Talk:Destiny of the Daleks

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Doctor Who Mid‑importance

	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.Doctor WhoWikipedia:WikiProject Doctor WhoTemplate:WikiProject Doctor WhoDoctor Who articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television: Episode coverage

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Writing

Adams' biography, Hitchhiker claims that Adams may have written more of the script than is usual for a script editor (probably not as much as City of Death). mention this? 82.35.13.34 19:32, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge

Movellans only appear in this one episode. SolidPlaid 12:18, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be pernickity - one serial of 4 episodes. I'd suggest merging it to List of Doctor Who monsters and aliens, as that is a list of species/ races in Doctor Who. Of course, the new silly "notability rule" may mean that we have to loose that. StuartDD ( t • c ) 12:30, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge it wherever you guys in the Project think best. The notability "rules" aren't really that new. SolidPlaid 12:35, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Doctor Who monsters and aliens sounds good to me. The notability rules ought to be a bit laxer for minor topic lists like that; they save us from having articles on each of the minor topics. Percy Snoodle 12:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree List of Doctor Who monsters and aliens is probally best. futurehawk|talk 19:00, 28 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.125.230.58 (talk) [reply]

agreed, merger —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.92.117.93 (talk) 17:56, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article merged with List of Doctor Who monsters and aliens. --Deadly∀ssassin 07:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What?

"...and a very badly made oddddball skirt being made for one Dalek as the only new part since 1973's wooden extras, just 1 of which makes it's last appearance in one piece, the only prop that dosen't have parts from other props."

I don't have a clue what that last bit's meant to say. 129.11.249.75 (talk) 05:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like nonsense to me. I've watched the episode and the Daleks don't seem to look that bad. While the acting of the Daleks may not have been superb (especially in the final scenes as they advanced on the Movellan ship) the condition of the Dalek models seemed fine. I've removed the statement. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 09:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the editor was expressing information from this page. If you look closely at the props, particularly in the indoor scenes, it is visible that they are rather battered and mis-matched. BreathingMeat (talk) 20:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes, the daleks were battered to death. You can see bits hanging off, and the DVDV mentions it. I meant the sentence itself didn't seem to be in English, but I couldn't work out what it was trying to say in order to fix it. Eiphel (talk) 01:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Viewing figures

This serial seems to have been watched on its original broadcast by more people than any other Doctor Who serial. Was there a reason for that ? If so, is it worth mentioning ? -- Beardo (talk) 15:22, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]