User talk:Boblipton

Hey. You appear to be from the US as you use the american spelling of travelling. As DW is a UK show, we use UK spelling, so traveling is incorrect, hence why it is underlined in red when editing a page. We use travelling, so please don't change it to traveling. Thanks. The Thirteenth Doctor 13:58, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :)
Lest you think that admin don't notice small edits, let me say thank you for knowing where to put a damned period. :) If only more editors around here could make delightfully useful edits like the one you just made at Martin Clunes. And for the record, I have no idea what The Thirteenth Doctor was on about, above. Whether you put a single or double l on travelling is correct in both strands of English. It's more common to see traveling in Britain and travelling in the US, but both spellings are valid alternatives in both localities, at least according to both the OAD and OED. Computer spellcheckers, of course, aren't smart enough to recognize alternative spellings. So use whichever spelling you want. Just use the same spelling across an entire article. And please keep contributing. Your work is clearly solid.

You're quite welcome, Czechout. I am happy to be able to offer some simple line editing for punctuation, grammar and clarity. I used to do this professionally a couple of decades ago and it is good to be able to do so again in my spare time. I intend to avoid editing for content at least for the time being. There seem to be a plethora of people around here who are happy to dedicate far more time to the pursuit of all things WHO than I.

As for the Thirteenth Doctor's issues, I am well acquainted with the trauma of people who are told that their command of their language is not perfect, that there are different ways of doing things than the ones beaten into them and so forth. I also appreciate his desire to maintain consistency of spelling when possible and will try to not change spellings from standard British English when I am aware of the distinction -- although if I find massive spelling errors in an article again, I may change a word or two that is correctly spelled to my more usual correct spelling in the general clean up. I will also tend to be old-fashioned and simple in my sentence construction.

Might I suggest that if there is some sort of function that permits it, to run a universal search of "travelling" and "travelled" and change it to be consistent?

Bob
 * Yes, there is such a thing. I've got a bot that can do precisely this sort of "search and replace gig".  But I don't intend to use it for this particular word because, as I said, both forms are correct — on both sides of the Atlantic.  I tend to use the bot only for editing actual errors or violations of site policy.  Travelling falls no further foul of our manual of style than does traveling. Anyway, Bob, glad you're here and I hope to keep seeing your name pop up in the "Recent Wiki Activity" box.  00:00:36 Fri 04 Mar 2011

20:09:11 Fri 11 Mar 2011

Mini-mitch\talk 17:24, March 15, 2011 (UTC)

15:50:27 Tue 29 Mar 2011

Mini-mitch\talk 14:49, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

Admin nomination
I have recommended that you be made an admin. If you do not wish to become an admin, please refuse the nomination quickly, so that no time is wasted on debating the merits of the case. 01:02:28 Tue 12 Jul 2011

As the nomination has vanished, I should note the two primary issues of my response to the nomination; first, I thanked Czechout for the compliment. Second, I turned down the nomination. Boblipton 11:54, July 26, 2011 (UTC)

Real World template
For some reason the "noinclude" notation on the Real World template isn't working so all the language about "Usage" etc is showing up. As you were the last person to edit it, and your edit removed the opening "noinclude" I reverted your edit to fix the formatting problem. However it appears "noinclude" still isn't working. You no doubt have noticed this by now yourself (unless it fixed itself). In any event, no reflection intended on your edit - it was just an attempt at fixing a format. Please feel free to go back and remove the text you were intending to, assuming the "noinclude" issue works itself out. Cheers. 23skidoo 03:44, August 4, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well the reason that noinclude failed to function was because you totally blanked the template code from the template page, leaving behind only the usage text. If it hadn't been made by you, I'd call it a direct act of vandalism, because your edit was, in template terms, the same as simply blanking a page.  Because it was you, I'm sure it was just a mistake.  I'm curious, though — what were you trying to accomplish?  You left behind no revision note, so it's difficult to divine what you were doing.  Because of the relatively catastrophic and wide-ranging effects your edit had, however, I've locked the page from further editing.  If you'd like to have an impact upon editing this page, please let me know what you were trying to do.


 * In future, please do be mindful that these top-of-page templates are propagated on hundreds — in this case, thousands — of pages. Changes will have a dramatic effect upon the cache, and so should not be undertaken lightly.  Certainly, changes should not be made which materially affect the message that is being conveyed on such a widely-used templates.  Changes to anything "notincluded" on the template (that is, within statements) won't have such a dramatic effect upon the system, as they only appear on the one page.   22:23:03 Sun 07 Aug 2011

I was trying to add a "real world" tag to the article, and I got caught up in the code by accident. To say I regret the accidental blasting, once I realized what I had done, seemed to me superfluous. It seems I was mistaken. Sorry for the error. Boblipton 00:58, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

MM/ Want to talk? 20:32, August 9, 2011 (UTC)

What?
Hey, I made a little template because I thought about what you said on your profile page. As you point out, you run across sentences which are opaque to you, because you don't have a doctorate in Doctor Who. It might be useful for you to therefore use what? — or, if you want to save a keystroke, what. This flags an individual sentence, with a little tag like this one:  It also puts the page automatically into a category so that it can be found easily. Hopefully, you'll find it a useful tool. 22:07:08 Thu 18 Aug 2011

Very kind of you. Boblipton 22:09, August 18, 2011 (UTC)

17:11:27 Mon 22 Aug 2011

IP user
In response to your request on User:CzechOut's talk page, I have blocked the user who vandalised the page. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. --Revan\Talk 20:21, August 31, 2011 (UTC)

Klade
The term "super-evolved" didn't originate with me. It's a direct quote from Lance Parkin's AHistory, and if he's the author who created the Klade, don't you think we should use his description? Zerinza 12:55, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

I didn't know that. Possibly we should, even though it may be an unnecessary distinction for someone not familiar with that particular work by Parkin. My aim is to be as clear as possible to the reader, not to worship at the self-admitted clay feet of Parkin. We are not limited to the words of the original author, who may take fifty-thousand words to tell a story while we hope to get it down to five hundred. Clarity, accuracy and brevity should be our watchwords, not "Lance Parkins says". How does "super-evolved" differ substantively from "evolved" and is the distinction telling to someone whose knowledge of the Klade limited to this article? Boblipton 13:04, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

Worship has nothing to do with it, as I'm not a fangirl of Parkin or any of the other Doctor Who authors for that matter. I do believe however he used "super-evolved" to convey the sense of ultimate life forms that exist very near the end of the universe (100,000,000,000,000 A.D., apparently). If so then I believe super- was a very effective prefix, and worth keeping. If the term's bothersome for some reason, then perhaps we could place quotation marks around it? Zerinza 13:23, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

No, it's not bothersome except for my tendency to chop out words whose utility is not immediately apparent. By all means, restore it, and thanks for discussing the matter. Boblipton 13:34, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

Come to think of it, as a compromise we could replace "super-evolved descendants" with "humanoid descendants" which not only solves the issue of redundancy but also clarifies what exactly sets the Klade apart from their Dalek ancestors. At present, I don't think there's any mention in the entry of them having a humanoid form, which as you said would make the article of little help to someone who's unfamiliar with the Klade... Zerinza 13:45, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

That's a nice distinction and I don't think of it as a compromise. It does offer additional information. By all means, make it if you think it good. Boblipton 13:53, September 7, 2011 (UTC)

Lyn Peterfield edit
I noticed that you had edited the page for Lyn Peterfield, and although I can appreciate the grammar (and tense) correction there were a couple instances where I thought the translation was incomplete and another where some data was lost. Specifically, I'd like to refer to information lost in the translation: "At some point learning" to "Knowing". This is, indeed, a peeve of mine where I think it should have been tremendously important for Torchwood to find out where and when Lyn learned this information. In the TW:Rendition episode, Lyn's source of knowledge is not discussed (which I consider to be a plot-hole, and said so in that forum) - I intend to raise the question of how long in advance Lyn may have known. --Watcher4200 01:26, September 8, 2011 (UTC)

Aliases
I've taken most of the worst aliases out of the "Minor Aliases" and "Names Given By Others" sections of Aliases of the Doctor, though I'm sure that some people will disagree with me about the names that I've taken out, so feel free to start fixing the grammar on the page.Icecreamdif 19:09, September 20, 2011 (UTC)

Please Stop
Please stop adding future episodes to the wiki, you or anyone else could add them when there aired Eh? I'm sorry, but I don't know what you're talking about. Boblipton 20:44, September 21, 2011 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Boblipton"Sorry if you're looking for earlier words of wisdom here, but when I checked here a few minutes ago, there was a lot of garbage coding visible. Please feel free to add your bons mots and make sure to sign your name.Boblipton 20:57, September 21, 2011 (UTC)

Blackthorne and other matters
Perhaps I should have been more specific. I was in fact referring to your removal of the word "installed". Now, you replaced it with the word "put", which simply isn't correct. Jack specifically refers to the action as installation, rather than just chucking it in there.

On an unrelated not, I noticed that you have chosen to delete the contents of your talk page, rather than archive it. Please note that this is a breach of Tardis:Vandalism policy. Having looked at the page history, I understand you had some technical issues, but if you could reinstate a working version, that would be great. Thanks-- 18:34, September 26, 2011 (UTC)

I certainly have no objection to a working version but have no clear idea of how to go about it. If you would care to do the honors, I have no objection.

As for the one word you objected to, you could have simply edited the piece to the same effect instead of reverting it. I have seem other people change words that I have chosen carefully -- I used the word 'bawdy' in working on River Song's personality section and was surprised to see it changed to 'vivacuous' by someone else. Until I puzzle out why the other person prefers that word, I won't change it bacl. Editing is about getting the details right in the context of the overall work. A reversion is an act of unthinking revulsion. I find its free use here rather puzzling. Boblipton 19:02, September 26, 2011 (UTC)


 * First up, please reply on my talk page in future. Secondly, go your page history, click on the date of the last working version, click edit, copy and then paste it above the header of my message. Thirdly, reverting an edit is not "unthinking revulsion" by any standard. As my inclusion of a reason clearly proves there was some thought involved in the process. Feel free to edit Blackthorne again if there is a particular issue you feel strongly about.


 * In a non-serious tone, I would ask you not to called reversion "unthinking revulsion" as, even though its a generalised comment, it could be likened to a personal attack. Again, I haven't taken offence; I'm talking about future instances here. Thanks


 * Well, I've reinstated the garbage-filled stuff up above -- although why removing it would be construed as vandalism is beyond my understanding.. Enjoy the lists of code. Boblipton 19:35, September 26, 2011 (UTC)

LINKS TO WEDDING OF RIVER SONG
No Worries. If you're interested, links are quite easy to do - just highlight what you want to link and click the "add link" button (It's a really obvious 'Chain' icon on the new editor). You should be led to a box that automatically checks if a page exists under that name and lets you change the text that is displayed (I'll leave the slightly more complex source mode coding out for the mo). Just make sure it goes to the right page - I had fun earlier fixing several links to the 'Cave of Skulls' which several pages had down as the name for the 'Seventh Transept' in 'WoRS' ; it turns out the 'Cave of Skulls' is actually a cave in 'An Unearthly Child'...or the second episode in that story...I may be an Classic Who fan, but I'm not that old LOL Baziel talk to me 02:27, October 3, 2011 (UTC)

Categories
Please remember to place new articles into categories and remove the image placeholder. Thanks-- 19:34, October 4, 2011 (UTC)

Umbaste
I reverted your edit because you removed words from the first setence so that it didn't make sense, the revertion meant that you could at least understand what the sentence said. --Revan\Talk 17:28, October 13, 2011 (UTC)

New pages
Please remember when creating new pages to remove the placeholder and add the appropriate category/categories. Thanks-- 14:44, October 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay, that makes sense. As for the placeholder, you should be seeing Placeholder.jpg when you create a new page. Simply delete this line. If you're going to be creating lots of pages for actors, I suggest using the preset.-- 14:50, October 14, 2011 (UTC)

River Song-Reply
Yeah, I noticed the references to Mel Zucker on River's page, but I didn't know whether or not they came from a canon source so I didn't remove them. If the only reference is from The Brilliant Book, then I guess what really matters i the context it was in. I've never read The Brilliant Book 2011, but do you know if it was mentioned in an in-universe story, or if was mentioned as more of a behind the scenes note. If it was written within a story, then I guess that makes it canon, but otherwise I don't think it is. I've put a link to the original Panopticon thread in my edit summary, and I also mentioned it on River's talk page. Hopefully peoplewill get the message, but I'm sure that these names will continue to pop up.Icecreamdif talk to me 02:35, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

Issues with the show's canon can certainly be confusing, but we really only need to worry about what's canon according to this wiki's canon policy. I know nothing about the Brilliant Book, except for what's on its page on this wiki. According to that page, "it features information from both an in-universe and real world perspective and new stories with the Eleventh Doctor and Amy Pond." I could be wrong, but I don't think that it would be canon if, for example, the book had a section on River that said something along the lines of "Melody eventually located her seven year old parents in Leadworth, where she went by the name 'Melody Zucker'," but it would be canon if one of the new stories in the book features a flashback to Amy with her good friend Mels Zucker. I might be mistaken, but I'm too lazy to go read the canon policy right now. If I were you, I would either ask somebody else who has actually read the book what context the name "Zucker" was used in, or bring it up at the Panopticon or Reference Desk. Another thing that might make some difference would be whether the name was used behind the scenes in Let's Kill Hitler, or if the book just made it up. Icecreamdif talk to me 06:14, October 18, 2011 (UTC)

Rumours at TWORS
You mean the two unsourced rumours? They were removed for being just that, as of the new series, it just been generally seen that all rumours must be sourced. This is to stop Users adding random rumours that they think might happen or read on a random blog. This was a common problem with the Omega, Rani, Master, Rassilon etc rumours that spring up all the time. MM/ Want to talk? 14:13, October 19, 2011 (UTC)

Placeholders
Please remove the placeholder when creating a new article. I have asked you multiple times now, so please try harder. Thanks-- 16:04, October 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * Er... I explained exactly how to do it in my previous message, under the heading "New pages".-- 22:10, October 21, 2011 (UTC)

MM/ Want to talk? 17:44, October 28, 2011 (UTC)

STOP!!!!
Please stop adding Category:Documentaries and Category:Doctor Who TV documentaries to the Doctor Who Confidential pages and go back and remove them where you have already done so. ALL the Confidential pages are in these categories via the category tree, there is no need for each individual page to also been in there.-- 12:39, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

seal (animal)
i saw youre summary when you took away my edit for its name in latin

hope it is'nt any trouble to the wikia Metardis talk to me           i find that a little bit annoying but, let bygones be bygones....Metardis talk to me

Travelling
Just stopped by to advise you, a bit late, that the bot which enforces T:SPELL does actually correct traveling to travelling. Since this very issue was the thing that drove me to your page in the first place, I thought you might be interested. I still stand by the notion that traveling is an acceptable alternate BrEng spelling. However, within the DWU, traveller/travelling is more common. Since a bot is essentially binary, I had to pick one or the other. Hence I went with the thing I earlier advised you wasn't necessary — actively changing traveling to travelling. 05:30: Thu 03 Nov 2011
 * p.s. What the heck is going on with the code on this page? Is this mess intentional?  Or did someone vandalise you?

Understanding user page vandalism
You were told that you can't remove stuff from your user talk page because of T:UVAN. And in general, it's very much disallowed for you to just remove things from any kind of talk page, including your own. However, in the case of blatant vandalism and code leak, the benefits of removing the offending code outweigh the harm of altering the page. T:UVAN is designed to ensure that conversations are preserved in a readable state for other users, since user talk pages are not private pages. This level of code leak is unlike anything I've ever seen on this wiki and should be treated like an act of vandalism itself. Since I take it that you don't want this on your page, I'll now track down the culprit and then remove it from your page. 12:52: Thu 03 Nov 2011

Note to readers of this page
In my opinion, User:MEGAKID III vandalised this page with this revision. This vandalism rendered large sections of this page unreadable. A note for the benefit of people who might be trying to follow user:Boblipton's discussions closely is therefore made of the fact. MEGAKID III's vandalsim will now be reversed, following an indication by Bob at User talk:CzechOut that he did not intend or desire this mess. Due to the unusual nature of this vandalism, and the fact that it's so pervasive as to make reading of the page all but impossible, removal of MEGAKID III"S comments is not deemed a violation of T:UVAN. After all, this massive code leak isn't actually a comment — which T:UVAN is designed to protect — but a totally incomprehensible mass of code.   13:07: Thu 03 Nov 2011

My thanks to Czechout for fixing the problem. I don't consider Megakid's messing up my page -- if it was him -- to be an act of vandalism. It looks more like someone pushed a wrong buttom and made a mess by accident. I've done that too. Boblipton talk to me 13:16, November 3, 2011 (UTC)