Talk:The Husbands of River Song

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mission: 2110?[edit]

I'm not sure, but does that look like a Roboid in that promotional picture? don't get me wrong but series 7 episodes "Dinosaurs on a Spaceship" and "The Rings of Akhaten" both reused elements from Mission: 2110 (Roboidz and Shades, respectively) but modified. Visokor (talk) 20:07, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

These statements are original research until you find a source to back up your claims. Alex|The|Whovian 22:05, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

River Song Link[edit]

@AlexTheWhovian:Why did you remove the link to River Song (Doctor Who) in the cast list?Theoosmond(talk)(warn) 14:01, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I was meant to only restore Kingston to the guest cast, not the companion section. I was unaware I removed the link too. Alex|The|Whovian 23:19, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Series 9 episode?[edit]

[1] this source states that this episode will be included in the Series 9 box set. BlueBlue11 (talk) 14:08, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Already noted on the Series 9 page in the Home media section. Alex|The|Whovian 23:12, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clara[edit]

@Edokter: I'll take the time to start a discussion and not proceed with any edit-warring behaviour. When I said "The absence of companions after they have left has been noted in the subsequent episode", I think you misunderstood my meaning. When a companion has left in an episode (e.g. in this case, "Hell Bent"), their absence is noted in the article for the next episode (in this case, "The Husbands of River Song"). Why not here? Alex|The|Whovian 10:39, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then they should be removed there as well; it is trivia that should not be placed in irrelevant episodes. Final appearances are fine, but why repeat the fact in the following episode where they do not even appear? -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 10:41, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Edokter: Because such changes such as the change of cast should be noted where relevant, given their major impact and connection to the series - this is the first episode where such a cast change has taken place concerning the companion since her first appearance, hence why it is notable. Alex|The|Whovian 10:57, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK then, provide some sources where this is notable, and where Colemans departure is linked to this episode. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 11:42, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Did you read a word of what I said? [T]his is the first episode where such a cast change has taken place concerning the companion since her first appearance, hence why it is notable. Alex|The|Whovian 11:44, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I read everything. The thing is, we do not get to decide what's notable; sources do. So again, come up with sources that establish Coleman not appearing in this episode is notable, and then we can include it. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 15:08, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Absence of Coleman[edit]

WHY is this here? Her departure is alrady noted in the previous episode's article, and has obsolutely no relevance to this article. Such inclusions are fine for Wikia/TARDIS Index File, but not here; it serves absolutely no purpose. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 10:39, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am inclined to agree, User:Edokter. Where there is relevance to the plot, it may be appropriate to mention such an absence (in "The Snowmen", the Doctor is said to be brooding over the loss of Amy and Rory). But at this point, he has forgotten who Clara is, and she is not mentioned. For someone just looking up the episode in ten years' time, who may not know who Clara is, such information is simply intrusive and distracting to the casual reader. The reference provided does not indicate notability, by the way, all it does is note in passing that she's gone. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 06:46, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why have you decided to run two separate discussions on this? Alex|The|Whovian 06:52, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you asking me instead of the person who started it? Perhaps he considered that part of it over and this to be a new one. You might also want to address the content of the discussion as well as (or indeed instead of) its present format, as that's not taking us forward but rather serves only to distract us from reaching a consensus. It's not like such a thing hasn't happened regularly on other talk pages countless times. We should always focus on improving the article. On that point, as another example, Matt Smith's final appearance in the show is the "surprise" cameo in "Deep Breath", yet I don't suppose it is required to be mentioned that he is absent from the next episode. That he does not appear in the show after he has left she show is not, in and of itself, notable or worthy of comment. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 18:17, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Continuity[edit]

Lots of items available for "Continuity", so thought I'd start a list we can add to - for someone (else) to turn into the usual subsection under "Plot".

  • Reading from the diary, we hear reminders of the Pandorica from The Pandorica Opens/The Big Bang, Jim the Fish from The Impossible Astronaut, the crash of the Byzantium from The Time of Angels/Flesh and Stone, the visit to Manhattan that ends with the inability to see Amy and Rory anymore after The Angels Take Manhattan.
  • The first River Song episodes Silence in the Library/Forest of the Dead deserve a paragraph, mentioning the introduction of River's sonic screwdriver, River's mention of the nice suit and the Singing Towers, and anything else that my fellow editors may have caught.
  • Was River's sonic trowel shown before?
  • Was a reference to Doctor Capaldi's need to be "doing his roots" (coloring his gray hair) mentioned before?
  • Probably cleaner to explicitly cover River learning of the Doctor's new batch of regenerations under "Continuity", rather than simply slipped in to the main synopsis.
  • We hear reminders of the Doctor's other marriages to Elizabeth I in Day of the Doctor, Marilyn Munroe (which might not have been properly sanctioned) in A Christmas Carol and Cleopatra (I don't know the episode).

...others? Thanks. Jmg38 (talk) 09:56, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All of these require sources. Alex|The|Whovian 10:21, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A source? Of course! Jmg38 (talk) 11:20, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Jmg, the purpose of continuity sections is to report referenced examples. Editors who go looking for such things before sources run the risk of engaging in original research. Some of what you've listed would fall into that category (all the ones where you are asking whether it's happened before--those are your own questions). River learning something new about the Doctor most likely does not belong to continuity--how can that "refer" to anything previous? ZarhanFastfire (talk) 18:26, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, all - but chill!! If I'd added them to the article, then I'd deserve a scolding. I've added it to "Talk", items the masses might come across when reading external articles that might support the transfer of any of these items to the wiki article. BTW, if you do have answers to any of my open ended questions, sourced or unsourced, feel free to answer, I'm really asking... Did we see the trowel before? We're the roots mentioned before? Thanks. Jmg38 (talk) 18:45, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Jmg, no-one is attacking you, but I would like to make the point (again, and I hope gently) that this page is not for you to ask your own questions as if it were a fan forum. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 03:41, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to the various editors who indeed confirmed references to 11 articles that address many of these, and a few other, "Continuity" items. Jmg38 (talk) 19:50, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite welcome, Jmg. I find it a lot of fun to create/add to Continuity sections.
In answer to some of your other questions:
  • No, this is the first appearance of the sonic trowel, although it has cousins in Sara Jane Smith's sonic lipstick and the Paternoster Gang's devices (see "Deep Breath" for those). I didn't add them into Continuity because they aren't relevant to this special.
  • Clara once commented on Doctor Capaldi's grey hair as well, in "Deep Breath". Again, no Continuity reference as it's irrelevant.
  • Someone slipped in a Continuity reference to the Doctor telling River that "a thing happened" which granted him more regenerations ("The Time of the Doctor"), but I can't find a source for it. Still, I've left it alone, as it is applicable, and I still believe not all Continuity items need to be sourced.
Happy 2016, all !!
Ooznoz (talk) 13:05, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Ooznoz[reply]

River As Companion[edit]

Is there a reason River is not listed as the companion for this episode? What constitutes a companion for an episode? 78.146.32.2 (talk) 15:19, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to the discussion at Talk:Companion (Doctor Who)#River Song. Alex|The|Whovian 23:59, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Continuity[edit]

"This Christmas special contains elements of past Doctor Who Christmas specials. Part of the story takes place on an space-bound cruise ship, echoing "Voyage of the Damned"." Quite apart from the random synesthesia (how does an image "echo"?), isn't it much more likely to refer to the much more recent Mummy on the Orient Express (a luxury vehicle in space), by virtue of the fact it's the only other episode where the Doctor is seen to wear the same dark suit and cravat? No, I'm not arguing for that, the point I'm making is that putting X and Y together like this is WP:SYNTH. Please stop forcing visual similarities into continuity. Will all episodes set on nostalgic luxury space nostalgia vehicles necessarily be referring back to this or the previous one? This is the same sort of trainspotting (to use User:DonQuixote's apposite word) that had us linking Clara dangling out of the TARDIS back to the Doctor dangling out of the TARDIS a few episodes back. Please, let us try to keep these sections from becoming fancruft-filled trivia lists. It's great we've got so much energy out there, but please try to channel it where it works best, as it's not always here. Also, please note that when writing about fiction, use of the word "echo" implies that the author (in this case the screenwriter or the director) is interpreted as doing this deliberately. We do not know that, even if a source thinks so we can't put that here. It would go under some sort of analysis unless someone from the show said that's what they were doing. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 04:05, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Husbands_of_River_Song&oldid=1199576760"