User talk:OncomingStorm12th

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

Birthdates 2: Electric Boogaloo

Sure! Never any harm in providing sources.
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 20:07, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

Anne Kelso

Drumroll.... Anne..d... done.

Didn't Anne-ticipate I'd do it right away, did you? I hate myself so much right now.. (Couldn't fit Kelso in without resorting to French.)
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 01:07, February 1, 2019 (UTC)

"No, this is Patrick" (Jr)

Is there any chance that either Patrick is confirmed as "Jr" or "Senior"? I wonder if there's precedence, otherwise, to just label the brother Patrick O'Sullivan Jr or Patrick O'Sullivan, Jr, for the purposes of disambiguation, even so?

To answer your question another way, though, there are very few links to Patrick O'Sullivan, so whatever rename situation best satisfies T:CHAR NAMES and T:DAB is perfectly feasible. When possible, we try not to dab by first mention (rather than appearance), but of course sometimes there's no other way about it.

Any thoughts on the Jr/Sr route?
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 01:13, February 6, 2019 (UTC)

Hey! Thanks for looking into it on your listen. I think dabbing by story might be most reasonable, if no story offers a better solution like Jr/Sr.
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 15:07, August 15, 2019 (UTC)

Quick question

I couldn't help but notice what I did for The Lucy Wilson Mysteries is the same as what is on the page for the Short Trips series. I'm just curious if that should be changed, instead, to a list, followed by a cover gallery.

LilPotato ☎ 04:40, February 25, 2019 (UTC)LilPotato

Main Range

To be clear, do you want them to swap the whole series variable link to just [[Main Range]], or do you want the current text (Big Finish Doctor Who audio stories) to link there? I don't think they mind a bit of exercise. SV7 took time off, and they're ready to get back at it, full throttle (well, half-throttle). If you tell me what the tasks are, I'll get them done whenever I have the free time. There's no pressure just in knowing.
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 01:19, February 27, 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I was doing a photoshoot for my bot, who's sporting a new look these days. I'm not 100% sure why, but I mostly see "Main Range" without italics among lists/section headings where all other ranges are italicised. And, of course, yeah, the other hesitation is that the "Main Range" is not the primary range of the whole Doctor Who franchise. Would "Big Finish Doctor Who Main Range" be overdoing it?
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 04:53, February 27, 2019 (UTC)

That would be similar to how we currently treat Torchwood. Also, I totally forgot there even was a series variable for Infobox Magazine. Do you have examples of that parameter being used correctly? Is it "Doctor Who Magazine issues", "DWM issues" or "Doctor Who Magazine"? Which do you think works best?
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 04:54, February 27, 2019 (UTC)

I agree. I wanted a second opinion. I won't be running anything tonight, though; long day.
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 02:42, February 28, 2019 (UTC)

Autor photo

Thank you, OncomingStorm12th, for the edits to my author page - it looks *fantastic*! I'm really excited to have a proper profile on this site.

Do you have any idea how to fix the problem with my author photo? It is a formal photo of me, taken by my husband at my request, to which I therefore hold the copyright. I can't figure out which licence I need to choose from the dropdown menu, and every time I upload it, an admin takes it down. I've even tried putting a © Rachel Churcher 2019 statement next to the image, but it seems that this is not good enough. Any advice would be very welcome!

Thank you,

Rachel Churcher ☎ 16:18, March 6, 2019 (UTC)

Main Range categories

Honestly, that’s the sort of thing that would affect so many pages that I would be far more comfortable going the forum route with this. "Main Range/2019 audio stories" would be highly irregular, but I don't see why something like "2019 Main Range audio stories" should be off the table. I just think this is the sort of thing that would merit a more public, inclusive discussion.
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 00:18, March 17, 2019 (UTC)

Quick question

I have a quick question: Are you TheOncomingStorm from YouTube? A hopeless struggle is what makes it fun Bad Wolf (Message) 11:06, March 18, 2019 (UTC)

References policy

Hi, you just reverted my edit to The_Ghosts_of_N-Space_(audio_story) and I was curious as to the meaning of your summary. Do you mean that references should have a link to an existing in universe page, such as "The Doctor uses his sonic screwdriver.", or did you mean a link is required to demonstrate a source for the information.

If it is the first case, I have been leaving links out of some of my edits because I am not confident on what is link-worthy and what is not (I'm still a bit new and haven't got to grips with all the nuances), especially when dealing with redlinks. I am just editing pages to add information that I think is relevant and would appreciate any suggestions you may have on what is appropriate to be on this wiki.

Thanks for any help, NeilBeforeTheMightOfSutekh ☎ 16:57, May 3, 2019 (UTC)

Twelfth Doctor edit

Why was the edit in the Twelfth Doctor article undone? However, Clara, angered by the position the Doctor had put her in and threatening to make him regenerate by slapping him so hard... 19:17, April 21, 2019‎ - https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/Twelfth_Doctor?action=history Doctor 25 ☎ 19:18, May 5, 2019 (UTC)

RE: A capital change

Nice title. I did come across one such instance. Thank you for the reminder, and for pinpointing what I missed the first time around. My book can wait a little longer; I'll run that now. :)
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 04:27, May 16, 2019 (UTC)

In the end, 180 pages had been missed. Looking through my log, it's strange that I actively removed the bit of regex that meant it was looking for both bigfinish and Bigfinish. No idea why I decided to run it that way. Thanks again!
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 04:54, May 16, 2019 (UTC)

Clara Oswald edit

Why did you undo my edit? https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/Clara_Oswald?diff=0&oldid=2731656 Doctor 25 ☎ 19:10, June 9, 2019 (UTC)

Re; TARDIS archive

Hi, thanks for reminding me about that. I tried several times to move it back but it didn't work for some reason. I need to look into it but I had forgotten. Thanks Shambala108 ☎ 19:51, June 14, 2019 (UTC)

Cyberman

Hi, if you're still working on cleaning up Cyberman after the merge, feel free to use the {{Inuse}} tag to keep other editors from editing the page until you are finished. Thanks! Shambala108 ☎ 16:26, June 28, 2019 (UTC)

Sure and thanks for doing the cleanup work for this page and for BBC. That's the kind of work I find rather difficult to do. Shambala108 ☎ 00:56, June 29, 2019 (UTC)

Also wanted to say thanks for clearing up the Cyberman page. After doing the merge I looked at in and it was just too much to think about (and was trying to focus on the remaining mergers). --Tangerineduel / talk 15:16, June 29, 2019 (UTC)

Brooke/River companion status

Hey, just wondering if you'd like to give your thoughts on the arguments put forth regarding this topic, over at Talk:Brooke (The Lady in the Lake). Cheers, Danochy ☎ 10:47, July 15, 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant to get back to you earlier but never got around to it. Just sending a quick reminder regarding this discussion. Thanks, Danochy ☎ 10:02, July 28, 2019 (UTC)

RE: Ranges and series

My apologies for not getting back to you on this sooner. I see no reason not to give prose stories the same treatment. My one hesitation concerns an issue which does eventually need to be addressed regardless: whether or not we italicise BBC Books and Virgin book series.

For the record, both MLA (here) and Chicago style (here) say to italicise a book series when it's named for the title of an individual work (book within the series). While Chicago favours roman type in all other cases, MLA wants us to italicise if it's published under that series title as a volume, box set or collection, as well. And Virgin Books themselves (here) use italics for the books but roman type for all their series/range titles, like "the New Adventures" and "the Missing Adventures".

Note that both Chicago and MLA agree that radio series should be italicised, and I'd extend that to audio ranges, so there's no problem there. But as a wiki, we're not entirely consistent about whether or not to italicise novel series titles, especially when those titles do not appear on any book covers. And we found out The New Adventures was somehow an "imprint"? For the most part, we haven't been italicising these series titles, so the one and only thing that gives me pause is how we deal with that in these variables.

My one thought is that maybe, instead of making exceptions for each of these book series, we could have a novel range variable, separate from range? Or maybe making explicit exceptions, as we already do for Main Range etc., is the way to go. Any thoughts?
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 03:59, August 4, 2019 (UTC)

(There's also the matter of short stories; I think making anthology autolinking, so you just type in the title itself, and separating audio anthology into its own variable would help with having separate anthology number in range and number in anthology variables. They would operate the same way, except that in the case where there is no anthology number in range, like, say, for The Triple Knife in The Legends of Ashildr, it still gives #3, rather than The Legends of Ashildr 3 or #1.3.)
× SOTO (☎/✍/↯) 03:59, August 4, 2019 (UTC)

Bledoe Cadets

You’re quite right — I misunderstood a post about them as suggesting that it was a mere variant cover. Thanks for catching the error and being so nice about it! – N8 ☎ 02:43, August 22, 2019 (UTC)

10,000 Dawns debate

Hiya. As I'm sure you may have seen, quite the heated debate has raged in the thread about the inclusion of 10,000 Dawns. What I'm basically asking for is an impartial admin to look over the debate and get this thing closed. The debate has examined all the relevant wiki rules concerning the original reason for the case being made against 10,000 Dawns as a crossover series, and all users bar one have decided it should be included. With the main butting heads of the debate involving two admins (myself and Amorkuz), I think it's fairer to get someone who hasn't been involved in the thread's debate to pass final judgement on the decision to include them and close the thread, or whether the debate still needs to continue. Thanks. --Revan\Talk 20:30, August 28, 2019 (UTC)