User talk:Tangerineduel

Categories
I've got another question... I'm having a hard time figuring out the category structure. There's categories called Stories, Doctor Who stories, Television stories, Television stories by Doctor and Doctor Who television stories. Within Television stories by Doctor, the stories are called episodes: First Doctor episodes, etc.

From what I can tell, it looks like the categories sort of evolved gradually, with each person adding their own categories without necessarily looking at a larger structure.

So I'm curious about what you think -- I'm kind of a nerd about that stuff, and you may not be concerned about it at all. I'd be happy to work on revamping the category structure, or help with it if other people are interested -- but obviously, I don't want to jump into a big project like that if you're happy with it the way it is. Let me know what you think... -- Danny (talk ) 18:39, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * The categories. Every so often I get motivated to fix the categories and when answering your other question I had a look at the TV stories categories noticed how haphazard they were.
 * I'm okay with how the categories are (though it annoys me sometimes). But I wouldn't say I'm happy with it. As I see it should have some sort of logic to it (even if it's its own internal logic), but it doesn't and probably needs a good shake up and fix.
 * If you want to work through how you want to do it that's okay, or if you want to start and I'll (try) and keep and eye on it, also fine.
 * Just as I said make sure its got some sort of logic to it and that its fits in with everything else and also make sure that it doesn't become TV centric as there's novels, short stories, audio dramas, magazines etc. Though some of those I have attempted to work on. In any case I'll try to help where I can. --Tangerineduel 02:34, 6 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'll take a crack at it when I have a little chunk of time to play with it. I'll definitely keep the structure consistent for the novels and everything.


 * I don't know if I've mentioned this to you, but I'm a huge Doctor Who fan. I've read all the Virgin and BBC novels up through the end of the EDAs, I get Doctor Who Magazine every month, and I've seen (and loved) the new Sarah Jane Adventures. Some of my happiest childhood memories involve stacks of Target novelizations. So I won't go messing things up; I know my Doctor Who. :) -- Danny (talk ) 18:46, 6 February 2008

(UTC)

"Proper" wiki Merges
As an aside, things like Border Princess and Border Princes should be merged properly in order to merge the histories into one place. Have you ever done this before? If not, the process is as follows:
 * 1) manually copy the information from the destination to the source article.
 * 2) delete the destination article
 * 3) move the source article to the destination (this creates the redirect too)
 * 4) undelete all deleted revisions of the page

And voila... you're done. You have all of the history from every instance of the article in one location. :) -- Sulfur 15:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Right (didn't know how to do it, or probably thought about it and did the easier way). Will bare it in mind for the future thanks. --Tangerineduel 16:06, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Doctor Who - The Novel of the Film
Keeping on the roll I started with Scream of the Shalka, I went ahead and created a proper article for the telefilm novelisation. I've never been able to obtain a copy of this book (it wasn't distributed in Canada as BBC Books didn't get a distribution deal here till sometime in 1998-99), and I can't find any online sources for a cover. There are versions of the audio cassettte reading, but that's different art, I think. I'm pretty certain the cover used for the book is the same as that used for the early VHS release. You wouldn't happen to have the book, would you? 23skidoo 04:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Spoiler Template
I thought, to replace the old spoiler template with a new one which reads Spoliers and has a picture of ProfessorRiver Song because that is mentioned in the series unlike the current one. It would also be catchy! Thanks, and sorry about the Energy blaster article I won't do it again. Thanks anyway --Gallifreyisgreater 17:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

In-universe
My understanding was that terms like First Doctor, etc. are allowed in in-universe discussion. Is this a rule that's been set anywhere (i.e. along the lines of not calling the Doctor "Doctor Who") or is this personal preference? 23skidoo 17:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Bred for war
this is orginnaly a message for skittles but he hasnt replied in ages dont if you have Bred for War but :

Bred for War. Well just windering if i should buy it though if seen two of the stories on uktv gold and just wondering if its a slipcase with the dvds covers inside or a box set with discs on plastic stuff. Does the box set have any extras on it that the stanard ones dont. Someones added journeys end to Davros's episodes thing it is not CONFIRMED he will return the thing in the trailer could just be a new type / model of dalek. Just checking ou the Tea,Coffee and Most of all the Sex page. Ace is sorta a slut ! Whats your oppinion bye !!!Quark16 16:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Doctor Who theme
I just made a major move and revision, taking the article called "Theme Arrangement" and changing it to the more-likely-to-be-searched Doctor Who theme. I expanded and reorganized the article thoroughly. The only catch is that there's a ton of "What Links Here" artifacts where Theme Arrangement is still linked.

I'm prepared to spend some time (when time allows) removing the redirects, but if you happen to have access to a bot that can do this, please feel free. (Alternately, if you don't mind redirects - they make Wikipedians antsy which is why I'm asking here - then we can just leave it be). I put the word "theme" in lower case for the renamed article, but I wonder if it should be "Theme". Do you know if the piece of music is actually called "Doctor Who Theme"? 23skidoo 01:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I just realized I accidentally posted the thread to your userpage instead of your talk page. Apologies. I think keeping everything together in one article is probably best. Someone looking for information on the theme music and its various versions would probably just want to go to the one article. Spinoffs related to specific versions such as Pertwee's vocal version might be feasible later, but for not I was able to turn it into a general article on the theme by just adding a few paragraphs to what already existed regarding the different arrangements. 23skidoo 04:49, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

The quite handsome Tenth Doctor
Well. First things first. I know Richard E. Grant was a doctor in the curse of fatal death. But was he the tenth ? The Paul McGann page seems to suggest that he played the (Quite handsome ) Tenth Doctor. This is quite confusing and i know the The Curse of Fatal Death was not Canon but if the thing on the paul mc gann page is an error I think it must be fixed. I have seen that you changed the name and uploaded a pic. I couldnt find one. Is the new name better than the old name ? Should it stay this way ? well anyway well done ! - Tenth Doctor (Comic Relief) Quark16 17:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

RE: Additions from Visual Dictionary and others
Are you saying I shouldn't make pages like that because they are only mentioned once ever (with hardly any info), and in its a book? The evil dudeArnie 16:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

From the Librarian: Comic Strip enquiries, and general catchup
Hi, you've been busy I see! I've been away awhile working on some other stuff, but noticed a couple of things Im not sure about that I thought you might know more. Hope you're keeping well by the way!
 * Firstly 'Doctor Who Comic Strip Stories'. Whats with the new 'COMIC stub' (and why hasn't the stub got an appropriate drawn picture). And, why is it even marked as a stub, lacking information when it links to pages that offers far more information than could easily be viewed on one page? :: On the stub issue, I notice a lot of pages (including the Target novel pages for instance), have now got stubs on them. I understand that there is always more information that can be added (the nature of the wiki you once told me!) but surely when there is some significant amount of content stubs could be dispenced with, couldn't they?
 * I realise the Battle in Time comic strips are abit individual at the moment but Battles in Times is something I've been looking at (as its due to be completed soon) and improving comic strip entry pages presentation is a key part of this. (hint: more graphics!).If BIT strips proves popular then I'll start working backwards on the others.
 * I thought it was discussed in the forum about creating seperate pages for one-off minor characters in comic strips but someone seems to have created links to each little entry under the characters section of the page. Is their anyway of giving guidance on this?
 * On another issue, a bit more general, (still a thicky with this wiki world LOL!)how is the longevity of content? I mean the content isn't likely to disappear overnight or becomes unusable because of ever-growing use and increased loading times...is it? I would hate to think that it turns out to be wasted time.
 * Anyway if you've time to reply I would appreciate it, and one other question, don't suppose you know of a page that is set up like a table with images on the left column do you? random searches for the format Im looking for haven't proved fruitful? Do you know anyone else on wiki who might be able to help provide what Im thinking of?
 * Bye for now, should see more content appearing in the next few months, feedback as usual welcome! Thanks The Librarian 18:34, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Continuity vs. References
Something I've been noticing in the episode articles is that the Continuity and References sections have become interchangeable. I've also noticed duplication as people add items to one section not realizing they're listed in the other. I wonder if some reorganization might be in order, perhaps combining the two sections into one and maybe creating a "cultural references" section or something like that to handle other items. Similarly it's not always clear what should be under Story notes as I've also seen continuity/references items listed there. I've probably done so myself. Thoughts? 23skidoo 17:10, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Whichever way works out is OK by me. The episode articles in particular probably need some sorting and cleaning up anyway. I just removed an Army of Ghosts item in References that not only duplicated something already in Continuity, but whoever added it didn't even bother to use capitals, punctuation or wikilinks! 23skidoo 17:42, 18 June 2008 (UTC)