Talk:Twelfth Doctor/Archive 1

Archive 1

Doctor Who Live: The Next Doctor

Hello to all you lucky people of the near future who know the identity of the Twelfth Doctor. Hope they're a good'un. Anyway, please see this old diff for some text and sources on the reveal programme. It was prematurely made, but there's some useful stuff there that can save some work for people putting together this page. U-Mos (talk) 14:33, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

PS Doctor Who Live: The Next Doctor's redirect will need altering once this page is created. U-Mos (talk) 14:35, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK

Hi, when this passes 1500 bytes, it can be nominated for DYK. (Or ITN...) Matty.007 18:55, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Now passed 1,500. I wouldn't know where to start to credit authors though, so someone else feel free to nom! matt (talk) 22:07, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

It's typically the one who has expanded it the most, so I say that's your job! I can help if you need it. Glimmer721 ^talk 22:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

OK, I'll nominate it later today. Matty.007 07:08, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

I changed it from a re-direct, and put the basics in, and have the second highest number of edits on the page, and Mattgirling has the most edits on the page, so I will jointly nom. Matty.007 08:43, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

You can find the DYK nom here. Thanks, Matty.007 08:58, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Doctor Who - WHO doctor

I'm sure I'm not the only one who noticed that Capaldi actually plays a doctor for the WHO in World War Z - a movie that premiered a month before Matt Smith's exit from the series was officially announced and was obviously scripted and filmed long before that. Surely this can't be a coincidence? And if not, shouldn't it be mentioned in the article? dllu (talk) 06:57, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it was a coincidence. And we can only include it in the articles if you have a reliable source saying it wasn't. Regards SoWhy 07:27, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Of course it's a coincidence. How can it possibly not be? –anemoneprojectors– 08:01, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Black actor turned down the part

According to Neil Gaiman Glimmer721 ^talk 16:20, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Gaiman doesn't make clear if the turned-down offer was for the twelfth, or for an earlier regeneration. The author commenting on Gaiman's statement appears to assume it was for the twelfth - but Gaiman's statement itself is ambiguous and could be a reference to a candidate to have been the eleventh. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:23, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Although not commented on by anyone in a position of authority, a few people are pretty confident that Chiwetel Ejiofor had been the main choice for Eleven, which then went to an open casting call which turned up Benedict Cumberbatch and Matt Smith as contenders for the part.Zythe (talk) 20:37, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Cumberbatch is a myth as he was already locked in to be Sherlock at the time. What is true is Matt Smith tried out for Watson and that led him to Doctor Who. Neither Ejiofor nor Idris Elba would have been even considered for the Twelfth Doctor considering both are currently involved in making major films for Hollywood; neither would do TV now (Elba's Luther is over but a film version is planned). 68.146.70.124 (talk) 21:54, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Is it worth...?

In the Casting section, would it be worth mentioning all the initial speculation that went on about the possibility of a female Doctor? 67.170.218.57 (talk) 07:34, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

No. Mezigue (talk) 07:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

To clarify, it would only really be worth mentioning if the rumors were directly from the people who where doing the casting, or a female actress saying that she had auditioned for the role. Random people speculating "I wonder if the Doctor will be a girl" is not the same as "Well, we were considering it and auditioned a few women for the role, but ultimately we decided otherwise". On is basically trivia, the other would be background information. Human.v2.0 (talk) 10:39, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Day of the Doctor - Twelfth -> Thirteenth

So given the events of The Day of the Doctor, where we learn that John Hurt was in fact the 9th Doctor, do we need to go through and edit all the articles appropriately? For instance, Peter Capaldi will now be the thirteenth Doctor. I hate retcons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.22.48.93 (talk) 23:26, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Good news: no, you don't need to. Mezigue (talk) 23:30, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

No. He's indeed the thirteenth 'incarnation', but he's still known as the 'Twelfth Doctor'. John Hurt is the 'War Doctor'. 5.66.230.171 (talk) 00:46, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

See [1] - numbering stays the same. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:47, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

The War Doctor

On other pages (eg. Ninth Doctor talk page) it is suggested that the sequence for the War Doctor should be between the Eighth Doctor and the Ninth Doctor (McGann -> Hurt -> Eccleston). However, as Wikipedia is written from a real world perspective and not from in-universe perpesctive, this has been disputed.

I suggest that the War Doctor is placed between the Eleventh Doctor and the Twelfth Doctor in the sequence, as this is the order they will appear on-screen in real world time (so Smith -> Hurt -> Capaldi). This stops the War Doctor being 'orphaned' in the preceeding/suceeding sequence.

As a result, the sidebar should be changed to: "Preceded by: War Doctor (John Hurt)" The page for the Eleventh Doctor should also be changed accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.61.85.254 (talk) 23:43, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

That's misleading too. John Hurt was a guest star. Had he been cast in the role as Smith's replacement prior to Capaldi then I think he'd go fine there, but he wasn't.Zythe (talk) 08:46, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

New article on viral video - From The Doctor to my son Thomas

• From The Doctor to my son Thomas

I've created a new article on viral video From The Doctor to my son Thomas.

Help or suggestions with additional secondary sources would be appreciated on the article's talk page, at Talk:From The Doctor to my son Thomas.

Thank you, — Cirt (talk) 23:18, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Colin Baker Arc of Infinity citation

Why does there need to be an citation when all it takes is a Google search on 'Arc of Infinity, Colin Baker' and see him in scenes with Peter Davidson WHO we all know was the 5th Doctor. [[2]] Jking88 (talk) 00:06, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Because having citations is better than none for verifiability. Mr. Gerbear|Talk 08:34, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion Hello, should the ""Doctor who live: the next doctor" be added to the list of videos of Dr.who that are not episodes or specials? I didn't find it in wikipedia. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.129.236.138 (talk) 22:32, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Early references

The following text has been added and removed multiple times in the last few days. Is there an consensus as to whether it is worthy of inclusion

The Doctor's twelfth incarnation has been briefly mentioned earlier in the series. In The Ultimate Foe, a serial from the 23rd season (The Trial of a Time Lord), a mysterious figure known as the Valeyard is revealed to be a distillation of the Doctor's darker side, from between his twelfth and final incarnations.

personally I think it is. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 18:37, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I'd say no, because it doesn't really add anything to this article other than explaining that the character has a twelfth and thirteenth incarnation, which is surely referenced at other times throughout the series' long history. The text tells us more about the Valeyard character and nothing about the Twelfth Doctor. I'd just leave it out, personally. Justin.Parallax (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Based on what Justin has just stated above, I agree that it's more in line with the Valeyard's article. DonQuixote (talk) 23:14, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I think I've said this before but I also vote no; the Valeyard isn't a reference to this Twelfth Doctor as far as we know. If Moffat is going to revisit this idea then it would be worthy of inclusion in the appropriate section about writing or whatever. But we don't know that yet, and The Trial of a Time Lord was not deliberately connected to Peter Capaldi's Doctor, unless the production team had a TARDIS. Glimmer721 ^talk 01:26, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

This Twelfth Doctor? There will only be one Twelfth Doctor, and that's already been confirmed to be Peter Capaldi. Unless you haven't even watched the show and don't know it's workings. I'm voting to keep it there, the information is valid and true. It concerns the twelfth regeneration of The Doctor - why wouldn't it be on the page of the Twelfth Doctor? 220.245.146.235 (talk) 03:40, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I understand where you're coming from in this regard, but I think you're getting ahead of yourself here. It's far more a reference to the character of the Valeyard than to this character. I mean, ask yourself this - what if the writers decide simply not to pursue that particular storyline? We don't know. We know nothing at this point. I've watched every remaining episode of the show, there's any number of plot lines that are simply abandoned and never mentioned again, so let's just wait and see if this is picked up or not before making any commitments. Justin.Parallax (talk) 15:28, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

It also strikes me as the sort of "trainspotting" trivia that proliferates on Who-related articles. Mezigue (talk) 18:16, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I have no strong feelings either way and I'm happy to go with the consensus that's agreed here. It'd be good to get a few of the IP editors and/or whoever added it in the first place to contribute here though. => Spudgfsh (Text Me!) 18:21, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

The article should be written from a real-world perspective and much of the discussion above is an in-universe perspective (or, as Mezigue put it, "the sort of "trainspotting" trivia that proliferates on Who-related articles"). Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. There is a Who-specific wiki where such content is more appropriate. Bondegezou (talk) 17:15, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

A suggestion

Links to 'one or several' websites, discussion groups and wikis are provided so that people wishing to entertain themselves with speculation etc can entertain themselves rather than having several 'This is WP not fandom' exchanges here.

To clarify - is the PC doctor 'an extra life' or 'the first of a new sequence of doctors'?

It would be quite feasible to have 'a Time Lord Narrator Character' with a different title - Taggart and Blake's Seven continued without the name-character being present; Midsomer Murders had a changeover of Narrator Detectives and Inspector Morse/Lewis ditto with a series name-change.

The main topics that have to be resolved - the return of Gallifray into the series universe, and the end of the Time War. Jackiespeel (talk) 17:37, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Or we could expect people to be intelligent enough to google a place to hold these discussions. Human.v2.0 (talk) 02:12, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Most people are - but sometimes 'enthusiastic would-be fanficcers and similar' want pointing in the right direction :) Jackiespeel (talk) 11:10, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Suggested addition

The John Hurt question needs to be addressed. I suggest the following paragraph be added at some point in the article.

Although Peter Capaldi has been officially announced as playing the Twelfth Doctor, this is pending clarification as to the identity, and nomenclature, of a previously unknown incarnation of the Doctor, played by John Hurt, introduced in the 2013 episode "The Name of the Doctor".

With that in mind, we should be prepared for potentially moving this article to Thirteenth Doctor depending on what happens in the anniversary special. (But not until then - we don't know what they'll end up doing with the John Hurt Doctor - he could spark a renumbering of the Doctors or he could be considered something else. 68.146.70.124 (talk) 15:28, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Such a statement ('pending clarification') is not encyclopedic, but rather speculative. So oppose.

The idea that John Hurt's role will affect Capaldi's character in any way is original research, so I don't think it should be mentioned at this point. The ending of "The Name of the Doctor" made it quite clear (to me at least) that Hurt's character won't be known by the "Doctor" name, probably to avoid the renumbering issue – Eccleston is seemingly the tenth incarnation, but still the "Ninth Doctor". If Capaldi's incarnation starts referring to himself as the "Thirteenth Doctor" next series, and official sources back him up, then perhaps a move could be considered, but I think it's too early even to think about it.

The articles for the modern Doctors may need to be tweaked, though. Will we have to start the Ninth Doctor article with "The Ninth Doctor is the tenth incarnation of the protagonist..." and so on? Does the series' internal canon overrule the real-world production history, in which Eccleston is undeniably the ninth incarnation? Will all future Doctor articles begin with a note explaining the relevance of Hurt's incarnation to the numbering? It'll be interesting to see how that goes down. —Flax5 16:09, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

As the Doctor says at the end of "The Name of the Doctor" that he does not consider John Hurt's incarnation to deserve the name "Doctor", and just because I don't think they're planning to radically alter how millions refer to the characters, I'm assuming there won't be a big change. Of course my opinion doesn't matter and we're on a wait-and-see basis. Also, what do you guys think of the "Early references" section? It seems to imply that there is a connection to the Valeyard and Capaldi's Doctor, but we don't know they'll address yet, and at any rate The Trial of a Time Lord is not a direct reference to the future Twelfth Doctor. I'm not sure how to deal with that. Glimmer721 ^talk 17:15, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

At the end of "The Day of the Doctor" John Hurt's character seems to be recognized by himself and 10 & 11 as being "Doctor again" and Matt Smith's incarnation basically says that Hurt's Doctor was the most like the Doctor on a day where it was impossible to get it right. So he's certainly an incarnation of the Doctor... but I don't think that it will change the established numbering of the Doctors. BBC announced that Capaldi will play the 12th Doctor so we should assume, until the BBC says otherwise, that the established numbering is still in place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaiotu (talk • contribs) 05:01, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Moffat has confirmed the numbering does not change (see below). To state otherwise based on what was said by fictional characters in an episode would go against WP:WAF. –anemoneprojectors– 16:32, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Technically, the War Doctor became the de facto Ninth Doctor in the closing scene of Day of the Doctor as he was accepted as the Doctor and accepted the name. However it was only temporary as he then lost his memory of the event, and status quo was preserved. BBC Worldwide, whose word is law, is marketing the John Hurt incarnation as the War Doctor (with some merchandise using the variant "Other Doctor" as the name "War Doctor" was not revealed until November). 68.146.70.124 (talk) 21:57, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps a way to mitigate the numbering issue is to stop referring to them by number, but rather by actor portraying them. The Doctor himself doesn't think he's the 12th or 13th, and the only mention in the show is how many times he has regenerated. The numbers come from people who like to categorize and classify, rather than from the narrative of the show. I myself prefer to think of John Hurt's incarnation as the REAL Ninth Doctor, because in the end, he WAS the Doctor and I count incarnations within the story, not series leads. It was a wonderful story and just because the Marketing department at the BBC wants to advertise a number doesn't mean that Wikipedia need fall into the same trap. Peter Capaldi is the 12th Series Lead, the 13th incarnation of the character, having had 13 regenerations (one of which did not change his incarnation). 208.250.96.20 (talk) 16:28, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

FOURTEENTH!

http://www.starburstmagazine.com/tv-news/7304-tv-news-moffat-reveals-matt-smith-is-13th-doctor-peter-capaldi-is-14th 101.168.42.169 (talk) 23:39, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Regeneration, not incarnation (13), nor Doctor (12).Zythe (talk) 12:06, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

You're going to have to be a bit clearer - what exactly is your implication? groovygower (talk) 03:58, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

It's possible 101 is referring to the fact that the Twelfth Doctor is actually the fourteenth incarnation due to the regeneration count given in Time of the Doctor that included the Tenth Doctor's aborted regeneration in "Journey's End". However this is too complex for this article. What I have done, however, is add a paragraph indicating that this is technically the 13th incarnation (since the Tenth Doctor did not change in "Journey's End") due to the existence of the unnumbered War Doctor. 68.146.52.234 (talk) 18:59, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

I think that since this is the subject of unending debate in the fandom, it is best to leave it out unless you can find a reliable source for it, since what you just did essentially constitutes original research. G S Palmer (talk) 19:12, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

13th Doctor.

He's the 13th Doctor. Matt Smith is actually playing the 12th Doctor, Tennant was the 11th, Eccleston was the 10th, and John Hurt was the 9th. (Unless you're counting as seen in show, but that still makes Peter Capaldi the 13th.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.246.39.20 (talk) 01:17, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Please see the previous section - per Stephen Moffat, John Hurt does not count as the ninth doctor, so Capaldi is still the 12th. -mattbuck (Talk) 01:33, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

No, it's worse than that. Now according to Moffatt, Matt is the 13th incarnation, because the Meta-Crisis regen counts. [3] Which personally I thought it should. At this point, I don't think we should change anything until after The Time of the Doctor. Because God knows what else Moffat will reveal before then. --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Border Town ‖ 02:59, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Just for the heads up, this discussion is also ongoing at War Doctor, I suggest discussion is centralised there. Thanks, Matty.007 06:48, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

This is a quote from Moffat after the episode was aired at the 50th Birthday anniversary celebrations (after what has already been quoted re The Night of the Doctor), and featured in the Metro this Sunday

"‘He has no more ever called himself the 11th Doctor than he would call himself Matt Smith. The Doctor doesn’t know off the top of his head [what number he is]‘ he said. ‘If you worry about such things, and I do, then I specifically said John Hurt’s Doctor doesn’t use the title. [Matt Smith's Doctor] is in his 12th body but he’s the 11th Doctor, however there is no such character as the 11th Doctor – he’s just the Doctor – that’s what he calls himself.’"

From reading this I believe Moffat is saying not to put too much emphasis on the numbering other than as a sequential chronological ordering - as to whether this is In-Universe or not I haven't the foggiest. Either way there is still a fundamental issue that the "War Doctor" brings up. Either the War Doctor is the 9th regeneration [in-universe interpretation] in which case he should rightly be included after McGann before Ecclestone OR he should be labelled the 12 "person to play the doctor" [real universe] on the basis that he was the next doctor to be featured on screen after Matt Smith, albeit only for a few minutes before Capaldi (who incidentally was referred to by the Gallifreyan as the Thirteenth). I would suggest that the proceeded/succeeded section on the infobox for the 8th, War, and 9th doctors be amended to 8th->War Doctor->9th in that orderAprhys (talk) 20:01, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

One thing is for sure. Capaldi isn't the 12th 'incarnation' of the doctor - so someone might consider rewording that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.97.226.4 (talk) 09:46, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

A real life case for arguing over the count would be Louis VIII of France being 'Louis I of England.'

'The main point is' - the Capaldi Doctor Who #seems# to be the last regeneration - and 'this talk page should not be for speculation as to what will happen when his regeneration comes in turn (with a redirect to appropriate Whovian discussion groups and wikis.' (The transition may or may not involve Coal Hill School or Susan Foreman.) Jackiespeel (talk) 22:39, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Clearly stated in 'Day of the doctor' by the time-lords that there were 13 Doctors, also the 'war' doctor is still the doctor and that makes him the 9th Doctor and the fact is the storyline backs this up when both David/Matt/John hurt as the the Doctors agree that he is no more known as the War Doctor but now the Doctor, even the Doomsday device (played by Billie Piper) calls him the Doctor frequently because Matt Smith mentions something about John Hurt he was the Doctor when nobody else could be. Also Moffat said David was the 12th because the Doctor only has 12 life's and that the Doctor was on his last life in 'The time of the Doctor' so either the Peter is the 12th with or without John hurt because Moffat has officially called Peter the 13th Doctor. Link here --Ronnie42 (talk) 17:08, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Moffat stated in interviews that he specifically wrote it so you could call Peter Capaldi's Doctor the Twelfth Doctor by omitting War Doctor from the count; Smith even gave an explanation of the numbering to the same effect in "Time", in which he called Tennant "Number Ten". The BBC website, Strax's video about the Doctor's first twelve incarnations and comments from Matt Smith all also say the numbering stays the way it is, with the War Doctor as "War" not 9, regardless of what happened in the story at the end - which the War Doctor doesn't remember. The source you're linking to features Moffat explaining about how many regenerations the Doctor has used, and the journalist concluding Smith is "thirteenth," though recent episodes and more fulsome accounts of Moffat's interview all still say "Eleventh Doctor" for Smith and "Twelfth Doctor" for Capaldi.Zythe (talk) 17:50, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Capaldi is clearly the 13th Doctor. Hurt regenerated in and out, he had a Tardis and a sonic screwdriver. What more do you need to be a Dr?

A degree and a stethoscope? Mezigue (talk) 13:59, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

The Doctor's numberings aren't about "counting" the Doctors anymore, as for the purposes of ordinal naming, the War Doctor is excepted.Zythe (talk) 16:24, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

BBC Worldwide is officially marketing the Peter Capaldi Doctor as the Twelfth Doctor. Their word is law. 68.146.70.124 (talk) 21:52, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

We've been over this topic already. In 'Day of the doctor' when 10/11/12 doctor turns up around 'The Moment', then the Time-lord mentions 13 Doctors before they freeze Gallifrey in the pocket universe, there were 13 Tardis's and that included Peter Capaldi which is the 13th Doctor, at the end of the opposite both 11, 12 both agree that 10th is the Doctor, I quote from David 'you were the Doctor when it wasn't possible to get it right', later the 10th Doctor even says 'I am the Doctor'. Moffatt does like to joke about things but the fact is the show itself is where the facts comes from. --Ronnie42 (talk) 20:49, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

We have been over this topic already and we have decided that the Doctor who regenerated twice is the 10th, the leather jacket one is the 9th, the bowtie one is the 11th and the eyebrows one is the 12th. The one in the Time War is the War Doctor. This was confirmed by the Strax Field Report. If you don't consider that canon, then the Time of the Doctor is. In that, it was specified that "number 10 regenerated and kept the same face", confirming that even the Doctor accepts that the War Doctor doesn't get numbered. This was after The Day of the Doctor, even after Clara briefly called him the Twelfth. The final confirmation is the voiceover towards the regeneration, "11's hour is ending and the clock is striking 12" or something like that. Back in Year 10 & 11 English class, we were practically forced into being able to spot subtle messages like this. The original system still applies. (I like the fact I wrote this without calling any Doctor by their actors name). That's it. It has been established out and in-universe. This discussion should never have gone beyond 2013 and I've just wasted 10 minutes on replying to this. All Doctor articles have the correct number. --77.102.238.119 (talk) 10:05, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Difficulty understanding Capaldi

I've just edited down the section discussion Capaldi retaining his Scots accent. The two articles (the Welch and Scottish ones being word-for-word identical) assume U.S. audiences are having difficulty based on a handful of bitchy tweets, at least one of which attributed to a supposedly American tweeter who is actually Irish (see his tweet splash page, which locates him in Dublin.) The section was also worded in such a way that it took the articles' overstatement, and further overstated the problem by over-emphasizing America/under-emphasizing Britain, while making it sound as though all Americans needed subtitles (total nonsense) or that the U.S. broadcast is subtitled (untrue). What is clear when the articles are read carefully, is that the range of English-speaking audiences (British, Irish, Canadian and America) have a subset of viewers who are having difficulty with Capaldi's rapid delivery and/or Scots accent. There is no indication that the handful of cited tweets is an accurate indicator of the overall audience's experiences with his accent in any of the four countries; generally Twitter is the bitchiest extreme of the vox populi. As a result, I have made cuts that present the content in a more measured way, removing the "those stupid Americans can't understand him" slant. --Drmargi (talk) 17:17, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Definitely an improvement; I think it's still a bit UNDUE. Based on the sources we have, I'd favour a single sentence on this topic, along the lines of "Some viewers indicated difficulty understanding Capaldi due to his accent and speed of delivery."--Trystan (talk) 17:45, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! I wasn't quite that brave in making the cuts, but certainly wouldn't resist were you to make further reductions. --Drmargi (talk) 17:59, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm inclined to say it's now gone too far the other way, making it sound as though Capaldi is incomprehensible according to a linguistics "expert" (seriously?). A whole paragraph is being devoted to--what exactly? That Capaldi speaks complicated lines quickly (as did Matt Smith, as did David Tennant, etc.). The whole reason Jenna Coleman was cast as Clara was that she could speak as quickly as Smith, supposedly. So what's left? That Capaldi has made the "controversial" decision to speak in his native accent--as did Ecclestone, as did McCoy, as did the actor who played Peregrine Took and indeed most actors around the world all the time. This should be seriously pared down again. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 03:11, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Furthermore the articles being cited (which essentially are covering the same story (a few negative tweets) in different online newspapers) do not support the assertion that the accent is the "problem"--if indeed there is one. My scissors are ready. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 03:23, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

And what would 'they' have made of Taggart's Glaswegian accents? Jackiespeel (talk) 15:44, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Additions and corrections

I added two things. First, there are many examples in the media where Capaldi is erroneously identified as the first Doctor to use a Scottish accent (not true, that was Sylvester McCoy. Second, the character history was written in a way that made it seem the Doctor stopped travelling with Clara because she lied to him about Danny coming back to life, which is not what happens in the episode at all. 68.146.52.234 (talk) 17:39, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

• Also added to the intro that Capaldi and Coleman are returning for Series 9, using the UPI wire service as source. 68.146.52.234 (talk) 14:32, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

I had an issue with the whole "first Scottish Doctor" thing as well, because I knew McCoy's accent (while slighter, not as pronounced as Capaldi's) was also Scottish in Doctor Who. He did not put on a fake accent like Tennant did.

Actually, if I remember correctly, that's exactly what happened at the end of that episode ("Death in Heaven"). They split because the Doctor knows she can't travel with him while with Danny, and Clara lies to him about Danny coming back (he actually sent the young boy through in his place). While they did get back together during the Christmas episode, they had split because of that lie. And if she didn't outright say that "Danny came back" (can't remember the exact words) she lied by omission by not telling the Doctor that he didn't. So the Doctor didn't stop traveling with her due to the fact that she lied (i.e. it was the lie that he was upset about) but because OF the lie (i.e. he believed it). Vyselink (talk) 14:53, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Series 9

Currently, the chronology section of the infobox states that this doctor only appeared in series 8. But, since we are counting Last Christmas as part of series 9, should the box be updated to reflect this?Status: Stuck in the Vortex (talk) 01:41, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

We update infoboxes as events occur - i.e. we add Series 9 once Series 9 has premiered. (Last Christmas is not part of Series 9 as such, we've only located the special into the article for convenience's sake.) Alex|The|Whovian 02:05, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Footnote for first appearance

I think it's perfectly fair to put a footnote next to the "first appearance" header because not everyone will scroll down to "appearances" and some may think this to be an error. So putting a footnote referencing the cameo does the job for anyone who scrolls over it without the need to make changes. Does that make sense? 68.146.52.234 (talk) 03:32, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. Although better yet, I think we should quite simply give "Day" as his first appearance, not "Time", since it's an inbox intended for simple fact-delivery and not for endless qualifications.Zythe (talk) 11:43, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Incorrect. That particular variable is for when the incarnation of the Doctor in question took over as series regular, which was in "The Time of the Doctor", and not "The Day of the Doctor". Alex|The|Whovian 11:49, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, no, it says "First appearance" not "Officially began as du jour Doctor".Zythe (talk) 10:37, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

I removed the footnote for several reasons. 1) it was badly written 2) putting pedantic explanations in footnotes is a bad practice 3) it is completely unnecessary. Capaldi does not appear in The Day of the Doctor. His eyes flash on the screen for half a second! Big deal. That is not an appearance, it's a subliminal trailer at best! Mezigue (talk) 11:19, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

I agree that a footnote is helpful here, but I support leaving the first appearance listed as "The Time of the Doctor". The footnote could be as simple as "While a brief glimpse of Capaldi portraying the Twelfth Doctor is seen in "The Day of the Doctor", his first full appearance was in the subsequent episode." Infoboxes are for conveying quick information, but information can't always be condensed down without being misleading. Sometimes a bit of qualification is needed.--Trystan (talk) 01:11, 12 November 2015 (UTC)