Talk:Daleks in Manhattan

message: I notice we have an article about Joe Montana. Is there a reason he is not linked there? Should I be bold and do it? 67.151.97.194 (talk) 23:13, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not unless the Joe Montana who played Worker #1 is demonstrably the same as the 59 year old retired American football quarterback of the same name. The convention is for new Talk Page sections to be added at the bottom of the page, btw. :) Bowdenford (talk) 17:55, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Joe Montana

message: It might be interesting to note the music playing in the background during the hybrid's big reveal.  I could only make out a few words but it sounded like "Form of the Dalek" with another line or two being repeated by the singers.  I'm not sure if it would fit in anywhere though...  74.232.70.76 (talk) 01:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Background scoring

message: At this point it's just 'net rumor, so not applicable for the article, but rumor has it that part 2 of this serial will be titled Sec's in the City. -- MisterHand 21:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do believe that began as a message board joke, thus it's fan-created and 100% unofficial as far as I'm concerned... Radagast 23:47, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The name of part two is supposed to be 'The on Coming Storm' but as this isn't 100% confirmed soI wouldn't use it yet, much like the name of episode 3.--Wiggstar69 18:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title of part 2

message: Could someone please confirm the validity of the title "Daleks in Manhattan"? Hikan 22:14, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's being discussed on Outpost Gallifrey's forum — apparently it's in the next issue of Doctor Who Magazine, which is officially released on Jan. 4.  Supposedly early copies are in the shops now.  I'd rather have waited until closer to the actual release date, but if someone actually has a copy of the magazine in hand that's fine. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does DWM mention these 'sewer monsters' as well? If so, that should be specifically referenced. Radagast 15:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: UNCONFIRMED TITLE

message: Well, it seems a reasonable assumption; we've only been introduced to one Black Dalek, and the last time we saw him he made a "temporal shift". Now here's a Black Dalek in 1930s New York. In theory the Void Daleks should have been the last in the universe, and at least the majority of them were sucked back into the Void. In addition, all of the Daleks inside the Genesis Arc appeared to be the bronze sort. 
Granted, a footprint doesn't look like a boot -- still, hell. If this weren't Sec, the circumstances sure are arranged to make everybody -- in particular new viewers -- fully expect it's him. Indeed, it's the only simple and obvious solution as to the identity of the Black Dalek. For that matter, the only non-obvious solution is to contrive an arbitrary reason to introduce another Black Dalek, from yet another unexplored corner of the universe -- which would seem a bizarre thing to do, if you've already introduced Sec and then prominently allowed him to escape.
All in all, it appears to me that until something is specifically stated to clarify that the Dalek in question is not Sec, the most reasonable expectation should be that it is. Again, on the basis of everything put forward within the new series to date, who on Earth wouldn't identify that as Sec? And if everyone expects it is Sec, what could be the purpose of making it anything else? 
So. Yes. Visual identification does seem to be enough, in this case. That's not to say there isn't the remote possibility that it could be proved wrong; it's just to say that it's not worth fussing about. On the one hand, it's unlikely to be. On the other, so what if it is? It's a TV show. If the wind changes, so can the article. --Aderack 21:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All that being said, it is nonetheless original research. We must keep to verifiable sources, please. Radagast 23:40, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a TV show, so we have to remember that they want to bring back characters that people like, so i think it is fair to say that that is Dalek Sec.--ANDY+MCI=Andy Mci 13:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is entirely reasonably, 99.9% likely speculation.  But it's still speculation.  If we can get a reliable source noting that it must be Sec, we can say, it is thought likely to be Sec, that's great.  Morwen - Talk 15:17, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

text: It must be sec, as we can clearly see that the black dalek in these episodes has the same identification tag (under the eye stalk) as the one which sec has. No two daleks have the same tag. Lumic 19:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  And the episode reveals that Dalek Thay also survived, although the other two members of the Cult of Skaro weren't named, as far as I can tell. Kelvingreen 18:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sec

message: Just, oops.  Could have sworn Invasion from Mars had Daleks.  But obviously not.  Morwen - Talk 15:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  oops 

message: The note about Ryan Carnes being cast for his American accent seems odd to me — I think that the ability to do an American accent was probably a factor for most of the cast of this episode.  Is there some source that mentioned Carnes' accent specifically?  If not, why does it merit especial notice?  The same goes for his Desperate Housewives role — we don't mention Hugh Quarshie's role on Holby City, and rightly so.  (Interested readers can just click on his name.)  I'm inclined to remove the Carnes note entirely unless anyone objects. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 11:18, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ryan Carnes note 

message: Interview with Helen Raynor in DWM 379 says the year is 1930 itself.  Morwen - Talk 20:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Year 

message: Apparently Outpost Gallifrey has a blurb from TV Times confirming Art Deco Daleks.  For the life of me I have no idea what one would look like nor why they would be Art Deco designed in the first place(and yes I know Art Deco was prevalent in the 30s but why Daleks would use it is beyond me). --128.174.178.148 22:39, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Camoflague, clearly! Morwen - Talk 20:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Art Deco Daleks Confirmed

message: In the Lifeboat Museum game on Whoisdoctorwho.co.uk, somewhere in the third level there's an item that, according to the description was found in the 1930's in New York. It appears to be an energy weapon of sorts. Just thought I'd make mention of it. --JohanTenge - /spit 20:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That item has a date of 1938.  That and the reference to the Brooklyn Bridge suggest that the item is a reference to the Big Finish audio story Invaders from Mars. Daleks in Manhattan takes place in 1930. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 15:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WhoIsDoctorWho.co.uk, Lifeboat Museum game 

message: I'm absolutly sure that in the episode 'Darlek' in series one (2005) when Van Statten is being taken away and having his mind wiped one of the places she said to dump him was Manhatttan.
Is there any chance of him poppong up agin?--Wiggstar69 09:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Henry van Statten 

message: The "freemaagyeman.com" logo in the picture isn't allowed, is it?--Rambutan (talk) 17:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: This looks like it is goinmg to be the story with the pig aliens seen in the trailer [].  What role they play remains unclear. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by StuartDD (talk • contribs) 12:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aliens 

message: If Gridlock is delayed for a week as a result of the FA Cup Semi-final extra-time, does anyone know if this episode will also be delayed for a week or broadcast after Gridlock? -OZOO (vote saxon) 09:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FA Cup [[Gridlock (Doctor Who)|Gridlock]] Delay 

message: I could've sworn that the daleks were grey and black in that story —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sekhmort (talk • contribs) 18:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genesis Of The Daleks? 

message: Do you think the picture should be another dalek rather than 'dalek sec'(because the same picture is in the article for Evolution of the Daleks. Also, the pig men are servants to dalek sec, but take orders from no other dalek (or man). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.176.105.39 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 12 April 2007
: And you know this... how? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.140.195.129 (talk • contribs) 23:12, 16 April 2007
:: Well, in the most recent series three trailer, the pig men do exactly what daleks sec says, but not what the doctor says (although i could be wrong) NEW TO WIKIPEDIA  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.39.162.160 (talk • contribs) 19:51, 17 April 2007
: Welcome to Wikipedia.  Please type ~~~~ after comments on this page and other talk pages, to ensure that your comment will be automatically identified by your signature and a timestamp. --Tony Sidaway 20:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture of dalek sec

message: ...http://www.radiotimes.com/content/magflash/...
and if you click on 'cover story' there's a nice big image... --Sekhmort 16:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Human Daleks... 

message: This:
: The cover for the Radio Times for the week from 21-27 April shows a picture of the Dalek/Human hybrid. It features a how they made it and a small section on a half man half pig. They appear to be Dalek experiments gone wrong. A trailer also shows Dalek Sec and two members of the Cult of Skaro and says "prepare the final experiment"
was edited to this :
: *The cover for the Radio Times for the week from 21-27 April shows a picture of the Dalek/Human hybrid. It features a how they made it and a small section on a half man half pig. The half man half pig is called Laszlo and the dalek/human hybrid appears to be Mr Diagoras.Laszlo is a dalek experiment gone wrong. A trailer also shows Dalek Sec and two members of the Cult of Skaro and Dalek Sec says "The final experiment will begin". It is most probably that this is the start of production for daleks and near the end of the episode before Dalek Sec becomes reborn as a human.
Added text is shown in italics above.
Much of this appears to be speculation based on a trailer.  The episode will be broadcast on BBC this Saturday so rather than separate fact from speculation I have reverted the edit. --Tony Sidaway 20:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Speculation based on a trailer

message: I added the cast list from the BBC factfile but seem to have severely buggered it up in the process. Sorry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.32.48.236 (talk) 11:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  cast list 

message: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/RT-2007-04-1-.jpg
now we know what they look like should somthing be writen?--Wiggstar69 17:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion, it'd cease being a spoiler if it's splashed on the front page of a well-selling magazine. Will (I hope they cannot see, I AM THE GREAT DESTROYER!) 19:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  !Warning Spoiler! 

message: Please don't annotate the fact that the Doctor shouts "Run!"  It isn't necessary. --Tony Sidaway 18:01, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He does shout it alot, though. --QUADRATUS (speak to me, human) (yes i've been here) (vote saxon) 18:52, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're stuck in a sewer with two men and a woman, and pig mutants are chasing after you. You'd shout "Run!", not walk briskly. Will (I hope they cannot see, I AM THE GREAT DESTROYER!) 19:46, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Done, if I'm not mistaken. --QUADRATUS (speak to me, human) (yes i've been here) (vote saxon) 08:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Run!"

message: Now that the Art Deco Daleks are pretty much no where to be seen, is it time to remove this tidbit from the article?--172.164.131.52 22:13, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, they were art deco. I spotted that without even reading all the fanguff/spoilers/teasers.Totnesmartin 22:58, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually they remind me of The De La Warr Pavilion. Totnesmartin 14:46, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The art deco thing was just a tie-in with the period and design of the Empire State Building.  It's not a huge big deal. --Tony Sidaway 23:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I never saw any "Art Deco Daleks," I just saw the same props they used in "Doomsday..." did I miss something?!? O.o --Promus Kaa 06:43, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Toymakers are very good at picking up on consumer demand but notoriously poor for authoritative statements about what's up in a television production.  The "art deco daleks" comment, which was made by an actor, not a writer, seems to me to be an interpretation of Davies' design concept for the program, which was that the basic design of daleks fits the era, and the art deco ethic of the Empire State Building, quite well. --Tony Sidaway 23:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So the upshot of all this seems to be that the daleks might not be art deco, but are verifiably considered to be (by the toymaker}. Thinks: Perhaps we could get in an art critic to talk bollocks offer an expert opinion on the art-deco-ness of these daleks. Totnesmartin 21:51, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Art Deco Daleks' 

message: Character Options (Toy maker) announced that a remote controlled Art Deco Dalek and a 5" Art Deco Dalek will be released later this year. This means that the Art Deco dalek has to be something new, not the gold or black ones (toys of these are already on the market). Nor could it be a Human-Dalek (remote control figure? Don't think so). I predict it would have to be either Sec with a larger dalek creature reveal, or a different coloured dalek that we have yet to see.
As it appears that a 1x dalek + 1x human is needed to produce a Human Dalek, then more daleks are needed, presumably from the same era. I hope the aerial on top of the Empire State building is used to contact them, far out in space. They would turn up, disagree with Sec (impure!), wipe out the Cult Of Skaro (Daleks killing themselves off!), then say something like "We will conquer this planet later" and warp off back to where ever they came from. If this doesn't happen, expect some crap about transmitting something over Manhatten to turn people into daleks... Andy B 21 April 2007
:Toymakers are very good at picking up on consumer demand but notoriously poor for authoritative statements about what's up in a television production.  The "art deco daleks" comment, which was made by an actor, not a writer, seems to me to be an interpretation of Davies' design concept for the program, which was that the basic design of daleks fits the era, and the art deco ethic of the Empire State Building, quite well. --Tony Sidaway 23:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So the upshot of all this seems to be that the daleks might not be art deco, but are verifiably considered to be (by the toymaker}. Thinks: Perhaps we could get in an art critic to talk bollocks offer an expert opinion on the art-deco-ness of these daleks. Totnesmartin 21:51, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Toys

message: Is it just me or does that thing look an aweful lot like the picture of the ancient "Thal Warrior" we see in the serial The Daleks? Deliberate? coincidence? Do we even know if the Thals and the Kaleds were even the species? Should it really even be a cyclops considering that both the Thals and the Kaleds/Dals had two eyes? Am I talking way too much?--172.134.61.220 22:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The hybrid 

message: This might seem pedantic, but the trailer for the next episode seems to show a bullet ricochet off a Dalek casing. I seem to remember the Daleks being able to block bullets with a force-field. This is probably completely irrelevant. RWyn 23:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Check the dalek article for details, and remember that Dalek Sec in this episode remarks that the daleks have made sacrifices, and as he does so the camera scans over the rear skirt of a dalek showing that some of its armor is missing.  So to speculate a little, it's quite possible that the casing of these daleks lacks its usual capabilities. --23:57, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dalek (in)vulnerability to bullets 

message: in the scenes when the dalek was escorting prisoners underground its id plate kept changing86.112.249.240 08:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  continuity 

message: Has anyone noticed how when the Dalek Sec still speaks in a dalek accent even when the casing is opened, if you remember back to The Daleks the casing causes the accent.Gabrielhobro 10:57, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accents 

message: Is it worth mentioning that this is the first episode not to mention Rose since her departure? U-Mos 15:16, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to me that the Doctor's "everything" most likely refers to both of his major Dalek-related losses of the past two or three incarnations - Gallifrey/the Time Lords and Rose. The current article covers this adequately, IMO (as of Tony's edit last night), without getting too OR about it. -- Karen | Talk | contribs 20:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rose 

message: Who actually was the Hero Pig? And why was he credited after Nick Briggs (who, until now, was always credited last in a cast list)? - NP Chilla 17:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the audio commentary, it was the pig that was featured in a couple of scenes, the one with the "sad" eyes. -- Karen | Talk | contribs 01:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh. Thank you, my dear. :) - NP Chilla 00:57, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hero Pig? 

message: I suppose it would be too "original research"-y to point out Biblical relevance of the name "Solomon," given that he specifically resolves an arugment by splitting the disputed item in two, even if it is screamingly obvious? - Chris McFeely 17:57, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, that is indeed original research until it's seen in a reliable source. Sorry. QmunkE 18:56, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I must disagree about it being too OR, precisely because it is screamingly obvious.  It could be worded in a way that makes no claims except that he shares a name with a Biblical leader who also settled a dispute by proposing that something be divided in half.  (Also, Tennant mentioned something about the character being "wise", a term associated with King Solomon.) Perhaps something more citable will turn up- next week.  The name Diagoras also has an historic connection; it would be nice to find something citable about that. -- Karen | Talk | contribs 01:08, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but it's original research by the Wikipedia definition - it's unsourced, hence it is unverifiable. If Russell T. Davies or Helen Raynor come out and says that's what they intended then great, stick it in - otherwise it's just fan speculation. QmunkE 17:41, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Diagoras of Rhodes? Except that he "walks a straight path that hates arrogance" which is out of character for the DW bloke. Diagoras the Atheist? he chopped up an idol to boil his turnips. hmm. Totnesmartin 15:22, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

text: It's not so much that it's original research.  Rather the reverse--it's so blatantly obvious that laboring the reference in the article would be futile.  The reference is used here solely to provide a means of sketching the nobility of Solomon's character in a short scene. The casting of a "king" actor, Hugh Quarshie, serves a similar purpose.  --Tony Sidaway 17:45, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solomon 

message: Are we sure this is a specific reference to Manhattan? Rhapsody in Blue has been associated with New York for much longer than the Woody Allen film has been in existence, so it looks like OR to me. Kelvingreen 09:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.Dr Faustus AU 13:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: It's not completely wrong.  Woody Allen's use in the film, which is described by Allen as a love letter to New York, was probably the first direct association of the piece with the city itself, although it was first performed there and already had strong associations.  As in Doctor Who, I seem to recall that the opening clarinet glissando is heard over a view of the New York skyline.  --Tony Sidaway 13:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gershwin/Woody Allen 

message: What gives this impression?  Not only is it just as likely two plates are geing held back to back but we see the FLAT areas where they have been removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.210.78 (talk • contribs) 
:Actually, we don't see the Flat areas; Dalek Thay has sheets of metal where the bumps were.(atleast, we don't see flat areas in DIM; I'm yet to see EotD)--OZOO (vote saxon) 20:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that we were already aware that the Dalek 'bumps' were actually complete spheres as they were shown in the episode Dalek separating from the Dalek's casing as a part of its self-destruct device.  I'm not sure whether this makes the 'double sided' plates in Daleks in Manhattan notable enough for inclusion in this article, as it seems to imply that this is a revelation unique to this episode.  What do other folks think?Dr Faustus AU 02:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The relevant point is not that the casing bumps are double sided, but that they appeared to be mounted on a flat metal sheet- however, I feel that the most likely explanation is that the casing was replaced with the metal afterwards. (84.71.245.11 20:16, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Double sided bumps? 

message: I noted under cultural references that Telullah employs the Yiddish slang "shmuk" which in Standard German (Schmuck) means an ornament but in Yiddish refers to a penis. It's the equivalent of somebody saying "you prick". I strongly suspect that the writer of this story was unaware of this; indeed, her grasp of American cultural history of this period seemed pretty poor. Unfortunately, some self-appointed guardian of propriety chose to erase my comment from the "cultural references" section almost as soon as I'd written it.
: It would be pointless nitpicking.  This is just a family TV programme, for entertainment only.  The writer isn't a scholar, just a writer with a reasonably good imagination. --Tony Sidaway 17:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unnecessary editing 

message: I changed the caption for the image, which illustrates a Busby-Berkeley style overhead shot of dancers, to say The production features music and choreography on a scale never seen before on Doctor Who.  This has been changed to a quotation from the song "My angel, she put the devil... in me!" Not sure if the quote is accurate, but that's not the point.  The point here is that there is nothing in the article about the choreography.  If this image is to be used to illustrate this article, we really should give more than a passing mention the choreography and musical arrangement which is its centerpiece.  This was the reason for my caption.  The current caption is useless unless you have actually watched the episode.  Context-free fragments of quotes from an episode are uninformative and substantially weaken the fair use case for using the non-free images in the first place. --Tony Sidaway 20:01, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now see, this is something I've been wondering about, especially with respect to an episode like this one that has an original song (as opposed to scoring). Would it not be worthwhile to have a music subsection or bullet point under Production?  Then we could mention that Gold wrote the song being performed in the image, give the name of the choreographer, etc. It's all in the Confidential for sourcing. And no, I'm pretty sure the correct lyric is, "My bad bad angel / you put the devil in me." -- Karen | Talk | contribs 20:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Caption

message: :Image:Daleks in Manhattan.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:21, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Rationale provided. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Daleks in Manhattan.jpg

message: Could someone find a better picture for this article-it is of bad quality and not a significant enough image in my opinion Harmless 77 (talk) 21:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Image

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Daleks in Manhattan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rmhttp/downloadtrial/doctorwho/doctorwho-seriesthree/doctorwho-seriesthree_20070421-1910_40_pc.mp3
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130128214855/http://blogs.thestage.co.uk/tvtoday/2007/04/when-is-a-spoiler-not-a-spoiler/ to http://blogs.thestage.co.uk/tvtoday/2007/04/when-is-a-spoiler-not-a-spoiler/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130128215210/http://blogs.thestage.co.uk/tvtoday/2007/04/doctor-who-34-daleks-in-manhattan/ to http://blogs.thestage.co.uk/tvtoday/2007/04/doctor-who-34-daleks-in-manhattan/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:21, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Daleks in Manhattan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070312164215/http://www.dwscifi.com:80/articles/show/227 to http://www.dwscifi.com/articles/show/227
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:15, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: What can I do to help improve this article to a B-Grade? Boomer VialHolla! We gonna ball! 02:07, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  B-Grade