User talk:OncomingStorm12th

Archiving
Teeny bit confused, but I deleted your first archive, and moved the second one to Archive 1...and your talk page is properly empty now? Was it something I did? This edit shows everything was removed, but when I looked at the page right before the page moves, it was all still there.

Anyway, from my experience, the archive tool has been known to be faulty on really big talk pages (which I don't think would include this one), and in those cases it's always best to just do the copying manually. If you have any further questions, let me know. 17:17, January 29, 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't know exactly what happened this time (maybe just the fact the archive template needed to recalibrate?), but, in general, making an edit, likely even submitting after having made no changes, will always "update" the page to what it really is, as you say. 17:26, January 29, 2017 (UTC)

Entity = Talent Scout
I hope you agree with the merge suggestion. PS. Thanks for looking into the image: I was a bit hesitant to put a two-page-large picture without a second opinion. Amorkuz ☎  01:06, January 30, 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the encouragement and the trust. My vision is, essentially, that there should be three pages: one for the planet from which the creature was cut (can't remember it's name now), one for the shapeshiting creature (Entity + Talent Scout), and one for ARC, which is the "brain" of the creature (I now cannot remember how exactly this was explained). The grouping into pages is by body separation: planet is one body, ARC is another, Entity is just the earlier body of the Talent Scout. Amorkuz ☎  09:34, January 30, 2017 (UTC)
 * UPD. I screwed up and make a mistake on the merge. Good news: I can fix it by myself. This year really cannot be edited on an issue by issue basis. Bottomline: I did not do enough research. I will and fix things. Amorkuz ☎  22:15, January 31, 2017 (UTC)

Shooting gallery
Sorry, I came up with a perhaps better image. But bring this one back if you think it's better. Amorkuz ☎  19:07, January 30, 2017 (UTC)

Reverting multiple changes
Just so you know, any editor can restore an earlier version of a page by going to the revision you want in the history, editing and publishing. 22:16, February 6, 2017 (UTC)

Page moves
Sorry for having apparently never replied (or actually submitted one, anyway). Yes, you are correct that I haven't been around as much lately, as in the past, but I did look through your list when I first got it, and took care of a few of the cases. I apologise, by the way, if I am unnecessarily verbose (or confusing in any way) in my reply; my day was very tiring, but better to write this now than put it off at all.

I'm afraid I can't just take your two lists as-is, and simply trust your judgement on what ought to be where. There was a reason CzechOut created the very first on your list at Norris, rather than Chuck Norris, and that's because it's not explicitly revealed in the text, and there are no other Norrises with unknown first names to create the need to disambiguate, or slightly bend T:NO RW.

I can't really comment on all the Unbound page moves right now, as I haven't actually listened to the stories myself to confirm whether or not the new names are in fact substantiated—and as other admin are, I'm still pretty confused as to how we're meant to deal with the recent decision on those stories, particularly Deadline.

I will try to get to the others. According to T:DAB, there is no reason for an audio series to be given a dab term when that same name has no other meaning. Given that The Churchill Years is not also the name of a book the Doctor owns, there is no real reason for it to become The Churchill Years (audio series), as you say, although I suppose the intention was to differentiate it from the first anthology in the series, The Churchill Years (audio anthology). Anyway, your second list seems about right. Those should be moved back.

Manually move the links? Don't bother. It's very easy to do by bot.

Preternatural Research Bureau needs to be renamed to P.R.O.B.E.. I don't understand how the latter link was ever the series. I placed a speedy rename at that page just now. Not sure what's up with Ruthven, truthfully. Now it's a redirect to Ruthventracolixabaxil. Should that redirect be Ruthven (The Eleven Day Empire) instead? There's a lot still to look at here. I will get back to this, maybe this weekend, and I'll see what I can do. 02:40, February 14, 2017 (UTC)

Infobox Anatomy
Huh. That's an interesting idea. A link in the infobox to cardiovascular system is, I think, a very natural evolution from current variables in other infoboxes. Present on? Present in? And if there's a "part of", why not an "includes" variable?

That said, I don't have time for that just now. In the coming week, though, perhaps even this weekend, I might be able to make this one for you.

(In the realm of categories, by the way, do you think category:Anatomy from the real world should be created? I normally make those by bot, based on the presence of .) 00:09, March 2, 2017 (UTC)

Thread:204223
Thread has been closed. Shambala108 ☎  02:30, April 6, 2017 (UTC)

Infobox images
I have no idea where the rule comes from or where it's written down, but I'm absolutely sure that at some point it was agreed that any story released to home markets first (BBV, video games, etc) should have their box art used in the infobox. This doesn't apply to things like TV stories because TV stories are rarely published with covers initially. OS25 (Talk) 23:53, April 11, 2017 (UTC)

Image Request
Hey, since you're pulling images from the latest episode, may I suggest a good one?

I recall a couple frames in there of Movellans being "exterminated; as their bodies become inverted and their skeletons show. One of these would be great for the Dalek-Movellan War page. Crop it a bit and I think it would really pop. OS25 (Talk) 03:35, April 16, 2017 (UTC)

Synopses
To be perfectly honest, this is already pretty clear from the current text at Tardis:Plagiarism. The "example of what not to do" is exactly this, but with a reference book.
 * Say one day that you notice, "Wow, we have a lot of blank story pages around here." Maybe The Terror of the Darkness' catches your eye.  So you go off to the Doctor Who Reference Guide, and find a plot summary there.  You then copy and paste that plot summary into our site.


 * At this point you are caught by an admin and blocked from further editing our site. This behaviour is absolutely forbidden.

This is then followed by:
 * Plagiarism is not about having the same information here that might also be found on the official BBC website, or in a reference book. Instead, plagiarism happens when you copy the precise wording used in another source. Put everything you submit here into your own language, and you'll be fine.

Do you have any suggestions on how you think this can be made even clearer? 18:21, April 16, 2017 (UTC)