User talk:Sky2042

poke
I wrote stuff on the Mentor page like you asked. Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 02:30, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Please review Rolandius's contributions. I don't see your approval on most of what he's been doing lately. -- 01:23, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Poke again. See Slot (Blacksmithing) and Subclass. 13:55, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Those two were good pages. I think at least, but I am a blacksmith. DNP? I got those terms, subclass and slot, from in-game. LOL Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:02, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * They were NOT good pages; Slots and Subclasses counts for all professions. 14:40, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * They are for all professions? Sounds like more of a reason to have those as articles, just without the (Blacksmithing) after the name. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:28, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * By the way, if you let Dire Rhea on WoWWiki, I am sure you could let subclass. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:10, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Dire Rhea is currently not a page...-- 02:26, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * That is because I put a speedydelete on it or else who knows how long it would have stayed on here. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:00, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Then that's not a good example, is it, if someone agreed to speedydelete? In this situation, a better example is something like Saurfang facts or suggested Warcraft movie screenplay. -- Ragestorm (talk &middot; contr) 14:01, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Dire Rhea has not and does not have an article. How do you delete that which has not existed? 14:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Rhea, a possibly fake excerpt from the RPG, existed, and Rolandius may be remembering that wrong. Whatever happened to the page creation approval thing? Rolandius' judgment seems out of sync with the commonly accepted again. BTW, while WoWWiki is still not Wikipedia, and Rolandius' intent is not vandalism, is this relevant?-- 21:32, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok wait. Are you saying I should have left the Rhea page alone? Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:23, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * No, what Gourra is saying is that it is not possible for you to have deleted Dire Rhea because the page never existed. Rhea, a species of bird found only in the RPG, did exist. So which one did you mark? -- Ragestorm (talk &middot; contr) 14:05, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I marked Rhea. Dire Rhea was on that page and another page. I checked Rhea's citation and found nothing on it either. If Rhea does exist then tell me where to find it in the RPG. I checked the citations for everything on that page, I think there were 3 or 4, and they all came up wrong. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 11:24, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Now we all know that you marked Rhea for deletion and not Dire Rhea. Can we shift focus back please? Just because the Rhea subtopic was resolved does not mean the whole thing is resolved.-- 21:10, 30 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok focus shifted back. I don't see the difference between the pages I made for "subclass" and "slot" and pages like hill and mountain. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:56, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:Template:Rare et al.
Sounds like a plan. I could write that template pretty easily myself, if you don't think you have the time. -Howbizr (talk) 17:03, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Check it out,, reputation. Just needs the styles taken out of the template and added to the CSS (of which I do not have permission). -Howbizr (talk) 15:48, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * *poke*. -Howbizr (talk) 18:23, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Address Rolandius, please
Sky, if you don't correct Rolandius, I will. -- 13:44, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It would be interesting to hear why my edits aren't seen as good while we have articles like hills and mountains and categories like Category:Crossings and Category:Valleys on WoWWiki. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 13:52, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Mainly because you tried to get Sky's approval on this and he explicitly told you not to, as well as the articles you cite are poor examples. -- 13:55, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * He said he would think about it. He never said do not do it. I did ask 2 months ago. The articles and categories are great examples. I could add more. Nations and Category:Crags come to mind. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 14:00, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow, way to use as an example something else Sky hasn't approved. -- 14:09, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay nevermind. Keep creating all those categories that sure look similiar to my attempts but somehow are okay. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 14:14, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

You should of re-asked me after I said "I'll think on it". You don't not get approval. Rolandius, I would suggest you drop it in this specific case. And especially, I insist you don't raise another issue for the next ten days. --Sky (t · c · w) 16:46, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I am not the one raising issues in the first place. I just edit and people raise issues about it or tell me to tell you about it on your talk page. My edits look just like other examples I follow on WoWWiki so I am not sure why mine are different. I have no idea if something I do will make someone get mad and raise an issue or tell me good job keep doing that. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:38, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Again
I'll count to five, and when I'm done, you've had a talk with your pupil. 09:34, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Useful macros for paladins
See User:Rolandius/Mentor. Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 06:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Rolandius mentoring
Rolandius sent me an e-mail suggesting that you may not have time to keep following his changes. Is this true? -- Fandyllic  (talk · contr) 2:37 PM PST 27 Jan 2009

Curious user
Could you check out Hallowseve15's edits? Some of the edits look okay, although messy, but then there are some where the user replaced the race Human with Peasant, wrote that Miners are Peasants, and removed some NPC boxes. Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 13:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Hope this helps
I have been tracking ALL changes made in the test HERE (where it wouldn't bother viewers). You can watchlist that page to monitor any changes too color="Blue">Gil (color="Blue" size="1">talk) 19:24, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:Formulas
Is the formula namespace deprecated now? -Howbizr (talk) 21:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * One of the projects I'd like to do (oh so many) is to organize the "mitigation" information. You're probably right about separating the pages. So that you know of, are there any other pages I should be considering?


 * I'm not planning to make a monolithic page, but I want to read all the content and see how I could make it better.
 * Attack table
 * Combat rating system
 * Resistance
 * Mitigation
 * Diminishing returns
 * Formula:Melee diminishing returns
 * Melee mitigation


 * -Howbizr (talk) 17:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Just letting you know this is still on my radar, just haven't had any time to mess with it. -Howbizr (talk) 13:22, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Moving Achievement Sub pages is BREAKING the ajax link to them - Slashes just means sub page of
When you move the subpage ((page/subpage)) to make the supbage not have slashes in it -- you are breaking the ajax link to the Subpage - in Wikia  the / just means it is a subpage of the main page - and those are fine - that is how Wikia works - Slashes might be bad for other language but not wikia language -- ( Morph  | Contribs | Talk ) 01:04, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You can see the information via ajax - but if you click on the Edit option in right corner you do NOT get redirected to the new page - you are put into the edit ode of the Redirect page -- and when did  slahes become bad as you call them ?? -- ( Morph  | Contribs | Talk ) 01:22, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * / has always been bad. It's hard to link to a slash with in-line English. --Sky (t · c · w) 01:36, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * but with the way you (meaning WoWWiki) have set up the ajax - it automaticaly creates / subpages that is how it works - no one links to the sub pages - we link to the main page for the Achievements - the sub pages are the ajax transcluded ( or however that is spelled ) pages for  each section -- ( Morph  | Contribs | Talk ) 01:45, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * They can be included in the other page either way, and the more correct way is without the /. I really must tell Kirkburn to have that turned off in mainspace. --Sky (t · c · w) 01:49, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * You are going to have to go thru EVERY achievement main page and move every ajax subpage then becasue Ajax  makes the subpages -- ( Morph  | Contribs | Talk ) 01:57, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * AJAX implies Javascript, which means I'm generally agin' it. However, in one particular, I can agree with Jrooksjr...  "you break it, you mend it".  My general complaint both with Zeal, and with the new "World of Warcraft" category adjective.  I would offer aid, but without Javascript I'm not sure that I can actually observe the problem. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 22:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I "broke it, I mended it". :P --Sky (t · c · w) 22:36, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * /me happy :P ... you do know that you've been voted 'crazy', don't you? --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 00:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I noted, though I'm not quite positive that it matters much, since I 1) already knew I was crazy, and 2) haven't been crazy on wiki lately. :) --Sky (t · c · w) 00:08, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Eek!
Ok - I will move them to proper location after I finish working on this one Major PAIN (I mean Change) page that Blizzard made tons of work in reding the table - almost done as we speak now - (M o r p h  | C  | T )  19:01, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Dungeons_%26_Raids_(Secrets_of_Ulduar_Heroic_Raid)_achievements -> Dungeons & Raids achievements/Heroic Ulduar Raid
 * Dungeons_&_Raids_achievements (Secrets_of_Ulduar_Heroic_Raid) -> Dungeons & Raids achievements/Heroic Ulduar Raid
 * -Howbizr (talk) 22:14, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * AJEIOW JNAIOWUH NOAJWEN JKA WI JLAWOUIM AUNEI: MW.


 * Move them to where they were request. >:( --Sky (t · c · w) 23:02, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That looks stupid as hell, Sky. I can't believe you suggested that.  Besides the fact that the subpages thing isn't policy yet (nor is there much difference in implementation as far as subpages versus disambiguation), the two things are vastly different, not even sharing the same name.  They should not be disambiguations of each other, they should either be subpages (which isn't the way the policy vote is going) or completely separate pages (e.g., Secrets of Ulduar Raid achievements, Lich King Heroic Raid achievements ).  Now all of the pages he moved will now have to be moved again. -- 02:09, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

New "single build" template uses very small width
And I can't find it to fix it. Why does the new reference ( {{single build ) generate tables that force the title to wrap, while the old reference ( {{:Builds/SingleBuild ) didn't? Mebbe it's the missing colon. Check it out? Thanks!
 * I threw in &lt;h3&gt; instead of === to remove the "edit" option, but to retain the auto-population of the TOC. Specifically check out the heavy use of the template on Warlock builds.  Onorvele (talk) 07:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Wowpedia:Stub policy
Just so you know, you're not supposed to edit policy pages (no matter how well intentioned) without at least explaining what you did on the talk page. Also, you're technically supposed to go through the policy change process before you make the changes. This is why I undid your changes to Wowpedia:Stub, because you didn't say anything about merging some of it into the policy page (which as just mentioned was a no-no).

I will let you revert your changes or at least give you an opportunity for better explanation for your actions. You might want to be a little more careful in the future. Being an admin doesn't mean you can do anything you want. -- Fandyllic  (talk · contr) 1:14 PM PST 8 Apr 2009

item [database] pages
I presume you are talking about "pages that have the tooltip, external links, and perhaps (but not always) links to quests the item is a reward from." Am I overgeneralizing? I think we do gain a benefit from those in their tooltip-transclusion nature. Not that we have a lot of need for a litany of "poor swords", but I guess it rocks some folk's boats. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 23:17, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

What I'd most like to see is Blizzard take us away from Wikia, but that's just wishful thinking. :) --Sky (t · c · w) 23:28, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Transclusion is the only benefit that the item pages have over their database brothers, but I don't think this balances out with the overall quality of such pages and the effort undertaken to maintain them, especially when compared to the comments found on item pages on the databases. We should be focusing on the quest type pages you make, and item comparison pages, and the item pages truly worth writing about, and the dungeon loot page compilations. Taking information and presenting it in new ways (more human!) is the best thing a wiki does, in my own opinion.


 * Amen, brother, on pretty much all of that. This last while, I decided to finally go through my Northrend screenshots and *use* them instead of just filing them.  So I've been making a lot of token quest item and quest rewards pages (in the process of supplying corrected reputation etc awards, spelling, and so on).  It has cut down on writing up quest chain pages, though. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 00:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Nagrand Mastery
It seems that while Talbuk Mastery got corrected from the Laurlybot insertion, Clefthoof Mastery (1) and Windroc Mastery (1) did not get corrected as well. Could you move these pages for me, please? There's a disambig page in the way... --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:55, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, Windroc Mastery is a duplicate of Windroc Mastery (3). Windroc Mastery (1) should still be moved over "Windroc Mastery", it's just more scary. :) --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 21:54, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks like Coobra got it. Thanks anyway! :) --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 22:22, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Vote
BTW, are you interested in voting on either of these issues? It seemed like maybe you were. 5:41 PM, 30 Jul 2009 (EDT)
 * 1) Change categories with "World of Warcraft" to "WoW"? Vote here.
 * 2) Avoid repeating prefixes on sub-categories? Vote here.

Cataclysm'ed out of retirement
I was merely concerned... That certain pages wouldn't be categorized correctly. =) Kids these days, with their thing navigation bars! Back in my day, nav bars were only one line thick! Nice to see you again.-- Hobinheim  ( talk ·  contr ) 19:35, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Are my new colors cataclysmic enough? I hope so!-- Hobinheim  ( talk ·  contr ) 19:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Account Expiry
What do you mean your account expired? Do you have to renew or what? BobNamataki (talk) 16:44, November 3, 2009 (UTC)

template vs transcludable page
The page Tier 7 token source got moved to the template namespace. I'm kinda curious why bother, since it's a small transcludable page, not a general-use template. The syntax to use it is almost identical. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 22:26, January 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * Btw, did your change to costitem fix the blank alt text that I whined about on the forum? --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 23:31, January 14, 2010 (UTC)

Before I get too much further with making Tier 9 transcludables/templates, would you examine [|these files] and example files that use them, and tell me if you would have them moved to Template space? If you'd intend to move them, then the Tier 9 ones I base on them would want to be moved too. And I might as well save you the time and effort by creating them in the "correct" place in the first place, eh? --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 00:05, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

You da man! --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:04, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Your views solicited
... for this discussion. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:19, February 18, 2010 (UTC)

Learn2playwow

 * [01:38] hi, i have been blocked by Sky2042 for the following reason:  "obvious spam account is obvious." which is untrue, i don't spam i put my video guides up just like any other user, there must be a mistake or a missunderstanding

Just passing on the message; it is perhaps worth reconsidering an indefinite block if the edits in question were made in good faith. -- foxlit (talk) 00:55, March 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * [Good faith] but a conflict of interest. I haven't looked to see if they are quality videos or not (and I wouldn't be the one to judge anyway), but videos should be placed on our pages because they are added by users who see them as useful videos, and not by users who see WoWWiki as a place to put their videos. --Sky (t · c · w) 04:54, March 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * As far as I can tell, that "should" clause is not codified in any of wowwiki's policies, so there would seem to be no way to know whether adding an on-topic but self-promoting video to an article constitutes grounds for a block. While I agree that the practice is not necessarily polite, it would seem that some sort of warning prior to a block would've been appropriate.
 * Perhaps reversing the block and starting a forum/policy discussion on the topic (with the understanding that the videos are not to be re-embedded by that user prior to the conclusion of the discussion) would be an amiable solution? -- foxlit (talk) 13:32, March 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * Presumably, you have this page WL'd.
 * Agreed, though part of my rationale is that the user had done so for a while now&hellip; As well, we have the sort of spirit of "no conflict of interest, please" codified in NPOV&hellip;
 * I'm amenable to a discussion on the topic, though I do not know that I would agree with unblocking for the time being. Let me ponder how to go about doing these things. --Sky (t · c · w) 21:09, March 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * As far as I can see, there was no malicious intent, so we're probably not risking vandalism if we reverse the block. Additionally, it would allow him to participate in the discussion, which would save me from having to relay messages. -- foxlit (talk) 22:40, March 7, 2010 (UTC)

I would have liked to be able to post these thoughts myself, but since banned I cannot do that. If unbanned I will not post videos until a conclusion on the matter is reached. So… now trying to express my thoughts on the situation: isn’t wowwiki about sharing? About ppl. working together to provide adequate information to the wow player? On the wowwiki page when ppl. are writing about a certain boss, when they write about the drops the strategy … etc. they take knowledge from various websites as well as from their own experiences. They then give credit to those websites by having them displayed in the References list. The same holds true for my videos, they provide knowledge related to a certain wow encounter but no link to learn2playwow.com is displayed in the references box or in the external links section. Thus putting a link in the vid, i don't think it's such a big deal, you don't even see it unless you start the vid.

A user coming to youtube should be able to take his pick when deciding which video to watch (which was true till few days ago), he can watch World’s First, he can watch some I donno what famous guild taking down the boss, he can watch one that has the rock music he likes so much, he can watch mine.

It’s a win-win situation if you ask me, I make my site better known by having my videos displayed, wowwiki gets better content by displaying my guide. If you decide that is best for wowwiki to have only videos with hardcore music and no real guides… then well… the wowwiki visitor would loose from that and so would i. Thank you for your time.


 * Just want to say that the videos are of good quality. They recently came up during a raid with my guild, and consus was people ejoyed them and found them helpful. Plenty of other videos on wowwiki lack any commentary at all and don't really show anything. -- 15:15, March 7, 2010 (UTC)

Kinda new to the site, didn't see the Wowhead link on the bottom there. Thanks for the revisions, no hard feelings :)

Zalazane's Fall (achievement) page deletion
I see that you've deleted the page I created earlier today for Zalazane's Fall, citing DNP, and I agree that on a cursory inspection the page would appear to fall under the category of "datamined or unreleased content," however I think this is not actually the case. The achievement will appear, and clicking it will reveal the description. The achievement can also be linked in chat without disconnecting users, which generally happens when linking illegitimate objects in chat.
 * The deletion comment read, "Neither the even nor the achievement are available on the PTR or live servers yet, so that makes this DNP," however I don't believe the statement to be accurate. The achievement is available on live realms. Enter this into a chat window: /script _=GetAchievementLink(4790);print('Shift click to link:', _)
 * The fact that it must be entered in a chat window to be observed might seem suspicious, but remember that this is a Feat of Strength. Feats of Strength do not appear in the achievement tab when incomplete. They're only visible when linked to by other users, when comparing achievements with other users, or when you yourself obtain it. Unless you could find somebody who has obtained, you'd have to enter a code into a chat window to see the achievement, yet it clearly exists on live servers.
 * The deletion comment says that the achievements aren't "available," but in fact they are simply not "achievable." Any player can check his progress in the achievement (which will be none) by linking it in chat. It is available, but unachievable.
 * An unachievable achievement is not unheard of either. was introduced (patch 3.3.0) before the Lich King encounter was even added to the game (patch 3.3.2). The only significant difference between Bane of the Fallen King and Zalazane's fall is that Zalazane's fall is a Feat of Strength, and thus not displayed in the achievement window.
 * Third-party websites seem to have a precedent for being considered sources of Feats of Strength not otherwise visible in-game. "Onyx Panther" is listed on the Feats of Strength page (look under pets), yet there has never been any Onyx panther item given out, nor any announcement of an Onyx Panther. It exists exclusively in images from mmochampion, databases like wowhead, and in-game achievement links. Every Feat of Strength listed on wowhead is listed in the Feats of Strength page. Some of them don't have specific achievement pages yet, but they were already in the list.
 * On a somewhat different note, it says "Only articles about announced content existing on the live or public test clients are permitted." The achievement itself was not announced, but the event to which it pertains was, so it's related in that regard.
 * There's also the fact that my pages (created minutes before the page for Zalazane's Fall) for and  were left alone, and not deleted. The same pages that link to Zalazane's Fall link to Gnomecoming, so it's hard to imagine users would have thought one was invalid but not the other when they appear in the same context.

If you still insist that this is DNP until the actual event goes live, then there are quite a few other pages that will have to be changed. Any page referencing Zalazane's Fall (I was in the middle of adding links to pages when I left for a break and returned to find it deleted) would need fixing, as would the Gnomecoming pages, and those linking to them. And it really wouldn't make sense to leve Onyx Panther up if Zalazane's Fall is DNP (Blizzard has made no announcement about an Onyx Panther). I'd be willing to undo the work I've done (which was difficult because the formatting is new to me rather than the complexity of the pages), I'll just remember for next time before creating pages. I believe I've presented a convincing argument for un-deleting Zalazane's Fall though. Dr. Cheis (talk) 08:26, April 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * Looks convincing to me. Restored. --Sky (t · c · w) 12:53, April 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Dr. Cheis (talk) 17:23, April 6, 2010 (UTC)

Question
Hello.

I was wondering, can I have no rename limitation without being an admin?

That's a bit boring to have to wait 2 minutes every two rename (especially for mass move like I am doing on Venture Co. -> Venture Co)

Thanks.

09:09, April 8, 2010 (UTC)

Learn to ride in the eversong woods
I'd just gotten done telling SWM that "I don't know what I would do with Admin rights that I can't do now" when I run across this. There's actually a quest by that name, id=14081. Started by a Riding Training Pamphlet you receive in the mail. I don't know what the contents of the deleted page were, but it might be a seed for the quest page (IE a case for undelete-and-move). Or might not. Could you take a look? --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 22:37, April 8, 2010 (UTC)

Hi!
Hi! why did You stop me yesterday? Well, i know WHY and i'm sorry, i did not noticed that You have deleted templates and thought that that was a glitch, my mistake, sorry again! Just to know: why You delete templates? Vilnisr (talk) 09:28, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

How very peculiar...
I'm getting the "you have new messages" banner, yet the last edit on my talk page is... mine. Not sure how one recovers from that. Hmm... after several tries, your message finally comes up.

I fear you'll need to send me your inseam measurement (and maybe waist too), if you want me to cut you some slacks. ... oh, wait. NVM... And no, don't mind me. The "smart" is still trying to catch up to the "ass". --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 21:50, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

Wintergrasp vendor pages
Your opinion is requested. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 23:45, April 29, 2010 (UTC)

Mage Gear link
Cheers for that, I was just adding the repaired link to the page and when i saved it said you did it already. Thanks!

Lost Ones article
Hi Sky. I just wanted to thank you for cleaning up the Lost Ones (organization) article. I think I made a mess in some parts and no one had taken time to clean it up. I think that article was done at the time when the "cite" template was made obsolete and I decided to try the extended one. So I guess we won't use that extended references again. I just have a doubt, shouldn't it be announced in the forums or somewhere that we aren't using Ref, Ref book and Ref rpg anymore? Also I think this guideline may need some rework. Benitoperezgaldos (talk – contributions) 05:44, May 27, 2010 (UTC)

Removal of quest subpages
Hey, I like that project. Any trick to finding them if I decide to help out? (assuming you haven't done them all) :) Drazisil (t/c) 11:43, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep :) [[Image:IconSmall_DrakeAzure.gif]] Drazisil (t/c) 17:41, May 27, 2010 (UTC)

Webcomics
It's confusing to me and I was looking to get an explanation on how pages devoted to webcomic characters are allowed. Drazisil (t/c) 22:16, May 31, 2010 (UTC)

Sons of Hodir
In The Sons of Hodir quest chain page summary, I removed all the "mandatory side quest" crap that turned out not to be so mandatory after all. I should probably revisit the quest pages and point them all at the quest chain page instead of the first quest-in-chain page. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 22:43, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Hooks - 3 reverts?
How do you figure? Special:Log only shows one delete and nothing links there. Unless it's a common term( I'd thinking hooking would be better) I can't see people searching for it. Drazisil (t/undefined) 01:33, June 20, 2010 (UTC)

Trivia on pages
Hi Sky. After the comment you made in the Cho'gall article I have some doubts that want to discuss. The trivia lists may be bad, but I think they should not be removed without integrating the information to the article; by removing the entire section, other contributors may dislike it.

A solution to Cho'gall article could be adding an item section, but for the server it is a bit more complicated. I opened a forum discussion to see how we should manage the notes that says that there is a server with the name of the character here and I would like to hear your opinion there.

Also you are removing the section headers and haven't answered me in Forum:Removal of T:RPG and T:Cat. And in Nathanos Blightcaller you removed the relative note, but it was accorded in Forum:Relatives of NPCs that this could be put in the articles. Benitoperezgaldos (talk – contribs) 19:25, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Small User Page
Hi Sky, I was wondering as to why my page is a lot narrower than yours? I'm rather new to the Wiki World and am interested in further developing my Wiki skills :)

Thanks, Lee.

Quest chain templates
Is your plan to replace both and  with  as a general rule, or would the  case stay as-is? --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:19, July 8, 2010 (UTC)


 * Couple of things. I think moving quests from a pseudo name space to a real name space is a good idea.  However, I think there are too many quests that would end up with name collisions, or at least cognitive collisions, to do entirely without a prefix or index of some sort.


 * And... Looking over your changes to Forging the Mightstone quest chain.  Hope you don't mind, but I'm going to re-paragraph the page.  You (or perhaps just your editor) removed the additional lines that caused the text to be readable.  Currently, it's a mass of "wall of text".  IMO, a stylistic error. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:34, July 8, 2010 (UTC)

Glad to see folks aren't obsessing over precise formatting of quest chain templates... --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 17:45, July 14, 2010 (UTC)

Given past history, it seems likely that Gourra will squeal about my aggregating several quests, even though one other quest in the same set of edits has been aggregated for at least as long as the others were separate. Still, marked 'em all for speedy deletion. Mark 'em for normal deletion if you think there'll be a real fuss over them. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:18, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

-> == ==

How to Break Into the Arcatraz. Had to go into hex mode on my editor after having copy/pasted both versions of the Rewards header, to see the difference. The delta didn't actually show the extra space character you removed. Auto wiki editor for the, um, win? --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 21:21, July 20, 2010 (UTC)

Quick ques
just asking but can u make ur own page?? like when there goob but that page doesnt exist????? so can u make a new one or is it impossible??

bty from westin318

no
no kinda like gooh the letters are red cause the page doesnt exist...is there a way to make that page exist

k
ok ty

Rakalilkilkikhkh
As you seem to know the Great True Behind It All, I would like to know how an article not linked in any article (as you say) has article linking to it.

Thanks.

14:18, July 31, 2010 (UTC)

Section templates
Why do you delete section templates?

They are made to be used ain't it?

Or do I miss something is the use we should have of them?

10:49, August 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sky is not a fan of them, and I believe is trying to have them deleted, I was trying to find the post, but couldn't. 22:31, August 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * I've found general agreement, from what I can see, to delete the section templates. See Forum:Removal of T:RPG and T:Cat.


 * I'm also pushing to delete the page-wide templates, e.g. novel. --Sky (t · c) 23:45, August 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't mean to be rude, but to me a "general agreement" means a vote.
 * Even if few people have voiced their opinion in the forum, a final vote would be nicer imo :)
 * 11:11, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Blackfathom Villainy (Horde)
You deleted Blackfathom Villainy (Horde) 25 July, how come? Was there some change recently that made Horde characters unable to accept the quest? -- 09:33, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Got it confirmed that as recent as 3 months ago the quest is still in-game. I still want your answer though. -- 09:57, September 16, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure why. I think I might have misread a comment somewhere or another. The two could probably be merged. --Sky (t · c) 13:18, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Do aeromancers exist in Warcraft?
Pondered a bit on the deleted aeromancer-page and whether there are aeromancers in the Warcraft-universe or not. Isn't Akil'zon (with his Gust of Wind), Naga sea witches (with their Tornado), Cenarius (with his Cyclone), Shamans (with abilities such as Wind Shear, Windfury Weapon, Windfury Totem and Wrath of Air Totem) and Druids (with their Hurricane) partly aeromancers? Also, as long as there are Air Elementals and those who controls them, doesn't that strongly suggest the practice of aeromancy? There is no NPC which goes by the name of "Aeromancer" in WoW yet (nor in Warcraft III either, if I remember correctly) but that doesn't mean that the concept doesn't exist. Just a thought I had - what do you think? WrathOfDeathfrost (talk) 12:00, October 3, 2010 (UTC)


 * They're not named aeromancers, nor is there such an exact concept in existence in WoW, which is the problem with having an article about aeromancery. --Sky (t · c) 15:05, October 3, 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmm, good points, but I still thought it was apparent enough in Warcraft for an article to be. Aeromancy somewhat "proves itself" out from things already present. If there are four elements and practitioners of fire, water, and earth, then it's only logical that there are practitioners of air as well. Perhaps Cataclysm (with the Vortex Pinnacle and the Throne of the Four Winds, for example) will give enough info to at least make a subtle article about it. With hydromancy, pyromancy and geomancy already present it's like something is missing without aeromancy. Oh well. WrathOfDeathfrost (talk) 21:45, October 3, 2010 (UTC)


 * No, the only points. We need, for most cases (there are a very few speculation article, but they are speculation and not presented as "subtle"), an explicit use of the term in WoW to include it here. If you really want to see it included, talk to Blizzard about it. :P --Sky (t · c) 15:10, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Re wowwiki moving...
I've been slacking these last two weeks, and it seems that a tempest had been building for the last month. I've not been a party to the financial figuring, but I have this ... forboding.... Is it all in my imagination? --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 21:50, October 13, 2010 (UTC)


 * And somehow, Eirik has managed to fat-finger his "reclaim this account" somehow. Currently it says "this account is in use", and "no email address associated with this account."  Can you give advice to a poor --Sock Puppet (talk) 18:13, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It's a problem with the extension thing we're using to "reclaim". More info shortly. --Sky (talk) 18:17, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Your opinion is desired
Hello.

I just wanted to solicit your opinion on whether Instancefooter should replace Dungeons} or not.

Thanks.

06:40, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes and no?
You added a Yes vote, but left your No vote at Forum:Adding_Sigrie_to_external_links. -- Fandyllic (talk &middot; contribs) 12:33 PM PST 14 Dec 2010
 * 'Tis indented in such a way as to remove the number. You are welcome to strike it if you wish. --Sky (talk) 19:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

When to template
I created Template:Swimming speed where I did, based on the example at Chef's Award/Vendors.

When should such material be a sub-page, and when should it be a separate template? —MJBurrage(T•C) 02:43, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

thank you!
Thank you for the valuable advice about colors. I really appreciate it. Anno1405 (talk) 05:07, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Freedom of information on reasons for policies / DNP policy in specific
Hi, found you via Special:Listusers/sysop, I am new here but not new to wikis :)

I would be interested in hearing any feedback admins have to this: Wowpedia_talk:DNP_policy (figured it's probably not a page that is read/used much so I'm messaging you all, I couldn't find a noticeboard page though I found what looks like a rather out-of-date list of admins hehe) --Kittymew (talk) 14:39, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Would like to interview you
Hi Sky2042,

I’m continuing my research (on WoWWiki and WoWPedia) this summer and hope to interview several of the core contributors about their experiences. Would you be available for an interview at some point this summer?

I also wanted to share an article of mine about WoWWiki that was recently published; you can find it linked to from my user page (happy to send you pdf, if you like). For the most part it talks about the writing processes of the community and how members work well together because of shared attitudes and beliefs about writing on a wiki. If you have any questions or feedback, I’d love to hear it.

Thanks for considering this. If you're interested in participating, you can contact me here via email . Dakhma (talk) 15:23, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

RE: Block of Killars
I remind people of the policies and even point to the ones they're breaking. I warned him and gave him time to read my comment to him. He ignored it and kept doing what he was doing, even reverted changes I did to help him out. 04:51, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Your opinion is desired
Your opinion is desired on this topic.

Thank you.

07:22, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Recent edit
Hi, you recently deleted MACRO_wargame and moved it to Wargame. The aforementioned page is part of the macro command listing set (all pages beginning with MACRO_), which adopts an API-style format. The page mentions information about the slash command and its arguments, not about what the general definition of a Wargame is. Generally people searching for Wargame would want information about wargames, not about how to use the slash command. I would recommend you reconsider your edit. --DrDoom (talk) 06:03, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * War Game has the topic they desire, which now actually has duplicate information to wargame!
 * The standard you set up with "MACRO" defeats the purpose of natural search. I stated my opposition to it at the very beginning of Macro API (something I hadn't recalled doing but which does suggest I'm being consistent). That "API" also exists (as a prefix) is something else that needs to be removed; I know that the API guys who actually use the site hate the prefix when linking within the articles as well as searching for the terms. There are other pseudonamespaces in use which should not be, and I've taken the time to remove a few of them (Formulas:) in a quest to make the articles which they are most similar to more concise yet more complete.
 * I have not changed what is on "wargame". I cleaned it up a little and gave it a lowercase title. It's quite distinguishable from Blizzard's official usage of the term, and the fact that War Game is linked quite prominently from the beginning of the page makes it easy for people to get to the page they so apparently want.
 * To be honest, this "standard" of pages is silly. If it serves us to make "wargame" a redirect to War Game, because the information is duplicated at the latter page, then we should, for completion's sake. Duplication of the information can lead to inaccuracies (I actually noticed this yesterday on "wargame" as well as tell). You can see what a merging might look like at "tell", as I also did that page and who yesterday. I think it would be best in fact if the pages were merged, but I understand the desire to maintain a consistent look. Be grateful I did not do more! :^) --Sky (talk) 17:35, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, I knew there were mixed feelings and understandings by the community when I implemented the macro listing, but I felt it was missing and necessary; I started the MACRO_ prefix to distinguish the article as a slash command versus a general term (friend for example). If you know of a better way to do that, I won't get in the way; I was merely trying to keep some semblance of order to it among the individual pages of the listing (I think they should display information in a common format of some sort, and the API pages already provided a standardized format).  Also as a side note, I feel that the listing which I made provides a nice way to store and display information about slash commands; certain people have expressed a desire to merge the listing with other pages, and I've worked to make sure that any information which might be found elsewhere on built-in slash commands is also available there.  I generated this list based on an addon which I wrote to scan for and find the built-in commands, which is a much better system than the brute force experimentation that other pages may have been built from.  Thank you for all the hard work you do in maintaining this very large database of information.  --DrDoom (talk) 23:12, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Thought on Race templates
The shape of Template:Humans and Template:Orcs are making troubles.

Please voice your opinion here.

Thanks.

09:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:Namespaces
Hey not sure if you're active these days, but I was wondering what was going on with WP:Namespaces and its talk page - they're obviously way outdated but it's still in the open proposals category. It would be nice to get that off the table if it's no longer relevant. Thanks! - jerodast (talk) 20:34, 4 July 2014 (UTC)