Talk:Fourth Doctor

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fourth Doctor article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 60 days

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Doctor Who High‑importance

	Doctor Who portal 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 Wikipedia. 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 articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

BBC Low‑importance

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 articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks for WikiProject BBC:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary)
Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing
Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House
Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland
NPOV : Criticism of the BBC (See comments)
Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles
Other : *Restructure the category
- Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes
- Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible
- Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC
- Return Dad's Army to a Good article. (See comments)
- Reassess BBC following improvements to article.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Science Fiction High‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

50th Anniversary/Day of the Doctor appearance[edit]

I made some edits to reflect his appearance in the 50th anniversary special. If I've done anything improper, please revert - I'm not an expert at conventions for editing these pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EleanorLockhart (talk • contribs) 21:19, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see the edits... but they aren't complete. The 4th Doctor also appears as a future regeneration of the Doctor at the end of The Day of the Doctor. I think it was pretty clear that even though it was a future regeneration it was still the same Doctor, same face, same personality as the 4th incarnation. I think discussion needs to take place in the talk page before we begin adding all this info from the 50th Anniversary episode so there can be some consensus on just how to characterize and include all this new info into the article. Maybe a subsection called "Future Incarnation of the 4th Doctor"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaiotu (talk • contribs) 12:09, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that in the sidebar his last appearance is listed as Dimensions in Time(93)... I don't know if of the Day of the Doctor appearance is technically the fourth doctor, apparently there's some debate, but it seemed to be strongly implied. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.162.199 (talk) 00:20, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Baker[edit]

Tom Baker was the best Doctor, easily. McCoy was a close second. 24.51.217.118 (talk) 07:22, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

^ I didn't put that David Tennant link in. Wikipedia did, and that's bullshit. 24.51.217.118 (talk) 07:25, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A) Wikipedia didn't add anything. That link is from an earlier post but because there is no dedicated references section on Talk Pages it is automatically posted to the bottom of the page, so chill. B) Your entire section adds nothing to a previous question, nor does it raise a new one, but is merely a fan pointing out something of his personal preference which is irrelevant here. Vyselink (talk) 15:21, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Audios[edit]

Why do we list every audio the Fourth Doctor appears in when there's a box at the end for that? Not to mention that most of the full-cast (i.e. starring Tom Baker) ones are referred to as "story relayed by 4th Doctor" when that's not the case. Only the ones with narration by a character should get that moniker. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.11.108.74 (talk) 12:13, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recognisable and iconic[edit]

MarnetteD Thought it'd be best to take it here. Which term is the US term? Iconic? Concerning iconic, the term is mentioned two other times in the article, primarily in relation to Four's scarf. -- Alex^TW 22:06, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okey doke AlexTheWhovian. Through the 80s he was a fave here in the US but the statement still reads hyperbolic to my eyes O_O - heehee. I can't find anything in this article about his being "iconic" in the UK though so that should either be sourced or removed. I know there was criticism (some of it at the time) of the Graham Williams years and there was even a book going into detail about that written in the early to mid 80's. Unfortunately, its name escapes me at the moment and my copy is in storage. Does it ring any bells for you? MarnetteD|Talk 22:23, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again ATW. I should add that the items are you refer to mention the scarf as iconic not the 4th Dr. Thus my concerns about the hyperbole nature of the statement in the lede. Please don't get me wrong - I lived through it :-) It read like fan speak when it should be more encyclopedic. MarnetteD|Talk 22:46, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately it doesn't, sorry. We should tweak the sentence... How about He was considered to be the most recognisable incarnation of the Doctor, with his iconic costume, both in the United Kingdom and internationally.? -- Alex^TW 17:45, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the line should read "is considered..." anyway, but I'm sure new DW fans might argue perhaps David Tennant, so I would suggest the sentence is taken out completely.Tuzapicabit (talk) 23:40, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We should be looking at the series as a whole, and not simply pander to the newer fans. The classic era exists as well. -- Alex^TW 23:45, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is no sourced mention of iconography in the UK in the article. As to "international" only the US and Italy are mentioned and the Italian item states that his episodes were the only ones seen. So, again, as it currently reads it is hyperbole. I would be fine with removing the sentence as well but it should at least be shortened to fit the referenced info in the article. 23:52, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Tenure start date[edit]

The infobox lists the Fourth Doctor's tenure as starting on 8 June 1974, the date he appeared in the final episode of Planet of the Spiders. For internal consistency within the infobox, and to match the table at The Doctor (Doctor Who) § Actors, I think the date should be 28 December 1974, when the first episode of Robot aired.--Trystan (talk) 18:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There has been some back and forth over this over the years. At the article you link to the start date is when the took on the lead role as the Dr. However, at the individual Dr articles it has been their first onscreen appearance. This inconsistency can be confusing. You might try asking at the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Doctor Who to see if a new consensus can be formed. MarnetteD|Talk 18:55, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Would you like a Jelly Baby?" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

The redirect Would you like a Jelly Baby? has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 24 § Would you like a Jelly Baby? until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]