Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER

Ripley68

The Black Hole of Plot Holes

Recommended Posts

Questions about plots and events that don't add up, don't make sense, or are just not understood.


At the very beginning of the first part of "The End of Time," the 10th Doctor has just arrived from marrying Queen Elizabeth the first.  "Day of the Doctor" spends time around those events with both 10th and 11th Doctor.  Shouldn't the Doctors guilt over Gallifrey have disappeared?  The whole thing with Timothy Dalton shouldn't have happened. 

Share this post


Link to post

Questions about plots and events that don't add up, don't make sense, or are just not understood.

At the very beginning of the first part of "The End of Time," the 10th Doctor has just arrived from marrying Queen Elizabeth the first.  "Day of the Doctor" spends time around those events with both 10th and 11th Doctor.  Shouldn't the Doctors guilt over Gallifrey have disappeared?  The whole thing with Timothy Dalton shouldn't have happened. 

 

Previous Doctor's never remember encounters with the current one or at least that's how I read it. The 9th and 10th still believe they used the moment. And the conflict with Rassilon and the Time Lords was about them being monsters just like the Daleks the whole reason he used the moment in the first place. But we're not supposed to remember that just all those innocent children.

Share this post


Link to post

Something may have changed in later years, but I recall in The Five Doctors when Sarah Jane Smith was surprised to see Pertwee's Doctor again, he was aware of the Tom Baker incarnation.

Share this post


Link to post

Something may have changed in later years, but I recall in The Five Doctors when Sarah Jane Smith was surprised to see Pertwee's Doctor again, he was aware of the Tom Baker incarnation.

That was purely because Jon Pertwee stole Lis Sladen's line, because he liked it and liked to hog all the good lines, and for no better reason than that. It can be argued that he got the gist from her gestures. But it is a fourth wall breaking moment that buggers up the mythology, to be sure.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

When Rory and Amy get zapped back in time, why can't the Doctor just go further down their timeline to get them?

I've often pondered this myself.  I only come back with flippant answers.  I hope someone else can offer a reasonable response.

 

(otoh, I want to know how two displaced Scots explain their existence in pre-WWII New York)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I've often pondered this myself.  I only come back with flippant answers.  I hope someone else can offer a reasonable response.

 

(otoh, I want to know how two displaced Scots explain their existence in pre-WWII New York)

The in-universe answer was a) because of the mess of timey-wimeyness that made it so difficult to land the TARDIS there in the first place, he was afraid of breaking time, or something (unsatisfying, but the whole episode is a mess) and b) he doesn't go back to find them because the letter at the back of Amy's novel told him that he didn't, or something like that. It's a mess that arises from the nuWho desire to engineer a tragic ending every time, best to just handwave it and move on.

 

As for how two displaced individuals (one Scottish one English) explain their existence in New York - I don't think that would be particularly hard. They're had plenty of experience blending into strange new places and are resourceful, as all Doctor Who companions need to be. They'd scrape through at first, then put down roots and settle, like so many before them. America is the land of immigrants, after all - give me your poor, your huddled masses, and all that. Amy and Rory would be fine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

IIRC he'd seen their toomstone, so what was written there can't be unwritten in the Dr's timeline.

 

 

The in-universe answer was a) because of the mess of timey-wimeyness that made it so difficult to land the TARDIS there in the first place, he was afraid of breaking time, or something (unsatisfying, but the whole episode is a mess) and b) he doesn't go back to find them because the letter at the back of Amy's novel told him that he didn't, or something like that. It's a mess that arises from the nuWho desire to engineer a tragic ending every time, best to just handwave it and move on.

 

So basically the answer is: "Because Timey Wimey, Wibbly Wobbly" hehe - such a useful phrase! ;)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Okay, this one's been bugging me for awhile. Is there an in-universe explanation for how Martha and the Doctor got stuck in 1969 in 'Blink'? They obviously got sent there by a Weeping Angel, but everyone else that the Angels sent to the past lived normal life spans, aged, and died. Billy was touched by the same Angel, also winding up in 1969, but aged normally and died in the present as an old man. For whatever reason, the same doesn't happen to Martha - she and the Doctor just live in 1969 forever until they get the TARDIS back. Did I miss an explanation for that, or is it just more timey-wimey bull?

Share this post


Link to post

Martha and the Doctor aren't any more "stuck" in 1969 then the others - they just aren't there for long enough to make it to 1970 and beyond. If they had never gotten the TARDIS back, Martha would have been in the same boat as Billy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Eventually the Doctor could have borrowed the TARDIS from his previous incarnation and gotten them back - the Third Doctor worked pretty closely with UNIT throughout the early 70s, so it was available and unattended a fair bit.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Martha and the Doctor aren't any more "stuck" in 1969 then the others - they just aren't there for long enough to make it to 1970 and beyond. If they had never gotten the TARDIS back, Martha would have been in the same boat as Billy.

I think I'm just thinking about it in too linear a fashion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

That's a great point that I never thought of, Bruinsfan, but even so I'm not sure that it would have been so easy. For most of the time that the Doctor was working for UNIT, his TARDIS was disabled; once he could travel freely again, he was there much more sporadically. I suppose Ten could have gotten in touch with the Briagdier and asked for him to tip him off when Four was back in town, but the Doctor tends to avoid deliberately crossing his own timeline because of the potential for paradox in any case.

 

I do think if the Sally Sparrow thing hadn't worked, the Doctor probably would have figured out some way of getting himself and Martha back to the present without the TARDIS. There are other means of time travel, after all. If nothing else, Jack Harkness and his vortex manipulator must have been around somewhere. I guess what I should have said is "without some kind of time travel capacity, Martha would have been in the same boat as Billy." 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

As for how two displaced individuals (one Scottish one English) explain their existence in New York -

I thought Rory was Scottish as well as Amy.   Either way, I wonder what they did during WWII.  Rory would have been of the right age and his medical skills would be badly needed.  

 

So basically the answer is: "Because Timey Wimey, Wibbly Wobbly" hehe - such a useful phrase! ;)

Yes, it is.  Unfortunately, i think it has become the catchphrase of the show for a lot of plot holes.

 

Weeping Angel,

And speaking of plot holes, the whole set up for "Angels take Manhattan" bugs me and no amount hand waving will fix that.  Was the Angels hotel/battery farm a really bad nightmare set up by the Angels?  It is the one possible explanation I have for how escaping involved the Rory/Amy suicide and why they would think that the Statue of Liberty was after them.  Seriously, can you think of another statue that is more watched? (/rhetorical question)  

 

When the Angels were first introduced, it seemed to me that their form was of the weeping angel and was not changeable, then as the series proceeded, they seem to inhabit the statue, any statue.  If that was the case, couldn't they then move to other statues?   And why couldn't one just take a sledge hammer to them?

 

I suppose Ten could have gotten in touch with the Brigadier

Which brings me to the question of why didn't Eleven, in all is preparation for his death, take a moment to pop back in time to see his old friend?  Then the scene where he calls up to talk with him, the nurse would say basically the same line about leaving out an extra glass for the Doctor's visit hoping to see him, but add the word *again*.  We wouldn't have had to see them meet, just hear about.  It could have been that simple.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Which brings me to the question of why didn't Eleven, in all is preparation for his death, take a moment to pop back in time to see his old friend?  Then the scene where he calls up to talk with him, the nurse would say basically the same line about leaving out an extra glass for the Doctor's visit hoping to see him, but add the word *again*.  We wouldn't have had to see them meet, just hear about.  It could have been that simple.

I think for the same reason he almost never goes back to visit any of his old friends. He can't absolutely guarantee getting the time right and a human lifespan is a very small target to hit, seen against the context of the whole of time and space. He doesn't want to land in the wrong time and be told of their death, because while he might be aware of when they die in the abstract, having it announced makes it real as part of his own timeline. By not visiting, he gets to preserve them in his memory exactly as they were - they can live forever, for him, the memory sleeping in his mind, as he once told Victoria. Once their death is part of his timeline, it's over, he can't and won't go back on that. That's why he doesn't try to find Amy and Rory in another part of their timeline. Their deaths are already part of his own timeline. It's why River was always such a big deal, unusual, because her death was always part of his own timeline from their first meeting.

Edited by Llywela
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

The only other statue that even comes close to the Statue of Liberty is Cristo Redentor.

 

...Actually, that would have almost been worth it to have a giant Jesus turn out to be a Weeping Angel.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think simply knowing when someone dies can be an issue in terms of interaction, since obviously the Doctor has met plenty of historical figures whose death dates he would have known. The problem, in theory, with Amy and Rory is that because he knows they are going to die in their 80s sometime in the 1990s (if I've done the math right) from their tombstone, he can't remove them from time without causing a paradox, assuming their winding up there is a fixed event.

 

So, if the Doctor, in-between trips with Clara, found out that she was going to die in 2075 in Birmingham, he could still go back to Coal Hill to pick her up - except, possibly, if he had met her on her deathbed, and she told him that the events of "The Caretaker" were the last time she had ever seen him in her personal timeline.  Again, this assumes a fixed point. So, he can't remove Amy and Rory from the slow path they begin in 1940 because of the tombstone, but he also can't visit them in the interim because of the note that Amy wrote confirming that she hadn't seen him since. 

 

To me, it makes sense in theory, but the plot hole is that the show in recent years has been so quick to make massive changes to timelines and even the whole of reality that it is pretty hard to believe that something so minor could actually be an obstacle. I mean,a few years ago, Amy dreamed all of reality back into existence. Rory was dead, then he wasn't. Ditto for Amy's parents. "Time can be rewritten" has practically become a motto of the show. Given that, it comes off as manipulation that this one thing would be utterly irrevocable. The graveyard issue is particularly iffy - couldn't the Doctor just put up the headstone to avoid the paradox, whether or not Amy and Rory actually died then and there? -- as is the idea that part of the reason the Doctor can't save them right away is that the TARDIS can't fly to New York in 1940. That's fine, but what about New York in 1939 or 1941? What about landing in Hoboken New Jersey and taking the PATH train? 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Time can be rewritten but should it?  Time travel has to have rules if you don't want to alter to much. You have to live with the Consequences of knowing that you affected events. The doctor knows Amy and Rory live a long life together but they never see the Doctor again. He can find away to see them again but if he did that, it could mean a short life. Is it something he's willing to chance? Everything that happened to them in the first place was because of events that doctor "caused" by meeting them in the first place.

 

Eleven was the most Selfish doctor. But he tried to be a good man. But did the selfishness defeat that purpose? He and his other selves tried to protect the children of Gallifrey (by not killing them but sending them into a pocket Universe) but in the end of the day it's what led to the events that created the cracks in the wall that was the big factor of Eleven's life span. 

Share this post


Link to post

the end of the day it's what led to the events that created the cracks in the wall that was the big factor of Eleven's life span.

So the cup-o'soup maneuver possibly explains why the crack was still in existence at Trenzalore?  

 

The crack from which came the question that so many were desperate not to have answered? 

 

The same one Clara spoke into to get Eleven's next # of regenerations?

 

Thoughtful replies concerning the time plot holes, enjoyed reading them.

Edited by elle
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

The Crack at Tenzalore was like a history scar. It's where the chain began. Though it's the end of events it's actually the beginning so it's where the scar is left. Point of Origin of these types of paradoxes are often not even addressed in Sci Fi. Moffat did it by having the scar where it started so the chain of events still happened. It's still very "Timey Wimey, Wibbly Wobbly" but because it happened in the first place to set the course of events in the past it had to still happen. 

So the cup-o'soup maneuver possibly explains why the crack was still in existence at Trenzalore?  

 

The crack from which came the question that so many were desperate not to have answered? 

 

The same one Clara spoke into to get Eleven's next # of regenerations?

 

Thoughtful replies concerning the time plot holes, enjoyed reading them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

The Crack at Tenzalore was like a history scar. It's where the chain began. Though it's the end of events it's actually the beginning so it's where the scar is left. Point of Origin of these types of paradoxes are often not even addressed in Sci Fi. Moffat did it by having the scar where it started so the chain of events still happened. It's still very "Timey Wimey, Wibbly Wobbly" but because it happened in the first place to set the course of events in the past it had to still happen. 

A history scar.  I can get my mind around that.  Never thought I'd admit to that.

 

I'd like to hear your take on the Silence.  One of the best adversaries invented and well used until this (grumble) episode.   Why would someone ruin a good thing such as that.  They did not need to be there or be explained away as "confessors".   And what a ridiculous conceit, confessing to something which you immediately then forget you even spoke to.

Share this post


Link to post

The confessors thing works really well, if you remember the Silence's other  ability of post-hypnotic suggestion. You see one, you confess, they give you a penance, you move away and forget that you saw it, but you still perform the penance. It's like the Coke Zero of forgiveness - you do something to make yourself feel better for the bad thing you've done, but not because you actually feel bad enough to do it off your own back. Forgiveness without that squicky feelings of self-doubt and self-contempt.

Edited by HauntedBathroom
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

 

It's like the Coke Zero of forgiveness

I have no response to that ("Joe vs. The Volcano")

 

otoh...Just because that whole episode angers me does not mean that there isn't a rational explanation for the presence of the Silence creatures.  Thanks for the rational response. ;0)

 

Another plot hole from that episode - Didn't Clara more or less confirm the identity of The Doctor when she spoke to the Gallifrayians (sp!) through the history scar?  And then didn't they acknowledge that he was the WHO for whom they were looking by giving him a shiny new set of regenerations?

 

So in the end, Clara's actions just negated all the death and destruction the town and the Doctor suffered by trying to keep everyone away by not answering that question, thereby leading to a Gallifrey invasion?

Share this post


Link to post

I've been confused somewhat by Turn Left. In Donna's parallel world Davros was aparantly using the reality bomb without Earth. Why didn't he need it in this case?

Share this post


Link to post

I've been confused somewhat by Turn Left. In Donna's parallel world Davros was aparantly using the reality bomb without Earth. Why didn't he need it in this case?

I'm not sure if Davros was using the reality bomb just yet.  In the 'real' universe, Earth was the last planet in place.  Maybe what Donna and Wilf were witnessing was the disappearance (or removal) of the other planets for his plan.

Share this post


Link to post

What is Rory? He died in the Salurian episode, then was brought back in "the Pandorica" as an autoton centurion from Amy's memory.  He then guarded her for 2000 years, they got married, had a kid, got zapped back to New York in the 30's, then died at 87/88.  Why did he die? When did he become human again.  I'm so confused.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I see what you're saying, but the actual Stars were "going out".

Then, maybe you have it right, Davros figured out how to make the reality bomb without the Earth.

 

What is Rory? He died in the Salurian episode, then was brought back in "the Pandorica" as an autoton centurion from Amy's memory.  He then guarded her for 2000 years, they got married, had a kid, got zapped back to New York in the 30's, then died at 87/88.  Why did he die? When did he become human again.  I'm so confused.

My guess is that Rory was "brought back" just as Amy's parents and aunt and The Doctor.  River as well, but for some reason she still seems outside of everything to me.

Share this post


Link to post

The way I understood it, the crack in the universe (from an exploding TARDIS) never existed because the new Big Bang reset the universe without the crack and the TARDIS was reset. Anyone who went through the crack and was wiped from existence (Rory, Amy's parents) came "back" because the crack was removed from history. For whatever reason, Amy was still affected, being at the center of it all, so she could bring the Doctor back from the other side and Rory was still aware of his time as the centurion.

 

Amy and Rory went back to the 1930s because of the Weeping Angels, which is a relatively simple line of reasoning for NuWho.

Edited by ketose

Share this post


Link to post

In "Silence in the Library," The Doctor meets River for the first time and she whips out her diary to start comparing time lines.  She mentions the Byzantium, which is the first weeping angels episode with Matt Smith.  As far as we know, River never sees the Doctor again with this face, why did she recognize it?  She wasn't shocked that he had a different face and honestly thought he would know her.  They already knew David Tennant was leaving at this point, so this seems like a major plot hole to me.

Share this post


Link to post

Another question from "Silence in the Library."  Well, actually a later episode.  When does the Doctor give River his sonic that is in the Silence?

Share this post


Link to post

In "Silence in the Library," The Doctor meets River for the first time and she whips out her diary to start comparing time lines.  She mentions the Byzantium, which is the first weeping angels episode with Matt Smith.  As far as we know, River never sees the Doctor again with this face, why did she recognize it?  She wasn't shocked that he had a different face and honestly thought he would know her.  They already knew David Tennant was leaving at this point, so this seems like a major plot hole to me.

She doesn't recognise his face from having met him before - he'd shown her pictures of all his other selves and she recognised him from that.

 

As for why she expected him to recognise her...well, it isn't the last logic gap you'll find in the story of the Doctor and River Song. It's what comes of writing a linear story about a time-travel-meeting-out-of-order relationship; the story isn't as clever as it thinks it is.

 

Another question from "Silence in the Library."  Well, actually a later episode.  When does the Doctor give River his sonic that is in the Silence?

It happens like the rest of their relationship: off-screen.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

Another question from "Silence in the Library."  Well, actually a later episode.  When does the Doctor give River his sonic that is in the Silence?

 

Wasn't there a webisode where he puts it in her cell in the Storm Cage?  Or was that just the diary?

Share this post


Link to post

Another "Angels Take Manhattan" question....I don't see how breaking River's arm will get her free of the Angel.  The Angel has grabbed her very tightly around the wrist and it's hand encircles her wrist completely.  How is breaking her wrist going to help?  She has to get her hand to slip through, which would be cuts, not breaks.

Share this post


Link to post

Another "Angels Take Manhattan" question....I don't see how breaking River's arm will get her free of the Angel.  The Angel has grabbed her very tightly around the wrist and it's hand encircles her wrist completely.  How is breaking her wrist going to help?  She has to get her hand to slip through, which would be cuts, not breaks.

Don't look for logic or sense in that particular story, would be my advice. The characterisation is horrific, as well.

Share this post


Link to post

 

How is breaking her wrist going to help?  She has to get her hand to slip through, which would be cuts, not breaks.

Another question is did she break her arm bone (wrist) or the tiny bones in the wrist which makes it flexible.  

 

I want to know why couldn't someone break the wrist of the stupid angel? 

 

Wasn't there a webisode where he puts it in her cell in the Storm Cage?  Or was that just the diary?

We see them saying goodbye at her cell at the end of "1969".

Edited by elle
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I want to know why couldn't someone break the wrist of the stupid angel? 

 

I've always wondered that too. But if you could break their wrists, then couldn't you just destroy them by smashing them to pieces?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I've always wondered that too. But if you could break their wrists, then couldn't you just destroy them by smashing them to pieces?

In fairness, it isn't a problem most people face, as the majority of weeping angels simply send people back into the past rather than grabbing hold of them.

 

Maybe River did find something to smash the angel's grip with, but doing so also broke her own wrist - she'd have to hit both, to free herself, unless she wanted a chunky stone bracelet forevermore.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

 

In fairness, it isn't a problem most people face, as the majority of weeping angels simply send people back into the past rather than grabbing hold of them.

True, until someone decided they would even more scary if they didn't just zap you to the past but could also snap your neck.  Oh and do that "use the your voice box (don't need to really say what it was)" so they could speak to The Doctor.  

 

I also that it was a bad choice to make every single statue a possible angel.

 

Besides the all the other plot holes, I want to know why those Cybermen didn't figure out how to use "the dead" before now?  I thought the whole mission of the Cybermen was to upgrade existing humans.  In "The Pandorica Opens" , the sentry Cyberman was intent on dispensing of its old, dead occupant and use Amy as the replacement.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I don't actually think the whole "using the dead" thing makes any sense. You have to store the consciousness in a data core and you have to use this tank to grow the suit. You have to transmit other stuff to the graves, apparently, in what sounds like a zombie Cyberman Apocalypse. Plus, they have 3W centers all over the world. The only thing that would make this possible is Timey-wimey Lord technology.

 

The Cybermen have been pretty effective at Borging other worlds, taking humans and augmenting them with Cybermen tech. Why use a corpse that's all decaying and put them in storage to spring it on the Doctor. That's the kind of thing a showy super villain would do. Oh, wait.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

The cybermen borging humanity doesn't really make much sense. The borg insert a nano probe that colonises the brain stem and then upgrades are grafted on later on by the advanced alien race slurping down biological and technological progress to achieve perfection.

 

The Cybermen essentially are walking robot suits that clamp around a living human preserving them indefinitely until they get hit with gold or have an emotional breakdown and explode. Of course where the metal comes from or why the walking cyber suit requires a human when it can move on its own is never really explained well. The meat inside reduces the effectiveness of the Cybermen entirely and the real horror of being trapped in a metal shell is never really explored in detail otherwise they'd have to explain why the Doctor kills them all the time instead of trying to free the trapped people inside.

 

I said in the episode thread it'd make more sense for the Master to clone his consciousness into all these robot bodies then he can have a robot version of being 6 billion people.

 

Plot holes and nonsense abounds in this show.

Share this post


Link to post

I want to know why couldn't someone break the wrist of the stupid angel?

I'm not making excuses for the writing on this show, but supposedly: The Weeping Angels are the 'perfect predator'. When their prey is unaware of them they are able to stalk and kill; when their prey notices them, they freeze (like statues) and become difficult to destroy.

Share this post


Link to post

Or at least seem innoucous.  While one or two looking at them, why can't someone else take a sledgehammer to them?

 

New question:  What happened to "The Moment" at the end of the movie?  Did the trio just leave it in the farmhouse, take it back to the Gallifrey vault, or leave it with the UNIT team?  Can you imagine what humans would do with a weapon of destruction like that...oh, wait, right

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Not exactly a plot hole, more a geography question - When Ten and Donna and the Family of Pompeii are watching the destruction of Pompeii including a bird's eye view of Vesuvius, where could they be standing really?

Share this post


Link to post

Not exactly a plot hole, more a geography question - When Ten and Donna and the Family of Pompeii are watching the destruction of Pompeii including a bird's eye view of Vesuvius, where could they be standing really?

 

Based on the map, most of the pyroclastic flows and heaviest ashfalls were directed towards the south and southeast except for the one that destroyed Herculaneum. The hills 8 or 10 kilometers to the east of Vesuvius would have probably been out of the danger zone - which the TARDIS would have known, of course.

 

http://quemdixerechaos.com/2013/11/07/translatingplinypt8/ 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Don't even get me STARTED on that mess of an episode, or storyline. Amy being switched doesn't bother me all that much - I can buy that there was opportunity for it to happen without spelling it out - but it makes no sense as a part of River's story.

 

We later find out that the Silence captured Melody/River as a newborn. But the little girl in the spacesuit doesn't act like someone raised by a militaristic cult as a weapon against the Doctor, she acts like a kidnapped little girl. Then, we have the picture of Amy and Melody in the orphanage - when was THAT taken? Why would the Silence/Kovarian keep it around? Did Melody have access to it, and if so why?

 

And of course, Melody escapes the silence and gets to New York - but still winds up as Amy and Rory's friend Mels in the early 90s, still under the control of Kovarian et al. And  is apparently capable of being  a really good friend to Amy and Rory, despite her wild behavior, yet turns into a sociopathic would-be assassin within thirty seconds of regenerating into River Song, seemingly having never questioned her orders to kill the Doctor. Just terrible character work, all around. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

When was Amy switched?  I'm guessing it was when she was captured by the Silence in "1969".

In "A Good Man Goes to War", the Doctor said that it happened "Just before America". If you recall, starting with "The Impossible Astronaut" and going forward until this episode, we see little snips of Madame Kovarian looking at Amy through a hatch. Amy asks him about it and he says that it was reality bleeding through and "They must have taken you quite awhile back. Just before America."

Edited by Gracie

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size