Talk:Dalek

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Dalek is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 23, 2005.
Article Milestones Date Process Result May 6, 2005 Featured article candidate Promoted January 30, 2007 Featured article review Kept Current Status: Featured article

Doctor Who Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Doctor Who, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Doctor Who and its spin-offs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

The spoken word version (part 1, part 2, part 3) of this revision (diff) of this article is part of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, an attempt to produce recordings of Wikipedia articles being read out loud. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and find out how to contribute.

Due to their length, previous discussions on this page have been archived.

Contents 1 Initial Merchandise Year 2 Stephen Hawking's voice 3 Bob the Angry Flower 4 Additional Trivia 5 Spoilers in the article 6 Torchwood 7 Emotionless? 8 Computer games 9 Photographic cut-outs and wooden models 10 More reference queries, mostly books 11 Fictional misanthropes? 12 Featured article removal candidate 13 Operators 14 Image 15 Dalek toys 16 "Classic series" 17 "Culture" section 18 Is this wording misleading or unclear? 19 Copy edit 20 Comic strip appearances 21 Mistaken for robots 22 Image

[edit] Initial Merchandise Year

Currently the article states that "The first Dalek toys from Louis Marx & Co. appeared that year [1965]". I've just had some old home movies transferred to digital which show my grandfather receiving a Dalek toy on a reel that is (on screen) annotated to say Christmas 1964, which seems to be supported by the BBC's trademark date. It's possible the markup on the cine is incorrect, but I thought it worth a mention in case the article can be more clearly written, or confirmed. I can provide stills if it's useful.--Ear1grey 15:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Interesting, and thanks for pointing this out because it allowed me to go back and fix a couple of errors. According to The Handbook by David J. Howe, Stephen James Walker and Mark Stammers, Walter Tuckwell approached several manufacturers and publishers to get them interested in licensing the Daleks. "By Christmas 1964, there were numerous companies gearing up to release toys and games the following year," is the exact quote, which seems to suggest that the toys were not released until 1965. It goes on to say that "by the end of 1965 around eighty-five different products had been released to tie in with Doctor Who and the Daleks." (The Daleks' Master Plan was broadcast during the Christmas 1965 season.) That doesn't explain the markup on your cine film, but that's the information for what it's worth. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 16:03, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stephen Hawking's voice

I had a look to see if I could find a verifiable source for Stephen Hawking comparing his voice synthesizer to a Dalek's voice, in part because I myself heard Hawking make the comparison at a talk I attended once. (His exact words, if I recall correctly, were that his voice "had been described variously as sounding Swedish, American, or like a Dalek.") Of course, my recollection is hardly verifiable by others, so I looked for another source. Surprisingly, the only source for Hawking himself saying something like that was this on his website, where he praises his voice synthesizer for not sounding like a Dalek. A Sunday Times article from 2004 says "Hawking believes that its metallic tones, reminiscent of a Dalek’s, are part of his identity," but that link is to someone's blog where the article is reprinted, which is probably a copyvio. (The Sunday Times archives are subscription-based; the article is also mentioned here on the University of Cambridge's website with the same headline, so I don't doubt its authenticity.) A journalist at The Register makes the comparison, as does a BBC Four documentary, but it would be better to get a quote from Hawking himself.

Anyway, I think that if anyone has a good verifiable source it might be nice to include the mention in the article somewhere — especially since Mickey returned the favour by saying that the Dalek vs. Cyberman bitch-fest was "Stephen Hawking vs. the speaking clock"! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 01:36, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bob the Angry Flower

I'm not sure whether it's notable or not, but it turns out that Daleks have appeared several times in Bob the Angry Flower: I think this one dates to a while back, and these three [1][2][3] are more recent. We could mention it in the "popular culture" section... or not. Not a big deal, but I figured I'd ask to see what others think. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 03:31, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I really don't think it's notable. It's not as if BtAF is a cultural phenomenon, is it? --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 03:52, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I suppose not. I had heard of it before it came up here, but had never read it — and I'm probably more comics-aware than the average bear. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:07, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Additional Trivia

Unfortunately I don't have a cite, but I know of a few interesting bits of trivia. The early series that used daleks was in black and white. To aid directing the dalek actors, each dalek had a large numeral painted on its headpiece in red. Easy to see for the directors, but invisible on the black and white print. They used the same trick to paint marks on the set floor for the daleks to follow. Also, it's not mentioned that the daleks were built on tricycles.

In the early movie, daleks got their power from the metalic floor panels of their city. There is one scene where a dalek is incapacitated by pushing it onto a coat thrown on the ground. Fracture98 02:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spoilers in the article

Shouldn't there be a spoiler warning in some sections of the article, particularly the history in the show section? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.219.24.191 (talk • contribs) 01:41, October 8, 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Torchwood

Any news wether daleks will appear in torchwood yet? If they do should a new headline be put in the article describing what they do and any difference or inequalities to standard daleks (like Lisa in Cyberwoman) that it has? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.133.71.103 (talk • contribs) 12:40, November 15, 2006 (UTC)

There is, so far, no indication that Daleks will appear in Torchwood. If they do, we'll edit the article accordingly. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:13, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

What about the dalek ariants and dalek empire pages? we'll they have to be edit them too wont we? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.137.71.75 (talk • contribs) 18:46, November 26, 2006 (UTC)

We can deal with those if and when it becomes an issue. No point in worrying about it now. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 23:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Emotionless?

I think to call the Daleks "emotionless save hate" isn't doing the Daleks much justice. Equally the Daleks are capable of pride (in themselves). They frequently get angry, defensive, aggressive and to note a non-neagtive emotion, they also take pleasure in exterminating stuff.

So, if no-one objects, I'd like to change "They are devoid of any emotion save hate; without pity, compassion or remorse." to simply "They are pityless, without compassion or remorse."

The sentence is a fragment, admittedly, but no doubt it will be tidied up shortly after the edit is made. 81.110.241.113 23:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it's not a fragment: it's got a subject ("They") and a verb ("are"). The only problem I see is the spelling of "pitiless", but as you suggest that's easily fixed. :) Go ahead and make the change — it looks good to me. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 23:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The Doctor said "Every Emotion except hate. Anger and Devensiveness are psychologically linked to hate and pride isn't an emotion. James Random

Not sure what the rule on self-referencing is here but [[4]] includes pride as a complex emotion (as well as anger, seperate of hate). The Doctor's comments regarding the Daleks can be easily explained as his own prejudice. So I would be more inclined to go on our own observations rather than what the Doctors say in this instance.

To mention just a couple of examples: In the series 2 finale the Daleks show pride in themselves (for being superior to the cybermen). Dalek Sec shows anger and surprise when Rose mentions her dealings with the Emperor.

Furthermore in the episode "Dalek", the Dalek there shows loss and unhappiness.

Emotions listed: Pride, anger, surprise, loss and unhappiness.

Other emotions that the Daleks have exibited (I'm sure you can think of examples yourself) in the past include: cruelty, caution, fear and respect. So I ask you, who here still thinks that the Daleks are emotionless, save hate? 82.21.85.203 15:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

To be fair, Sec isn't the best example, since he's been trained to "think like the enemy". He's probably capable of a much wider range of emotion than your bog-standard Dalek. That said, I think that we can either keep the current description or use "removed every emotion except hate" as a quote, attributed to the Doctor, with a citation. (Is that from Dalek?) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Computer games

At the FAC, it was observed that the "computer games" section may have acquired some commercial content, advertisements and/or spam. The article currently mentions five unauthorized Dalek games, and includes links to four of them. Which of these, if any, are really noteworthy? Should we pare that paragraph down to something like "Several unauthorized games featuring Daleks have been made, including Dalek-based modifications of Quake and Half-Life."? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Sounds all right to me. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 05:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Done. If anyone feels strongly that these should be retained, they can find the original links in the page's history. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Photographic cut-outs and wooden models

Does anyone recall off the top of their head in which episode of The Dalek Invasion of Earth photographic cut-outs were used to swell the numbers of the Dalek ranks, and which episode or episodes of Destiny of the Daleks feature wooden "dummy" Daleks? I'm trying to provide the {{cite episode}} citations for all the footnotes (as requested at the FAR), but that template requires a specific episode. If no-one here knows I can ask at OG, or I could re-watch the DVD myself. ;^) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 08:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

For DIOE, that would be "The Daleks" and/or "Day of Reckoning" (2 and 3) - the cut-outs were at the Dalek saucer landing site, seen while the prisoners were being marched into the saucer and possibly later on when the resistance commences their assault. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 09:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Right — thanks! Any idea about the cut-outs in Destiny? Or, failing that, any idea of how to use {{cite episode}} or another template to cite an entire serial? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 10:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Um, no on both counts. I'd have to watch Destiny again, I suppose, to answer that... --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 11:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

...a fate no man should have to endure.

Anyway, they first used the photographic blow-ups in The Daleks — take a look at some of the control room scenes.132.185.240.120 14:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Sod it — I've just spelled the reference for the full serial out. I suppose it's OK to refer to specific episodes when we're talking about a specific line, but there are also references to entire serials that we should be able to cite as such. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 21:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More reference queries, mostly books

Some of my Doctor Who books are in storage, so I couldn't provide the citation for the novelisation of Remembrance of the Daleks. I do have a copy of The Also People, but I couldn't find the Dalek verses in it (although the book does have a verse of what looks like Cyberman blues). Finally, does anyone recall which episode of The Chase "Advance and Attack! Attack and Destroy! Destroy and Rejoice!" comes from? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 23:06, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I think I have the Remembrance novelization in the house. Which bit do you need to cite? SMegatron 13:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

The first usage of "Ka Faraq Gatri", as mentioned in Dalek#Culture. You can use the {{cite book}} template. Thanks! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 16:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, i think Ive added the correct reference, but I would be obliged if someone would check it over, as Im hopeless when it comes to cites. Regards.SMegatron 19:32, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks pretty good to me — the only thing you might want to add is the page number, if you can find it. You can add that by typing "| page = 47" or whatever (no quotation marks) at the end, before the double curly brackets. Thanks for finding that info! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:09, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem. The page no. is now up (after a few attempts), so give me a shout if you require anything else of that one. Sorry I can't help with the rest. Regards.SMegatron 13:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch, SMegatron. Sorry I led you up the garden path with "page" instead of "pages". I'm sure we can find someone to help with the other citations — I'll ask at OG. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Not a problem. Happy to help.SMegatron 18:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fictional misanthropes?

Recently, a CfD merged the category "Fictional characters opposed to humanity" (to which Dalek had belonged) into "Fictional misanthropes". I removed the new category from the article, because I didn't think it really applied very well. An anon re-added it today, so let's talk it out.

Although etymologically, "misanthropy" refers to "hatred of mankind", I tend to think of a "misanthrope" as a character like Scrooge or the public persona of W. C. Fields — or indeed, Alceste, the misanthrope of Molière's eponymous play. A misanthrope, as commonly conceived, will express his loathing for his fellow man, and may even claim that he would be happy to see the human race exterminated, but does not usually act on that sentiment himself. A misanthrope is rarely a murderer, much less a mass-murderer. The hatred that the Daleks feel towards humanity (and, indeed, all non-Dalek life) is of a different kind, most notably because the Daleks are not themselves human. They hate humans as the other against which they define themselves, not as a class to which they themselves belong (DO NOT BLASPHEME! notwithstanding). I just feel that "misanthrope" isn't the most accurate word to describe Dalek psychology. But what do y'all think? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. "Misanthropic" seems a very odd word to apply to the Daleks - an understatement, to say the least. --Brian Olsen 19:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree that it's an odd description. That category currently includes everything from Cylons, Mysterons and Silurians, through Magneto and his Brotherhood of Evil Mutants all the way to Dogbert ! Something needs to be done about it. -- Beardo 22:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

However, the category page says "Most of the characters are non-human, and belong to one of three groups: other species from Earth, aliens, or artificial intelligence." -- Beardo 22:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Featured article removal candidate

This is just a heads-up to editors of this article that it has been moved from Featured article review to Featured article removal candidates. The expressed concern is that the article lacks sufficient citations (despite extensive work in the last few weeks). Comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Dalek. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:54, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Operators

Is there a list of Dalek operators yet? Arthur Newall who played a Sensorite often said he played a Dalek and I just wanted to verify this before adding it to the article DavidFarmbrough 10:36, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image

I'm a little bit concerned about the article's use of Image:Dalek from BBC.jpg. It seems to me to be pretty close to the line of "decorative" rather than "informative", especially with its placement opposite the "costume details" section. I think it would be better to use an image of a Dalek with its "lid" off, showing the operator sitting inside. Does anyone know where we might find one? (I know the pictures exist, I just can't remember where I saw them.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 08:32, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I've found a suitable image, but I don't have a scanner to put it online. On p. 84 of Doctor Who: The Sixties there's a very nice image of Robert Jewell and John Scott Martin getting into the Dalek casings from the filming of Power of the Daleks. Does anyone have both this book and a scanner? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 03:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dalek toys

I removed this sentence, for which a citation had been requested:

Also unsuccessful were Dalek toys made of rubber and tin.

I couldn't find any reference to the toys having been unsuccessful. However, I don't have any of the books like Howe's Transcendental Toybox specifically dedicated to Doctor Who merchandise; if anyone can find a citation in one of these books (or elsewhere), please feel free to restore the sentence with the appropriate citation. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Classic series"

LuciferMorgan asked for a citation for the phrase "classic series". Rather than providing a citation like this (showing that it's the term used by the BBC to refer to the 1963-1989 series) I've changed it to "original Doctor Who series", because I think a footnote at that point would be more confusing than illuminating to the reader. I tend to see "classic series" as a unitary phrase, equivlent to "original series", not a statement of opinion that the original series was "classic" — but if others feel that the term is biased and requires citation, I suppose we can use the more neutral "original series" instead. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the best thing would be the cite the term in the main Doctor Who article, rather than having to provide a cite every time the term appears in all the other articles. I agree, I've always seen it as a descriptive term meaning basically "old" rather than a quality assessment. It's used in preference to "the original series" I suspect because that's already so associated with Star Trek. But the BBC's use of the term is more than reference enough, I think. DWM is probably full of cites for it too. Angmering 07:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Culture" section

I've provided primary source citations for the "Culture" section of the article, but I'm slightly concerned that although I happen to think that lines and actions in those particular television stories illustrate the points being made, it's still a bit OR-ish without secondary sources. Can anyone think of a good secondary source to back this section up with? Was there perhaps a good overview of Dalek culture in Doctor Who Magazine at some point? The books I've used to cite other parts of the article merely summarize the events of Dalek stories, and talk about the ideas behind them — I haven't been able to find anything that synthesizes what we learn about the Daleks in these stories into a portrait of them as a culture, the way that this section of the article wants to. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 21:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Have you tried Parkin's AHistory book? I seem to recall that having a lot of this sort of stuff in it. Angmering 23:49, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is this wording misleading or unclear?

In an effort to remove gender-specific language (I assume), Marskell changed this sentence:

The Dalek cases were built in two pieces; once an operator stepped into the lower section the top would be lowered onto him.

to this:

The Dalek cases were built in two pieces; once operators stepped into the lower section the top would be lowered onto them.

I'm all for gender-neutral language (although it's probably worth noting here that to date, all Dalek operators in Doctor Who have been male). But I'm slightly concerned that the revised sentence may lead readers to think that there's more than one operator in a single Dalek. Can we think of a gender-neutral way to say this that isn't misleading or unclear? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

...the top would be attached? Put into place? I think if we change the verb from "lowered," the "onto him/them" may not be necessary. --Brian Olsen 06:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. I went with "secured". —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copy edit

I am almost through this, but it will be another day before the FAR can be closed. Some notes:

• "The Master's trial presumably took place before the destruction of Skaro" is now buried with a note, as "presumably" suggests OR. Explain, source, or remove.
• Watch for unneeded adjectives and adverbials: e.g., "the mere mention of the Doctor's name...". These sorts of emphasizers are unneeded and read like fan writing.
• Two fact requests in "parodies."
• "Other appearances" headings reorganized.
• In general, the "Other appearances" section is list-like and comes close to trivia, which is a FA no-no. I have removed as trivial "An Andy Dick sketch...featured a silver creature strongly resembling a Dalek" and "In the Teen Titans...housed in a conical mobile casing, the lower half of which resembles a Dalek." We don't need a list of things that "resemble" Daleks. I would suggest people be very selective in adding anything new.

Dalek fans can be happy, however—the review has received a lot of attention from a number of different editors. Marskell 18:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your work on this, Marskell. I've removed the speculative note on the Master's trial, found a citation for one of the parodies, and commented the other one out. I'll also try to keep a lid on additions in the "Other appearances" section. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I've passed this finally. Kudos on your own work, Josiah. I realize how troublesome pages like this can be: without watchers, cruft will just pile up. I would suggest pruning "Other appearances" a little more. Can the ANZ and Kit-Kat commercial references be turned into a single sentence, for instance? Anyhow, it's still a better page than it was before the review. Cheers, Marskell 19:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comic strip appearances

Should the Daleks' many appearances in comic strips over the years be listed also?–Alan-WK 23:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mistaken for robots

It's been a while since I watched Destiny of the Daleks, but I seem to recall the Doctor referring to the Daleks as robots on more than one occasion. He also speaks strangely of the Kaled mutant he finds on the surface of Skaro — again, I can't recall the exact wording, but it's something that suggests that the Daleks have done away with their organic components. Of course, this is not followed up in later stories, and is usually treated as an anomaly. But I think that the article is accurate in indicating that in Destiny the Daleks are treated as robots. After all, that's the whole point of the Movellan stalemate — two logical, robotic races stuck in a stalemate because they can predict all of each others' moves.

If you think that the Destiny line is misleading, please discuss. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:11, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image

The main image has recently been changed from Image:Daleknew.jpg to Image:partingoftheways.jpg. While the latter is nicely atmospheric, I feel that the former was a better and clearer illustration of what a Dalek looks like. I'm going to revert back to the old image, but if others prefer the Parting of the Ways image, let's discuss it. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:25, 25 March 2007 (UTC)