User talk:Bigredrabbit

Use Infoboxes please
Please when you make articles use Infroboxes. Without them it ruins the article. --Catkind121 10:34, November 18, 2009 (UTC)

Yeti
Before you starting ripping shreds into me, It was an accident I fixed it, because, of your edits to the infobox, please remember to do not delete sections from it Bigshowbower 07:40, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

Infoboxes
Just be careful when you are editing infoboxes, leave all sections, do not delete them. If there is no information for the sections, leave them blank as well. 06:19, November 21, 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism
If a page has been created that is classed as vandalism. You do know you can add a Proposed deletion tag to the page, and it will be dealt with by the admins. Bigshowbower 04:27, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Dreamland
The method through which you created the disambig for Dreamland is incorrect, it removes all of the history for the Dreamland audio story. Effectively what you did was copy the text of the Dreamland audio story article and copy it onto the new article name. This does two things, it removes all the page's history (as it's left behind on its original page) and through implication of you being the first contributor implies you created and did all the work on the article. I have now corrected this and moved the page (which moves the history) and created the disambig page. --Tangerineduel 07:06, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Slitheen-Blathereen family
I have noticved that when you made the Slitheen-Blathereen family, in looking through the history you made the article in Present Tense. You should make all articles in past tense as it states in the manual of style. --Catkind121 13:03, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Feature Articles
You can vote and nominate here: Feature Article nominations, any article can be nominated as long as it conforms to the Feature Article policy (now obsoleted) criteria. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 10:43, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

User images
Hey, when uploading images intended for your user page select the 'Image uploaded for use on user page' selection in the licensing drop down menu (or you can manually add to them manually, I've done so and also deleted your previously uploaded user images as our Tardis:User image policy states you may only have 3 images for your user page. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 15:50, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

Main page
Hi, it is inadvisable to edit large portions of the main page. Much of the code on the main page is in place to fit around certain obstacles such as the advertising and other things, altering large chunks of it tends to cause bad formatting issues. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 12:54, December 13, 2009 (UTC)

HTML and a few things
Please do not add HTML code into pages/articles, make sure you have all the fields/sections for the infobox and when referencing the episode name, make sure it is in italics. --Bigshowbower 06:19, December 16, 2009 (UTC)

Unproduced stories
Much like Illegal Alien and Night Thoughts, the unproduced stories, which are to be produced by Big Finish may have their (sparse) information incorporated into the Big Finish centred articles. Take Ice Time or Crime of the Century which have been referenced with sources, which may remain given their additional sources.

On thw Cybs article, nothing linked to it, it had no sources and a search of 'Cybs' turns up the production sub-page of Doctor Who (1996) and that page is currently in need of sourcing and copy-editing. Any information about the Cybs could be incorporated into the Doctor Who (1996) article, the Cyberman article or the Doctor Who: Regeneration article (the book I believe where the information came from, or the information is from The Nth Doctor). --Tangerineduel 01:46, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

Empty child
Pages should be moved rather than content copied, in the Empty child article case you'd need to request the move of an admin as the page's destination needs to be deleted to make way for the move. But copying information doesn't copy the page's history (which is how we can track changes on the wiki). --Tangerineduel 04:35, January 4, 2010 (UTC)

Planet of the Dead Placment
With many things known to happen in 2009 now, the only problem is Planet of the Dead. You placed it as April 2009, but it should really, by not much of a stretch, be placed very late May in 2009 for Doctor Who. The events of The Stolen Earth/Journey's End happen coming towards late May, and Planet of the Dead references the events. One could say Planet of the Dead happens anywhere from a few days to a week after the finale, in 2009. Delton Menace 00:55, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

DYK nominations
Thank you for being the first user to participate in the new "Did you know" process! In future, please be sure your factoids are sourced (that is, tell us what story they came from), and to put them into the appropriate section. For example, if it's about a race, please put them into the race and species section, not under "minor characters". Thanks very much — and please keep nominating factoids for DYK.  Czech Out  ☎ | ✍ 17:14, March 13, 2010 (UTC)

Partners in Crime Placment
Hey, I'm curious as to why you moved Planet of the Dead to very shortly after Christmas 2008? If it depends on how Christmas is refered to (i.e. if Donna mentioned it as "last Christmas," the context would indicate the entire Christmas time is over and they're in the new yesr, 2009. Or, in general, depending on how Christmas is refered to (it could be refered to as having just gone). Delton Menace 22:40, March 13, 2010 (UTC)

Spoilers category
Hi, I'm about to undo this as it's a very bad way to implement this. The better way (which I've just done) is to incorporate a category called Category:Pre-broadcast spoilers into the Template:Pre-broadcast spoiler template so where the template is the category is (and more importantly) when the template is removed the category goes with it. --Tangerineduel 13:48, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

Templates
Just a small note anything that's a template and starts with Template: doesn't need the 'template:' to make it work. You just need to enclose whatever follows after the hyphen in the brackets. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 04:50, April 3, 2010 (UTC)

Doctor Who at the Proms
Although the article started by the anonymous IP was rubbish, Doctor Who at the Proms was a legitimate topic, being a major event. I removed the deletion tag and wrote a new article from scratch. I've been meaning to do it for a while. 23skidoo 03:59, April 8, 2010 (UTC)

Allies of the Doctor
Hi, individuals like Vicki and Barbara don't actually need to be within the allies of the First Doctor because they're already in the Companions of the First Doctor category, which is a sub-category of the allies of the First Doctor category (this means in terms of categorisation) everyone within the companions of the First Doctor category is in the allies of the First Doctor. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 12:41, May 7, 2010 (UTC)

Pharos Institute
'''They were investigated during the 456 invasion. (TW: Children of Earth)'''

What is your source for this? --SawyerDN 02:17, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Gothic stories
Could you specify which parts I copied and pasted? I went to some lengths to ensure that the whole article was referenced with sources correctly cited. I'd like to address the issue rather than have it remain at fault within the Gothic stories article. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 11:01, October 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, plagiarism is copying another person's work and not providing adequate credit (is what wikipedia says). I'm not sure what you mean by it changing since you posted, as between when I posted it and now aside from some wikilinking and adding images nothing's really changed. I made sure for any information from another site that I cited all the information relevant for checking the source. In some cases I quoted directly and other cases I paraphrased the information in order to suit the flow or writing within the article, but as long as it's cited it's not plagiarism.
 * The first paragraph, which I'm assuming what you're basing this the plagiarism statement on is from the Kasterborous site is footnoted and cited as is everything else on the article.
 * I reject that where "a lot" of the article is from is the Kasterborous article, for starters it only covers in detail a handful of stories and not all the stories that are covered in the Gothic stories article. I'll remove the (cited) info concerning The Rescue as that and The Dæmons are the only two stories in the Kasterborous article covered in detail with The Tom Baker Years covered in the space of a sentence or two, if that's where you believe I've plagiarised (but as I've said, I've not attempted to pass this info off as my own, I've cited info throughout the article).
 * Precisely how should one write a factual article without citing sources to back up the information without citing sources and therefore apparently "plagiarising"? In order to define the topic of 'gothic stories' there is a need to refer to outside sources, just as one would on an a Wikipedia article or an essay. I'm just really confused about your assertion of plagiarism and I want to fix the article as I thought it was a good example of usage of sources to write an real world definition or a subject that was viewed in different ways and the only way to define it is to cite outside sources and not just make my own assertions. Some of it is my own observations, based on the definition of gothic early in the article and these are uncited but the others are cited. --Tangerineduel 12:54, November 1, 2010 (UTC)

Companions
Adding disputed companions to the template is seen as vandalism.--Skittles the hog 23:01, December 31, 2010 (UTC)

Tomato
I think this thing about putting "I'm a Hydroponic Tomato" at the end of every comment is a bit annoying, can you stop please?94.4.108.156 13:41, April 14, 2011 (UTC)

Removing useless speculation?!
What on earth are you talking about?! That's nonsense, how is it useless speculation? Every edit which says that will be reverted. So stop doing that! BroadcastCorp (talk | contribs) 09:44, August 26, 2011 (UTC)

You really are a hydroponic tomato, aren't you? BroadcastCorp (talk | contribs) 11:24, August 27, 2011 (UTC)

I've never took you seriously. BroadcastCorp (talk | contribs) 07:30, August 28, 2011 (UTC)

Your complaint re: BroadcastCorp
Hmm, tricky this. You're right, it's not quite violating policy, but it is headed in that direction. You guys aren't exactly violating tardis:no personal attacks or tardis:editing policy, but you're awfully close to the line.

And there are faults on both sides. I completely, 100% agree with your initial, 27 Aug post on his page. You were editing according to the superior standard. Problem is that he calls you a "hydroponic tomato", based on your sig, and you fire back with "I never took you seriously". He then responds in kind.

It's all got the definite whiff of the schoolyard about it, really. I'd recommend in future that you stick to facts about editing and don't belittle people by telling them that they're not worthy of consideration. When you do that, it makes it impossible for an admin to back you up. Sorry.

I will of course be posting a different, but relaated note, on his user page about this matter. 15:28:44 Sun 28 Aug 2011


 * Oh, minor thing, but could you please remember to re-add some form of link to User talk:Bigredrabbit to your signature, as mandated by our signature policy? It just reduces the number of clicks it takes to talk to you.  Thanks — and thanks for the continuing quality of your edits!   16:32:12 Sun 28 Aug 2011

Comics
Your logic works on every page except the front page. Red links are great, but not there. Our front door cannot lead to a dead end. See Forum:How to update front page. 23:27: Sat 17 Dec 2011
 * Thanks much for trying to get some content on these stories but we need more than a sentence or two. I think you probably know that wasn't a "proper" start to the articles, but something you were just sort of rushing through.  In future, please at least lay down the basic skeleton, with a complete lead, infobox, main characters, and main creators.  Also, make sure you add only existing categories.  (It's "stories set at Christmas", not "Christmas stories".)


 * I quite understand your point about the section being labelled "latest stories". The impulse is to therefore want to make that term fully accurate.  But uber-accuracy is not the point of the front page.  Instead, it's about catching the eye of the new visitor and getting them to stay a while.  They won't stay if they click a dead link, or find a verrrrry sketchy article.


 * The front page is prime real estate. That's why Wikipedia have whole teams of hundreds of editors working on it.  Everything linked on the front page is effectively a featured article, and should be written as completely as possible.  It's more important to have a link to a well-started article, than to change over the links on the exact day of release.   03:10: Sun 18 Dec 2011


 * Cool, I understand that. In the meantime, I'll try to expand those pages a bit. The preceding comment was made by Bigredrabbit (talk to me) 22:28, December 19, 2011 (UTC)

04:06: Tue 20 Dec 2011 18:08: Thu 22 Dec 2011