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)

New Monaco skin
Hi again! Have you seen the new Monaco skin yet? It's the new Wikia skin that just launched this week. You can see it right now on Muppet Wiki, Marvel Database, DC Database and Flash Gordon Wiki. (If you're not seeing anything new when you visit those, you might have to check "see custom wikis" in your preferences.)

I'm asking some of my favorite Entertainment sites if they want to try Monaco out... I really love it so far, and I think it'll help people navigate and get involved. You can set it as the skin for this wiki at the bottom of your skin preferences page... What do you think? -- Danny (talk ) 00:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I had a look and previewed the TARDIS wiki and I didn't think it worked. It bulks the page up quite a bit makes everything a little less readable. Though I don't want me to be the be all and end all of this so if you think it really has merits chuck a discussion in the forum and get other's opinions on it. --Tangerineduel 05:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, I'm sorry you didn't like it. I'm not sure what you mean by bulking the page up and making things less readable... Maybe you're seeing something I'm not seeing. Can you tell me more about what's less readable? If there's a problem, I might be able to get it fixed. -- Danny (talk ) 14:35, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * It's just the whole...with the page layout as it is the left hand side menus is very unobtrusive and it's thinner than Monaco. With Monaco it's a little bit thicker. Everything seems to have a slightly higher graphics content and busy. Plus with the Monaco layout the adverts are a lot less harder to igrnore. Also with the ticker left hand side menu it pushes the size of the page to be smaller. I just find the default layout a much cleaner easier loading and simpler to navigate layout. --Tangerineduel 15:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, that makes sense. I think the width of the left sidebar is misleading you a little bit -- there's actually more content area on the page with Monaco. The left sidebar is thicker, but there's no right sidebar, so there's more space across the page for content.


 * But if you don't dig it, you don't dig it. Thanks for checking it out! -- Danny (talk ) 19:10, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

quotes
is there a appropriate place to ask the whole community, what they think about some improvements? i think this wiki could need a quote collection, but i want some comments bout that. where would i ask for a second opinion, and start a discussion to standardize that approach? -- Q 1712 01:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * You can ask questions in the Forum:Panopticon. We do have a quotes category Category:Quotes which is generally the standard place to put them (as generally speaking do not place quotes in the TV/novel/audio drama/other media articles for the sake of having quotes. If they're there they are to illustrate a point). --Tangerineduel 13:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)