Fandom staff inter minorian functionary
  • I live in the janitor's closet at, but I often go on slumber parties all around the FANDOM network!
  • My occupation is Special Operations
  • I am part of the team that helps you promote your wikia — and make it look better. Click on "My Website" to put in your request, today!
  • Bio CzechOut has been at FANDOM since its earliest days. He likes comparing Irish whiskey with a good single malt, getting lost in a new city, and digging deep into the latest Apple® product.
  • [Show More]
(Difference between revisions) | User:CzechOut
Line 191: Line 191:
: Also, what does the "without proviso" bit next to ''Real Time'' on that page mean? -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 01:15, April 29, 2012 (UTC)
: Also, what does the "without proviso" bit next to ''Real Time'' on that page mean? -- [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] ([[User talk:Tybort|talk page]]) 01:15, April 29, 2012 (UTC)
Sorry about the spoilers on the Doctor Who page. It's been ages since I've properly been here and I wasn't completely sure what counts as spoilers. So it's everything about the new series that's a spoiler then? There's no production info that's been released that we can mention on the page? --[[User:The Thirteenth Doctor|The Thirteenth Doctor]] <sup>[[User talk:The Thirteenth Doctor|talk to me]]</sup> 15:28, April 30, 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:28, April 30, 2012

Archives: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11, #12, #13, #14, #15, #16, #17, #18, #19, #20, #21, #22, #23, #24, #25

Please note that I will not respond to unsigned posts. I urge you to remember to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your post, because this is required by wiki policy. Please do not use {{unsigned}} on this page, unless you are signing after-the-fact for yourself.

This page is also available in Bulgarian, German, Spanish, French, Dutch and Russian.


Okay, but is still think most of those images were fine. Some, I would say, were actually VERY good, like the Frank Butcher and the Kathy Beale images, despite being taken from a (copy of a) VHS recording. If I understand correctly, the copy I had was released by Loose Cannon Productions... OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 02:50, April 12, 2012 (UTC)

Monobook toy

Not sure if I'm the odd one out, but I only edit/look at the site using the Wiki/Oasis skin. As you say on the forum post that's how most people see it, so that's how I use it, better to see what everyone else is seeing/using. I've worked through most of the odd quirks of the Wikia/Oasis skin. --Tangerineduel / talk 15:34, April 12, 2012 (UTC)

Well, I, for one, use Monobook exclusively because Oasis/Wikia is too narrow and the ads are intrusive. But I run several Wikis and, as stated, need to see what others see. This is one of the best tools I could have possibly hoped for. Thanks. Darth Prefect talk to me 00:37, April 20, 2012 (UTC)

Cat: Unproduced TV story images

Help. I cannot figure out where to put this Category:Unproduced TV story images. I renamed OS25's category to make a little more sense, but I can't work out where to put it. I've shoved it into Category:Images by story which I think is okay but it doesn't fit with the other category nomenclature that's there. But the category as it was named before Cat:Images by Unproduced TV stories seems even more awkward. --Tangerineduel / talk 15:54, April 12, 2012 (UTC)

I saw the categories that OS25 created and did have a moment of WTF. It looks like all the images come from either DWM or one or two DVD docos.
Technically they are "related to" the story. But as you say it's concept art (and can only be concept art), based on the story a long time after the fact.
I think concept art of a Dalek or whatever qualifies it to go in the Category:Dalek images category, that's fine, but to have a category for images relating to unproduced TV stories...the images were produced for DWM or the docos to illustrate the article or the docos.
That means they're firstly related to the article in DWM or the doco first and then second they're related to the unproduced TV story. (Does that logic make sense?) So while yes they're images relating to an unproduced story, their first affiliation is to where they appeared/created for because that's a stronger association... (I know that's a kinda shaky logic)
I'm not sure even about the articles themselves, a while back I created several (and deleted others for lack of sources) and I integrated others into their novel and audio counterparts. For the most part I thought consolidation of the info that existed was better than having a thin spread of info on dedicated articles. --Tangerineduel / talk 16:31, April 12, 2012 (UTC)

con and alongside

Well, that's a good way to make sure that no one watches. I don't recall if it was, but that bit of of programming idiocy should be noted somewhere in the article; quite obviously my changing the word to "after" is that "alongside" would indicate that they were being shown not only to one side -- which would be appropriate since it was being shown on BBC 3, but would indicate at the same time -- which not only is idiotic but contradicted by by the article on Confidential. I saw the piece was being reverted, thought it was by mennarc(sp?) and was thinking how I would write him a note explaining the poor usage of "alongside" before fixing it, then was frozen out for three days. By the time I got back in, someone had changed one of them to "in conjunction with" which I thought was annoyingly vague but at least I wouldn't have to get into a p***ing match.

"Alongside" is a perfectly good word in American English, typically seen in discussions of naval stuff, when a floating thingy moved with another floating thingy, not fore, not abaft, but at the side. The long side, y'see.

Given this information, if you can find out which CON episodes were transmitted in this idiotic fashion, it should be noted specifically which they are "This episode was first broadcast on BBC at the same time as...", the two or three transmitted before should be noted as such and the remainder after. That would be more accurate writing and no hardship on the reader. However, if not, then "in conjunction with" shuld be left as the best of bad choices.Boblipton talk to me 18:38, April 12, 2012 (UTC)

Expanded Wiki navigation

Do you think the Expanded Wiki Navigation would be something useful to enable here. I was going to just enable it, but paused for thought and thought I'd run it past you, considering the multitude of changes made to the wiki and the potential that extra menu features might break one of those. Over on the Pokemon Wiki it seems like a good way to expand the top menu system. --Tangerineduel / talk 14:40, April 13, 2012 (UTC)

As I said I thought I'd run it past you. And it's not something really urgently needed, we could use the extra space for DW/TW/SJA etc but it's not needed. Simple navigation is far more useful.
You have a lot on your plate.
The Quote of the Week and the Feature Articles and the need to moderate the voting, sort articles and quotes really put me off them and the DYK. It was one of those things I disliked doing (neither were my creation I just sort of ended up having to do them). So...I'm mostly indifferent to the DYK.
I agree about the MOS. It's kinda become a whole manual on one page. Considering the ways we do things on this wiki, almost each of the subheadings on the MOS page needs its own article. And then the Manual of Style page would just be 'here the very brief see the page for more detail' or something.
I also agree about the T:CAN, we've mostly worked through everything in the forums. I don't remember you mentioning Rose Tyler/Dodo slash fiction in the T:CAN the last time I edited it (maybe I've just blocked it out).
Do you think some sort of Admin working page would be useful, a page that lays out what we're all doing and in what order so all admins (and other active users) know in what order things are happening so we don't overlap or end up in edit conflicts or having to do massive rollbacks? Thanks for letting me know what you're up to. --Tangerineduel / talk 14:33, April 14, 2012 (UTC)
Actually, ignore my last point. I've been musing on it and it'd be a bad idea (possibly helpful), though probably lots unforseen problems would creep in. --Tangerineduel / talk 14:12, April 16, 2012 (UTC)

game thing

Sigh... File:The french revolution.jpg is not widescreen despite being from a source of such... Well, it had a network logo so I had to crop it... Also you could argue that it's not a good image because the book is facing down... OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 02:13, April 15, 2012 (UTC)

However, the logo does this weird "I'm gonna rotate" thing, so I found a better frame. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 02:22, April 15, 2012 (UTC)
D'oh! Totally forgot! Sorry! OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 02:47, April 15, 2012 (UTC)


I think User: might be a vandal... OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 03:11, April 15, 2012 (UTC)

As may User: OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 03:17, April 15, 2012 (UTC)
74.109 is randomly making edits putting full stops in wrong places. He's also repeatedly blanked pages. -- Tybort (talk page) 13:23, April 15, 2012 (UTC)
I need a favor...some idiot has vandalized my talk page, as well as many other pages, and I can't get the edit button drop down menu to work. Could you please revert it for me? Thanks! Shambala108 talk to me 03:57, April 15, 2012 (UTC)
What's the procedure of obvious vandalism on other user pages (like User:MrThermomanPreacher)? -- Tybort (talk page) 13:17, April 15, 2012 (UTC)
Umm, the above page has been vandalised? -- Tybort (talk page) 17:32, April 15, 2012 (UTC)
Reporting the same thing. Sorry, I was a little confused by your wording, I guess. -- -- Tybort (talk page) 18:34, April 15, 2012 (UTC)

edit button problems

I've had this problem for a few days. The 'edit', 'random page', 'preview', 'publish', and 'wiki activity' buttons changed their appearance. They look like oval buttons superimposed on rectangular buttons. When I try to use the 'edit' or 'preview' drop-downs, I get the white outline of the menu but no words and nothing clickable.

  • What browser and version is giving you issues? IE, presumably the current version.
  • Is it only on user pages, or every page? Every page.
  • Is the drop down menu not working or is it the whole button? That is, are you only barred from looking at history and move, or does pressing the edit button do nothing? I can edit but can't access any drop down features.

I looked at a couple other wikis, no problems there. I also tried the monobook thing you suggested, but I don't think I did it correctly. Shambala108 talk to me 00:55, April 16, 2012 (UTC)

OK I will look into changing browsers. In the meantime, could you revert my user page for me? Thanks for all your help! Shambala108 talk to me 05:26, April 16, 2012 (UTC)


Now, I understand what number to put down per what Tardis:Format for television stories, but how do I actually write the entry? Should it just say that number on its own, or should there be more clarification as to it only being the transmission, and not the "final" figure? Sorry if this is a bit nitpicky. -- Tybort (talk page) 14:20, April 16, 2012 (UTC)

So, in essence, it shouldn't be the channel premiere overnights? -- Tybort (talk page) 17:39, April 16, 2012 (UTC)

Potentially dated statements

For some reason, the April pages of the "potentially dated" categories, have mispelled "containing" which means we have Category:Articles contatining potentially dated statements from April 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014, while the containing pages for 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 are in the Zero Room. Could that be fixed so that the {{As of}} for 4/2012 actually leads somewhere? -- Tybort (talk page) 15:44, April 16, 2012 (UTC)


Okay thanks.

Oh, speaking of missing pages, the reason i have included the production codes is because most of these images were WELL into production when cancelled, particauarly the original Season 23. In the documentary, The Lost Season, they showed the sheet that included the original production codes. They had even planned over-sea shooting plans! OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 15:38, April 18, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I will. For both. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 15:53, April 18, 2012 (UTC)

Pages that need moved.

The Destroyers (unproduced spin-off) needs to be moved to The Destroyers (spin-off)... Or maybe The Destroyers (TV story) sense it's more about the pilot then the episode. The spinoff shows from BBV and RP need moved, like Downtime should redirect to Downtime (RP video) and stuff.. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 16:03, April 18, 2012 (UTC)


Yeah, I created it, though it was being bold, but I forgot about the K9 edit track. I assure you it won't happen again. I when I enabled the SJA adventures I disabled the Sarah Jane audio stories. I was thinking of creating a new track for sometime and the SJA just seem ideal.

My plan was to switch SJA and Torchwood; by that I mean create the edit track for SJA, which I have, and a track for Torchwood audio stories. I would then disable Torchwood television storie and SJ audio stories.

As for K9, it has been enabled for quit a bit of time (I think). If we have to disable one, I'd go with K9, it can easily be switched back. However, I don't want to yo-yo the two edit tracks. If we have one enabled, we keep it enabled for however long we feel it should be enabled for and we don't enabled one, then disabled it after two month in order to enabled another one (i.e we don't want to enabled SJA for May and June then disable and enabled K9 for July and August, then enabled SJA again).

I will, full apologise if you wanted me to run it past you, and can see reasoning behind any reason you wish to disable both of them. MM/Want to talk? 19:03, April 18, 2012 (UTC)


Our usernames out alike :P -- CzechMate

Uncertain prefix

Does Vigil have a prefix or is it a unique case? It's part of an anthology with "BBC Radio Collection" on it but I can't see anything on the Doctor Who Reference guide page for the anthology, Out of the Darkness which outright says that CD premiered as a broadcast, so is it AG-owned? -- Tybort (talk page) 15:02, April 19, 2012 (UTC)


Thanks! I'll try to keep the file sizes down. Incidentally, could you weigh in on a discussion on the Eleventh Doctor's talk page? I had an issue with the main image of the page and we started a discussion about finding a new representative image (before it got into an edit war). Memnarc talk to me 08:14, April 20, 2012 (UTC)


Okay, I think I figure out what I did wrong before (not highlighting, and mis-highlighting respectively), but that still leaves me with a blank archive page and an archive page created from highlighting improperly. Is there a way of resetting that count? -- Tybort (talk page) 20:47, April 20, 2012 (UTC)


Were having another problem with the Master's page names... See The Master (UNIT years)... And The Master (thirteenth incarnation)... Along with The Master (fourteenth incarnation)... Etc. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 05:26, April 21, 2012 (UTC)

I could say exactly the same thing about other works, such as The Curse of Fatal Death or Scream of the Shalka, which also aren't canon, which I stated with the "<nc>" template.

Gallifrey102 talk to me 11:55, April 22, 2012 (UTC)

I meant that the article on Power of the Daleks is the same as The Curse of Fatal Death or Scream of the Shalka in that they also aren't canon. I pointed this out with the non-canon header on the article.

Gallifrey102 talk to me 12:30, April 22, 2012 (UTC)


SOrry, I already had all these images prepared when we talked, I'm going to start that soon, I swear. OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 19:11, April 22, 2012 (UTC)

Promotional images and missing episodes

I have a serious problem with this rule, as there are a lot of very important events in missing episodes. Sometimes, like for the hanging scene in The Highlanders, the promo shot is very in-character for everyone (nobody's posing) and is the only image for the whole scene that really shows anything (otherwise, it's a few second clip of Jamie's knees and Troughton's trousers beside him). This rule needs to mellow out regarding missing episodes for totally in-character shots that are the only source for what a scene may have looked like. And there are tons of promo pics on the modern Doctor and companion pages (Ten and Rose have them off-hand). One of them is very specifically illustrating Ten's costume in a shot that is in the episode, but it's a promo version of it. I would also argue that shots featuring, say, Jamie having met another Doctor and companion, illustrates more than a head shot. You're illustrating events in the character's life and trying to help the reader of the wiki by putting an image to the event (and illustrating the character in appropriate sections like appearance). NileQT87 talk to me 06:18, April 23, 2012 (UTC)

Duplicate Badge

Hi :)

Just been looking through Mini-Mitch's earned badges, and I noticed one had been duplicated. The badge is "The Time Lords doff their bowlers at your editing skill" (for making 50 edits on individual Time Lords). Is this a technical error, or will it score you more points in The Game of Rassilon?

Layton4 16:09, April 23, 2012 (UTC)


Well, I'm all for making this wiki look unique. I am not frequently disappointed when visiting other wikias when I see what they have compared to what we've got going on.

Having all these extra random features won't affect the main page's load time will it?

As with anything tell me what I can do to help and I'll jump to it.

On a side note are we doing anything with the data from the polls? I dunno what could be done with it, I just thought I'd ask.

I may be around sporadically over the next week or so, a fairly severe computer crash left me contemplating editing on an iPad, but that's a horrible experience, fine for reading though. I'll still be around, just not editing as frequently as I usually would. --Tangerineduel / talk 16:14, April 24, 2012 (UTC)

And so it begins...

I've begun my illustration of fourth Doctor stories. DW: The Invisible Enemy has now been illustrated, although I may find a few more to spread them around the page, you know? OS25 (talk to me, baby.) 15:17, April 25, 2012 (UTC)

Miranda Borman

I just edited the article about myself. Is that OK? I'm also thinking of editing either the Dragonfire or Stellar article to talk about my battles with the crew about my costume and the infamous panty shot in Part Three. Miranda Borman talk to me 23:30, April 26, 2012 (UTC)


I mention some the problems i had here - - that stupid dress for one thing. Miranda Borman talk to me 09:43, April 27, 2012 (UTC)


The article TVA is locked. The conjunction in it should be "and" and not "but". Boblipton talk to me 13:23, April 27, 2012 (UTC)

I think it definitely falls on the "and" side, since there is nothing terribly surprising about the name change. It's all part and parcel, I feel, of the tendency to dignify the trivial and trivialize the dignified.... a sense I have that a lot of the people here don't understand modulation in language and probably storytelling. While viewed on its own merits and strictly within the context of this particular article, there is nothing to strongly suggest "and" rather than "but", in terms of the wiki overall, these comparative markers -- "but", "however" "ironically" (with no sense of irony) and the formal and rarely used "in contrast to" throughout the wiki are overused. It reduces every event to the same level of significance and expectation. Worse, it is contemptuous of the reader, telling him to hold that this is a noteworthy change, instead of letting him decide on his own. In many ways "but" is an opinion and not a fact. I try to examine each case and if I think the case for using the marker is not overwhelming, then I knock it out.

I blather on not in the expectation that this will change your mind, but in the hope that you will understand what I am trying to accomplish. In like wise, I have declared war on "to manage to", holding that if the Doctor's efforts in escaping to earth from an exploding star cruiser by grabbing a falling space suit in vacuum are worthy of the prefix, then ordering breakfast is not. Besides, it makes the sentence shorter. Boblipton talk to me 14:33, April 27, 2012 (UTC)


I notice you pointed out in Forum:Is The Infinity Doctors canon? that Shada (in the Tom Baker iteration) isn't covered by the canon policy. Does that mean that any writing or images above the "behind the scenes" line shouldn't reference DW: Shada? And I'm not sure if T:CANON labels all this very clearly, if at all, especially considering the deleted scenes discussion you mentioned's from 2009. -- Tybort (talk page) 20:05, April 28, 2012 (UTC)

Should I point out where the redlinked audio categories on User:CzechOut/Sandbox8/WhatThisWikiCovers should point to, or have you figured that out already?
Also, what does the "without proviso" bit next to Real Time on that page mean? -- Tybort (talk page) 01:15, April 29, 2012 (UTC)


Sorry about the spoilers on the Doctor Who page. It's been ages since I've properly been here and I wasn't completely sure what counts as spoilers. So it's everything about the new series that's a spoiler then? There's no production info that's been released that we can mention on the page? --The Thirteenth Doctor talk to me 15:28, April 30, 2012 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.