Wowpedia talk:Main Page Dev/Archive01

Are Puta 20's changes from a bot, virus or trojan of some sort?
I was looking at http://www.wowwiki.com/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&hideminor=0&target=Put a20&limit=500&offset=0 User contributions For User:Pu ta20|Puta 20 (our most annoying vandal, IMHO) and there seem to be an insane amount for a human to make in the period of time elapsed. It looks more like the work of a virus or bot of some sort (or perhaps a trojan).

I've been trying to undo as much as possible, but I fear I've missed many, many changes.
 * --Fandyllic 6:45 PM PDT 27 October 2005

His User_talk:Put a20|talk page has more details. He/she/it is putting hidden links (e.g. to porn sites) in some files, and using dummy edits as "noise" to disguise that activity. I think an IP ban would probably be the best response to this sort of action. --Aeleas 01:06, 28 Oct 2005 (EDT)

He's been listed on the vandals page for quite some time, but the account is still active, and he's back. --Aeleas 11:08, 3 Nov 2005 (EST)

Can you insert a Captcha verification on register and/or login? The bot actions are getting more and more annoying Stilpu

wowwiki .vlad1.com
Is http://wowwiki .vlad1.com a mirror of www.wowwiki.com? It seems like domain that just goes to the same place, but I have to login separately to edit.
 * --Fandyllic 11:43 AM PDT 3 October 2005


 * It looks to me like it does go exactly the same place (wowwiki.com), and I for one didn't need to log on separately. Maybe it appears that you do because you hadn't refreshed the page. Could that be it? Schmidt talk 23:31, 3 Oct 2005 (EDT)

Slight reformatting (Jan 2005)
I've slightly reformatted the main page.

I was trying to convert to a two-column style, but when that didn't work, I found this sufficiently aesthetic to the eye.

-- AlexanderYoshi 09:38, 4 Jan 2005 (EST)

Main page Addition? (Sep 2005)
Would it be possible to get a link to the Category:Items on the front page. I am currently cleaning up a lot of unconnected pages to fit under the layout I have listed on my user page. If you look at the lay out you will see it is going to be a very grand addition to the web site and an awesome tool for people to use. --BaldMonkey 22:59, 29 Sep 2005 (EDT)

Now that I've looked at this a bit more what do y'all think about replacing the link to Category:Weapons & Armor with the new Category:Items? The Weapons & Armor area will fit very nicely into the redesign, as it stands now that gategory seems to be trying to do more than just working as a listing of thing that fall into the category of Weapons and Armor. --BaldMonkey 00:00, 30 Sep 2005 (EDT)

Main page change?
How about putting the Lore page on the main page? It's such a huge section now. Maybe it could take the place of the Maps link, since that page is kinda worthless (the info is already available in several other locations).
 * --FeldmanSkitzoid 22:37, 25 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Just to follow on From Feld. The main page is beggining to look very outdated. It is hard to find what you need; a *lot* more sections are needed as others have outlined already. As an example the Wiki has a large section on Reputation...that is not even linked to from the main page. Where are the main page links to PvP?, a huge part of the game. Where are the links to Tradeskills? these are not even mentioned on the main page.

Section for Items?
How about a section for items? Maybe using the categories from AH? Like


 * Weapons
 * Axe
 * Bow
 * Armor
 * Cloth
 * Leather
 * Leather


 * I just added a starter page: Weapons & Armor. Does anyone know how to center items in a table?

--FeldmanSkitzoid 19:45, 14 Feb 2005 (EST)


 * put 'align="center"|' before the cell contents. See the sandbox for an example. --The Nerd Wonder


 * Check out Items I've sort of taken this well beyond this. :-) --BaldMonkey 01:55, 1 Oct 2005 (EDT)

Search not working?
I am trying to use the search and it is always giving an error saying it can't access a file. Is it down right now?

Can anyone suggest a location for the information or suggest how it is possible to save data to a txt file from ingame. eg curent raidgroup or currently logged in guild list saved with a /cmd to a text file on HDD.

Thanks


 * The search bits sometimes crap out, when mysql decides to corrupt its indexes. I rebuild them once a week or so to prevent that from going on for too long. =/ -- Rustak 03:34, 3 Mar 2005 (EST)

Just got this page after trying a search for "lady"

A database query syntax error has occurred. This could be because of an illegal search query (see Searching WoWWiki), or it may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was: SELECT cur_id,cur_namespace,cur_title,cur_text FROM cur,searchindex WHERE cur_id=si_page AND MATCH(si_title) AGAINST('+lady' IN BOOLEAN MODE) AND cur_namespace IN (0,9,11) LIMIT 0, 20 from within function "SearchEngine::showResults". MySQL returned error "1016: Can't open file: 'searchindex.MYI' (errno: 145)".

--The Nerd Wonder 20:02, 18 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Lore of WoW
Okay, first off, I'm not proposing another "History/Background" idea. Instead, what if we start trying to document all of the in game storylines that come from the quests. For example, we could go into the whole Van Cleef story and the like. Rather than a listing of quests (there is elsewhere for that) we could go into detail on the individuals and places in the game, and how they tie into the story itself. I'm proposing this here, becuase it would probably be an addition linked from the main page, and I would like some input before starting anything.

--Wake 10:13, 1 Mar 2005 (EST)


 * Check out the whole "Lore" section I've put together. I've been subtly pushing to have it linked to on the main page. :)


 * You could probably make a new section/page on the History page detailing the various WoW storylines. Don't forget the invasion of the Silithids!


 * You probably also want to check out the Locations and Characters sections.


 * --FeldmanSkitzoid 19:33, 1 Mar 2005 (EST)


 * Followup
 * I copied what was in Lore, made it a redirect to Category:Lore and put its contents there. I hope this isn't  upsetting. It allows people to see the high-level contents and the individual articles.


 * I like all the work that was done for these areas.


 * --Another reply


 * Another reply
 * I've just been "messing" with the Category feature, and I didn't realize how helpful it could be. Check out the Creatures page now.
 * --FeldmanSkitzoid 17:50, 3 Mar 2005 (EST)

-- Polleke 17 Oct 2005 (EST)
 * Follow up


 * Can we get the lore categroy on the frontpage. Lots of info now there

Main Page Content Table(s)
Under Interface Customization, can we have some of the most important points of that page there? I thought something like this:

Interface Customization

 * World of Warcraft Global API
 * World of Warcraft Widget API
 * Events
 * WoW Constants
 * FrameXML Elements
 * More...

--Shadowcode 16:12, 10 Mar 2005 (EST)

Merging Categories

 * ''See also Wowpedia talk:Policy

I hope nobody minds that I've been merging a few pages with their Categories. For example, the Race pages and Classes page. Take a look. I'll keep working on that if nobody has any objections. Basically, I just thought it'd be a good way to tie everything together better. Now all the Orc characters (and eventually towns and stuff) are displayed at the bottom of the Orc page, for example.
 * --FeldmanSkitzoid 15:31, 4 Apr 2005 (EDT) :Looks good, so far, and seemless.
 * --- Fandyllic 7:47 PM, 6 Apr 2005 (PDT)

The Guilds Page
Something's wrong with the Guilds page. The History section shows what happened, but I don't know how to revert to a previous revision.
 * --FeldmanSkitzoid 19:26, 14 Apr 2005 (EDT)


 * Only Sysops can do rollbacks on Mediawiki systems.
 * --Powerlord 00:55, 15 Apr 2005 (EDT)

New pictures
Regarding the pics I posted today:

Unofficial Blizzard sites and communities are allowed to feature the Blizzard related artwork of sonsofthestorm.com provided the site is non-commercial/non-business/non-profit and that it explicitly says that the art is copyrighted Blizzard Entertainment and made by the artist in question.

http://www.sonsofthestorm.com/faq.html

Name Conflict Resolution: Ravage?
I've noticed that there's already a page named Ravage. This is also the name of a Druid Cat Form ability. What should the page for the Druid Cat Form Ability be named? Druid Ravage? Cat Form Ravage?

This problem also exists with other things, such as spells that have the same name for multiple magic schools.

Is there any rules on WoWWiki about naming conflicts?
 * --Powerlord 14:08, 3 May 2005 (EDT)

Response
I don't know what the official way is, but in the past I've used "Druid:Ravage". For example, Cure Disease and Shaman:Cure Disease

For the Category link for the bottom of the page, just enter this: so it sorts properly.
 * --FeldmanSkitzoid 21:13, 3 May 2005 (EDT)

Reply to Response
Thanks for the tip on the Category. I'll have to keep that in mind. I've also been thinking about creating a separate page for Druid Cure Poison, or adding it to the Abolish Poison page when I create it. Even though the Druid and Shaman versions are the same spell, I think it would look cleaner having separate pages for them.
 * --Powerlord 18:08, 4 May 2005 (EDT)

Response
If the same problem occurred in Wikipedia, the articles would be named Ravage (cat form) or Ravage (druid) or some such, and I feel like that is better. I don't know what Ravage means in this context, so I couldn't come up with anything better than that. (I see now that this is a very late reply. Well, for future reference.... -- D. F. Schmidt talk 03:48, 5 Sep 2005 (EDT)

Regions zones and more

 * ''See also the Namespace debate.

I recently became very confused when trying to organize the Regions, Zones, Towns, etc. categories. So, if nobody objects, I'm going to lay down some rules for that stuff.

We will refer to this map of the Barrens:

And this map of the Eastern Plaguelands:
 * Note the categories at the top Here's the hierarchy:
 * World (just Azeroth and Draenor at the moment)
 * Continent (Kalimdor, Eastern Continent, and Northrend at the moment)
 * Zone (Barrens, Durotar, Thousand Needles, Eastern Plaguelands, etc.)
 * City (cities that are their own "zone" - Orgrimmar, Ironforge, etc.)
 * Region (on Barrens map: Thorn Hill, Merchant Coast, Field of Giants)
 * Town (Crossroads, Camp Taurajo - places that have NPCs for one/both factions)
 * Instance (WC, RFK, RFD)

Corin's Crossing and Tyr's Hand (in EPL) should be considered Regions, since there are no friendly NPCs for either faction in them.

So, the following "Category:X" tags should be used on:
 * Orgrimmar: Category:World:Azeroth, Category:Continent:Kalimdor, Category:Zone:Durotar, Category:City
 * Brill: Category:World:Azeroth, Category:Continent:Eastern Kingdoms, Category:Zone:Tirisfal Glades, Category:Town
 * Blackrock Depths: Category:World:Azeroth, Category:Continent:Eastern Kingdoms, Category:Zone:Blackrock Mountain, Category:Instance

So, I will begin moving stuff around in the categories. Hope nobody minds. I think it'll be much easier to follow once it's all properly categorized.

--FeldmanSkitzoid 20:09, 9 May 2005 (EDT)

Response to Regions vs. Zones
I completely disagree with the organization of Regions vs. Zones above. Blizzard clearly indicates in their Region Levels page what are regions and they are not such smaller areas such as Thorn Hill, Merchant Coast, or Field of Giants.

I hate to say it, but Blizzard trumps you in my mind.

NOTE: I WILL change things based on what Blizzard says is a region... what you think is a region is more generically a zone or something not a region.

Here is an updated suggested hierarchy:
 * World (just Azeroth and Draenor at the moment)
 * Continent (Kalimdor, Eastern Continent, and Northrend at the moment)
 * Region (Barrens, Durotar, Thousand Needles, Eastern Plaguelands, etc.)
 * Zone (on Barrens map: Thorn Hill, Merchant Coast, Field of Giants)
 * City (cities that are their own "zone" - Orgrimmar, Ironforge, etc.)
 * Town (Crossroads, Camp Taurajo - places that have NPCs for one/both factions)
 * Instance (WC, RFK, RFD)

-- Fandyllic 5:40 PM PDT 19 May 2005

More
It's true that Blizz calls them regions on that page. However, in-game, they are clearly called Zones. If you go on the map page, the drop-down box is called "Zones". I figured that it was better to label them as they are labeled in-game than the way they're labeled on a page few people ever see (I certainly haven't, and I've spent a lot of time going through Blizz's web site).

But, since Blizz seems to use both terms, maybe we should say Zones and Regions are the same thing, and call the smaller stuff Areas (or something similar). That way, we don't have to change all the category tags (and man, there are a lot of them).

So, here's my thought:
 * World (just Azeroth and Draenor at the moment)
 * Continent (Kalimdor, Eastern Continent, and Northrend at the moment)
 *  Zone/Region  (Barrens, Durotar, Thousand Needles, Eastern Plaguelands, etc.)
 *  Sub-Zone  (on Barrens map: Thorn Hill, Merchant Coast, Field of Giants)
 * City (cities that are their own "zone" - Orgrimmar, Ironforge, etc.)
 * Town (Crossroads, Camp Taurajo - places that have NPCs for one/both factions)
 * Instance (WC, RFK, RFD)


 * --FeldmanSkitzoid 17:23, 20 May 2005 (EDT)

Sounds good
You are most wise. I can live with that. Sorry to be so contentious, but calling everything a zone is way too confusing. I guess I don't pay as much attention to what the areas are called in game, because don't switch "zones" on the map very often by the drop-downs.


 * --Fandyllic 3:37 PM PDT 20 May 2005

A Little More  According to to the Location Functions what you call 'Areas' should be 'Subzones'

--Jimmcq 17:30, 20 May 2005 (EDT)

Cool, thanks for the info (and that incredibly swift response, even though I'm sure it's just coincidence).
 * --FeldmanSkitzoid 17:32, 20 May 2005 (EDT)

Response to Regions vs. Zones ; Does _not_ sound good (July 2005)
The reference to the API link on "Subzones" points out the problem here. The words "ZONE" and "SUBZONE" are coding / game-design terms, while "REGIONS" and "SUBREGIONS" are game terms. As WoW is supposed to be an immersive game, the game terms are preferred unless you are specifically talking about something like coding a UI enhancement. This is parallel to the usage of REALM instead of SERVER. It's also parallel to WORLD DUNGEON instead of INSTANCE. The fact that the in-game map uses the word "Zones" is probably just an oversight (remember that the coders built the interface, and were used to using their own terminology).

I would recommend that unless the article is talking about the "behind-the-sceens" workings of the software game, we follow Blizzard's model:

Locations:
 * Worlds
 * Continents
 * Regions
 * Subregions
 * Cities (major cities)
 * World Dungeons (aka Instance Dungeons)
 * Small dungeons
 * Areas (Towns, Villages, Lakes, etc.)

But that's just my 2copper's worth.... - Laisren

A word on categories (July 2005, cont)
Also, Fandyllic and Feldman, I appreciate your work, and I can see the logic of having Category:: for everything, but not EVERY article should be a category. A Category is really intended to just be a list, used for "related articles". That's why it can be added to the bottom of any page. For a good example of an Article that shouldn't be Category, see Category:World:Draenor/Outland. See how many articles are in this category? I know it seems convenient to have all related articles listed under an article, e.g. Category:Night Elf, but the two type of pages are really supposed to serve different functions in a Wiki. The category should be modular, such that the Night Elves category should be able to be applied as equally to the "Night Elves" Article as to the "Teldrassil" Article.

Here are some suggestions: Wowpedia:Category, Wowpedia:Article_Type, Locations, example of diff between main article and category: Guilds (disambiguation)....

Best regards, [ Laisren 03:04, 2 Jul 2005 (EDT) ]

Reply
Well, I'm done with retagging/relabelling/moving all that info around, so if you want to, feel free. :) Personally, I think that with all the confusion as to what these areas are really called, it's probably best if we just leave it alone.

Regarding the World:Draenor/Outland category, at the moment it's a pretty useless category, but it's a placeholder - they're going to add at least part of the planet to the game eventually.


 * --FeldmanSkitzoid 22:17, 25 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Update: proposal for Article Types (July 2005, cont)
This line of thinking got me to develop an Article Types proposal. I welcome feedback. Thanks, Laisren [ Laisren 08:21, 2 Jul 2005 (EDT) ]

Category namespace vs. Article namespace
If there is no policy in effect to the contrary, I'll base any future edits off of this proposed policy which have substantive articles in the regular namespace, as per the Wikipedia standard. --Aeleas 11:56, 26 Oct 2005 (EDT)

New categories for main page (May 2005)
Would it be possible for WoWwiki's moderator to add a link to the Lore section on the main page? It's a pretty large section now, and doesn't really fit under the "Races" section.

Also, I just started a new page for Battlegrounds. Maybe that should be listed on the main page too, under the Instances link.
 * --FeldmanSkitzoid 17:36, 12 May 2005 (EDT)

How can I get the distance between enemy and me?
Who can tell me the Function of get distance from a target? I am a mage.So i want to use spell by the distance.
 * There isn't a specific getTargetDistance function anymore. --The Nerd Wonder 10:41, 15 Jun 2005 (EDT)

Mount vs. Mounts
Can we please have Mount and Mounts merged? it seems silly to have both.

OwlBoy 18:41, 2 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * Normally, this would be proposed on talk:mount and talk:mounts, or on another page other than talk:Main Page. Technically, it doesn't really belong here, but I don't know specifically of another page that is active enough to get anyone's attention. Anyways, in case you didn't notice (I suspect you have, though) one is redirected to the other. -- D. F. Schmidt talk 15:56, 26 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Wikipedia Normal
For articles about Malfurion, Illidan, Arthas, Random Hero, the normal wikipedia already has extensive articles. Should they be "imported"?


 * Well as someone who is responsible for writing a few of those articles i'm not against it and think it could add some background to WoW. If you want to we could start doing that. -Derktar 01:06, 16 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * I absolutely agree that they should be moved here. While general descriptions of games are appropriate in an encyclopedia like, details about game characters, locations, lore, gameplay, etc. should be reserved for other places on the web (like this one). (And removed from Wikipedia; it's not "Wikipedia-The Gamer's Encyclopedia").-Laisren 05:25, 30 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * Malfurion, Random Hero do not exist. What is Random Hero?
 * Illidan Stormrage, Arthas Menethil are the others. We could link those other articles to their Wikipedia counterparts. -- D. F. Schmidt talk 16:02, 26 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Allakhazam v. Thottbot (June 2005)
I've noticed that most links are to Thottbot. But I think Allakhazam is far more reliable. Allakhazam's website is wow.allakhazam.com for those who want to experiment with using it.
 * I like both of them. It depends on what I'm looking for.  also, while I am running protowall, allakhazam is SLOW because of the Ads timing out.  --Morbid-o, June 15 2005; 08:10 EDT
 * Why not WoWGuru.com? :) --User:Zeeg; July 5 2005; 08:16 EDT

I just went to WoWGuru.com and I personally think it's junk. It might be better in specific areas, but on the whole I don't like it at all. I don't especially like Allakhazam, either, but they do organize quests much better than Thottbot. -- D. F. Schmidt talk 15:43, 26 Aug 2005 (EDT)

I go to Thottbot because it is much faster, but I do use Allakhazam when I'm suspicious of Thottbot. Also, the ads on Allakhazam are annoying and tend to slow it down. --Fandyllic 1:57 PM PST 22 November 2005

More links for UI stuff?
Would it be cool to have links on the left side, like "UI: Global API" and "UI: Widget API"? Could they go in their own navigation section? Or in the main one? Please consider this. Thanks.

Error Reporting (July 2005)
Action: Search. Result: (If you have somewhere else you'd rather we post errors, please let us know. Thanks.) -- Laisren 03:36, 1 Jul 2005 (EDT) :Unfortunately, this is a recurring problem. See Search not working? on this page for more details as to why it happens.
 * -- Powerlord 15:55, 1 Jul 2005 (EDT) ::Thanks for pointing that out Powerlord!
 * Maybe this page is getting too long? Anyone want to help with archiving Talk:Main Page?
 * I'm reproducing here a tip I put on the WoW Wiki FAQ:

Finding Articles '''Q: Help! The search doesn't work! How can I find pages? Is there an Index?''' '''A: Yes, you can access the index at Special:Allpages. (You can also use Google to search by prefacing your search with "site:wowwiki.com"; see this example: site:wowwiki.com Alchemy.


 * -- Laisren 19:55, 1 Jul 2005 (EDT)

New search option (July 2005)
Added a new link for Searching WoWWiki (Alternative Search Method) to Wowpedia:Searching. -- Laisren 06:26, 2 Jul 2005 (EDT)

(your comment here)

Scripting and macroing for Rogues
Why would the line:

/script CastSpellByName("Stealth(Rank 4)")

work from within a macro (no semi-colon on the end changes nothing) on my 60 Rogue, but not work from the command line? I encountered this while trying to write some Roguing scripts and noticed that when I had:

CastSpellByName("Stealth(Rank 4)")

in my script, I would not stealth. I have no add-ons (other than the very simple ones that I've written) loaded to mess things up either.

Thanks for your help, Aoene

Vendors, Trainers, Etc.
I was just wondering what everyone else thinks...do we REALLY want every single NPC in the game to have their own page here? Or, should we just link to Thottbot or something? Should we even bother to make pages like this? Personally, I think they clutter up the Category lists they're associated with, making it harder for users to find the important characters.


 * --FeldmanSkitzoid 02:29, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)
 * I think we should have every single npc in here. Just like wikipedia we need completeness ;) --Teh aSak 09:07, 5 Oct 2005 (EDT)

WoW Lingo
Hey, a great section to start would be a WoW lingo page, lots of people online say stuff like "hey three toons ganked me on my way to AH, so I rezed and..." Well, that's not really complex stuff, but I have been playing for 4 months and just now found out what a toon was. Maybe a few categories? Gampleplay slang (Toon, Gank, AH, etc) Location slang IF, AH, (some are obvious bot some are not so...) Item slang (cant think of specific, but some of you more experienced peeps should be able to lay a lot of this down).

I would wiki this, but I don't have the depth of experience yet. Anyone think this is a good idea? -oldbenway

Response
See Category:Game terms and Category:Acronyms.
 * --Powerlord 16:29, 7 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Main Page
The link to Wikipedia (currently as Wikipedia or something like it) could be changed to or Wikipedia, so that it's not rendered as an external link. -- D. F. Schmidt talk 16:12, 26 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Also, the "navigation" pane in the left column, under the orc image, could include a link to a WoWWiki policy article as I have proposed. (But before, I didn't propose linking it here, but only on the main page.) YPPedia has a link in the nav pane to their Policies and guidelines page. I think we should do the same, perhaps. Although, it is notable that Wikipedia does not have this. -- D. F. Schmidt talk 03:53, 5 Sep 2005 (EDT)

Article Tagging
You will find that if you look at wikipedia (or almost any other wiki), that tagging your name/nick on the main content is not done and usually considered vandalism. While it may be true that you originally created a section, people are continuously contributing, fixing, and updating. Your entry soon becomes a mix of many people's contributions. If you want credit for your original article, well.. you already have it in the history tab. Neither should discussion be done in the article itself.

I notice this was likely started in the API pages by AlexanderYoshi, but I really think that we should move away from this, detagging pages when we happen to edit them, and discourage it in future. This wiki belongs to us all, and under the GNU Free Documentation License you don't own the rights to any of it. Let's keep to the wiki spirit of sharing knowledge without advertising ourselves. --Quadir 12:19, 3 Sep 2005 (EDT)


 * It is noteworthy that sometimes people put comments in, not to dog the person (or people) who wrote the other text, but just to make a statement. They might want to cite themselves because they're aware that their observation may not be common to all, and maybe it is highly dependent upon their class, their play style, or whatever. I do agree that I don't like it when people make small comments that most definitely do not belong in the article, especially when it regards technical aspects. (I don't disagree on any point, but just reveal something you may not have thought of yet.) I second that motion. -- D. F. Schmidt talk 04:00, 5 Sep 2005 (EDT)

Formulas and Game Mechanics
I'm glad that a section started yesterday got major contributions already and I was wondering if we could get a Main Page link for the formulas and game mechanics category. Also, valid contributions or discussions on those pages are more than welcome :)
 * Stilpu 04:13, 16 Sep 2005 (EDT)

= German Version = Hi, is it planned to create a German version of this kewl weekee? I only play the German version of the game and you could do this just like Wikipedia with the interwiki functions. I'd contribute to the German wiki :) --Teh aSak 09:01, 5 Oct 2005 (EDT)


 * This wiki would probably need to be upgraded to support sub-domains like en.wowwiki.com and de.wowwiki.com, but I doubt that will happen any time soon. There was a similar wiki that had an English and French version called www.wikiwow.com, but the Englsih version died of neglect, so now it is only a French version... fr.wikiwow.com. Maybe you could get that person to open a de.wikiwow.com, if you could get more German players to contribute to it.
 * --Fandyllic 12:16 PM PDT 15 October 2005

Feedback
Very interesting wiki site!... Thanx! --HarryRens 13:53, 15 Oct 2005 (EDT)

mediawiki upgrade?
When is wowwiki going to upgrade to the latest version of MediaWiki? It's a much better version than what is currently running (1.3). [[User:CyberSkull|Dread Lord C y b e r S k  u  l  l  ✎☠]] 03:40, 26 Nov 2005 (EST)