User talk:Cult Of Skaro

Colourised images forbidden
Please do not upload colour images of things that were originally broadcast or published in monochrome. This is a specific violation of T:ICC. 04:28: Tue 05 Mar 2013
 * Please don't split hairs. Obviously, Marco Polo was in black-and-white.  A colour image is not from the episode, but must logically be an out-of-universe image taken of the actors from the side of the set.  The image you uploaded was never an angle seen in the original.  To make crystal clear: colour images from black and white episodes may not be uploaded here.  05:17: Tue 05 Mar 2013

Redlink
A redlink implies that a page should be created. It technically shouldn't until Saturday (although I do admittedly have a text file with the article prepared for the occasion :D). It's not really that much of a big deal if it's redlinked, but, preferably, it shouldn't be linked until broadcast. --SOTO ☎ 01:59, March 25, 2013 (UTC)

Color images of B/W eps
No. 18:03: Mon 25 Mar 2013
 * Because colour images from the B/W era violate T:IUI. All colour images are not from the episode, but rather from rehearsals or a different angle than the videocamera would have employed.  They are thus not in-universe pictures. I refer you also to forum:Images Policy where the specific case of the Marco Polo pics was taken up and roundly defeated.  (I should say that the discussion perhaps uses ''colorised" incorrectly—and indeed in quotation marks—but it's very clear the discussion is talking about precisely the images you're talking about.)  18:13: Mon 25 Mar 2013

Thane
Sorry to have to keep deleting the same pic, but your subsequent efforts still come short of our basic rules. As is made clear on upload screens, please follow these simple rules and your pic will probably be allowed to stand Also, could you please clarify the source of your pic? 21:52: Mon 15 Apr 2013

Categories
Please remember when creating a page to add a category (unless it's a redirect). For your recent Big Finish Doctor Who audio actor pages the category for them is Big Finish Doctor Who voice actors. See Jonathan Forbes‎ which you recently created, I've added the category and the which sits above the category and ensures the page is correctly sorted when it's in the category. --Tangerineduel / talk 16:56, April 17, 2013 (UTC)

Actor pages
Hi :) Thanks for adding so many new actor pages. However, please go back and add  to the top of all these.  Also, please make an effort at including an imdb link, as is standard practice on these pages.  All you do is add

External link
If they don't have an imdb page, please indicate that in a non-printing remark, like this: Thanks! 17:46: Wed 17 Apr 2013
 * Yes, I quite like making actor articles, too. On the ones where the Imdb isn't clear, do this little trick, if you would.  Take your best guess at the Imdb number. I mean, pick the person who seems like they would have most likely been active in the UK during the time that the audio was released, and, if need be, who seems to have a body of work that might be compatible with doing BF audios.  Then, add this category: Articles with questionable IMDb links.  Then, leave a non-printing remark about the difficulty you encountered.  That way, we'll know to go back and investigate it further.  18:23: Wed 17 Apr 2013
 * Nope, strike that. Forgot there was a template.  (Heh, and I made the damned thing.)  Don't worry about the non-printing remark.  Just add the link, and right next to it add .  See Alison Bingeman for an example.  18:25: Wed 17 Apr 2013

Answers

 * Documentary titles are italicised.
 * If a character appears only on audio then you use the variable.   is, as the instructions at  now say with greater clarity, only for televisual actors.  I'm pretty sure the reword there should answer your questions; let me know if you're still confused.   16:11: Thu 18 Apr 2013

John Banks
In a sense, it doesn't matter that the user adding the information to the page might be John Banks himself. T:NO SELF REF disallows the add if it is John Banks, so we'd have to remove it anyway. And if it's not him, we need to have objective, verifiable proof. So what we're essentially left with, unless you have every single one of these CD liner notes, is the Big Finish website's search engine, and specifically this search: http://www.bigfinish.com/search_results?txtSearch=%22John+Banks%22&x=0&y=0 So, if you can, could you check the results there against the list we have, allowing only those things on this list to be on our list? We're looking to exactly match the Big Finish-generated list — no more, no less.

Will this mean that we might lose some of the info that this IP user has added? Probably. But them's the breaks. Neutrally verifiable sources is what we have to base our work on, not the possibility that an actor might drop by and be perfectly accurate about his or her resumé. Remember, actors routinely include on their c.v. parts that didn't make it into the final cut of a production. That's a completely fair and legitimate thing to do, because, hey, they got paid for the job, so it is something that they did. But it doesn't suit our purposes, unless we clearly know, through other sources, that they were paid not to appear. We don't really know all that much about the behind-the-scenes machinations at Big Finish, so it's hard to know what's going on when we get a claim about a part that isn't credited. Tempting as it is to use information from someone who might have actually been in the recording booth, we need to stick with what we can verify. 19:35: Thu 25 Apr 2013
 * As I said, you can just click here and verify our page against the resulting search results. I figured since you'd already done work on the page, you might want to handle the verification.  But if you need me to put it on my to-do list, please let me know.  It'd be best if we can get this done before Monday, just to put the issue to rest swiftly.   20:25: Thu 25 Apr 2013
 * So is it your contention that the article as it is now fully represents what's on the BF website?  20:30: Thu 25 Apr 2013

David Warner Doctor image
Weird, I came across the page because of another process I was doing, and hadn't even noticed your message. Because I didn't investigate your issue prior to deleting the image because of what I was doing, I don't know specifically what went wrong with your upload. Sounds like the typical "Wikia caching issue", though. When you upload a new version of a file, sometimes — not always, but sometimes — it can take days for the cache to catch up and start displaying the new version. Looks like you only left it active for a few minutes before revering to the original, so it had no time to adjust. Next time, just leave it alone and it'll eventually catch up. 18:55: Sat 27 Apr 2013

Image
Sorry about you image, but it was on the cusp of being 250px. It was also 4:3 instead of widescreen, and images should generally be widescreen - so not only was it at 250px, but the aspect ratio was wrong. I changed the deletion rational to reflect this. Thanks. MM/ Want to talk? 14:02, May 8, 2013 (UTC)