User talk:SOTO

To save you the trouble, just call me SOTO. Also, please sign your messages. Thanks.

× SmallerOnTheOutside  (☎/ ✍ / ↯ ) If you've come here to request a simple, uncontroversial page move, please consider using instead. This puts all rename requests into a neat little chart that all admin can see and work on.

Missing videos
Hey, sorry to bother but I see that you're uploading some videos. If you're not too busy, could you please upload some missing videos which I recommended over at Tardis_talk:Video_recommendations? Thanks in advance Flabshoe1 ☎  19:39, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

So, thank you for taking the time to do the Oxygen TV trailer. Could you also find the time to the rest of the missing videos? This is something I would do on my own, but obviously I can't so I need your help. Thanks! Flabshoe1 ☎  19:56, May 13, 2017 (UTC)

Coal Hill entrance hall
Hey, back in November, I added an infobox for Coal Hill entrance hall, and you later removed because your intention was to have an image of it back on TV: Remembrance of the Daleks and how it looked now, on TV: For Tonight We Might Die. I'm ok with that, and even agree the idea is good. But what do you think of this: the infobox comes back and we make the images go to the left of the page. This way, we can keep an infobox on the page, and also the two images.

Furthermore, there is a third image (File:Quill and Armitage.jpg) on the page. This could perhaps be the infobox image. OncomingStorm12th ☎  21:28, May 14, 2017 (UTC)

Infobox Anatomy and Events
Ok, so according to Special:Insights/nonportableinfoboxes, CzechOut has finished making the infoboxes portable. As you asked me to do, I'm giving you a heads up about this, in case you've got the time to do the new infoboxes. OncomingStorm12th ☎  21:56, May 24, 2017 (UTC)

Brotherhood
Hey SOTO. Could you please delete Brotherhood? Currently, it points to Brotherhood of the Immanent Flesh, but it should be kept for the concept of a brotherhood, and an overview of brotherhoods. Oh, and the only link that existis for it is on a sandbox. OncomingStorm12th ☎  01:57, June 6, 2017 (UTC)
 * Oops, I was holding off on creating Brotherhood (disambiguation) until broterhood was a redlink, but published it accidentally. Anyway, now there's also a link to it on the dab page. OncomingStorm12th ☎  01:59, June 6, 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the redlink; and about the profile pic, it's like they say: Times change, and so must I. OncomingStorm12th ☎  02:08, June 6, 2017 (UTC)

Trick story name
Hey, today Big Finish released torchwood_cascade_CDRIP.tor, a story with the trickiest name I've ever came across. I made the page under the closest name to the one on the cover, and added a on the top of it, to make it exaclty like on the cover.

However, when I went to add the cast list, I realised it'd be extremely hard to make the dabbing for this story. On the trailer for this story, Nicholas Briggs simply refers to it as Cascade (which is the same as "torchwood_cascade_CDRIP.tor" if you remove the tricky-stuff). I was wondering if perhaps it'd be fine to actually name the page Cascade (audio story), use the retitle, and use Cascade as the dab term for the characters in this story. IMO, using "torchwood_cascade_CDRIP.tor" would be terrible, because it's too long. OncomingStorm12th ☎  22:07, June 7, 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, after User:PicassoAndPringles edited the page a bit, I realised it wasn't as tricky as I first thought. The trick can also be done to Stephen (torchwood cascade CDRIP.tor), Max (torchwood cascade CDRIP.tor) and Nikki (torchwood cascade CDRIP.tor), once these pages are created. Perhaps, a simple redirect from Cascade (audio story) to Torchwood cascade CDRIP.tor (audio story) will sufice. But thanks for looking into it anyway ;) . OncomingStorm12th  ☎  01:08, June 8, 2017 (UTC)

A bit scared
I've added the new episode for the Twelfth Doctor's, Bill's, Nardole's, the Master's and the Ice Warrior's list of appearances, but I remembered about the spoiler policy. I thought it'd be fine because Revanvolatrelundar added as well as other non-admins but now I'm not sure if it's the correct time? Am I allowed to, and I hope that if I'm not I won't get punished too greatly.

Thank you and I apologise if it was the wrong thing to do. StevieGLiverpool ☎  19:22, June 10, 2017 (UTC)

P.S- The time wasn't actually 19:22, my timing on this computer is bugged but it's actually 20:22 when I messaged, as the page histories should probably prove. Thanks again.


 * Thank you for being kind, I won't break the rule again, or at least try really hard! ;) StevieGLiverpool ☎  20:41, June 10, 2017 (UTC)

Fact checking for other wiki
Hi, I'm an admin on the Old School RuneScape wiki, and someone recently made a trivia edit that I wanted to fact check over here. I chose you because you were the first coloured name in the recent changes list, so sorry if I'm putting you on the spot :P

Its been a long while since I've watched doctor who, and frankly your wiki's layout is alien to me (pun not intended) - So I wanted to verify with a real person.

Anyway, someone added an anecdote about the Slitheen, and about how a quest from 2006 may have been referencing them, but I'm pretty sure the Slitheen weren't introduced until sometime during 2009. Am I dead wrong? Your infoboxes are weird. Thanks and take care! --— Scuzzy Beta (talk) 20:41, June 11, 2017 (UTC)

The Black Archive navbox
Hey, I started making pages for The Black Archive and thought that a navbox would be useful (as there are already 11 books, and plans for a lot more). I don't know if non-admins are even allowed to properly make these, so I made one in my sandbox. When you have the time, could you check it up (and see if there's any coding stuff I missed). If there's nothing missing, could you implement it? Thanks. OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:51, June 27, 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I got a bit stuck on the name. TBA does look like it stands for "to be added" or something like that. Do you have any suggestions? OncomingStorm12th ☎  01:16, June 27, 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmm.. you're right. Usually, it's good to have a shorter name, but I don't think there's a good one in this case. If you could create the template, I'd be really glad (not 100% sure how to do it, so I rather hold back on doing it for now). :) OncomingStorm12th ☎  01:23, June 27, 2017 (UTC)

Links to YouTube channels
Hey SOTO. I was revisiting the BBC Three page and tried linking to their YouTube channel. I managed to do so with the template (adding "bbcthree" there). However, doing so in the infobox links to "/user/bbcthree", which isn't a proper link to their channel.

There is also another way to get to BBC Three: "/channel/UCcjoLhqu3nyOFmdqF17LeBQ", but is also doesn't work for the infobox. Is there some trick to make the link work on the infobox? OncomingStorm12th ☎  18:13, July 6, 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey again. I'm so, so sorry, but I'm a pudding brain and I could not make it work. I tried using:

and Rassilon knows how many other variations, but I couldn't get it to display the link on the Infobox. I must be making a very simple mistake, but I can't quite see what. OncomingStorm12th ☎  20:39, July 6, 2017 (UTC)
 * youtube       = UCcjoLhqu3nyOFmdqF17LeBQ
 * youtube channel = UCcjoLhqu3nyOFmdqF17LeBQ
 * youtubechannel = UCcjoLhqu3nyOFmdqF17LeBQ
 * channel       = UCcjoLhqu3nyOFmdqF17LeBQ
 * YouTube channel = UCcjoLhqu3nyOFmdqF17LeBQ
 * Oh, nice change. Almost went mad for a second back thre :p. Thanks as always SOTO. OncomingStorm12th ☎  20:56, July 6, 2017 (UTC)

Greetings
I am new to this wiki and want to make sure I start off good. Primarily, would you mind directing me to your policy pages? Or if possible, briefly summarizing the important ones?

I primarily hope to fill in events on the various timeline pages. The Everlasting ☎  01:03, July 13, 2017 (UTC)

Recent video uploaded
Hey SOTO. You recently uploaded File:LGBTQ In The Worlds Of Doctor Who - Doctor Who The Fan Show. While the subject of the video doesn't contain any spoilers, there's a small discussion about stuff from Series 11 (Doctor Who) crew (around 19:49). I realise is really quick, and I really wanted to add it to Bethany Black, Waris Hussein and bts in sexuality, but I remembered that spoiler-ish bit, and took it of. Just popped by to give you this heads-up in case you did not watch it before uploading (or, like me, already knew the spoiler and forgot that it even was a spoiler). OncomingStorm12th ☎  21:27, July 29, 2017 (UTC)
 * I. Know. Right? I have to admit I wasn't a big fan of the Fan Show. Watched first few episodes back when it started, and found them so cringy I gave up on them. However, I caught myself watching some of the most recent ones, and I am so loving it now, this one above all. Hope the video can stay (I really hope we won't need to hold this 23min beauty because of a 12 seconds line, but oh well). The only thing which disappointed me a bit was the extreme focus on the TV media. OncomingStorm12th ☎  04:11, July 30, 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh what a 23min piece of gold we have then. I have not quite got around the 7/Benny/Ace stuff on books (actually, almost no book-stuff at all), but The New Adventures of Bernice Summerfield and The Triumph of Sutekh got me excited enough. Hope there's a part 2 on this subject, focusing on non-TV media (I mean, they didn't even mention Luke Smith and how they planned to reveal he liked men, or even Charlie and Matteusz. Anyway, I'm sure there are some pages to benefit from this video in the near future: Bethany Black, Waris Hussein and sexuality. OncomingStorm12th ☎  04:28, July 30, 2017 (UTC)

Note on Cat:Individual Time Lords
Hey there! I asked Shambala108 about a change I wanted to make, but she hasn't gotten back to me, so I figured I'd run it past you instead. On Category:Individual Time Lords, there's a note from 2012 saying
 * "Individual Time Lords cannot be a subcategory of Category:Individual Gallifreyans, or vice versa. Such arrangement creates bot-stopping recursion. From a purely practical standpoint, the two categories need to be merged for the smooth operation of the wiki."

I'm thinking of modifying this note to remove the merger suggestion. Besides the bot, there are plenty of other reasons why someone shouldn't put Cat:Individual Gallifreyans in Cat:Individual Time Lords, or vice versa; namely, there are several non-Gallifreyan Time Lords, and there are also several non-Time Lord Gallifreyans, like I.M. Foreman and the Outsiders. This is also a strong argument against merging the two categories, hence why no editor over the last 5 years has followed the note's suggestion. What would you think of me removing that part of the note? NateBumber ☎  00:36, August 14, 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)

Spoilers
Hi! I noticed you uploaded this video. It contains references to the gender of a future Doctor and was just wondering if you were aware of this when you uploaded it. --Borisashton ☎  16:10, November 26, 2017 (UTC)

Overview categories
Hmm, what you said made a lot of sense. When I started placing them in "audio overviews", I though: (using Category:Gallifrey audio series as example) if a user comes here, they will be able to get a view of all series/seasons of this range, as well as their respective stories, and, if they exist, box sets collecting them. They would also be able to see which voice actors were present in it (and, as pointed out/suggested on Category talk:Category:The True History of Faction Paradox writers, writers and directors). OncomingStorm12th ☎  22:34, March 4, 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you're right about the pages being on "audio overviews"; only the pages should remain there, and re-arrange the rest of the category tree.
 * Category:Audio stories by range or series seems a good counterpart to Category:Television stories by season / series.
 * Perhaps we could create Category:Big Finish Doctor Who audio series, which could be a meta-category for all series from Big Finish Doctor Who audio stories. This way, the category tree remains more or less unchanged, just switching "audio overviews" with this (or, when necessary, Category:Big Finish audio spin-off series)
 * PS: Sorry if anything ended up unclear; I feel like this tends to happen when I write too much . OncomingStorm12th ☎  23:53, March 4, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Real world people
Hi, thanks for tips about adding real world people pages. I'm not very good with html but now I have the template for adding "real world" and "name sort", I will definitely start adding them to any new pages I create if applicable. Same with the IMDB links. Thanks again :) LauraBatham ☎  03:40, March 5, 2018 (UTC)

Nth Doctor audio stories
The changes you made to Tenth Doctor audio stories were definitely very good. I made them closer to Ninth Doctor novels because that format seemed quicker at first, but indeed the format of comic overviews is more informative (though I like having a table rather than a long list). Two things I'm struggling with are:
 * Should we merge a few tables? For example, you can notice I did it for The Churchill Years on these pages (otherwise, we'd have a lot more one-row tables. Should it also be done, for example, for the four Doom Coalition tables at Eighth Doctor audio stories?
 * How many templates to use? One for each Doom Coalition boxset, at we have now, or just one for Doom Coalition (audio series) at the top of that sub-section?

Please let me know what you think about these :) OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:39, March 18, 2018 (UTC)
 * I really like the new format for the Doom Coalition table. I've often wondered if we should have a single table on these 4-box-sets series, but never got something I quite liked. Looks way better than the Dark Eyes section this way.
 * Your idea to when split tables and when not seems good, as most series/box-sets nowaday have 4 stories. If you give me permission to start making the changes, I'll glady do it.
 * I do plan to add a bit of text between these tables, to make the page look better, giving a few explanations of format changes, etc. OncomingStorm12th ☎  22:47, March 18, 2018 (UTC)

Near future bot request
Hey. I'm planning on engaging in a new "project": sorting Category:Big Finish Doctor Who voice actors into the relevant categories, such as Category:Classic Doctors, New Monsters voice actors, Category:The Eighth Doctor: The Time War voice actors, et al. But before, I have a question regarding bots: Once I had gone through all relevant pages and added the categories, it'd be good if you could run a bot, removing all individual pages from "Category:Big Finish Doctor Who voice actors", as they'd be sorted under more specific categories already. However, once these categories are created, they will, of course, be put under "Category:Big Finish Doctor Who voice actors", which means, for example, Joe Jameson would be both on "Category:Classic Doctors, New Monsters voice actors" and "Category:Big Finish Doctor Who voice actors". Is there any chance that running a bot would mess up this categorisation? OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:42, April 11, 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes; thanks for simplifying my thoughts; sometimes I get over excited, shoot off at the mouth. I was rather afraid that the bot could accidentally jump from the main category into one of the subcategories. Since you reassured it won't, I'll start this (probably long :p) task. When I get around to finishing it, I'll post another message here. Thanks. OncomingStorm12th ☎  23:48, April 11, 2018 (UTC)
 * OK. Now I've added the specific categories for each voice actor. When you have the time to do so, I'd really apreciate if you removed Category:Big Finish Doctor Who voice actors from individual pages. Thanks. OncomingStorm12th ☎  16:07, May 1, 2018 (UTC)
 * I wasn't so sure about Special Releases as well, but created a page and categories for it because of releases such as Living Legend (audio story) and The Ratings War (audio story) which didn't have more specific ranges, but, as often happens with BF's website categorisation, it soon became a bit of mess, with stuff like Classic Doctors, New Monsters: Volume One and The Churchill Years being added there. I'm not opposed to deleting them, but that'd mean Category:Big Finish Doctor Who voice actors couldn't be a super-category.
 * And yes, I did look into category:Audio writers, but I think I'd like to tackle my proposal code for the Infobox Event (and next doing the coding for the Infobox Anatomy and Physiology) before going back to the category tree. OncomingStorm12th ☎  17:14, May 1, 2018 (UTC)

New infobox
I'll start this message apologizing for potentially - probably - sounding obnoxious and/or repetitive, but it's just that I get a bit overexcited over stuff sometimes. Anyway, the reason of this message (and I know I already messaged you about this in the past, so, just in case, sorry again) is that I have a proposition for an infobox which covers non conflictual events, such as 2012 Olympics, which is the page I used to test the code for it.

Back when I last talked to you about it, the infobox were just a few scattered ideas, but between then and now, I started looking at the code of, and decided to mess with it a bit, changed a few things, and then came to be User:OncomingStorm12th/Sandbox 3, which is the "final" version of the code (unless there's some technical issues with it being implemented as it is). Most of the paremeters for it are tested on the Olympics page, and I made sure the others work like I intended them to.

So, basically, now all I need to know is if there's any "bureaucratic" process to get it implemented and good to go, and deciding the name. I was pretty happy with having it as, but this is currently a redirect for. The reasoning for it is the main category which would be associated with the said Infobox (Category:Events). So, when you have the time to look at it, hit me back. Thanks (and sorry for the over-long post as well ;p ). OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:23, May 4, 2018 (UTC)


 * Hmm, combining it with Infobox Conflict didn't cross my mind before; it could work as well. One good addition, even for conflicts would be the "causes" parameter. Anyway; "Infobox Event or Exhibition" could retain it's name, I think. Only the redirect needs to be changed, as the "or Exhibition" part would disambiguate it from the in-universe template. OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:32, May 4, 2018 (UTC)

Tumblr Template
Hey SOTO! I was just thinking about making a Template:Tumblr to complement Template:Twitter and Template:Facebook, but after a clumsy attempt at my sandbox, I realized I'd probably be better off just proposing the idea to you. I think it'd help with standardizing pages like Jacob Black, Q, Simon Bucher-Jones, and ... well, Nate Bumber. Hope you're well! – N8 ☎ 00:36, June 7, 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much -- this is exactly what I was hoping for! – N8 ☎ 18:53, June 8, 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Soto! We need your help in the Snicket wiki! Almost all of the admins are inactive! Please come back!

The Rename of The War
... yeah, this is a fun one. Revanvolatrelundar recently okayed the rename of the page "The War" to "War in Heaven", but didn't actually move the page because, well, we need a bot. The War is actually going to stay around as a redirect and be changed in a case-by-case basis (as I've been slowly doing for a few months now), but the problem is the hierarchy of categories that have "The War" in their title: The words "in Heaven" need to be added to the end of all the categories. There's no rush or anything, but is that something SV7 would be able to help with? – N8 ☎ 13:42, September 4, 2018 (UTC)
 * Category:The War
 * Category:Conflicts in the War
 * Category:Groups in the War
 * Category:Individuals in the War
 * Category:Planets in the War
 * Category:Species in the War
 * Category:Technology in the War
 * Category:Great House members in the War
 * Category:Faction Paradox members in the War
 * Category:Vehicles in the War
 * Category:Weapons in the War


 * Just a quick update: Since Revan gave the a-okay to moving the page, all those categories have been manually fixed, the old ones have been deleted, and all links to The War (outside of talk pages, sandboxes, and Panopticon discussions) have been moved to War in Heaven. I've even prepped the other redirects to point at War in Heaven. So the move is all ready, whenever you (or any other admin) wants to push the button! – N8 ☎ 20:47, February 10, 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much! That one's been a long time in the works, and it's super satisfying to see it finally finished :) – N8 ☎ 22:10, February 10, 2019 (UTC)

Inaccuracy in your Summary on the "Pronoun Use" Thread
Your last, summing-up post in the Pronoun Use thread reads so:
 * "Opposing arguments are built on a false notion that we "made up" singular they/them pronouns,"

and though it's too late to argue with the bigger conclusion, I don't think this is a fair summarization of my argument. What I meant to get across was absolutely not that I rejected the "singular they"; nor was it only that we lacked in-universe evidence of use of "they".

My point was that the "singular they" when definitively talking about an individual means something a little different than what "he or she" (or "she or he"; either fits) means. "They" would fit in either of two cases: if the individual had a pinned-down gender but the speaker didn't know it; or if the individual positively identified as nonbinary or actively genderfluid. And I argued Time Lords were a different matter than either of those cases, because they don't changing genders willy-nilly, nor identify at any time of their life as nonbinary; instead, their life is a succession of discrete incarnations, each of whom is either positively male or positively female. At times the Doctor is a "he", at times the Doctor is a "she", but you'll never dig up a past or future version of the Doctor who'd explicitly answer to "they".

Therefore when talking about the Doctor across his timeline we ought to say "he or she", because at certain points of the timeline we're talking about "he" was appropriate, and at others "she" was appropriate. But never "they".

Then from the basis that "he or she" and "they" were not simply synonyms, but meant subtly different things, that's when I tried to dig up in-universe quotes, to show that people used "he or she", thereby signifying the particular meaning of "he or she" as opposed to "they".

This is a minute argument, and I understand that it might not convince you. Again, I'm not here to argue with the conclusion or reopen the debate as such. But I feel like your summary does a discredit to what I thought was a subtle and nuanced position. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  10:17, October 3, 2018 (UTC)

Clarification on the plagiarism policy
Hi, I was looking over the synopsis history of The Woman Who Fell to Earth and I noticed that one of the old synopsis was removed due to plagiarism, which I then found to be the official synopsis from the BBC. I was just wondering why using the official story synopsis counts as plagiarism. Thanks 0003c9fe ☎  06:33, October 9, 2018 (UTC)
 * So in that case, the hundreds of publisher's summaries that are on the wiki are also plagiarism, and yet these have been left alone for years, and are regularly added. So how come these hundreds of counts of directly copying official synopsis are fine, yet when it comes to the main television series it is suddenly unacceptable? And for another example of seemingly acceptable plagiarism in story summaries is the summary for Vrs, which you may be familiar with as you were the one who added it. The summary is a full copy of the story, which as far as I can tell, definitely makes that plagiarism as well. Was just looking for some clarification on why those are allowed but the Woman Who Fell to Earth case was different, as either there's some difference between them that I can't see, or we have a rather large plagiarism cleanup job on our hands. Thanks for your time, 0003c9fe ☎  01:57, October 10, 2018 (UTC)

hi just want to let someone know the link to Bradley Walsh on the main page is misspelt --2A00:23C5:4206:3500:6849:1BC3:8E85:8BE1talk to me 20:23, October 11, 2018 (UTC)

Sylvia Noble and Names
Hi there, SOTO. I had a quick question regarding Sylvia Noble's companion status. In the audio story Wild Pastures she is the Tenth Doctor's main companion. Her page has updated to reflect this. Unfortunately, I am unable to add Sylvia's name into the template "Tenth Doctor Companions" since it has been protected. Should she go in the "Original to audio" section, or "television" section?

Another small question I had was regarding the names of some of the characters of Extremis. Usually, characters are named with their first appearance in brackets. This being the case, shouldn't the characters (eg. Moira, Penny, Nardole) be titled as "Moira (Extremis)"? Similarly, shouldn't people from Pete's World be given page titles such as "Jackie Tyler (Rise of the Cybermen)" rather than being based on the world they come from?

Sorry if my questions are a bit vague, but an answer would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!

Lay ton  4  - 15:37, 21/10/2018

Infobox Organisations update
Hi. When you have the time, would it be possible for you to update the code of ? Currently, the "name" field is, but for pages like Torchwood (Pete's World) and Unified Intelligence Taskforce (Pete's World), it means manually removing the dab term from the infobox. Thank you. OncomingStorm12th ☎  01:36, November 2, 2018 (UTC)

Infobox Audio Series
Hi (sorry to bother again, but you do seem to be the most active admin these past few days). When you have the time to do so, could you update so that the "starring" parameter behave like the "companion" one (as in, displays only the character's first name?). After all, does this as well for "featuring". Thanks again. :) OncomingStorm12th ☎  21:53, November 2, 2018 (UTC)

The Arcade of Doom
Hi. I copied and pasted all links that were already present when User:Revanvolatrelundar, so I'm afraid you'll have to ask them about it. OncomingStorm12th ☎  20:15, November 24, 2018 (UTC)
 * Don't worry. It was no botther at all :) OncomingStorm12th ☎  20:56, November 24, 2018 (UTC)

Making OOU connections for real world people
So, I was editing James I's page and added a link to James I's mother as her name was not said in the episode, but noticed on The Witchfinders, under the references section, a link to Mary Stuart. Neither page makes the connection between them. Is this something that could/should be done? Should links to her be added in his page and vice-versa (with bts notes explaining their kinship was never established IU), or should a different page indeed be created until said kinship is established? OncomingStorm12th ☎  21:54, November 25, 2018 (UTC)
 * If I may butt in, this feels like another “Martin Luther King in Lie of the Land” situation. The situations may be slightly different, but the basic problem is still the same — two different DW stories refer to what the viewer knows is a single IRL figure, but without anything explicit in-story to confirm the two references are to the same person. So I think whatever was the decision with MLK should also apply here.


 * Problem is, the thread's closing didn't follow regular procedure (since it was closed because of an inaccurate statement at one point in the opening post, as opposed to because a solution had been reached on the main problem), Shambala's closing message didn't include a summary of the final decision, if there even was one.


 * Since Shamabala closed it because of a point of procedure, and explicitly left the door open for a new discussion to be made to finish solving the actual problem at some point, perhaps this would be the time to open such a thread. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  22:04, November 25, 2018 (UTC)
 * okay, so, giving a quick search at all prose that mentions, or in which both James I and Mary Stuart appear, no connection is made between them. The closest we got was in The Plotters, where it's said "It was not the God but the man Mary carried in her womb" and "It follows that the existent body of Christ was incarnated in the womb of Mary, and that she is the Mother of God. Dispute that!". However, I haven't fully read the novel, and thus can't provide any context to these quotes, nor guarantee they indeed refer to James I and Mary Stuart. But, in any case, even if they do, no last name is given to this Mary. OncomingStorm12th ☎  22:32, November 25, 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, one last thing: "Stuart" is also referred to throughout the book. Again, as I'm not familiar with the context of these references, it'd be best we find another user who is familiar with the source, perhaps user:Gusthegreat or user:GusF, as they added content to the page a while ago. OncomingStorm12th ☎  22:37, November 25, 2018 (UTC)
 * Unless you have reason to believe otherwise, those lines of dialogue just seem to blatantly be talking about the Virgin Mary.


 * But seriously, even if on this particular matter we do dig up a reference to Mary Stuart being King James I's mother, the discussion about the special case of NORW is still something we must have. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  22:39, November 25, 2018 (UTC)
 * Alright, so what we've gathered so far is: both James and Mary belong to the Stuart lineage, and Mary, much like James' mother, was beheaded. I'm almost inclined to believe IU they are the same, if only beheading wasn't a common method of public execution. After all, we have IU evidence of monarchs being beheaded in England (Charles I, a Stuart, no less) half a centery after the events of The Witchfinders. Who's to say that there weren't other Stuarts being beheaded arount the same time as Mary? But I think we at least would be able to provide a wealthy bts note. OncomingStorm12th ☎  23:36, November 25, 2018 (UTC)
 * Certainly, but could you please answer to my suggestion? --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  10:14, November 26, 2018 (UTC)

Solitract replicas
Do we need to create alternate Solitract versions of Grace and Trine like we did with the Shadow World versions of S10 TARDIS team? --DCLM ☎  20:19, December 3, 2018 (UTC)

Infobox question
Hey if I am making a page for a character that has been mentioned in something but didn't appear, am I supposed to use the "only" infobox field or the "first mention" infobox field to specify what that source is?

Also I noticed that they Infobox Policies link on Tardis:Help is broken and doesn't lead anywhere, maybe that can be fixed? Thank you for your help! ^_^ Toqgers ☎  19:28, December 9, 2018 (UTC)

RE: Creating pages
Hi. Yes of course. Sorry about that. I was simply trying to get some pages, necessary to the given series, made instead of them being broken links... --DCLM ☎  08:07, December 11, 2018 (UTC)

Infobox list template
Hey if I'm using Is there a way to have lini text display differently than name of page&mdash;i.e. can i make Vitus (Combat Magicks) appear simply as Vitus or should I use different method to make my list, bullets or something? Thank you! Toqgers ☎  19:58, December 21, 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response! I was totally overthinking that! :P Toqgers ☎  20:53, December 21, 2018 (UTC)

Main Range in infoboxes
Hiya and thank you for changing to link on the top of infobox from Big Finish Doctor Who audio stories to Main Range. Now, this has probably ocurred to you, but just in case it didn't, the "series" parameter in most infoboxes still links to the former. Perhaps a certain bot could lend a hand and help on this? OncomingStorm12th ☎  20:38, December 21, 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, what a bummer. Perhaps SV7 needs a Doctor or two (or three), if needs must! But it's all good. We have managed to work fine with these links for a few months, a bit more time won't hurt the wiki, especially as the top link is to the Main Range page at least. It'll be great if it's added to your list. Thanks for responding. OncomingStorm12th ☎  20:50, December 21, 2018 (UTC)
 * I noticed that SV7's back online. When you have the time, could you put them up to the task? I'd be very glad. There's one or two things I have in mind for them as well, but no need to overcharge you (and the poor thing) for now, as it's nothing too urgent.OncomingStorm12th ☎  01:09, February 27, 2019 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I think it's better to change the current text to "in Big Finish's Main Range", like it's displayed at Power Game, Devil in the Mist and a few others. After all, The Revisionists and Tick-Tock World are also "Big Finish Doctor Who audio stories".
 * The other thing I had in mind was taking advantage of the "|series =" parameter in Infobox Magazine. I've noticed many magazine pages don't use them (I noticed it through VOR issues, though that is kind of my fault, since I'm the one who didn't add them while making all those pages). Anywaym I've seen a fair share of DWM pages without that as well, and surely there's other magazines missing them, like 12DY2 10. Specially for the bigger ones like VOR and DWM it'd be good to have a helping hand from SV7. OncomingStorm12th ☎  01:26, February 27, 2019 (UTC)
 * Look, I'm not that sure there's a "right" way, but there sure is a way I prefer: Doctor Who Magazine. Adding "issues" is quite unnecessary in my view. Once a person lands on a page and go to the prev/next, they can only expect to navigate among issues after all. Much the reason why we don't need to add "X audio stories" for most audio pages, or "X novels". OncomingStorm12th ☎  20:27, February 27, 2019 (UTC)
 * In the subject of the Main Range and SV7, perhaps it'd be useful to remove Category:Doctor Who monthly audio stories and add categories like Category:Main Range/1999 audio stories (or something similar) and Category:Fifth Doctor Main Range audio stories (as we do with Category:Fifth Doctor DWM comic stories). Anyway, let me know what you think. OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:08, March 17, 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay; will take the time to write it in just a bit. OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:24, March 17, 2019 (UTC)

"Redundant" categories
Hi, I don't think you understand what people mean when they say a category is "redundant". Sure, the use of the word isn't quite what is stated on the categorization policy pages. However, we have a nested category system on this wiki. To use the most recent example that you changed, Category:Ravenous voice actors is already in Category:Doctor Who voice actors, so there is no need to add the Category:Doctor Who voice actors to, say, Nicholas Rowe. This kind of thing has been enforced multiple times over multiple years, so if you have an issue with it, it would need to be brought up at Board:The Panopticon. Thanks, Shambala108 ☎  03:46, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

The Black Archive
Upon seeing you add recent volumes of The Complete History to series' infoboxes, another range of reference books came to my mind: The Black Archive. Though probably best suited for the infobox of the relevant story than the series infobox, do you think this a worthy addition? OncomingStorm12th ☎  20:38, January 11, 2019 (UTC)
 * From where we stand now, (and trying to avoid spoilers) it looks like the plan is to release more and more, while they keep selling well (which seems to be the case, given they were bi-monthly before, and turned into monthly releases). Perhaps the best path right now would be to add them to specific stories only, and once there's more of them (in a year or two, if they're still being released) add them to series as well. OncomingStorm12th ☎  21:06, January 11, 2019 (UTC)

Dates
Hey, thanks for your suggestions as well. Certainly not something I had thought about. So, just to leave this as a guide for myself to do, an to let you and Czech know, I'll do the following: go thorough all pages that link to XXXX (people). Those who have sources, I'll add in the relevant (people) pages. Those who don't, I'll add a, to remind ourselves (myself mostly) to look back at them. Once I finish that, I'll see if there's any dates in those pages which have neither a source nor the template attached to them, and see what needs to be done. Once that is finished, I can go back an start checking the sources and adding those who don't have one. Did that make sense? OncomingStorm12th ☎  01:42, January 15, 2019 (UTC)
 * OK, just to make sure I got it correctly: instead of the current:

it would be:

If so, I can take a side step on the current plan, and add them manually to all day pages. Also, would the code at the top need any changes as well, or just the bottom?
 * OOh, I missed the message about . With that in use, it'd replace the whole of

? If so, I think it might be a good thing, because erasing the whole line(s) and adding a new thing is easier than going in the midle of the code and adding another. But even if I got the idea wrong, if you believe it'll make the overall job easier, go foward in all your beliefs, and prove to me that I was mistaken in mine. I'll hold of on the project for a few hours, until this is resolved. OncomingStorm12th ☎  23:57, January 15, 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I see. Well, it's one less thing for me to type anyway, so I guess it's still good. When you have time to do it, let me know and I'll roll the changes over the day pages. OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:02, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
 * Only took about a minute, but I had to abandon an idea I had for production pages since my idea at Transmat:Doctor Who is not cooperating. It's an even simpler template now; is just the heading and a call to . You have the option to specify how many columns, but it's set to a default of 2. Should it be 3? Take a look at 16 January (people). 00:13, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, hoping over to 16 January, I think 3 collumns work better, because assuming all references will have "clean", small titles like this test is not something I'd like to rely on, and using as a test for a non-tidy reference made a 2-collumn section look quite ugly for me. Specially when mixing the clean ones with the more messy ones. I published this change, if you wish to see it as well.OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:22, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
 * I have to admit that, for citeweb and for it only, 2 columns is looking a bit better, but I don't see them around neraly as much as the [link name] format. Final thought: I think keeping 3 columns is better. OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:41, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
 * Great to know! I'll start the changes then, and roll 16 January to previous state, so readers don't get too confused to the whole testing we did over there. OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:53, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
 * One thing that came to mind: even though the template is called DayReflist, would it cause any technical problems if it was used on year and month pages? That way, we'd reach a bit of uniformity among all birth/death pages, and would also be easier for me to implement. OncomingStorm12th ☎  13:13, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
 * I would, indeed. Perhaps ? OncomingStorm12th ☎  17:35, January 16, 2019 (UTC)
 * Hope it doesn't sound like a bother, but while you don't rename the template, I'll keep adding the references to the relevant pages (without adding reflist, nor the regular or the Dayreflist) and, once it is renamed, I'll add it to all moth/year pages. Just saying so it doesn't look live I'm forgetting to add them or stuff like that.
 * Aah, and one more thing while I'm here: once I do start adding them, should it be done in the same place as I've added them in the Day pages, or before the bottom code begins? OncomingStorm12th ☎  13:21, January 17, 2019 (UTC)
 * Alright. Thanks for moving it! I'll start adding them to the pages now. OncomingStorm12th ☎  23:06, January 17, 2019 (UTC)


 * Concerning marriages, shouldn't we try to go and add sources for them as well? For one, it gives the wiki/information more credibility, but also prevents people from adding false marriages to the wiki. OncomingStorm12th ☎  20:02, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

Number alphabetisation
Hi again! Just dropping by to clarify how you are alphabetising larger numbers so I can implement this in future creations. Thanks in advance. --Borisashton ☎  15:03, January 20, 2019 (UTC)

I Ann in need of assistance
It has come to my attention that Ann Kelso hasn't been added to. As only admins can edit the companion templates, could you add her when you have the time? Thanks. OncomingStorm12th ☎  01:00, February 1, 2019 (UTC)

Patrick(s) O'Sullivan
While editing Molly O'Sullivan's page, I stubmled across the name of one of her brothers, Patrick, with no linkage at all. Seems an easy fix, if I linked it to Patrick O'Sullivan. However, that's the name of their father.

While only the father appears in any story, Molly's brother is first referenced in X and the Daleks, while her father appears in Tangled Web.

Do you think it's reasonable to have the father renamed as Patrick O'Sullivan (Tangled Web) and create links to her brother under Patrick O'Sullivan (X and the Daleks)? OncomingStorm12th ☎  01:04, February 6, 2019 (UTC)
 * Admittedly, it would require me a re-listen through both stories (if not other/all Dark Eyes stories to confirm whether Jr/Sr has been used, which I won't have time to do soon. But who knows, maybe we'll get another Short Trip with Molly one of these days where her brother appears, or something. Eventually, when I relisten Dark Eyes (which I intend, at some point) I'll return to this. OncomingStorm12th ☎  01:19, February 6, 2019 (UTC)

Audio series
Something that crossed my mind these days: ever since we started creating pages for audio series (like Series 1 (8DA), Series 11 (BFBS), et al.) we never applied Category:Seasons to them. Of course, doing so would require a bit of change in the category tree, but do you think this would be a worthy change (given it would also affect the Game of Rassilon)?

Also, anthologies like The Diary of River Song: Series One where the anthology is the series would get in, but stuff like The Fourth Doctor Adventures Series 8: Volume 1 and The First Doctor Box Set wouldn't. OncomingStorm12th ☎  12:19, February 16, 2019 (UTC)

Audio covers for the Eighth of March
Unless I missed something, The Eighth of March had no individual covers... right? The ones on the pages right now are pretty close to a fan made version uploaded in a Facebook group I'm in. OncomingStorm12th ☎  00:40, March 15, 2019 (UTC)

Block
Hi just wondering why you shortened my block of user:185.130.156.204 from 180 days to 6 days (that's 3% of my original block). It's my standard practice to block anonymous users for 6 months, and you've never seen fit to shorten my blocks before. What makes this case so special? Especially since I also blocked user:24.124.10.6 for six months yesterday, and you didn't seem to think that one needed shortening thanks Shambala108 ☎  14:31, March 20, 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the quick reply.


 * First of all, the statement " it seems more like you were trying to silence this user for their other edits, essentially taking another POV." is very offensive considering my long track record of allowing personal attacks against myself specifically in order to avoid silencing the so-called opposition. I suggest you take a page from Tardis:No personal attacks and "assume good faith".


 * And it seems rude that you chose to change my block without even mentioning it to me. When you blocked User:OttselSpy25 for a year and I thought it was too long, I approached you on your talk page (the message has since been removed at User:CzechOut's request, but it's there in the edit history). I would think you would grant me that same courtesy instead of just reverting my block. Now it looks like we admins can't get along or agree on anything.


 * Lastly, since it seems you other admins are discussing this naming issue in private, I offer a suggestion: take it to the forums. Not only does this allow more transparency, it would avoid future misunderstandings from users who don't know you guys are discussing this in an off-wiki site. Shambala108 ☎  15:21, March 20, 2019 (UTC)