User talk:Falcotron

Nasreen Chaudhry
I'm not the one who needs to get consensus. You're the one who needs to get consensus before adding her as a companion, and as pointed out on the page for Nasreen Chaudhry, people seem to be against including her on the basis of one quick unpowered trip. Until you get consensus, she will keep being removed. --Golden Monkey 19:02, May 23, 2010 (UTC)

The Pandorica opens sypnosis
I think that we should leave it with my sypnosis because it is more informal and gives you a real feel of itThe mysterious 08:56, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

My Sypnosis(s) A Van Gogh painting is ferried across thousands of years, communicating a disturbing prophecy to the Doctor. In 102AD England, Romans receive a surprise visit from Cleopatra. Nearby, Stonehenge conceals the Pandorica, a prison-box of legend. As it slowly unlocks, terrible forces gather in the heavens above. What bearing do growing cracks in time and Amelia Pond’s bedroom, have on all of this? There is just one certainty: silence will fall…

A Van Gogh painting is ferried across thousands of years, communicating a disturbing prophecy to the Doctor. In 102AD England, Romans receive a surprise visit from Cleopatra. Nearby, Stonehenge conceals the Pandorica, a prison-box of legend. As it slowly unlocks, terrible forces gather in the heavens above. What bearing do growing cracks in time and Amelia Pond’s bedroom, have on all of this? There is just one certainty: silence will fall…The mysterious 08:56, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

I do have a source it's even on the "The Pandorica Opens" article The mysterious 09:16, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your comment. It was a smart way to end a long war. Sadly, both races died. Just like the time war. Kerange 22:04, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Cold Blood
Thanks for getting those spelling errors - they should install a spellcheck on this thing, I think. To Blindly Go 12:15, May 30, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit
Thanks for editing my edit on the five doctors discontiuty guide.

Licesened images
Whats that all aboutThe mysterious 12:05, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

So including images from the trailer The mysterious 12:07, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

I never heard of that licesened images because there's loads of users who do that and no one has ever warned anyone about that The mysterious 12:21, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

Ok,so then i have to remove The Lodger's main article pic The mysterious 12:43, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, cheersThe mysterious 12:49, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

I Like to Say...
Fuck you about my spelling, am 17 years old and dyslexic with enough problems without you critizing my spelling!! LEAVE ME ALONE!!

Jfraser25

Well, well, well...You think I'm stuped now.

The Pandorica Opens
The current picture on The Pandorica Opens article is from the The Big Bang thats why it needs changing and switching to The Big Bang.The mysterious 22:40, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

Ok,thats partly the reason that i changed it a time ago to the un-liscened imagesThe mysterious 22:56, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

Template:VG
Nothing appears to be wrong with the coding of this template. As it turns out, the (video game) disambig swapping is actually pointless with temp:VG, as no videogames have the same names as other works, so no videogame names are actually disambiguated.

However, there is a broader concern with citing from a videogame, in that there's precedence for not allowing games as valid resources on this wiki. Per our canon policy, FASA roleplaying games are flatly disallowed, and I do think there are many problems with using videogames as valid resouces. Frankly, Attack of the Graske is tricky enough, and, to my mind, only exists as canon inasmuch as it gives the tiniest sliver of information about the Graske. But I do not believe the events and storyline described in that game actually exist in the DWU. The Doctor did not stop by your house one day and invite you on a test to see whether you could be a companion. Players of these games — that is to say we — are quite clearly not a part of the DWU.

The other problem with videogames is that, depending on how they're constructed, multiple outcomes can be possible. Thus, which outcome is canonical. Going back to Graske, we can't say whether the outcome where you lose and "don't have what it takes to be a companion" is the one we should adopt as "canon", or whether it's the "happier" ending.

So while there's nothing wrong with the coding of the template, there are all sorts of issues that need to be sorted out — probably on the forum — before we can actually start to use it. If you'll note at the canon policy page, the policy on video games is still said to be "in flux". We need to really hammer that out before we start incorporating material from videogames into articles. My recommendation would be to hold off citing from these things until we have a clearer notion. What would be a nightmare, I think, is if peopple started playing these new adventure games, while furiously jotting down notes and filling up the articles on Amy Pond, the Daleks, and the Eleventh Doctor — only to find out months from now that in fact the game had a branching architecture and it didn't actually include the same information every time it was played.  Czech Out  ☎ | ✍  21:16, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Gonna have to disagree with you there. No BBC producer of the modern age (or any age, of which I'm aware) has ever used the words "this is part of canon".  "Canon" is a fan concept, not an official one.  Yes, they are selling these as "part of series 5", in the same way they sell the books and audiobooks as that.  But that's a far, far cry from "the canon policy of this wikia".  As you've pointed out through your own discovery of the game, the problem of videogames is that they aren't stories they're games.  They have multiple outcomes.  Now, you're right, if they provide a walkthrough, and say, "This is the story of City of the Daleks," then we're talking something we can use without too much question — unless they use weasel words like "recommended way of play", "optimal outcome" or something that suggests there are indeed other ways you can play it.   Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  22:13, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * So the Eleventh Doctor dying and getting resurrected before your eyes (but not at that precise moment for anyone else playing the game) is "part of the DWU"? No, c'mon: a single incarnation of the Doctor has ever been shown to do that.  The producers are doing what BBC execs have always done with this franchise:  tell you their product in another medium "counts" so you won't reject it.  Remember, JNT contended that Dimensions in Time was a valid reunion story, and we utterly reject that today.  The website has previously offered "official" games, which we don't cite as valid references here.  "Official" release or "because the producer says so" are not, actually, enough for our canon policy.  Our policy here is something we've made up because the BBC doesn't have a canon policy.  So we can, in fact, choose to believe Piers Wenger — or not.  We need to get to the end of the TV series and the end of the games series to actually see if Wenger is telling the truth or just, as BBC execs have most certainly done in the past, lying to drum up interest.  And then, if it does actually check out, we have to figure out how to handle this completely new narrative form on this wiki.   Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  01:41, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

Doctor Who Answers
Are you the same user on Doctor Who Answers? The Thirteenth Doctor 21:19, June 20, 2010 (UTC)

Formatting the Doctors
Hey. You were part of the discussion above. I was wondering if you could have a look at the discussion as I have given a new reply including an example page, and maybe we could start discussing it again now that we'll have time before the Christmas special. Thanks. The Thirteenth Doctor 20:53, June 27, 2010 (UTC)