Jump to content

Talk:Aliens of London

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

First contact

[edit]

>(First contact is a science fiction term long before Star Trek. Clive's website says he's dead.)

I had never come across the term first contact in any SF books, TV or film before STTNG, but if you can quote me a reference I'd be glad to know. Clive's website isn't part of the television series, so we still don't know he's dead.User:DavidFarmbrough 11:23, 18Apr2005(BST)
Have a look at First contact (anthropology) which makes reference to the concept in SF predating Star Trek. It's an anthropological term, not even one that originated in science fiction - for example, there was a film called "First Conact" in 1984, 3 years before TNG Season 1 began, that talked about the cultural confrontation in Papua New Guinea. If you look on Google I think you'll find a page where there is a list of SF stories with first contact themes.
As for the website: it's debatable - Clive's website URL was visible when Rose first searched, and we saw his website as well. It's also been updated over the last couple of weeks as the series as progressed. We're not necessarily limited to television sources, as well. If it helps, we can mention that the info that Clive is dead is based on his website. --khaosworks 20:10, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
According to Science Fiction Citations, "first contact" has citations back to 1935. -- Avaragado 18:44, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Email to an acquaintance" re "you're so gay"

[edit]

Both the alleged controversy over the dialogue, and the alleged email response, need sources IMHO. -- Avaragado 20:20, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Here's two; [1] [2]
Both links are dead. Please update. 173.58.47.102 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:02, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Electricity

[edit]

sends a deadly dose of electricity jolting through the experts' ID cards

Is it explicitly stated in the episode that the ID cards produce electricity? I don't recall such. --DudeGalea 16:28, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't, but it certainly looks like crackling electricity, not your generic sci-fi energy. It's a visual cue more than a verbal one. --khaosworks 16:38, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

Caption

[edit]

In all the other episodes of the 2005 season, the screenshot's caption is a quote from one of the characters. Yet, on this page it just says First contact or something more sinister?. I can't think of a quote that we should put there. Any ideas? Thelb4 13:49, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aliens of London/Christmas Invasion same week?

[edit]

A recent edit said that the dates provided by the UNIT website would put this story and The Christmas Invasion in the same week. But The Christmas Invasion took place over... well, Christmas, surely? How does June=December? Or am I missing something obvious? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:22, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, no, June means that Boom Town (six months later than AoL) would have to take place in December. And so would The Parting of the Ways, since that takes place between Boom Town and The Christmas Invasion. So it can't be right. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 04:34, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, right. I misread the note — my bad.
But is it possible that Boom Town and The Parting of the Ways take place in or around December 2006, and The Christmas Invasion takes place in December 2007? Does anything in TCI indicate a year? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:50, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Answering myself — IIRC, nothing in The Christmas Invasion as broadcast indicates a year, but the Guinevere One website suggested it was Christmas 2006. I think the websites are contradictory, but the series isn't necessarily. I'll try to reword the note accordingly. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:02, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the logical conclusion that the note leads to is that the websites are contradictory. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 05:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, wait — I just did a bit of checking and I can't find the June 28 date on the UNIT website. Instead, I find this page, which seems to suggest a May 26 date for AoL/WW3. May 26, 2006 would place Boom Town in late November, so The Parting of the Ways could be early December and The Christmas Invasion on Christmas Eve/Day. No problem.
So the question is, did the site formerly have a June date which was changed so that the timeline wouldn't be messed up? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:16, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The dates on the site are a mess. The June 28 date comes from an exchange in the secure section under "Operation London". Although the header read 26/03/05 (cut and pasted from "Operation Mannequin", i.e. Rose), the IM log that follows is all dated 28/06/06 and contemporaneous with the crash in the Thames. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 05:21, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, right. But if the UNIT site gives two dates (May or June 2006) for the same events, and only one of them is problematic, isn't the obvious answer to go with the one that isn't? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:26, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, my legal and historical training tells me that the one with the larger amount of documentation that cannot be easily explained away is the one that's "correct", so my gut's pointing me towards the June 28 date suggested by the website as the one that was intended. But the point is, the website's wrong, or at best inconsistent with the series. AoL, as far as I'm concerned (and Lance agrees in AHistory), takes place in March 2006, 12 months from the established date of Rose's disappearance. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 05:29, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I still think I'll try to reword the note a little bit to indicate that the UNIT website isn't even consistent with itself, let alone the series. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Werewolves of London

[edit]

Is the title a reference to the song Werewolves of LondonJameshibbard (talk) 04:32, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

Why was my deletion of the link to the first reference http://badwolf.org.uk/clues.html reversed? It is a dead page; the domain has been parked for sale. The link should be removed.Amabaie (talk) 16:14, 2 January 2015 (UTC) David Leonhardt[reply]

If you find a dead link it is better to mark it as such (via {{deadlink}}) than remove; mirrors or archives of dead links can then be sought by others when you flag it this way. Removing the reference makes that harder to know there was an issue before. --MASEM (t) 16:29, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aliens of London. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 07:19, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Aliens of London/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 09:30, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Comments

  • "show Doctor Who that was first broadcast on 16 April 2005 on BBC One. Written by ..." I would split earlier: "show Doctor Who. First broadcast on 16 April 2005 on BBC One, it was written by ...."
  • Probably needs to note it was the revival first season too. Some of us remember the originals (just....)
  • No need to link "Earth", I think most of us know what that is.
  • You have one ref in the lead, I would suggest leaving the lead unreferenced and make sure all the material in it is mentioned and referenced in the main part of the article.
  • "Jones, played by Penelope Wilton who" comma after Wilton.
  • " part Computer-generated imagery" no need for capital C.
  • "by 7 million" seven.
  • And I presume that means live, i.e. at the time of the original broadcast?
  • Again, delink Earth.
  • "twelve months after " don't need italics.
  • Link Prime Minister appropriately (i.e. to the UK one) or not at all.
  • Link TARDIS.
  • "Guest Cast" -> "Guest cast"
  • Probably use {{div col}} template here to reduce that whitespace near the guest cast.
  • Quatermass -> the is lower case, and this should be in italics.
  • " producer Russell T Davies" Davies is overlinked, and no need to introduce him again....
  • Bob and Rose -> Bob & Rose.
  • In Filming section, ROse needs disambiguation, but I think you've already linked it.
  • Same for Matt Baker, but you haven't linked that one before.
  • "Hospital.[11][10] " ref order.
  • "from August 20th, 26th to 31st (except the 29th), September 1st to 3rd, and the 6th." probably too much detail, and we don't use "th", "st" etc on dates.
  • "On October 4th the clip of Blue Peter presenter " 4 not 4th, and Blue Peter in italics.
  • Link BBC Television Centre.
  • "was watched by 7 million viewers in the UK, a" seven.
  • "#2 for the timeslot" see MOS:HASH don't use # to denote "number".
  • Broadcast and reception section, plenty of short paras in there, work them into more elegant prose.
  • Why is Smith? The link just calls him Robert Smith.

That's it for a first run. On hold, cheers. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 20:36, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All problems have been resolved except for the "Probably use div col template here to reduce that whitespace near the guest cast." I'm unfamiliar with this template so if it is to be implemented I am requesting help DMT biscuit (talk) 21:08, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like you've missed a few items, and introduced a few odd things, e.g. "along with ROae due to the"?? Could you mark off each comment individually? The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:17, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DMT biscuit pinging. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 09:04, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "show Doctor Who that was first broadcast on 16 April 2005 on BBC One. Written by ..." I would split earlier: "show Doctor Who. First broadcast on 16 April 2005 on BBC One, it was written by ...."✓
  • Probably needs to note it was the revival first season too. Some of us remember the originals (just....)✓
  • No need to link "Earth", I think most of us know what that is.✓
  • You have one ref in the lead, I would suggest leaving the lead unreferenced and make sure all the material in it is mentioned and referenced in the main part of the article.✓
  • "Jones, played by Penelope Wilton who" comma after Wilton.✓
  • " part Computer-generated imagery" no need for capital C.✓
  • "by 7 million" seven.✓
  • And I presume that means live, i.e. at the time of the original broadcast?✓
  • Again, delink Earth.✓
  • "twelve months after " don't need italics.✓
  • Link Prime Minister appropriately (i.e. to the UK one) or not at all.✓
  • Link TARDIS.✓
  • "Guest Cast" -> "Guest cast"✓
  • Probably use {{div col}} template here to reduce that whitespace near the guest cast.-Requesting help for this
  • Quatermass -> the is lower case, and this should be in italics.✓
  • " producer Russell T Davies" Davies is overlinked, and no need to introduce him again....✓
  • Bob and Rose -> Bob & Rose.✓
  • In Filming section, ROse needs disambiguation, but I think you've already linked it.✓
  • Same for Matt Baker, but you haven't linked that one before.✓
  • "Hospital.[11][10] " ref order.✓
  • "from August 20th, 26th to 31st (except the 29th), September 1st to 3rd, and the 6th." probably too much detail, and we don't use "th", "st" etc on dates.✓
  • "On October 4th the clip of Blue Peter presenter " 4 not 4th, and Blue Peter in italics.✓
  • Link BBC Television Centre.✓
  • "was watched by 7 million viewers in the UK, a" seven.✓
  • "#2 for the timeslot" see MOS:HASH don't use # to denote "number".✓
  • Broadcast and reception section, plenty of short paras in there, work them into more elegant prose.✓
  • Why is Smith? The link just calls him Robert Smith.✓

DMT biscuit (talk) 09:22, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man pinging.DMT biscuit (talk) 09:22, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, some more:

  • Where is the production code referenced?
  • You don't need to repeat the whole cast in the infobox.
  • Murray Gold is mentioned in the infobox, not referenced or mentioned in the article.
  • Likewise Mal Young.
  • Collinson is linked in the infobox but not in the prose.
  • What makes shannonsullivan.com a reliable source?
  • Online references need publication/accessdates.
  • "onto star in the spin off torchwood as Toshiko Sato[3]" --> "on to feature in the spin-off Torchwood as Toshiko Sato.[3]"

The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:46, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DMT biscuit some more comments here. Please address each one individually, directly after each comment. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 15:26, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
i changed the wording per the request, how have i not addressed it? The Rambling Man
No you didn't, I did. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 12:10, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DMT biscuit (talk) 11:43, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man pinging.

DMT biscuit (talk) 19:06, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DMT biscuit responded. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 19:11, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The Rambling Man Responded DMT biscuit (talk) 19:50, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think we're just about there. I made a raft of changes for typos, poor formatting etc, which I hadn't seen previously, but it's satisfactory now I think. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 18:29, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Aliens_of_London&oldid=1204703173"