FANDOM

Welcome to the Wiki-wordmark Pluto2

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!

Hello

We only take the best!

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. -- CzechOut (Talk) 23:24, 2012 January 30

Recent edit to Tenth DoctorEdit

Your recent edit to the Tenth Doctor article was rolled back because it contained a significant amount of material that appears to have been copied from the Doctor Who Reference Guide, which is plagiarism.

Any of the information that wasn't from the DW Ref Guide appears to have been copied from the Summary pages from this wiki. While you can copy information around on this wiki there should be different interpretations and presentations of information for different articles. Also note that for in-universe articles (which are any that don't have the real world tag on them that everything must be written in the past tense. Please have a look through our Manual of Style and our Help pages, and also have a look around the wiki at the various articles to familiarise yourself with how articles are written on this wiki. Thanks. --Tangerineduel / talk 13:41, January 31, 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're asking me to do.
I won't write, or rewrite your additions for you. As I said above you copied the information from the DWREF Guide and the summary pages.
If you want to add content to the pages you need to write the information based on your reading of the texts/watching of the shows/listening to the audios. Thanks. --Tangerineduel / talk 02:13, February 8, 2012 (UTC)

Christmas cheer Edit

Happy holidays!

As this fiftieth anniversary year comes to a close, we here at Tardis just want to thank you for being a part of our community — even if you haven't edited here in a while. If you have edited with us this year, then thanks for all your hard work.

This year has seen an impressive amount of growth. We've added about 11,000 pages this year, which is frankly incredible for a wiki this big. November was predictably one of the busiest months we've ever had: over 500 unique editors pitched in. It was the highest number of editors in wiki history for a year in which only one programme in the DWU was active. And our viewing stats have been through the roof. We've averaged well over 2 million page views each week for the last two months, with some weeks seeing over 4 million views!

We've received an unprecedented level of support from Wikia Staff, resulting in all sorts of new goodies and productive new relationships. And we've recently decided to lift almost every block we've ever made so as to allow most everyone a second chance to be part of our community.

2014 promises to build on this year's foundations, especially since we've got a full, unbroken series coming up — something that hasn't happened since 2011. We hope you'll stick with us — or return to the Tardis — so that you can be a part of the fun!

TardisDataCoreRoadway


Forum decisions Edit

Hi! I feel like I need to make something clear to you. Forum decisions can only be closed by admins. If a discussion is not closed, it is still ongoing. Please do not take any actions based on still-open forum discussions. Thanks. Shambala108 03:21, November 22, 2016 (UTC)

Input on a thread Edit

You seem like the sort of person whose input would be helpful on Thread:206566. Fwhiffahder 22:31, December 16, 2016 (UTC)

I'm definitely getting involved. --Pluto2 (talk) 22:39, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
Shame this wiki isn't run like a proper wiki, by community decision making, but exists solely to boost the ego of one admin with an agenda... Obverse 15:09, December 28, 2016 (UTC)
Comment aimed at Obverse: Probably shouldn't butt in but that comment obverse is a personal attack. I can only suggest you remove it. I don't know which admin you're referring too but none of what you've said applies to any admin. I'm suggesting it, merely on a user to user basis, to warn you that you'll probably end up getting blocked under Tardis:No personal attacks. I wish you all the best. - Sir DENCH-and-PALMER 18:41, December 28, 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, it was aimed at CzechOut, a sad little man who appears to run this place like a personal fiefdom and takes no notice of either common sense, reasoned argument or, frankly, the way a wiki is supposed to be run. Being blocked from a site ruled by him, with a handful of regular posters all scared of his pettiness - no huge deal. (this is not aimed at you byw as you seem to be a sensible sort of person - I admire your patience working for - sorry, with - such a pathetic individual.) But in reality when every poster on a Wiki inclusion thread supports inclusion, and covers - in detail - every point required for inclusion, and one admin comes along an unilaterally closes down all discussion on the basis that (a) it'd be hard for him to correct his initial mistake and (b) it'll please those who want less content on the wiki - well, that wiki is effectively a useless space. Please understand, I have no interest really in whether Fp is on this wiki or not from a publishing POV - it'll not lead to one more sale or one more reader, but I've never been a fan of tiny fish in little ponds throwing their weight about. Obverse 22:29, December 28, 2016 (UTC)
Look. I'm upset that FP hasn't been included - really - I'm really upset. But attacking someone seems unfair. Yes the discussion was long and well backed up with evidence. Yes the end result was really upsetting. However CzechOut doesn't "run" the wiki, the admins do. I mean some non admins help more than some of the admins such as OS12, CoT and I.
CzechOut's reasons weren't what I expected but insulting him is unwarranted and darned unfair. I here propose that you delete your last comment. Not in fear that you'll get banned but so User:CzechOut doesn't have to read those vile comments.
On a brighter not, thanks for publishing FP. You've made a lot of Who fans happy. - Sir DENCH-and-PALMER 22:39, December 28, 2016 (UTC)

Re: Vienna Edit

I'll tell you what User:Fwhiffahder said, since I deleted both his post and yours. He asked you to not derail the topic of the thread. I suggest you read both Tardis:Forum policy and Tardis:Discussion policy. And just to let you know, any thread to re-open the issue of Vienna will be deleted. That is a relatively new decision that took over a year to reach, and we will not be re-opening old closed threads just because new users who missed the original decisions want to re-open them. The (very few) admins on this wiki have too much work to do on the wiki and don't wish to keep having to rehash old decisions. Thanks for your attention. Shambala108 02:21, December 19, 2016 (UTC)

Okay, sorry. Mind commenting on the Faction Paradox thread again? --Pluto2 (talk) 02:23, December 19, 2016 (UTC)
There were a ton of new posts added yesterday when I was not available, and I need some time to read all those before posting. In addition, since both User:CzechOut and User:Tangerineduel ruled against FP in the original forum threads, they should both be consulted here as very-senior admins who understand Tardis:Valid sources better than anyone who has yet commented on that issue. Shambala108 02:32, December 19, 2016 (UTC)
That's okay! --Pluto2 (talk) 02:33, December 19, 2016 (UTC)

Unplaced IW stories Edit

It's Iris. Making a timeline page at all shows remarkable stupidity on my part. It can be very difficult (read: deliberately impossible) to tell when a story is set. But, for a breakdown:

  • A Hundred Words from a Civil War just says in the narration that Iris tried to get into the City. It could just be placed around Library Pictures, since they're in the same anthology.
  • From Dog Days of Summer to God Engine Rhapsody are stories from Fifteen, which contains a variety of difficult-to-identify Irises.
  • The last few are from The Perennial Miss Wildthyme. It also contains several Irises. I'm reading through it right now and updating the page as I go. Fwhiffahder 19:56, December 20, 2016 (UTC)

Dorian Gray Edit

If there's one thing that is certain, it's that his name is "Gray" with an "a," not "Grey" with an "e." And I don't know why you're bringing this up. The inclusion thread was closed a while back. And the series has ended with a contradiction of Shades of Gray. Fwhiffahder 19:19, December 22, 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm an idiot! --Pluto2 (talk) 19:20, December 22, 2016 (UTC)

Black Mould/Night Witch Edit

The Doctor (Battlefield) says The Collection is that Doctor, The Collection says it's definitely Muldwych, and I think Happy Endings says that Muldwych is the same Doctor who was Merlin. He ages a ton in Birthright if I remember right. Fwhiffahder 00:35, December 23, 2016 (UTC)

FP thread Edit

You said "So I take it this debate will probably continue past Christmas?"

Yes, it looks like it will. These things are never resolved quickly. Please stop trying to push it, and just wait. It's been years since FP was banished. There's no great urgency now. Fwhiffahder 03:04, December 23, 2016 (UTC)

Seconded. NateBumber 03:59, December 23, 2016 (UTC)
Hey :) I'm really sorry you're disappointed in the decision. I can understand that, and I greatly sympathise. The thing is, I myself am frustrated that I can't really hold out the option of re-merging. But some things are just harder to do correctly on a wiki than you'd think.
Re-reading the thread won't change the fact that there are genuine technical difficulties with re-merging.
But please believe me when I say that there's no good reason that high quality, well-linked articles can't be created at the FP Wiki. Nate suggested that an option was to give help in establishing a better community at FP, and I'm perfectly prepared to do that, as, I imagine, would be other admin.
This decision doesn't mean that the thread has been in vain. Instead, I hope it serves as a catalyst for newfound growth at the FP Wiki, by highlighting FP content for the first time in the DWUs existence at Fandom/Wikia. I think, too, that the thread has given a lot of helpful and specific relief to the nature of the editing that needs to happen to get the ball rolling.
czechout@fandom    09:52: Wed 28 Dec 2016


FP Edit

Well if it's allowed here. I'll surely help you. DENCH-and-PALMER 09:52, December 30, 2016 (UTC)


FP short stories Edit

I'll definitely create some of those articles.

Though I'll have to do it tomorrow when I'm on a computer rather than an iPad as it takes longer and it's harder to work. Denchen 19:23, January 1, 2017 (UTC)

Morbius Doctors Pictures Edit

Thanks for you edits on the Morbius Doctors pages. Since you did it for the Fifth Doctor can you add pictures of the other Doctors individually. Thanks. --86.160.234.226talk to me 20:28, January 10, 2017 (UTC)

Image width Edit

All images uploaded to the wiki must be at least 250 pixels wide. Thanks! P&P talk contribs 03:59, January 11, 2017 (UTC)

Vandalism on someone else's user page Edit

Thank you for making note of the vandalism done at User:PicassoAndPringles' user page. However, as the rule goes, non-admins should never edit the user page of another, even in these cases. To quote from T:USER OTHER:

"If you notice that someone else's user page has been vandalised, please do not revert on your own initiative. Instead, please alert an admin. Admin have greater powers to notice editing patterns, and so are in a better position to identify the seriousness of the vandalism."

That said, your efforts are appreciated. But do try to keep this in mind in the future.
× SOTO (//) 01:47, January 19, 2017 (UTC)

Re:War Chief Edit

The fact that Dicks described the War Chief the same way he described the Master is very interesting, why didn't you put it in the BHS section? (Are you saving it for a debate? ) The fact that I think part of the point that the point is trying to make is that various "spin-offs" have shown that both the Monk and the Master were in completely different situations at the time of the Second Doctor's trial. Also, you should never delete an entire chunk of information because of an easy-to-fix wording problem (even if it conflicts with your vision of the DWU). CoT ? 03:08, January 22, 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't really know anything about Divided Loyalties aside from it apparently being the worst Dr Who story ever. That said, can you really fault Gary Russell for having excessive continuity? It's as natural to him as breathing air. CoT ? 03:25, January 22, 2017 (UTC)
Where might I find this server? I've never used discord before and am downloading it now. What do I do afterwards? CoT ? 03:43, January 22, 2017 (UTC)

FP connection to DW Edit

Hi, in the page Toy Story (short story) you've created you made a lot of connections that are not obvious to an outside observer like myself: the Pilot is the Eighth Doctor, the Male Companion is Fitz Kreiner, the Ship is The Doctor's TARDIS.

In Thread:208233 it is stated that such connections are only allowed "if and only if it's explicitly stated in-text that a Faction Paradox character or concept is a Doctor Who character or concept".

There is an ongoing discussion at Thread:209869 regarding the kind of evidence in existence supporting the statement that Lolita and the Doctor's TARDIS are sisters (discussion prompted by your edit to the Doctor's TARDIS webpage I might add). Thus, I would appreciate it if you could quote on that thread the in-text evidence for the connections you made. Thank you in advance. Amorkuz 11:51, January 22, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Doctor Who Unbound Edit

Hey Pluto2. When I reverted your edits on The Innocents (short story) I had not seen that forum's decision. I was aware of it's existance, and, though I did not reply on it, I followed (most of) it. I just had not seen it was closed in favour of including the rest of the Unbound series (which I 100% agreed with). Sorry for not double-checking before reverting your edits. No hard feelings though, right? OncomingStorm12th 21:56, January 23, 2017 (UTC)

Friendly note on moving pages Edit

Sorry for interfering. I know we clashed recently and you might still be mad at me. There will surely be an admin coming around soon explaining this too. But this is a time issue. Which is why I stick my head. Please believe that this is nothing but a friendly note on one of the policies that almost everyone (me included) violated at least once.

It has been a long-standing rule on this Wiki that pages should be moved only by admins. It may be maddening to wait sometimes. But that's how it is. There are all sorts of reason behind it, starting from the fact that there are moves that only admins can do. Just to be sure, I do not question the moves you made in any way. It's a purely procedural question.

The reason I hasten to let you know is because I expect there are tons of moves like that, with so many new valid stories, and many editors eager to work on this pages. As Shambala108 once told me when I lost patience after waiting for months and moved a page myself, if one non-admin user does it, even knowing what he/she's doing, then others would follow suit and the admins will be the ones to clean up the mess.

The fastest way for getting a page moved is to slap a "Speedy rename" template on it. (It should only be reserved for non-controversial moves that require no discussion, but I assume those are the ones you're making anyways.) That puts the page in the list visible to all admins. Though not a matter of policy, but I found that if you actually change all the links to the page to its new proposed name, which admins can see in the list, it may speed up the process as there is less for them to do. On the other hand, there are bots for these kinds of things. The second thing that works well is personally asking an admin to move the page. Amorkuz 09:48, January 24, 2017 (UTC)

Decided to go for the extra trouble and find where this policy is stated explicitly: Thread:128198. The reasons are spelled out more fully there. Amorkuz 09:59, January 24, 2017 (UTC)

Woah, TIL and Duly Noted! It's really weird that this policy is in a long-dead discussion thread instead of in the actual policies of the wiki. I wonder why the admins haven't just disabled this option for non-admin users? NateBumber 14:42, January 24, 2017 (UTC)

I somehow suspect that the Wiki engine does not allow restricting users from moving. And yes, I keep begging to include this or that rule into the official policies as I have not found a good way to search the forums. But this Wiki has existed before us, and there is a robust equilibrium on how things done. The main difference, IMHO, that to learn this equilibrium you need to talk to people rather than read the policies. It does have a certain benefit though because, when admin comes to tell you you misbehaved, he or she might actually explain the origin of the rule, or you can ask for an explanation. Amorkuz 14:57, January 24, 2017 (UTC)

Apology Edit

Dear Pluto2, Today we fought hard and we fought brave, as two crusaders for opposing causes. As it happens in the rage of battle, I might have been less civil than I'd like myself to be. For that I apologise. Please be assured that I respect you as a fierce and unrelenting opponent and respect your right to having an opinion wholly different from mine. Your surrender on one of the threads does not make me happy as I'd prefer to return to the content-based discussions we had regarding FP. I wish you to have more luck in future battles. Amorkuz 22:01, January 25, 2017 (UTC)

Block Edit

I don't like performing blocks, but things can really get out of hand here. This is not only in direct response to Amorkuz's message on my talk page.

You have been asked not to start more inclusion debates, and this was many many weeks ago. Yet still you persist, and it's getting to the point where multiple users are questioning whether these new discussions are in good faith at all. What's more, we, the admin—we who choose to devote some time to maintaining this website and this community—cannot possibly keep up. It's starting to seem as though you are disrupting this wiki to prove a point. You're bringing out fringe cases, of perhaps dubious copyright, certainly dubious connection to the DWU (our point of coverage). Maybe you're really enthusiastic about covering these things. Maybe you don't like the necessary boundaries we set up so as not to have to include all of Marvel of all of Star Wars, to take two extreme cases. Regardless of your intentions, this sort of mass upheaval is certainly taking a toll on the maintenance of this wiki, and the editing time of those who are with us.

And yes, you're moving pages. You shouldn't be doing that. Yes, you have gone against T:BOUND in your editing and in your discussions, and that is very important, as well. But mostly, I'm seeing, and others in our team of admin are seeing, mass violation of T:POINT.

I'll leave you with the text in big letters at the top of that policy:

If you don't like one of our policies, attempt to change it through direct, succinct discussion at a single thread at Board:Panopticon. Do not attempt to poke holes in the rule by editing pages in the main namespace in a way that demonstrates the weakness of the rule, or by starting the same argument in several different places.

Your block will last a total of 4 months.
× SOTO (//) 03:27, January 26, 2017 (UTC)

Re: message left at Thread:181884 Edit

I'm posting this here rather than Thread:181884 because it's off-topic, but I have to address the comment you left for me today: "You seem to be under the impression that users are morons."

Your message has no relevance to the discussion. In fact, you have taken my well-considered words and turned them into a personal attack. The only reason you are not blocked for violating Tardis:No personal attacks is that I generally don't block users for an offense committed against myself. Please understand that if you had addressed your comment to any other user, I would have given you a substantial block.

To address your specific point: If you really think that new and/or infrequent users always read our policies and don't make mistakes, then I challenge you to take a look at Special:Contributions/Shambala108 and see just how many of my 100,000+ edits are correcting mistakes by other users. Most new users are so excited to contribute that they jump into editing right away, many times not even aware of how many policies we have.

In the future, keep your comments on-topic and refrain from attacking other users. Another violation of Tardis:No personal attacks will result in a block. Also, please take a look at Thread:223085. Shambala108 23:13, September 16, 2017 (UTC)

T:FORUM Edit

Since Shambala108 quoted your post at Thread:181884, deleting this post is in violation of T:FORUM. To quote from the policy: "It's not fair to make a later poster look like they've misquoted you." The post is now restored. Please, do not make any further modifications to it. Amorkuz 23:48, September 16, 2017 (UTC)

Forum post Edit

Your forum post at Thread:209497 has been removed. It is not your job, or any other non-admin, to determine when/if a thread should be closed. In recent months and on recent threads, that point has been made quite clearly. In particular, the last comment on the page (mine) specifically makes this policy clear. Do not post on threads to ask for closure. You don't know whether an admin is in the middle of researching an issue or is planning to take some kind of action. So don't call for closure or claim that something has been decided. Thanks for your attention, Shambala108 00:52, May 27, 2018 (UTC)

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