If you want more opinions, the correct and sensible approach is a neutrally worded invitation on the doctor who project talkpage. GraemeLeggett (talk) 08:36, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Doctor Who audio plays by Big Finish, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages The Master and The Doctor. 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) 10:20, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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) 10:37, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
I would like to request your input in the "Heaven Sent" / "Hell Bent" discussion, the issue needs to be discussed. Fan4Life (talk) 14:52, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Doctor Who: The Third Doctor Adventures, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Llewellyn. 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) 10:23, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
I was not aware of WP:DABABBREV. Thank you! -- AlexTW 11:01, 25 April 2017 (UTC) |
I didn't say the tag wasn't "applied in good faith", so I don't think there's much to be gained by insinuating otherwise. My role as an administrator is - in part - to review articles tagged for speedy deletion. When I believe that the tagging is justified, I follow that by deleting the article. When it isn't, then the tag gets removed. As far as the precedent itself goes, I'll follow that up on the article's Talk page. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 07:45, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
FYI, one of my recent removals on the classic series (Edge of Destruction) was restored by MarnetteD saying Continuity works forwards as well as backwards. I can only imagine they've not been following the recent talk page conversations. Interestingly, MarnetteD did not actually revert me: he or she simply copy and pasted everything I removed--so as not to alert me, presumably, which I find troubling, not to say annoying; it's not something I'd expect from a blue-linked named editor. If they want to keep doing as they do, the next move will be to change or challenge the edit of the WP:WHO/MOS, and an RfC being called on the main DW talk page and loads of people being pinged. Could be an interesting few weeks. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 02:27, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
"I'd like to thank the Time Lord Academy..."
Now you have an idea what it is we're up against.:) ZarhanFastfire (talk) 00:42, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Have you noticed that unlike our practice in the current series articles, these appear to regularly identify the number of the Doctor along with a blue link?... as if it weren't bad enough the plot summaries are usually tediously long, someone has to go and confuse the general reader too (whaddya mean Fourth?). Ugh.ZarhanFastfire (talk)
Hello D. Thanks for your work updating the episode tables for the Dr Who articles. Your journey reminded me of this video that I saw recently. Even if you've seen it before you might enjoy watching it again. Thanks again for your work and cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 19:42, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
((Doctor Who episode head))
and ((Doctor Who episode body))
deprecated - if so, where is that stated? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:06, 27 July 2017 (UTC)The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I don't see the need to split the discussion here. Dresken (talk) 21:37, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
If you are going to destroy the work of other editors, you should have the basic courtesy to leave an informative edit summary. You do not seem to have understood the content of the edit you reverted, and in fact you seem to be simply trolling by reverting. Kindly explain your reasons on the talk page. What you posted there was not adequate, as it failed to explain why you restored a grammatical error and text with no meaning to the article. 95.145.130.78 (talk) 20:04, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Dresken. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
No sooner had I gone through most of the classic series last spring when half the Baker years (at least) had loads of it reinserted or else new unsourced continuity (and things that belonged in production, etc.) appeared. I know because someone added warning tags and they dated from June or July 2017. We need to get the word out somehow that anything unsourced should be deleted on sight. It's just depressing. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 06:28, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:TRAINSPOTTING. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:TRAINSPOTTING redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:47, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I meant that before doing a thing for the first time, take it to the talk page. Sebastian James (talk) 04:35, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
The first time for RT critics consensus. Do I really have to explain all the things detailed to you? Sebastian James (talk) 04:57, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Dresken. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Dresken. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello! This is a generic message created and copied to all editors using scripts that I have created. As I have recently changed my username from "User:AlexTheWhovian" to "User:Alex 21", any scripts that I have created that are listed at your common.js page may, at the moment, no longer be working. To fix this, simply update all occurrences of "User:AlexTheWhovian" to "User:Alex 21"; see here for an example. All the best! -- /Alex/21 11:03, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
The article Counter-Measures (audio drama) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Article has never had any independent citations; fails WP:GNG; tagged for notability for some months
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. Bondegezou (talk) 14:12, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
An article you recently created, Counter-Measures (audio drama), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Atlantic306 (talk) 23:17, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
The article Charlotte Pollard (audio drama) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
No independent sources. Has been tagged as needing more citations for 2.5 years and still nothing.
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. Bondegezou (talk) 11:45, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Dresken
Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Onel5969 and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Counter-Measures (audio drama), should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Counter-Measures (audio drama) (2nd nomination).
You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with ((Re|Onel5969))
. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~
. Thanks!
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Onel5969 TT me 11:20, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Doctor Who: Philip Hinchcliffe Presents, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doctor Who: Philip Hinchcliffe Presents until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)