- 1 Full stops
- 2 "Et al."
- 3 People encountered
- 4 Re: Editing competition
- 5 2029
- 6 Chequers vs. checkers
- 7 Mary's Story edit
- 8 Dating for "The Witch from the Well"
- 9 Dating for "Image of the Fendahl"
- 10 Elisabeth II?
- 11 The Lost
- 12 Categories
- 13 Request for opinion on thread
- 14 Archduke Franz Ferdinand assassination date
- 15 Unsubstantiated accusations
- 16 Unsubstantiated accusations still unsubstantiated
- 17 Goth
- 18 1966 World Cup
- 19 Fairy Godfather and other pantos
- 20 Dating for the Dalek Empire series.
Full stops[edit source]
Hey, Gus :) Thanks as always for all your work around here. Following a review of a recent edit of yours I did just want to draw your attention to T:PERIODS AND QUOTES. It's an obscure little rule, but it's one of those things that we want to try to be consistent about. Please remember that if you're quoting a sentence fragment at the end of a sentence, the punctuation typically appears outside the inverted commas, as in:
- The Doctor said that he was "concerned about the past".
You only put the punctuation within the quotation marks when the quotation is a full sentence (i.e., a subject and verb), and therefore the punctuation applies to the quotation.
There's a nominal split on this notion between American and non-American usage, with some American style guides, like the APA, giving the go ahead to the changes you made in the edit I cited above. However, remember that we side with British English around here, and therefore T:PERIODS AND QUOTES stresses British style.
Again, thanks for all your edits! :)
"Et al."[edit source]
Hello, GusF! Can I ask you why you are removing every "et al." or "onwards" from the references, as in Engines of War? Not only I've (we've) always used those notes, but I find them very useful to convey when a reference is to a single story (that is, "this is the first mention to this past reference") or a series of stories ("this is just the latest one"). Is there a new guideline? Thank you :) HarveyWallbanger ☎ 21:31, October 15, 2014 (UTC)
People encountered[edit source]
Hello Gus. I was just wondering what your approach is to the Real world people encountered by the Doctor category. It has a number of issues, such as the syntax of the category name, and the definition of the word 'encountered' used therein.
As you can see from the talk page, it's quite a contentious topic. Just to save yourself a lot of work, you might want to wait for a conclusion to be drawn before you categorise all the necessary pages. Regards, Skittles the hog - talk 20:28, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
Re: Editing competition[edit source]
- Hey Gus :) Thanks for all your hard work editing these past few weeks. It's very much appreciated. I just wanted to drop by and say that the second contest was originally going to be funded directly by me, but thanks to some behind-the-scenes jiggery-pokery, Wikia are actually going to help a bit with prizes, and there'll be one for residents of the British Isles and one for the rest of the world. However, I'm going to have to activate the "rules subject to change" clause and push back the deadline to the end of the quarter, because the prizes are in fact pretty good. I'll be changing the front page this week to reflect that. I wouldn't worry too much about this if I were you; you've banked a lot of points. :)
Chequers vs. checkers[edit source]
Hi, thanks for collaborating on Heinz (The Silver Turk). One thing I'll have to change back though. I was also surprised by it, to be honest. The British spelling of "checkers" is "chequers" (see  and ). Since this Wikia (unlike me) uses British English, it seems we have to use "chequers." What is strange for me is that it appears that there is a special British name for the game---"draughts." I have no idea why they did not use that one. Amorkuz ☎ 23:17, December 14, 2015 (UTC)
Mary's Story edit[edit source]
Just in case you misunderstood my action as deleting your newest edit. I saw your update from 2013 to 2015 and realized that this note had been misplaced originally. It is the whole anthology that acknowledges all three continuities. Thus, I moved the note to The Company of Friends (audio anthology) page with minimal modifications. Amorkuz ☎ 22:34, December 21, 2015 (UTC)
Dating for "The Witch from the Well"[edit source]
Hi, it seems that you added some exact dates to the events of the story. I've started a discussion of them on the story's talk page. But in case you're not receiving updates on that, let me additionally ping you here. Do you by any chance remember where these dates came from? 'Cos I can't find them in the story. Thanks in advance. Amorkuz ☎ 23:39, May 26, 2016 (UTC)
Dating for "Image of the Fendahl"[edit source]
Hi GusF! Back in November 2012 you made a few edits saying that Curse of the Fendahl took place in July 1977. The "1977" part is fine, that much is said in Taking of Planet 5, but I can't seem to find any source for the "July" bit. Would you be able to cast your mind back half a decade and remember if there's a calendar seen in one of the episodes or if the novelisation says it's July? CoT ? 17:11, March 12, 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll search for that calendar when I get around to doing 1977, but for now I'll just leave things as they are. CoT ? 20:52, March 12, 2017 (UTC)
Elisabeth II?[edit source]
- More likely - yes. Established in the story - no. Sorry, without explicit confirmation or a very extensive research into the gap between Victoria and Elizabeth II, I am changing it back. Amorkuz ☎ 19:54, May 7, 2017 (UTC)
The Lost[edit source]
Request for opinion on thread[edit source]
Hey GusF, it would appear from your edit history that you've heard Ringpullworld and Find and Replace, as such I would be very interested in hearing your opinion over at Thread:206638. Best wishes, CoT ? 17:29, July 13, 2017 (UTC)
Archduke Franz Ferdinand assassination date[edit source]
Hi, sorry to bother you. I was banging my head trying to find a DWU source for the exact date of Franz Ferdinand assassination. I noticed that long time ago you added it to the page of 28 June. Do you by any chance remember if it was based on a primary source or just a secondary wiki source. I checked all the three stories stated as sources and none of them mentions the 28th, unless I am missing something. Thank you in advance for your time. Amorkuz ☎ 06:59, October 6, 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick response. I was secretly hoping you'd pull the date from somewhere and put the matter to rest. I'll continue digging. Amorkuz ☎ 09:50, October 6, 2017 (UTC)
Unsubstantiated accusations[edit source]
Hi, it is an unpleasant situation, and I regret that your proactive behaviour resulted in these recriminations instead of praise. I hope you understand that, as admins, we are obliged to investigate every report of potential wrongdoing. Let me, however, assure you that these investigations are performed under the standard presumption of innocence doctrine. Thus, until evidence is presented, you remain blameless in the incident. I have a lingering suspicion that, as often happens, this might be a result of a misunderstanding. For instance, your edit that was correct in one setting could be mis-extrapolated to another situation, where a similar edit became wrong. Once again, I understand it's unpleasant to be blamed. But, as you can see, two admins are actively involved in the case. Just let things run their course. At this point, the ball is not in your court. You can safely continue editing the way you prefer. Amorkuz ☎ 12:51, November 2, 2017 (UTC)
Unsubstantiated accusations still unsubstantiated[edit source]
I clarify that you are not and have not been under any investigation regarding this matter. As I wrote all that time ago, "it will be investigated as soon as you [Xx-connor-xX] provide exact information on when and where this occurred." I was being quite literal about it. No evidence has ever been provided of a wrongdoing. Thus, no investigation was ever initiated.
In fact, the response of Xx-connor-xX to that request of mine for such evidence made it clear that he did not have it. He then proceeded to accuse the admin of forcing him into this unsubstantiated accusation, much the same way as he had earlier blamed you for his mistakes. For me, this matter has been closed then and there. I regret if you felt under any shadow of suspicion all this time. I assure you that you were not.
As a matter of course admin must investigate reasonable and justified complaints but equally as a matter of course we ignore baseless accusations. Apologies for not stating this clearer. Amorkuz ☎ 23:13, January 3, 2018 (UTC)
Hi, some long time ago in forums far away, you thought that there was some canonical evidence for Goth and Gulliver being the same character. Do you still think so? If so, could you provide your arguments at Talk:Goth please? I currently do not see this connection and tried to explain there why. Amorkuz ☎ 19:10, May 27, 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick reply. Good to know we agree. I often think of this style of writing as attempting to both please fans by playing to their head canons and simultaneously not to spoil any continuity other writers might want to stipulate. The Woman (The End of Time) is a prime example. Having said that, I found another source, War Crimes. I'll post the relevant information on the Goth talk page. Plus I need to recall some terminology from The War Games. That may or may not give something new. Amorkuz ☎ 19:41, May 27, 2018 (UTC)
1966 World Cup[edit source]
I moved the content to a separate page on the 1966 World Cup Final where it is more relevant. The 1966 World Cup is a page on the whole tournament; as the majority of information was related to the final, it seemed more relevant on its own page. I can easily put it back if you want. 66 Seconds ☎ 15:16, August 16, 2018 (UTC)
- No problem at all. I've added a disambiguation on both pages for the sake of other users. 66 Seconds ☎ 15:24, August 16, 2018 (UTC)
Fairy Godfather and other pantos[edit source]
Hi, sorry to bother you about several edits you made on October 24, 2014. Yes, I know, a long time ago. I'm trying to understand the sources of the additional roles in the cast list for Oh No It Isn't!, specifically The Fairy Godfather, Computer, and The Grel. All three were added by you. But, interestingly, not in one edit. What is the source for each of the three? Thanks in advance. Amorkuz ☎ 23:04, September 16, 2018 (UTC)
Dating for the Dalek Empire series.[edit source]
Hi, I know it was seven years ago, but going back through the history of edits in the Dalek Empire series, I've noticed you were the one adding the years to the story infobox settings. Having listened to all 4 audio series I haven't found any such references, so I can only assume it was from one or more of the Short Trips: Dalek Empire stories. Is this true? If so, would it be possible for you to send me the relevant quotes as evidence, so I can add them to the page notes, and also to Theory:Timeline - Doctor Who universe? Thanks a bunch Danochy ☎ 05:53, April 5, 2019 (UTC)
- Hey, just letting you know that User:Shambala108 has found that the source of the setting on this page here http://www.tetrap.com/drwho/disccon/8/time.html#boxitem, which, being an invalid source, means I'll remove the settings from the in-universe pages. Thanks, Danochy ☎ 04:55, July 9, 2019 (UTC)