Talk:Susan Foreman/Archive 1

I changed the information about Alex having two hearts. I've just listened to Earthly Child and Susan states quite clearly that he only has one heart. It can be found in track 13. Hope it was okay to change this. EIG 19:41, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

that picture is a still from an episode, right? which one?

--I think this article needs a new image as she looks quite different there to any on-sceen appearance I've seen. He whole demeanour is...To mature? It seems like a publicity photo from possibly the pilot. I might be way off the mark, but I still think it needs to be changed. Taccer 07 22:42, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Seriously, what am I looking at here, is she hiding in a pile of junk?

We know that 'Foreman' isn't really Susan's last name, so should we be listing her as Susan Foreman or just Susan? --Mantrid 18:19, 12 Jul 2005 (UTC)


 * The reason I'd chosen to list as Susan Foreman was that she was, initially, referred to as such within the programme - as that was how she was known at School. It does seem to be the commonly used name for Susan in reference materials, but if others feel that 'Foreman' should be dropped then this can, by all means, be altered. Kazzab72 09:04, 28 Jul 2005 (UTC)


 * Just "Susan" can refer to other characters and is more ambiguous. Better keep it as Susan Foreman to distinguish it from others.

I've edited the quotes section as it looked cluttered. Any opinions, suggestions etc.? --GingerM 15:45, 3 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Maybe her full name is Susan the Foreman (you know the Doctor ,The Foreman)

Campbell last name
I'm not familiar with the novels and audio dramas mentioned. Do any of them confirm that Susan did indeed take the last name Campbell (and indeed married David)? See Gwen Cooper for an example of a female character who kept her maiden name after marriage, for example. If any of the non-TV sources confirm this, then never mind. If not it might be an assumption that needs to be removed. 23skidoo 03:33, January 24, 2010 (UTC)

Not to mention the fact that some people don't count novels/audio dramas as being canon, as many of them are contradictory or ambiguous 81.135.117.170 08:15, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * It's the official policy of this wiki to accept all Doctor Who stories officially licensed by the BBC as being of equal weight when trying to write our articles about in-universe subjects. Thus, if a BFA calls her "Susan Campbell" — which all the Eighth Doctor/Susan BFAs consistently do —  she is Susan Campbell, to us, regardless of the fact that The Dalek Invasion of Earth doesn't confirm that she either a) actually marries David or b) took his last name upon that marriage. Our manual of style also gives specific instruction about what to do with the titles of articles about characters who get married.  Namely, it is to change the article to the last known name, but keep a redirect.


 * Hence this article should be at Susan Campbell, according to the policies of the wiki.


 * Also, it's hardly that non-televised DW is especially contradictory or ambiguous. Even were we to confine ourselves solely to televised stories, we'd run into an awful lot of continuity errors.  Case in point: Dalek history.  Wanna see how screwed up the television series is, just try writing a history of the Daleks using only material in the TV series.  Go. See ya when you get back from the insane asylum.


 * Although stories from other media do sometimes insert more continuity problems, they're often quite useful in resolving issues that would be present if only televised material were available to us. 04:58:23 Wed 07 Sep 2011

The Return?
Have there ever been a sign that he has planed to go back for her?--Rutilus saeta passer 09:56, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

Non have been anounced yet, but their is nothing stopping her coming back, after all she is a time lady, so being played by a differnt actress isn't a problem and since we last saw her on earth in the early 21st century she might not have been in the time war.---General MGD 109 4:32, january 26, 2010

Pics
Please remember that The Pilot Episode is not canonical, and, thus, according to our Canon policy, cannot be used to illustrate an article about an in-universe topic like this one. Also, according to Tardis:Manual of Style, promotional stills of Carole Ann Ford, even if black and white, cannot be used to illustrate this topic either.  Czech Out  ☎ | ✍ 15:24, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

Joanna Page 'Confirmed'?
The article states Joanna Page has been 'confirmed' as starring in a future episode - Where exactly is the source for this? Are we now accepting a tabloid ( and one well known for it's false rumours) story as 'confirmation'? For the record, both the BBC and Page have denied any involvement. 80.0.211.162 01:51, May 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * And that's good enough to delete the rumour. If it isn't confirmed by the BBC, then it has to be considered false information. I've never, ever come across a tabloid rumor regarding Doctor Who in its current version that has been correct. Otherwise we'd be watching Paterson Joseph as the Doctor (since he was "confirmed" as being cast as the Doctor), and the Doctor long ago would have gotten romantically involved with Captain Jack (per another "confirmed" report). 68.146.81.123 03:04, May 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * WARNING SPOILER: IMDb states that Joanna Page is present in the two final episodes of this fifth season, in the role of a "Time Lady". Maybe's Susan, maybe's not, we have just to wait and see.--Sid-Vicious 10:50, May 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * And we all know now how "correct" that was, don't we? The IMDb is NOT A RELIABLE SOURCE for this sort of information. Only the BBC or a "trusted media outlet" such as the Radio Times or DWM. I've once again removed the Joanna Page reference from the article. 68.146.81.123 01:33, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

Susan being taken after departure.
Is the idea that Susan in The Five Doctors is from after the Doctor left her ever implied or stated in that episode? I certainly don't remember any reference to "20 years". (Does that also mean that Two's Season 6B spanned decades too?) -- Tybort (talk page) 22:09, September 11, 2011 (UTC)


 * I believe it is stated in the novelisation, which is cannon as long as it is non-contradictory. OttselSpy25 talk to me 03:48, November 26, 2011 (UTC)