Talk:Series 11 (Doctor Who 2005): Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
m (Reverted edits by Brian Boy (talk) to last version by GusF)
No edit summary
Line 17: Line 17:


:::: I concur with Shambala108 and TheTARDISLegilimens. [[User:GusF|GusF]] [[User talk:GusF|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:57, April 1, 2018 (UTC)
:::: I concur with Shambala108 and TheTARDISLegilimens. [[User:GusF|GusF]] [[User talk:GusF|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:57, April 1, 2018 (UTC)
Why is Imdb not a reliable source but twitter and facebook is ? And just so you knw the stuff about Marina Stoimenova being the mud witch in doctor who has been removed from her spotlight account so that mihht not have been reliable after all .

Revision as of 14:59, 26 May 2018

Please note that, per Tardis:Spoiler policy, spoilers may not be posted on this talk page. Spoilers are only allowed on the Series 11 page itself.

Peculiar edits

I'm not sure if this is the place I should be writing - but I suggest locking this page and only allowing registered users to edit it. I keep coming across peculiar edits by those without accounts and I don't get why. StevieGLiverpool 16:27, November 14, 2017 (UTC)

No. What they need to do is exile all these different accounts clearly used by the exact same person. They usually have a long weird code for a username. I tried to tell the person off, but I was told to do something real complicated. --DCLM 17:01, November 14, 2017 (UTC)
The page has been protected. Shambala108 17:25, November 14, 2017 (UTC)
Just to clarify one thing. I strongly suspect that the "long weird code" you mention is just their IP address in the recently rolled out IPv6 format. Thus, attempts to contact such a person may well be futile as they do not receive notifications. This can also explain the changes in the observed user descriptions: these are different IP addresses rather than multiple accounts. Amorkuz 21:16, November 14, 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what I thought, so there should be no more accusations from users that any of these anonymous users are the same one. That's up to the admins to decide. Thanks, Shambala108 21:23, November 14, 2017 (UTC)

April Fool's

What do we do about April Fool's jokes surrounding the new series? I've come across two already. --DCLM 11:24, April 1, 2018 (UTC)

I would stick them in the Rumours section but explicitly state it was an April Fool. --Borisashton 13:27, April 1, 2018 (UTC)
If they're April Fools jokes, then they're not even rumors, so why put them on the page? Shambala108 13:49, April 1, 2018 (UTC)
I agree with Shambala108, April Fools jokes shouldn’t be put on articles. Unless it is central to a plot line, but then it’s not a real April Fools joke. TheTARDISLegilimens 14:44, April 1, 2018 (UTC)
I concur with Shambala108 and TheTARDISLegilimens. GusF 14:57, April 1, 2018 (UTC)

Why is Imdb not a reliable source but twitter and facebook is ? And just so you knw the stuff about Marina Stoimenova being the mud witch in doctor who has been removed from her spotlight account so that mihht not have been reliable after all .