Talk:Season 6B

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Doctor Who WikiProject
Doctor Who Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Doctor Who, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Doctor Who and its spin-offs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.


Contents

[edit] Season 6B movie...what is it?

As I remember, there is a fan-produced movie that is set about the time prior to the regeneration of the Doctor between his Second and Third forms, which, in a sense, takes place within the Season 6B continuity. However, I've forgotten the name of it. Can someone help me out here, please? --JB Adder | Talk 01:05, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

You're likely thinking about Devious. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 01:30, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Which I am in, as a Dalek operator, somewhere along the line... Angmering 18:05, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Doctor's Age

Might reference be made to 6B as a possible explanation for the Doctor's great increase in age between Troughton's and Tom Baker's eras? I have seen several charts of on-screen age references that note this gap as potentially a gold mine, as far as resolving dating problems. --71.139.18.66 09:36, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

There's already a reference to the visibly aged appearance of Jamie and the Second Doctor as one of the discrepancies that 6B tries to account for. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 12:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Another possibility is suggested (presumably invented by writer Stephen Moffat) in the for-Charity mini-episode 'Time Crash' set between the modern 3rd and 4th seasons; The 10th Doctor (David Tennant) explains away the apparent ageing of the 5th Doctor (Peter Davison) as 'a shorting out of the time differential' (sic), and that everything should 'snap back into place' once the earlier incarnation was back in his own time. 82.219.197.3 23:41, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Different scenario though, the second Doctor wasn't pulled into the 6th Doctors time as the 5th was into the 10ths, and was already shown, before the arrival of the sixth Doctor, to be visibly older than his earlier appearance.Number36 01:26, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Jamie/Zoe mindwipes

Doesn't the Doctor realise that they are phantoms when Jamie recognises the Brigadier? PMA 08:51, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

To be precise, yes. -khaosworks 14:33, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I've corrected erroneous statements that the Doctor would not be aware that Jamie and Zoe had their memories of their time with him (excepting their respective first adventures) removed by the Time Lords. He was very much aware of that fact, since he had a conversation with one of the Time Lords about it:

"They'll forget me, won't they?"

"Not entirely. They'll remember their first adventure with you, but nothing more."

The Time Lord then tells the Doctor to come with him. "Your fate has been decided."

Enki Nabu 20:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC)


I have again corrected someone's errors concerning the Zoe and Jamie mindwipes.

Again, before the Time Lords forced a regeneration on the Doctor, they sent Zoe and Jamie home, and _told_ the Doctor that his companions would remember their first respective adventures with him, but nothing more. Therefore, in _The Five Doctors_ the Doctor is very much aware of the mind wipe. The error in that episode is that the Doctor says "how do you know who we are" instead of "how do you recognize the Brigadier?" Again, Zoe and Jamie remember the Doctor and their first respective adventures with him. In point of fact, when we last see Zoe in "The War Games", she's been returned to The Wheel and a woman asks if the Doctor and Jamie have gone. Zoe replies, "yes. I've just seen them off." Enki Nabu 17:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


_First_ Zoe and Jamie are returned to their own time and _then_ the Doctor is put on trial and sentenced. For some reason, someone keeps changing the paragraph that addresses this point to suggest the Doctor's sentencing comes first. This only leads to unnecessary confusion.

Enki Nabu 22:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Just for the record, only Jamie directly indicates recognition of the Brig. Ted Watson 20:21, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Continuity problems

Someone keeps writing "However, it is not explained how the Second Doctor could know any of this" about the fact that the Time Lords have erased Jamie's and Zoe's memories, when that fact _has_ been explained. The Doctor not only witnessed Jamie and Zoe being returned to their own time, he was told they would not remember anything but their first respective adventures with him.

The _real_ question is _when_ would the Doctor- who is aware of the Zoe and Jamie mindwipes- have had time to visit the Brigadier and become embroiled in the events of "The Five Doctors"? After all, his trial and sentencing take place immediately after Zoe and Jamie return home. The logical answer is that contrary to what's implied in "The War Games", the Doctor did not immediately undergo a regeneration. That answer supports the season 6b theory.

Enki Nabu 06:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First proposed by?

This article claims it was first proposed by Cornell in the mid 1995 Discontinuity Guide, but I have a recollection that the early 1994 first series of trading cards proposed the theory on one, when addressing just how the Doctor knew about Jamie & Zoe's fate. Was Cornell propounding the theory in early 1990s fanzines? Timrollpickering 19:24, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I know nothing of these trading cards, but am quite interested to learn as to how Cornell has been singled out from his two collaborators on the book to be solely credited with this concept. Admittedly, I had long ago suspected that they divided the programme between them and worked separately on indexing each story per the agreed upon format, as well as having the sidebars (including "Season 6B") variously assigned, but this was strictly my own speculation and I certainly had no information as to who did which, or even that this was correct. Ted Watson 18:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why is this considered merely a "theory"

I can't understand why it’s considered a theory, it’s clearly on screen in The Two Doctors, since he’s working for the Time Lords, prior to The War Games he was running from the Time Lords and Jaimie hadn’t heard of them, and in the five Doctors he even specifically references the events at the end of the War Games. It doesn't get much clearer than the character making specific references that place him after those events. It simply can’t be, with what is shown on screen, before that, so it has to be after War games but before he regenerates. The specifics of the CIA stuff that Paul Cornell came up with is theory (and obviously the tie-in stuff is of unclear canonicity like all the non-screen stuff), but the basic idea is just what was on the screen. I can't see where there's any room for controversy here. I'm not het up about it or anything, it just puzzles me.Number36 22:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Time Crash

Season 6B is, in part, an explanation for why characters appear as inconsistent ages in The Three Doctors. The new canonical short Time Crash offers an in-universe explanation for this effect in dialog. A note about this connection was removed and cited as original research (which is true in a sense, but so is much of the information about "Season 6B"). However, if there is an explanation in canon for some of what this article is describing as being outside of canon, shouldn't that itself be mentioned? 209.202.205.1 (talk) 04:15, 22 December 2007 (UTC)