Thanks for your eagle eyes with the Peri Brown situation. If you ever get into such a situation again, don't hesitate to put a note on my talk page (or that of any active admin) so that you don't have to waste so much time yourself.
Thanks for backing me up
Thanks for leaving that nice note at that IP user's talk page. Looking at it, I've left a message there before - must have been the same guy all along. However, I might as well let you know that there's very little chance that he'll actually read it. IP users don't get notifications when they get messages; it's all wibbly. Thanks anyways! :) --SOTO ☎ 18:17, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
- That said, your note just made me review the IP user's work and ban him outright. So maybe he'll talk to me on my user page at w:c:community and I can make sure that he does read and understand your note. An then, in an ideal world, he can return to edit more productively.
Hi! I just wanted to let you know that it's not necessary to correct redirects. Technically, they're not wrong. They're just shortcuts that save a bit of typing. That leaves us all free to make the edits we actually want to make :) Shambala108 ☎ 16:19, April 15, 2013 (UTC)
Glad you liked that one. Sorry if it just jeopardised your employment.
Hi! Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I looked into the matter. The anonymous user eventually brought the issue up on the talk page, and Tybort explained our policy. That should end the edit war, but I'll keep an eye on it, and if you notice he/she's done it again, you can let me know. Thanks! Shambala108 ☎ 15:20, September 6, 2013 (UTC)
- Ok the page is done. It's at the bottom of the Theory:Doctor Who audio discontinuity and plot holes page. It's apparently a really complicated procedure that someone else did for me, but I think I can do another one if it comes up. Shambala108 ☎ 02:43, October 4, 2013 (UTC)
Tenth Doctor lead-in
- This item was originally added by Czechout (with both Tybort and me re-adding it when it gets removed), with the comment that we actually have verification of the number. This helps to clear up questions that people have with regard to things like the Morbius incident and the (still not yet established) identity of the John Hurt character. Until we learn otherwise, the Doctors are as stated in their story pages, and we will change if/when necessary. This comment by the comic character is a bit of in-universe confirmation of a necessary fact.
- You described the character Kath Braxton as a "minor character from a comic that a lot of people on here probably haven't read." While this is true, it is the policy of the wiki that all stories have equal weight and importance, so there really isn't such a thing as a minor character or story. Therefore, her information is valid and useful.
- You also assumed that, if you did something similar on the Eleventh Doctor, it would be removed. If you put it in with the proper citation, it will be accepted. We have actually had people changing 9, 10 and 11 to 10, 11 and 12 based on assumptions about the Hurt character. Having in-universe confirmation of incarnation numbers will help keep this kind of thing to a minimum (like I said earlier, until we learn more about him).
- In addition to all this, it was, if I remember correctly, the first time that Tennant's number had ever been given in any officially licensed story. Since Eccleston's number has never been given (as of this writing), it was an especially vital nugget of information. It may not look like a big deal, now that Smith has given his number in The Lodger and Clara again in The Name of the Doctor. When published, it was the first time that an incarnation number had been given by a BBC Wales-approved story.
- Importance isn't measured by who says something, but by what they say.