Misplaced Pages

♦My Spellbook♦ (Or, "How I Learned to Stop Hatin' & Love All the Crazy")
Arc 001 Arc 002 Arc 003

What was archived

* What has gone before...

Doctor Who

What edits are you referring to? Ophois (talk) 20:51, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Those edits where you reintroduce edits repeatedly after it is reverted repeatedly. The fact that it is being reverted tells you two things: A) you are dealing with someone who is stubbornly unwilling to discuss their reasoning (or continue discussing it) and B) your repeated introduction indicates that you need to convince folk more. BOLD and IAR are all well and good, but not when they create bad blood. - Arcayne () 20:54, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

And, FWIW, "penultimate" is a suitable word, because it means "next to last". Sceptre 20:07, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Clom is said to be missing in the episode... the Doctor reads through the list of missing planets and says something like "Clom?! Who'd want Clom?" Ophois (talk) 15:25, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I thought I would ask, to be sure. - Arcayne () 15:27, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

You are something special

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		The fact that you could put editorial differences aside, and help another person in deep distress, with whom you were often in serious conflict, deserves special mention. You embody the best of Misplaced Pages, and I am proud to be your colleague. God has a special place in Heaven for people like you Jeffpw (talk) 21:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow

While I appreciate your answer about why you chose to post to me and not the anon editor, I was a little taken aback by your reaction to removing posts on my talk page. If you notice, I delete pretty much everything on my talk page. I don't really leave much up there. There is no reason to take the deletion personal. Niteshift36 (talk) 23:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Revert

No probs, though if I'd known they'd already abused you on your talk page I wouldn't have suggested they brought it here :). Still, you're not a true Wikipedian until you've developed your own fan club! (btw, I wasn't getting at you for your penultimate comments...I was just interested since I hadn't come across that useage.) Gwinva (talk) 08:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Stolen Earth lede cite

I don't think it needs to be cited as it is readily apparent from the article itself. My interpretation of LEADCITE is to only cite quotes, unrepeated material, and contentious material about living people in the lead section. Sceptre 15:27, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

And even including the Independent review, nearly every other review I've seen (and will use) sings the episode's praises. Sceptre 15:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

What I'm saying is that it's an uncontroversial fact that reviewers commended Davies and Bleach. Having to supply six citations for that would make the lede itself look as bad as you say the lower parts of the article are. Sceptre 15:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Consensus for lead sections is, or appears to be, for editor discretion. You can add a citation to the lead if you want to. (Oh, and about the double/quad cites in the broadcast section, that's to cite the challengeable record fact. Sceptre 15:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Stolen Earth - B or A class?

Just asking your opinion here - I think it should be A-class as it is more definitive than even Partners in Crime and Doomsday, and my intention is to put it on FAC within the next 36 hours. Sceptre 12:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

happy Birthday, America!

I made this as my birthday present to America. Thought you might enjoy it. Jeffpw (talk) 12:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Laughter

"any thoughts of us being smarter than average are egoistic and doomed to an editorial kick in the crotch", with which I totally, and utterly agree (and it made me laugh a lot, as always :))--andreasegde (talk) 15:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)