Talk:The Mark of the Rani (TV story)

How come the main picture was changed? I rather liked that picture of the village.

David 09:58, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I changed it because I didn't feel it was very rerpesentational of the story. --Mantrid 09:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Should this be moved to The Mark of The Rani, as per the title card? Tardis1963 09:43, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

Timeline
Although the Luddite riots did take place (in the real world) several years before the time of this story, they were still quite recent. It may not be an anachronism to use the term in the story. The violence perpetrated by the Rani's victims would have recalled that of the Luddites and the term could very well have been revived to describe them. It's still used occasionally. --89.241.76.143talk to me 06:52, March 2, 2012 (UTC)

1820s?
Perhaps I missed something, but how do we know that this takes place in the 1820s? EDIT: If it's based on Liddell becoming Lord Ravensworth in 1821 and Humphry Davy's death in 1829, aren't we not supposed to use out of universe info to date stories? -- Saxon 18:53, August 5, 2018 (UTC)
 * The closest thing I could find was Peri saying she could be stuck in the 1800s forever. --Borisashton ☎  17:38, August 8, 2018 (UTC)

Historical Figures
"With the appearances of George Stephenson and Lord Ravensworth, this was the first televised Doctor Who story to feature an historical figure as an onscreen character since TV: The Gunfighters in 1966."

This is incorrect, as demonstrated by this line from the Highlanders article:-

"Solicitor Grey is the only real-world historical person to appear in the story."165.225.76.55talk to me 11:27, October 30, 2018 (UTC)


 * Also, didn't King John Lackland appear in a 5th Doctor story?Matthew Babe Stevenson ☎  06:25, November 19, 2020 (UTC)


 * Technically no. That was Kamelion disguised as the King. --Borisashton ☎  11:16, November 19, 2020 (UTC)