User talk:Digifiend

New logo
I know, that's what Forum:New logo or Wordmark is concerning, I'm just waiting for any other suggestions. Thanks. --Tangerineduel 13:57, October 15, 2010 (UTC) 14:40: Tue 20 Dec 2011

Outnumbered
You are best talking to User:CzechOut, he can have his bot change the category if it a mistake - which thinking about it is is. MM/ Want to talk? 00:41, December 27, 2011 (UTC)

Update and spoilers
Update cannot be used to request information about a future event. The IDW DW/TNG crossover has not been released yet. Therefore information about it falls under our spoiler embargo, as outlined at T:SPOIL. You may only use Update to request information be added to an article from sources that have been officially released. Since you have an interest in the crossover, you may wish to contribute to Forum:IDW Doctor Who/Star Trek crossover to help shape policy about how we're going to cover the event after its release. 15:46: Fri 17 Feb 2012

Logopedia spam
Hi. Back on logopedia, these men have been spamming news and non-logo stuff on the wiki: [logos.wikia.com/wiki/User:Xuanyjian] [logos.wikia.com/wiki/User:Tltgbjj] [logos.wikia.com/wiki/User:Huitao] They are sock puppet accounts. Ban them now! --74.104.186.68talk to me 21:22, July 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. But next time, please report them at Logopedia's User Reports page. Even if you didn't know about that, I don't understand why you posted on my talk page here instead of at Logopedia. Digifiend 23:39, July 20, 2012 (UTC)

Calmly/politely coming up with a compromise
"My recommendation is to calmly and politely work this out with Digifiend and come up with a compromise. Since you are blocked on the wiki you can try leaving him a message on this wiki." Is what a proffeseional recommended for me to do so we could put an end to this situation. You'll be able to find that on your message wall in your user page on community central wiki. King wiki ☎  23:25, July 29, 2012 (UTC)

Older tech issue
Heya :) October was crazy for me because I stepped up my work on a political campaign, so I'm just working through some of the backlog of issues on my talk page.  On 7 October, you mentioned you were having problems with undoing edits.  Are you still having problems with that, or did Wikia eventually resolve it?  I can't say I notice the problem you reported, but I wanted to check.  If you are still having problems, please note your exact OS and browser version numbers.  Sorry for the massive delay in responding.  15:47: Sun 18 Nov 2012

Totally good idea
You're absolutely right. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 03:30, December 22, 2012 (UTC)

Moving pages
Hi. Please don't move pages unless there's been a discussion concerning the move of the page as your move of Oswin Oswald to Clara Oswald was bad. Especially as your edit summary stated "Clara and Oswin are the same person.... but how that's possible I cannot explain, as she's now died twice.)". If you can't explain it do not try to explain it by moving the pages. Separate pages should have been created for Oswin and Clara. Later if we found them to be the same person we could have merged the articles. But splitting articles becomes problematic as we can't separate out the page histories, because you moved Oswin to Clara and then people started editing the article on top of the Oswin edits. Any future articles that you "cannot explain" please do not move. If you believe a page need to be moved add the to it adding the reason you think it should be moved. --Tangerineduel / talk 15:04, December 28, 2012 (UTC)

Spoilers
I'm afraid I have to block you for a week, since you clearly violated T:SPOIL ALLOW, T:SPOIL CREW and particularly T:SPOIL FORUM in the now deleted Panopticon thread entitled "November special casting". You absolutely, positively may not post spoilers in The Panopticon or anywhere else — save the exceptions of the Howling and the series page. If there is no series page to cover what you want to talk about, then you may not post spoilers except in the Howling.

It is necessary to enforce this rule so that we can enjoy the support and contributions of editors who may not wish to be spoiled. 16:20: Sun 31 Mar 2013

Hey Digifiend
Hello! I love stamps and I&#39;m 22. ☎  01:41, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

Front page
Thanks :) I never remember to just cut and paste like a normal person.  01:59: Tue 14 May 2013

Alien babies!
Well, I am surprised. I don't get DWA; is this seriously a feature? --SOTO ☎ 13:28, May 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sorry. I messed up the months somehow; thought March was May, and we were in March. I just noticed today that it did in fact come out... --SOTO ☎ 01:14, May 24, 2013 (UTC)

David Melbourne
Yeah, I noticed. I'm more prominent in in-universe pages, so I'm not yet entirely used to refs. Now I know. Thank you! --SOTO ☎ 13:25, June 1, 2013 (UTC)

Tomorrow's spoilers
Thanks for the heads up. Without spoiling things for me, any way you could perhaps advise which articles might be most vulnerable to attack so I can lock 'em down for a bit? 21:25: Sat 01 Jun 2013
 * I've got a very, very bad feeling about this. I fear it may be impossible to hold back spoilers if they're coming out in the press in June 2013.  Just outta curiosity, what kinda press we talking about?  The Sun?  Or something more serious?  Is the "size" of the news something that would make an official BBC announcement more likely?   21:56: Sat 01 Jun 2013

2014 Annual
Sorry for the late reply; busy day. Thank you, again. You are ever so resourceful. I'll buy it as soon as I find it around here. :)

Still, this is something I must look into. Everywhere I look says 17 September: every fan sites, Amazon... even the official BBC Shop website! You are right though — only W H Smith carries it. Their website says it was published 1 August, but yet even the BBC haven't released it yet...

This is very, very odd, and quite interesting in a geeky sort of way. Does that make it officially released yet? Hmm... Was the release date officially 1 August or will it be 17 September? I have to put it as something!

Anyway, I won't bore you any longer. Don't know why I'm rambling about this to you. Thank you for the info. Goodbye! --SOTO ☎ 03:07, August 23, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Man, on Logopedia
Well, I'm sorry I have posted false information on Logopedia, I should've read the article on Wikipedia instead assumed it was used. Well then again the caption of the picture is "The old logo of Wikivoyage". Sorry for not really reading the article closly. See you when the block expires. And I'm surprised you game me no warning I would be blocked. TheCanadianTentinabox (talk) 23:53, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * If you read the policy page, you'll see it's there plain to see. Inserting false information is an automatic ban.

A chat invitation
You have been invited to the chat.   Tariqmudallal   Talk    LogoLine     Logopedia    Community Central    Pixar Wiki    Bloons Wiki    Plants vs. Zombies Wiki   05:21,12/7/2013

Apology
Since I can't seem to reply on the "Incarnations", "bodies" and "selves" page I will here. I am sorry for insulting you on that thread. I was just angry.

T:DAB OTHER
Hey, T:DAB OTHER is like a day old. Please don't take action on it just yet. Any page moves arising from T:DAB OTHER need to be handled by an admin — and really, an admin with a bot. None of the pages which currently violate T:DAB OTHER should survive the move. Because you don't have the power, on this wiki, to delete upon page move, you're kinda just creating a trail of flotsam. Worse, you're making it hard for me to recognise which pages need to be properly moved and which don't.

That said, your impulse to help is appreciated. And the fact that you've even read a policy page that hasn't really been rolled out yet gets you major kudos! 16:41: Tue 17 Dec 2013

The Avengers
Nice one; good catch! And, uh, thanks. :) --SOTO ☎ 20:26, January 4, 2014 (UTC)

Series 8
Done. Thanks for pointing that out. :) 01:46, August 15, 2014 (UTC)

Talk:S8
Hey, man: no worries about any of what went down on that talk page. I wasn't at all angry with any of the participants. Everyone was acting in good faith and trying to do their best in a unique situation.

In truth, if any fault is to be assigned to what happened there, it's entirely mine. When the leaks happened, I should have recognised that by closing series 8 (Doctor Who) as SOTO properly did, that there would likely have been a question as to where to put information as it came in. I should have gotten there way earlier with an interpretation of existing policy, and provided better guidance. So Shambala108 didn't mislead you. I just missed a trick amidst the other protections that we had to enact to protect against spoilers.

In fairness to me, though, we've never had to take steps like these before. In every other year, we've happily kept the series page open and debates sorta worked themselves out over time, on that page, generally through the edit summaries.

Unfortunately, the leaks have screwed things up, making us way more cautious than we'd like to be.

Nevertheless, as to the accuracy of the series article, I have to say that personally, I'm not all that bothered. I'd rather let the article languish and then eventually be populated by facts as they're made evident upon transmission than go around chasing every press announcement. Remember, the BBC got the name of The Vampires of Venice wrong in their first press announcement of 2010, so it doesn't bother me in week 1 of series 8 that we've apparently got the title of week 11.

On the question of "where was the correct place to report news", I have to note that you weren't reporting news. You were giving what this wiki considers to be a spoiler: information about an as-yet-unreleased story. So, as the note at Talk:Series 8 (Doctor Who) said, you start a thread at The Howling, give it an accurate title that contains no spoilers, then alert an admin that there might be information that needs to be added to the article at whatever your Howling thread is. 04:03: Thu 21 Aug 2014

Infobox images and discussion pages
Hi :) As you popped onto my talk page to answer another user's question, I think I should put that answer on your talk page as well.


 * It's unlikely that I'll be adding capacity for a third image to infoboxes, as two images already makes infoboxes quite long. In a case like the one you've cited at The Ghosts of Gralstead, the variations are slight and add little in the way of useful context. Putting value judgements aside, the infobox capacity is limited to two as that's the maximum number required in the vast majority of cases. This multiple cover issue come up on a few other pages, most notably DWM issue pages, and the recommended method in this case is to have a centred gallery at the bottom of the page. See DWM 413 for an example.

Also — and don't take this like I'm angry or anything remotely like it — I'd like to request that you don't answer questions on admin talk pages. In this case, your advice suggested a course of action that has already been considered and rejected years ago. You're of course at liberty to question decisions, but please do just let admin answer the original question first. :)

You should also realise that user talk pages don't really work like discussion or forum pages. Putting a comment on my talk page doesn't alert AdricLovesNyssa that the conversation has moved on. It only alerts me. So, if you're trying to reach the original poster, it doesn't do much good to jump onto the recipient's talk page, anyway. 16:08: Tue 09 Sep 2014