User talk:Patrick Watt

Image at Dalek removed
Please note that our image use policy in conjunction with our manual of style regulates the kinds of pictures that can be used. One of the more important concepts is that a publicity still, being an out-of-universe shot, cannot be used on an in-universe page. Thus, I have reverted the image you placed in the infobox at Dalek. I can quite appreciate that the image currently there is perhaps insufficient, because it only shows post-Victory of the Daleks models, but, still, you cannot use a publicity shot on that page. Perhaps you could find an image from within Victory that has most types together? Or maybe you could make an image using various models in different segments, as we've done with the picture to your right. 00:15: Thu 29 Sep 2011

Daleks
Hey, while your suggestion is good, I'm quite firmly against collage images. Don't worry - I'm not abnormal - I too hate the new Daleks, but we don't want to have loads of unnecessary collages littered around when a single image works just fine in most cases. Raise it at the forums if you fell strongly about though, as my word is far from definitive.-- 14:19, September 30, 2011 (UTC)

Like I said, open a forum topic on it. Please keep messages about the same subject under one heading and remember to sign your posts.-- 07:43, October 1, 2011 (UTC)

Chat
Hey, sorry for missing you in chat earlier today. I tend to have a lot of windows opened, and that one gets buried. Coupla points, though. Chat is still effectively "in beta". It occasionally behaves weirdly, as when it signs people in and out for no reason. You seem to have mistaken my disconnections and reconnections as an intentional effort to get rid of you. They weren't. It was just the chat window being. . . the wikia chat window. And it could hardly have been intentional, since I wasn't even aware of what was going on in that window. Another thing, you called me a jerk twice in chat. Sorry you feel that way, but our ] rule, as confirmed through our [[tardis:chat policy|chat policy doesn't allow for such things. Please don't attack other users directly like that in future. I'll let you off with a warning this time, but be aware that sort of behavior can lead to really long bans.  Thanks :)

I'm actually intrigued by your multi-color-but-not-Skittles®-Dalek idea, and would love to hear it. 17:49: Mon 10 Oct 2011

Welcoming is automatic
Please don't start another person's user talk page manually, as you did at user talk:Jake Fraser. I know you're just trying to be friendly, and that's great! However, it interferes with normal bot operation, and prevents user:Wikia from automatically placing the welcome template, which gives users important starting information. We really need to make sure that all new users are given a message which clearly says: 1) no spoilers and 2) use British English. New users will get such a message immediately upon making their first edit. So, please: let the bot do its job. Thanks :) 23:42: Thu 13 Oct 2011

Chat
When reporting an technical problem, please give more details than "I'm having an error". It's incredibly unlikely that I did anything to affect chat, but still, I need more to go on before I can even begin to help you. 22:47: Fri 21 Oct 2011

Formal warning: spoilers not allowed
Consider this your final warning. After considerable thought, I have decided not to block you at the present time. Rather, I'm going to give you one more chance. Even if you've done so before, go now and read our spoiler policy and our chat policy. You must understand what this wiki considers to be a spoiler, and that the general policies of the wiki do apply in chat. Don't repeat or reference spoilers except where the spoiler policy allows. Don't try to "skirt around" the policy by using "code language". If you spoil other editors, they may choose not to edit with us. That's why if you break spoiler policy again, you will be prevented from editing for at least one month. 01:18: Fri 28 Oct 2011

file:200px-Tenth_Doctor.jpg
The above-named file was deleted for violating several rules. It was mis-licensed (you said it was a screenshot when really it was a publicity shot), it had a bad aspect ratio, it was narrower than the minimum 250px width, and the subject was looking straight into camera. You should probably take a look at our image cheat card before uploading any more pictures. 22:47: Fri 18 Nov 2011

timelink vol. 1
I'm not sure what you;'re talking about. I don't generally do much about images,. If I did something right, you're welcome. If you're being sarcastic, oh well. Sorry. Boblipton talk to me 23:24, November 18, 2011 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. I assure you it was inadvertant.  Sometimes junk characters appear.  Sometimes the code is unstable,.  I expect that's what happened. Boblipton talk to me 23:32, November 18, 2011 (UTC)

You have me confused with someone else
I've never opposed your using a multiple Dalek image at Dalek. Please read the first comment on this page. I suggested that option.

However, you will have to go through the process of submitting it for consideration, because everyone does not share my view. At the end of the day, a multiple image might not succeed in this case because a Dalek is a Dalek is a Dalek. The difference between old and new series Daleks, up to an including the Victory Daleks, is not so great as the difference between old and new series Silurians.

And Ten doesn't need a pic. The original infobox has been restored, including the pic that was there at the time it was overwritten. 23:37: Fri 18 Nov 2011

Watch your tenses, please
According to this diff, you introduced the present tense into the initial paragraph of the article at The Doctor. It is extremely important that you refrain from this type of editing in the future. T:TENSES is extremely clear on this point: only the past tense may be used in the in-universe portion of articles. 23:26: Sat 03 Dec 2011

Dalek collage
You'll need to put that up for discussion at forum:panopticon and/or talk:Dalek. It's not appropriate for it to be submitted to me personally for approval. I will say, however, that I would immediately vote against it because your crop of the "new" Daleks is apparently editorialising. The thing that jumps out at me is that you haven't depicted the whole body of the new Daleks, whereas you have for every other type. Not only does that just look weird, it appears to be a message that you're trying to send. It's also a bit weird that you've used profiles of older Daleks but not the new ones, as if you're trying in every way possible to "hide" the "bump in the trunk". I do like the width and color of the dividing lines, as well as the basic layout. 23:20: Sun 04 Dec 2011