Jump to content

Talk:River Song (Doctor Who): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:River Song (Doctor Who)/Archive 1) (bot
Melody Williams
Line 33: Line 33:


::::::: Since Dec 25th 2015 her bisexuality is canon. The twelfth Doctor reminds her of her second wife. [[User:Judith Sunrise|Judith Sunrise]] ([[User talk:Judith Sunrise|talk]]) 13:08, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
::::::: Since Dec 25th 2015 her bisexuality is canon. The twelfth Doctor reminds her of her second wife. [[User:Judith Sunrise|Judith Sunrise]] ([[User talk:Judith Sunrise|talk]]) 13:08, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
M
Why the character's name Melody Pond and not Melody Williams or Melody Pond Williams? Why has her father been castrated when it comes to her surname?--[[Special:Contributions/75.130.91.73|75.130.91.73]] ([[User talk:75.130.91.73|talk]]) 12:52, 28 January 2018 (UTC)


== Ref "check date values" error message? ==
== Ref "check date values" error message? ==

Revision as of 12:53, 28 January 2018

Orientation

Other than the statement made by Moffat that Song is bisexual, is there anything in the Doctor Who canon that substantiates this? — Loadmaster (talk) 22:50, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. The only allusion to River's 'open mindedness' is a remark she makes about an auton, which is a typical "Captain Jack" type of joke.Zythe (talk) 12:36, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So then we should change the Category:Fictional bisexual females to Category:Fictional females, then, right? — Loadmaster (talk) 20:41, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We have the quote from the creator, and the category is a useful way of linking together these articles which variously describe representations and attempted representations of bisexual women in fiction. Imo it's a matter of interest that some of these characters have been given explicit scenes to show their orientations and some haven't, despite the protestations of their creators (Xena falls into this category as well). Thankfully, Wikipedia doesn't have to care whether River is "canonically" "really" bisexual, or about the differences between a writer's intent and possible interpretations of his work. It only cares about sources, and a creator who is the character's primary writer is a fairly authoritative one. (I also wouldn't include anyone in Category:Fictional females anyway; only its subcategories, really.)Zythe (talk) 10:21, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There's also her comment in "Silence in the Library" that Lux was the only member of the team she was in that she didn't fancy, which is why she had him keep his helmet on. So she did fancy Other Dave, Proper Dave, Anita and Miss Evangelista. -- Noneofyourbusiness (talk) 17:28, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This interpretation relies on a specific connotation of the word "fancy", i.e., "sexually attracted to". Perhaps she simply meant "like"? To label her with a specific orientation, I'd prefer more canonical and less ambiguous references to back it up. — Loadmaster (talk) 18:24, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's the primary meaning in British English. But let's not talk about interpretation or other original research. "Canonical" status, too, is immaterial.Zythe (talk) 10:11, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Since Dec 25th 2015 her bisexuality is canon. The twelfth Doctor reminds her of her second wife. Judith Sunrise (talk) 13:08, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

M Why the character's name Melody Pond and not Melody Williams or Melody Pond Williams? Why has her father been castrated when it comes to her surname?--75.130.91.73 (talk) 12:52, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ref "check date values" error message?

I added the name of two actors, with a supporting news cite. In the references section, I see this:

Lewis, Paul (06 June 2011). "Dr Who fans see double as Baglan Moors twins get starring roles". South Wales Evening Post. Local World. Retrieved 17 August 2015. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

I looked at the help page, rechecked the dates, entered it through the template again, with the same results.

Wikipedia is perfectly happy if I remove the "|date=06 June 2011" element, thusly:

Lewis, Paul. "Dr Who fans see double as Baglan Moors twins get starring roles". South Wales Evening Post. Local World. Retrieved 17 August 2015.

The text inside the original cite is:

cite news|last1=Lewis|first1=Paul|title=Dr Who fans see double as Baglan Moors twins get starring roles|url=http://www.southwales-eveningpost.co.uk/Dr-fans-double-Baglan-Moors-twins-starring-roles/story-12717666-detail/story.html%7Cwork=South Wales Evening Post|publisher=Local World|accessdate=17 August 2015|date=06 June 2011

Why? /Bruce/ [aka Slasher] 23:42, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

River's abilities

Anyone else catch when River first changes clothes on the cruise ship and she says "Not bad for two hundred"? This implies that she has an extended life span, probabaly due to her being part Time Lord. It's well established that Time Lords have long lives, even apart from regeneration -- just look at "The Time of the Doctor" for proof -- and even though River can't regenerate any more, she still has the Gallifreyan life span. Ooznoz (talk) 12:47, 31 December 2015 (UTC)Ooznoz[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on River Song (Doctor Who). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:43, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on River Song (Doctor Who). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:59, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]