Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 17:55, 27 January 2024

This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Doctor Who: Torchwood Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Doctor Who, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Doctor Who and its spin-offs on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Doctor WhoWikipedia:WikiProject Doctor WhoTemplate:WikiProject Doctor WhoDoctor Who Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Torchwood task force. Television: Episode coverage This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Misplaced Pages articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force. This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.

Harriet Jones

I doubt it would still be Harriet Jones that Jack was speaking to, so I am removing this assertion, post-The Christmas Invasion and the "Doesn't she look tired?" stuff Wolf of Fenric 23:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm still a newbie regarding making comments on this Torchwood site, but forgive me for pointing out that there's a comment on the Cyberwoman discussion page (at least that's where I think it is) regarding peoples' opinions versus currently-known facts. As far as is so far known, Jones is still Prime Minister, at least according to World War Three. Yes, both The Christmas Invasion and Love & Monsters show her Government having problems, but that she has lost her placement by Late 2007 is your opinion, and does not reflect currently-known facts. Having written all that, I do actually see your point...it's just (going by the afforementioned Cyberwoman thing), I have to point out a reason why the P.M. should (in inverted commas) be named Harriet Jones--Stripey1 13:18, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

If she isn't actually named as Prime Minister, we can't assume that she still is. — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Forget I said that. As she was elected for three successive terms, it must have been her, right? — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:35, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Picture

Sigh. With all due respect, the image MatthewFenton put up does not sum up the story better; it leaves out the biggest focus of the episode itself: Toshiko, and her relationship with Mary. That's why I replaced it. The original image just shows Mary and it's not even all that clear. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 15:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

"My" Mary is much more clearer then your image of a "Mary" and sums up the episode far better imo.. and also you mentioned that the Dr. Who project goes against the MoS with its own MoS you better not let Josiah her that as he "projects can't go against guidelines." - I'm pretty sure you where also saying it as well.. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 15:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Expanded:

"My" Mary is much more clearer then your image of a "Mary" and sums up the episode far better imo.. and also you mentioned that the Dr. Who project goes against the MoS with its own MoS you better not let Josiah her that as he "projects can't go against guidelines." - I'm pretty sure you where also saying it as well.. also this is the 3rd time you've done this over images on TW pages frankly it is getting annoying when you get all agitated because you didn't get to upload an image..thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 15:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not backing down on this one - I've already elaborated as to why the new screenshot describes the episode better. Describe your own reasons. Also, I did not mention that the Wikiproject goes against MOS - 350px doesn't go against any MoS that I am aware of... I would be grateful if you could point me towards that guideline, if any. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 15:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

"See WP:WHO - our MOS calls for 350px screenshots" - You dont have a MOS, project guidelines are "irrelvant" -- Don't back down then, I'm not backing down either. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 16:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not agitated because I didn't get to upload an image; I'm not satisfied because the screenshot isn't as good. Also, where does it say pictures can't be 350px or that Wikiproject guidelines are irrelevant? --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 16:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Apparently WikiProjects can't have guidelines (WP:TV-NC) either way I'm not bothered about size as "my" image is better and sums the article better, and as mine was first YOU must get a consensus as I _dispute_ the change (+ the quality on yours stinks..) - Also if your not agitated why do you kick up a fuss every time you don't get to do an image upload :-\? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 16:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Show me where 350px conflicts with general MOS guidelines. And once again, I "kick up a fuss" as you put it when I find that the image isn't illustrative. However, I am not unreasonable - if other opinions feel that the other image is better, so be it - if consensus wants that, let that be. That's how it works. But not otherwise. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 16:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Show me the consensus for your MOS ;-) ? (I don;t care about image sizes anyway.. so forget it..) — You kick up a fuss when things are not how *you* like them (WP:OWN) - which is slightly irritating because in my opinion _your sucks_ - I'm not unreasonable either should a consensus say "khaos works is better" then I will accept it - as I sternly dispute your change as a gesture of good will you should self rv. and get a consensus. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 16:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you want to, go see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Doctor_Who/Archive_1#Screenshot_size where the discussion settled pretty much on 350px. As far as self-reverting is concerned, I respectfully decline in this instance, because I really don't like yours either. But I do invite others to chime in on this. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 16:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

The discussion at WP:TV-NC wasn't arguing that wikiprojects can't have guidelines, merely that those guidelines can't contradict the overall wikipedia guidelines. --Milo H Minderbinder 16:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing that out, Milo. For the record: Matthew is completely misrepresenting my position above. I have never said that WikiProjects can't have guidelines, merely that if those guidelines come into conflict with universal Misplaced Pages guidelines, the latter should take precedence unless a reason for the exception, convincing to non-Project members, can be made. (I've even argued that the Doctor Who Wikiproject's recommendation of italics for episode/story names should be changed to comply with general Misplaced Pages guidelines.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 16:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Re. comment on my talk page. I restored the original image, and hope you can discuss your changes instead of edit warring. Thanks. --Majorly 18:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I have discussed my changes - I even gave specific reasons as to why I think it's a better illustration. Unfortunately, it's Matthew who hasn't given any reasons in reply except that he thinks the one I uploaded "sucks" and keeps reverting. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 18:30, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

You have not given a reason as to why yours should be within the article, mine sums the episode (the "Mary") yours just shows Tosh and Mary.. It's much like the faeries.. they sum the episode just like the Mary does, the only reason you have cited is that you believe yours is better (which I dispute..) - I dispute the change, I believe mine is better and summarizes the episode.. You must now get a *consensus* to implement a change. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 18:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

"the image MatthewFenton put up does not sum up the story better; it leaves out the biggest focus of the episode itself: Toshiko, and her relationship with Mary." That's my reason. Opinions, anyone else? --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 18:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Yours shows them.. You can't hope to recreate the story, or the science of the episode with a single frame.. that is why yours is not as good as mine. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 18:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

You still haven't given a reason why yours is better. Sure, no one picture can capture everything, but the question is which picture best illustrates it. At least mine attempts to bring in two of the important story elements. Yours is just one, and as I stated, it misses the point. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 18:50, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I think Khaosworks' version (with both Tosh and "Mary") is preferable: Torchwood puts as much emphasis on the character interactions as on the aliens, if not more. I think an exclusive focus on the "monsters" reflects a misunderstanding of the show's nature. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

1. Mine shows one of the primary focal points of the episode (the "Mary") in true form.
2. Mine passes the FUC (*hint*)
3. Mine is of a better quality.
4. My versions DOG is also less noticeable.
5. Mine dos not attempt to summarise plot points in one frame a single image could not do.

Just 5 of probably a thousand reasons. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:01, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

To answer the points in turn:

1. Mine shows two. Mary and Tosh. As explained, Tosh is also as important a part of the episode.
2. What FUC are you talking about? If it's a matter of size, this is a technical issue than can be easily fixed.
3. Better quality by what criteria? FU requires it to be a lower-resolution pic anyway.
4. DOG is also a technical (and minor) issue. If it really bothers you, I can digitally remove it, as I've done for several other screencaps.
5. Again, the question is not trying to summarise the entirety of the plot. It's what illustrates it better. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 19:13, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

(edit conflict with Khaosworks) I had a similar response typed out, but Khaosworks' was better and more thorough. Suffice it to say that I don't see how attempting to cover more of the episode's thematic material is a disadvantage, as Matthew seems to be implying. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:15, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't know much about the technical guidelines for pictures, but of the two, I'd go with Khaosworks' - it illustrates the story better, and I think a picture with Tosh is better than one without. That said, I think a picture without Mary's true form would be preferable, as it's a bit of a spoiler (I know there's a warning, but you really can't help seeing the picture). --Brian Olsen 22:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't like either of them. Sorry! — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:54, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

That's fair enough, but any specific reason/any suggestions? --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 00:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I feel a bit odd making suggestions as I don't have the tech capability to make screen grabs myself, but...is there a good shot of Mary giving Tosh the pendant, or maybe a reaction shot of Tosh wearing the pendant and hearing thoughts? In any case, the pendant/telepathy seems more crucial to the story to me than the alien. --Brian Olsen 01:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay well as Khaos' is the prefered version I've reverted back to him, this does not mean my opinions do not still stand, in the spirit of good faith (and primiarily because it was a self rv.) and the spirit of WP:3RR it is not a violation. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 11:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

The big, bad wolf and Squids

I wrote that Tosh says, "I can't forget the things I've seen. The things I've heard", but someone removed it. In a move away from that, did anyone notice Jack's mention of squids? Could we relate that to The Power of Kroll?--Stripey1 13:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Sarah Jane

Why is nearly every bloody thing I write on these articles removed? I do not see why my helping expand this article regarding Sarah/Blue Peter was deemed to have to be edited. From a very angry--Stripey1 13:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Because it was self referencing. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 13:52, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Does that mean it referenced me? Or 'Greeks Bearing Gifts'? Or 'Torchwood'? And this doesn't answer why everything else gets edited.--Stripey1 14:51, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Self = Misplaced Pages; You referenced a talk page. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 14:55, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Which "else" are you talking about? You should read the edit summaries; they normally have an explanation why the reverts take place (unless they're really obvious, like inaccurate info or something). The last edit of yours I reverted recently was the "Briscoes" in They Keep Killing Suzie, which is the wrong spelling. Earlier I removed your linking Tosh's talking about "everything she's heard" to The Unquiet Dead because the phrasing isn't even exact, and it's a bit of a stretch. Both edits were explained. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 15:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I think I found Edit Summaries. I've obviously never found that before, so cheers. As for Briscoes, I'm telling you, there is a moment where a Hub computer says 'Briscoe'...though, as you point out, the credits don't agree. Anyway, taa again.--Stripey1 11:35, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Someone on Talk:They Keep Killing Suzie pointed me to the right scene; I've added a note to that effect to the article. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 12:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Kubla Khan

I can't help wondering if the Kubla Khanreference isn't referring to the the First Doctor and Marco Polo after all, but to Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency instead. The poem features heavily in the novel, which was written by a former DW script editor, and featured plot elements from "City of Death" and "Shada". Like "Greeks Bearing Gifts", it was about an alien who had been stranded on Earth for a long time and was possessing and manipulating people in an attempt to escape. P Ingerson (talk) 00:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Transphobia

Having watched this episode yesterday, I've gotta say I'm pretty disappointed. In the scene at the hub towards the end, Jack uses the analogy of a former colleague who "started acting strangely" then disappeared for a while and came back demanding that everyone call "him" Vanessa.

I saw this as a pretty cheap shot. This is a show that's supposed to be LGBT friendly. So far, all I've seen is bisexuality, and even then it seems to be more a case of "let's show as many femme women kissing as possible" to appeal to straight male viewers. The one reference to transgender, and they do this. Would it be worthwhile making a note in the LGBT section of the main Torchwood entry to this effect? Suzyj 02:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't necessarily disagree with your opinion about that little monologue, but we should make sure that the opinion has been stated in a reliable source — in this case, probably some media critic or LGBT news source. If it's just what you and I think, it's not acceptable by Misplaced Pages's standards because it would be original research.

(Oh, and for what it's worth, you get more male homosexuality and bisexuality in later episodes. Bisexuality seems to be the default setting for Torchwood, both male and female.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:06, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't call it transphobia per se. I mean, if you were to notice me acting all funny and I disappeared for a while and came back with a Lotus Seven, that wouldn't necessary make you autophobic or some such. DonQuixote 00:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Date

I know somtimes they get the dates wrong on these bodies but because of how long the body was 'said' to be there for it suggests that the year is 2009, is this correct?--Wiggstar69 20:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Leader of the opposition?

Doesn't Jack complain to the PM during that phone call about them telling the leader of the opposition about the Institute? --GracieLizzie 17:01, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Greeks Bearing Gifts.jpg

Image:Greeks Bearing Gifts.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Telepathy soundbyte

Did anyone else think the soundbyte sounded familiar, when Tosh put on the pendant and everyone "spoke" at once? I knew I'd heard it before. The WWE used to use it as a "signature", that short bit that plays at the beginning. The signature now is a vignette of match clips, but it used to be more animated and featured a bunch of people talking at once. Torchwood only used the first half of the clip, and possibly looped it, likely sped it up, but I'd know it anywhere. It's on one of their CDs that I have, and I used to play it on repeat and try to make out what was being said. Never got anywhere with that. There's no bona fide verification for it, but if you listen to the YouTube clip I linked after watching the episode, it's not hard to see the connection. NathanJ1979 (talk) 05:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we cannot use the clip as a source, so I've had to remove it. — Edokter • Talk • 17:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

How many of there are you?

Tosh says "How many of there are you?" when she's talking in the bar. Sounded hilarious. Aeronflux (talk) 16:04, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

grandfather

My thoughts on this sentence: "Toshiko's grandfather, a Japanese man, being able to work at Bletchley Park is inconsistent with both reality and her paranoia about being captured when transported to 1941 in "Captain Jack Harkness"." ; people have two grandfathers. one could have been persecuted and the other not. Or it could have been the same Grandfather. Being persecuted and being at Bletchley Park are not mutually exclusive. Ask Alan Turing. And as for reality, well... 108.52.65.237 (talk) 05:52, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Philoctetes

Tosh's "pub quiz question" conversation with Jack references a minor Trojan War character, Philoctetes, who has his own wiki page. It's almost as if it was written before Misplaced Pages was well known. I'm not wasting my time putting it into the article, because some jerk would just revoke it, so do what you want with the information. There's a continuity foul-up : Tosh swaps between red dress and lilac tee-shirt several times through the second day "at the office".

AKarley (talk) 08:10, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

• Start-Class Doctor Who articles
• Mid-importance Doctor Who articles
• Torchwood articles
• Start-Class television articles
• Unknown-importance television articles
• Start-Class Episode coverage articles
• Unknown-importance Episode coverage articles
• Episode coverage task force articles
• Automatically assessed television articles
• WikiProject Television articles