User talk:NateBumber

	Archives: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5

Welcome to my Talk Page! To save time, you can call me N8.
Please remember to sign with ~~~~ so I can see who you are.
– N8 (☎/👁️)

Re: thinly-veiled characters

I found another character to add to your "thinly-veiled characters" section in your sandbox: an unnamed companion in PROSE: The Blue Angel fits the description of Cedric from NOTVALID: Search Out Space.

Epsilon📯 📂

14:12, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Oh, and for your list of "valid references to invalid stories", you might not be aware of the two references to Griffoth (from NOTVALID: Attack of the Graske) in TV: SJAF 1 and Journey's End.

Epsilon📯 📂

18:58, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Another for this list would be that in TV: The Christmas Invasion, the Tenth Doctor refers to man he had once met called Arthur Dent; this encounter was first mentioned on the Who is Doctor Who website, when Arthur Dent mentions the Ninth Doctor, who lay in front of a bulldozer in front on Dent's home.

Epsilon📯 📂

11:51, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

In PROSE: Big Bang Generation, the Doctor mentions Time Squids and Crinis from NOTVALID: The Twelfth Doctor Interactive Story.

Epsilon📯 📂

23:50, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Another is Magister1971.

Epsilon📯 📂

13:20, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Although there have been many references to NOTVALID: Dr. Who and the Daleks in valid sources, one that hasn't had much attention is in PROSE: Bafflement and Devotion, where it is evident that the version of TV: The Daleks that Iris lived through was actually a version of Dr. Who and the Daleks.

Epsilon📯 📂

13:13, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Not sure why this one isn't present, considering you wrote Cobweb and Ivory, but aren't the painted warriors retroactively intended to be Weeping Angels in your story?

Epsilon📯 📂

08:40, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Up to ye whether you want to list him, because he's intentionally ambiguous and could be any of several thinly-veiled-licensed-characters or public-domain characters; but three of the possible identities for the Man in black are the Master/War King, the Genesis of the Daleks Time Lord messenger, and Voyager. Also, left a couple of messages for you on Discord! Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 15:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

PROSE: The Gallifrey Chronicles mentions Jemima-Katy as one of the Doctor's companions, who was an "applicant" to be the Doctor's companion in NOTVALID: The Skivers.

Epsilon📯 📂

15:57, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Important news

Oi! Would appreciate you showing up on Discord when you can, I have several pieces of Who-related news of some great import which I'd like to discuss with you, and which cannot be discussed on-Wiki for various reasons (such as T:SPOIL). Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 16:36, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

BotW

Why did you remove the plot section of The Book of the War? It won't be an easy one to write, but it can and should have one — probably following the order of events given in the Timeline and building from there. Also, if you'll slide over to Discord once more, I have related things to discuss with you which T:SPOIL still bans from these parts… Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 16:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

I dunno. Probably it would be better for someone without any COI at all to have a look at the situation. You've written for FP, of course, and as for myself, I do have a vague connection to PROBE — we're very close to my Oath here, so I don't feel comfortable making any administrative decision, even if I think I can have valuable things to say as an editor among equals. Also, if you could give me a reply on the above;? (And show up on Discord whenever convenient…) Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 16:15, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, certainly. It's really a pity Najawin vanished just as so much new FP stuff was bubbling to light… Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 16:49, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Well, waiting for you over on Discord. Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 16:54, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

RE: Comments on your Sandboxes

Thank you so much for your support. I've still got a fair bit of work to do before I'd feel happy seeing the template implemented (currently the template will only work well for prose stories) but I'm going to be adding support for other forms of story soon. Hopefully other editors will also like the template when I propose it upon the return of the forums! Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 16:26, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Re:Infobox Phenomenon and Conflict

Hey, I was away from the wiki for a while, so could not respond sooner. Regarding the infobox, yeah, it's been in a sandbox for a long while, mostly because I and other people with whom I discussed it couldn't find a 100% suitable name (because the more generic "Infobox Event" already existed as a redirect to {{Infobox Event or Exhibition}}.

That said, your suggestion of "Infobox Phenomenon or Conflict" had come across my mind once and, honestly, is probably as good as we'll ever get for it. I'll proceed to publish it and work on a documentation of the three types of "events" they can be used on: conflicts, which is already done by {{Infobox Conflict/doc}}, sport matches, and other, more general events. Feel free to use it on whichever pages suit them. OncomingStorm12th ☎ 14:51, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Slight update: I decided to leave the final name as {{Infobox Event or Conflict}} because describing 2012 Olympics or Fourth Doctor-K9 chess match (The Androids of Tara) as a "phenomenom" didn't seem quite... as fitting (though {{Infobox Phenomenon or Conflict}} still exists as a redirect). OncomingStorm12th ☎ 15:19, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Renames

I've just done Minor (star), and somebody else did Maxie Masters, so you can cross those off your list!

Also, waiting for you over on Discord with some fun FP discoveries whose implications I'd like to discuss with you… Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 13:42, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Rosette

Hey! Please do see my second reply at Talk:Man with the Rosette. I really didn't think I was doing anything out of the ordinary here — nor meant to imply that you had done anything especially wrong. You yourself cited T:EDIT WARS — well, at the end of the day, there was one reversion from you and one counterreversion from me, which is still well within accepted practice on both ends. Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 14:38, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Re: Third opinion

Thank you very much for the ping today, it served the dual purpose of reminding me about your message last week (sorry for forgetting about it).

Coming onto that, I'd probably go with "Notably, several of BBV's decisions were decried by Lawrence Miles" over "This was notably decried by Lawrence Miles". This is because he lists two releases in particular as reason for feeling the way he does so the "several" just helps future-proof the statement (assuming Miles won't complain about literally everything they do with the license moving forward). As you say though, the distinction is very minor and the link to the tweets is there for those seeking clarification either way. Borisashton ☎ 23:02, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Re: messages

'Ey! Been awaiting your feedback on a handful of things over on Discord, one of which has a fortunate connection to one of your latest posts over on Tumblr and Wiki implications… Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 12:17, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Re: appearances tab

Yes, this seems well within the precedent of things like the "soft testing" of the new 'Infobox Event' on a select few pages in the main namespace before its wider implementation. You can go ahead — but do make a note on the talk page(s) clarifying the special nature of these changes, and that other users shouldn't begin converting Thirteenth Doctor - list of appearances to the new format out of the blue! Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 18:29, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

RE: Your message on my talk page

You're absolutely right I neglected to sign a few messages, but really, is that the main worry? I... made a string of very bizarre edits. Utterly misreading the contents of a page on a trailer, telling users to "get owned", ending inquiries with "TELL ME NOW NOW NOW!", and removing a use of the phrase "BTS" meaning "Behind the Scenes" because of the Kpop group of the same name. I was... well... not in an entirely lucid state of mind at the time. Yeah, I probably shouldn't try editing in...that... anymore. NightmareofEden ☎ 17:44, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Page moves

Hey, I've seen you attempted to move The First Men in the Moon (comic story) from your sandbox into the (main) NameSpace. I appreciate your eagerness to improve the coverage, but, in the future, please only move sandbox pages if you're moving them to another sandbox title.

This is because non-admins automatically leave redirects behind when moving pages, which is fine on a sandbox NameSpace, but that's not desirable for the main NameSpace. Thanks. OncomingStorm12th ☎ 18:43, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Re: Tree limitations

Hi, thanks for taking an interest in this project! I think your way of representing Orson Pink is very good. I also like your Doctor family tree. I feel it would be nice to try and include family members such as Granny Five, although this probably isn't practically possible.

I also like your series relationships diagrams; I feel they are much better then mine. I'm going to have a look at re-making some of mine with individual stories rather then whole series. With regard to missing intersections, I've been meaning to have a look at how practical it is to add more tiles. There are some cases in some of my diagrams where different tiles to the ones given would have been useful.

Additionally, now that there's 3 people (me, you and RadMatter) taking an interest in trees, I feel that it's important to consider the fact that, with Fandom's current implementation of the mobile skin, trees will not work on mobile as this will be a major hurdle on getting this used on the wiki at large. I have a few ideas, non of them great, on how this could be overcome, but I thought that I would mention this as something to consider. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 15:47, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

I prefer the prefix version as it is, as you said, more flexible. I can't see the harm in resurrecting the old prefixes in just this scenario where it does add a lot of clarity. To be honest, the majority of casual users with whom these prefixes would be confusing are going to be on mobile and so won't be able to see the trees properly anyway. The only case where I could see prefixes being an issue is if a story isn't part of any series, such as Glam Rock Detective. An idea that has just occurred to me is that my extra citation template could be used, although this is not yet finished and may not make it through the forums anyway. The benefit of this would be that author is shown (something that I feel could be particularly useful when dealing with Paul Magrs and that side of the DWU, as well as release date and other information that could add some context to otherwise confusing looking placements. It would also help with the seriesless story scenario.

Another concern I have is that using individual stories isn't always as practical or effective as using series. For example, in this tree showing the way TV spin-offs connect together, pinpointing a particular story doesn't always work. Moreover, it's probably more helpful for the new fan that this is intended to help if series are used as they likely wouldn't have knowledge of every story name. Therefore, I feel that both versions of the tree should be used with a key always present (perhaps in a collapsible) to make sure it is clear which format is in use. The different keys could be set as templates, or even just one template that takes an argument and changes what key is shown based on that argument.

I do not believe that it is possible to make the tree (which is simply a table with a lot of formatting at its core) not display on mobile, at least not in a practical sense (in theory, the entirety of the tree could be placed on the page by CSS or JavaScript which then wouldn't be rendered on mobile. In practise, this would make easily editing the tree basically impossible). It is definitely possible to add a message warning mobile users that the tree won't render properly, and it should be possible to make this message only render for mobile users. I have been considering providing a link to let mobile users view the tree with the desktop skin, although this of course isn't perfect, especially if they are using the Fandom app. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 18:29, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

I have worked out how to add extra tiles to the {{tree}} template. The extra ones that I've added are on the bottom row of the tree on my 14th numbered sandbox. Are there any others that you feel it would be particularly useful to have? As {{tree}} is protected, I would like to make all of the extra tiles that will be needed before asking an admin to add it to the template. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 11:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

That shouldn't be hard to do at all. I'll add it tomorrow. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 20:06, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Are these the tiles that you want added?

Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 10:04, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Are these good?

Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 19:20, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Brilliant. I'll be asking an admin to add the new tiles to {{tree}} in the near future. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 13:12, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

{{tree}} has been unprotected and I've added my changes from User:bongolium500/tree to the template, including editing the documentation page. Therefore, you should be able to replace all uses of User:bongolium500/tree with {{tree}} in your sandbox. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 17:54, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

The reason I thought it would be good to make a thread is that trees do not work on mobile and I believe (although have not confirmed) that some things (such as the use of tabs) have been disallowed due to not working on mobile. There isn't really a way around this (unless the trees are created in a sandbox and screenshotted with the images being inserted into the page, although this wouldn't work properly with light and dark theme and would make editing the trees a massive hassle). What I'm currently thinking is to exploit the fact that CSS does not load on mobile to create a message that replaces the tree on mobile telling people that the trees do not work on mobile view with a link to view the page on desktop view. This could be implemented straight into {{tree/start}} and {{tree/end}} but the templates are protected meaning I'll need to bother some admins to get them unprotected again. I'll also need to add a bit to CSS. This means it's not something I could get implemented today. Do you have any other ideas? Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 19:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

I've finally got round to making trees a little more mobile friendly to the point where I think they could start to be used. On mobile, the tree is hidden and instead a message is displayed with a link to view the desktop site. This is implemented directly into the various templates and so no extra work is required when creating trees. Therefore, if you think it is fine to start adding them to pages, I can think of no technical reason as to not. I think this could work as an additional section at the bottom of story pages, as seen here, although it could also go in the notes/story notes section. It may also be worth standardising a key in the form of a template. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 19:30, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Twitter

Hi Nate, how are you? I just saw your addition to the Twitter page and was unsure if the reference to The Crooked World does actually belong there, or if the birds in question should have their own separate page. I see your point about the Crooked World having manifestations of memes and whatnot, but the novel was released four years before Twitter was even founded, so I'm not sure if this was one. I mean, in-universe it works magnificently and makes me think that Steve Lyons may be psychic, and I don't mind at all if it stays on the page, I just wanted to check to see if the release date/authorial intent was a problem? LauraBatham ☎ 04:40, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Scanlon = Monk?

Hello! I'm sorry to report that I have some heavy doubts on the legitimacy of the John Scanlon/Time Meddler connection; more details in the Tumblr post I linked. Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 17:39, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Re: Novelisation page names

Thanks for the heads up; at the suggestion of User:Shambala108 I've queried User:SOTO about what the current policy is just for clarification's sake, though I don't expect a speedy answer or solution - I posited the name change 7 years ago and a grand total of nothing has occurred since then. To answer your question, I can't think of any other pages this particular situation might apply to off the top of my head - I only pushed for the Lavel page's change because I was gifted the Battlefield novel and noted the added information. If I find or think of another page that could benefit from the same name change, I'll come back and add to this. Pbandfluff ☎ 22:21, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Re: The Merge of Morbius

Hello! I likewise hope you're well… Despite the (I assume?) continued unavailability of your Discord, remember that we can also communicate through Twitter! I believe I left some messages for you there several days ago.

As concerns this Morbius business: hmmm. I don't know. "The Ship" relies on a very direct licensed connection — she is "the timeship which converted Compassion into the first humanoid timeship", with Compassion appearing under license; that's thus a licensable 'aspect' of the Doctor's TARDIS and we acknowledge the appearance. Likewise "the Homeworld" we can acknowledge as Gallifrey because it's "the home planet of the Great Houses", with the Houses appearing under license.

I'm not sure I see an equally straightforward reasoning with Morbius and the Imperator. "The first President of the Great Houses to have advocated for more interventionist policies, been deposed, and executed"? Perhaps — but that is, I think you'll agree, a step further removed, even if the logic holds.

The thing is, I can't really justify to myself the idea of accepting that reasoning for 'Imperator Morbius', but remaining blind to the War King's former identity as the Master, which is easily argued on a similar basis of "the most infamous criminal the Great Houses produced, whose timeship left the Homeworld on the same day as 'the Ship'" (that is, you could argue this even if we set aside the matter of whether we should acknowledge that the Lord President in The Taking of Planet 5 was a licensed appearance the Master from the word go — which is another pathway to potential acknowldgement of War King=Master).

Plus, there are concerns about where extending the Homeworld Principle this far might take us. Auteur is "the metafictionally-minded early member of the Great Houses who charted the meridians of time", so is he really Astrolabus by the Homeworld Principle? Etc., etc. It is not that I would necessarily be against a proposal for the Wiki to acknowledge "implied characters" across the board (as per the proposal on your user-page's bulleted list); but I am leery of doing so "through the backdoor" by extending the Homeworld Principle further and further. The way I see it, the Homeworld Principle is its own standard, which is not quite the same standard that would let us accept things like Imperator Morbius or Auteur/Astrolabus; and we should stay true to the spirit of the current law.

All this being said, perhaps there is some angle I'm missing about the specific Imperator/Morbius matter.

Actually, I think there's a somewhat speculative angle we may have all missed: The Brain of Morbius was cowritten by Robert Holmes. It is known that the Robert Holmes estate gave The Book of the War the right to use the Sontaran, though Miles decided it was best not to include any named TV Who concepts in the book. Is it not conceivable that Holmes owned Morbius (or at least, some portions of the character; perhaps not the name), and authorised his use? How sure are we that The Book of the War did not have the license to Morbius, anyway? I don't have any certainty in this area but perhaps the matter is worth investigating. Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 19:28, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox

Hi, do you have plans for the redirects left behind after your recent page moves thanks Shambala108 ☎ 18:07, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Discord

Time to revive old traditions: I would appreciate you nipping over to Discord if you have a minute free! Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 22:42, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Fascination

Hi Nate,

You are correct that the character's only "official" appearance in the DWU was in the charity anthology, however the Special Executive characters Wardog, Zeitgeist and Cobweb have made several appearances in Marvel comics which feature Fascination (these are the only ones which I have red-linked/intend to create pages for as they feature DWU concepts). Fascination has also been referred to as a loom-born Gallifreyan in an X-Men handbook.

And I am doing really well thank you, hope the same for you! RadMatter ☎ 22:52, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Re:Infinity Doctor

Ha! That was a nice catch, and, much like the Fugitive Doctor, he benefits that the moniker we're using appears in their first story's title, and (ever-important) it also has a meaning to the character in-universe.

Although dab terms are good and saves our lives when naming pages, you are right that they're not as useful when writing (and reading!) articles themselves, so I think that, presented a good alternative like this one, we should take advantage of it. Rename incoming! OncomingStorm12th ☎ 23:16, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

I.M. Foreman

Hey, always nice to see you around (and sorry for the delayed answer, the placement of the notification bell reeeeally isn't helpful, I often don't see it). So, let's go for it: when redlinking to the page, I defaulted to Gallifreyan (Interference) much in the same vein of Renegade Time Lord (The Eleven), which is "a generic-dabbed-by-story term, in the lack of a better one" (however, if you do think of a better, less generic name, please reach out again! As you've by now surely noticed, I'm all-for non-dabbed pages whenever possible.

As for the category... I'm not sure. Sure, the War Doctor is in Category:Incarnations of the Doctor despite not being often called "the Doctor" (although, in many many stories he... ends up being called just that ;p). In general, though, I think it'd be a bit weird to name the category after any of the incarnation instead of the overall Time Lord/Gallifreyan name. We don't have, after all, Category:Incarnations of the Eleven, but rather Category:Incarnations of the Renegade Time Lord (The Eleven). (again, please give me a shout for a good name for the overall character, {{conjecture}} might be our best friend, since you're more familiar with the character than myself)

Finally, the "prev"/"next"... I.. don't know. I feel like it'd be slightly redundant with {{Meddling Monks}} and the likes of it (otoh, perhaps draft a Sandbox incoporating this idea. That'd be a good material to our temporary threads, if they ever materialise before our propper forums are back.) OncomingStorm12th ☎ 16:37, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Maybe a bit on the nose, but [[The Show Traveller]] came to mind (to mirror I.M. Foreman's Travelling Show, and it fits, cause all of them were a part of the travelling show, right?) Let me know what you think. OncomingStorm12th ☎ 16:49, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

It's occurred to me that the thing about templates like {{Doctors}} and {{Meddling Monks}} is that, for Time Lords with lots of minor incarnations like the Doctor, we don't have all of them in the mini-navbox under the infobox. A next field in Previous Doctor (Seven Keys to Doomsday) pointing to The Doctor (Seven Keys to Doomsday) would not be redundant with the presence of {{Doctors}} on those pages. I think I am cautiously in support of the prev/next idea now.

By the way, if you could jump over to Discord, got a couple of things to tell ye about! Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 20:57, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Once again, would I speak with thee of matters paradoxical over there… Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 16:54, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Re: Infobox inquiry

Hi Nate, I'm doing well. How about you? What you're asking about is pretty simple. I've made it at User:Bongolium500/Infobox Individual and I've placed an example below.

NateBumber
Incarnation order
← Previous	Third Doctor
Next →	Fifth Doctor

The relevent code can be found at the bottom of the infobox. It only has 1 set of navigation fields but this could easily be expanded. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 19:07, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Re: Infobox test

Yes, by all means! Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 18:13, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Mh. Try refreshing it a couple of times? Worked for me. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 21:41, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Great Black Eye

Would be happy to discuss all this with you more broadly and speculatively on Discord if you would…! At any rate, I do think there is something intentionally eye-like in the Glorious Dead art — note the cluster of "stars" near the center. It's more obvious when you zoom out and look at it in low resolution that it gives the impression of a simplified eye design, black withe a white pupil.

I also think the "purely the post-War Eye of Harmony" and "eye of the Master" interpretations should be covered separately — in large part because, by all appearances, Miles didn't intend the Eye in The Adventuress of Henrietta Street to be anything else than the Post-War Eye, sans Master connection (or else, surely the Man with the Rosette would have something interesting to say about it!). Linking it to the visual from The Glorious Dead and the broader idea of the echo-Master was very much Parkin's retrospective dot-joining. So, in the spirit of these "Possible identities"-type sections on pages being used to also give readers a sense of the competing authorial intents of the real-world writers, it's best to keep them separate even if the Master version is consistent with some interpretations of the Eye of Harmony versions. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 23:08, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

(Oh, and as for the repetition — let me know if you have any better ideas, but the thing is that the stuff from Glorious Dead is simultaneously "a sighting", and possessed of context useful to interpreting one of the "Possible identities"; so it really should be represented in both sections of the page, given the way the page is currently structured, or else one of them wouldn't be complete. I did try to write the two paragraphs in such a way that the one is more focused on the sheer event of the Doctor being given a glimpse of the black eye-like sun, while the other was more concerned with explaining the context, quoting the Master's retrospectively very interesting statements about the world which the black sun would herald, etc.) Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 23:15, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Renames

Hi there! Thanks for your message and sorry for taking so long to respond. I haven't had the time to do any editing but reverting vandalism for a while.

Yeah, I did notice that we were moving pages ourselves now, although I didn't know exactly how come. If I've added Speedy Rename templates to any pages recently, it must have been force of habit! Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 19:18, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

News

Are you around Discord-wise? Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 14:19, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Once again… Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 15:38, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Page moves

Hi, when you move pages don't forget to delete any unnecessary redirects thanks Shambala108 ☎ 02:53, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Navboxes

Hi. Regarding a general-purpose Template:Counterparts, I completely agree. That would work far better and save a lot of time and space in the long run, though it would have to be created by somebody better at template coding than myself. I'm thinking of something similar to Template:Looks like which can be used as standard, where we can either add the subject or it is autopopulated by the page name. If a general counterparts template was created, I think it should say "Alternate counterparts of [subject]" rather than "Parallel counterparts of [subject]", that way it includes both parallel universes and alternate timelines. 66 Seconds ☎ 22:21, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Need a favor

Hi, I need a favor and I'm hoping you can help me. I've been so busy the last few years, and the forums have been down almost as long, so I've lost track of where certain stories and their elements stand on the wiki. As far as the characters for He Jests at Scars... (audio story), do you know what has been decided on how to cover them? Thanks and if you don't know, could you point me in the direction of someone who does? Shambala108 ☎ 23:01, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply! I think you answered my concern, but I want to be sure I have it right.

So any character from He Jests is considered to come from the Unbound series? My reason for asking is that a new user created a bunch of character pages, like the Doctor, the Master, etc, with the dab term "He Jests at Scars". When I see a bunch of pages created like that, I always wonder why they don't already exist, but I don't want to delete them if that's how we're covering them. So are they valid pages or not, do you know? For example, The Master (He Jests at Scars...) and Fourth Doctor (He Jests at Scars...). (Ignore the multiple policy violations on the pages, there's no need to fix them if the pages will be deleted.)

It also looks like he created character pages specifically for several of the other Unbound stories, so I guess your answer will apply to all of those.

Thanks again! Shambala108 ☎ 01:24, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate it, especially since, as I told User:Scrooge MacDuck, I don't really know anything about the topic and wouldn't really know how best to fix the pages. Shambala108 ☎ 02:31, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Capaldi Interview

Maybe it's just me, but that link on your user page seems to be broken and the web archive only has saved the first page of the interview, not the specific quote. Do you have it saved somewhere? Najawin ☎ 05:58, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I'm not sure that interview means much, the situation is one where they had only their phones (so searching the page for "tv" would be a little cumbersome) and a limited period of time. Something to be discussed though. Najawin ☎ 00:36, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

I mean, I'm pretty sure mobile users have consistently been an after thought on this wiki. For good or for ill. Najawin ☎ 19:29, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Whenever you're free, I'd appreciate input at Talk:You Are The Absurd Hero (short story). Najawin ☎ 03:12, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Erasing Sherlock

So I figured recently that it might be an idea to ask my local library to ILL some FP books to summarize, would be cheaper than buying them. Well, if the library can find them. Almost all of them are either dead ends (Obverse, TBotW) or are ones that I already own (the ones I've already summarized). I did find that Erasing Sherlock has a few libraries in the US with copies, but each one charges a small fee to loan, more than the ebook, but a manageable expense. I'd prefer not to pay it, all things considered, I mean, who would? But there are differences between the ebook and the print book, is my understanding. My question is, do you have a copy of the book/are you planning on doing a summary? If so, I'll not worry about it. If not, I'll go ahead, request the book, and do a summary. (Obviously no pressure, just explaining the context for the question.) Najawin ☎ 22:53, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Alright, I'll go ahead and let my library know. (Since iirc you're also in the US you can probably ILL it from your local library as well if you want. The $20 fee isn't fun, but it's not like TBotW or anything.) (I think technically Northern Illinois University and Eugene Oregon have physical copies of TBotW but they don't loan them out. Yes, I asked.) Najawin ☎ 00:49, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Also, not exactly wiki relevant (shhh, don't tell anyone), but based on the current reading group discussion, are you aware of the |PhilSci Archive? Always a great place to go when you want to mull over some conceptual issues in physics/metaphysics. eg |1 |2 |3. Najawin ☎ 01:29, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Also, do you know an FP source that delineates the duties of FP parents off hand? We have a lot of Mothers and Fathers floating around, but no Parent (rank) page. Najawin ☎ 19:59, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Hmmmmmm. I'm not sure if this is narrative. But, well, can't be invalidated at the moment! I'll write it up sometime today. Thanks. Najawin ☎ 21:36, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Do you know if Miles wrote all of The Spiral Politic Database except for A Tour of the Capital? I can't find authors. Or dates of publications. Najawin ☎ 22:59, 22 September 2022 (UTC) Ah, I wasn't aware of the situation with the main page! That makes things substantially simpler. (I did catch those dates, I just had no clue how anyone had figured them out.) And if it's Miles that's great. Cheers. Najawin ☎ 17:28, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

By the way, do you know if Off-Cuts and Afterthoughts was ever published anywhere else? I thought about making a page for it under the The Spiral Politic Database header, but about half of these are missing. Najawin ☎ 22:09, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm an idiot, I even have the scripts downloaded. I was thinking they were like in an earlier version of them or something. Thank you for humoring me. Najawin ☎ 17:54, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

So actual Erasing Sherlock stuff. Yale has a physical copy that they're willing to lend out. I've got it for a few weeks, but in about a month if you talk to your library it should be back with Yale if you want to try for it. Najawin ☎ 05:40, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Hurricane

Good luck and stay safe btw. Najawin ☎ 18:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Against Nature Summary

No no, just a joke. Riffing on the old "I came here to have a good time and am honestly feeling so attacked right now" style of comment. That particular summary was exhausting. And, in all honesty, still probably incoherent to someone who hasn't read the book. Najawin ☎ 17:38, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Re: 🥳 New template 🎉

Hi, I've had a look over the template and most of what you want done isn't too hard. I'll go through the things one at a time, explaining as best I can my methodology and techniques.

1. Firstly, {{da}} is not my template. Its an old one from well before my time as an editor. As for the actual changes to make, I did these edits in one go as Special:Diff/3338142. I've made use of some of these magic words for this. For (a), I'm pretty certain what you had would have worked. However, I replaced {{#titleparts:}} with {{SUBPAGENAME}} as {{SUBPAGENAME}} is simpler, making the template easier to read, understand and improve in future (that's also what the comments are for). For (b), {{da}} automatically creates a link. Therefore, I removed the unecassary linking syntax. Moreover, I replaced {{PAGENAME}} with {{ROOTSUBPAGENAME}} as the page root name is what we want here.
2. I'm not quite sure what you want here. Do you want the editor to provide a linked or unlinked list? Should they be allowed to use "and", or just commas? I assume you want them to provide an unlinked, comma seperated list that is then linked and formatted nicely, but I might be wrong. If this is what you want, it should be possible with the {{#arraymap:}} parser function.
3. I did this as Special:Diff/3338145 and Special:Diff/3338148 (I made 2 small errors in the first edit. I explained this briefly in the edit summary). However, instead of just having a single name, I've done seperate display and link variables to cover more potential edge cases. This required changing quite a bit of the stuff I did in the first set of edits. Firstly, I switched out {{da}} for {{dau}} which provides an unlinked output. I also added back in the explicit linking syntax with both the link and the display text having a different hierarchy of variables. In wikitext, variables like this are represented with 3 curly brackets. For example, if {{{test}}} was in a template, it would be replaced with the value provided to |test= when the template is transcluded. You can also set default values to use when no value is provided like this: {{{test|default}}}. The default value can be anything: it could be blank (this is required if you want the variable to actually return nothing when no value is given), it could be some arbitary text, or it could be even more variables, magic words and templates, allowing hierarchies of overides to be created like I've done for this template. For the link, the template first checks the link variable. If that's blank, {{ROOTSUBPAGENAME}} is just used. For the display text, display is first checked. If that's blank, link is used with {{ROOTSUBPAGENAME}} as the final fallback. Both of these 2 final fallbacks are passed through {{dau}} to remove dab terms as well.
4. I'm sorry to say that this is not actually possible, although you wouldn't actually want to do it anyway! The code editor being used on {{counterparts}} is a consequence of its template type being set to infobox. In this case, {{NCmaterial}} is not an infobox and so should not use this template type as it would have undesired side effects, particuarly with display on mobile. Instead, {{NCmaterial}} is a notice (a case could be made for it being one of the templates deliberately classified as "unknown" for the reasons presented on this page). This template type uses the default wiki editor, not the code editor. However, the code editor for infobox templates has very limited syntax highlighting, pretty much only highlighting portable infobox syntax, which is not helpful at all here. The default wiki editor has much better syntax highlighting for this scenario and so is preferable over the code editor.

I never mind answering requests like this, so don't feel guilty about making them. You do lots of great things that I find very useful, just one example being running the Book Club of the War on the FP Forum.

If you ever do want to learn templates a bit yourself, most documentstion is on the MediaWiki Wiki with some Wikipedia help pages also being quite good. Fandom documentation is mostly on Community Central with some stuff on the Gamepedia Help Wiki. Generally, I recommend just searching the web for whatever you want to try and do, appended with "mediawiki" or "fandom". It doesn't always work, but it'll often bring you to the relevant documentation. Bongo50 ☎ 20:05, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Ah ok, I see what you're trying to do now. Something like {{{: 1|.}}} doesn't work here because anything between the {{{ and | makes up the mame of the variable, so in this case, the name of the variable you've defined is actually ': 1'. To do the formatting you're trying to do, you'll need to use the {{#if:}} parser function. I've implemented this in this edit. The usage of this parser function is as follows:

{{#if:thing to check|output if there is text|output if there isn't text}}

The parser function checks if there is any text in the "thing to check" field. In this case, the thing to check is {{{1|}}}. This will produce an output if the editor provides a list of sources. Otherwise, it will output nothing. Then, if there was an input provided to the variable, the parser function outputs a colon, followed by the input provided. Otherwise, it outputs nothing. Whatever happens, we then end with a full stop (period) which is outside of the parser function.

As for the box being too small, I think that's probably a CSS thing. I'll have a look. Bongo50 ☎ 17:13, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

The height of box problem seems easy enough to fix. I want to do a quick test tomorrow when I'm on my comouter and then I'll send the fix to an admin to implement. Bongo50 ☎ 17:52, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Community consensus

Unless you're referencing a page I'm unaware of (quite possible!), I don't think Fandom Policy requires a forum to discuss rules. Even the advice on the subject doesn't specify that a single place to discuss things must exist. If this was policy, we wouldn't be the only large wiki to not be compliant, neither the Scratchpad wiki nor the Military wiki has forums. So even if you're right I don't know if we could count on Fandom to intervene.

As for the other thing, I'll be honest, it's strategic. I don't expect to get people saying in large numbers that the forum isn't needed. It might happen, I might end up being surprised. But I suspect that on average people will side overwhelmingly in favor of the forums coming back. The way I wrote my original post was specifically tailored to try and make bringing the forums back hard to deny, and I think the more people we can get on record in favor of the forums the stronger the case becomes. Ultimately if someone chooses to insist that the forums can't come back, well, they might do so regardless of any public support, but I think our chances are better the more people we have. Najawin ☎ 04:15, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't want to read into Czech's intent too much here, but I think he's very wedded to the idea that the archives have to come back before the forums. I also think there's at least one admin who thinks they don't have to come back at all. I'm sure both of these people have the best interests of the wiki in mind, I can certainly understand Czech's point of view if he thinks this (and I've even given thought to a compromise here, not discussing topics that rely on heavy reference to older discussions), but I think overwhelming support saying that we need to work on things now would be incredibly helpful.

As for the other issue, that's a wonderful idea, thank you for implementing it. Najawin ☎ 17:57, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Unregistered contributor

Hi, Nate. The only reason I've reverted some of that editor's contributions is because, over the past few months, they've included a lot of paragraphs (almost exclusively on pages devoted to colours) in the wrong tense and story titles not in italics. See their most recent edit on the page "Snathe" for an example of both. This basically means all their edits need proofreading.

Shambala said the following about an unregistered user with a different IP address but similar editing habits:

I have been reverting this person's edits for months and they still don't follow our rules or even bother to check why their edits are being undone. At first I did correct the edits but the repeat nature of his "offenses" has led me to just remove or revert his edits. [...]

This editor's focus seems to be on color and clothing pages. As you've noticed, he ignores Tardis:Citation and Tardis:Italics but he also creates many articles and leads using the real world perspective, violating T:NO RW. Therefore, you can correct his edits as much or as little as you like, but in general I will continue to revert them until I get his attention (maybe he'll leave a message on my talk page?) so I can explain what rules are broken."

I agree with her that the user is creating work for others and have left OncomingStorm a message today about it, although I'm not sure what could or should be done. I just know that I don't fancy going through all their work to correct it all and I don't think anyone else should have to. - Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 21:19, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Cheers! I'll sleep easy tonight. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 22:13, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

It might have been going on for almost two years. See Talk:Olive (colour). One or two IP users have been repeatedly editing the color pages since late 2020, early 2021, even as admins will occasionally delete these pages. The IPs are in different parts of the UK, but the edits are super similar, as are the edit summaries when they actually write them, so it could be the same person using a VPN/proxy. Really weird situation. Najawin ☎ 23:03, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Reply

Apologies for the late reply, been busy at work getting ready for Christmas. Been doing well. Managed to watch all the classic episodes, and skimming through the modern eras to update their respective pages. BananaClownMan ☎ 07:49, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Merry Christmas, User:NateBumber, and have a Happy New Year. Sincerely, BananaClownMan ☎ 11:03, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Admin nomination

Thanks for the prompt and apologies for the tardiness in actually actioning this. I've been fine, this year has been...a complex one. --Tangerineduel / talk 13:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Nate

Hello Nate, my name is JamesMaster75

Re: Feedback page

Hi, go for it! The more feedback I can get for this, the better. Thanks! Bongo50 ☎ 17:17, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Re: Casanova

Only here as far as I know. MrThermomanPreacher ☎ 23:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

"The Mysterious Planet" not a story??

Hey. Scrooge said that we're supposed to consider them to be individual stories, meaning they count. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 16:29, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

I haven't got any sort of point I'm trying to prove. Various pages acted as though The Trial of a Time Lord was one story and, when Scrooge said:

"What the devils do you mean, "we don't consider The Mysterious Planet to be a story"? Yes we do."

I went about making sure that the wiki actually acts as though that is the case. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 16:37, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

That doesn't make sense to me, I'm afraid. I've sent Scrooge a message to get clarification. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 16:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry about proposed forum threads edit

because of the edit conflict i couldnt quite see what that one person added so i was going to just save that edit then add in that persons edit in a second edit. i wasnt trying to vandalise the page or anything. Im sorry. Tellymustard ☎ 19:55, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Etc. v et al.

I'm pretty sure this was actually brought up in the thread that we can't see! That's just the MPAA/Chicago/whatever style. It's not the actual meaning of the terms. "Et cetera" is closer to "and so on", but it's non trivial to figure out what the other sources in question are when you have a list, especially when the DWU is as varied as it is. "et al" allows us to be clear that there are others involved but you might not be able to figure out what they are from context. I fully admit though that this is a quixotic quest, hence my edit summary. Najawin ☎ 00:03, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Orson Pink

I might give a more in depth response another time. But for now I will say this: our policies, particularly T:NPOV, have nothing to do with literary interpretations or subjective critiques or judgements of character or fan theories (with the exception of the theory namespace of course). I am saying what I have primarily because of what happens in the series 8 (and 9) finale, not just the words of the writer later on. -- Tybort (talk page) 23:26, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Most importantly, base your edits on the facts present in valid sources.T:NPOV

What definition of explicit are you using here? Although there is some link involving the toy soldier, he's not a direct descendant in the same way lots of characters played by the same actor aren't direct descendants or secretly the same character. -- Tybort (talk page) 16:12, 23 January 2023 (UTC)