User talk:CzechOut

Re; Recommend delete (Price article)
Hi, just for future reference will place a delete banner on the page and put the article in the proposed deletions category. Thanks. 07:56, 18 June 2008 66.92.67.202

I am here to Complain, You have reasonaly but a delete banner on my new page, because its not very good, but seeing as I only created it a few hours ago I think is a reasonable excuse and I would kindly ask that you wait till I start this page before you insist it has to go. General MGD 109, Undo it.

Stubs and related things
Just wanted to say thanks on the stubs, (I admit that I mainly just copied and adjusted the names from the original stub), and for adding pictures. I was just curious about the alignment of them, the audio one is aligned to the right and the TV one is centred...also I think it might be better for all the stub templates to have a border around them (just to know where the article ends and the box begins and all that. Also while I'm praising I'll also be a bit picky (sorry), minor edits are for, well minor alterations spelling, punctuation that sort of stuff, anything else it isn't a minor edit. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 14:58, 21 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Re: Real world. It's mainly articles that don't have a lot of content Jasmine Breaks for example, the template sort of hovers over the external links header. In the Doctor Who theme page it doesn't really matter because there's enough content to push everything down, but a lot of the real world pages are lacking in content. --Tangerineduel 16:30, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Monobook. --Tangerineduel 16:34, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Well...That's a good enough argument. But there are (I think) a lot more articles with not a lot, and plenty which I'm sure that'll stay that way for a long while (articles such as Tony Imi, Charles Parnell and Norman Greaves). (Sorry, not much in terms of an alternative the whole coding thing isn't quite my forte) --Tangerineduel 16:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I was going to say, (when you got to this edit), it's good, about as good as we're going to get (that works across all skins). It might give some people the nudge to fill in the articles that are just one line. It's certainly better than some permutations (the centre aligned one was perhaps not the best). --Tangerineduel 17:29, 24 June 2008 (UTC)--Tangerineduel 17:29, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

MagnifiedMaster.jpg
Ah, sorry about that, I do remember looking at the page. I deleted either by mistake or that I thought it was a faked image, sorry about that. --Tangerineduel 07:25, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Going overboard
ok Skirmish at Tranquil Repose wasn't needed but articles such as these other ones are still a vital part of the wiki whether they have names or not other wise we have articles on charcters, technology and the like but not the evens that they appeared in Dark Lord Xander 09:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I created Skirmish as Tranquil repose and Battle on the Dalek Saucer as they are key points in there respective stories and have a place on the wiki wheater or not you think so.--Skittles the hog 12:07, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Why are you deleting battle pages
All of the battles that have happened in the doctor who universe why are you deleting them. They tell people about all the wars and battles the doctor has been in. I just want to know why you are doing this (Catkind121 29 July 13:31.

Gisella ! Opps!!
Thanks for the heads up on that one! Been away for a bit...got some tidying up to do I think. Didn't even think anyone would notice yet lol. I wanted to read on before developing this (short) entry - opps a spoiler. Anyway its on my list thanks again! The Librarian 21:50, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Spiral nebula
Yikes! I didn't realize you were in the middle of article work on spiral nebula (and an apparent edit situation with an anonymous IP) when I dropped in to switch the tense on a word. Apologies if that created an edit conflict at your end. 23skidoo 23:25, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

TDL
Hi! The MAIN content of the TDL website reinforces the text in the book, segments are re-presented as bite size snippets and the games tend to progress and follow the books overall storyline. Any new material, so far, seems to be in the visuals which are unlocked as you go through (eg wallpapers) which I've included in this wiki with links to the appropriate download site. A further wallpaper for each title is now being offered following a link given in the Doctor Who Adventures magazine with each new release (which Ive also included. The site has some other content background to authors and the like, but there is nothing substantial (eg authors favourite monster and Doctor etc.) bearing in mind the target age group (I'm doing it purely for research purposes of course, you understand!! -says me smiling to myself! Damn those games can be frustrating!!!). As its an ongoing work in progress, Im trying to avoid spoiling it by, waiting for a new book to be released before reporting on the previous title and as I develop the coverage other articles will be expanded. I know it looks clumsy but some of the articles, I am aware, are simply a series of 'notes so far' (perhaps I should ensure these pages are stubbed). Hope this helps towards answering your question.The Librarian 11:42, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Easter Eggs
Just wondered, any thoughts on how best to cover these, all on one page or tied to DVD releases - Im sure you have given it some thoought! Let me know The Librarian 01:35, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Marnal
Hi, I was just wondering if you had read EDA: The Gallifrey Chronicles. If you have, could you take a look at the Marnal article? Most of it was written by me, but I haven't actually read the novel and got my information from the Internet. I just wanted to see if anyone who has actually read the book could confirm the information in the article. Thanks.--The Traveller 12:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Invasion Animation
The Restoration Team on their forum and at OG repeatedly pointed out that the episodes had been commissioned and (more importantly for future animations at the time) *paid for* by BBCi. For reasons I can't recall, the episodes didn't end up on the website and were essentially lying around. 2entertain paid some money to have the right to release them on DVD, but otherwise was not involved. Steve Roberts at the time of the DVD said that a DW DVD budget wouldn't stretch to paying for such animation and is why (at the time) the RT considered the animations a one-off. Going by some recent rumours that may no longer be the case.Gallicus 02:31, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Comic strip infobox!
Wow! You have been busy! I like the completist nature of the new look. A big well done! Battles in Time has just (at last) finished and I was planning on revisiting each page again anyway so Ill finish off the last few then work back through them if thats ok. Just so you dont get alarmed and think Im ignoring your work. Well done again. Im going to assume that the online release is ok to include in 'publication' The Librarian 22:41, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, two immediately spring to mind, the exclusive (but unnamed) online Torchwood comic strip and the entire Battles in Time Strip Series available to online subscribers of the Doctor Who DVD Files for those who didnt want to buy the magazine AND the DVD. The Librarian 22:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * All I've repeatedly asked for is to consider the usability functions of the infobox the ability of a casual reader to use and read through the infobox, you've really addressed this section of my request, you've said that it improves the overall flow and editability of the infobox but I've said that it comprimises the usability. Doctor Who is complicated and I feel that simplifying it down to an arrow is over simplifying its understandability. You've also said that we're at an impasse. To resolve this as we both think we're correct I thought it was a logical step to try and involve someone else. I am really sorry and didn't mean for it to come across this way. (I'm just very worried about this issue that's all and the discussion has felt very two sided with no one else really involved) --Tangerineduel 16:46, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


 * You are right, I shouldn't have put it up into the forum. I'm sorry about this. It's just I really am worried about it, really (if I could begin to fathom how to edit the infobox I'd give it a go myself), but I can't which is why I'm being so annoying with you. The reason I put it up was I am very, very worried about it, I hate MemoryAlpha's interface it's very much too minimal and it really worries me that we're going to be affecting the usability of the site with the arrows. --Tangerineduel 17:01, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I guess I should explain something of the reason why I'm so worried about the user interface over how it looks, I volunteer assisting people with limited dexterity / mobility using touchscreen systems (and obviously use them myself when doing this) and with many of the systems it's quite hard to 'mouseover' just by the way the systems handle the touch systems (not all, some you can almost, frustratingly can almost mouseover). I know this is about making it better but I'm just concerned especially with the proliferation of various other touch based forms of web navigation like the iPhone we're going leading this up a navigation dead end and I keep looking at it and thinking that we're loosing a lot to gain something. --Tangerineduel 06:31, 30 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi CzechOut, a big favour to ask. If you get a moment (I know you've busy :) ) but could you cast an eye over the infobox for the first BIT strip Growing Terror, make the changes then, as I revisit them I can tidy the box a bit. When I started the pages, I was new, thought it would be a short run and made some 'now' obvious mistakes which I had every intention of revisiting. The Librarian 01:30, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Re:Spiral nebula
Its really bad to saying "you're editing the hell out of it". LMAO, this IP adress belongs to a library, though I don't recall doing anything about Spiral nebula and such (mainly because I'm just a kid who didn't do such of that (aka a kid younger then 13), you should ban me 0_o (Saying this to be a pain in the word) --204.167.92.26 16:30, January 2, 2010 (UTC)

Amy
I don't think that "Amy" should be moved to "Amy (Key 2 Time)" because she's the only Amy character only known by that name -- all the other Amy characters have last names. Therefore I state that "Amy" should be for that companion, and "Amy (disambiguation)" for the list of other named characters. Doug86 16:17, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Categories - Thanks
Thanks for sorting out the categories, it's something I've often looked at, but never really had enough motivation to work out what went where and whatever. --Tangerineduel 14:38, February 5, 2010 (UTC)


 * I do notice a majority of things around here...I just often don't say anything (or on many occasions with new editors experience the sensation of slamming my head against the desk).
 * There isn't a way to move categories (that I'm aware of), as I've been through the lengthy mind-numbing process of changing category names and the articles associated with them also.
 * As for deleting cats, just slap a prop delete and I (or another admin) will get to it in due course. --Tangerineduel 15:09, February 5, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yep, a category can be deleted even if there's stuff in the category. The stuff in the category still exists but it doesn't exist within any structure.
 * What I mean is, you could put 2 things in Cat:X, and it would be a red category link, click on that link and you find those two within a category, but you still need to hit 'save page' to make it an actual category (if this makes sense). --Tangerineduel 13:05, February 6, 2010 (UTC)

German woman
Sound argument, reverted, moved back to what you had it as. --Tangerineduel 07:05, February 8, 2010 (UTC)

K9 screenshot
Perhaps that possibly wasn't the way to go.

Perhaps it would have been better, rather than making the screenshot template more exact, making it more encompassing.

Your changes to the screenshot infobox kinda mean nesseciate going through the screenshot category to look for all things which aren't the BBC's. The wording in the previous edit of the screenshot template contained the words "and/or its original author(s). ", which covered other screenshots from spin-offs, which the BBC don't have ownership over.

I think it might be better to either create a screenshot template for the BBC specifically something like BBCscreenshot (much like the Template:bbcbookcover and Template:Bbcaudiocover templates) that can be applied to the BBC's screenshots (then we can go through and add it to all images manually, a boring though not hard job, I've done it several times). Or alternatively broaden out the screenshot template to encompass everything. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 08:10, February 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * The video covers are covered by Template:Bbvcover or Template:Rpcover (BBV and Reeltime).


 * The promotional template is used for wallpapers and promo photos and the like.


 * I'm starting to hate it when you make reasoned arguments! (Just joking, I will take reasoned arguments over shouted comments decrying my rolling back of misspelled edits, random comments and vandalism)


 * I think I'd rather have a BBV specific template, but that may be a little too specific, so I think a more general 'other screenshot' template for BBV, Reeltime and anything else not covered by the screenshot, K9 and film screenshot templates. I'd also prefer not to re-purpose the film screenshot template and in fact make that more precis to refer to two 60s Dalek films.


 * As for the 31 Who and other things, couldn't that be covered by the 'other screenshots' template that would also cover BBV/Reeltime?


 * Once all this is sorted out I'll add it to the drop down menu, I'll change Screenshot to BBC Screenshot, add the K9 one as K-9 TV series and the other, other one depending on what we work out.


 * Just on a side not, looking at your updates of the stub and other templates, they've all got a black line along the right side, is this a formatting issue or is it meant to be there or what…just curious. Thanks --Tangerineduel 11:39, February 11, 2010 (UTC)

Navigation sidebar
Yes. That's simple to add.

Where should I put the behind the scenes section (and just call it behind the scenes?), under Stories? I or one of the other admins need to do it as it's part of the mediawiki. Tell me how you want it, what should link off and I'll get it put in. --Tangerineduel 06:56, February 10, 2010 (UTC)

Moffat, Mandragora, and Consistency
Gotcha, I do understand that not everyone agrees with Moffat's comments about renumbering the series and so forth. Perhaps I muddied the waters by citing that as a part of my rationale. Although I do agree with him on that score, my primary reason for changing the phrasing on The Masque of Mandragora is that it seemed to be the only page using that particular phrasing ('the first story of Season 14 of the 1963 version of DW'). I completely understand and agree with you that referencing it explicitly as a season 'of Doctor Who' is appropriate and makes sense, as there are of course other television serials covered by this wiki (Torchwood, SJA, etc). Hence why I did change it to 'the first story of Season 14 of DW'. However, referencing 'the 1963 version' for this story only seems a bit inconsistent with other similar pages, and perhaps even confusing to an inexperienced reader. Spreee 18:59, March 3, 2010 (UTC)Spreee

Infobox stuff
Just fyi, but the Wikia ads on the Monacco skin (which is the default for anon-visitors, etc) are 292px wide. The ads are bigger than the info boxen in terms of width, and cause some funny word wrapping sometimes. Just as an aside. :) -- sulfur 19:47, March 3, 2010 (UTC)
 * What are you suggesting in terms of a solution?  Czech Out  ☎ | ✍  19:54, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Apparently my suggestion is a large amount of pain. Heheh. Unless we can find a nice bot to handle it all. -- sulfur 20:27, March 3, 2010 (UTC)

Cultural references
Thanks, for explaining (leaving a message here rather than on the cat:talk page as I'm about to hit delete). Sometimes I just need things laying out for me. I started to think about the cultural refs category after leaving the message, I was wondering do you think they could all be further categorised into things like 'Music groups from the real world' etc (which would then be a sub-category of cult refs from the real world? (Just throwing the idea out there).

Just two other things, when marking categories for deletion just make sure they haven't got links to them (as the references on some pages uses it as a linked sub-heading, I've gone through and changed those).

The other thing (I'm probably just being difficult by asking this question) but...what happens if we need a category called 'The Matrix' in the future? I'm thinking stuff like; The Matirx (obviously), the Seventh Door, that area where Rassilon and his buddies met as a council (can't think of the name but it's in a comic strip from the 80s or 90s, very vague sorry), there are probably others. I know we don't currently have articles for these things, I'm just looking to the possibility of it in the future. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 13:31, March 6, 2010 (UTC) Taking these three points sequentially:
 * I think the vast majority of things in category:cultural references from the real world are already in other categories. At the very least, there are categories available for them to put into.  There may not be a "musical groups from the real world" cat, though. But, yeah I do think there should be some "from the real world"  reorganization, but I haven't really thought deeply enough about it yet.  I'm kinda diggin' the idea of creating the super-cat of category:From the real world and sticking it directly under The Matrix, so that people had one central place to look for all "from the real world" cats.


 * Sorry that you found cats which had not had all their instances delinked. I really thought I'd checked all the "What links here" reports.  Guess I must've missed some.  If you do find that, though, don't waste time doing the changes.  Just tell me and I'll get my bot to zap things in an instant.


 * And if we need a cat called The Matrix in the future, changing things will be as easy as changing it was this time. I nearly called the cat the Time Space Visualiser.  Now that you've brought it up, maybe I should change it to that.  As a part of "dead" DW mythology — i.e., not something that can really be used in new DW fiction — I didn't really think about it as having an existence beyond television.  But now that I'm reading the Matrix page more carefully, I guess there are enough things associated with the Matrix in older spin-off material that a category could be possible.  So, category:Time-Space Visualiser then?  Or do you have another suggestion?   Czech Out   ☎ | ✍  14:04, March 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * Time-Space Visualiser seems fine, I definiately don't think we'll need a Time-Space Visualiser category (unless we wanted a 'stuff seen on the Time-Space Visualiser category, but I think that would be going overboard).
 * As for the what links here, I like doing small changes it gives me a chance to look at random article pages for problems (though if anything needs fixing that's over 50 articles then I may ask). --Tangerineduel 14:14, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

Main page
Hey, just wanted to say what a great job you've done with the main page rework/re-edit/rebuild/redisign. Clearly a lot of work's been done on it, and I may have been a little too critical of things along the way. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 14:12, March 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * Before it goes live we should probably have the did you know police/nominations page up (or not have a link to the nominations page on the main page, however you want to do it).
 * The quote of the week will need updating (I just swapped it over on the main page half a dozen minutes ago).
 * There is one other thing, I was looking at the version of the main page (on your sub-user page), I was looking down at all the templates used (so I could go ahead and semi-protect them all) and there's one that's redlinked Template:Bgcolor, is that doing anything/should I semi-protect it?
 * Aside from these small issues, when everything is ready to go with you I don't see any problems with it going ahead. Also when you update it, you may want to keep an eye on it in case (registered) users revert the edit, I could fully protect it for a month or so (though that would mean only admins could edit the main page). --Tangerineduel 14:41, March 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * Two things I didn't notice until now, the background of everything is grey, but the background that the ads sit on is white, it's very noticeable at the top with the TARDIS Wiki logo sitting between both white/grey. And also the category (right at the bottom of the page) is oddly aligned to the far left. Would both these issue be a result of the various templates? --Tangerineduel 16:44, March 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * Noticed another issue, when the page first loads up we've got the logo in the top left, but then once it's fully loaded it disappears. Which may be what's messing with the alignment/the grey/white issue. --Tangerineduel 17:10, March 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think the best place for you to go and ask the question is Central Wiki - Forums. They should be able to help with the problems that relate to the main page (and all other wikia related issues). --Tangerineduel 14:54, March 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh goody, CSS classes...That would involve the MediaWiki pages I guess. If those things need fixing/altering just tell me what needs doing and I will stare at it and think 'I hope this doesn't break the wiki' (then I'll click save page and busy myself with something unrelated and hope nothing breaks. --Tangerineduel 15:39, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

New logo wording
Hey, what font did you use on your new logo? I'd love to use it for the logo of the Doctor Who Collectors Wiki. Tardis1963 21:55, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Tardis1963 10:26, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

Did you know...
Looks alright, I've changed the part where an admin does the change over. All the portions of the main page are only semi-protected, so any logged in non-new users can change everything.

Ideally I'd like to have a separate policy and nominations page (just because it's easier to tell users 'this is where the policy is - read it' and 'this is where you write stuff, stop mucking around with the policy'.

I think a weekly turn around of factoids is being a little bit optimistic, I think maybe go with changing them monthly. --Tangerineduel 05:20, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

Nav boxes
That's great to know! Beats my solution of shifting all the colours to s lighter shade. --Tangerineduel 14:35, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

Category help
I found those two categories whilst clearing some up and actually had to think about it (and go to a dictionary to define it). Hence why I put a little note at the top of the categories. Association is that they're part of a group for a common purpose, so that's why the CIA and the Faction Paradox are in that one.

Affiliation is being a part of a group because you're allied or affiliated with it. There's no common purpose with regards to you being a part of the group, it's more the interrealted connection that lead you to being part of it. --Tangerineduel 04:34, March 14, 2010 (UTC)

New logo
It's a an interesting start, but I would like this, I think to be put to the forums so the community can get involved and decide what they want.

If I were to critique it though, I find the Hartnell logo, while recognisably a Doctor Who logo it's not immediately placeable (for me) as the Hartnell logo, as that logo is always presented as a white logo on black background. Looking at the current logo as a set of recognisable symbols, there's the outline of the police box and a recognisable Doctor Who logo that was thrown on a lot of merchandise (books, DVDs, the later video releases, Big Finish) and continues to be used on a lot of merchandise (DVDs, Big Finis, Missing episode CDs/audiobooks). That sort of brand recognition really helps in its job as a logo. --Tangerineduel 12:56, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for that. Don't worry about the using the old logo, still looks fine. Tardis1963 07:30, March 16, 2010 (UTC)

New page templates
It is odd, as I tested the new page templates by following a red link and then testing it that way. Which made the templates work. But at the create page page...I can't say that I've ever used the layout and I very rarely use the create page, page. From looking at it it should work. But doesn't. Have you tried undoing your all your edits on the say newpage actor template, saving and then testing the create page again to see if it indeed did work before or not? --Tangerineduel 08:47, March 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * I've just tried un-doing your edits to the companion newpage template and testing out the Create new page again, and it's still not working.
 * The only thing I can think of that may have broken it is a month or two ago wikia central implemented a popout box (see here easier than me explaining), I found it quite irritating (I was somewhat vocal about it) ToughPigs disabled it here as he drops by now and then. That's about the only thing I can think of, that would be affecting the create page page (not sure how though). --Tangerineduel 12:23, March 29, 2010 (UTC)

Production Errors
Anytime. I switch all the names over in the K9-TV episodes and went though The Sarah Jane Adventures. It seems to me Tochwood seems to have no production errors.... hmmmm 21:11, March 29, 2010 (UTC)

Timeline navigation changes
Well, it's going to be interesting seeing your code in action. Certainy a lot more complicated than mine :)

Speaking of which, how do you get a wikia wiki to pre-load templates when editing a new page like it does here?


 * → Koschei: :  Life. But not as we know it.  05:26, March 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, looks like you've got it all in hand :)
 * → Koschei: :  Life. But not as we know it.  11:03, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up on the template, but I can't really visualize what it's supposed to look like from the test page. Is there a test edit (possibly reverted that can be viewed from the history) that I can look at to get a sense of what's being planned? The only dull part about the Timeline work is updating current events from "are scheduled to happen" to "have happened".23skidoo 12:03, March 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * This is brilliant, I always thought there was a way to get a template to recognise the year and count back/forwards one.
 * I do have a question with regards to centuries. I (sort of) understand the code, plus or minus one seems straight forward. But when you get to centuries is it going to handle the difference between 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th (and all other 'ths')?
 * Also is it possible to be center aligned? Just as with some years there may be a Wikipedia link away and center aligned just aesthetically makes more navigational sense with years bridging off to the left and right (I know these are likely minor things that could be fixed later on), but it's these things I often see. --Tangerineduel 12:49, March 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * I have never created a single page with nothing but a template. I've had enough to do with sorting the thousand or so pages that were cluttering up the top of Category:Timeline which included calendar dates, centuries, decades, alternate timelines, et cetera, all of which combined were shuffling the subcats to the last page on the category. It is naturally an irritance to me to see pages like 1454 and 1456 created perhaps to link pages with actual content.


 * On another note, I notice with a page like 2000 that the template will treat it like a 21st century year. Is it possible to fix this?
 * --Nyktimos 03:54, April 2, 2010 (UTC)

Feature articles
I actually wrote something similar to what I'm about to write here on Michael Downey‎'s talk page. The article of the month on the main page should make people want to go to the article and be a little bit enticing, I know (reading other wikis) that reading the article of the month and then reading it again on the page after following the link is somewhat boring to find your place again. So I find it better to have lead in text that makes people want to find out more (and want to click the 'read more' link). I've gone back to my edit and included 'The Wire' in the text. I did admittedly write the text quite quickly (I do usually try to jump ahead and write the text and clear out the voting and everything before anyone else jumps in, but I was somewhat slow this month). --Tangerineduel 16:22, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

DPL, Users, other things
I've warned the user in question and pointed the user towards the Forum:Doctor Who television discontinuity and plot holes proof of concept page I created.

DPL. I'm not sure about this one. I've read through the page and had a look over at the w:Help:DynamicPageList page. I have my concerns. I know you're all for the (I can't think of a word that surmises all the templates, automation bafflegab), I'll go with bafflegab for now I think. I'm concerned about the downsides to DPL amongst other things.

Let me take a completely different tact which is only vaguely related, when I was trying to work out how to make the fields in infoboxes collapase I went through quite a few search engines looking through various wikis to find this information and an example of how it's done. (I can't remember the wiki I found it on annoyingly). But I would like for editors of this wiki to be able to undertsand how this stuff works, not just that it does work, so should they wish they take that working knowledge from this wiki onto others.

I also know all this stuff is in theory good, but also know that while you've put a lot of explanation text into the templates (such as the Newpage template) I'm unsure of their usefullness in getting people to read them and make them work effectively (I haven't said anything as I've been waiting to see the results and impact before bringing it up). It's just no matter how much we might want users to read the manual of style or the in-line text within the article many people won't and we need to take into account that some people aren't (though they may be good editors) and we've got to work with that. I think I would prefer to have lots of new people using and understanding this site and the wikis in general (and taking that knowledge onwards) than bamboozling them somewhat with all this stuff. (Slightly random rant I'm sorry). --Tangerineduel 04:05, April 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * I actually said bafflegab in a random Doctor Who reference. (I do sometimes write when replying to things in a slightly stream of consciousness sort of way, so somethings may come out a little rambling).


 * Those little edits might not increase our information, but they may make people better at editing and fixing other small issues along the way and in knowing how to fix these little edits they're not made as frequently. As I said most of the time saving things I agree with. Some things though for eager and ready editors need to be learnt 'give a man a fish and he's fed for a day, teach a man to fish and he's fed for life' (as we're throwing around proverbs).


 * Information is actually one of the trickier things to write incidentally, it's no surprise that a lot of people write the one sentence real world actor articles, they're simple, there's lots of them and you can follow a pretty simple pattern. Writing more detailed articles especially for in-universe stuff requires access to the source material and being able to collect and write the info.

Little edits are often what many people feel they can contribute, that is simple and not complicated and not too daunting.


 * I didn't mean to be critical of the advances, I'm just looking at the larger wiki, not just in terms of information and the smooth running but the development of editors, or them learning how all this works (that is how I got to this point). Automation is good, but knowing how it works so they can go on to apply it when there's no one around is better. --Tangerineduel 14:44, April 2, 2010 (UTC)