User talk:Amorkuz

Clara Oswald
OK. What is the problem about my last edit? I think I have proof. The End Of Time: "And the whole War was time locked." "Nothing can get in or get out of the time lock." The Day of the Doctor: "10th: 'These events should be time locked. We shouldn't even be here.' 11th: 'So something let us through.' MOMENT: 'You clever boys'" The Night of the Doctor: "I'm not part of the war. I swear to you, I never was." "I don't suppose there's a need for a doctor any more. Make me a warrior now." I don't think I made speculation. I don't think I even made interpretation. And I never said River didn't meet the War Doctor. I only said she isn't confirmed to have met him. But thank you for your work anyway. Even if, this time, I don't understand. Basil Pond ☎

Computer programs
Small thing: when you create DM and Whatsapp, which I hope you will, category:Video chat has already been created, and both Skype and Chat would also be candidates for category:Instant messaging, in all the same categories except vision. 22:28, November 22, 2016 (UTC)

Joyrider technology
If you ever choose to make a page for the Joyrider technology (whatever you'd want to call it), I know of at least one other body swap device (the Reciprocator) which could potentially form category:Body swap technology with it if we find another (Cabinet of Souls, in-a-way-not-really-forget-I-said-anything?). Not pushing you or anything; just letting you know. 05:31, January 4, 2017 (UTC)

Roger (and Hammerstein, and anyone else in fact)
Not sure if you're familiar with this feature, but it's very easy to use. Let's say you wanted to create the dab page Roger:
 * Will give you a complete list of all pages Roger:


 * You can achieve the same thing, in this case, with just the first two lines, but you'd end up with a long bulleted list. In any case, I notice, for example, you've been added Roberts to the dab page Robert. So with this same format:


 * It will in fact give you a list of pages with "Roger" in them, which are not already at Roger:


 * All Roberto, Roberta, Roberts/Robertson, etc. You've done a good job, it seems. Or maybe you'd want to widen the search to include all pages starting in Rob.


 * Replace  with , by the way, and you'll end up with all pages where "Robert" can be found anywhere in the title, not just at the beginning. If you're searching for a surname, you might want to include   at both ends.


 * Anyway, I thought I'd introduce you to this little useful tool. I could feasibly make a template to make the process easier, but if you just add the above to User:Amorkuz/sandbox (or User:Amorkuz/DPL, or anything, really), you might find it a lot easier to generate such a list for editing purposes. I don't much trust the search function. As I don't work for Fandom/Wikia, I can admit that Special:Search is just a bit shit.


 * Sorry if this looks like an overload. I've had a tiring day, so I would usually try to be more concise. 02:12, February 14, 2017 (UTC)
 * Glad you like it. Delta sounds like a great idea, and to answer your question, it can indeed include pages with Delta anywhere in the page name. Enjoy! 04:39, February 15, 2017 (UTC)

Introducing... T:DAB LINKS
Nah, it's not as flashy as I'm making it sound. Tardis:Links to disambiguating pages is simply a link dump for "lonely" dab pages, which aren't linked to from any article, so they don't show up on Special:LonelyPages. But since you've been taking an interest in dab pages of late, I figured I'd let you in on this particular maintenance page. So you know, we no longer bother making the list there alphabetical. 00:15, March 2, 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd never really considered it, but, logically, a DPL query updates its results on a page save. So it seems if you hit publish, you'll get the latest list there. Good question. 00:25, March 2, 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I have no idea. I guess DPL can be temperamental. I doubt there was an edit right before your last save. 01:17, March 2, 2017 (UTC)

Sticks and Stones
A minor point, but should "Sticks and Stones" perhaps be a page for the rhyme? I noticed you made a Wikipedia link to that rhyme at Terrorformer; currently, the above name links to Sticks & Stones (comic story), and that very story features the rhyme itself. In writing this, I've already convinced myself hehe. If I changed all the links and ev'rything, would you consider writing up the article? 02:24, March 18, 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh man, in checking my currently small collection of DWU prose (previous collection on another computer was far more extensive, but this will do for now), I'm getting a few hits for "sticks and stones", but none that actually continue the rhyme. Same goes for The Wedding of Sarah Jane Smith, which has K9 strongly imply the meaning of the rhyme:
 * Mr Smith: I am perfectly able to complete that function, Clyde. There's no need to consult the dog.
 * K9: Sticks and stones.
 * That said, I don't think we need the complete rhyme to write a good page on it, as long as we can derive from the various stories which mention it the broad meaning of the phrase. 13:19, March 18, 2017 (UTC)
 * I got busy yesterday, but I actually remembered that I have a backlog of issues of DWM, so I have access to those comic stories if you want me to give them a read and provide you with relevant quotes and passages. 22:43, March 18, 2017 (UTC)

W. Hartnel
Part of me would reccomend putting the information at Billy (Pier Pressure). CoT    ?  13:42, April 4, 2017 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to point you in the direction of the "notes" section for Facades (comic story). CoT     ?  18:55, May 6, 2017 (UTC)

Ten explicty refers to jack being a fixed point just think it needs a mention

W. Hartnell
I don't see why W. Hartnell can't have a page; he died during or before the 20th century, and was buried in London. Whatever the story tells you. So many of those in the, or customers at Adipose Industries seen in Partners in Crime, etc, are in fact the names of various members of the production team. The Bells of Saint John even features the pictures of many of the production team, along with their names and actual online profiles, which were used in that episode. You just put a at the top of W. Hartnell, maybe the other way around, mention the name's significance in a BTS, and you're good to go. 02:27, April 7, 2017 (UTC)
 * category:Humans from unknown eras is a very useful category, indeed. I would recommend this one.
 * And you only need information relating this individual (they/them pronouns because of unspecified gender, remember) to the reference that establishes their existence within the story.
 * "X was a person who died" is not much of an article, but "After X died, they were buried in a New York cemetery, and such and such a person walked by their grave" is definitely sufficient to merit inclusion. Remember, we house articles on the most minute of references; we have a host of pages that just say the person is dead/went missing, and where their name is found. 22:17, April 9, 2017 (UTC)

Re:Main settings
Hey Amorkuz. Well, to be honest, I don't have a systematic way of dealing with this. What I try to do is keep the "main" part of "Main setting" in mind, really.

For the story we're mainly discussing: Slaver's Song. Almost the entire story is set on the Tupi village, but the last two or three pages lead us into Remand Station Mackay-One. This means a very small part of the story (additionally, a part of the story that doesn't really add much to that story's plot) is set on Remand, so I don't myself consider it a main setting.

Another recent example: The Pilot. A lot of anon users (mainly) kept adding Australia, Planet (The Pilot) and War zone (The Pilot) to the infobox. However, these can't really be called main settings. Sure, they appear on the story, but the Doctor and his companions spend little time on them; specially when you compare it to the time spent on St Luke's University.

But coming back to comics: I agree with you. Sadly, Comic story pages don't get edited too often, and sometimes these non-main settings tend to be left out. This is the reason why I try to put as many links and redlinks as possible on the "References" and the "Characters" sections (this way, readers can at least have a brief idea of what/who appeared on that story). Thankfully, some users like you take their time to make the pages more complete. However, I don't think that the infobox is the solution to our problem. I personally believe that we should stick to the real basics on it.

Another comic example: Beneath the Waves. The story begins with the Doctor in a ship on the deep sea, where he meets a few Quarks, after a few pages, he goes to the Twist, where he reencounters Hattie. Then, they travel to Seaton Bay. The plot of the story develops mostly on Seaton Bay. The scenes on the ship and the Twist aren't much important to the plot, if at all. Thus, I think it'd be unnecessary to add them to the infobox, because they are not main settings, just like adding the Quarks would be a bit too much, because they also don't add much to the plot.

Anyway, this reponse is getting too long as well. I don't think we (or anyone else) will get a perfect system on this, but I'd love to keep chatting about it with you. (PS: Congrats on the admin nomination. You 100% deserve it). OncomingStorm12th ☎  01:31, April 29, 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I like this "system" you proposed very much. Though I don't exactly remember what happens on those stories, I trust you on their revelance to the respective plots.
 * Something slightly tangencial, but also concerns infoboxes and settings: Explaining a setting too much. For example, on What He Wants..., the infobox gives us "Hackney, London, 1962 and 2014". But is it really necessary to add "London" on the infobox? Because Hackney explains very well how Hackney is a part of London. (Not saying you, I or anyone else is to blame on this subject; this is just something I was always bothered by, but never talked about). So, as a general case, do you think these "double linking" are truly necessary? Because if we put "Location X, Location Y" on the infobox, as soon as we go to Location X, we'll learn that it is located within Location Y. Adding both seems, to me, like overcrowding the infobox. What's your opinion on that? OncomingStorm12th ☎  23:14, April 30, 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, glad to see we agree. Also, thank for pointing the third case to me. When making the page for The Dollhouse I simply added Los Angeles, because a part of the story is set on Hollywood, but most of it is set on other parts of Los Angeles. Now I see that putting Hollywood, Los Angeles on there is much more correct than just LA. This conversation is really going places. Or perhaps is it better to leave just LA? Now I think I confused myself about the "double linking". Do you think is ok to double-link in such cases? OncomingStorm12th ☎  23:52, April 30, 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the team!
Just here to say exactly that: welcome! :)

Be sure to change the editorial mop water every once in a while, and feel free to come to me or any of the other active admin with questions.

Proud to have you on the admin team!
 * Oh, whoops! XD Armorkuz. Armorbot. Armorkuz is a little close to your regular name, which could be confusing, but I love it(!) and I appreciate the credit for my slippery typing ;P 19:54, April 29, 2017 (UTC)

Twelfth Doctor Companions Template
You've been doing a fantastic job as an admin in the last few days, and I don't mean to disrupt your flow or hand you too many tasks. But I just wanted to inform you of several problems present at Template:Companions of the Twelfth Doctor. This template is frankly in the need a bit of a spring cleaning, evident when you open the 'view source' tab and you realise that a whole GROUP of companions has been left off by a typo calling both the prose and comics groups "group 3." That's a singular issue, there's many more.

So I whipped up a version of the template that I would think is the bests:

Here's the things that I changed/would change:
 * Fixed the order of the TV companions (Clara, Nardole, Bill; not Clara, Bill, Nardole)
 * Fixed the doubled "Group 3" typo which caused the entire PROSE section of the template to totally disappear.
 * Removed repetitive coding and use of the word "Companions" to be more in-line with the superior Template:Companions of the Tenth Doctor
 * Fixed lack of end to italics section of the template.
 * Added Sonny (Clara Oswald and the School of Death) under "comics/Single-story." While it might seem like it's silly to add, the Doctor literally states to Clara "This is our new companion," which is a pretty universal way of telling us how to count "him."
 * Added new section for video games, where Lumpy has been placed.

Thank you for your time, hope this isn't too much at once. OS25 (Talk) 22:21, April 30, 2017 (UTC)


 * I understand your decision, although I think it's hard to argue against the Doctor's blatant statement of "[This is] our new Companion." He talks to the thing, takes it everywhere with him in the story, and then tells Clara and the audience "Companion." But I won't force anyone to add that without a debate.


 * I actually think that most of the "companions" listed in the template really need to be discussed. It seems to me that over the years the definition of the Twelfth Doctor's companions has somehow been stretched out to "anyone that he meets in one story, even if he refuses to allow them to travel in the TARDIS." Most of these "single-story" companions probably need to be re-considered. OS25 (Talk) 19:03, May 2, 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh, I can explain that one actually. ("I'd like to understand how a character who only appeared in one story overall becomes a "multi-adventure" companion.") So a single-story, Multi-adventure companion happens when we see only one of their adventures but we know that more happen off-screen. Miss Young, for instance, only appears in one comic story but she's been with the Doctor for a while and at the end they head back to the TARDIS. For a time, Brian Williams (Rory's Dad) was a great example of this, because he initially only appeared in one story but it was made clear that he and the Doctor went on several trips afterwards (if you recall, he sent several post-cards). Basically, a single-story, multi-adventure companion had more adventures off-screen that we didn't see. It's a rather important distinction.


 * Also, while it's probably the least important change that I wanted to make, I want to point out the difference in the sorting of colomns in my versions of the template, as I think the current sorting for the comics section of the page is really ugly. As I said above, Template:Companions of the Tenth Doctor is probably the best version that we currently have. OS25 (Talk) 20:02, May 2, 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much! The template looks so much better now, you're really cleaned it up. Great work! OS25 (Talk) 21:08, May 3, 2017 (UTC)

War Doctor Companions
Hi Amorkus, I've just noticed you've recently edited the War Doctor Companions Template, I have had on it's talk page since January to Add Heleyna and Kalan to that page, could you add them to the page between Rejoice and Ollistra? Adric♥Nyssa∩Talk? 05:55, May 3, 2017 (UTC)
 * Cool let me know when they revamp is going to happen and I'll help you out with any fish-y ones. Adric♥Nyssa∩Talk? 18:03, May 4, 2017 (UTC)

Re:Da
Hi, Amorkuz. Thanks for your response on my talk page. Re: the "Da" template, I can identify three problems with using it to dab (thanks for explaining that term) episode pages. Firstly, the user still has to write " TV " before the template, then add italics to the episode title, and write an extra "(TV story)" dab at the end of the link. On the other hand, the method I propose, " ", could take care of all three of those issues very easily. Also, surely the examples you gave (with different lines of comics publishing stories of the same name) could be taken care of by an extra dab, for instance " ". These suggestions would seem to make editing this wiki a lot easier and less time-consuming. :) --Time Lord ☎  14:39, May 9, 2017 (UTC)

Tuck
Hey, just wanted to explain why I left a speedy rename on Tuck. There's a character in The Incomplete Death's Head named Tuck, and since that story features the Seventh Doctor, I didn't think it would take this long for the inclusion debates to reach a consensus. Good call holding off moving the page, just wanted to clarify. OS25 (Talk) 18:10, May 9, 2017 (UTC)


 * Good catch. I think the conflict itself was with the species in Breakfast at Tyranny's, who are basically the Nestene Consciousness from another universe. The only real name we have for them is (as I recall) "The Wraiths," meaning that it's the best name for the page. OS25 (Talk) 18:31, May 9, 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh man, it's a big one issue. They kinda wrap the storyline up. The next issue will probably just be them dealing with other bad guys.


 * What I can tell you is that the "Wraiths" within the "dream" are identical to the "Wraiths" they encounter in the real world. OS25 (Talk) 18:50, May 9, 2017 (UTC)

Good call. OS25 (Talk) 19:25, May 9, 2017 (UTC)

Wraiths
Hey there! Nice to meet you;

I was just wondering (since you're the only Admin online right now), if I could have your opinion on a change I would like to make. I wanted to make a disambiguation page named "Wraith", since there are many types in the DWU, for example the Cloister Wraiths, among others.

This means that the existing page at "Wraith" needs to be moved, which normal users are forbidden to do. I was wondering if you could do the honours; I don't mind filling in all of the content.

Please let me know your thoughts? Many thanks; 19:14, May 9, 2017 (UTC)


 * So I've done some digging, and I've found that there is precedent for giving a species a DAB name if more than one story illustrates a species with such a name. See Martian, Martian, and Martian. OS25 (Talk) 19:28, May 9, 2017 (UTC)

Hi Amorkuz, I just wanted to clarify my point on the Wraith talk page!

I'm completely fine with putting off moving the page(s), I just am not fine with doing a Hunters-of-the-Burning-Stone style "block" on discussing the story as if it hasn't wrapped up. I've tried to word all of this without explaining it in detail because I really liked the comic, and wanted you to as well. So I'm not upset that the page hasn't been moved, I just didn't wanted it to be open policy that it can't be moved. Instead, when reading into the case further, I've come to agree with you.

Cheers. OS25 (Talk) 21:50, May 10, 2017 (UTC)

Karen Davies
You're welcome. Sometimes, I see other people add Speedy renames, and decide to check how many links there actually are. If there are few (in this case, only three) I move them myself. I'll now move the ones from the character, as there are only two. OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:18, May 10, 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, no probs. I just checked, and appart from the Valley of the Gods, it seems all my current speedy renames have at least 77 links. It'd be inhumane (or in-Time Lord-ne, if that's a thing) to ask anyone to manually move this. OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:28, May 10, 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, and I didn't ignore your last post on my talk page, btw (well, not on purpose, at least). I read it, but forgot to actually answer you. The good side is: it doesn't looks like many pages have "wrong" dab terms like the Valley of the Gods did. But it is really weird to see all those Daleks in there :p. OncomingStorm12th ☎  02:41, May 14, 2017 (UTC)

The Lost
My pleasure! --GusF ☎  14:53, May 12, 2017 (UTC)

RE: Thank you note
No problem ^_^ I realised I wasn't going to get anywhere so I figured there was no point "fuelling the fire" so to speak. I'll leave the rest up to you and the other faithful admins :) Snivystorm ☎  19:50, May 14, 2017 (UTC)

Actor/Actress
Just a heads up Actress is roper English form as you put it in the edit history for Susan Foreman, it's one of the few English words where there is an male and female form, so Actress was acceptable on that page. Adric♥Nyssa∩Talk? 15:44, May 18, 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't see what the Guardian's opinion has to do with his wiki. Regardless of their opinion, the Oxford Dictionary considers "actress" to be a perfectly proper word. Certainly, I see value in using the word on this wiki for pages about particularly glamorous individuals such as Iris Wildthyme or Marlene Dietrich. CoT     ?  18:34, May 18, 2017 (UTC)


 * Ah gotcha. The fact that you did it on Susan Foreman gave me the wrong idea. Do you plan on fixing other uses of "actress" in BTS areas?  CoT     ?  19:08, May 18, 2017 (UTC)

I wasn't advocating its use I was just saying it is a word. Adric♥Nyssa∩Talk? 13:02, May 19, 2017 (UTC)

Location renames
I see, but I can't quite understand how "The general rule of thumb is to make the name a single, simple word, such as (planet), (moon) or the like" applies to those cases. Yes, in general we tend to use the simple words, if the thing is the only "thing" with that name. So, if we have a character, a planet and a star system with the same name, then the small words are useful, because if quickly lets us figure out what is what.

However, this does not happen with White Rabbit (Legion). Just from the title, what is the "White Rabbit"? A place in Legion, an individual who lives there, a species who is native to Legion, or something else different? Unlike "planet", "book" and "system", "Legion" doesn't quite tells us what that the White Rabbit is.

Also, as far as I've seen, (planet), (species), (book), and the sort are only used when there is one thing with that name. As there is only one book named Black Orchid, it makes sense to use the "small word", but take a look at A Journal of Impossible Things (Human Nature) and A Journal of Impossible Things (The End of Time). By a logic similar to "(Legion)" and "(London)", these would be dabbed as "(John Smith)" and "(Verity Newman)".

Also, Forum:Peter Anghelides's future doctor naming does not cover what we're dealing with. There, it dealt with how to dab a character by it's first appearance. But our problem is greater, as we have two different places with the same name. Has there ever been a thread on how to differentiate two things that fall under the same "category" (two planets, two pubs, two pubs, etc) with the same name? OncomingStorm12th ☎  22:13, May 20, 2017 (UTC)
 * Hm, I see it now. The Coal Hill example quite made me give in. Well, I guess this is one of those situations where it seems weird at first, but eventually, I'll get used to dabbing this way. Anyway, thanks for the elaborated answers, as well as taking the time on the research. OncomingStorm12th ☎  23:24, May 20, 2017 (UTC)

Ilya or Llya?
Hi Amorkuz. I've read through T:CAST and it states "cast lists shall give the name of the character, as listed in the credits seen on first transmission of an episode". The episode I watched, and the episode presented on BBC iPlayer, shows the name as Ilya. I was wondering where Llya originated. As I understand it from the user who originally edited the name to "Ilya Sviatoslavych", the name appears on his uniform in Russian. I simply created the page in the name given on the episode page when I was making pages for the army officials. 66 Seconds ☎  01:39, May 29, 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi. Sorry to have bothered you. The name "Ilya Sviatoslavych" originated further down the page under the heading "Biological data". I just created the page in that name because I noticed it in the cast list earlier in the day prior to your edits so presumed it was the same in both places. I admit that I made a mistake in not checking myself whether it was verified prior to creating the page. I should have done. As for a screenshot, I have provided one from the credits as shown on the BBC. Here its say Ilya, rather than Llya. 66 Seconds ☎  02:03, May 29, 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry to intrude, but if "biological data" was where that name was linked, then it might originate from the scene where 12 is scanning Ilya with his glasses. The page for the character notes that this is also where the "70 years old" claim comes from. Perhaps this is what should be verified? OS25 (Talk) 02:11, May 29, 2017 (UTC)

Re: No Real World
Okay, yeah. I wasn't sure on the exact policy to do with images. Can these sorts of pictures go in the bts sections of these articles? From our real world knowledge we know it is them so I assume they would be allowed there? --Borisashton ☎  18:20, June 8, 2017 (UTC)
 * Great, I'll work on that now. --Borisashton ☎  18:24, June 8, 2017 (UTC)

Mind if I butt in before Borisashton starts moving everything to BTS? Surely allowing pages for these real world individuals is no different to allowing pages for unnamed songs. You yourself created The Birth of Venus using real world information to name it. CoT    ?  18:31, June 8, 2017 (UTC)

Additionally what are we to do with people that only info is from The Lie of the Land such as Mother Teresa and Martin Luther King Jr? --Borisashton ☎  18:47, June 8, 2017 (UTC)


 * Why is it even debatable? They are shown in-universe. That, as far as I'm aware, make them in-universe moments of Earth history as well as real world. --DCLM ☎  18:57, June 8, 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: if you post questions faster than I can reply, I will not be able to reply to them all. :)


 * Starting from the end: This is debatable because they are part of the footage intended to implant false memories of things that did not happen into the human race.


 * So first of all (it was first at first), this is exactly right: for the purposes of disambiguation it is allowed to create a page under the real-world name. However, the real-world name on the page should still be confined to the BTS section, which is perfectly demonstrated by the page for the painting I created.


 * In other words, the real-world information is normally only allowed in BTS and, exceptionally to avoid stupid dab terms like "Female monk (The Lie of the Land)" for Mother Theresa, in the page title. However, the in-universe portion of the page should only rely on the in-universe sources. Chances are that eventually information will also be found in-universe. When that happens, then BTS content can be gradually moved into the main article.


 * For instance, Martin Luther King Jr page could say something like: "an image of a prominent figure from human history could be seen on screens inside the Cathedral." One could mention that the footage was black-and-white, that the person was male, maybe even Afro-American.


 * To be honest, I would be surprised if there is not a single mention of him in novels, short stories, or comics. Unfortunately, these often remain unreported.


 * One final comment about this situation. It is important to know that this footage is a forgery intended to override human memory. Thus, there is an additional degree of indeterminacy involved: we do not assume that DWU is exactly the same as the real world in general. But here, the Monks could additionally modify the footage. The images should of course be still used. But the wording of what they are should be really cautious. Amorkuz ☎  19:19, June 8, 2017 (UTC)


 * So what you're saying is that the photo of Einstein, for example, can't be said to be Einstein, or the photo of Edison can't be said to be Edison... because it's not said to be them. --DCLM ☎  20:02, June 8, 2017 (UTC)


 * The year would be real world only...
 * So that means none of them, except a select few, can be said to actually be them? The photo of Trump can't be said to be Trump and so on...? --DCLM ☎  20:44, June 8, 2017 (UTC)


 * I think that the point is that you can assign names to these images, but it's best not to use those names on an in-universe basis if they've never been identified elsewhere. Also, Martin Luther King Jr was also heard in TV: Remembrance of the Daleks. OS25 (Talk) 13:29, June 11, 2017 (UTC)

Amorkuz, I've read through your posts, and I fundamentally disagree with your interpretation of how we cover the appearances of real-world figures. As long as Martin Luther King (JR) has a page, we can of course discuss from an in-universe fashion his role in TV: The Lie of the Land and Remembrance of the Daleks. We are a wiki dedicated to covering content within Doctor Who stories, and while we do it naturally within the boundaries of the DWU, there is a limit. You can't tell me that the photo of Trump isn't a photo of Trump -- because as far as our readers need to be concerned, it totally is. Even if Worf isn't directly identified in COMIC: Party Animals, our identification of him is proper, because our readers will want to know where the character shows up before the nitty-gritty details of when his name was said out-loud.

Someone going to a page on MLK will want to know about where he is referenced or brought up. They aren't going to care if it's just an image, or just a clip of audio. Suggesting culling this information is unreasonable. OS25 (Talk) 13:38, June 11, 2017 (UTC)


 * Another example: if someone mentions some element of Star Trek in a story, it is illogical for us to jump through hoops to connect the reference to the franchise. The statement should simply be added to the page, because people looking for information on references to Star Trek won't care about if The Enterprise has ever been clearly shown to be in the TV show Star Trek. OS25 (Talk) 13:46, June 11, 2017 (UTC)


 * The point is that you are suggesting a different page for all three of the current references to Martin Luther King Jr -- one for a mention of him in an audio, one for the stock audio used of him in TV: Remembrance, and one for the stock photo used of him in the episode. With such precedent as the pages for Struwwelpeter and Anthony Eden, it is obvious that at some points bends to T:NO RW can be made for the sake of our readers. As Czech states:

"See, we need to balance the terms of that policy against the other need to have an easily-searchable wiki."

- CzechOut


 * So no, I am not arguing against the policy. I am arguing with you about how the policy is to be handled, and I think that trying to lie to our editors about what images of who appeared where is out-right a mis-use of the idea.


 * The purpose of T:NO RW is to stop individuals adding information to pages like Victoria that have no basis in any story. It would be speculation, for instance, add anything to a Martin Luther King Jr page about how he fought systemic racism, because we have no in-universe evidence of that. But it is not speculation to say that an image of Martin Luther King Jr's face in an episode of Doctor Who is an image of Martin Luther King Jr's face. And if Martin Luther King Jr is mentioned in three stories in different terms, all three references should be included on one page. OS25 (Talk) 14:41, June 11, 2017 (UTC)


 * Here's a recent example that I've seen some of the admins bring up on a similar situation: we've all come to agree that "Paperback Writer" by the Beatles plays in TV: The Evil of the Daleks. At no point does anyone in that story stop to say "HEY! I sure love the Beatles, who are performing this VERY SONG!" Nor do they say "OH MY WORD! IT'S PAPERBACK WRITER! THE SONG THAT IS BEING PLAYED RIGHT NOW!" And yet, we have accepted that is is ineeed Paperback Writer, a song by the Beatles, because of course we have. Who would it truly serve to bleach the information on that song from the entire site just because no one steps outside the boundaries of natural character writing to confirm to a bunch of fan boys from the future that Paperback Writer does indeed have the same name inside this fictional Sci-fi show from the '60s. A recording of MLK is a recording of MLK, just as much as Paperback Writer is a song performed by The Beatles with the title of Paperback Writer. OS25 (Talk) 14:48, June 11, 2017 (UTC)


 * Wholly irrelevant. I find no precedent for removing information on references to ideas on the basis that you are suggesting. If we can admit that the Beatles can be heard in TV: The Evil of the Daleks and Remembrance of the Daleks, then there is no controversy in clearly stating that the voice heard in Remembrance and the picture seen in Lie are of the same man mentioned in The Age of Revolution from an in-universe perspective.


 * Suggesting that two of three of the most blatant references to King shouldn't be acknowledged is ludicrous. This would be the equivalent of a story mentioning Struwwelpeter by name and all of the content currently on it being moved to the BTS section. If Remembrance were the only story to feature MLK, we would still use his name as the title for the article. Same for Lie. And yet, because a third story gives a shortened name, you are suggesting that we ignore the fact that all three stories are referencing the same man. There is no precedent for this. None at all.


 * It is not a break of T:NO RW to say that the Beatles can be heard in TV: The Evil of the Daleks, it's not a break of T:No RW to say that the USS Enterprise appearing on a TV must be an episode of Star Trek, and it is certainly not a break of T:No RW to say that a recording of MLK is a recording of MLK. OS25 (Talk) 15:47, June 11, 2017 (UTC)

I must ask that you adhere to Tardis:No personal attacks. There is no need to resort to petty accusations, or to take the conversation personally. I am listening to what you have to say, and I am strongly disagreeing with you. If you don't want to have this conversation, that should have no bearing on our current policy.

Your position as an administrator for this site does not make your say final, and thus I would ask that you stop stating your loose interpretations as absolute "in the eyes of the law." How you've decided to view T:No RW has had no legitimate use in the past, there is no precedent for your current instance of how our policies work. You have your right to an opinion, but your opinion is not "the policies". OS25 (Talk) 18:27, June 11, 2017 (UTC)

Appearances Tables help
Hey, thanks for the message, I completely understand, I appreciate you informing me. I was wondering, what if I were to do this instead? https://gyazo.com/4c4603d501a0a30ec8ba85b368985d56 whereby all official television appearances are on the table and anything else is still below in the lists and stuff. Or would that still be against the rules? Bhind45 ☎  10:41, June 11, 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the response, very sorry. Bhind45 ☎  12:08, June 11, 2017 (UTC)

Deleted comments from Empress of Mars
Can you tell me why my comment was deleted from Empress of Mars? Paulmorris7777 ☎  20:05, June 12, 2017 (UTC)

Response
Conscious Obsession ☎  16:32, June 13, 2017 (UTC) Hi Thank Amorkuz for your lovely and human welcome to the wikia and helping me tidy up the Cyber Wars article and for informing me about the Unbound stories. I hope to enjoy continuing my work on the wikia. Have a lovely day. :) Conscious Obsession

Deleted comments from Empress of Mars again
I created "The Empress of Mars" page, then changed it to "Empress of Mars". Still does not explain my contribution to the page was deleted!

Re:Ace Attorney
TBH I don't care much for the page. I'm not at all familiar with the series, and if that one quote doesn't seem to exist, who knows if the others do. Even if I decided to get Silhouette - which actually I probably should to improve Paternoster Gang - I'd have no way of knowing if all those supposed Dr Who Easter eggs actually existed. CoT    ?  11:11, June 15, 2017 (UTC)

Gray Thane and Franklin Thane
How come you moved two pages from the characters full names to just their first names?

Regeneration Energy page
Hey there. I went to make the "regeneration energy" page earlier and found that you previously deleted. Does the reasoning given then still apply, and so should all links to the uncreated page therefore be removed? If not, is it alright if I make the page? Thanks! Snivystorm ☎  23:22, July 8, 2017 (UTC)

Sweet. I went ahead and made the page, still needs some work but now it's there. Thanks for letting me make it. ^_^ Snivystorm ☎  10:12, July 9, 2017 (UTC)

I'll keep thst in mind, thanks. Snivystorm ☎  18:58, July 9, 2017 (UTC)

Possible Lock opertunity
Hi, is there a possibility of putting a lock on Anthony Spargo so that only registered editors can edit it as there has been an anonymous user(s) who keep vandalising the page, and myself and User:OncomingStorm12th keep having to undo the vandalism. Adric♥Nyssa∩Talk? 16:06, July 28, 2017 (UTC)

Reply
Thank you for the explanationary reply, and I apologize for my rather rash actions. I guess that six month block I got for not giving reasons for removing information just left a bitter taste for when I see others do so.

While I'm here, can I ask this of you; what should be done about The Forgotten Son claiming that the Intelligence in The Snowmen is an amnestic who has faint memories of the Classic Series, when the Doctor believes The Snowmen is the origin story. In fact, unless I'm mistaken, the Doctor is the only one who gives the origin in The Snowmen, and he has been wrong before.BananaClownMan ☎  13:06, August 12, 2017 (UTC)

Aliens Among Us
Yeah I see what you mean, I was considering not having the "Part 1" myself. I actually believe we should have a Series 5 (Torchwood) page for Aliens Among Us, as this is how the series is being marketed by Big Finish, and it has the blessing of RTD. What do you think of that instead of the single anthology pages? --Revan\Talk 16:24, August 13, 2017 (UTC)

Seeing as though the anthologies are actual releases, I suppose there is sense in keeping those pages. The Big Finish news article for Aliens Among Us' release does refer to it as Series 5, too, so it's not like we're making any kind of leap by making such a page. --Revan\Talk 18:56, August 13, 2017 (UTC)

Interference (novel)
Hey there! I know a few months ago you said something on Talk:The Jago & Litefoot Revival (audio story) about extending the precedent used to combine countless multi-part stories, from The End of Time to Blood of the Daleks, to combine Interference - Book One and Interference - Book Two. As you correctly guessed there, the books present a continuous narrative, and they have the same title. The publishers clearly hint at this fact with how they released Interference: the two volumes were the only two BBC Eighth Doctor Adventures published in the same month ... in fact, they were released on the same day.

Shambala108 suggested a counterpoint about how each volume appears to have a different name on the front cover, but the "Book One" and "Book Two" labels she was referring to are exactly analogous to the "Act One" and "Act Two" on the covers of The Jago & Litefoot Revival, which didn't prevent those audios from being treated as one story.

Anyway, I've cobbled together a merged article at User:NateBumber/Sandbox, so I was wondering if you'd be willing to take action on that earlier discussion. NateBumber ☎  00:42, August 14, 2017 (UTC)


 * Sounds good :) thanks for getting back to me! NateBumber ☎  23:49, August 15, 2017 (UTC)

Oh, duh. Don't know why I haven't done that yet. Thanks for the reminder! :) – N8 ☎ 22:24, November 18, 2017 (UTC)

Lethbridge-Stewart
You don't seem very familiar with Lethbridge-Stewart, and it's getting me quite flustered. It's the Vince Cosmos Enter Wildthyme situation all over again! Now I am by no means a fan of the series, but a few things you've said (with such certainty) in the last few days regarding it are flat out wrong.

Sorry if I'm being a bit harsh, but surely you would agree that the edits of admins should be accurate? Just a few days ago you said to OttselSpy25, "[Other editors] are your equals and can decide for themselves. If they make a mistake, an admin will correct them." - implying to me some sort of high standard for admin activity.

You seem to be under the impression that the Doctor is referred to as "the Thief" throughout the Lethbridge-Stewart series. The fact is that that never happens. There's one paragraph in Legacies in which a character from The Web of Fear recalls the Doctor - or (as you might perhaps see it) the role that the Doctor fills in The Web of Fear - as a thief. Not the Thief, but the thief. It's not a new made-up title, just a character remembering the Doctor as a criminal the army found in the London Underground. Cosmic Hobo tends to be the go-to term for the majority of the series.

The other big issue I have with your edits is that you don't seem to realize that the one short story with the >spoiler spoiler spoiler< is completely unique in regards to all of the short stories Lethbridge-Stewart has released. The 2015 short stories especially, because all of those were literally released for free. All other stories save The Two Brigadiers have been sold in anthologies. That one short story with the >spoiler< is much more free than all the others because it written in two days and thus not advertised to subscribers as a feature of a subscription. We'll have to wait and see whether they have the gall to publish it in an anthology.

Honestly, things would go much smoother if you just smacked a bunch of cleanup tags about. It would (hopefully) have the same effect except editors more familiar with the series could do the job. Although I suppose it could be a bit of a problem in terms of neutrality, but c'est la vie. CoT    ?  19:01, August 15, 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh, that's very nice of you to say! CoT     ?  19:46, August 15, 2017 (UTC)

Template:Masterpic proposal
Hi. I listed a proposal to correct Template:Masterpic back in July. Please note that I listed it on The Master's talk page as opposed to the template's own talk page as I had hoped that it would receive more traffic on an active talk page. As there have been no contributions as of yet, I was wondering if you would like to give your opinion on the proposed corrections? Thanks. NickM98 ☎  08:25, August 26, 2017 (UTC)

T:FORUM
I removed my post because I realized it was rude. --Pluto2 (talk) 23:51, September 16, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Gabby Gonzalez
Hi, no need to take offense at my edit. I saw you were working on Gabby-related pages, and then (incorrectly) thought that an IP user had undone one of your edits. That's all that was. Thanks, Shambala108 ☎  14:56, October 1, 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem; I don't have a lot of time to edit in the morning, so I usually go down the list of IP and new user edits. When I saw the IP's edit, I just assumed he was undoing one of yours. Apologies for causing you extra work. Shambala108 ☎  22:39, October 1, 2017 (UTC)

Archduke Franz Ferdinand assassination date
Hi Amorkuz. It's no trouble at all. I have to admit that I don't remember whether I based the 28 June on a primary source or an existing reference already on the wiki. However, I am certain that it was one or the other as opposed to a case of real world creep as I steadfastly avoid using RW information such as dates unless it is mentioned in-universe. --GusF ☎  09:40, October 6, 2017 (UTC)

St Michel's stuff
Hey man, thanks (I guess) for alerting me to something that I would have otherwise completely missed. Like, adding that speedy rename to St Michel War Cemetery months ago was a mindless edit which I quickly forgot. Just CoT of an era past trying to follow one of the policies around pagenames. Things might be easier if we would just allow it to be World Trade Centre, I mean wouldn't the logic that dictates that that page should be renamed World Trade Center also dictate that St Michel should be renamed St-Michel? All this focus on America feels to me like patriotism dripping into the wiki. In terms of this case, I don't see how two wrongs make a right. BUT... I realise that similar ideas probably came up with the three or four of you on Slack, so sorry for wasting your time with the last paragraph.

And please don;t feel any need to respond to this. I have literally no desire for this conversation to continue. There are much bigger fish that this wiki needs frying. And I consider even Woman (The Weeping Angels of Mons) to be a bigger fish. You took the time to message me, so I figured I'd return the favour. That's it. That's all. Ya get me? CoT    ?  04:07, October 7, 2017 (UTC)

Multiple pages for Dorian Gray?
I couldn't help but notice that you're making links to Dorian Gray (fictional character); is this really necessary? I just relistened to a few bits of Shades of Gray and that story has a scene where Dorian indicates that he is the same person as the main character of The Picture of Dorian Gray. To compare this to a similar example, I certainly couldn't imagine us having a separate pages for Sherlock Holmes and Sherlock Holmes (fictional character). CoT    ?  22:00, October 18, 2017 (UTC)


 * Moving BTS info about actors who have played Dorian Gray to Dorian Gray (fictional character), thought that would happen if the page were made. I really object to that. The information "Kate Kennedy once played Dorian Gray in Selfie, "a radical retelling of Oscar Wilde's The Picture of Dorian Gray"." is just as relevant to Dorian Gray as played by Vlahos. CoT     ?  22:15, October 18, 2017 (UTC)

Ruth Leonidas: But that's just a story, a book. It isn't real. I mean, you can't be real.

Dorian: And yet here I am before you.


 * I am of the opinion that it makes little sense to spread out information about a single character across several pages. Shades, Echoes, and all other stories which feature or refer to Gray all draw from a single source. They're all intended to be Wilde's Dorian Gray.


 * Again, like all the Who-related stories featuring Sherlock Holmes which usually only ever care about their relationship with the Doyle canon, and not with the continuity established in other Who-related Holmes stories. Are we to make a separate page for Santa Claus (fictional character) if some story definitively states that Santa isn't real? Or Jar Jar Binks?


 * I see (fictional/real) as a contradiction no different than (met the Doctor for the first time in 1599/knew the Doctor since childhood). All stories featuring Shakespeare are intended to feature the famous playwright; all stories featuring Dorian Gray are intended to feature the famous immortal with a spoopy painting. CoT     ?  00:27, October 19, 2017 (UTC)

Question for you
Hi, I noticed that you added speedy rename tags to Dram Fel-Fotch Heppen-Bar Slitheen and Ecktosca Fel-Fotch Heppen-Bar Slitheen, removing the hyphen between Fel Fotch. There are a bunch of other Slitheen that have the Fel-Fotch in their names; do they need the speedy rename too? Thanks, Shambala108 ☎  00:12, October 26, 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks, I can't keep track of all these Slitheen names. Shambala108 ☎  00:17, October 27, 2017 (UTC)

Re:Chapterhouse 5
Of course! No issue at all; I certainly didn't mean to imply that I thought you were arguing against. I was just apparently in the mood to write an overlong explanation of why I want a rename :)

By the way, can I just commend you on your reliably witty reply titles? I got a really good chuckle out of Chapterhouse 5! – N8 ☎ 23:51, October 29, 2017 (UTC)

Accusations
Hi Amorkuz. I feel the need to give my side of the story. I just want to assure you and the other admins that User:Xx-connor-xX's accusations are baseless. As I said on his talk page, the only corrections that I made to any of his edits were of the following kind: I changed the Doctor to the Tenth Doctor (or the Fourth Doctor in some cases) and, for instance, changed (COMIC: The Memory Collective) to (COMIC: The Memory Collective). He was already making these mistakes and making them continually. It was not an issue of me changing his edits so that he would begin to cite things incorrectly.

Furthermore, it was never my intention to intimidate him in fixing his systemic editing errors. --GusF ☎  11:29, November 2, 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes, I likewise suspect that this unfortunate situation is the result of a misunderstanding. I certainly understand that investigations need to be carried out in circumstances like this. You'll have my complete cooperation throughout. While I obviously wish that this scenario had not arisen, I am entirely satisfied that these investigations will be conducted in a fair and impartial manner. In fact, one thing that I've always liked about the Wiki is that it stringently enforces its policies and makes every effort to ensure a pleasant and efficient editing experience for all users. Thank you. --GusF ☎  13:04, November 2, 2017 (UTC)

Now We Are Six Hundred Clarification
Could you clarify if possible? Are you saying that Six Hundred should be reviewed in its entirety before info can (or cannont) be added to in-universe pages. Or are you singling out Ode and Jones, PM as specific cases? (Since I noticed The Doctor (The Death List) hasn't been marked with an invalid tag). I thought Harriet Jones, PM as a minimum would be allowed since a positive canon statement has been made on it (which is more that can be said for some TV stories). Thanks in advance. --Borisashton ☎  07:54, November 25, 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarity on that. In regards to the canon policy I was aware there is no canon on this wiki. I was simply highlighting there had been an explicit statement on whether or not these stories "counted". I should have worded my response more carefully. Anyway, thanks for the info on this matter. --Borisashton ☎  10:41, November 25, 2017 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, Amorkuz, on what grounds are you questioning this validity? T:VS says, "Most Doctor Who-related stories so obviously pass our rules that you don't really have to even think about it. The chances are very good that if a story bears an official logo from any of our covered television shows — and an appropriate copyright declaration — it'll be a valid source." That situation surely applies to Now We Are Six Hundred. Isn't this more of a "valid until proven otherwise" scenario? – N8 ☎ 14:42, November 25, 2017 (UTC)


 * That's more than fair. Thank you for your reply, and I look forward to participating in the eventual thread! – N8 ☎ 20:00, November 25, 2017 (UTC)

Hello i left a message to a user and i got an answer from you and yes i am one of the oldest!You see i joined first at 2012 or 11 i cant remember and as a user i wasnt always very active!....so i needed to know,whats happening here!I left this wiki one year or maybe more than a year i think!Anyway because i joined the wiki at those to years 2011 n 12 thats why im considered one of the oldest and if you know at those years the discussion page created!

-DoctorWho23-

Re: Monsing angels
Hi! Apologies if I stepped on your toes, but I've been working through Special:Wantedcategories and removing non-existent categories from pages. Mostly these are categories that were added to pages but weren't created. (Eventually I will probably tackle the covers and images categories that don't exist.) Sorry for any trouble I caused, Shambala108 ☎  00:05, December 4, 2017 (UTC)

Benny - Walking to Babylon
Copyright on cd is 1999, hope that helps Adric♥Nyssa∩Talk? 19:28, December 8, 2017 (UTC)

Just War
Cd says Garry Russell, but I remember that when in a podcast that in that it was actually Nicholas Briggs and that's why there is a discrepency. Adric♥Nyssa∩Talk? 09:39, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Buried Treasures
I don't have a physical copy of Buried treasures unfortunately. I do have the individual stories plus the interviews if that helps.Adric♥Nyssa∩Talk? 11:13, December 10, 2017 (UTC)


 * So actually it's neither of those values its 22:24 for Making Myths and 29:51 for Closure. Both Sources are right as Gary Russell is the one conducting the interviews. Adric♥Nyssa∩Talk? 17:44, December 12, 2017 (UTC)

Catching up, and all
Since I'm a few weeks behind, thanks to exams and a vacation ... a belated thank you for your insight on the bad German in A Star's View of Caroline! Probably just another case of British Doctor Who authors not properly understanding foreign languages, rather than anything intentional ... so many quotes have made me shake my head over the years. ("Pigeon German" made me chuckle, by the way.)

I'm a huge fan of your work with Series 1 (BFBS), by the way. The issue of how to best represent the BFBS stories has been a headscratcher to me for a while, especially when you take into account the varying quality of the pages concerning the individual stories. Since there's a single narrative that weaves between the books and audios, I think a release-order table (as I started on the series page) is probably the best way to go forward, but I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on that -- and, come to think of it, also about the idea of renaming Big Finish Bernice Summerfield series to Bernice Summerfield (series). And COMING TO THINK OF IT, do you happen to have your hands on Bernice Summerfield - The Inside Story? Sounds like it might have some info relevant to this discussion... (I'm almost done with my rename/merge crusades, I promise!) – N8 ☎ 01:35, December 12, 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply! I appreciate the go-ahead with the rename; I have indeed given User:SOTO a poke. And I've looked but there's really nothing missing from Series 1 (BFBS); I love what you've done with that page.


 * You're right that the table is scary big, and splitting it into seasons is a great idea to fix that. I also really like that it would let us provide commentary about how the series format changed over time. After the switch to boxsets with Epoch, the Bernice Summerfield books can absolutely be matched with the audio series, but before that, it's a little tricker. Especially since the book and audio release schedules were independent, there are a few cases where connected stories were released in the wrong order over the course of a few months. The most major issue of this kind is in series 6:
 * Release order gives us the order 6.2 The Kingdom of the Blind, 6.3 The Lost Museum, novella anthology Parallel Lives, short story anthology Something Changed, and then 6.4 The Goddess Quandary and 6.5 The Crystal of Cantus.
 * In the stories, however, there is a direct sequence where Parallel Lives follows straight from 6.4 The Goddess Quandary, Something Changed follows straight from Parallel Lives, and 6.3 The Lost Museum follows directly from Something Changed. ?!?!?
 * As you said, interweaving the books and audios is important to preserve the ongoing storylines (eg Benny's pregnancy) that flow between both mediums, but cases like these mean release order can't be the be-all and end-all ... and at the same time, it'd do no one any good to turn it into a timeline page.


 * I think I've hit a pretty good balance between release order and timeline, thanks to some input from User:Fwhiffahder; I've thrown together the story order list here and I've turned it into a nice wiki chart at User:NateBumber/Sandbox2. Whenever the placement of stories in the list deviates from release order, I've used a reference tag to explain the sorting -- which does almost make it feel like a timeline page, but I really think it's the best option. (Side note: I really wish we were allowed to put links in section headers; it would eliminate so many Main templates.)


 * Since I do not know how to use color-coding, User:NateBumber/Sandbox2 just uses your suggestion of not numbering the books. That said, List of Doctor Who television stories is sexy as hell, and I think color coding could help tidy up that gross Audios / Novels / Short story anthologies / Novella anthologies column. All that said, if you think my sandbox looks okay, I'll throw it up on the page for now. – N8 ☎ 17:58, December 14, 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the colors! I tried adding another color to differentiate between the "bunch of short story" format anthologies and the "three novellas" anthologies, but I somewhat embarrassingly can't get any colors to work, besides your red and orange. Tried all the main ones that I knew, but no dice. Hrmph.


 * Yeah, I don't have my heart set on the New Adventures going on the page. You have a great point with the production code change; I researched this when planning the FP inclusion debate, and I came to the conclusion that the change in branding was done to bring Benny under the Doctor Who license. Obviously when the Benny audios started, they were completely unattached from the license; and even after Big Finish got the license, the Benny series continued to only tangentially reference the Doctor and the Time Lords rather than anything explicit. The separation of series between The Worlds of Big Finish and The Worlds of Doctor Who also hints at this idea that, for the purpose of the license, Big Finish has to draw a concrete / tangible line between series that use licensed Doctor Who elements vs series that don't; and it's pretty suggestive that since the New Adventures rebranding, the Doctor has appeared in every boxset.


 * So the format of the New Adventures pretty much exactly follows the yearly-boxset pattern of the late Bernice Summerfield series, with the most recent release even bringing back the tie-in book, but said tie-in book doesn't feature the Doctor by name, suggesting that despite being a tie-in to the New Adventures it's actually a part of the Bernice Summerfield book range ... it's easy to see why this is confusing.


 * All that said, the New Adventures are branded as being separate from the Bernice Summerfield range, so I figure that's the best way to cover them. I've reduced the corresponding section of my Sandbox to just a link to the continued audio series and a listing of True Stories.


 * And don't worry about not having the time / not wanting to pull the trigger; enjoy the holidays :) – N8 ☎ 02:08, December 23, 2017 (UTC)