Follow TV Tropes

Discussion Series / DoctorWho

Go To

Sep 22nd 2020 at 11:49:15 AM •••

Is there a reason why the page image was changed from the compilation of all the Doctors to just the Jodie poster?

Hide/Show Replies
Sep 22nd 2020 at 1:19:33 PM •••

The Staff Note says it's so the compilation doesn't have to be constantly edited for new Doctors. This way when there's a new Doctor we just switch to a poster of that person.

Nov 28th 2020 at 11:00:46 PM •••

All things considered, it seems kinda weak and lazy. The compilation shows the whole legacy of the Doctor and really gets across that this is a very long-running show.

Plus, given the poor rep 13 has garnered in some circles, it can come across as an ego trip or trying to promote her over other incarnations.

Nov 29th 2020 at 2:28:31 AM •••

Its not an ego trip really, they have always replaced the Doctor with the current incarnation for consistency. They will replace her when she regenerates as well as a matter of course. It's more practical then anything. Also every version of the Doctor has received poor rep in certain "circles" one way or another. Does not affect the image itself, as it's function is to show the current Doctor.

Edited by Tuvok
Sep 19th 2019 at 6:59:42 PM •••

Can we do something about the Doctor/Clara shippers running this wiki? It's fine if you ship them but every Doctor Who related page treats the interpretation of their relationship as a romance as as close to canon as you can get under Doctor Who rules. It can be interpreted it that way, but it doesn't have to be, so can we not treat alternative character interpretations/shipping as fact?

Feb 24th 2018 at 9:43:18 PM •••

With the reveal of the Whittaker logo, when will the front page image be altered to reflect the new logo?

Feb 22nd 2018 at 5:13:01 AM •••

Is it possible to make a sort of "Creators/DoctorWho" index to include the various writers? We've got articles for a few of them now - off the top of my head, RTD, Moffat, Paul Cornell, Robert Holmes, Terrance Dicks, Terry Nation, Malcolm Hulke (that was mine), John Nathan Turner and guest writers like Neil Gaiman. I've thought about adding an Eric Saward page too, or maybe Phil Hinchcliffe. And that's not even counting guest novel writers like Alastair Reynolds. But there's no cross-wicking to other writers, other than whatever other people happen to be mentioned on a page.

Is there any precedent for writers on a specific work? I know comics writers are indexed under Comic Book Creators, not by specific work, but I think Doctor Who is big enough to be worth doing. There's nine or ten entries there already.

Edited by moloch Hide/Show Replies
Feb 22nd 2018 at 8:35:40 AM •••

I think it's worthwhile, but I'd put it through TLP and put it at Main.Doctor Who Creators as an index.

Feb 23rd 2018 at 2:01:35 PM •••

I threw it up on TLP, see what people think. I think it's a pretty sensible index. I managed about twenty names on the page, and I'm sure there's some I'm not thinking of, and there's some people who could be given Creator pages, like Ben Aaronovitch, Paul Magrs or Gary Russell (to name three very different examples), to bulk it out even further.

(I just realised I forgot Nicholas Briggs! And Colin Baker, as the only Who actor to get a writing credit too. There's probably some British comics creators too - Alan Moore comes to mind.)

Edited by moloch
Mar 5th 2018 at 9:49:36 AM •••

Right, I've had no action in two weeks, either here or on Ykttw, so I'm going to make it a page. I'll model it on Comicbook Creators, and it's just an index, so surely nobody will have a problem with that. And if they do, it's nothing we can't fix.

Dec 7th 2017 at 11:15:44 PM •••

Alternative character interpretation - Doctor Who companions Peri, Mel, and Ace:

The common consensus seems to be that Peri was a sympathetic butt-monkey to 6's harshness. Mel, by comparison, seems to be viewed as the plucky and loud designated scream queen. In contrast, here's how I view them, and their dynamics with the doctor. Peri, while no shrinking violet, didn't have the personality to match 6. Yes, at times she was abused, but she never stood up for herself all that much and never made a proper effort to put 6 in his place, leaving him somewhat unhanded and a loose cannon. Peri was a negative influence on 6. Mel, while certainly a screamer, had enough pluck and personality to bark at 6, but always in a friendly and loving way. Mel was 6's first time having a guarding, an actual morality pet. Not just an emotional load to carry around. (While she certainly shouldn't be considered at fault, Peri was a major factor in the death of 5/birth of 6). Because 6 and Mel were such a match for each other, when 6 became 7 there was little need for him to manipulate her. He was able to enjoy lighthearted (by comparison) adventures. It wasn't until 7 met the troubled and lost Ace that he saw that he needed to bring out some of his darker traits. (Certainly 7 losing his original companion didn't help matters). When 7 met Ace he already knew she was being used as a pawn, and responded appropriately. Thoughts?

Hide/Show Replies
Dec 7th 2017 at 11:16:28 PM •••

This is my 2nd attempt at posting something. I'm sorry if i'm still doing something incorrect

Sep 2nd 2017 at 9:38:04 PM •••

The quote got changed from a short one by the First Doctor to an outrageously long one by the Twelfth Doctor. I've changed it back, but does anyone have any further opinions on the matter?

Nov 26th 2016 at 9:53:17 PM •••

Can we please stop discussing canon in the articles? People like Paul Cornell, Steven Moffatt, etc., have gone on record saying there is no canon, so to see it be discussed in the articles is really annoying.

Hide/Show Replies
Feb 22nd 2018 at 5:07:48 AM •••

Yes! Thank you, I'm not the only one. It's really annoying seeing entries debate whether something is "canonical" or not (or worse, "made uncanonical" by whatever other story) in a series where the writers themselves say ideas of canon are a load of bollocks. This isn't DC, where they like to have a firm idea of what "counts" and what doesn't. (And then contradict themselves every two years, but that's a whole other problem.)

Jan 20th 2015 at 5:42:28 AM •••

There seems to be a problem with the main page. I just tried to add an example, and it's not showing up. I've tried re-adding the example twice but it still not working.

Hide/Show Replies
Feb 9th 2015 at 7:37:14 PM •••

I've been having the same problem! Is there a page administrator we can talk to you?

Feb 10th 2015 at 7:55:50 AM •••

It's far over the size limit. 664154 characters. I've locked it to prevent further explosions; I'll split it in a minute so that you can still edit the examples.

Oct 1st 2015 at 6:27:40 PM •••

Why is the page still locked? Can you add a mention of the new spin-off, Class, please?

Oct 2nd 2015 at 12:11:03 AM •••

Please use the edit requests thread linked from the Locked Pages page, please.

Jun 27th 2014 at 1:58:13 PM •••

Is there any chance we could get some sort of consensus on exactly how closely cropped the pictures of the Doctor are supposed to be? Some are head-and-shoulders, while some get everything from the waist up. I'm more of an advocate of the former, really, as most Doctors have assorted outfits and it's the face that's the important bit, but in any case some consistency would be nice.

I made a mock-up of a head-and-shoulders version, for comparison. It's the same height and width as the current one, and the only picture I swapped out was Tennant's because the source image crops out his entire left shoulder. Granted, I don't think most of these work well as headshots, but I assumed they were voted on or something and I wanted to respect that.

Edited by
Jun 10th 2014 at 10:04:37 PM •••

Don't know if this should go under Headscratchers Fridge Logic, or even Hypocrisy, so I've put it on the discussion; did anybody find it slightly hypocritical, or perhaps even a little self righteous of the Eleventh Doctor in the Beast Below when he said "No one human has ANYTHING to say to me", especially since his Tenth incarnation went all Time Lord Victorious?

Hide/Show Replies
Jun 11th 2014 at 4:18:43 AM •••

I don't think that would fall under any of these tropes. Maybe Pride?

May 12th 2014 at 1:39:11 PM •••

Removed this from Universe Bible.

  • That statement is debatable. The series has always had a well-defined bible dating back to Sydney Newman and CE Webber's original source document. And the show has always had technical advisors to keep track of various things. Also, the actors themselves maintained continuity in terms of what buttons to press, etc.

I don't think Doctor Who has a Universe Bible. Newman and Webber's brief created before Anthony Coburn wrote "An Unearthly Child" hasn't been expanded on by any producer or production team, and I'm pretty sure it's the actors' own memory that make them press the same button rather than any document. Russell T Davies definitely didn't draw from this when pitching the revival series. I don't think a document outlining the very initial tone (which David Whitaker and Anthony Coburn heavily stray from) is the same as an American-style Universe Bible.

Is this source document the same document where "the Doctor" literally has the surname Who (and doesn't seem to remember where he came from, in contrast to Susan clearly remembering the details of Gallifrey in "The Sensorites" and the Doctor explictly saying he and Susan are "cut off" in "An Unearthly Child"), and Susan, Ian and Barbara are Biddy, Cliff and Lola? Along with Doctor Who's team "not writing science fiction" nor "fantasy"? Yeah, apart from the very basics of "an old man, two school teachers and their student travel through time", this barely resembles the early transmitted episodes.

Also, the police box shape is not mentioned at all, but the TARDIS (in the document called "Dr. Who's machine") actually turns invisible (which I don't believe happens prior to "The Impossible Astronaut" in 2011). That is, people can feel it, bump into it, partly disappear by partly entering it and fully disappear by fully entering it.

Newman's notes on this memo read "Don't like this at all" on several occasions as well, so Webber already seems to be straying from this in the development of the show.

Can't speak for technical advisors (though if this is referring to Ian Levine in the 80s, I'm pretty sure he was either unpaid or unbilled in his role).

Edited by Hide/Show Replies
Jun 16th 2014 at 6:16:02 PM •••

In fact, here's an exact quote from RTD I found on the Big Finish podcast Who's Round 59 (at about 16 minutes):

"Well, exactly, and the fact that there is no great big controller dictating what this character [the Doctor] is. There's no bible sort of saying 'this character will be this'. Makes it much, it's, he's more interesting than Captain Kirk. All these other- more interesting than Buffy, frankly. It's, like, a lot of these characters do have bibles and it hasn't done them any good. This man's been a different actor, he's been all over the place, he can do anything. It's marvellous."

Edited by
Apr 27th 2014 at 12:47:37 AM •••

The Weeping Angels cannot be killed normally, as looking at them makes them turn to stone and stone cannot be killed. That alone makes sense. However, couldn't someone, say, go at the statue with a hammer? Look away, and it basically bleeds to death-assuming you didn't hammer its head off, in which case it would die instantly. So, why exactly did this never occur to anyone on the show? (I've only watched the first two episodes with them, the two-parter in Season 5 counting as 2 episodes, so sorry if this was brought up at some point.)

Hide/Show Replies
May 6th 2014 at 9:21:32 AM •••

Whatever they are made of is probably stronger than actually stone. One episode of the new series showed characters trying to destroy them with firearms to no avail. At-least when they are at the peak of their strength. The same episode also showed that angels that had not feed in a long time would grow weaker which made their "stone"-form deteriorate easier.

Edited by
Apr 15th 2014 at 3:16:44 PM •••

  • May Contain Evil: Besides the Nestenes and Autons, any hit trend or product is likely to be a front for an alien scheme. Satnavs, weight loss pills, a satellite phone network, school dinners...

...what on Earth?

Satnavs are (to at least richer people) an outright replacement for roadmaps. Not to mention that the front in that case was the clean ATMOS fuel. The satnav just happened to be built in.

Weight loss and dieting aren't really a fad at all (though they're obviously only really seen in developed countries). I mean, what? How are MOBILE PHONES a "hit trend or product"? Have I gone into a time warp into the 1980s to when these were a status symbol or something? And I'm not even going to touch on school dinners. Especially as it's not even directly about healthy eating or banning turkey twizzlers.

Apr 11th 2014 at 3:49:57 AM •••

I know both "Hide" and "The Day of the Doctor" allude to the "Witch from the Well", but what other Big Finish references were there in series 7b? I'm not that familiar, but I'm really struggling to see how "The Crimson Horror" and "The Name of the Doctor" (both focused on Moffat-era characters) or "Nightmare in Silver" (inspired by the "scarier" 1960s Cyberman episodes and largely involving doppelgangers fighting one another) could even make an oblique reference.

Mar 15th 2014 at 3:37:15 PM •••

Eccleston's run is not an example of Cut Short. The story arcs and characters introduced in the season continue into David Tennant's run a year later, and as far as I can tell, Russell T Davies did not plan any multi-year plan for Eccleston's version of the Doctor, especially when revamping the show was such a gamble, it may have not made it past 13 episodes.

Feb 10th 2014 at 10:27:19 PM •••

Hello everyone. I and one of my friends have been trying to get on of our friends into this show, but we don't know which episode to start her off with. We don't want to scare her off, so "Blink" and "Midnight" are out. Thoughts?

Hide/Show Replies
Feb 11th 2014 at 1:45:38 AM •••

Hello, MHM. You might find more information in the forum thread - wiki discussion pages are more for discussing the page than the work.

Feb 5th 2014 at 5:46:15 AM •••

Removed from No Export for You

  • Played straight again immediately with the 2013 Christmas Special The Time of The Doctor. Now, BBC Worldwide's Asia arm has never aired most of the specials in most of their Asian feeds of BBC Entertainment except when they fancy, period (and apparently, only South Korea and Japan got to watch said special). Asian Whovians have previously been denied of the Easter Special, most of the past Christmas Specials, and many of the other specials for that matter. The specials have typically have been of little concern to Asian Whovians given that they're just filler episodes. However, The Time of The Doctor has the Doctor regenerating from Matt Smith to Peter Capaldi, the first time a doctor has ever regenerated in a special since the past two regenerations have happened in season ending episodes instead, and as it goes, all regenerations are very important events to Whovians. Many Asian Whovians tore BBC Worldwide Asia a new one. Though BBC Worldwide Asia have promised to air the special eventually, it won't happen anytime soon, and will most likely hold off until shortly before the next season premiere (which will result in the sick Christmas in July trope). The best option Asian Whovians have? Wait for the US Blu-Ray release at the end of March 2014 since US shares a Blu-Ray region with most of Asia (except China and India). Or if the Whovian has access to region-free DVD gear and don't mind watching the special at a lower resolution, import the UK DVD release which came out at the end of January 2014, which was still a full month's wait.

Specifically for this passage:

"The specials have typically have been of little concern to Asian Whovians given that they're just filler episodes."

And this bit about "The Time of the Doctor" behind a spoiler:

"the first time a doctor has ever regenerated in a special since the past two regenerations have happened in season ending episodes instead"

These Whovians are mistaken. Even considering they wouldn't have realised the significance of "Voyage of the Damned" to series 4, that still leaves, a post regeneration episode (Christmas 2005), the aftermath of cliffhanger endings (Christmas 2005, 2006 and 2007), the Tenth Doctor's imminent regeneration (Easter 2009, The Waters of Mars, Christmas 2009, New Year's Day 2010, where the regeneration happens), and the Doctor missing and returning to the Ponds (Christmas 2011) and the proper introduction of Clara Oswald along with the Doctor leaving retirement and the reintroduction of the Paternoster Row gang (Christmas 2012).

Not to mention, if BBC Worldwide Asia will air the special and just hasn't yet, then it's not this trope.

Edited by Hide/Show Replies
Feb 5th 2014 at 6:08:41 AM •••

Actually, I confirm BBC Asia has never aired any of the specials. I was disappointed with them skipping the Easter Special, but since it was filler I let it past. But then they did skip The Time of The Doctor. I can confirm that there was a huge backlash in the contact us page for BBC Asia ( see , halfway down, continued into page 4, 5 and probably further back).

The message given by BBC Asia (on Page 5) reads as follows:

Thank you for your enquiries asking whether Doctor Who: The Time of the Doctor Christmas Special 2013 will be shown on BBC Entertainment. This special is not due to be shown on the channel in the near future but we have certainly noted fans’ interest in seeing this Christmas Special.

Notice that nothing has been said about them airing it in the future. I assume it something is "No Export For You" until it is confirmed that they bring it in?

I guess I misinterpreted "we have certainly noted fans’ interest in seeing this Christmas Special." as that they will be airing it in the distant future, but have come to realize I was too optimistic.

I will go ahead and put it back into the page with some tweaks.

PS: I assumed that it aired in Japan and Korea somehow because there were many Japanese and Korean replies to BBC's posts about the special on Facebook, that seems to implies that the special has somehow aired in both countries and not the rest of Asia.

Edited by
Nov 28th 2013 at 9:04:38 AM •••

Wasn't sure where to put this, so Discussion seemed like the best place. I've not seen any Word of God on the subject, and fans seem to be rabidly debating it whereever I go.

I believe that the events of The End of Time are still quite valid, and that The Day of The Doctor doesn't retcon them out.

Instead, if you listen closely to what the 10th Doctor said during The End of Time, he said "Back into the Time War, Rassilon."

Rassilon also spoke about trying to escape the Time Lock.

So it is my belief that Rassilon and his fellow Time Lords were trying to escape the Time Lock prior to the time that the Doctor used The Moment, and just before the final Dalek attack on Gallifrey.

Due to the events of The End of Time, that effort failed.

Then the final Dalek attack came, and The War Doctor attempted to use The Moment, resulting in the awesome solution that The Day of The Doctor gave us.

Nov 19th 2013 at 3:52:21 PM •••

It has just been confirmed in a special called Night of the Doctor that there was indeed a secret regeneration between Eight and Nine (played by John Hurt).

  • This effectively makes the Ninth Doctor (Eccleston) the Tenth Doctor and the Tenth Doctor (Tennent) the Eleventh Doctor and the Eleventh Doctor (Smith) the Twelfth Doctor and the twelfth Doctor (Cipaldi) into the Thirteenth.
  • Does that mean we now have to do some major repair work? because any trope that currently refers to a Doctor by number, for example Ten, needs to be changed to Eleven and so forth. Do do so otherwise will both be incredibly confusing to brand new fans of the show visiting the page and factually inaccurate.
  • Of course we will know more when the show airs in a couple of days if the new doctor is more akin to Dr Handy than anything but I thought I would start the thread now just so we can think it over.

Edited by Hide/Show Replies
Nov 19th 2013 at 8:51:45 PM •••

No. No. And no. John Hurt is an anomaly hidden from the Doctor's history and time stream even if he legitimately is a proper regeneration that follows McGann and precedes Eccleston. The three revival doctors have been widely known as Ninth, Tenth and Eleventh or Nine, Ten and Eleven for years. Also, as John Hurt's "Doctor" abandoned the name "the Doctor" upon becoming a warrior, Eccleston is still the ninth incarnation to go by the Doctor, meaning that although the count involving twelve regenerations may be complicated and require footnotes, that does not excuse site-wide renames for the 21st century Doctors.

The BBC site and the 50th anniversary site keep those names and will likely not change them.

Nov 24th 2013 at 2:37:55 AM •••

So what he's called is the War Doctor even if I'd have preferred Warlock myself. What we need to do is edit the cover picture with his face I think.

Nov 24th 2013 at 3:10:48 PM •••

Unless we can get permission for a bit of digital trickery, where a mouse-over reveals the new picture with the War Doctor inside.

Nov 24th 2013 at 6:49:46 PM •••

You do realize that we we have no inclination to keep the old numbering system, due to new information. We now know that all Revival Series doctors are up a number, this cannot be disputed. The reason this is also important is due to his lifespan; this makes Capaldi his final life, period.

Telcontar MOD
Nov 25th 2013 at 2:14:35 AM •••

Whilst now incorrect, the old numbering system is well-established and changing it would lead to a lot of confusion across the site (because even if we bumped the doctors up a number here, other pages with Doctor Who examples might not get that done) and be out of step with official materials. The numbers should be left as they are with a special note about the War Doctor.

Nov 26th 2013 at 6:32:41 PM •••

I believe it's been asserted that the original, official count refers to the Doctor who calls himself the Doctor. The War Doctor abandoned that name (save for that touching moment in the end, but of course he'd forget about it soon after), so he doesn't count.

Also, be warned, since Moffat also amended his prior statement about the numbering, how there's Twelve Doctors (that's counting Capaldi) and thirteen regenerations (that's counting Hurt). NOW he's saying that the Metacrisis Doctor also used up a regeneration (cue some people crying I Knew It!!), so now Matt Smith's Doctor is the thirteenth incarnation instead of the twelfth, meaning his regenerating into Capaldi's Doctor should be impossible. I'm pretty sure there are those who disagree, so I foresee an Edit War about this coming in the future.

Edited by
Feb 5th 2014 at 5:45:55 AM •••

"The Time of the Doctor" maintains that Matt Smith still "the Eleventh Doctor".

Sep 14th 2013 at 10:06:40 AM •••

Hi folks I need a bit of help with an example(s) from a Special Efforts thread. See InstantDeathBullet Sandbox for more details Links to threads are in the description.

Any help, suggestions, or other info can be posted to The Special Efforts thread

There any examples of Instant Death Bullet in the various episodes? The Aversion entry will be removed as it is not a proper use of an aversion.

Is Rory's literal hand gun a gun in the traditional sense or is it some sort of fancy Ray Gun?

  • Doctor Who
    • Averted in the 1996 television movie, where the seventh Doctor is shot multiple times and faints - it's implied that he would have survived being shot and healed without regenerating if it hadn't been for Grace Holloway's attempts to treat what she thought was an irregular heartbeat - really his two hearts
    • Played straight in Eleventh Doctor episode "The Pandorica Opens"; after being shot by Rory, Amy spends a couple of seconds gasping for breath before dramatically falling backwards, dead. However, the following episode, "The Big Bang", reveals she is Only Mostly Dead and she is restored to life by the Pandorica.
      • We don't see the wound clearly, but the implication is a point-blank shot to the heart, which might well do that.

Aug 13th 2013 at 2:23:50 AM •••

My Name Is Not Durwood is no longer a trope. Please readd under a correct trope.

Aug 5th 2013 at 7:29:28 PM •••

Twelfth Doctor Spoilers I know that a good several million people watched the special and millions more found out online, but there are also plenty of people who are deliberately trying to avoid finding out Twelve's identity before December 25, so could we maybe wait to put up the giant picture of Peter Capaldi? I think enthusiasm is intruding on courtesy.

Hide/Show Replies
Aug 6th 2013 at 1:45:52 AM •••

I see where you are coming from, but casting doesn't really fall under "spoiler", especially when the BBC itself wants everyone to know.

Aug 6th 2013 at 9:40:23 AM •••

The casting of Peter Capaldi is all over the news. You have to live under a rock to avoid any spoilers until Christmas...

Aug 5th 2013 at 12:07:24 AM •••

Hurt's Doctor explained

“There was a gap between Paul McGann playing the Doctor and Christopher Eccleston, when we didn’t see a regeneration, and John Hurt will fit into that gap. He is a past Doctor, not a future Doctor.”

Edited by Hide/Show Replies
Aug 5th 2013 at 1:25:23 AM •••

So 12 isn't "12", he's "12+X" where X is one or more regenerations.

Aug 5th 2013 at 1:53:26 AM •••

The way I took it is that they've never said just how long the Time War took, and even if you just go by Hartnell, then Time Lords do age; the rest just haven't stuck around long enough to do so visibly. Or they could just say something timey-wimey happened to make him look older.

Aug 4th 2013 at 1:57:50 PM •••

In the caption for the picture it points out that Colin Baker is not related to Tom Baker. Interesting that 10 (Tennant) actually is related (by marriage to his daughter) to Peter Davidson (5).

May 6th 2013 at 8:02:42 AM •••

Re: Forever War: I'm not hugely familiar with pre-Eccleston Dalek history or nuclear war, but presumably, several nukes launched over a few minutes would be sufficient to make Skaro an uninhabitable wasteland. In fact, I think that's what the war originally was before Genesis of the Daleks retconned it.

Mar 9th 2013 at 10:21:45 AM •••

Fandom tends to prefer folks who are unknown, or at least have more history with theater than film or television.

Jan 16th 2013 at 8:15:37 PM •••

In the episode, "The Empty Child", the doctor seems to have less regard for human life than in other episodes, summed up with, "What is life but natures way of keeping meat fresh?". This seemed really out of character to me, does anyone have an explanation?

Hide/Show Replies
Jun 2nd 2013 at 8:02:38 PM •••

He was referring to "life" at its most basic. Just because one has "life" does not mean one has consciousness. That's the distinction he was making. Sure, the nanogenes were able to bring the boy back to "life," but they weren't able to make him himself again.

lu127 MOD
Jan 1st 2013 at 5:56:16 AM •••

Does someone know where this goes?

  • Thinking Tic: A sketch has a bit where the BBC head of programming and the producer who is pitching Doctor Who to him are thinking and both drum their fingers to the "da-da-da-da" tune of the Doctor Who theme.

The person who provided it in the YKTTW said the sketch might be from the DVD of "An Unearhly Child".

Hide/Show Replies
Jan 13th 2013 at 7:08:40 PM •••

I'm relatively sure it's from a "Doctor Who Night" the BBC had in 1999. Not positive.

Edited by Wackd
Dec 11th 2012 at 7:39:22 PM •••

Should someone make add Strax and Lorna to character page on Doctor Who other supporting cast? I mean Vasta and Jenny are both there and I know it's becuse they are well loved by the fans, but Lorna and Strax where in the same episode, and Strax even stared with Vasta and Jenny in the preview for the snowmen.

Sep 22nd 2012 at 6:35:41 AM •••

Isn't better change, in the character tab, change "Doctor Who Doctors" to Doctor Who The Doctor" or something similar. It's basically the (in a way) the same character played by several doctors, just "Doctors" it's a bit misleading, i now that when there are several incarnations they are named in the plural, but as a Name of the page, i really think its misleading for someone that doesn't know much about the series.

Sep 18th 2012 at 10:56:41 AM •••

I'm happy to discuss this, but Riddell from "Dinosaurs on a Spaceship" fits [1] perfectly.

The episode's writer clearly wanted to show how tough Amy and Nefertiti were so he wrote in this character to make outdated remarks - refusing to take orders from a woman, thinking Amy is incapable of firing a gun etc - towards them just so they could respond.

Jan 6th 2012 at 8:15:44 PM •••

I realise it's officially licenced, but still, is The Curse of Fatal Death (and by extension, Dimensions in Time) an example of the series proper?

Hide/Show Replies
Jan 7th 2012 at 5:17:29 AM •••

No, they aren't. They are both a sort of Elseworld episodes, same with Scream Of the Shalka, the one with Stephen Fry in it, that Jimll Fix It skit, and those appearances at the Albert Hall for the Proms. Just Curse of Fatal Death is a very crack-y one.

Personally I'd love to know the canon status of the radio plays and the Tom Baker audio adventure "The Pescatons".

Edited by CrypticMirror
Aug 8th 2012 at 5:59:06 AM •••

Doctor Who media has never been given "canon status" by an official body, unlike Star Trek and Star Wars. At least one of the writers (who did Shalka and the TV series) straight-up says that it doesn't HAVE a canon.

Jun 2nd 2013 at 8:05:24 PM •••

It doesn't really matter. What with all the time travel that goes on, any of the adventures could be canon and not canon at the same time because "time can be rewritten."

Jan 6th 2012 at 7:45:39 PM •••

Is the "16 straight days" reference in Long-Runners still accurate?

Jan 3rd 2012 at 2:06:00 PM •••

  • Conservation of Ninjutsu: In "Dalek", a single Dalek manages to wipe out an entire base full of trained elite soldiers (and is only defeated because it decides to destroy itself). More recent episodes have seen entire armies of the supposedly terrifying and insurmountable space-Nazis regularly thwarted by a combination of technobabble and genetic wizardry.

There's a sense of hypocrisisy in this entry, or is that just me? Couldn't the Dalek's defeat in "Dalek" qualify as "technobabble and genetic wizardry" as well?

Hide/Show Replies
Aug 25th 2012 at 12:16:17 AM •••

Didn't the Dalek in Dalek kill itself?

Aug 25th 2012 at 8:40:29 AM •••

Yes, but it hardly just woke up one morning and said "I've had enough of this world".

Aug 25th 2012 at 8:49:28 AM •••

Well, the Dalek only killed itself because it had absorbed some of Rose's DNA and because it thought it was the last Dalek left. The Daleks in the season one finale had absorbed human DNA as well, but didn't kill themselves.

Feb 17th 2013 at 7:01:06 PM •••

To be honest I've got to agree. Although we don't see the deaths more people die in the series 1,2 & 4 finals than do in the episode Dalek its just our characters are closer to the dalek hence we see the characters die contrast with parting of the ways where we just see continents change

Dec 19th 2011 at 5:53:30 PM •••

Why are we using these icons for the character images? Wouldn't actual photos/screencaps be a lot more useful and less injokey?

Oct 20th 2011 at 5:31:13 PM •••

This is my first time adding to a discussion page, so I hope I'm doing this right. Shouldn't Doctor Who have "Our Witches Are Different"? (The Shakespeare Code)? And shouldn't William Shakespeare himself be included as "Bi the Way"? (also The Shakespeare Code). New troper here, so if I should posit this somewhere else, just tell me where. Thanks!

Edited by Laymanterms
Oct 15th 2011 at 11:19:18 AM •••

I get the feeling there's a Name Trope for this, but I don't know the title. Amy Pond wears the trousers so completely in her relationship/marriage, that The Doctor calls her husband Rory Pond. Maybe a cultural misunderstanding... but a Radio Times cover did it too.

Hide/Show Replies
Oct 15th 2011 at 11:25:45 AM •••

Henpecked Husband is probably the trope you are thinking of, but I don't think Rory is an example. He's just a laid back kinda guy who is happy to be with the woman he loves.

Oct 15th 2011 at 11:27:52 AM •••

I think he's more of an example of Tropes Are Not Bad. He's dominated and she wears the pants, but she treats him fine now and he's happy to let her take charge.

Telcontar MOD
Mar 4th 2013 at 6:00:45 AM •••

In that particular case, Rory Pond over Rory Williams might be a space issue — the names look better if they're close to the same length making the four of them roughly a square, but the full Rory Williams would break it. I do like how the Doctor often uses Rory Pond, though.

Oct 11th 2011 at 7:03:04 AM •••

Should we mention the space whale in "space is an ocean", or is that redundant? Seems like you might even wanna mention it under "the sky is an ocean".

Oct 11th 2011 at 7:02:30 AM •••

The trope "Christmas Episode" has a reference to "the aforementioned comedy episode". I suggest people shouldn't make references to previous tropes like that. The list is constantly filled, so no one will know which trope was right above it when this was written.

Oct 6th 2011 at 5:37:58 AM •••

"Use of the word "companion" in-series only really started with the new series."

My knowledge of classic series Who is limited, but The Mind Robber pretty clearly uses the word "companion", so is this really an example of Ascended Fanon/Sure, Why Not??

Hide/Show Replies
Jan 19th 2012 at 11:07:36 AM •••

"Companion" is used as far back as the first serial, IIRC, although not exactly in the usual context.

Sep 17th 2011 at 2:04:03 PM •••

Okay, so I want to add a Put on a Bus entry for Amy and Rory in "The God Complex" (I think I read somewhere that the actors are returning in a recurring capacity for series 7), but I'm not sure how to word it without it being a Self Fulfilling Spoiler or a massive wall of white.

Edited by OldManHoOh Hide/Show Replies
Oct 3rd 2011 at 2:13:08 PM •••

Classic Who: companions join and leave.

RTD Who: companions join and leave or die.

MOF Who: Doctor recruits Amelia at age 8 and abandons her until she is 20 and abandons and comes back and abandons and comes back.

Aug 16th 2011 at 2:50:20 AM •••

Something that has bugged me a lot recently is how the Wham tropes (Wham Episode and Wham Line) relate to Doctor Who, because of the Status Quo changing nature of wham, and the fact thatthe show's premise is so simple that it can't really change that much (And RTD's propension to use the Reset Button all the time).

Most examples listed both here AND in the trope pages are (imho)not Wham at all, because theyre mostly twists in one particular serial.

Case in point : the 'End of Time' example listed on the show's main page : it's not a Wham Episode, it just has a Cliffhanger.

Other examples on Live-Action TV :

- The three bullet points about companion deaths are not really examples, companions come and go all the time, often in a tear jerking fashion (mostly depending on how much you liked the character...), still part of the premise.

- The Cliffhanger for Stolen Earth/Journey's End : yeah, it was a surprise cliffhanger. Then, it was resolved in less than twenty seconds in the next episode and didn't have any repercussion (or even mention) after 10.5 departure. No wham here.

- A Handful of Master examples. "Holy Shit the Master is Back ZOMG" is no really an Wham example when it's resolved next episode with an absurd Reset Button, and never mentionned at all. bonus point for this gem : "If that's not the EPITOME of this trope, I don't know what is." No, that's not the epitome, that's not actually an example.

- Army of Ghost example : more of the same, Cliffhanger, egregious Reset Button.

- The Rory example might count, because of the impact of his loss on Amy, and the various mentions in the following episodes, but the example fails to point this.

- The series 32 examples are kinda fine by me, because they change the dynamic in the Doctor/Amy/Rory relation, even if it doesn't come into play until The Almost People.

All in all, apart from stuff like the first regeneration, and the Doctor being stranded on earth (which I'll add), there haven't been a lot of true Status Quo changing in Doctor Who, ever.

So, quick question here : should I go on a killing spree and remove all the rubbish examples? If I do, will they be re-added in the following minute? Should I just add a Line in Square Peg, Round Trope, or will it ironically Square Peg, Round Trope the Square Peg, Round Trope page?


Edited by La_Ninje Hide/Show Replies
Aug 17th 2011 at 7:25:16 AM •••

Between 1963 and 2011, all of five companions have died without returning later on (Katarina, Sara Kingdom, Adric, Astrid and Adelaide)*

and of those, Adric is the only "regular" companion to do so, so yeah, I would call that a rather big shake-up.

You seem to be using Reset Button in a way I don't recognise. Does it just mean "killing/trapping the enemy" now?

Army of Ghosts - The destruction of Torchwood London is an important and mandatory part of the spinoffs, but also that of The Runaway Bride, the series 3 and 4 finale, and The End of Time.

Utopia - A lot IS reset, but that still doesn't change the fact that he's been manipulating Martha's family from behind the scenes, as well as the fact that the Doctor couldn't (and can't) sense any surviving Time Lords in the universe. Another person hiding with a fobwatch? Seems pretty Whammy to me.

I don't consider plot threads "Emergency Temporal Shift", the Cybermen being pulled into the Void with the Daleks and the Master and that ring being picked up on again in a long string of Dalek episodes, The Next Doctor, and The End of Time, respectively.

Granted, I don't have too much issue with removing the End of Time example. I don't even recall stuff about "the Void" and "time bubbles". The Doctor BURNED Gallifrey, right?

The alterations between cast members IS a change to the status quo, isn't it.

I also don't see how they fit HSQ instead. In fact, the HSQ page STATES "Wham Episodes tend to have a high HSQ".

Aug 17th 2011 at 11:32:24 AM •••

I just have to point out, Peri's fate is ambiguous. Katarina, although not there for long, was intended to be a Wham moment to the sixties audience.

Aug 17th 2011 at 4:40:51 PM •••

The companion-changing moment does alter the status quo, but the changing itself is part of the premise of the show, which is a stronger (at least more immovable) notion.

The mention of past companions have mostly always been "they come and go and it's always sad". the Adric example, though more valid as Wham Episode than, say, the departure of Dodo, made for a tear-jerking episode conclusion, but didn't have more repercussion than, the departure of any other companion. *because the cast alteration have become part of the premise*

The problem is the examples only list the HSQ part of a given episode, not the status quo altering part of the episode. So yes Torchwood'd destruction was a handy plot device for a handful of later stories, though it is a "Emergency Temporal Shift" kind of plot device - except as a background element rather than a central plot point.

Thing is we should list those particular ETS instances (precisely, an enemy that shouldn't exist, does because they got lucky, but at the end of the episode, it is the final end of that enemy...ever! — which I unaccurately refered to as reset button though, technically it's not, but given the very episodic nature of the show, for all intents and purposes, it is the same thing)

- The Dalek ones (obviously)

- The Cybermen

- The Master/Time Lords have one (actualy Utopia/Sound of Drums/Last of the Time Lords isn't any more Whammy than Dalek) and YES, the Doctor burned Gallifrey, which we have known since series 1. not an End of Time revelation.

- The numerous tech scavenged from the supposedly destroyed TW 1 who all get destroyed by the end of the serial in which they're introduced.

- The time war had at least three FINAL BATTLE EVER-s! (Dalek, Parting of the ways and End of Time - though every other Dalek story might count too...)

Edited by La_Ninje
Jul 15th 2011 at 9:43:51 AM •••

So here's a question for you - those kind of speeches that the Doctor likes to do where he tells his enemy exactly how he's going to (or how exactly he *already* has) defeated him/her/it/them... what would you call those? They're not exactly Kirk Summation, since - just as often as not - the Doctor is telling his enemies what he's *already* done, or already considers them beyond redemption. They're also not exactly "The Reason You Suck" Speech, though there usually is some kind of overlap. A few examples in particular of what I'm talking about: the Eleventh Doctor telling off House at the end of "The Doctor's Wife"; and the Tenth Doctor's speech to the Cybermen while stalling for Mickey to save the day at the end of "The Age of Steel." What would you call that?

Hide/Show Replies
Jul 15th 2011 at 9:49:09 AM •••

Mentally, I call them "Doctor Speeches" at the moment; though I have the suspicion that they must turn up elsewhere.

Aug 7th 2012 at 12:32:39 PM •••

The Doctor seems to be especially talented at the Crowning Moment of Awesome, which he conveys via speechifying. Generally, they seem to include to following elements as well as the ones you mentioned:

Bavarian Fire Drill; Xanatos Gambit; Last-Second Chance; Dare to Be Badass

None of those really capture his specific talent, though. The battle's already won, he's just letting you know. If anything, it needs a new category: Check and Mate.

Edited by engelkith
Jun 12th 2011 at 6:26:28 AM •••

Is the page quote really appropriate? It seems more to sum up the RTD era than anything else, not every season is defined by "running". How much did Hartnell run around, or even Tom? Perhaps something else like the "mad man with a box" line sums up the show and character a bit better.

Hide/Show Replies
Jun 12th 2011 at 6:34:16 AM •••

Really? I thought running through corridors was a staple of the old show too. Not the Hartnell era, though, obviously.

Edited by OldManHoOh
Aug 17th 2011 at 7:04:14 AM •••

And even THAT I'm not sure about, as one of One (not actually played by Hartnell) and Susan's first scenes in The Five Doctors are exactly that.

Aug 17th 2011 at 7:07:38 AM •••

the very first appearance of the Daleks was at the end of a scene which involved running down a corridor. The running along (cardboard) corridors is mentioned almost as often as the phrase "behind the sofa" when it comes to Who.

Oct 19th 2011 at 5:39:25 PM •••

Mad man in a box is typical of The Doctor himself, but I think the current quote works for the show.

Jun 7th 2011 at 6:25:55 AM •••

Non Sequitur issues. Everything listed under it is actually Arc Words or ArcSymbols. Just because they don't make perfect sense the first time we see them doesn't make them Non Sequitur or Big-Lipped Alligator Moment candidates. In order to fit those tropes, they have to not have any relavance to the story and/or are never brought up again.

From the Arc Words page:

An enigmatic word or phrase that appears, unexplained and without context, here and there throughout an Arc, and (with luck) is finally explained at or near the climax. A way of building up tension and mystery, as well as an indicator that anyone using the words knows more than they're telling. Can also be used as a memetic way of advertising the show. A typical element of a Mind Screw.

Before I change anything, I just want to see if anyone else agrees with me on this.

Edited by jdotmi
Jun 7th 2011 at 2:21:05 AM •••

Removed Luke, You Are My Father. It's definitely Luke, I Am Your Father. Yes, wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey, but River's not some unheard-of long-lost relative. She's a Kid from the Future, who's also the adventurer archaeologist that's appeared in several episodes. She also seems to be the frightened little girl in "The Impossible Astronaut" and "Day of the Moon".

Hide/Show Replies
Jun 9th 2011 at 1:24:13 PM •••

Here is my reasoning why it should be Luke, You Are My Father: This isn't a situation where someone is revealing their maternity/paternity to someone but is the *other* way around. Yes, River has been known to Rory and Amy for two series but they don't actually know who she really is; they don't know her *real* identity. Therefore this should be considered a Subverted Trope of Luke, You Are My Father because, further on in "A Good Man Goes to War," Melody had just been taken. While she isn't a "long-lost" child she is still "lost;" Rory and Amy have no idea where she is or if they will ever see her again. In light of this fact it is a big shock when River reveals herself as their daughter from the future.

What's the consensus on this issue, then? Does anyone else agree/disagree with either of us?

Edited by Torfindra
Jun 9th 2011 at 2:49:48 PM •••

I'll add that she's been seen four times before said kidnapping. Three by Amy, and two by Rory. She's not an unknown. That's my main point of contention. They know at least as much as we do about an archaeologist called River Song before Melody's kidnapping.

Luke, I Am Your Father, both on the page, the Laconic page and on the Canonical List of Subtle Trope Distinctions, simply says characters once thought to not be parental-child related before, are. It doesn't say who reveals what to who, though for obvious reasons it's usually the parent to the child.

Though I'm not sure what you mean by subverted. But, yes, I'd like some more discussion on this point.

Edited by OldManHoOh
Jun 21st 2011 at 4:58:15 PM •••

I agree with Torfindra on this.

While Amy and Rory know River, they still had no idea that River is their daughter's future self, therefore she tells them this and reassures them that the Doctor would find her and that she would be okay. Therefore, Rory You Are My Father does still fit the situation.

Edited by Qicetrini
Jun 23rd 2011 at 12:57:37 AM •••

They don't, but isn't that the entire definition of Luke, I Am Your Father that I just mentioned in my above post?

Jun 26th 2011 at 8:22:05 AM •••

Those two links you gave me are just general distinctions between the tropes. The trope pages themselves should be considered the real sources; the real point of distinction is who is doing the revealing, as I mentioned in my previous post. According to the actual Luke, I Am Your Father page it is always parent to child and always vice-versa in the Luke, You Are My Father page - the latter trope being what happened in the first place since it is the child to the parents.

Also, in the latter trope the child has to be either unheard of OR long-lost; these requirements can be mutually exclusive as the trope explains. As I wrote above, Rory You Are My Father is subverted since she isn't a "long" lost child; Amy and Rory lost Melody just now. River, on the other hand, was aware of the fact that she is long lost.

Edited by Torfindra
Oct 3rd 2011 at 12:41:34 PM •••

River says "Rory, you are my father.", this fits Luke, You Are My Father which is the Anti Trope to Luke, I Am Your Father.

Except it ain't. There is a Grandfather Clause such that LIAYF is the Super-Trope for all {insert name}, I am your {insert relation} and LYAMF is the sub-trope.

Both the super trope and the sub trope apply, leave them both in tlc.

Oct 3rd 2011 at 12:41:34 PM •••

Double post please delete

Both the super trope and the sub trope apply, leave them both in tlc.

Edited by Trotzky
Jun 6th 2011 at 3:41:03 PM •••

Would the Silence count as The Greys? They seem to do some experimentation on Astronaut Girl, but their appearance is all wrong, and Moffat himself says that their influence is from the Edward Munch painting The Scream.

Hide/Show Replies
Jun 6th 2011 at 4:15:56 PM •••

Someone's added them to that page; I'll say that I first thought they were Greys when I saw early previews, but those were all very brief and distant views. They do seem to have something of it about them, though. And it seems fitting since they're most active in America and Greys are part of American popular culture.

Jun 6th 2011 at 4:29:19 PM •••

"Most active in America"? Huh? They've colonised Earth since prehistoric days, and have tunnels reaching out across the entire planet.

I read the description on The Greys page, and the appearance doesn't really work at all for me. The main discrepancy is that they're too tall, and the eyes (even with the weird shadow the sockets make) are too tiny.

Jun 6th 2011 at 5:21:18 PM •••

It was stated in the show that most of the Silence are in America, though they didn't say why. Also, Greys can be tall. It's a common enough variant.

Edited by Generality
Oct 3rd 2011 at 12:29:10 PM •••

Silence are Munch's Scream? I was thinking the Gentlemen from BTVS, but both could derive from Scream.

May 25th 2011 at 5:49:50 PM •••

I added Moment of Awesome to the list but I'm not good at wiki things so I'm not sure how to make it a link, or add examples. I don't want to add any and not have spoilers hidden, but I was thinking about the end of Day of The Moon anyone who has seen it knows what I am talking about.

Madrugada MOD
May 17th 2011 at 12:22:51 PM •••

Redirect is now broken; the Series.Doctor Who Namespace title is now accessible for the series pages to be moved to them.

Apr 30th 2011 at 1:30:54 PM •••

Is Music of the Spheres considered canon? It talks to the Proms audience, so I'd assume it wasn't.

Hide/Show Replies
May 3rd 2011 at 10:35:38 PM •••

Yes, it is canonical. It takes place after "journey's End" and before "The Next Doctor."

Apr 25th 2011 at 2:36:41 AM •••

Okay, I have no idea where to add this, so I'm asking here for advice.

I was just browsing BBC's Doctor Who homepage and read a bit about The Impossible Astronaut on it's own episode page, when I found a code in the section named "the fourth dimension".

There are some words that are in cursive - and if you put them together you get all the secrets you seek can be found here on the Webb.

So, um, I'm kinda blown away by this. Comments? Where can I add this factoid here on tvtropes?

Edited by SpiritOfSahara Hide/Show Replies
Apr 25th 2011 at 2:45:27 AM •••

The cursive word in question was a surname. I think they just mean "web" as in the homepage or the internet.

Edited by SpiritOfSahara
Apr 5th 2011 at 2:50:27 PM •••

Re: page quotes

I'm putting the old one back for now. I'd just as soon have no page quote at all, because less is more and I don't see how that kind of thing is necessary.

People keep coming in here and adding or changing the page quotes. It gets on my nerves, which is why I'd like us to try and stick to one. The Donna quote has been there for some time and there was some consensus on it awhile back. I like it because it is short, succinct, and funny. It's not that I don't like the immensely quotable snippet from Mr. Gaiman, I do, but it's long and too meta for me. If we quote anything we should be quoting from the show.

Hide/Show Replies
Apr 5th 2011 at 3:09:09 PM •••

Hmm, Talk pages never appear on my watchlist anymore so I forget to use them.....anyway, I still vote for the new quote, but I get your points.

Apr 5th 2011 at 3:10:10 PM •••

Try dropping and readding watches.

...which I actually forgot to do for this page myself. D'oh.

Edited by OldManHoOh
Mar 6th 2011 at 6:46:52 AM •••

It seems all the links on the recap pages to online episodes with (at least) the first Doctor aren't working anymore. They used to go to a great page that collected pretty much everything, but it was shut down a few months ago. Does anyone have a replacement of some kind?

Jan 19th 2011 at 2:26:52 PM •••

We'd better propose a new caption. One that won't get vandalized and edit warred all the time. There really should be something, I'm just not sure what. Any ideas?

Hide/Show Replies
Jan 19th 2011 at 3:38:14 PM •••

The problem is, there doesn't seem to be any one line that epitomizes the show itself (unless, of course, it's "Run!") The Doctor's incarnations all have different catchphrases. But then, my knowledge of Classic Who is extremely sketchy and the only series I know in-depth is Christopher Eccleston's.

What we need is that one sentence or phrase that just says "Doctor Who." And we can't use "Vworp Vworp Vworp!" as a caption (if only!)

Jan 19th 2011 at 6:49:21 PM •••

How 'bout just no caption then? Or is that too boring?

Jan 19th 2011 at 7:06:54 PM •••

Having no caption both lacks context where context is needed and also encourages tropers to fill the space with something stupid that they think is clever (or at least revert the deleted one, which has happened already). We should put something there that's hard to mess with.

Jan 17th 2011 at 7:11:20 PM •••

Can we stop the back-and-forth on the "Trust Me, I'm a Doctor" pothole on the caption? It's stupid and it's an Incredibly Lame Pun. Plus, it spams watchlists. LEAVE IT. It doesn't need to be there.

Jan 4th 2011 at 10:13:40 AM •••

Just so I understand, "Rule of Ice Hot" is a reference to that star in "Amy's Choice". Is that right? If not, then what's it referencing?

Hide/Show Replies
Nov 18th 2010 at 7:13:18 PM •••

Not sure if this goes here, but does anyone know where to watch Dr. Who online? I've never seen it before. It sounds interesting but I'm clueless about where to watch it. Thanks in advance!

Hide/Show Replies
Nov 18th 2010 at 9:15:25 PM •••

I'm not going to just tell you where to watch it illegally. You'll have to find it on your own (it's not hard).

Alternatively, netflix has the first five years of the revival online, whcih you'll get better quality for.

Nov 19th 2010 at 3:56:48 PM •••

Actually it is very hard to find a decent site to watch it on, otherwise I wouldn't asking where to find it. I never said anything about watching it illegally, I was only asking if there was a site (like an official website or something) that had back episodes on it. But I'll probably just order a box-set of it.

Edited by MetaKitty2010
Nov 19th 2010 at 4:44:00 PM •••

Believe me, there is at least one site that streams every episode plus every episode of the spinoffs and is not at all hard to find.

If you can afford a box set, do yourself a favor and get a netflix account instead.

The BBC itself hosts the episodes sometimes, but for stupid reasons that I don't understand, the content is blocked outside the UK. So you're probably down to streaming/downloading them illegally, or renting them in some way, or buying them, whichever you prefer. I'm not aware of any site that streams them legally for free at the moment, probably for aforementioned UK copy protection.

Edited by Hadri
Nov 21st 2010 at 4:06:31 PM •••

Yeah the BBC doesn't show in my country either so I'll go with the netflix plan. Thanks!

Nov 29th 2010 at 2:59:51 PM •••

The reason the BBC website is blocked outside the UK, by the way, is probably because of how the BBC works. The programming is paid for not by advertising (which is actively forbidden on the BBC), but by me, and millions of other Britons, paying a fee for a "license" to watch television. It's compulsory if you own a TV set, not a subscription model like cable or satellite.

So, a decision was made that British license-fee payers pay for the programme, they get to watch it free and everyone else can buy the box-set or wait for their own TV network to buy the show. And I have to say, as one of said license-fee payers, good on them.

Jan 18th 2011 at 8:18:03 PM •••

Yes, but why not try to market the licenses outside the UK, and just have some sort of Log-on for the site? I would buy it.

Jan 19th 2011 at 12:58:11 AM •••

You would? piracy is so easy that not many people would. The BBC may need to address this someday, because it's not like we all have to wait for the tapes to be shipped overseas anymore.

Apr 22nd 2011 at 4:06:25 AM •••

I believe the BBC are looking into implementing an international iPlayer, which I imagine will either be on a subscription model or a $1 an episode style model...

Nov 18th 2010 at 10:11:03 AM •••

Any advise on where to start?

Exactly What It Says on the Tin - I've never watched Doctor Who before, and don't want to get spoilered by the too detailed page description, so what season is the best season to start with? The very first episode ever, the first one with the current doctor, the first episode from the current/last season, some other place to start?

Thanks in advance.

Hide/Show Replies
Nov 18th 2010 at 10:35:38 AM •••

I wouldn't start from the very first episode. The show's been going far too long.

My advice is to start with the first 2005 revival episode, with the ninth doctor, Christopher Eccleston. It's called "Rose". Things will still makes sense. They'd have to for it to work, since it was the first episode after a long hiatus.

Enjoy! I'm sure you'll love the show!

Nov 18th 2010 at 10:41:11 AM •••

There's a graphic to help with this:

I also recommend Rose. By the time you catch up to the current series, you'll be a fan. You'll also be better able to appreciate the pre-modern series, which are very unlike a modern TV Show and harder to break into.

Edited by Hadri
Nov 18th 2010 at 5:30:18 PM •••

I recommand to start at season 31.

Far too long to start from An Unearthly Child and the production values make it hard to step in for a 00's viewer starting during the "classic" era.

The episode that really got me started is The Eleventh Hour. Then I watched the RTD era. During 9 and 10's run it is a truly mediocre series with (at most) 3 great episodes per season and the rest ranges from So Bad Its Horrible (Fear Her, Aliens Of London/World War Three, the one with Simon Pegg, Voyage of the damned, Season 30 Finale two parter) to So Okay, It's Average.

Had I started with Rose, I'd have stopped 2 minutes in.

Nov 29th 2010 at 2:52:11 PM •••

Okay, thank you. I'll start at series 1.

Nov 29th 2010 at 3:03:19 PM •••

So Bad It's Horrible has fallen into So Bad It's Horrible Trope Decay.

Sep 1st 2010 at 2:33:22 PM •••

All right, this page is too much. It's insanely long, nigh-incomprehensible, and uses some very unusual wiki mark-up not seen elesewhere on the site. Ironically, I can't even fix it because I know little about the finer points of Doctor Who and this page has done squat to educate me.

Given my ignorance, I'd like to hear some suggestions for improvements, as I've no good ideas of how to proceed.

Hide/Show Replies
Sep 1st 2010 at 4:22:06 PM •••

Trouble is the show has been running for the fat end of 50 years, the lead character has changed actor - and characteristics - eleven times to date and the companions (effectively second lead and as important to the canon as the lead) many times more. The story has ranged over all of space and time (literally from the beginning to the end of the universe), introduced two major British cultural icons as well as several lesser ones - and encompassed almost any form of televisual story telling you can think of.

It is a show a huge and labyrinthine history - and the namer for 22 tropes - and although I'm quite certain a good copy edit would shorten it a fair bit, in terms of key details it really hasn't gone too far.

I think the mistake was perhaps not including the premise in the intro until yesterday, when I added it. Because the premise is really very simple. But the rest just isn't.

I know - not that helpful, but I've looked at it a few times and there really isn't a section that could be removed and the page still be considered complete by those of us who saw the very first episode and have been fans ever since.

Sep 1st 2010 at 7:54:43 PM •••

Oh, don't be so apologetic- that's much more helpful than what I've gotten from Trope Repair Shop on this.

If I look at this more closely, the first five paragraphs as of this writing are fine, and could probably stand slight rewrites, but nothing major. It's what comes after that's confusing. We've got a couple of paragraphs about how the show has puzzling numbering, and about a dozen special paragraphs that so far as I can tell are trope example essays.

To get anywhere, it might behoove us if the Doctor Who fans could explain why so much of this information needs to be in the description. Why do we need to know right off the bat that series 4 uses weird numbering? What's with the "significant characters and concepts" section? Most of those are just tropes. No other page that I'm aware of uses special formatting to call attention to "important" examples.

I'll grant I don't speak for everyone, but a lot of this is off-putting. It makes the page look longer than it actually is and consequently makes me not want to read the page. In my opinion a lot of this stuff needs to be reorganized for the aesthetics to be any good here.

Sep 3rd 2010 at 7:52:25 AM •••

Well, everything will always benefit from a good copy edit, but good copy edit is hard and takes time (which is why there is so much over-written drivel on Wikipedia).

The challenge is to find a way that is respectful of other's work (including their sense of humour), while trimming the cruft.

The ep number paras can go, but they are a fanboy-ish bone to chew so it would be a shame to lose them completely (a meta entry on Just Bugs Me strikes me as harmless enough).

But it does get tricky. Missing Episodes are very important to Who's history - but I doubt we need listings of other shows affected (they are dealt with elsewhere): that William Harnell's last episode is lost and you can win a damned Dalek if you ever find it: that matters.

In the interest of humour I'd almost be minded to remove the entire trope list and replace it "All of 'Em", but that might be a tad controversial.

Nov 29th 2010 at 3:24:49 PM •••

I still think the page is very very long and confusing for new readers, and I'm wondering if there's some there that can be cut out and readers redirected to the pages on the Other Wiki for more detail.

I'm willing to have a crack at a copyedit, but is there any sort of Sandbox feature around the site where I can throw something out and get feedback without actually changing the page as is?

On Wikipedia, I can do it in my User Space and direct people to look there...

Nov 29th 2010 at 3:26:08 PM •••

Sort of. Most people would probably just go Sandbox.Doctor Who, I think.

Edited by OldManHoOh
Sep 1st 2010 at 2:08:28 PM •••

If no-one objects, I think I'm going to remove the part of the lead which has two paragraphs on the technicalities of season titling and definition.

Hide/Show Replies
Aug 5th 2010 at 8:10:56 AM •••

I think it would be nice if the introduction already included a rough outline of what the show is actually about for those of us who don't know it. It's a bit tedious to collect information from characters and concepts throughout the page. One or two sentences of that would in my opinion be more important than an 18 month hiatus or similar stuff.

Hide/Show Replies
Aug 5th 2010 at 8:35:44 AM •••

I see what you mean. Outside of the sections, the only really part that summarises what the show is about is

"Since its debut on 23 November 1963 on BBC television, the British scifi series Doctor Who (...) takes place in and established the Whoniverse, which has a very loose and lax continuity, even discounting the Doctor Who Expanded Universe."

Not sure how to approach it myself though.

Jul 19th 2010 at 9:31:38 AM •••

I've looked around and haven't found anything about this on the main page. Am I incorrect in thinking that it's inconsistent with what else we know of Cybermen for there to be a complete skull inside of one's head? I thought they just had brains in there.

Hide/Show Replies
Jul 19th 2010 at 4:48:52 PM •••

I asked that question when the episode first aired. It was suggested that that particular Cyberman was a rushjob, churned out because there wasn't time for a complete Cyberfication for whatever reason.

Edited by Anaheyla
Jul 15th 2010 at 3:48:47 AM •••

Should we add a Doctor Who subsection to the Foe Yay page? The examples are getting rather long. I posted there, but got no reply.

Jun 22nd 2010 at 6:54:20 AM •••

Is there anyway to change the photo on themain page? I was thinking i would photoshop it ans put a huge crrack in it and change the text to silnece will fall....:)

Jun 22nd 2010 at 1:20:49 AM •••

Changed lines 680 from:

  • Reset Button: Used far too often in the newer seasons, though it has sometimes been used to tell stories that otherwise would not fit into the Doctor Who format ("Turn Left" and "Last of the Time Lords").
    • Hm. Only one other occasion in the new series springs to mind ("Father's Day") although Margaret Slitheen and Donna both get their own personal Reset Buttons.
  • Reset Button: Sometimes used to tell stories that otherwise would not fit into the Doctor Who format ("Turn Left" and "Last of the Time Lords").
    • "Father's Day" is another use and Margaret Slitheen and Donna both get their own personal Reset Buttons.

Seriously? Are Reset Buttons used that often? You could argue for some of the endings being Dei Ex Machini (or whatever the plural for Deus ex Machina is), but hardly Reset Button.

Edited by Hide/Show Replies
Jun 22nd 2010 at 1:28:52 AM •••

RTD wasnt as obnoxious about reset buttons as later season of Star Trek could be, but it was used in every season finale except the first.

...however I don't really see how 'Turn Left' and 'The Last of the Time Lords' don't fit the format of the show. Perhaps the entry should be rewritten completely?

Dei ex machinae, fyi.

Jun 22nd 2010 at 3:34:23 AM •••

No, it wasn't. That's my point. Only Last of the Time Lords (and in a very localised extent Journey's End If the cracks in time have undone it, it took eight episodes (Victory of the Daleks) for that to be apparent. And of course that's been reversed as of "The Big Bang" so...) counts. Doomsday, Journey's End (though the hand has existed since The Christmas Invasion and has been in the Doctor's possession since Utopia, and the Doctor Donna was loosely hinted at in Planet of the Ood, not to mention Rose's enigmatic statements of calling Donna "special") and The End of Time could arguably be called Dei ex machinae though.

Doomsday is not a reset button especially because the Doctor is alone (and still pining for Rose well into series 3), Torchwood, a then-128-year-old organisation is in tatters, and now only has Torchwood Three (at the time being Jack, Owen, Toshiko and Susie) left and hundreds, if not thousands of people on the ground are dead.

Edited by
Jun 22nd 2010 at 4:29:20 AM •••

Okay, well, part of the problem is that Reset Button is defined more narrowly than it is in common usage - thus the disappointment of fans when Davies would write a finale with huge consequences that get undone by the end of the episode.

Must a Reset Button erase all changes to the status quo? For instance the Daleks killed a lot of people on Earth in the Stolen Earth, but this is treated mostly as irrelevant by the series after this, and the planets are returned to their proper places. Is that, by itself, still not a Reset Button?

Also, in the End of Time, Rassilon pressed the Reset Button on the Master's "become everyone on Earth" plan as soon as he showed up. So it definitely occurs in that episode, Rassilon isn't really a Deus ex Machina himself.

However, I'm not disagreeing with you, but I definitely am saying that I dont like either version of the entry. I think it needs more clarity.

Edited by Hadri
Jun 26th 2010 at 6:03:43 PM •••

Well, inevitable spoilers for the finale.

Shooting the Pandorica into the exploding TARDIS re-creating the universe sure seems like a reset button to me.

Jun 27th 2010 at 5:48:41 PM •••

Yeah, about that. This was written before "The Big Bang" aired. So currently I count series 3 and 5 (and probably The End of Time) as Reset Buttons, series 4 as very borderline, and series 1 and 2 not at all.

Edited by
Jun 21st 2010 at 11:43:25 PM •••

Well if we're not going to get a better picture for all the Doctors other than "guys in squares on default white graphics program background", can we at least get an official photo for Matt Smith as the 11th Doctor?

Hide/Show Replies
Jun 22nd 2010 at 12:07:40 AM •••

I do think it's a little simple but it's also pretty effective. It is important that this page maintains a focus on the show as a whole rather than just the current series. The image adds to that.

Jun 23rd 2010 at 8:54:15 AM •••

Alright. 11th Doc has a better picture now.

Jun 19th 2010 at 11:33:58 PM •••

The "parking brake" thing was just a joke! Every other TARDIS seen in the show made that sound, as did the Doctor's TARDIS when River piloted it again (or previously) in "The Pandorica Opens". She can make it materialize without making the sound, yes, but I suspect it's more likely she's just that good than that the Doctor (and every other Time Lord to pilot a TARDIS) is just that bad.

Edited by Robotech_Master Hide/Show Replies
Jun 19th 2010 at 11:45:00 PM •••

River flying the TARDIS resulted in the universe being destroyed yesterday.

Giving the gag some canonocity after all.

Apr 22nd 2011 at 3:55:06 AM •••

To be fair, it's not just the sound... The Doctor is very, very bad at getting the TARDIS to where he wants it.

Dec 11th 2013 at 7:25:17 AM •••

The TARDIS goes where there is trouble, not just where the Doctor wants to go.

Jun 13th 2010 at 9:28:46 PM •••

YES!!!!11! SOMEONE Finally changed the image of Matt Smith thxxx!!!

May 29th 2010 at 8:07:08 PM •••

The contrivances weren't all the fault of the characters being stupid , but you could argue that.

Jun 3rd 2010 at 8:19:31 AM •••

I agree with Hardi, but what ____ did was pretty stupid. ;)

Jun 3rd 2010 at 8:51:31 AM •••

I don't get it. Are you guys speaking English?

Jun 3rd 2010 at 2:01:30 PM •••

All I can very vaguely gather from that is that Ambrose was holding the Idiot Ball, maybe? I don't know, but that's still not justification for Idiot Plot (which applies to the whole cast).

Edited for spoilers.

Edited by
Jun 3rd 2010 at 2:45:36 PM •••

No spoilers for us Americans who haven't seen these episodes yet (The American airing is about three weeks behind).

Jun 6th 2010 at 6:28:41 PM •••

I AM American! I live in California!!!!

May 25th 2010 at 7:23:53 PM •••

Yeah I hadn't seen Matt Smith before, looking at the photo here was my first time looking st him, and I was like "Wow he looks like a freak." But I was so wrong.

Hide/Show Replies
May 25th 2010 at 7:46:06 PM •••

His early look was pretty bad. It's very good that they went with something a lot more stylish.

Apr 22nd 2011 at 3:53:03 AM •••

Given what he seems to wear in real life, and that he basically picked his own costume, we're lucky we didn't wind up with something as hideous as Six's technicoloured nightmare coat...

May 23rd 2010 at 9:15:24 PM •••

So, I'm new to the series, having only seen two episodes, "Blink" and "The Girl In The Fireplace" and have noticed a recurring phrase(or pseudophrase)

The Doctor says something and then corrects himself twice, e.g. "Nah there's nothing here, WELL, nothing dangerous, WELL, nothing that dangerous." and "I've got something going on right now, WELL, four things, WELL, four things and a lizard." with a slightly drawn out emphasis on well.

Is this a recurring tendency? And if so why is it not listed as one of his catchphrases and/or a Running Gag. :hmm

Edited by Anaheyla Hide/Show Replies
May 24th 2010 at 12:14:33 AM •••

They're both consistent with David Tennant's sometimes unusual way of phrasing things. I can't recal any other examples in particular, but I can tell you that both those episodes were written by the same writer.

In any case, if we listed everything odd David Tennant did or said more than once during his run we'd be here all week.

May 24th 2010 at 4:28:43 PM •••

He does it well in "The Unicorn and the Wasp" with regard to Agatha Christie: "You fool me every time. WELL, most of the time, WELL, once or twice, WELL, once. But it was a good once." Ten has a habit of Verbal Backspacing, especially in situations where he needs to talk fast. More a Verbal Tic than a real catch phrase (and he has TONS of those).

Apr 22nd 2011 at 3:51:33 AM •••

Yeah, no more a catchphrase than Mc Gann's Doctor's tendency of repeating small words multiple times when in a hurry and/or panicing. "Nononononono!" from the television movie stands out, but the books and comics both picked up on that, and he continued it in the audios.

Apr 17th 2010 at 1:47:03 PM •••

Would the Peter Cushing movies count as Non-Serial Movie?

Edited by Hide/Show Replies
Nov 2nd 2010 at 2:11:58 PM •••

Not really. They take the basic concept in another direction, contradicting most prior established facts - not just later ones. Non Serial Movies aren't canon, but could be (until the next episode airs, at least). The Cushing movies aren't even that.

There probably is a trope they fit into, though.

Apr 22nd 2011 at 3:48:52 AM •••

They're possibly Pragmatic Adaptations of the first two Dalek serials (rather than the series as a whole)

Edited by Gizensha
Apr 4th 2010 at 6:58:04 PM •••

Is there a time traveller or time travel effect in place on the website? "Vampires of Venice" has not been on telly yet! ("The Eleventh Hour" has and I just realised it's a Stealth Pun.)

Hide/Show Replies
Apr 4th 2010 at 7:24:47 PM •••

And none of the entries for it are spoiler-cut! Give away the plot if you must, but some of us in other parts of the world will not be seeing it for a while.

Apr 4th 2010 at 7:27:20 PM •••

Clips of it have been released via publicity shows and naturally the internet shortly after.

Apr 17th 2010 at 5:33:39 AM •••

Yeah, "Vampires of Venice" hasn't even aired in the UK at the time of this writing and won't for a few weeks. Unless the folks troping on it are BBC insiders, or it's being released sooner in countries outside of the UK than it is in its own home nation (which I strongly doubt), then the tropes on it are semi-educated guesses made based on teasers and trailers.

Apr 21st 2010 at 8:51:04 PM •••

A 1:30 minute excerpt of the episode was released online.

May 31st 2010 at 5:52:12 PM •••

in america, the episodes air 1 episode after the one airing in britan.

Jun 3rd 2010 at 8:15:02 AM •••

So, since I'm in America, I've already seen "Cold Blood."

Apr 4th 2010 at 6:37:52 PM •••

Unofficially, Nine has been played by 3 people - An American in a bootleg film (when they thought it would never restart), Christopher Eccleston, and Richard E. Grant in one of the Flash videos on the BBC website.

Hide/Show Replies
Apr 5th 2010 at 3:19:58 PM •••

...and Rowan Atkinson in "The Curse Of Fatal Death", the 1999 Comic Relief special, written by one Steven Moffat. Two BBC-licensed, non-canon appearances and Chris.

Edited by
Apr 15th 2010 at 7:51:23 AM •••

American bootleg? I've never heard of this, got any more info on that?

Apr 16th 2010 at 5:05:52 PM •••

I don't know about any specific American bootleg (as far as I can tell there were dozens of fanfilms made during the wilderness years), but there was an addition ninth Doctor in the form of Rowan Atkinson in Stephen Moffat's 1999 Children of Need sketch, Curse of the Fatal Death. In this same story there were also a tenth Doctor played by Richard E. Grant (before Scream of the Shalka), an eleventh by Jim Broadbent, a twelfth by Hugh Grant, and a thirteenth by Joanna Lumley. Yes, a woman.

Apr 17th 2010 at 1:45:33 PM •••

And of course, Eccleston IS official. Or was that just a slip of the tongue?

Edited by
Aug 26th 2010 at 12:35:35 PM •••

No, unofficially there were three (or four or whatever) Ninth Doctors. Officially, there's one. All depends on your point of view. Lots of things work that way.

Apr 3rd 2010 at 6:37:23 PM •••

Is there a trope for the fact that there was a lot of hype surrounding Amy's police uniform which turns out to have just been a costume she threw on to intimidate the strange man who broke into her house?

Hide/Show Replies
Apr 4th 2010 at 5:11:22 AM •••

I... feel like there should be, but I don't think there is?

Apr 17th 2010 at 6:31:45 AM •••

Nah, that's for actual cops. This is for someone who isn't...

Mar 19th 2010 at 8:36:10 AM •••

Just wondering...because the list of tropes is so long for this show, would it be easier on readers' eyes to split the list between the Old and New series? Or would it make a difference? I know several tropes appear in both shows, after all...

Edited by Ingonyama Hide/Show Replies
Mar 19th 2010 at 11:38:14 AM •••

A lot appear in both eras, so we can't really split it.

Also, some would consider it one show.

Edited by SilentHunter
May 5th 2010 at 7:25:26 AM •••

Perhaps the list could be split somehow differently:

Tropes from all of DW Tropes unique to classic tropes unique to new

or something like that?

Jun 28th 2010 at 3:52:32 PM •••

I wouldn't want to see it split up, it is canonically the same show.

Sep 22nd 2010 at 7:43:50 AM •••

How about just put it in Alphabetical folders?

Edited by kipperonthefloor
Sep 22nd 2010 at 8:37:59 AM •••

Hmm, maybe. I don't think the page itself needs splitting.

Oct 25th 2015 at 9:38:12 AM •••

I agree. We should do this.

Edited by beeruckzII
Mar 13th 2010 at 1:09:07 PM •••

Can we please get a better image of Matt Smith in the compilation? It's pixellated to Hell and back, and he looks like he's wearing lipstick.

Hide/Show Replies
Dec 26th 2010 at 7:53:49 PM •••

For that matter, is there a better picture of David Tennant? The current one really doesn't do him justice.

Dec 26th 2010 at 8:02:50 PM •••

True. I recall that's one of the early photos. No idea who actually makes these images though.

Type the word in the image. This goes away if you get known.
If you can't read this one, hit reload for the page.
The next one might be easier to see.

How well does it match the trope?

Example of:


Media sources: