Talk:Tribe of Gum

Name
At the bottom of the page it states that the name of the tribe was never stated on screen. So where does the name come from? MM/ Want to talk? 14:34, October 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing it comes from the working title for the story, The Tribe of Gum; while it's a reasonable guess that it is also the name of the tribe, it is still speculation. Shambala108 ☎  14:50, October 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * Probably should be moved to the Tribe, since that's in the serial and the novelisation. "The Tribe of Gum" is just a working title for the serial.  Since that title was never used, we shouldn't use it either. I think that Thread:122107 has actually given us quite a help with this issue.  If, as I suspect, Za's original name was "Gum", then that would solve quite a few mysteries.  We should keep our eyes peeled for the answer in DWM 458.   19:14: Thu 14 Feb 2013
 * The First Doctor Handbook says that the "likely reason" the story changed from The Tribe of Gum to 100,000 BC is because the tribe "is no longer given a name in the final version of Anthony Coburn's scripts". That's at least citable proof that there is no in-universe thing called "Tribe of Gum".  04:59: Sat 16 Feb 2013
 * Someone removed the rename tag and the note at the bottom, claiming that the name was used in a DWM comic. Any idea which one? It needs to be cited. --SOTO ☎ 17:12, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Czechout mentions DWM 458 upthread, so I'm guessing that's the one. Since it's not out yet, I think you did the right thing in restoring the rename tag. Shambala108 ☎  17:34, March 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay, we shall wait...... --SOTO ☎ 17:42, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm now removing the rename tag based on this narrative evidence:
 * --SOTO ☎ 18:06, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

Czech restored the tag, claiming that the above evidence isn't enough. Why is that? --SOTO ☎ 18:59, March 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I saw the thread you started. --SOTO ☎ 19:01, March 10, 2013 (UTC)