User talk:D. F. Schmidt/Archive2

''Feel free to fill out your ideas on examples I haven't done in talk: styling. Oh and put in a post-it, btw =) --Mikk 12:44, 22 June 2006 (EDT)''

API
It's work in progress, usually i move trough 1 stage or flood of pages at a time, rather than 1 page at a time. I like having the "todo" list available trough the stubs page, as it encloses mostly all pages. It may seem odd at some times, but its a comfortable way to work, all incomplete pages are visible trough a single area, rather than having to search for them.... Also just re-categorized a couple deprecared stubs as well.

btw, shouldn't the API pages get their own {Stub} subcategory like the other stubs? CJ 06:37, 8 Mar 2006 (EST)


 * I went ahead and implemented stub/API and Category:Stubs/API. Batching my way through all the junk atm, and aiming to get rid of API/Uncategorized --Mikk 18:54, 23 May 2006 (EDT)

---

Yeah, to my understanding, they should get their own stub tag. I mean, it just makes sense. I think it's, but would make more sense.

As I think on it now, well, if you were offended by how I said what I said, then I'm sorry, but just so you know, you had re-created a bunch of blank articles (well, having no content anyways, just a tag) that I had just deleted. Someone else had made a note before me on the talk:World of Warcraft API discussion page expressing irritation at the fact that so many articles linked from there were empty stubs. I agree, so I deleted them. Then just a few hours later you created them anew! I can't think of anything especially good to recommend, but what I just said on your page: If you don't have anything to add but a tag, it's better to leave it uncreated.

That said, what are you working on with those articles you created? Read: Do you mind if I delete any of those API stubs? Schmidt 11:42, 8 Mar 2006 (EST)


 * Was just on my usual stubbing spree :P trying to normalize and equalize pages, ( as seen in the page with Bow and all connected, Armor sets, and soon the talent pages. did some background searching on the API area,, but couldnt find anywhere to get the info from.. so ill probably leave that area to those with more experience in those. feel free to delete whatever is non functional from there. CJ 08:52, 10 Mar 2006 (EST)

help !
We are flooded by spam bots right now !! .. can't they be blocked by IP address.. this is obviously the work of 1 person. and, no problem, delete the api articles with only stub in them. CJ 08:46, 10 Mar 2006 (EST)


 * I assume you didn't see it. In Wowpedia talk:Known vandals, I mentioned that anyone sharing an IP with any blocked user will automatically be blocked. See the block log as I linked it there. It's right near the top. And as you can tell, I've been working a lot on making vandals easier to block. Hopefully this will either dissuade them from continuing the mission or else just make it easier for us to do our jobs. :) Schmidt 09:34, 10 Mar 2006 (EST)


 * ah so i ssee, they're probably using a router or spoof to generate random ips though.. but time will tell. CJ 10:14, 10 Mar 2006 (EST)

thoughts
What do ya think of this template:

CJ 11:27, 10 Mar 2006 (EST)


 * Ya know, I was just looking at that. I had an idea of making it look like the chart on class or category:classes, but I don't know. It'd probably be too big, especially if you're planning to have this on many pages. But that was just an idea, and probably a bad one. That especially considering the scope of this template doesn't even concern race. It looks alright I guess, but it might be better to abbreviate each class to make it a little easier to read, and it might look better in a table format. Such as having the class name heading each column, and heading each row have Class (maybe), but also Talents, Builds, and Set Items. Then each cell could contain either an abbreviation of the class name (to make it more readable when reading across, since the width is greater than the height) or perhaps an abbreviation (or the name) of Talents, Builds, etc.


 * That's my thoughts on it. Do what you want. :D Schmidt 11:35, 10 Mar 2006 (EST)


 * yeh, does look like it'll end up too large. i'll look at it before putting it on every single related page. so.. any comments on this other one? :P CJ 07:34, 13 Mar 2006 (EST)


 * That looks a little better, more readable. For me (don't know about your or anyone else), the "Set Items" appears on two lines. If you want me to, I can see what I can do about that. Schmidt 22:38, 13 March 2006 (EST)
 * looks like on 1 line on my computer. hmm. CJ 01:47, 14 March 2006 (EST)

Well I fixed how it appears on my screen by changing the width of the first column as 5.5em. If that screws anything up just change it. Schmidt 16:37, 23 March 2006 (EST)

new feature n stuff
Sometimes a page has a : [Mark as patrolled] tag in the bottom. not sure, but what does this do..?


 * I have no clue what you mean by this. If you have a specific page in mind, it'd be nice to get a link to that page. I've never seen it myself. If you know of a page with this in it, let me know and I might be able to see what's up with it. Schmidt 17:18, 16 March 2006 (EST)


 * Oh, I think I know what it is. If one of us (maybe just admins, but maybe others too) clicks "Mark this edit as patrolled" or something like that in the edit screen, it basically makes it so it is a confirmed edit. Schmidt 18:25, 16 March 2006 (EST)


 * Hmm. i only see the option on pages after an edit,, though i see no clear reason why it sometimes is there, and sometimes its not. once you click it, it doesnt return. CJ 04:26, 17 March 2006 (EST)
 * here is one: http://www.wowwiki.com/index.php?title=User:Zeeka&rcid=8198, not sure how long itll stay like that though CJ 07:06, 17 March 2006 (EST)


 * Had the same question and did some research. Looks like it is just a new security type feature.  When you look at the Recent Changes section there is a bunch of red exclamation points on all the edits.  If you click on the diff right under the current revision section and the persons name is the link to mark as patrolled.  Clicking this link means that you have verified this edit as something that contributes to the page and is not junk, vandalism, spam, etc.  If it is a new page then the link is at the bottom right like your example above.  The benefit of this is that people looking at the recent changes and are simply making sure that the edits 'good' edits can only look at the edits with exclamation marks.  Assuming that everyone that verified an edit click the marked as patrolled item, it would make it less time consuming for people.  Rather than 5 people looking at the diff for the same 10 pages to make sure they were good, they could each be looking at 10 different edits. Patrolling edits--Ralthor 01:56, 6 April 2006 (EDT)

Clear case of Wikisquatting: Children of Light, not sure what you usually do about such cases. CJ 02:44, 15 March 2006 (EST)


 * I don't think I can make a judgement on this myself. Me, I have no arguments against it, especially since it looks like all information related to this is on one page alone. So basically, if their information wasn't here, then they would need a host elsewhere for only one page, as it seems. And in that case, if it wasn't a wiki elsewhere, then they could have only one member edit it. Above all, this page you speak of has nothing to do with anything outside WOW (that is to say, everything is game-related). The example on Wikisquatting makes mention of a bulletin board that comp-sci guys use and someone decides to post a music flyer or something on it. In the case of Children of Light, the parallel would perhaps be someone posting a TigerDirect or Mozilla flyer. So I'm going to have to say that maybe Fandyllic would know better what to do. Schmidt 17:18, 16 March 2006 (EST)


 * seems to me there is a bit overmuch usage on that page, which they could use on their message board, which is linked at the top, and stated that all info "is" in fact slowly being moved there. CJ 04:29, 17 March 2006 (EST)


 * It's probably worth noting, as well, that that is Fandyllic's guild. The fact that an admin is in it is probably enough to say that it's okay. Plus, like you said, it looks like they're going to migrate some stuff over to their forum. At least they're not talking about their Guild Wars or Everquest guild, you know. Anyways, Fandyllic knows what he's doing, and I'm fine with it. Schmidt 20:53, 25 March 2006 (EST)


 * CJ, I think you need to have a better defense of saying the Children of Light page is wikisquatting. So far your only concrete criticism is that "there is a bit overmuch usage on that page". Advertising your WoW guild on WoWWiki is a perfectly okay usage of WoWWiki unless you don't put helpful information about your guild (not saying what server, is especially lame). If I were looking at it, the main criticism I would have would be the stuff on the discussion page, but that really isn't being used (I should delete it). Having a guild roster might be questionable, but putting it on a wiki makes much more sense than a forum thread or a regular website.
 * I also would have appreciated if you had complained to me directly rather than going to Schmidt. Please clearly state your criticisms, not vague stuff. --Fandyllic 3:08 PM PST 27 mar 2006

My guess is that he didn't realize that it was your guild. At least I didn't, until several days after he brought it to my attention. But I have to say even then that I probably would have said the same thing as you, Fandyllic. Schmidt 18:20, 27 March 2006 (EST)

Nice work on removing all the junk API articles
Thanks for purging all the post-spambot junk from the API section!


 * Thanks for noticing. It was something I had been wanting to do for a long time. I deleted all the articles that didn't have anything in them other than API/Uncategorized. I did check the history on all of them, just so you know. And if there was anything more than just that tag, then I left it alone. There are many talk pages associated with the ones I deleted. I didn't really know what to do, so I just left them untouched. Schmidt 00:46, 17 March 2006 (EST)

war3
Any thoughts at removing most of the warcraft 3 info from the wiki? Category_talk:Elves : CJ 09:16, 20 March 2006 (EST)

If bot link in vandal and block templates
What is the need for this extra link? As far as I can tell it just does the same as normal contributions... --Fandyllic 10:05 PM PDT 1 May 2006


 * From what I've read, it makes it so that when you rollback each page, it flags that reversion as a bot reversion of sorts, so it stays in the page history, but it doesn't put it in the recent changes list, provided that you (any user) don't have "show bots" selected. I know this isn't the best wording of what I'm trying to convey, but it's the best I can do right now. Let me know if you still don't know what it's for. Schmidt 01:26, 2 May 2006 (EDT)


 * Okay, I get it. It flags rollbacks as a rollbacks of bot content. I'll try using this link next time I do some rollbacks and see if it makes a difference in recent changes. --Fandyllic 7:44 PM PDT 2 May 2006

Changing the sidebar
I'd really like to know how to do this, but mostly to change the "vote" from time-to-time. Send me an e-mail if you don't want to explain it here. --Fandyllic 12:41 PM PDT 8 Jun 2006


 * I assume that you would have emailed me about this if you didn't want it to be public. Me, I have no concern for that because it's readily available on MediaWiki's site (see their sidebar). That said, it is slightly difficult to explain. It's not completely intuitive, but not hard to learn either. It is probably better to discuss this on MediaWiki talk:Sidebar, right? Check out MediaWiki's manual on how to use the sidebar. If you have further questions, either email me or ask on that talk page because that seems to make most sense. I'll watch that page and make sure I notice any questions there. Note that the only thing I know more than what is on that page is simply that I have a little bit of experience in using it. But go ahead with any questions.
 * Mentioning "vote", were you referring to the "votes" box immediately below the navigation box? Schmidt 14:47, 8 June 2006 (EDT)


 * Okay, now it seems painfully obvious to me. I don't think I'll need help. And yes, I meant the "votes" box. --Fandyllic 6:02 PM PDT 8 Jun 2006

Ongoing vandalism of community portal + subpages
Keeps vandalizing after reverts. Multiple times. --Mikk 12:43, 14 June 2006 (EDT)


 * Alex is sorting it :) See, this is why it's useful to be on the WoWInterface channel :P -- Kirkburn 12:45, 14 June 2006 (EDT)


 * So it's all taken care of then? Schmidt 17:32, 14 June 2006 (EDT)

Gnoll Rumor
It's divided into usful little bits of info. And the primary page looks just like a race page. I don't know how to consalodate anyway. Insert random complaint here. Charred But Alive 15:06, 16 June 2006 (EDT)


 * You consolidate by taking all the information you've spread out over all your edits and put them in one or a very few articles. I'll let you have redirects from each of the pages you've created. In any case, you know that I have the ability to block you from editing for any amount of time (short or infinite), right? If you keep this up annoying people, and if I think it's justified, then I may just do that.
 * Furthermore, having a rumor page about gnolls becoming a playable race and basing it on pure fan fiction is not legitimate. Write what you want for fan fiction, but don't refer Rumored Races or Gnoll Rumor to stuff that only you've written about. And it's polite and makes most sense to respond on your own talk page if someone has initiated the discussion there first. Do that from now on, please. Schmidt 15:17, 16 June 2006 (EDT)

Policies/Dev
Was bugging Fandyllic to plop it into WoWWiki:Policies (locked) but he said to run it by you also. So... now I am :-) (Check his talk page for some related talk). Thanks!  --Mikk 12:18, 19 June 2006 (EDT)