User talk:Scrooge MacDuck

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

RE: An Unearthly Child

Hi. Thanks for explaining. I was aware that the pilot had something of the sort suggested but seeing as it is invalid on the wiki, I thought the broadcasted version must have suggested it as well. I was terribly confused for a minute there, thinking I had forgotten something (which, to be fair, is not an uncommon occurrence). Thanks again :) LauraBatham ☎ 13:53, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Edit Warring

Yet another instance of User:Epsilon the Eternal exceeding four revisions on the page Poppy Munday. It is becoming increasingly tiring now, especially as the image he keeps applying has been challenged by several users on the talkpage. RadMatter ☎ 15:25, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

THANK YOU

Oh, thanks.. you're an angel. I was having a lot of grief with that. What's going to happen to the fool who is vandalising the wiki? Saint2 ☎ 20:42, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Potential Vandalism

Potential vandalism worth considering to delete (https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/Right_of_first_refusal). DJAitch ☎ 13:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

RE: Invalid info

My bad. Sorry. Luckily I only did a few pages so it hopefully shouldn't be too much trouble to undo my edits. LauraBatham ☎ 01:13, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Green Global Chemicals

Thanks for the ping, I've replied at Talk:Global Chemicals! – n8 (☎) 12:40, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Cyber Foundries

I noticed a few days ago that you renamed Cyber-Foundry to the Cyber-Foundries. Wouldn't it be suitable to omit the from the title? I know the Master says "the Cyber-Foundries" all in one line, but I don't think that therefore the word the is needed for the title, like how pages such as Dalek Empire and Seal of Rassilon don't use the in their titles, even though they technically could. Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 11:14, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, apologies that I haven't replied sooner. Whilst I understand where you're coming from with regards to the name The Cyber-Foundries, I personally feel that the The in the name still isn't necessary. If somebody was confused by the title and, at first glance, they thought it was incorrect, all they would have to do is simply click on the page and they'd immediately realise why the page has a seemingly plural name. I'd like to start a further discussion on the page itself. Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 10:31, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

An user accused me of being jealous

https://tardis.fandom.com/f/p/4400000000003438477/r/4400000000011661751 Matipereira User talk:Matipereira

Master template

I did not have the template saved anywhere. If you would be kind enough to move it to a sandbox, say User:BananaClownMan/Sandbox/Mastertemplate, I would be most grateful. And my Doctors template too, please, if it also goes against any template policies.BananaClownMan 11:03, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Imagery

It's not a weird precedent at all. We have often fielded complaints from people who say they'd like images of them or family members taken down. Fair use clearly doesn't apply in such a situation.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍  22:59: Mon 17 May 2021

"Fair use" isn't a privacy issue. And my removal of the pictures in questionn had nothing to do with anyone's privacy. Rather it was a matter of complying with the wishes of the copyright holder, and that always trumps the nebulous notion of "fair use". When someone asks for an image to be taken down, it is. That's standard practice, no matter what wiki we're talking about. But in this case, it's also in Tardis' self-interest because we surely don't want DWM's legal team coming after us. Beyond that, it's simply the correct and courteous thing to do -- and it's something we've done on this wiki several times before. After all, we aren't entitled to put a single picture up. We exist only at the will and pleasure of those who hold the copyrights for the topic we cover. Furthermore, there is zero argument at all which required these particular pictures to be uploaded as an illustration of that particular person. I'm quite certain others could have been found which would not have raised a single eyebrow at the DWM offices.

Finally, remember that Wikipedia have a much greater claim to being an educational resource than we do, and they're constantly taking down pics for copyright reasons. Thousands of pics get pulled from Wikipedia every year. Today's action was just a normal part of running wikis, even if it's something you haven't yet encountered as an admin.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍  23:44: Mon 17 May 2021

Re: T:VS elucidation

Thank you for those clarifications. I will add them to the table tomorrow. That point about Can I Help You? is interesting and definetly something I would like to debate once we have the forums again. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 20:02, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi

Can you please lock my post because Users are getting into a comment war and I can't stand it. Proof: https://tardis.fandom.com/f/p/4400000000003453366/r/4400000000011863244 – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joker1943 (talk • contribs) .

Early Bird

Just in case someone wants the evidence/reasoning for deletion here are the pictures: RadMatter ☎ 13:49, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

OH, true enough! I think it must have been an edit conflict that stopped me from posting, then I saw the page deleted. RadMatter ☎ 13:54, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Re: Daft Dimension Numbering

I am very sorry about changing the format. I remember it being without the number and the very quick check I did found a page where it was without the number (Boys (The Daft Dimension 560) which I have just remembered that I created (although according to the edit history I forgot the citation and that was added later by Doug86 (linking to the incorrect instalment)) and have now fixed). While I do not like the current method, I will not change it again. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 13:28, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Benny infobox image

If you weren't aware, I've added a new candidate for the infobox image over at Talk:Bernice Summerfield, so you ought to check it out!

Epsilon📯 📂

23:28, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Dalek Appearances

Having slept on the matter, I see your point: it does kinda makes sense to have parallel universe equivalents of a species on a species' appearances list. I'll edit Kaleds - list of appearances and Thals - list of appearances to accommodate Masters of War and The Eighth Doctor: Time War: Volume Four. Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 07:32, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism

I just reverted vandalism to Ian Levine by user 82.45.10.63. It violates numerous things including using unnessary swearing on the Wiki as well as targetted harrassment. Just thought you would want to be aware of it. Have a nice day. TheFartyDoctor ^Talk 10:35, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Re: Re: Dr. Who

Oh yes, I'm definitely in agreement with you there. Just as we would typically use "the Doctor" in plot summaries and the like, the same should apply to Dr. Who. Danochy ☎ 11:54, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Mad (as in "Angry") Larry

He doesn't specifically mention the scripts (which, like Mr Saldaamir, had been available for free online for years) or the PROBE crossover, but it seems to me that his citations of Saldaamir and Eternal Escape are just examples in support of his real thesis that "you [should]n't buy any Faction Paradox material from BBV." So I interpret the entirety of BBV's 2020s Faction content as what he's decrying, not any of the releases in particular. – n8 (☎) 16:12, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't think CoI is playing a role in my revision of the page, but I see what you mean; I don't think the decider here needs to be an admin, so maybe I'll try to drag in Borisashton or Najawin (PBUH) to break the tie, if that's ok with you?

Oh, regarding The Plot of the War, it's definitely summarizable, as you can see at the awesome DWRG page for it; but my thought was that there's little utility in a section which will likely remain to be added until the end of history, when a plot summary is already given (albeit in a distributed fashion) by clicking the links to the entries. The story-order listing of entries is already kind of unique for story pages on the wiki: we don't list tables of contents for any other book. But I don't feel strongly either way, so I'm completely okay with being overruled on this point. – n8 (☎) 16:36, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I really hope he's okay! – n8 (☎) 16:51, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Does the original Eternal Escape warrant a short story page? RadMatter ☎ 18:49, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

There was mention of "The Enemy's homeworld" but I'm not sure if that is enough. RadMatter ☎ 19:17, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

The Black Dalek of Vengeance

Hey. From listening to Vengeance last week, there's only one instance (at least, I'm pretty sure from my memory) where the Black Dalek is referred to as "the Black Dalek", and that's by Magnus Drake. On all other occasions, it's referred to as "the Dalek Supreme". But more importantly, it's explicitly destroyed by the Master late in the story, with the Dalek Litigator explicitly stating immediately afterwards to the Master "you have destroyed the Supreme".

Besides, loads of stories featuring a Dalek Supreme of some kind refer to their Supreme as "the Supreme", and yet we know that these Supremes aren't all the same individual, what with how many get blown up, and stuff like the Dalek Supreme Council confirms that multiple Supremes can exist at the same time. The same goes for Black Daleks - they're a rank as well as an individual, yet they may be individually referred to as "the Black Dalek", but that doesn't make them the same individual. I'd say that the Master blowing up the Vengeance Supreme with his mind makes the latter separate from the Black Dalek Leader, because without some kind of indication of its survival, nor something bigger to indicate that the two Black Daleks are the same beyond the words "the Black Dalek", there's nothing that says the two are actually the same.

Now that I think about it, the Vengeance Supreme being called "the Black Dalek" may just be a simple stylistic choice, given that, in the animated trailer for Master!, the Supreme appears as a black-and-gold variant of the red-and-gold Supreme Dalek design from The Stolen Earth and Journey's End. Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 22:54, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

No problem! Glad to have helped. Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 13:51, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Davros (Unbound Universe) help

I'm trying to add an "affiliated with" section to the infobox on Davros (Unbound Universe), but for some reason, even after adding the info I'm trying to add, it won't show the new section on the visual editor or the preview. I've tried various edits on both the visual editor and source editor, and I'm getting nowhere. Could you help me? Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 16:09, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I was trying to add four affiliations to the "affiliated with box" because I thought, what with pages such as Dalek and Cyberman having more than four affiliations, that I could add more than three. Is the difference because Dalek and Cyberman use "Infobox species", whereas Davros (Unbound Universe) uses "Infobox individual"? Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 16:33, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

I guess I could. It's probably not a very big deal, given that we could just swap out, say Kaled (Unbound Universe) from Davros (Unbound Universe)'s infobox and stick in Quatch Empire instead, seeing as, of the four key affiliates this Davros had, the Kaleds are perhaps the least significant, and therefore could just be swapped out. But perhaps it's worth a shot for the long run. Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 16:55, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

This is somewhat unrelated, but there's something else I'm curious about regarding Davros (Unbound Universe)'s infobox. Would it be appropriate to specify in the infobox's name that the subject is from an alternate universe? As in, changing the name of the infobox from Davros (as is the case for Davros and Davros (Palindrome)) to Davros (Unbound Universe) - just to be a tad more specific. Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 16:49, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Alrighty. I take it that also applies to infobox sections such as "species" and "place of origin", given that they're also in-universe? In which case, I'll undo what I did a few minutes ago. Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 16:59, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Cool stuff. Thanks for helping me again. I'll undo what I did on Davros (Unbound Universe) earlier. Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 17:28, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Re vandalism

Hi, that last two reverts you did, you may want to look at Osgood and Kate Stewart, as they did the same type of vandalism on those too Valeyard12.5 ☎ 21:37, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Cyan Doctor

I was referring to this: https://dwexpanded.fandom.com/wiki/Cyan_Doctor. Is that a mistake?

Master links

Hello, there.

I wanted to ask something that, no matter how I phrase it, sounds nit-picky, but I thought it wouldn't hurt to at least ask all the same; would it be possible to change the links for War Master and Spy Master to "War" Master and "Spy" Master. I think it helps illustrate that these are nicknames for these Master instead of official titles.

Also, do you plan to go even further with this idea, like "Saxon" Master or "Tremas" Master? Could this be the first stage of getting individual Master pages.

Thank you for your time, Sincerely, BananaClownMan 02:20, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@User:Scrooge MacDuck: Well, great minds think alike, don't they? ;p

Just after I posted my reply, I saw yours, and turns out we gave more or less the same rationales, but worded a bit differently. OncomingStorm12th ☎ 02:40, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Nick Scovell

I think you're mistaken about the plays Nick Scovell was in. I can't find them anywhere on the wiki. Since they aren't covered, I think he should be removed from the Doctor actors category. MystExplorer ☎ 13:20, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Ok but they aren't mentioned on either of the stories' pages. So they aren't covered by the wiki. MystExplorer ☎ 15:10, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, the fact is that they aren't. So by definition, Scovell should not be in that category. So I am going to remove him (again) and I am done arguing about it. Sorry. MystExplorer ☎ 15:18, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Go ahead and create pages for them then. MystExplorer ☎ 15:44, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Worshipful reply

Its the “copied on the real book's” part that I have an issue with. To me it doesn’t read right and isn’t 100% clear in what it’s trying convey. Up until that point it makes perfect sense.

I would maybe change it to something like:

"Salyavin left a decoy in its place — really a copy of a human work of fiction, entitled The Hitchhiker's…, disguised in the real book's red binding."

SarahJaneFan ☎ 22:54, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, that's pretty much the size of it. Plus the fact that the title of the book had just been mentioned made it seem like the title was copied onto the binding, which didn't make a lot of sense. Perhaps that is just book-making jargon we aren't aware of, but the fact we aren't aware of it would be a good reason to use a different term.

Also I think referring to it as the "original book" rather than "real book" would increase the clarity so maybe "disguising it in the red binding of the original book"? Danochy ☎ 23:00, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Seeing your reply to SJF, I see you're now saying it's a different red binding, although your original post did say it was made using the same red binding, so you understand the confusion. Regardless, I suppose I better amend my suggestion to "disguising it in a red binding based on that of the original"? Danochy ☎ 23:10, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

That’s fair enough, but this comment of yours did kind of imply it was the same binding, hence the confusion:

“by rebinding it using the same red binding as the real Worshipful & Ancient Law”

In that case, I would just suggest changing "copied on" to "based on" or "inspired by". I feel something like that would make the sentence far clearer. SarahJaneFan ☎ 23:12, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Can I make a sandbox page in the template namespace?

I'm working on a template that I really need to have saved in the template namespace, rather then the user one. Could I create a sandbox page in the template namespace, potentially at Template:Bongolium500/TEMPLATE NAME? Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 18:02, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Re: don't wikify your own material

Hi since I'm not 100% sure what you meant on the page, I can't fix the following error, so I'm pointing it out here:

• On Tardis talk:Don't wikify your own material you have User:OncomingStorm12th listed twice

Obviously I have a pretty good idea what you meant but it's probably better that you fix it thanks Shambala108 ☎ 04:16, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Tabular list of appearances demo

I don't know if you've noticed what I've been up to over at User:NateBumber/Sabbath - list of appearances and User:NateBumber/sortname, but I'm seeking permission to move the "sortname" template into the normal template namespace and implement this tabular list of appearances format over at Sabbath - list of appearances (likely in conjunction with a speedy rename request). I think it's a clear improvement over the existing format, as it can allow any reader to sort by medium and series like now, but also by release order and author. I obviously don't intend to replace every list of appearances at once – that would require further automation and SemanticWiki'ing a la Bongo50 – so my intuition isn't that it would require a forum thread to implement, but I figured I'd run it past a purplename before I just publish it. Any thoughts? – n8 (☎) 17:59, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

220.188.250.84 - spam

Just an FYI, if you check user 220.188.250.84 and their contributions, you'll see a lot of blanked pages that I have tried my best to reverse. The Peter Capaldi page hasn't balanced back to "0". In fact, it says "-3", so I'm not sure what the deal is there. Just thought you'd like to know and take whatever action you deem fit. Have a good day. TheFartyDoctor ^Talk 04:03, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Two points of query

Hi, just wanted to inquire regarding two points that have come to mind.

1. The Wyngarde Debacle In light of the new Wikify page, I went back to mull on the original No Self Ref. and actually came to wonder if a particular circumstance with the Peter Wyngarde page may toe over the lines of acceptability. Though not added by Wyngarde himself, long been since passed away... in my own previous revisions of that page, I opted to document the ever complicated tangle that is his birth date. (You'll see well enough from the page that it's quite a tangle!) Three of those sources - which were all from the same site over different period of times and notably inconsistent with each other - always did perplex me but being that of his official fan club, I'd pondered that they may have had the same level of confusion as average onlookers do with Wyngarde's birth details.

But just the other week, it came to my attention that the fan club website has infact been run by a Tina Wyngarde-Hopkins. Following that back, it seems she claims to have been romantically partnered with him for 30 years... and further to that, Wikipedia's talk page seems to contain some form of argument between her & editors there. Now, I know we have to maintain NPoV - but would there be some form of consideration to be taken when an individual close to a real person claims a key detail in their life in an unverified and often inconsistent manner whilst they were alive and now after their passing? I wouldn't think it 'taking sides' if we were to conclude that - by whatever manner and intentions, perhaps that of simply being told so by Wyngarde himself in those years - there was an issue with the inclusion of those as sources.

No Self Ref is, I will admit, primarily meant for instances in which the person themselves adds the information to the page or an editor does so on the basis of their comments, but like I say, I have to ask if this might also extend to this rather complicated case?

It's a rather tricky situation, and after thinking on it the past week, I decided best to refer to yourself.

2. Non-cis and Non-het RW individuals It's been on my large "Things to tackle when the Forums return" list, to get to the implementation of non-heterosexual and non-cisgender categories for real-world individuals. I was thinking when I drafted my list that this would likely need to involve the forums but it was later brought to my attention that in-universe categories for this already exist. With that mind, as creating them would be to compliment the existing in-universe categories - and since a large part of the forum discussion on those in Thread 271132 was actually to decide the need/significance of having those & the best suited naming for such a category - would it be the case that there is enough precedent for making those categories right now without a forum discussion?

The thread decided a significance to having in-universe cats, and that they should be named "Non-cisgender individuals" & "Non-heterosexual individuals".

So, would real-world cats in the same vein not be just as valid to add presently, provided they were named in the same scheme i.e. "Non-cisgender real world individuals" and "Non-heterosexual real world individuals"?

JDPManjoume ☎ 02:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your replies on both points. With that first point in mind, I will amend Wyngarde's page to remove the fanclub website, and note the rationale on the talk page so that it is clear to any others editing the page why those have been taken off the page. You made a good point re. third-party sourcing from actual individuals - I would've been better placed to say sourcing key information without further independent verification of the accuracy of the statements.

Thanks also for the reminder that the thread was at that stage of opinion re. real-world individuals, as I'd forgotten about that. I shall of course leave well alone on that for now.

Just as an aside, since it's just come up - please see the talk page on David Burton when you get a chance for why I wished to remove that statement for the moment. It was a matter of who added it, the best way to word it to avoid reader misinterpretation re. licensing, and the question of finding a source for the production actually existing.

JDPManjoume ☎ 12:50, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd noticed Najawin's sandbox just last night, hence my most recent additions to my list. I will probably move a copy of it over there sometime soon once I've cleaned it up a bit more. And yeah, the PoC categories are going to be a complicated situation. I've no doubts about that, but I think it's worth having the conversation to see how much can be untangled.

On the Dhawan vs. Delgado thing specifically, that had come to mind actually (as had Tso in the audios) - and I suppose my argument there is going to be akin to the point that this contention is not too dissimilar to the matter re. "first PoC Doctor actor". (Jo Martin, Daniel Anthony, Lenny Henry, Damian Lynch) All of those actors in both cases are, by an academic and scientific standpoint, people of colour. Thus, the approach I'd already be proposing for that would be that their individual pages note who is generally referred to as the first in media reviews and fandoms, whilst also noting the other people of colour who can be applied that title too.

This is the approach that is already being taken for a subsection on the Fugitive Doctor's page. If that can point out the technicality that Damian Lynch was briefly playing the Third Doctor as predating Jo Martin as Fugitive Doctor, then I don't see why the technicality of Delgado being hispanic and though not noted at the time, would actually be a person of colour, should throw any particular troubles.

As such, then it would be a viable path that operation of the category can include them all. I wasn't really thinking of those folks being an issue. What will be, however, the three major points of complexity that actually stand out to me would be that of Richard E. Grant, Marcus Hearn and of Peter Davison - who are all despite typical perception all mixed-race. Even if ultimately it doesn't result in a category add, it would at least provide something to point at in terms of it being considered & lay a groundwork that might one day be further resolved by someone else. Time will tell, as it always does.

JDPManjoume ☎ 15:47, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

FandomDesktop migration

Hey there! We are due to migrate this wiki very soon to FandomDesktop and I need to help get a light theme ready. Apologies for the short notice of this, there were some unforeseen circumstances.

It would be great to work with the entire admin team to get the wiki ready for FandomDesktop. Have you been using the new skin? I'm going to start some preparation tomorrow and it would be great to work with the admin team on this. We may need to:

• Adjust the theme on light theme
• Adjust templates
• Adjust CSS/JS
• and more potentially.

If you have any suggestions for how we can collaborate, please let me know. I wondered if a forum thread on Forum:Index might work? Please let me know if you have any questions, and I look forward to hearing from you! --Spongebob456 ^talk <staff/> 18:47, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Henrywaltertardis

Hi Scrooge,

I thought that I would raise a possible concern about User:Henrywaltertardis.

It appears that this user is editing the 2021 (releases) page based purely on the dates which have been given on the List of future releases, despite the fact that some of these releases have been delayed or the dates mentioned on the page were incorrect. For example; the user recently added the Iris Wildthyme story The Mermaid Menace to the 2021 releases page and stated that it was released in May 2021 - the release is noted for May 2021 on the future releases page. However, I cannot find any information that this publication has actually been released. Likewise, the user has added Lytton 4 and Orcini as having been released in June - again information which matches that found on future releases - but I am certain that these have not been released yet.

Thanks. RadMatter ☎ 15:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

The Undying

Hi Scrooge,

It features Archibald Angelchrist from Paradox Lost in a supporting role. I have added the information to his page. RadMatter ☎ 13:19, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Community Connect

Hey there! Can I confirm you received an email re Community Connect please? May be in spam and it's to the email associated with your Fandom account. Is this something you would be interested in attending? Thanks! --Spongebob456 ^talk <staff/> 10:27, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Abigblueworld

Hi hope you are well. The user abigblueworld is being a major nuisance. Editing wars, vandalising pages, adding fandom. Should be blocked in my view Valeyard12.5 ☎ 21:03, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

whats adding fandom? Fandom is already a Website :/ 21:06, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Language?

Hey, I just wanted to ask you what the rules are when it comes to language and bad words in comments on posts. I would like to be aware of it. Someone said a really bad word in a comment on my post, but they weren't attacking anyone, so I guess it's fine. But going forward, I'd like to know what the rules are. Thank you!

Vandalism by Tr8d0s0a1

User:Tr8d0s0a1 is repeatedly vandalising pages by either blanking, spamming text or moving them. I've had to constantly revert their edits to combat it. See Special:Contributions/Tr8d0s0a1. EpsilonGamma ☎ 08:25, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi. Abigblueworld101 could use a block. LauraBatham ☎ 14:06, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Seconded DanTheMan2150AD ☎16:28, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Possible breach of Tardis:Don't wikify your own material

Hi, I've been rereading some of the policy stuff just because I like to make sure I know exactly what is and isn't allowed and after reading this policy just now, I got reminded of a point in 2019 when I edited a page on here after another wiki user had done, only for someone to message me on Twitter asking why I edited it because they were the one who wrote that section (I was fixing an error from the book I had just read). The person in question is someone who is a writer of DWU content and the part of the article I edited was something related to a story they had been involved with. After reading this policy, I checked my Twitter messages, but they have left Twitter, so I may not have info on those messages (although they may still exist in my emails), but the user on here has edited a lot of content that they themselves have worked on and has also edited their personal page here on the wiki, so wanted to mention it to an admin, and because you're an admin I regularly see editing stuff, I thought I would mention it to you. ThomasRWade ☎ 20:12, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

With regards to this editor, I have managed to check my emails and the time they mentioned to me about it being them was February 2020. However, this was in a private message and their profile on here doesn't mention who they are. They claimed the account name on here is a pen name they plan to write under in the future, so I don't want to dox them for it, but they are still editing pages that involve works they are directly tied to, as of August 3rd. This editor previously used an account with their name that is known publicly, but based on te Contributions page, their last time using that here was early 2019, with the first edit on the new account being late 2019. If revealing the information is doxxing, due to the nature of them telling me being via private message, then I won't reveal who it is (that's why I've been vague about the editor, to avoid breaking rules regarding that), but I felt it best to notify an admin that I had seen this happening, because I saw that policy last night. Thanks ThomasRWade ☎ 11:13, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for clarification. I was worried about that being an issue. They no longer appear to be on Twitter anymore, so I doubt I'll be able to contact them. It's a shame that some people don't read the policies, but I am guilty of that in the past myself. Sorry for wasting your time. ThomasRWade ☎ 12:05, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Vandals on Martha Jones

Hi, two vandals are putting some extreme vandalism on Martha Jones’s page Valeyard12.5 ☎ 18:01, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Serial vandal

Hi, that Furneai on wheels (or whatever he’s called) is back as a sock puppet Doctor Who is rubbish, up to his old stuff Valeyard12.5 ☎ 21:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Another vandal

User HAHAGOTyalmabig is vandalising pages Valeyard12.5 ☎ 12:13, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Fandom projects

Hi! Got a couple of things:

As this wiki used to use Special:Forum, Fandom wants to make sure that old forum links and references aren't cluttering up maintenance special pages (unusedfiles, needed pages etc). Would you mind checking and letting me know asap as to whether that's an issue for this wiki? Just looking for dead links to forums in special pages, or links to images used in forums but are now dead, stuff like that. No need to attempt to cleanup yourself, I just need to know if they exist.

Secondly, did you receive an email sent last week I believe inviting you to The Downstream on September 10th? The email is titled "[The Downstream] Ask Fandom Anything, Social Media Tips, and Data Insights". I just want to confirm you received the email as we know Fandom outreach emails often land in spam.

If you could let me know about both of those things, that would be fantastic. Thanks! --Spongebob456 ^talk <staff/> 09:43, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, just a reminder that The Downstream is Friday, September 10 at 11am EST at https://www.twitch.tv/Fandom. You can register/RSVP and add the event to your calendar here. That page also gives a lot of detail on what the event offers. Any questions, please let me know! --Spongebob456 ^talk <staff/> 12:10, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Notable referencing issues on Vitas Varnas

Was doing a bit of research in a personal project regarding Doctor Who at the BBC: Lost Treasures, and in process, stumbled upon the note that Vitas Varnas has a thanks within that. In checking Vitas' page to determine a source to push over onto the release's actual page... That source provided some handy help - but - I noticed that the following; "Vitas appears in the comic Omega as a Minyan in a crowd witnessing Princess Malika put onto trial. He also appears in the comic story Goodbye To All That where he's seen on the streets of Soho, 1975." is cited with sources that are actually tweets from Vitas himself. Though the creators did acknowledge the first of those tweets in some small manner, I believe this would probably still fall under a self-ref issue as it is still using an individual's own statement as sole verification of a contribution.

Things only got more complicated from there, as reviewing the other sources, I then noticed that the initial citation for creating the page re. his likeness appearing in a K9 book - is also within this situation. It's a Facebook post from Vitas himself about it. The likeness may be clear enough, but I thought it was still a problematic thing and that it would be better to check the actual book for a proper credit.

As the editor in question - EpsilonGamma - had covered the creation and sourcing, I then decided to check their other related edits to see if there were any other similar situations.

EpsilonGamma's citation on Vitas' page re. Strangeness in Space is yet another social media statement from Vitas about being involved. And the DWU counterpart also has a similar situation for its sole citation.

The H.P. Lovecraft page also has edits that veer in this direction too. The Jonathan Green page, too, seems to have had such an edit.

Finally, there is a little bit of concern to me regarding the citation for his GameGrumps participation. Aside that linkage to an easter egg does not show he was a frequent contributor.

[Older revisions of the page also involved EpsilonGamma adding a birth date and year to Vitas' page, that other editors would understandably later remove for being completely uncited. This seems to have been cited on the 1992 (people) and 16 June (people) pages with a People Pill link, but that actually has no such information.]

I would normally deal with this as typical, but given the scale and breadth of the matter, I thought best to draw to your attention so that you can conclude the best possible resolution of these issues and can more officially speak to EpsilonGamma re. this.

JDPManjoume ☎ 20:29, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the reassurance that it was a NO SELF REF issue - I've moved those statement to the talk page of Varnas' page, until any proper sourcing can be found. (Having just looked at Amaral's RW page, there was no issue there... but there was a citation that was failing NO SELF REF on the page of the in-universe counterpart that I've also removed for the time-being.)

As for sourcing either... well, looking at the Kickstarter page for Omega provides no information of whom the 24 backers who would fall under the 'likeness' perk.

And the Cutaway Comics website has no page I can find re. these backers. And neither their old Twitter (cutawaycomics) or their new Twitter (cutawayuniverse) has anything that would be helpful in that regard. Which is a bit of a stumbling block, not just for Varnas but also for Amaral, in terms of having them properly cited.

I agree that we could certainly count the resemblance without an outright name; because as you say, we have plenty precedent for identifying individuals grouped under one credit title (particularly in supporting artist territory) - though having now read the talk page for Amaral, I will admit I have questions about drawing a direct connection between two separate cameos as one whole character without cited authorial intent... but I will air those over there in due course, after I've mulled the implications of Bart Simpson.

(I did note, however, on the Kickstarter page but not entirely sure if we can take the wording offhand on that page that "our chance to appear in Omega #1! We'll need your image by early December, but assuming we do, you'll achieve Minyan IMMORTALITY at the pen of John Ridgway!" as to any definite statement on the character of Antonio being definitely a Minyan, but might that be helpful on that currently tangled BtS section?) JDPManjoume ☎ 17:18, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Both Amaral and Varnas are credited in the Omega comic series with thanks as well in the fourth issue of Lytton, however it doesn't say specifically it's them in the audience as I could only go by their posts to confirm this, and no one in Lytton I could see resembles Amaral. Would scans of the comic book credits uploaded to the wiki be considered a reliable source? EpsilonGamma ☎ 09:46, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi, user 82.28.161.139 is vandalizing pages constantly. He was blocked on one profile but has turned up again. Voyage. Of the damned and dinosaurs on a spaceship are the pages Valeyard12.5 ☎ 22:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

The Merge of Morbius

Hey Scrooge, hope you're well! I enjoyed scrolling through the Morbius incarnation pages this morning and it reminded me of something which was floated several years back but never decided or implemented: that it might be within the bounds of current policy and standing admin decisions to conclude that the Imperator is the First Morbius. Sadly the forums are currently inaccessible, but as I recall it, the case of the Imperator went unaddressed in the original debate(s), and while it's easy to compare him to the Master and the War King (which were decided to stand apart, given the state of evidence at that time), I think his character is much more comparable to the Homeworld and "the Ship" from Toy Story, each of which the wiki positively affirms with their DWU equivalents. I'm curious what you think; given today's changes to Morbius, it would be an easy and unobtrusive integration. – n8 (☎) 19:00, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Very eloquently explained. I definitely see what you're saying regarding mixing precedents. I'll shelve the idea for now… In the meantime I'll start working on something about the policy suggestion I mention on my user page. The forums can't come back quickly enough! – n8 (☎) 20:13, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Dalek television stories template

Hello, there. I thought I'd come to you directly to ask if it was okay to update the Dalek television stories template based on the current talk page, such as the removal of images and archive footage? BananaClownMan 01:57, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Prime Ministers Box

For some reason the box on PMs of the UK overlaps with the Show button meaning you can't open it.

Checking in

Hi there! Sorry it has been a little while since I last checked in, I have been out of action for the last two weeks unfortunately. How are things going? One thing I did notice was that the navigation in dark theme, the Explore tab in white is hard to read. Have you guys noticed that? Figured if we do what we did before and if we continue a single thread on my talk page, it might be easier for us to keep track. Hope that's ok! :) --Spongebob456 ^talk <staff/> 09:03, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Spammer Alert

https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/YOU_MUST_COMMIT_SUICIDE (DJAitch ☎)

Re: Re: Forums

Appreciate the help!

StevieGLiverpool ☎ 00:34, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Checking in

Hi again! Just checking in to see how things are going. How're things on the wiki? All set for the premiere? :) --Spongebob456 ^talk <staff/> 10:52, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Please Delete this Page

Look at the mess this is. Needs to be deleted. Or should we edit it? It's so cringey I had to tell someone, it was burning holes in my eyes as I looked at it. [LINK REMOVED PER T:SPOIL] DoctorRey12 ☎ 21:07, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

User Boredvoord

Boredvoord is editing pages of episodes to replace their content with nonsense. Thdy have also edited at least one Talk page to remove all content, then add in some offensive stuff, as well as adding personal attacks in edit notes. ThomasRWade ☎ 22:13, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

I see that the user has been edit blocked, but they still appear to be blanking out their own Talk page Talk:Boredvoord. ThomasRWade ☎ 23:22, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox Zeta

Hiya Scrooge. I've got a few suggestions for your "Sandbox Zeta".

• The "Katy Manning" Iris refers to the Celestial Omnibus as a Timeship in the BBC produced audio story Iris Wildthyme Speaks...!.
• The Faction in The Wintertime Paradox are a clear few appearances of Faction Paradox.

I think there are a few more but I can't remember right now.

Epsilon📯 📂

12:36, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Testing a new template

Hello Scrooge. I have been working on some small additions to {{Infobox Story}} at {{Bongolium500/Infobox Story SMW}} in order to set up some Semantic MediaWiki for another template idea and I'm at the stage where I really need to test this infobox on some actual pages. It should look no different visually but has a few changes behind the scenes. Would I be able to test the infobox on the articles in the following list?

• The Daleks (TV story)
• Regeneration (TV story)
• The Holy Terror (audio story)
• Rosa (TV story)
• The Eight Doctors (novel)
• Mr Saldaamir (short story)
• Skywatch-7 (comic story)
• The Klepton Parasites (comic story)
• The Lonely Assassins (video game)

Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 15:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the approval. I don't think it would be great to place {{inuse}} on the pages as some of them are very large and high-traffic pages. Would a comment in the wikitext suffice, similar to how it is done on Regeneration? Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 20:26, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

The tests so far have gone quite well and I've managed to iron out a good few issues. Would I also be able to test the template on the following pages?

• Doctor Who in an Exciting Adventure with the Daleks (novelisation)
• The Dreadful Flap (short story)
• Rise and Fall (audio story)
• Martha Jones' MySpace blog (short story)

Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 17:52, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Despite some issues, this is going well. Would I be able to also put the test infobox on The Boundless Sea (audio story)? Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 11:30, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

I forgot to include it in the above message but could I also put it on Full Circle (novelisation)? Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 11:33, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Would I also be able to test the template on The Five Doctors (TV story) and The Faceless Ones (TV story)? Additionally, could I test a new template that I've made, User:Bongolium500/store variant data, on these 2 pages? It won't have any visual effect on the pages but will do some stuff in the background. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 14:37, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Regarding the validity of the short story 'Rescue' from the 1995 yearbook

Just today whilst browsing the wiki, I started down a rabbit hole of looking into the possible validity of Rescue, a short story published as part of the Doctor Who Yearbook 1995 that provided the backstory to Cyrian, Samuel West's character in the 1993 charity special Dimensions in Time. After some initial ground research into the matter I contended that the story appeared to me to fall in line with the 4 Rules, and I was advised to contact an admin, with yourself listed as an example, if I had, and I quote, "read the story, and [verified] it cann^[sic] standalone without the context of DiT".

I am writing to you now to inform you that, after a number of hours attempting to reliably and accurately source a copy of the annual and having thoroughly read through the story start to finish, it is with a not inconsiderable amount of personal satisfaction that I can confirm ardently that this is in fact the case. Beyond the name of the character and Samuel West's picture taken from DiT, there is absolutely no reference to the events of that story in any way shape or form (the story is entirely self-contained, only portraying the events of Cyrian's rescue on the planetoid and stopping just short of actually showing Cyrian's first meeting with the Rani), and it is on this basis that I respectfully request the reconsideration by the wiki administration of this short story's status as a valid source. 88.211.77.22^{talk to me} 23:01, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

I would advise you to create an actual named account on this Wiki before pursuing such endeavours as this; for one thing, this would award you the use of an actual user talk page, rather than leave me to reply to you here.

At any rate, your efforts are well-appreciated, but I would be curious to get more background to who told you to simply "contact an admin" (such as myself) about this. The normal procedure for validating a hitherto-{{invalid}} short story based on new evidence is in fact an inclusion debate in the Forums. There are circumstances where this can be circumvented, but not arbitrarily and not without a solid rationale. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 23:13, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Understood. So just to be clear, how would I go about that? I'm not too familiar with the new Forums. 88.211.77.22^{talk to me} 09:18, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

The En Sentac Identity

As I have just posted on her talk page, I believe enough infomation has been revealed about the Division to warrant re-examining En Sentac's status as a supposed Time Lord, since they is very little infomation in the story itself to come to that conclution giving what has been revealed in recent chapters. By the original logic, Lee Clayton should still be listed as a Gallifreyan like Gat, since it is similiary implied that he was in his appearence. BananaClownMan 10:33, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Baker's End

Hi Scrooge,

I recently noticed that you red-linked several of the stories on The Sleeze Brothers page. I didn't realise that this was allowed for invalid series, does that mean that the Baker's End stories could also receive invalid pages? RadMatter ☎ 22:58, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Russel T Davies protection

Hiya Scrooge, I noticed that you protected Russell T Davies back in September due to vandalism, but as it has now been three-ish months, could you lower the protection settings please?

Epsilon📯 📂

09:10, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Page that needs deletion

Hey, Scrooge! Got a page that needs to be deleted. It's spam. And it's rude. Deez Thanks. DoctorRey12 ☎ 03:04, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Testing a new template

Hi Scrooge, Bongolium500 was nice enough to make me a modified version of {{Infobox Individual}}, and I'm hoping to test it out on I.M. Foreman and his subsequent incarnations. May I have permission? – n8 (☎) 17:36, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Re: Discord, I'm trying... getting a "API OUTAGE" error! – n8 (☎) 21:32, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Vandal

Hi. The user 49.145.235.100 is repeatedly vandalising the Woman Who Fell to Earth page and is edit warring Valeyard12.5 ☎ 10:38, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Moving away from Fandom (better host)

Hi, before you click away and think I'm a spammer please just hear me out. I personally quite like Doctor Who and am disappointed that the only wiki that exists is on Fandom. I'm also a user on Miraheze which is a (free and no ads at all) and much better wiki hosting site than Fandom. All I'd like is for you to give Miraheze a chance and simply consider moving away from Fandom and transferring this wiki to Miraheze (it's really easy to do that). Please take just a few minutes to read https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Comparing_Miraheze_to_Fandom and make up your mind. Many wikis have already moved from Fandom.

Thanks for hearing me out,

Nevrik.

Altered Vistas

Hi Scrooge,

I wanted to ask whether you thought a page for the Altered Vistas site would be acceptable.

I was thinking something along the lines of the Audio Visuals page so that all the essentially fanmade content from AV productions could be covered on this site in some form despite not warranting their own page. Altered Vistas are notable for having exclusively released the scripts for After Daak and Star Tigers: World of the War-King. RadMatter ☎ 18:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Will give that a go, thanks! RadMatter ☎ 18:16, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Tardis:Infobox images

Hey @Scrooge MacDuck, considering that you have been responible for many edits that updated some neglected areas of policies on this Wiki, I'd like to ask you, if you have the time, to take a look at Tardis:Infobox images? It's, in my opinion, woefully out-of-date, as it treats mobile phones as something to future-proof for, despite mobile phones being commonplace in 2022.

Epsilon📯 📂

09:41, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism Alert

Making you aware of a vandal: https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/What_is_a_sockuppet%3F_a_hacker_name%3F

Additional Vandalism

Another vandalism to make you aware of: https://tardis.fandom.com/wiki/No_reason_is_gay

Please undelete The Doctor's First and Last words

Why did you delete it? I wasn't finish adding to it. Please undelete it. Angelgreat ☎ 19:06, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Torchwood 3 Staff

Hi Scrooge,

Would you be able to cast an eye on my post at Template talk:Torchwood 3 Staff? I know that I only posted it yesterday so you may not have got round to it, but a former post about adding Ng to the category hasn't been acknowledged coming up two years. RadMatter ☎ 02:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Quick image copyright check

Would you mind doing a quick check of the copyright licensing for the images in the Cybermen: Status Update images category for me? I just want to be sure which copyright template I should use in the likely case that I upload any more images for this story. Also the link to said category isn't showing up in this message for some reason, sorry. Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 20:52, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for checking! And cheers for the info on how to link a category page on a talk page. Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 16:48, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Off-topic megathread for discussions

So I’ve seen a few wikis with off-topic megathreads (Jurassic Park wiki being one example, with the “Chaos Zone”), which are basically discussions threads where users can post whatever they want that is not related to the subject of the wiki (in this case, posts unrelated to Doctor Who) in the replies to that thread. We could put it in the Tardis wiki category, so it’s easier to find, and we can tell users about it whenever a discussion is or goes off-topic. Maybe we could call it “The Void” too, as it is technically outside of “the universe of the wiki”, as the void was outside the universe of Doctor Who. What do you think about this idea? (P.S I asked Shambala about this, but she didn’t respond at all despite being online to block someone yesterday, that’s why I’m asking you) GaganTopia ☎ 20:26, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

This user has an inappropriate profile picture

As you can see by looking closely, their profile picture is of a (trouser-covered) buttock. What should we do? Should we warn them to change their pfp with the punishment for not changing it being block, or should we block them instantly, or something else? (btw once again, I told Shambala about this before but she didn’t respond despite being online later to edit pages, that’s why I’m telling you about it) GaganTopia ☎ 09:23, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Main characters

Hi there, Scrooge. I wonder if you could give me or direct me to a bit of guidance about how we decide who goes in the Main Character field of story infoboxes for audios. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 15:54, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

So, the first three Gallifrey releases credit "Lalla Ward and Louise Jameson with John Leeson", so their characters are listed as Main for those stories. This excludes Narvin (who has appeared in all but two Gallifrey stories so far, I believe, but isn't listed as a Main Character on this wiki until Gallifrey: Time War 1) and Braxiatel, who are almost exclusively put in the Featuring field for the range.

I figured that Narvin and Brax have been put in Featuring because Sean Carlsen and Miles Richardson weren't credited on the cover like Ward, Jameson and Leeson, but their names have been on them (when they appear) since Gallifrey IV. In stories in which they play a major role, should they be listed as Main Characters as well? Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 16:06, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

So the Main Characters are the ones on the front cover. Does that mean that Narvin should be listed as a Main Character when Carlsen's name starts being put on the front covers, then?

Another issue is with K9. John Leeson's name is on the front cover of the first two stories, in which Mark I has a big role but Mark II makes only brief appearances. Should both K9s be listed as Main?

Also, in A Blind's Eye, Leeson is credited on the cover but K9 appears in only one scene. Currently he's in Featuring, but should he be moved to Main? And should Sissy Pollard be in Main if she's only a one-off character but India Fisher's name is on the cover? Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 16:44, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Ah, okay. In which case, I'm terribly confused about where we draw the line between a main character and a major regular character... Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 21:35, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Images

Hey Scrooge,

I've been adding pictures to some 10k Dawn and Copper-Coloured Cupids characters recently - Auteur, Aesculapius, Graelyn Scythes, etc - but didn't realise some of these were saving as pngs (don't think that has happened to me before). Would I be alright to reupload them or, judging by your comment, are these non-DWU images not wanted on the site? I thought that these full-bodied images of the characters made the pages more interesting and they were only on the BTS sections. RadMatter ☎ 22:33, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Fandom updates

Hey there! I posted some Fandom updates here, which includes details on an upcoming MediaWiki upgrade to the platform. If you have any questions/feedback/comments on it, please do message on my talk page! As normal, if you wanted to continue a thread left by another admin too that'd be great to keep things in one place. Thanks! :) --Spongebob456 ^talk <staff/> 21:51, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Vandals

Hi Scrooge,

I would like to report the anon 86.106.74.130 and the account When you cry I... Wipe away all of your tears. for repeated vandalism. I think it's all been reverted but some may have slipped through. Bongo50 ☎ 19:21, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi there. There's been quite a bit of vandalism, including at THE TRANSEXUAL PADOFILE MUST BE EXTARMINATED. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 11:05, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

And now at Logopedia. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 18:56, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Deletion

Hello, can you please delete the category "Individuals Fairies", it's a complete misspelling that I made of my intended category "Individual Fairies" meant for Jasmine Pierce, which I also hope you can approve of and finalise. The misspelt category is placed in the deletion bin among other items that should be reviewed as well. Thank you. RedWizard98 ☎ 20:44, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Hello, unfortunately as Jasmine is the only known individual fairy, this category will probably have to be deleted as well. Most wikis allow only one item per category, which is why I made it, but I understand the rule of three here. RedWizard98 ☎ 20:51, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Rules and Blocking Policy

Hey!

Recently, Fandom staff posted updates to the Fandom Wiki Rules and Blocking Policy. As a reminder, this is a global policy to aid the wellbeing of communities that all wikis have been following since 2021. These new changes go into effect on April 4th.

I'll let you read through those changes and if you have any questions, please let me know on my talk page! :) --Spongebob456 ^talk <staff/> 15:23, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Replied on Discord :) --Spongebob456 ^talk <staff/> 10:24, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Parallel universes in infoboxes

When it comes to infoboxes regarding things from parallel universes/alternate timelines, is it appropriate to specify within certain parts of the infobox, e.g. a character's species or place of origin, is within an alternate reality?

I was just wondering this while looking at the infobox for Davros (Unbound Universe). For his place of origin, I've worded it as "Skaro (Unbound Universe)" to specify that he's from the Skaro of the Unbound Universe; if I left it simply as "Skaro", I feel that there's a chance viewers could misinterpret his origin as the Skaro of N-Space. Should I leave it like this or remove it? And if it's appropriate to keep it, should I also add "(Unbound Universe)" to sections such as Davros's species (i.e. "Kaled (Unbound Universe)") and his affiliations (i.e. "Daleks (Unbound Universe)")?

I should also mention that I know that, in this context, the phrase "(Unbound Universe)" would normally not be used due to it not being used in such a manner in-universe (i.e. the Kaleds of the Unbound Universe are not referred to in-universe as "Kaleds (Unbound Universe)"). However, I believe such a phrase could be acceptable in an infobox if I alter the links so that the first instance of the phrase "(Unbound Universe)" being used in an infobox section, it would link to the page Unbound Universe, and any repeat instances of the phrase would simply not link to that page to avoid unnecessary repetition. E.g. the species section in Davros (Unbound Universe)'s infobox could be formatted as "Kaled (Unbound Universe)", and then his place of origin (for example) could be formatted as "Skaro (Unbound Universe)" - actually this is already formatted this way on Davros (Unbound Universe), but I want to be sure whether it's correct or not. What do you think? Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 22:18, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I'll bear that in mind whenever I do any editing on parallel universe stuff. Gonna edit the pages regarding Davros (Unbound Universe) first. Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 15:56, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Actually, just one other thing: does this also apply to other infobox sections? E.g. the "used by" section - should I use brackets to denote a parallel universe, or stick with commas? Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 16:28, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Ah okay, apologies. Thanks for your help! Thalek Prime Overseer ☎ 16:43, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Image queries

Hello, does the wiki permit the changing of file sizes in articles to make them better displayed and more visible, say at 250px? Also curiously I wished to upload an image for the topic "cannibalism", my only issue being its gruesomeness, from Countrycide of Torchwood. While it's a BBC screenshot, I was concerned it could be considered graphic. Simply it's a bloody fridge full of human body parts from that episode. Also again with file types, I was rather displeased to see some perfectly okay png files I uploaded get deleted and then have no attempt to re-upload them, meaning the wiki had lost good images because the individual who deleted them did not attempt to simply change the file types online and then re-upload them themselves, which is incredibly simple and still respects the said user's contributions. I find it most unhelpful doing the opposite, since Fandom overall permits the uploading of several file types, yet it's deceptive to have a wiki upload feature which allows png files and others to be uploaded when they are supposedly not wanted. Personally I see no issue with file types, since technically they have no material or application differences to them. Kind regards. RedWizard98 ☎ 06:42, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I've re-uploaded the deleted files, but I've got some png files on my uploads list; if you wanted to help me re-upload I'd appreciate it. Some of my SJA images aren't great quality as well, maybe you can find clearer resolutions for them.

Cool about the Torchwood images. Of course Torchwood content isn't for kids. I'll upload this countrycide one then happily. Also about image sizes, I guess it all depends on the sizes of the files themselves. Kind regards. RedWizard98 ☎ 14:34, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Bothersom user

User:5.81.96.21 appears to be doing nothing but using talk pages for pointless talking ("Yaz is awesome", "I loved this episode", etc.) WaltK ☎ 20:45, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Avoiding an edit war

Hi, Scrooge. Newer editor User:DrWHOCorrieFan seems to have an inexplicable fondness for adding arbitrary spaces in infoboxes and seems to want to enter an edit war over them. Whilst the spaces make no difference at all, they're entirely unnecessary and I don't think such pointless edits should be encouraged. I wonder if you could provide some direction. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 13:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

I undid an edit to the LeDuc page and described it as "needless". They reverted it and said "likewise". Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 13:04, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

It has been proven on several other Wiki sites that I am involved with that having the information within infoboxes "away from the wall" encourages uniformity. Users will see these spaces and often take necessary steps to follow the pattern hence less need for other users to go through and tidy the infoboxes up. I checked this Wiki's rules and to my understanding there is no hard rule against having these spaces, and if you think that they make "no difference" it bemuses me that you would find such a problem with them.

It also baffles me that you would prefer to stalk through my edits and undo my work before reporting me to an admin without ever approaching me, also to call my edits "inexplicable", "unnecessary" and "pointless" without ever hearing my explanation feels like a personal attack to me. Give people the benefit of the doubt. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 13:13, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't believe that the edits have been wasting my time, I have been tidying up infoboxes as I have went along. A lot of the infoboxes on this site are in pretty substandard condition, and I don't think that the local rules apply to this topic as there is no hard rule regarding the spaces. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 13:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

(Unrelated to the ongoing discussion, I'll elaborate more when reverting edits in future. If I recall, I'd been reverting a lot of vandalism and perhaps should have been less blunt in that instance.) Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 14:05, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

It is a misrepresentation of events to suggest that I insisted upon the edits despite others objecting, or that I came anywhere close to breaching Tardis:Do not disrupt this wiki to prove a point. As soon as the objections were made clear - rather than unexplained or vague reverts - I stopped my edits, even though User:Jack "BtR" Saxon has since went through and reverted them all once again (isn't this against policy as the pages should remain the same as to when a discussion started?). As for arguably childish name calling of me being a "rules-lawyer", there are far more infoboxes that need tidying to those that are correct.

Below are two examples of infobox:

 main alias        = 
 image             = 
 species           = Human
 job               =
 affiliation       = Torchwood One
 origin            = Earth
 only              = New Girl (audio story)
 voice actor       = Simon Hickson

species    = Human
job=
job2 =
job3    =
affiliation   = Torchwood One
affiliation2 =
origin= Earth
first mentioned =
only = New Girl (audio story)
appearances =
actor             =
voice actor  = Simon Hickson
main alias= 
image                  = 

The first one is an example of my infobox which is being deemed an egregious break of the rules, the bottom is a typical example of the infoboxes that I have had to clear up that are being accepted by this site without issue. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 20:17,

That's not got anything to do with spaces in question, though, does it? And Scrooge has already made his ruling. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 21:06, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

I disagree entirely, just because the format doesn't show in the actual infobox doesn't change the fact that it is the wrong format and should be discouraged/actively corrected. Not only do they look below standard, but these out-of-order layouts often lead to duplicate entries being added and can upset users with OCD due to their improper formatting. The later being something I absolutely think affects the Wiki experience of certain users (myself included!).

As a side note, I am confused that you would pull me up about my message on Epsilon's talkpage but not challenge Epsilon themselves. From a newcomer perspective it looks like favourtism, Epsilon absolutely presented their comment as if it were from an admin (or at least that it holds greater weight than it does). With their altered username font I would have thought that this message was from an admin had I not seen them being reprimanded for a similar thing by an actual admin. There was nothing unfriendly about my approach to Epsilon, in fact I had seconds before thanked them for at least giving me the benefit of the doubt regarding this whole thing, and I certainly didn't "scold" them. I told them that I didn't appreciate them leaving their opinion in such a way that it appeared to come from an admin. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 23:06, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

I feel like I need to clear up a few things here.

• User:DrWHOCorrieFan, your comment about leaving edits as they were during a discussion is true; however, when there is an existing rule in question, that's where we leave the edits during the discussion. In many cases, the original rule stands, so there is no point in keeping the changes until they are actually accepted.

• User:Scrooge MacDuck, DrWHOCorrieFan has a very valid point about the appearance of favoritism. You called out DrWHOCorrieFan for acting like an admin but made no such comment towards User:Epsilon the Eternal, whose comment was first and who has been called out for the same behavior before. Please be careful about how you treat newcomers, because we don't want them to feel unwelcome or that they have to follow the rules more strictly than users we've known for years.

• And User:Jack "BtR" Saxon, please refrain from making editorial comments about others' editing. There is no need to make comments such as "inexplicable fondness" or the like. And do not accuse others of starting edit wars; let the admins decide that. Just state the facts.

Thanks, everyone, for your attention. Shambala108 ☎ 23:50, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

R.E.: admin

I've been following the discussion about the infoboxes since it started, and throughout I have remained exceptionally calm, even erring on the side of the new user, giving them the benefit of the doubt.

I haven't, in any way, acted as an admin, I have not threatened to ban them, or anything of the sorts.

It simply stems from me telling a user, that if they are making large changes not established by any policy/upending our local conventions, they ought not to go about implementing the changes and wait for the Forums.

There is absolutely no policy stating that an non-admin cannot give advice to other users, nor can I be "warned" for doing so, as per Tardis:When do local rules prevail? stating that any ban-worthy offence must be written down as a policy. I make extremely sure that I do not try to give incorrect advice to newer editors, and considering I have nearly 20,000 edits, I think I may, just maybe, know what I am talking about.

To reiterate: I have not acted as an admin, I have remained neutral and respectful to both parties, and I have broken no policies and I am frankly unimpressed by how you've handled the situation, with all due respect.

Boldening text is not acting as an admin, and using it should not be construed in that way.

Epsilon📯 📂

02:16, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

RE: Message directed at me on Shambala's talk page

That message was placed there with the intention of being a final message (so it shouldn't upset Shambala's dislike for arguing on their talkpage as it was intended as a conversation closer). A message directed to you on your talkpage would have potentially opened up a whole dialogue that I am not interested in participating in (unfortunately that hasn't been avoided). I'd appreciate it if you would drop the speculation over Shambala's comments, I have never said specifically what they intended, only that their comment could be interpreted that they agreed with me on this subject and therefore I will leave it up to them to decide if they want to participate in the discussion. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 20:07, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

RE: Frazer Hines appearances discussion

Hi there,

Thanks again for engaging with my comment on the Talk:List of Big Finish regular cast page. I decided to go back through and identify anything where Frazer Hines was credited as "The Doctor", featured him in an uncredited cameo, or anything from The Companion Chronicles which was formatted more like a full-cast audio (e.g. The Jigsaw War).

I now believe I have matched up my count with that on the Wiki. The only snag really is Deleted Scenes, which may have featured in-character narration though I don't recall the format. BritShadow ☎ 09:37, May 1, 2022 (UTC)

Severing contact with another user

Is there any possible way that I am able to put some sort of injunction in place against a particular user?

There have been several negative interactions between myself and User:Jack "BtR" Saxon. I do not feel comfortable in correspondence with this user and have asked them repeatedly to contact an admin if they have an issue with me, yet they continue to strike up correspondence with me. This user has repeatedly jumped to conclusions in regards to me; they accused me of making "inexplicable changes" (despite not having asked me to explain them change) and suggested that I was purposefully ignoring a ruling. Outside of that they have repeatedly stalked through my contribution page in, what I believe, is an effort to make me feel incompetent.

I do not mind if they want to spend their whole time dedicated entirely to edits I've made, but I would prefer it if they were not to contact me in future as it always seems to be in a negative, aggressive or accusatory tone. Surely they can talk to an admin about any concerns they have with me and that admin can relay the message or handle it themselves? DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 17:09, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Scrooge. Do feel free to see my message on DrWHOCorrieFan's talk page to judge whether or not it is remotely negative or constitutes harassment rather than being a polite reminder which they have not addressed. Jack "BtR" Saxon ☎ 17:38, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

This will be my last reply, but surely if someone feels uncomfortable... they feel uncomfortable. If someone feels harassed... they feel harassed. The justification that this time the message wasn't as negative and accusatory doesn't matter when the user has already requested to be left alone. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 17:43, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Sheep Fvcher

Hi, a user called sheep fvcher, a sock puppet of that on wheels bloke is up to his old tricks again Valeyard12.5 ☎ 21:59, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Your administration

I certainly do not wish to tell someone to get better at administrating, but some of your decisions certainly need called out. Firstly, you have still not replied to a message (nor taken action) that I left you a while ago regarding feeling harassed on this platform. Now you would prefer to accuse me of violating T:SPOIL and edit warring rather than simply locking the page in the first place. Nothing I posted was a spoiler nor could be interpreted as such. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 01:18, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

The obvious thing to do in this situation was to redact my comment and heed the warning to lock the page instead of waiting for others to potentially be spoiled as will inevitably happen. However, you decided to invalidate my rights to comment something which does not break the spoiler rule (I have checked) and kick off a big argument to draw attention to the page.

As for the other situation, why on Earth would you assume that it has been resolved? What gave you that impression? I have hardly been posting recently as a result of how uncomfortable I feel and how insignificant your ignorance made me feel also. This is exactly like the situation where Shamblar even pointed out your favourtism towards EpsilonTheEternal. Lets just leave it at that, I know that I'll have to approach another admin in future and I am fine with that. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 01:34, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

You can redact a comment without removing it outright.

I don't really want to hear any of the excuses as to why you ignored my comment, at the end of the day that is all they are... excuses. A reasonable admin would have followed up to double check their assumption that the problem was resolved rather than allowing the user to go on feeling that their concerns were being invalidated. I said that it was my final comment a) because I was uncomfortable in the interaction and b) I was wary of arguing on another user's talkpage.

A user who continuously makes remarks that another's edits are "useless" or "inexplicable", stalks through their edit history and repeatedly accuses them of ignoring discussion is certainly violating T:NPA and is quite frankly harassing. To stand back and allow another user to continuously interact with someone that feels harassed by them is ridiculous. I'm not talking about in areas of the site where interaction is inevitable but if they want to be left alone by said user - not contacted by them, etc - then they should be left the hell alone. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 02:09, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

I don't understand why you have to add these bitter asides onto your replies. "if it means this much to you…" that you do your job as an admin properly and fairly? Yes it does, actually.

You have went into a long spiel about Jack, none of which actually has any merit as the part you're focusing on was our initial interaction/fallout and not what I was actually complaining about (which was the subsequent stalking/reediting of every single edit I'd made and accusing me of intentionally ignoring a discussion, among other things). Perhaps if you had acted at the time you'd be more aware of the situation? Accusing me of treating you like an enemy for calling out your wrong decisions is outrageous. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 05:42, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

"Homosexual" as a redirect

Hiya Scrooge, I was wondering if you could unprotect homosexual, as @CzechOut deleted and locked it back in 2013 as it "attacked" T:LGBT, and turn the page into a redirect using this text please?

#REDIRECT [[Sexuality#Homosexuality]]

Epsilon📯 📂

15:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

[Redacted request]

Hey @Scrooge MacDuck, could you please edit-protect the page for REDACTED? Pages like REDACTED already have, so REDACTED's page should surely follow suit.

Epsilon📯 📂

15:13, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Regarding the redactions, I thought talk pages was an area spoilers are allowed on?

Epsilon📯 📂

23:25, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Editing old messages on another user's talk page

I have been getting edit notifications for previous messages on my talk page being edited by User:Epsilon the Eternal and wanted to check in regarding that. As far as I was aware, editing old messages on Talk pages was against the rules. Thanks if you can clarify with this. ThomasRWade ☎ 15:38, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

AFAIK it is not against the rules for a user to change link during maintenance on a talk page. Franklin to Franklin (Adam) ain't vandalism or nothin'.

Epsilon📯 📂

15:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

I have left a long, formal message on Tardis talk:Vandalism policy to question the wording of this policy. Input would be greatly appreciated.

Epsilon📯 📂

16:43, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for looking over this. I only questioned it due to it having been done by a user who didn't appear to be an admin. ThomasRWade ☎ 17:17, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Sprout Boy meets a Galaxy of Stars

Hey, I was wondering if you could please remove the {{rename}} tag off NOTVALID: Sprout Boy meets a Galaxy of Stars, as it was proposed in 2016, and six years later, no action has been taken on it. I did try to do it myself back in December, but the edit was reverted.

Epsilon📯 📂

10:28, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Counterparts template

Hi. I've spoken to User:NateBumber who raised with me the possibility of having a general-purpose Template:Counterparts so that we can standardise things rather than having a ton of different counterpart infoboxes. I'm thinking of something broadly similar to Template:Looks like which can be used across multiple pages. The DWU already contains a wide number of parallel universes and alternate timelines, and franchises like Marvel are bringing the idea of the multiverse to the forefront of popular culture. We have a number of linked pages on the wiki previously created by other users, such as Buckingham Palace/Buckingham Senate and Amy Pond/Amy Pond (The Girl Who Waited). I was wondering if such a template would suit the wiki, and if there was anyone who could code such an infobox/navbox as my template coding skills only stretch so far. 66 Seconds ☎ 22:44, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Split signature and other editing problems

Apologies for splitting your signature on Talk: The War Chief, but this was mainly down to some sort of glitch where, when I tried editing the section, the last line was missing from the edit box, leaving me with no choice but to insert my comment where it was, at the end of the visible section. I've just had similar problems, although in one case the missing section did eventually appear. Skteosk ☎ 08:11, 25 June 2022 (UTC)