Talk:Logopolis

message: Was the Watcher played by Davison? Kuralyov 18:51, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope — it was Adrian Gibbs, uncredited.  (See here.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just one addition to Josiah's note that may explain what Kuralyov was remembering. Josiah is correct that Gibbs had played the Watcher throughout the serial. However, during the regeneration scene we first see Baker lying on the ground. He then begins to merge with the Watcher. We then see Gibbs face in the white makeup of the Watcher. Then, for a brief moment, we see Davison's face in the same white makeup and then we see him without the makeup just before he rises up on his elbows. I don't mean to speak for Kuralyov (and apologies for doing so) but if this is what you are remembering then, technically, you could say that Davison did play the Watcher for just a moment at the end of episode four. I hope this is of some help.MarnetteD | Talk 16:02, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But, "He (The Watcher) was the Doctor all the time!" Format (talk) 08:03, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Watcher

message: Should  I  add   The  Watcher,since  he  is  technically  the  5th  incarnation  of  the  Doctor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.49.42.137 (talk • contribs) 15:23, September 19, 2008
:No, because the cast listing should reflect the programme's credits.  And despite the line "the Watcher was the Doctor all along", Gibbs is credited as The Watcher.
:I could get into a fan debate about the difference between a "full" incarnation and a projection like the Watcher or Cho-Je, but that would get us into WP:NOTAFORUM territory.  For Wikipedia purposes, we should just stick to the facts — in this case, the credits. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 16:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doctor 

message: The image :Image:Regeneration4to5.gif is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:30, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 08:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Regeneration4to5.gif

message: Is the anime Puella Magi Madoka Magica an remake of Logopolis? To me, it is a remake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starkiryu64 (talk • contribs) 
:You would need to cite a reliable source that explicitly states that. DonQuixote (talk) 06:16, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia works by citing and summarising reliable sources. DonQuixote (talk) 23:16, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  to followup on DQ's posts what you are engaging in is original research and synthesis. You have seen a connection - which is fine BTW - I've done things like that many times over the years. But Wikipedia articles require sourcing for any info that it added to them. In other words you would need an interview with the makers of Puella... stating that they were purposely referencing this Dr Who serial in their story. You can certainly write about the connection that you see between these two tales in a blog or on your facebook page though. MarnetteD|Talk 23:31, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remake