User talk:Timelydia1234: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(Rewording as that came across passive aggressive)
Tag: 2017 source edit
Line 8: Line 8:


Hey, there was a recent policy change about how we deal with appearance lists. We now allow invalid appearances in those lists. I highly recommend you join our discussions in the [[Tardis:Temporary forums|Temporary forums]] to provide feedback and your perspective to our discussions! More voices are always welcome, and it's a way to keep up with policy changes. Cheers! [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:01, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Hey, there was a recent policy change about how we deal with appearance lists. We now allow invalid appearances in those lists. I highly recommend you join our discussions in the [[Tardis:Temporary forums|Temporary forums]] to provide feedback and your perspective to our discussions! More voices are always welcome, and it's a way to keep up with policy changes. Cheers! [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:01, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
im sorry that's stupid why would you put a invalid stories in appearances lists they are not canon so the doctor did not go on that adventure because its invalid this rule should be changed.


== Re: TARDIS Teaser ==
== Re: TARDIS Teaser ==

Revision as of 14:04, 13 February 2023

Categories

Hi please do not add categories to pages until you've edited with us for a while. We have a lot of category rules, and a good rule of thumb is: if a page is missing a category, there might be a reason. It's always a good idea to ask an admin if you're not sure thanks Shambala108 03:44, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Block

You have been blocked for one month for violating Tardis:No personal attacks at the discussion boards, specifically "Least Favorite Doctor?" Your comments, "Anyone one who says 9, 10 or 11 are deranged" and "@Bruce Wayne of Earth-1 its so embarrassing you think your right and you don’t know how stupid you are" violate the policy; the first one is directed in general at anyone who disagreed with you but the second was a direct personal attack at an individual. Incidentally you also reported the post that User:Anastasia Cousins made warning you about the policy. Do not do that in the future. Reporting posts is for posts that violate our policies. Shambala108 18:21, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Ninth Doctor/Appearances

Hey, there was a recent policy change about how we deal with appearance lists. We now allow invalid appearances in those lists. I highly recommend you join our discussions in the Temporary forums to provide feedback and your perspective to our discussions! More voices are always welcome, and it's a way to keep up with policy changes. Cheers! Najawin 00:01, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

im sorry that's stupid why would you put a invalid stories in appearances lists they are not canon so the doctor did not go on that adventure because its invalid this rule should be changed.

Re: TARDIS Teaser

Hiya, I think that you've misunderstood, actually. The exact quote is:

"Moreover, as proposed in the opening post, rule 3-failing (e.g. unreleased/unproduced) stories may now be added to lists of appearences as a separate section below the main list."@Bongo50

@Bongo50 specifically specified rule three failing stories go in a separate section, not regular invalid sources. You can ask @Bongo50 for clarification if you want. Many thanks, and happy editing.

14:00, 13 February 2023 (UTC)