User talk:Tangerineduel

MissUndefinable
I have been recently looking at the Quote of the Week nominations and literally all of them have been placed by MissUndefinable. It clearly states on the page that one user may place one vote only in each section. This user has broken this regulation. I think that you should place some new quote categories so that MissUndefinable's quotes can not be re-used. Thank You. Ghastly9090 15:58, February 7, 2011 (UTC)

Series 7?
Sorry to bother you again, but last night while I was looking through my latest copy of Doctor Who Magazine, I noticed this section in an interview with Mark Gatiss. Here's what it says: Will Mark be writing for the 2012 Series? "They've asked me to, but it all depends on my other commitments..."

I think that is pretty strong confirmation that there will be a Series 7/Series 2/Series 33. I know that you probably already knew there was going to be a Series 7, but doesn't this show that it might just be time to start putting a Series 7 page into production, or maybe you could do it after all Series 6 filming has finished so there isn't confusion over episodes. The quote above is 100% accurate and true. I'm not lying. This isn't a request, just a gentle nugde if you get what I mean. Thanks once again. Ghastly9090 10:57, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

I take it you saw the above message? Ghastly9090 16:29, February 15, 2011 (UTC)

Can you test something for me?
Hey, by now you'll probably have noticed something different when you try to create a new page. I've started adding in a whole fleet of enw preloadable formats. Today, I've gotten around to the more complicated formats for DWA and DWM issues. When you get some free time, could ya kick the tires on the formats for me, and tell me if you'd like anything tweaked about them? I've based both on the most recent issues of the mags. I think the DWM one is pretty solid, cause I'm familiar with that mag, but it's been a while since I've seen an issue of DWA. I think that you'll like that both formats automatically add a lead, fill in most of the infobox, and even automatically add categories and the previous and next issues. I'm a little less sure that I've got the subheads right on the DWA thing. Thanks for any input you can provide on these or really any of the new preloadables.
 * Wow, thanks for the detailed remarks. I've already implemented the more cosmetic things you requested, such as going to "Option 1" and paring down the language so that caps could be both used and grammatically correct. Both of those were great suggestions that wouldn't have occurred to me. Now as for the other points:

Stray
Yeah, this is a weird one. The thing is that ultimately the "glowy box thing" will just be hardcoded into the CSS, like it already is at w:c:tardistest:template:Tardis license. If you take a look at that template, you'll see that it really doesn't have much in the way of editable style markup. Roughly, it's just: This is the text in the box. And when we make the shift over to an actual CSS style sheet, MediaWiki:Newarticletext will be similarly restyled. That'll mean a reduction of a div, and therefore that stray div will poof. There's undoubtedly a way to make the stray div poof now, using just regualr wiki markup, but it's a waste of effort, because of what's in the next section.

Namespace specific text for new pages
The points you make about the current text failing to apply to, say, the creation of new talkpages, are of course valid. Phase 2 of the "Newpage Project", for lack of a better term, is newpage text specific to the namespace. Thus, if you're creating a new "Help" page, you'll get different text than if you're creating a new "Category" or "User" page. I've been looking around for a way to do this, and unfortunately I was barking up the wrong tree for a while, which is why we didn't the whole system at once.

The solution, it turns out, is something implemented on the Russian Wikipedia. Basically, when the software calls up newarticletext, that file checks to see what the namespace of the new page is, and then switches to a template appropriate to that namespace. Pretty nifty really. I'm not entirely sure that Wikia's version of MediaWiki will let us change every single namespace's new page message this way — not every namespace seems to call MediaWiki:newarticletext — but for those that do, we'll be able to easily fiddle with things. Thus, once it's all in, I'll definitely be looking to you for some wording. Just to get your mind thinking ahead of time, what would you like to say on a new category page? A new user page? A new Tardis page? A new Help page?

Update: Success!
This now produces a different message for each of the namespaces. Of course, it only produces that specific message if you click on a redlink to create the page. If you choose to create a page through Special:CreatePage, then you just get the standard mainspace (option 1/option 2) thing. Thus, if you choose to "Add a Page" but create a Tardis: page, you're not going to trigger the Tardis:-specific message. But if you were to click on Tardis:Namespace-specific new article messages, you'll see a bare bones namespace-specific message. Now we just have to work on what we want to say for each of these namespaces.

Option 2 worries
Yeah, people could just copy a whole page over into a new page, press publish, and we'd be stuck with two copies of the same articles with different names. I think that the time savings for legitimate edits, though, outweigh the potential for abuse. I know that my personal editing style would be more to go for option 2 than option 1.

Other templates
template:infobox Audiobook has in fact been modified to effectively merge the variables in infobox CD and Audiobook together. It can be used for any kind of audio release, save music. As for other templates that haven't yet been finished, I've dragged a lil on TV story templates of series that aren't pending. They'll be in shortly. The rest, save merchandise and toy, are all done. At the end of the day, I may just eliminate merchandise and toy. Dunno yet.

Spelling
"Website" now corrected; thanks for the catch. (The file, btw, is MediaWiki:Edittools, though it is partially now controlled by changes to common.css.)

Glowy boxes
If you want to create a "glowy box", like is used on edittools and newarticletext, that's now been defined as a CSS element, as it's a major design element at w:c:tardistest, and it'll be the base for all message box templates once this site gets its facelift. Also, these new page templates are going to require that background, and I couldn't be bothered cutting and pasting any more. To use, do this: Your message Which gives:

Your message Any text in the box is unstyled by this id, so you'd likely want to add a second, interior div (or span) to give the text some flair. And the box is at 95% width but not automatically centered. Thus if you want to create a box that IS centered, and style the interior text, you'd do something like this:  Warning:  You are about to do something naughty. Which yields:

Warning: You are about to do something naughty.

Infoboxen
The thing I'm finding after having gone through the process of making up this preloadable formats, and thereby scouring category:infoboxes, is that we have an awful lot of duplication. The difference between audiobook, CD and audio story was minute. There's no reason to have three different infoboxen there. Same thing's true of the various ones we have for television episodes, prose works, and comic stuff. We could cut the number of infoboxen in half and not blink an eye. And, ultimately, this will happen. All the infoboxen will have to be reformatted when the site gets its facelift, and at that point you're likely to see a massive winnowing. And at that point, it will probably be very much appropriate to make very simple, basic template names, like infobox audio. But we won't want to delete any of the pre-existing names, like infobox audiobook. We'll just convert them to redirects, so that the transition is fairly seamless. It's kind of a waste of bot energy, when a single redirect does the same thing. You can already kind of see the coding approach at template:infobox Audiobook. If you look at the guts of it and notice what's going on with the "name" variable, you see that the template allows that variable to be either "name" or "audiobook name", which means it still works on audiobook pages, but now accepts the "name" variable common to infobox CD. (I gotta say, though, I don't understand why a different name for the variable would have been employed in the first place. "Name" should've been kept standard to any infobox. Who knows, though, maybe I did this unique variable name thing on some of the infoboxen I designed. It's gotta stop, though. Users should know that there are some variable names that are standard, "name" being at the top of the list.)

New page text
These are all going to be in category:newpage message templates for you to peruse and change as I add them.

Time Field
Can we please move Time Field to Crack or something? Nobody is going to go searching for "Time Field", and as far as I can remember "Time Field" was only said once or twice in the whole series. Everybody calls this story arc "the cracks", not "the Time Field". Just a thought :-) --The Traveller 14:15, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

What the hell has happened to your talk page?
Where did all the previous questions/answers go? What the...? What happened? 90.215.45.50 21:59, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

Doug86
Doug86 is an admin but I strongly think he should be dropped back from the admins list. Looking at his talk page, I have found lots of complaints about his edits and he never ever even replies to any of his messages, and that's why I think he shouldn't be an admin. 90.215.45.50 13:33, February 18, 2011 (UTC)

Update on new [ns] page text
Work is continuing apace on the various templates that now appear at the top of the page when you want to start new pages in the various namespaces. You may have noticed in some cases that persistent odd , but this problem has now been solved, as can be observed if you. Sorry to have kept the wiki in limbo on this issue for longer than I imagined; for some reason I caught the fever to write articles about all things Australian for the past day. Should have completed putting up preliminary text up by either the end of Saturday or maybe Sunday morning your time.

BTW, I did like your proof of concept on the DWM cover organization dealio.
 * Your rewording request on newtemplatetext implemented.
 * Definitely need your eyes at newtardistext.

Australia
Well, I know. I was fascinated, too. In a way, it's only about a few pages in Invasion of the Cat-People, where Gary Russell decides to write a fairly dull travelogue (oh, wait, it's Gary Russell, of course it's dull writing), but still it's interesting the degree to which there is coverage of Australia in DW fiction. I mean, Three kept coming back for more in his comic strips. Countdown in particular loved sending him to Oz —I think two or three times in the space of about a year. He's certainly the Doctor with the most trips to Oz, which maybe makes sense cause he was on Earth for so long. But you still wouldn't immediately have that at the tip of your brain. I think it's fascinating the degree to which other media lets the Doctor go to both Australia and America, when we tend to think of the Doctor being so incredibly wed to England (not even Britain, but England).

Edit to Azes13's Talk Page is mistaken

 * Note: I had to rollback this user's contributions to your page, as he/she destroyed it. The following is an exact copy of their last substantive edit to your page. 
 * Why the hell has CzechOut put the above message there?
 * Why the hell has CzechOut put the above message there?

I have not edited Azes 13's talk page ever so I don't know why you randomly came up with that, but I'm sure there's a logical explanation. User:90.215.45.50 17:02, February 18, 2011 (UTC)

Update
Your concerns about MediaWiki:Edittools saying "if you're uploading a pic blah blah" on every page have now been addressed. Edittools completely changes for Special:Upload and Special:MultipleUpload so that it's no longer necessary to have the license warning on every single edit page. Let me know if you think the version on the upload pages is too bare bones. Might have to do some tweaking on the main edittools text; it looks a little weird to my eye now. Too much whitespace at the top or something.

The new[ns]text pages have now all been completed. Peruse/change at your leisure —but at least now there's something on each type of new page.

homepage
hi how do you make your homepage hidden --leon norman 22:41, February 19, 2011 (UTC)

The Thirteenth Doctor 21:57, February 20, 2011 (UTC)#

Why should I know?
I know about the User Conribs page. Anyway, I obviously don't like Doug86 so I did that on Azes13's talk page, I admit, but, How was I to know that that was vandalism when I have only been editing on this wiki for a month and 14 days? 90.215.45.50 16:33, February 21, 2011 (UTC)

admin
can you make me an admin and come and join my wikia at http://classicnewdoctorwho.wikia.com --leon norman 19:20, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

You banned me earlier this year and I would like to say that I had let my 5 year old cousin look at dalek pics but I didn't know that I was still logged on and then he tryed to edit stuff like do on my wiki and when I had come back from doing the gardening I found I was banned. Please can I be an administrator for being banned for 4 months for doing nothing.

Wikia lies
About that 'Anyone can edit' motto sort of thing from wikia, not anyone can edit. For instance, there are a lot of pages we anon users cannot edit so the 'Anyone can edit' slogan is not strictly true. Just saying. 90.215.45.50 20:11, February 22, 2011 (UTC)

pictures
you know when you add a picture on here youve got a liscense how did you create new liscenses like dwm magazine issues if you get what i mean

qotw and other stuff
Hey, I'm sorry I've not been in touch the past day or so.
 * Glad you liked qotw. I should've done it for you a lot earlier. Poor guy. You've been unnecessarily sloggin' through that copy and past schtick for years now when you really didn't have to. As for first or second person in the "voice" of the message box, I dunno, I went for second, cause I saw you doing second. I figured it just sounded more like what you'd been doing. So you'll see auto-generated phrases like "your quote should ..." and the like throughout. Feel free to change the language to fit your own voice better.
 * Oh, btw, wanted to offer you another bit of helpful code for QOTW matters. Did you know that we could knock up a very easy automated system? It's so simple:


 * Literally, that's it. You could effectively change the whole way you did quotes with this. You start the year with 10 quotes left over from the previous year. That gives you a cushion. You throw out 20 broad topics in January, then wait for people to populate those requests. At about the time the Doctor Who series starts in the spring, you "harvest" the quote page for the next few months. With any luck, you'll get 42 quotes at that point, and then you'll never have to mess with QOTW until the end of the year. At that point, you'd have all the quotes in one place, and you could just send them off to archive without having to do all that cutting and pasting. So basically you interact with quotes a three or four times a year, not every week. Lemme know if you'd like to implement this.


 * In response to a rather cryptic message at Forum:Rumours on the loose, I took a look at tardis:spoiler policy and noticed it was maybe not specific enough to help User:Ghastly9090 combat an influx of rumors on series 6 (Doctor Who). Thus, I beefed up the language on the page and gave a detailed example of proper sourcing at the various stages of a rumor's life. Please take a look when you get a chance to see if you have problems with the amplification of the basic policy.
 * How do you think I should handle the visual changeover that drove me to seek adminship in the first place? Do I ask for a community vote of every single point of the design at w:c:tardistest? Do I bring it in one major feature at a time? Or do I say, look at this overall design; are you mostly in favor of it or not? Or do I just bring it in without discussion and say, "Look if you've got specific problems with this, please let me know on the forums?" I've kinda gotten off the rails on that major project, but it's late February now and there's not much time before the new series starts. I really need to be gettin' on with the implementation, but it's so major a change I'm honestly not sure of the best way to go about getting basic community assent.
 * I know you had a specific objection to the design of the transparent background. But remember I put the Baker vortex design up specifically to highlight what the background could do. That's not the design I'm saying should ultimately be there, nor do I think it should always be one design. I think it should a) change seasonally and b) largely concentrate on images that are on either side of the main text area. For me, the interesting thing about the feature is not that you can see through the text area, but that it doesn't move when you scroll. That means you can create a design that's relatively short and it won't scroll away when you scroll down. So let's say we wanted to put up a little strip of Gallifreyan writing across the top. It would always be across the top. I also made another test background where I had a couple of Yeti peeking out from behind the text area. That was fun. We could certainly have "character" backgrounds like too. Or a background where photos were pinned to the sides of the screen. Or one where we have the Doctor in profile on one side, and Amy in profile on the other. Or one dominated by roundels. There are a lot of possibilities for it. Don't prejudge it by the test pattern :)

Pictures
If a picture that has nothing to do with the Dr. Who universe is put onto a subjects talk page does it have a right to be deleted. I ask as I put a picture on the Vashta Narada talk page, so that people can decide wether it should be written about as a refrence. Please tell me if it is alright. The picture was temporary anyway. Thank you Son of Icthar 11:17, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

Also I am not very happy with Skittles the hog's tone in the messages he leaves on my talk page. Thank you. Son of Icthar 11:36, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

3 things; 1 Thank you for answering me. 2. Do you think it could be a possible refrence? 3. How do you do a link to another site, because I have no idea. Thank you Son of Icthar 12:36, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

I still don'tlike his tone. Son of Icthar 11:13, February 28, 2011 (UTC)



User
I have a strange feeling that User:Finisterman may be a User that was blocked earlier in the year for doing the exact same thing: Adding the wrong categories to pages, even after being warned several times. Can you look into it for me?? Cheers. Mini-mitch\talk 16:39, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

I thought the same thing the second he started editing, possibly using the same IP adress I mentioned to you earlier. His edits are identical and as vandalising as Finister2's edits and they share a common name. --Revan\Talk 16:42, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
I would like to thank you once more for telling me how to do an external link, would it be alright to do that on the page or shall I let it die down abit? I also thought that there should be a page to Nicholas Courtney's most memorable lines on this wiki, if you agree I think that would be an excellent tribute to the great actor. Son of Icthar 17:01, February 24, 2011 (UTC)

Quotations
I understand. Son of Icthar 14:06, February 25, 2011 (UTC)

Would you do me a favour please?
Hi! Thanks for the help recently managed to sort it out with CzechOut ...just wondered would you be so good as to just drop me a line on my talk page with a subject heading of whatever 'cos I just want to see something  more a test realy - thanks! The Librarian 15:59, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

Why can't anon users insert pictures?
Why can't anon users insert pictures onto the wikia? 90.215.45.50 18:14, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

New Look

 * 1) What has the blots got to do with dr. who?
 * 2) FEELING SEA SICK Josho 03:44, February 28, 2011 (UTC)

, so a decision can be reached! Mini-mitch\talk 17:14, February 28, 2011 (UTC)

Once again the decor changes
ok that is weird the previous decor lasted less than two months and this decor is weird. One question. What the hell is with the bubbles? QUIT CHANGING THE DECOR! IT'S JUST A WEBSITE AND IT DOESN'T NEED DECORATION AFTER DECORATION AFTER DECORATION ALL THE TIME! Oh, and one other thing, ANSWER MY QUESTIONS PLEASE, O MIGHTY TANGERINEDUEL!!!!!!!!! 90.215.45.50 17:26, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

New Dr Who Books
Hi,

I was looking for a page where I could contact the site admins or editors. It might be worth adding an 'admin talk' type page, where ideas and suggestions could be thrown in. Maybe it's there and I'm not seeing it, but if that's the case, then making it a little more obvious for the impatient like me might be useful.

Anyway, I have found a new series of Doctor Who (Matt Smith) children's books, known as 'flip books' (because you read one story, then turn the book upside down so that the back becomes the front, and you have a second story). These don't seem to be covered in the wikia at all.

Here's some links to them on Amazon:

Book 1: Heart of Stone / Death Riders

Book 2: The Good, the Bad and the Alien / System Wipe

Book 3: Rain of Terror / Extra Time(not yet released)

Book 4: The Underwater War / Terminal of Despair (not yet released)

Sorry, I don't have to time to add these, and was hoping someone else did...

EDIT: Nevermind, found Forum:Panopticon... Will post this there

EDIT: Posted it here: Forum:New_flip_books_by_BBC_Childrens_Books

Thanks Jamdog 18:41, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

Canon policy rewrite
Hey could you take a look at user:CzechOut/Sandbox8 for me? It's a top-down rewrite of the canon policy, which incorporates some recent discussions at Forum:BBV and canon policy. I'd appreciate your thoughts. 03:49:52 Thu 10 Mar 2011
 * Thanks for the comments. Well, I haven't begun to address all of them, since one of your requests is a fairly massive undertaking.  I've made a decent stab, I hope, at getting the positive list you requested.  In my way of thinking at present, there'll be the policy page, which generally proceeds from the notion of explaining what we don't allow, and then a list-ish page which goes through what we do allow.  It's here: User:CzechOut/Sandbox8/WhatThisWikiCovers.  Thing is though, the main canon policy page should be given primacy, because it's more likely it will be current.  For instance, the current "positive" list doesn't even refer to IDW at all.  So, technically, according to current policy, IDW isn't canon!  People just aren't going to remain committed to keeping the "positive" list up to date, if the current canon policy page is any indication.  That's why I think it's important to approach it from two different angles, and make the more long-winded canon policy page as the "superior" version of the policy (that is, any discrepancies are resolved in the main canon policy page). Any future stories should be evaluated on the basis of the policy, rather than the list.   09:18:49 Fri 11 Mar 2011

20:06:59 Fri 11 Mar 2011

The Beast Below?
I was on "List of Dalek Appearances " an i went down to Series 5 and the last scene from The Beast Below has been totally ignored, Is there a reason behind this??? Josho 21:00, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

I Know i can up date it my self. It's just that i rember the beast below being in the "dalek Appearances box" so i though it was an admin thing Josho 19:09, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

QOTW
Could you explain that a little more, or, better, take a screenshot of what you're seeing? I'm not detecting any problems my end. 16:01:26 Mon 14 Mar 2011
 * Ahhhh, TOC/glow collision. I see.  Thanks for the pic.  I'll look into it. I'll try defining TOC a little more, but if that doesn't work, the obvious solution is simply to make the width of the QOTW template narrower, about 600px.  But let me mess around with the TOC defs first.  Interesting problem.   16:57:43 Mon 14 Mar 2011
 * Well, I wanted to get you a quick solution so that the page didn't look so bad. This may not be the final solution, because TOC's are tricky.  They're not "really" there on the page, so it's hard to tell the code, "if you detect this TOC box, adjust to its presence".  Nevertheless you can easily change some things about them.  What I've gone for here is to switch it from a transparent box to one that has the color of transparency.  So it still matches the background, but it actually has a background.  I've also absolutely defined a left margin, so the text of the template, at least, will recognize the edge of the template — even though the border of the template won't.  This will tuck the right edge of the template background under the TOC, but still leave the text of the template fully readable.  Ideally, it'd be nice to actually get the whole template to recognize the TOC border, but for now, at least it's all readable and not actually colliding any more.   18:08:05 Mon 14 Mar 2011
 * Well, like I said, the solution was a stop-gap one, just to make the page legible. It's probably not where we'll end up.  I'll continue looking at it.  The best solution, by far, is to get proper collision detection, such that qotw "sees" the toc and shrinks accordingly.  Dunno quite how to do that yet.  15:39:19 Tue 15 Mar 2011
 * Yes, I thought about changing the width of qotw. And I still might do it. Problem is that doesn't solve the larger issue.  See, the TOC is not, for reasons I don't get, obeying it's own width commands.  If you check out pages where the sectional headsers are really wordy (I dunno, like DWA Issue 1, maybe), you'll see that it has a much bigger width than on the page I just edited, Time Wake (short story).  Somehow, the TOC's just got a mind of its own.  And I really do need to understand its fundamentals a bit better.  So it's just as well to play around with this excellent test case at the QOTW nomination page than to just fix that one page and learn relatively nothing about why the TOC behaves as it does.


 * See, if I can control the TOC, and ensure that it is always 250px, then that gives us a definite width for qotw. Because the header length is controlling the TOC width, however, the TOC width is not always the same, even on that one page.  (A header for a week in December is longer than a header for a week in May, for example.)


 * I guess that what I'm saying is there are obvious fixes, but more obscure solutions.  16:03:55 Tue 15 Mar 2011
 * Some progress has been made today in that a found the right element to use to make all TOCs a standard width. At the moment all are at 250px. I may have found something which allows an object, like a template, to clip itself off after a certain width,  if it encounters another object nearby.  It failed to work putting it on the TOC code, but i'll try later putting it on the QOTW temp.  If that fails I'll keep looking for a bit.  But at least we now know what the width of the TOC is definitely going to be, meaning that we can, at a minimum, define the width of QOTW with confidence that it will always "clear" the TOC.  08:21:01 Wed 16 Mar 2011

Mini-mitch\talk 17:20, March 15, 2011 (UTC)

Adventure making books
Surely Make Your Own Adventure with Doctor Who and ''Decide Your Destiny books are not canon as they have no set storyline. Is there a reason they are not in this category?Skittles the hog-- Talk 18:09, March 17, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought you'd relate them to computer games. Personally, I don't think a non-definitive story can be canon, but the adventure games are clearly designed to fit in with the series, so I suppose you can't discriminate.Skittles the hog-- Talk 16:25, March 18, 2011 (UTC)

New artcle of the month
No offence to Nick Courtney, but isn't it time for a new article of the month?Ghastly9090 16:20, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Subheads
There might be a little tweaking here and there, but not much. This is pretty much where it is. I think it's a vast improvement in readability. It's very clear now what's a section head and what's a bit of text in the section. This was considerably less clear, especially when you got down to the h5 and h6 headers. Now though, there's an obvious difference between the headers and the regular text on the page. [Take a look at companion, for an example of an article that uses all subhead levels.]

But the big thing is precisely this matter of the sentence case. It's still the rule, and I hope this doesn't give people license to go do what they want with headers cause they know the headers will "take care of things for them". But as someone who's spent a fair amount of time enforcing the MOS, I'm honestly just tired of fighting that fight, even with a bot. This way, with one command, the site instantly snaps to attention and looks more professional.

Of course, people should still follow the rule because of TOCs and because if you link to a section of a page, you want to have confidence in how it's capitalised; section links are entirely case sensitive. In other words, this is a cosmetic change in the way a particular class of text is presented on our site. It's not a revision to the manual of style, which tells us how we should type in the raw text. It's still very important that people follow tardis:Manual of Style. 16:50:13 Mon 21 Mar 2011
 * I strongly disagree with your assessment. It's taken me a while, but I'm really happy with the font mix that now obtains on the site.  I love the all caps accents that exist on the site right now, and think that the pages look much more interesting because there's a clear demarcation between body text and other text.  I can add more explanatory text to the MOS to explain what's going on. It's more important that the site read clearly to the average user than it is that we get a perfectly WYSIWYG output for our editors.  Besides which, WYSIWYG headers are available on every page through the TOC.  The site finally has a uniform, simple text style that uses a minimum number of fonts in the font stack.  I don't want to change it — especially not if the main rationale is "because editors might get confused if they read the MOS".  The solution is to change the MOS so that it's clearer, not to throw out the baby with the bath water.   14:44:36 Tue 22 Mar 2011
 * I'm confused. You said to keep the details out of the forums when I started the project, and now when you find one thing you disagree with, you want a vote? Odd. I don't understand why you're so concerned about this, anyway, since largely you're not the person who polices this issue.  I am.  My bot has made literally thousands of changes on the sentence case in headers issue.  My experience on this matter is simply greater than yours.  And I'm tellin' you that people are going to disregard the issue.  Headers will always be put in title case, and it's impossible for bots to take care of the hundreds of pages where unique headers are used.  Therefore, it's best that the code forces a style upon the headers, so that everything is consistent.


 * In any event, I was rewriting the MOS at the time you left your last message — please don't think that I did it after receiving your message, out of spite — and I think it's a lot clearer than it's ever been.


 * I would urge you to give yourself and others some time to let this new font mix breathe. I wish that I had been able to implement this from the get-go, but I didn't know a few weeks ago how to do it.  Though I know a bit about design theory, I am still learning how to enact that theory through CSS.  So I'm not always able to instantly make my original design ideas happen.


 * I will say this, though. The idea you have that editors should be able to see what they type is completely contrary to the very notion of CSS.  What is the point of having the ability to style text if you don't use it?  In fact, we never see things as we type them, because the font of the edit box is not the same as the font of the article page.  Indeed, the very act of creating a subhead always results in a text transformation.  On the web, there's always a text transformation of some kind that happens between your raw text and the way that a page ultimately presents itself to the reader.  Contrary to your apparent belief, the web is not a WYSIWYG environment — MediaWiki wikis, even less so.  15:44:06 Tue 22 Mar 2011

Nav templates and headers
Sorry for not getting back to you about your earlier comment about the headers. I honestly don't know whether I'll be able to get a superscript "c" for the case of "McCoy". Since it's only theoretical at this point, I'd say it's probably best to just do a bit of individualistic coding on the future headlines in which this might occur. The easiest coding is: ===The M c Coy factor===

As for nav templates, thanks :) You mentioned the bottom spacing, and this was a concern for me.  I've put in a 5px spacing at the bottom, which can be observed in action best on one of the "combined" navboxes, such as the ones at Sarah Jane Smith and Jack Harkness.  When you open up the single navbox at the bottom, all the others come tumbling out.  Tell me if you think that's not enough space.  I don't want it to get crazy with space between them — certainly I don't want anything close to even a half-line of space between them, but I could maybe go along with a few more pixels of distance between them.   <span style="">15:56:53 Fri 25 Mar 2011
 * Ohhhhh, the top margin colliding with text above it. Yes, that's a valid concern.  I Had thought about this one, too, but I had thought it better to put the spacing on the bottom margin rather than the top.  Let me try reversing the margin to see what effect that has.  If it's usatisfactory, I might have to put this on the unresolved issues list for a bit, since I want to finish actually switching over the templates, and this issue wouldn't seem large enough to stop the rollout.  But you're right, it's every so slightly inelegant.   <span style="">16:23:06 Fri 25 Mar 2011
 * Okay, if you will, please open up two windows to Sarah Jane Smith. In one of the two, clear your cache so that you're looking at the new version in one window and the old version in the other.  Then if you would, report back on things you like about the change, and things you don't.  <span style="">16:35:01 Fri 25 Mar 2011

<span style="">15:43:48 Tue 29 Mar 2011

"Human" in infoboxes
Yeah, the bot's "human" run kept getting aborted by a problem in the category tree that tends to create endless loops somewhere in the "British categories" (locations in Britain, British monarchs, etc.). So I kinda stopped on that project because I coudln't do it "in the background" of my restyling efforts. But I do intend to get back to it, and to do a mass infobox switch. Hopefully it won't be too hard to do, but I am kinda of expecting that I can only do it semi-automatically, in that I'll have to approve each bot change individually. Dunno, though, maybe I can just do multiple runs to account for those people who properly put pipes at the beginning of lines, and other runs where people put pipes at the end of lines (that is, |species = human versus the sloppier species = human |). <span style="">02:55:20 Wed 30 Mar 2011
 * No, wait, that's stupid. The limiting factor for the bot isn't the pipe.  It's whether the variable is "species" or "race" and the number of spaces around the equals sign.   <span style="">02:55:20 Wed 30 Mar 2011
 * Try using a regex expression instead. Something along the lines of 'species( *)=( *)human' -> 'species\1=\2Human'  (for example). -- sulfur 11:58, March 30, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sulfur is of course correct. I've just been a) preoccupied and b) lazy.  It's actually just a regex away.  So to answer your latest question, no, it won't hurt if you change things manually.  On the other hand, I don't want you wasting your time.  I really will get on it.  Maybe right now, in fact :)   <span style="">13:13:29 Wed 30 Mar 2011
 * Okay, the bot's on it right now, after a few minutes of tinkering with sulfur's suggested regex.  However random your efforts have been, you can step back and concentrate on other things.  I expect that this run will take several hours, possibly as much as 24, thanks to our still-looping category tree structure.  <span style="">15:53:21 Wed 30 Mar 2011
 * Okay, the bot has given up — but only an hour ago. That was a long run, but, hey, it's most of the database.  If you find a nest of these lower-case-h "humans" in infoboxes, please don't change them, but let me know.  It'll help me further refine the bot runs if I know the bot is missing a category here or there.   But I'm guessin' you won't find much, cause it made something approaching 3000 edits.  <span style="">01:13:58 Fri 01 Apr 2011

One user and untagged images
I've have asked User:Jeffman52001 several time now to add a license tag to the image he has upload and by judging from his talk page, you have as well. On all occasions he has ignored me and not selected a license. On one occasions I add to add the licenses myself, but it should be him that is doing it, not me. I have warned him action will be taken if he continues to ignore me, and I've offered to help him if he cannot see the drop down menu to select the license, which he has not taken up with me. What action should we take? Is there a away to prevent an image from being uploaded without a license? Thanks. Mini-mitch\talk 17:28, March 31, 2011 (UTC)
 * I've looked into this a little bit, and what I've found is that it is theoretically possible. However, according to w:forum:"None selected" in upload form should pull up a template, it may be a violation of the TOS to alter things so as to prevent someone from uploading without a license.  Or it may not.  Nevertheless, I did find some javascript that looked like it was going to work.  But it hasn't.  If this is going to be successful, it must be done through js, and, frankly, I'm not that strong with js.  So all I can tell you is that I tried something and . . . it didn't work.  I'll look back in on this subject from time to time, but I haven't found a way to do it easily.  I certainly haven't found any solutions on a wikia wiki.  (My attempted code comes from an outside wiki running MediaWiki.)  I'll keep looking, but it's not super high on my priority list, since we do have a tool that shows us pics without a license.  We can then pretty easily delete these.  It's not as good as preventing the problem in the first place, but it's relatively easier to fix than other problems which don't have associated automatically-generated reports.  <span style="">02:17:18 Fri 01 Apr 2011

Can you help me?
I am very new to Tardis wiki. Revanvolatrelundar has been stalking me since I signed up and when I asked him to stop, he threatened to ban me. Can you help? | Who is Dr. Who? 15:02, April 1, 2011 (UTC)

Admin page update
i was just looking at the admon page, and i saw that some people listed as admins, haven't logged in since 2005! I think the page needs to be updated, and people that have not logged in or been active on the wiki since say April 2009 should be dropped. This is just a opinion. Thanks. Ghastly9090 14:00, April 2, 2011 (UTC)

Series 6
Hi. I've just had a thought that I got after having a look on another wiki. Basically a reallly big thing was released and they locked editing on the wiki to prevent congestion. I know we already do this for episode pages, but shouldn't we make this a bit more bigger? People will be creating character pages as the episodes roll on, so mabye a editing block should be made so that only registered members and mabye just admins would be able to edit. I know this has probably been considered before, but seeing as the series is being broadcast in the U.S at the same time as the U.K we should be a bit more controlled. Ghastly9090 16:45, April 4, 2011 (UTC)

What do you think? 85.210.91.65 14:49, April 5, 2011 (UTC)