XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:137098
This is the way I've begun nameless characters, planets and species as of the present (not always), but could someone outline the differences in grammar between one beginning with "This bla bla bla was" and one beginning with "A bla bla bla was", and how the grammar's right or wrong for wiki writing? Examples in the relevant pages at the bottom.
- Shambala108
Actually, you're doing it the right way. A while back, Czechout and another user had a conversation discussing this (and unfortunately I don't remember where I saw it) and it is considered bad grammar to start an article with "this so-and-so" because readers don't know what "this" is referring to.
I've been changing it whenever I come across it, but there are probably tons of examples that I haven't seen yet.
- Tybort
That makes sense. I suppose you can't start a subject with "this" without some context.
- SOTO
Yeah, I read that conversation too. Might have actually been me, can't remember.
Anyway, I personality try to write with the article "the":
- The steward was blah blah blah
Because
- A steward was blah blah blah
sounds like I'm talking about the job in general.
The whole point of the lead is to ensure that the reader knows exactly what the article's about — and we don't want to confuse 'em like that.
- Tybort
Looking at the page for the occupation miner, I can see exactly what you mean by that, Smaller. Didn't even consider that.
However, what if the adjective "unnamed" was in there, i.e.: "An unnamed Peladonian steward was..."? Would that be clear enough?
Though speaking of examples beginning with "steward", the existing example of Steward (The End of the World) with "the steward" because he's actually referred to by several characters as "the steward".
- Shambala108
No, it wasn't you. I found it at user talk:Boblipton, nearly at the bottom of the page for anyone interested.
As for the use of "the" v. "a/an", I think "the" is only marginally better than "this". It still leaves the reader asking, "Which one? Did I miss something?"
Compare these two sentences:
- A boy saw Rory leaving the TARDIS. Rory gave the boy an ice cream.
or
- The boy saw Rory leaving the TARDIS. Rory gave the boy an ice cream.
The first choice establishes a boy, then continues to refer to the specific boy.
The second choice sounds like it's referring to something already established (or is coming from a first grade reader).
"The" can be used in certain circumstances, the best example of which can be found in Czechout's examples on Boblipton's talk page.
- SOTO
So that's where I read it! Anyway, I think at this point that
- "An unnamed miner yadda yadda yadda"
is the best option as far as the lead.
But, while we're on this topic, I've been meaning to bring up the matter of the {{{name}}} variable in the infoboxes of subjects with unknown names.
They have no names. We can't write nothing in them, so do we write the name of the article (possibly with dab terms truncated) or do we just write "unknown" on all the pages?
- Shambala108
I don't know if there's a policy, but I would prefer "miner" or "boy" to "unnamed miner" or "unnamed boy" (just for the infobox name variable).
- Tybort
For credited TV and audio characters, I just say what they're credited as, minus the dab term.
For instance, for Miner (The Bride of Peladon) and Foreman (The Bride of Peladon), who aren't really called anything beyond maybe "dad" and "son", I put the {{{name}}} variable as "Miner" and "Foreman".
This doesn't account for everything, of course.
- CzechOut
You can't use "unnamed" because they have a name in universe. They aren't actually unnamed. Their parents, whoever they are, did name them. We, the audience, just don't know what that name is. So it's actually a technical violation of T:NO RW to say "an unnamed miner".
You just have to use a prepositional phrase to give some kind of context. "A miner on Peladon in <insert year here>", for example.
Please never, ever use "unnamed" in an in-universe article.
- Tybort
Apologies for that. I'll at least fix the Bride ones immediately.
That said, I still stand by the specific example of "the steward" in post 5 as a correct usage, as that's what he's called in-universe.
- CzechOut
And before you ask, yes, this does mean that all the titles of planets and species that begin with "unnamed" are wrong. However, these are relatively easy to fix by bot, so I keep putting it off. The proper — and faster-to-type — nomenclature is "Planet (story title)" — not "Unnamed planet (story title)".
- Tybort
What would the name of what's currently known as "unnamed planets" and so forth be in the {{{name}}} variable in infoboxes? Would that be Planet (story name), or just Planet?
- CzechOut
That said, I still stand by the specific example of "the steward" in post 5 as a correct usage, as that's what he's called in-universe.
Don't misread me. I'm not saying you should always use a instead of the. Certainly in the case of Steward (The End of the World), that's "the steward". He's the only one not only on Platform One, but also several others. In fact, I would argue that the s begs to be capitalised in that case. I think he's "the Steward", cause it's a title not just a job. Borderline case, obviously, so I'm not rushing in to change it, but if it were currently written as a proper noun, I wouldn't change that, either.
But in the case of something not unique — like a miner — you clearly wouldn't use a definite article. SOTO is, in my view, grammatically wrong above when he says that he'll just use the … whenever. No, you don't do that. Most of the time when someone is identified by a job — waitress, miner, secretary — you're obliged to use a, unless it can be established there's only one of that type of worker in a particular situation. There might only be one secretary in a small firm, for instance, or one teacher in a frontier school. You don't use the definite article just because that's the only one of that type of worker that we meet in a story, because using the definite article implies something that's simply not true.
- CzechOut
Tybort wrote: What would the name of what's currently known as "unnamed planets" and so forth be in the {{{name}}} variable in infoboxes? Would that be Planet (story name), or just Planet?
Dab terms should never be in an infobox, so, yeah, just "Planet".
- SOTO
Huh. I never actually considered that, in-universe, they're not unnamed. Good point.
And I see your point with a/the, but I still think we should try to avoid sentences like
- A waitress was a 21st century human who worked at Happy Cook.
I mean, that does kind of sound like I'm claiming that all waitresses came from the 21st century and worked at Happy Cook. Obviously, I don't mean that. But, if we're not to use "the" unnecessarily, how better could we phrase it? Does
- A waitress from the 21st century worked at Happy Cook.
sound more like I'm referring to one individual waitress?
- CzechOut
The construction
- A waitress was a <whatever>
doesn't directly or indirectly indicate that all waitresses were <whatever>. There is no definition of a which means everything of the class of thing that follows. Instead, a means pretty much the opposite: one of the class of thing that follows. It is a way of individuating one from a group, not applying a common characteristic to a group. In your example, you're saying, "of all the waitresses that exist, this one has the characteristics which follow".
There is nothing grammatically wrong about:
- A waitress was a 21st century human who worked at Happy Cook.
However, it's pretty boring writing for a lead sentence. Remember, lead sentences should try to grab the reader's attention. Alternately the lead should economically give us the topic's key relevance to the DWU. That sentence does neither really. A better sentence might be:
- A Happy Cook waitress identified Josh and Gary for Gwen during Cooper's Eugene Jones enquiry.
- SOTO
Well, your sentence does make it much more clear what the topic of the article is, and actually gives information. I guess I'll start writing my leads more like that from now on. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
- Tybort
In light of Czech's bot change to the "Unnamed" titles in post 12, does this mean we should get rid of the dab pages Unnamed alien and Planet (disambiguation)?
- Shambala108
I think the "boring" leads come from the fact that all new character pages start with "Pagename was", and editors just fill in from there. I do occasionally change the "was" to something more interesting, but the fact that it's there allows me to be lazy without even thinking of it, especially when creating a lot of new articles at once.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:137474
Can I get a concise definition of what would be suitable on a story page's Production errors subsections, such as whether flubs and mispronunciations (of any sort, including in live or as-live productions) or overheard crew members count?
- Shambala108
It might be easier to say what a production error is not. If it's a production choice, it's not an error. For example, the use of cardboard Daleks in the early stories is not a production error, because the producers chose to use cardboard to increase the number of Daleks shown. If a cardboard Dalek fell over, that would be a production error.
Also, if something disagrees with the real world, that is not a production error, per T:NO RW.
If I think of anything else, I'll add it to the list.
- CzechOut
Is T:FORM TV's definition insufficiently concise? Check out the discussion which created the sections.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:139244
What if you aren't able to edit pages?
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:140069
More informatioin here: http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/3d-tardis/x/1841357
MAKE IT REAL!
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:141076
I Was seeing the Chameleon Arch Page, and I have been Wondering, In The Doctor page, you people confirm that the Doctor was half human since he was born, But in the chameleon Arch page, you guys say that he used a trick to become half human to foil The Master, I Think this part on the Chameleon Arch page should be removed.
- JagoAndLitefoot
Unfortunately, different stories don't agree on this subject.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:142619
Is it ok to use information from real life to categorize a page? For instance, if a page about wildebeest was created, could you categorise it in Cat:Antelopes even if them being antelopes isn't in any in-universe source?
- SOTO
To the best of my understanding, we try not to break T:NO RW in categorising, but are given a little more flexibility when there's no choice.
For example, if we were to just take info from Hide, flea is not necessarily an Earth insect in the DWU. But we have to give it some category, so we use category:Earth insects.
Virginia Woolf is never specified to be a writer, but yet is still put in category:writers from the real world. People looking at that category would expect to see all real world writers expressed in the DWU; excluding her would undermine the category's usefulness.
So, to answer your question more specifically, if wildebeest (wildbeests? does that work plural?) were mentioned off-handedly without explanation in a DWU story, I would definitely put it in category:Antelopes.
I am not, however, an admin, so I may have it all wrong, and have been doing it wrong from the start. So don't quote me.
Think of the rules of categorisation as being ranked in this order:
- All articles must have a category, per T:CAT
- Categories should be based on information from stories only, per T:NO RW
- If the narrative gives no information about what the thing is, T:CAT outranks T:NO RW.
Note, though, that step 3 doesn't give you license to go on some sort of infinite loop, adding more and more categories as you see fit. Add the one RW category that you think is most important to finding the article. In SOTO's example, you would only add category:antelopes to wildebeest. You wouldn't add a host of others based on your personal knowledge of wildebeest.
For instance, Hawaii is never explicitly called one of the category:American states in DWU fiction, nor is it called an island. But we still prefer the state category because it's the one that makes the most sense, since it would be unusual for DWU fiction to be specifically talking about the County of Hawaii (i.e. the island called Hawaii) rather than the whole state.
Of course, all this is admittedly value judgement, which is why we really don't want to mess around with T:NO RW-violating categories, except whenever absolutely necessary.
Remember, T:CAT NOT also applies here. You shouldn't be using categories to give more information than what's in the narratives: adding categories is no substitute for writing the article properly.
Basically, when you find you absolutely, positively need to add a T:NO RW-violating category, you should also add a behind the scenes notes that makes it clear you've gone beyond what the text actually provides. See Hawaii#Behind the scenes for an example.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:142840
Where do I go to get it published or have permission to have it published?
- CzechOut
Sorry, we don't offer advice of this kind. It's doubtful, however, that you would ever get full legal permission to publish it, as BBC Books commission authors rather than accepting unsolicited manuscripts.
- Lisa Gates
Thanks!
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:145631
One of those templates at the bottom of a page
It would be War Doctors Companions
List: Clara Oswald, The Moment
Could anyone help me out
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:146246
Hi, I have been collecting these cards but not the magazines, therefore I do not know the rules of the games, I can not find the rules anywhere online. In order to enjoy the cards more than just playing a top trumps type game I have made up a few games of my own.
If I created a sub-page to the Monster invasion page entitled "user made games" and listed my games rules there would that be acceptable or not?
Thanks steve
- Digifiend
I'm guessing not, as there's no official release for such a thing. Anyway, here's those rules you were looking for. Had to use Wayback Machine, it seems the website went down recently.
http://web.archive.org/web/20120615034428/http://www.doctorwhomi.com/cards/card_games
- Shambala108
To answer the original question, anything user-created is not allowed on the wiki. Thanks.
- CzechOut
Hey Steve :)
As Shamabala has indicated, we wouldn't allow your suggested posting on this site. But you might be interested to know there's a perfect home for you on Wikia. There's actually a Monster Invasion cards wiki! You might try asking Legojt or Blathereen, the two admins over there.
- 82.32.218.14
Great, thanks everyone.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:146919
delete it now
Thread closed.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:148161
?
- Digifiend
Mantrid. He hasn't edited here since January 2008 though.
- Tangerineduel
You can read all about the history of this wiki on the Tardis:About page.
- Digifiend
Gah! Didn't think to look for such a page, I found out by checking all the bureaucrats listed on Special:ListUsers. Since the About page's last edit, Wikia created an invisible redlink by deleting the 100 Wikicities article. I've replaced the link using Wayback Machine. I hope that's OK.
- Orangerichard56
who is the wikis new owner
- Digifiend
No-one owns a wiki, but the lead administrator is CzechOut.
- Tangerineduel
No one is a lead administrator either.
CzechOut is an admin who does a lot of the tech stuff of the wiki.
Orangerichard56 I am curious though, what's made you think there's an "owner" of a wiki and why do you think this wiki has a "new" one?
- CzechOut
Seconded. I'm not the lead administrator. Such a thing doesn't exist.
But a) I'm a loudmouth and b) my name is all over the key configuration files of the wiki. That gives the very false impression that I'm "in charge" or something silly like that. In truth, though, Tangerineduel is the "senior bureaucrat", in that he's the editor who's been an active bureaucrat for the longest continuous period of time. Doug86 is the most prolific main namespace admin. Shambala108 is indisputably the admin who's shepherding short stories. Revanvolatrelundar is the go-to guy for questions about the vast field of Eighth Doctor stories. Mini-mitch looks over the image library, though he's been a bit busy this year.
We all have our thing, and one of the unofficial requirements for new admin is that they have a particular editing focus that complements the existing crew.
- TheDoctor69B
Tangerineduel wrote: No one is a lead administrator either.
CzechOut is an admin who does a lot of the tech stuff of the wiki.
Orangerichard56 I am curious though, what's made you think there's an "owner" of a wiki and why do you think this wiki has a "new" one?
WoW!.....ye'd think this would be more difficult ;) LOL!
Hi, newbie on here but joining in here since I've always been curious on this one: I always just assumed someone has to technically own a webspace etc so someone retains responsibility.....not so for a wiki? so who "gets the blame" if someone slanders etc on a wiki - any wiki lol - no-one because it's public access?!
TheDoctorTheDoctor69B ☎ 09:32, January 2, 2014 (UTC)
Wikia are at the top tier of the Wikia sites, you can read about them on their own about page.
At the bottom of every page you'll also see the words 'Content is available under CC-BY-SA' which covers how the licensing on a Wikia works.
You can have a look at our vandalism policy for how we deal with specific vandalism on the wiki.
Every edit that is made, be it by an IP user or registered user is linked to that user. Every edit made is recorded in a page's history. So if vandalism occurs we can then remove it and take measures to prevent the editor from making similar edits again.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:148402
I couldn't find any policies on the matter so; multiple non-DWU incarnations of the Doctor appear in The Curse of Fatal Death. So I was wondering whether creating a template like the one to navigate between the canon Doctors would be allowed to be made.
- CzechOut
First of all, there is no such thing as canon. Second, no rules preclude the creation of such a template.
- The Light6
Thank you for your help.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:148447
Hi
Im a new-ish contributor and a VERY dedicated fan - Possibly THE most dedicated fan there is, and I say that without arrogance since I JUST made a sonic circuit board (for my own in progress screwdriver) that CAN open (some) locks!!!! Seriously message me if you'd like to book a purchase once i'm whipping these screwdrivers out regular - I WILL honor first come first serve here lol! :P
But im confused as to the admin/moderator hierarchy on this wiki and the moderation policies? It's great that you nominate your own admins.......but IS this a fully unbiased process or do the current admins do the nominating/suggesting of new ones?! Also, is there a HEAD admin or some sort of hierarchy within the admin structure should a contributor have a grievance or debate with a single moderators decision?!
Since the Public use and trust all wiki's now as an unbiased source of validated facts I feel it is important to also publicize how the admins that review all imput are them selves reviewed to ensure a lack of bias (possibly with a formal statement on here?!) - Otherwise there is now way to know if the admins here are removing/creating relevant/irrelevant posts based on personal whims etc.
I'd appreciate everyone's thoughts on this. VERY keen to make this a good wiki and feel the best way to do that is to make it FULLY unbiased and open minded to ALL -non spoiler- topics of interest. AND..... more importantly, to let the PUBLIC know HOW we achieve this!!!
- CzechOut
Administration on any Wikia wiki is an informal process. You seem to suggest that we create layers of bureaucracy and start a formal in-service review process for our admins. That's basically never gonna happen. We're just unpaid volunteers trying to make a big wiki work. I don't think any of us has enthusiasm for setting up anything like you suggest.
We just try to use our best judgment in writing and administering the rules of the wiki so that it will flourish. If we make a mistake, we try to apologise to the user in question and move on. We don't really worry about going on public witch hunts against our fellow admin.
Given our phenomenal growth rate this year, that approach seems to be working.
To answer your other questions more specifically:
- Anyone can nominate a user as an admin, as explained at Tardis:User rights nominations. It's even possible to nominate yourself. But we have denied nominations in the past. A good guideline we use to determine suitability can be found at Community Central.
- Of course this process isn't unbiased. All nominations processes are biased. That's definitional. If you nominate yourself, you're biased towards yourself. If someone nominates you, they clearly want you to succeed. There's no such thing as an unbiased nomination.
- The best way to deal with grievances with an admin is to talk to them directly.
- There's not really an administrative hierarchy, no. The more "power" people get around here, the more janitorial work they get stuck with. If you have any notions in your hand that being an admin is anything other than being the guy stuck with the broom and the mop, you don't understand what it means to be an admin.
- We don't conduct periodic reviews of admin. That would imply a hierarchy that doesn't really exist. As is standard practice across Wikia, once admin are in, they're in. Although all admin have at some point had to deal with controversial matters, we've never had a case of serious abuse of power. What has sorta happened with our staff is that each of us has a particular focus, and within that focus we tend to defer to other admin. If there's a question about short stories, I'll defer to Shambala108. If there's a question about books from the 1990s, I'll tend to turn to Tangerineduel. And so on. Additionally, to ensure we're on the same page, we tend to talk amongst ourselves.
- To users, admin may sometimes appear to be acting autonomously. But the truth is that we have hundreds of decisions to make on any given day, and we just don't have the staff to form arbitration committees like they do on bigger wikis like Wikipedia. All admin simply try to look at the rules and act in their best judgement. If you have a problem with a particular decision, by all means bring it up with the individual admin in question. If that admin doesn't give you satisfaction, try another one. But if you get two similar responses from admin, you should probably leave it at that. Belabouring a point isn't allowed.
- This isn't a democracy. Heck even Wikipedia is not a democracy. We make a concerted effort to involve the community in discussions, and we have one of the deepest archives of community discussions anywhere on Wikia. But there is no guarantee of transparency or user participation in decision making.
- TheDoctor69
Hey
Many thanks for getting the reply up so quickly - also recall reading today that "czeckout" is the wiki founder so glad to get this from the "top" even though I realize now there IS no top here ;)
Great summary of the review process here: indeed the explanation of admin policy that I was suggesting.
I cant help but feel an assumption was made however that i'm trying to tie up the wiki with formal bureaucracy etc and setup a "taddletale" style system - this was not what I was suggesting! I fully appreciate that this wiki is run by volunteers who have enough on their plate already etc and that there are some informal systems to ensure fair review etc - this is a great system!! My point is simply that since there can be no strict "rules" or "laws" regarding these wiki's in general...then it's up to us - the community - (and to be fair more you the admins) to demonstrate and explain the internal systems used for review (with posts like this etc) to ensure that the public who use it trusts the validity of the information posted and also so they know the information is not censored and/or controlled in any way. This will get further support and more donations (assuming this wiki is setup for donation support?!)
Many thanks however, LOTS of clarification here and I hope the post stays up so others have a chance to read your great reply.
PS: confused on the last point?! Wikipedia isn't a democracy?! The assumption made by the public - with all of the wiki's on the web - is that they are controlled by and contributed to the mass as opposed to the few. That way the information can be better trusted and not censored etc..... really though....it's not like this?!? 0_0
- Shambala108
TheDoctor69 wrote: My point is simply that since there can be no strict "rules" or "laws" regarding these wiki's in general...then it's up to us - the community - (and to be fair more you the admins) to demonstrate and explain the internal systems used for review (with posts like this etc) to ensure that the public who use it trusts the validity of the information posted and also so they know the information is not censored and/or controlled in any way. This will get further support and more donations (assuming this wiki is setup for donation support?!)
We actually have quite a lot of rules and policies on this wiki — in fact I've recently seen a complaint that we have too many — because we're dealing with a 50-year-old show with spin-offs, prose, audio, comic stories, etc. etc. etc. We even have a few of our more important rules plastered where everyone can see them. But there are still users who don't see them or take the time to look up our policies. There's only so much you can do to get a user's attention.
- TheDoctor69
Shambala108 wrote:
TheDoctor69 wrote: My point is simply that since there can be no strict "rules" or "laws" regarding these wiki's in general...then it's up to us - the community - (and to be fair more you the admins) to demonstrate and explain the internal systems used for review (with posts like this etc) to ensure that the public who use it trusts the validity of the information posted and also so they know the information is not censored and/or controlled in any way. This will get further support and more donations (assuming this wiki is setup for donation support?!)
We actually have quite a lot of rules and policies on this wiki — in fact I've recently seen a complaint that we have too many — because we're dealing with a 50-year-old show with spin-offs, prose, audio, comic stories, etc. etc. etc. We even have a few of our more important rules plastered where everyone can see them. But there are still users who don't see them or take the time to look up our policies. There's only so much you can do to get a user's attention.
Sigh.....guys this thread is already starting to unravel, czeckout makes it sound like there are no formal policies etc and I believe he should know this as the founder - try to get your stories straight before y'all post LOL!!!!!!!! anywho...........if you have policies etc then surely you can 1) publish these all in one place so you've somewhere to send noobs and contributors etc - no this isn't done yet - and 2)review these policies periodically with feedback from general contributors and publish these reviews - this would greatly enhance the reliability of your review process and this wiki!
Also, a statement on censorship policies would be good! I have so many relevant, simply factual, comments removed even after meticulous adherence to all the policies I've read on here and it's starting to look like the wiki has something to hide on this <ahem> particular topic that I wont mention here just incase ;)! Given that this wiki now has a public reputation of "if the information isn't on here then it isn't true" it is even more important that all facts regarding Dr.Who are allowed to be published!
As I said before, great discussions here guys - I feel we'll be able to get the wiki review process back "up to code" fairly quickly at this rate :)
TheDoctor````
- Shambala108
Our stories are straight. CzechOut was referring to your question about policing admins; I was referring to the wiki as a whole (perhaps misunderstanding the point you made that I quoted in my post; sometimes I post too much info in an attempt to educate all users who might be reading).
As for your removed posts, this wiki has no interest in publishing anything about DW's future, because as we have seen countless times, things can change before they happen. As every edit window states, we care about the Doctor's past, not his future. We also don't publish speculation or spoilers. We do have a place where you can post this info if you wish, at Howling:The Howling. This is the only place on the wiki where spoilers, speculation and theories are allowed.
If you want to see all our policies listed in one place, you can go to Category:Policies.
Hope this helps clear things up.
- CzechOut
You misread me. I never said there were no formal policies. You had asked whether there was a formal review process for admins — or, as your thread title put it, "Who admins the admins"? That was what I said had no formal process. I never suggested the wiki had no rules. Shambala108's comments are perfectly in line with mine, since we aren't really talking about the same thing. She's talking about rules on the wiki in general, and I was answering your specific question about internal audits of administrators.
I don't know where you've gotten the idea that there is some sort of "problem" with the wiki that needs to be addressed. We're perfectly "up to code". There's no issue that needs to be addressed.
You seem to have a grievance that your own edits have been mishandled. I'll take a look at that and respond on your own talk page. But please stop suggesting that because your work got reverted there's a general problem with the way the wiki has been administered. When you submit your work to our wiki, you agree that it can be edited, refactored, or removed without your permission. So when your work gets changed, you simply accept it as part of the deal. You don't go starting threads that suggests that there's something wrong with the wiki's management.
Finally, I am not the wiki's founder. Please read Tardis:About.
- TheDoctor69
Shambala108 wrote: Our stories are straight. CzechOut was referring to your question about policing admins; I was referring to the wiki as a whole (perhaps misunderstanding the point you made that I quoted in my post; sometimes I post too much info in an attempt to educate all users who might be reading).
As for your removed posts, this wiki has no interest in publishing anything about DW's future, because as we have seen countless times, things can change before they happen. As every edit window states, we care about the Doctor's past, not his future. We also don't publish speculation or spoilers. We do have a place where you can post this info if you wish, at Howling:The Howling. This is the only place on the wiki where spoilers, speculation and theories are allowed.
If you want to see all our policies listed in one place, you can go to Category:Policies.
Hope this helps clear things up.
Hmmm.....perhaps just not as straight from my perspective then although I feel the public will read and agree with me here LOL!
I was actually attempting to merge both of these points in my initial post. The idea being that you admins do need an additional level of moderation so we the public can feel comfortable knowing that relevant Dr.Who facts are neither censored nor edited before posting on here. The two points then merge when I point out that the best way to keep us feeling comfortable here is to periodically review yourselves and publish these results for us all to see. However, if y'all can't be bothered with doing a proper job here........well some would ask why you're an admin in the first place....myself I will simply post my suggestions for improvement and leave it there in the hopes i'm not censored as usual!
No I've posted my issues with post deletes on CzechOut's user talk although now wondering if it was yourself - again - who pulled it down Sham?! Anywho - I feel that its more appropriate to discuss there but will make two points just to tie it all up here also.
My post on series 7 written on the 29th was regarding the same post made on this wiki (by me) on the 29th referring to the improvement in writing quality since the new exec started supervising Moffat - these are all facts fyi not opinion or speculation and I would have included further citations if given the chance - which I wasnt. Now yes I get that this is a paradox - and ive shamed you all by asking why such a paradox isn't appreciated here - but it was in no way referencing any future events regarding Dr.Who it was infact referencing either the present or past quite deliberately - would you like to have another go at your explanation here?! LOL!
My post on Steven Moffat page written on the 29th was referencing a page started on Facebook "Dr Who Forever" (https://www.facebook.com/pages/Doctor-Who-Forever/205186176304084) that was designed to prevent Steven Moffat finishing Dr.Who forever just for his own ego. This page was started in June 2013 and hence it is also referring to the past and not the future. If the page itself refers to the future then this is not a point you can argue since you are reviewing my words not the citations themselves - many episode reviews used as citations will contain some mention of possible futures so why cant my page :P - Do you want to have another go at this answer too? ;)
- Shambala108
First of all, please do not call me "Sham". Thanks.
I didn't revert either of your edits, but they were reverted by two users with a lot of experience, one of whom knows this wiki's policies back and forth and inside out and upside down.
Your posts are dealing with Moffat supposedly ending the show. Well, it hasn't ended yet, so that is in the future. Another reason for the removal of your posts is that we don't cover fanon (to use the word in the edit summary that removed your post), fan fiction, theories, speculation, rumours, etc. because that would open the door to a ton of conflicting, unreliable info to be posted on the wiki. Some stuff just isn't relevant for this wiki.
Frankly, it's starting to get a little insulting that you think the admins on this wiki are trying to "censor" information. We cover certain things on this wiki and we don't cover other things. We allow certain things and we don't allow other things. That's what our policies are trying to cover. We're not removing your info because we're in league with Moffat, or afraid of him, or whatever you're concerned about. The majority of our policies are arrived at through community discussion and consensus.
That doesn't mean admin don't make mistakes. But I've never seen anyone here abuse the faith placed in them. And it's only abuse that would warrant a review of their position.
So even if we could, we're certainly not going to be holding some kind of admin tribunals every time an admin reverts your work. Nor are we going to waste the time of other editors using the forums to review your work.
This issue affects only you. It does not involve "the public". I'm happy to undertake one review of your recent work so that you'll better understand our ways. But — it's your talk page or nothing.'
The Panopticon is for issues that affect the whole wiki. It is not a place for people to air their individual grievances in the guise of "public spiritedness" or "concern for the community".
You're mad cause your stuff got reverted. This is a wiki. It happens. You're warned it will happen every single time you submit an edit. So when it happens, try to find out why it happened. Learn from it. Ask the specific person involved why they reverted you. You'll end up being a better editor for it.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:150258
It displays fine on Google Chrome, but on Firefox the main image of a page is giant and goes behind the text and also stretches out the information panel that always appears at the right of an article.
- StalwartUK
As another Firefox user I also have this problem.
In the interim, we suggest you switch to Chrome or Safari.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:152896
If an alien character is always referred to by their name or species, what pronouns do you use to describe them? Is it okay to use "it"?
- CzechOut
I think so, yes. Alpha Centauri, for instance, is referred to as an "it". It really depends on how they're referred to by other characters in the story, but if other characters give you no clue, "it" seems appropriate for a hermaphroditic or genderless character.
- Scout Finch
what about the gender neutral pronouns like "ze" and "hir"
- SOTO
These should be used only when the stories use them. If the story gives nothing, then something neutral like "it" should definitely be used, and not something of your own creation.
- Mewiet
SmallerOnTheOutside wrote: These should be used only when the stories use them. If the story gives nothing, then something neutral like "it" should definitely be used, and not something of your own creation.
Ze and hir are gender neutral pronouns. Scout Finch didn't make them up, people actually use these and like terms to self identify and/or respectfully refer to individuals who do not use gender binary language.
- SOTO
Nevertheless, there's no DWU precedent for such terms.
Okay, Benny calls an alien "hir" in one novel as I recall, but that's a specific case and more of a running joke than anything. So if we're discussing Sgloomi Po, we can say hir.
(Sorry, I just realised this didn't actually send when I wrote it out yesterday.)
- Scout Finch
"It" is pretty offensive. We shouldn't use it.
- 82.55.169.179
Ok if you're talking about an alien from a species with different types of genders than humans, or even one of a species where males and females look the same and it's unknown for this specific character, you can say the word "they", unless they're referred with gender specific pronouns due to name or appearance you call them "he" or "she".
If it's, like, an human (or other sexed species) individual, that considers zeirself "above" the binary gender convention, then you can use these kinds of pronouns. (depending if said character would use these pronouns, pronouns related to their original sex, just "they" or "it", or whatever. For trans* characters, we would use the same pronouns they use for them in the show.)
- SOTO
Scout Finch wrote: "It" is pretty offensive. We shouldn't use it.
It's not really a matter of that. I know people use things like "they" online, but it's not exactly grammatically correct to use a plural pronoun to refer to a single person.
Once again, whenever possible, we should go with whatever the story gives us. "Chick" Peters, for example, in Blue Box is consistently referred to as a "he/him", so that's the language I used when discussing him at Sexuality#Other.
- FemaleDoctorPHD
On that note do the daleks have gender's?
- 119.73.108.218
Gender is not the main problem I think people often with good nature and experience can be useful in any part of life. no matter what the gender is.
- Shambala108
Gender is not the main problem I think people often with good nature and experience can be useful in any part of life. no matter what the gender is.
- Martin.hall.9404
Gender doesn't matter. Matters your actions and voice that how you react in different situations.Problem is that we are not agree to encourage and support them. Thanks from Martin Hall
- JagoAndLitefoot
"I know people use things like "they" online, but it's not exactly grammatically correct to use a plural pronoun to refer to a single person"
Actually, it not being grammatically correct is something made up by 18th century prescriptivists. Before that, even classics like Shakespeare or Chaucer used singular "they" on occasion. It's not new, it's just making a comeback.
- Shambala108
@119.73 and Martin.Hall.9404, let's keep this discussion on topic. We are not discussing the importance or not of gender. We are merely discussing how to describe non-gender-specific television characters on article pages. Thanks.
- JagoAndLitefoot
These look like spambots actually (see their links), best to delete the two comments.
- Shambala108
JagoAndLitefoot wrote: These look like spambots actually (see their links), best to delete the two comments.
Thanks JagoAndLitefoot, I've done just that.
- Bwburke94
Ze/hir are not widely used in British English, and are not used in the DWU except in the specific case of Sgloomi Po.
As for the specific question of "it" vs "they", I do not see a reason one should be used over the other. While a number of British English sources state singular they is technically improper, it has become common usage, and it is more preferred than "he" or "it" when discussing transsexuals/asexuals due to the connotations of "it" in this case. In cases of indeterminate gender, there are no such connotations, so "it" and "they" can both be used freely.
Direct quotations are, of course, to remain as is.
- 39.48.41.228
Visit ! this website https://goo.gl/ZLmVzX
- Sandlogo
https://goo.gl/s7kUlq plz visited the celebrities jacket's of wahshi.com
- Thefartydoctor
In my opinion, when there is no in-source statement from which we can gather a gender, 'they' should be used over 'it' when talking about humans. There's nothing wrong with the grammar of it. I left university with a degree with modern languages and can tell you that using 'they' is perfectly fine. Where aliens are concerned, sometimes gender can be a lot trickier and their reproductive systems won't necessarily be the same as ours. For that reason, I don't see any problem using 'it' over 'they'. In conclusion, it either comes down to personal preference, or if you really care that much, a vote.
I don't think 'ze' and 'hir' are appropriate here. As was mentioned quite rightly earlier, neither 'ze' nor 'hir' are used widely throughout British English and throughout the Whoniverse. One character being called 'hir' constitutes less than a minority of characters. But in that character's case we call them 'hir' because the story does.
- AeD
I think singular they is, at this point, common enough to be the obvious, logical default, and most modern style guides essentially allow it, albeit usually with some disclaimers.
To cite the AP Stylebook's recent update:
They, them, their: In most cases, a plural pronoun should agree in number with the antecedent: The children love the books their uncle gave them. They/them/their is acceptable in limited cases as a singular and-or gender-neutral pronoun, when alternative wording is overly awkward or clumsy. However, rewording usually is possible and always is preferable. Clarity is a top priority; gender-neutral use of a singular they is unfamiliar to many readers. We do not use other gender-neutral pronouns such as xe or ze... In stories about people who identify as neither male nor female or ask not to be referred to as he/she/him/her: Use the person’s name in place of a pronoun, or otherwise reword the sentence, whenever possible. If they/them/their use is essential, explain in the text that the person prefers a gender-neutral pronoun. Be sure that the phrasing does not imply more than one person.
Personally, speaking as a non-binary person myself, I've always found "it" immensely dehumanising, like my dissatisfaction with the gender binary means I no longer warrant personhood.
Singular they should absolutely suffice for referring to individuals for whom no other appropriate pronoun is provided by the source text.
- Thefartydoctor
I agree. I wouldn't call my worst enemy "it". You're right by saying that it's 'dehumanising'. And, for me, using 'ze' and 'hir' when the source text does not call for it, is inappropriate.
- OttselSpy25
I had never considered just not using pronouns at all, and just always using their name. It'll create some annoying sentences, but it might be the best option.
Note from SOTO: If no clear pronoun is provided in the narrative(s), or there are conflicting pronouns in the source(s) you're using, they/them pronouns are the default option. I absolutely protest the idea that we should try to skirt around the issue by simply not using pronouns, and referring to characters by name alone.
(As an archiver's note, I (SOTO) did not identify as nonbinary at the time of my earlier contributions to this thread, as I do now. My previous comments from 2014 reflect my lack of education on these topics at the time. Gender-neutral pronouns are absolutely a part of the English language, we use them all the time, "it" is almost always degrading when applied to a sentient being of any kind, and singular "they" is the most respectful and correct pronoun to use when you're not quite sure.)
In summary: if the story gives you a specific pronoun to use, use that pronoun; otherwise, singular "they" is greatly preferred over all other options. If the story says he, or zhe, or she, or anything else, use that pronoun, but do not shy away from the gender-neutral option when that's the way to go instead. More complicated cases like Alpha Centauri can be dealt with on their talk pages.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:154709
How can you tell what pages are orphaned?
- Shambala108
The list is located at Special:Lonelypages.
- Quest?on
Thanks!
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:154806
Where do I report what I believe is an error concerning the birthdate of an actor?
- Shambala108
You can post it on the talk page of the actor's article.
- Hamlet64
Thank you.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:155005
What happened to The Howling? Where did it go? Where did its discussions go? 107.194.218.9talk to me 23:28, April 22, 2014 (UTC)
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:155013
no but the ninth doctor has seen the head of an cyberman if that counts in the story called 'Dalek' that would be the only time though p.s and i don't think the eight doctor has seen a cyberman aswell.
- Shambala108
The Eighth Doctor first met Cybermen in the audio story Sword of Orion.
- Tangerineduel
Chronologically for the Doctor and by publish date Dreadnought (comic story) trumps Sword.
- Shambala108
Fair enough, I was just trying to find a story in which Eight met the Cybermen. Probably shouldn't have used the word "first".
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:156203
So basically, in 2007 when I first joined the Tardis Wiki, I didn't realise that accounts set up on one Wikia were global across Wikias, and so I made an account on the Tardis Wiki under the name Sichamousacoricothingmabob (I was 12, don't judge me!). I soon realised that the accounts were in fact global across Wikias. Despite that, I still used the account I set up for the Tardis Wiki for all my edits on this Wikia, and I used Imagine Wizard for everything else. What I am wondering (and this is probably something I should've asked six years ago but whatever) is does anyone have the power to sort of combine my accounts - basically so all the contributions I did under the account I set up for this wiki are now attributed to this account instead - so that, essentially, I can just use this account for everything, but I won't have lost the continuity from that account. (To clarify, I set up the 'Imagine Wizard' account on another Wikia before I joined the Tardis Wiki, and THEN I set up the Sichamous account on here before realising that my Imagine Wizard account also existed on here.)
Thanks very much.
- CzechOut
Well, you're kinda asking at the wrong place. This is a forum for the local Tardis community, and your issue is at the Wikia network level. Please proceed to Special:Contact, cut and paste the above message there, and send it through. That'll put your request in the hands of people who deal with this sort of thing every day.
- Imagine Wizard
Yeah, I suspected I was in the wrong place, but I thought if I was and I asked here, I'd be pointed in the right direction. Thanks very much, Czech.
- 104.32.214.184
Imagine Wizard wrote: So basically,... when I... joined the Tardis Wiki... I made an account on the Tardis Wiki under the name Sichamousacoricothingmabob (I was 12, don't judge me!)....
You have to be 13 to join. That's why I don't have an account. But on 27 December 2014 I'm joining up!
- 104.32.214.184
Hopefully.
104.32.214.184talk to me 104.32.214.184talk to me 22:11, May 26, 2014 (UTC) 22:11, May 26, 2014 (UTC)
- Imagine Wizard
You have to be 13? If so, you didn't 10 years ago (you may be thinking of the American law which doesn't let under 13s publicly disclose personal information, but you could still set up an account.)
- Imagine Wizard
CzechOut wrote: Well, you're kinda asking at the wrong place. This is a forum for the local Tardis community, and your issue is at the Wikia network level. Please proceed to Special:Contact, cut and paste the above message there, and send it through. That'll put your request in the hands of people who deal with this sort of thing every day.
Czech, where on that page, because Special:Contact appears to have forms for specific tasks, no general place to repost my request?
- Shambala108
It looks like you have a couple of options on that page. At the bottom it asks, "Does this page answer your question?" followed by a "contact us" link. You could try that, or in the same section there is a link to the "community help forums". Either of those would probably work for your specific issue.
- Imagine Wizard
Shambala108 wrote: It looks like you have a couple of options on that page. At the bottom it asks, "Does this page answer your question?" followed by a "contact us" link. You could try that, or in the same section there is a link to the "community help forums". Either of those would probably work for your specific issue.
-facepalm- I have no idea how I missed that link. It's one of those days. Thanks very much :)
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:156257
I am a huge River Song fan. I recently found an awesome picture that is the relationship between River and the Doctor's timelines, and want to add it so other Whovians in need can find it... But how would I go about doing that? It was made by Will Brooks.
- http://news.drwho-online.co.uk/Infographic-River-Songs-Timeline.aspx
- http://s191.photobucket.com/user/Willbrooks1989/media/RiverTimelineDWO-01_zpsba67c99c.jpg.html
Would uploading it to the TARDIS core infringe upon some kind of copy right?
- Shambala108
First of all, we decided some time back that we would not allow timelines in the main namespace, as it involves too much speculation. We do have the section on timelines (which you've been editing), but those pages don't have images on them.
Secondly, the images you've posted here don't satisfy our valid sources rules, and would not be allowed on any in-universe pages for that reason.
However, all that being said, you are allowed to upload a maximum of three images to your user page, as long as you provide a proper license for them. So if they don't violate any copyright, your user page is the place you would put them.
Hopefully someone a little more knowledgeable about copyright can answer that part of your question.
- Rebazim
Thanks, that helps a lot. I can post links to it though, yes? Like in discussions "Hey, check this out!" ?
- Shambala108
I did a little bit of digging, and at this point I suggest you read our policy at Tardis:Image use policy. It goes into detail about licenses and copyrights and things like that, and it can explain far better than I could.
- Rebazim
Thanks. I'll check it out.
- Rebazim
"Use of images posted to various internet discussion communities is probably not wise, as one cannot be sure of their copyright status." I believe I will simply content myself with the fact that I discovered it. Thanks for all your help!
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:156286
Hi, I'm new here. How can I find licensed image? I put an image in one article, and it was erased because it didn't have license. Can you please explain how to avoid this in the future?
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:156472
Hello... Recently I have been looking at the (unfortunately) neglected 'job' category of companions. While doing so, I discovered there was a page for Journalists, but not Models. (Yes, I was working on Amy's jobs) Also, there were categorical pages for both Journalists and Models. However, when I tried to add a link to the categorical pages on the journalist and model (which I created) pages, I couldn't figure out how. Has anyone done it in the past? And it so, how?
http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Human_journalists http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Human_models
- CzechOut
Not sure what you're trying to do, exactly, so if this doesn't answer your question, feel free to restate. Categories are are added a number of different ways, but the easiest is simply to add the following to the bottom of a page:
[[Category:<category name>]] So if you were trying to add "human journalists" to a page, it would be: [[category:human journalists]]
- Rebazim
Thank you!
- CzechOut
You may also wish to consult help:categories. Be aware, though that I've given you advice, above, of how to add categories while in source mode. To my mind, it's the easiest way to add categories. Most editing on this wiki is done through source mode. You can elect to set source mode as your preferred method of editing by going to Special:Preferences, and then the Editing tab. Or you can choose to make a single edit in source mode by going to the edit button on any page and pulling down to "classic editor". Adding categories is also possible in the new VisualEditor, but the help file doesn't tell you how.
Also, the help file is written for use on a default wiki setup, and we're fairly customised. So it makes reference to some things that don't exist here. Ignore paragraph three of the first section, and ignore the whole of the section labelled "category presentation".
Also while the information on adding a sort key is strictly speaking accurate, it's almost never necessary on this wiki. We have a few templates here that make auto sorting much easier than the "sort parameters" section suggests.
For people, when you create a new page about a person, please just add {{NameSort}} to the bottom of a page, and for titles of stories, add {{TitleSort}}. On this wiki, the category sort key is for extraordinary circumstances only. If you want to know whether you have encountered an extraordinary circumstance, please ask an admin.
- Rebazim
And I just discovered a place at the bottom of a page where you can add categories, which I believe is the more correct place... Thanks for everything though!
- CzechOut
Since this is your first time adding categories, may I suggest that you ask User:SmallerOnTheOutside whether you're proceeding along the right lines? We have a highly developed category structure, and it's important that any new categories fit into it. Thanks :)
- Rebazim
Oh, no... I wasn't creating categories. Sorry for that confusion. I wanted to link to existing ones at the bottom of pages... But I can check in anyway... what do you think?
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:157409
What is the minimum number of pages required to create a category? Is there a set amount? I noticed a few categories with only one page- is that okay?
- Shambala108
The minimum number is three, but some people fudge that, claiming that it's better to have a one-page category than articles without categories. Not very helpful, sorry!
For instance, there's not much point to a category like, Songs the Second Doctor played on his recorder in The Web of Fear. There's only one. There's ever only going to be one. So we don't create that category.
However there are cases where you will find legitimate 1-page categories here.
Sometimes, categories are created where there is a reasonable expectation that the category will contain more pages. So we might create Songs the Third Doctor sang, even when we can only readily name "I Don't Want to Set the World on Fire", because we know he sang to himself on multiple occasions.
On other occasions, we create categories with only one page because it makes structural sense in terms of the overall category tree. This is particularly — but not exclusively — true of our real world crew categories, such as Doctor Who crew. There are some jobs that, at least when the categories were created, had only one person who had performed that particular job. But to make the categories easily searchable, it was necessary to create a category that would probably never have three people. A good example of this is Doctor Who technical co-ordinators.
Even better examples are to be had by looking at SJA crew. Since this was a "smaller" show, it had fewer people on staff. But we nevertheless made the category structure mimic Doctor Who crew so that people more familiar with the DW crew structure wouldn't get lost. Hence, you'l find that SJA stunt co-ordinators, for example, has only one page. But it's a good thing to have around because it matches Torchwood stunt co-ordinators and Doctor Who stunt co-ordinators.
So while we do generally say that three pages are required, it's not — because it can't be — an absolute rule. It can be broken if it logically aids in making the category tree more navigable or more logical — or if there's a reasonable expectation that the category might someday get three pages.
If you're in doubt as to whether a category should exist, it's a good idea to ask here.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:157979
I have noticed that a few Doctor Who stories have prequel webcasts. However, they go overlooked in the story infoboxes.
Should there be a content template in the story infobox that lists this type of media? Say, for example, we have the Confidential row set aside for the companion episode of DWC in the infobox. How would a prequel or prequels be addressed?
- CzechOut
I personally agree that the prequels should be considered as a part of the ongoing narrative of a series, and that, really, they should just be in the normal broadcast order in the navigational section of the infoboxes. I'm not quite sure why Tardisodes and prequels have been ignored by the main "broadcast order" thing.
I know there's been an effort to create a tertiary navigational track that puts prequels in order that they were produced — or something — but this isn't very useful, it seems to me. I don't want to know when Tardisode 3 is in relation to Tardisode 4. That's obvious. I want to know where Tardisode 3 is in relation to School Reunion.
I suppose that people might have gotten hung up on the word "broadcast" and said, "Well Last Night was never broadcast." Since Moffat has taken over, "broadcast" means nothing anymore. Perhaps we should think about changing our main point of navigation to "intended viewing order". That would seem to solve a good many "nomenclature fights", and present the navigation in the way of greatest utility to our casual readers.
- Thunderush
That is a suitable idea for a navigation. A simple list of everything in chronological order. However, we still hit a snag with episodes like The Day of the Doctor. It's the only TV story with War Doctor, who precedes the Ninth Doctor, and because he regenerates in it, there are no stories exclusive to his Doctor which can follow. You get a weird past/present tangle because the principal main character among the Doctors in the 50th is the Eleventh Doctor.
So, the 50th anniversary special is an interchangeable story- if you look at it from the War Doctor's perspective, this story predates Rose. I added a War Doctor timeline and a Ninth Doctor timeline in between TDOTD and Rose beneath the broadcast order navigation so that if someone was skimming through Doctors in order of incarnation, they wouldn't get confused.
There's a lot that could be done to fill in the gaps, but I believe we're on the right track. Big Finish Productions also deserves a mention, because of the massive number of stories they've produced which fill in the continuity gaps that were not covered onscreen. So instead of jumping from the TV Movie to The Night of the Doctor, we could continue with the earliest of the Eighth Doctor stories, Storm Warning and then follow his timeline down to Dark Eyes 2, the future releases which continue from there, until it finally links up to the mini-episode.
- SOTO
By "intended viewing order", Czech, do you mean overall narrative order or more order in which the stories were released? As a more complicated example, where might we place The Battle of Demons Run: Two Days Later? It's more of a sequel to A Good Man Goes to War, certainly arguably a prequel to The Snowmen, and yet it was released in the lead-in to The Bells of Saint John, and therefore after Snowmen.
To Thunderush' idea, I'm sorry, but I can only offer you an outright no. We decided a while back to get rid of "timeline" sections which purported to tell readers what came before and afterwards from the perspective of the Doctor and/or other characters — we cannot definitively state this especially taking into account the different, often conflicting media. Certainly not with the Eighth Doctor as you suggested, whose history and even more so the order in which it all took place is so incredibly convoluted. Speculative timelines for the Doctors are housed at Theory:Timey-wimey detector, but this kind of thing can never be in the main (or content) namespace.
We do not or at least should not currently "jump from the TV Movie to The Night of the Doctor", because The Night of the Doctor, while, sure, the next television story narratively for the Eighth Doctor, is most definitely not the next Doctor Who television story. With timeline navigation certainly out of the way, the only navigations we should have at the bottoms of infoboxes are release order for specific series, and production order. There should not be an "Eighth Doctor television stories" navigation, again per Forum:Timeline sections on pages.
And I'm not seeing language like "broadcast order" anywhere either, Czech. It's just "Doctor Who television stories", or "Torchwood television stories", or "DWM comic stories", and then possibly "Production order". And at the moment, whether or not prequels "count" as DW television stories is completely inconsistent: sometimes the prequels are linked to, sometimes they aren't but yet the prequel pages themselves still link out to main run television-broadcast stories, and sometimes prequels are totally excluded. Seemingly randomly. I don't have a problem with, in addition to working the prequels into the "Doctor Who television stories" run, also having a "Doctor Who prequels" run, same as we have one for things like "Christmas specials".
- Thunderush
SOTO, I understand. At the very least, it would be a good idea to note these supplementary prequels and other episodes in the introductory paragraphs section for a story. A while back, the timeline made sense, but the 50th anniversary threw things for a loop. And timelines get even more skewed when the writers bounce all over the place. The Tardisodes complement every episode of Series 2 except The Satan Pit, because Tardisode 9 is actually a sequel to Tardisode 8, which are both set before The Impossible Planet.
- SOTO
At this point, I can see two choices: either we consider prequels to be Doctor Who television stories and add them to the run, or have them in their own prequel run and add a "tardisode" and/or "prequel" parameter to {{Infobox Story}} that'll link to the relevant prequels, kinda like we do for Confidential.
- Thunderush
The new parameter sounds like the best option. Simple and clean. This could extend to interquels such as Web of Lies or sequels in the case of The Battle of Demons Run: Two Days Later.
- CzechOut
I don't see any need for a special parameter. If you can define for me the actual difference between content delivery methods these days, I'd be much obliged. As far as I can work out, it's all TV, and its all web. There's no distinction between them, so they're all (TV story), simply because that harmonises usage since 1963. That is, we could call The Curse of the Black Spot a webcast, because it was, but that makes it unnecessarily difficult to compare it with, say, The Smugglers.
(TV story) means, simply, that it could be commonly and easily viewed on a TV. This has been the meaning of that dab term since at least Dreamland. And it makes sense to go with a more forward-looking definition, because there are an increasing number of editors who just won't get a distinction based upon "method of content delivery". It might, in fact, be time to think of changing our dab terms again, swapping (TV story) for (video story), which will cover all cases better — even if there's the slight possibility that older British fans might consider think we're talking about "stories on VHS".
In any case, the term (webcast) is an antiquated one that might apply in a few cases in the late 1990s and early 2000s, but even those are dubious. You could view Scream of the Shalka on your TV, after all, since it was also released on the precursor to BBC Red Button.
There are very few things which are pure webcasts, and in these days when things can be Airdropped from your iPad to your TV with the flick of a finger, and your TV is delivered through the same fibre-optic lines that bring you the internet, there is zero meaningful distinction between webcast and broadcast.
I rather strongly feel that the most useful way to organise these things is to consider them genuine, if short, episodes of the television series. I mean, is anyone seriously prepared to argue that The Night of the Doctor is just a webcast? I think most people feel that it's an absolutely vital piece of the series' narrative, made with no less attention than The Day of the Doctor itself. Heck, it's the same damn production block!
The Battle of Demons Run: Two Days Later is obviously post-A Good Man Goes to War and pre-Let's Kill Hitler, so we should probably do the simple thing and directly state that in the infobox.
Web of Lies is slightly trickier, but mainly only because Miracle Day was so bloody disappointing, no one wants to go back and piece together the narrative relationship between WOL and MD. But "interquel" is a really posh name for it, in my view. I think it's something happening concurrent with Miracle Day, but at definite points in the MD narrative. I think you can plot a course that leads from a Miracle Day ep to a WOL ep and back again to MD. Viewed in its totality, WOL has the effect of just being some additional scenes of MD that were animated, rather than filmed in live-action. It's essentially just a Dreamland-esque thing — and, well, we call that Dreamland (TV story). In any case, Web of Lies shouldn't be the reason we do anything on this wiki.
At the end of the day, I think we serve our guests better by trying to place the shorter stories relative to the longer ones in a logical narrative order than just kinda vaguely attaching them to an episode.
From a technical standpoint, we should remember, too, that we'd have to allow for multiple values, if we were going with a line in the top of the infobox, because several of the shorts are more relative to each other than to the larger episodes.
- Thunderush
All passionate feelings about the series aside, this does make a whole lot of sense. Usually, you can tell how much love a page gets by the attention directed toward it. People would explicitly see She Said, He Said: A Prequel (webcast) and Clarence and the Whispermen (TV story) come before The Name of the Doctor (TV story) in the ordering and not skip past them by accident. Or if people wondered how the Doctor was erasing himself prior to events stated in series 7, The Inforarium (TV story) can be fitted in the time frame before The Doctor, the Widow and the Wardrobe (TV story).
IMO, Miracle Day was alright, but messy. It seemed detached continuity-wise if you try to pair it up with DW Series 6 because the Ponds and Eleven are unaffected. Web of Lies could follow The Blood Line in the nav box for TV stories.
- Mewiet
When you're talking prequels, are you referring to filmed prequels? The Angel's Kiss: A Melody Malone Mystery was a prose prequel to The Angels Take Manhattan, for instance.
CzechOut wrote: I don't see any need for a special parameter. If you can define for me the actual difference between content delivery methods these days, I'd be much obliged. As far as I can work out, it's all TV, and its all web. There's no distinction between them, so they're all (TV story), simply because that harmonises usage since 1963. That is, we could call The Curse of the Black Spot a webcast, because it was, but that makes it unnecessarily difficult to compare it with, say, The Smugglers.
(TV story) means, simply, that it could be commonly and easily viewed on a TV. This has been the meaning of that dab term since at least Dreamland. And it makes sense to go with a more forward-looking definition, because there are an increasing number of editors who just won't get a distinction based upon "method of content delivery". It might, in fact, be time to think of changing our dab terms again, swapping (TV story) for (video story), which will cover all cases better — even if there's the slight possibility that older British fans might consider think we're talking about "stories on VHS".
I've been wondering about some of the dab terms for a while. I always thought it was strictly content delivery of the original release (unless it was something that was meant to be delivered one way and then ended up being delivered another, like The Night of the Doctor being a webcast when it was intended to be televised first). But then I became confused about stories like Last Night (and the other DVD exclusive minisodes) which seemed like they would fall under the HOMEVID category - "any adventure which wasn't broadcast, but was instead first published on a home video format, like VHS, DVD, or Blu-ray" - but are instead labeled TV stories.
- DENCH-and-PALMER
Would Tardisodes apply?
- DENCH-and-PALMER
I do think we should add both the prequel for say, The Girl in the Fireplace which would be Tardisode 4 and the game (sort prequel or sequel) which would be Clockwork Quest. As one would with a novelisation.
- Thunderush
Wow, topic resumes nearly 1 and a half years later... hi! It's a bit unclear if there's going to be any action taken towards this, but it would be nice if there was something similar to a little blurb in the episode infobox, and it would need to be set up to accompany multiple prequels/mini-episode accompaniments if such was the case.
- DENCH-and-PALMER
Agreed, would you want games in the infoboxes, we could have The Age of Steel; Prequel: Tardisode 6; Game: Save Paris (which is sort of a sequel prequel).
- Thunderush
Sure. I suppose the canonicity of the material is a gray area, but it's feasible.
- SOTO
Games are not stories. Things which are not stories should not go in any navigation sequence dedicated to Doctor Who television stories.
- DENCH-and-PALMER
Just a thought. They may not be but they're still for that story.
- Thunderush
Again, gray area. Games are definitely in a different category- they were programmed out, but not filmed. It's not the same format, even if it's connected to a television story, and if we added them in, it would cloud up the purpose of using a television-exclusive category. Things like Attack of the Graske are interactive stories.
Perhaps a "see also" section in the article, not the infobox, would be better to deal with works that are directly connected to television stories, and would categorize works under "Prequels", "Sequels", "Games", etc. This is a merely a suggestion. The idea could be simplified.
- SOTO
Most Doctor Who video games, like those on the DW website over the years, are not stories at all, and we can't have users going overzealous on this. We've also rules against see also sections entirely in a prior discussion.
- Thunderush
Let's consider the matter closed. It's a tired discussion and I'm fine with things as is.
- SOTO
Well I don't think there's currently much consistency in this area, across TV story articles.
- Thunderush
Czechout's post earlier previously went in-depth on what we should do. The real problem seems to be that the television story navigation follows release order instead of narrative order, but when a story has no discernible release date, or is released out of chronological narrative order, it becomes hard to figure out where they should all go. It makes sense to stick them in chronological narrative order when stories clearly take place before or after another. But if it is unclear where a story falls, it seems best just to stick it where it least disrupts the narrative flow (Ex: The Infinite Quest takes place in Series 3 but has no clear placement. If it is slotted in right before Utopia, the latest it can take place, it does not interrupt the Series 3 story arc progression).
As for The Night of the Doctor, that one seems to be fine placed as is because it coincides with the smooth transition of the narrative from the surprise reveal of the War Doctor to how he originated. It's technically before Rose, but because there's a huge gap between the TV movie and 2005 revival, it becomes hard to follow without the narratives revealed in The Name of the Doctor.
Something similar happened with Batman: the Animated Series. The episodes were aired out of order but the production order is generally viewed to be the correct narrative order- but Doctor Who does the opposite. And Doctor Who, of course, is far from linear.
- SOTO
Where did my reply go?
- SOTO
Okay, I had to rewrite it: But then you enter into the area of speculation. As I linked to earlier: Forum:Timeline sections on pages. We ruled against timeline sections, and that certainly extends to any proposed timeline navigation.
As we cannot perport to say the narrative order—from whose perspective?—all we can do is state the order of release for television stories. The only question now is what counts as a DW TV story. If prequels and Tardisodes are included in the count, then Tardisode 9 indeed goes after The Impossible Planet in the order.
- Bold Clone
If I may step in and offer my opinion, I believe that only stories initially released on television channels (such as BBC1) or Red Button should count as TV. Short stories and mini-episodes which premiere on the internet or iTunes would count as WEBCAST. Thus, all the Tardisodes would count as WEBCAST also. Thoughts?
- SOTO
As a wiki we're likely soon going to be stepping away from the use of terms like "webcast", as there is no clear distinction. Television is online nowadays, as well as on television. Heck, BBC Three is exclusively online, and whole shows have aired there. There is no true distinction between the TV story released on a "television channel", and those released exclusively online (including all of Torchwood and SJA), assuming that both were produced by a television crew. The Tardisodes are still very much television, in the most modern sense of the word.
- Bold Clone
Ugh. TV is now web, and web is now TV...</headache> If that's the case, then what do you think should we name them? Would the "(TV story)" label be applicable to them? One thing I don't like about this idea is that suddenly everything audio/visual becomes a TV story. This then impacts pages like the "list of Doctor Who TV stories", our numbering count, and so on. I realize that distinctions are difficult in the digital age, but without some sort of distinction I can't see how we can avoid numbering troubles.
EDIT: What about the HOMEVID designation? Does the wiki plan on keeping stepping away from that too? Just curious.
- SOTO
Well we haven't formally had this discussion yet, but both WC and HOMEVID are likely to soon be deprecated. It's been suggested in discussions that VID will replace TV. Anything audiovisual is a video, or a video story; anything audiovisual attached to a television series, produced by a television crew, is a TV story.
There is no reason to include these stories in the count, though. You will note, if you look more closely at List of Doctor Who television stories, that animated stories like The Infinite Quest and Dreamland, and mini-episodes like Children in Need Special, Time Crash, Music of the Spheres, Space and Time, etc. are already listed in bullet lists in subsections, rather than included in the tables and in the count. Just to look at one specific example, Time Crash most certainly aired on TV, so even by the most precise definition is a TV story. The Night of the Doctor is not included in the count. The Doctor's Meditation isn't part of the count.
And just for the record, I don't think productions like the BBV videos or the Reeltime Pictures videos should ever be considered television stories, nor should Transmission from Mars and Dead and Buried. A prequel produced as part of a TV series but released first online, though? Definitely television, no doubt about it. Again, Torchwood series 1 was aired on BBC Three, which is definitely television, as is BBC Red Button, BBCi, etc.
- DENCH-and-PALMER
What about a list of home video stories and a list of webcasts?
- SOTO
Those would have no meaning. "Webcasts" means nothing nowadays. All video stories are broadcast on the web. And most are released in home media as well. Again, "television stories" is not about the mode of release being viewed a television set.
- Bold Clone
Hmm. That alleviates a lot of worries I had. So just to make sure I understand correctly: some of the current WEBCASTs and HOMEVIDs would be relabelled as VIDs, while the rest (the ones done by a television crew) would be considered TV? And they wouldn't mess up the show's episode or story count because they aren't full-length? While I don't agree with your premise (I feel "television stories" can only properly be viewed as a mode of release), I do think your reasoning is well-thought out. I just shudder to think how I'll need to adjust Template:DWTV.
EDIT: Just to clarify, I'll go along with the consensus--regardless of how it turns out. I just won't necessarily agree with it.
- SOTO
Well perhaps "television" does have a little to do with broadcast. But where it's broadcast is not terribly significant, or, at least, cannot be a determining factor that means anything in this day and age. TV stories have been released exclusively on TV and later on video in the past, but nowadays your average episode of Doctor Who can be watched online at the very same time, some TV is produced exclusively for online broadcast or DVD distribution, and some was actually in theatres before anywhere else, which is historically much more typical of films.
And I doubt you would argue that Torchwood series 1 is not television because it's comprised of "webcasts" first released online, right? BBC Three, BBC iPlayer, BBCi, BBC Online/the DW website, heck, even sometimes the BBC and DW YouTube channels, can all, at this point, be considered methods of television distribution. Direct-to-video stories should be included as well for convenience, because they too were produced as part of a television series. I feel like if we ruled those VID it would just get way too confusing, for no reason at all. Television is television. We're going to be looking at the word television as meaning "television industry", rather than meaning "television set" or "television channel".
- Bold Clone
Well, no; I would consider Torchwood series 1 to be television because it was originally broadcast on a television channel. The fact that the channel was online is irrelevant to me. The crucial thing IMO is whether the online material was released via a television channel or not. So from my reasoning, DW stuff on iTunes would be considered WEBCAST or just WEB, while BBC3, BBC iPlayer, BBCi, BBC Red Button are all TV.
Going by your definition, though, the WEBCAST and HOMEVID categories logically should be done away with, and I actually think it's the right thing for you do in order to maintain consistency (even if I don't agree with it).
As I mentioned earlier, I'll go along with whatever the wiki decides, and I've even whipped up a prototype revision of the DWTV template at my sandbox. I've made sure to include the Tardisodes, the prequels, and other WEBCAST and HOMEVID material.
- SOTO
Permission to try something out on your talk with page version? I think it would work a lot better with all mini-episodes in small text.
Anyway, bringing this back to the discussion at hand, specifically—how do you think we should approach the nav with a broader definition of television in mind?
Keep in mind that we can always add another nav if it helps things. For example, Doctor Who television stories could include all stories deemed television, splitting apart even some two-parters if Tardisodes are deemed to count—and then series 2, which would be the regular episodes only, starting from New Earth and ending with Doomsday. In other words, the second nav would be for the run of episodes, usually one a week during the time Doctor Who's on air. Series 6 and 7 would thus be split up into parts 1 and 2. Once you hit AGMGTW or TWORS, you have to use the main TV nav to find your way to the following run of episodes.
Only issue with that treatment is that for some series the nav will just be redundant. And series 3 could be confusing with episodes of The Infinite Quest airing through the same period of time as series 3 proper. So does TIQ get mentioned in between each and every episode? Even if it links to the appropriate plot section, that can get annoying, and it would necessitate us adding some sort of nav template resembling the infobox but more horizontal, at the top of each episode of The Infinite Quest, seeing as they don't have individual names. Or do we just list TIQ after Smith and Jones in the main nav, and then after Last of the Time Lords in the series 3 nav? I like that solution better.
(On a side note, even if we ever decided that non-broadcast stories—released straight away to home media such as DVD and iTunes—those would not be considered webcasts and/or homevids. They'd be video storiee, in league with BBV, etc. And I'm not totally against this. I just think it's much simoler with the other definition which includes everything ubder the Doctor Who banner. But again, I'm not opposed to maybe considering any video produced with no intent of broadcast juet a videi/video story.)
- Bold Clone
If you're asking me, then feel free to tinker away. If you were addressing someone else, I apologize. Regarding the nav, I'm going to need some time to think about how to approach it...
- DENCH-and-PALMER
Anything that could be viewed on a television?
- Bold Clone
DENCH-and-PALMER wrote: Anything that could be viewed on a television?
Well, I think that's a good place to start, D&P, but I think that's too wide. For instance, I can access and watch Youtube on my tv set. For that matter, I can connect my laptop to my tv and read digital collections of DW comics and books! I think one place to start would be to define TV as either "audio-visual DW material which premiered on television" or "audio-visual DW material produced by a television crew." Originally my stance was that of the former, while SOTO held the latter. However, after thinking over the matter and getting a good night's sleep, I think SOTO's position has more credit than I'd thought. Consider various prequels, such as The Making of the Gunslinger, The Great Detective, and Up All Night. All of these a mini-episodes leading into their respective episodes, but because they were released in different modes, they're all given different categories. Gunslinger is a WEBCAST because it premiered online, Detective is TV because it premiered on television, and Up All Night was released direct to DVD. It's consistent on our part to note the various release modes, but I think SOTO has a point: they're all mini-stories produced by the TV crew. Thus, in a sense they are all TV.
- SOTO
Woah, you just convinced me of my own stance. I was wondering yesterday whether it might be a good idea to call anything released directly to home media (VHS, DVD, iTunes, YouTube) video stories even if they are produced by a television crew as pieces of television. But, no. You brought up some very good examples, and so I think it would be stupid on our part to make a senseless distinction between equivalent stories which are all expansions to episodes of TV.
I think the primary mode of release is irrelevant to the classification of stories. Audio stories released on radio are just audio stories, as much as there's no real distinction between digital downloads and CD orders. Short stories released as e-books or online are still just short stories. Online comics are just as much comic stories as those which are printed. And so, likewise, television is still television, whether it's been broadcast on TV, broadcast online, released directly to home media like DVD or iTunes, or even if it's first released theatrically, as with the prequel to series 9 this past year. And any video-based story which is not a piece of television is a video story.
As for prefixes, though, ultimately TV has gotta go. (TV story) should remain a thing, but let's remember that (novel)s, (novella)s, (short story)s and (novelisation)s are all simply PROSE. VID will be the prefix to replace all of TV, WC and HOMEVID.
WC is a stupid one anyway, because people seem to use it for online video as well as for any other online content like comics or short stories. All of that should go. The only things we can truly can "webcasts" were those TV stories released before 2005.
By the way, if it's commissioned by the BBC or in any way ordered by the executive producers/head writer of Doctor Who, it's almost certainly television, with very few exceptions, if any, I'd expect. Those videos which are not television are usually made independant from the BBC, by companies such as Big Finish and BBV Productions. If it's not connected to a TV series, or at least an attempted pilot of one, it's very likely not television.
- Bold Clone
Now that we've convinced each other (funny how that works), what do we do next? Hammer out how this impacts nav-templates? Run this by Czech? Just start changing stuff?
- SOTO
No no, this is not yet policy. There will be a highlighted community-wide thread soon enough. All admin who frequent the Skype group are in favour, though. :)
Since this is gonna be the future, definitely feel free to experiment further on user subpages, to have an idea of how to deal with a more inclusive definition of television. That will actually be helpful for the discussion and actual enactment of the new dab rule. But please don't do anything in the main namespace, nor with categories, until the discussion has been had.
- Bold Clone
OK. That's what I thought, but it seemed safe to double-check.
- DENCH-and-PALMER
On Screen - that could work?
- DENCH-and-PALMER
Has anything come of this?
- Thunderush
No clue. I'm still watching this thread, but right now considering the show itself is resting and I've burned myself out rather severely, I let this go. All this was meant to do was make sure that if shorts or mini-episode comes out that can be overlooked because it's not shown with the main installments of the show, it doesn't get passed over in the main navigation. Like for instance, Tardisode 1 -> New Earth -> Tardisode 2 -> Tooth and Claw instead of just New Earth -> Tooth and Claw.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:159295
Is there a way for me to set my default skin differently for each wiki? For Wookieepedia I want to use monobook, here I want to use Wikia, but if I change my preferences it affects both wikis.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:165222
I've been adding a lot of chapter title listings to novel articles lately. Some of the authors have laid their chapters out in a fairly "experimental" fashion, and I've been trying to replicate that when possible. But this morning, a lot of my work was wiped out by an admin because I used the break tag (
) when listing chapters that did not follow a standard numeric progression. I know about T:NO HTML, but does that really have to extend to use of the break tag when it is listed in the Wikitext Cheat Sheet as the proper way to break a line?
- Digifiend
There's no wikitext equivalent to that as far as I'm aware. <nowiki> is also an example where HTML has to be used. Perhaps a list of exceptions is needed.
- Shambala108
What's the problem with using asterisks or colons? Just what kind of formatting do you need that isn't covered by these two methods?
- Soundacious
In the case of Millennium Shock, the chapters are numbered with hexadecimals. It's true that this could be done with bullets, but I would like other administrators to discuss this issue.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:165734
While reading some entries I have noticed that there is the occasional typo or grammatical error. I am wondering if it is acceptable to edit these in another persons post? If not is it ok to point these out to the person who made the post originally?
- Granville4879
Oops! Sorry I didn't notice I wasn't signed in there!
- Skittles the hog
In the main namespace, yes, that's fine. If you're talking about user pages and forums, then no, you need to contact the editor. I doubt many will be interested in correcting typos in their forum posts though. Unless they've fallen asleep on the keyboard, it's probably too minor to concern them.
- Granville4879
There I just proved my point! I knew I was talking about the main Wikia sections. :-~
I would never think of touching something labelled a user page and have been around forums long enough to know to leave posts there alone...but I am the only person who could have known this.
- CzechOut
Unless the typo is of a nature that makes the meaning of a sentence unclear, it's probably a nicer thing to do to just let it slide in the forums. If the typo actually, honestly admits of multiple interpretations, then it's fine to ask gently for clarification.
- File:
- Tardis:
- Help:
- Category:
As a very general rule of thumb, if the namespace number is even and less than 100 (the namespace page gives you numbers), go ahead and correct the typo. If the namespace is odd never correct the typo, and never point it out, unless, again, the typo makes the meaning of the sentence genuinely unclear.
[What's up with the even/odd business? Even-numbered namespaces are usually reserved for the "meat" of a particular namespace. It's where you'll find the actual pictures, the actual articles, the actual categories. Odd-numbered namespaces are what are called "meta" namespaces. They're "talk" pages used to "talk about" the content on the (talk namespace number - 1). So, if you're at unlucky ns:13 (aka Help talk), that's the talk namespace for ns:12 (aka Help).]
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:166335
Hello, recently the site The Cloister Library went down "http://www.magnetopia.org/cloisterlibrary/" (it has very detailed guides to many of the novels). They can't bring it back up with the same name, so they moved to "http://mysite.science.uottawa.ca/rsmith43/cloister/". They kept the same page names, so mass replacing the first address with the second should bring all those links back up.
For example in http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Timewyrm:_Genesys at the bottom it links to "http://www.magnetopia.org/cloisterlibrary/genesys.htm" and it should go to "http://mysite.science.uottawa.ca/rsmith43/cloister/genesys.htm"
Thanks
- Shambala108
I've asked an admin who can do bot work to take a look at this post, so hopefully you'll have an answer soon.
- Tasadi
Hello, could you please poke the admin once more? Thanks
- CzechOut
Heh, what needed to be poked was my "enter" button. I had actually had the bot running from 24 November until today, but I forgot the window was running. So it got stuck on the first change. I discovered that window today and gave the thing a nudge. 203 changes were made, so I'm thinking that concludes this request. Let me know if you find any mor broken links.
- Tasadi
Thank you! :)
- 198.23.71.119
By the way, total number of changed pages was 263.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:168162
Danny said that Clara was born in 1986, but somewhere in season 7 that Clara said that she was 16 when her mum died (in 2005), which would mean she was born in 1989 or 1988. Which one is correct? This incredibly frustrating.
- 97.79.222.96
(Apologies, I think I posted this on the wrong board, but "Help!" seemed appropriate because this conundrum is freaking me out and the fact it bothers me so much probably means that I need, like, actual help.)
- 92.41.159.44
1989 would be correct. In bells of Saint john, she was apparently 24 given it being the last age in Her book. We know bells of Saint John took place in then current day 2013. So if she was 24 in 2013, she would've been born in 1989 - and its Moffat. Chances are he did that deliberately as 1989 is a well known year (not for the best of reasons) in the whoniverse
- Shambala108
"Apparently" and "if" and "chances are" are just speculation. We can't assert 1989 on any in-universe pages unless a story actually tells us so.
- Digifiend
Jenna was born in 1986... so it may be that Samuel Anderson flubbed a line and said the wrong year, confusing the actress's year of birth with the character's.
- Mewiet
Everything prior to the 1986 line aligned with 1989. I think it was a continuity error that unfortunately we're now stuck with.
- Purplehead
What if Clara just didn't write the rest of the numbers after 24? We can't assume that she was 24in TBoSJ.
- Tybort
Digifiend wrote: Jenna was born in 1986... so it may be that Samuel Anderson flubbed a line and said the wrong year, confusing the actress's year of birth with the character's.
The line comes from Death in Heaven and was spoken in the dub or off camera by Nicholas Briggs in his Cyberman voice before the helmet opened, so, unlikely (Anderson says Clara's birthday in Dark Water too as I recall, but not the 1986 part). Not to mention that overdubbing techniques go as far back as the TV movie, where they fixed "12 lives" with "13 lives", so that'd be easy to spot and fix. Also, Strax says Clara was 27 in Deep Breath, which was supposedly set immediately after Christmas 2013 (I have my own issues with continuity surrounding series 7 and 8 being set in the year of broadcast, but that seems to be the intention of the writers. Even the "2016" line in In the Forest of the Night is vague at best in context.). I doubt Strax' scan's a flub as well.
I agree with what Purplehead says about how we just don't know if Clara even filled in those numbers in The Bells of Saint John. She left out ages before 24 in that book after all.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:169377
I click on the Edit button and nothing happens. Is there some permission I have to get from an administrator? My registration said Happy Editing as if I could do so right away
- Shambala108
The wiki is undergoing some testing of changes right now, so there might be an issue with that. However, I do have one thing to check first: did you click on the pencil icon (on the left of any page), or did you "mouse over" it to let the drop sideways menu to appear? Most wikis aren't testing these changes, so some stuff is going to work differently than you might be used to on other wikis. If you mouse over the pencil icon, you should get a menu that includes "edit" and "visual editor".
If you've already done this, and still can't edit, please reply here so someone associated with the technical aspects of the wiki can try to solve your problem.
- CzechOut
Actually, Wikia in general had a little hiccup. Should be better now. I've been able to successfully edit a page in the last minute. However, if you've just created your account, there are some pages you won't be able to edit, as some are locked to new editors.
- 50.78.57.153
I am mousing and clicking on the Pencil icon & the blue Edit button. I got into the River Song page once but now can't get in again. I tried getting into the vortex manipulator page but it's not working either.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:172467
Are there Roleplaying discussions or boards? Could someone link them if possible?
- Tangerineduel
No.
These forums are for discussing the editing of this wiki. See the notice at the start top of the forums Special:Forum.
- Rightroblo
ALright
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:173415
can I have some help I was trying to add strax on the leading bit because he commanded the armys but it all went array
- Alexj98
fixed it
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:176826
I hope I'm using the right forum to say this. I've been using the site for some time for reference purposes, but I finally decided to become a member when I noticed some rather scandalous lies being told about actress Sophie Okonedo (of The Beast Below). In her article, some rather sexual comments are made about her, including a statement that she is a prostitute. Clearly someone was tampering with her article, and I thought I'd better bring it to someone's attention.
Brad
- JagoAndLitefoot
I have reverted the vandalism.
- Hamlet4
Thanks. Is this sort of thing frequent? And is there a way to trace the perpetrator? I'm curious as to how long the entry had these lies.
- Tybort
The offending information has been up for five days, and was added by an anonymous IP address as anyone can edit a wiki provided they're not banned. Usually but not always, regular editors catch this sort of stuff both on real world and character pages, but I don't think it's super frequent. The offending edit was here, and you can find the full list of revisions here, or by clicking "History" after hovering over the "My Tools" menu on the bottom of a page. I noticed someone saw the formatting error created by the vandalism in the following edit a few minutes after, but failed to notice the sexual comments that have nothing to do with her roles related to Doctor Who.
- Shambala108
In the future, if you see anything else like this, you can revert the edits yourself, or if you'd rather, you can go to any admin's talk page and ask them to take care of it.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:178220
I'm still new here, and I attempted my first edit this morning. I noticed that Suranne Jones' birthday was absent, and I added it, citing my sources as both Wikipedia and imdb. I'm going to take a guess that my change was undone because those sources are not considered authentic enough? if so, my apologies, and I'll refrain from doing this again.
Brad
- Shambala108
Hi! Because wikipedia and IMDB are user-edited, they are not considered acceptable sources for real world information on this wiki. You can read more at Tardis:Valid sources.
- Hamlet4
Okay, fair enough, I promise I won't do that again.
Wikipedia itself gives the following site as its source. Would The Guardian be considered trustworthy?
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2004/oct/26/furthereducation.uk3?INTCMP=SRCH
Thanks, Brad
Of course, in this case, we have no source beyond the Guardian. There's no guarantee that they didn't simply go to IMDb and snatch the date from there. But the point is that we have some reasonably credible publication (i.e. not a publicly edited site) making the claim. And we leave it up to the reader to decide if the Guardian is a good enough source for their purposes.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:178399
I know there was an article/discussion about this here, and I've lost it. Perhaps in the Howling somewhere?
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:178871
I've been reading TARDIS wiki for several years now. I come to it to read the biographies and cast & crew lists for the different stories.
I noticed this week that many actors, directors, etc. who had previously had their birth dates, death dates, etc. listed on their pages have had them deleted.
For example, Graeme Harper, Dudley Simpson, Damaris Hayman and many others who previously had their dates listed, now seem to be deleted.
What is the reason why dates which have always been on these profiles before have been deleted?
- Mewiet
Because they either aren't sourced or aren't properly sourced. If a birthdate is sourced, it has to be a source that is not the individual themselves as they could be lying about their birthdate.
- Shambala108
To expand on Mewiet's answer, I explained in Thread:177648 that it was decided years ago that cast/crew birth dates must be properly sourced. Yes, there are still lots of dates on this wiki that have unsourced dates, but another user and I have been working to remove those. Please read the forum thread that I mentioned here to see more information.
This might be a good chance to remind all users that one or more violations of a rule do not make the rule invalid. This is a large wiki, and sometimes mistakes slip through the cracks.
- MystExplorer
I'm only removing the dates from the articles of living people. Since dead people can't be negatively impacted by having their birthdates known, I've decided to leave those articles alone.
- Shambala108
MystExplorer wrote: I'm only removing the dates from the articles of living people.
Unsourced is unsourced. From an admin standpoint, it's best to be consistent, so if we require sources for living people's dates, we should also require them for deceased people's dates.
- Professor Sondergaard
It's a good policy to make sure the information is accurate as possible, but most of the dates on these pages have been around for many years and have usually been backed up and verified on other websites: IMDB, Wikipedia, Doctor Who Magazine, and through Doctor Who research websites such as Doctor Who Cast & Crew and Toby Hadoke's biographies.
So it seems a shame to delete dates unless they have been shown to be incorrect. When incorrect dates are found, could they not be replaced with the correct ones, rather than removing the date outright?
- Shambala108
If you check out Tardis:Valid sources, you will see that we do not accept IMDB or Wikipedia as valid sources, since they are user-edited.
Only unsourced dates are being removed. There is no problem with adding them back if they are properly sourced.
- MystExplorer
Shambala108 wrote: Unsourced is unsourced. From an admin standpoint, it's best to be consistent, so if we require sources for living people's dates, we should also require them for deceased people's dates.
I was told by CzechOut that listing people's birthdates could potentially have a negative economic impact on them. Actors need to be able to play a range of ages and knowing their exact age could limit that somewhat, especially for older actors. That's why I'm only concerned with living people.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:180234
Greetings, fellow fans of Doctor Who! My name is The Time Lord, but feel free to call me "TTL" for short. I'd like to become a more active editor here, but because I am an American user, my lack of knowledge of British English holds me back.
I'd rather not make things difficult for the other editors here; would someone be willing to give me the lowdown on proper punctuation and such? My concerns are not so much about British spelling, but about where to place periods in quotes, commas in lists, et cetera. In short, grammar and mechanics.
Thank you for taking the time to read this message. I look forward to editing with you all in the future!
- Shambala108
Please see Tardis:Spelling, Tardis:Spelling cheat card, Tardis:Quotation marks, Thread:177443 and Tardis:Honourifics for some answers to your questions.
- The Time Lord
Thank you for your response. I've read the pages you linked to, but I'm sorry to say they did little to answer my questions.
I know very well the differences in spelling between British and American English, as well as the fact that in British English, honourifics do not use periods.
The specifics of what I'm asking are below:
- Which is proper:
- "The Doctor is a tall, old, and smart man."
- "The Doctor is a tall, old and smart man."
- Which is proper:
- "Trust me. I'm the Doctor."
- "Trust me. I'm the Doctor".
- Which is proper:
- Missy is the Master (TV: Dark Water).
- Missy is the Master. (TV: Dark Water)
The specifics of my questions have to do with the placement of punctuation in lists, quotes, and citations. I notice this is inconsistent across this Wiki's articles, and I also have experience on other Wikis where arguments have broken out over what is the right way to format things. I'd like to avoid negative interactions with users here as often as possible, so before I go around messing up articles unintentionally, I thought I'd ask what was right.
- Which is proper:
- Shambala108
Ok, for the first one,
- "The Doctor is a tall, old and smart man." is the correct way in British grammar.
For the second one,
- "Trust me. I'm the Doctor." is correct, but there are several variations that you can see at Thread:131641 (which is actually the one I meant to link above).
For the third one,
- Missy is the Master. (TV: Dark Water) is correct, not for grammar reasons but because at some point it was chosen by the wiki community to do it this way. Sometimes we choose policies that aren't necessarily grammatically correct, such as Tardis:Quotation marks, where technical reasons force us to use the American style despite the wiki in general using British grammar.
Hope this helps, let me know if there are any other questions.
- Bwburke94
As for your first question, T:COMMA states that serial commas are "correct, but antiquated" in British English, and that they should be avoided when possible.
- The Time Lord
A couple more questions:
I was always taught that it is improper to format sentences as follows:
- "The man ate ice cream, and went back for seconds."
Even so, it appears several times on the Wiki. As far as I know, the correct version of the above sentence (even if it's a poor/improper example) should be:
- "The man ate ice cream, and he went back for seconds."
The justification for this is that the ", and" is being used to join two separate thoughts. The two thoughts need to be complete sentences on their own if ", and" is removed. What are the opinions on this, and does the difference between British and American English have anything to do with this?
Another potential error I keep noticing that may or may not be because of the differences in English involves semi-colons; people are using them to join a complete thought with an incomplete thought, like so:
- "They were able to activate the effect again; the shock of the effect reconnecting the TARDIS to some part of its interior."
The correct version of the example above (as far as I know) should be:
- "They were able to activate the effect again; the shock of it reconnected the TARDIS exterior to its interior."
Is it ok for me to correct these errors when I see them, or is there a specific reason (such as British English or a Wiki-wide decision) why they are present? I apologize if my questions seem stupid; I'm not used to editing a British Wiki, let alone one that is so large.
Feel free to correct such errors you find. Sometimes editors edit an existing sentence by adding to or subtracting from it, and that causes errors; some editors just don't have a good grasp of punctuation rules.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:181242
Am I completely missing something here, I can't seem to find a search box. I would think that'd be a basic necessity of a wiki
- The Time Lord
…It's right at the top of the screen (at least on my laptop) and says "Search within the Tardis…."
- 96.227.251.70
OK, I'm not seeing that anywhere. I would upload a screenshot, but that doesn't seem to work either. Are there known issues with Google Chrome or any of its plugins?
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:181433
I'm reposting this here. I accidentally posted it in the wrong section a few hours ago.
I was wondering when series pages are allowed to be created. Looking back TW and the SJA, series 1 pages were created quite a while after the premiere episodes, but with K9 the Series 1 (K9) was created in June 2009, months before Regeneration broadcast. I know we create series pages before the series starts (such as Series 9 (Doctor Who 2005) being created a month before the broadcast of Last Christmas), but do we also create series pages before the premiere episode of a series has begun? If so, how long before?
- Digifiend
A timely question, considering Class will need such a page...
- Bwburke94
I've seen them created as soon as announced, as was the case with Series 9.
- Mewiet
Well, I'd like to see appropriate pages created so long as they don't violate our spoiler policy.
We've never defined a length of time before premiere that a series page can be created — though common sense would dictate that we have to wait for at least the commissioning announcement. It would have been premature to create Series 9 (Doctor Who 2005) in 2008, for instance.
I wouldn't use Torchwood or SJA as precedents. We had to work out a nomenclature for distinguishing the narrative Torchwood from the series Torchwood. And the name of The Sarah Jane Adventures was in flux almost up to time of broadcast. (You may remember that there was early press it was to be called Sarah Jane Investigates.)
Also, we weren't really sure back then how to handle naming the pages for another reason. We'd never had two "series 1"s to deal with. Series 1 meant, indivisibly, the Eccleston season until SJA/Torchwood rocked up. So it took us a little bit of time to figure out a rational naming system.
But the truth is, none of it was or is that big a deal. Back in those early days of the wiki, no one paid all that much attention to the series pages, anyway. Even today, they're not really the draw in terms of number of visitors.
So I wouldn't worry too much about the fact that some of the series pages were started after premiere and some not.
So it's nothing to sweat about. The answer's pretty simple: there's no reason why a Class (Series 1) page couldn't be started right now, so long as the appropriate spoiler tags are added.
Please consult T:SPOIL for details about how to create a page abut a future series.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:184471
There's a thread called: http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Fuck_buddy
I just found it, is that really a real thing on DW?
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:185116
I tried to edit Martha Jones but found that the page was protected. Is there a reason for that?
This page is temporarily locked while we fiddle with new infoboxes. It will be reopened. If you'd like to suggest edits, please do so at Talk:Martha Jones
However, that was back in July, so you might want to bring it to the attention of CzechOut, the admin who locked it.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:187342
Whenever I try using the spell checker to correct a misspelled word while editing, the page crashes and I lose all my changes. This happens on any and all pages I try to edit. Why is this happening, and how do I fix it?
- SOTO
What browser do you use, and which version? Also what's your OS?
- Jamma77
Google Chrome, version 47.0.2526.106 (I think). OS is Windows 10.
- SOTO
You said the page crashes. What precisely happens?
- Jamma77
I start editing, spell something wrong, right click it to access spell checker, click on the desired correction, then the display changes to a blank page with a message from Chrome saying "Something went wrong while displaying this webpage"
- SOTO
I'd recommend sending a Special:Contact/bug and see if anyone on Wikia payroll can help you. I don't know what the root of the problem is, myself.
- Jamma77
Ok, the issue has apparently decided to fix itself, because the spell checker is working normally now.
- Bwburke94
Personally, I just let SpellBot handle the spellchecking.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:187837
Hi do you guys have a page/sections for continuity errors? If you do would River having a secret alcohol cash in the Twelfth Doctors Tardis be a continuity error on her first and last meeting with him? Knightmare · [Talk] 05:01, December 27, 2015 (UTC)
- SOTO
Theory:Doctor Who television discontinuity and plot holes may interest you. We do not tend to discuss narrative discontinuity in ns:0 articles, because contradictions occur all the time in such a large and expansive universe as the DWU. For the purposes of article writing, what a story says is what is valid. If an error is non-narrative, though, like an object that appears in one frame but disappears in the next, then it can go in the "production errors" section of at least every TV story article.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:194138
Hi...
Completely new to the Wiki and completely lost in how to add an edit to a section. The instructions state "You should write a short edit summary in the small field above the edit-box." I have no idea how to find that...or how to add links...(I'm lucky I know how to type or spell some days)
Anyway...whatever help can be offered would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:194322
Greetings fellow Time Lords (Ladies),
I've started earning the badges for the Game of Rassilon and (although this may seem a dumb question) I see a badges for writing on blog posts, yet I've been unable to figure out where they are. Can someone point me in the right direction?
Thanks
- PicassoAndPringles
Blogs were disabled on this wiki after a community discussion in 2012, so that badge is not currently available to earn.
- Mister Fifty
That's a shame...And I had so much to say... 8)
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:194790
Is there a way for me to see a complete list of all the 50,000-plus articles on the wiki?
- Shambala108
Try Special:Allpages. It's not a list of all pages, which would be too long a page, but it gives you sections of the list.
- 86.175.22.152
That was one quick reply! Thank you so much :-)
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:196871
I have a theory about the Doctor's origin. Is there a discussion area where it is acceptable to post theories? Thanks
- RedQueenaAR
NM - Found it! Thanks!
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:196978
Should the publisher's summaries of 2nd, 3rd, etc. issues be ignored?
I've noticed, for instance, that the publisher's summary for the comic story Weapons of Past Destruction is the one from Issue #1 (out of 5). Thus, out of necessity many plot threads are omitted from it. On the other hand, the publisher's summary for the collected edition Weapons of Past Destruction refers to the whole story and is, thus, complete.
What is the policy?
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:202733
who is the creator of the cybermen I don't mean john lumic I mean the mondas cybermen I am counting audio because I know the genesis of the cybermen story is an audio story called spare parts do we know who the creator of the cybermen is
- DENCH-and-PALMER
No one individually. It was a company on the planet Mondas.
- Alexj98
yeah I get that but wouldn't someone be incharge of the production like davros was for the daleks
- DENCH-and-PALMER
Yeah but I don't think it's ever been established yet. Something to look forward too though.
We are looking at you Big Finish.
- Alexj98
there was a big finish cybermen story called spare parts but I couldn't find out who created the cybermen
- DENCH-and-PALMER
Yeah but I don't think it said who though.
- Alexj98
okay would anyone else on here think the daleks are often compaired to the cybermen
- DENCH-and-PALMER
For other users references, this is by no means a chatting thread, but in fact a question into which I responded. By no means is this a social experiment but merely the means to an end.
- OncomingStorm12th
Ok.
First: I left a message on an user talk page, for the user of the referred talk page.
Second: in no moment I said you started the thread. No need to get defensive.
Third: Nowhere in this thread is an indication of editing any page. Just Q&A about the Cybermen.
Fourth: "However, these areas should be used for discussions specifically relating to the editing and creation of this site." extracted from T:NOT BOARD. Where in this thread has there been any mention of editing any page?
Fifth: SOTO is a well qualified admin. In the end, is up to him (or any other admin) to decide wheter this is a "chatting" thread or not.
- Alexj98
I only started this thread because I want to know who created the cybermen an I don't mean kit pendler
- TheChampionOfTime
But this thread is in the Reference Desk board, which is specifically for these sorts of things. As for this topic's question, I believe Allan held at least some of the credit for their creation.
- Shambala108
This thread can remain open as long as the posts attempt to respond to the OP's question. To quote the instructions for this board:
- "Maybe you wonder which story was "the one with the aliens who had lizard heads". Or maybe you need to know which issues of Doctor Who Adventures featured Rose Tyler after Billie Piper quit. Come here for quick facts—but not speculation."
- AdricLovesNyssa
The closest you are going to get is Doctorman Christine Allen as she is the one performing the conversion.
- Alexj98
I read that I just a got a bit confused so is she the creator then the davros for the cybermen
- AdricLovesNyssa
not exactly, she's the one who performs the surgery/supervises it, it isn't suggested that she created them the same way Davros created them, I think it would be an order of the committee possibly
- Alexj98
but davros was incharge of the kaled science group is there no one incharge of the people who maid the cybermen cuz I would have said her
- DENCH-and-PALMER
Let's say that it's not been established yet.
- Alexj98
do we think they will do a genesis of the cybermen
- DENCH-and-PALMER
They were going to see Genesis of the Cybermen (TV story) for more info.
- AdricLovesNyssa
if you relisten to Spare Parts there is in part four the group of people called the committe they keep telling her to convert the mondasians that's the closest you are going to get to a leader telling people to make the cyberman
- Alexj98
my question was do we think they will ever make genesis of the cybermen into a real story
- Shambala108
Alexj98 wrote: my question was do we think they will ever make genesis of the cybermen into a real story
Now we're getting into speculation. If you wish to discuss this question, you must take it to Howling:The Howling.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:203554
I need a bit of help I know this is not the wiki but I do not know what else to do could someone post an image of dr who battles in time 35 with the dalek wars paige please
- Alexj98
or could someone tell me a link where I could read the DWBIT issues
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:203565
could someone help me make a page of davros inventions we know he invented the daleks of course the imperial daleks the reality bomb what else has he invented I would be greatful if anyone could tell me what else he has created I know there wont be a lot considering he has only been in 9 episodes but I would just like to know what he has invented
- Alexj98
oh and also he created the cyborg imperial daleks because their biology was cyborg
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:207185
why do people keep taking off the reality bomb from the inventions section on the davros page it is confirmed he invented it so it should be part of it please stop taking it off
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:208440
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:208755
I've noticed that there are some completely redundant pages across this Wiki: per Interference, Great Vampires are Yssgaroth, and the Time Lord-Vampire War was the Eternal War. Furthermore, all the information from Yssgaroth is duplicated on Great Vampire, and all the information from Eternal War is duplicated on Time Lord-Vampire War. In an ideal world, I'd petition for Time Lord-Vampire War to get moved to / overwrite Eternal War, and the same for Great Vampire to Yssgaroth, since they're better and more accurate names and all. But T:SPEEDY only seems to work if the destination link (in this case, Yssgaroth and Eternal War) is red! How can I go about doing this anyway?
- TheChampionOfTime
Try Template:Merge.
- SeaniesBeanies
You should probably also create redirects for Great Vampire and the Time Lord-Vampire War to their pages, especially because Great Vampire is far more broadly used than Yssgaroth.
- SOTO
Definitely use {{merge}}. Also, if there is any discussion to be had for a rename, you should be using {{rename}}, not {{speedy rename}}. The latter is for simple things, like a spelling mistake in the name, plural when it should be singular, missing dab term, etc.
There is definitely a discussion to be had about which name is the most common/superior title for any given element, if indeed it's even decided they should be merged.
- NateBumber
SOTO wrote: Definitely use {{merge}}. ... There is definitely a discussion to be had about which name is the most common/superior title for any given element, if indeed it's even decided they should be merged.
I just realized I never responded to this great advice! Thanks, SOTO; I've initiated a discussion about it at Talk:Great Vampire and linked to it on the other relevant talk pages.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:208920
In The End of the World, what did Rose Tyler mean by "Yeah, and I'm here too because you brought me here, so just tell me!" http://tardis.wikia.com/d/p/2916164564078823009. Doctor 25 ☎ 21:20, January 7, 2017 (UTC)
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:209625
how come on the davros page the reality bomb is not on the inventions section
But at any rate, no takers in months, so time to close.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:209960
I understand that the mark III travel machine is the finished dalek model but what is mark I and mark II
- Alexj98
well actulley from the description of one of the davros stories the mark I travel machine he creates is the same design as the very first daleks but I still do not know what mark II is
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:210440
how many gods can we think of in doctor who when I mean gods I do not mean people who perceive themselves or others as gods but characters with god like powers for instance the badwolf entity aka rose tyler
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:210806
do we know how many aliens are on akhaten
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:211527
why aren't the jixen on the military species
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:211907
what are bob baker creations
- SOTO
I'm not sure I understand your question. K9, Omega and the Black Guardian all debuted in Bob Baker scripts, if that answers your query.
- Alexj98
well what I am asking is what characters bob baker created and owns the rights to
- OttselSpy25
I've always heard that it's just K9 and Omega. I imagine the BG and WGs share copyright, and aren't owned by Bob.
- Alexj98
I read up he still owns rights to use them hence the new movie coming out but I also red up he had the rights to the axons my question is does he own any others
- OttselSpy25
I wouldn't keep my hopes up about the movie actually getting made anytime soon.
And the idea that he had the rights to use the Axons comes from a cameo in K9, but it was likely unlicensed.
- Alexj98
ok well I still think it will be released because they have been planning it for seven years
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:211983
I was wondering if anyone could help with identifying the actor who played jate as i want to get all the cast from the episode utopia
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:211994
can anyone send me an image of the cyber megatron bomb and the kraal virus
- Alexj98
I tried looking but I could not find anything
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:212088
I understand that because of the poor reception they got they just stopped using them and are being kept with the peter cushing daleks but what is the in show explanation for why we do not see the paradigm daleks are the bronze still the part of the paradigm or has davros coming back gotten rid of them all and made a new dalek race again
- TheChampionOfTime
Well there are hundreds of Paradigm Daleks trapped in the Phantom Zone in The Lego Batman Movie...
- Shambala108
This kind of question belongs in Board:The Reference Desk, where I have moved it.
- Alexj98
ok but what has happened to the paradigm could it be they were sent to an alternate universe in this case the phantom zone
- TheChampionOfTime
What happened was Dr Who fans thought the bronze Daleks were better than the Paradigm Daleks.
I don't think there currently is a fictional explanation, and unless John Peel is writing a new tie-in book, we probably aren't going to get one any time soon. Just think whatever you want!
- Alexj98
ok this can be closed unless anyone knows of a doctor who explanation
- Xx-connor-xX
I'm pretty sure that the Daleks we are seeing now (in all episode from Victory of the Daleks to the Witch's Familiar except for those set in the past, e.g Day of the Doctor) are "the New Dalek Paradigm". They are the same Daleks that were created in Victory of the Daleks even though they look the same as the ones that came before. The five main Daleks that represent this new paradigm were phased out after receiving a bad reception but the Dalek paradigm still exists.
- Alexj98
I don't think so I'm presuming when davros came back he made the daleks out of bits of skaro
- Xx-connor-xX
But the Daleks aren't just machines, they are made out of Kaleds.
- Alexj98
yes but he can make daleks out of his skin presumably he can use the organic parts of skaro
- Xx-connor-xX
That is just assuming. All the Daleks were killed and destroyed in the Stolen Earth (except for a tiny group that went on to create the Paradigm Daleks). So until we are told any different, the Daleks we are seeing now are the new Paradigm.
Narratively, the history of the Daleks is as much a problem in the BBC Wales era as it was in the BBC London era. But Steven Moffat has certainly gone out of his way to confuse things. Both Asylum and the Series 9 opening two-parter showed Daleks that hailed from as far back as the 1960s, so this notion that the NPD replaced all other Daleks is obviously false. Seriously, the last scene of The Magician's Apprentice will have you scratchin' your head as much as Asylum's "Parliament of the Daleks" will.
While you might be able to convince yourself that the NDP created a variety of new casings based on earlier designs -- and that they are, as XX-Connor-XX said all NPDs -- there's really no narrative that directly informs that determination. And there's absolutely no story of which I'm aware that gives an explanation as to why the multi-colored NPDs have been absent for the whole of the Capaldi era.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:212405
this message is mainly to SOTO I am starting to regret saying they should be put on military races If they should be then fine but then I would argue why the meron who aren't on there but I'm just not sure if the jixen should go on
- Shambala108
This should have been posted in the original thread, not start a new one.
- Alexj98
i couldn't the thread had been closed
- Shambala108
Then if it's meant just for SOTO, post on his talk page.
- Alexj98
I am not sure how to
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:212430
should the jixen be on the military species page and what about the rutans or the sycorax
- Alexj98
or the merons
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:212431
on the warlord page I noticed there was no mention of dalek sec I am just curious why he is not included or for instance davros I'm not saying include them I'm just curious why there not included
- Micjan2003 (2)
Ok.
- Alexj98
so why aren't they included
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:212480
I'm watching an unearthly child but theres so many differences to the actual episode for instance when susan reads a book and says that's not right she instead is doing painting
- NateBumber
To interpret, sounds like OP is talking about the differences between An Unearthly Child (TV story) and The Pilot Episode.
- Alexj98
yeah I found that out I meant to close it but I do not know how
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:212493
does anyone think the jixen and the meron should be added to the military species catagory
- Alexj98
and yes I know I posted this originaly but I messed something up so I need to start it again so should these go into military species yes or no
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:212647
does the doctor not count as a transendential being when the human race brings him back with the archangel network and he is all blue and shiny
- Alexj98
or donna when she is the doctor donna
- Shambala108
If you have a question why something isn't in a category, please bring it up on the individual category's talk page. These boards are for issues that affect a number of pages; your questions really only concern one category.
- Alexj98
it would be easier if you could anwser
- Shambala108
The answer is that no one has put it there. Please bring this up on the category talk page.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:212728
on this page it describes about the different military species but shouldn't the jixen, the rutans, the meron, the quill, judoon, maybe silurians or the great vampires
- Alexj98
be on it
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:212765
on the superweapons page why isn't the key to time on there
- Alexj98
or the warp star
- Shambala108
There is no super weapons article on this wiki.
- Alexj98
yes there is here is the link http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Superweapons
- Shambala108
That's a category page, not an article, and if you have a question about that category, please bring it up on the category talk page.
- Alexj98
could u at least answer why the key to time is not on there
- Shambala108
Shambala108 wrote: That's a category page, not an article, and if you have a question about that category, please bring it up on the category talk page.
Repeating myself: please bring it up on the category talk page.
- Alexj98
I cant find the category talk page
- Garthwebb
You can use the "talk" link on that category page to get there. It will bring you to this link:
http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Category_talk:Superweapons
where you can add a topic.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:212911
why has the military species bein deleted
- Shambala108
It was deleted for violating Tardis:Category naming conventions.
- Alexj98
ok is it named something else or is there another page that describes the warrior species
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:212986
I have heard that the military species apparently had a bad name so what is its name now
As I posted on the other thread, the category was deleted because the category violated Tardis:Category naming conventions. If you read the policy you will understand why it won't be created under any other name.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:213081
how many doctor who anniversarys are there I can think of the three doctors the five doctors I think dimensions in time not sure about 2003 and the day of the doctor
- Shambala108
This type of question belongs at Board:The Reference Desk: "Come here for quick facts—but not speculation."
- Borisashton
- 10th anniversary: The Three Doctors
- 15th anniversary: Nationwide special
- 20th anniversary: The Five Doctors
- 25th anniversary: Silver Nemesis
- 30th anniversary: Dimensions in Time / The Dark Dimension (unproduced)
- 40th anniversary: Scream of the Shalka
- 50th anniversary: The Day of the Doctor
That's all I know of. You can see 23 November (releases) for stories released on the anniversary.
EDIT: Oh, someone posted before me.
- Alexj98
so can anyone tell me how many anniversarys there are
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:213082
how many anniversarys are there I can think of the three doctors the five doctors I think dimensions in time ? the day of the doctor are there any more
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:213846
What is the policy on alphabetising names, specifically last names with various prefixes, like de, von, Mac, Mc etc.? I'm guessing that for a BE wiki, de, von and other non-English prefixes should be taken literally as is, i.e., alphabetised under "d", "v" etc. But what about English prefixes Mac and Mc. I heard that they are sometimes disregarded, putting, say McElroy under "E". What is the wiki policy?
- Shambala108
Well, I found several examples of the "von", "de" and "ben" type that all had the namesort tag, so they would automatically be alphabetized by the last word. That doesn't necessarily mean that it's policy, but in my (admittedly small sample size) random search, I found no examples that didn't contain the namesort tag.
The "Mc" and "Mac" are almost always part of the last name, not separated by a space, so they would be alphabetized by the "M".
- Amorkuz
Thanks.
- Shambala108
I will do some more research later on, so don't look at what I've posted so far as "official policy". I'll have more time to look this evening, and someone will probably come along and contradict me anyway. But we'll work it out.
- Shambala108
Found it (right under my nose). Template:NameSort specifically states, "Note that names with non-English possessive adjectives are properly sorted in English by the last name. So the template does the right thing by sorting Vincent van Gogh as Gogh, Vincent van."
- Amorkuz
I love clear rules.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:213962
I have a question I was trying to research how many bodies the master has had so I looked in the wiki but I am getting confused can someone tell me how many bodies we know about all I can think of is 1 child 12 rodger 13 crispy master 14 Anthony ainly 15 keith potter 16 another stolen 17 eric Roberts 18 the one in the comic 19 not seen 20 mastermind master 21 not seen 22 bald master 23 time war child 24 derek Jacobi 25 john simm 26 missy
- TheChampionOfTime
Technically, Ainley, Keith Potter, and "another stolen" are all just the crispy Master in various stolen bodies. In fact, Potter is just Ainley temporarily projecting his mind into another body.
Also, 17, 18, 19, & 20 are all just the "essence of Master" stealing a series of bodies.
Also also, you seemed to miss one incarnation that appeared in a few 90s books. He was in First Frontier (novel), Happy Endings (novel), and Housewarming (short story).
Also also also, I'm sure there are different interpretations to he Master's life than mine. Take everything I said with a grain of salt.
- Alexj98
so wait how many are there
- Shambala108
TheChampionOfTime wrote: Also also also, I'm sure there are different interpretations to he Master's life than mine.
As User:TheChampionOfTime says, there are many different interpretations. This question does not have a definite answer.
- Alexj98
fine let me rephrase how many do we know of
- Shambala108
We have a page for the Master, you might find what you're looking for there.
And if you have a question about the show (or other media) please stop using this board. This board is for editing help questions. The board you should use is Board:The Reference Desk.
- Alexj98
ok I looked at the page of the master and I calculated 24 bodies he/she has had I am presuming this is right right?
I absolutely wouldn't think the number is as high as you're making it out to be, though. Certainly not if you equate regeneration to fully unique body.
In any case, closing this thread because anything is partially speculative for a while.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:213973
why has the paradox machine been added to the individual tardises it just the doctors
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:214005
why has the paradox machine been added to the individual tardis catagory
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:214006
why has the paradox machine been added to the individual tardis catagory
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:214108
what classic elements are in modern doctor who I can think of characters coming back old dalek, tardis and cybermen designs as well as the sonic screwdriver and returning monsters is there anything else from the classic era that has appeared in modern who
- 523970
The Ice Warriors, The Silurians, The Master, Sarah Jane Smith, Sontarans, Davros, The Zygons, Rassilon
- Alexj98
anything else
- OttselSpy25
- Alexj98
so there are the macra movellans great intellegice classic tardis classic screwdriver the master sarah jane sontarans silurians davros cybermats ice warriors cybermen daleks rassilon classic daleks and classic cybermen any more
- OttselSpy25
The Classic Cybermen have not appeared in new-Who.
- Alexj98
what about the head in the cabinent
- OttselSpy25
I guess that counts.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:214161
ive been researching how many classic daleks were in the asylum aparantly the silver daleks from death to the daleks were in the asylum but when I look at the image one site says they were the silver daleks another says they were not does anyone know if the death to the daleks daleks were in it
- OSWIN: Survivors of particular wars. Spiridon, Kembel, Eridius, Vulcan, Exxilon. Ringing any bells?
"Exxilon" means Death to the Daleks.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:214166
I know there have been multi doctor stories starting from the 3 doctors but have there been any with other time lords meeting previous incarnations of themselves
- TheChampionOfTime
I.M. Foreman, Category:Multi-Master stories, AUDIO: Renaissance, & AUDIO: The Trouble with Drax spring to my mind. There's probably more.
- Alexj98
sorry I meant on television
- TheChampionOfTime
Then the answer is no...
for now.
- TheChampionOfTime
Oh wait! K'anpo Rimpoche sorta interacts with his future/past self in Planet of the Spiders.
- Alexj98
well I looked at that but they way they describe it is more like the doctor and the watcher
- Alexj98
well its a mental projection did the projection know he was a future incarnation if so then it is a multi story
- Alexj98
and on the wiki they count the mental projections of the doctor in his mind in the name of the doctor so I would say it counts
- OttselSpy25
Yea, I wouldn't say that it does really.
- Alexj98
I'm just saying it does because of chronotis
- OttselSpy25
Woa what about Chronotis?
- Alexj98
i got confused i meant k'anpo rimpoche
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:214192
I was looking at the cybermen but there are a lot of different versions of there creations one account says the voord invented them another says they lived during prehistoric mondas with the mondas silurians and sea devils then there is the one from spare parts that doctorman Christine Allan was incharge of the creation of the cybermen
who is the real creator
- Shambala108
There is no right answer to your question. As you yourself said, there are a lot of different versions. There isn't one that is more "real" than the others. That's just the way Doctor Who works.
- Alexj98
damn well which one sounds most likely I like the voord one most
- OttselSpy25
We as a wikia do not attempt to find the "true" versions of any account. We simply attempt to illustrate what sources say, without showing favor over any specific instance.
However, the two mainstream versions of the Cybermen are those from Mondas (The Tenth Planet) and those from Pete's World (Series 2). These are the ones most likely to be revisited by any current mediums.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:214327
http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Individual_TARDISes
just curious why is the paradox machine in the individual tardis catagory
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:214537
question why was the paradox machine added to this catagory
- Alexj98
could someone please answer this question please
- OttselSpy25
Well, simply because by all accounts they could only be constructed from TARDISes. However, it does seem that the page is on the concept of a paradox machine. Thus I will instead by adding it to Category:TARDIS variants.
- Alexj98
okay but why is it part of that
- Alexj98
also if its a tardis still it should stay on the individual shouldn't it or is that because its the doctors
- OttselSpy25
Not sure what the first question is, for the second question the page is clearly on the concept of a paradox machine before it is the Doctor's TARDIS.
- Alexj98
so should it not stay on the individual tardis page
- OttselSpy25
I would say so. It should not stay. And thus it has been removed.
- Alexj98
but it is a type of tardis
- OttselSpy25
yes
Your topic doesn't exist on the wiki because it hasn't been created. It hasn't been created because either:
- no one has has had time to create it
- no one has had interest to create it
- most users who would have created it think that it's not worthy of creation
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:214997
should the doctor not be added to the transcendential beings page because of when he has the powers from the archangel network
- OttselSpy25
Was he described as transcendental?
In actuality, the logic behind the sequence is very scientific in the eyes of the DWU.
- Alexj98
the bad wolf entity was never described as transcendental I just think because the doctor had god like powers he should be added
- OttselSpy25
You see, that just makes me question if this category is sound. "God-like" is amazingly vague, especially considering the often inconsistent DWU definition of the word "god."
- Alexj98
well I don't know what they mean but what I mean is I think he should be added because even this wiki states he has the power of a god
- OttselSpy25
That just seems like too vague of a concept to be a really well-working category.
- Shambala108
OttselSpy25 wrote: You see, that just makes me question if this category is sound. "God-like" is amazingly vague, especially considering the often inconsistent DWU definition of the word "god."
Agreed, which is why I placed a prop delete tag on Category:Transcendental beings.
- Alexj98
insted of deleting could we not rename it
- OttselSpy25
The name isn't the problem. I can't imagine us ever being able to think of a name specific enough to eliminate rampant speculation. The best that could happen is that we split it into very specific categories that are only a fraction of the original, but I don't find that very likely.
- Alexj98
i don't wanna lose another category like we did the military species
- Shambala108
Alexj98 wrote: i don't wanna lose another category like we did the military species
Categories are useless if they can't concretely define what belongs in them. I suggest you read Tardis:Category naming conventions for an understanding of our policy.
- Amorkuz
To provide an external point of view of someone who never thought about this category before, I am at a loss to find what unites all these entries. I mean Chronovore and Quill Goddess, the existence of the latter being a bit, shall we say, metaphysical?
I'm sure the creators and contributors to the category had something in mind, maybe, indeed, they thought of "god-like" as suggested upthread. But the name of the category did not suggest this reading to me.
And I agree with OS25 that an attempt to rename it will most probably lead to splitting into more specific and, hence, better defined categories.
The only thing that can save this category, IMHO, is to use it in a literal sense: if the Doctor (or someone else) says that this creature is "transcendental", only then is it allowed in the category. But I doubt very much that's how it was formed. And I bet that this would just shift the mismatch in understanding the word "transcendental" from us, editors, to writers of the stories involved.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:215419
anyone notice that other people get anniversary's as well for instance davros was 40 in 2015 and they bought him back the cybermen this year because it was on hiatus and the ice warriors are there any more people who get anniversary episodes
- Alexj98
as well as series 2 because that was fourty years of the cybermen
- Alexj98
also k9 timequake is to celebrate 40 years of him
- OttselSpy25
Ooh, please check out Tardis:Spoiler policy. As far as we are concerned, half of the things that you mentioned in your first post can not be discussed on this site as of yet.
- 217.43.40.225
OttselSpy25 wrote: Ooh, please check out Tardis:Spoiler policy. As far as we are concerned, half of the things that you mentioned in your first post can not be discussed on this site as of yet.
BILL AND NARDOLE DIE LMAO. JK, they don't really die.
- 217.43.40.225
Well, actually I don't know if they die, but I doubt it.
- 217.43.40.225
OttselSpy25 wrote: Ooh, please check out Tardis:Spoiler policy. As far as we are concerned, half of the things that you mentioned in your first post can not be discussed on this site as of yet.
Even on forums?
- OttselSpy25
Almost everywhere. At all times.
- Alexj98
i apoligse I am not very good on forums but descluding the series 10 stuff could my question still be anwseredd
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:215582
I would like to know why the military species page was deleted and request we remake it. it had monsters and aliens who had a belief or were made for war for instance daleks cybermen sontarans shadow kin anubians krontep and more
- OttselSpy25
It was a vague category which just couldn't survive on this site. A "military species" is any species with a military, technically speaking. And that's most every species that has ever appeared in Who media.
- Alexj98
what do you mean most of them there aren't many warlike species how many are there I can think of daleks cybermen cybus and mondas sontarans ice warriors mire shadow kin krontep time lords anubians dominators thals are there any more
- OttselSpy25
It's harder to NOT think of species that had some sort of military.
Thains? Almost?
This is why it is no longer a category.
- AeD
Yeah, it's one of those People Sit On Chairs categories.
(I imagine the Tivolians probably don't have any kind of armed forces of their own, either.)
- Alexj98
the idea of it was species who had a culture based around war like the daleks or the sontarans
- OttselSpy25
Or humans. Even if you don't agree that we are currently a "species with a culture based around war," humans have at some point been that way in the DWU.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:215584
why was the paradox machine added to the tardis variants catagory
- OttselSpy25
Because it's a category of TARDISes.
- Alexj98
so wait is it a type of tardis
Your topic doesn't exist on the wiki because it hasn't been created. It hasn't been created because either:
- no one has has had time to create it
- no one has had interest to create it
- most users who would have created it think that it's not worthy of creation
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:215585
I know ive asked this before but how many master's are there because the cannon has changed with crispy master being the thirteenth body and rodger Delgado being the 12th so how many bodies do we think the master has had
- OttselSpy25
On this website we hold the strong belief that there is no canon. Thus, we can not decide how many Masters there are because we can't decide which stories do and do not "count."
We can not answer this question without speculation.
- Alexj98
the master cant decide how many bodies he's had died
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:216282
Your topic doesn't exist on the wiki because it hasn't been created. It hasn't been created because either:
- no one has has had time to create it
- no one has had interest to create it
- most users who would have created it think that it's not worthy of creation
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:216650
could someone help me fix series 10 page I was trying to put 6 7 8 as a three parter because that is what they are
- OttselSpy25
Let's not open spoilers here, but Moffat has said that they are not a three-parter.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:216913
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:217669
could we do a page about multi time lord stories I know there Is one for the doctors but what about other time lords because k'anpo rimpoche talks to himself in the sameway the doctor does in the name of the doctor and the master met himself in a comic and in the two master's audio story
Also, please stop creating threads in Board:Help! that are not about how to use the software underpinning the wiki. Board:Help! is for things like, "How do I insert a picture on a page?" or "How do I log in from my phone?" -- technical questions about how the wiki works.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:217842
we need to change series 10 to say that <removed by admin per T:SPOIL>
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:217843
I know the military species was deleted because it violated terms but what does that mean exactly
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:222958
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:225399
Hey everyone who is good at CSS, templates and all sort of styling things! I would love to make the Finnish Doctor Who Wiki (http://fi.doctorwho.wikia.com/wiki/Doctor_Who_Wikia) a bit nicer to look at. I'd also like it to look kind of similar to the English Tardis Wiki. Now I'm not experienced enough with templates to create similar infoboxes that adapt to the needs of the user.
This is why I'm asking for someone to help me out a bit and revive the Finnish DW Wiki! You don't need to know Finnish to help me! Reply in here if you're able to help! (I'm sorry if this post is in the wrong section. Thought it would be better here than in UNIT section.)
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:229030
Where do I find the blogs?
- Shambala108
Blogs were disabled several years ago. They weren't very popular, and most people only posted comments like "Hi", just to get the badges. The other, more important, issue was that they would require policing to prevent violations of Tardis:Spoiler policy, which was determined to be too difficult.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:230566
Is there somewhere in the Board index to ask questions about a scene from an DW episode?
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:237601
I wanted to make a new category, but am not sure how to (and furthermore, once I made one, I'm not even certain I'd be sure how to make it a part of other, wider categories). Could anyone shine some light on this?
- Amorkuz
Which category were you thinking about?
- JonathanHardy123
I was thinking of making a category for characters who are agents of the Committee, an organisation in the Torchwood audios. There are a number of characters in these audios from different time periods and places (as well as some TV characters who're retconned to be agents of the Committee), so I thought it'd make sense to have a category that links them all together. However, I'm not actually sure how to make a category page/category!
- Amorkuz
Seems like a useful category. But before creating it, the most important thing about categories is giving them crystal clear names. So that absolutely every other editor would immediately know how to use it. The explanations for that are in Tardis:Category naming conventions. In light of this, I am wondering whether you are planning to include in this category people who were unwitting pawns of the Committee. Remember how they would take over bodies of elderly people for only a short time? The reason I am asking is that it's not obvious whether such people can be called "agents" of the Committee. So if you would like to include them, then the name has to be more precise than just "agents".
There are probably a few ways to create a category, but the simple way is this:
- Add the category to an appropriate page (this does not, however, create the category yet)
- Click on the link to the category, which will take you to the create page
- Add an appropriate category to the one you want to create, then publish. This creates the category.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:238175
Is the use of a Displaytitle template appropriate on this wiki, or are they banned? Let's take a random example: Eleventh Doctor (The Curse of Fatal Death) has a long enough title that it forces a rather unseemly line-break between "Fatal" and "Death". Typing:
{{DISPLAYTITLE:<small>Eleventh Doctor (The Curse of Fatal Death</small>}}
(as is, for example, policy on the Scrooge McDuck Wiki) would solve this issue.
However, it does not appear to be done anywhere on the Wiki. Is it banned for some reason? (I presume that using it to obscure dab-titles is, also, though I don't really understand why either.)
- Shambala108
What do you mean by a line-break? More specifically, where does this line break occur and under what circumstances?
- SOTO
We do have a use for such things, but we have a particular use for DISPLAYTITLE. Our templates {{retitle}} and {{title dab away}} mainly serve to add italics or quotation marks where needed.
Dab terms are retained for the purposes of disambiguation, and there are far longer titles on this wiki than Eleventh Doctor (The Curse of Fatal Death).
For instance, the Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union takes fully three lines to display in my browser.
- Scrooge MacDuck
Shambala, I trust SOTO's example has clarified what I meant by line-break…?
SOTO: sure, there's much longer. I was just picking a random example. And I understand that the dab titles exist for disambiguation (obviously); the same thing exists on several other Wikis I edit, only there, it's "hidden" by a DISPLAYTITLE on the page itself, and only appears during a search, which I find more seemly. Still, there's a good argument to be made both ways.
But I don't really understand your final answer, if you've even given one. Should I add DISPLAYTITLES with "<small>" tags to such long-titled pages when I find them, or not?
- SOTO
That's not something we do with {{retitle}} (and we would use that template, not DISPLAYTITLE directly) at Tardis, as of 2018 anyway. And I don't see a need to start.
For one thing, I don't think it's unseemly for a long title to take up more than one line. That's kind of the beauty of a long title.
For another, where would we draw the line? How could we determine which names need smaller-text titles, and which don't? The name may take more or less space on a line, depending on browser and window/screen size.
The way I see it, page headers accommodate for long titles just fine, on their own. Long names don't run on ad infinitum, past the buttons and then the margin. It automatically allows for a bit of a soft line wrap.
And if I added
{{retitle|{{sm|{{PAGENAME}}}}}}to the aforementioned Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union, it would still take up three lines for me.And I'm seeing Eleventh Doctor (The Curse of Fatal Death) already on one line, on my computer, so, again, where would we draw the line?
As SOTO has said, please keep to using the already-established templates, like {{retitle}}.
Italicisation and funky capitalisation — like iPhone — are the main intended uses of the DISPLAYTITLE functionality on this wiki.
So, to answer Scrooge MacDuck simply and directly:
- Please do not attempt to alter the styling of any title on this wiki, through any means, except to properly italicise or capitalise it.
Thanks!
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:238696
Google Plus, a site i used to use a lot, is shutting down in august 2019
now, you might be asking "what has that got to do with us?"
well, if it wasn't for google plus, i wouldn't be here, i know, it's egotistical, but google plus got me into communities like these, and it was the lessons that i learnt on google plus that is helping me through the problems in my life
i know, it's only open for enterprises but that would be stupid
so please, sign this petition to SAVE GOOGLE PLUS!
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:238924
For example, could we put information about how Tzim Sha's language may have affricates with only one part voiced?
- Danniesen
Unless it is a given information on a reliable or directly connected site or given in the episode in question, this would be speculation. And speculation is not used.
- Snivystorm
Agreed, best to follow the rules for T:Valid sources and T:CITE. Simply, if we don't know for sure/have proof, then it doesn't belong on the wikia, at least on the articles.
- Opdagon
Snivystorm wrote: at least on the articles.
Would it go anywhere?
- Scrooge MacDuck
Well, in most other Wikis that disapprove of speculation (even likely one) in the main page relocate it to "Behind the scenes". I don't know if it's the case here, though. (In what I find a rather mystifying turn of events for a wiki about a character who constantly breaks the rules of everything, Tardis tends to have much harsher policies than other wikis, in general, though there are exceptions.)
- Snivystorm
Opdagon wrote:
Snivystorm wrote: at least on the articles.
Would it go anywhere?
I was referring to talk pages and your own user page; you can speculate there, as far as I'm aware. I don't believe we allow it in Behind the Scenes as, again, that would make it part of the main article so we would be speculating to wider readership.
- Snivystorm
Scrooge MacDuck wrote: (Tardis tends to have much harsher policies than other wikis, in general, though there are exceptions.)
I wouldn't call it "harsh", simply in-depth and thorough, rather than the loose structure other wikis go for.
- Scrooge MacDuck
This isn't the place for that debate (and I'm not trying to be offensive or anything; Tardis's way clearly works, empirically), but I definitely think some of the image policies, at least, definitely qualify as "harsh", especially in their "delete on sight without forewarning" application. Ibid for the exclusive licensing-based rules — I'm not asking for it to be valid, but I think it would be a net positive if the Wiki had a page for, say, Gene Genius.
And forbidding sensical or widespread speculation at all to the extent that this wiki does, I think, also falls within the "harsh" category. For example, not being able to raise the possibility that the Curator might be the same fellow as the Doctor Who Night Doctor, or that the Eleventh Doctor (Ganger) survived, or that House was a time-splinter echo of the Greatest Intelligence. All this should of course not be written as fact on the in-universe portions of the page, but acknowledging theories like these seems to me to enhance the reading experience rather than detract from it.
But anyway, you got your answer, Opdagon.
- Snivystorm
Scrooge MacDuck wrote: But anyway, you got your answer, Opdagon.
Precisely.
Though, if you want to discuss the matter you brought up in your comment @Scrooge, feel free to message me on my talk page about it. :)
- Shambala108
Going to chime in here. With all due respect, neither User:Snivystorm or User:Scrooge MacDuck are admins, and the above comments are their opinions.
That being said, we do not allow speculation on in-universe pages. There shouldn't be any speculation on real world articles - information should be properly sourced whenever possible. And talk pages, whether article or user, are also not the place for speculation or theories (Tardis:Discussion policy).
Speculation can take place at Howling:The Howling, but keep in mind that it is one of the few spoiler-allowed areas on this wiki.
- Shambala108
And ScroogeMacDuck, please do not derail forum threads to complain about the rules. If you have a problem/question, either post on the policy's talk page or contact the admin in question. See Tardis:Discussion policy and Tardis:Forum policy.
- Snivystorm
Shambala108 wrote: Speculation can take place at Howling:The Howling, but keep in mind that it is one of the few spoiler-allowed areas on this wiki.
Thanks for the clarification. I always forget about The Howling ahah.
- Scrooge MacDuck
Shambala108 wrote: And ScroogeMacDuck, please do not derail forum threads to complain about the rules. If you have a problem/question, either post on the policy's talk page or contact the admin in question. See Tardis:Discussion policy and Tardis:Forum policy.
I didn't really derail it myself, though. I made a passing remark as part of the on-topic discussion, which was picked up by Snivystorm — and when I replied to that, it was prefacing with the warning that this was veering into off-topic, and ended with a return to the main topic, through which I meant to close the "harshness" discussion.
Which I'll do again! If it ain't broke, don't fix it, and all that.
So about your answer — The Howling is all very nice, and apparently you were well-inspired to remind Snivystorm of its existence, but it's not really the same thing. It's a place for users to post their own personal theories, which isn't really what I at least was talking about earlier — the reasonable, tone-appropriate, plothole-solving speculation that would absolutely be of interest to the casual reader, not just to fans looking for individual fans' own ideas.
- Shambala108
Scrooge MacDuck wrote: Which I'll do again! If it ain't broke, don't fix it, and all that.
Not sure what you're referring to here?
- Scrooge MacDuck
Harkening back to the original topic after the first part of a post which was veering into off-topic.
- Amorkuz
I think a distinction is to be made between a self-made speculation and a popular well-established fan theory. The latter can be acknowledged with appropriate sources in the BTS section. A good example here is The Woman (The End of Time). It is widely speculated whether she is the Doctor’s mother. The BTS Portion documents all the available evidence for and against, including the script, statements by the creator, casting notes, etc. In other words, we are not documenting the speculation itself. We are documenting the reaction of the production team to this speculation. (Another example here is Face of Boe.)
On the contrary, an idea that just came to one's head yesterday is, to be honest, fanfic (or the beginnings thereof). So it is mostly disallowed. In addition to what have been said before, it can be flaunted in Discussions (provided it's a theory and not a fully formed story).
- Scrooge MacDuck
Naturally. And Tardis does, of course, cover the latter of these two.
But I was making a further distinction between a far-fetched idea that popped into someone's head and really is an "original work" (say, Peter Cushing's pet theory about how his Doctor could fit into the TV series continuity, though that one is notable for another reason, namely that it's Peter Cushing's) and what I'd call an interpretation — a possibility not exactly raised by the relevant work, but more or less as likely as the "suggested" interpretation. Such as, say, "the Master may once have been, or impersonated, Gengis Khan", based on his statements in the TV movie.
It's not a popular theory, but it's a theory that makes sense, y'know — a theory that doesn't require any additional element, just a different interpretation of what's on-screen.
You say yourself that Tardis's way is to cover the phenomenon around a popular speculation more than the speculation itself, and that's not the only way, I think. Though it's a valid way.
By the way, I don't think "the Face of Boe is Jack" and "The Woman is the Doctor's mother" are really fan theories at all. Call them theories if you will, because of Tardis's refusal to consider Word Of God as a valid source, but they're not from fans — they're authorial intent that didn't explicitly make the final cut. A better example of a widespread fan theory would be that the Weeping Angels are corrupted Time Lords (through a combination of the Ring of Immortality's curse in The Five Doctors and the mysterious face-covering Time Lords in The End of Time), or that the Doctor's secret, secret name actually is Doctor Who.
- Danniesen
When it comes to the topic of self-made speculation and fanfics and such, some fandoms make seperate Wikias specifically for the purpose of fanfiction ideas and on these you can freely write your own ideas and speculations. I personally, however, find these kind of Wikias to be an outright mess, as there seems to be no actual structure on pages.
- Scrooge MacDuck
Same here. The problem is that when you start creating a Wiki about documenting the fandom, a bunch of people start thinking it's a place to post new fanfiction that doesn't appear anywhere else.
But besides, my Argument for Reasonable Speculation is that it is of interest to people who want to read about official Doctor Who, and would be kind of wasted if put on a Wiki about fanfiction (even a hypothetical orderly one) since it isn't really that.
All that said, I'm probably in the minority here, considering how long the Tardis Wiki has been going without such Reasonable Speculation. There may not be much more to say on this thread.
To sum up: no speculation is allowed on the in-universe part of in-universe pages. Any speculation, fan theories, etc can go on real world and/or BTS sections of in-universe pages only if they have valid sources. Otherwise, all speculation and the discussion that arises from it can go in the discussion boards (the DISCUSS button at the top of every page) or Howling:The Howling.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:238940
Where the TARDIS
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:240280
I am quite aware of the long-standing policy on this Wiki not to cover charity works. Not just not to make them valid sources, but the policy against even acknowledging their existence.
First, I am given to understand that it started because of the licensing issues, but… why do we care? We aren't the BBC, nor are we copyright lawyers. This kind of puzzles me.
But furthermore, and this is the real kicker, there was, I found while strolling through the Matrix Archives, a decision that the "no charity" rule would apply even when it's not that the copyright holders let someone else use their property for charity, but instead that the actual holder of the copyrights made a charity story with that copyrighted element.
There I frankly don't understand the problem. If the reason for the interdiction of most charity publications is that they're not properly licensed, why would charity publications where there is no wonky licensing also get roped in?
- Shambala108
To give a detailed answer, I would have to do some research, but here's a quick answer: It's easier to enforce.
We have 50+ years of material, 67,000+ pages, dozens of policy pages, and less than 10 users who regularly clean up edits (and only two of them are admins who have page-deleting abilities). It's a fact that many of the rules on the wiki are made (at least partially) for ease of enforcement.
When I have some free time, I'll look up the old discussions and post more here.
- Scrooge MacDuck
Hm, okay. Thanks for a quick answer, anyway! For the very reasons you outline here, I imagine you're quite busy.
- Shambala108
OK, I found three different places that explain where we're coming from with regards to charity works, and there is a bit of repetition, but I'll list them here for anyone who wants to see the details.
- Tardis:Valid sources#What doesn't count - the first thing listed is charity publications, with the following comment: "Any fiction, by any author, where the copyright holder hasn't given permission isn't allowed. And no, it doesn't matter that the story was written by someone who has otherwise written licensed fiction. Or that the publisher did a nice thing and gave his or her profits to charity. Or that the work was almost published by the BBC."
- Forum:Charity anthology short stories - this is the original discussion where the policy was formed, and it's instructive to note that User:CzechOut explicitly calls charity stories "no better than fan fiction", which of course is not allowed on the wiki per Tardis:What the Tardis Data Core is not.
- Thread:199045 - this thread dealt with some of the Iris stories that were for charity, in which User:Amorkuz' closing statements included this point: "A story that isn't commercially licensed by all of the relevant copyright holders doesn't count."
Now that doesn't really answer the OP's question as to why we care about the licensing. We may not be copyright lawyers, but we do care about not violating copyright. I've no idea whether the BBC could shut down our wiki if we violate copyright, but it's always been policy on this wiki to respect copyright, which is why we have such rules as Tardis:Video policy, Tardis:Plagiarism and Tardis:Citation.
As for the OP's question in the third paragraph, I believe in those cases there wasn't the full copyright given, similar to the Iris cases. I'd like to know if there are examples on this wiki of charity publications that had full licensing given.
About whether the BBC could shut down the Wiki because of copyright issues: in my unprofessional opinion: theoretically, yes, maybe, but that's incredibly unlikely given that I don't know of any other wiki (even ones that are much less careful about image-size or videos or that kind of thing) being shut down for it.
And if it were, the issues would be that our bios "plagiarize" the works they're based on, or that we have no right to use the images we use. Covering externally-created "fanfiction" wouldn't matter much to them — by definition, in talking about/quoting from a fanfiction, we wouldn't be unrightfully quoting from something that belongs to them. If they had to sue anyone over a fanwork it would be its author(s), not a Wiki hypothetically giving background info about the fanwork.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:242342
(I have tried, and failed, to find an answer to this query in the policies, but perhaps I haven't looked well enough.)
What sort of links are appropriate for "External links" sections on pages? My feeling is that it ought to be links to pages about this same subject on other websites/wikis. Am I wrong?
- SOTO
I'd say that's usually the case. Same subject covered on other sites, or official accounts/websites of the subject in question. Occasionally, I'll also add interviews with the subject, if they're particularly informative.
Do you have any specific cases you're not sure about?
- Scrooge MacDuck
Okay.
And yeah, matter of fact. I was wondering if, on the Disney Time 1975 (TV story) page I just created, a link to the Disney Time page on the Disney Wiki, and a link to the Disney Time 1975 page on the Scrooge McDuck Wiki, would be appropriate. In the meantime I'd left the section blank (I see you've since deleted the header).
By the by, I was right, wasn't I? There was no page about this special yet?
- SOTO
I'm not omniscient, but I'm reasonably certain, yeah.
Would you mind providing a link to those pages in this thread? Just to note, Assimilation² (comic story) has external links to pages on Memory Alpha and Memory Beta about the same crossover series.
- Scrooge MacDuck
- Shambala108
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:243258
I found a group of games on the BBC Doctor Who website, and I was wondering if we create (an) article(s) for these games? I wouldn't create it without your decisions...
Here's the link: https://www.doctorwho.tv/games/
- Scrooge MacDuck
I don't see why not. Video games are video games, even if they're found online on a website — take Into the Vortex, for example.
On the other hand, you may need an Inclusion Debate thread to determine whether any of those games are valid sources. I doubt it, though.
- Danniesen
My next dilemma was how to build up an article like this one would be...
- SOTO
None of them are valid sources. They're not stories. They're three quizzes and a jigsaw puzzle.
They wouldn't make very long articles, either, but feel free to have at it. A short description of the goal in the game, of the simple gameplay, and of the context in which it was released (Christmas 2018). Beyond that, simply a bullet-point list of the quotes (w/ sources) / questions and available answers / allies and enemies, and a mention of the prize at the end.
- SOTO
And they've helpfully provided infobox/thumbnail images for each game on that very page. And at 2000px, as well.
- Danniesen
All I wondered was whether it was worth an article and how to set up such a specific article.
- Danniesen
I've started up an article now. :)
- SOTO
I had imagined you'd make them separate articles. Where did the title come from?
- Danniesen
I thought it would be too small with seperate articles. But feel free to change it if that's better.
The title came from the site of those mini-games. At the top of the page it simply says "Games". But again, if you feel that's too on-the-nose, feel free to change it.
I won't claim authority on it.
- Scrooge MacDuck
The Tardis Data Core's policy is that no page is too small — as long as the subject is relevant it deserves its own page. (Except if you're [[John and Gillian]], of course.)
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:243499
Hey, are these links of any use to this site:
1. <redacted by admin> 2. <redacted by admin>
They detail that in May 2017, it was announced that due to the terms of a deal between BBC Worldwide and <redacted by admin>.
- Scrooge MacDuck
I don't really understand what you would have us do with them?
- Danniesen
No offense to you at all, but maybe an admin should weigh in on this. They might have a clearer picture of what could be done with this info.
Again, no offense meant.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:254005
What with Big Finish having launched one for their 20th anniversary, I'd like to ask how, if at all, livestreams such as this are to be covered on Tardis.
Since it's mostly a medium for rereleasing preexisting audio stories (or, as the case may be, single episodes of them), it doesn't feel right to me to cover it like a single webcast; but we really ought to do something, because there are also original behind-the-scenes featurettes packaged in, none of which have an individual name or credits. They may be of some use for sourcing of real-world info.
There are also little looped CGI animations running while the audio is on, including, for example, an animated appearance by a Tenth Planet Cyberman who walked on-screen and then went away while Spare Parts was on. Something like the two Yule Logs in format. Where, if any, would it be appropriate to list these easter-eggs?
- Shambala108
What's wrong with putting this information on the Big Finish Productions website?
- Scrooge MacDuck
Oh, nothing, if that's established practice. I was asking, not questioning anything.
(Though to answer your rhetorical question literally, the livestream was done through the Doctor Who YouTube channel, not the Big Finish website itself, so that could be an obstacle to covering it there.)
Also, would a screenshot of that Cyberman I mentioned be welcome anywhere?
- Borisashton
Would this not be a similar situation akin to pages within Category:Television repeats?
- Scrooge MacDuck
I thought it might be. Shambala?
- Scrooge MacDuck
Oh, and just an update: Day Two also included an outright fictional sketch (an eminently non-DWU, fourth-wall-breaking one, mind) around the 9:30:00 mark. What do we do about it?
- Borisashton
If you're talking about the Toby Hadoke Quatermass thing I say if we make a page for the event (something like Big Finish 20 at 20) we can just mention it there. It certainly doesn't warrant a page, especially since the character concerned is not from Doctor Who.
- Scrooge MacDuck
Hm… Big Finish 20 at 20 was the 'tag' they used, but the oft-repeated title card said 20 Years of Doctor Who at Big Finish, and the title of the video was the rather stilted LIVE FULL Episodes of Doctor Who Audio.
At any rate, I don't know about it not warranting a page — it's a ludicrous sketch about the supposed behind-the-scenes of a Doctor Who production, even if the joke is that this is a character from a completely other series trying to get a part in a Big Finish story. We do have pages about parodic behind-the-scenes skits not actually featuring any DWU characters — The Corridor Sketch, for example. Perhaps it might be best to just cover it on the page about the broadcast as a whole, if we do end up making one, but I wouldn't have thought it as clear-cut as you make it sound.
…you know, I began this thread in the Help Desk with the assumption that there was a straightforward answer to the question already in policy, but this is turning out more like a Panopticon sort of thread, isn't it? Phooey.
- Shambala108
The Help Desk: "Confused about how wikis work and what we do here at the Tardis Data Core? Come here and ask questions without fear of sounding 'stupid'." Doesn't really apply here; policy questions belong at Board:The Panopticon.
- Scrooge MacDuck
My initial question was about "how the wiki worked"; it only later became clear to me that policy in this matter had to be made, not just found out about by me personally.
- Danniesen
- Danniesen
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:259514
Just checking, are the Terry Nation Army web documentaries a valid source for real-world info? They include a ton of interesting background information that would definitely belong in the BTS section of such pages as Mechonoid or Dalek Supreme (Planet of the Daleks). Linking back to Thread:251268, it would also be extremely helpful in sourcing info on the eventual page about Get Off My Cloud! (TV story).
Tardis policy is that well-researched, professional web research, if it's of a similar "grade" to what might just as well be available in print, can be used as source for real-world information. Does this apply to video documentaries as well? (Mind you, their latest video was apparently released in tandem with Big Finish, who timed a special promotion on the Masters of Luxor CD to the release of the documentary, so these aren't quite unofficial, but it's nothing solid.) And should we have a page about them? The episode I mentioned about the RL origins of the Mechonoids features a digital recreation of the original design for the Mechanoid, before it was changed to the familiar multi-faceted spheres; can we put an image of that in the BTS section of the page? Etc.
- Scrooge MacDuck
Bump.
- RingoRoadagain
To me, they are. Co-creator and narrator is Gavin Rymill (aka themindrobber); a prop specialist who more than once was involved as such in the franchise.
- Borisashton
After watching the entirety of series one, I agree that the documentaries are very professional and the info contained within them would be assets to our pages.
I would be hesitant to make pages on them based on the Luxors promo alone. This looks like a situation similar to The Great Curator (webcast) in that it is well-endorsed fan work.
As per T:VID LINK we would be unable to use the videos directly as a source. Fortunately, Dalek6388 has us covered with this page and this page containing embedded links of all the Terry Nation Army stuff.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:261618
Just out of curiosity, what makes a being eligible for the Unique Beings category?
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:265405
On certain other wikis I’ve been a part of, I’ve had the ability to create new pages that aren’t a part of the main wiki, but are instead just an extension of my own user-page. Could I do that here? I want to make a page on a particular out-of-universe subject, but I don’t want to go ahead and make it an “actual” page on the wiki for fear it’ll be deleted.
See Tardis:Bad uses for user pages for more on where we draw the line.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:265419
The Gemini Contagion and The Hounds of Artemis are in the wrong order.
- SOTO
Where?
- TheLivingInk
On the page for the New Series Adventures and each of their individual pages. The release dates are right, they're just in the wrong order.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:266629
I’m not sure whether or not it’s part of the site or an ad, it comes down from the top on every page, and it looks like it’s part of the website itself.
- 99.203.145.247
Like it says something about big finish audio stories or something?
- RingoRoadagain
it is part of the website as far as i can tell. The wiki has already had some relations with BBC America before iirc.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:268836
How do you properly put in images for an article?
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:272143
Why hasn't series 12 on the Doctor Who discontinuity hub been updated?
I know that sounds flippant, but everyone who edits this wiki is a volunteer. We edit where our interests are. And we don't tell users what areas they should edit.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:275810
Bunch of questions concerning and related to my coverage of the Doctor Whoah! strips:
One thing I’m finding particularly challenging is to determine when characters should be identified as their in-universe selves or as the actors playing them. Some times it’s easy; this story clearly features the Tenth Doctor and Rose as opposed to David Tennant and Billie Piper, while this one is obviously focusing on Tom Baker and his fellow Doctors rather than the Doctors themselves.
But then there are situations like this strip, where all characters seem to appear in costume, in a so-called "in-narrative" moment, except Astrid Peth is explicitly referred to as Kylie Minogue, in which case who is the man in the suit meant to be in this scenario, the Doctor or David Tennant? In strips like this one that appears to depict an on-set moment, is that Rose Tyler and Harriet Jones, or Billie Piper and Penelope Wilton?
My next query: while looking up the Doctor Who? pages to use as a template, I found that pages had been created for the strips’ fictional versions of the real actors that appeared within (Peter Davison (Untitled 6), Colin Baker (Doctor Who?), for two examples). For one thing, I thought this would have gone against the supposed rule that real actors involved in Doctor Who that also had in-universe references should only get “real-world” pages with their in-universe reference being included in a section somewhere (on a related note; how are there pages for the version of Matt Smith that appeared in The Girl Who Loved Doctor Who, and the TV Action version of Tom Baker? Doesn’t that directly go against those rules?
Assuming giving those versions of the characters there own pages was the right thing to do, does that mean pages like "Tom Baker (Doctor Whoah!)" should also be made? And does that also go for real-world characters that are only mentioned (“Russell T Davies (Doctor Whoah!)”) eligible for pages too?
Oh oh oh, AND, if a character that shows up in a Whoah! strip that previously showed up in a strictly-invalid capacity already, does the information concerning their Whoah! appearance go on their existing page, or does a separate page need to be created for that particular version of the character? As yet another example, the page for Grant Mitchell currently covers his appearance in Dimensions in Time, and his Doctor Whoah! appearances. Was this the correct thing to do?
Apologies for the long winded post. This is stuff that I wanted to run by people on the Discord server, but none of the mods have gotten around to allowing me access to the #wiki channel, so here I am.
- Scrooge MacDuck
Well, you did right to bring those concerns up here; while casual off-Wiki discussions between users, such as on Discord severs, can be a very good thing in terms of fostering goodwill between us fans who happen to also be members of the Wiki, it is enshrined somewhere in this Wiki's policy that they absolutely cannot be used to come to decisions in matters of policy.
As concerns the matters of real world pages vs. individuals, I believe the decision was originally taken regarding pages about real world individuals' counterparts in An Adventure in Space and Time. It was thus taken for the good reason that such pages, since Adventure is a docudrama, would essentially duplicate information that should already be present as historical information on the pages of the real-world individuals. Arguably, this reasoning doesn't apply for the heavily fictionalised versions of real-world individuals who appear in parodies.
John Nathan-Turner (Doctor Who?) is a major recurring character of the strip (as evidenced by the fact that he even has a list of appearances!), and the wealth of information about this in-universe version is such that it would bizarrely clutter the potential section of "John Nathan-Turner" we'd devote to him. Because the world of Doctor Who? is not at all the real world, Nathan-Turner in the Who?niverse, as it were, is a very different person from the Nathan-Turner of the real world. This is even more obvious with Roberta Tovey (Doctor Who?), who is named for the real-life Roberta Tovey but appears to have absolutely nothing in common with the actress.
…As for the pages like Tom Baker (TV Action!) and Tom Baker (The Girl Who Loved Doctor Who), I'm assuming this is because of how we treat parallel universes. Arguably, the current policy would point towards us covering of Tom Baker in N-Space at plain Tom Baker, but the Tom Baker of the meta-fiction universe is not the same person as that Tom Baker whom we'd cover at Tom Baker, and so should get his own page. I could be wrong but this seems to make sense and account both for current usage and for current policy.
…As concerns the matter of when valid characters used in an invalid context get their own pages… I think it's generally a matter of whether the character is a substantially different person in the world of the invalid work. Dimensions in Time is an invalid story featuring the valid Rani; you're meant to assume her history in the main TV show "applies" to what we see of her in DiT. Whereas the history of the Seventh Doctor in Death Comes to Time is ostensibly different from what we're used to, even if he looks like the Seventh Doctor and seems to have had most of the same adventures as the TV version.
- WaltK
I went ahead and created a page for the Whoah! version of Tom Baker to start things off, only for it to be hit with a deletion proposal on the grounds that there’s already an invalid Tom Baker page. So...should just put Baker’s Whoah! info on that page instead?
If we’re going to compile all of these invalid appearances into one page, could we at least give these pages more appropriate names? Like, say, “Tom Baker (invalid)”?
- Scrooge MacDuck
The deletion tag is more about T:BOUND: once you've created a thread asking what should be done about Topic X, you can't start implementing one potential solution before this thread reaches an official closure.
So while I wasn't the one who placed the deletion tag, and may thus be wrong about the rationale, it's more that until we figure out exactly what to do, the invalid information might as well be put on the existing invalid Tom Baker page.
- WaltK
Okay.
Do you have any thoughts on the character vs actor thing?
- Borisashton
I know Scrooge has a slightly different method for dealing with Fun Book / It's Bigger on the Inside! characters but for Doctor Who? I have found that the only viable route is to identify characters as their real-world counterparts only when explicitly told.
This is because there are varying degrees of meta-fictionalality in the Who?verse. Some stories are set exclusively in-universe, some in the real world, some have DW characers (rather than their actors) working on the show and some are a mixture of all three.
I've thus broadly approached these stories on an individual basis. Sure, when there was obvious continuity of some sort between the use of a concept in Doctor Who? and in a Fun Book story, there was no point in a separate page (Roberta Tovey in Doctor Who? 85 vs. The Final Script comes to mind).
But when an individual story is about the shooting of Doctor Who, without the context of Doctor Who? to establish that those may be actual Time Lords in front of the cameras, then the natural assumption is that we are dealing with a story set in a parody of the real world. And that's what I've gone with.
Now, I'm not all that familiar with Doctor Woah, but it might be a matter of deciding whether it's more like Doctor Who? (which has its own lackadaiscal unity beyond a shared authorship and artstyle — though it would be pushing it to speak of "continuity"), in which case a similar policy to Boris's Who? recommendation should be thought up — or whether the various strips are so unconnected that they're better handled on a case-by-face basis like Fun Book material.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:277650
This is going to sound odd, but would it be at all possible to get a user removed from the editing history of an article?
On my previous account here, I was the author of one particular page that, looking back, I feel ashamed to have been attached to. Even though I no longer use that old account, I hate having my old name associated with it.
- Shambala108
If it's that bad a page, shouldn't it be deleted?
- TheDarkBomber
To my knowledge, the only way would be to remove the article entirely.
- NightmareofEden
Additionally, even if such a thing were possible, surely you’d have to tell us which one you mean first, thus attaching this account to not only that article but everything else the old account did.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:277667
After I posted my previous thread, it occurred to me that I was asking the wrong question.
I really think this site should get rid of all the pages that cover slurs and discriminatory language (pages likes n*gger, negro, poof, Paki, and so on)
I’ve been reading up on people's opinions of this site as a whole, and it came to my attention that this sort of language can be triggering to some. I definitely, thoroughly regret being the author of a couple of these pages, and I hope to make a difference by arguing against these pages remaining on the site. I'm not opposed to keeping references to them on other pages when necessary (only mention the racist language on the racism page, for example), but having pages dedicated to these individual, unpleasant words feels a step too far.
- Epsilon the Eternal
The purpose of the wiki is to cover everything from the DWU, regardless of content. Pages that describe discriminatory slurs from an unbiased perspective shouldn't be removed, in my opinion, as that would be a disservice to the readers of this wiki who want to compare how language is treated in the DWU, and even if the wiki did remove those pages, it wouldn't eliminate that content from the stories that the language came from in the first place.
- SOTO
There is no such thing as an unbiased perspective on this sort of thing, even if those who benefit from the discrimination (and are untouched by it) think their perspective is somehow more objective. What is valuable is the perspectives of those who endure it.
While there is a major distinction between slurs and mere curse words, we do generally have a policy here of covering all ills in a DWU story encyclopaedically. We're really left to deal with whatever a story gives us. Given that we do have these pages, some written by editors who do not belong to those communities, the question is maybe: how do we move or convert or properly tag this information so it's at least 1) well within context and 2) sufficiently warned about? We also want to pay close attention to the language used, how it's contextualised and how it's introduced, to make sure the documentation of such behaviour cannot read as valorising.
- Jack "BtR" Saxon
The way I see it, the terms exist, are used or referred to in the DWU and are covered in a factual and inoffensive way on their respective pages.
- DiSoRiEnTeD1
Is everything problematic and triggering these days? I am gay and have no problem with the word poof, and many other words, unless they are being directed at me to cause offence. If they are just written down I am old enough to look past them and accept the pages.
- Shambala108
One possibility is to lock the pages, either to everyone but admins, or at least keep out new and unregistered users. But the problem is, as User:DiSoRiEnTeD1 pointed out, that any word can be problematic. We would end up having to lock a bunch of pages, keeping people from contributing.
- SOTO
I'm fairly sure that's already in effect for the pages linked above. It would be limited to select pages in one category, though: category:Derogatory names and insults from the real world.
- NightmareofEden
I would have to agree. But unfortunately this wiki has a different policy.
- Epsilon the Eternal
I was in a rush while typing out my previous message, so sorry if there's any errors.
Personally, I do think it's possible to have a page about sensitive words while being unbiased. If the page had some sort of discretion tag, and then the quotes were written a straightforward and clean fashion, e.g. character "x" said slur to character "y", that should be a good way to do it. By not having these pages at all I think it would be tantamount to saying that they don't exist within the DWU. I do like the idea of having pages about slurs being locked to everyone except admins, as it would be much easier to moderate, however how would any new info be added to those pages? Perhaps if there's a quote a user wants to be added to that page, perhaps having a secondary project page where you input the quote and the corresponding page you want it on could be a reasonable idea.
Sorry if I'm wrong in any way, and if I am, just politely tell me.
- Scrooge MacDuck
This is a big issue I've thought about repeatedly and extensively; I'm glad the community has finally, and of its own accord, begun thinking about this problem. Unfortunately, this means my long-simmering thoughts would have been a veritable wall of text if I'd just posted them as a stream of consciousness, so please bear with me through a structured pseudo-blog-post of a reply.
(Just to be on the safe side, do remember that I'm just a user presenting my views in an unusually lengthy and structured manner. I am not an expert, admin, or any other type of authority "laying down the law.")
Approaching the issue[[edit] | [edit source]]
Why we have a problem[[edit] | [edit source]]
I think all this talk of the word "unbiased" is barking up the wrong tree. "Unbiased" — that is to say, cold, neutral reporting of what the DWU sources tell us about Sensitive Subject XYZ — is already what we're doing. It is clearly making a lot of people uncomfortable, not just new users here, but also readers who then toddle off to Twitter to tell all their friends about how horrible and bigoted Tardis Wiki is.
We have a problem, and simply being "unbiased" is not the way to solve it. User:Jack "BtR" Saxon speaks of "factual and inoffensive" coverage, but the thing is, those two don't necessarily go hand-in-hand. Right now, we are factual. But objectively speaking, if a bunch of people report that they feel offended, then we're not being inoffensive.
Why we should keep the pages[[edit] | [edit source]]
However, I also maintain that these pages should be retained. We could live without the page about the N-word, but as User:Shambala108 said, the problem is that it's very hard to draw a line in the sand about what words would be too awful to repeat here. I can see making an exception to our "every noun gets a page" rule for the N-word, but do we keep "Poof"? Do we keep "Idiot"? How far do we go with this?
My proposal[[edit] | [edit source]]
On "triggers" and subjectivity[[edit] | [edit source]]
User:DiSoRiEnTeD1 complains, upthread, that just about anything can be branded "offensive" and "triggering" these days even though in his personal experience, at least one word some decry as offensive… fails to offend him.
Now, "offensive" is a bit of a different kettle of fish, but let's take a moment and consider the other adjective — "triggering". 'Cause a "trigger" in the psychological sense that makes people demand "trigger warnings", as Wikipedia will inform you, isn't meant to apply to everybody. Something is "triggering" to someone if it prompts an abnormal mental reaction due to a preexisting trauma or condition. If that preexisting trauma isn't present in you, then… great!
Trigger warnings aren't about saying "you should feel bad when you see this content", it's a gesture of kindness to those who would feel bad. You're no more obligated to feel bad about "triggering", or offensive, content yourself, than a person in possession of functional legs is obligated to use a wheelchair ramp instead of the stairs. Saying "but I don't mind it" is as much of a nonsequitur in a discuss of triggering content as saying "but I can use ordinary stairs" when discussing the problem of public spaces not being designed with wheelchair-users in mind.
Yes, I am going somewhere with this.
The Trigger Warning Templates[[edit] | [edit source]]
Namely, I propose that we introduce a new class of tophat-type templates, not unlike our "Spoilers" templates. In fact, the cases are very similar; most people on this Wiki don't give a fig about "spoilers" in the sense of general info about stories-yet-unreleased, but there are people who do, and out of respect for those people, Template:Spoiler adorns pages about upcoming seasons or anthologies. Interested readers are not prevented from looking past those templates in any way; I don't think anyone ever advocated for the removal of these templates.
So… the wording would have to be studied carefully. But I think the best way forward is a tophat template summarizing Tardis Wiki's stance from a real world perspective.
For pages about slurs, it might read something like…
This page describes the term and its usage as they have been depicted inside the fictional Doctor Who universe. Bear in mind that the term unfortunately exists in the real world as well, and is offensive to many real people and groups.
and we could adapt the same basic concept to pages about potentially-triggering subjects such rape, murder, Nazis, etc.
Coda: broadening the issue[[edit] | [edit source]]
In fact, we could even broaden the idea to encompass stories which are known to contain offensive and/or triggering content.
e.g., it feels as though we might want to let people know what they're getting into with The Talons of Weng-Chiang without requiring that they read the BTS section all the way through — let's not forget a lot of people routinely skim our Wiki's pages to get an idea of a story they want to watch/read/hear, but will deliberately not read the entire plot summary or suchlike, for fear of spoiling the experience completely.
But this also goes for stories which no one is arguing were bigoted in and of themselves — just stories which might trigger traumatic response in some readers for well-documented reasons. We've had complaints on the talk page of Arachnids in the UK from people suffering from arachnophobia about our ghoulish infobox image. It's easy to imagine a survivor of child abuse being triggered, in the full psychological sense of the term, by the flashbacks to Sardwick Snr.'s treatment of Kazran in A Christmas Carol, even though it certainly doesn't endorse the relatively tame violence being displayed.
- Najawin
So I think there's a distinction between a word or depiction being "problematic" and one being "triggering". As for the latter, the less complicated, I endorse Scrooge's proposal. I haven't noticed anything on this wiki, but I have mild trypophobia (fear of irregular patterns or clusters of holes), and seeing the right kind of image could set me off all day. I would definitely appreciate that sort of template. (And for the record, I've found that a lot of people have this same fear when they actually look at the right images, so it's not like this is some big unreasonable ask.)
For the former, thinking about "problematic" words, we can just apply a historical, real world test. Consider the following thought experiment. Everyone who's poisoned suddenly thinks that the word "toxic" is offensive and shouldn't be used. Are we morally obligated to change our standards of language over this immediate change in their mental states? I think not. It might be polite, but it's not required, it's supererogatory.
Rather, what matters is whether the word has an actual history of being used to insult or contribute to the oppression of a marginalized group. Not merely to label them (hence why "person of color", while somewhat outdated, isn't a slur), but to actively insult or contribute to their oppression. Under this standard there are very clear ways to determine whether or not a specific word would be considered a slur or discriminatory, and should be handled with greater care.
- Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived
I'm gonna just say it here: I agree with WaltK 100%. I've always hated those pages, and have wanted them gone. Preferably, this would end with the pages being deleted. ESPECIALLY due to what is happening in the real world, it frankly is a TERRIBLE look for the wiki.
However, if the wiki decides for some really strange reason to keep them, then yes, please do put a template on pages of slurs. It's the least we can do.
I'd be wary of doing it on episodes, though. Obviously, I'd support a warning on Talons, Toymaker and stuff like those, but there is room for people manipulating a system designed to be a genuine warning and using it to badly mark an episode they personally hate, as opposed to one with genuinely offensive content.
- Scrooge MacDuck
@User:Najawin: Perhaps the historical standard works for racist slurs, but for e.g. insults aimed at queer folk, things get very complicated very quickly due to the underground nature that was the lot of gay/queer culture for most of its relatively recent history in the western world (including while Doctor Who was beginning to air, natch). With a very small number of exceptions, any one word for "homosexual" or "transgender" has at various times been both an insult and a word used by the community to describe itself; it's often hard to know for sure on which side of the fence a particular word began, and nor is it terribly useful for the present.
Recall the whole "That's so gay" debacle from the RTD era… Does Gay get the same slur tag as the N-word page? It has a "clear history of being used to insult a marginalised group". But that doesn't feel right to me, all the same.
I think common sense should be exercised, rather than a hard-and-fast history-based rule. These things change fast nowadays, and we're not looking for a nuanced history of the usage and nuance of Controversial Term X (although how that history intersects with its use throughout the history of Doctor Who would make for an interesting BTS section), we're looking to avoid making our readers now feel unwelcome.
@User:Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived, while I understand your position, I really don't think it's viable to delete these pages. At best we could make a one-of-a-kind, symbolic exception for the N-word page, but going further than that is a slippery slope that we really can't sustain. (Merging a select few of the slur pages into Racism might be a viable avenue, again especially in the N-word case, but that can only go so far.)
As far as the "look" this gives the Wiki goes, I'd argue that the deletion of the pages could be construed as equally problematic. We delete the page with no further action, and tomorrow, the twitter mob will be crying, "did you know official BBC media have used the N-slur a bunch of times? well, there isn't a word on the Tardis Wiki about that! Wonder why!".
Deleting the pages wand pretending offensive-yet-valid DW content doesn't exist would smack of head-in-the-sand-ism, IMO, even if I know that's not the way you mean it.
- Najawin
Not just racist, but ableist as well. At the very least it serves as a necessary, rather than sufficient, condition.
Suffice it to say that the LGBT+ issue is relitigating a discussion that's still not resolved in Thread:271132.
- Scrooge MacDuck
Both good points.
- Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived
Deleting the pages wand pretending offensive-yet-valid DW content doesn't exist would smack of head-in-the-sand-ism, IMO, even if I know that's not the way you mean it.
Oh no, I definitely don't want to sweep it under the rug. If anything, more fans should be willing to critique this show, at least in my opinion. But, analysing it in the BTS section is somewhat different ot having it have its own page. It should 100% be on the BTS pages, and in the top spot. But having its own page? Ehhhhhhhhh.
As far as the "look" this gives the Wiki goes, I'd argue that the deletion of the pages could be construed as equally problematic. We delete the page with no further action, and tomorrow, the twitter mob will be crying, "did you know official BBC media have used the N-slur a bunch of times? well, there isn't a word on the Tardis Wiki about that! Wonder why!".
Gonna have to heavily disagree with you here Scrooge. I've been shadow browsing fansites for a while, and I have yet to see a single person who genuinely thinks that.
- Najawin
Possibly because they don't want to be dogpiled on when they voice their dissent? Social media inherently tends towards negativity (as you tend not to post if you're content with the way things are) and if inherently tends towards an echo chamber.
I'm not saying these people are common. But we can't just rule out their existence.
- Scrooge MacDuck
Well, obviously they don't think that, inasmuch as it's a hypothetical reaction to something the Wiki hasn't actually done yet, and, IMO, shouldn't do.
- Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived
Like, let me try to explain my position. Imagine that, hypothetically, there was in the 60's a popular slide show thingy where you could display a cartoon with a slur in it and it got a rerelease. My perspective is that mentioning the slurs on the BTS is the label on the box, "this has content that may be considered offensive to modern audiences". Short, sweet, and not trying to hide anything.
The version where the pages stay up is like if during the commercial, when they're talking about the slide show, they say, "It also has the n-word"! And it's said not in a matter of informing, but more just in passing. Sure, some people could see it as being honest, but others would (rightly) wonder why the hell having the n-word would be dropped right in the middle of talking about the features.
The template idea would be if the commercial gave a statement about the word in a serious matter, but didn't include the label on the actual product. Like, if the pages stay, the template is a must for me, but it doesn't stop a random user tying in the search tool and wondering why the n-word is there.
- Najawin
Let me clarify my position. I'm willing to go either way on moving all slurs to one page (so as to "minimize the surface area of the problem"), but don't necessarily see the need to do so. I'm willing to be convinced, however.
I think the templating that Scrooge suggested is imperative, however, and we should have very clear trigger warnings both for traumatic descriptions (eg sexual assault) and images for people with phobias (eg spiders or lotus seeds - dear lord those are terrifying).
- WaltK
I just want to say I'm glad this has generated a good long discussion, and you all make really good points.
Here’s another option: make a page titled "Discriminatory language in the DWU" which covers every instance of these sorts of words being used, with a disclaimer at the top, making it clear that it's presence is entirely for research purposes.
- Scrooge MacDuck
Would that be a RW- or in-universe-focused page? If the former, then while it is a praiseworthy thing to do, it doesn't actually replace the in-universe coverage — much as we have both Queer representation in Doctor Who for RW, and a more strictly in-universe Queer. I also feel that if we're going to do such a page, we might as well just make it Discrimination within Doctor Who. ("In the DWU" phrasing is inadvisable in any event, as we want to have somewhere to put information originating in sources that we happen to call "non-DWU".)
Also, this is a similar sort of solution to what I mentioned before (namely the possibility of merging, e.g. the N-word page into Racism), and that means it has the same problem: what standards do we set? Where do we stop?
- DiSoRiEnTeD1
any word can be an insult or "discriminatory". the word "woman" is often used against men for example; "don't be such a woman". it just isn't feasible to pick and choose which words are worse than others. everyone has their own preference.
- Shambala108
There are 96 pages in Category:Derogatory names and insults from the real world.
- Scrooge MacDuck
Yes, but not all of them would require the edit-lock/template/whatever. I doubt anyone is going to be offended that we have pages like Philistine, Oaf, or Rapscallion.
- DiSoRiEnTeD1
Scrooge MacDuck wrote: Yes, but not all of them would require the edit-lock/template/whatever. I doubt anyone is going to be offended that we have pages like Philistine, Oaf, or Rapscallion.
who is to say? offence is subjective, even the words that are insults for people like me do not offend me when they are not meant to.
- Scrooge MacDuck
Well, there are words which have been historically used as slurs and continue to be used so. If e.g. "poof" doesn't offend you, that's all fine and dandy, but that shouldn't stop you from exercising basic common sense and recognising that it is usually employed with harmful intent, and that a lot of people are in fact offended by this malicious usage.
As for other words, I propose that we simply cut the Gordian knot and do the following: we will define a list of words which need the template (or whatever) by this thread's conclusion. And if any registered user complains in good faith that they feel another term in the category is offensive to them, we will take them at their word and add the template, no exceptions.
- DiSoRiEnTeD1
if the word is not being used with "harmful intent" then no, i cannot use "basic common sense" in recognising that it would offend people. thanks.
there's literally a food dish called faggot - do i burst into flames whenever i hear that? i am old enough and wise enough to know when something is being said to hurt me. pages documenting slurs should not be offensive, and those who do find that offensive will probably have a long, long list of other things that they find offensive and before long half of our pages will be problematic.
- Scrooge MacDuck
As you will see from Gorilla (insult), we have different pages for the insult and for any coincidental homonym thereof. If the food dish "faggot" is ever referenced in a DWU source, it will get its own page, separate from any potential page about the slur. So that whole line of argument is a dead end. The page about the slur will be about the word used as a slur — that is to say, used with harmful intent. That is the entire meat of what we are discussing.
- DiSoRiEnTeD1
just because my argument went over your head does not mean it is at a dead end.
- Scrooge MacDuck
If I overlooked some part of you argument, a nice way to respond to that would be to rephrase it.
- DiSoRiEnTeD1
the point I was clearly making was that if a word in not being used in a harmful way, such as a dish being named “faggot” or a page documenting the use of a slur, then it should not offend you. if it does offend you then you should take steps to avoid those pages (they’re hardly jumping out at you) as the rest of us are old enough to distinguish between what is being used against us and what is simply documenting.
not everyone thinks the world is out to get them, and with this topic being raised alongside others it really seems to me that people are going out of their way to be offended.
- Najawin
I'll note that I'm one of the people here who's perhaps more sympathetic to the "intent" line of argument than anyone else - I just don't think you can be willfully ignorant of consequences and must consider them as well in order to properly characterize the statement you're making. So it's actually defensible, just, being deployed far overzealously.
The thing is, even if it's defensible in general, I think it's clear that "intent" for usage of a slur cannot be the metric seized upon by this wiki. Simply because authorial intent is used as a last resort of sorts here and we'll have a contradiction on how to handle intent. Or, alternatively, T:NPA (obviously my favorite policy on this wiki) says that we should "Maintain a civil atmosphere towards fellow users at all times". Perhaps the "towards users" clause won't follow, but it doesn't matter about intent as to whether or not this is met if a user scrolling through this site is hit with a slur, they'll still feel like it's an uncivil atmosphere.
(Just as an aside, I noticed T:NPA doesn't mention ableism though it does mention ageism. Is there a specific real world event in the wiki's history that led to that?)
So I think it's clear that regardless of what you think about people being "overly sensitive" in general, or in your personal life, for the wiki's rules to be consistent some sort of action has to be taken.
- Scrooge MacDuck
@User:DiSoRiEnTeD1, I did get all of this. But my point is, if we had a page about Faggot (dish), I doubt anyone would be complaining about that. This is absolutely not what we are discussing. We are discussing pages that are about slurs, as slurs.
@User:Najawin, what's important to remember is that when we speak about intent here, it is the intent ascribed to characters in-universe when they use those terms. Unless there exist instances of slurs being used (as slurs) by an omniscient third-person narrator, of course. But authorial intent isn't the ticket — rather, it's whether the word is used as an insult within the story, as opposed to, say, describing a dish.
- Shambala108
As an aside to the aside...
To quote Tardis:No personal attacks (bold lettering mine): "Specific examples of personal attacks include but are not limited to:"
- DiSoRiEnTeD1
once again you completely ignore my argument, I will not be rephrasing as it seems purposeful to me now.
- Najawin
Scrooge, I realize. My point is just that we already don't give intent primacy. Why should we suddenly do so on a new policy?
Shambala, sure. My question is more why ageism in particular was the example chosen. Maybe to get a less common one to show even that wasn't chill?
DiSoRiEnTeD1, there's substantial evidence that people with phobias and people who've experienced traumatic events do better if they can get out and experience life and try to readjust. In these scenarios, content/trigger warnings are imperative so they can avoid things that set them off but still work on recovery. These are cases that aren't about "being offended", but are about someone's actual mental wellbeing.
- Scrooge MacDuck
"A completely different meaning of what is coincidentally the same set of syllables" is clearly not the same thing as "a third-party description of people using the term in a harmful way". If that was your impression.
Again, no one is accusing A Christmas Carol of being pro-child abuse, but the scenes between Young Kazran and his father could still set off painful episodes in people with preexisting abuse-related trauma. This is a very similar thing.
- Shambala108
Can we please have at least one thread where people don't assume what others means and others don't complain that people don't know what they mean?
- DiSoRiEnTeD1
@Shambala108 i would love that for a change!
- Najawin
Nor are we accusing Arachnids in the UK (TV story) of either being pro spider or pro animal abuse. The former is just a consequence of the story and the latter is just the writers being careless. But both should be marked at the top of the page so readers know if they're sensitive to that sort of thing. "Warning, this contains [Images] of [Spiders] and [Descriptions] of [Animal Abuse]."
- RingoRoadagain
FANDOM's Terms of Use state the following:
You agree not to:
- Post or transmit any content that is obscene, pornographic, abusive, offensive, profane, or otherwise violates any law or right of any third party, or content that contains homophobia, ethnic slurs, religious intolerance, or encourages criminal conduct;
So, no we obviously can't use slurs but sadly, FANDOM does not have a list of banwords. I think maybe we would have to make a list of those, for example using this list from bannedwordlist.com as a first basis, and replace them with an edited version that when clicked would redirect to a general slur page. (eg [[n*****]] for the n-word would create a redirect link to this page)
As for the rest, I think a general warning template could be created, as done on other wikis like the villains wiki does with its Mature template:
This article's content is marked as Mature
The page contains mature content that may include coarse language, sexual references, and/or graphic violent images which may be disturbing to some. Mature pages are recommended for those who are 18 years of age and older.
If you are 18 years or older or are comfortable with graphic material, you are free to view this page. Otherwise, you should close this page and view another page.
RingoRoadagain wrote: FANDOM's Terms of Use state the following:
You agree not to:
- Post or transmit any content that is obscene, pornographic, abusive, offensive, profane, or otherwise violates any law or right of any third party, or content that contains homophobia, ethnic slurs, religious intolerance, or encourages criminal conduct;
Well, I think that proves WaltK's and my position that the pages should be deleted. As I have been educated on at Talk:Penis, when Fandom says no, we cannot override it.
As for the rest, I think a general warning template could be created, as done on other wikis like the villains wiki does with its Mature template:
This article's content is marked as Mature
The page contains mature content that may include coarse language, sexual references, and/or graphic violent images which may be disturbing to some. Mature pages are recommended for those who are 18 years of age and older.
If you are 18 years or older or are comfortable with graphic material, you are free to view this page. Otherwise, you should close this page and view another page.
Sure, I'm cool with something like that, just as long as it's done in an unbiased manner.
Jack "BtR" Saxon wrote: And if we worried about making this wiki look good, I don't think we'd have pages I've seen ridiculed on Twitter like pages for oddly specific numbers.
There's a difference between people mocking us for being different from other wikis and people pointing out that, hey, it's kinda messed up for us to have a page on the n-word. It's different because categologing numbers and cuss words is harmless fun. Slurs are different and not at all fun.
I think that at least for each of them we should retitle, as done with N*gger or f*cker, to stay consistent and to follow FANDOM's guidelines of not posting content with ethnic slurs and such.
I assumed in my previous post to just keep the first letter and replace the rest with star symbols, but if just replacing the second letter is a more common practice I'm not opposing it. I was thinking about a merging for the former case but I don't think it is useful if we keep the latter current format.
I think the line is actually pretty clear. It's where Fandom's ToU tells us it is. LGBT+, religious and racial/ethnic slurs should be censored, all others should be given content warnings to minimize "potential offense given". Since it seems we haven't been doing this as much as we should have been, that should be the change. For instance, P*ki.
(Also, as an aside, just glancing at the list, can I say how hilarious I find Yank? I know of literally no American who would be upset by being called that, unless they were from the Deep South and you were implying they were from New York.)
Who should make these decisions? Just the admins (I seriously doubt that one would fly). Just regular editors (and how do we define regular editors)? Or do we accept any complaint from any editor and label/delete just to be on the safe side? And what happens when someone is offended that we deleted a page? These are things that need to be discussed.
As for the first. Ideally the "labeling" would just be a banner we could apply to pages at the top to say "hey, before you scroll down, here's a warning that there are images of [these things you might find upsetting] and descriptions of [these other things you might find upsetting]". So ideally, much like any other banner, it should be available to any user - I can't go to a page that features an image of the praxeus virus without it setting me off for the entire day and needing to shower immediately, so me being able to label any page I come across with those images for other people would be incredibly helpful.
Whether or not people would abuse this is an empirical question, I would hope the answer is no, though I suspect the answer is yes. Though, whether or not they would abuse it more than they abuse any editing feature ever is I guess up for debate.
As for the slurs issue, again, I think the answers were beginning to form in this thread. We go based on the Fandom ToU, and at very minimum we can use the necessary condition I mentioned above. Whether or not people think that condition is sufficient to make something a slur and thus in need of censorship, is of course, open to discussion. But it's not like we've wholly ignored the issue, I think the priorities of people here are just different than yours, politely.
Thirdly, to object to these things on the basis that they're intersubjective would be self defeating in the most spectacular fashion. By analogy, it's an intersubjective fact that there are Doctor Who fans, but it's a subjective fact as to whether you as an individual are a Doctor Who fan.
And, of course, we come to the benefits of content warnings. For people who have experienced trauma, the best treatment is reintegration with their normal life. Avoidance of "triggers" can be problematic, depending on the specifics, but not inherently, but even given that, the proper approach is to slowly manage them in a clinical setting, not haphazardly reintroduce them. Content warnings allow people who have experienced trauma or who have phobias to control their reintegration to society or avoid the few things that set them off.
With all that said, I'm interested in seeing the thread you mentioned.
Edit: Just to further explain why I don't think the Arachnids "take personal responsibility and don't go on pages where you know you'll be upset" principle can be the general rule of thumb, let's just go with the most obvious example imaginable. "Oh, I'm a classic who fan and have experienced sexual assault, my favorite companion is Dodo Chaplet, and dear lord what is this on her wiki page?" Sometimes you literally cannot know that there's going to be upsetting aspects on the page you're visiting. And, of course, the wiki is staffed by volunteers, so it's not like we can force anyone to do this. It's just whether the benefits of having the ability outweigh the negatives.
As for the Arachnids discussion, my main problem was that there is a whole episode of stills to choose from for the infobox image, and yet the one that was chosen to be the first thing a user sees when visiting the page is the most triggering shot of the lot. My issue was not so much "this triggering picture is included", but more "this picture is included despite there being other options that are not triggering", so my discussion of that topic may not be so relevant to this discussion.
As for whether or not we should have specific pages for slurs and discriminatory language, I'm not touching that one with a ten-foot pole. There are a lot of pages that I personally don't think are needed, but the wiki's current policy is that all nouns can be wikified as long as they have a valid source.
CzechOut wrote:
A lot of great ideas have already been raised about in this thread, and we’re thrilled to see the level of insight and civility that’s clearly on display. You know, if we keep this up, we just might arrive at a more inclusive future!
The relevant quote for this discussion is
SOTO wrote:
In any case. More to the point, our stance should always just be deferring to the group in question. If POC come on and say there's a problem with our treatment of RW or fictional people of colour on the wiki, we should just listen. If certain language around disability is better for the real-world community, we should just go with that. The wiki is improved, in my mind, and certainly no lesser, for me having reworked statements about Ryan Sinclair "suffering from" dyspraxia, or certain characters being "confined to" their wheelchairs. There's no reason we, as editors, shouldn't be conscious of the implications. Absolutely nothing is lost by showing that sort of respect.
User:SOTO can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm interpreting this to be at least somewhat an admin position, not merely solely their personal one. And even if not, the spirit of said thread is quite clearly aligned with the message therein.
This statement, and the spirit of the thread more generally, clearly supports greater care being taken for slurs and serious consideration of content warnings. If we are to take seriously the idea that a year ago this wiki refocused to inclusivity, and it wasn't just lip service, we're forced to take the ideas espoused in this thread seriously.
Najawin wrote:
And even if not, the spirit of said thread is quite clearly aligned with the message therein.
That is, it's literally impossible for my comment to make this thread more long-winded or repetitive than it would be otherwise (and obviously personal attacks aren't being brought up here), since I would be bringing up Thread:248287 anyhow. (And the exact same comment about interpretation would have to be made) The comment you're responding to is a holistic discussion of that thread, and what you're taking umbrage to is me discussing how there are two interpretations of a comment, with me selecting the one that makes more sense for the thread in question.
I appreciate the idea that one should not be interpreting other people's comments needlessly in principle, but when the actual argument does not depend on the interpretation, it seems to me this concern is wholly misplaced.
DiSoRiEnTeD1, a lot of people who have learning disabilities don't see themselves as "suffering", they see it as another mode of living. Similar issue with wheelchairs and "confinement".
We're not negating the experience of people who do feel like they're suffering. We're just not lifting their experience up above the experience of those who don't feel that way.
There's an obvious contextual difference between the two. And I again reiterate, my comment would stand regardless of this fact.
Should we just abandon having pages for some of these more problematic names / insults? This isn't a suggestion to get rid of them all, as some in the thread have suggested given the broad range the category encompasses.
Context is what is missing from a lot of the pages mentioned. Perhaps the solution to this is merging some of these pages into their related pages within a subsection for "Derogatory and slang".
If need be these sections could be placed within a box with a show/hide so they could be present on the page without actively being part of the body of the article.
Obviously we'd need a proper box for this, but something like this example with show/hide
Which pages that would need merging would obviously require further discussion, but would at least let us move forward with merging / separating some of these pages.
Someone who frequently comes to the Wiki but doesn't often login and certainly leaves discussion alone... For once, I find that I think I have to raise a few words for thought.
The OP has raised a question of whether or not all of the pages related to discriminatory language should be removed. I understand that as a Wiki, some sort of balance has to be maintained as to detailing the Whoniverse and the nature of it. And I totally understand that... So, on that side, I wouldn't say that *all* pages on discriminatory language should disappear. That's a complicated matter, and one that should really be case-by-case. Especially since some terms like Queer have been notably and prominently reutilised in more positive manners, in real life and in the Whoniverse.
But I would argue that the two variations on the N-word should be dealt with in ways that don't require pages. I'm not gonna presume anything of anyone here racially - that would be ill presumption - but I'll make it clear here that I am a person of colour who has had these words directed at me.
I would say that there is a difference between acknowledging the existence of a horrible action (see: Domestic Violence & Gaslighting) and detailing the words & actions used. Additionally, the two terms are undoubtedly always used in a derogatory manner (within the Whoniverse). And unlike Wikipedia itself, where there is a significant need to detail a long history and occurrences of such horrible actions for reference purposes, we don't. The two pages I'm focusing on here are quite stubby.
Couldn't N****r's content (the two stories in which it's come up) be consolidated within the page for Racism - in a similar matter of how Paki and Terrorist are listed there in regards to Rosa? The material re. Blood and Hope could slip inbetween Thin Ice and Shakespeare Code. The Celestial Toymaker in-universe material could shift to the "Amongst Other Species" subheading, as it's indicative in-universe of the term being used in other realms like the Toymaker's. And the BtS Toymaker material could easily sit aside the notation of Alpha Centauri's B&WMS appearance, as suitable acknowledgement of change in views as time has progressed.
And for N***o's content as well. Lost in Time's usage of the term is already notated within the Racism page. Amending the line "Yasmin Khan was mistakenly perceived as Mexican in a Montgomery diner so was denied service." on said page would allow for the usage in Rosa to be covered too.
I would imagine if anyone wanted to use this Wiki to reference usage of racist terminology, then the Racism page would probably already be on their list of pages to review/read - so wouldn't preserving the info on these two pages there allow for just as easy accessibility?
Aside from the above, I'd also like to indicate my agreement with the proposal of adding trigger warnings - both in terms of the two N-word pages, if my own proposal is deemed unsuitable... and in terms of the Wiki in wider scope - at least for pages where the presence of potentially triggering content is not apparent from the page title. Dodo Chaplet is the noted one & I can see exactly why. The fact that a TV companion's page - which is sure to get some notable amount of readership - doesn't have a warning for getting into a clarification about whether or not she had Syphillis is a potential concern in my mind as is... but then it drops in that she was victim of an attempted rape and murdered whilst pregnant in the last sentence. Yeah, it's perfectly factual - but without a warning to signpost it, it feels disconcerting for me.
I understand there are concerns about how the Wiki is perceived outwith based on decisions made of this nature. But I fail to see how removal of the two N-word pages would be detrimental in that regard, if the content has been moved to the already notable Racism page. And I can't see anyone on Twitter being able to sell the notion of adding trigger warnings as a travesty etc.
I get that removing the two N-word pages would likely require some change to allow exception to the Wiki policy on nouns, but I honestly feel like there is a strong case here that these two pages should be removed. I'm often happy about this Wiki and the steps that it has made to balance complete factual presentation with inclusiveness and appropriateness. I have defended the Wiki in some instances particularly re. white actors playing non-white characters & how that is acknowledged here. But this is one case in which I'm feeling sad about the present state of affairs.
I understand this is quite the ramble from someone who has preferred to indirectly help others rather than been involved in the Wiki directly, and perhaps a little personally charged - which I hope I've tempered back suitably enough.
I have always granted that deleting the N-word page (and its "o"-ending sibling) was very much a viable way forward, even if deleting all pages about offensive terms is not. I am glad that you settle upon this as an acceptable way forward, and I agree that putting the information on Racism would be perfectly viable.
although if I was in charge I wouldn't have these be pages at all, I'm just trying to make a compromise here
Jack, I would say that with the Racism page, it is not that is less triggering as such, but I would say that is more justified in its existence. If the Wiki does take up the idea of trigger warnings, then it certainly would be worth discussing the Racism page as one such case where it would prudent to note the use of slurs. (I mean, either way that things go on the existing pages, the Racism already has the Lost in Time usage of n***o contained within...)
Jack, clearly in the trivial sense moving everything to one page reduces the chance that people stumble upon these words using the "Random page" button. But even ignoring that the racism page actually gives greater context for the word than the page for the word itself. Moreover, I don't think anyone is suggesting that if we move these words to one page we just stop there. Like I and others have suggested, the content warning banners should probably still be implemented.
Jack "BtR" Saxon wrote: Is it necessary to have a page for the number 94.6 or corned beef?
no
80,000 of the 85,432 pages literally have no purpose whatsoever
Najawin wrote: So I'm just gonna note that this thread has attracted attention on twitter. While I'm sure we all look forward to people engaging constructively, just be aware that this is occurring.
Najawin's right. I've seen this and it's not pretty. Our wiki's reputation is going down the toilet.
There's a big difference between making pages for "useless" stuff (My page on F*ck, for instance, won't hurt anybody) and actual slurs, which will hurt people.
Make a page on Depictions of bigotry in the Doctor Who universe or something, but the n-word does not need its own page.
Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived wrote:
Najawin wrote: So I'm just gonna note that this thread has attracted attention on twitter. While I'm sure we all look forward to people engaging constructively, just be aware that this is occurring.
Najawin's right. I've seen this and it's not pretty. Our wiki's reputation is going down the toilet.
There's a big difference between making pages for "useless" stuff (My page on F*ck, for instance, won't hurt anybody) and actual slurs, which will hurt people.
Make a page on Depictions of bigotry in the Doctor Who universe or something, but the n-word does not need its own page.
agreed, I'm not mad at the fluff (many of the fluff/junk pages link into a major canon thing) but I feel like we shouldn't have pages for slurs. it's harmful fluff
GarfielfStuff wrote:
agreed, I'm not mad at the fluff (many of the fluff/junk pages link into a major canon thing) but I feel like we shouldn't have pages for slurs. it's harmful fluff
Exactly. Thank you, @GarfielfStuff
Also, something that just came to mind recently, aren't these slurs adjectives? You know, things we aren't allowed to have pages on?
The pages I created for Non-binary and Genderfluid were pretty quickly deleted, despite them being IDENTITIES, not adjectives, so shouldn't the slur pages instantly be deleted for failing that rule?
I think we should still try to do the best we can in each situation that comes up, but I don't know that our concern should be the reputation, so much as it should be not being actively harmful, or being cognizant of potential bad actors or how extra attention directed at a thread can change the narratives within a thread (for good or for ill [obviously I think in this instance good, but it is something to be aware of]).
Najawin wrote: tbf, as discussed above, in some ways this wiki just can't win when it comes to its reputation. CF: People still getting mad about deleting in-universe tags for LGBT+ individuals while refusing to engage with Thread:271132, the new thread discussing reinstating them, and I've seen people criticizing the thread as "wow, straight people on Tardis Wiki talking about how best to categorize LGBT+ people". It's just obviously a no win situation.
I think we should still try to do the best we can in each situation that comes up, but I don't know that our concern should be the reputation, so much as it should be not being actively harmful, or being cognizant of potential bad actors or how extra attention directed at a thread can change the narratives within a thread (for good or for ill [obviously I think in this instance good, but it is something to be aware of]).
but who's gonna get mad at the fact there aren't any pages for slurs besides hedgewik comics or 4chan?
As far as the "look" this gives the Wiki goes, I'd argue that the deletion of the pages could be construed as equally problematic. We delete the page with no further action, and tomorrow, the twitter mob will be crying, "did you know official BBC media have used the N-slur a bunch of times? well, there isn't a word on the Tardis Wiki about that! Wonder why!".
Now, I dunno if this will happen. This is a hypothetical Scrooge brought up. I don't see it as outside the realm of possibility.
I'm not saying that this means we should keep the pages. I'm just saying that this means that the axis we should be thinking on isn't reputation, but instead trying to do the right thing for the wiki and the community we serve, no matter their ethnic background, sex, gender, religion, sexual orientation, able-bodied-ness, etc.
Edit: No idea why this was a response to 92. Weird.
Najawin wrote:
As far as the "look" this gives the Wiki goes, I'd argue that the deletion of the pages could be construed as equally problematic. We delete the page with no further action, and tomorrow, the twitter mob will be crying, "did you know official BBC media have used the N-slur a bunch of times? well, there isn't a word on the Tardis Wiki about that! Wonder why!".
Now, I dunno if this will happen. This is a hypothetical Scrooge brought up. I don't see it as outside the realm of possibility.
I'm not saying that this means we should keep the pages. I'm just saying that this means that the axis we should be thinking on isn't reputation, but instead trying to do the right thing for the wiki and the community we serve, no matter their ethnic background, sex, gender, religion, sexual orientation, able-bodied-ness, etc.
Edit: No idea why this was a response to 92. Weird.
i seriously doubt that people would even care if there was a page for it on the Doctor Who wiki they'd probably try to cancel the BBC or the writers who wrote the stories with the n-word in them
Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived wrote: Also, something that just came to mind recently, aren't these slurs adjectives? You know, things we aren't allowed to have pages on?
The pages I created for Non-binary and Genderfluid were pretty quickly deleted, despite them being IDENTITIES, not adjectives, so shouldn't the slur pages instantly be deleted for failing that rule?
I'd like to put this forward again, since it seems to have been glossed over. If pages that aren't adjectives, but supposedly are "similar to adjectives", can be deleted without warning, why can't we delete the slur pages, since they are unquestionably adjectives?
Najawin wrote: I mean, I'm talking about the older stories here, the ones that already existed that we've now, in the hypothetical person's eyes, failed to cover properly. Regardless, the point is tangential to what this thread is about. We agree on substance largely, just disagree on whether there might possibly, theoretically, maybe be repercussions to reputation that we shouldn't even care about.
let's say hypothetically, theoretically, might be possibly in a scenario that it was a recent story
Again, this is tangential to the topic at hand.
Najawin wrote: It would start with The BBC, and then later on, after that had blown over, months or years later, they would, in the hypothetical, get upset that the wiki fails to document this properly and reverts the edits of people trying to do so.
Again, this is tangential to the topic at hand.
now let's say that, hypothetically, a site like 4chan (far right) gets mad that there aren't any slur pages on the Doctor Who wiki and vandalizes the wiki
do you make the pages or do you just ban them?
Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived wrote:
The pages I created for Non-binary and Genderfluid were pretty quickly deleted, despite them being IDENTITIES, not adjectives, so shouldn't the slur pages instantly be deleted for failing that rule?
That’s a bit odd, considering we have pages for Transgender and Cisgender, which are also adjectives (and I believe a few others, but I’m trying to stay on the "identity" theme, so will only mention the examples relevant to such). Certainly, I’m trans, and would rather object to being called "a transgender".
Jack "BtR" Saxon wrote: The way I see it, we either stick to the current policy of having a page for every single noun that has ever been said in Doctor Who media and keep the pages on slurs, or decide that not everything needs a page and delete them.
But again, slurs aren't nouns. They're adjectives. Crude ones, but adjectives. Therefore, they should've already been deleted as per policy. Deleting them won't affect the rest of the wiki.
Are we gonna list every time every single noun is used in every single doctor who story?
Jack "BtR" Saxon wrote: No, they are definitively nouns.
How? They're derogatory terms used to describe people. That's the definition of an adjective.
Also, I find it strange that pages on things that aren't adjectives, such as the ones I mentioned earlier that I created, get deleted, but the slurs pages can't. Even if we end up believing that slurs are nouns, they're still similar enough to adjectives that they should be deleted. (also because it's not cool to keep the pages up in any case)
"You are a beautiful" [adjective] doesn't make sense. "You are a beauty" [noun] does.
It's not a case of "believing" that they are nouns. They objectively, definitively, literally are.
Secret alt-right stuff?
GarfielfStuff wrote: Why are people even defending slur pages?
Secret alt-right stuff?
I agree. What's the purpose of keeping these pages up?
Jack "BtR" Saxon wrote: Aren't you supposed to assume good faith?
Sorry :(
Jack "BtR" Saxon wrote: Currently, we make pages for any and every noun we come across. By that logic, they should stay. Alternatively, we decide that not all nouns deserve pages and decide which should, which I would support.
But the thing is, they're not nouns. Even if they aren't adjectives, they're still different enough from nouns that they should be deleted.
Jack "BtR" Saxon wrote: Alternatively, we decide that not all nouns deserve pages and decide which should, which I would support.
This sounds good. Perhaps we could make a policy rule that no slurs are allowed, but all other nouns are?
Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived wrote:
Jack "BtR" Saxon wrote: Currently, we make pages for any and every noun we come across. By that logic, they should stay. Alternatively, we decide that not all nouns deserve pages and decide which should, which I would support.
But the thing is, they're not nouns. Even if they aren't adjectives, they're still different enough from nouns that they should be deleted.
Jack "BtR" Saxon wrote: Alternatively, we decide that not all nouns deserve pages and decide which should, which I would support.
This sounds good. Perhaps we could make a policy rule that no slurs are allowed, but all other nouns are?
That would quickly become a headache with the amount of nouns in the average novel
Do we really want to continue having ridiculous pages?
As for the hypothetical of a word having existed on this wiki and/or a BBC licensed work, and us deleting it and moving it. We'll maintain the words as a redirect. People will still be able to search for it, or even link to it, but it'll just exist as a redirect to wherever we decide to put these pages.
Trigger or content warnings I think should be a separate discussion as what they might cover is beyond what this discussion is about.
I believe the Racism page provides better context than a single page.
We don't need to come up with an overarching policy concerning all nouns, adjectives or verbs. We can have a policy on slurs and derogatory language that only applies to this situation that's being discussed. Citing this, and any further discussions we have to work out which pages and how we deal with them.
Describing allows an editor to frame the information in the best way possible, and allows them to organise the page in such a way that a decent amount of context comes before examples.
Insisting on taking direct quotes from hateful characters (whose writers are all too eager for the chance to use slurs so long as it's being "condemned"), or allowing the oppressive narrative to take control of what info is gained from a single article, is just not the right way about it. This can justifiably make many of our readers feel unsafe, and, by normalising it (through coverage without context), even contribute to the culture of oppression.
It is always a good policy to defer to those with lived experience on matters which concern them. That means making changes when someone on the talk page brings up an issue that had been overlooked, and even in the text, trying to always put the POV of characters of colour first. But it should also mean taking the readers themselves into consideration.
Tangerineduel wrote:
We don't need to come up with an overarching policy concerning all nouns, adjectives or verbs. We can have a policy on slurs and derogatory language that only applies to this situation that's being discussed. Citing this, and any further discussions we have to work out which pages and how we deal with them.
I second this.
I propose that the following pages be merged into the Racism page.
Merging preserves the pages' histories, meaning we have a complete editing history of these all in one place.
These pages will then remain as redirects to the racism page and will be locked preventing anyone editing them.
Once these pages are merged and their content combined we can look at this process and use it to inform our policy moving forward as an example of how this proceeds and how information like this is given context in a wider article, as opposed to a singular page.
Epsilon the Eternal wrote: The purpose of the wiki is to cover everything from the DWU, regardless of content. Pages that describe discriminatory slurs from an unbiased perspective shouldn't be removed, in my opinion, as that would be a disservice to the readers of this wiki who want to compare how language is treated in the DWU, and even if the wiki did remove those pages, it wouldn't eliminate that content from the stories that the language came from in the first place.
I would just like to retract this; after hearing everybody's discussions about the subject, I've definitely changed my mind since I commented this.
I'd like to voice support for certain sensitive pages being merged into the racism page.
The notion of this type of article — which is to say those in Derogatory names and insults and its real world equivalent, was always to make it clear to readers who may never have encountered the word what the word meant, and that it was intended to be offensive.
Doctor Who, after all, is written in British English, and it's reasonable to expect that Americans won't always see a British slur as offensive, and that some Britons, writing about American subjects, won't always get just how offensive an American slur might be.
This is particularly true of the N-word usage in The Celestial Toymaker, which has zero context, and might leave/have left viewers with the impression that it was "an okay thing to say".
The article in question was therefore written in order to attach proper emphasis on just how horrible the word was, something that the Civil War-era novella actually managed to do. It was therefore easy to demonstrate, just by quoting the Doctor and Peri, what the full meaning of the word was, and how it made various characters in the story feel.
However, it's not worth upsetting the users of this wiki, and I think I see more consensus around removal rather than preservation. So it's gone.
I've also deleted Negro. It's a complicated word with a complicated history, and there's not enough in the DWU to give it full context. The DWU simply doesn't get you to the American journey of the word, from over a dozen uses in MLK's "I Have a Dream" to Barack Obama's 2016 removal of it from US Census code.
I'm a little less certain about Tangerineduel's suggestion to get rid of Paki, because it's not an insult in wide use in all parts of the English-speaking word. I think it serves some utility in pointing out to readers that it's not merely a shortening of the word "Pakistani", but actually a slur. But it's not a hill on which I'm prepared to die; it's merely not something I'm initially prepared to delete today.
As for broader proposals to get rid of Derogatory names and insults from the real world, I'm fine with it, if that's what y'all want. It was an idea that I had at the top of the last decade merely to help people on both sides of the Atlantic more deeply understand what characters were really saying.
Perfect example of the confusion the little project was trying to solve, if you need one, can be found in 2020's Ted Lasso. It's about an American who suddenly has to manage AFC Richmond, without any knowledge of football at all. The local fans immediately take to calling him a wanker, but he has no idea what that means. Since he's inundated with the word, he eventually has to turn to the landlady of his local pub to give him the definition.
As that show makes abundantly clear, a lot of Americans just don't get the vernacular points of British English, and vice versa. That's the only thing this category of page was meant to alleviate.
But if you all no longer find value in this type of page, they're not worth heartache or anger. The pages can be swiftly deleted with a simple bot run.
So, with the N-word and Negro now deleted, please continue to debate on the basis of whether you want to keep this kind of page going. Given the already-wide participation in this thread, I don't think we need to hold this discussion open for more than about a week from now, though.
Oh and by the way: I do third my fellow admins in saying that we don't need an overarching policy about nouns. I don't even actively propose the deletion of the category in question. I just point out that it is technically easy to do, as so many proposals made in forums don't even consider the difficulty of administration.
Like, I’ve noticed certain inconsistencies regarding terms that refer to the same concept.
Currently, we have a page for Posterior, which seems to cover all other slang terms referring to it as well (arse, ass, bottom, etc.), and I believe that works perfectly fine. So then, why can’t wanker just be merged into masturbation? Why do we have individual pages for both f*ck and f*cker? Why does f*ck buddy even exist?
I realise bringing this up myself may well be a tad hypocritical of me considering I’ve likely contributed similarly pointless pages in the past (via this account and my previous one), but I was mainly going with the flow. Doesn’t mean I haven’t questioned and/or mocked the practice in the back of my head on occasion.
Ergo, the mastubation page could have: "A commonly used slang term for masturbation in the United Kingdom is to "have a wank", with "wanker" being used to describe a person who partakes in such an act, or as a general insult."
See also Gorilla (insult).
A lot of British usage is obscure to the uninitiated. It's one of the reasons that I created a lot of pages about cricket. Most Americans, and not a few Britons, are absolutely lost when listening to some Davison scenes in audio, not to mention a few references by both he and Baker on TV.
Sure, these are small articles, but phrase definition is important to understanding some key scenes. Baker's reference to slow bowling in The Horns of Nimon might — to you — be perfectly obvious. But it's not to everyone. Heck, I don't think you can really follow Black Orchid part 1 without a little help from the wiki.
So I'd like to make sure that we don't judge an article's wroth based exclusively on personal English usage. Instead, we do need to consider the purpose of an article in light of how it helps people understand scenes.
It's really important that we remember that this is a global community, and that we try to make deletion decisions based on whether the article is, on balance, of use to all our readers, not just to whether it's a part of one's vocabulary and therefore something that doesn't need explaining to you.
Yes, some slurs are awful. But we do have to balance that against the larger effort to help people understand what's going on in the stories that comprise the DWU. I mean, we're not deleting the article clown just because there's a possibility a reader might have coulrophobia. Nor are we "hiding" it in an article about circuses.
While I've taken immediate steps today to delete a couple of articles, I don't think that's the best way forward, generally — even if it is technically possible. Let's use the next week here to mention the articles about slurs that are the most egregious and go from there.
That said, I don't want to turn this thread into an ongoing, never-ending, word-by-word examination of all our articles. Let's try to confine our review of Derogatory names and insults from the real world to the next week so that we can wrap things up relatively quickly.
CzechOut wrote:
Yes, some slurs are awful. But we do have to balance that against the larger effort to help people understand what's going on in the stories that comprise the DWU. I mean, we're not deleting the article clown just because there's a possibility a reader might have coulrophobia. Nor are we "hiding" it in an article about circuses.
Not at all the same thing. Colorophobia is an irritational fear, clowns can’t hurt you (somebody dressed as one conceivably could, but that wouldn’t be related to their costume/occupation). Slurs are an utterly rational thing to dislike if one is of the group they are INTENDED TO WOUND. To say that, for example, a black person not liking the N word, which their enslaved ancestors were called as they were beaten, or me as a trans woman not wanting to be addressed as a "she male", is tantamount to an irrational fear of the painted smile... I really struggle to explain how this is different, since it seems to obvious. It’s like trying to explain to being poked in the eye with a kitchen knife hurts. It just... blatantly does. Slurs are purely hateful, and targeted at certain groups. Clowns are not. I feel it may be easier to understand if one is part of one of said groups. Well, there are slurs for all categories of person, but not seriously wounding ones.
I do agree with you on the topic of words like wanker and stuff, or pages like cricket, insofar at least as they’re not really relevant to the discussion. I don’t think this wiki desperately needs them, but nor does it desperately need rid of them. Not does it the clowns article, for that matter. But to equate this with slurs is simply a false equivalence. I don’t have "transphobiaphobia". Racial minorities do not have "racismphobia". And nobody has "misogynyphobia", "classismphobia", "homophobiaphobia", you get the picture.
Please, you must understand how inflammatory these pages are. I’m fine with them on Wikipedia, but on a Doctor Who wiki they are better off "hidden" under a single banner. I’m trying to come up with a snappy final sentence but honestly I’ve run out of stuff to say so I guess I’ll just
CzechOut wrote: It seems to me, having read this thread, that most people are in favour of either deleting or merging the page about n*gger. So I've simply deleted it.
I've also deleted Negro. It's a complicated word with a complicated history, and there's not enough in the DWU to give it full context. The DWU simply doesn't get you to the American journey of the word, from over a dozen uses in MLK's "I Have a Dream" to Barack Obama's 2016 removal of it from US Census code.
I'm a little less certain about Tangerineduel's suggestion to get rid of Paki, because it's not an insult in wide use in all parts of the English-speaking word. I think it serves some utility in pointing out to readers that it's not merely a shortening of the word "Pakistani", but actually a slur. But it's not a hill on which I'm prepared to die; it's merely not something I'm initially prepared to delete today.
Glad to hear this change :)
Re. the other pages in the category, I have no concerns (for instance, gay and queer - they have been used in a 'reclaimed' manner so I have no issue. Terrorism has significant valid usage of the term in its page and said page is already of a obviously sensitive matter as it is, so I would imagine anyone who comes to that page via others or Random Page would swiftly move on if troubled by the main content. There is the discussion of possible content warnings but that's of course separate from this one...)
On the matter of Paki, I understand - and previously acknowledged, I think - that it's a much more complicated matter... so I understand the wish to not immediately delete that one. Perhaps though, regardless of whether or not that Paki stays as a page, its contents should be copied into the Racism page to be illustrated in a more appropriate context?
The instance of Yaz mentioning it in Rosa is already there... but I'd imagine the three instances involving Manisha would fit around the detailing from Ghost Light of Ace relating how her house was firebombed. The Wages of Sin remarks that Jo had heard could also fit inbetween Remembrance and Ghost Light/Manisha, as further period evidence. (As it makes the point of detailing the existence of the mentality in the 1970's as well as the 1960's and 1980's)
The Nightshade one... I'll be honest, it's been sometime since I read that bit with Vijay but IIRC he's replying to Hawthrone in a mocking manner? So that could be copied (Regardless of decision on the Paki page itself) to Racism and added in the appropriate chronological spot? (And if my recollections about the tone of Vijay saying it are right, I think we might be best served by rewording the statement to make it more clear that it is being used by a Pakistani man to mock the mentality of racism?)
As we've said already, racism is a good spot of contextualising these matters, and it makes it not-too-bluntly-or-potentially-offensively/upsettingly what the subject matter will be from the page name and lead, so I think it would be worthy to do so.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:278351
So I made a similar comment to this on User:SOTO's talk page, but I know how busy admins can be, and it's a more general question than a "this needs to get done immediately" sort of thing. User:DiSoRiEnTeD1 pointed out that on Rose Tyler there was some "random letterings" - ie, a dead link to the Korean Wiki, which has closed down. Since then I've noticed similar things in a few other places, like Clara Oswald and Doctor Who. Is there a general policy to handle foreign wiki closures? Should I just not touch stuff in case it starts back up? Should I remove the dead links wherever I see them? I'm unsure what to do, and it's a bit frustrating.
- TheDarkBomber
I've read the policies concerning ILLs, and none of them mention what to do in the event that one closes. I think the best option is to post a notice on either the United Nations Intelligence Taskforce or one of the admin's talk pages, preferably one that runs a bot, such as SOTO or CzechOut.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:278494
In response to some of the discussion that has taken place in thread:277667, I'd like to suggest that we make two kinds of content tags.
The first kind should cover articles with adult-oriented material:
This page covers adult-oriented subject matter which may not be suitable for younger readers.
This would be used for in-universe articles such as those covering sex or sex-related topics, as well as on pages for stories that are unambiguously aimed at an adult audience, such as episodes of Torchwood and Class and their related off-shoots, and things like the Virgin New Adventures novels.
Secondly is a tag that warns of sensitive subject matter:
This page covers topics of a socially sensitive nature, which may distress some readers.
It should go without saying what this particular tag would cover: pages such as racism, homophobia, rape, and all articles relating to them. Certain story articles should also bear this tag, such that of Rosa and The Talons of Weng-Chiang (for the latter, perhaps we should have variant tag that explains that the insensitivity was of the time).
- Jack "BtR" Saxon
I'm not sure if this is workable or would even be effective. Are younger readers really going to be deterred by a such a content warning? My experience says no, nor do I think we have reason to be worried about children coming across these things.
If this were to go ahead, we'd presumably have to have a tag on Jack Harkness's page because of the amount of sex that he has and when he was raped. I don't see the benefit in labelling a whole page as "socially sensitive" (a vague term I can't say I'm fond of) because of a tiny amount of information like that.
Also, I think placing such a tag on pages like racism and homophobia is, frankly, ridiculous. What would one expect to see on such pages?
- Epsilon the Eternal
I like this suggestion, but how about this for the first tag?
This page covers explicit content which may not be suitable for sensitive readers
Or something similar.
- SOTO
On the first tag: just about any page could contain "adult content". TV companions might do some pretty explicit things in expanded media, for instance. This is why we have Tardis:ParentPage, as a general warning for the entire site.
Brief content warnings for stories might well be feasible, however. We are not a review site, but general warnings about serious triggers contained in various Big Finish Torchwood stories would certainly be an asset. The issue there is not "adult content": listeners ought to be warned about sexual abuse (as in Corpse Day) or domestic abuse when those issues are prevalent in the story.
If your suggestion involves warnings for not-particularly-gruesome death, tobacco use or mild sexual content, though, that would be far too big a project. The bar should be set higher than what you might find in a modern episode of BBC Wales Doctor Who -- or, perhaps it would be far more useful if we only issued warnings that could not be applied to the entire series. (Specifically, I mean stories which go above and beyond what Tardis:ParentPage says about the range--we can always expand our coverage there, and use section links in some capacity, if deemed necessary.) So if, say, Countrycide has warnings that couldn't be applied to most episodes of original Torchwood, we'd tag that page but not issue a general warning on each and every episode of the series.
- SOTO
Like User:Jack "BtR" Saxon, I'm not sure what "socially sensitive" means. If we're doing content warnings, it'll be because of the traumatic nature of the story, scene or line of dialogue being covered on the page. (Direct quotes of this nature can perhaps be avoided, in favour of more trauma-informed encyclopaedic language, on those pages not primarily about the topic, ie. those pages which would not ordinarily be tagged.) We can always employ sensitivity, and respond to suggestions in talk pages with material changes to the text, and expand best practices through community discussion.
But if we're tagging stories, it'll be because what they contain — what we will cover, as an encyclopaedia, with perhaps a bit more care and sensitivity than the stories themselves — would be triggering to a reader who has gone through, or is continually dealing with, the trauma inherent in the experiences we're describing. And by marking this out on story pages, and in-universe pages specifically about those topics, readers are forewarned, so there's no surprises.
- 86.11.164.109
Okay, sensitive content tags then, at the very least.
- WaltK
^Whoops, that was me. Forgot to sign in.
- SOTO
I would also distinguish between a story that recognises racism exists in the world, and a story which depicts it, like TV: Human Nature or PROSE: Blood and Hope.
I can't speak much to that, but for reference, with transphobia: AUDIO: The Jabari Countdown has a harrowing scene in which Arbuckle taunts Eleanor about her being trans and maliciously misgenders her as she breaks down emotionally, whereas AUDIO: Wild Animals just has Tania mention that it's been a problem for her before when prospective partners learned she was trans. The latter story does not contain any such content, and she doesn't go into it. It's certainly unfortunate that this is fairly standard reality, but the story is not gratuitous about it, does not involve scenes which force trans listeners to relive those experiences.
Likewise, a story that uses the word post-colonial, or which involves characters seeking out reparations or other forms of justice, would not be the same thing as a story depicting the original atrocities, digging into traumatic experiences that come with the aftermath, or being way too eager for an excuse to repeatedly use slurs in dialogue.
- Najawin
I also think that in reducing them to "this page contains material" somewhat ignores one of the categories that matters, namely, people with phobias. They tend not to be upset by descriptions of things, but by the sight of them.
My original suggestion was one tag with two fields, one for "content that might upset users if they read about it" and one for "images that might upset users if they saw them". The tag should be reasonably smart, so leaving one field blank changes the wording subtly to not suggest there's another field that was left blank.
- Najawin
Bringing this back up, given the events in Thread:277667. Is there greater consensus on how to proceed?
- Tangerineduel
I agree with Jack "BtR" Saxon that the workability of these tags would be so broad as to be questionable in its effectiveness.
While we're not Wikipedia I always look to how they deal with things. Then also to a larger wiki like Memory Alpha & Beta, to see how a wiki which has a large fictional universe like the DWU handles content like this. Neither has content warnings on pages like those cited above.
Are there any wikis which have a comparably diverse audience / range as ours that does have content warnings?
I agree with SOTO the Tardis:ParentPage could broadened, or even just a separate page, duplicating a lot of the info but removes the 'parent' part so it addresses a reader directly who might be seeking more info.
- Najawin
Tangerine, how do you feel about a restricted suggestion, not for mature content, but for content that might traumatize people? Jack's criticism just isn't applicable to that case.
Similarly, I don't think Memory Alpha is all that comparable a situation (Beta might be? I'm not sure as to how, uh, controversial the things on Beta can get). Wookiepedia notably does not have content warnings, but they've had some drama related to their editorial decisions on a similar front.
Wikipedia's refusal to use content tags can be found documented here (and in the relevant talk page). The tldr is that they insist that content tags violate NPOV, are censorship, take up editors time, take up space, open them up to lawsuits if some pages lack content tags, and the disclaimer stating that wikipedia isn't always sfw makes them redundant.
Obviously these are all either nonsense or not clearly applicable to our wiki. We have no reason to uphold NPOV in this manner based on a strict reading of T:NPOV, but even if we did, it's not clear that what they're saying is correct. It's just trivially not censorship. Editors are volunteers, so they can decide what they thing is most important. Taking up space is true, but, uh, that's sort of the point, so I don't see the criticism. They're clearly not redundant, and we're far more likely to get sued by having none of these than some of them. Since we can hit the really obvious pages and stop people from being traumatized, when they obviously might not read T:NOT SFW before browsing. (Not that I think this is at all likely, just, you know, 1 epsilon vs 10 epsilon.)
Lyricswiki lacks content warnings but is being shut off soon due to the content therein. Harry Potter wiki has spoiler tags, but not outright content warnings. Most of the stuff around our size seems more sfw than us tbh. Though, I'm sure they'd say that about us if they didn't know about our weird niche areas.
- Jack "BtR" Saxon
I think you're overestimating how easily people are traumatised. In fact, I think if anything's being trivialised here it's the concept of trauma.
- Scrooge MacDuck
I think User:Najawin misspoke — the fear ostensibly isn't that a page on our Wiki will traumatise someone, but rather that it might trigger someone's existing trauma. Which sounds much more reasonable to me. Certainly the matter with the giant spiders at Arachnids in the UK clearly could spook an arachnophobic reader.
- Tangerineduel
MemoryAlpha has a decent amount of pages in its w:c:memory-alpha:Category:Crimes category, none of which I've been able to find have any warnings on them. Memory-Beta also contains a similar category w:c:memory-beta:Category:Crimes.
As Jack "BtR" Saxon alludes to, how do we decide what requires a trigger warning and what doesn't? And in trying to or trying to define which pages 'deserve' a warning are we going to be doing worse? That's why an overall statement like the Tardis:ParentPage but a more neutrally named one would be better. So that an informed decision by someone visiting can be made.
I'm not against the idea for a tag on story pages, like that which is on some older cartoons and other older media, linked to a page that explains these stories are a production of their time. Something that is properly cited, and can give context / provide information beyond just being a tag for stories. That way a properly cited page can inform the tag, the tag links to the page etc.
Regarding the issue of Arachnids in the UK, it may be worth re-visiting the Tardis:Guide to images to consider some sort of best practice regarding the story pages, as they're some of the most highly trafficked of pages where people are likely to encounter an image like that is currently on Arachnids in the UK.
- Najawin
Scrooge is correct, a subtle mis-communication on my part. I commented just as I was about to hit the sack.
As for MemoryAlpha, glancing through that, only a handful of those would merit content warnings. Arguably the r*pe article is less traumatizing than Dodo Chaplet's article. Same for Beta actually, though oooohhhhh boy could that torture article use one. I also can't find that they've even discussed the idea, though, I also don't know if they've had as much drama related to them in the relevant community as this wiki has.
Regardless, as for the idea that we're trivializing the idea of trauma in some way, there's an easy solution. Let volunteers do this, if someone adds something people think is inappropriate, we can discuss that at that particular time on that talk page. (eg: if you think my trypophobia is silly as has been alluded to on one of the prior discussions, if I edited in a noticed about irregular patterns whenever the praxeus virus came up you could start a discussion in the relevant talk page)
There's also a more difficult way, which is take the list of all phobias + the list of all things known to cause ptsd, but I think this is both less efficient and less helpful, since there are things not covered by this (trypophobia is considered by some to not be a true phobia, as the feelings related to it are a mixture of disgust and fear, with sometimes disgust winning out, not just fear).
- Tangerineduel
My worry, coming at this from an admin's POV is...there's a many people who will use this as a means of attack / disruption for the wiki, and it's very hard to ask someone to 'justify X'.
That's why I favour a blanket page like the ParentPage and then a page with supporting text for stories.
Your suggestion let volunteers (we're all editors / volunteers here), opens a huge box of problems. As you note the issues surrounding the validity of trypophobia. Once broadened out to dealing with users, those who are just being obtuse for the sake of it, difficult users or those who are pushing up against this, but not actually violating the policy it becomes a very difficult balancing act.
I try all of the time to assume good faith whenever anyone contributes, but have had a long time of editing on this wiki, so I look to these less than optimistic scenarios. This is why I'm keen to find another wiki that has tried this so we have a model to follow.
Because looking ahead I don't ee an easy way out of the problem, if there's a scenario where we have someone arguing for a tag on a particular page and we use a theoretical list to justify a yay/nay of the tag and we fall on the negative, but they're insistent that it is a problem and raise it on talk pages / forums that raises the possibility of needing to block them. And that is a bucket of problems of silencing someone who might actually have a real issue.
Now I know the alternative is a much more passive position, but the choice rests with the reader, not with us.
- Najawin
I'm not unsympathetic to these concerns. However, current policies on this wiki already make it easy for bad actors to disrupt/attack the wiki in subtle ways. There are discussions that have been resolved for years that haven't been officially closed so no action can be taken. People can edit, the mistake can be noticed a short bit later, and then when an edit war starts it becomes the new default under a strict reading of the edit war policy, people are then obfuscatory on the talk page, and it stays. The situation at Talk:Fanboys (short story) has made it more than clear that you can edit obscure short stories and people will not correct you for years. While I was browsing Eye of Harmony, I found a user who explicitly has on their user page the view that T:NPOV should be actively rejected, and had to revert an edit of theirs to this effect. Were I not looking at a relatively mainstream page related to my interest in physics in the DWU, the damage done could have been far more long-lasting. Thread:281689 has a bug that people could use maliciously that was likely around for years and nobody stumbled across. The tools given to editors allow for a reasonable degree of freedom to make garish pages for articles.
All of this is already here, and some of it actively can't be dealt with, since you can't always pin down someone being obtuse. Tools are already in place for bad actors if they want to use them. Is this potentially another tool? Yes. Obviously. Anything added to the wiki is potentially a tool for bad actors. But we always have to think about how likely it is to be used compared to how helpful it can be.
Now, the other point, of having to fall on the negative when someone has a genuine issue, I think it's clear that this is going to happen only in very fringe cases. How fringe is up for discussion, obviously (again, cf trypophobia). But at that level of discussion I think the point you can make isn't "we're discounting the idea that you and some others have a genuine issue", but rather "given the possibility of bad actors, we have to draw the line somewhere, and the problem you're discussing, while it may be legitimate, is so marginal that adding the tags you're asking for would enable bad actors more than it would help the community we're serving. We're sorry, and encourage you to make your own list of pages that might upset people with the problem you have so this resource can still exist for your community."
The keyword for disabilities is "reasonable accommodations". If five people in the world suffer from a particular phobia, tagging our content concerning it isn't reasonable. Mentioning when there's pictures of spiders or clowns? Or discussion of torture or sexual assault? Yeah, that's a reasonable accommodation.
Hence my wish to provide an information page for the reader.
I'm still unsure on the how helpful / how likely it is to be used to disrupt the wiki equation.
I appreciate and understand what you're putting forward from a user point of view. But it is a wider scope where my concerns lie.
Not to repeat myself, but without examples of other wikis implementing something like this, and how their admins / policies dealt with this, it's a trek into the unknown that I'm not comfortable pursuing.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:278668
So, for stories without the Doctor (and some exceptions) we have the Main Character field in the story infobox. However, I can't seem to find any policy on what a main character actually is and its scope seems to vary depending on which page you're on.
For the Torchwood television stories, the whole team is almost always listed as Main regardless of their involvement in the story. For example, Tosh is listed as a Main Character in Out of Time when she has only four lines - with one of them being her name - but, for the Story Continues stories, the fields seem to be stricter. Ng and Orr aren't Main Characters in See No Evil, nor is anybody but Tyler in Hostile Environment despite Ng and Mr Colchester being more involved in the plot than Ianto was in Adrift.
I wonder if we have a policy on this.
- Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived
Yeah, it does seem strange that we don't have guidelines on that. I'd support a policy page.
- Danochy
I would also support a policy page. I assume such a page would cover other variables, like "main enemy" and what to do if there are multiple Doctors.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:281671
Hi, I was just wondering whether or not Vince Cosmos: Glam Rock Detective is considered valid or not. Moreover, how can one tell whether a story is considered valid by the wiki?
- Belegityt
Also wondering about the 10,000 Dawns crossover stories.
- Najawin
Glam Rock Detective has a real world tag, not an invalid tag, so it's valid. The, uh, 10,000 Dawns crossover stories are currently considered invalid but there were three highly contentious inclusion debates surrounding them, and a fourth very small one, at Thread:265926. Due to how awful that atmosphere got, it's out of our hands and in the hands of FANDOM staff to deal with.
- Belegityt
Okay, thanks for your help. One more thing- shouldn't Imaginary Boys (audio story) have an invalid tag, not a real world tag? Is that an error I've noticed or a mistake on my end?
- Najawin
Thread:206638, discussed on the talk page.
- Belegityt
Thanks again!
- Shambala108
When in doubt, you can always ask an admin.
- Belegityt
Shambala108 wrote: When in doubt, you can always ask an admin.
Will do, thanks!
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:281998
When I was looking at the release dates for the comics from Titan Publishing, I noticed that some of the release dates on the pages for individual issues are different from the release dates on the pages for the stories and series and I'm not sure which dates are correct. I tried looking on the Titan Comics website to verify, but the pages for some of the stories list a print release date and a web release date, and the website only has the web release dates. I can't find any sources to verify the print release date. I have no idea what to do about this issue.
- WaltK
I’ve noticed that too, unfortunately. One possible reason could be because a story may have had a planned release date that got changed later on, and whoever added the info was using an outdated source. Or it’s a typo. Who knows?
- CzechOut
One great resource for this kinda thing, particularly for American releases, is https://comiclist.com. They have a pretty good database that could be of help. Now, if a comic misses their release date, this site might not be helpful, but misses are somewhat rare.
Here's an example from the beginning of the year http://www.comiclist.com/index.php/lists/titan-comics-extended-forecast-for-01-08-2020
I'm sure the reason our pages only give a web release date is that those are much easier to check up on, and because many of our editors no doubt, like me, prefer to read comics on their iPads, rather than junking up their limited living space with boxes of physical comics.Another thing you can do is to focus on the magic word, solicitations. That's the word in the comics biz, if you didn't know, for what distributors pass around to comic shops as they "solicit" sales. So "titan comics August 2018 solicitations" produces a number of hits, like https://www.cbr.com/titan-comics-august-2018-solicitations/
You then search the resulting page for "Doctor Who" and you easily find that Doctor Who: The Road to the Thirteenth Doctor #2 hit shelves on 8 August 2018.
Easy, once you know what to ask the internet! Give it a shot! You may find it's a quick way that you can make a big difference on the accuracy of our articles!
- TheLivingInk
CzechOut wrote: One great resource for this kinda thing, particularly for American releases, is https://comiclist.com. They have a pretty good database that could be of help. Now, if a comic misses their release date, this site might not be helpful, but misses are somewhat rare.
Here's an example from the beginning of the year http://www.comiclist.com/index.php/lists/titan-comics-extended-forecast-for-01-08-2020
I'm sure the reason our pages only give a web release date is that those are much easier to check up on, and because many of our editors no doubt, like me, prefer to read comics on their iPads, rather than junking up their limited living space with boxes of physical comics.Another thing you can do is to focus on the magic word, solicitations. That's the word in the comics biz, if you didn't know, for what distributors pass around to comic shops as they "solicit" sales. So "titan comics August 2018 solicitations" produces a number of hits, like https://www.cbr.com/titan-comics-august-2018-solicitations/
You then search the resulting page for "Doctor Who" and you easily find that Doctor Who: The Road to the Thirteenth Doctor #2 hit shelves on 8 August 2018.
Easy, once you know what to ask the internet! Give it a shot! You may find it's a quick way that you can make a big difference on the accuracy of our articles!
It took me a while to figure out how to navigate that website, but I finally did it. It's very helpful. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to have records of every issue. I'll keep looking, though. Thanks for the assistance!
- Collgirl560570
hi
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:283261
Now that I’ve finished making pages for all of The Daft Dimension strips, I will be very shortly resuming coverage of Doctor Whoah!
Before then, I could really use some feedback on how to cover a particular quirk that the strips have; their tendency to blur the line between "in-universe" and "behind the scenes" scenarios.
An example of this occurs as early as the first strip; this strip depicts a supposedly behind the scenes moment in which production of The Christmas Invasion hits a snag due to a miscommunication with the costume designer. The strip features an appearance by, who we’re currently interpreting as, Rose Tyler and Harriet Jones. But if this is a "behind the scenes" moment, should they actually be documented as Billie Piper (who does appear, named, in another strip) and Penelope Wilton?
An additional example is in the DWM 391 strip where, during Voyage of the Damned, the Host are starstruck and flustered over the presence of Kylie Minogue, who appears in the background being swooned by, who could be interpreted as, either the Tenth Doctor or David Tennant.
Yet more examples appear in strips I haven’t made pages for yet. One has Matt Smith (addressed as such) talking about his audition, while in costume as the Eleventh Doctor; standing beside him in the strip is either Amy Pond, or an in-costume Karen Gillan.
Another strip takes an affectionate jab at the real life event of Matt Smith (again, identified as such) carrying the Olympic torch for London 2012, when the Tenth Doctor (or an in-costume and in-character David Tennant) appears to take the torch from him. Complicating things even further is the cameo appearance of the Seventh Doctor (or is that an in-costume Sylvester McCoy??) running up behind them.
Argh! Such a headache!
- Scrooge MacDuck
The Kylie Minogue strip is especially thorny because the joke requires that the Host be actual robotic beings, not special effects/props/stuntmen.
- Epsilon the Eternal
Might be a bit difficult to write, but how about having the characters be both actors and their respective characters?
- WaltK
Regardless of what the Host actually are in the story, they can still be easily identified as "The Host" and nothing more, and that they can be thought of, in this universe, as “actual robot people who have been employed to play them”. A similar case can be seen with Stike and Varl in Doctor Whoah! 383.
- Borisashton
Isn't this the same question that was presented in Thread:275810?
- WaltK
Yes, but that thread focused on a variety of things related to these strips. This focuses solely on the one thing.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:283538
I'm trying to edit an existing image on the site of a character so that it's infobox-worthy, but there's a speech bubble in the way, and the only possible way to get around it is to rotate the image slightly. I was wondering if such a thing was actually allowed?
- Epsilon the Eternal
Back in 2015, Shambala108 endorsed a user to edit an image of Bernice Summerfield for the infobox a few years back. This.
Whether or not this allowed now, I'm unsure.
- CzechOut
Please see Tardis:Guide to images#Comics.
- WaltK
Nothing on that page answers my question.
- TheDarkBomber
The example on that page states that the cropped version of the image which removes the speech bubbles is considered better than the one that doesn't. So, at the very least, it appears that cropping is permitted.
- WaltK
But that’s not what I’m asking.
I want to know if rotating the image (as in, turning it around slightly) is allowed.
- TheDarkBomber
Probably yes. By the way, what image do you plan on rotating?
- Scrooge MacDuck
Well, Walt can't very well show it to you if he can't upload in its present, non-image-policy-obeying state…
- TheDarkBomber
Would it be possible for him to upload it to an external site and provide the external link to it?
- Scrooge MacDuck
Pretty sure that's against policy too — linking to offsite image files. Could be wrong.
- TheDarkBomber
I've searched through the policies, and they don't seem to mention anything about forbidding external/offsite links to images, and even so, such a policy would most likely only apply to the main namespace, though I could be wrong on that.
- WaltK
- WaltK
- TheDarkBomber
Ah, I see. There might be a problem though since non-90 degree rotations can cause interpolation artefacts. I recommend trying to clone-stamp out the speech bubble instead.
- WaltK
I’m afraid I lack the ability to do that :(
- Scrooge MacDuck
Also, your image would still be too narrow. Character images must be wider than they are tall.
- Najawin
There are online photo editors that have a clone functionality. My worry is that doing so might change the license in some way.
- WaltK
I gave it go with my drawing app. I’m afraid it’s just too hard to pull off convincingly.
- Najawin
The ice and the lighting would make things difficult, yes.
- WaltK
- Shambala108
Ok somehow my original post got lost, and I'm not going to try to recreate it. So in a nutshell, the original is the image that best fits our policies, at least for now. The article as it stands is too short for an infobox, and it's definitely too short for an image that is not widescreen.
- Danochy
Scrooge MacDuck wrote: Also, your image would still be too narrow. Character images must be wider than they are tall.
Actually, according to T:IBOX PICS:
While widescreen images are certainly preferred, we know there are times where a widescreen image just isn't possible. Some comic panels, for instance, are portrait-orientated, making it hard to get a widescreen image. Even so, if your aspect ratio is really small (meaning that the picture has significantly more height than width), you can test the limits of what the infobox code can handle.
So if a widescreen image is unattainable, then portrait is ok. This is also somewhat acknowledged, with regards to character images, at T:GTI. We also have Template:Narrow pic for this purpose. Although in this instance, widescreen is required, as Shambala has pointed out.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:283708
Basically, what the title says. I'm working furiously at trying to make a improved version of the timeline of Class, but to do so, I need to try and figure out how to split up the sections of the story, What She Does Next Will Astound You. There's week gaps throughout it here and there. So, what is the appropriate way to structure entries for such a story across a Timeline page?
It would surely be cumbersome to try and keep it as one (not least, because of the complications that trying to maintain that as at least a month of time passing without any other Class stories happening around it would be difficult. And that two pages occur on the day of TCWTDT, whilst later chapters allude to being post-Nightvisiting), but I can't find any such examples of this having been done on the other Timeline pages?
- Epsilon the Eternal
I'd add the story into the timeline where appropriate, perhaps with a note specifying which chapter the information is from.
- Najawin
I personally would do something like:
A-B October 2016 - PROSE: What She Does Next Will Astound You (Pages P-Q)
C-D October 2016 - PROSE: What She Does Next Will Astound You (Pages R-S)
Etc, but YMMV. It doesn't seem too weird for this wiki (unlike my summary for Warring States). Maybe ask an admin just to make sure?
- MrThermomanPreacher
I believe the Torchwood timeline has a good example of this with Broken (audio story), which is set through the middle episodes of Series 1.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:283746
I've been pondering over attempting to rework some of the page for The Dark Dimension, as well as the production page for 1990 in relation to the plans had for this story over the course of the year.
However, some of the dates for key points in the preproduction plans of this unproduced story seem to only be present in Josh Snares' mini-documentary on the matter (Offsite linking obviously not allowed but it's under Doctor Who: Oddity if anyone wishes to seek it out) and T:UNOFF REF is, of course, about tackling such things case by case.
The thing about the mini-doc in question is it doesn't feature interviews with any contemporary figures involved, and insightful as Josh is, he doesn't have a citation list featured or attached to it.
As a newbie to interpreting the more nuanced policies of the Wiki like this, what would be the best approach for this one?
- Scrooge MacDuck
I don't know if it's decisive evidence, but to give fuller context to people not familiar with Snares, he has created at least one Doctor Who documentary for the BBC.
- Najawin
Thread:275731 brought up that there was a contradiction between T:UNOFF REF and Tardis:Resources, but the closing post declined to resolve the contradiction. If you find that Snares' documentary would fall under one of the categories listed in Tardis:Resources, that might be enough to re-open that particular issue in a panopticon thread.
(Though, interestingly, Tardis:Resources needs to be changed anyhow, as it links to Documentaries about missing episodes etc, not the categories).
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:283874
Some of these strips are earlier versions of strips that were ultimately published.
Doctor What 4 and another unpublished strip I haven’t covered yet are both earlier versions of Doctor Whoah! 376. The final strip is changed just enough to be considered its own strip, but the two prototypes are nearly identical save for a couple minor added details.
Furthermore, Doctor What 6 is an early version of Doctor Whoah! 415, with the only difference being that the final strip was completely redrawn.
What I want to know is: what differences between the these strips be enough to constitute their own pages?
- Danochy
I would say no, given the fact that we don't even create separate pages for the animated versions of missing television stories. Similarly, there is a minor difference in the Subscriber Short Trips version of Neptune (short story) - with both versions covered on the same page.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:284078
So, as I've been browsing the wiki, I've noticed that certain videos, such as "Who killed the president? - Doctor Who - The Deadly Assassin - BBC" are no longer available. Is there a way to mark them for deletion?
- Danochy
Can't you just add a {{Proposed deletion}} tag?
- Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived
Yeah, I can. I was just wondering if that was what I was supposed to do or if there was another method.
- Danochy
It's not ideal, but it at least shows up in Category:Proposed deletions. Unless there's some more specific way I'm unaware of, I'd say adding the tag and removing it from any pages it's on should be sufficient.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:284376
So I'm working on a navbox at User:Najawin/Sandbox_4 and I'm wondering if there are any issues with it. The bottom section with disclaimer text is larger than the actual things it's navigating between and it sort of jumps between an in universe point of view and an out of universe point of view. I haven't found anything forbidding this, but I just want to make sure before I actually make the template and add it to pages.
- BananaClownMan
I like it.
- Scrooge MacDuck
I don't know if there's any policy forbidding this but I'm not altogether sure you need it. Seems to me you can just make "the Enemy" in the title of the navbox into a link to The Enemy, and people who care enough to click it will see for themselves that there are other proposed Enemies.
(See also Template:Founders of Gallifrey not bothering with huge reams of text to document that "seventh, nameless, historyless Founder" mentioned once, and other such side-steps. Navboxes are supposed to be quick navigation tools as opposed to exhaustive.)
But that navbox is missing a couple of Enemies still. At the very least, if Yartek makes the cut, so should the Earth-Reptiles. And "Who indeed".
- Najawin
Yeah, I was debating Earth-Reptiles since nobody had actually put the category on them.
- Scrooge MacDuck
Is Yartek in Category:The Enemy? If so they definitely should too. The possibility that they're the Enemy is discussed at much greater length than the Yartek "theory", even if it proved less memetic.
- Najawin
He very much is. Similarly, the Doctor is not, even though Warlords of Utopia makes the suggestion.
- Scrooge MacDuck
In the Doctor's case, it may be for the same reason The Master isn't in Category:Companions of the Doctor.
- Najawin
It also lacks Timeships and can't possibly comment on the aspect of the enemy seen in Life-Cycle (how do you write a page on that?). And this sort of discontinuity between the page The Enemy and the category is why I was so keen on encouraging people to read the page in the actual navbar, not just link to the page in the header.
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY XXXXXX User:SOTO/Forum Test/Help!/Thread:286011
i Want to post a comment on the chat page but i dont now how?!
Category:SOTO archive threads YYYYYY Warning: Display title "User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Help!" overrides earlier display title "Help!/How To Post a Comment".