This is Wiggstar69's talk page - feel free to leave a comment.--Wiggstar69 15:27, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'd just like to thank you for the page edit and for reminding me of the Chula Zombie's name. If you need any help feel free to mail me back. :) Xdt (talk · contribs)

If you see anymore mistakes on the page I would be more than happy for you to correct them. I shall be adding some major updates with the arrival of the new series on Saturday, let's hope it's as good as it looks! Xdt (talk · contribs)

I was wondering if you could help me, the assistants to the Plasmavores have caused me a great deal of concern, I have been trying to figure out their name since they are listed as both Slabs and Slavs on various sites. Any ideas on their actual name? Xdt (talk · contribs)

Thought so, looking over the official image page I noticed the spelling. Thanks anyway. I was wondering if you could help me. My userpage is coming along nicely, but I can't decide whether to use human enemies like the Editor and Henry Van Statten. The Editor was quite an important role and I'm very unsure about the idea. Xdt (talk · contribs)

That's a good idea. I'm still thought out over whether to include Mr. Finch (possibly part of Krillitanes) or Father Angelo and the Bretherin from Tooth and Claw. I may cut out a few such as the blue children and the space pig seeing that the pig was no real alien or threat. Might add it. Xdt (talk · contribs)

That's fine you've done me a huge favour, I've been thinking what to name then since after the concept of them just being female changed yesterday I was thinking a lot about a rename to that section. Poor old Boe, I've got a feeling he could be a Time Lord. The Macra, nice to see them again despite a short performance. Is it worth me adding all them unusual creatures to the list the Doctor meets while jumping through cars? Xdt (talk · contribs)

Do you reckon I should add a separate section for the Human/Dalek hybrid? Xdt 16:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm gonna probably create a list of who and what will be part of the list soon. Xdt 16:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My ideas so far for a list would be:

• Abzorbaloff
• Auton
• The Beast
• Carrionites
• Cat People
• Chula Zombies
• Clockwork Droids
• Cyberman
• Dalek
• Dalek Human Hybrid
• The Editor (?)
• Emperor Dalek
• Empress of the Racnoss
• Face of Boe
• Family of Blood
• Forest of Cheem
• Gelth
• Hoix
• Isolus
• Jack Straws
• Jagrafess
• Judoon
• Krillitane
• Lady Cassandra
• Lazarus
• Living Drawing
• Macra
• Nanogenes
• Nestene Conciousness
• New Human
• Ood
• Pig Slaves
• Robot Santas
• Plasmavore
• Reaper
• Slab
• Slitheen
• Sycorax
• Toclafane
• Werewolf (I completely forgot!)
• The Wire

Xdt 22:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, i'm gonna tweak the list a bit. Could you mail me a list of your ideas for list candidates? Xdt 16:32, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for removing Enfield from the Worth School page Alumni list. He was at Worth for less than 1 year, and left because he hated it. He doesn't see himself as an "old boy" of Worth, and wouldn't want to be listed as such. I think its fair to avoid putting him where he never wanted to be! Cheers Lanspergius 21:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I reverted your change to the dating of Smith and Jones, as it's debatable whether it's set in 2007 or 2008 (if the myspace is used as a reference, it points to 2008 - the blogging engine can't set dates in the future, and Saxon is mentioned blowing up the Webstar), but it is fact it's set after Doomsday. Will ^{(I hope they cannot see, I AM THE GREAT DESTROYER!)} 13:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:RT-2007-04-1-.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking we could possibly allow the page as something anyone can constructively contribute to. It would give both of us a break. I'm updating the list with stuff from Daleks in Manhattan/Evolution of the Daleks and The Lazarus Experiment, I believe the monster is called Lazarus.....I hope. Anyway, it's real naff about ridiculous Eurovision sending 42 a week later. Haven't had much luck with schedules this year. The trailer depicted Jack Straws (the scarecrows) and Family of Blood (the pale guy) along with Mr. Saxon. 42 might have possessed crew members (much like the Ood) and Blink will involve some kind of haunted house with living statues that turn people to stone by simply looking at them. Look at the image for Utopia on the episode's page and you can see an insectoid face to the far left that is seemingly sharing a drink with Sir Derek Jacobi's character the Professor. Xdt 22:53, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, it could come across as confusing otherwise. :) Xdt 22:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep getting rid of speech marks and replacing them with italics? Didn't you know that it was decided we had to use quotes for episodes, italics for serials?~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 15:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's why we used all italics for the longest time. But we kept getting people from other Wikiprojects descend, and eventually we were forced to conform.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 15:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The anon is right - there are differences between the universes (for example, next month Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is released in our universe, but it hasn't been by 2008 in the Whoniverse). Tiny differences - I suspect they may have not converted to Common Worship there. Will ^(talk) 16:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Doctor's tone of voice was "I've read it and you haven't". Will ^(talk) 17:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, on a conflict between dating - Jackie is actually forty on the night "Rise" takes place, but says she's 39 because she officially shares a birthday with Cuba Gooding, Jr. (she still doesn't anyway, but that's not the point). While it's OR, Mickey's statement about it not being that farflung does take precedence over Battles in Time (episodes being absolute canon and ancillary media being of sketchy but still admissible canon). Will ^(talk) 15:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Her official biography in the alternate universe says she's 39, sharing a birthday with Gooding Jr (they still don't, they're 29 days apart), but in actual fact she's 40 (hence why Jackie Tyler says 1969). Will ^(talk) 15:44, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, do you think the dating of 2007 is justified now because I've explained it? Will ^(talk) 17:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is confusing? Will ^(talk) 18:57, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Jackie Tyler is born on Feb 1st, 1967.
• Cuba Gooding Jr. is born on Jan 2nd, 1968.
• Jackie and Pete get married some time in the 80s. At around the same time Pete becomes famous with Vitex, and Jackie becomes famous by by association.
• Jackie commissions an official biography, and says in that that her birthday is Feb 1st, 1968
• Before the party, Pete and Jackie have an argument:

JACKIE

Forty. It says forty.

PETE (nonplussed)

You are forty.

JACKIE (exasperated)

Well, I don't want the whole world telling, do I?

PETE

You're having a party tonight!

JACKIE

My thirty-ninth. My official biography says I was born on the same day as Cuba Gooding Jr, and that makes me thirty-nine, thank you very much.

• Which dates it to 2007, as that's when Gooding was 39. Will ^(talk) 14:03, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia, as you did to Last of the Time Lords. Your edits do not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use Wikipedia:Sandbox for test edits. Thank you. Rambutan (talk) 20:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK - but there must be a listed source before the episode's broadcast.--Rambutan (talk) 20:22, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Attack of the Graske was broadcast on TV after The Cristmas Invasion via BBC Digital. Just a note. --Edokter (Talk) 10:58, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some people on the Outpost Gallifrey forum have received copies early and have confirmed the titles. --The_Iceman2288(Talk) 13:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article Tin Dog Podcast has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. See WP:WEB. NawlinWiki 16:03, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Per your request, I posted the text of the deleted article to your userspace at User:Wiggstar69/Tin Dog Podcast. I read the article again and see no indication of how this podcast meets the notability requirements of WP:WEB. Its having been advertised on another podcast is not enough. Also, you need reliable independent sources showing that the podcast is notable -- it's not enough for you to say that you think it's popular. Thanks, NawlinWiki 16:16, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

july 2008

review in SFX magazine issue 171 page 128 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.188.248.70 (talk) 15:41, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:21410797 m-1-.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:21410797 m-1-.jpg has a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission, which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3). While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case[1][2]. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:21410797 m-1-.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 11:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:TinDogpromotionalartwork.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 13:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from Warriors of the Kudlak. Please be more careful when editing pages and do not remove content from Wikipedia without a good reason, which should be specified in the edit summary. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Stephenb (Talk) 15:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I understand, but blanking pages doesn't delete them. Instead, either request that they be deleted or redirect them (as I have done) Stephenb (Talk) 15:10, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source that confirms the airdate for each and every episode of the coming series? Because, if you don't, then you're not adhering to WP:CRYSTAL: we can't simply assume there's be no breaks in broadcast or changes in the programming schedule.

There is no need to rush things. Confirmation will come. --Mark H Wilkinson ^{(t, c)} 13:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if you copy and paste the code below onto your userpage, changing every appearance of the word Porcupine to Wiggstar69 (obiviously!!), it should work. Tell me if it doesn't.

{| style="background: none; border: none; text-align: center; font-size: 90%; font-family: Verdana" class="plainlinks" align="center" |- valign="bottom" |width="80px"|<imagemap> Image:Vista-mouse.png|70px circle 64 64 64 [[User talk:Porcupine|User talk]] desc none</imagemap> |width="80px"|<imagemap> Image:Internet-mail.svg|70px circle 64 64 64 [[Special:Emailuser/Porcupine|Email]] desc none</imagemap> |width="95px"|<imagemap> Image:Exquisite-kfind.png|65px circle 64 64 64 [[Special:Contributions/Porcupine|Contributions]] desc none</imagemap> |width="90px"|<div style="position:relative; width:90px; height:60px; overflow:hidden;"><div style="position:absolute; font-size:60px; overflow:hidden; line-height:60px; letter-spacing:60px;">[http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/Tool1/wannabe_kate?username=Porcupine&site=en.wikipedia.org <span title="edit count" style="text-decoration:none;">   </span>]]</div>[[Image:Crystal Clear app calc.png|60px|Edit count]]</div> |width="75px"|<div style="position:relative; width:65px; height:60px; overflow:hidden;"><div style="position:absolute; font-size:60px; overflow:hidden; line-height:60px; letter-spacing:60px;">[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Porcupine <span title="logs" style="text-decoration:none;">   </span>]]</div>[[Image:Exquisite-folder_document.png|60px|Logs]]</div> |width="95px"|<imagemap> Image:Crystal Clear app kcoloredit.png|65px circle 64 64 64 [[Special:Prefixindex/User:Porcupine|Subpages]] desc none</imagemap> |- valign="top" |<font style="font-variant: small-caps; font-size: 105%">'''[[User talk:Porcupine|Talk]] <br/>(<span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Porcupine&action=edit&section=new <span style="color:#002bb8">new post</span>]</span>)</font>''' |<font style="font-variant: small-caps; font-size: 105%">'''[[Special:Emailuser/Porcupine|Email]]'''</font> |<font style="font-variant: small-caps; font-size: 105%">[[Special:Contributions/Porcupine|'''Contributions''']]</font> |<font style="font-variant: small-caps; font-size: 105%">'''[http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/Tool1/wannabe_kate?username=Porcupine&site=en.wikipedia.org <font color="002bb8">Edit Count</font>]</font>''' |<font style="font-variant: small-caps; font-size: 105%">'''[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Porcupine <font color="002bb8">Logs</font>]</font>''' |<font style="font-variant: small-caps; font-size:105%">'''[[Special:Prefixindex/User:Porcupine/|Subpages]]</font> |}

By the way - it's not actually mine... I nicked it from User:GlassCobra!!--Porcupine (prickle me!) 17:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There you go - I've done it for you myself!--Porcupine (prickle me!) 06:45, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Layout07-1-.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to know if you could go to my user page and put the this user is a fan of Doctor Who userbox on my page would you do that please?--The K.O. King 23:05, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I want to say thanks for improving my page it looks much better so if you ever go to my userpage and want to improve you are certainly welcome.--The K.O. King 17:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input here - regrettably, this is unlightly as Victory93 has a history of not accepting any opinion other than his own; see
1
2
3
4
5

He has constantly reverted edits concerning the above, even after being asked not to, and been given pretty clear explanations why what he was doing is wrong, and being blocked for breaking WP:3RR.

He has even started attacking other users 1,2

I hope we can come to an agreement, but it is not realistic. StuartDD ( t • c ) 13:10, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(my talk page) This person makes unrelistic and uncompremising demands to other users, I feel we should give him a formal warning through his discussion page using the information you gave in your last message. We have to let him know that it is not acceptable to rule over other users in a dictatorship style and if he does not comply and continues to be 'out of order' then we can report him to a member of wikipedia with more authority. Wiggstar69 12:41, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but I don't know what we can get him for. What do you suggest? StuartDD _{contributions} 12:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try Digby Tantrum and Wryspy. They were involved in that page to, and Victory93 stopped just short of atacking them on there talk pages - including threatning Digby with a vandalism report for removing the games when consensus was to exclude them. StuartDD _{contributions} 08:11, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've dropped a note on the above users talk page, as well as OZOO asking if they would like to add anything to the letter. StuartDD _{contributions} 08:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "your very welcome" - maybe. I hope it's not just a one off. I think two days is a good idea, but if he practices his arrogance again before then, we should just post it. StuartDD _{contributions} 21:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Good thinking, we'll leave for now and get back to it on Monday" - Yes, I agree. Just a note, I'm away on monday, but just go ahead with the note. StuartDD _{contributions} 21:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incase you missed my suggestions for the letter, here's what I think we should have
Dear Victory93

Thanks for your input here - although regrettably, both I (Wiggstar69) and Stuart DD feel you do not take into acount any other opinion then your own and seem quite agressive in your approach when talking to other users; see
1
2
3
4
5

a trend which you are continuing both here and here".

You have even started attacking other users 1,2

I hope we can come to an agreement, before you find yourself being reported.
I decided to remove the part about reverting edits, as he hasn't done that for a while. StuartDD _{contributions} 08:36, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you are talking about. I haven't attacked anybody. --Victory93 10:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, those arn't attacks. They discussions on certain items which most people turn into wars. --Victory93 07:06, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do let other people edit but if they don't make sense or arn't right then I revert them, just like you and other people would do so technically, I'm just doing the same things as you do. --Victory93 07:26, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Doctor Who: Tin Dog Podcast Episode Listings, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Breno ^talk 06:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do not bring those back again. This site has certain policies and guidelines that cannot be overruled by fan interest. If you would like me to explain it fully, please ask, or if you want to complain go here. Either way, do not bring those back again. TTN 19:35, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're arguing from a standpoint that I have killed dozens of times already. Consensus is found within our policies (see WP:CON: "When consensus is referred to in Wikipedia discussion, it always means 'within the framework of established policy and practice'. Even a majority of a limited group of editors will almost never outweigh community consensus on a wider scale, as documented within policies."), not numbers. I suggest that you head over to Wikia, where this kind of content is fine. TTN 19:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Doctor Who articles have actual real world information available; these do not. TTN 20:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That page is a mess, but it has real world information. These episodes do not have a chance of that. TTN 20:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is easier said than done. This minor show is leagues below colossi like Doctor Who and The Simpsons. Without any sort of backing, that doesn't help you. TTN 21:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The merge tags were up for over a month, so for now, you can let them be redirected, and work on them from a sandbox. Just create User:Wiggstar69/Sandbox or any other variation, copy the episode(s) over, and work on them from there. You can also notify interested users, and place hidden messages on the redirects. TTN 21:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should only be working on one to three at one time anyways, and if you do bring one up to the current standards, they can all come back afterwards. You just need to notify those that want to help (there are three at most anyways). Anybody passing by will not be adding real world information. TTN 21:47, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this were a new proposal, then your way would be reasonable, but there was an entire month to do that already. Anyways, I'll send them messages if you can redirect them again to show that it isn't part of the edit war. TTN 21:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about this: Find a couple of reliable sources that provide non-trivial information for one episode by sometime tomorrow, and they can stay for now. Otherwise, we stick with the sandbox idea. TTN 22:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You need reliable sources to back important and relevant information. TTN 23:21, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the production and reception sections of Pilot (Smallville) for what you need. TTN 23:21, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need that much information; you just need information like it. TTN 23:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Doctor Who: Tin Dog Podcast. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as the text has been restored from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Please bear in mind, removal of AfD notices before the process is complete is considered vandalism.Nuttah68 21:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your spate of recent reverts. Please do not revert back until you are ready, per you indication above, to revise these articles so they comply with our policies about television episodes, which you can find, variously, at WP:TV and WP:FICT. You may also find useful WP:NOT which explains why plot summaries are not appropriate for Wikipedia and WP:TRIVIA which will explain why trivia sections are strongly discouraged. Additionally, you will need to assert real-world, out-of-universe notability for these articles (see WP:N, backed up by independent, third-party, reliable sources (see WP:RS). Sorry for all the acronyms & underlining, but it is important that your content comply with the policies and guidelines that have been developed over time and serve as the WP:CONSENSUS (and do please read that). This allows this site to function, despite diverse editors and points of view. Finally, I would note that if your principal interest in this TV series is to provide plot summaries, character development and trivia, you will be far better off to invest your time and efforts at a wikia (www.wikia.com), where such econtributions are not only welcomed, but warmly encouraged. Thanks and happy editing. Eusebeus 23:35, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• TTN is right, Sandbox these; until then they should remain as redirects. Also, I remind you again that the wikia website, which already has a section on this series [3], WARMLY encourages the kind of content that deals explicitly with the series in a fictonal universe. You might well worth considering contributing to that wiki if your principal interest is exploring the series within its own terms. As it stands, you should be aware that very few television episodes, of any series, can aspire to notability per our guidelines and policies. (Wikia) has no such concerns. Eusebeus 23:45, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:TinDogpromotionalartwork.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:57, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Over the past months, TV episodes have been reverted by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [4]. --Maniwar (talk) 19:26, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi; I reverted your creation of the article... see the edit-summary for why. I think two episode articles at once is enough at any one time. —TreasuryTag—t—c 22:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. —TreasuryTag—t—c 11:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the practise because all past versions of an article are saved; click here for yours. When the time comes, we can restore that version. Don't worry! —TreasuryTag—t—c 11:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. What do you think of my version as opposed to yours? ([5]) I don't think the short sections are needed just yet, and we can always insert tham back in three weeks time. Sceptre ^(talk) 16:29, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, when I was writing the article, I was thinking on whether it should be split into sections. I didn't, though, because all four paragraphs were about the writing, unlike Meet Kevin Johnson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (before Thursday night), where each of the three sections talked about something else. Sceptre ^(talk) 16:42, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. When the episode airs, it'll get sections, don't worry :) Sceptre ^(talk) 16:54, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Wiggs, thanks for doing what I wanted to do for a long time... However, Please remember to put the actor first. Now we still have to do it all over again. — Edokter • Talk • 13:23, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your thanks! :) I thought if I was going to make suggestions, I could at least do some of the graft. But it's surprising how addictive it quickly becomes! -- Cuddlyopedia (talk) 07:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)→[reply]

Re Adrift: 90s section? Episode starts 7 months before 'present'. But Jonah being taken by the rift can indeed be given a seperate date. I'll do it when reverting the entry for Adrift (the present one is unjustifiably specific). -- Cuddlyopedia (talk) 01:52, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiggstar69...Time to take a breather from all of that assessing. I know that I need it, and I haven't assessed all that many today. You are going at a really good click. I was about to do a manual count, but that can wait until you are done for the day. You have my thanks for stepping in and doing this very tedious task. Have a nice day! - LA @ 21:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome, I am just hoping the others will start doing it soon. The two of us could probably pound out the remaining articles, but my wrist is starting to feel strained again, so I might have to quit for the day. ACK! - LA @ 21:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but, although this is obviously a much-loved article and a solid start has been made, I am going to have to quick-fail it on two points.

• The first is the presence of the Needs Citations banner as, under the Quick Fail criteria, this qualifies as an automatic fail: #Presence of any correctly applied cleanup banners, including, but not limited to, {{cleanup}}, {{wikify}}, {{NPOV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{fact}}, {{clarifyme}}, {{huh}} or similar tags.

• The second, and obviously related to the first point, is the lack of references contained in the article. Under WP, a quick fail can be carried out for this: #A complete lack of reliable sources - see Wikipedia:Verifiability.^[1]

Ideally, all major points in the article should be referenced, with at least one reliable reference per paragraph. At the moment, there are only a handful. This might take some time, but I am sure the enthusiasm several editors have already shown for this page will help ensure the work gets done.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far. --seahamlass 11:33, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you all the very best of luck! It looks great, and loads of work done, but refs really are its downfall! --seahamlass 11:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The WikiProject Doctor Who Award
		Thank you for helping with the assessment of the Doctor Who articles. - LA @ 00:01, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

	The Space-Time Telegraph
	The WikiProject Doctor Who newsletter
	Issue 1	March 2008
Project News We have five new participants: Sm9800, Seanor3, T saston, Type 40, Jammy0002. One editor has left the project: StuartDD. The Doctor Who portal has expanded to increase the number of selected stories to 33. Articles of note New featured articles None New featured article candidates Voyage of the Damned (Doctor Who) (FAC) New good articles Dalek (Doctor Who episode) Astrid Peth Delisted articles None Proposals A proposal for changing the layout of the episode pages is under way here. A discussion about the formatting of the cast lists in episode pages is under way here. A discussion to move United Nations Intelligence Taskforce to UNIT is under way here. News The Torchwood project has become a task-force under the project's scope. The Torchwood series 2 finale airs on 4th April, and the 4th series of Doctor Who will start to air on 5th April. For the Doctor Who project, Sceptre (talk) 19:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] You have received this letter because you are on the newsletter recipients list. To opt-out, please remove your name.

Hi. This is a cross-post to members of the Doctor Who assessment committee. Because of the introduction of the 'C' class, the general criteria for assessment has been changed. Please familiarise yourself with the new criteria and help migrate several Start- and B-Class articles into the C-Class category. Thank you! Sceptre ^(talk) 22:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 22:28, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wiggstar69! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 2 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Alan Wareing - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Charles Martin (director) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 05:56, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 01:07, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wiggstar69,

I have edited the Worth School article, minor edits such as moving a picture to the info box, but also a restructure of the 'Notable' list. As an editor of the article, please take a look. I have laid out my views, observations, suggestions and requests on the Talk:Worth School page.

Thanks,

Acabashi (talk) 02:19, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Dan McCulloch, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan McCulloch. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Weaponbb7 (talk) 17:15, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please if you have time and you know anything to it (I have seen that you have made edits in the article area which owns relations on it) , please look on the article Audio theatre, somebody placed a erase discussion on it. after we have had a merge discussion. It would be interesting what you would say to the merge and the delete discussion. And possibly it could help to contact other people that they should help also. )-: Merry Xmas --Soenke Rahn (talk) 07:27, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Richard Herring Interviews, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Matt Green and Lee Camp (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:50, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Me1 vs Me2 Snooker with Richard Herring requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. GedUK  11:25, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Me1 vs Me2 Snooker with Richard Herring: Frames requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. GedUK  11:39, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Me1 vs Me2 Snooker with Richard Herring is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Me1 vs Me2 Snooker with Richard Herring until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GedUK  11:52, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Richard Herring's interview podcasts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ben Moor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Me1 vs Me2 Snooker with Richard Herring, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of Doctor Who – Battles in Time comic stories has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Have these comic stories any notability? Doctor Who, obviously. The magazine, yes. But the comics in the magazine? With 200+ words summaries of a 4-page comic? Serious overkill.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fram (talk) 11:26, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Doctor Who: DWO Whocast is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doctor Who: DWO Whocast until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 06:39, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Doctor Who: DWO Whocast is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doctor Who: DWO Whocast (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

TipsyElephant (talk) 02:34, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ashley Way has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of significant coverage, no evidence of passing WP:DIRECTOR, probably fails WP:NBIO

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. OliveYouBean (talk) 09:28, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]