Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
Perhaps worth noting that the newspaper Amy Pond is reading has the headline "Detroit Lions win Super Bowl" - yet Detroit have never even reached the big game. Perhaps noting that this means the "modern day" New York in which they're having their picnic etc is set in either the future or some alternate universe? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Perhaps worth noting that the newspaper Amy Pond is reading has the headline "Detroit Lions win Super Bowl" - yet Detroit have never even reached the big game. Perhaps noting that this means the "modern day" New York in which they're having their picnic etc is set in either the future or some alternate universe? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Please see ] and ]. ] (]) 15:27, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
:Please see ] and ]. ] (]) 15:27, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
== The return ==
I hate to nitpick - so, apologies, but here goes. In the lead, it currently says ''"The story features the return of the Weeping Angels."'' This reads slightly oddly to me, because of a (perhaps wrong?) feeling that there can really only be one ''"THE return" ''and we've already had that with the bl**dy scary spaceship with a whole mob of them dashing around it like manic hamsters in a potato cupboard. This is ''A return,'' yes, but that's a weak expression compared with ''THE return,'' and I don't think, being a non-unique return, that it can be a simple ''"the". And ''"the second return"'' or something would, I fear, be intolerably clunky. ''<small>(Do you see at all what I mean here, are am I just waffling meaninglessly on per usual? I could stfu, go out for a coffee, or maybe both! Yes.) </small>So I wonder if, in the interests of accuracy and of not confusing ], it might be better reworded slightly to avoid the ''THE ''problem - maybe something like ''"The story features the third appearance of the Weeping Angels"'' only better-written? What d'you think?? Thanks and best wishes to all ] (]) 08:39, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC
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
A fact from The Angels Take Manhattan appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know column on 7 September 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Unless I imagined it, I'm sure Zac Fox was retrospectively credited for his role as "Photoshoot PA" in "Asylum of the Daleks" in the credits to this episode. Truly bizarre - worth mentioning.........? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:33, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Just looked up the credits on iPlayer all it says is "PHOTOSHOOT PA ZAC FOX" nothing to suggest it wasn't for this episode. Narom (talk) 10:53, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Well, as far as I recall, no such character actually appeared in this episode, whereas our article on "Asylum" says that Zac Fox was in it as just such a character but was not credited....-- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:13, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps worth noting that the newspaper Amy Pond is reading has the headline "Detroit Lions win Super Bowl" - yet Detroit have never even reached the big game. Perhaps noting that this means the "modern day" New York in which they're having their picnic etc is set in either the future or some alternate universe? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ftr2k7 (talk • contribs) 15:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
I hate to nitpick - so, apologies, but here goes. In the lead, it currently says "The story features the return of the Weeping Angels." This reads slightly oddly to me, because of a (perhaps wrong?) feeling that there can really only be one "THE return" and we've already had that with the bl**dy scary spaceship with a whole mob of them dashing around it like manic hamsters in a potato cupboard. This is A return, yes, but that's a weak expression compared with THE return, and I don't think, being a non-unique return, that it can be a simple "the". And "the second return" or something would, I fear, be intolerably clunky. (Do you see at all what I mean here, are am I just waffling meaninglessly on per usual? I could stfu, go out for a coffee, or maybe both! Yes.) So I wonder if, in the interests of accuracy and of not confusing the aged, it might be better reworded slightly to avoid the THE problem - maybe something like "The story features the third appearance of the Weeping Angels" only better-written? What d'you think?? Thanks and best wishes to all DBaK (talk) 08:39, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
