User talk:Dalek194
Please feel free to post here if there is anything you want to talk to me about - one of my edits, Doctor Who in general... anything really
Thanks for your recent edits! I'm Jimbo, your robot wiki representative! We hope you'll keep on editing with us. This is actually a great time to have joined, because we're now fully independent, and working on a host of new features!
We've got a couple of important quirks for a fan written wiki, so let's get them out of the way first.
British English, please
We generally use British English 'round these parts, so if you use another form of English, please be sure you set your spell checker to BrEng, and take a gander at our spelling cheat card.
Spoilers aren't cool
We have a strict definition of "spoiler" that you may find a bit unusual. Basically, a spoiler, to us, is anything that comes from a story which has not been released yet. So, even if you've got some info from a BBC press release or official trailer, it basically can't be referenced here. In other words, you gotta wait until the episode has finished its premiere broadcast to start editing about its contents. Please check the spoiler policy for more details.
Other useful stuff
Aside from those two things, we also have some pages that you should probably read when you get a chance, like:
- the listing of all our help, policy and guideline pages
- our Manual of Style
- our image use policy
- our user page policy
If you're brand new to wiki editing — and we all were, once! — you probably want to check out these tutorials at Wikipedia, the world's largest wiki:
Remember that you should always sign your comments on talk and vote pages using four tildes like this:Thanks for becoming a member of the TARDIS crew! If you have any questions, see the Help pages, add a question to one of the Forums or ask an admin.
Your input is needed!
You are invited to join the discussion at Forum:Can we disable visual editor please?.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ <span style="">13:59: Tue 20 Dec 2011
Hi
Your own creation of this page inadvertently prevented you from being officially welcomed, so I hope you don't mind if I slip on the welcome template just a few months too late. It contains a lot of useful links which you may wish to explore, if you haven't already.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ <span style="">18:10: Sun 19 Feb 2012
Images
Hey, thanks for your great images from Spearhead from Space. You've started contributing at a time of some transition with images. We're just beginning to categorise them a bit more usefully. All the supporting documentation hasn't been written yet, because I'm literally in process of doing the major restructuring necessary.
However, if you could please put your uploads into at least categories that identify the story from which they came, it would be a big help. I've gone back and relabelled all the Spearhead images for you.
The basic format of a category is:
[[Category:Full name of serial TV story images]] so [[Category:Spearehad from Space TV story images]]
We also have several other ways of organising files — by object, by character, etc. Please take some time to explore the super-category, Category:Images, to get a feel for the organisation we're attempting, Then place as many categories as are logical for the picture you're uploading. For instance, if you had a pic of Pertwee and Liz from Spearhead, you'd add, category:Third Doctor images, category:Liz Shaw images and Category:Spearhead from Space TV story images.
This effort will help us build a much more searchable, user-friendly collection of pictures. If you go to Spearhead from Space and click on the "images" tab at the upper left, I think you'll see what I mean.
Thanks again for your great pics! Please do keep 'em comin'!
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ <span style="">18:10: Sun 19 Feb 2012
- Heh, no worries. Just to clarify — you didn't add the wrong tags. You got {{screenshot}}, the most important one, on there. This business of fully categorising pages is literally a week old, so there's no reason you should've known about it yet. Hell, I don't even have the help files written yet! It was more a "head's up for the future" kinda thing than a "you done wrong" issue.
- And as for the welcome thingy, well, consider yourself a "highly unusual" user. You have to be very fast indeed to create your talk page before the bot creates it for you. When the bot's working, only about 1 of every 250 users is able to create their talk page before the bot gets there first. So congratulations for beating the system. Too bad there's no money in it for you . . .
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ <span style="">18:39: Sun 19 Feb 2012
Handbook images
I'm so busy creating categories and laying down the basic structure, I haven't had a chance to look at individual cases. I'd imagine the rationale of whoever did that was that there are indeed images of the other Doctors on, say, The First Doctor Handbook. I see your point, though, that the overwhelmingly dominant pic is of the First Doctor on that particular handbook. I'm not really at a point where I've thought too much about the nuances of policy on this new feature. Could you perhaps ask Tangerineduel and user:Mini-mitch what their opinions of such images are? Exactly how dominant a person has to be in a pic in order to qualify to be put in that character's category isn't something we've actually defined yet.
czechout<staff /> ☎ ✍ <span style="">22:46: Sun 19 Feb 2012
Images and categorisation
Hi, it's not exactly and just an image policy question, it's more image categorisation policy question.
As CzechOut has said we haven't quite got the specifics worked out. But the in these circumstances I think it's better to over categorise than under. The reason is it's difficult to define terms like "predominately", "relevant" and "significant" when musing on an image.
Your First Doctor Handbook example would at first seem clear, so we apply that rationalisation to everything? Everything under a certain amount of space on the image can't be included, but then things like the sonic screwdriver might only take up a very minor piece of the image but is still relevant. So then we have to set up a set of rules defining the primary/secondary focus of the image and what is a tertiary focus of the image...and then you still need a threshold to work with.
I wouldn't even want to say that the image has to hold an immediately recognisable image of the category name, because there are images like File:Japan The Daleks illustration 2 with text.jpg which isn't immediately recogniseable as an image of the First Doctor (or Ian and Barbra), but is still relevant to the subject matter.
So at this early stage in the development in this categorisation process I think it's best to categorise everything on the image. As at least then it's all in the categories and we can see it for what it is, if need be it can be culled of the categories first. Hope this answers your questions, but feel free to question me further. Thanks. --Tangerineduel / talk 13:44, February 21, 2012 (UTC)
