Its easy and its recognised and tbh there are far more interesting things about either Nu or Classic Who that deserve the debate space taken up by this thread.

But hey, why say a word that is universally recognised and easily understood as a differentiation between the two eras and replace it with a longer more ambiguous word, or two that'll cause casual readers to question what era is being referred to and get rebuked for asking stupid questions by the die hards who decided to change it.

Basically this. It's been two millennia and they still say New Testament.

No one's forcing you to look at or comment on the thread, and considering it is now on it's second page, it's obvious that a lot of people do find the subject matter interesting. To be fair, there's not exactly a whole lot of new stuff to talk about at the moment.


Fair point, but would say that's fairly set in stone, whereas the 'new who' term started as more of a nickname at a time when the revived series actually was new, and only really remained because no - one has really come up with anything else. To me, it just sounds a bit silly to call a nine year old show 'new'. A lot of shows don't even make it to nine years so at this point, even the revived series on it's own can be said to be long running when compared to the average time that shows seem to last, yet still we call it 'new'

Probably after the next hiatus and revival, today's show will be called Middle Who.

Shot on Middle Earth