User talk:Jaime9526

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] TARDIS changes

Hi, Jaime. I didn't revert your changes to the TARDIS page; I rephrased one comment about TARDISes being "birthed", for accuracy (I believe the idea of TARDISes being "born" originates in the New Adventures) and to improve the flow of the paragraph. Khaosworks reverted the rest of them. I can't say why he did that, but it might have been because he thought the information from the novels was too tangential to be included in the main TARDIS article. Perhaps you could ask him, or ask for discussion of your proposed changes on the TARDIS talk page. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:33, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] perhaps..

yes, i realize khaosworkz had more do with it than yourself afterwards...although the birthed idea is also heavily present in all of the 8DA BBC books, (notably in the concept of the eighth's fear of time lords 'raping' compassion to produce type 102 tardis' and in the cradles etc.....) in fact thats mainly where it comes from not the NA 's. Since Lungbarrow, Sanctuary aetc are mentioned throughout the article on the TARDIS, its unfair to discount the concept on the grounds of canonicity...although i see why you write it that way at least. I according to this wiki who project thing the books are canon incidentally.....and theres a few NA references in the new series....catch the reference to Lucifer from Lucifer Rising on the weakest link? and I'm pretty certain the Thracian Ambassadors party that cassandra attended was an NA thing too......

anyhoo, you can see why i might be a little....annoyed. I didnt edit it out of any concern other than adding information....I didnt take a single thing out. Only putting in new things. So having my edits removed is rather annoying....

it seems to be a trend around Who entries from what i can gather reading about the place.

I have provided an explanation in Talk:TARDIS. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 05:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Regarding canonicity: the wikiproject doesn't actually take a stand on the subject of what is and isn't canon. We just try to make sure that the source of any information from the novels, audios, or comics is noted, with a standard disclaimer that there's some dispute over what is or isn't canon. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

As an additional note, the Wikiproject does not say that the books are canon. It says:

The only thing that fandom seems to agree on is that the televised episodes, barring specials or spoofs like Dimensions in Time and Doctor Who and the Curse of Fatal Death, are unquestionably canon (this includes the 1996 television movie, though some fans dispute this). The two Peter Cushing films of the 1960s are not considered canon. Everything else is up for grabs. We should not take a firm stand on what is "canon" and what is "non-canon" apart from this, but simply source where the material comes from and let the reader decide for themselves how it fits in.

In practice, what this means is that anything from the televised stories need not be sourced or distinguished, although the relevant episodes should be referenced. These can be stated as fact. Any material outside the television series needs to be sourced." (my emphasis)

The section then goes on to discuss how, for the sake of sanity, we should limit such non-television series material to licensed material, but it does not say they are canon or not. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 06:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

good point, it does indeed not use the word canon, but implies their goodness lol. However...what about Lucifer in the new series ? amongst other things. Jaime9526 06:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)jaime9526

It may not be the same Lucifer, you see. If you asked me, I would say that everything's canon, books, audios, comic strips, TV Comic, even the Cushing movies. But that's my own personal POV and I won't impose that on this project or this encyclopedia. We just give the sources, note the lack of clarity, and let people come to their own conclusions without pushing any particular interpretation. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 06:12, 6 June 2006 (UTC)