User talk:StuartDD/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Discussion 1

I am not disrupting Wikipedia. I do not take your threat seriously. The titles I tried to add are genuine and seeing the history of the page, other users agree. So stop. This is your last warning. -ClaxsonUnit (talk) 22:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

hate to disagree - but please check WP:V and WP:RS. I have already reported you to the admins, so we'll see what they think. StuartDD _{contributions} 22:14, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

If they ARE genuine, then please give the source where you found them. StuartDD _{contributions} 22:16, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I work on the show. and "Hasty to report me to admins", report what? I would go after much larger fish if I were you.

Reporing the fact that you are not adhering to wikipedia rules, despite being warned, and having edits reverted. And do you really expect me to believe that you work on the show? StuartDD _{contributions} 22:22, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether you believe me, it's only a small assisting role, but it is on one of the best shows on television. Just wait in the Spring you'll really enjoy the next series.--ClaxsonUnit (talk) 22:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, inforamtion on wikipedia requires a reliable source - and someone claiming (whether correctly or not) to be working on Doctor Who is not going to be considered a reliable source. StuartDD _{contributions} 22:32, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps I was a little "Hasty to report [you] to admins", so I will appologise for that. It doesn't matter if you work on Doctor Who or not, wikipedia still requires a reliable source, so unfortunately we can't add those titles till we have one. StuartDD _{contributions} 22:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

List of Doctor Who serials

Howdy, I noticed your edits to the List of Doctor Who serials article. It can be frustrating to edit when another user won't come to the talk page and discuss their edits. While frustrating, however, it would be best to follow the WP:3RR. I have sent a similar note to RambutanKing. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, --TeaDrinker (talk) 21:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know that this report [1] has been filed. I hope that it turns out okay for you and thanks for protecting the integrity this page. MarnetteD | Talk 21:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that. I've let them know what's going on - and the context of this. I think I'm covered in the exceptions but I'm not sure. If he does it again, report it here. StuartDD _{contributions} 21:31, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Not the 6th, the 7th

Hi,

I know in which log I just placed the Empty Child IfD. I will assume good faith on your mistaken edits. Bear in mind, however, that bizarre manipulation of the IfD tag was the cause of the deletion review result. Further such edits may result in page protection or blocking of offending editors, if ill intent is clear. Best wishes, Xoloz (talk) 16:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

As I said on your talk page, it wasn't there the first time I looked, and was under the 6th on the main page. I now see it on the 7th, so i will appologise. StuartDD _{contributions}

Ok... I see its a simple mistake! ;) Sorry for the sternness... I was beginning to worry there was a Who cabal afoot, of which the Doctor would certainly not approve! Best wishes, Xoloz (talk) 16:16, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Midnight

I have NOT removed any information regarding that episode. - SaxonUnit (talk) 11:21, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I appologise. The History page and the talk page made it look as such, but I should have checked first before posting that. StuartDD _{contributions} 11:30, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Doctor Who

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

Care to expalin this? - I haven't been experimenting. StuartDD _{contributions} 21:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject DoctorWho - Image Deletion

Hello StuartDD, I wanted to ask you a question about image deletion policy. I see that you have recently had a dialogue with Fasach Nua about the deletion of some Tom Baker and Doctor Who images in respect to which the former had insisted upon deleting.

Fasach Nua has also just deleted a publicity still of Alexandra Moen (playing Lucy Saxon) from the article of the same name which had originally been uploaded by another user but which I had linked in to that article. I have included a Fair Use Rationale for the article on the image template. Fasach Nua again deleted the image saying that it was not possible to argue fair use in the circumstance of living people as they were deemed to be replaceable. I have checked an essay on the policy here at Living People and there seems to be no consensus view, rather administrators can make a judgment call. What is your view on this? Should the image of Alexandra be re-instated? Kind regards--Calabraxthis 08:10, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, I'm not an admin - just a regular user. Secondly, WP:NFC has certain criteria. One of the criteria for a non-free image is that no alternative is available. I don't know if there is a free image of theis actress available. I don't know if there is such an image. However, I don't think the image of here as Lucy would be the best, as it probably wouldn't meet the significance criteria (given that it is not one of her main roles). Also, I think only admins can delete images, so it is likely that Fasach Nua just nominated it for deletion. You can try uploading it again if you wish - as it could be argued tohat no free image is known to exist - but chances are it will probably not be used. StuartDD _{contributions} 11:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Torchwood magazine

No probs. I think it may have been advertised as due out tomorrow, but that's only two hours away now anyway. :) Stephenb (Talk) 22:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Episode table

Supposed to be used for stuff in a references section, inside citation tags. Will ^(talk) 15:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

You'll have to explain that - I'm not entirely sure what you mean. StuartDD _{contributions} 15:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean that the table is for references, not external links? StuartDD _{contributions} 15:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Will ^(talk) 15:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've undone my changes to the table. StuartDD _{contributions} 15:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

All that's really needed is duplicating the references - DWRG, ABHoT(T), and the BBC are all linked anyway. Will ^(talk) 21:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Question

Do you have a copy of DWM 385? I need help with a citation. Will ^(talk) 23:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't - I only started getting them at issue 390 so I could actually check the material going in. StuartDD _{contributions} 15:04, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

By the way, are the stories you're adding to the Portal stubs? Personally, I would've added the serials first, then added the books, but still, I've got no problem with them if they aren't stubs. Will ^(talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Some of them are stubs. I Just thought it would be a good idea to include some novels/audios. If you want to replace them with something else, then go ahead. StuartDD _{contributions} 08:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I was just checking and only The Devil Goblins from Neptune is a stub, so feel free to replace that. StuartDD _{contributions} 09:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Redirect of Death Comes to Torchwood (Torchwood)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Death Comes to Torchwood (Torchwood), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Death Comes to Torchwood (Torchwood) is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Death Comes to Torchwood (Torchwood), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 17:31, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Red Dwarf peer review

I was wondering if you could take some time out of your schedule to head over to the Red Dwarf talkpage and give us an honest peer review. The page has gone through some major changes in the last few months, and it would be fantastic if a prominent editor/contributor like yourself, could head over and give us at the Red Dwarf Wikiproject some sound opinion and ideas on improvements for the page. We have all worked very hard at improving the page, and we need great outside, reliable and trustworthy users to come over and help us improve. If you are interested in joining the peer review discussion with other prominent users/contributors, much like yourself, please follow the link. Thank you very much for your help and your continued effort to improve Wikipedia and its quality! Wikipedia:Peer review/Red Dwarf --Nreive (talk) 10:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll have a look later today when I have more time. StuartDD _{contributions} 11:19, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Signing

Thank you for the lesson. I will try to keep that in mind for future reference. Here I'm trying it here... hope I did it right. Homoaffectional (talk) 01:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)