User talk:The Thirteenth Doctor

Categories
Have you checked around to make sure there's nothing else that can go in the archaeology category? But if there's nothing to go into the category, yes definitely change it so archaeology (the article) is placed within the two categories. I'll also merge the two pages shortly. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 11:49, October 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yep, any categories that have less than 3 articles within them I think don't really need to be categories, the articles can be categoried elsewhere, just be sure to check the 'what links here' before exorcising them of their content (sometimes that what links here might give some indication of other things that might be categorised into it). Also thanks for the SJA bracket correction. --Tangerineduel 12:58, October 21, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the advice. I have made a fourum page so please edit that and show people waht you think. Also am I as you said a episode editing pro or con? Ghastly9090 14:26, October 21, 2010 (UTC)

Vortex Manipulator
Want me to try and separate them then? - '' I. Am. Excalibur-117 '' -(talk • contribs) 16:08, October 22, 2010 (UTC)

images doctor
can we make an exception with these article, its really hard to get good images. (Ceryu 22:09, October 24, 2010 (UTC))

Infobox
Thanks for letting me know, I've reverted to a previous edit for now until I can make sure it works correctly. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 12:34, October 25, 2010 (UTC)

New pages
It's sort of assumed that when creating a page you've got something to write about, I'm reticent to create a policy just about that, but I've added a note to the Tardis:Community Portal saying to make sure you've got enough to justify an article. It's sometimes hard to define exactly how much is "enough" given the wide range of articles, but as I re-check through policies/help articles I'll see if I can add it elsewhere. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 13:58, October 26, 2010 (UTC)

Santiago's dad
It's not a big deal, but obviously that was the point of RTD's coy line. It's being wilfully difficult to say "Ah, yes, but we did not have an extra ten words specifying why he was a member." If we're being literal and not allowed to understand the writerly decisions behind lines, then we have to believe outright that the Doctor can regenerate 507 times also (when this is a joke). Clearly it's meant to be saying "Look, Santiago's a normal boy whose dad is gay but is still an active father in many respects." I thought (admittedly, from a real-world perspective), that this was an interesting portrayal. It's probably also an interesting thing about Santiago in terms of his real-world biography, anyway.Zythe 15:17, October 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Does the Doctor's flippant delivery to the question not actually imply, textually, that it is intended to be humorous? I can't see why a person can't exercise a little critical judgement.Zythe 23:00, October 27, 2010 (UTC)

Jo Jones
Jo did NOT die in a house fire in 2028! That's just nonsense in those Virgin novels that those idiots write, how could you allow such a horrible thing to be written about someone as nice as Jo without even saying it might to be true? She didn't die, she died peacefully in her sleep god damn it. No offence.

Theres no need to take offence, I didn't swear at you or anything like that, and I'm sorry if you feel that way and I'm pretty sure you did remove my edit, as I saw it. The people who wrote the books were not idiots, but I find them bad writers because they like interfering, apart from killing off half the people who have ever been in the show, the continous sexual agenda and the numerous stuff to contradict the Time War, they haven't really contributed anything to the Whoniverse.

It seems to me though that you enjoy suffering and people dying, and I wouldn't call that speculation...and I've seen many of your edits on Doctor Who Wiki, do you even have a life outside of this? Because all you seem to be doing is coming on here and making articles as dull as possible. I can name many times when I've felt offended by you for dehumanizing yourself and others. I could go on.

And before you take offence yet again, that paragraph above wasn't offensive either, and to be honest in a world where people can execute woman for commiting adultery or removing their burkhas, I think I can say you're making this site dull. Its like you enjoy the grim idea of Jo dying, if the whole world just ended, and everyone you ever knew was dead...would you still treat it as a "stone cold fact" and not think anything else of it? Because with your language and attitude you're giving me that impression.

~ThePandoricaOpens666 17:31 27th October 2010

Hmmmm....I guess.

~ThePandoricaOpens666 19:36 27th October 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry I was a bit rude to you, I have a problem at the moment with people in authority and get frustrated very easily.

~ThePandoricaOpens666 22:14 27th October, 2010 (UTC)