[ Disclaimer, --- , ]
Classic Research Page?
Why did you delete the classic research page?
In the future please do not delete content. Wiki admins should only be deleting pages that have since had all content removed.
I had moved it to User:Caiu/Classic Research because it appeared to be better suited for a User page then a main wiki page, it contained a number of google drive links and was poorly presented.
--Zosymandias (talk) 12:18, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Custom images on item pages
Seems you've ruffled some feathers by deleting a bunch of custom player/fashion type images from item pages. They all seem to be from Awakened guild.
I don't necessarily disagree, but let's here discuss if we want such content on item pages, elsewhere, etc, anyone who cares can chime in, then we can reach a decision.
- It was my idea to post them. I like knowing what items look like, and a couple of the items I had posted were server firsts for the blue server. I had hoped to be contributing to the wiki. Is the issue that we have the guild tag in the pictures? I can cut that out if needed.
- Same case as with Franswa. Added multiple pictures for items on which none of them had a previous picture. Seemed as a good idea, pictures are allways a nice to see thing.
It seems (preliminary at least) like this was an "attack" on Awakened, not on fashion images in the wiki. I strongly support keeping fashion images in the wiki.
In fact, I'm still working on my fashion crawling code (it's maybe 75% of the way there, but it took me awhile to get the hang of this MediaWiki's crazy/ancient API). Once I finish it the wiki will have categories for every type of item appearance (and hopefully categories for every tint also). When that happens those category pages will be the perfect place to hold fashion image, but until then deleting them from other pages seems counterproductive.
As for keeping names/guild tags in the images, at first glance it seems like name-less/guild-less pictures would be more appropriate for the (neutral) wiki. However, letting people keep their name/guild in the picture provides an incentive for people to upload images, as they get to leave their mark in the wiki. Even with that allowance we still have only a tiny fraction of all possible fashion images, so I'd hate to wind up with an even tinier fraction because we jeopardized submissions by adding this ban.
My vote is to make the official wiki policy that names/guild tags are allowed in images, but name-less/guild-less images are preferred. If there are ever two pictures of the same race/gender/type of item, one with names/guilds and one without, the one with names/guilds should be deleted ... but otherwise they should be left as is.
- I was trying to keep in context of the rest of the wiki, the only server first we were posting were Epic weapons. Most of the edits where done by people who had contributed nothing else to the wiki. Also I would like to mention I did leave a few and but had to clean up those pages, Warlord's Boots for example had a the picture currently on Warrior Kael Armor Quests a picture which has the characters feet cut off. It should also mention the items being described in the description not the person/guild. My vote is to make it wiki policy to make name-less/guild-less images are preferred. Most of those images could have been cropped to fit with in this.
- In addition if we choose to allow item images on item pages, we should choose a location for them to display. Some pages, particually those with an auction box, were quite unreadable with the item images on them. I did think this might ruffle some feathers but my intent was to keep these pages with in keeping of the rest of the wiki.
- User:Jaxon was removing Red server player images from items, which seems in contrast to what him and other Awakened members were doing to other item pages.
Zosymandias (talk) 01:01, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Seems there wouldn't be strong opposite to cropping out player names/guild names whenever possible (on item pages). So I would suggest we in general try to do this (as Loramin proposes). For items which are really important/unique, where we want to acknowledge server firsts, let's keep this on some sort of separate page?
Anyways, there are "second_image" and "second_imagetext" arguments for item/NPC pages, e.g.
I agree it doesn't look so great with the auction box. But this can be changed. Can we try to use this method for adding second/fashion images (i.e. within the template), so that the style can be uniformly changed across all pages in the future.
STOP DELETING server first names/pictures on images, it will be undone and it's childish. Thanks.
Sure thing, removing them has been a strong motivation for me once I got done editing the JC page. I would really like to create the Project 1999 Wiki:Copyrights page but I have no clue what the text on the page should be, any thoughts? Also thank you for all your quality edits I know when I see you edit something it is more then just a spelling change! Although I have to say that adding a red link to my talk page is quite a good troll... just gonna fix that right now.
--Zosymandias (talk) 19:53, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Question about zone page updates
I'm curious how often the Special:DynamicZoneList function triggers. The What's in the Zone sections, specifically the quests, aren't reflecting the changes I've made to the actual quest pages themselves. Daelyth 19:28, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- The DynamicZoneList takes time to update. To be honest I'm unsure on the amount of time it takes for the changes to propagate. --Zosymandias (talk) 19:45, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Spells and their era
So I was looking through some spells and noticed that some spells that came out in Kunark/Velious weren't marked as Kunark Era or Velious Era. On the same note, none of the spells that came out in Classic were marked as such either (though this isn't as important?).
The reason this is important, is because some classes were debatedly pretty bad in Classic/Kunark, but became really good classes in Kunark/Velious after receiving some critical spells.
The biggest example of this I can think of is Mages who didn't have a heal spell for their Elemental until Kunark. Many people will tell you that the definition of a mage is sitting back and healing your pet, and occasionally doing something else.
Anyways, I figured that if the spells weren't marked then maybe there was a reason.
I saw that you were quite active on the Wiki, so I figured I'd ask what your opinion on the subject is.
On another note, trying to find an Admin for this wiki is impossible?
I don't think there is any reason the spells aren't listed with their era, most should be currently listed on the class page as to which era, but most individual spell pages are missing that info. You can feel free to add it to any page but I don't think it is a huge priority.
As for an Admin, you found one! Congrats! --Zosymandias (talk) 01:18, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Forged Velium Warsword
Hi sir! I wanted to mention to you, a heavy editor, that I've blocked two users for vandalism of a shady goblin article. The block is only for 1 day. The first one was about 12 hours ago, so I'm expecting some more vandalism tonight. Maximum (talk) 13:59, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah I was looking at that, been a ton of heavy edit wars on various pages. I think that a shady goblin info there might be needed to move to the talk page? what do you think?
- While we are talking what is your opinion on pages like Shroud of Longevity and Spirit Wracked Cord. I've resisted changing them especially Spirit Wracked Cord (because they came to their own consensus it seems with sharing a pic) but in general I don't think we should be keeping track of who got an item first, with an exception being epics. Thoughts? --Zosymandias (talk) 15:00, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Re: Wiki Code
ability to trim the outliers is current set to off Trim Outliers can we turn that on, or is that a Ravhin ability?
That's all Ravhin (or technically anyone could change the PHP code to Rogean and ask him to deploy it, but Ravhin has both the knowledge and ability to change his own code PLUS I'm pretty sure he has the power to deploy it himself, so if at all possible you'll want to talk to him).
Personally my thought is that we should make the Auction Tracker correction page(s) wiki admin-only. That way admins can still fix things, but non-admins can't abuse the system to inflate prices (which I'm pretty sure is why it was turned off in the first place).
Secondly on the page Category:Deity Worshiper Equipment and its subcategories when you hover over most links you get the error "AjaxHoverHelper Error 2." and it often obscures the links.
Thanks for catching that; I just fixed it (you may need to refresh or even clear cache to see the fix). What was going on is that I added mouse-over item links to all the equipment categories awhile back, so you didn't have to click on each item in a category to see it. However my code confused by that category, because it had "Equipment" in the title, but didn't have item pages (and it's ironic because I created that category).
hopefully when the Dynamic lists repopulate it will fix itself. I know it takes a few days do you know when it repopulates by anychance?
I don't, but I'm glad to hear you found a fix. If it doesn't repopulate itself soon, I think the answer is ... unfortunately ... Ravhin.
Hope that helps.
- Hey, I just wanted to point out that I added a new functionality for cleaning auction prices. It is admins only (I hope). You can see it as a "[ADMIN Edit Prices]" link, just underneath the 20 auction prices, on any item page. Use with caution! I turned off the old "trim outliers" (I assume Loramin and others will also see this here) --Ravhin (talk) 16:36, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Cleric Class Page
Yikes! Lots of drama over there.
I added a MIN/MAX section similar to the Enchanter page explaining why certain races have advantages over ones, and then someone goes and deletes all of it saying
"Removed a lot of opinionated or incorrect information, as well at information that goes outside of the scope of this page. Improved formatting and a few typos as well."
Before I get into the bulk of my explanation I think I should say first:
Other pages have MIN/MAX sections reviewing why certain allocation of skill points/races have advantage over others.
I'll copy here a taste of what I put.
Min/Max Allocation of Points
To a Cleric, the most important stat is Mana.
...we see that by focusing mainly on +Mana, our Wisdom still reaches the cap of 255.
...charisma wise, Humans beat Dwarves by a large 22 points (with optimal allocation of stats), and High Elves beat Dwarves by a giant 27 points.
In addition to the Lull spell line being more effective on a Human/High Elf over a Dwarf, they're able to sell/buy items at a vendor at a much better price - from level 1 onwards.
I fail to see how any of that is opinionated. Instead of removing user content that people don't agree with, why don't they just fix the issues? How is "Allocating Skill Points" of a Cleric "...outside the scope of this page..."?
In addition I wrote that Clerics get many fear spells, while Human/Dark Elf Clerics of Innoruuk are the only race/god combo to get Snare. "Fear Kiting" is a popular leveling tactic, and therefore Human/Dark Elf Clerics of Innoruuk have a(n) (fairly large) advantage over the other race/god choices. Imagine a Cleric/Rogue at Nybright sisters Fear Kiting them. No other race/god can do this. That's not worth mentioning?
Sorry for bugging you with this, but I feel like i'm getting attacked over here for just trying to do the right thing by bringing to the forefront advantages of certain races over others when it pertains to Clerics.
People should become part of the discussion, not try and stop it from happening.
You might be wondering why I am bothering you with this.
If I was to restore the old content that was deleted, it would probably just get deleted again and then I imagine I would get banned for 24 hours at least. If I was to make a new section from scratch, it would probably just get deleted as well.
If YOU were to restore the old content, or create a MIN/MAX section to get the discussion going, I think other users/admins would be wary to just go and plain delete all of it.
I will take a look at it for you. The person who removed all the content only has 1 other edits, which I really frown upon people coming in and creating an account to only remove content. Like you said people should be part of the discussion and not try to stop it. It may take me a bit to get around to returning it but I do think it has a place there.
--Zosymandias (talk) 15:47, 11 November 2019 (UTC)