![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The plot summary for this is dreadfull. It gives an outline of the first ten (or thereabouts) minutes of action, then just stops. Not giving the rest of the plot at all. Can someone sort this out. I would do it myself but i don't have the time right now, so if anyone else could finish it it would be much appreciated. CDuck2 11:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't it contravene Wikipedia is not a crystal ball? -- GracieLizzie 19:53, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Some more details apparently in the Manchester Evening News: see
[1]. This one is set on a spaceship... Does anyone have access to MEN to confirm?
Morwen -
Talk
15:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Is it really noteworthy that this is "the first time that numbers have been used as opposed to being spelt out (i.e. The Three Doctors) since Galaxy 4 (1965)"? My feeling is not. I'm not even certain about the "shortest title" note, but I can't see how indicating whether numbers in the title are spelled out or not is encyclopedic. Thoughts? — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 21:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
There was info in this article that contradicted stuff in the List of Doctor Who serials article -- I commented out the offending portion, but if the info here was correct, please feel free to reinstate (and fix the other article instead). -- Jay (Histrion) ( talk • contribs) 19:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
How do we know that Image:42(Doctor Who).jpg is from this episode? — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 08:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Come on, we don't need to link the episode title with Lost. How can these shows be linked and why? Xdt ( talk · contribs)
I think it's relevant and worth adding that this episode is scheduled to air in the UK the day after the sixth anniversary of the death of Douglas Adams. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.131.90.154 ( talk) 23:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC).
I'm wondering, with the Doctor having 42 minutes to save the world or whatever, could this episode be shown in real time? U-Mos 20:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I think it probably is. At least a "maybe" comment would be true.-- Rambutan ( talk) 12:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Actually, on dr who confidential russel mentions that this episode is the frst one be made in real time
I (along with someone else it seems, as I got an edit conflict when I tried to the first time), removed the note about Captain Jack appearing in this episode... the preview at the end of today's episode showed footage from all the rest of the series, not just 42's, so it's impossible to confirm this. Besides I'm sure I heard somewhere Jack won't be back until Episode 11. Jez MM 18:54, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
You've missed John Simm off the character list here. I don't for sure know which character he plays in 42, but im fairly sure he was signed up to the cast to play Mister Saxton (Harry) James Random
He is not in 42.
The trailer at the end of The Lazarus Experiment was for the rest of the series and not just this episode. 86.152.187.183 11:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Where does the bit about Francine Jones appearing in this episode come from? -- OZ OO ( vote saxon) 14:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
There was a clip on Totally Doctor Who today, it looked like Martha was calling her on a phone (she only said one word in the clip).
Elvis was the word. 86.152.187.183 11:28, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
A trivia section was added. It contained:
This is admitted trivia, and Original research. The length of the title of a Doctor Who episode is of vanishingly small significance (perhaps less than a scene-by-scene count of the number of specks of dust on the Doctor's suit) So I've removed it (twice). If someone thinks it is significant then I recommend that they find a way of working it into the text at some point and explaining its significance. -- Tony Sidaway 19:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
This image seems to be from a trailer. There is no fair use rationale for its use and it will be deleted in six days if one is not written. Since we don't know the plot of the episode, and it hasn't been broadcast, I don't see how it can be said to illustrate the article in any meaningful way. I have removed it from the article. -- Tony Sidaway 19:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
i have seen the trailer and it seems that it is indeed from this episode, he is using a suit similar to the one used in the satan pit last year and this seems to be the only episode set in an envoiroment that he can use it! -- Secisalive! 17:57, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Also it shows the Doctor's eyes glowing exactly as shown in the TDW trailer. Call it original research if you must but there's no denying that the picture is from this episode, and screengrabs have been placed on articles for unbroadcast episodes before, so I really don't see the problem.
I'm removing this because it's unsourced and the episode has not yet been broadcast. We'll all know in a week or so, so I don't see any rush to add something not known for a fact to the article:
Continuity
-- Tony Sidaway 18:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Right, so we're going to assume the Doctor decides to leave in the TARDIS midaway through the adventure, pick her up, and then come back.
You're looking into this too much. We don't even know if the episode will be called 42 for sure yet, there might be a last-minute change, but we're putting that as fact. Based on your ideas we shouldn't have the article until it's been aired.
And we clearly see, in the Totally Doctor Who clip, Francine talking to Martha on a phone. It is in no way unsourced.
Should we add a disambig link to the top of one of the other articles on the number 42? It took me a while to find this article by searching. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SkorponokX ( talk • contribs).
The other day someone remarked on the similarities between the ending of The Lazarus Experiment and that of the latest Spider-Man film. I dismissed this as coincidence at the time.
Now we've got a space ship heading towards the sun and everybody getting a bit hot under the collar. A little like the recently released Danny Boyle film Sunshine, in fact. Still this could all be coincidence and I still haven't seen the actual episode, but those who like me have seen the film might like to keep your eyes open during the broadcast. -- Tony Sidaway 13:43, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
A reference to the use of the sentence "Burn with me!" by Florence Finnegan at the end of Smith and Jones was placed under continuity, sourced to a "Fact File" on this episode on the BBC website [2].
However, the same fact file contains all kinds of meaningless coincidences, such as "42 is the age that Russell T Davies reached when Series 1 of Doctor Who began in 2005", "42 is not a Happy Prime number", and "42 minutes was the length of The Beatles' last live gig, performed on the roof of Apple HQ." The BBC is having a bit of a fun with the nerdish propensity to read meaning into casual coincidence which plagues fandom, and no evidence is provided to suggest that the phrase is anything other than a coincidence. I've removed it. Let's stick to known facts, and avoid speculation and possible red herrings. -- Tony Sidaway 02:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I certainly don't think we ought to encourage people to think that any repetition is worth mentioning. As this hasn't even reached 'catchphrase' status (cf. 'I'm so, so sorry' or any of the 'reverse the polarity' variations), I can't see we have any reason to include it yet. Digby Tantrum 08:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
It's been over six hours! Has nobody captured a picture yet? Upload it, provide a fair-use rationale, and plop it down in the article. A picture of Martha receiving that Tardis key would be peachy! -- Tony Sidaway 02:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, Tony, to be fair, you've been being a bit of a shark about images, and you've scared people off. You've changed all the old customs about having quote-captions, and this is where it's brought us.-- Rambutan ( talk) 06:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I never asked for one! I just explained that you were the cause of the lack of an image.-- Rambutan ( talk) 07:24, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, you're missing my point. I'm not discussing the morals of free use, or questioning the policy-correctness of your action. I'm saying that your action - whether right or wrong, ethical or otherwise - caused the problem you complained about above.-- Rambutan ( talk) 07:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it did: it put them off. They saw that someone called Tony kept removing images and making points about policy and copyright law, and they thought to themselves, "I don't want to get into trouble with anyone, so I won't bother". Sceptre agrees with me, above.-- Rambutan ( talk) 08:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Anyway, I've done it. I think the ship flying into the sun is a better and more important plot point than the TARDIS key. Will ( We're flying the flag all over the world) 14:03, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
AvatarMN 21:21, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I removed these because they aren't references, simply opinions expressed by an editor that some plot elements bear a resemblance to other stories:
To record a reference, we have to have some evidence that the plot element is deliberately modelled on a similar element in another story. A mere plot similarity isn't enough. -- Tony Sidaway 07:18, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Verifiability are official, encyclopedia-wide policies. This article is not an exception. Do not add any more original research to this article. Picaroon (Talk) 20:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I am an actual credentialed scholar of popular culture, employed by a major research university. I would like to take this opportunity to point out that you can, in fact, be pedantic, precise, and sensible in writing a popular culture article. A good popular culture article does not contain idle fan speculation or a sort of free-association linkage. A good popular culture article contains documented discussion of the influences that went into the piece, interesting facts about its production, documented notes on its reception, and other such things. It is perfectly possible, and in fact important to be serious about popular culture. The Cyclops and Solaris edits are bad edits, not because they're original research, but because they're unimportant trivia that is not encyclopedic. Phil Sandifer 20:46, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Regarding the item:
I can't work out what this has to do with continuity? -- Chuq (talk) 12:46, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Where else can it go? All the other Bad Wolf and Torchwood references are I believe in the respective articles' continuity sections (correct me if I'm wrong). Mr Saxon is the S3 story arc, so anything new about him is continuity.
I removed this because it's unsourced:
If this was reported in a public source, please reinsert and disclose the source to conform to verifiability. -- Tony Sidaway 16:32, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Is the title of this episode perhaps a reference to Hitchhikers Guide "Meaning to Life"?
It seems pretty obvious to me. The theme tune to H2G2 is echoed several times in this episode. I wrote about that on the main page for this article, but some plonker decided that wasn't worth mentioning. 59.15.61.147 13:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Apart from the title - what about: heroes stuck on a ship heading for the sun (Disaster Area's stunt ship), people being ejected from an airlock with no space suit? These are clear H2G2 references. I'm surprised no-one has picked up on them already. Andy j taylor 10:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I cannot believe that my double-referenced note on what the S.S. Pentallian must have been named for was removed! "Original research presented as reference"? What the hell does that mean? I reasoned that the ship must be named after something, and no one knew what or had thought to mention it yet, so I went looking. Searches of Google, Yahoo, and Ask turned up exactly two and only two web sites with the word "pentallia" in them. They state the things I presented; that Pentallia was in Cyprus, and Cyprus was once a part of the British Commonwealth. It's the only thing the Pentallian could be named after, if there was another Pentallia it'd be mentioned somewhere on the web. When I added the note without references, it was removed. I wasn't believed that Pentallia existed, I guess. So I proved it, and that was considered original research. Would I have to prove that London existed, if I were to mention that fact in the "Rose" article? If I did prove it, would it be inadmissable "original research"? This is getting more bizzare by the minute. -- AvatarMN 06:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
The new DWM (383, Family of Blood promotion on the cover) does actually say it's named for the system in Revenge of the Cybermen! So there you go.
Digby Tantrum ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has twice replaced:
While the Doctor runs to Abi's aid, Martha and Riley have to override the system by answering pub quiz style questions set by the crew, years previously, after a night of drinking. The questions include a crew member's favourite colour, and the next in a series of what turn out to be happy prime numbers. To answer another question, Martha has to ring her mother to ask her to find out the answer to the question "Who had more number one hits, Elvis Presley or The Beatles?" and we find out that Martha's mum has her call tapped. Meanwhile, the Doctor finds the imprint of Abi and concludes that she was vaporized. He reasons that Korwin has been infected in some way by the sun, and can vaporize people by focusing his sight on them.
with:
While the Doctor runs to Abi's aid, Martha and Riley have to override the system by answering questions that only the crew know. On one question, Martha has to ring her mum to ask her to find out the answer to the question "Who had more hits, Elvis Presley or The Beatles?" and we find out that Martha's mum has her call tapped. Meanwhile, the Doctor finds the imprint of Abi and concludes that she was vaporized. He reasons that Korwin has been infected in some way by the sun, and can vaporize people by focusing his sight on them.
(I've highlighted the salient points in the former). His edit summaries were "Removed 'hilarious' edit and replaced it with previous version of the paragraph" and "Excised extraneous details" respectively. I find the former summery unhelpful and don't believe that the three items highlighted are extraneous; all are taken from dialogue in the episode, and give context. "Mother" is more appropriate, in an encyclopaedia, than "mum". Andy Mabbett 15:42, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Somebody is continually changing, in the cast list, 'Sinister Woman' to read some variant of 'Sinister Woman (Miss Dexter)'. She is credited as 'Sinister Woman' there, so that is how she should be credited in the end. Please stop changing it.
Officially I know they have said that the broadcast date was changed later on due to the Eurovision song contest. But if it wasn't preplanned then how comes the trailer from the end of the Runaway Bride only shows clips up to the Lazarus Experiment, yet in the first 2 series they had clips from episodes later than halfway through. Its seems a huge coincidence that they'd get the exact right point to split the trailers at.-- Hammard 14:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
A user has added the following to the continuity section:
- A symbol on Martha's enhanced mobile phone display matches the symbol on the laptop computer used by the Mysterious Woman. [3]
Do we have any good reasons to think this is significant?
I added that. I would hardly think it's just a coincidence, but agreed, there is nothing yet to suggest it is of significance. Could possibly add a caveat to the effect that "the significance of this connection is as of now unknown", if that would help. 67.183.3.173 23:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Actually - it's me again - the Doctor Who site at http://www.thedoctorwhosite.co.uk posits that the symbol is related to the "Archangel" that has been mentioned in connection with the final episodes of the series. Not anything concrete, by any means, but does this render mentioning the symbol kosher? 63.240.143.76 20:21, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
There's an apparent disagreement over which image to use ( [4], [5], [6] & [7]). Perhaps we should have a discussion over which would be the better choice for the article? Mark H Wilkinson 17:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
We only need one for the plot, really. So it boils down to getting a consensus over which is "better". Mark H Wilkinson 17:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)3. (a) Minimal use. As little non-free content as possible is used in an article. Short rather than long video and audio excerpts are used. Multiple items are not used if one will suffice; one is used only if necessary.
Thus far Brinstar, Matthew and Tony Sidaway have stated a preference for the newer image ( Image:Doctor42.jpg), and judging by the edit history, Sceptre is in favour of Image:42 (Doctor Who).jpg. Do we have any further opinions on this? It'd be great if we could get this decidedly trivial issue over and done with. -- Mark H Wilkinson ( t, c) 16:13, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Regular contributor Someguy0830 has this [9] to say: "The ship seems more indicative of the situation. Flamy-eye Doc just doesn't illustrate it as well." -- Mark H Wilkinson ( t, c) 09:40, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
I suggest that the picture of the sun goes to List of Doctor Who planets (which has only a few pictures), and the glowing eye one be used instead.( Black Dalek 17:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)).
I favour Image:Doctor42.jpg, the image of the ship isn't clear enough, at first I thought the image wasn't in the episode. I have noticed a pattern where most of the article images seem to depict the villain/monster of the episode, 42 is tricky but either the Doctor with the glowing eyes or an image of the crew member with the welding mask burning someone would suffice for this page.-- Nosxalc 11:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Someone needs to resolve this, it's reached a total stalemate( Black Dalek 17:26, 5 August 2007 (UTC))
I make the poll count at 5 - 4 at the moment, majority in favour of ( Image:Doctor42.jpg), correct me if I have made a mistake. Unless anyone has any objections, I think this straw poll should close and the image go back on the page.-- Brinstar 21:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps this is purely coincidental, but I couldn't help but think the writer of this episode might have - at least subconsciously - drawn on elements from an old edutainment game I played on the Amiga 500 called "Discovery". In addition to the profile of the ship depicted in 42 looking somewhat like the side-view map of the game (which I'm aware is a variation on a common design), the premise of the game - summed up in the final sentence of the game's synopsis, delivered by the traditional goofy synthesized voice - is "Pass security doors by answering questions". That is, the game will frequently block your progress with security doors that deliver a pop quiz in much the same fashion as the ones in this episode (though unlike the ones in this episode, you get as many tries as you need). A further note is that the game starts in the aft of the ship, with your goal on the main bridge (after you "Collect 12 fuel crystals" to "Repair the ship and win the game"). Of course, there are no masked monsters burning people to death, though that doesn't stop the alien animal specimens running amok from being a nuisance...
I'm aware that in the 90's-gen Tom Swift novels, the titular character had a security lock which posed music trivia questions...though note that the thing actually operated on a voiceprint lock and the trivia was just for show.-- Tenka Muteki 04:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
There's been a minor dispute over a character's name, apparently due to the fact that Hal Korwin is referred to as Korwin McDonnell in the BBC prequel [10]. The edit I've performed reverts the character name to Hal Korwin, while adding a footnote to the effect he's named differently in this prologue. I've weighted things in this manner for two reasons:
If someone has a neater way of handling this, I won't object. However, I will restate that we tend to give authority to the programme credits unless there's something to trump that (eg. a statement from RTD saying that they messed up the credits). -- Mark H Wilkinson ( t, c) 18:57, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Go to your local WHSmith and buy a copy of the DWM S3 Companion for 6.99, or just look at it in the shop since it's just one page. Go to page 79 and at the bottom it is stated that the credits are in error.
Alternatively, go to www.battlesintimeinvader.com and click on 'THE CARDS', then on human, then find the card named 'Korwin McDonnell' there, or go to the monster section and find the 'Sun-Possessed Korwin McDonnell' card.
Or, use common logic. Kath consistently refers to the character as 'Korwin' throughout the episode, as does Ashton, and why would somebody refer to their husband/friend by their last name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.48.236 ( talk) 12:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I think that the current crediting of just 'Korwin' is a fair compromise, but as for 'The project level MoS (see ) directs that the cast list takes its lead from the programme credits' - Utopia (Doctor Who says Professor Yana whilst the credits say The Professor, The Sound of Drums and Last of the Time Lords both say Toclafane voices whilst the credits say Sphere voices, The Family of Blood says The Doctor/Smith whilst the credits say The Doctor, and there's probably plenty of other examples of this, because it makes it more clear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.48.236 ( talk) 18:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Is the following note:
"The plot bears some similarities to the Fourth Doctor serial Planet of Evil, which involves a sentient planet, problems caused by the mining of (in that case) antimatter from the planet, and the return of the stolen material as a resolution."
really necessary? It may have similarities, but is this very encyclopediac? Thelb 4 16:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 42 (Doctor Who). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:29, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The plot summary for this is dreadfull. It gives an outline of the first ten (or thereabouts) minutes of action, then just stops. Not giving the rest of the plot at all. Can someone sort this out. I would do it myself but i don't have the time right now, so if anyone else could finish it it would be much appreciated. CDuck2 11:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't it contravene Wikipedia is not a crystal ball? -- GracieLizzie 19:53, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Some more details apparently in the Manchester Evening News: see
[1]. This one is set on a spaceship... Does anyone have access to MEN to confirm?
Morwen -
Talk
15:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Is it really noteworthy that this is "the first time that numbers have been used as opposed to being spelt out (i.e. The Three Doctors) since Galaxy 4 (1965)"? My feeling is not. I'm not even certain about the "shortest title" note, but I can't see how indicating whether numbers in the title are spelled out or not is encyclopedic. Thoughts? — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 21:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
There was info in this article that contradicted stuff in the List of Doctor Who serials article -- I commented out the offending portion, but if the info here was correct, please feel free to reinstate (and fix the other article instead). -- Jay (Histrion) ( talk • contribs) 19:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
How do we know that Image:42(Doctor Who).jpg is from this episode? — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 08:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Come on, we don't need to link the episode title with Lost. How can these shows be linked and why? Xdt ( talk · contribs)
I think it's relevant and worth adding that this episode is scheduled to air in the UK the day after the sixth anniversary of the death of Douglas Adams. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.131.90.154 ( talk) 23:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC).
I'm wondering, with the Doctor having 42 minutes to save the world or whatever, could this episode be shown in real time? U-Mos 20:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I think it probably is. At least a "maybe" comment would be true.-- Rambutan ( talk) 12:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Actually, on dr who confidential russel mentions that this episode is the frst one be made in real time
I (along with someone else it seems, as I got an edit conflict when I tried to the first time), removed the note about Captain Jack appearing in this episode... the preview at the end of today's episode showed footage from all the rest of the series, not just 42's, so it's impossible to confirm this. Besides I'm sure I heard somewhere Jack won't be back until Episode 11. Jez MM 18:54, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
You've missed John Simm off the character list here. I don't for sure know which character he plays in 42, but im fairly sure he was signed up to the cast to play Mister Saxton (Harry) James Random
He is not in 42.
The trailer at the end of The Lazarus Experiment was for the rest of the series and not just this episode. 86.152.187.183 11:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Where does the bit about Francine Jones appearing in this episode come from? -- OZ OO ( vote saxon) 14:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
There was a clip on Totally Doctor Who today, it looked like Martha was calling her on a phone (she only said one word in the clip).
Elvis was the word. 86.152.187.183 11:28, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
A trivia section was added. It contained:
This is admitted trivia, and Original research. The length of the title of a Doctor Who episode is of vanishingly small significance (perhaps less than a scene-by-scene count of the number of specks of dust on the Doctor's suit) So I've removed it (twice). If someone thinks it is significant then I recommend that they find a way of working it into the text at some point and explaining its significance. -- Tony Sidaway 19:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
This image seems to be from a trailer. There is no fair use rationale for its use and it will be deleted in six days if one is not written. Since we don't know the plot of the episode, and it hasn't been broadcast, I don't see how it can be said to illustrate the article in any meaningful way. I have removed it from the article. -- Tony Sidaway 19:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
i have seen the trailer and it seems that it is indeed from this episode, he is using a suit similar to the one used in the satan pit last year and this seems to be the only episode set in an envoiroment that he can use it! -- Secisalive! 17:57, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Also it shows the Doctor's eyes glowing exactly as shown in the TDW trailer. Call it original research if you must but there's no denying that the picture is from this episode, and screengrabs have been placed on articles for unbroadcast episodes before, so I really don't see the problem.
I'm removing this because it's unsourced and the episode has not yet been broadcast. We'll all know in a week or so, so I don't see any rush to add something not known for a fact to the article:
Continuity
-- Tony Sidaway 18:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Right, so we're going to assume the Doctor decides to leave in the TARDIS midaway through the adventure, pick her up, and then come back.
You're looking into this too much. We don't even know if the episode will be called 42 for sure yet, there might be a last-minute change, but we're putting that as fact. Based on your ideas we shouldn't have the article until it's been aired.
And we clearly see, in the Totally Doctor Who clip, Francine talking to Martha on a phone. It is in no way unsourced.
Should we add a disambig link to the top of one of the other articles on the number 42? It took me a while to find this article by searching. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SkorponokX ( talk • contribs).
The other day someone remarked on the similarities between the ending of The Lazarus Experiment and that of the latest Spider-Man film. I dismissed this as coincidence at the time.
Now we've got a space ship heading towards the sun and everybody getting a bit hot under the collar. A little like the recently released Danny Boyle film Sunshine, in fact. Still this could all be coincidence and I still haven't seen the actual episode, but those who like me have seen the film might like to keep your eyes open during the broadcast. -- Tony Sidaway 13:43, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
A reference to the use of the sentence "Burn with me!" by Florence Finnegan at the end of Smith and Jones was placed under continuity, sourced to a "Fact File" on this episode on the BBC website [2].
However, the same fact file contains all kinds of meaningless coincidences, such as "42 is the age that Russell T Davies reached when Series 1 of Doctor Who began in 2005", "42 is not a Happy Prime number", and "42 minutes was the length of The Beatles' last live gig, performed on the roof of Apple HQ." The BBC is having a bit of a fun with the nerdish propensity to read meaning into casual coincidence which plagues fandom, and no evidence is provided to suggest that the phrase is anything other than a coincidence. I've removed it. Let's stick to known facts, and avoid speculation and possible red herrings. -- Tony Sidaway 02:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I certainly don't think we ought to encourage people to think that any repetition is worth mentioning. As this hasn't even reached 'catchphrase' status (cf. 'I'm so, so sorry' or any of the 'reverse the polarity' variations), I can't see we have any reason to include it yet. Digby Tantrum 08:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
It's been over six hours! Has nobody captured a picture yet? Upload it, provide a fair-use rationale, and plop it down in the article. A picture of Martha receiving that Tardis key would be peachy! -- Tony Sidaway 02:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, Tony, to be fair, you've been being a bit of a shark about images, and you've scared people off. You've changed all the old customs about having quote-captions, and this is where it's brought us.-- Rambutan ( talk) 06:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I never asked for one! I just explained that you were the cause of the lack of an image.-- Rambutan ( talk) 07:24, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, you're missing my point. I'm not discussing the morals of free use, or questioning the policy-correctness of your action. I'm saying that your action - whether right or wrong, ethical or otherwise - caused the problem you complained about above.-- Rambutan ( talk) 07:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it did: it put them off. They saw that someone called Tony kept removing images and making points about policy and copyright law, and they thought to themselves, "I don't want to get into trouble with anyone, so I won't bother". Sceptre agrees with me, above.-- Rambutan ( talk) 08:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Anyway, I've done it. I think the ship flying into the sun is a better and more important plot point than the TARDIS key. Will ( We're flying the flag all over the world) 14:03, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
AvatarMN 21:21, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I removed these because they aren't references, simply opinions expressed by an editor that some plot elements bear a resemblance to other stories:
To record a reference, we have to have some evidence that the plot element is deliberately modelled on a similar element in another story. A mere plot similarity isn't enough. -- Tony Sidaway 07:18, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Verifiability are official, encyclopedia-wide policies. This article is not an exception. Do not add any more original research to this article. Picaroon (Talk) 20:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I am an actual credentialed scholar of popular culture, employed by a major research university. I would like to take this opportunity to point out that you can, in fact, be pedantic, precise, and sensible in writing a popular culture article. A good popular culture article does not contain idle fan speculation or a sort of free-association linkage. A good popular culture article contains documented discussion of the influences that went into the piece, interesting facts about its production, documented notes on its reception, and other such things. It is perfectly possible, and in fact important to be serious about popular culture. The Cyclops and Solaris edits are bad edits, not because they're original research, but because they're unimportant trivia that is not encyclopedic. Phil Sandifer 20:46, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Regarding the item:
I can't work out what this has to do with continuity? -- Chuq (talk) 12:46, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Where else can it go? All the other Bad Wolf and Torchwood references are I believe in the respective articles' continuity sections (correct me if I'm wrong). Mr Saxon is the S3 story arc, so anything new about him is continuity.
I removed this because it's unsourced:
If this was reported in a public source, please reinsert and disclose the source to conform to verifiability. -- Tony Sidaway 16:32, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Is the title of this episode perhaps a reference to Hitchhikers Guide "Meaning to Life"?
It seems pretty obvious to me. The theme tune to H2G2 is echoed several times in this episode. I wrote about that on the main page for this article, but some plonker decided that wasn't worth mentioning. 59.15.61.147 13:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Apart from the title - what about: heroes stuck on a ship heading for the sun (Disaster Area's stunt ship), people being ejected from an airlock with no space suit? These are clear H2G2 references. I'm surprised no-one has picked up on them already. Andy j taylor 10:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I cannot believe that my double-referenced note on what the S.S. Pentallian must have been named for was removed! "Original research presented as reference"? What the hell does that mean? I reasoned that the ship must be named after something, and no one knew what or had thought to mention it yet, so I went looking. Searches of Google, Yahoo, and Ask turned up exactly two and only two web sites with the word "pentallia" in them. They state the things I presented; that Pentallia was in Cyprus, and Cyprus was once a part of the British Commonwealth. It's the only thing the Pentallian could be named after, if there was another Pentallia it'd be mentioned somewhere on the web. When I added the note without references, it was removed. I wasn't believed that Pentallia existed, I guess. So I proved it, and that was considered original research. Would I have to prove that London existed, if I were to mention that fact in the "Rose" article? If I did prove it, would it be inadmissable "original research"? This is getting more bizzare by the minute. -- AvatarMN 06:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
The new DWM (383, Family of Blood promotion on the cover) does actually say it's named for the system in Revenge of the Cybermen! So there you go.
Digby Tantrum ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has twice replaced:
While the Doctor runs to Abi's aid, Martha and Riley have to override the system by answering pub quiz style questions set by the crew, years previously, after a night of drinking. The questions include a crew member's favourite colour, and the next in a series of what turn out to be happy prime numbers. To answer another question, Martha has to ring her mother to ask her to find out the answer to the question "Who had more number one hits, Elvis Presley or The Beatles?" and we find out that Martha's mum has her call tapped. Meanwhile, the Doctor finds the imprint of Abi and concludes that she was vaporized. He reasons that Korwin has been infected in some way by the sun, and can vaporize people by focusing his sight on them.
with:
While the Doctor runs to Abi's aid, Martha and Riley have to override the system by answering questions that only the crew know. On one question, Martha has to ring her mum to ask her to find out the answer to the question "Who had more hits, Elvis Presley or The Beatles?" and we find out that Martha's mum has her call tapped. Meanwhile, the Doctor finds the imprint of Abi and concludes that she was vaporized. He reasons that Korwin has been infected in some way by the sun, and can vaporize people by focusing his sight on them.
(I've highlighted the salient points in the former). His edit summaries were "Removed 'hilarious' edit and replaced it with previous version of the paragraph" and "Excised extraneous details" respectively. I find the former summery unhelpful and don't believe that the three items highlighted are extraneous; all are taken from dialogue in the episode, and give context. "Mother" is more appropriate, in an encyclopaedia, than "mum". Andy Mabbett 15:42, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Somebody is continually changing, in the cast list, 'Sinister Woman' to read some variant of 'Sinister Woman (Miss Dexter)'. She is credited as 'Sinister Woman' there, so that is how she should be credited in the end. Please stop changing it.
Officially I know they have said that the broadcast date was changed later on due to the Eurovision song contest. But if it wasn't preplanned then how comes the trailer from the end of the Runaway Bride only shows clips up to the Lazarus Experiment, yet in the first 2 series they had clips from episodes later than halfway through. Its seems a huge coincidence that they'd get the exact right point to split the trailers at.-- Hammard 14:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
A user has added the following to the continuity section:
- A symbol on Martha's enhanced mobile phone display matches the symbol on the laptop computer used by the Mysterious Woman. [3]
Do we have any good reasons to think this is significant?
I added that. I would hardly think it's just a coincidence, but agreed, there is nothing yet to suggest it is of significance. Could possibly add a caveat to the effect that "the significance of this connection is as of now unknown", if that would help. 67.183.3.173 23:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Actually - it's me again - the Doctor Who site at http://www.thedoctorwhosite.co.uk posits that the symbol is related to the "Archangel" that has been mentioned in connection with the final episodes of the series. Not anything concrete, by any means, but does this render mentioning the symbol kosher? 63.240.143.76 20:21, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
There's an apparent disagreement over which image to use ( [4], [5], [6] & [7]). Perhaps we should have a discussion over which would be the better choice for the article? Mark H Wilkinson 17:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
We only need one for the plot, really. So it boils down to getting a consensus over which is "better". Mark H Wilkinson 17:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)3. (a) Minimal use. As little non-free content as possible is used in an article. Short rather than long video and audio excerpts are used. Multiple items are not used if one will suffice; one is used only if necessary.
Thus far Brinstar, Matthew and Tony Sidaway have stated a preference for the newer image ( Image:Doctor42.jpg), and judging by the edit history, Sceptre is in favour of Image:42 (Doctor Who).jpg. Do we have any further opinions on this? It'd be great if we could get this decidedly trivial issue over and done with. -- Mark H Wilkinson ( t, c) 16:13, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Regular contributor Someguy0830 has this [9] to say: "The ship seems more indicative of the situation. Flamy-eye Doc just doesn't illustrate it as well." -- Mark H Wilkinson ( t, c) 09:40, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
I suggest that the picture of the sun goes to List of Doctor Who planets (which has only a few pictures), and the glowing eye one be used instead.( Black Dalek 17:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)).
I favour Image:Doctor42.jpg, the image of the ship isn't clear enough, at first I thought the image wasn't in the episode. I have noticed a pattern where most of the article images seem to depict the villain/monster of the episode, 42 is tricky but either the Doctor with the glowing eyes or an image of the crew member with the welding mask burning someone would suffice for this page.-- Nosxalc 11:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Someone needs to resolve this, it's reached a total stalemate( Black Dalek 17:26, 5 August 2007 (UTC))
I make the poll count at 5 - 4 at the moment, majority in favour of ( Image:Doctor42.jpg), correct me if I have made a mistake. Unless anyone has any objections, I think this straw poll should close and the image go back on the page.-- Brinstar 21:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps this is purely coincidental, but I couldn't help but think the writer of this episode might have - at least subconsciously - drawn on elements from an old edutainment game I played on the Amiga 500 called "Discovery". In addition to the profile of the ship depicted in 42 looking somewhat like the side-view map of the game (which I'm aware is a variation on a common design), the premise of the game - summed up in the final sentence of the game's synopsis, delivered by the traditional goofy synthesized voice - is "Pass security doors by answering questions". That is, the game will frequently block your progress with security doors that deliver a pop quiz in much the same fashion as the ones in this episode (though unlike the ones in this episode, you get as many tries as you need). A further note is that the game starts in the aft of the ship, with your goal on the main bridge (after you "Collect 12 fuel crystals" to "Repair the ship and win the game"). Of course, there are no masked monsters burning people to death, though that doesn't stop the alien animal specimens running amok from being a nuisance...
I'm aware that in the 90's-gen Tom Swift novels, the titular character had a security lock which posed music trivia questions...though note that the thing actually operated on a voiceprint lock and the trivia was just for show.-- Tenka Muteki 04:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
There's been a minor dispute over a character's name, apparently due to the fact that Hal Korwin is referred to as Korwin McDonnell in the BBC prequel [10]. The edit I've performed reverts the character name to Hal Korwin, while adding a footnote to the effect he's named differently in this prologue. I've weighted things in this manner for two reasons:
If someone has a neater way of handling this, I won't object. However, I will restate that we tend to give authority to the programme credits unless there's something to trump that (eg. a statement from RTD saying that they messed up the credits). -- Mark H Wilkinson ( t, c) 18:57, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Go to your local WHSmith and buy a copy of the DWM S3 Companion for 6.99, or just look at it in the shop since it's just one page. Go to page 79 and at the bottom it is stated that the credits are in error.
Alternatively, go to www.battlesintimeinvader.com and click on 'THE CARDS', then on human, then find the card named 'Korwin McDonnell' there, or go to the monster section and find the 'Sun-Possessed Korwin McDonnell' card.
Or, use common logic. Kath consistently refers to the character as 'Korwin' throughout the episode, as does Ashton, and why would somebody refer to their husband/friend by their last name? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.48.236 ( talk) 12:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I think that the current crediting of just 'Korwin' is a fair compromise, but as for 'The project level MoS (see ) directs that the cast list takes its lead from the programme credits' - Utopia (Doctor Who says Professor Yana whilst the credits say The Professor, The Sound of Drums and Last of the Time Lords both say Toclafane voices whilst the credits say Sphere voices, The Family of Blood says The Doctor/Smith whilst the credits say The Doctor, and there's probably plenty of other examples of this, because it makes it more clear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.48.236 ( talk) 18:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Is the following note:
"The plot bears some similarities to the Fourth Doctor serial Planet of Evil, which involves a sentient planet, problems caused by the mining of (in that case) antimatter from the planet, and the return of the stolen material as a resolution."
really necessary? It may have similarities, but is this very encyclopediac? Thelb 4 16:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 42 (Doctor Who). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:29, 30 September 2016 (UTC)