Welcome to the Wiki-wordmark Fwhiffahder

Thanks for your edits! We hope you'll keep on editing with us. This is a great time to have joined us, because now you can play the Game of Rassilon with us and win cool stuff! Well, okay, badges. That have no monetary value. And that largely only you can see. But still: they're cool!

We've got a couple of important quirks for a Wikia wiki, so let's get them out of the way first.
British English, please
We generally use British English round these parts, so if you're American, please be sure you set your spell checker to BrEng, and take a gander at our spelling cheat card.
Spoilers aren't cool
We have a strict definition of "spoiler" that you may find a bit unusual. Basically, a spoiler, to us, is anything that comes from a story which has not been released yet. So, even if you've got some info from a BBC press release or official trailer, it basically can't be referenced here. In other words, you gotta wait until the episode has finished its premiere broadcast to start editing about its contents. Please check the spoiler policy for more details.
Other useful stuff
Aside from those two things, we also have some pages that you should probably read when you get a chance, like:

If you're brand new to wiki editing — and we all were, once! —  you probably want to check out these tutorials at Wikipedia, the world's largest wiki:

Remember that you should always sign your comments on talk and vote pages using four tildes like this:
~ ~ ~ ~

Thanks for becoming a member of the TARDIS crew! If you have any questions, see the Help pages, add a question to one of the Forums or ask on my talk page. Doug86 18:38, November 24, 2015 (UTC)


Hello. I reverted your edit to the Master pages because Prisoners of Time and Destiny of the Doctors feature an older Tremas Master without the Cheetah virus, which totally contradicts Prime Time and the Eight Doctors as the Cheetah virus infested Master in those stories lives from Survival right through the ingesting the Deathworm Morphant seen in The Movie. Because of this a fourth contradictory timeline Post-Survival exists for the Master.

In the case of the Monk, I reverted your edits because the NA books for the Monk are set directly after he escapes being trapped after The Dalek's Master Plan, and that there was also an inaccuracy in the edit stating that the Monk from The Black Hole wanted revenge for Tamsin's death when it should have been under The Secret History. I also think that attributing an actor name to each Monk doesn't exactly work since the NA Monk never had an actor portraying him, despite what the author may have intended him to look like.

I hope that has clarified things for you, and that you enjoy contributing to the wiki in the future. Thanks. --Revan\Talk 18:50, November 24, 2015 (UTC)

I admit that I haven't yet read No Future, and what I had gathered from reading about the novel that it was set post-ice planet. In that case make the changes, just make sure to explain why you've placed the No Future Monk there in relation to the others. Thanks! --Revan\Talk 19:03, November 24, 2015 (UTC)

In Dust Breeding the Warp Core has stripped away the Trakenite DNA from the Master, so it has to be the Tremas Master he precedes. For both the Doctor and the Master they state their last meeting was on the Cheetah Planet, so it's definately another contradiction. It is weird that both Stop the Pigeon and Dust Breeding were written by the same author, but out of universe there was clearly many efforts to differentiate Big Finish from the BBC Books. You can see all of that more clearly with the Eighth Doctor stuff - it's like a minefield. --Revan\Talk 20:03, November 24, 2015 (UTC)

Placement: BF and Virgin Edit

Hi. I'm sorry if I have come across as intolerant or ignorant, but this issue comes down to one of the oldest issues in the book: "canon" and continuity. The Virgin books are indeed a direct continuation of the cancelled TV series, which makes "placement" extremely difficult: both BBC Books and Big have attempted to make direct continuations of the show, ie. a de facto "Series 28", immediately disrupting the flow of character and universe continuity. However, this wiki does not attempt to come up with definitive placement, answers to production errors or solutions to discontinuity. The Big Finish stories were produced as ongoing adventures set post-Survival, and have developed Ace in a very different way, yes, but they are still intended to be set prior to the NAs. If we decide to come up with speculative answers to problems with continuity (ie. "Ace lacks memory of age in BF, knows it in NAs, therefore loss of memory post NAs sets BF stories after NAs"), then we not only work against what is intrinsically the purpose of the wiki (to display information, rather than formulate new ideas) but we also open up a whole can of worms. I could equally say that the "mind wipe" scene at the beginning of Timewyrm: Genesys is the reason why Ace thinks she remembers her age: her mind has reverted to a point when she did. Lungbarrow leaves the Doctor with potential for a sneaky trip or two before heading off to Skaro, so therefore all of the DWM comic stories with 7 solo take place there. Et cetera. I sympathise with you when you when you suggest that certain placements don't make any sense, but this is Who 101. Even in the TV series, stories constantly contradict each other, sometimes deliberately and other times by accident. However, the clear authorial intent is what we follow on this wiki. BF want to set all of the Ace/Hex audios before the NAs, so that's how we arrange them. Certain alterations can be made, such as setting the Timewyrm tetralogy apart from the rest, thus reconciling a few issues, but by and large, it is necessary to follow what is intended rather than what is "right". I'm rather confused that nobody has told Ms Aldred that, regardless of how she wishes to play Ace in Nightshade and Love and War, the character is supposed to be older than even the Dead to the World Ace in Theatre of War and All-Consuming Fire. This is just yet another unfortunate choice which makes characterisation less consistent according to continuity. So, to recap: we work by narrative and intent. When Signs and Wonders states that "Dorothée" is a potential future for Ace, it makes clear that, according to the producers and authors, the NA series takes place after that story. When Deceit places the Cat's Cradle trilogy, Nightshade and Love and War consecutively, we are forced to make adjustments to where Memorial and Metamorphosis go. But when there are an equal amount of errors either way, we go with what is intended, and base our choices primarily on authorial decisions, not actors' choices.

By the way, you may want to note that two of the issues you raised are not strictly problems. Love and War is very much a BF story as well as a NA, and the "problem" you detail is something BF have "solved". Equally, The Prisoner's Dilemma was unusual in it's placement, but stories such as The Lights of Skaro and Intervention Earth have since provided explanations for both the reasons she is again travelling with the Doctor and the extent of memory loss she suffers.

I'm sorry we've gotten into a debate so early on in your wiksperience (yeah, just made that one up), but I hope you get where both I and we as a community are coming from. Best wishes on your further ventures on Tardis, and feel free to contact me again if you need anything. If you still have big problems with the placements of various stories, you might want to bring it up with the community as a whole on a particular article talk page, or contact an admin for specific policy rulings. Happy editing. RogerAckroydLives 16:01, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from, I really do, but your own statement makes clear why we do what we are currently doing. Implication is never the same thing as statement. BF make it clear in a number of stories that the NAs take place after their ongoing arc(s). Much of the characterisation and storytelling may well imply that Ace's timeline works the way you detail it, but statement trumps implication. If an upcoming story were to have a post-Hex Ace remembering Benny, then this debate would be much more difficult to resolve, but until then, we must extrapolate from the facts. Therefore, we stick one mind wipe before another, with absolutely no way of being "sure" where either is set. But, while the Timewipe (NA) is one which affects both the Doctor (to a lesser extent) and Ace, the Crimewipe (BF) is only an Ace thing. Therefore, if we swap them around, we simply get even bigger problems trying to reason what the Doctor does or doesn't recall, given he hasn't been wiped. If there is a point where things can be slotted in with more regard to the intents of all creative contributors, we will embrace it with open arms. But, while our current (but most definitely not definitive) timeline is wrong, you haven't proposed a sequence which isn't wrong-er. RogerAckroydLives 16:29, December 28, 2015 (UTC)
If you want to start a major debate about placement, which is one of the least important parts of this wiki (every fan can have and most do have an individual "order" or set of stories they feel are "canon", etc.), then I would advise you to go to a talk page or start a forum thread. It isn't really relevant what "continuity problems" I may or may not have with your ideal sequence, but given how the in-universe articles on this wiki are written, it would be far more problematic to assume that your wording of a particular entry would be understood by everyone "because of the stories", when the point of a wiki is to be a source in and of itself. If you want to propose a way we can improve the Seventh Doctor and Ace articles, then, without actual physical evidence, you need to appeal to the community in order to make a democratic decision. It's not unambiguous where Time's Crucible might be set with regard to every other Doctor Who story ever written under license from the BBC, but as a wiki we have to take a stance. And without a democratic decision, we can't simply alter that stance to our own. RogerAckroydLives 16:49, December 28, 2015 (UTC)
It seems my original reply was lost, but its essence was the following: allowing for a little ambiguity should be fine, but the article must still be written completely objectively, not implying that its placement is either here or there. I have rewritten it accordingly: it isn't great, but I accept that it better complies with a potential production p.o.v. Feel free to advise me if you think it still needs work. RogerAckroydLives 07:49, December 29, 2015 (UTC)
It's accurate, but by the time you're getting into that much detail on , it's something that belongs on a discontinuity page. Do you have a particular problem with how it's currently worded? I would have thought it had a great enough level of ambiguity, but if you don't think so, I'm happy to listen to further propositions. RogerAckroydLives 08:59, December 30, 2015 (UTC)

Narvin -Master Edit

can you give me a track and tome for your proof? Adric♥NyssaTalk? 19:25, January 12, 2016 (UTC) I meant time but thanks Adric♥NyssaTalk? 19:37, January 12, 2016 (UTC)

Proof is

Narvin : The actions of coordinator Straxus are regretable. The Doctor: Then you (referring to Narvin) took the insane step of sending the Master to clear things up using the Eminence Narvin: I admit certain error of Judgement have been made, that's ehy I'm here now.

The Doctor says Narvin sent the Master to clean up Straxus' mess and Narvin regrets to action.

Adric♥NyssaTalk? 19:42, January 12, 2016 (UTC)

Re: Stop the Pigeon Edit

The edit you refer to was me correcting a capitalisation issue. In answer to your question, the problem is not to do with whether it was the Tremas Master who was infected, it refers to the fact the FF leaves no "infected but still travelling within Tremas' body" gap. RogerAckroydLives 03:29, January 13, 2016 (UTC)

Yes, he could be lying, but so could every character, ever. We assume that characters are telling the truth when it isn't suggested or proven otherwise. The Tardis wiki community doesn't focus on showing the DWU as one coherent whole, it simply displays all licensed works and assembles the narrative as best as it can. Continuity and canon really isn't our forte, so whether the post-Survival Master gets help from the Tzun, goes in search of Virgoans, makes an alliance with the Inter Minorians or regenerates into a duplicate of Michael Jackson, we don't claim to know. We simply say what other sources say, rather than fitting together jigsaw puzzle that, nine times out of ten, isn't even supposed to fit. RogerAckroydLives 03:50, January 13, 2016 (UTC)

Damaged Goods Edit

If I could butt in, this wiki does not not have any such policy as you refer to with regard to adaptations. Novelisations, yes, but adaptations, no. RogerAckroydLives 01:37, February 8, 2016 (UTC)

Master timelineEdit

I didn't do it for no reason. If you read the stories, there's no way that the ones which follow The Movie could all fit together. The Glorious Dead states that the Master passed through the Eye of Harmony immediately after the film, while Forgotten has him in there for a long time before he escapes. Also in Forgotten the Doctor states that the last time he met the Master was in San Francisco, leaving no gap for his chats in the EDAs to take place.

After Survival is also similar, Stop the Pigeon has the Master suffering from the Cheetah Virus and meeting the Doctor for the first time since Survival, while in First Frontier the Master landed in Roswell immediately after Survival with no Cheetah Virus and meets the Doctor for the first time since Survival again. In another conflicting route that I could have added to the page is that the post-Survival Master in The Eight Doctors is in Tremas' body but hasn't met the Doctor since Survival and has been planning his revenge since, contradicting Stop the Pigeon and Prime Time.

Doctor Who doesn't fit neatly into one neat line, and believe me I spent a long time trying to work out ways in which it could. The timeline we had on there was simply lying about the flow of events in the Master's life at these points, so the reason for my edit was to clarify the discrepancies for readers wanting to learn more about his timeline. --Revan\Talk 15:56, May 20, 2016 (UTC)

Timeline change Edit

Hello there. We haven't talked before, but I've noticed your interest in the timeline forums, particularly Seven's. I just wanted to be sporting and tell you that I've spent the past month coming up with the most logical formula for Seven's confusing timeline, and believe I have found the one that works best. Nonetheless, if you see a flaw that I've overlooked, feel free to rearrange my theory, just leave an explanation below the story so a better understanding for all is there.

Yours in peace, BananaClownMan 19:14, July 13, 2016 (UTC)

Glad you approve. Well, there are so many accounts saying the TARDIS gets redecorated into the Telemovie design that I just ignored them for the most part, but left a note anyway incase someone else found a way to explain it. I guess saying it changes back and forth would be as good an explanation as any. Also, in a project like this, I take whatever hint I can get. If he's shown looking old or young on the cover, and the story doesn't contradict that, I take it for what it is; he's old and alone.BananaClownMan 21:07, July 13, 2016 (UTC)

Hello there, just wanted to give you some advice. Firstly, just because the audio and book covers are sometimes wrong is no reason to dismiss them all. Also, as we talked about earlier, the TARDIS interior is one of the many continuity conundrums in the Seventh Doctor's timeline, so it can't be said that all stories or audios that mention it being recently changed come on-after the other. It's just as plausible that he changes it continuously, especially since he goes back to hos TV interior in UNIT: Dominion after having the telemovie one in The Settling and so forth. Finally, it doesn't really seem plausible for the Klien stories to come in a row, as the Doctor is nearing his end by Persuasion, and Raine comes and goes by then. I hope this explains why I changed the timeline to how it was, and if you see a flaw in my logic, please do share so we can debate a solution.

Yours without malice, BananaClownMan 09:12, July 14, 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the long list of "advice", now it is time for me to defend them. First, what do you mean by "features". If you mean the limiting factors, that was there before I expanded upon it, so that one can't be pinned on me.

1/6/13/20/22/25/26/27/36) I like to add a bit of a brief plot summery to remind myself during the construction phase what happened when in the event an expanded universe piece mentions it. I leave it there when I upload it so others can get a rough idea of why a certain order is used. It also helps cover "Whan Events", for lack of a better term, such as joinings, departures and companion deaths

2) The amount of lindos hormone in his system indicated how soon the regeneration was, as explained in the audio.

3) The disc explanation is because the two disc give two difference account of events.

4) Both are words, so either can be used I suppose.

5) For events that depict flashbacks, flash-forwards or mention of other events, I like to leave a little note to what is depicted, to indicate it is a small part of a larger story.

7) You seem to start rambling at this point, and the advice isn't very clear or constructive as a result.

8/12) Who's "we"? And it is a fact that any story where Ace knows the Brig must come after Battlefield, the age thing is just another fact that limits suggestion. What other word can be used other than "setting"?

9/10/11) Well, since you boast such an understanding of proper timeline etiquette, how come you haven't noticed this practice being used in the previous six Doctors' pages.

15) Documenting when the Doctor first meets someone is important for when they reunite, or they get mentioned again. Also, in the case of Colditz Castle, the location is also mentioned again down the line.

17) Anthologies are generally ignored, as the individual audios and prose are what truly document events.

18) Unless Ace definitely mentions Spacefleet or being in an army, it's an implication.

19) It does if he previously mentions not going to a location.

28) You keep saying audio covers can't be used due to errors in the past, yet say the implications of aging on The Architects of History is valid. I'm afraid it can't be both ways; either the covers can't be used at all, or they can be taken into account so long as nothing contradicts them.

29) Yeah, that one was my bad. I have dyspraxia, so I often hit the wrong keys and then I end up with confusing sentences.

31) Also my bad. The only hint to placing was on the Reference Guide, so I just took it as fact without thinking about publication order.

32) And, Reference Guide. I think it's written on a blurb like with the Titan Comics, but don't take my word for it.

33) There a period where Doc7 goes down a darker path in his old age, implied to be because he is nearing the end and thinks the ends will justify the means. I mentioned it there to remind myself to put that story in the general part of his dark life.

35) There's perfect implication that it leads into the movie. What else would the High Council want of the Doctor that Big Finish wouldn't mention directly at this stage?

Also, I try not the remove information when possible. I always strive to include new info. It's just you rearranged the timeline so much I got lost. So, I reverted it to the version I was familiar with and updated your edits. Sorry if that offended you, but I was only trying to find the middle ground that pleased everyone.

To each his own, BananaClownMan 08:29, July 15, 2016 (UTC)

I don't presume to own anything on this wiki. I merely noticed that I had written down the wrong word by accident and changed it to make sense in the contest of the sentence. The reason I didn't gave an explanation was because I thought the reason of obvious. Also, I apologise for mixing "setting" and "placing", I just see them as one of those two words with the same meaning sort of thing.BananaClownMan 13:52, August 1, 2016 (UTC)

I explained this briefly in the Edit summery, but I'll get more direct here: Does the Valeyard, or anyone for that matter, specifically say anything about Spiral Scratch during The Last Adventure?

In any event, remembering Charley and his seventh and eighth incarnations doesn't confirm his memory of the Sixth Doctor's regeneration due to one fact from Time and the Rani: The Seventh Doctor can't remember his regeneration due to being drugged with memory blockers by the Rani. Even after it stabilises, he and Mel stick to the story that Old Sixie banged his head, as seen in Love and War and Head Games, because Mel was unconscious when it happened.

In any case, this isn't about me disagreeing with someone because I'm "territorial"; this is about me disputing a theory because I tried to find a way around it too, and found nothing concrete, which, by this wiki's any-speculation policy, meant that these two(or three) stories are just different accounts with the same outcome, like Romana's escape from E-Space in The Apocalypse Element and Blood Harvest.BananaClownMan 14:45, August 1, 2016 (UTC)

I have no idea where you got that train of thought from, (on a side note, could you clarify where you read or interpreted that from) but that's not what the timeline forums are for. Originally, they were there to put together the stories and try to find a way they all messed together based on what the story says or, occasionally, what year they were released.BananaClownMan 15:03, August 9, 2016 (UTC)

NEVER think you're a loser. As far as I'm concerned, you've stood up for a cause you believe in, and, even when someone tries to put you down or disillusion how effective what you're doing it, you've turned what they've said around and continued on with what makes you happy, even when it seems hat no one is behind you on it. And from where I'm standing, that makes you a winner.BananaClownMan 15:54, August 9, 2016 (UTC)

Mary's Story Edit

I don't like conflicts. But I already erroneously moved around the comment you deleted. So it seems fair if I defend it now. However, I would be happy to listen to your arguments before restoring the passage. Unfortunately, I could not understand your note to the edit. You say this is disallowed, but the previous edit before you is by Shambala108, an admin, who was doing cleanup. If this passage violates the policies, known to Shambala108 much better than to you, why did she not delete it? Could you please cite which policy it violates? Secondly, could you be more specific when referring to Big Bang Generation et al.? Which other stories are meant under et al.? And which part of the page or the talk page or of a forum discussion says that the acknowledgment of continuities in Mary's Story is not notable enough?

Please keep in mind that the Eighth Doctor is a unique doctor as far as continuities go. Every other doctor has a clear timeline from TV episodes first, with other media inserted in the already established timeline from regeneration to regeneration. The Eighth Doctor, on the contrary, has barely any TV presence and his timeline was developed more or less independently by multiple media: books, comics, Big Finish audios. This independent development creates a lot of headache for making a coherent version of his life. Thus, to have an audio story that directly references his comic-book and book lives is, in a sense, as special as having The Night of the Doctor directly reference his audio companions. So I strongly believe that such confirmations for the Eighth Doctor are very much notable. Even Paul McGann himself said in an interview that the latter confirmation finally resolved his doubts over whether his Doctor is a canonical Doctor or not.

As I said, I would be happy to listen to your arguments, but I don't believe this matter is simple. I would suggest to have a discussion on the talk page or in the forum before deleting this passage. Amorkuz 18:28, July 16, 2016 (UTC)

Narvin EditEdit

I couldn't fit this in the edit summary bit, the reason why I have reverted you're edit so that the Return of Omega goes after The Eminence Wars, is that in the Death of Hope, Narvin tells the Doctor that he's asked the High Council to protect Heron's world, and that if the Doctor agrees the help Narvin discover what the Master plans, it would help to aid the protection as the current President a sympathies for the Doctor, ergo Romana is still president at this Time not Livia. Adric♥NyssaTalk? 21:30, July 24, 2016 (UTC)

Narvin: "You don't have a choice, You see I imagine my humane alternative will hold more sway with the power that be if they know that you are involved" Romana's administration would be persuaded by the Doctor's involvement than Livia's Adric♥NyssaTalk? 05:26, July 25, 2016 (UTC)
I see what you mean but we don't know the incarnation, her third incarnation would need more persuading than her second. Adric♥NyssaTalk? 16:21, August 8, 2016 (UTC)
But this happens before Braxiatels intervention. Adric♥NyssaTalk? 21:03, August 8, 2016 (UTC)
Are you talking about Farina's line about Romana's first term in office? that's referring to pre Mindbomb, I take it to mean that this takes place post ascension in Romana's second term, as Matt Fitton might not have knonwn about scott's plans to change the timelines. Adric♥NyssaTalk? 20:52, August 10, 2016 (UTC)
Ah ok that proves the Eleven is post Enemy lines with both our evidence, still think Dark Eyes is pre Enemy Lines Adric♥NyssaTalk? 21:28, August 10, 2016 (UTC)
I can, what I mean is the version that we hear is pre-Enemy Lines, and still happens in a post Enemy Lines just in a different way. Adric♥NyssaTalk? 06:06, August 11, 2016 (UTC)

We Are The Daleks Edit

The "T" is capitalized in both the website page title (one of the only places the title is not rendered in all caps) and the writer's notes. P&P talk contribs 01:50, August 4, 2016 (UTC)

New Adventures is After LegionEdit

One Main Clue, Benny is now comfortable with flirting with guys and has therefore come to terms with Jason's death and isn't worried about being caught by Braxiatel. She mentions that she has to go back to Peter but that would be due to his state of mind after the loss of Antonio not because he's young. Adric♥NyssaTalk? 21:31, August 28, 2016 (UTC)

Scott Handcock has just said on his tumblr that it's meant to be set after Missing Adventures. Can you show me where it says Peter's a child? and the passage in The Big Bang Generation? Adric♥NyssaTalk? 09:02, August 29, 2016 (UTC)

"Made Up" Edit

Regarding the Master timeline edit where you mention "(correct me if wrong) Kroton putting him back in the EoH is completely made up)," well of course it's made up. It's a theory after all, isn't it? That page is titled "Theory:Timeline - The Master" after all. :P --Crazyface201 17:15, September 20, 2016 (UTC)

Your expertise is needed Edit

Hi Fwhiffadher, since you seem to know quite a bit about Iris Wildthyme, would you pop onto Thread:198639 and give your opinion on creating individual pages for each of Iris' incarnations? CoT ? 01:37, September 28, 2016 (UTC)

Personal attacks Edit

Re your comments at Thread:194725:

The comments you made in response to User:DENCH-and-PALMER very definitely do violate Tardis:No personal attacks. You have come very close to violating this policy in the past.

This puts me in a dilemma. I really should block you for your comments, but then I would be subject to accusations that I blocked you in order to prevent you from defending your point of view on the thread. I have removed your comment from the thread, but consider yourself warned. You are never to attack another user again. Shambala108 17:02, November 8, 2016 (UTC)

I appreciate that you apologized, and did so on the public forum.
As for my use of the word "you" in the forum post, I tend to use that to address anyone who might be reading the thread. Sometimes, I use "anyone who is interested in this issue", but obviously that's a pain to type over and over. The thing is, a lot of new people are attracted first to our forums, so many of my forum posts tend to reiterate policies/decisions for them that long-time editors are already aware of. I'm sorry that I didn't make it more clear just who I was addressing and I'll try to be more specific in the future. Shambala108 00:13, November 9, 2016 (UTC)

Paul Magrs Wiki plagiarism Edit

Hey Fwhiffahder, this might be old news to you, but I was rather surprised to notice that apparently I consider your Paul Magrs Wikia to be one of my favourite wikis and that I had made 30 edits there. I hate to complain as it might give you the idea I'm one of those "fascist bastards" you mention on your wiki's front page, but I feel rather miffed. In fact, I think many of those "bastards" might also be miffed that you copied whole articles off of tardis and added them to your wiki. Now, I don't know if there are actually any rules against it, but I rather suspect what you did is called plagiarism. CoT ? 01:08, November 16, 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, it's a bit hard to tell the difference between sarcasm and hate on the internet. Also, I know very little about the customs in regard to importing pages to different wikis so sorry about all that. You're quite right about people not noticing your wiki, apparently I've had it in my favourite list since May and not noticed! I was utterly shocked to find it there today. I'm really quite sorry about this hassle and I hope you understand where I'm coming from. CoT ? 02:42, November 16, 2016 (UTC)
Nevertheless, there are many editors on this wiki who contributed to the pages you imported and they now have it within their "favourite wikis" list. An editor's userpage is for representing themselves and I don't think many people here would like to have a wiki with what the front page of the Paul Magrs wiki currently has on their list. Would you be willing to change it? CoT ? 00:47, November 17, 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, can't appreciate Edit

Mr./Ms Fwhiffahder, I will let admins figure out whether what you did was plagiarism or not. Notwithstanding, I'd like to register my displeasure with the situation. In your message, you are trying to normalise the use of the word "fascist" in reference to your fellow editors. This should never be done. Firstly, potential readers of your newly-minted wiki will not know (just like none of the editors you copied knew) that you meant "fascist" as a joke. Secondly, one should not use such words even as a joke. If you think, that the actions of admins prohibiting editing material about fiction universes can compare to the murder and torture of millions of people, you are insulting the memory of these people and you are insulting their descendants. What's worse, you diminish the crimes committed by fascists, making them seem like no big deal, like things normal people sometimes do. Far be it from me to tell you how to live your life. But I would not want to be associated in any way with a wiki whose creation is based on such a foundation. Amorkuz 07:23, November 17, 2016 (UTC)

Forum post Edit

Hi! Re your comment posted at Thread:194725: "a meaningless policy distinction that keeps the story from being covered in the proper context", I'm going to strongly suggest that you refrain from openly criticizing rules that you don't agree with, especially in the very public forums. We all disagree with various policies on the wiki, but we know if we plan to continue editing here we must follow those policies. I should inform you that we had a very prolific and helpful user who was actually blocked for a year for too many open criticisms of policy. It's not something I agreed with, but it did happen. If you have a problem with a policy, it should be brought up at the policy's talk page or a separate post in the forums, not constantly dragged into other discussions. Thanks for your attention. Shambala108 22:53, November 28, 2016 (UTC)

If you choose to take a friendly bit of advice that way, I can't help that. Shambala108 23:52, November 28, 2016 (UTC)

Re: The Hidden Realm Edit

Hi! I undid the edit because somehow you had put an author's name in place of the year of release. Given that I don't know anything about the story, I didn't make any changes, just reverted to the previous edit. Feel free to add the correct author back. Shambala108 00:59, December 1, 2016 (UTC)

Philip Craggs Edit

Okay, thanks. The talk page is usually a good place, by the way. I renamed the page to Philip Craggs, leaving behind a redirect at Phil Craggs, as that's probably how he's credited in The Panda Book of Horrors.
× SOTO (//) 01:45, December 18, 2016 (UTC)

Feel free to create category:Manleigh Halt Irregulars short story writers and category:Manleigh Halt Irregulars short stories, by the way.
× SOTO (//) 01:46, December 18, 2016 (UTC)

What did you say about Vienna? Edit

It got deleted... --Pluto2 (talk) 02:15, December 19, 2016 (UTC)

Help Edit

Only trying to help pal. Sorry buddy. - Sir DENCH-and-PALMER 21:56, December 19, 2016 (UTC)

Iris Wildthyme timeline Edit

Why exactly are the unplaced stories...well, unplaced? --Pluto2 (talk) 19:44, December 20, 2016 (UTC)

Missing Episodes Edit

Hi! Sorry for not responding to you sooner. About Project: Longinus and Imaginary Boys… Contact me here. Дмитрий Куклин 15:24, December 22, 2016 (UTC)

Dorian Grey Edit

I stopped by The Divergent Universe and asked if Confessions was in the same universe as Doctor Who.

Scott Handcock gave this answer:

I'd never impose anything on listeners either way...

For me, however, they're separate worlds. Dorian doesn't have aliens, or exist in a world of UNIT and Torchwood, etc. And Doctor Who doesn't really have the supernatural (those stories with supernatural trappings tend to have a scientific rationale behind them).

I've always said the Dorian in Shades of Gray (Bernice Summerfield) is different from the Confessions Dorian. The performances, for one, are wildly different, even though they're played by the same actor. Worlds of Big Finish features a mash-up collision of universes, so that features the Confessions Dorian, and arguably it's only Iris who crosses between the universes - keeping Sherlock/Dorian in their worlds, and Graceless/Benny/Vienna in theirs.

Similarly, The Picture of Dorian Gray is another Dorian altogether, given the fate he invites upon himself at the end of Wilde's novel.

Hope this helps!

So...yeah. --Pluto2 (talk) 19:00, December 22, 2016 (UTC)

Merlin and Muldwych Edit

I don't think Muldwych is an older Merlin. Rather, he's the incarnation after Merlin. The people of the parallel universe in Battlefield are aware of regeneration, so it's likely that the Doctor regenerated into the incarnation known as Muldwych while in that universe. --Pluto2 (talk) 00:29, December 23, 2016 (UTC)

Paul Magrs wiki Edit

I've removed it. No hard feelings hey pal? - Sir DENCH-and-PALMER 23:23, December 23, 2016 (UTC)

Make stuff up Edit

I put "may imply" in the BTS section as many other articles do, however I'm sorry if it's disallowed. - Sir DENCH-and-PALMER 17:24, December 26, 2016 (UTC)

Blocked Edit

These days, I'm very, very slow to block anyone. The last block I performed was more than two years ago. In the past five years, I have actually unblocked many more people than I have blocked. Tardis is a hobby for me -- as it is for everyone who edits here -- so I want the time I spend here to be fun, not disciplinary.

But violations of T:ATTACKS are hard to ignore.

On the attacks Edit

If the Tardis adminstrative staff never acted upon personal attacks, the wiki could descend into a shouting match that resembled a back-alley message board. Clearly, we want it to be a community of editors trying to build something of use to others.

In the social areas of the wiki, you've violated T:ATTACKS enough times, and with sufficient impunity, that blocking is now a reasonable course of action. Here are a few of your greatest hits:

  • You call admin "cakesniffers" on your user page. It's a straight-up ad hominem attack, the precise thing that T:ATTACKS is designed to stop. In the context of an adjacent #OccupyWikia statement, it's not a joke, so much as a political philosophy. Now, I don't care what you call me, personally. And I'm not trotting this one thing out as enough to require your blocking. But it's unmistakably indicative of your broadly negative attitude towards our very hard-working, very volunteer admin staff. It informs your language. In other words, you insult our admin staff by default. And that ain't cricket.
  • There have been cases in the forums where you have stepped over the line of T:ATTACKS, then edited your response to make the offending statement disappear.
  • There have been other times where you haven't removed the offending statement. Just this weekend, you have accused an admin, in our public forums, of bad faith abuse of her powers. At its core, T:ATTACKS asks users to assume good faith.
  • T:ATTACKS applies to revision notes, too. Yesterday, you left behind a revision note at Sarah Jane Smith of "Don't just make stuff up", which not only provoked a response from the editor you were addressing, but it showed that you failed to interpret others' edits as being made in good faith. Just the word "please" would have made a big difference in that situation. At other times in the past week, you've said things like "Get your commas right", and "Don't make the grammar WORSE". Revision notes are for improving collaboration by explaining edits, or marking where you are in an editing process. They're not for insulting others or appearing to bark out orders.

Timeship Edit

And then there's w:c:timeship, where you call Tardis admin "fascist bastards" -- or more precisely, FASCIST BASTARDS, on the front page. I'm pretty sure there's no admin of any big wiki that hasn't been called a name or two. It's our job to try to do our best, brush off illigitimate criticism and learn from the real stuff.

But when it starts affecting other users, it's another ballgame.

One user tried to warn some admin of this note, indicating he was offended by it. He intimated he thought it was an expression of hate. He tried to help you by removing the comment on 17 November 2016. You restored it. You laughed it off as a joke, even when a second user, right here on your talk page, told you how inappopriate such language is to those who understand the realities of fascism. In fact, they were drawn to the page because you had Special:Import-ed their work over to w:c:timeship and created a link to that wiki in their profile. (And that link creation to "an external source that fits the commonly-accepted threshold for a personal attack" is another, specific violation of T:ATTACKS.)

That you put it back up once proves it's a message you want people to see -- one that meets, if not exceeds, the definition of hate speech. Indeed, four days ago, a third user removed it, with the explicit revision note of "removing hate". And you put it right back up. In six minutes. At Christmastime.

So that's twice people have tried to help you out, and you won't have it any of it. To the contrary of what you've said, it's not a joke to you. You won't let it go. It's what you believe. And if I've got at least three users -- not admin -- who are morally outraged by it, how can I ignore their feelings?

Conclusion Edit

Make no mistake: many of your edits to our main namespace are of high quality, and we thank you for them. But they don't shield you from the consequences of repeated T:ATTACKS violations.

At this point, you've received more than one warning about T:ATTACKS violations. You're deemed to have read the rule in its entirety. And yet, you continue to make "accusatory comments towards editors ... said repeatedly, in bad faith, or with sufficient venom". And if we keep letting it slide, then the rule will mean nothing, and others will be encouraged to model your behavior.

So upon consultation with some other admin -- and in part due to the fact that three non-admin have deemed speech you've used to be not just ordinary insults, but hate speech -- I am blocking you for a period of one year from today, and I point you in the direction of both Help:I'm blocked and T:SOCK for additional reading relevant to your current situation.
czechout@fandom    23:12: Tue 27 Dec 2016

Welcome back ... but please consider your words carefully Edit

Heya :) Happy holidays :)

You're of course welcome back after your blocking. But it's important that you don't start down the same path again. We're a little concerned after your edits today that you seem to be making exactly the same sort of edits that you were making a year ago. Since it's the holiday season, we want to be charitable in our interpretations of your edits today. In order to avoid future blocking, we hope you'll take on board the following tips:

  • Please remember that things you consider to be jokes may not come across that way in print. Our ad hoc meeting of four admin studying your edits to User:Fwhiffahder were exactly split on whether the phrase "Dr Who is gay" was funny or needlessly pejorative. We suspect that casual readers of the page, should they stumble across it, may also be divided. Some may think that it's not an insult, because there's not one thing wrong with being gay. Others may think that you're talking about the show itself and therefore using "gay" as an invective. There are a lot of people who would find this latter use of "gay" problematic. Since it does admit of widely differing interpretations, please consider the context in which you use the phrase, and how it might be read by all parties.
  • Edit summaries are bound by T:ATTACKS. We feel that your edit summary at Special:Diff/2440695 is in direct conflict with those rules. We're unanimously reading your edit summary as needlessly profane and challenging to anyone who might read it. You literally seem to be saying to the reader, "Get fuck(ed)". That's just not acceptable. While obscenities, themselves, are not cause for banning users here, all four admin who gathered today to view your edits agreed that your phrase was provocative and insulting. Similar edit summaries in the future will result in you getting re-banned. Please note the following from T:ATTACKS:
Maintain a civil atmosphere towards fellow users at all times, including in edit summaries (i.e. do not write removing crap, or undoing pointless info).
  • Toward that latter end, please remember that admin are people, too. You might find it funny to explicitly challenge the admin with statements like, "Red dots appear on my forehead as tardis data core admin snipers lock on." But it feels insulting to us. See, we have an interest in having more editors. We have the lowest percentage of blocked registered users of any major wiki at FANDOM. So we're demonstrably not trying to weed out people. After all, we're members of this community, too--just with a few extra janitorial powers. When you say things like you've said on your user page like this (and others) you are in fact insulting us. And you can't insult users, even on your user page.
  • If you want to be a part of our community, you're most welcome to be so. But be a part of it. Don't stand on the sidelines -- either here, another FANDOM wiki, or even outside the FANDOM network -- and throw eggs at us. We're doing our best with the time we have available to us.
    czechout@fandom    23:58: Thu 28 Dec 2017

Personal pronoun Edit

Meanwhile, as a sign of good faith, I'd like to ask you which personal pronoun you would prefer to be addressed by. Now that you've self-identified as a member of LGBTQ, I realise that the issue of a personal pronoun can sometimes be a sensitive one. I would not want to inadvertently offend you by using a wrong pronoun. So please let me know which one you prefer. And yes, welcome back and happy editing! Amorkuz 08:57, December 29, 2017 (UTC)

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