User talk:Whoisdrwho

<div style="background-color: transparent;	border: 1px dashed #2f2cb8;	color: #000;	margin: 2em 0 1em;	padding: .5em 1em;	vertical-align: middle;       align:center;        width:90%;        line-height:110%;        font-size:95%;	text-align: justify;        -moz-border-radius:10px !important;        -webkit-border-radius:10px !important;         border-radius:10px !important;         -moz-box-shadow:0 0 40px #2f2cb8 !important;         -webkit-box-shadow:0 0 40px #2f2cb8 !important;         box-shadow:0 0 40px #2f2cb8 !important;">

Welcome to the Whoisdrwho!

We hope you'll enjoy being a part of our community! If you're new to either us or wiki editing in general, you might want to check out some of these links:
 * Internal pages
 * Help pages
 * Manual of Style
 * Forums
 * Recent changes
 * User page policy


 * External Wikipedia pages
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial

Remember that you should always sign your comments on talk and vote pages using four tildes like this:  ~

Thanks for becoming a member of the TARDIS crew! If you have any questions, see the Help pages, add a question to one of the Forums or ask on my user talk page.

Re:stalking
As an admin my job is to keep an eye on the day to day dealings of the wikia, in this I have to check everyones editing and make sure it keeps to our manual of style. Your posts on the talk page for Roswell dictated a response and as I was online I responded to your questions. Now none of the things I have been doing can constitute as "stalking" as it is my job to make sure things run smoothly on the wikia.

Also be careful what you accuse people of on the wikia, some editors could define your actions as personal attacks which under the blocking policy can lead to a block on your account. --Revan\Talk 14:07, April 1, 2011 (UTC)
 * So now you are threatening me. You are a brand new admin and my statement was valid.  I will talk to senior admins about your threatening me. | Who is Dr. Who? 14:59, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

It was not a threat, just a warning. What you have said about me on various talk pages puts me in a bad light, my intention was make clear that user's can find your comments hurtful. --Revan\Talk 15:11, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

"Stalking"
For my point of view, he is not stalking you. He is just checking you editing skills are up scratch. It's what I do when I see a new User. I would encourage that you read our Manual of Style to understand the dos and don'ts of this wiki. All he was doing was giving you a heads-up, so you don't do it again in the future and get yourself in trouble. Remember, we want you to edit here, and it's good your asking if there something bothering you. Keep editing this wiki positively, and you will become a great editor! Mini-mitch\talk 15:19, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

Audit of your activities relative to Revanvolatrelundar's
Since you didn't specify the causes underlying your charge of "stalking", I've gone through and looked at all of your 40 edits, then checked to see where Revanvolatrelundar also appeared near you in the edit history. Here, then, are my findings.

Like mini-mitch, above, I find it difficult to substantiate a general charge of "stalking". I, too, have experienced times when editors seem to be following me around and making edits while I am. And it does feel like a kind of stalking, I'll grant you. What's probably really happening is that your edit is popping up under "Recent Wiki Activity", and other users are just — probably more out of boredom than malicious intent — checking to see what' s just been changed. Don't worry about it. On the other hand, if it does get to the point where you're prevented from editing because someone is changing your last edit while you're making a new one, you might want to send them a message, politely asking that they back off that article for a few minutes. When another editor changes an article before you can save your revisions, it's called an edit conflict. And it's, frankly, a pain in the ass. So in that instance, you certainly have the right to politely ask for some space, or to use the inuse tag. All that said, I do not find that stalking has generally occurred.

Turning now to more specific edits:
 * To anser your initial query at Talk:Space (TV story), you weren't able to edit the article because your account was still new. See Tardis:Protection policy for a more precise definition of protection.  Revan failed to contribute tot his page, so therefore, nothing to worry about, here.
 * Talk:Series 6 (Doctor Who): Revan only edits before you on this page, not after.  So there's no stalking here.  But your comments on the page — well, I'll talk about them further down.
 * Doctor Who: You're the most recent contributor here, and Revan hasn't been here since 3 Feb. No stalking (let's just abbreviate that NS, cause I'm going to be using it a lot, I think.)
 * Talk:Doctor Who: You're again the most recent contributor.  NS.
 * The Pirate Planet: Revan hasn't been there this year.  NS. Nobody's touched your contribution yet, but frankly, it's speculation and takes the whole paragraph even further off the topic of The Pirate Planet.
 * The Time of Angels: You're the latest contributor (YTLC). NS.  Revnan not there since 16 Jan.
 * Susan Foreman: Revan has been here after you, but he didn't touch your contribution. NS.
 * UNIT: YTLC. NS.
 * Roswell. Yes, Revan edited after you. But it's hardly stalking, since you put up the delete flag, which is effectively like waving the bat-signal in front of an admin.  Same sort of thing at Roswell crash and the related talk pages.  I suppose you could question whether Revan erred with respect to our deletion policy, since he removed the delte tag without discussion.  On the other hand, I don't disagree with his decision.  We should have separate articles about the town and the crash.  And, he took your views into consideration when he subsequently edited the two articles so as to give better differentiation between the two.  This is what you wanted, so I don't think this is at all a case of "stalking" or admin abuse.
 * You also had some forum edits and talk page edits, but I won't consider those in this review.

Series 6
At the end of the day, though the main bone of contention, it seems to me, is the near edit war at Series 6 (Doctor Who). And here there some legitimate gripes on your parts, as well as an error or two that you made. The big thing that I see is that you were trying to strip the article of some of its doctorwhospoilers.com references. This was a good thing, and something of which I, and the manual of style, approve. You were definitely, unambiguously, in the right. I don't think Revan was being malicious by reverting your edits; I just think this was at a point when I had just blown the whistle on doctorwhospoilers.com and he may not have made it to the forums yet. I'm sure he thought that doctorwhospoilers.com was a valid source and that he was reerting your removal of something that had a valid source attached to it. I think you did precisely the right thing by backing off just before the tussle ended in an edit war.

Where I think you could have helped the situation a little more was to be clearer in your comments on the talk page. it wasn't at all obvious from your comments what the edit war was about. You should have pulled out an example of the thing you were trying to remove from the article and explained why you thought it wasn't appropriate.

You should also have avoided language which made it appear as though you were attacking him for abuse of admin powers. Yes, I understand that he did mention banning you, but this was well after you raised the tension on the series 6 talk page by asking for admin help. In this whole dispute, you never went to his talk page just to discuss the substance and merits of what you were trying to edit. Instead, you went directly from his reversion of your edits to "omg, he's abusing his admin powers by reverting me!" The middle step of "Hey, dude. Here's why I made my edit, why don't we talk about it for a bit?" is an awfully important one to skip over.

To reiterate, I find your edits at Series 6 (Doctor Who) to have been helpful, well-intentioned, and perfectly proper. Where you went wrong was in thinking that Revan had something personal against you. As I've demonstrated by careful review of your edits, series 6 is the only place where he's directly contradicted your edits. And I'm convinced he was acting in what he believed was good faith, as were you.

There's simply been a misunerstanding here. That might be because the only time you spoke with him directly was when you were convinced he was stalking you. If you had explained your editing on his talk page, which you never really did, I feel sure that you would have found Revan reasonable, and you would have worked to a common goal. After all, he demonstrated on his Roswell / Roswell crash edits that he was listening to your issues. Try to remember in future that while revision notes (the summaries that you include before you save your articles) are things that should be included, they aren't a terribly effective way of carrying on a conversation with someone. So while you did leave notes in the history, it's entirely possible that Revan never saw them. Far better to leave emssages directly on user or article talk pages.

I noticed while I was typing this that you blanked your talk page and appear to have left our community. I reverted your talk page, in part because you technically don't have a right to delete discussions on this wiki, but mostly because I hope you'll decide to come back. Your edits have been generally good ones so far. We could certainly use you in the future, especially as the new series begins. 18:38:33 Fri 01 Apr 2011