User talk:TheDoctor69
TheDoctor69Thanks for your edits! We hope you'll keep on editing with us. This is a great time to have joined us, because now you can play the Game of Rassilon with us and win cool stuff! Well, okay, badges. That have no monetary value. And that largely only you can see. But still: they're cool!
We've got a couple of important quirks for a Wikia wiki, so let's get them out of the way first.
British English, please
We generally use British English round these parts, so if you're American, please be sure you set your spell checker to BrEng, and take a gander at our spelling cheat card.
Spoilers aren't cool
We have a strict definition of "spoiler" that you may find a bit unusual. Basically, a spoiler, to us, is anything that comes from a story which has not been released yet. So, even if you've got some info from a BBC press release or official trailer, it basically can't be referenced here. In other words, you gotta wait until the episode has finished its premiere broadcast to start editing about its contents. Please check the spoiler policy for more details.
Other useful stuff
Aside from those two things, we also have some pages that you should probably read when you get a chance, like:
- the listing of all our help, policy and guideline pages
- our Manual of Style
- our image use policy
- our user page policy
- a list of people whose job it is to help you
If you're brand new to wiki editing — and we all were, once! — you probably want to check out these tutorials at Wikipedia, the world's largest wiki:
Remember that you should always sign your comments on talk and vote pages using four tildes like this:Thanks for becoming a member of the TARDIS crew! If you have any questions, see the Help pages, add a question to one of the Forums or ask on my talk page. Revanvolatrelundar ☎ 18:55, August 17, 2013 (UTC)
Spoiler policy
Hi! Since you are new here, you may not have seen the spoiler policy plastered all over the wiki. We do not allow spoilers here, so your edits at Steven Moffat and Talk:Steven Moffat have been removed. I strongly encourage you to read our spoiler policy, which you can find here. Thanks! Shambala108 ☎ 20:23, August 17, 2013 (UTC)
- Once again your post at Talk:Steven Moffat has been removed. I did not request you to read Tardis:Spoiler policy because I thought you didn't know the definition of spoiler; I suggested you read it so you would learn exactly what this wiki considers a spoiler and how we deal with spoilers. Specifically, a user usually gets blocked for posting spoilers; since you are a new user, I chose not to block you. If you think that's poor treatment, I can't do anything about that. Please do not post this information again. Shambala108 ☎ 21:48, August 17, 2013 (UTC)
Christmas cheer
As this fiftieth anniversary year comes to a close, we here at Tardis just want to thank you for being a part of our community — even if you haven't edited here in a while. If you have edited with us this year, then thanks for all your hard work.
This year has seen an impressive amount of growth. We've added about 11,000 pages this year, which is frankly incredible for a wiki this big. November was predictably one of the busiest months we've ever had: over 500 unique editors pitched in. It was the highest number of editors in wiki history for a year in which only one programme in the DWU was active. And our viewing stats have been through the roof. We've averaged well over 2 million page views each week for the last two months, with some weeks seeing over 4 million views!
We've received an unprecedented level of support from Wikia Staff, resulting in all sorts of new goodies and productive new relationships. And we've recently decided to lift almost every block we've ever made so as to allow most everyone a second chance to be part of our community.
2014 promises to build on this year's foundations, especially since we've got a full, unbroken series coming up — something that hasn't happened since 2011. We hope you'll stick with us — or return to the Tardis — so that you can be a part of the fun!
Signatures
When leaving posts on other people's talk pages, please review the policy at T:SIG HOW and follow its instructions. You must sign using four tildes. This leaves a link to your user and talk pages on your correspondent's page, making it easier for them to get in touch with you. Thanks :)
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 02:38: Mon 30 Dec 2013
Review of your edits
As requested, I'm going to now review your edits at Steven Moffat and Series 7. You stated that you believed that your edits conformed to local policies. I have not found that to be the case.
- This edit at Steven Moffat is clearly disallowed by T:OOU SRC. Facebook is not a valid source for out of universe information.
- This edit at Series 7 is unbelievably inappropriate. You've used used the article as a source for itself! Again T:OOU SRC specifically disallows this.
Far from improving the quality and veracity of our articles, I find that your edits significantly weakened our work. Please thoroughly review our valid sources policy before continuing to edit here. Further edits of this kind will immediately lead to a revocation of your editing privileges.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ 02:52: Mon 30 Dec 2013
Response
Ok, sorry about the signature thing - normally don't forget this!!
And....just to immediately rebut your "review" - and please don't argue further here, I am technically correct with my assertions and am insulted by these half baked attempts you and sham are making at debate - I would find it much more respectful if you just said something like "we're removing your comments because we don't like them and because we can" Please do not hide behind your policies like this, I have over 10 years experience with review of legal and academic documents and unlike many here I am a doctor :P and went to a lot of effort to circumvent the policies to show it could be done....perhaps even consider rewording the policies themselves as I have clearly found loopholes!
1) The Stephen MoFat comment was in reference to the facebook page that was setup to stop him! The focus of this contribution (and the very specifically worded paragraph submitted) was the facebook page itself and simply described it's existence and purpose (which itself is clearly stated on and taken from the facebook page). Hence the fact that the facebook page exists https://www.facebook.com/pages/Doctor-Who-Forever/205186176304084 is all I need to support the inclusion of this article - by taking the piece down you refute what was said ergo suggesting that this page doesn't exist! This could actually be interpreted as illegally misleading the public since everything I included was fact :P
2) Ok so you guys have covered up this paradoxical manner of contributing to the wiki with a nice little rule - haven't read this one yet! Well, cant argue with that one really but it's seriously quite shameful that you guys consider yourselves "true fans" whilst not appreciating this kind of addition to the wiki. Really disappointing that this is the wiki that is associated with the show and that you are the people tasked with it's moderation! Believe me William Hartnell, Patrick Troughton etc are all turning in their graves at you guys! Think about what you're really trying to achieve here!
My friend I have tried my best to use this online...?resource?.... appropriately to forewarn Fans of the REAL oncoming storm (Courtesy of MoFat!) and present the facts of the case with the appropriate timing. I have tried to follow policy on the website and am ashamed that neither yourself nor sham can debate or argue effectively and still consider yourselves suitable to lead the admins here. Of course Like ALL fans I truly hope I'm wrong about MoFat's plan etc but my evidence so far is just too compelling to ignore and I could not consider myself a true fan of the show - or even a real doctor - if I did not try this hard to get the possibility out there to the fans before it all gets set in stone and hence is too late. It's worth noting that I did manage to screenshot my contributions before removal and document my efforts to help here. The records are therefore made and will show I did my best with this one.
TheDoctorTheDoctor69 ☎ 21:00, December 30, 2013 (UTC)
Block
By your own admission, you "went to a lot of effort to circumvent the policies to show it could be done". In other words you were deliberately editing in a counter-productive way to make a point. Policy demands you be blocked.
And I really wanted to believe the best of people this holiday season, too.
