User talk:Dr. Anonymous1

Welcome back
By a vote of 5-0, your editing rights have been provisionally returned to you. The provisions are these:


 * You may not request reactivation of user:Patrick Watt, nor may you create other alternate accounts on the Wikia network without creating clear links in your profile page to your secondary accounts. You were banned because you attempted to "get around" a block on your primary account.  This must never happen again.  We have no choice but to support — even if we do not recommend — the Wikia wide ability to create multiple accounts, but we insist that you make it incredibly clear what your alts are.
 * You cannot violate any of our major policies. A single violation will result in the reinstatement of your permanent ban, with little chance of reversal.  These policies include:
 * Don't vandalise (your) user pages or any other pages
 * use only valid sources when writing articles
 * Follow our image rules and guidelines
 * Don't personally attack other users
 * Don't spoil stories that haven't yet been released
 * Chat responsibly and don't be rude in discussions
 * Don't abuse the Related Videos Module or otherwise upload videos that don't comply with our video policy.
 * Don't plagiarise.
 * Understand what this wiki is not
 * Your attention is drawn to our spelling policy. Intentional conversion of British spelling to American spelling, or any indication on your part that you are not trying to use British spellings, could lead your blocking.
 * You cannot remove or alter any links from user:Dr. Anonymous1 to user:Patrick Watt or vice versa.
 * You may not delete this post or any others which indicate why this account was previously blocked. You may, however, archive such notes according to our archiving policy.  In fact, it may a good idea for you to perform an immediate archive so as to start fresh.
 * You may not archive, delete or in any way change user talk:Patrick Watt or user:Patrick Watt, which have now been protected.
 * If at any point, over any issue, you directly defy an admin, you will be permanently banned without chance of reprieve.

I make special note of the fact that your behaviour has been exemplary during this review process, and you serve as a model of the correct way to behave during a ban reversal process. Your first edit upon your return must be directly underneath this message, where you acknowledge that you will comply with the terms that have been set out above. 19:39: Tue 21 Aug 2012 summarizing the opinions of Tangerineduel, Azes13, and Revanvolatrelundar, and passed without objection by Mini-mitch, Skittles the hog and Josiah Rowe

Agreement
I agree to follow all of the above provisions, and I thank you for listening to my case. I assure you that the incident that caused all this will NOT be duplicated in the future, and if it does, I request that you take the harshest actions possible. My days of rule-breaking are over.

Thank you, User: Dr. Anonymous1 21:38, August 21, 2012 (UTC)

Messaging system
Hey, ask CzechOut about that, he's our tech admin here. Thanks. --Tangerineduel / talk 15:28, August 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * Any information of that nature would need to go in the Behind the scenes section of pages.
 * But as the new series is barely more than a week away from debuting perhaps wait until then and see what it reveals. --Tangerineduel / talk 15:56, August 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * See our Tardis:Spoiler policy. --Tangerineduel / talk 16:09, August 22, 2012 (UTC)

Hypercube message
Please see forum:Hypercube message for instructions on how to customise the message box. 16:34: Wed 22 Aug 2012
 * I'm sorry. I really don't know how to simplify my language any further.  I've been asked the question a lot, so I wanted to keep my language clear. Perhaps you're not noticing that there are clickable links in the text of Forum:Hypercube message? I suggest returning to the thread, re-reading it, and clicking the links.  22:20: Wed 22 Aug 2012

Signature and user page ettiquette
Please alter your signature such that it complies with the signature policy. It must contain a link to your user talk page, not just your user page. Since you've not done anything fancy to your signature, I suggest just returning to the default.

Furthermore, you cannot remove a message placed on a talk page, user talk page or forum page, even if you're the one who put it there. I know that you removed something you added to my talk page recently. Please see T:UVAN.

Note that T:UVAN was one of those pages that you just agreed to follow or you'd be kicked off the wiki for good. I'm lettin' this one slide, mainly cause I don't want to immediately trash the work that was put into your ban reversal over the last week.

I urge you to carefully read everything that was linked above. 16:34: Wed 22 Aug 2012

What's up with the duplicate categories?
Please don't add duplicate categories to pages, as you did at Bessie. Please come to chat so I can try to set you right. You're blocked for 10 minutes (less now) just to put the brakes on your current editing pattern. 18:08: Fri 24 Aug 2012

Test
Testing your talk page, as per your request at Special:Chat. 19:26: Fri 24 Aug 2012

Space before categories
Please do not remove the single carriage return which appears at the end of an article. This space may look extraneous in Wikia, but in Monobook (and in Wikia, if you choose to disable the category module), it acts as a buffer between the article and the category list.

T:MOS BOT will reinsert this space, so it's really a waste of time to remove it. Look at Maria Jackson, for instance, in Monobook as well as Wikia to see the utility of this final carriage return. 19:13: Thu 30 Aug 2012

Reformed individuals
There's a deletion rationale at Category:Reformed individuals. I delete very little without leaving a message behind — unless it's a very technical page that no one aside from me will likely care about.

Don't recreate this category, or anything like it, please. 19:43: Thu 30 Aug 2012
 * Sorry, this matter was decided in your absence, through several forum discussions. We're not having any categories that attempt to characterise "alignment".    22:39: Thu 30 Aug 2012
 * You can use the search function at the forums to easily look up past discussions. If you know that the discussion changed policy, you can just go to category:policy changers and scan through the alphabetised list.  To save you time, though, I'll point you toward Forum:Enemies, intention and association, Forum:What makes an ally and an enemy?.


 * As an aside, when leaving a message on someone's page, please don't post it in the middle of another discussion. Please remember to start a new section.  I seem to recall this was something we talked about prior to your blocking.    00:54: Fri 31 Aug 2012

Disagreement
I'm sorry you feel that I've been reminding people of your earlier blocking. I've taken great care to allow you to turn over a new leaf as much as is practically possible. I suppose I did slip up in the most recent message and use the word "blocking". I had been consciously trying to avoid that, which is why in the earlier message in the same section I had used the more neutral word, "absence". Certainly, the required message at User:Dr. Anonymous1 was carefully worded to be perfectly neutral. All it says is that you were once Patrick Watt; it says nothing about that account being blocked.

You are at complete liberty to properly archive this page as it currently stands so as to partially hide the references to your past blocking. You were even encouraged to do so at.

That said, I'm not sure what sort of linguistic legerdemain you expected out of me when talking about a decision reached when you weren't here. I had to make some sort of reference to your past just to answer your question. The reason that these categories have been removed is because — while you were away — we decided to axe them.

Also, the terms of your return — to which you agreed at, were that you were very definitely on probation. That's just the deal. So, yes, we want you turn over a new leaf. But realistically you are very much on a kind of parole. Expect for admin to say things like, "Hey, remember a year ago when I told you about x? That still applies." In particular, note the final bulleted point of the agreement:


 * If at any point, over any issue, you directly defy an admin, you will be permanently banned without chance of reprieve.

That obviously includes anything you've already been told by admin at user talk:Patrick Watt. So, yeah, you've realistically got to expect that I and the rest of the admin staff might make mention of things from your past.

Course, if you just re-read that page and abide by the things you've been told there, we'd have no need to reference them again. 17:43: Fri 31 Aug 2012
 * Sorry, there's no way to downsize that message. It's a standard size and will, of technical necessity, remain.


 * You mentioned that you "accept[ed] my apology". It's important that you understand that I wasn't asking your forgiveness.  I was explaining how things are.   If I were you, I'd be happy that you escaped permanent exile, instead of trying to nitpick the terms of your return.  Yes, we'll try not to stress  your past mistakes.  But you honestly have no cause to complain if an admin uses the word "blocked" in connection with you.  You were blocked.  It's not a slur or a personal attack to say that. What you did was frankly inexcusable. It's some what miraculous that you've been allowed to return.  So you're being a little more than cheeky to complain about us simply mentioning your previous exile.  As Tangerineduel stressed in your reinstatement discussion, you do not have a clean slate.  We want you to turn over a new leaf — but we can't help but remember the diseased tree from which you fell.


 * My advice is that you just chill. Have fun editing, but don't be so sensitive. You're going to have to accept the fact that you were blocked.  The less emphasis you place on having been blocked, the more likely we are to forget about it.  Complaining about my use of the word "blocked" has only served to make the issue bigger.    20:50: Fri 31 Aug 2012

Dalek Caan image
I'm leaning towards no even as a stopgap given how thumbnail jpegs could easily be down to 40kb or less and the old image was over 100kb. Well, the image's been deleted by an admin at this point, so whatever my thoughts were are moot. -- Tybort (talk page)

New pages
Please remember to preview any pages you create before publishing them, just so you can spot any mistakes before the article goes live. Also, please abide by T:BOLD as I've noticed you have forgotten this necessity on occasion. Thanks-- 20:45, September 7, 2012 (UTC)

Banned from chat
Heya :) Just been checking with Trellar on this one.  Skittles the hog banned you prior to a major change in the way that the chat feature worked.  Since you were, at the time, infinitely banned, no one here thought it necessary to follow up on the effects to your account.  When I switched to a javascript-based system for adding user tags to people's user pages, it picked up on the antiquated "banned from chat" flag that you had.

Unfortunately, I've got no way to turn it off, because the flag is obsolete. According to Trellar, you should have been thrown a new flag, but you weren't. Trellar has now escalated this problem up to an engineer, who should be fixing things forthwith.

Sorry for another reminder of your unfortunate past. Rest assured it wasn't an intentional sleight by the admin staff. We remain committed to giving you as clean a slate as is possible.

I've got no ETA for the removal of this tag other than "soon". 22:18: Thu 15 Nov 2012


 * ....and fixed! 22:19: Thu 15 Nov 2012


 * Fastest "soon" in history! Rappy 22:23, November 15, 2012 (UTC)

Nine background
Nine was chosen because we were at an impasse. The Angels Take Manhattan was very much the end of an era. We wanted to immediately dismiss Amy, Rory and River from the desktop upon transmission of that episode, but we didn't immediately have anything from the current series to replace it with. So we had to go back. Nine, and for that matter Rose, had never been featured in any of our backgrounds, so it seemed like a good time to slip in a little love for the "second first Doctor". 20:58: Thu 06 Dec 2012 20:58, December 6, 2012 (UTC)