This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
I was just wondering if the following tweaks to the article would be usefull or welcome, or whether they would be judged unnecessary or irrelevant - I think sometimes its better to check in discussion before making the changes in the article itself. Any comments on the points below? If the response is generally positive, I'll try to introduce the points into the main article, harmoniously and not taking up to much space of course :-)
1. Other appearances, merchandising. The article states that 'Fan-built full-size models of the police box are also common'. Are they really that common? It might be better to say that 'a number of fans have built full-size models', but I don't think it is correct to say they are common. Also, is it worth adding that the BBC generally frowns on such fan reproductions and that the only officially licensed full-size replica of the TARDIS is made by ThisPlanetEarth?
2. External doors. In the TV series, the police box doors have always opened inwards. In contrast, the doors of Peter Cushing's police box in the Dalek movies open outwards. Interestingly, in some of the publcicity stills for the 9th Doctor series, the police box doors are shown opened fully outwards, while in the TV series itself they always open inwards.
3. Doors. Occasionally, the external doors close by themselves suggesting they are physically connected to the electronicaly operated internal doors. For example, in the second episode of Unearthly Child, there is a very satisfying moment when we see an internal shot of the console room with the inner doors closing slowly, followed by a cut to the outside showing the external doors slamming shut right on cue (wonderful direction!) while everyone is some distance from the TARDIS. On many other occasions, however, we see the Doctor pulling the right hand external door closed, suggesting the two entrances are not linked, or at least that they can be unlinked. This refers to the original series only, of course.
4. TARDIS destroyed. The destructability/indestructability of the TARDIS has been discussed, but there has been at least one instance I can think of (Mind Robber) where the TARDIS was actually destroyed and shown to explode in space with all the panels going off in different directions, leaving the Doctor and companions clinging to the control console. Should this be mentioned?
5. Popular culture. Another appearance for the TARDIS is in a song on the album Six by Manusn, which also features a speaking part by Tom Baker. At the end of the song, the dematerializaton sound can be clearly heard in the fade out. Also, Robbie Williams 'Fashion Tardis down at Quo Vadis' - is that a relevant one?
-- 82.14.68.109 08:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Khaosworks :-) 1. This was me thinking aloud really, so I've no strong feelings about the original version of the text, I was just interested to see what everyone else thinks. It may be worth mentioning that the TPE replica is the only officially licensed one though and include the link. On the same point, this is actually marketed as a movie TARDIS. TPE do not have a licence to produce a TV TARDIS but I was told when I bought mine that the two were so similar that they didn't think it was worth the expense to apply for a second licence. Most purchasers adapt them to suit their own preferences, e.g. I have modified mine to look more like a Tom Baker era TV prop. 2. I'd like to hear other opinions, I thought it was an interesting titbit of information. 3. That sounds good to me 4. Ditto 5. OK, I'll mention Six. Does anyone else have an opinion about Robbie Williams? (keep it clean!). I don't really understand the significance of the line myself. I'll wait to see if there is any other feedback before doing the mods. -- 82.14.68.109 11:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
6. The TARDIS is not fictional.
It should be pointed out that this process takes some time to occur.
Editing the page and Wikipedia will now tell you that it's over 50K characters long, and that people using Google toolbar might encounter problems editing this article. Sounds like time to split some sections off to sister articles? I have absolutely no knowledge nor interest in this TV series so I can't be of help in the actual splitting, sorry. 24.19.184.243 11:25, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
The section "The Doctor's TARDIS" is 17 kilobytes long, the longest top-level division in the article. Might be a good candidate for splitting off. Bryan 23:43, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
There have been for years a range of toolboxes and chests with intricate folding drawers in the UK which go under the brand name 'TARDIS'. Wolfe 18:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Any objection to the article having an infobox? thanks/ Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 20:04, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether the TARDIS really belongs in Category:Bioships. Although it is alive in some sense, and the Doctor says that TARDISes were "grown, not made", it's not really portrayed as having organic or biological components in the usual sense of the term. The bioship article mentions Axos, but not the TARDIS. It's certainly a less clear-cut example than, say, Moya from Farscape. Thoughts? — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 18:56, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, but why is the one reference in "Impossible Planet" considered of overriding canonicity as opposed to the multiple references to the ship being built in the old series? --Mong the Senseless —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.138.2.87 ( talk • contribs) 20:30, November 27, 2006 (UTC)
In the Visual Dictionary, it most definitely is alive - the whole mechanism of the way it's bigger on the inside than the outside is shown... I'm not really sure how to explain it, but I'll try and it add it here first so that you guys and gals can see what it actually says about it... UltimateNagash 15:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I've always understood that the TARDIS was alive in the sense that it had an emergent intelligence rather than being organic in nature. Also I'm somewhat confused by Osgoodelawyer's suggestion that something biological is not necessarily organic, although I suppose that you "construct" a biological entity Frankenstein style without it having to go through the normal organic growth processes. I don't think a ship qualifies as a bio-ship unless it is primarily biological, a half and halfer would most likely be considered biomechanical.-- Teletran 03:34, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I actually believe a new image would be a good thing.. the one we have at present is pretty crappy.. I'm sure a decent view of the TARDIS could be found. thanks/ Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 11:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I've moved the new CG image provided by Smomo to the "Exterior" section, since I think it illustrates that very nicely. I still think it would be nice to replace the Pertwee image with a screencap from the new series — perhaps the TARDIS in the snow from The Unquiet Dead? I'd do it myself, but I actually don't know how. — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 06:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
In 'The Doctor's TARDIS/Interior', it is claimed that the 'weight' of the TARDIS in the 'Earth-like gravity of Alzarius' is some value in kilograms. Since kilograms are a measure of mass, not weight, and are therefore constant no matter what the gravity is, we should probably consider revising this, even if it is a direct quote, simply because it's nonsensical. 80.189.118.50 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
"In Full Circle (1980), Romana stated that the weight of the TARDIS in Alzarius' Earth-like gravity was 5 × 106 kilograms (5000 tonnes). This presumably refers to its internal weight"
Another note on this. Romana gives the answer in specific reference to whether there are machines on Alzarius capable of moving the external Tardis around on the planet. It doesn't make sense because a few swamp creatures carry it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.196.179.114 ( talk) 19:20, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
I encountered a debate on one of the talk pages regarding the TARDIS's translation of Galifreyan writing which I intended to contribute to once I had checked some references, but cannot remember where it was, now. I am sure the original questioner, if still interested, will probably find this comment. So: 'is Gallifreyan writing 'translated' for Rose?' I would say the Tardis (and the Doctor) keeps this private for Time Lords (i.e. is not included in 'the Time Lord gift'). References: Canon: In 'Fear Her', when the Tardis is analysing the scribble creature, Rose has to ask what the Gallifreyan writing says. Not-so-canon examples: the novel 'Only Human' p 15, refers to (from Rose's POV) 'A maze of graphics, in the incomprehensible alien script the Doctor always worked in.' The book suggests (p16) that Captain Jack can understand some of it, although in 'Deviant Strain', p9 (Jack's POV) 'Not a lot of it made sense but he nodded knowingly.'
Incidentally, Jack seems able to understand much of the TARDIS technology (as did others in the classic series, including Nyssa). Where did they learn to do so? Is the technology not exclusive to the Time Lords? Gwinva 14:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
is it explained how the Tardis is bigger on the inside. it's explained how the tardis can (in the doctor's tardis's case was able to) camoflague ( by a chameloeon circuit) so what tachnolgy makes the Tardis bigger on the inside. plz notify me on my user talkpage when u answer thx.-- I.W 21:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Dimensional Pockets actually... The console room you see is actually a sphere, with the living 'switch room' below, which controls everything. This is surrounded by more of the coral to link it up to a massive 'sceptre', with the console room at the top.
Above it is the sensor tower, ending in a large spike/antenna.
Below the console room is a sphere about twice the size, called the Core Services Module (CSM), which contains all the main things any ship needs: power rooms, time travel control rooms, navigation, life support and of course, bedrooms...
Below that it slowly thins down to the end, with an antenna to take power from various stuff. Just above that is the Cloister Room.
On the part just below the CSM are four orbs joined by rods that contain the main knowledge, databanks etc...
Surrounding this completely is hundreds of spheres joined together by curving rods, all flowing around the sceptre inside a pocket a dimension. Each of these spheres contain something, and are linked by 'bridges' (more like wormholes, I guess...)
All of this info compiled from the Visual Dictionary, ISBN 978-1-40531-867-9
Hope that helps...
UltimateNagash 15:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
No not really. In "The Robots of Death" the Doctor explained it in terms of objects appearing smaller than they really are when they're far away. If you think of the interior tardis being connected to the exterior by a wormhole then the outside doesn't necessarily need to fit around the inside. Of course then the problem becomes where you put the inside, as previously stated a pocket dimension is probably the best solution. -- Teletran 03:58, 3 July 2007 (UTC) It has been explained that the TARDIS is not actually bigger on the inside. I do not remember which episode. It simply requires less energy to move the door of the TARDIS than to move the whole thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.23.66.23 ( talk) 17:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
See, here's the thing. And yes, I will state up front and in advance I understand that this is just a t.v. show and was not and still is not written to be technically accurate or sufficient to stand up to the light of close scrutiny (however, given the foregoing comments on this discussion page, you folks were long past that point ages ago, so don't complain that I'm adding to it.) Anyhow, a TARDIS's exterior is a solid matter projection, kind of similar (at least in concept) to the solid projections of a holodeck from Star Trek. When the power is removed -- or, for that matter, the source -- then the object should just pfft out of existence. Now, whether that's instantaneous or gradual can be argued, but without the TARDIS "there" and actively maintaining the exterior, there should be no exterior. Capedude2005 ( talk) 07:05, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
An anon recently added the following:
This sounds vaguely familiar to me, but since TARDIS is a featured article we should include information like this only if we can provide a specific episode citation. Anyone remember where, specifically, this is from? — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 07:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
In " The Shakespeare Code" Martha asks if someone needs to take a "driving test" to fly the TARDIS and the Doctor replies that not only that it does, but that he failed his. This was a joke of course but it did strike me as a possibly truthful one. Do we mention this? (I can't find it if we do). -- GracieLizzie 19:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I think that this article attempts to integrate televised and non-televised material to such a degree that it's really getting unclear what ideas are fully supported by televised evidence and what are not. In section 2, we have a general statement about TARDISes alluding to The Two Doctors:
Before a TARDIS becomes fully functional, it must be primed with the biological imprint of a Time Lord, normally done by simply having a Time Lord operate the TARDIS for the first time. This imprint comes from the Rassilon Imprimatur, part of the biological makeup of Time Lords, which gives them both a symbiotic link to their TARDISes and the ability to withstand the physical stresses of time travel.
This paragraph is fine, though I think the word "normally" should be removed. I don't think there's any doubt in The Two Doctors that it's absolutely done this way. This idea of a symbiotic link between the Doctor and his particular TARDIS has a great deal of overt support in the new series (what was Bad Wolf if not the TARDIS protecting the Doctor?) and it also is implied in the way several classic Doctors anthropomorphize the TARDIS. Indeed, Hand of Fear's "call from Gallifrey" scene and The Masque of Mandragora's invention of TARDIS language translation services (as importantly revised in The Christmas Invasion) directly demonstrate that the TARDIS establishes mental links specifically with the Doctor. Importantly, if the Doctor's disabled, so too is the link the TARDIS establishes with others. He is, as Rose points out, "part of the circuit". All of this completely jibes with The Two Doctors.
However, in the very next section we have what I think is a contradictory statement:
In the programme, the Doctor's TARDIS is an obsolete Type 40 TT capsule (presumably TT stands for "time travel") that he unofficially "borrowed" when he departed his home planet of Gallifrey. According to the Eighth Doctor Adventures novel The Gallifrey Chronicles by Lance Parkin, it previously belonged to a Time Lord named Marnal, who was, like the Doctor, somewhat of a renegade.
This co-mingling of spin-off material with the televised facts leaves me, as a reader of this article, scratching my head as to how the TARDIS has become an obviously imprinted on the Doctor if he wasn't the original owner. The simpler conclusion from just the televised facts is that the First Doctor stole the TARDIS when it was in its unprimed state.
Mentioning Lance Parkin in the thick of the article just muddies the water. Gallifrey Chronicles is perhaps a worthy footnote, but it definitely shouldn't be a part of the main body of the article. If anything, The Two Doctors proves The Doctor didn't steal someone else's TARDIS, he just stole from the government on Gallifrey, which is consistent with his character. CzechOut 02:47, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
The meddling monk is said to possess a "Mark IV TARDIS" which is 'newer' than the Doctors, should the "mark etc" model system at least be mentioned once somewhere in the article? 207.202.227.125 02:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Don't want to re-open that old wound of TARDIS vs Tardis again - archived at TARDIS vs. Tardis and Backronym - but over the past couple of weeks there have been letters in the Beeb staff mag, Ariel which I've put here - and as a result of this extra info., I've gradually expanded the first footnote of the article to include it - hope this meets with approval. Zir 13:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
What, no mention of the famously malfunctioning "Cameleon circuit"? This name is given in some episode or other to describe the system that is supposed to make a TARDIS blend in with its surroundings. Although it isn't given that name at first, the circuit makes its appearance early on when it malfunctions on a voyage in the very first Doctor Who story. -- Tony Sidaway 13:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
This article fails FA criterion #3. Please add {{ Non-free media rationale}} for all non-free images without a rationale, or remove the images from this article. – Ilse @ 22:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I had a flip-through in the local shop, and saw the Dorling Kindersley guide to the revived series. There's an excellent spread on the current TARDIS and its overall design: the control room is near the top of a "scepter" connected to time and space. I'm just making a request if anyone could properly cite the information and include it. Ilse@ 12:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
From the article: "A TARDIS has also appeared in the Torchwood episode "End of Days". Because Torchwood is situated near a rift of temperal energy, The Doctor uses it to recharge the TARDIS. In the episode Jack Harkness hears the tell-tale sound of the engines, smiles and afterwards is nowhere to be found."
I have little issue with this particular statement, although the TARDIS didn't technically appear in the episode itself, just the familiar engine whine. The issue that I have found is in the following:
"As the camera shows Cardiff Bay at the end of the Torchwood episode "End of Days", You can see a tiny TARDIS sitting near the metallic piller fountain of "Roald Dahl Plass. Veiwers assumed that he was picked up and lead to the mis-conception that the TARDIS materialised inside Touchwood but infact it did not. This is further explained in the Dr Who episode "Utopia"(S03EP11)."
I've watched the episode again and I am not convinced it is the TARDIS. The shot is long and doesn't allow much in the way of detail. Not to mention that there appears to be a SECOND "TARDIS", down and to the right of the first "TARDIS". Can someone verify that the TARDIS actually appears in the shot before I rewrite this section of text? Thank you. - DrachenFyre > YOU! 15:01, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was
From WP:RM:
I should point out that no actual request is underway. The text was moved here as a more appropriate place to archive the discussion than buried in the history of WP:RM, which is a very active page. In any case, the consensus here is already apparent. I shall remove the proposal from WP:RM immediately. Consider the move rejected. -- Stemonitis 11:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
The wall of the TARDIS is breached for the first time ever in ' The Last of the Time Lords', by a ship, presumably the RMS Titanic. Is this relevant enough to be mentioned and/or pictured? - The Good Ol' Country Doctor Ụšəг ŧª∫Қ 21:42, 30 June 2007 (UTC) It is only breached because the sheilds were down.... i hope this helps! -- MiniGuy1994 ( talk) 13:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Earlier today I removed an external link to a site called www.the-tardis.com/, which ties together a number of Who-related RSS feeds -- useful enough a resource, but it can't be considered to be a TARDIS/Police Box site, relevant to the article. It was re-added [1] by Doctor_No1, a user whose only contributions have been to include that link. Which is odd, seeing that the ID is similar to the LiveJournal account [2] of the chap who runs said site. This seems like a potential WP:COI to me.
It's not a huge deal, but I was under the impression self-promotion was not the done thing. Mark H Wilkinson 22:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
The Conceptual history portion of the article gives this description of a police box:
At the time of the series' debut in 1963, the police box was still a common fixture in British cities (it was used in the 1960s as a temporary holding cell for suspected offenders until police back-up arrived), and with some 700 in London alone, it was a logical choice for camouflaging a time machine.
Which while not strictly inaccurate gives a misleading view of a police boxes function so I wrote this:
The main function of a police box was to allow communication between police officers they contained a telephone with a direct line to the nearest police station which could also be used by the public. The police box contained first aid equipment as well as a small workstation and could temporarily be used as a holding cell. As police cars and two way radios became more common the police box was rendered obsolete.
Which doesn't fit into the rest of the paragraph so I'm not sure what to do with it. Any suggestions?-- Teletran 02:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
There's a significant amount of detail in that book on the TARDIS and I thought it would be useful here. Particularly the mention of something called a Time Sceptre. Its certainly as cannonical as any of the other Doctor Who books (if not more so, as the writers did consult with the Producers of Doctor Who in the making of it), and surely at least deserves a mention. I've seen the Visual Dictionary referenced in other Doctor Who articles, and seems even more important to mention it here, where such an important part of the book is about the TARDIS. Steve Terran 23:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
On a number of episodes of the current series the TARDIS appears to act as a relay between Rose's mobile phone (and possibly Martha's as well, cant remember if I saw it or not) allowing her to call home wherever she is in the universe. Although nobody says that this is specifically linked to the TARDISes systems, during " The Impossible Planet" the disappearance of the TARDIS into an earthquake rift renders Roses's phone useless, giving the impression they are linked. Just wondered whther this should be mentioned? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.26.68.97 ( talk • contribs) 16:44, August 12, 2007 (UTC)
As this is zipping in and out of the article, let me just point out that although the extrapolator acquired in Series One does grant the TARDIS a handy-dandy forcefield, at no point in "The Runaway Bride" does the script assert that it's that very thing which keeps the atmosphere inside the TARDIS when the doors are open; the Doctor only says that "The TARDIS is protecting us." While it may be the case that that's what RTD had in mind, we don't know that for sure. -- Mark H Wilkinson ( t, c) 11:55, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
The paragraph on power source (or subsequent ones on other essential substances that need replenishing) needs updating. In the episode that just aired on the SciFi channel, a "rift" in Cardif is set to be a refuling stop. — Długosz 25-September-2007 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 14:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
How would the weight of the Tardis be calculated?
It appears to exist in more than three spatial directions, and does not disrupt the surface on which it rests to the extent that the weight of its contents might suggest.
(A link to "Weighing four-dimensional objects on a three dimensional weighing scale/ weighbridge" or similar would suffice.) Jackiespeel 17:29, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
But - the question has not really been answered.
The weight of the Tardis-police-box-form would be only a fraction of the 5000 tons (in what gravity?) mentioned, otherwise there would probably be significant damage to the ground underneath its footprint.
Sometimes Wikipedia talk pages are the best places to ask such questions - even if to be redirected to appropriate places. Jackiespeel 15:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Dr Who the series operates in "the universe as we know it" - the rules of physics etc (apart from the Tardis' specific properties).
A "red phone box" is about a metre square - and the Tardis appears to be of the same size.
The Tardis can materialise on any surface, and be supported by any ground (spaceship etc) which would support the weight of a red phone box: when it leaves, there is no visible mark. Its contents are larger/heavier/more massive, so must exist "somewhere else" - where in the multi-dimensional universe would its contents cause the Tardis to have a different weight? Would a "non-cube shaped tesseract" have different weights in different three dimensional planes?
I was asking the question in case someone on Wikipedia knew where the answer could be found. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackiespeel ( talk • contribs) 21:26, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
The FASA RPG mentions that TARDISes can vary their weight, from next to nothing (to allow landings on unstable surfaces) to several thousand tonnes. Their whole argument is that the craft is a mathematical construct made solid ("Logopolis", and built upon in several novels), therefore the weight can be adjusted as easily as the interior/exterior appearance. Presumably, this defaults, at least externally, to the weight of the object the TARDIS is impersonating, as part of the camouflage.
Not canon of course, but perhaps worth a mention like other non-canon sources. - Wolfe ( talk) 07:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
I keep seeing the basic tenets of this discussion repeated over and over and over and over again here on this page. I think Josiah Rowe (above) had it right when he said there is effectively no canon in Dr. Who. This show simply was never written to stand up to any sort or form of scrutiny, which actually is something I believe is unfortunate and actually distracting. But in any event, the exterior of any TARDIS should nominally weigh just what whatever it's made to be like would weigh, assuming the operator didn't decide to just add additional mass through increased density, or whatever. If the exterior of the TARDIS is made to look like a one pound rock, then it should weigh -- you guessed it -- one pound. As for the weight of the rest of the TARDIS, remember (as I and others have pointed out elsewhere) the TARDIS itself actually sits in a self-generated pocket universe (a.k.a. microverse) and so, while it has whatever mass it's got, has an apparent mass in this universe of nil. Whether the act of projection of the exterior would have therefore "exposed" some portion of a TARDIS to this universe and therefore the apparent mass is >0 is so far beyond the capabilities of anyone to say with authority (up to and including, in my view, writers for the show and producers of the show, as it would only be their own opinion with nothing more "authoritative" on which to really go, thanks to no real scientific thought or any kind of developmental forethought being put into this) that there's no point in us discussing the matter. And yes, for the record, I do find this highly frustrating. It's like an itch you can never scratch. Capedude2005 ( talk) 07:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
The fact that these facts may not be true is pretty important; should we shift the text of cite 12 into the main article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.48.236 ( talk) 12:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I've removed the following:
Firstly, this is sourced to a scandal rag, The Sun. Moreover, their source is unidentified and merely speculates:
"The elements we know about Kylie's appearance point towards" means "I do not know but I am speculating that."
Even setting aside the Sun's poor reputation, even if we knew who this unidentified individual was, reporting his speculation is not reliable sourcing. -- Tony Sidaway 11:11, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Would it be worth mentioning that in a recent episode of CSI: NY the sound of the TARDIS is used a few times? The plot revolved around a "time machine" built by an eccentric, but brilliant scientist. One of the characters, upon seeing it says something along the lines of "Paging Doctor Who." And in the flashback sequences showing the scientist using the machine, the distinct sound of the TARDIS is heard. (sorry if this doesn't make a new section, still new to editing talk pages.) UncleThursday 06:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Chameleon Circuit was created today, duplicating much of the material in this article. I don't see it growing, and as yet it lacks references which exist here. Hence the proposal to merge it here. -- Rodhullandemu ( Talk) 09:47, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
do it 64.180.237.28 ( talk) 07:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
The TARDIS exterior (along with manys surrounding props) was altered for the Turn Left finale to read 'Bad Wolf' over and over. I believe this is notable as it is the first (?) time that the TARDIS exterior is seen as being altered by an external (I assume) force. It was removed as non-notable. For the sake of reversion wars, discussion here? -- .../Nemo ( talk) 07:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I think we need to clarify who the six pilots are in the final episode of Series 4. The article says both "Rose Tyler, Martha Jones, Sarah Jane Smith, Mickey Smith, the Doctor and the Doctor's doppelgänger" and "Mickey Smith, Jack Harkness, Rose Tyler, Martha Jones, Sarah Jane Smith, and a clone of The Doctor" in two separate parts. The common characters on the lists are "Rose Tyler, Martha Jones, Sarah Jane Smith, Mickey Smith and the Doctor's clone/doppelgänger.
Watching the scene again on iTunes, I believe it is Rose Tyler, Martha Jones, Jack Harkness, Mickey Smith, Sarah Jane Smith and the Doctor. To begin with, it looks like the clone (blue suit) is helping as well, but him and Donna move to the side. And Jackie (Rose's mother) stands with her arms crossed, leaving the other six to pilot the tardis.
I have edited the article to reflect what I can clearly see on the episode, and have noted this in the edit summary. Thanks. -- Woodgreener ( talk) 22:30, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
The article presently states the following on the question of the number of pilots:
This is new to me! I suggest we delete this unless someone can actually give an episode reference. Cuddlyopedia ( talk) 06:16, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
The TARDIS also possesses a scanner so that its crew may examine the exterior environment before exiting the ship. In the 2005 series the scanner display is attached to the console and is able to display television signals as well as various computing functions and occasionally what the production team has stated are Gallifreyan numbers and text.
Is this in reference to the main viewscreen that looks like a flat panel TV hidden behind a sliding panel, or the console display that Tegan used to look at the Index File ? 70.51.10.188 ( talk) 05:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
In Scream of The Shalka, the Doctor locks the TARDIS doors remotely, presumably using central locking. I see it's not mentioned here - as I don't know how you guys view the canonicity of this story I am reluctant to just plonk this info in the aricle. Thoughts? 81.151.33.88 ( talk) 17:40, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Regarding the following:
I just rewatched the serial, and it was the White Guardian, not the Timelords, who hijacked the Doctor's TARDIS in the Ribos Operations, though Romana had believed she'd been sent by the President of the Timelords. I believe it was in Genesis of the Daleks that the TARDIS was externally controlled, and one or two other episodes, but am not sure enough to edit. IMHO ( talk) 23:20, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
When the article talks about the tardis as not gernerally noticed by people,
"Despite the anachronistic police box shape, the TARDIS's presence is rarely questioned when it materialises in the present-day United Kingdom. In "Boom Town", the Doctor simply noted that humans do not notice odd things like the TARDIS, echoing a similar sentiment expressed by the Seventh Doctor in Remembrance of the Daleks (1988), that humans have an "amazing capacity for self-deception". Various episodes, notably "The Sound of Drums", also note that the TARDIS generates a perception filter to reinforce the idea that it is perfectly ordinary."
It may be a reference to the SEP (somebody else's problem) field that surrounds the bistromath in the Hitchhiker's Guide series. See Somebody Else's Problem.
Should it be noted that the St. John's Ambulance badge returns to the TARDIS door in Series Five, from the set photographs The Sun have published online today? 80.177.217.162 ( talk) 14:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
In the 2008 Christmas special edition, The Next Doctor, Jackson Lake (David Morrissey), while under the delusion that he is the Doctor, has a hot air balloon of the same colour and name as the TARDIS, which he explains as standing for "Tethered Aerial Release Developed In Style". It is not capable of time travel.
Surely this is inaccurate? This version of the TARDIS could indeed travel through time, but in only one direction (and just as quickly as the rest of us). - 77.96.158.204 ( talk) 20:46, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't we include a picture of the tardis traveling through time? There's lots. Use any search engine and type in "TARDIS" into the pictures part. See? Pictures galore! WinifredJ ( talk) 02:35, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
For fear of being slammed if I edit the actual page I am writing this here. It seems odd to have the plural of TARDIS be TARDISes. Surely it would simply be TARDISs. The e seems unnecessary. 68.100.66.192 ( talk) 01:36, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus to move. Jafeluv ( talk) 09:02, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
TARDIS →
Tardis — There are two major reasons for making this move. Firstly, Tardis is a trademark of the BBC, see
this article here. Both
Wikipedia's poicy on trademarks and
Wikipedia's policy on capitalisation state that using all capitalisation is frowned upon, with the only exception I can see being generally permitted are when the letters are pronounced individually, which in the Tardis doesn't apply as it is always pronounced "tar-dis". The second major reason for moving is that the spelling "Tardis" is that it is almost always the spelling used in the mainstream media, such as this article in
The Times, this article in the
Daily Mail, and this article in
The Independent. That "Tardis" is a fictional acronym ("Time And Relative Dimension(s) In Space") is not that significant, as like
laser it has clearly entered popular usage as an individual word. —
84.92.117.93 (
talk) 14:35, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Could there not be some kind of list or complination of pictures to show the different TARDIS interiors shown on doctor who? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.242.82 ( talk) 15:38, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Explained in Doctor Who The Visual Dictionary by DK books, the inside of the TARDIS in it's dimension is called the Time Scepture. There's an entire image of what the TARDIS looks like in it's dimension, is it possible if we could have it uploaded to here? -- Victory93 ( talk) 09:13, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Dr._Who
And it's a pretty direct reference in one of the most popular games ever. Never edited Wikipedia so I'll leave it to you guys, lest I mess up something...
193.198.16.211 ( talk) 00:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey, Wikipedites.
I was just browsing through here when I noticed mentions of "Compassion" and other references to novels and such, and was wondering if they were considered canon or not. Usually, I see something along the lines of "canonicity is disputed" or something when I come across these, but not here. Just something to clear my head up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.6.233.167 ( talk) 08:00, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
This section is a mess, it needs a complete rewrite as it just rambles and repeats itself a few times. 81.137.240.118 ( talk) 16:05, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Is anyone planning to add the mass of new information provided in The Doctor's Wife? 68.146.78.43 ( talk) 03:51, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
I made some adjustments, at least in the discussion of The Doctor's Wife, with regards to referring to the TARDIS as an it. First, the TARDIS is a ship, and nautical tradition holds that ships are always to be referenced in the feminine. But beyond that, the episode confirms that the soul of the TARDIS is female. Not because she was placed within the body of a woman, but due to other references, not the least of which is the very title of the episode, but in terms of on-screen references, she makes direct reference to "my sisters" when talking about dead TARDISes. Plus the Doctor himself referred to the TARDIS as "old girl" and other terms going back to the earliest episodes; he knew the TARDIS was alive, and he knew it was female. Having just watched the episode for the 4th time, it's also pretty clear that, silly as it may sound, the TARDIS' name (or at least that of the soul of the TARDIS) is officially "Sexy". They say the Devil will get you once you say his name 3 times. She suggests the name when asked, the Doctor says "it's your name" when she asks him to confirm later, and finally she self-identifies with the name. It's her name (or, at the very least, a legitimate nickname). 68.146.78.43 ( talk) 02:54, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
I was just wondering if the following tweaks to the article would be usefull or welcome, or whether they would be judged unnecessary or irrelevant - I think sometimes its better to check in discussion before making the changes in the article itself. Any comments on the points below? If the response is generally positive, I'll try to introduce the points into the main article, harmoniously and not taking up to much space of course :-)
1. Other appearances, merchandising. The article states that 'Fan-built full-size models of the police box are also common'. Are they really that common? It might be better to say that 'a number of fans have built full-size models', but I don't think it is correct to say they are common. Also, is it worth adding that the BBC generally frowns on such fan reproductions and that the only officially licensed full-size replica of the TARDIS is made by ThisPlanetEarth?
2. External doors. In the TV series, the police box doors have always opened inwards. In contrast, the doors of Peter Cushing's police box in the Dalek movies open outwards. Interestingly, in some of the publcicity stills for the 9th Doctor series, the police box doors are shown opened fully outwards, while in the TV series itself they always open inwards.
3. Doors. Occasionally, the external doors close by themselves suggesting they are physically connected to the electronicaly operated internal doors. For example, in the second episode of Unearthly Child, there is a very satisfying moment when we see an internal shot of the console room with the inner doors closing slowly, followed by a cut to the outside showing the external doors slamming shut right on cue (wonderful direction!) while everyone is some distance from the TARDIS. On many other occasions, however, we see the Doctor pulling the right hand external door closed, suggesting the two entrances are not linked, or at least that they can be unlinked. This refers to the original series only, of course.
4. TARDIS destroyed. The destructability/indestructability of the TARDIS has been discussed, but there has been at least one instance I can think of (Mind Robber) where the TARDIS was actually destroyed and shown to explode in space with all the panels going off in different directions, leaving the Doctor and companions clinging to the control console. Should this be mentioned?
5. Popular culture. Another appearance for the TARDIS is in a song on the album Six by Manusn, which also features a speaking part by Tom Baker. At the end of the song, the dematerializaton sound can be clearly heard in the fade out. Also, Robbie Williams 'Fashion Tardis down at Quo Vadis' - is that a relevant one?
-- 82.14.68.109 08:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Khaosworks :-) 1. This was me thinking aloud really, so I've no strong feelings about the original version of the text, I was just interested to see what everyone else thinks. It may be worth mentioning that the TPE replica is the only officially licensed one though and include the link. On the same point, this is actually marketed as a movie TARDIS. TPE do not have a licence to produce a TV TARDIS but I was told when I bought mine that the two were so similar that they didn't think it was worth the expense to apply for a second licence. Most purchasers adapt them to suit their own preferences, e.g. I have modified mine to look more like a Tom Baker era TV prop. 2. I'd like to hear other opinions, I thought it was an interesting titbit of information. 3. That sounds good to me 4. Ditto 5. OK, I'll mention Six. Does anyone else have an opinion about Robbie Williams? (keep it clean!). I don't really understand the significance of the line myself. I'll wait to see if there is any other feedback before doing the mods. -- 82.14.68.109 11:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
6. The TARDIS is not fictional.
It should be pointed out that this process takes some time to occur.
Editing the page and Wikipedia will now tell you that it's over 50K characters long, and that people using Google toolbar might encounter problems editing this article. Sounds like time to split some sections off to sister articles? I have absolutely no knowledge nor interest in this TV series so I can't be of help in the actual splitting, sorry. 24.19.184.243 11:25, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
The section "The Doctor's TARDIS" is 17 kilobytes long, the longest top-level division in the article. Might be a good candidate for splitting off. Bryan 23:43, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
There have been for years a range of toolboxes and chests with intricate folding drawers in the UK which go under the brand name 'TARDIS'. Wolfe 18:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Any objection to the article having an infobox? thanks/ Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 20:04, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether the TARDIS really belongs in Category:Bioships. Although it is alive in some sense, and the Doctor says that TARDISes were "grown, not made", it's not really portrayed as having organic or biological components in the usual sense of the term. The bioship article mentions Axos, but not the TARDIS. It's certainly a less clear-cut example than, say, Moya from Farscape. Thoughts? — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 18:56, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, but why is the one reference in "Impossible Planet" considered of overriding canonicity as opposed to the multiple references to the ship being built in the old series? --Mong the Senseless —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.138.2.87 ( talk • contribs) 20:30, November 27, 2006 (UTC)
In the Visual Dictionary, it most definitely is alive - the whole mechanism of the way it's bigger on the inside than the outside is shown... I'm not really sure how to explain it, but I'll try and it add it here first so that you guys and gals can see what it actually says about it... UltimateNagash 15:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I've always understood that the TARDIS was alive in the sense that it had an emergent intelligence rather than being organic in nature. Also I'm somewhat confused by Osgoodelawyer's suggestion that something biological is not necessarily organic, although I suppose that you "construct" a biological entity Frankenstein style without it having to go through the normal organic growth processes. I don't think a ship qualifies as a bio-ship unless it is primarily biological, a half and halfer would most likely be considered biomechanical.-- Teletran 03:34, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I actually believe a new image would be a good thing.. the one we have at present is pretty crappy.. I'm sure a decent view of the TARDIS could be found. thanks/ Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 11:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I've moved the new CG image provided by Smomo to the "Exterior" section, since I think it illustrates that very nicely. I still think it would be nice to replace the Pertwee image with a screencap from the new series — perhaps the TARDIS in the snow from The Unquiet Dead? I'd do it myself, but I actually don't know how. — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 06:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
In 'The Doctor's TARDIS/Interior', it is claimed that the 'weight' of the TARDIS in the 'Earth-like gravity of Alzarius' is some value in kilograms. Since kilograms are a measure of mass, not weight, and are therefore constant no matter what the gravity is, we should probably consider revising this, even if it is a direct quote, simply because it's nonsensical. 80.189.118.50 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
"In Full Circle (1980), Romana stated that the weight of the TARDIS in Alzarius' Earth-like gravity was 5 × 106 kilograms (5000 tonnes). This presumably refers to its internal weight"
Another note on this. Romana gives the answer in specific reference to whether there are machines on Alzarius capable of moving the external Tardis around on the planet. It doesn't make sense because a few swamp creatures carry it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.196.179.114 ( talk) 19:20, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
I encountered a debate on one of the talk pages regarding the TARDIS's translation of Galifreyan writing which I intended to contribute to once I had checked some references, but cannot remember where it was, now. I am sure the original questioner, if still interested, will probably find this comment. So: 'is Gallifreyan writing 'translated' for Rose?' I would say the Tardis (and the Doctor) keeps this private for Time Lords (i.e. is not included in 'the Time Lord gift'). References: Canon: In 'Fear Her', when the Tardis is analysing the scribble creature, Rose has to ask what the Gallifreyan writing says. Not-so-canon examples: the novel 'Only Human' p 15, refers to (from Rose's POV) 'A maze of graphics, in the incomprehensible alien script the Doctor always worked in.' The book suggests (p16) that Captain Jack can understand some of it, although in 'Deviant Strain', p9 (Jack's POV) 'Not a lot of it made sense but he nodded knowingly.'
Incidentally, Jack seems able to understand much of the TARDIS technology (as did others in the classic series, including Nyssa). Where did they learn to do so? Is the technology not exclusive to the Time Lords? Gwinva 14:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
is it explained how the Tardis is bigger on the inside. it's explained how the tardis can (in the doctor's tardis's case was able to) camoflague ( by a chameloeon circuit) so what tachnolgy makes the Tardis bigger on the inside. plz notify me on my user talkpage when u answer thx.-- I.W 21:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Dimensional Pockets actually... The console room you see is actually a sphere, with the living 'switch room' below, which controls everything. This is surrounded by more of the coral to link it up to a massive 'sceptre', with the console room at the top.
Above it is the sensor tower, ending in a large spike/antenna.
Below the console room is a sphere about twice the size, called the Core Services Module (CSM), which contains all the main things any ship needs: power rooms, time travel control rooms, navigation, life support and of course, bedrooms...
Below that it slowly thins down to the end, with an antenna to take power from various stuff. Just above that is the Cloister Room.
On the part just below the CSM are four orbs joined by rods that contain the main knowledge, databanks etc...
Surrounding this completely is hundreds of spheres joined together by curving rods, all flowing around the sceptre inside a pocket a dimension. Each of these spheres contain something, and are linked by 'bridges' (more like wormholes, I guess...)
All of this info compiled from the Visual Dictionary, ISBN 978-1-40531-867-9
Hope that helps...
UltimateNagash 15:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
No not really. In "The Robots of Death" the Doctor explained it in terms of objects appearing smaller than they really are when they're far away. If you think of the interior tardis being connected to the exterior by a wormhole then the outside doesn't necessarily need to fit around the inside. Of course then the problem becomes where you put the inside, as previously stated a pocket dimension is probably the best solution. -- Teletran 03:58, 3 July 2007 (UTC) It has been explained that the TARDIS is not actually bigger on the inside. I do not remember which episode. It simply requires less energy to move the door of the TARDIS than to move the whole thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.23.66.23 ( talk) 17:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
See, here's the thing. And yes, I will state up front and in advance I understand that this is just a t.v. show and was not and still is not written to be technically accurate or sufficient to stand up to the light of close scrutiny (however, given the foregoing comments on this discussion page, you folks were long past that point ages ago, so don't complain that I'm adding to it.) Anyhow, a TARDIS's exterior is a solid matter projection, kind of similar (at least in concept) to the solid projections of a holodeck from Star Trek. When the power is removed -- or, for that matter, the source -- then the object should just pfft out of existence. Now, whether that's instantaneous or gradual can be argued, but without the TARDIS "there" and actively maintaining the exterior, there should be no exterior. Capedude2005 ( talk) 07:05, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
An anon recently added the following:
This sounds vaguely familiar to me, but since TARDIS is a featured article we should include information like this only if we can provide a specific episode citation. Anyone remember where, specifically, this is from? — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 07:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
In " The Shakespeare Code" Martha asks if someone needs to take a "driving test" to fly the TARDIS and the Doctor replies that not only that it does, but that he failed his. This was a joke of course but it did strike me as a possibly truthful one. Do we mention this? (I can't find it if we do). -- GracieLizzie 19:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I think that this article attempts to integrate televised and non-televised material to such a degree that it's really getting unclear what ideas are fully supported by televised evidence and what are not. In section 2, we have a general statement about TARDISes alluding to The Two Doctors:
Before a TARDIS becomes fully functional, it must be primed with the biological imprint of a Time Lord, normally done by simply having a Time Lord operate the TARDIS for the first time. This imprint comes from the Rassilon Imprimatur, part of the biological makeup of Time Lords, which gives them both a symbiotic link to their TARDISes and the ability to withstand the physical stresses of time travel.
This paragraph is fine, though I think the word "normally" should be removed. I don't think there's any doubt in The Two Doctors that it's absolutely done this way. This idea of a symbiotic link between the Doctor and his particular TARDIS has a great deal of overt support in the new series (what was Bad Wolf if not the TARDIS protecting the Doctor?) and it also is implied in the way several classic Doctors anthropomorphize the TARDIS. Indeed, Hand of Fear's "call from Gallifrey" scene and The Masque of Mandragora's invention of TARDIS language translation services (as importantly revised in The Christmas Invasion) directly demonstrate that the TARDIS establishes mental links specifically with the Doctor. Importantly, if the Doctor's disabled, so too is the link the TARDIS establishes with others. He is, as Rose points out, "part of the circuit". All of this completely jibes with The Two Doctors.
However, in the very next section we have what I think is a contradictory statement:
In the programme, the Doctor's TARDIS is an obsolete Type 40 TT capsule (presumably TT stands for "time travel") that he unofficially "borrowed" when he departed his home planet of Gallifrey. According to the Eighth Doctor Adventures novel The Gallifrey Chronicles by Lance Parkin, it previously belonged to a Time Lord named Marnal, who was, like the Doctor, somewhat of a renegade.
This co-mingling of spin-off material with the televised facts leaves me, as a reader of this article, scratching my head as to how the TARDIS has become an obviously imprinted on the Doctor if he wasn't the original owner. The simpler conclusion from just the televised facts is that the First Doctor stole the TARDIS when it was in its unprimed state.
Mentioning Lance Parkin in the thick of the article just muddies the water. Gallifrey Chronicles is perhaps a worthy footnote, but it definitely shouldn't be a part of the main body of the article. If anything, The Two Doctors proves The Doctor didn't steal someone else's TARDIS, he just stole from the government on Gallifrey, which is consistent with his character. CzechOut 02:47, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
The meddling monk is said to possess a "Mark IV TARDIS" which is 'newer' than the Doctors, should the "mark etc" model system at least be mentioned once somewhere in the article? 207.202.227.125 02:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Don't want to re-open that old wound of TARDIS vs Tardis again - archived at TARDIS vs. Tardis and Backronym - but over the past couple of weeks there have been letters in the Beeb staff mag, Ariel which I've put here - and as a result of this extra info., I've gradually expanded the first footnote of the article to include it - hope this meets with approval. Zir 13:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
What, no mention of the famously malfunctioning "Cameleon circuit"? This name is given in some episode or other to describe the system that is supposed to make a TARDIS blend in with its surroundings. Although it isn't given that name at first, the circuit makes its appearance early on when it malfunctions on a voyage in the very first Doctor Who story. -- Tony Sidaway 13:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
This article fails FA criterion #3. Please add {{ Non-free media rationale}} for all non-free images without a rationale, or remove the images from this article. – Ilse @ 22:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I had a flip-through in the local shop, and saw the Dorling Kindersley guide to the revived series. There's an excellent spread on the current TARDIS and its overall design: the control room is near the top of a "scepter" connected to time and space. I'm just making a request if anyone could properly cite the information and include it. Ilse@ 12:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
From the article: "A TARDIS has also appeared in the Torchwood episode "End of Days". Because Torchwood is situated near a rift of temperal energy, The Doctor uses it to recharge the TARDIS. In the episode Jack Harkness hears the tell-tale sound of the engines, smiles and afterwards is nowhere to be found."
I have little issue with this particular statement, although the TARDIS didn't technically appear in the episode itself, just the familiar engine whine. The issue that I have found is in the following:
"As the camera shows Cardiff Bay at the end of the Torchwood episode "End of Days", You can see a tiny TARDIS sitting near the metallic piller fountain of "Roald Dahl Plass. Veiwers assumed that he was picked up and lead to the mis-conception that the TARDIS materialised inside Touchwood but infact it did not. This is further explained in the Dr Who episode "Utopia"(S03EP11)."
I've watched the episode again and I am not convinced it is the TARDIS. The shot is long and doesn't allow much in the way of detail. Not to mention that there appears to be a SECOND "TARDIS", down and to the right of the first "TARDIS". Can someone verify that the TARDIS actually appears in the shot before I rewrite this section of text? Thank you. - DrachenFyre > YOU! 15:01, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was
From WP:RM:
I should point out that no actual request is underway. The text was moved here as a more appropriate place to archive the discussion than buried in the history of WP:RM, which is a very active page. In any case, the consensus here is already apparent. I shall remove the proposal from WP:RM immediately. Consider the move rejected. -- Stemonitis 11:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
The wall of the TARDIS is breached for the first time ever in ' The Last of the Time Lords', by a ship, presumably the RMS Titanic. Is this relevant enough to be mentioned and/or pictured? - The Good Ol' Country Doctor Ụšəг ŧª∫Қ 21:42, 30 June 2007 (UTC) It is only breached because the sheilds were down.... i hope this helps! -- MiniGuy1994 ( talk) 13:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Earlier today I removed an external link to a site called www.the-tardis.com/, which ties together a number of Who-related RSS feeds -- useful enough a resource, but it can't be considered to be a TARDIS/Police Box site, relevant to the article. It was re-added [1] by Doctor_No1, a user whose only contributions have been to include that link. Which is odd, seeing that the ID is similar to the LiveJournal account [2] of the chap who runs said site. This seems like a potential WP:COI to me.
It's not a huge deal, but I was under the impression self-promotion was not the done thing. Mark H Wilkinson 22:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
The Conceptual history portion of the article gives this description of a police box:
At the time of the series' debut in 1963, the police box was still a common fixture in British cities (it was used in the 1960s as a temporary holding cell for suspected offenders until police back-up arrived), and with some 700 in London alone, it was a logical choice for camouflaging a time machine.
Which while not strictly inaccurate gives a misleading view of a police boxes function so I wrote this:
The main function of a police box was to allow communication between police officers they contained a telephone with a direct line to the nearest police station which could also be used by the public. The police box contained first aid equipment as well as a small workstation and could temporarily be used as a holding cell. As police cars and two way radios became more common the police box was rendered obsolete.
Which doesn't fit into the rest of the paragraph so I'm not sure what to do with it. Any suggestions?-- Teletran 02:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
There's a significant amount of detail in that book on the TARDIS and I thought it would be useful here. Particularly the mention of something called a Time Sceptre. Its certainly as cannonical as any of the other Doctor Who books (if not more so, as the writers did consult with the Producers of Doctor Who in the making of it), and surely at least deserves a mention. I've seen the Visual Dictionary referenced in other Doctor Who articles, and seems even more important to mention it here, where such an important part of the book is about the TARDIS. Steve Terran 23:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
On a number of episodes of the current series the TARDIS appears to act as a relay between Rose's mobile phone (and possibly Martha's as well, cant remember if I saw it or not) allowing her to call home wherever she is in the universe. Although nobody says that this is specifically linked to the TARDISes systems, during " The Impossible Planet" the disappearance of the TARDIS into an earthquake rift renders Roses's phone useless, giving the impression they are linked. Just wondered whther this should be mentioned? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.26.68.97 ( talk • contribs) 16:44, August 12, 2007 (UTC)
As this is zipping in and out of the article, let me just point out that although the extrapolator acquired in Series One does grant the TARDIS a handy-dandy forcefield, at no point in "The Runaway Bride" does the script assert that it's that very thing which keeps the atmosphere inside the TARDIS when the doors are open; the Doctor only says that "The TARDIS is protecting us." While it may be the case that that's what RTD had in mind, we don't know that for sure. -- Mark H Wilkinson ( t, c) 11:55, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
The paragraph on power source (or subsequent ones on other essential substances that need replenishing) needs updating. In the episode that just aired on the SciFi channel, a "rift" in Cardif is set to be a refuling stop. — Długosz 25-September-2007 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 14:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
How would the weight of the Tardis be calculated?
It appears to exist in more than three spatial directions, and does not disrupt the surface on which it rests to the extent that the weight of its contents might suggest.
(A link to "Weighing four-dimensional objects on a three dimensional weighing scale/ weighbridge" or similar would suffice.) Jackiespeel 17:29, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
But - the question has not really been answered.
The weight of the Tardis-police-box-form would be only a fraction of the 5000 tons (in what gravity?) mentioned, otherwise there would probably be significant damage to the ground underneath its footprint.
Sometimes Wikipedia talk pages are the best places to ask such questions - even if to be redirected to appropriate places. Jackiespeel 15:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Dr Who the series operates in "the universe as we know it" - the rules of physics etc (apart from the Tardis' specific properties).
A "red phone box" is about a metre square - and the Tardis appears to be of the same size.
The Tardis can materialise on any surface, and be supported by any ground (spaceship etc) which would support the weight of a red phone box: when it leaves, there is no visible mark. Its contents are larger/heavier/more massive, so must exist "somewhere else" - where in the multi-dimensional universe would its contents cause the Tardis to have a different weight? Would a "non-cube shaped tesseract" have different weights in different three dimensional planes?
I was asking the question in case someone on Wikipedia knew where the answer could be found. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackiespeel ( talk • contribs) 21:26, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
The FASA RPG mentions that TARDISes can vary their weight, from next to nothing (to allow landings on unstable surfaces) to several thousand tonnes. Their whole argument is that the craft is a mathematical construct made solid ("Logopolis", and built upon in several novels), therefore the weight can be adjusted as easily as the interior/exterior appearance. Presumably, this defaults, at least externally, to the weight of the object the TARDIS is impersonating, as part of the camouflage.
Not canon of course, but perhaps worth a mention like other non-canon sources. - Wolfe ( talk) 07:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
I keep seeing the basic tenets of this discussion repeated over and over and over and over again here on this page. I think Josiah Rowe (above) had it right when he said there is effectively no canon in Dr. Who. This show simply was never written to stand up to any sort or form of scrutiny, which actually is something I believe is unfortunate and actually distracting. But in any event, the exterior of any TARDIS should nominally weigh just what whatever it's made to be like would weigh, assuming the operator didn't decide to just add additional mass through increased density, or whatever. If the exterior of the TARDIS is made to look like a one pound rock, then it should weigh -- you guessed it -- one pound. As for the weight of the rest of the TARDIS, remember (as I and others have pointed out elsewhere) the TARDIS itself actually sits in a self-generated pocket universe (a.k.a. microverse) and so, while it has whatever mass it's got, has an apparent mass in this universe of nil. Whether the act of projection of the exterior would have therefore "exposed" some portion of a TARDIS to this universe and therefore the apparent mass is >0 is so far beyond the capabilities of anyone to say with authority (up to and including, in my view, writers for the show and producers of the show, as it would only be their own opinion with nothing more "authoritative" on which to really go, thanks to no real scientific thought or any kind of developmental forethought being put into this) that there's no point in us discussing the matter. And yes, for the record, I do find this highly frustrating. It's like an itch you can never scratch. Capedude2005 ( talk) 07:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
The fact that these facts may not be true is pretty important; should we shift the text of cite 12 into the main article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.48.236 ( talk) 12:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I've removed the following:
Firstly, this is sourced to a scandal rag, The Sun. Moreover, their source is unidentified and merely speculates:
"The elements we know about Kylie's appearance point towards" means "I do not know but I am speculating that."
Even setting aside the Sun's poor reputation, even if we knew who this unidentified individual was, reporting his speculation is not reliable sourcing. -- Tony Sidaway 11:11, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Would it be worth mentioning that in a recent episode of CSI: NY the sound of the TARDIS is used a few times? The plot revolved around a "time machine" built by an eccentric, but brilliant scientist. One of the characters, upon seeing it says something along the lines of "Paging Doctor Who." And in the flashback sequences showing the scientist using the machine, the distinct sound of the TARDIS is heard. (sorry if this doesn't make a new section, still new to editing talk pages.) UncleThursday 06:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Chameleon Circuit was created today, duplicating much of the material in this article. I don't see it growing, and as yet it lacks references which exist here. Hence the proposal to merge it here. -- Rodhullandemu ( Talk) 09:47, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
do it 64.180.237.28 ( talk) 07:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
The TARDIS exterior (along with manys surrounding props) was altered for the Turn Left finale to read 'Bad Wolf' over and over. I believe this is notable as it is the first (?) time that the TARDIS exterior is seen as being altered by an external (I assume) force. It was removed as non-notable. For the sake of reversion wars, discussion here? -- .../Nemo ( talk) 07:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I think we need to clarify who the six pilots are in the final episode of Series 4. The article says both "Rose Tyler, Martha Jones, Sarah Jane Smith, Mickey Smith, the Doctor and the Doctor's doppelgänger" and "Mickey Smith, Jack Harkness, Rose Tyler, Martha Jones, Sarah Jane Smith, and a clone of The Doctor" in two separate parts. The common characters on the lists are "Rose Tyler, Martha Jones, Sarah Jane Smith, Mickey Smith and the Doctor's clone/doppelgänger.
Watching the scene again on iTunes, I believe it is Rose Tyler, Martha Jones, Jack Harkness, Mickey Smith, Sarah Jane Smith and the Doctor. To begin with, it looks like the clone (blue suit) is helping as well, but him and Donna move to the side. And Jackie (Rose's mother) stands with her arms crossed, leaving the other six to pilot the tardis.
I have edited the article to reflect what I can clearly see on the episode, and have noted this in the edit summary. Thanks. -- Woodgreener ( talk) 22:30, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
The article presently states the following on the question of the number of pilots:
This is new to me! I suggest we delete this unless someone can actually give an episode reference. Cuddlyopedia ( talk) 06:16, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
The TARDIS also possesses a scanner so that its crew may examine the exterior environment before exiting the ship. In the 2005 series the scanner display is attached to the console and is able to display television signals as well as various computing functions and occasionally what the production team has stated are Gallifreyan numbers and text.
Is this in reference to the main viewscreen that looks like a flat panel TV hidden behind a sliding panel, or the console display that Tegan used to look at the Index File ? 70.51.10.188 ( talk) 05:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
In Scream of The Shalka, the Doctor locks the TARDIS doors remotely, presumably using central locking. I see it's not mentioned here - as I don't know how you guys view the canonicity of this story I am reluctant to just plonk this info in the aricle. Thoughts? 81.151.33.88 ( talk) 17:40, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Regarding the following:
I just rewatched the serial, and it was the White Guardian, not the Timelords, who hijacked the Doctor's TARDIS in the Ribos Operations, though Romana had believed she'd been sent by the President of the Timelords. I believe it was in Genesis of the Daleks that the TARDIS was externally controlled, and one or two other episodes, but am not sure enough to edit. IMHO ( talk) 23:20, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
When the article talks about the tardis as not gernerally noticed by people,
"Despite the anachronistic police box shape, the TARDIS's presence is rarely questioned when it materialises in the present-day United Kingdom. In "Boom Town", the Doctor simply noted that humans do not notice odd things like the TARDIS, echoing a similar sentiment expressed by the Seventh Doctor in Remembrance of the Daleks (1988), that humans have an "amazing capacity for self-deception". Various episodes, notably "The Sound of Drums", also note that the TARDIS generates a perception filter to reinforce the idea that it is perfectly ordinary."
It may be a reference to the SEP (somebody else's problem) field that surrounds the bistromath in the Hitchhiker's Guide series. See Somebody Else's Problem.
Should it be noted that the St. John's Ambulance badge returns to the TARDIS door in Series Five, from the set photographs The Sun have published online today? 80.177.217.162 ( talk) 14:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
In the 2008 Christmas special edition, The Next Doctor, Jackson Lake (David Morrissey), while under the delusion that he is the Doctor, has a hot air balloon of the same colour and name as the TARDIS, which he explains as standing for "Tethered Aerial Release Developed In Style". It is not capable of time travel.
Surely this is inaccurate? This version of the TARDIS could indeed travel through time, but in only one direction (and just as quickly as the rest of us). - 77.96.158.204 ( talk) 20:46, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't we include a picture of the tardis traveling through time? There's lots. Use any search engine and type in "TARDIS" into the pictures part. See? Pictures galore! WinifredJ ( talk) 02:35, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
For fear of being slammed if I edit the actual page I am writing this here. It seems odd to have the plural of TARDIS be TARDISes. Surely it would simply be TARDISs. The e seems unnecessary. 68.100.66.192 ( talk) 01:36, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus to move. Jafeluv ( talk) 09:02, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
TARDIS →
Tardis — There are two major reasons for making this move. Firstly, Tardis is a trademark of the BBC, see
this article here. Both
Wikipedia's poicy on trademarks and
Wikipedia's policy on capitalisation state that using all capitalisation is frowned upon, with the only exception I can see being generally permitted are when the letters are pronounced individually, which in the Tardis doesn't apply as it is always pronounced "tar-dis". The second major reason for moving is that the spelling "Tardis" is that it is almost always the spelling used in the mainstream media, such as this article in
The Times, this article in the
Daily Mail, and this article in
The Independent. That "Tardis" is a fictional acronym ("Time And Relative Dimension(s) In Space") is not that significant, as like
laser it has clearly entered popular usage as an individual word. —
84.92.117.93 (
talk) 14:35, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Could there not be some kind of list or complination of pictures to show the different TARDIS interiors shown on doctor who? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.242.82 ( talk) 15:38, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Explained in Doctor Who The Visual Dictionary by DK books, the inside of the TARDIS in it's dimension is called the Time Scepture. There's an entire image of what the TARDIS looks like in it's dimension, is it possible if we could have it uploaded to here? -- Victory93 ( talk) 09:13, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Dr._Who
And it's a pretty direct reference in one of the most popular games ever. Never edited Wikipedia so I'll leave it to you guys, lest I mess up something...
193.198.16.211 ( talk) 00:24, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey, Wikipedites.
I was just browsing through here when I noticed mentions of "Compassion" and other references to novels and such, and was wondering if they were considered canon or not. Usually, I see something along the lines of "canonicity is disputed" or something when I come across these, but not here. Just something to clear my head up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.6.233.167 ( talk) 08:00, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
This section is a mess, it needs a complete rewrite as it just rambles and repeats itself a few times. 81.137.240.118 ( talk) 16:05, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Is anyone planning to add the mass of new information provided in The Doctor's Wife? 68.146.78.43 ( talk) 03:51, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
I made some adjustments, at least in the discussion of The Doctor's Wife, with regards to referring to the TARDIS as an it. First, the TARDIS is a ship, and nautical tradition holds that ships are always to be referenced in the feminine. But beyond that, the episode confirms that the soul of the TARDIS is female. Not because she was placed within the body of a woman, but due to other references, not the least of which is the very title of the episode, but in terms of on-screen references, she makes direct reference to "my sisters" when talking about dead TARDISes. Plus the Doctor himself referred to the TARDIS as "old girl" and other terms going back to the earliest episodes; he knew the TARDIS was alive, and he knew it was female. Having just watched the episode for the 4th time, it's also pretty clear that, silly as it may sound, the TARDIS' name (or at least that of the soul of the TARDIS) is officially "Sexy". They say the Devil will get you once you say his name 3 times. She suggests the name when asked, the Doctor says "it's your name" when she asks him to confirm later, and finally she self-identifies with the name. It's her name (or, at the very least, a legitimate nickname). 68.146.78.43 ( talk) 02:54, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |