User talk:Shambala108

If you need to leave a message here on my talk page, please follow a couple of guidelines: --
 * Please don't forget to sign your posts. I won't answer any post that doesn't have a signature.
 * Also, if you are starting a new topic, please add a new heading.

Thumbnail
What exactly does "the thumbnail of this image was too indistinct" mean, and why were my images removed for that? (JMC Red Dwarf ☎  21:26, March 16, 2018 (UTC))

Images
Hey. uhm, i don't know how to change the file name without them not working. and i didn't specify the size of them User:Jantoshipper 18:49 17 March 2018

Wikipedia template
Hi, your message to User:Sam601 caught my eye and I was just wondering exactly why the wikipediainfo template can't be used on the Doctor pages. Is it because it is written from a real world perspective or because it has less information on it and is considered inferior?

If so, would it be okay to put the template on pages like The Doctor (The Girl Who Loved Doctor Who) since that page contains less information and since the events of that story happen in the "real world?"

P.S. On a completely unrelated note when I was typing your name into the search bar I noticed the user pages of the vandalistic accounts Shambala08 and Shambala weighs 2500 pounds still existed which you might or might not want to delete. Thanks for your time. --Borisashton ☎  12:37, March 25, 2018 (UTC)

Carvaggio rename
Hi, I noticed you reverted my speedy rename template back into a rename on Carvaggio? Just wondering why -- I relistened to that bit from the audio, and it really sounds like "Caravaggio". – N8 ☎ 13:55, April 6, 2018 (UTC)

Avoiding trouble
Hello, Shambala108, I hope you are doing well.

Listen, I'll cut to the chase. I've been having trouble with an unregistered user on pages Ninth Doctor, Rose Tyler and Martha Jones concerning whether the narrator for audios is a valid other voice actor, and removing the invalid Rachel MacFarlene from Rose's page. I've tried to be civil and explain how this wiki does not count narrators as voice actors unless its an in-character narration, but I'm not getting through to them, and I have a dissertation I should really being focusing on. I was hoping that you could step in and give your opinion before this gets out of hand. Don't worry, I'll support whatever decision you come too, as you have a far better understanding about this wiki than I do.

I just wanted to let you know before what always happens happens; they'll complain to an admin that I'm being unfair, I'll get blocked for a few months without an opportunity to defend my actions, they'll course trouble and get blocked themselves, and then I'll return and have missed out on editing new articles that I could have helped with. I really don't want that to happen again, especially since I plan to update the Eighth Doctor's psychological profile once my dissertation is done in a month's time, so I'm coming to you first this time to avoid that outcome.

Hope I'm not troubling you, Sincerely, BananaClownMan ☎  15:10, April 25, 2018 (UTC)


 * UPD. Both users have been blocked for a day for an edit war across several pages. I would not call the behaviour of either of them civil. Amorkuz ☎  15:44, April 25, 2018 (UTC)

Why is all my stuff that I'm adding and sourcing constantly being removed and no one else's is, even if I use other people's sources? And why is IMDb not a reliable source but facebook and some random guys from twitter are reliable sources ?

Sincerely , Craig Winder @

Trap For Fools
Hi, just saw your edit on this page and had a quick question. I understand fully that the policy of this wiki is to use double quotation marks, as well as the parts about honourifics, and would have no hesitations were it a section of text that had been come up with by a user. However, in this case it came directly from the summary created by the publisher, word for word, symbol for symbol. Does this policy also cover changing the formatting of officially published information, since technically speaking, what is on the page now is not the official summary, but a slight modification of it.

Just wanted some clarification, thanks for your time. 0003c9fe ☎  12:41, May 30, 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for clearing that up, I'll be sure to keep it in mind when doing future summaries (and anything else that is copied). 0003c9fe ☎  14:27, May 30, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you
I'm new here and I'm still figuring out the ropes. Sorry and thank you. Dedicatedlogic

Thanks
Thank you for your message and the explanation, I'm sorry for posting it there! Mirthetje ☎  16:48, June 26, 2018 (UTC)

Series 11
I've got new information for Series 11. I know it was locked due to recent leaks, but this info is genuine from the BBC's Doctor Who site itself. --DCLM ☎  21:28, June 26, 2018 (UTC)

3.2 Removed fanon
Hey, You recently deleted an edited page about Beatrice. Why is that?

ReggieAde

St Michael's Church
Hi, could you remove the prop delete on St Michael's Church (real world) now? It gathered one reply from a user sharing similar views but its quite an obscure page so I doubt it will attract anymore attention.

To be honest I don't fully understand why you reinstated it after I removed it saying that they shared no relation. I get that one shouldn't generally remove prop deletes placed by an admin and that you should make a case on the talk page but there was no case to make. It's like merging John Hart (The Sea Devils) and John Hart (Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang) because they share a name. Thanks for your time. --Borisashton ☎  11:31, July 7, 2018 (UTC)

SJA narrative trailers
Hi, I just bumped into these three pages: SJA series 1 (trailer), SJA series 3 (trailer) and SJA series 4 (trailer). The last one you labelled invalid. Probably, all of them should be treated the same. Should they all be made invalid? Amorkuz ☎  22:33, July 8, 2018 (UTC)

Video Trailer
I added the video trailer for the audio Hour of the Cybermen to its page. It came from the official Big Finish Youtube channel. Other video trailers on other pages like Order of the Daleks have not been removed, so why was mine? Thanks. Omega3454 ☎  04:09, July 17, 2018 (UTC)

SJA Warriors of Kudlak
Hi there, I was wondering what I did wrong on the edits of Warriors of Kudlak (TV story). The changes that I made were reverted without a note of explanation, so I'd like to learn what it was that was done incorrectly. Thank you. Coldraught ☎  00:22, July 23, 2018 (UTC)

Demonyms
Hello! About the demonym page you deleted a few weeks ago: I know generally there must be references from Doctor Who in-universe or out-universe to make an article, but I was based on something actually already in this wiki (the category, https://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Category%3ADemonyms). Dr Von Wer ☎  19:17, October 7, 2018 (UTC)

Categories response
I positively give up editing here, I'm never going to get anything right! I'm just so tired of screwing this place up, while I'm trying to do right... Okay, I'm done. I'm sorry for messing up the categories and again breaking the wiki's policies. I won't go added categories anymore, since I clearly don't understand them; I'll leave that to other editors. But I really feel as if I should stop editing here. I'm clearly not contributing anything of worth if I'm making this many messes. I just can't deal with the stress and disappointment in myself over messing this wiki up for others with dodgy edit after dodgy edit. My apologies again and I hope I've not made you or any of the other admins mad with me.

BelcherMorganJames ☎  21:34, July 29, 2018 (UTC)

Categories
Could you be a bit more specific with the issues you have? I'd be happy to explain any queries you have. --Borisashton ☎  02:54, August 1, 2018 (UTC)

The Clocksmith's TARDIS
Hi. I was hoping that I can re-write the Clocksmith's TARDIS page with your permission. I'm asking because the last time it was uploaded it was deleted. Thank you for your time, I look forward to hearing from you. Hope you can't wait for the new series, I know I can't. --Saint2 ☎  14:50, August 4, 2018 (UTC)

It's about British words, I'm using Grammarly and I see the red. If you can, pm me about the British words that are right.

Crossed Lines does exist
Here's my proof  ADarthTokuDalek ☎  03:15. September 2, 2018 (UTC)

Re-Categories Revisited
Sorry for reverting your edit, I just wanted to respond to what you said. Anyway, you said not to remove categories that are in The Game of Rassilon. I was pointing out that I had not removed any categories from the Game, I was only removing redundant categories.

Categories I removed: -Earth Battles -21st Century Earth-based conflicts -Dalek Conflicts -London History -Human Conflicts -Cyberman Conflicts -Torchwood -The Void -Battles

None of which are in the Game of Rassilon, all of which are super-categories to another category the article is in.

The Category: The Battle of Canary Wharf and The Category: Conflicts were the only two I left.

I appreciate that you know more than me about the wiki (kinda obvious) but your explanation for the reversion didn't seem relevant, so I assumed you thought I'd removed Conflicts (I hadn't).

If there's another reason it shouldn't change, please do let me know. Danochy ☎  07:15, September 3, 2018 (UTC)


 * OK, so what you're saying is that a page with a category in the game of Rassilon should have none of it's other categories removed either? Because the page for Category Conflicts only says not to remove that specific category from pages. I didn't realise it applied to all categories on that page. Sorry for the confusion. Danochy ☎  03:37, September 4, 2018 (UTC)


 * I think I understand. Those categories I removed weren't redundant because of the Conflicts category, but because of the Battle of Canary Wharf category. Some, I noticed, were already redundant because of the Category:Battle of Canary Wharf, and others I decided (perhaps wrongly?) should be moved to this category, rather than page Battle of Canary Wharf. Perhaps I shouldn't have made this change, but it seemed like an appropriate change based on observation of other similar pages and category pages on the Wiki. Danochy ☎  04:02, September 4, 2018 (UTC)

Reaching people on Discussions
Hi, I think we both had trouble reaching some Discussions-only users. They sometimes just seem to completely ignore messages we leave on their talk pages. Well, I've been given an alternative, technological reason for that. Apparently, a user who only uses Discussions through the Tardis/FANDOM app receives no notification of the message left on their talk page, can see the blocking message only for a few seconds while trying to post, and cannot click on links in these blocking messages. In other words, they are likely to be completely in the dark as to what is going on. Upon some testing, it seems that the only way to reach such users is to duplicate the messages that we already left on their talk pages to some of the Discussion threads they participate in. I am planning to start doing this for my own Discussion-based blocks. It would be good if it turns out our messages were not purposefully ignored, but rather never read. "The Times They Are a-Changin'". We better keep up. Amorkuz ☎  23:29, September 3, 2018 (UTC)


 * so, why are there no more comments?

Followup: another way is to give an extended reason for a block instead of writing it on the talk page. The block message shows up (for a short time) when a blocked person tries to post. Amorkuz ☎  23:30, September 14, 2018 (UTC)

Move
Really sorry about the move, that last one happened so long ago that I couldn't even remember if it was this Wiki that had that policy or another one that I frequented. Guess I should have checked my talk page first. –Nahald ☎  05:42, September 14, 2018 (UTC)


 * Also in regards to Jacques de Requin: Thank you for pointing that out; I hadn't realized a redirect had been left behind. No surprise, you're completely right, and I was wrong to use language that could be seen as accusatory! I've removed my comment (and the links). – N8 ☎ 00:45, September 17, 2018 (UTC)

Spouse category
Hi! On the advice of Amorkuz, I thought I'd reach out to you before I get too far into it.

I've started work on Category:Spouses and think it would be a great addition to the wiki. Many individuals have been married and I believe that it would be a helpful line of inquiry. Also, Category:Spouses of the Doctor already exists as a precedent. Your opinion on the matter would be much appreciated and I look forward to hearing from you. --Borisashton ☎  19:38, September 16, 2018 (UTC)

Inclusion debate post edit
I was really surprised to see this edit, since I didn't think those lines broke any rules. What rule did the removed excerpt break? (For the record, I don't intend to challenge or disagree with you; I just want to make sure I won't make the same mistake.) – N8 ☎ 03:39, September 19, 2018 (UTC)

Unbound TARDISes
Hi, I was wondering if it would be alright to write and publish pages on the TARDISes used by some of the Unbound Doctors? I'd like to hear your opinion. Thank you. --Saint2 ☎  09:05, September 21, 2018 (UTC)

Whittaker's story
Hi. I found this article with Jodie Whittaker. I was wondering where to put it. No spoilers are revealed, so I don't think you can classify it as a spoiler. http://m.ign.com/articles/2018/09/24/doctor-whos-jodie-whittaker-what-being-the-doctor-means-to-me-ign-first --DCLM ☎  16:47, September 24, 2018 (UTC)
 * I was merely unsure where to put it and if it was relevant. --DCLM ☎  14:58, September 25, 2018 (UTC)

Adam Adamant Dies!
Sorry about the Adam Adamant Lives! page. I only made it because it was listed on the 'wanted pages' list. Twitter: @BeeblePete 17:16, September 30, 2018 (UTC)

The first edition of Ahistory is now out why was my contribution removed again?

The first edition of Ahistory is now out why was my contribution removed again?

File:When he was a woman
Hello! As you know, participating in the Prounoun Use for Time Lords discussion, I uploaded the file When he was a woman.png to illustrate a point. I had it properly licensed. I'll admit that it was over 300Ko (Though honestly, that is a woefully outdated policy for the Wiki to have; last time it was discussed in 2014 it was determined that it still had justification, but in 2018? Come on. And it was extremely difficult for me to get this file, or the Jim Broadbent one, under that draconian limit on my computer, for the record.), something I have now corrected, but your editing reason mentioned several policy violations and I couldn't figure out what the others might be.

Also, as a sort of P.S.: isn't it a bit harsh to delete the files without warning in such cases? It's not a matter of license violation — the Tardis Wiki isn't in legal trouble for having them around — so might I suggest forewarning the user when possible? It's lucky I still had the files around on my end, but I very well might have deleted them from my hard drive by the time I learned you'd deleted them here, and then they'd have been lost. Rendering the relevant post on the Pronoun Use thread nigh-incomprehensible, too. (This is just a remark! Perhaps you have perfectly good reasons. But from an outsider's perspective, I just want to note that it looks weird and kind of barbaric.)--Scrooge MacDuck ☎  09:58, October 2, 2018 (UTC)

"This image cannot be changed without community discussion." It said it can be changed starting from 2012.--Looperreallyreallysucks ☎  00:30, October 4, 2018 (UTC)

Hello there! I would totally love creating fanfiction pages on this wiki! I don't want to use the Doctor Who Fanon Wiki, as their infoboxes are plain, and I would like to use this wikis infoboxes. You could make a fanfiction portal where there's noting but fanfiction. Please? For example, someone could make a new fanfiction page, (Fanfiction: The Doctor).

Thanks for your time.

Upper Canada Village
Reverting my edit to add a link to explain what Upper Canada Village is seems pretty daft, but I defer to your longer experience in this wiki vs. mine in Wikipedia. You might consider copying the Wikipedia article to eliminate the redlink. PKT ☎  00:20, October 15, 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I got your message with the thread to look up regarding uploaded images. The email you sent me doesn't have a working link to that the thread and I've been unsuccessful so far in finding that discussion thread on Tardis wiki. Could you try giving me that link again or point me toward where to find what you wanted me to review?

Thank you. Esparza3368 ☎  14:32, October 21, 2018 (UTC)

Banned on Xx-Connor-xX
Why have I been banned on my main account? And why am I unable to message you on that one? It is ridiculous. I changed one thing, I didn’t “edit war”. Someone removed the fact that Yasmin was Pakistani from a page, it had long since been established that she was Pakistani and as such I put the information back and asked why it had been removed (it was not information solely related to today’s episode). I was told the information shouldn’t be added until on the hour, and as such I readded the information after 8pm. This is seriously not legitimate grounds for a three month ban. Madness. ConnorNew ☎  22:46, October 21, 2018 (UTC)

RE: Question
Hey there. As far as I am aware, no. Yes, racial slurs were mentioned ("negroe", "Paki" and so on) but - as best as I can recall - no one in the episode said "black people" or "white people". Ryan was even called "your kind" by Krasko, a complete avoidance of the term "black people". Although, the sides on the bus indicated "white" and "color" - whether that warrants the page remains unclear to me; certainly the "Black people" page would be more accurate if called "Coloured people" based on that source. Snivy   ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦   00:43, October 23, 2018 (UTC)

RE: New pages
Thank you for your explanation as to why you removed my articles. I am fairly new to the wiki and wikis in general and was trying to help out with the addition of information after the new episode by creating a few pages.

I was aware of the no real-world rule and attempted to present the article as a real-world account of "Black people" and "White people" as a social class.

While I cannot remember the precise usage of the term "black" in "Rosa" or in other DWU stories, it is a term that has been used before as I believe Bill thought she'd be too "black" for Regency Era London.

The same is true for "White people." During the episode there are several references to "white-only" facilities, and the concept is mentioned in other stories, such as when Clyde Langer refers to his hand not being white.

As for needing a source for white people having lighter skin and black people having darker skin, I don't know if I'm quite getting the objection. Characters who are labelled as black are played by darker-skinned actors than those who are labelled white. I cannot source this being explicitly stated, but the Adipose are also described as being Marshmallow-shaped, and I don't think that was explicitly mentioned in their stories: it, too, is an inference from what is seen on-screen.

I made the pages under the name after seeing hyperlinks to them that did not exist created by other users, and created a few links to the not-yet existing articles myself. In accordance with plural vs singular policy, I have no objection if they were to be renamed "Coloured people," "Coloured person," "Coloured," "Black person," or "Black (race)", and "White person" or "White (race)", but I'm not sure if I see the need for outright deletion.

Thanks for your time and sorry if this got a bit ramble-y. I appreciate that it's always a bit contentious making articles that address DWU topics that exist in the real world that are controversial due to racism etc. --Princess Eska ☎  05:25, October 23, 2018 (UTC)

Short stories short comment
Hi, I somehow started editing a bit in short stories, where you are the expert. Thought I'd mention that if I accidentally break something, it's probably because I don't have the whole picture, only look at some stories and often just parts of them. Please feel free to turn things back in such cases. (And my god if there isn't a lot of useful info in short stories.) Amorkuz ☎  00:00, October 30, 2018 (UTC)

Torchwood Novels and Audio template
Hi there, Shambala,

Hope you are well; I just wanted to draw your attention to the current Torchwood Novels and Audio Template (Here). For me, some of the text is unreadable. Also, I believe that there are too many 'child' navboxes.

I have created a (what I believe is an improved) prototype, which splits the stories into Novels, Audio, and Big Finish Audio, since Big Finish has tons of stories already!

These can be found at my sandbox (Here), and I was hoping you would be able to check over and hopefully use these as new templates? If all is okay with you, and my templates are approved, I don't mind going to each individual story and replacing the outdated one?

Thanks so much for your time, Warm regards, Lay  ton  4  - 22:14, 6/11/2018

Unsourced
oh well, i refer to wikipedia and to a tweet by Colin Baker, and there are many opther sources you can find, and you blame me for not naming my source, Seems tom me i am completely wrong in this wiki... Do i have to understand this ?!? --Rübenbrei ☎  20:12, November 12, 2018 (UTC)

Warlock's Cross Alternate Cover
Hi, I notice that you reused the Cover Art of the Alternate as the Main, the One I "reupload" is not a double, the previous is a Cast mistake, instead of having "Tracy Childs" it has "Sophie Andred" and "Bonnie Langford" I know I should've said something in the comments of the Image, I just want to let you know that the Cover Art you have it set have the wrong casting. --SleepyTechnoKid ☎  02:36, November 14, 2018 (UTC)

I believe that it is best to remove it and I'll just reuploaded it. --SleepyTechnoKid ☎  02:21, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

Rowspans on series pages
Hello. Last few days, I went on Series 11 (Doctor Who) and switches two consecutive instances of the same writer for "|rowspan=2". Then, User:Zanda21 simply reverted it with no edit summaries, so I added them back in (because no rationale was given, and the use of rowspans is fairly used on tables). Then, the same user reverted again to previous state with the following rationale: "Actually, there is. Rowspans are atrocious for anyone with a screenreader, as it does not take them into account and causes major issues for readers who use them. Same as colspans". Finally, User:Borisashton added them back, saying the were used all over the wiki even suggesting to bring it to the forums, but once again Zanda21 reverted edits with the same rationale, claiming rowspan were "introduced recently": ''"When people need help, I never refuse" These were introduced recently, so they should stay reverted until there's a policy to support it. Else, you're refusing entrance to anyone with a screenreader. Hover over the spans, see what happens.''.

I really don't want to start an edit war over this, so I'm coming to admin to settle the question: can rowspans be used on tables for series pages? Thanks. OncomingStorm12th ☎  02:25, November 15, 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clarifying things. I'll add them back now :) OncomingStorm12th ☎  03:00, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

The Time Warrior
Hi, i saw you edited https://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/The_Time_Warrior_(TV_story)?diff=2591006 and was wandering how this is a cast and crew note:
 * After mistaking men and women for two different species and calling the human reproduction inefficient, Linx suggests to change it and states: "At the sontaran military academy, we have hatchings of a million cadetts at every muster parade, thus we can sustain enormous casualities on all battlefronts."

why do you think it doesn't belong on the page. I think it is worthy because we heard something on screen that helps us getting a better picture of the whoniverse.

--Bobowm ☎  11:51, November 26, 2018 (UTC) --Bobowm ☎  11:53, November 26, 2018 (UTC)

You Bro
w hy did you delete the Arctic Monkeys article its relevant. --Owen 04:02, December 3, 2018 (UTC)

Re: battle of ranskor
Hello there ^_^. I suppose removing the content is the most effective method to get an anon's attention to stop committing unwarranted edits. However, how do the images make the entirety in what they added worth removing? Why couldn't we keep the plot summary for editors to proofread later when we could have removed the images separately? My line of thinking was keep the plot information as it saves editors a bulk of work outside proofreading it. Thanks. Snivy   ✦ The coolest Pokemon ever ✦   09:29, December 11, 2018 (UTC)

Added Response
Bro refers to a person were I come from i didn't mean to assume anything --Owen 07:19, December 15, 2018 (UTC)

BC or B.C.
Hi there, just wondering whether BC or B.C. is preferred in articles or if there are different preferences in different contexts, as I've seen both. Specifically wanting to say that an character ruled during the 6th century BC/B.C. in the body of an article I'm writing. Thanks for your time! Toqgers ☎  22:59, December 19, 2018 (UTC)

PNG images
Er… what now? Perhaps my memory is playing tricks on me, but I was pretty sure that JPG was for screenshots, whereas images from comics were supposed to be in png. Did I just… hallucinate that? If so I apologize, but that's weird. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  14:23, December 21, 2018 (UTC)

EDIT: yeah, there it is at T:IMAGE CHEAT. ".png and .svg preferred for line drawings." Care to explain? --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  14:26, December 21, 2018 (UTC)
 * Look, I'm willing to take your word for it, but I don't see how either policy page, in any way, says JPG should be used for comic arts. The passage you quoted says JPG is to be used "for photographic images like screenshots" — nothing to do with drawings. T:IMAGE CHEAT, as I quoted above, says "PNG and SVG preferred for line drawings", without saying anything about transparency. I can't see how the image you deleted at Magnus (Flashback) is anything but a line drawing, as opposed to a screenshot.
 * (As for why I notified OS12, no offense was meant to the speed of you answer; I just felt bad about leaving those two or three pages with broken file links for too long, and had a nagging fear that I was missing something so obvious that there was no need to ask an admin over it. Yes, I know, busy time of the year. Happy holidays!)
 * --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  10:28, December 22, 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, please do… again, I believe you now that you tell me this, but I would never ever have figured out from a policy that says JPG is for screenshots, and PNG is for line drawings, that JPG was to be used for line drawings too unless they were transparent. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  10:13, December 23, 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, please do… again, I believe you now that you tell me this, but I would never ever have figured out from a policy that says JPG is for screenshots, and PNG is for line drawings, that JPG was to be used for line drawings too unless they were transparent. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎  10:13, December 23, 2018 (UTC)

Line drawings
Glad to have been useful. Still no idea where would line drawings would come from, other than user images. Amorkuz ☎  10:31, December 26, 2018 (UTC)

Hangar page
Hi, just wondered why you deleted the page for the hangar from Insect. I noticed you moved it then added to info to the main hangar page. Thanks in advance. --Borisashton ☎  02:05, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

Category redundancy
Look, I really don't know why you're suddenly taking issue with this. As I've pointed out before, this has been standard practice for as long as I can remember.

But since you've brought it up once again, it seems I need to repeat my explanation. If a writer has written a novelisation, as well as novels that are not novelisations, they get both categories.

However, if they're only ever written novelisations, adding "novel writers" -- a more general category, which in this case only encompasses the more specific one -- would, in fact, be redundant. Adding Doctor Who voice actors or Big Finish voice actors to a person who's only ever been a Ravenous voice actor would, indeed, be redundant.

It's not really my fault if this hasn't been well-documented in our policy pages. In any case, this has long been established, and I'm surprised you've only picked up on this of late. 03:54, January 5, 2019 (UTC)
 * Put another way, the actor's role in Dreamland is not at all encompassed within category:Ravenous voice actors. That category, on its own, inadequately covers the topic of the page.


 * And there are no issues, technical or otherwise, with having two categories that are related in the category tree, if in an exclusive sense, both apply. 04:02, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

RE Moving page
Sorry about that. i didn't realise until too late that the page name was not spelt corectly. I'll notify you instead of doing the move in the future. Sclera1 ☎

Categories
Hey :) Hope your new year has started well! Just wanted to stick my toe in the waters of this category organisational thing that's caused some confusion.

Thing is that it's indeed possible for something to be in both a parent and a child category, and for it to cause neither recursion nor any other ill-effect. In fact, it can be good to put a page in multiple, somewhat related categories. For instance, the Golden Gate Bridge is both a "bridge from the real world" and, further up the category tree, a "San Francisco location". Even though both these categories are ultimately under category:Locations, it's useful to put them both on the article Golden Gate Bridge, since they describe different aspects of the bridge's status as a location.

Of course, we do want to be as precise with categories as possible. And you're absolutely right to be on guard against over-categorisation. But we don't want to avoid using multiple relevant categories just because those categories are notionally related.

Like many categories, Category:Doctor Who voice actors has a meaning both in itself and as a link on the category tree. It's one of the oldest categories on the wiki, and it traditionally has meant "someone who provides voice work for the TV programme Doctor Who" — such as the actor who voiced Alpha Centauri. The actors in Dreamland would naturally go in this cat, since Dreamland is properly titled Dreamland (TV story).

Purely for organisational purposes, subcategories were later attached to this so that you could kind of read "Doctor Who" as meaning the franchise. So category:Big Finish Doctor Who voice actors is within it, but this "organisational meaning" is only seen in the category namespace. That is, you can use category:Doctor Who voice actors to get to category:Big Finish Doctor Who voice actors, if you're clicking your way through our category tree.

But someone placed within category:Doctor Who voice actors is not a Big Finish actor, nor vice versa.

In the case of Nicholas Rowe, we do want to put him both in category:Doctor Who voice actors, because he was in Dreamland, and in Category:Ravenous voice actors, since he was in that as well. And if he shows up in another BF range, we'd want to separately categorise that, too.

This gives us a lot of options down the road, such as the ability to run SMW or DPL queries which separate one part of his career from another, or to run a report which includes him amongst other actors who also gave their voice to the main DW TV programme.

The real error in this particular case would be to put him in Category:Doctor Who voice actors if he had not appeared in a TV story. That is, if an actor only appeared in, I dunno, Phantasmagoria (audio story), they absolutely should not be in Category:Doctor Who voice actors. They only belong in Category:Big Finish Doctor Who voice actors.

Hope that helps! 22:29: Mon 07 Jan 2019

Someone old, someone new
Thank you for explaining your view of the situation. (And apologies for the delay in replying due to RL interference.) I'm glad we agree that certain things are unacceptable no matter what. Needless to say, I agree that new users should be welcomed. I also try to make sure that this does not create imbalance compared to users who have been with us for a long time. In this case, Danniesen simply repeated my assessment of it being a personal attack, so he can hardly be blamed for it.

While we must indeed remember to welcome newbies, once in a while it happens that these newbie users are not ready to adapt to our rules and policies. It is regrettable but statistically unavoidable. I'm not even saying that such users are necessarily acting in bad faith. It can simply be a confluence of factors. And when they cross the line of civility, it is too late.

I also noticed the admission of guilt to CzechOut, which was a good sign. And you are right: different people are catalysed into editing by different triggers and I agree we should not begrudge a new user their desire to enter this particular discussion so late in the game. But this situation was compounded from the very beginning by the claim that they entered the discussion having studied it and preceding threads. Sure, people can say that to achieve a more authoritative position, which a new user might desire, but we can't just assume the user to lie, can we? And assuming familiarity with the thread, the initial post was bordering on the violation of T:POINT. If there is a discussion ending in an explanation, how can one "not get" why the policy was enacted? Disagreeing with the reasoning - sure, but not getting why? One possible interpretation was that the arguments for why in that old thread were idiotic and should be ignored. And so, instead of a gentle welcome, I had to remind that policy is policy. You may well be right about misunderstanding in that the user was not as diligent in reading prior threads as they had claimed, but here we were.

The second response started promisingly with an admission that they were new. But then they relapsed into the same trap of trying to assume false authority. Calling the current "they" policy based on "an obscure random dialect" right after admitting to not being a native speaker and after claiming to have read a thread analysing the historical use of singular "they" in British English was both arrogant and aggressive, I would even say mildly insulting for a lot of our editors who, you know, speak this "obscure random dialect" called BrE. So the second post called for a second reprimand. And the third post was the final "goodbye, don't bother writing".

My personal appraisal of the situation is that users who start editing from the position of arrogance risk facing a pushback instead of the customary welcome. At some point, upholding the rules and defending other users outweighs the desire to go easy on someone who is not going easy on others.

Anyway, this was a very long post. And much of this latest conversation could have been preempted if we could just compare notes beforehand. As fun as this textual analysis is, it's even funner online without delay, which is what usually happens with several other admin. Since we are all different, we note different things and interpret them differently. Pooling our views typically provides for a more balanced and fair assessment. Plus, I find there is a certain decorum in closed jury deliberations resulting in a jointly agreed opinion. Amorkuz ☎  00:44, January 12, 2019 (UTC)