User talk:***Stardizzy***

Hi. How can i create diffrent Infoboxs, is there Admins here, whos in charge? (No Pun intended) User:Joker1138

unsure of the answer to either question. regarding how to create a template for an infobox, if I knew, I would create a few myself. if you go to the Wikia main site or to Wikipedia itself, though, that should give you some pointers, though I don't know if this Wiki uses the exact same code as Wikipedia itself. admittedly, I haven't gotten around do learning how to do this myself, as I said. --***Stardizzy*** 18:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

User Page
How come you don’t have a user page, it’s the most wanted! Lol Joker1138 ( The Hub )


 * I know I should have paid those parking tickets! too busy working on entries, I guess. maybe tomorrow. --***Stardizzy*** 00:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, 15 days later, and you've got more than twice as many links than the next wanted page. You don't seem to have done much in the last 5 or 10 mins, so how about you create one today? Or at least this week? And if you think you're a bit too busy on something, you can always do it a bit later, or even ask me to (try and) do it. 19:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * [shrugs] go ahead and make one for me if you like. I never know what to put on those things. --***Stardizzy*** 19:50, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Alright, although I might not even trust myself to make a proper userpage, I'll give it a shot and add you to the (what I call) Infobox Cult. 19:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, done! 19:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * knowing me, I might go and replace that with something goofier, but go for it! --***Stardizzy*** 19:55, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I just have... you are Human, right? :) 19:56, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Reverts
Sorry for reverting your edit of The Monk, but I thought you'd blanked it by mistake.--GingerM 18:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * oh, no problem. --***Stardizzy*** 18:45, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Dalek Hierarchy
What's the Dalek Hierarchy?


 * the Dalek pollitical power structure. --***Stardizzy*** 20:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * sighs. yes but what is it? E.g 1st it's the emorer then it's the ... --Si 20:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * whoops, okay. I thought some random person had come by and left that question... as far the actual hierarchy, it has varied from story to story or never got mentioned at all. in most stories they never even mention the Emperor. the Dalek Supreme gets mentioned pretty consisently though. I could find some links for you about this though it will take me a few minutes. --***Stardizzy*** 20:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Never mind about Si, he just left that question on everybody active's talk page. I've replied to him in the refdesk. 20:59, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

cyber-planner
where can i get a picture of the cyber-planner for my project?--Si 15:45, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * that probably belongs in the Image request forum. give me a second though, I will see what I can do.


 * http://www.geocities.com/joekano/cybermen/index.htm


 * okay, the above site won't allow visitors at the moment (too much traffic), but you could try later.--***Stardizzy*** 15:55, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Where's the Image request forum? --Si 16:04, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Tardis:Image requests. 16:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * thankyew. as far as the Cyber-planner, I found two here:


 * http://www.btinternet.com/~jp1885/who/


 * not high quality, though. someone with a DVD player and screen cap ability could provide. The Invasion has a Cyber-planner and one of The Wheel in Space episodes form the Lost in Time DVD set might have a picture, too. --***Stardizzy*** 16:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Which epesode was the last to feature a Mondas Cyberleader?--Si 16:58, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Silver Nemesis, the last Mondas Cyberman serial. 17:02, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Human Time Lords
btw. ***Stardizzy*** would u like to be part of the Human Time Lords ? --Si 19:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * sure! --***Stardizzy*** 13:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Cool. i recomend u take a look at this. also knowing that you don't like updating your User Page sould I put on the fact ur a human time lord in the species section. thx--Si 13:22, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

So do i have permission to put on your infobox the fact that your a Human Time Lords ? --Si 13:50, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * yes. I probably will make the infobox go away at some point; for now you can, thanks. I will keep a notice that I belong to the Human Time Lords after, though. thank you for asking. --***Stardizzy*** 13:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * That's it. your officialy a member now. welcome--Si 14:23, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * thanks, there. let me know if I graduate from the Academy. --***Stardizzy*** 14:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Also if you know anyone who would like to be part of the h.t.l tell me or Ghelæ.--Si 14:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Rogue apostrophes...
I'm not sure I would ever describe talking about CVEs as standard English usage, but... are you *sure* about the apostrophe thing?

Because to me it just looks like bad grammar and an inappropriate use of the possessive... sorry...

We get around the issue of TARDISes because it has an S on the end, and UNIT's a singular thing, but... when you get around to doing The War Games in detail are you really going to talk about the War Chief creating a number of SIDRAT's for his allies?

I know it's only a small style point, but bad grammar just looks... er, bad...


 * me are also hating bads grammar. however, standard practice, really. this rule mainly applies to newer acronyms and less common ones. example, in book title:


 * a more standard acronym, like TARDIS, which has even gotten into official dictionaries, might not need the apostrophes. traditionally, though Wiki style ignores this, you also put a apostrophe after decades, like 1890's, versus 1890s. like I said, though, Wikipedia ignores this. --***Stardizzy*** 16:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * If I may comment here (and if I may not, it's a bit too late) "SIDRAT" would be simply pluralised as "SIDRATs", as it is pronounced as if it were a normal word, but "CVE" could be pluralised to "CVE's" as it is pronounced letter-by-letter ("see vee ee", not "c've"). I think. 16:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I shall go home and consult my copy of English Grammar in Use (no kidding, it's an essential tool of the trade in my job). I stand ready to apologise of course but I don't think I'll be able to help out on any articles involving SIDRATs. Sorry, SIDRAT's (ugh)...


 * Ghelæ got it right, I think and clarified the distinction. good on you for actually doing outside research for this. I think that your copy of the grammar will back up Ghelæ. --***Stardizzy*** 16:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Well... my grammar reference doesn't mention the pronunciation issue at all (which is sort of logical given you don't pronounce the apostrophes anyway). Neither does it say there is a hard and fast rule on this issue... but it does say the more usual usage is sans apostrophe (ie, CDs and not CD's). The English grammar teacher I consulted (I swear I'm not making this up) agreed.

Thanks for the apostrophe bit, laziness on my part, it looks better now, keep checking. Oh and hi! The Librarian 01:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Different Categories
Just a little curious what the difference is between Prose Writers, Prose Fiction Writers and Novelisation Writes (just so in future I can put them in the right categories). Thanks --Tangerineduel 16:05, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * well, basically, I decided I got confused and created Prose Writers and Prose Fiction Writers. those mean exactly the same thing: writers of original novels and/or short stories in the Whoniverse. Novelisation Writers means someone who has adapted a television story (or audio, etc.) into novel form. thanks for asking. --***Stardizzy*** 16:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay...can we have a key / list of references some where...just so there's a page listing what categories go on what sort of page. Thanks.
 * --Tangerineduel 16:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * good idea, though I don't know where to put that. I will put a note on certain categories. --***Stardizzy*** 16:14, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

"Gotten"
Just in case you didn't notice, "gotten" is not a word. It would be a past tense of a past tense ("got" is the past tense of "to get"). Just a point. 16:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * well, the word does exist and I think you can use it grammatically depending on tense. I will try to make sure that I use it more correctly in future, though. --***Stardizzy*** 16:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'll see if it does, but it seems a bit unrealistic and ungrammatic, so I very much doubt it does. 16:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * According to Wiktionary, it is the past participle of "to get", but so is "got", which seems to be more commonly used (as far as I'm aware). Besides, I don't think many of your uses of "gotten" seem to work with either word, and "became", "[have] been", "was" or some other verbs fit better. 16:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * yes, I will admit I have sometimes gotten sloppy with my grammar. --***Stardizzy*** 16:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Of course gotten is a word. At least in American English, the verb "to get" is highly irregular.  It effectively has two past participles, used in different contexts.  That is "have got" and "have gotten" have different meanings.
 * I've got some money for food implies a state of being. It is, strictly, the present perfect tense, meaning that it applies presently, but it may be the result of some action in the past.   It's what I informally call the "MacArthur tense".  "I have returned", as the General may well have said, is an example of this tense.  It looks like it's talking about the past, but really it's talking about something that is presently true.  A state of being, if you will.  Thus, if you say you've got some money, it means you still do and that you're not really talking about how you got it in the past.  The emphasis is on the helping verb, "to have", not on the main verb "to get".
 * I've gotten some money for food is probably a reflection of the importance of French to American English. It is, for lack of a better description, a borrowing of the French tense, passé composé.  The emphasis is on the main verb, "to get", not on the helping verb "to have".   It means, in other words, that you are talking about the process of obtaining the money.   Yes, you still have the money, but the thing you're stressing is that you've completed the task of getting it.  Generally, it would require some sort of prepositional phrases or adjectives in order to make it clear.  In the sentences, "I've gotten some money for food by working", the dangling prepositional phrase makes it absolutely clear you're talking about the process of getting money, and not the fact of having it.


 * Another example might make this clearer. If you say, "I've got the mail (or newspaper or dog  or email or whatever)," it means that you have it in your possession.  If you say, "I've gotten the mail,"  it means that you have completed the process of walking to the mailbox, retrieving the letters, and bringing them back into the house.


 * Thus there are a number of things heard in British English that sound odd in American English. For instance, the British phrase "I've got rich," sounds wrong as a description of financial affairs (although it's completely appropriate if you're holding on to a guy named, "Rich").   If you undergo the process of obtaining wealth, then you "have gotten rich".    Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  19:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Some Help...as you seem to be the one in the know
I think, well I know Forerunner has been mucking with the Individual Infobox, but all those extra new pages (I couldn't fathom what they did)...that is until I created Time (Eternal) though whatever he was doing is at the bottom of all pages that use the individual infobox template. It's too a whole lot of categories, with nothing in them, but the categories don't appear in the edit box on the individual pages.

Sorry, that's very complicated and rambling. --Tangerineduel 16:45, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I noticed this, too. I did understand what you meant. as far as technical matters like code, I mostly remain in the dark, so I can't help. you should take it up with the Forum, talk to Forerunner or revert back to before s/he changed it. --***Stardizzy*** 17:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)