# Talk:Space Babies

Is it appropriate to wikilink the Bogeyman in this article? I'm not sure it is; I think in the context of a Doctor Who articles, people would expect a link to go to a page about the Doctor Who Bogeyman, rather than the article about the general concept of a bogeyman. So I think it's confusing and an inappropriate link. However, before removing the links, I thought I should canvass opinion and see what others think. JustAnotherCompanion (talk) 22:01, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

I think it is relevant, as the "bogeyman" portrayed is essentially a variant of the bogeyman. I think it should at the very least be linked in Space Babies § Development (which it currently isn't) as this references the creature being inspired by the folkloric Bogeyman, as well as the lead. Irltoad (talk) 22:23, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
I recently added the links based on the fact that actual people are linked in other episode articles. For example, the "Wild Vlue Yonder" page links to Issac Newton the person, not the character; "The Giggle" links to John Logie Baird the person, not the character. I felt it was the same concept. TheDoctorWho (talk) 22:24, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Space Babies/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: TheDoctorWho (talk · contribs) 06:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Mr Sitcom (talk · contribs) 23:28, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I will review this article in the coming days. Although I am a WikiProject Doctor Who member, I have not edited this article before and am impartial to its successful or unsuccessful nomination. Mr Sitcom (talk) 23:28, 3 January 2025 (UTC)


### Overall
### Lead
Link science fiction television to science fiction on television  Done
Remove the dot (".") after the "T" in Russell T. Davies  Done
A broadcast on BBC One followed later in the day. → A broadcast on BBC One followed later in the day on 11 May  Done
The episode picks up immediately after the events of "The Church on Ruby Road", and follows an alien time traveller known as the Doctor (Ncuti Gatwa) and Ruby Sunday (Millie Gibson) as they travel to a space station and find a baby farm. The babies are under threat by a creature dubbed the Bogeyman. → The episode, which takes place immediately after the events of "The Church on Ruby Road", follows an alien time traveller known as the Doctor (Ncuti Gatwa) and his companion Ruby Sunday (Millie Gibson), as they travel to a space station and discover a baby farm. Together, they learn that the babies are under threat by a creature dubbed "the Bogeyman".  Done
Add a comma after Davies wrote "Space Babies" as a soft reboot  Done


### Plot
The plot, though quite well-written, could do with some copyediting  Done


### Production
#### Development
Link "Bogeyman"  Done
Davies first run → Davies's first run  Done
He also went on to note that Disney did not make any notes on the episode, particularly in relation to the babies brandishing flamethrowers. → He also explained that there were "no Disney notes" in the episode, particularly in relation to babies brandishing flamethrowers, noting that "they're just as much up for this adventure the rest of us are".  Done


#### Filming
The read through for "Space Babies" took place on 1 March 2023. → The read-through for "Space Babies" took place on 1 March 2023, at Wolf Studios Wales, Cardiff.  Done
It was directed by Julie Anne Robinson. → The episode was directed by Julie Anne Robinson. Add [6] citation to the end of this statement  Done
The episode was produced in the series third block alongside the third episode "Boom" in March and April 2023. → It was produced in the series's third block alongside the third episode "Boom" in March and April 2023.  Done
Remove the CultBox source [7]  Done
For Ruby's prehistoric prosthetic, the production team attempted to create something similar to the Silurians but were instructed by Davies to make it appear cute. → For Ruby's prehistoric prosthetic, the production team attempted to create something similar to the Silurians but were instructed by Davies to make the prosthetic appear cute.  Done


#### Casting
[15]: Replace this source with the Radio Times one [12].  Done


### Broadcast and reception
#### Broadcast
followed by a broadcast on BBC One later in the day. → followed by a broadcast on BBC One at 6:20 pm. Add this citation (archived) to the end of the new sentence.  Done
[23]: Is there a better source that specifically refers to the airdates of this episode, instead of a general statement at the end of the article?  Done
The episode is the first non-special to air since the thirteenth series finale "The Vanquishers" (2021).[26] The source does not appear to support this claim.  Done
It provides a list of episodes that have aired. The most recent one not labeled special was The Vanquishers Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:20, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
All good, I see it now. Mr Sitcom (talk) 00:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Disney also handled → Disney+ handled  Done


#### Ratings
Louise Griffin from Radio Times attributed the low ratings to the episodes launch on BBC iPlayer nearly 20 hours previously. → Louise Griffin from Radio Times attributed the low ratings to the episode's launch on BBC iPlayer nearly twenty hours previously.  Done


#### Critical reception
ultimately, not making sense." → ultimately, not making sense".  Done
and noted the message as an allegory about the rollback of abortion rights in the US to be "accompanied by the deafening scrape of a crowbar". → and noted that the episode's allegory about the rollback of abortion rights in the United States was "accompanied by the deafening scrape of a crowbar".  Done
stating it felt "a tad too lightweight and kitsch" and felt it was too similar to "The Church on Ruby Road". → stating that the episode felt "a tad too lightweight and kitsch" and was too similar to "The Church on Ruby Road".  Done
He also has mixed feelings on the plot, particularly calling the Boogeyman's change of character as "so jarringly sudden", particularly how the babies, initially terrified of it before, come to care for it. → He also had mixed feelings on the plot, particularly with regards to the Boogeyman's change of character, which he believed to be "so jarringly sudden" that he wondered whether a scene was missing.  Done
[19]: Change inews.co.uk simply to i, as it was then known  Done
Ed Power felt that it had → Ed Power felt that the episode had  Done
Den of Geek writer Stefan Mohamed criticised the episodes CGI. He also praised how the episode followed up on the "Timeless Child" plot line. → Den of Geek writer Stefan Mohamed praised the way in which the episode followed up on the "Timeless Child" plotline, but was critical of the episode's CGI effects.  Done
Inverse's Bui Tran-Hoai thought the episode was a "mixed bag", describing it as "an outrageously goofy sci-fi adventure involving talking babies and a terrifying creature that stalks an abandoned space station" that "spends much of the runtime establishing who the Doctor is and what he does, leaving longtime fans to basically twiddle their thumbs as they wait for the good stuff". → Inverse's Bui Tran-Hoai believed the episode to be a "mixed bag", describing it as "an outrageously goofy sci-fi adventure" that spends too long establishing the Doctor Who premise to its new Disney+ viewers, leaving long-term fans to "twiddle their thumbs as they wait for the good stuff".  Done
Reviewing the episode Radio Times, Morgan Jeffery believed the story to be simple, but saying that it should please both new and returning viewers. → Reviewing the episode for the Radio Times, Morgan Jeffery believed the story to be simple, but felt that it should nonetheless please both new and returning viewers.  Done
Jennifer Zahn with Vulture noted an allegory between the thematic element of the baby farm and the overturning of Roe v. Wade in the United States. She also felt the episode failed to sufficiently explain why the Doctor could not use the TARDIS to move the space station to safety, and felt it was vague what will happen to the Bogeyman and the babies when they land. She also criticised the CGI animations of the babies' facial movements. → Vulture's Jennifer Zhan noted the allegory between the thematic element of the baby farm and the overturning of Roe v. Wade in the United States. Zhan believed that some plot elements in the episode did not make sense, and criticised the CGI animations of the babies's facial movements.  Done
Citation [33] is a review from WP:DEXERTO. Admittedly, I am not sure whether it is reliable nonetheless, so I will let you decide.  Done (removed)
Emmet Asher-Perrin called the episode "intensely goofy" but praised that "the Doctor chooses to connect with the bogeyman" noting it as a better contrast to his killing the Goblin King's in "The Church on Ruby Road". → Emmet Asher-Perrin called the episode "intensely goofy". Perrin praised how the Doctor chooses to connect with the bogeyman, noting it as a better contrast to his killing the Goblin King in "The Church on Ruby Road".  Not done (removed for questionable reliability)


### In print
Rename this section "Home media" and add info relating to DVD/BluRay releases (see The Church on Ruby Road#Home media)  Done
Firstly, this section needs updating to reflect that the novel has now been published. There are some useful citations at List of Doctor Who novelisations#Fifteenth Doctor  Done
[35]: Change name from DWN 1 (Doctor Who Target Collection 2024, 2) to Doctor Who: Space Babies (Target Collection). Change Amazon.co.uk to Amazon.com  Done Amazon.com is not being cited, Amazon.co.uk is
Changed this one to the neutral Amazon, I try to avoid including .com's or co.uk's in the work field when possible TheDoctorWho (talk) 07:19, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
@OlifanofmrTennant: not sure why Amazon is disputed I agree with not changing to Amazon.com, but regardless of whether it's Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk, they're both the company Amazon. This is further confirmed by the instructions at Template:Cite web which says Name of the work containing the source. The name of the work is "Amazon" not "Amazon.co.uk". The same way the work is "Radio Times" not "RadioTimes.com" or "CultBox" not "CultBox.co.uk". TheDoctorWho (talk) 07:29, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Fair enough Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:36, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
[36]: Change name from Doctor Who Space Babies to Doctor Who: Space Babies. Change Rare Waves to Rarewaves  Done


### General comments
Please note: All citations mentioned are taken from this revision of the article.

@Mr Sitcom: I believe that all your comments have been addressed. TheDoctorWho (talk) 04:53, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
They have indeed. Well done @TheDoctorWho: and @OlifanofmrTennant: on successfully nominating this well-written, in-depth article! Mr Sitcom (talk) 05:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)