth Doctor parts of the article? Please, please, please!! The Master Chief-117 22:09, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * the detailed information can go in the episode summaries for those episodes. Stardizzy? 20:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Key Life Events has gotten ridiculous
this has gotten into "the Doctor changes his hairstyle (DW: The Idiot's Lantern)" territory. this section should concern only the most important happenings in a person's life. his separation from Rose would count. getting stuck in 1969, let's in Blink, wouldn't count. I will change this I get around to it. actually the article in general needs trimming. --Stardizzy? 20:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


 * as long as longer now as when I made the above comment. --Stardizzy2 15:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Key Events
I did some trimming of the Key Events, I tried to keep it to big events that could shape his life. Please have a look and feel free to add or remove any you think they should be there or shouldnt Bigshowbower 09:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Are We allowed to list BBC Books in key events, such as meeting Gandhi in TDA:Ghosts of India  The-Doctor  11:00, 17 November 2008


 * when I created the Key Life Events, I meant to make it only for important events like fighting the Time War. subsequently, editors have made it mean that time the Doctor peeled gum off the sole of his trainers. so, yeah, in theory you could include the books. in reality, a) I don't think meeting Gandhi would matter too much in the Doctor's overall life, b) with Doctor Who on television again, the important stuff doesn't happen in the books any more. (whereas a lot of the big events in the life of the Seventh Doctor and the Eighth Doctor happened in books, audio, etc. --Stardizzy2 20:11, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Eleventh Doctor?
Can I just ask, seeing as The Doctor DID use a regeneration process, doesn't that technically mean that David Tennant is now also the Eleventh Doctor? If so, shouldn't we make the necesary changes? Sylictic 09:18, 24 July 2008 (UTC) Sylictic


 * designations like Tenth Doctor, etc., get used more as an out-of-universe thing than anything else, when the actor playing the Doctor changes. David Tennant stayed on as the Doctor, so to my mind that makes him still the Tenth Doctor. --Stardizzy2 15:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


 * The trouble is with your argument is you haven't put forward anything conclusive, you have said in your mind he is the Tenth Doctor, that does not make it law. The facts are that, the number of the doctor, be it first, second or tenth refurrs not just to the actors who play the doctor but as his designation in the programme, Time lords (orrigninally) only had regenerations limited to 13 times, no more no less, and as he completed his 11th regeneration cycle even though he didnt change still means he regenerated, so david tennant is not only the 10th incarnation of the doctor but the 11th as well. So i agree with sylictic, the necesary changes should be made. regardless of your opinion (that you believe is fact) Alex1991 21:25, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Simple answer He did not finish the cycle, he said he used the energy to heal himself. than stopped the process before he changed face than syphoned the energy off into the hand. I suggest Alex1991 you go and rewatch Journey's End Bigshowbower 06:08, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Exactly, he syphoned off the last of the energy, hence he used the cycle, he didnt use it all on himself, of course, but he did use it all up. However, I believe he is still the 10th Doctor, there will just be 12 Doctors in the end. This is going to end up a bit like the 'Did the 2nd Doctor actually regenerate?' debate that last lasted for some time till if was sorted in The Five Doctors. We'll get some decnt answers in the future, as for now, Matt Smith is the 11th Doctor. Taccer 07 17:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

far too much details
really detailed plot summation belongs on the pages for the individual episodes. --Stardizzy2 15:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Stardizzy you did a good job making the Master (Harold Saxon) page why dont you have a go at doing that to this article Bigshowbower 09:14, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * sadly, I have any only finite levels of dedication/masochism. --Stardizzy2 20:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Suits
I know this isn't really very important, but could the Doctor actually ever wear the blue pinstripe suit ever again? Seeing as the Duplicate Doctor went with Rose to 'Pete's World' wearing this suit, and I don't think he's planning to come back, I don't think the Doctor will wear it again (unless he's got another one in his wardrobe) and was wondering wether we should mention this or not.

Thats the last thing this article needs Bigshowbower 09:18, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


 * In the trailers for The Next Doctor The Doctor is wearing his brown suit so we don't yet know, but the writers may just decide to bring his blue suit back and let us assume that The Doctor had more than one. Possibly we should wait to see if he wears it in the 2009 Specials before mentioning it in the article, though I'm not sure where would be appropriate.--Bill Odie 17:39, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Tuxedo Photo
Small thing, but it is actually from The Lazarus Experiement, not Voyage Of The Damned. 86.155.205.250 18:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Fate?
I think the fate section is completely unecessary. It doesn't chronicle any part of the Doctor's life, and does nothing except state the obvious. Of course, once his final episode comes to pass, that'll be included, but this section just creates a big gap in the narrative. Taccer 07 19:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

GSM Phone?
It says the Doctor has taken to carrying a phone around with him. Isn't that Martha's phone?

Removed from "Casting"
The following was added to the "Casting" section back in February:

"David Walliams was the second choice for the role of the Tenth Doctor but he had to turn it down because he was stuck in the tight scheduele of the third season of his show Little Britain. The original choice for the role of the Tenth Doctor was an unknown and (unnamed by the BBC) actor who spoke in a cockney accent, but he didn't get the role because he moved down to Australia with his wife and daughter, his name has never been revealed publicly to protect his privacy, however Tennant has stated in interviews he's been told who the original choice for the role was, knows who he is and greatly admires him, even calling that near casting decision a more perfect casting then him being cast."

I've never heard any of this, and it sounds highly improbable to me. I'm reverting to the previous version until someone can produce some verification. —Josiah Rowe 03:38, 29 March 2009 (UTC)