Talk:The End of the World (Doctor Who)

message: I was thinking of adding the note:
:Rose's line "Where am I gonna go, Ipswich?" is an exact copy of a line of dialogue spoken by Kate Winslet as Reet in Russell T. Davies' very first television drama, the children's science-fiction serial Dark Season from 1991. In both, the characters are trapped in rooms and told not to go anywhere by the leading male character on the other side of the door.
But I was worried it might be a bit ephemeral for this place. What does anyone else think? Angmering 12:46, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A bit too obscure unless you want to use it as an exmaple of authors' a) recycling their own material, b) leaving hidden tidbits for the cognescenti. If you were to add it, it would either a) make the article appear very nerdy/fanboy, or b) generate some (healthy?) cynicism about Mr Davies attitude to writing. GraemeLeggett 14:20, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that's what I suspected, a bit too obscure. Never mind, it'll definitely get a mention elsewhere online / in print. As to it being cynical - that didn't really strike me, I just thought it was a fun little reference to Dark Season for all those of us who were children in the early 1990s! Angmering 14:43, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if nowhere else, I intend to use that ever so interesting bit of trivia in the About Time style guide I'm writing for the new series with a friend...can I cite you for noticing it? I'll post a link to the guide here when I have it online. -- Guybrush 03:29, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, feel free. It'll also be turning up in Shaun Lyon's Back to the Vortex, which is probably hard surprising given that I'm helping out with that one! Angmering 13:37, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Kate Winslet

message: We should settle this for reasons of consistency. Previous serial and episode articles have had "originally aired" - which is accurate, as they were free-to-air. The new ones have had first broadcast because we now have cable and satellite transmission, but the earlier ones I think should stay as "aired". Thoughts? --khaosworks 17:07, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: tv signals have always been Broadcast for me. You air greviances and clothing, and tv presenters are "on air" when it's live but the BBC broadcasts to the nation GraemeLeggett 20:10, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Transmitted is another option, as favoured by Howe and Walker's The Television Companion. Tim! (talk) 16:48, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Broadcast or "aired"

message: There are some wild inferences in the notes about the eye of harmony! (Especially the pumping). I suspect some light will be thrown on events, at least as far as the spin-off novels are concerned, in the forthcoming novel the Gallifrey Chronicles, and possibly within the series. Tim! (talk) 20:24, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The influences of the novels are probably minimal on the vast majority. (readers of the novels being far less than viewing audience). Mind you my continuity reference is the Discontinuity Guide (which I note the BBC has adapted for its Doctor Who website)GraemeLeggett 20:34, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Lance Parkin, writer of "The Gallifrey Chronicles" has made it abundantly clear that the book will not have anything to do with the new series, although it will supposedly flow quite well into it. We'll just have to wait and see. As for the Eye, my intent was just to point out that there's a problem that has yet to be explained - I left the pumping bit in although it treads very close to speculation, but if people want to remove the note in part or completely, I've got no problems. --khaosworks 20:57, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Destruction of Gallifrey

message: This article needs to be renamed. End of the World is a fairly large disambiguation page and "The End of the World" needs to point to it. I would suggest "The End of the World (television)", however I will solicit your input before making any changes. Stbalbach 16:23, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at other Dr Who episodes with disambig problems, such as Inferno (Doctor Who) I will rename it to "The End of the World (Doctor Who)" Stbalbach 16:32, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article needs rename 

message: I am in the USA and have not yet had the privelege of watching the new Doctor Who series.  But - I remember a loooong time ago (almost 20 years) I saw a first doctor episode from the 1960s where they were on a "eco-bio ship" carrying the last humans from Earth to a new planet just before the sun expanded into a red giant and destroyed the earth.  I recall the Doctor watching the event from the spaceship.  If so, it would mean that this ninth doctor is actually in the same place and time as the 1st doctor!  Interesting concept.  Does nayone know the episode Im talking about from the 60s?  If so, we should put it in as a trivia item or an actual note regarding a plot issue. -Husnock 06:26, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in the notes - the Earth was burned by the Sun in The Ark during the 57th Segment of Time, which the First Doctor estimated at AD 10,000,000. Even considering it's an estimation, it's a bit of a stretch to suggest that the Doctor was out by two orders of magnitude. In the episode, we don't see the Earth being blown apart - we see it burning. It's entirely possible that in between The Ark and this episode the National Trust moved in and re-terraformed and repopulated the Earth, the Ark inhabitants' proclamation that they were leaving Earth "for the last time" notwithstanding. 4,990,000,000 years is a long time. --khaosworks 06:57, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Easier to say that this is one of those irreconciable differences that happens with Doctor who - and that it generally only worries fans with good memories. I would like to write a bit on doctor who continuity just to say these things happen. GraemeLeggett 11:11, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: But that's no fun. :) The game is trying to explain around the inconsistencies rather than chalk it up to metafictional reasons. I believe we already have a paragraph in The Doctor (Doctor Who) that talks about discontinuities. --khaosworks 11:25, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot Problem? 

message: The article lists "Forest of Cheem" although when I heard it I'd assumed it was a pun on "Forest of Cheam". Pity ... --Vamp:Willow 19:19, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Forest

message: Jabe's 'long appendage' is actually a liana --Jawr256 07:30, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
:Yep, the Doctor says to her in that scene "nice liana". Tim! (talk) 19:24, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jabe 

message: I'm not sure whether I have my words mixed up or not, but isn't "Bad Wolf" a repeated meme? CNash 12:38, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See Bad Wolf references in Doctor Who for a mention of this exact point. :) --khaosworks 12:40, August 2, 2005 (UTC)
I watched with subtitles on DVD and this came up as "repeated mean". After a bit of a laugh, I heard Doc say "But what is a mean?" when he pulls off the arm. Anyone else get this?MartinSFSA (talk) 19:37, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated Memes? 

message: The source for info on guests such as the University ones and the Rex Vok Jax bit comes from where? It's neither in the program nor in Monsters and Villains.--213.18.248.23 07:23, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the note until someone who has the book can verify it one way or another. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 09:48, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

text: It's not in Monsters and Villains, but it is in The Shooting Scripts.  I'll put it back in with the appropriate citation. —Josiah Rowe 17:45, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

text: My bad: they're actually mentioned in both books.  (Page 69 of Monsters and Villains, page 56 of The Shooting Scripts).  I assumed that the anon user above was correct, and didn't check Monsters and Villains.  By the way, all the details are in both volumes: I assume that a few of the Steward's lines were cut for time or pacing. —Josiah Rowe 17:09, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other guests 

message: I didn't know that "Toxic" was released as a 12" single.  I think that RTD wrote in a DWM "Production Notes" that it wasn't released on vinyl at all.  Evidently he was wrong, but the point was probably that there wasn't a single of "Toxic" that could be played in the jukebox they had on set, and they had to mock one up.  I'll see if I can find the DWM reference to confirm it later. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 16:44, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, that makes sense, and the note's clearer now. I remembered some discussion on the OG forums after the episode aired about whether "Toxic" was actually released as a single or not. I'm not too savvy with the difference between 7" and 12" vinyl, but I knew that someone pointed out it was released. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 16:50, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Toxic" single 

message: Am I the only person to think that this episode "borrowed" heavily from The Restaurant at the end of the Universe? --Dweller 14:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, let's see: we have a bunch of rich and weird people (and also people) gathering to watch the end of a world/universe in the far future. That's pretty much where the resemblance stops, though. No murders, last humans, robot spiders, death traps in Restaurant. Similarly, no Dish of the Day, rock bands, deities, immortals in The End of the World. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 14:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (btw I loved this episode) --Dweller 14:37, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Didn't think you didn't. :) But the similarities, IMO, are pretty superficial. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 14:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Douglas Adams 

message: I made a whole bunch of changes, mainly to break up the trivia section. I added "Cast Notes," "Production," "Broadcast," and "Continuity" sections. I left the "Continuity" section as bulleted text, but changed "Production" and "Broadcast" to prose, in the hopes that somebody will fill those sections in a bit more in the future. I deleted a few speculative or original research bits, a few that weren't particularly relevent to this particular episode, and cleaned up a few links and the references. Apologies if I've deleted anyone's favorite bit, but hopefully, if anyone puts something back, it'll at least be a little easier to find. --Brian Olsen 23:46, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Revision

message: The article states "The Fourth Doctor found it unusual that Sarah would ask about understanding other languages, but the Ninth Doctor is not surprised by Rose's question here." I think this slightly misrepresents the events in The Masque of Mandragora. To my recollection, when Sarah asks about understanding Italian, she was under the hypnotic influence of Hieronymous. The Doctor had told her long ago (off-screen, presumably) that it was a Time Lord gift he shared with her, and found it strange that she was (again) asking about the language issue. In fact, this was what tipped him off to the fact that she was under some influence. So the Doctor's surprise was very circumstantial and was very much unlike Rose asking about the language issue on her very first trip.
--Peter Niemeyer 15:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Aliens Speaking English

message: Wouldn't it be interesting to mention the references to Dunes in this episode?
* the Face of Boe in its 'tank' looks remarkably like the Guild Navigator (see not-so-good picture on that page) in David Lynch's 1985 dune movie, complete with basically the same scene when it enters the room.
* when Rose mentions something about the alien being so strange, the Doctor says something like "You are lucky that I didn't bring you to the deep south then".  In the Dune novel, "the deep south" is the name given to the hidden part of the planet, protected from scrutiny from space, and where the civilized people do not go but where the mythical, huge sand worms live (check that article to see that they indeed are a bit strange).
To me it seems blatant, but if I'm unconvincing, I suppose that we could drag some Dune article writer into the debate.
87.64.123.4 (talk) 03:47, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I absolutely do not understand the concept beneath deleting the section with the comment thanks for all of the {{WP;OR]] but this is not a chat room and retrospective ideas are perfect for those.  Can you not tell me in a comment here what you are talking about?  Way to deal with new users, so they do feel like they can just get the hell out of someone's personal playground and go away in disgust from this supposedly newbie-friendly and community-oriented place.  This is a genuine attempt to help, I had to figure things out, and I am being treated exactly as if I was trying to vandalize some precious discussion page. 87.64.123.4 (talk) 12:59, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand how you feel. Let me clarify why some contributions are removed. Wikipedia has some strict rules about what information can be added to articles. One of the basic rules is that everything must be sourced, so that the information is verifiable. That means that we cannot make our own conclusion, as that ammount to original research. There are other wikis that do allow this kind of information (the Tardis Index File for example), but Wikipedia is quite adamant about it's information meeting the standards of an encyclopedia.  — Edokter (talk) —  14:57, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Dune references

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on The End of the World (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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sfx.co.uk/tv_reviews/doctor_who_the_end_of_the_world
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:55, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified