![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Requesting reasons for not being able to add the fact that it's the 250th story of Doctor Who, an important milestone, where The War Games, The Stones of Blood, Silver Nemesis and Planet of the Dead already have. And "needs a source" is not an answer, due to the fact that right at the top of the infobox, it says "250". Without a source. AlexTheWhovian ( talk) 10:12, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
10:40, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
The plot summary says the Doctor enables Siege Mode to get out of the path of a train. This is not the case - he walks the TARDIS out of the path of the train, and the Siege Mode later activates when the TARDIS resembles the Pandorica (the 'Gallifreyan Cube' as someone called it). I think this should be corrected. GavSalkeld ( talk) 15:25, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
A sentence I recently added:
The pre-credits scene slowly reveals an Anamorphic projection of a Boneless' victim's face, recalling the skull in Holbein's The Ambassadors.
Has twice been removed as "OR". This is poppycock.
The clause "The pre-credits scene slowly reveals an Anamorphic projection of a Boneless' victim's face" is a bare description of what is shown on screen. It is no different to saying "the TARDIS has shrunk", "Clara poses as "Doctor Oswald" or "the episode concludes with Missy, seated in a darkened room, watching Clara's adventure" - all of which are still in the article. The essay WP:BLUE is pertinent.
The remainder of the sentence, "recalling the skull in Holbein's The Ambassadors" is also not OR, because any head or face seen in Anamorphic projection recalls that in The Ambassadors, which any art historian will tell you is the first and best known example of such. That clause serves to act as an example for any reader not familiar with the term and wanting to know what it means.
"OR" would be an additional sentence saying something like "Jamie Mathieson included this because it's one of his favourite paintings".
The sentence should be restored. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:39, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
How about we approach this dispute from a different angle - instead of keep / delete, how about re-wording it? It is still a similar effect to The Ambassadors, and may well have been meant as a reference to it. So... "reminiscent of", instead of "recalling"? Something like that? It's still a valid parallel to draw, we maybe just need to change the emphasis being placed upon it. 146.90.85.13 ( talk) 11:55, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
Why was the Ambassadors comparison removed when the following comparison was allowed to stay: "The further-miniaturised TARDIS in "siege mode" resembles the Pandorica..." Robert The Rebuilder ( talk) 15:55, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Requesting reasons for not being able to add the fact that it's the 250th story of Doctor Who, an important milestone, where The War Games, The Stones of Blood, Silver Nemesis and Planet of the Dead already have. And "needs a source" is not an answer, due to the fact that right at the top of the infobox, it says "250". Without a source. AlexTheWhovian ( talk) 10:12, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
-- [[
User:Edokter]] {{
talk}}
10:40, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
The plot summary says the Doctor enables Siege Mode to get out of the path of a train. This is not the case - he walks the TARDIS out of the path of the train, and the Siege Mode later activates when the TARDIS resembles the Pandorica (the 'Gallifreyan Cube' as someone called it). I think this should be corrected. GavSalkeld ( talk) 15:25, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
A sentence I recently added:
The pre-credits scene slowly reveals an Anamorphic projection of a Boneless' victim's face, recalling the skull in Holbein's The Ambassadors.
Has twice been removed as "OR". This is poppycock.
The clause "The pre-credits scene slowly reveals an Anamorphic projection of a Boneless' victim's face" is a bare description of what is shown on screen. It is no different to saying "the TARDIS has shrunk", "Clara poses as "Doctor Oswald" or "the episode concludes with Missy, seated in a darkened room, watching Clara's adventure" - all of which are still in the article. The essay WP:BLUE is pertinent.
The remainder of the sentence, "recalling the skull in Holbein's The Ambassadors" is also not OR, because any head or face seen in Anamorphic projection recalls that in The Ambassadors, which any art historian will tell you is the first and best known example of such. That clause serves to act as an example for any reader not familiar with the term and wanting to know what it means.
"OR" would be an additional sentence saying something like "Jamie Mathieson included this because it's one of his favourite paintings".
The sentence should be restored. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:39, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
How about we approach this dispute from a different angle - instead of keep / delete, how about re-wording it? It is still a similar effect to The Ambassadors, and may well have been meant as a reference to it. So... "reminiscent of", instead of "recalling"? Something like that? It's still a valid parallel to draw, we maybe just need to change the emphasis being placed upon it. 146.90.85.13 ( talk) 11:55, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
Why was the Ambassadors comparison removed when the following comparison was allowed to stay: "The further-miniaturised TARDIS in "siege mode" resembles the Pandorica..." Robert The Rebuilder ( talk) 15:55, 3 December 2014 (UTC)