User talk:Scrooge MacDuck

Your question about images
Hey hey :) Thanks for your recent question about images. I've removed it from Thread:200906 because that thread is in Board:The Time Lord Academy, which is primarily used for announcements, rather than discussions.

You didn't get an automatic welcome, which would have given you more convenient access to our rules, and particularly those around image use. Sorry about that! The welcome tool was broken for a number of weeks. So I've manually added it to this page. T:IUP is where you'll find a lot of answers about our image policies here, but you may be particularly interested in T:IUP FAIR. Thanks, and welcome aboard! Always good to have another Duck fan around! 22:44: Wed 11 Jul 2018

Thank you very much! And glad to know you're another Duck enthusiast. (I imagine DuckTales 2017 ' s casting of Tennant and Tate must have increased the overlap in fandoms, come to think of it.) --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  22:49, July 11, 2018 (UTC)

File deletion
Hey, with all due respect, I'm afraid you're talking to a wrong admin. If the file you mean is File:When he was a woman.png, then it was deleted by Shambala108, not by me. Note that it is not necessary to participate in a discussion to bump into a newly uploaded image. There is a special page for them, and admin often police these lists for possible violations. During such cleaning jobs, a file in clear violation of the rules requires no further investigation and may be deleted on sight. Don't take it personally.

Incidentally, as someone who struggled with the image restrictions myself in the past (as you might have discovered), my advice is to accept them and put an extra effort once into learning how to satisfy them. Like many users before me, I've learned in my time that it is possible (and not that difficult). Of course, you can restart the discussion but it is likely to be closed for lack of new arguments. And barring a possible rule change, you will have to learn to follow the current rules from Help:Image cheat card anyways. Good luck and remember to always keep your cool. Amorkuz ☎  09:48, October 2, 2018 (UTC)
 * Huh, sorry. (Still, I do think it's about time the file-size problem was reevaluated. That policy's right out of the early 2000's and it bothers more people than it helps. And I can't think of a single argument against my "forewarning" suggestion.)--Scrooge MacDuck ☎  09:57, October 2, 2018 (UTC)

Re: File deletion
Hi, apologies in advance because this is going to be a bit long. But I wanted to address all your comments not only in the post you left on my page, but also your response to User:Amorkuz regarding our image policy.


 * First of all, you stated, "As you know, participating in the Prounoun Use for Time Lords discussion..." Well, I didn't know. I have been following that discussion, but I never saw your image there. I use the "recent changes" page to see uploads etc. that I might have to deal with.
 * As for the "several" issues with your images, I have a preloaded comment on the drop-down menu when I give reasons for deletion. If there are at least two issues, I use that comment. The only other issue with your image is that it was .png, which you have since corrected.
 * Image size: there is a very good reason for this policy. I don't know the statistics, but many people access this wiki via cell phones. Therefore, we limit the size of images for them (as well as people who have slower load times on computers). You can suggest a change in the forums if you want, but I advise you not to waste your time because the policy isn't going to be changed. The policy is not "woefully outdated", "antiquated" or "draconian".
 * Speaking of the drop-down message I leave for image deletions, part of that message includes a link to a forum thread I created to make it easier to access all our image policies: Thread:148148. I believe that thread includes advice on how to bring down image sizes.
 * Forewarning - sorry, but that isn't going to happen. It would require extra work on my part to leave a message on each user's page, then check back later to see if they fixed the problem. There are just way too many new users who don't read the image policies before uploading images; I learned a long time ago that users learn more from having their work removed than from someone else cleaning up their mistakes.
 * "It bothers more people than it helps" - you actually have no proof of that. Most people who edit here don't realize that there are many many more people who visit this site without ever editing it, and many of them use cell phones.
 * Lastly, I suggest you take a look at Tardis:No personal attacks. When you uploaded the new versions of your images, you basically violated that policy with your comments. There's no valid reason to say that I "savagely deleted" your image; there's nothing personal when I delete images and you are violating the directive to "assume good faith" when you used that term. Keep in mind that your comment is now attached to that image, and anyone reading the forum thread and clicking on the image can see your comment. That is unacceptable, especially since our forums attract a lot of new users and we don't want to give the impression that it's ok to criticize other users.

Thanks for your patience in reading this long message, Shambala108 ☎  01:19, October 3, 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for a very in-depth answer.
 * I hadn't considered the issue of cellphones users; previously browsing the old discussions, the latest I could find on the subject restated that the small images were for the benefit of people with slow Internet on their personal computers, and didn't, as far as I recall, mention cellphones. Though I honestly don't entirely follow the reasoning with cellphones, either. Note for example that quintessential primarily-telephone-browsed websites include Tumblr or Twitter, and on both rather large images are commonplace. I don't know. As someone who never, ever uses a telephone for Internet-browsing I might just be missing something.
 * It's a pity about the forewarning. But I would still consider the policies of this Wiki on the draconian side of things — which doesn't mean they're wrong; but speaking as someone who has been active on a number of Wikis, it's simple fact that I've never seen one as harsh in its image-policies as Tardis. Some advised, for example, the use of Jpg for live-action images and Png for drawings and diagrams — but I have never, ever seen one where this was a hard rule and your image would get automatically deleted if you violated it. On the Harry Potter Wiki (the closest in size to Tardis, though, of course, Tardis stil wins by a wide margin), the deletion of an image file has to be discussed on the "Candidates for deletion" talkpage, like any other page, unless it is obvious NSFW trolling. On the Scrooge McDuck Wiki, with the exception (again) of NSFW trolling, it's against policy to delete an image, even if it is no longer in use on any page.
 * I apologize for the "savagely deleted" comment, written through the lens of extreme annoyance (and while I had a headache for other, medical reasons). Note however that I didn't mean it as a personal attack towards you — it referred to my opinion on the policies themselves.
 * One practical question, though: the Image Policies state plainly that png is the preferred format for drawings, as opposed to screenshots of live-action or photographs. Why then was png an argument against my image? It is, after all, a drawing. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  10:03, October 3, 2018 (UTC)
 * I apologize for the "savagely deleted" comment, written through the lens of extreme annoyance (and while I had a headache for other, medical reasons). Note however that I didn't mean it as a personal attack towards you — it referred to my opinion on the policies themselves.
 * One practical question, though: the Image Policies state plainly that png is the preferred format for drawings, as opposed to screenshots of live-action or photographs. Why then was png an argument against my image? It is, after all, a drawing. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  10:03, October 3, 2018 (UTC)
 * One practical question, though: the Image Policies state plainly that png is the preferred format for drawings, as opposed to screenshots of live-action or photographs. Why then was png an argument against my image? It is, after all, a drawing. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  10:03, October 3, 2018 (UTC)
 * One practical question, though: the Image Policies state plainly that png is the preferred format for drawings, as opposed to screenshots of live-action or photographs. Why then was png an argument against my image? It is, after all, a drawing. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  10:03, October 3, 2018 (UTC)

Forum posts
Hi, you are going to stop complaining about forum threads being closed, especially in unrelated forum threads. That's not your job to decide; if you have an issue with a forum thread closing, take it to the talk page of the admin that did it. Otherwise such comments will be removed from the forum threads, and repeated violations in the past by other users have been met with lengthy blocks.

See, I think you need to understand that admins are not paid staff, we are volunteers just like the rest of you. We don't have time to warn every user when we are about to take such actions as deleting images or closing long-abandoned forum threads. And the forums are very public places on this wiki, so I enforce a much stricter standard of posting than I would on a talk page. We have lots of new users who come to the forums first, and they have no idea what our policies are and who is/isn't an admin.

Thanks for your attention, Shambala108 ☎  14:57, November 5, 2018 (UTC)


 * I apologize if my post sounded like "complaining", I only meant it as a legitimate question — as the answer to it seemed relevant to the Romana Trey/Romana III thread. And I wasn't the one to bring up the old thread to begin with; someone else did; once it was in discussion I didn't see a problem with discussing its content. I could, if you want, edit the post to make my intentions clearer, for the benefit of the new users you are referring to? --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  15:01, November 5, 2018 (UTC)

Removing posts by other editors
I am assuming this could be an honest mistake even though you removed my post seven minutes after it was posted. Do not repeat this again.

And I sincerely ask you to drop it. This is not a game. It's a life of a real person, a child. It's exactly a wrong page to be argumentative for the sake of the argument. We should stop trampling on a special gift given to Anna by Jodie and the TARDIS crew. Amorkuz ☎  20:01, November 19, 2018 (UTC)
 * It was indeed a complete mishap. No idea how it happened. Conflicting edits, probably (I went back to fix a typo in my own message a little while after posting).
 * And I get what you mean, I do — though frankly, if it were me, I'd be even more happy if a side-effect of Whittaker & Co's kindness was that I got to be considered a real Doctor Who character. See my last post on said talk page. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  20:06, November 19, 2018 (UTC)
 * And I get what you mean, I do — though frankly, if it were me, I'd be even more happy if a side-effect of Whittaker & Co's kindness was that I got to be considered a real Doctor Who character. See my last post on said talk page. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  20:06, November 19, 2018 (UTC)

Pipe-switching capital letters
Hi. Just wanted to let you know that pipe-switching capital letters when linking to pages such as the Doctor, the Rani's TARDIS, etc. is not necessary. You can just write it in lower case, and the link still works ;). Happy editing. OncomingStorm12th ☎  19:33, December 21, 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, not much I can do to help in this matter, I suppose. I typically always upload .jpg files because they are easier to get under 100kb for me. But keep in mind (specially with admins, and furthermore in the case of Shambala, who, I think tends to do clean-ups) that it's very common to wait a few hours (or days indeed) to get a reply from user talk messages. But I'm sure she'll get around to answering you, eventually. OncomingStorm12th ☎  19:47, December 21, 2018 (UTC)

Re: PNG
Hi, per Tardis:Image use policy, "Use JPG format for photographic images, like screenshots. Use the SVG format where possible for icons, logos, drawings, maps, flags, and such. PNG format is also acceptable as an alternative to SVGs, and can be especially convenient when you require an image to have a transparent background."

PNG is mainly for images when you want transparent backgrounds. This is not the case for comic images. If you choose pretty much any comic image at random, you'll see that they are in JPG. This is partly for consistency, something that most users don't appreciate the need for, but on a wiki this size it's a prime consideration for many policies.

Also, I feel like I need to remind you that I and other admins are not paid staff here. When we receive a message on our talk pages, we try to answer as soon as possible, and an answer within two days is considered better than what you get on most wikis. It is not necessary to go to someone else within a few hours after you make your original post. Please keep in mind that we all have real lives, we might live in different time zones, and of course this time of year is especially busy for many of us.

Thanks, Shambala108 ☎  03:58, December 22, 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, apparently I wasn't clear enough. We use JPG for comic images (see virtually any comic image on the wiki) and I gave a reasonable reason: for consistency. The policy I cited says PNG is for transparency, which comic images do not need. If it helps, I will change the language at the policy, but for the sanity of all admins, it is just better to keep as many images as possible in the same format (JPG) to keep new users from misunderstanding the rules and using PNG for any image. Like I said above, much of what we do here is for consistency and ease of enforcement, which is necessary when you have a wiki with 50+ years of material and 60000+ pages. Shambala108 ☎  03:39, December 23, 2018 (UTC)


 * Apologies for butting in, but I am curious why you do not apply screenshot rules to comic images. Don't you obtain images for comics by taking a screenshot of the comic presented on your screen? I certainly do. How do you make them otherwise? Even if you scan a printed edition, Forum:Tech note: Image use policy change clearly mandates to use jpg. Amorkuz ☎  11:06, December 23, 2018 (UTC)


 * Well, far be it from me to opine on how you store your comic stories. But neither should the policy and the type of files for images be affected by your personal habits. It is rare that comics are sold as pdfs because of copyright, DRM etc. And comics are certainly never sold as individual jpg's, one per page. The policy does not refer to the eventual format you chose for storing it. The policy refers to the formats that can be obtained from original legally bought merchandise. For comics, by far the most common ones are paper editions, which can be scanned, and digital editions, which geneally cannot be legally transformed into pdf or jpg, but can be screenshot. For both cases, the policy mandates the use of jpg format. While there may exist some marginal cases other than these two, as Shambala already mentioned, it would be counterproductive to let the policy split hairs. Use jpg for all comics is a good policy because it is easy to maintain, and it has no downsides.


 * There may be other cases of non-comic images that can be classified as line drawing and would benefit(?) from png-format. But I cannot think of an example. Again, as already mentioned by Shambala, transparency could be one feauture, but I cannot think of an image using transparency. Amorkuz ☎  14:31, December 23, 2018 (UTC)


 * Well, that lays this one to rest, thanks to User:Amorkuz. But you need to keep in mind that we can't cover every contingency in every policy page, so sometimes you do have to, as you put it, take an admin's word for it. In this case, my experience of editing story pages yielded the fact that most, if not all, comic images are JPG.


 * And here's where you can have a look at the uses of PNG for transparencies: Category:Real world logos. Note which ones use JPG and which ones use PNG and you should be able to spot the distinction. Shambala108 ☎  01:37, December 24, 2018 (UTC)

Yana
I haven't actually left a message; I just added Yana and John Smith (Tenth Doctor) to the "Pages most relevant to this discussion" at the bottom after reading the debate.--Borisashton ☎  22:59, February 4, 2019 (UTC)

Personal attacks
Hi given that you've been warned at least once before, you're blocked for three days for violating Tardis:No personal attacks at Thread:171578 when you called User:AdricLovesNyssa's comments "poppycock". Shambala108 ☎  22:38, February 10, 2019 (UTC)
 * …Oh for cryin' out loud. First and foremosthat was a joke. I thought using a funny, old-timey word would have made that clear. I don't think anyone involved other than you thought it was a personal attack of all things. Because it didn't refer to Adric's comment as a whole, let alone to them as a person. It was very specifically about one of the suggested ideas. And again. A joke.


 * I have perused Tardis:No personal attacks and, much as I expected, failed to see anything whatsoever forbidding someone to use a jokey word to point out that someone's ideas on a specific matter are a bit silly. The policy is about insulting people, and I did no such thing.


 * I have nothing but good feelings about the Tardis Data Core, and as the main admin of another Wiki that's nowhere near this one's size I can sympathize with how hard it can be to keep order on such things. But in my opinion, your way, that is to say, sometimes-bizarrely strict rules, enforced in usually-fair, but ever-ruthless fashion — that's not a decent way to do it. Since it has a tendency to boil down to "shoot first, ask questions later".


 * (If I may make a suggestion, I think a worthy improvement to the way you handle perceived "personal attacks" (to other Wiki editors; Doctor Who cast & crew is an entirely other kettle of fish) would be first to see if the supposed target perceived the comment as insulting; then to have them talk things over with the supposed culprit if they thought it was an attack. If after this process the victim still feels there's been a wrong, then start dealing out sanctions. This would prevent miscarriages of justice such as, well, this one. And what's more, it would actually be beneficial to you admins, since then you'd only be called in as a last resort, while not bothering you for nothing in situations where there's plainly no harm done.) --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  23:49, February 10, 2019 (UTC)

Disclaimer: by the time I got your post, you had already been blocked by User:Amorkuz.

Anyway, there are two main points that I want to make about your (original) block.

First, I think most users are not aware that our forums attract many new users. Maybe they're looking for a chance to talk about DW but haven't found the discussion boards yet, I don't know. At any rate, the forums are a highly visible place for new users, and as such I enforce our rules much more strictly than on, say, article talk pages. If something even remotely looks like a personal attack, I will block (unless it's against me, because I don't want it to look like I'm silencing someone who disagrees with me in a forum thread). Keep in mind that when I blocked you it was only for three days, despite me already having given you a warning. Most blocks are for much, much longer.

Second, the purpose of the block is to teach the correct behavior. I warned you once, but since that didn't work, the block was necessary. I'm going to give you an example that is similar to yours. Several years ago, User:SOTO made what appeared to be a personal attack against me. By my usual policy, I warned him instead of blocking him (since it was against myself). He explained that what he said was not aimed at me. I then told him that sometimes when a user tries to make a joke, it can come across entirely unlike what he intended. In SOTO's case, he hasn't stopped making obscure comments that are hard to understand, but he is careful not to say anything that could offend. This is what I suggest you do: if you want to say something funny, think about how (especially new) users might (mis)interpret what you want to say. And especially, if you disagree with someone, just say "I disagree" and give your reasons.

Despite your defense of your comment, it looked to me (and who knows who else) like you were dismissing User:AdricLovesNyssa's comment. Please in the future treat other users as you would like.

And one last thing, while I can appreciate your finding it necessary to involve someone else in stating your defense, we actually do have a procedure in place for you to protest a block: see Help:I'm blocked for what to do if you want to contest Amorkuz' block.

Thanks, Shambala108 ☎  04:19, February 14, 2019 (UTC)

Block
Hi. Did you ever wonder why you sometimes narrate how you are being mistreated and how admin are wrong and you are right, and lo and behold an admin warns you about personal attacks, like it happened here: Did you ever consider that your opinions are often rude and judgmental, like here: Did you consider that some of your posts are condescending, like here: (In fact, if I knew for a fact that you are male, I would have said it is a textbook example of mansplaining)
 * "...then savagely deleted for reasons that partially escape me..."
 * "...ever-ruthless fashion — that's not a decent way to do it. Since it has a tendency to boil down to "shoot first, ask questions later"..."
 * "You no doubt committed the error detailed below with good intentions, and simply got carried away because running a Wiki is hard. (I know, I run one too...)"

Let me hasten to add that we do not have a policy against rudeness. You may choose to be rude. But this choice provides context for your other posts. So is it really that surprising that, as you keep making jokes, admin keep asking you to stop personal attacks?

Now looking at the log, I can see that so far you called every time you were blocked a "miscarriage of justice". Here is your reaction to the first block by Shambala108: And here is your reaction to my block: Of course, since then you admitted that Shambala108's block was not, in fact, unfair:
 * "This would prevent miscarriages of justice such as, well, this one."
 * "the month-long one you have now imposed on me was nothing short of a miscarriage of justice."
 * "I rather disapprove of the way Tardis Wiki is handling the whole "Personal attacks" thing, Shamabala's (sic!) explanation was rational, clear, and convincing."

So I harbour a hope that you will change your opinion on the other block too, after looking at the situation from somebody else's perspective.

Since I am not clairvoyant and cannot read your mind or guess your intentions, your words are the only thing I have to go by. Here is what you wrote: I see here three options:
 * "For one thing, I used a silly "nonsense word", not some actual serious insult; it's an incompetent bully indeed who'd expect "Poppycock" to be taken as actual offensive name-calling these days."
 * 1) Can it be interpreted to say that you were calling yourself a hypothetical "incompetent bully"? Perhaps. You did switch from first to third person before going for the said epithet, but you may have still meant yourself in a convoluted counterfactual sense.
 * 2) More importantly, could it mean Shambala108, an admin who has blocked you because she had considered "poppycock" to be offensive on your part? In fact, who better fits the role of a hypothetic bully, an ordinary user who is simply being rude or an admin? Your views on this (and other admin) have been previously stated very clearly: we are savage, ruthless, "shoot first", "get carried away", ... Wouldn't you say that your persistent descriptions of admin of this wiki is suggestive of you thinking of us as "bullies"? On the other hand, why would you apply "bully" to yourself? Why would you even go from a personal attack to bullying? AFAIK, you have never been accused of bullying, which is several degrees worse than personal attacks. Thus, for someone who does not have access to your internal thinking, it looks much more likely that in this comment you continue railing against the "miscarriages of justice".
 * 3) A third possibility is that it was purposefully written in an ambiguous way so as to both let you blow off steam and at the same time provide an alibi.

As I said, I do not know which of the three options was intended. But even if the second option were not the more likely given the context, the fact that it is a possible reading makes it a personal attack. As Shambala108 explained to you, when other editors bump into your reaction to a block, they may "misinterpret what you want to say" and read it as a personal attack on the blocking admin, which is not an acceptable behaviour. Given that your reaction to a short block over a questionable post was to make an even more questionable post, only a longer block could have a chance to effect a change in your behaviour.

To be quite honest with you I was considering shortening your block based on your explanation. But then I noticed something peculiar about your post to me. You misspell Shambala108's name in almost every instance. You write Shamabala instead of, even though the latter is a dictionary word. I did a quick spotcheck and it seems that this is not the first time: you did the same in November. But you seem to have learned the correct spelling by December. Once again, I do not know whether it was an honest mistake, a Freudian slip, or an even sneakier personal attack. So I have decided to follow your advice, as it were. I will ask Shambala108 to shorten your block if she does not consider this persistent misspelling offensive and thinks that your responses to her block and my block do indicate that you will refrain from language interpretable as personal attacks in the future. Amorkuz ☎  01:03, February 15, 2019 (UTC)

Block: collective decision
You can find the final decision at User talk:Amorkuz. None of the admin involved feel that your messages in response to the blocks warrant the shortening thereof. I apologise for assuming originally that you are familiar with our procedures for those under block, but you have been informed by now. Based on some unfortunate recent experiences and not to repeat this mistake of assuming your general knowledge, I would like to impress on you the seriousness of our sock puppetry policy. An attempt to circumvent a block by editing from an IP or an alternative account would result in an automatic infinite block on all accounts involved, with no possibility of an appeal. Note that this policy is also triggered by attempting to appeal your current block from an IP or some such. To be clear, I do not view such an attempt as likely on your part. But better safe than unwittingly walking into an irreversible infinite block. Amorkuz ☎  08:57, February 15, 2019 (UTC)

Violating policies while blocked
Please be advised that your latest post to me on Community central violates Tardis policy regarding behaviour while blocked in several way. The policy was communicated to you by Shambala108 and quoted by you in your first message on Community central. Hence, your knowledge of it is not in doubt. Since I specifically referenced this policy in my response to your appeal, the violation of this policy cannot be anything but deliberate. I will quote the policy at length: "Because Fandom Staff probably won't help you, somehow you need to get in touch with local admin. The only way to do this, if they're preventing you from all communication on their wiki, is to go to another Fandom wiki — neutral ground as it were — and leave a message on their wall/talk page there. If they don't respond to you after one (again, one) polite and reasonable attempt at apology, you can make one last attempt.

You can then seek out a different local admin than the one who blocked you and plead your case. (Again, you'll have to contact them on a different wiki, and again you'll need to keep your cool when you do it.) Admit that you were wrong and ask the "neutral" admin to perform an internal review of the case. If you make your case politely and you admit you were wrong, you might get the blocking re-considered. The blocking might not actually get overturned, but at least you'll have gotten some sort of review by the only people who can overturn it.

Having said all this, you need to be very careful about contacting people who have blocked you. Don't carry on a conversation with a person on wiki a about events on wiki b. The admin of wiki b might not like it, especially if the conversation turns ugly. You could easily end up being banned from wiki b too. Make it one note. Make it apologetic. Don't swear. Don't accuse. Just say, "I made a mistake. I apologise profusely. Is there any way you could review the block and lower it?" That's it. And remember: one attempt at communicating with a blocking admin is reasonable. Two or more attempts can be considered harrassment."

- Policy preventing harrassment of admin by blocked users

Firstly, after I promptly responded to your appeal, got a second opinion from another admin and responded with the final decision, you contacted me for the second time, which is explicitly called possible harassment in the provided quote.

Secondly, you continued discussing internal Tardis business on another wiki. One of the functions of a block is that you lose your voice in wiki affairs for the duration of the block. Since blocks are not necessary for people who could be persuaded without using force and since you have repeatedly refused to apologise based on extensive explanations provided to you by two admn, the fact that you are not able to participate in current validity debates whenever your posts are classified as personal attacks might finally dissuade you from making such posts.

I have spent quite a lot of time reviewing your case and am not planning on spending any more. Further attempts to appeal your block to me or to Shambala108 will be considered harassment and result in the lengthening of your block. You have been given plenty of opportunities to apologise, as prescribed above, and explicitly refused to do so. Amorkuz ☎  12:35, February 15, 2019 (UTC)

RE: Legibility
Quite fair! The issue, really, is that I've hardly visited or paid much attention to my user page in the last number of years. It read quite well in the old colour scheme, of course. As soon as I have the free time for it, I'll see about updating. Quite frankly, the text is out of date too. Thanks for the reminder! :) 09:15, May 16, 2019 (UTC)

Image policies
Thank you for your inquiry. Your image was deleted because it violated our Tardis image policies. However, your claim that no edit summary was left for the deletion is false. As an admin on another wiki, you must surely know how to read delete summaries. The deleted image you are referring to features one of Tardis preset delete summaries for images, "< 420px width".

Before uploading any more images, I would request that you familiarise yourself with all our image policies, including Help:Image cheat card, Tardis:Guide to images and Tardis:Image use policy. This will help avoid confusion on your part in the future. Thank you for your attention. Amorkuz ☎  10:06, May 16, 2019 (UTC)

Page names
Please additionally acquaint yourself with Tardis:Naming conventions. Plural names can only be used if the singular version either does not exist or would mean something else. (Plural names are naturally also used in proper names that are pluralised, as in United Nations.) Amorkuz ☎  10:30, May 16, 2019 (UTC)


 * Why would the description "widowed reflections" be a proper name? I fail to follow your reasoning. Amorkuz ☎  13:15, May 16, 2019 (UTC)


 * So your argument is that this nickname, which is used exactly once to finish the phrase "some kind of" and which is never uttered by their creator (who calls them "my flock"),---that this is a proper name. These are most similar to "Stingrays", voiceless creatures descriptively named by somebody in passing. Unlike "stingrays", however, these distorted reflections do not play a significant role and are not the main antagonist of the story. They require no page of their own and should be mentioned in at most two sentences at Mirror Folk, which itself should be "Mirror folk". Amorkuz ☎  08:49, May 17, 2019 (UTC)