User talk:BananaClownMan

Re: Question(s)
Hello! Welcome back to the site.

The timeline info can actually be found on TARDIS, on the page Stripped for action?. If you want a slightly longer version, with a few more citations, you could check out the original in DWM 168.

Connections is the linking arc to the 1993 anthology The Incomplete Death's Head. It is set before, congruent, and after COMIC: Party Animals and is a sequel to COMIC: Time Bomb. It also features the Seventh Doctor, is set on a DWU planet, and has a DWU character as its villain.

The reason it has no page and a limited coverage is that it is currently under debate at Thread:213311. More specifically, we are analyzing if all of TIDH is valid, or indeed if any of it is. If you'd like to swing by there and leave a post, it would by very helpful towards kick-starting that discussion. OS25 (Talk) 09:56, April 19, 2017 (UTC)


 * Well, on the topic of Peri travelling with 7 this is suggested because the Doctor and Frobisher talk about Peri as if she just left the TARDIS.


 * As for further discrepancies with the timeline printed by DWM, I could comprehend the worry but honestly it's of little matter. With the recent Titan comics, for instance, we have seen the Doctors have many flashbacks to things that technically haven't happened yet. 10 sees TEoT Master long before TEoT, Clara makes a cameo appearance as a picture on a wall in a story set around the same time as TV: Death to the Doctor, etc. We can smack our heads and say "D'oh! They got it wrong!" and we can certainly cover this information on the pages, but we can not use this to over-ride the official timelines. Authorial intent means more than execution. OS25 (Talk) 10:19, April 19, 2017 (UTC)

Master
Hi, you seemed to have recently added several "section stubs" on The Master regarding a lack of a clear description of the Masters "reaction" to regeneration. Whatever do you mean, and how does such a thing justify a section stub template?

Also, if you're going to add these, please add them to the most-sub-section of whatever story is written. OS25 (Talk) 10:53, April 19, 2017 (UTC)


 * Well, I have read those stories and I can surely add that info... If you can give me examples...


 * Can you quote to me other passages describing how the Master/Doctor reacted to regeneration? OS25 (Talk) 21:19, April 19, 2017 (UTC)

Twelfth Doctor
Hey BCM, so as to prevent any potential edit wars I figured I'd chat with you first. Would you be apposed to me 1) putting all of the sections of the Twelfth Doctor's life where he's with Clara inside one big section (like I've done with Tenth Doctor), 2) putting all the solo adventures you've put in the Kill the Moon-Mummy Orient Express and Woman Who Lived parts of his life into "undated events", and 3) putting those two DWA comics from December 2015 and January 2016 into the section after Heaven Sent and He'll Bent? I've explained it over at User talk:95.149.104.214. CoT     ?  11:17, April 19, 2017 (UTC)


 * I really should disable autocorrect on my iPad.


 * I really agree with most of what you're saying, but I quite disagree with the outcome. I think the page should look a bit like this. The reason I'm talking to you is that you're the one that put all those stories in the order they are. In the past, I've seen that these sorts of edits don't go down too well with you. I figured that it would be best to explain my logic beforehand so that none of the stuff that used to happen happens today.


 * Recently, - during matters which had little to do with Tardis wiki - I've discovered within myself a hatred for timelines. If possible, I want to get all this theory out. I want our articles to rely much more on blatant connections made by the stories and when they were released than on timelines. While these solo stories could definitely happen between Kill the Moon and Mummy on the Oriet Express, they do not definitely happen between Kill the Moon and Mummy on the Oriet Express. To directly say that they do is to lie. Sure, release date would indicate these stories take place during the Clara era, that was the only era the authors knew, but they don't have to take place where you say they do.


 * Clara takes up a huge chunk of the Twelfth Doctor's life, so I'd say it's best to place them in the undated events section, which is for all undatable events, not just undatable events that can be summarised in a sentence. CoT     ?  15:41, April 19, 2017 (UTC)


 * It was just a matter of someone who was really enthusiastic bout timelines, but had barely seen/read/heard any of the stories they so passionately argued about. But that doesn't really matter.


 * The difference between Twelve & Clara and Six & Evelyn is that Evelyn is that Evelyn lives with the Doctor. As shown in Listen, The Caretaker, Kill the Moon, Flatline, In the Forest of the Night, Dark Water, The Magician's Apprentice, The Woman Who Lived, The Zygon Invasion, Clara Oswald and the School of Death, Deep Time, Beauty Sleep, and I'm sure many more, Clara does not live in the TARDIS. All of the adventures currently lumped together are not meant to be lumped together, they're just set between one of the Doctor's regular meet-ups with Clara. CoT     ?  20:23, April 19, 2017 (UTC)

Couple of things
Hi! I had to restore your talk page because you didn't actually archive it, you just deleted all the previous posts. I don't have time to explain the process of archiving now, but I will get back to you later today (probably during the evening my time) with archiving instructions and to answer your question about your block. Thanks. Shambala108 ☎  14:13, April 19, 2017 (UTC)


 * He seems to have done most of the steps right, he just never added Template:ArchCat to the top of the page. OS25 (Talk) 21:20, April 19, 2017 (UTC)

OK, three things:


 * First, to quote you from User talk:TheChampionOfTime: "if there is no mention of Clara (or any other companion) in a story, it must take place at a time the Doctor was on his own." This is speculation, which I have told you many times is not allowed on this wiki. There are tons of companion-less adventures that take place while a companion is in the TARDIS or somewhere else. Stop adding speculation to main namespace pages.
 * About your attempt to archive your page: What you did was merely remove the info and create a user subpage with that info. However, you have not left an easy way for someone to search your "archives". That's why you must follow the correct instructions. At the top of your talk page, there is a drop down menu, with "edit", "history" and a few other things. One of those things is "archive". Click on that, and you will be taken to a page with buttons that say "select all" and "deselect all". You would usually choose "select all", except that you have a few active conversations going and won't want to archive them, so manually select the threads that are finished. Then you will click on "save archive" and that should do the trick. You should then see at the top of your talk page a link to your archive(s). Take a look at my talk page to see what that looks like. Sometimes, it doesn't work. If that happens, use the undo function and try again. See Tardis:Archiving policy for guidelines.
 * Your block was for continuing to use the "undo" function to revert other users' edits without explaining why in either the edit summary or on the talk page. I had warned you (by my count) four times that you needed to start leaving an explanation, so when you once again ignored my instructions I had to block you. Please keep in mind that constantly undoing others' work without the courtesy of an explanation is rude and potentially unwelcoming to new users. All of us forget to leave edit summaries from time to time, but with you (and, incidentally, User:RogerAckroydLives, who also got the same warning) it was getting to be a bad habit.

Please, before you archive your talk page, re-read my messages about timelines on the main namespace of the wiki. You seem to be engaging in the same practice of rearranging Doctor/companion adventures based on your own theories; as you have been told multiple times, this belongs in the theory namespace only. Thanks for your attention. Shambala108 ☎  01:06, April 20, 2017 (UTC)

Position of inter-language links and categories
Heya :) Thanks for your recent edits. However, I need to ask you to please stop changing the position of the interlanguage links and catgegories on pages. The bot is running right now to take care of any stray problems in this regard, and you could very well accidentally undo the work it's trying to do. Thanks much!   19:27: Wed 19 Apr 2017

Aging/Regenerating
Hi

You've recently removed edits to The Master's page which make it openly clear the vagueness of the Titan's illustration of a key scene, and I would like to clarify why this was in place.

While most fans would jump to regeneration being the answer, this doesn't have to be the case. If it was meant for us to be able to directly identify the moment as regeneration without any controversy, they would have illustrated it as such. We know what regeneration is supposed to look-like at this point.

There are numerous moments in the comic where we see the paradox distort time. The Doctor takes the form of his other incarnations, for instance. We've seen time ripped by anomalies in this arc, and it is not outside of the realms of possibilities that what we're seeing is not regeneration. So we need to keep this open on the page itself, to avoid speculation. OS25 (Talk) 23:09, April 27, 2017 (UTC)

T:NPOV warning
Hi, I would like to remind you that it is a long-standing policy of the wiki that all valid stories have equal weight. The claim in your edit summary that "creators of the character [...] have more right than the BBC to say what it is" is in direct violation of T:NPOV. No one has more right than the other. Those that have the license have the right and we treat all such stories equally. Those who do not have the license do not have the right in the very legal sense of the word (see T:VS). If different stories provide different accounts of some event, all should be covered and no account should be given preference. Please consider it an official warning that you cannot choose one such account from PROSE: Legacies and put it in the lead while deleting another account from TV: The Snowmen completely.

On a side note, as recently pointed out by CzechOut, the fact that a story is published is not by itself a proof that the publisher has fulfilled all legal formalities and obtained all necessary licenses. Candy Jar Books has very recently published a story (in exactly the same faux-free format) that grossly violated both the BBC license and our spoiler policy. They even went as far as to use an image owned by the BBC to promote this supposedly free story on their website.

Thank you for your attention.

Secondly, as I already explained in an edit summary, when an admin reverts your edits, the correct reaction should be to ask why on the talk page of the said admin. In fact, if your edits are undone by any editor at all, you should not insist on your primality by undoing in your turn (please (re)acquaint yourself with our policy on edit wars entitled Tardis:Edit wars are good for absolutely nothing). You should always try to discuss the matter on the talk page of the user, the talk page of the article, or Panopticon thread depending on the issue at hand. Amorkuz ☎  12:57, August 12, 2017 (UTC)

Forgotten Son
Ok, let's think about this.

First some general platitudes. If stories contradict each other, the standard way is to use: "according to one account", "according to another account", etc., however many accounts are there. Unless the stories make an effort to fit each other, speculation is not to be used to make two accounts compatible.

DWU is, frankly, full of such contradictions. If you think GI's origin story is muddled, try to explain the genesis of Daleks. After similarly difficult deliberations regarding the origins of Cybermen, Moffat finally took pity on us and explained (from the Doctor's mouth) that all the origin stories in existence have happened because Cybermen evolved independently in many different places.

So now to the question at hand. The Doctor thinks that The Snowmen is the origin story, so it is "one account". The refutation of this account cannot come from out-of-universe. Neither can it come from a company that is legally prohibited from mentioning the Doctor. Absolutely nothing they print has any effect on the Doctor. Candy Jar Books have rights to GI, which is why their variant of the origin story is currently "another account". But they cannot retcon anything happening in The Snowmen. Please remember that there is no Doctor in Candy Jar Books' books for legal reasons. Even when recalling events from TV episodes, they legally have to resort to euphemisms. For instance, they have a character called "the thief". And nothing that happens to the thief in their books can be applied to the Second Doctor unless it also happened to the Second Doctor on TV. I implore you to exercise extreme caution while editing based on CJB stories. The licensing situation makes them jump through the hoops, creating secondary hoops for us. Amorkuz ☎  23:24, August 12, 2017 (UTC)

The Tenth Doctor Adventures - Volume 2
There is no mention of Mickey in any of the adventures, especially in Infamy of the Zaross, I assumed that was due to the events of the Cyberman Two Parter. There is also no mention of his new body. I placed it before the impossible planet because they rapport between the two seem like the have been together a long time post regeneration plus the mention of the cybermen (I didn't know about that comic before you referenced it) made me think they. Adric♥Nyssa∩Talk? 19:51, November 28, 2017 (UTC)

New Series template
Since we are both working on this template, I propose that we work out a common rule of thumb how it should be instead of guessing each other's intentions. The edit summaries are way too small for that, so let me try to give you my side of the story. First and foremost, I see this template as the production- rather than content-related one. It's about stories published by BF under the umbrella title "The New Series". (An example of content-related template is .) This explains, for instance, why The Jago & Litefoot Revival is included while All Hands on Deck is not. Both are originally from the Short Trips range. But, although the latter is set in the Time War, which is under the New Series licence, it is not part of the New Series range according to BF.

My guess is that you try to put series of the New Series in chronological order (of first release), which I completely agree with. Unfortunately, BF is not explicit on what constitutes a series. But I believe the hints are there to be discovered. Note once again that these templates are not filled based on the meaning of the template's name, but rather based on how this name is used by BF in production. For instance, the does not include the Eighth Doctor adventures from the main range. It may be hard to guess now why it includes Dark Eyes and Doom Coalition. Don't know if you remember, but Dark Eyes used to be part of the Eighth Doctor Adventures range. And the same logic was then applied to Doom Coalition, which was produced as a continuation. I moved The Eighth Doctor: The Time War to this template precisely because it was not described as the continuation of Doom Coalition (in fact, there will be a different continuation that is not announced yet). Incidentally, this link is also where I got the term "Time War Saga" from. It is the term used by BF though not very prominently, but still it can be found here, here, VOR 104 etc. It seems that the Time War Saga bundle is no more, but you can read at the last (working) link that it consisted of all four War Doctor box sets and what was eventually released under the title The Eighth Doctor: The Time War 1.

Thus, the reason I combined The Eighth Doctor: The Time War with the The War Doctor is simply because it was announced from the very beginning as a prequel to it and sold as part of the Time War Saga. (Yes, the concept developed in the process, which we are not supposed to discuss per T:SPOIL, but it was planned to be part of it from the get-go.)

You can hopefully see now why I do not consider The War Master to be part of it. It was announced separately and never claimed to be part of that run of box sets. Look, for instance here: "Or save money with a bundle, get The War Master along with ... on download. And for fans of the Time War saga, don’t forget that we plunge head first into the Time War with the Eighth Doctor played by Paul McGann and new companion Bliss played by Rakhee Thakrar, coming out later this month." Time War is clickable there and leads to the Eighth Doctor box set.

I'll be the first to admit this is not precise science, so an independent verification would be nice. It is provided by the production codes. Releases with through enumeration are clearly part of the same run, whereas starting enumeration anew is a sign of a separate production. Here's the evidence:
 * Eighth Doctor Adventures, Dark Eyes and Doom Coalition all have production codes with prefix BFPDWCDMG (whatever that means :)): Blood of the Daleks part 1 is BFPDWCDMG001, ..., To the Death is BFPDWCDMG034, Dark Eyes is BFPDWCDMG035, ..., Dark Eyes 4 is BFPDWCDMG038, Doom Coalition 1 is BFPDWCDMG039, ..., Doom Coalition 4 is BFPDWCDMG042.
 * The War Doctor and The Eighth Doctor: The Time War both have production codes with prefix BFPDWWAR: Only the Monstrous is BFPDWWAR01, ..., Casualties of War is BFPDWWAR04, The Eighth Doctor: The Time War 1 is BFPDWWAR05.
 * The War Master has production code BFPDWWMAR01.

I hope I managed to persuade you of the grouping I propose. If not, I'd be happy to hear your arguments. Amorkuz ☎  10:25, December 15, 2017 (UTC)

Second Doctor Timeline
I felt it necessary to take a moment to explain why I believe you are incorrect about placing a bunch of stories between The Wheel in Space and The Dominators. In your edit description you imply that the time in between The Wheel in Space and The Dominators is like the time between most other stories, when it is narratively made clear that this story takes place directly after the Doctor finishes telling Zoe about the Daleks. The one of the first things the Doctor says in this episode is, "Yes, just a little bit weary, Jamie. It's a very exhausting business projecting all those mental images, you know." This means that he had literally just finished using the mental projector to show Zoe the Daleks. More than that, this very clearly seems to be Zoe's first adventure traveling in the TARDIS, as one of the first thing she says after landing is, "And there won't be any Cybermen or Daleks, will there?" a very clear indication that this is her first adventure and she is nervous. As I stated in my description, an exception can be made for The Forgotten because crossover stories tend to mess about with the memories of the Doctor and his companions, so even if he did go on an adventure with his future self, from his perspective he still would have just finished using the mental projector.

I feel the crux of your reasoning for putting these stories where they are, in spite of the fact that they clearly contradict established canon, is because you are basing their placement on the fact that they say "Zoe hasn't been traveling with the Doctor long" or some variation of that. I feel like when you look at this statement, you are looking at Zoe's time in the TARDIS from a viewer's point of view as opposed to her own point of. I maintain that the following stories take place back-to-back uninterrupted, barring side stories and crossovers: The Wheel in Space, The Dominators, The Mind Robber, and The Invasion. However, your position is that because there are stories that take place early in Zoe's travels with the Doctor, these stories have to take place at some point before the end of these four stories. The only problem is that you are overlooking one major detail: Even though this period of time covers four stories, totaling 24 episodes, from Zoe's point of view, probably not even a week has passed. Zoe began her travels with the Doctor at the end of The Wheel in Space, and according to my reasoning, The Dominators takes place next. The Dominators seems to take place over the course of a day or two, so by the end of that story we have about two days at the most that Zoe has been traveling with the Doctor. Then we go to The Mind Robber, a story which I can't imagine takes place over the course of more than a day at most. After this we go into The Invasion, a story in which a significant amount of time passes from its beginning to its end, but in all probably only five days pass. So by the end of this all, in spite of how eventful her time with the Doctor has been thus far, it has only been about a week since Zoe has left the Wheel. Having these stories take place shortly after The Invasion would still qualify as being "early" in Zoe's travels without having to shoehorn them into some place in the timeline where they cannot logically fit, especially at the cost of taking away The Dominators status as being Zoe's first TARDIS adventure.

I encourage you to rethink your position on this, but I hope we can discuss this in a civil manner. Perhaps we can get some second opinions on this subject in the Wiki channel of the Discord Group. –Nahald ☎  20:41, December 22, 2017 (UTC)

Seventh Doctor Timeline
Thanks, though I really can't have much of an opinion one way or another at the moment because I really haven't gotten the chance to get into much of the Seventh Doctor stuff yet. But since I'd rather not keep all those stories unplaced, I suppose I could go ahead and put them into the article's timeline based on where you put them in yours, better than keeping them unplaced permanently. By the way, while we're on the subject, here's some other timeline articles that have some unplaced stories that I haven't gotten around to listening or reading, maybe you'll know what to do with them:


 * Theory:Timeline - Last Great Time War
 * Theory:Timeline - UNIT
 * Theory:Timeline - Torchwood

Yeah I know the Torchwood one is a bit of a doozy, but I'm mostly concerned about that one audio story that has yet to be placed in there.

Re:Congratulations!
Thank you! I'm still kind of glowing from seeing my name on something published. If you're interested in doing the same, I highly recommend submitting to charity anthologies and/or pitching whenever anyone is asking for submissions. It happens more often than you'd think! – N8 ☎ 20:33, January 29, 2018 (UTC)

Ninth Doctor
Hi there. I'm continuing this conversation here to avoid an edit war. The Beast of Babylon frames all its story around Rose, and only works with Rose being a very recent memory for the Doctor. The whole story involves the Doctor having second thoughts on the decision to leave Rose, one he has only just made.

The Eyeless, The Promise, and quite a few other stories now have opened room for adventures before Rose. The Oncoming Storm has a Ninth Doctor that's basically a depressed wreck, which most certainly isn't how he looks in Rose or any time after it.

With reference to the "recently calibrated" line, Vampire Science has the Eighth Doctor saying that he spent three years after leaving Sam at a Greenpeace rally getting used to his new body. It's a very vague term that is used. If it was "having only just regenerated", then fine, but it leaves plenty of wiggle room for more stories.

It's become quite a tiring process of reorganising the page time and time again, but with the information from all the stories so far released, its the best fit for them all. --Revan\Talk 11:49, March 8, 2018 (UTC)

I get the whole Rose argument. At the time it was a little nod that he might have just recently regenerated, but that piece of wiggle room is being really exploited by almost every new Ninth Doctor story we get these days. My personal view on it is that if I had big ears I'd be commenting on them almost every time I look in a mirror. The Doctor's eccentric like that, so it makes sense to me.

The Promise definately takes place before Rose. At the start of the Ninth Doctor segment the Twelfth Doctor tells Bill that he had "hadn't long regenerated" when he met Plex. He also says that he was "running from an old face; from an old voice in my head". Without a doubt its not long after he's regenerated.

On the subject of the ears reference in the Promise, Plex says that his new face doesn't suit him, and he replies: "neither do the ears, but we work with what we have." To me it kind of suits the notion of him having a bit of a complex about them. It's certainly used as an ongoing joke in Series 1.

The Oncoming Storm is an early one for sure. I can't recall if the screwdriver is used, but it certainly doesn't mention his red one, and from memory I can't say if mentioned to a blue was was made either. It's his character that places that story. He's frosty, staying behind the scenes and barely wants to involve himself with people. He only gets involved at the end when he has to. That's definately way out of character for how he is in Rose onwards, so to me its paving the way for a whole new Ninth Doctor era we never really knew about.

The short stories we've had over the last couple of years which have him on solo adventures don't mention any kind of information to place them. But what you said about Rose making an impact on him has actually gone a way for me to have an idea on where to place them. If he had met Rose then certainly he would be thinking about her, maybe even referencing her. Giving that there's no mention at all to her tells me that he hasn't met her at all yet, thus placing it before Rose. --Revan\Talk 13:17, March 12, 2018 (UTC)

"Working around license text"
I noticed in this edit summary you referenced that you were dismissing the "working-around-license" text, but fyi, Christmas on a Rational Planet is fully licensed and features the (named) Seventh Doctor as a main character. That said, you're probably right that the information about the Shadow Directory and the caillou isn't suited for that page :) – N8 ☎ 13:08, March 29, 2018 (UTC)

Ears and other stuff
Hi again. The ears subject is very ambiguous, hence all the debates going on in fandom, including ours. I know that when RTD wrote Rose, he had planned for it to be one, if not the first of Nine's adventures, hence the line about the ears. Rose was thirteen years ago now (Jeez, I fell old), and both Titan and Big Finish have pushed several stories into the gap before Rose, and I very much doubt they'll stop. I'm going to bring you back to The Promise, where Nine makes a comment in his opening page about his ears. It's his first comment when asked about his new body, so clearly he has an issue with it. When the War Doctor regenerates he even mentions it, so how his new ears turned out are clearly something the Doctor has an ongoing resentment with. No matter how many times I read over those pages in The Beast of Babylon, I still can't see how anything more than even one adventure can be squeezed in there after he leaves Rose.

The way things look to me is that the guys at Big Finish and Titan are trying to retcon the Ninth Doctors life so we can see more of his adventures. I'm fine with that, he's one of my favourite Doctors, but it does mean that preconceptions over that very dubious line in Rose are being stepped around a bit. It's nothing that Big Finish haven't done before: in The Caves of Androzani Peri seems very new to the TARDIS, but Big Finish managed to get in dozens of adventures and even a second companion before then!

Right, so that just leaves The Bleeding Heart. The story just screams first story, if not one of the very first. I think it was in Vortex, or at least on a forum, that it was intended as a coda to the War Doctor series. The story involves beasts from the Time War, regrets the Doctor has about that time, and all while he's searching for somewhere to relax and forget about the whole thing. The whole stuff with War's sonic was just a little bonus for placement. The Oncoming Storm, on the other hand, doesn't really have anything concrete to place it anywhere after he regenerates. The only thing I can remember is the way he behaves and acts. Part of it is like how he is in Rose: he's in one place and saves one person, then he's off, popping in at another location as the story progresses.

I'm not sure if it's still up there, but for the release of the second Churchill Years boxset in February, the Oncoming Storm was made free as a taster for the range. I hope its still up there now so you can listen to the story yourself. --Revan\Talk 17:27, April 3, 2018 (UTC)

Just a little extra if you're interested: on the Divergent Forums (the unofficial Big Finish one), there's a thread for free stories Big Finish have offered over the years and where to get them. I haven't looked at it in a while, but there might be some still available. I remember scouring the thing when I was at uni, it's a good way to look after the pennies! --Revan\Talk 10:01, April 4, 2018 (UTC)

DotD novelisation
I haven't finished reading it yet, but I'll definitely let you know if it's in there! – N8 ☎ 17:39, April 5, 2018 (UTC)


 * Nope, we never learn his first words. However, we do find out that (presumably very early on) the Ninth Doctor rampaged around the TARDIS smashing all the mirrors and vowing to never look at what face he was wearing. So that might be relevant to your conversation with Revan. – N8 ☎ 20:23, April 5, 2018 (UTC)

It's a very odd way to resolve it, but I'll take it!!! Maybe Big Finish will be brave enough to make a whole series set before Rose with him dodging mirrors. One can dream! :P

It's been good debating it, anyway, its healthy every now and again. :) --Revan\Talk 16:29, April 6, 2018 (UTC)

Clive's website
Hey again. The policy of the wiki has been to exclude websites from validity, which is why Clive's website appears in the behind the scenes sections of articles. At the time I was opposed to it happening, as I'd spent quite a bit of time writing articles based on characters on the website which were subsequently deleted. I don't really have a problem with websites if they're in-universe, so if you think it should be included in what we cover get a discussion going. You have my support already. --Revan\Talk 11:50, April 9, 2018 (UTC)

Edit wars
Tardis:Edit wars are good for absolutely nothing. I have nothing more to say on the subject, but you need a refresher on the subject. Please read it carefully.

Note, however, that extending your edit war to several pages goes in the direction of Tardis:Do not disrupt this wiki to prove a point. Please keep that in mind.

I believe you that you thought you were being civil to the IP. Sorry to disappoint. You were, for some reason, talking to this IP from the position of authority, which you do not have. Part of being civil is treating others as equals. Instead you were instructing another user how to behave, whether they have to login or not. Given how many blocks you have for not following admin instructions, it is strange of you to expect other users to blindly follow your (non-admin) instructions.

Further, you were claiming to rely on a policy without providing a link to such a policy. Since you clearly respect Shambala, let me remind you how she explains policy: she would either provide a link immediately or go back and search for the piece of policy she means. In the worst case scenario, a couple of times she stated that she could not find it at the moment but had a clear recollection of seeing it in the past. Compare it to your edit summaries: "It is not an opinion" and "Until then, this wiki does not count narraction as voice acting". You should not be issuing opinions on behalf of the wiki. Even admin may disagree on finer points of interpreting various policies.

What you (and the IP) should have done instead of reverting each other's edits while exchanging ever more heated edit summaries was to start a discussion on the talk page. Let me try to explain it in your language. If you're righting a project or a paper with another student and they removed something you added, do you add it back or do you ask them to discuss it? I'm betting on the latter. Think of editing the wiki as collaborating on a paper.

The question you were debating is not as clear cut as you tried to make IP believe. I encourage you to explain your position, say on the talk page of Rose. I can think of several nuances that may or may not affect how such cases should be handled. But, because of the edit war across at least three pages, today is not the time to discuss it. Amorkuz ☎  17:30, April 25, 2018 (UTC)


 * Well, as usual, the truth did out in the end. The more aggressive party showed their true colours. But first of all, though I know it is hard in the heat of the moment, please try to stop before the fourth reversal in the future. If the page is not in a state that would require you to hide it from your boss/mother, it can stay in this state for a day or two. The best course of action is to invite the other person for a conversation on the talk page. If that fails, the second best course of action, which you eventually took, is to notify an admin. Oh and, from the purely psychological perspective, it provides for a better, friendlier conversation if one does not combine the invitation to talk with the revert of the edits.


 * Regarding authority and stuff, I know it often comes out unintentionally. So in effect, I reacted not so much to what you said but how you said it. And though I do agree with you that there is no benefit to editing under an IP, still none of us has the right to impose this belief on others. This was the most serious case of telling the IP what to do. Their reaction ("So because I don't have an account that means my opinion is worthless?") is a clear indication that it was interpreted as a hostile comment. You are right to a certain extent: talking to an IP is generally hard and more often than not impossible. For one thing, they do not receive notifications of changes/new messages. But we have to respect their choice nevertheless.


 * Now for the examples: "You can't just readd something" was probably intended as a protest but in this form sounded like an order. "Until then, this wiki does not count narration as voice acting" was when it sounded like you are authorised to speak on behalf of the wiki. Fortunately, these things are easy to avoid by adding a bit of subjunctive and "I believe"-like modifiers. The above two edit summaries could, for instance, be rephrased to "I'm afraid readding something without providing an argument would not help resolve our differences" and "Until then, I do not believe narration is counted as voice action on the wiki" (passive voice is also a great pacifier). These are mere suggestions. You will surely right it in your own style. The main thing is not to forget to add these little niceties, which we routinely add when looking someone in the eye.


 * Happy editing. And I remember that I still owe you the Master thingy, which sadly no one else is commenting on. I just don't seem to find proper editing time in the past two months. I'll get to it, I promise. Amorkuz ☎  21:29, April 27, 2018 (UTC)

A Rose on any other monitor
I thought I reverted the Midnight removal and another user removed the removal of The Poison Sky. Could you double check if it is ok now? Amorkuz ☎  09:36, May 19, 2018 (UTC)


 * No worries. And good luck with the thesis. Amorkuz ☎  01:27, May 21, 2018 (UTC)

Wild Pastures Placement in The Tenth Doctor Timeline
Are you sure about Wild Pastures taking place during Donna's travels with the Doctor as you put it in the Theory:Timeline - Tenth Doctor article? The narrative seems to suggest that it takes place after his travels with Donna, not during. –Nahald ☎  20:27, June 9, 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually just had a chat with someone who listened to it, seems the Doctor is still with Donna at the time, she's just vacationing somehwere. –Nahald ☎  21:19, June 15, 2018 (UTC)

Sixth Doctor and Torchwood Stuff
There's a few stories in the Sixth Doctor timeline that I'm a bit unsure of where to place, particularly the new Jago & Litefoot story. Also, the Torchwood timeline page has a lot of stuff under unplaced, not sure how knowledgeable you are on that. –Nahald ☎  23:48, August 21, 2018 (UTC)

7th Doctor Timeline page
Hello! I have a couple of questions to ask you about this page.

Firstly, I noticed you removed the links to the audio adaptations I added. While not strictly necessary, I don't see why they shouldn't be there. They're useful and don't exactly provide any detriment to the page. On top of that, they often have extra information not originally provided in the books, like Cold Fusion which helps to place the Day of the Doctor and The Sirens of Time.

Secondly, is there any reason the 7th Doctor page doesn't have the forum header like the other pages all do? it means it doesn't feature on here: Theory:Timey-wimey detector. I'd add it myself but I first wanted to check if there was a reason why it wasn't there. Danochy ☎  04:13, September 4, 2018 (UTC)

Timeline discussion
Hi, I apologise for not responding to you sooner, I somehow only noticed that I had a new message on my talk page now, so I hope that you don’t think that anything I’ve done since has been a passive aggressive response to your message.

Anyway,I’ll admit I did see you as somewhat territorial to begin with, but I’ve since seen that you did construct vast amounts of these timelines to fit everything in a certain place, so I can see why it would be irritating for someone to come along and start making large changes without even discussing.

Honestly, I think everyone needs to use the talk page more in general because it seems as though when the edit summar is used, it just turns into edit wars with people arguing.

I didn’t realise that you added the extra placement subheadings and do think that is a good idea. At the end of the day, we’re both trying to do the same thing here, even if we don’t agree on everything, I think it would be a good idea to keep in touch and discuss these things over both the timeline talk pages and our own. In fact, I have just posted in the talk page for the Fourth and Fifth Doctor pages and would very much appreciate a look in.

Many thanks, SJF

SarahJaneFan ☎  18:54, October 2, 2018 (UTC)

Twelve Angels Weeping 13?
Hmm, I haven't delved into most of the book yet, but I understood from this one interview with the author that the last story in it featured 13. CoT    ?  14:18, October 18, 2018 (UTC)


 * “I asked could I do a Thirteenth Doctor story and the response was in the negative,” he says. “This was last February. They weren’t sharing scripts for the new series and told me her personality hadn’t been set in stone yet. They were still at the planning stages for the next season.”


 * Rudden had meanwhile mentioned to a friend he was writing a Doctor Who book. With widened eyes, she revealed her mother would be delighted. She had been a huge Whovian as a child, only to be told by the nuns at her school in Ringsend that it was inappropriate for a girl to be interested in science and time-travel.


 * She had been a huge Whovian as a child, only to be told by the nuns at her school in Ringsend that it was inappropriate for a girl to be interested in science and time-travel. “I asked my friend if she wanted me make her mother part of the Doctor Who universe. An idea appeared and it started writing itself. And who else would meet a 10-year old girl at the end but the Thirteenth Doctor?”


 * ^a few paragraphs from the interview. CoT     ?  14:34, October 18, 2018 (UTC)


 * Update: 13 definitely, undoubtedly appears in the second last story of the collection, the one with Judoon. CoT     ?  02:01, October 19, 2018 (UTC)

Images
Hi, I'm on an iPad right now so I'm not logged in, but this is Shambala108, and I removed images from all the doctor pages yesterday. Do not add them back. 68.131.63.11talk to me 00:58, November 16, 2018 (UTC)

Seventh Doctor TARDIS Interior
Hey, I was recently listening to the 2016 Ace and Mel Big Finish trilogy and line in Maker of Demons stood out to me, so I think it might be of interest.

The Doctor, Ace and Mel are sitting in what they describe as a ship’s galleon, only they’re actually on a Spaceship that’s been made to look like a regular sea-faring ship.

Mel comments on how strange it is to be inside a Spaceship with wooden panelling, to which the Doctor responds by saying that she clearly hasn’t seen all the rooms in the TARDIS yet.

I took the Doctor’s comment as a reference to the secondary control room, but I find it interesting that this exchange even happened as they’re supposed to be using the TV movie console Room currently, which obviously is known for its wooden panelling.

It’s making me wonder despite the sound effects, if we can really claim that the console Room used in the Seventh Doctor Audios after the Settling really is the TV Movie one.

SarahJaneFan ☎  16:30, November 22, 2018 (UTC)

Anonymous User Making Changes to Timeline Pages Headers
Just wanted to let you know that an anonymous user with the IP address 70.94.73.78 is going around changing the section headers to all the Timeline page headers, changing them to marks seasons rather than periods of the Doctor's life. I'm going around and reverting his edits right now, but we should keep an eye on him. I doubt we can report him since these are theory pages, but if he starts just doing whatever he wants, we may have to find some way to intervene. –Nahald ☎  04:13, December 3, 2018 (UTC)

Yage
"After all, what was more likely to be true? That she was a twenty-year-old travelling the universe with a Time Lord in a police box, or that she was twelve and at school in Sheffield?"

- Yaz's thoughts at some point during the events of the novel. Hope this helps. The second of the options is not the reality there. Amorkuz ☎  20:35, January 20, 2019 (UTC)

Well I didn't say "indicate," I said, "implied." ;)

Images
Hi I'm going to stop you now before you get any farther. Please stop adding so many images to The Master. The general rule is one image at most per section. Small sections should not have any images. Please go through your recent edits and pare down the number of images to something more manageable for all browsers thanks. Shambala108 ☎  01:45, January 28, 2019 (UTC)


 * Make sure you remove most of those images. And keep in mind that any editor is free to change/edit what you've posted on that page. Editing is really supposed to be done on the pages, not on someone's sandbox where no one else can have input.


 * And you could open a thread about splitting the Master pages, but you would have to have a really good reason to justify the work that would be involved and that would outweigh the many reasons why the pages were merged in the first place. Make sure to read through the old Master posts regarding the merge before opening any new thread about it. Shambala108 ☎  02:24, January 28, 2019 (UTC)

Re: Image debate
Hi, just saw your note on User talk:Shambala108 and figured I could help out! Yesterday Shambala pointed me to User talk:Forgetful 10th doctor fan, where CzechOut lays out the guidelines: "Unless a section is exceptionally long, it's a good rule of thumb to use a maximum of only one pic per section." Frankly, seeing as it's a rule of thumb rather than a hard & fast rule, I think many of Jack "BtR" Saxon's recent edits are rather uncalled for, and that can be determined without any debate; I've already replaced the removed image on Time corridor without any trouble. – N8 ☎ 18:39, March 21, 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi there :) The addition of images to any article carries with it a technical burden. Add too many, particularly if the article is itself already quite large, and the page just won't load swiftly for some of our users — particularly those on cellular on a phone. So admin do reserve the right to delete images from pages in an effort to make articles more manageable for readers.


 * That is why I have now deleted your massive addition of images to Eleventh Doctor — a page that is still one of our biggest.


 * Understand, though, that this is a situational thing that is going to defy definite rules. What N8 didn't point out from that message I left for Forgetful 10th doctor fan is that I went on to say that even if we allow one pic per section, it's not always a great idea for every section to be illustrated.


 * You have to consider the ratio between text and images when deciding if a section should even get one. So, I actually went on to delete images from some sections entirely.


 * Of course, this is a 2013 case, so I should say that another consideration you have to make these days is: Where is this image going to end up on a phone? A lot of times, an image illustrates a certain block of text perfectly well on desktop, but completely misses the mark on the Fandom App. And you may not be able to position it quite the right way, particularly if you have too many images in that section.


 * So please don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying Shambala is wrong to generally assert, and take action, upon the "one image per section" notion. Nine times out of ten, that's completely in order, and it makes sense to stick to that, when you're working a wiki that has 70k pages! And it'll almost always help the situation on mobile devices.


 * But the reason that the one-pic-per-section thing is a guideline rather than an absolute rule is because every page is a little different, and they evolve over time. We need to consider what makes the most sense editorially — and technically — when we emplace images. So there may well be exceptions to that notion. But you should generally expect that no more than one per section is going to be allowed. 22:25: Thu 21 Mar 2019


 * Hey, looks like we were typing up things at the same time, but in two different places. Since we published at about the same minute, let's continue the discussion here, since most relevant parties are already here, if you don't mind. 22:32: Thu 21 Mar 2019

Debate
I guess it's not a problem, as long as I get the chance to make my case.

''"A number of ushers and I have been having separate discussions about the number of images on articles, and I think it’s time we come up an official rule for image use, since it has transpired that there is no official wiki policy on image numbers, only a guideline layout out by CzechOut to User talk:Forgetful 10th doctor fan in 2013: "Just because we allow one picture per section doesn't mean that a picture a section is a required. In fact, it's often a bad idea to use one pic a section, if the sections are relatively brief. You need to stand back and look at the article as a whole. Pictures shouldn't flood the frame, but instead have plenty of room to breathe." Even users that govern this rule have reportedly disagreed with it.''

''Now, one of the deciding factors in only having one image per section is in order to reduce load time for pages, since it has been claimed by User talk:Shambala108 on User:Jack "BtR" Saxon's Talk Page that "a lot of people visit the site on cell phones and other mobile devices", and the load time for them can be "especially long". I myself do not have such issues with my mobile device, but I am able to believe a small number of individuals do when factoring in that some people do not have superfast connection speeds. However, phone technology has really advanced since 2013, and will continue to advance in the coming years, so the problem of loading time is not the biggest of deals in this argument, though a valid point to be made.''

''But, there is one upside to a restriction on images; "too many bakers can spoil the cake". Image overflowing has been an issue, but I have a solution; zigzagging images so that no two images are on the same side in a row, and having only one image per story entry for the long articles that cover multiple stories in a single section, such the Doctors, the companions, and the rogues gallery.''

''Speaking of the Doctors, since they are the character with the most appearances in the franchise, I believe they are the exception to the "rule", since they are undeniably long pages. The sections on their appearance definitely need an image for a visual reference for the readers to have. Not to mention that there are a number of "sub-sections" in the physiological profile sections; are they to be applied to this "one-section" rule of thumb. I would like to make the case that images that display important moments be prioritised on the biography section, such as the moments before and after regeneration, the moment they meet or invite aboard a new companion, the Doctor facing a main adversary, or when the Twelfth Doctor returned to Gallifrey."''

- "A Pro-Image Case by BananaClownMan ☎  22:36, March 21, 2019 (UTC)"
 * I agree that a restriction on the amount of images in a section should be limited solely to the wiki's longest pages and not be a blanket rule. -- Saxon 22:39, March 21, 2019 (UTC)

Re: Images
Hi! To address each point separately: Thanks, Shambala108 ☎  01:06, March 22, 2019 (UTC)
 * The link you sent me doesn't work.
 * Your statement "my mobile phone has never had trouble opening a page with lots of images" is great for you, but there are other users on this site. Admins have to think of how every user experiences the site, not just ourselves.
 * Given that you added back the images two different admins removed from Eleventh Doctor, despite us leaving edit summaries explaining why we were removing images, please give me a good reason why you shouldn't be blocked for such flagrant defying of admin instructions.


 * See, I don't think you're getting my point here. The admins on this wiki work hard to make sure everyone understands that if they have an issue with an admin edit, take it to the article talk page or the admin's talk page. In addition, we are constantly instructing users about Tardis:You are bound by current policy, which states that you are bound by current policy even if you are planning to propose a change. Your undoing of my and User:CzechOut's various edits, with your edit summaries there for everyone to see, works against both those points. Any new user who sees your edits, and your longevity here (almost 5 years with over 10000 edits) might think that you know what you are doing and that your behavior is acceptable. That is why longstanding editors sometimes get blocked - they work against the rules, setting a bad example for new users (and incidentally more work for the admins). Shambala108 ☎  14:37, March 22, 2019 (UTC)

Torchwood Timeline
Hi! Could you please check the Torchwood timeline talk page? Cheers. Danochy ☎  00:47, March 25, 2019 (UTC)