User talk:Najawin: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(Undoing vandalism)
Tags: Removed redirect Undo
No edit summary
 
(245 intermediate revisions by 39 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{ArchCat}}
{{ArchiveList}}


== Warring States FPW ==
== Re: TLDR ==
Ah, thank you. Will do so in a minute. {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 19:08, 2 August 2023 (UTC)


Yes, I recently stumbled across that page of yours and was admiring it mightily :) As both its caretaker and the user who made it redundant to Tardis, I see the Faction Paradox Wiki as the giant, free-for-all sandbox where we can more beautifully cover the aspects of the Faction Paradox universe that grate against TW's conventions, eg my shot-down merger of [[Interference - Book One]] and [[Interference - Book Two]] into [[w:c:factionparadox:Interference (novel)|Interference (novel)]], or the finer points of who ''exactly'' left [[Carmen Yeh]] on that [[Ellerycorp Foundation|ElleryCorp]] shipping vessel. So by all means, the inventive timeline trickery of [[User:Najawin/Sandbox 4]] would have a welcome home over at the Faction Paradox Wiki! – [[User:NateBumber|<span title="User:NateBumber">N8</span>]] ([[User_talk:NateBumber|<span title="Leave me a note">☎</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/NateBumber|<span title="Spy on my edits">👁️</span>]]) 02:27, September 12, 2020 (UTC)
== RE:Sandbox ==


== Quantum Mechanics for Audio Story Editing ==
Thanks very much! [[User:Aquanafrahudy|<span style="font-family: serif; color: pink" title="Hallo." > Aquanafrahudy</span>]] [[User talk: Aquanafrahudy|📢]] 18:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)


Hey [[User:Najawin|Najawin]], hope you're keeping well! I just finished listening to the audio story [[Ghost Walk (audio story)|Ghost Walk]]. There's actually a bit of quantum mechanics involved in the story. Nothing crazy, but I made a little explanation in the "Notes" section explaining the differences between its use in the story and its actual definition in real life (they involve time in it to a certain degree but not in a sensible way). I was wondering if you could give it a quick check to make sure it's publishable in case an admin comes along and is confused by it, as I'm sure you have more experience with that sort of stuff than I do. Cheers, [[User:DoctorQuoi|DoctorQuoi]] [[User talk:DoctorQuoi|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 04:26, September 15, 2020 (UTC)DoctorQuoi
== Re: threads ==
:I see. I would have to play the audio back and give you the exact lines to work with but from what I  understood, they were trying to use the analogy that "the more certain/exact a point in time they try to reach, the less likely they are to reach it" I believe was what was thrown in the story. The story, unfortunately, never explicitly states that it is comparing it the the uncertainty principle, it just seemed to be implied. I will have a look at those [[Pre-narrative Briefings (short story)]] as soon as possible, thank you for providing them.
Aye, that's next on my docket. Give me a minute, though: nine in an afternoon, phew! And I still have a reply on that ol'R4BP thread cooking… [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 20:23, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
:In terms of the time-energy uncertainty relation, I only mention it because in the story, they apply the "abstract" understanding of the [[Uncertainty principle]], in other words, the popular "misconception" and erroneously apply it to time. However, debates on "time-energy" uncertainty aside (thank you for providing those articles, will make for some nice reading this weekend), I only brought it up to explain that time in non-relativistic QM is not thought of or treated the same way as position and momentum in Heisneberg's Uncertainty Principle, as the story erroneously does. So I thought it would be a good idea to explain the "actual" "uncertainty relation", namely the one provided in non-relativistic Quantum Mechanics, at least according to my NRQM textbook (Townsend, ''A Modern Approach to Quantum Mechanics, 2nd Edt''). I will edit it up and reply to your talkpage tomorrow to see if I have properly fixed up the section. Thank you again for all your help. [[User:DoctorQuoi|DoctorQuoi]] [[User talk:DoctorQuoi|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 06:10, September 15, 2020 (UTC)DoctorQuoi
::Indeed, while we used Sakurai throughout my graduate course on NRQM, I would continually go back to Townsend, especially since so many of the more difficult derivations in Sakurai are done and explained a lot more clearly in Townsend. It's one of my most prized books.... that and every page is full of notes haha! Alright then, I will either bring it up on [[User:SOTO|SOTO's]] talk page or another admin's tomorrow. Thank you for all clarifications! [[User:DoctorQuoi|DoctorQuoi]] [[User talk:DoctorQuoi|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 06:19, September 15, 2020 (UTC)DoctorQuoi


== Re:Concerning admin nom ==
== Re: I dunno about you ==
Hi, thanks for reaching out! You're right that [[User:CzechOut]] is indeed the best person to direct the question to, for two reasons: he was the one to reach the decision for Borisashton candidacy being cut short, and moreover because he's not only an admin at Tardis Wiki, but also he works at Fandom, so he has a better grasp at the ins-and-outs of the more specific details.
Just left a response on [[Forum:10 Years on, Amnesty Once More]]. Thanks for telling me about it. Sorry I haven't added anything to [[Forum:Rule 4 by Proxy and its ramifications: considered in the light of the forum archives]], that thread became, very quickly, overwhelming to me considering its length. {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 16:56, 22 August 2023 (UTC)


But, while I can't speak ''for'' him, I ''can'' look at some other precedent and try to give you a nudge of perspective. The mere fact that a user was blocked previous to candidacy doesn't exclude them from applying for an admin position (for example, [[User:SOTO]] had received two short blocks - for other reasons). I ''believe'' the reason Boris got unlucky is because he violated not just local policy - but a Term of Use. Though, again, only CzechOut will be able to confirm this for you. [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 18:32, September 16, 2020 (UTC)
== Re: Sections ==
Yeah, I think so. It's just too much unbroken in-universe gab. You'd need subsection titles, pull-quotes, images — but I also think parenthetical citations are the wrong fit for this, and we should discuss the flow of episodes and season-breaks and EU media in-text. "Though largely standalone, Christmas special provided some emotional resolution for Amy and Rory, while teasing the next arc-plot on a thematic level…" sorts of things. Or so I suspect. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 20:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
: Image choices look workable. I would definitely alternate between right- and left-justified images, though. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 13:48, 4 October 2023 (UTC)


== Re:Template rename ==
== Hi ==
Hi, you have to add the template like this for it to show up properly: <noinclude>[template]</noinclude>. Otherwise, all you'll get is {{tlx|speedy rename}} ''also'' appearing on every page you add {[tlx|Proposed Identities of The Enemy}}. I'll perform the rename now. [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 02:55, October 1, 2020 (UTC)
Would be exceedingly interested to hear your thoughts over at [[Forum:Roland Rat: The Series]], if you have the time and the inclination. No worries if not, though, or if you have no real thoughts on the matter. :) - [[User:Aquanafrahudy|<span style="font-family: serif; color: pink" title="Hallo." > Aquanafrahudy</span>]] [[User talk: Aquanafrahudy|<span title="Talk to me">📢</span>]] 09:54, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
: Huh, weird, it ''should'' have updated, but sometimes that takes a bit to update. At any rate, thanks for reaching out. [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:07, October 1, 2020 (UTC)


== Re:Images ==
:Fair enough. <s>The whole first series is available on Youtube, if you're interested</s>. [[User:Aquanafrahudy|<span style="font-family: serif; color: pink" title="Hallo." > Aquanafrahudy</span>]] [[User talk: Aquanafrahudy|<span title="Talk to me">📢</span>]] 19:40, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Ah, I've figured out why the post is inaccessible. It's in a private group. (Specifically [https://facebook.com/groups/717091035015612 this one], if you're interested.) [[User:Epsilon the Eternal|<span style="color:gold">Epsilon</span>]] ([[User talk:Epsilon the Eternal|''Contact me'']]) 09:52, October 2, 2020 (UTC)


== Re: Oh no ==
== Endless ==
Heh! That instantly made me think of ''[[Oh No It Isn't! (novel)|Oh No It Isn't!]]''. Worse things to be reminded of, I'll say! And thank you for bringing that thread up again. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:55, October 2, 2020 (UTC)


== Re: Curse of Fatal Death ==
What's the difference with endless and infinite? [[User:Sum41Champ]]


Haha, fair enough. Well, maybe once my thesis is over I can spare some time to browse the forums! Thanks for the relevant link! [[User:DoctorQuoi|DoctorQuoi]] [[User talk:DoctorQuoi|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 18:52, October 2, 2020 (UTC)DoctorQuoi
== Re: Thread closures ==
Hi, I'm a little busy at the moment but I should be able to have a look at these either today or tomorrow. Sorry about the massive backlog of threads that need closing. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|<span title="talk to me">☎</span>]] 07:01, 7 November 2023 (UTC)


== Re: BotE ==
: Sory but I've not had time to close either thread yet. I have done a reread of [[Forum:10 Years on, Amnesty Once More]], though, and am starting to formulate some closing thoughts. Hopefully, I'll be able to get that one closed tomorrow with [[Forum:(SPOILER: The start of RtD2) Quickstart Guides]] following soon after. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|<span title="talk to me">☎</span>]] 18:59, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Crikey, I'm so sorry I missed your talk page note about ''The Book of the Enemy''! The way you've done it on {{tlx|Proposed identities of the Enemy}} looks phenomenal; it's good that the template isn't actually structured around the anthology, since as you've noted, there are plenty of suggestions for the enemy's identity in other stories. – [[User:NateBumber|<span title="User:NateBumber">N8</span>]] ([[User_talk:NateBumber|<span title="Leave me a note">☎</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/NateBumber|<span title="Spy on my edits">👁️</span>]]) 19:04, October 2, 2020 (UTC)


==Admin categories==
:: Yep. I'm discussing some potential complications of [[Forum:10 Years on, Amnesty Once More]] with Scrooge and I'm writing the closing post to [[Forum:(SPOILER: The start of RtD2) Quickstart Guides]] right now. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|<span title="talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
It's a little bit of both, as it's a little hard to tell if people are reading and just not editing (as I have been for a while). However you're right in that it can be confusing for new users unless they want look through a user's contributions. I've done a bit of a re-organisation and edit of the page. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] / '''[[User talk:Tangerineduel|talk]]''' 05:11, October 3, 2020 (UTC)


== Vandal blocking ==
::: Yep. I still need to talk things through with Scrooge but I think we've both been quite busy. There doesn't seem to be any kind of way to automate the unblocking process so, unless we feel we can devote the time to perform the amnesty, we won't be able to close it. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|<span title="talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:43, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Ah, thank you! Done. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 09:23, October 4, 2020 (UTC)
:And so I was! Done once more. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 09:06, October 15, 2020 (UTC)


==Story arcs==
== The Klade ==
So, our earlier discussion at [[Talk:Story arc]] is being continued [[Howling:The Road to the Dark Times, story arcs, and how we cover it|in this forum thread]], due to a future release, and I was wondering if you could add your perspective? [[User:Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived|Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived]] [[User talk:Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 13:19, October 6, 2020 (UTC)
I have opened up a talk page to discuss the possible kalde mention on that page if you would like to take part.[[User:Anastasia Cousins|Anastasia Cousins]] [[User talk:Anastasia Cousins|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:43, 17 November 2023 (UTC)


== The Wintertime Paradox ==
== Re: R4BP ==
Do you have a copy? I didn't think it was out yet. – [[User:NateBumber|<span title="User:NateBumber">N8</span>]] ([[User_talk:NateBumber|<span title="Leave me a note">☎</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/NateBumber|<span title="Spy on my edits">👁️</span>]]) 20:38, October 15, 2020 (UTC)
It's been the plan for some time for [[User:Bongolium500]] to write a semi-closure, and then officially set the bounds for a Part Two thread to properly discuss where we go from here. But I did ask him to hold off until I got the chance for one last riposte, which I do have half-written — my thoughts on Web Theory no longer reflect what's up in the thread (though lest you cry victory it goes without saying that I still don't agree with you, either). I've just been, as I said, very busy. After tonight, I should hopefully be past one of the most time-consuming responsibilities of those last two months — I'd tell you what it is, but, uh, [[T:SPOIL]]. [''eyes emoji''] So at a wildly optimistic guess expect a response this week-end, and more realistically some time in the coming week… after which it's up to you whether you'll want to reply to me again (I don't want to forcibly have the "last word" or anything), or to leave it to Bongo to close and reboot. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 18:41, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
:Oh, I'm dumb, it came out today. Is ''Canaries'' really the last story listed in the book? I thought it's more of a prelude. – [[User:NateBumber|<span title="User:NateBumber">N8</span>]] ([[User_talk:NateBumber|<span title="Leave me a note">☎</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/NateBumber|<span title="Spy on my edits">👁️</span>]]) 20:42, October 15, 2020 (UTC)


== Time Lord Intelligentsia ==
== TCoRR plot summary ==
Just want to thank you in advance for fleshing out the plot summary for ''[[The Church on Ruby Road (TV story)|The Church on Ruby Road]]''. {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 02:48, 26 December 2023 (UTC)


Hi!  I'm done with [[Time Lord Intelligentsia]] for now and will be moving on to Reflex Link.  I'm not sure I picked the right Category, maybe you can help?  Thanks!  [[User:Captain Infinity|Captain Infinity]] [[User talk:Captain Infinity|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:24, October 16, 2020 (UTC)
== Re: editoralizng ==


== T:BOUND and edit wars ==
Which part of the edit was editorializing? It carries none of my personal opinions, is the same information as the previous version just written less clunky. {{Unsigned|Thisyeah}}
Thanks for reaching about [[User:Daniel.holleman|Daniel.holleman]], ''and'' for pointing out that I'd left the message at the wrong place. I followed your link to their ''user'' page, and I'm tired enough that I didn't even realise I wasn't in the ''talk'' page. [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:34, October 16, 2020 (UTC)


== Re:Vandalism/Block ==
== Taking you up on an old offer ==
Hey, I've protected the page for a week for anonymous/unregistered users, and blocked all relevant users. Hopefully, it'll stop soon. [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:44, October 21, 2020 (UTC)


== DiSoRiEnTeD1's accusations ==
A while ago you offered to explain to me how to perform some edits on this wiki. At the time I turned down the request however I would now like to take you up on it. I have an image I would like to upload however I struggle to understand the image policy and I do not know how to practically add an image at all. Can you explain this to me please. I would like it explained if possible as someone who know absolutely nothing about beyond computers beyond knowing how to type and sign things[[User:Anastasia Cousins|Anastasia Cousins]] [[User talk:Anastasia Cousins|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:05, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi! Just wanted to pop in to apologise on behalf of the Wiki for [[User:DiSoRiEnTeD1]] dragging you into his apparent persecution complex. But also to ask you what exactly you were both talking about? From the sound of it I'm sure you did nothing wrong, but I ''am'' curious what message on what other Wiki DiSoRiEnTeD1 was referring to. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:44, October 28, 2020 (UTC)
:thank you for your help the image has been uploaded is this okay?[[File:Red Dalek Leader in the Dalek’s in Colour.PNG|thumb|Red Dalek Leader and two Subordinates]]
:Ahh, I see. Sorry, it seems I no longer get notifications from messages left to me on my $MD Wiki talk page in the UCP. Another loss to mourn about the move, then.  


:I've replied to you there, but in essence, your (perfectly valid!) concerns are I believe unfounded insofar as I didn't actually make an ''admin decision'', but rather highlighted that the thread was spurious and functionally T:POINT-breaking. (Not necessarily in a "being intentionally disruptive way", but certainly a "no new evidence necessitating a change of policy has been proposed" way.)
== Re: QuickAnswers ==
Yes, that's definitely been on both Bongo's radar and mine. Worrying indeed, but we (the Wiki) have weathered worse storms, and we (Bongo and I) are pondering solutons. A Forum thread will of course be opportune once it rolls out…


:You are of course correct in the general casethat it is best practice, though not always ''forbidden'', for admins to avoid closing discussions in which they played a major part. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:56, October 28, 2020 (UTC)
I do wish there were some means — email, even?… — of keeping you abreast of things in a more "light-hearted" manner than Forum discussions or even talk page messages, which generally have a pointed and particular purpose… You would not need to worry about where our heads have been at, and I could speak at greater lengths about floated ideas without thereby committing to them (albeit as proposals), as an admin kind of does in a public discussion. Have you given any further thought to such avenues? [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 21:11, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
: Argh. I know you're trying to hint at something but alas it's going over my head. A Najawin can be found in the comments…?… But so what? YouTube doesn't have a private-messages setting, does it?…


== Re:inuse ==
: Asking to be spared, as it were, is an obvious thought, yes. Again, a thought whose implications I wish we could discuss somewhere else. In my experience, once one possess ''one'' Google account/email, I don't think a phone number is required to create an alt. account with no public link to the first, which comes with its own email; can't you attempt that?
: Ah, thank you for the reminder. I'll finish it in a few hours at the very most. <div style="background-color:#0E234E; border: solid 0.5px gold; display: inline; white-space: nowrap;">[[doctorwho:user:Epsilon the Eternal|<span style="background:#0E234E; color:white"><tt>'''Epsilon'''</tt></span>]]''' '''[[User talk:Epsilon the Eternal|📯]] [[doctorwho:special:Contributions/Epsilon the Eternal|📂]]</div> 19:32, October 28, 2020 (UTC)


== RE:Admin behaviour ==
: (Besides, ''my'' gmail address is no great secret — it's the obvious aristide.twain thing — so if you're willing to trust that ''I'' would not disclose whatever email address you emailed me from to anyone else, you ''could'' email me first. It is obviously not a step I can ask you to take in any way that could possibly come across as pressuring you; just laying it out. I do at least hope that you would trust me ''that'' much by now, as far as not disclosing it further goes, such that it would be down to whether you're alright with ''me specifically'' having that email. But, again, totally fine if you're not, wouldn't take it personally) [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 21:44, 7 February 2024 (UTC)


Not to sound blunt but I don't change my views simply because someone came to my defence.
:: Well, best wishes with that, but ''is'' all rather time-sensitive… Have you considered registering an account on the [https://factionparadox.boards.net/ Faction Paradox Forum]? Could talk there in Forum-style DMs. No phone numbers or real names or any such thing necessary. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 22:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
::: Well I'm sorry to hear ''that''… Gah, but this is tricky business. I do want to note that I'd picked the FP Forum precisely because it's so low-activity that it scarcely feels like "social media" — but I do see how the subject matter might worry you, and of course we may hope, the present business aside, that it might get livelier in the foreseeable future… Well, how about this — I've gone and ''made'' a Forum. [https://scroogesroost.freeforums.net/ There's nothing in it and there never will be]. If you make an account there, we could DM there. That could work? Maybe? There ''are'' things I'd like to bounce off you! Wiki-related and not, even.  


The edit that you made today was the exact one that had been reverted by an admin months ago, and your edit summary shows that you understood the change that you were making. You say that it wasn't intentional, so I accept that, and you later owned up to the mistake and came to my defence so I appreciate that too. [[User:DiSoRiEnTeD1|DiSoRiEnTeD1]] [[User talk:DiSoRiEnTeD1|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:11, October 28, 2020 (UTC)
::: To get back to the matter at hand, the thing is that my current feeling — as far as I'll get into on here — is that as presented this would be ''such'' a trainwreck on Tardis as to be a non-starter, and I have to believe Fandom would roll it back within a week once this became apparent. I don't know that I'd wholly trust them to take concerns seriously if e.g. answers on [[The Doctor]] fail to abide by T:NPOV or the like; but auto-generating at least three answers based on every one-sentence page, every real-world author page that's just a list of credits, etc.… that would doubtless clutter their servers with aimless gibberish to a degree that they cannot possibly think is in their best interests. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 23:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)


== "Vincent and the Doctor's Gallery" ==
:::: Well, [https://www.twitch.tv/scroogemacbadger here goes nothing…]. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 00:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
W/ regards to your recent edit summary of [[Vincent and the Doctor's Gallery (webcast)]]: you're right that the discussion wasn't over and [[User:Epsilon the Eternal]]'s edit was thus improper. But in ''theory'', I actually think the "invalid" tag would be fitting, for at least one of the potential proposals for how to cover this, namely mine — that we cover it as akin to some episode of ''[[The Fan Show]]'' which mix in-universe and “documentary” material in a jokey, fourth-wall-breaky way. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 19:57, October 29, 2020 (UTC)
:Ah, forgive me. I'd quite forgotten where we were at in the [[Talk:Doctor Who: Lockdown!]] page, and was instead (as, I think, was Epsilon) talking about the state of the discussion at [[Talk:Vincent and the Doctor's Gallery (webcast)]]. Also, it's worth noting that ''The Fan Show'' dab terms aren't solid policy or anything, just a "close enough" deal. I've actually been thinking a unique dab term, patterned after "(CON episode)", might involve less guesswork. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:42, October 29, 2020 (UTC)


== Re: SpookyUCP ==
:: Phooey. Fixed now. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 00:40, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm aware that we're losing WikiActivity. I think I ''could'' get used to RecentChanges (I've started doing so on other Wikis) but it's less than ideal. This patch-up ''is'' intriguing; but I'm useless at coding, and therefore the absolute last person to ask. You should probably take this to [[User:SOTO]], who is savvier in these matters than I. (And/or Czech, of course, when he returns.) --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 02:02, November 1, 2020 (UTC)


== "Engaging with Thread:272817" ==
== Re: Quick Answers ==
Hey!


I do applaud your hewing closer to what is shown on screen until [[Thread:272817]] concludes, but while it's not a full-on [[T:NPA]] violation or anything, it wasn't quite right of you to ascribe some sort of intentional negligence to [[User:Epsilon the Eternal]] and [[User:Jack "BtR" Saxon]] in "pointedly not engaging" with said thread.
Yes, I've been following it, and I don't love it. The review period they're introducing is a positive change in the right direction, and I do believe that something like this could be beneficial, but I am distrustful of the use of AI and I don't like that ''every'' page will have to have at least 3 answers. There is no point to, say, [[cheeseburger]] having a Quick Answers module. We currently have 108,069 pages on this wiki. That's 324,207 individual answers to have to review and potentially edit. Lets asssume it takes 10 second to review an answer (which I'm pretty confident in saying is an underestimate). That's 3,242,070 seconds, or over 37 days, of just reviewing and editing Quick Answers, and that's just for the pages we already have: this number will continue to increase without bound as the wiki grows. That's time I'd much rather spend working on actual articles. The AI-generated answers are also probably going to violate [[T:NPOV]] and probably [[T:IU]] a ton, meaning we'll either have to carve out an exception (sacrificing consistency in our style), or edit most of the answers (making 10 seconds a definite underestimate). [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|<span title="talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:41, 8 February 2024 (UTC)


Not only could this be ''argued'' to be a mild personal attack, but [[User:Shambala108]] has, more recently, specifically cautioned against ascribing implicit motives to people. Moreover Epsilon at least ''has'' in fact contributed several posts to that very thread, even if Jack Saxon has not.
== QuickAnswers query ==


Obviously this is all quite mild and I'm not about to take any disciplinary action here beyond the above talking-to, but do please be mindful. After all the drama in the past two years, this Wiki is aching for its sense of community; there's no reason to be passive-aggressive in edit summaries like this when Epsilon and Jack, whether or not they sometimes put a foot wrong, are clearly editing in good faith (as are you!).
Hey! I saw you had some concerns re QuickAnswers and Tardis and I just wanted to address these, and if you had any questions etc.  


Cheers! --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:45, November 8, 2020 (UTC)
In terms of your concern of questions appearing on every page, [https://community.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:Pikushi/Updates_on_Quick_Answers_and_Adding_a_Vetting_Period as the blog states], we're working with wikis to work out what a feasible amount looks like. Larger wikis would have more candidates for QAs as their content is often more built out, but the idea isn't to overwhelm you all. We're working with wikis on this, hence the extensive testing.
:Right! I understand better, now. But as you yourself acknowledge, one ''should'' also consider potential alternative readings of one's words.  


:(Also, it ''had'' stalled even before that, of course, but it feels slightly… ''odd'' to complain about lack of activity on a given forum thread in the current situation.) --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:59, November 8, 2020 (UTC)
Re the quality of the questions and answers, you say they're "fundamentally broken". To begin with, sure, there were a lot of issues and I don't think anyone is disputing that. But since then, the process for generating QAs has been overhauled and tested and I'd hold fire on assuming they're broken until you view the final product. I'm around on Tardis if you have any issues with QAs on rollout, and you know my talk page and Discord are always open of course.  


== Re: Potential vandalism ==
Happy to take any questions/concerns on this! --[[User:Spongebob456|Spongebob456]] <sup>[[User talk:Spongebob456|talk]]</sup> <staff/> 10:13, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Quite right! Always happy to help. I've left a few stern words (and links to our edit-warring policies) at Bridget's talk page. Let's hope no more is required. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 19:09, November 10, 2020 (UTC)


== Re: Forums ==
:Hey, I know you've had long conversations with Lostris on this so I won't go over the same ground other than to say you have valid concerns for sure. Specifically for Tardis, I get you're saying as Doctor Who has complex lore. The same applies to wikis like Wookieepedia too with the Canon/Legends timeline, not to mention the multiverses in comic books (and ever increasingly in films but I digress!). Staff are aware of this and we need to be patient to see what the quality of the QAs will be.  
I haven't properly rewritten the closing post. However, I ''did'' summarise its main points on the actual relevant policy page — see the first and third bullet-points of the last section of [[Tardis:Even good categories can be removed]]. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:37, November 10, 2020 (UTC)


== Re: Sanbox Nine ==
:If they aren't any good, QAs on select pages are easily editable or deleted and we can work out a plan with the community and Fandom staff. An example of this is on the 4 testing communities we rolled QAs out to, they pushed back on the number they had to review. The result was Fandom increased vetting time to a month and halved the number of QAs to review to help with community concerns. You raised an issue re user rights and how feasible it is for admins to cover all the questions too - hopefully this answers that we will work out a plan for this.
It's his sandbox so he can do as he pleases anyway. But as it happens, I'm with Epsilon on this one. Not all works involving a fictional Doctor are necessarily part of the in-universe ''Doctor Who'' series.  


There are many accounts listed on [[The Doctor in popular culture and mythology]] of works which feature a fictionalised Doctor, by name, but aren't part of a wider, preexisting ''Doctor Who'' brand: the ''[[Doctor Who Discovers|A Doctor Who Discovers]]'' books, the Cushing movies in ''[[The Day of the Doctor (novelisation)|The Day of the Doctor]]'' (where they exist removed from the TV series that inspired them in the real world).
:I will keep the wiki updated on QA developments and have spoken to the admins about setting a forum thread to post these updates which I will make when the next updates come in. Please do keep keep queries coming in the meantime on my talk page though! --[[User:Spongebob456|Spongebob456]] <sup>[[User talk:Spongebob456|talk]]</sup> <staff/> 12:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)


So the metafictional ''implication'' may be clear in ''Afterword'', but strictly speaking Moffat's book ''could'' be a one-off. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:44, November 11, 2020 (UTC)
== Text Cursor ==
I did have that same, or at least a very similar, issue a few years ago. Right pain. But unfortunately I don't know how to fix it, as IIRC Fandom eventually patched it themselves. {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 14:12, 10 February 2024 (UTC)


== Re: Sanbox Nine [sic] ==
== Communication ==
Well spotted! That part flew over my head when I first read ''[[Afterword (short story)|Afterword]]''. Now, I won't remove him from the Sandbox, as it's there for me to collate info about real world individuals' in-universe counterparts' connections to ''[[Doctor Who (N-Space)]]'' specifically, but I ''will'' add a footnote, explaining that he did write a book of fiction about the Doctor. <div style="background-color:#0E234E; border: solid 0.5px gold; display: inline; white-space: nowrap;">[[doctorwho:user:Epsilon the Eternal|<span style="background:#0E234E; color:white"><tt>'''Epsilon'''</tt></span>]]''' '''[[User talk:Epsilon the Eternal|📯]] [[doctorwho:special:Contributions/Epsilon the Eternal|📂]]</div> 20:47, November 11, 2020 (UTC)
Ahoy — I thought I should let you know that for reasons which elude me, Twitch is now refusing to let me send you any more text messages unless I confirm a phone number, even though I can still see yours. (In answer to the last, OS12th has now joined us, though he does not expect to be very active in the immediate future. Revan will certainly ''not'' resume sustained activity, but still intends to try and migrate for the principle of the thing.) --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)


== Paul Bowman ==
== Marked as Bot ==
Ahh, of course. Thank you for the reminder! – [[User:NateBumber|<span title="User:NateBumber">N8</span>]] ([[User_talk:NateBumber|<span title="Leave me a note">☎</span>]]/[[Special:Contributions/NateBumber|<span title="Spy on my edits">👁️</span>]]) 21:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)


== Do we know what's happening with Sandboxes/Following Pages/etc?  ==
Hi Najawin, I saw that you put a bot marker on my page, but I think I've been mislabelled as I'm not a bot and just a guy making [[Special:WantedCategories|Wanted Categories]]. Hope this can be reversed soon :) [[User:Gingerfool|Gingerfool]] [[User talk:Gingerfool|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 08:18, 11 April 2024 (UTC)


Hey, I hope you're well! It's end of semester for me so lots of marking and writing and assignments and well you get the idea haha. Do you have any updates since the changes regarding the mysterious disappearance of [[Tardis:Sandbox]] pages for users as well as pages we follow? I wanted to edit an audio story tonight but I can't find my sandbox pages since I chose some pretty poor names. I have seen that we can "search" for the pages using the wiki search feature and I see you've just linked yours on your profile page, however, what about the pages/articles we "follow"? I had all the future pages I was going to edit in that list... Best, [[User:DoctorQuoi|DoctorQuoi]] [[User talk:DoctorQuoi|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:21, 29 November 2020 (UTC)DoctorQuoi
== Re: Wrongly Marked as Bot ==


:I see , ok thanks. That's really frustrating. Might just hold back on major editing until the mods figure out what's going on. Hope you're keeping well! [[User:DoctorQuoi|DoctorQuoi]] [[User talk:DoctorQuoi|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:43, 29 November 2020
I think it's also because I setup an automated filter to block page creations (except for trusted users and sysops) and this caught their edits. However, the spam attack seemed to have stopped before I got this setup so I've disabled it. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|☎]] 08:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
(UTC)DoctorQuoi


::Thanks, I've only been following this half-heartedly, didn't realize it was a more general thing. I just thought that due to some of our older functions/features, we were finally updating them (like the image uploading problem I had a little while ago). Thank you again for the update. Guess we'll just have to be patient. [[User:DoctorQuoi|DoctorQuoi]] [[User talk:DoctorQuoi|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 04:44, 30 November 2020 (UTC)DoctorQuoi
== Re: Spam ==


:::Hm, interesting, thanks for the share! I'll be blunt, reading it was like reading those memos the university sends out every time they change software for something, usually emails I delete straight away as they're along the lines of "... we are dong this to improve the user experience to make editing fun for everyone!" and general silliness and over-optimistic tones and like that. It's funny because we switched to a new payment system and the software is terrible and if like myself and a group of others you run linux logging into the software is an absolute nightmare. Almost everyone is the department hates it and rightly so, I had to (rather embarrassingly) call our IT service for help, even they're not happy about it/the change. It is what it is. I do appreciate having the source editor combined with the visual editor, I'll give it points for that. I understand where they're coming from and fully support the migration, it's just annoying, had I known I would have better-prepared for this by keeping a better track of my sandboxes and following pages, like export a list or copy/paste into a textfile on my machine, idk. When did they give us a warning? I know it's too late now, just rather frustrating as we DEFINITELY could've been better prepared for this, which is why I'm cautious about putting too much of the blame on fandom. [[User:DoctorQuoi|DoctorQuoi]] [[User talk:DoctorQuoi|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 05:13, 30 November 2020 (UTC)DoctorQuoi
I've deleted all of their pages and blocked all of the suspicious accounts. I'm going to try and set up some filters to catch and prevent these edits. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|☎]] 09:24, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
: Scratch that. I don't think the edits have enough defining features to catch them with a filter. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|☎]] 09:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)


::::I see. Well thank you once again for taking the time to clarify. Now I'm really miffed. Plus my opinion has one-eight-tied entirely. That's such a poor way to deal with the migration issue. I saw the messages and visited briefly but never fully read comments beyond the initial post. Once again, my mistake. Also, now quite annoyed about the visual editor. I'm seeing the "Edit Page" thing at the top of the page, and only see source editor. I don't know. This whole operation just sounds so.... botched, for lack of a better word. They really could've done this better. Anyway. Cheers. :/ [[User:DoctorQuoi|DoctorQuoi]] [[User talk:DoctorQuoi|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:13, 30 November 2020 (UTC)DoctorQuoi
== Re: Just to help ==


== Regarding The Adventure Games ==
Good grief that thread was a pain to follow, but thanks for pointing me to it. I've read T:HOMEWORLD like a dozen times and still for some reason didn't make that link as I've been ruminating on this, 'tis a big help, ta - [[User:CodeAndGin|<span style="color:green" title="CodeAndGin">CodeAndGin</span>]] | [[User_talk:CodeAndGin|<span title="Talk to me">🗨</span>]] |  23:57, 16 April 2024 (UTC)


I don't know if you would saw this in The Adventure Games, so I'm posting here just in case.
: Also very useful, thanks! - [[User:CodeAndGin|<span style="color:green" title="CodeAndGin">CodeAndGin</span>]] | [[User_talk:CodeAndGin|<span title="Talk to me">🗨</span>]] |  01:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)


Doctor Who: The Adventure Games is not a collection of games, it's *the* game. It's the same, for instance, as The Walking Dead or Batman: The Telltale Series. You can't play the episodes individually. You need the main game to do it. Just like in Legacy and Infinity. A collection of games is, for instance, Atari Vault. It gets different games (*really* different games) who were release separately and released them in one package. The episodes in The Adventure Games follow the same gameplay, the same visuals. It's not like the first game is a top down action-adventure, the second is a 2D plataformer, the third is a 3D first-person shooter. They follow the pattern established by the game, The Adventure Games. They are episodes, not games. --[[User:D25m09|D25m09]] 15:57, December 16, 2020 (UTC)
== Regarding T:BOUND ==


== Jodie Whittaker (The Terror of the Umpty Ums) ==
Heya, so on [[Talk:The World's End]] you said we shouldn't make the edit because the forum thread is ongoing, "per T:BOUND". Sorry if I'm missing something here, but why would editing something to be more in line with current policy while that policy is being discussed be ''against'' T:BOUND? "... while a discussion is ongoing about how to change a particular rule, you are bound by the rule as it '''currently''' exists" suggests the opposite to me. Cheers, - [[User:CodeAndGin|<span style="color:green" title="CodeAndGin">CodeAndGin</span>]] | [[User_talk:CodeAndGin|<span title="Talk to me">🗨</span>]] |  20:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


To be honest, I haven't read ''[[The Terror of the Umpty Ums (short story)|The Terror of the Umpty Ums]]'' yet, but as there were on several pages statements such as "she was played by a [[woman]]", I changed the link, thinking it'd be apt to have a more specific page, albeit with a conjecture tag.<br>If the information from [[Jodie Whittaker (The Terror of the Umpty Ums)]] was ''just'' from ''Umpty Ums'', I'd be okay with it's deletion (provided what you say is correct, about nothing in ''Umpty Ums'' saying anything about Jodie, named or not), but as there is a visual shot of Jodie as the Doctor in ''[[The Zygon Isolation (webcast)|The Zygon Isolation]]'', and an image of Jodie on the cover of ''[[Wild Thymes on the 22 (anthology)|Wild Thymes on the 22]]'', it leaves us in a bit of a pickle, as there is clearly ''some'' information to show that she exists in-universe, though it's hindered in its brevity.<br>I'd be opposed to create pages for the versions of the Doctor and Clara ect, as it's already covered in the legacy sections of the respective characters. ''If'' these pages were to be created, I'd prefer something like <nowiki>[[Thirteenth Doctor (fictional character)]]</nowiki> or <nowiki>[[Thirteenth Doctor (character)]]</nowiki>. <div style="background-color:#0E234E; border: solid 0.5px gold; display: inline; white-space: nowrap;">[[doctorwho:user:Epsilon the Eternal|<span style="background:#0E234E; color:white"><tt>'''Epsilon'''</tt></span>]]''' '''[[doctorwho:user talk:Epsilon the Eternal|📯]] [[doctorwho:special:Contributions/Epsilon the Eternal|📂]]</div> 05:35, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
:Admittedly, I'm a bit confused here. That section, and the thread that enshrined it, if I understand correctly, is referring to '''current practice''' also being policy, even if it isn't written down. Are you implying that "leaving pages alone insofar as policy is concerned while said policy is being discussed for change" is current practice? If that's the case, cool (though in that case I might bring that to the Forums to be actually written down, because that precedent in itself is confusing with the summary I cited). If not, could I bother you to elaborate? Thanks for the help - [[User:CodeAndGin|<span style="color:green" title="CodeAndGin">CodeAndGin</span>]] | [[User_talk:CodeAndGin|<span title="Talk to me">🗨</span>]] |  22:13, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


::I see. Thanks, really, that's been a great help - [[User:CodeAndGin|<span style="color:green" title="CodeAndGin">CodeAndGin</span>]] | [[User_talk:CodeAndGin|<span title="Talk to me">🗨</span>]] |  22:38, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


== Re: Stupid awful fandom drama ==
== ''Space Babies'' ==
Dear, dear, dear. I don't want to cover it any more than you do, and I think there are strong reasons not to, at least at this time.
You've got me curious now, what are your thoughts on ''Space Babies''? {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 23:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
: Pardon my jumping in — I didn't much care for the episode either, but I confess myself baffled as to how one could ''possibly'' interpret it as anti-abortion. The pro-choice parable seemed, if anything, ham-fisted (though intentionally so, I'm sure, that's just how Davies rolls, so that's not necessarily a criticism). "There's a law against switching off baby-making machines, but no structure to support the 'surplus' babies"… it seems pretty clear-cut? The law is clearly singled out as stupid in itself, so I don't think there's much of a reading to be had whereby the law is good but the government is culpable for not having the safety net afterwards. It's very much pitched as "you people passed that self-evidently stupid law, and then you ''don't even'' do anything to mitigate the damage? for shame". I've thought about it from several angles and I really just don't see what reading you and your friends seem to be onto. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
:: I don't see what "save the Bogeyman same as the others" has to do with it. I ''guess'' the basic "every life is valuable" can be read uncharitably, but that still seems strained to me; it's not as though the Doctor asserts that the machine should be kept ''on'', after all. It's just the difference between being pro-choice and being pro-''A Modest Proposal''. Maybe slightly clumsy but, with due respect to your friends, this seems tenuous enough relative to the earlier, much more explicit metaphor that I would certainly not describe it as ''worse'' than the ever-discourse-stirring ''Kill the Moon''. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


* '''Firstly''', a tweet is not "reference material we cover", even if it could be used as a footnote ''if'' the information in it were otherwise noteworthy. So it fails the "Hartnell Precedent". If a book on the complete history of Arcbeatle Press mentions the event, and we have a page on that reference book ''qua'' reference book, ''then'' this would fulfill the Hartnell precedent.  
::: I did have the same take-away as Scrooge here did, but I almost get the impression that it's pro-choice, but, if in the situation where that choice is denied, then the children should be cared for. I do feel it likely wasn’t an intended theme of the episode though, it didn't feel like something RTD consciously wanted to write the story around.
* '''Secondly''', this also fails the Roberts Precedent because nothing had been formally ''announced'' that has now been ''cancelled'' — the association between writer and publisher is simply at an end.  
::: It was, otherwise, certainly purile but it'd be amiss for me to say that I didn’t love the performances of Gatwa and Gibson and how they really ''bounced'' off the environment. Ruby's disgust was downright palpable. {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 01:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
* '''Thirdly''', I don't know if such a policy has been formalised but we should in no way shape or form wade into ''ongoing'', surfaced-within-twenty-four-hours drama, especially drama involving ''accusations that could have legal repercussions''. There is such a thing as illegal slander.


Oh, and feel free to link people to this; it constitutes an admin decision, albeit an off-the-cuff one. Crikey.  
: Well, for what it's worth, I rather thought the idea was that the Bogeyman ''wasn't'' a villain at all — just an innocent six-year-old being who just so happened to have been designed to ''look'' instinctively scary. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 02:04, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
== Mh? ==
Did I what to whom now? I'm quite lost. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 03:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
: Oh yes! Well, I can't say the rewatch of ''DCtT'' which prompted this round of edits had ''nothing'' to do with the stream… But it's not as though the Houses aren't always gnawing at my brain in my ''natural'' state, and I have other reasons besides. I wasn't consciously thinking of sticking that page on the next Wheel or anything. Although, now you come to mention it… --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 03:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


== Homeworld treatment ==
== Re:not on Twitter ==
(Are you and LegoK9 the same person?) Anyway, I'm aware of Nitter, but I thought they closed down? [[User:WaltK|WaltK]] [[User talk:WaltK|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:49, 6 June 2024 (UTC)


What are the limits to the "Homeworld treatment"?
== Re. FP forums ==
It happens that I have moderator status on the FP forums, so I've attempted to do a cleanup. I am ''hoping'' — fingers crossed — I didn't muck anything up, as that's the first time I've deleted posts and banned a user... {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 02:42, 15 June 2024 (UTC)


Hypothetically, what would happen if the Faction Paradox use of the "Homeworld" continued to grow with its own mythology and became absolutely unrecognisable to Gallifrey? Both the BBC and Faction Paradox writers will both have their own versions of this concept which will inevitably continue to clash and contradict. Would there ever become a point where a decision is made to separate them once again? [[User:RadMatter|RadMatter]] [[User talk:RadMatter|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:55, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
== Re: Boulevard ==
Unfortunately not! I've fallen off a bit with the more recent FP releases. [[User:TheChampionOfTime|TheChampionOfTime]] [[User talk:TheChampionOfTime|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC)


== Re: The Master talk page ==
== Re: Signature Template ==
Hmmf. Well, people are entitled to their opinion, but the thing is that this has been ''ruled'' upon, by me, the matter of the ''Terror'' quote being conclusive. [[T:BOUND]] and all that. Unless new factual ''evidence'' is presented, any number of people could disagree without that changing anything; these things aren't decided by popular vote!
Hi Najawin, you mentioned making my Signature a template so that it doesn't take up loads of space, but it doesn't seem to work how ones like Epsilon's do, even though there doesn't seem to be any differences between the signature code, it still transfers the whole mediawiki code of mine into the page when signed. Is there anything I can change in the preferences to change this? I've tried linking to the [[User:Gingerfool/Sig]] page using {{}}, and it automatically adds SUSBT: to it, but is there anything else I can try? -[[User:Gingerfool|Gingerfool]] [[User talk:Gingerfool|Talk Page]] 14:10, 30 July 2024 (UTC)


''That being said'', I also don't want to come across as an Admin Lord Victorious locking down discussion in the face of dissent.  I'll think on it and get back to you. Maybe a separate section on the talk page, where this discussion could be allowed to continue in parallel to our more on-topic discussion in the existing section — with the understanding that it wouldn't ''necessarily'' be empowered to change anything, unless it led to more tangible results than a headcount of people who disagree? Let me know if you have any suggestions. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 18:48, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
== Re: Quantum ==
:: I don't think we're quite talking about the same thing. The fact here is that unless new ''facts'' (or, marginally, new viewpoints on the existing facts) are presented, it is not within policy for people who disagree with a ruling admin's interpretation of existing evidence to be able to argue against that ruling by simply saying "I hold the opposite interpretation of the contentious evidence". It is not just that some arguments come to naught no matter what — it is, rather, that this particular argument (to continue the legal metaphor) wouldn't be admissible evidence in ''any'' case.
You really will be much happier once you accept that the Observer Effect and the observer effect are different things altogether… --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 12:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)


:: It is, as a matter of policy, held to be true by the Wiki at this time that [[User:Borisashton]]'s initial arguments were persuasive — that barring omissions of additional data, we should indeed interpret those passages in those books to say those things. Providing a new interpretation of those passages, one which had not been discussed at all prior to that ruling (e.g. your "maybe they're saying Delgado did ''War Games''") is an acceptable counterargument; so is examining further quotes not previously presented (e.g. Laura's calling up, and disagreeing with me about, the "These days he calls himself the Master" line). But going back to those same passages I already ruled conclusive, and merely saying "personally, having read those same passages, ''I''{{'}}m not seeing it"… is not.
== Muppets: creatures? puppets? ==
Actually, my understanding is that, in most accounts, "the Muppets" is in fact simply the name of Kermit's ''acting troupe'', and they are, diegetically, genuine talking animals. (Or talking humans in some cases.) Of course, various media have shown them displaying awareness that they are puppets to one extent or another, but that's more of a fourth-wall joke (e.g. Kermit remarking that he isn't sure who this Jim Henson fellow is, "but I've heard that he's got his hand in a lot of things around here. Not sure what that means"). The idea of 'Muppets' as living beings of felt and cardboard, knowingly coexisting with flesh-and-blood humans, in the mould of ''Roger Rabbit''{{'}}s ink-and-paint 'Toons', is more of an online meme/fandom confabulation. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)


:: Additionally, the way in which I felt the "burden of proof on the opposition" guideline was being ignored was that people were not bringing opposing interpretations of the quotes — rather, they were saying, "could the pro-War-Chief-inclusion side elaborate on the quotes more?". I did so under the good-faith assumption that it was merely a request for information — but it might equally have been viewed as asking the pro-WC side to ''justify'' itself, whereas the idea behind the burden of proof thing is that it wouldn't ''have'' to, and it's the opposite side which would have to bring positive arguments to the table rather than try to nitpick at the pro-WC side's arguments without formulating any of its own.
== Re: Cover art sandbox ==
I'm sorry, I'm not entirely sure which part of the discussion you're pointing to specifically - the thing about using cite source? (possibly in relation to the idea of cover art being cited on the same page as the publication?)_ [[User:Cookieboy 2005|Cookieboy 2005]] [[User talk:Cookieboy 2005|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)


:: I hope all of that makes sense.  [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:41, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
: Ah, right, I'll edit it to make it a tad clearer, wouldn't want to leave anyone confused. [[User:Cookieboy 2005|Cookieboy 2005]] [[User talk:Cookieboy 2005|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:31, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
 
== Affiliated Wikis ==
Hi! W/ regards to your message on [[User talk:Time Lord the Incognito]]: actually, we are affiliated with more than one Wiki: there's also the ''Doctor Who Legacy'' Wiki, and, more recently and to a lesser extent, the ''Doctor Who: Lockdown!'' Wiki. Not that it matters much in this case, just reminding you.
 
Anyway, thank you for attempting to deal with that user while I was away, and ultimately warning Shambala. It's disconcerting when you just can't get through to someone, I know…  [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 12:10, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 
== The wording ==
Lol the SEP is written by "socialists" of the same sort Lenin so accurately describes in the first paragraph of State and Rev. Also I just realised my auto correct got me there and changed "commodity" to "community" for some reason but oh well this isn't really a discussion for a Doctor Who wiki anyway. What is more relevant for a Doctor Who Wiki is that yeah the specific wording you discussed would probably be better. Idk though I'm really tired to the point of being barely conscious rn. Honestly though I don't think we have real definitions of Communism or Feudalism in the DWU either. [[User:NightmareofEden|NightmareofEden]] [[User talk:NightmareofEden|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:57, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 
== Sandbox4 ==
Ohhhhhh boy. Kudos, and best of luck!!! – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 04:11, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
:Do you know, I'm not altogether sure about "the whole Eye of Harmony/Attack of Ignorance thing basically confirms Von Neumann Wigner as being the correct interpretation of QM". For one thing, the [[Observer Effect]] in the Time Lord sense of the term is in fact an ability unique to the Time Lords, give or take [[Kifah|particular posthumans]], so it can hardly be quite the same phenomenon as what allows garden-variety possibilities to solidify in our backyards and particle colliders.
 
:More generally, I think it is paramount to remember that while logic may tell us many things, [[Voyager (comic story)|"logic is a new toy"]]. The mathematically-definable physics humans grope towards are, within the framework of the [[anchoring of the thread]] mythos, not the ''true'' governing principles of the universe at all, but rather an arbitrary framework created and enforced by the Great Houses, imposed over the rest of reality. The Gallifrey Observer Effect is a function of the ''true'' laws of the universe, the meta-physics (har, har, see what I did there) through which they were able to bind the rest of the world to their laws in the first place.
 
:Evidently the capita-O/capital-E Observer Effect ''resembles'' the Von Neumann-Wigner theory of human physics, but although that is a mite too speculative for the Wiki, it seems to me more a case of the Great Houses' noosphere echoing down into the [[lesser species]] and/or the design of the Great Houses' system than anything deeper, and as such, it may or may not be true regardless of the existence of the "true" Observer Effect ''beyond'' the laws of physics. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:07, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 
Heh, good to know you follow! Yeah, unfortunately like most of the books reviewed by "The Untranslated", ''Schattenfroh'' might be straight-up untranslatable. I'm working on my Deutsch, so I might try to give it a go ... or more likely, absolutely not. But maybe it's the sort of thing that might be fun to reference in a ''Cwej'' story one day, given the [[Army of One]] vibes. ("Professor Shadowglad" has a nice ring to it, doesn't it? Or maybe "Professor Shatterfrond"?) Good eye on OSR in ''Logopolis'', I'd never considered it in that light before. I'm right there with you with regards to physics in FP and Who in general; presumably [[biodata theory]] includes some mindbending synthesis of the many-worlds and Wignerian interpretations that's inconceivable to our fragile 21st century minds ... but incomprehensibility rather defeats the purpose of a theory, doesn't it? Personally I'm at a state of epistemic learned helplessness when it comes to QM stuff; ten years ago you could have found me arguing vociferously for the pilot-wave interpretation but then [https://www.quantamagazine.org/famous-experiment-dooms-pilot-wave-alternative-to-quantum-weirdness-20181011/ 2015 happened.]
 
Also, there's a good chance that you've already seen this, but besides Burton's Nahuatl dictionary there's also
{{fpx|File:Against Nature House Meddhoran Glossary.pdf|Against Nature House Meddhoran Glossary.pdf}}
These glossaries aren't valid ''per se'', but each definition could be deduced from the text of the novel by a very careful reader, so they're ''functionally'' valid. If that makes any sense?
 
While we wait for the forums to reopen (I'm fully on-board with creating something new in the [[Forum:]] namespace, btw), my eye has turned to the author biography problem in ''[[Talk:The Book of the Enemy (anthology)|The Book of the Enemy]]''. I'm still leaning toward the idea that ''for now'', we should cover the in-universe biographies as a part of their respective stories, and the future forum debate will concern whether or not the not-clearly-referenced-in-story versions should be included as valid (presumably alongside the stuff I just mentioned [[User talk:Epsilon the Eternal#FP_metafiction|on Epsilon's talk page]]. Would you be strongly opposed to me going ahead with [[User:NateBumber/Sandbox5|my Sandbox5]] in the interim? – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 14:48, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 
: It's actually that discussion which inspired my edits to [[Nothing day]] etc! And oh, I never replied to your previous message. I really appreciate your insight on Pilot Wave Theory; and that Tumblr ask was brilliant (we've really got to get you an author page here sometime). I see your issue with [[Wilhelm Liebknecht]], and I'm embarrassed to see that it was ''me'' who cited "''Biographies of Authors''" there. The first few weeks of trying to figure out how to cover BotE was a real headache -- a headache that some of us are still feeling! Should we wait for the forums or, given the recent and relieving effectiveness of talk page discussions while they're closed, ping an admin about [[Talk:The Book of the Enemy (anthology)]] and see if we can reach a resolution there? – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 17:30, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
 
:: I'm not surprised at the length. And it's going to be a pain to condense without compromising the plot. I had a similar problem on [[Interference (novel)]] and chose to just "untangle" the story's different segments into standalone narrative parts, but that only worked because they were sequential and relatively standalone, so no help for ''AN''. Definitely a head scratcher. But incredible work so far, I've enjoyed reliving the book through your summary updates! – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 00:15, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 
== Re: Observer Effect ==
Hmmm. Well, I suppose. Still, it doesn't quite make sense to me that the means by which the Time Lords instituted mathematics would itself be mathematically legible. The relationship between the two "observer effects", as I picture it, is not unlike the difference between a printer, and a 2-dimensional photograph thereof printed ''using'' the actual printer. Outwardly similar to somebody with depthless, two-dimensional vision, perhaps; but little else. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 18:40, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 
== Notablity  ==
 
Just dropping you a message to re-affirm that we create pages for things even if they're only about a throwaway reference - otherwise thousands of pages would have to be deleted. Also, might I ask you about why you said [https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/Life-spore?type=revision&diff=3016789&oldid=3016783 this] in you edit summary of [[life-spore]]? <div style="background-color:#0E234E; border: solid 0.5px gold; display: inline; white-space: nowrap;">[[doctorwho:user:Epsilon the Eternal|<span style="background:#0E234E; color:white"><tt>Epsilon</tt></span>]]''' '''[[doctor who:user talk:Epsilon the Eternal|📯]] [[doctorwho:special:Contributions/Epsilon the Eternal|📂]]</div> 19:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 
== Re:vandalism ==
Hi you would be better off asking [[User:SOTO]] or [[User:CzechOut]]; I'm absolutely the least tech-savvy person on this wiki. Sorry [[User:Shambala108|Shambala108]] [[User talk:Shambala108|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 05:22, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 
== Re: The Other Side of the World ==
[https://www.lulu.com/shop/lawrence-burton/the-other-side-of-the-world/paperback/product-21469226.html?page=1&pageSize=4 It exists!…]
 
As for temporary forums, our new Wiki Manager has told me in private messages that they may look into finishing the setup of the actual DPL Forums soon if Czech remains silent, so at the moment I'm waiting out for ''that'', but I feel you. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 02:15, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
:If it's not indiscreet to ask, have you/will you buy ''Other Side of the World''? I've actually found reason to believe that ''that'' book was very nearly printed as-was by Random Static before that publisher ceased publishing FP, which ''would'' warrant an {{tlx|unprod}} page for the novel. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:10, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
::To the contrary, it's my understanding that this was the first draft of the novel as Burton originally submitted it to Random Static, ''before'' the RS editor insisted on a ton of changes to the characters, plotting, etc. As an early unfinished draft that just happens to bear its own name, even though it was put on Lulu (for no profit) I don't think it belongs on the wiki, any more than all the cut ''Dying Days'' epilogues which were given their own names in fanzines. Not to mention that Burton likely had a very good reason for excluding it from his Goodreads page, and we might do well to honor that. – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 17:12, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
::::Oh, I'd sort of assumed that you'd ''want'' to own the book regardless of whether we ended up covering it.
 
::::At any rate, I agree (from your message on Nate's talk page) that what we'd be covering ''would'' be the unpublished-book-that-mutated-into-''Agains-Nature'', as {{tlx|unprod}} — not the released version, which clearly isn't licensed DWU fiction.
 
::::While I'm sympathetic to an extent to the "dirty laundry" concern, it doesn't really fall within policy. If something ''was once'' publicly available, it's fair game to us, and actively ''should'' be documented provided it's relevant to ''Who''{{'}}s history. I mean, Mark Gatiss has explicitly said that in hindsight, he wishes people didn't have access to his early, and, in his view, embarrassing, ''[[P.R.O.B.E. (series)|P.R.O.B.E.]]'' scripts. But those aren't going to stop being [[Tardis:Valid sources|valid]] on such a basis, and even if they somehow did, we'd still cover them from a real-world perspective either way. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 17:30, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
:::Naturally it would be covered as unproduced, as like ''Campaign'', ''Time's Champion'', etc it's completely unlicensed. But is there any precedent for covering earlier drafts of an ultimately-published work as unproduced? Despite the existence of ''[https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/21946579-unnatural-selection Unnatural Selection]'', we don't have any pages for the significantly divergent earlier drafts of ''[[The Natural History of Fear (audio story)|The Natural History of Fear]]''. In any case, I've read ''The Empty Days'' but don't have my copy on-hand, so while I might be useless for any specific questions, my broad-strokes impression of the timeline is pretty solid. – [[User:NateBumber|n8]] ([[User talk:NateBumber|☎]]) 17:55, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 
== Re: Wiki Representative ==
Hey! Yeah, I've noticed as well. Though honestly, I think Staff probably know about this already.
 
But for the record, while I do have DM access to him, [[User_talk:Spongebob456|Spongebob456 does have a user talk page]] where you or any other user, admin or otherwise, are quite welcome to ring him up for something like this! [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 03:10, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 
== Rels ==
Very interesting additions to [[Rel]]! If I understand this correctly you try to draw conclusions from the Daleks' using "rel" both for speed and for time — but that leaves one alleged meaning of "rel" unaddressed: is there any way you could fathom to account for the unit also being used as "a measure of hydroelectricity"?
 
(Of course, what precisely "hydroelectricity" is, is a riddle for the ages. It's clearly not "electricity produced by hydropower" in this context; the common-sense reading would be "how electrically-charged is this water," although of course that is a ''curious'' question in the first place from a point of view of scientific accuracy.) [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 04:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
:I see. I still wonder what drives the Daleks to create a specific unit for "''hydroelectric'' energy" in particular, though. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 04:54, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 23:31, 9 December 2024

Archive.png
 Archives: #1, #2, #3, #4

Re: TLDR[[edit source]]

Ah, thank you. Will do so in a minute.

19:08, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

RE:Sandbox[[edit source]]

Thanks very much! Aquanafrahudy 📢 18:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Re: threads[[edit source]]

Aye, that's next on my docket. Give me a minute, though: nine in an afternoon, phew! And I still have a reply on that ol'R4BP thread cooking… Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 20:23, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Re: I dunno about you[[edit source]]

Just left a response on Forum:10 Years on, Amnesty Once More. Thanks for telling me about it. Sorry I haven't added anything to Forum:Rule 4 by Proxy and its ramifications: considered in the light of the forum archives, that thread became, very quickly, overwhelming to me considering its length.

16:56, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Re: Sections[[edit source]]

Yeah, I think so. It's just too much unbroken in-universe gab. You'd need subsection titles, pull-quotes, images — but I also think parenthetical citations are the wrong fit for this, and we should discuss the flow of episodes and season-breaks and EU media in-text. "Though largely standalone, Christmas special provided some emotional resolution for Amy and Rory, while teasing the next arc-plot on a thematic level…" sorts of things. Or so I suspect. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 20:03, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Image choices look workable. I would definitely alternate between right- and left-justified images, though. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 13:48, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi[[edit source]]

Would be exceedingly interested to hear your thoughts over at Forum:Roland Rat: The Series, if you have the time and the inclination. No worries if not, though, or if you have no real thoughts on the matter. :) - Aquanafrahudy 📢 09:54, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough. The whole first series is available on Youtube, if you're interested. Aquanafrahudy 📢 19:40, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Endless[[edit source]]

What's the difference with endless and infinite? User:Sum41Champ

Re: Thread closures[[edit source]]

Hi, I'm a little busy at the moment but I should be able to have a look at these either today or tomorrow. Sorry about the massive backlog of threads that need closing. Bongo50 ☎ 07:01, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Sory but I've not had time to close either thread yet. I have done a reread of Forum:10 Years on, Amnesty Once More, though, and am starting to formulate some closing thoughts. Hopefully, I'll be able to get that one closed tomorrow with Forum:(SPOILER: The start of RtD2) Quickstart Guides following soon after. Bongo50 ☎ 18:59, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Yep. I'm discussing some potential complications of Forum:10 Years on, Amnesty Once More with Scrooge and I'm writing the closing post to Forum:(SPOILER: The start of RtD2) Quickstart Guides right now. Bongo50 ☎ 20:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Yep. I still need to talk things through with Scrooge but I think we've both been quite busy. There doesn't seem to be any kind of way to automate the unblocking process so, unless we feel we can devote the time to perform the amnesty, we won't be able to close it. Bongo50 ☎ 11:43, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

The Klade[[edit source]]

I have opened up a talk page to discuss the possible kalde mention on that page if you would like to take part.Anastasia Cousins ☎ 21:43, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Re: R4BP[[edit source]]

It's been the plan for some time for User:Bongolium500 to write a semi-closure, and then officially set the bounds for a Part Two thread to properly discuss where we go from here. But I did ask him to hold off until I got the chance for one last riposte, which I do have half-written — my thoughts on Web Theory no longer reflect what's up in the thread (though lest you cry victory it goes without saying that I still don't agree with you, either). I've just been, as I said, very busy. After tonight, I should hopefully be past one of the most time-consuming responsibilities of those last two months — I'd tell you what it is, but, uh, T:SPOIL. [eyes emoji] So at a wildly optimistic guess expect a response this week-end, and more realistically some time in the coming week… after which it's up to you whether you'll want to reply to me again (I don't want to forcibly have the "last word" or anything), or to leave it to Bongo to close and reboot. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 18:41, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

TCoRR plot summary[[edit source]]

Just want to thank you in advance for fleshing out the plot summary for The Church on Ruby Road.

02:48, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Re: editoralizng[[edit source]]

Which part of the edit was editorializing? It carries none of my personal opinions, is the same information as the previous version just written less clunky. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thisyeah (talk • contribs) .

Taking you up on an old offer[[edit source]]

A while ago you offered to explain to me how to perform some edits on this wiki. At the time I turned down the request however I would now like to take you up on it. I have an image I would like to upload however I struggle to understand the image policy and I do not know how to practically add an image at all. Can you explain this to me please. I would like it explained if possible as someone who know absolutely nothing about beyond computers beyond knowing how to type and sign thingsAnastasia Cousins ☎ 11:05, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

thank you for your help the image has been uploaded is this okay?
Red Dalek Leader and two Subordinates

Re: QuickAnswers[[edit source]]

Yes, that's definitely been on both Bongo's radar and mine. Worrying indeed, but we (the Wiki) have weathered worse storms, and we (Bongo and I) are pondering solutons. A Forum thread will of course be opportune once it rolls out…

I do wish there were some means — email, even?… — of keeping you abreast of things in a more "light-hearted" manner than Forum discussions or even talk page messages, which generally have a pointed and particular purpose… You would not need to worry about where our heads have been at, and I could speak at greater lengths about floated ideas without thereby committing to them (albeit as proposals), as an admin kind of does in a public discussion. Have you given any further thought to such avenues? Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 21:11, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Argh. I know you're trying to hint at something but alas it's going over my head. A Najawin can be found in the comments…?… But so what? YouTube doesn't have a private-messages setting, does it?…
Asking to be spared, as it were, is an obvious thought, yes. Again, a thought whose implications I wish we could discuss somewhere else. In my experience, once one possess one Google account/email, I don't think a phone number is required to create an alt. account with no public link to the first, which comes with its own email; can't you attempt that?
(Besides, my gmail address is no great secret — it's the obvious aristide.twain thing — so if you're willing to trust that I would not disclose whatever email address you emailed me from to anyone else, you could email me first. It is obviously not a step I can ask you to take in any way that could possibly come across as pressuring you; just laying it out. I do at least hope that you would trust me that much by now, as far as not disclosing it further goes, such that it would be down to whether you're alright with me specifically having that email. But, again, totally fine if you're not, wouldn't take it personally) Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 21:44, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Well, best wishes with that, but is all rather time-sensitive… Have you considered registering an account on the Faction Paradox Forum? Could talk there in Forum-style DMs. No phone numbers or real names or any such thing necessary. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 22:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Well I'm sorry to hear that… Gah, but this is tricky business. I do want to note that I'd picked the FP Forum precisely because it's so low-activity that it scarcely feels like "social media" — but I do see how the subject matter might worry you, and of course we may hope, the present business aside, that it might get livelier in the foreseeable future… Well, how about this — I've gone and made a Forum. There's nothing in it and there never will be. If you make an account there, we could DM there. That could work? Maybe? There are things I'd like to bounce off you! Wiki-related and not, even.
To get back to the matter at hand, the thing is that my current feeling — as far as I'll get into on here — is that as presented this would be such a trainwreck on Tardis as to be a non-starter, and I have to believe Fandom would roll it back within a week once this became apparent. I don't know that I'd wholly trust them to take concerns seriously if e.g. answers on The Doctor fail to abide by T:NPOV or the like; but auto-generating at least three answers based on every one-sentence page, every real-world author page that's just a list of credits, etc.… that would doubtless clutter their servers with aimless gibberish to a degree that they cannot possibly think is in their best interests. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 23:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Well, here goes nothing…. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 00:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Phooey. Fixed now. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 00:40, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Re: Quick Answers[[edit source]]

Yes, I've been following it, and I don't love it. The review period they're introducing is a positive change in the right direction, and I do believe that something like this could be beneficial, but I am distrustful of the use of AI and I don't like that every page will have to have at least 3 answers. There is no point to, say, cheeseburger having a Quick Answers module. We currently have 108,069 pages on this wiki. That's 324,207 individual answers to have to review and potentially edit. Lets asssume it takes 10 second to review an answer (which I'm pretty confident in saying is an underestimate). That's 3,242,070 seconds, or over 37 days, of just reviewing and editing Quick Answers, and that's just for the pages we already have: this number will continue to increase without bound as the wiki grows. That's time I'd much rather spend working on actual articles. The AI-generated answers are also probably going to violate T:NPOV and probably T:IU a ton, meaning we'll either have to carve out an exception (sacrificing consistency in our style), or edit most of the answers (making 10 seconds a definite underestimate). Bongo50 ☎ 17:41, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

QuickAnswers query[[edit source]]

Hey! I saw you had some concerns re QuickAnswers and Tardis and I just wanted to address these, and if you had any questions etc.

In terms of your concern of questions appearing on every page, as the blog states, we're working with wikis to work out what a feasible amount looks like. Larger wikis would have more candidates for QAs as their content is often more built out, but the idea isn't to overwhelm you all. We're working with wikis on this, hence the extensive testing.

Re the quality of the questions and answers, you say they're "fundamentally broken". To begin with, sure, there were a lot of issues and I don't think anyone is disputing that. But since then, the process for generating QAs has been overhauled and tested and I'd hold fire on assuming they're broken until you view the final product. I'm around on Tardis if you have any issues with QAs on rollout, and you know my talk page and Discord are always open of course.

Happy to take any questions/concerns on this! --Spongebob456 talk <staff/> 10:13, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Hey, I know you've had long conversations with Lostris on this so I won't go over the same ground other than to say you have valid concerns for sure. Specifically for Tardis, I get you're saying as Doctor Who has complex lore. The same applies to wikis like Wookieepedia too with the Canon/Legends timeline, not to mention the multiverses in comic books (and ever increasingly in films but I digress!). Staff are aware of this and we need to be patient to see what the quality of the QAs will be.
If they aren't any good, QAs on select pages are easily editable or deleted and we can work out a plan with the community and Fandom staff. An example of this is on the 4 testing communities we rolled QAs out to, they pushed back on the number they had to review. The result was Fandom increased vetting time to a month and halved the number of QAs to review to help with community concerns. You raised an issue re user rights and how feasible it is for admins to cover all the questions too - hopefully this answers that we will work out a plan for this.
I will keep the wiki updated on QA developments and have spoken to the admins about setting a forum thread to post these updates which I will make when the next updates come in. Please do keep keep queries coming in the meantime on my talk page though! --Spongebob456 talk <staff/> 12:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Text Cursor[[edit source]]

I did have that same, or at least a very similar, issue a few years ago. Right pain. But unfortunately I don't know how to fix it, as IIRC Fandom eventually patched it themselves.

14:12, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Communication[[edit source]]

Ahoy — I thought I should let you know that for reasons which elude me, Twitch is now refusing to let me send you any more text messages unless I confirm a phone number, even though I can still see yours. (In answer to the last, OS12th has now joined us, though he does not expect to be very active in the immediate future. Revan will certainly not resume sustained activity, but still intends to try and migrate for the principle of the thing.) --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 00:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Marked as Bot[[edit source]]

Hi Najawin, I saw that you put a bot marker on my page, but I think I've been mislabelled as I'm not a bot and just a guy making Wanted Categories. Hope this can be reversed soon :) Gingerfool ☎ 08:18, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Re: Wrongly Marked as Bot[[edit source]]

I think it's also because I setup an automated filter to block page creations (except for trusted users and sysops) and this caught their edits. However, the spam attack seemed to have stopped before I got this setup so I've disabled it. Bongo50 ☎ 08:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Re: Spam[[edit source]]

I've deleted all of their pages and blocked all of the suspicious accounts. I'm going to try and set up some filters to catch and prevent these edits. Bongo50 ☎ 09:24, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Scratch that. I don't think the edits have enough defining features to catch them with a filter. Bongo50 ☎ 09:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Re: Just to help[[edit source]]

Good grief that thread was a pain to follow, but thanks for pointing me to it. I've read T:HOMEWORLD like a dozen times and still for some reason didn't make that link as I've been ruminating on this, 'tis a big help, ta - CodeAndGin | 🗨 | 23:57, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Also very useful, thanks! - CodeAndGin | 🗨 | 01:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Regarding T:BOUND[[edit source]]

Heya, so on Talk:The World's End you said we shouldn't make the edit because the forum thread is ongoing, "per T:BOUND". Sorry if I'm missing something here, but why would editing something to be more in line with current policy while that policy is being discussed be against T:BOUND? "... while a discussion is ongoing about how to change a particular rule, you are bound by the rule as it currently exists" suggests the opposite to me. Cheers, - CodeAndGin | 🗨 | 20:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Admittedly, I'm a bit confused here. That section, and the thread that enshrined it, if I understand correctly, is referring to current practice also being policy, even if it isn't written down. Are you implying that "leaving pages alone insofar as policy is concerned while said policy is being discussed for change" is current practice? If that's the case, cool (though in that case I might bring that to the Forums to be actually written down, because that precedent in itself is confusing with the summary I cited). If not, could I bother you to elaborate? Thanks for the help - CodeAndGin | 🗨 | 22:13, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
I see. Thanks, really, that's been a great help - CodeAndGin | 🗨 | 22:38, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Space Babies[[edit source]]

You've got me curious now, what are your thoughts on Space Babies?

23:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Pardon my jumping in — I didn't much care for the episode either, but I confess myself baffled as to how one could possibly interpret it as anti-abortion. The pro-choice parable seemed, if anything, ham-fisted (though intentionally so, I'm sure, that's just how Davies rolls, so that's not necessarily a criticism). "There's a law against switching off baby-making machines, but no structure to support the 'surplus' babies"… it seems pretty clear-cut? The law is clearly singled out as stupid in itself, so I don't think there's much of a reading to be had whereby the law is good but the government is culpable for not having the safety net afterwards. It's very much pitched as "you people passed that self-evidently stupid law, and then you don't even do anything to mitigate the damage? for shame". I've thought about it from several angles and I really just don't see what reading you and your friends seem to be onto. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 00:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
I don't see what "save the Bogeyman same as the others" has to do with it. I guess the basic "every life is valuable" can be read uncharitably, but that still seems strained to me; it's not as though the Doctor asserts that the machine should be kept on, after all. It's just the difference between being pro-choice and being pro-A Modest Proposal. Maybe slightly clumsy but, with due respect to your friends, this seems tenuous enough relative to the earlier, much more explicit metaphor that I would certainly not describe it as worse than the ever-discourse-stirring Kill the Moon. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 01:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
I did have the same take-away as Scrooge here did, but I almost get the impression that it's pro-choice, but, if in the situation where that choice is denied, then the children should be cared for. I do feel it likely wasn’t an intended theme of the episode though, it didn't feel like something RTD consciously wanted to write the story around.
It was, otherwise, certainly purile but it'd be amiss for me to say that I didn’t love the performances of Gatwa and Gibson and how they really bounced off the environment. Ruby's disgust was downright palpable. 01:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Well, for what it's worth, I rather thought the idea was that the Bogeyman wasn't a villain at all — just an innocent six-year-old being who just so happened to have been designed to look instinctively scary. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 02:04, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Mh?[[edit source]]

Did I what to whom now? I'm quite lost. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 03:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Oh yes! Well, I can't say the rewatch of DCtT which prompted this round of edits had nothing to do with the stream… But it's not as though the Houses aren't always gnawing at my brain in my natural state, and I have other reasons besides. I wasn't consciously thinking of sticking that page on the next Wheel or anything. Although, now you come to mention it… --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 03:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Re:not on Twitter[[edit source]]

(Are you and LegoK9 the same person?) Anyway, I'm aware of Nitter, but I thought they closed down? WaltK ☎ 21:49, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Re. FP forums[[edit source]]

It happens that I have moderator status on the FP forums, so I've attempted to do a cleanup. I am hoping — fingers crossed — I didn't muck anything up, as that's the first time I've deleted posts and banned a user...

02:42, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Re: Boulevard[[edit source]]

Unfortunately not! I've fallen off a bit with the more recent FP releases. TheChampionOfTime ☎ 14:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Re: Signature Template[[edit source]]

Hi Najawin, you mentioned making my Signature a template so that it doesn't take up loads of space, but it doesn't seem to work how ones like Epsilon's do, even though there doesn't seem to be any differences between the signature code, it still transfers the whole mediawiki code of mine into the page when signed. Is there anything I can change in the preferences to change this? I've tried linking to the User:Gingerfool/Sig page using {{}}, and it automatically adds SUSBT: to it, but is there anything else I can try? -Gingerfool Talk Page 14:10, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Re: Quantum[[edit source]]

You really will be much happier once you accept that the Observer Effect and the observer effect are different things altogether… --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 12:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Muppets: creatures? puppets?[[edit source]]

Actually, my understanding is that, in most accounts, "the Muppets" is in fact simply the name of Kermit's acting troupe, and they are, diegetically, genuine talking animals. (Or talking humans in some cases.) Of course, various media have shown them displaying awareness that they are puppets to one extent or another, but that's more of a fourth-wall joke (e.g. Kermit remarking that he isn't sure who this Jim Henson fellow is, "but I've heard that he's got his hand in a lot of things around here. Not sure what that means"). The idea of 'Muppets' as living beings of felt and cardboard, knowingly coexisting with flesh-and-blood humans, in the mould of Roger Rabbit's ink-and-paint 'Toons', is more of an online meme/fandom confabulation. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 23:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Re: Cover art sandbox[[edit source]]

I'm sorry, I'm not entirely sure which part of the discussion you're pointing to specifically - the thing about using cite source? (possibly in relation to the idea of cover art being cited on the same page as the publication?)_ Cookieboy 2005 ☎ 22:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Ah, right, I'll edit it to make it a tad clearer, wouldn't want to leave anyone confused. Cookieboy 2005 ☎ 23:31, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://tardis.wiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Najawin&oldid=3911520"