User talk:Tangerineduel

"Proper" wiki Merges
As an aside, things like Border Princess and Border Princes should be merged properly in order to merge the histories into one place. Have you ever done this before? If not, the process is as follows:
 * 1) manually copy the information from the destination to the source article.
 * 2) delete the destination article
 * 3) move the source article to the destination (this creates the redirect too)
 * 4) undelete all deleted revisions of the page

And voila... you're done. You have all of the history from every instance of the article in one location. :) -- Sulfur 15:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Myths and rumours
I think it should be case-by-case. I think "rumours" is appropriate if the information given is in fact about rumours that were contemporary with the original broadcast, especially if said rumours were dispelled. A myth is more along the lines of "A munchkin can be seen hanging in the background of a scene in the Wizard of Oz". I don't think every article needs to have the header changed, however if the content of the section sparks the same reaction that I saw which inspired the original discussion -- someone removed some information because "it's a rumor, not a myth" then the header should be changed accordingly. Another important distinction is that rumours are, by their nature, more difficult to source. A myth is in theory easier to find a source for; for example, the myth that Hartnell quit because of the onset of Multiple sclerosis. 23skidoo 14:53, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Template
Whoo Hoo, I did something. Anyway, i thought id mention you inspired me to go out and buy a PDA and three EDA's. Ive red Eater of Wasps and it was brilliant. Thanks alot.--Skittles the hog 16:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

BIT Comic Strips
Hi, just came across an edit to Crimes and Punishment...why? We did discuss this and I've recently made my case again to Dark Lord (see talk for BIT10Dr.jpg). I asked for you especially for your input and criticism 'cos I thought you of all people might understand what I was trying to do (and why), and frankly feel a bit 'miffed' that you've gone ahead and changed it anyway without even the courtesy of letting me know. I further feel that the move is clumsy. You've edited down the picture to fit the infobox leaving it grainy and of poor definition and you've taken the picture frame away from beneath the story synopsis. The visuals weren't just selected to fill the box they were intended to represent ALL the main characters featured in the strip (along with perhaps an integral element to the story). There isn't a easily identifiable single defining image found in every 4 pages of strip due to the somewhat younger approach the strip follows (unlike the vast majority of other 'deeper' strips, or the early strips which were presented in a much more linear/traditional format). If you (and others) object so much to the infobox picture I used I'd rather see it left blank than lose the picture frame inserted above the characters bit, unless of course someone else thinks they can go through the whole series and find a uniform sized picture for the infobox for each of the BIT strips!! The Librarian 00:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi again, its ok I was probably over-reacting! I thought perhaps you would carry on and redo them all regardless. "My Bad" as they say! I agree to an extent that an appropriate picture can be beneficial in the infobox BUT the importance is greater when there is one single image used on the page to represent the strip. As a try, and because coverage of this limited run strip differs in several respects from others (eg same illustrator), I thought it would be a good idea to try something different. When its done I was thinking of putting it to the forum to discuss a for or against. Anyway waffling now...not so miffed! The Librarian 23:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Future episodes template?
Do you know if there is a Tardis Wikia version of Wikipedia's "future film/TV episode" template? If not, I think there should be one, since speculation is starting to build regarding the specials, Torchwood and SJA. I've seen this Wikia cited as a source of information on several forums, which is a good thing, but given the fact that information can change regarding an episode (I'm still seeing rumors of the Doctor regenerating in the 2008 Christmas special, for example, and now there's a rumor 2 specials will be made in America) I think a tag saying "this article is about a future episode and the information here may include speculation and unconfirmed reports" or something like that would be a good addition. We could have some fun with giving it Who-style wording, and maybe use a picture of the Doctor meeting himself in Day of the Daleks to illustrate! Thoughts? 23skidoo 12:27, 29 August 2008 (UTC)