User talk:Fandyllic/Apr 2006 thru Jun 2006 Archive

= Random Comments from Fandyllic =

Someone made me an admin?
I'm not sure when it happened, but I think AlexanderYoshi made me an admin at some point. It may have happened around the time he obliquely agreed to add some more admins, see "another admin or two please" section of his discussion page.

Since I just found this out (and don't know what it means exactly), please don't bug me with requests right away.
 * --Fandyllic 2:09 PM PST 29 Dec 2005


 * That was me, actually; check your yahoo email account or toss me an email from another account that you prefer :)
 * -- Rustak 10:47, 31 Dec 2005 (EST)


 * "Quote: I'm not sure when it happened" - actually, it was, incase that helps (-: --  &#8465;ilver&#167;&#8465;ide|undefined 12:03, 31 Dec 2005 (EST)


 * Congratulations. --Powerlord 23:33, 31 Dec 2005 (EST)


 * Congratulations. Remember to fear the Power! --Dracomage 09:01, 12 Jan 2006 (EST)

Because of this, you shouldn't be the head of any of the community teams, right? I mean, of course it's your decision, and I have no problem with it I guess, but you need to be able to give what time you have to administering the wiki at large. In any case, I guess you could just outline stuff and let your team members deal with the execution of it all. Just a thought. Schmidt 00:39, 14 Jan 2006 (EST)


 * Didn't think of that, but since I'm not a community team leader anyway, it doesn't matter. Hopefully, I won't be the only active admin most of the time, but we'll see. --Fandyllic 7:56 PM PST 14 Jan 2006


 * With great power comes great responsibility... So don't pull a GIR and decide to mess with the site and ultimately destroy it. Please. Geohevy 21:50, 20 Jun 2006


 * Hunh? --Mikk 20:56, 20 June 2006 (EDT)


 * If the reference is about Gir the robot on Invader Zim... I don't get it. ---Fandyllic 10:34 AM PDT 21 Jun 2006

= Comments to Fandyllic = See current stuff.

The navigation sidebar
I just discovered how to change the navigation sidebar. In doing so, I was thinking about how we might change it. All I can think of to add is links to various policies. Now, this should be stuff that every user should know about, even newcomers (as I reckon it). Since many people may not look at the main page (I, for one), maybe important links should go there. So, what do you think belongs there? It could be external links, too, such as worldofwarcraft.com. What do you think? Schmidt 22:03, 28 April 2006 (EDT)


 * Sounds good. You could make a Wowpedia:Proposed new sidebar to put any ideas. I don't have any good ideas off hand. --Fandyllic 4:46 PM PDT 30 Apr 2006

Vandals
Hey Fandyllic, thanks for adding adding me to the Cleaners list. =) --Tarog 13:48 PDT April 16, 2006

Flavor Lore
I created an article discussing the concept of Flavor Lore. Its to explain how sometimes things thought to be retcons or mistakes are sometimes intentionally written to add flavor to the universe, and show that not everyone believes the same things. I've included a few examples from the RPG, Manuals, and even WOW itself

I altered the Warcraft RPG category to explain that many supposed errors, are often intentionally written for flavor, and are often reflect the viewpoints of the inhabitants of azeroth at the time the book is said to take place. In many cases the book will tell competing beliefs, or theories made at the time, and usually not set anyone belief in stone.Baggins 13:29, 14 April 2006 (EDT)


 * Good article. --Fandyllic 2:48 PM PDT 14 Apr 2006

Bookkeepers
Sure sounds like fun.Baggins 17:20, 14 April 2006 (EDT)

Thanks for the recs- I've actually had my eye on them for the last week or so... I'm still trying to figure out how to organize such a team (you'll notice that we still haven't finished assignments), so things are still in flux... hopefully, things will be solved soon. Ragestorm 22:30, 14 April 2006 (EDT)

Homefries
When you get a chance can you do something about this page, Homefries, its gotten almost 2 dozen edits in less than an hour between three user who are constantly changing it to what 'they' want. I guess Wowpedia:Three_revert_rule could end up being useful.--Ralthor 11:43, 15 April 2006 (EDT)


 * See Talk:Homefries and Wowpedia:Known vandals. --Fandyllic 10:51 AM PDT 16 Apr 2006

Policy Proposal
Well i did my best to follow you recomendation, Any informal reccomendations, or advice you can offer me on Wowpedia:NPOV or WoWWiki writing in general would be really helpfull.


 * Thanks Kaso 13:24, 24 April 2006 (EDT)


 * Good start, I'll edit it a bit and put it up for a vote. --Fandyllic 12:44 PM PDT 24 Apr 2006

Krunk Smash article
If you have a moment, would you be able to verify that the accounts who voted to keep Server:Doomhammer US/Krunk Smash have unique IPs? They all showed up to vote within 30 minutes, each a few minutes after the last, and only one has a previous contrib.--Aeleas 22:14, 24 April 2006 (EDT)


 * Sorry, I can't see the IP addresses of users. I'll talk to Rustak, maybe he can make this info available. --Fandyllic 9:48 AM PDT 25 Apr 2006

Community Teams
I am still interested in Community teams. I couldnt find which one I signed up for in the beginning but they all sound fun to me :D! Thanks! purrdeta 19:20, 25 April 2006 (EDT)

Deletion of Identical Articles
I'm planning on cleaning up the Patches Category, and I'm noticing that many of the pages, such as Patch 7-Nov-2004 (Release Notes) have identical, ordered counterparts: Patch 1.1 (Release Notes). What policy should I use with these pages? Speedydelete, Delete/Vote, or Terminate? (Sorry, didn't know who else to ask the question to) -- Pandaut 18:22, 1 May 2006 (EDT)


 * You may not have to delete them at all. I suggest you carefully check they are truly duplicates and if not move the different stuff to one of the articles (I would think "Patch #.#..." article would have precedence). After that, just make the one you like least a redirect to the one you like more (put  at the top). Does that make sense? --Fandyllic 7:25 1 May 2006


 * I'll be sure to check carefully (some of them are merged patch notes as well) and I'll put the redirects up. Thanks! -- Pandaut 21:19, 1 May 2006 (EDT)

WoWWiki and WikiWoW
Hi there,

I'm the main admin of WikiWoW. I sent you an email a while back but it seems you are too busy to get back to me! I used to discuss with Alexander Yoshi about linking our Wiki's, but it seems he's no longer part of the project. WikiWoW is basically the same thing than WoWWiki, but in French and has only an encyclopedia approach.

Please note WikiWoW is not a rip-off of WoWWiki. I created WikiWoW with no knowledge of the existence of WoWWiki, which at the time was just a wiki about the WoW GUI librairies and stuff anyway.

Please let me know. By email at furism@gmail.com if possible.

Cheers,

--Furism 08:25, 12 May 2006 (EDT)


 * I forwarded your message above to Rustak. --Fandyllic 11:47 PM PDT 13 May 2006


 * Wow. I just looked at your wiki. Well, all I really saw was the main page, but it looks so nice! How do you do that? Schmidt 03:58, 14 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Hi Schmidt. How do you do what? :) If you mean the background thing, I edited the MediaWiki:Monobook.css page. I'd show you but at the moment we are upgrading to MediaWiki 1.6 so the website is closed (so we don't loose contributions, in case we need to load the database backup). --Furism 09:14, 16 May 2006 (EDT)


 * Is Monobook.css your default, and all your code is there? I've tried to add some general CSS code that would allow just saying, hypothetically,  rather than , if you get my meaning. Do you know by any chance how to add code that will work for any choice of preferred CSS skin? Schmidt 11:01, 18 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Hi. Yes I use Monobook.css, however somewhat modified. I didn't change the actual file on the server too much, I used the /MediaWiki:Monobook.css page to add some code. Here :) --Furism 08:49, 23 May 2006 (EDT)

Do you remember this guy's name?
This gnome and his robot were the Blizzard patch technitions, but they are not named anymore on the website. Do you remember their names? link --- DarkTichondrias 00:20, 18 May 2006 (EDT)


 * Yeah, it was Tyrion and his Spybot. He's part of a quest in Stormwind Keep. --Fandyllic 10:46 AM PDT 18 May 2006

Sky functions clobbering Category:AddOns
Mate, it seems you're the one that categorized all the Sky functions as Category:Addons. It's doing ugly things to Category:AddOns tbh. Please fix =)
 * Mikk 22:11, 13 May 2006 (EDT)


 * I moved most of the Sky functions to Category:Cosmos AddOns. Not a great solution, but it gets them out of AddOns where they don't belong. --Fandyllic 11:35 PM PDT 13 May 2006


 * I dumped them in Category:Function Libraries/Sky documentation now. Scream if you hate the name; I'm not so sure I like it my self - it's pretty darn long. (Aye, I have your talk page on watch by now :-)) --Mikk 11:21, 26 May 2006 (EDT)


 * Uh, that name is pretty insanely long. Maybe you should make a more general category, like Category:Function Library Documentation and put stuff in there. We really don't need to have separate categories for all the function libraries like Sea also. All the organizing is appreciated regardless. --Fandyllic 10:48 AM PDT 26 May 2006


 * I've been mulling over this for a bit, and, to me, it seems that keeping the separate categories is more helpful. I myself believe in the ability to navigate via categories, and chucking all the library calls (there's lots of them!) in one huge category makes it somewhat meaningless. Also, these pages will never be members of more than one category so it doesn't hurt the bottom bar in any way.
 * I went ahead and did the same to other libraries, but used to do it so it can be changed more easily. One would still need to walk over all the pages with an "&action=purge" because of caching but ... it's easier anyway. --Mikk 04:00, 29 May 2006 (EDT)

Delete/Talk template
Stop editing Delete/Talk, mate. It's not meant to have instructions. They're contained in Delete/Vote. Delete/Talk has to be as small as possible since it's substed directly into the talk page. --Mikk 23:44, 23 May 2006 (EDT)


 * See for Template:Delete/Talk. Maybe subst: is working oddly for me, but it doesn't add the Delete/Vote stuff when I use it with Delete/Talk. That's why I changed stuff. Besides, Delete/Vote was getting out of control. Also, its best to keep policy out of the template, since we don't want to have to update the template each time policy changes.
 * If you can explain why subst: is not working with &lt;includeonly&gt; or what I might be doing wrong, then I'm fine with changing Delete/Talk back to the way it was. --Fandyllic 10:57 PM PDT 23 May 2006
 * Gotcha, moving the discussion to the talk page. Already wrote a response there. --Mikk 00:03, 24 May 2006 (EDT)

Category:Editing vs Category:Help
Seeing as how you're in the Cat Team, I thought I'd plop this in your lap.

I recently stumbled over Category:Editing and thought "Hey, that's a worthy cause" and started adding a few pages to it. Then I remembered about Category:Help (that one isn't advertized nearly enough, really...). But reading the category heading, it says that help pages live in "Help:".... well, the ones I wanted to add don't (Wowpedia:Templates, Wowpedia:Templates/Editing). Maybe I should just ignore that directive? Or maybe /Editing deserves to live some place else? Or maybe I should just stick to the API pages and keep my fat fingers out of everything else.... I dunno...  Help? :-) --Mikk 07:03, 26 May 2006 (EDT)


 * Hmm, the more I think about it, the more I think that WoWWiki:Templates/Editing should be moved to Help:Editing/Templates. But I'll still wait and see what you have to say about it all, I think. If nothing else, you adminny type guys might want to take a look at it and see that I'm not trying to override some policy by what I'm saying; stuff in "Help:" tends to be taken as official gospel, after all. --Mikk 09:18, 26 May 2006 (EDT)


 * Yeah, I would move stuff to Category:Help. We should probably deprecate Category:Editing, or at least put it in the Help category. You don't get directly to the Help category from the Help link on the upper navigation sidebar, but there is a link to it at the top. Also, don't worry about if stuff is unofficial. If anything conflicts we can work it out as people complain about it. Most help pages are written with good intent. --Fandyllic 10:46 AM PDT 26 May 2006


 * Right. I moved Templates/Editing to Help:Template. The old one was quite horrible. Moved that to Template/Old and linked to it just in case there actually was useful information there. --Mikk 02:33, 29 May 2006 (EDT)


 * Just an update since I got you involved initially... Ralthor and I agreed that Help:Editing quickref was the right way to do this. Category:Editing is now empty and queued for deletion. --Mikk 12:52, 6 June 2006 (EDT)

Unprotecting function library documentation pages
The following pages are protected for... well.. no good reason? I was going to categorize them but no go.. --Mikk 06:13, 27 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Sea.IO
 * Sea.wow


 * They may have been protected in the days when we didn't have so many vigilant spam cleaners. Unprotected now. --Fandyllic 9:10 AM PDT 27 May 2006


 * Ack, Template:Vote/Recall was locked, too. Didn't realize there was one. --Mikk 04:28, 1 June 2006 (EDT)
 * Unprotected now. --Fandyllic 10:30 AM PDT 1 Jun 2006

Character Table
Fandyllic, thanks for the welcome to WoWwiki. With respect to your Character Table design (very nice by the way), is there a reason (browser related maybe?) why you used: Just wondering (and thanks again for the design) —MJBurrage 11:20, 27 May 2006 (EDT)
 * |align="center" width="60px"|Status   instead of,
 * !width="60px"|Status   which does the same thing.
 * No particular reason. Some of the lamer wikis don't handle ! in tables well sometimes, so I guess I'm in the habit of not using it. --Fandyllic 10:37 PM PDT 27 May 2006

Created a Vote/Vote/Content too
I could care less about this one personally, but I hacked up a Vote/Vote/Content real quick based on Delete/Vote/Content "just because". Pull it in into Vote/Vote if you'd like to use it. (Oh, and the category tag in Vote/Vote should probably be in tags..) --Mikk 02:15, 28 May 2006 (EDT)

Hello
I have a broken user name I can't get back into, and it won't send me a new password, any chance I could get your email so I can send my information so you can fix it? Ghlen 10:33, 29 May 2006 (EDT)


 * See your talk page. --Fandyllic

Collaboration of the Week
Is there anyone in charge of this? How do we go about adding new collaborations? I have two ideas for possible collaborations.--Ralthor 18:47, 31 May 2006 (EDT)


 * This was one of the many legacies of SilverSide. He generally proposed these based on community team leaders, I think, but he only proposed one.
 * If I were to guess his intent, I suspect you would have to be at least a community team member to propose a CotW, but anyone can since there really is no policy on this.
 * If I were to suggest a course of action (which it looks like I'm going to...), I would say: think of a collaboration idea, join an appropriate community team (assuming there is one), and put your idea on CotW. I only suggest joining a team so it looks like we have some restrictions on changing this (which we really don't).
 * Please bug me, if the community team leader of the team you want to join isn't responding. --Fandyllic 6:13 PM PDT 31 May 2006
 * Well I've had an application in with the Help Team for a while, but there is no leader and two inactive members. ;( There are a couple others I would be interested in, but didn't want to join more than once so I would be able to devote more time to just one topic (and general other wiki stuff).  Maybe you could be temp. leader for a while and get some people in there, I've sorta declared myself an unofficial member and play with the help pages when I get a chance (check out my votes on Help_talk:Contents if you haven't seen it yet).


 * While I am on your talk page, I just noticed on Special:Wantedpages it is dominated by templates and user pages, rendering the page mostly useless. Is there any way from an Admin side to get rid of the the user namespace from the wanted pages?  I think it would be a good idea to remove the template namespace as well because it is dominated by so many that will never be created, but it can be useful to find links to templates that don't exist so they can be corrected and I guess only templates:1-10 will always be there, the rest need to be corrected..so I am sorta undecided on the template namespace being there.--Ralthor 19:47, 31 May 2006 (EDT)


 * This may sound bold, but I'm willing to make you leader of the Help Team, if you're willing to be the leader.
 * I wouldn't be too worried about the responsibility, since its leaderless now.
 * To start with you would probably just want to recruit some more active members and then worry about actually thinking up regular tasks or responsibilities. I'll help out too. I would have made myself leader, but I'm already nominally leading 3 teams (which seems like way too many) and only really doing anything on WelComm.
 * What do you say? --Fandyllic 7:44 PM PDT 31 May 2006
 * Sounds like a plan.--Ralthor 21:03, 31 May 2006 (EDT)
 * Be careful what you wish for... ;-) 9:57 PM PDT 31 May 2006

Vote stuff

 * Posted a question (for you, I do think) in WoWWiki_talk:Policy/Voting --Mikk 02:53, 1 June 2006 (EDT)
 * I'll respond there. --Fandyllic 10:30 AM PDT 1 Jun 2006


 * More unlocking pweeze:
 * Wowpedia:Policy_status_phases (text needs updating)
 * Template:Policy/Proposal Template:Ratified Template:Adopted Template:Decreed Template:Rejected Template:Recalled Template:Vetoed (just want to categorize and document these)
 * --Mikk 15:43, 1 June 2006 (EDT)
 * Okay, more unprotected. --Fandyllic 3:27 PM PDT 1 Jun 2006


 * I'm thinking about axing WoWWiki:Policies. Its contents really aren't more than the ToC + random age-old comments that should be moved into the respective proposals (if indeed they aren't there already). If you agree, just unprotect it and I'll get slaughtering (aye, lots of link fixing as a result - I must love creating work for myself :-))    --Mikk 13:17, 2 June 2006 (EDT)

Just curious: Why did you lock them, Fandyllic? I figure I should probably know about it so I don't go unlocking them indiscriminately. Schmidt 18:52, 2 June 2006 (EDT)


 * You're an admin, unlock what you think should be unlocked. Don't worry about why I did it. At the time, I thought it might be a good idea to lock policy related stuff, because I remember someone tried to vandalize some banners. I figured someone would complain if they needed to be unlocked.
 * Mikk can ask you to unlock stuff also, he's just used to dealing with me, I guess. --Fandyllic 6:06 PM PDT 2 Jun 2006
 * Yup :-)   --Mikk 02:28, 3 June 2006 (EDT)

"Difficulty" Section Removal
It's not vandalsim. Wikipedia and any other Wiki is not supposed to be a message board where people list their opinions, positive or negative. Clothbies? Easy Mode? Those are opinions, not facts. If that section of the article is cleaned up to look more professional, drop the opinionated statements, and explain the classes for a little more depth then I believe it would be justified in holding a spot. Ohterwise, if you're going to let people talk garbage about classes they more then likely have never played then it holds no bearing on how accurate the statements are, and it doesn't belong on a page, or a site, that is supposed to be based on fact. Another thing, when you're explaining something on a fact based website that is supposed to resemble an encyclopedia, you don't use slang terms that only the population who participates in the event or game can understand I.E. Newbies. World of Warcraft attracts many brand new players who may or may not have ever even played a video game before, and putting the word newbies or clothbies in an article that is supposed to be informing to them can be confusing, and looks downright unprofessional. --Alburn 09:51, 2 June 2006


 * What a wiki is for is your opinion also and this is not wikipedia. A vast amjority of statements about classes on the Choosing a class page are opinions but you didn't wipe them out without explanation. Just because you disagree with something doesn't mean it is okay to wipe it out without explanation. This is a wiki... fix it! If you think it's BS opinion then say that at the top somewhere.
 * As I said earlier, this is not wikipedia. We do have slang in WoWWiki and its dubious to say any wiki is fact-based unless every statement has a supporting citation which 99% of stuff doesn't. Wise people take even wikipedia with a grain of salt. Looking professional doesn't make something accurate, it just makes it look professional. WoWWiki isn't just for newbies, it just happens to be one of the better sites for newbies. The way you help newbies isn't removing slang, they way you help is linking it to an explanation of what it means. People aren't going to stop using slang terms, so you might as well document what people usually mean by them. We should have newbie, clothbie, squishy, ninja, gank, etc. Otherwise, how will they learn?
 * Besides all that, why didn't you put your rant in Talk:Choosing a class, if you had a good reason? --Fandyllic 12:12 PM PDT 2 Jun 2006


 * I would have said nothing different than what Fandyllic just said (except what follows). Moreover, a significant advantage to a wiki is that you can pose opinions and people can hash it out and perhaps get a more accurate (not to mention more useful) definition of something that needs to be discussed. Without posing opinions, you can't really do that.
 * And if someone doesn't know what clothbie means, that person can just kiss this game goodbye. Squishy is a little easier to get confused on, because it may or may not include leather-wearers. (Cloth and leather are the bottom two classes of armor; chain and plate are the top two, so you might be uncertain as to the definition.) Ninja is definitely something to be defined. Sure, each of these terms are not exactly the best terms and the most likely to find their way into a realistic environment such as school, but the fact is, these terms are used in the game, so anyone who plays the game should know what they are. Just in case they don't, we need to use them in the way that you might see them used in the game (which is why I started FTW, because it was so hard for my mind to wrap around it yet it's used with some frequency), and we need to define it on its own page so that you can better get a grip on what something means.
 * This game doesn't come without its own lexicon, just like you don't grow up learning Latin. Latin may be a superior language, but we don't speak it around here. So it's not useful. You have to learn the lingua franca (the language of the folk). Maybe someone should start that article. Schmidt 18:23, 2 June 2006 (EDT)

On FTW
On FTW, why did you add a link to For The Win? Doesn't that seem a little redundant? Schmidt 18:52, 2 June 2006 (EDT)


 * I like to have articles for acronyms in their expanded form and just redirect the acronym to the expanded form. It just happens to be that most folks only ever use the acronyms. If I had my way, there would be articles for everything and very few redirects. --Fandyllic 7:42 PM PDT 2 Jun 2006


 * I'm not 100% on what you might mean there. We could have FTW redirect to For the win or For The Win (I prefer the former), but as it stands, it makes no sense to explain FTW and have a link to For The Win on the same page. The thing is, redirects are not bad. Not bad at all, when used properly. For instance, redirecting Thunderfury, Blessed Blade of the Windseeker to Thunderfury, or vice versa. Either way is acceptable. Redirects are there so you can mention something without piping the link, but you want an article name to be representative of what's there, so you don't want the article name too short, either. And UBRS -- you don't want to type "Upper Blackrock Spire" for to mention UBRS on each page. Redirects are great! If you can name some that you really don't want, maybe I could get a better feel for what you're talking about, and I might even agree on that. Schmidt 02:42, 4 June 2006 (EDT)


 * It seems to me that Fandyllic is agreeing with you in words but not in actions :-) --Mikk 07:33, 4 June 2006 (EDT)


 * A lot of good that does! But I'd more likely say he might agree in actions but not words, since he did say if he had his way there would be no redirects but I say they're perfectly good, if they're properly placed. Schmidt 10:58, 4 June 2006 (EDT)


 * I didn't say NO redirects. Just few. On FTW, I would have FTW just point to "For The Win" and have "For The Win" have the explanation for what it means. Besides, FTW means other things to some people like "F___ The World" which has a totally different spin, but why explain what all the expansions of FTW mean in FTW? --Fandyllic 6:44 PM PDT 4 Jun 2006


 * As for FTW, really the only definition we need to mention is For The Win. We can just assume out any other possibility, because it really is never used that way that I've ever seen. Other acronyms may be similar. I can't think of any right now though. Schmidt 20:08, 4 June 2006 (EDT)

Vandalism definition
Whoups, I edited WoWWiki talk:Vandalism since the vote had closed. But then I realized I couldn't actually add the new definition to the article since it's locked. I figured I'd dump that job on your table since you've actually been voting for it. --Mikk 12:45, 6 June 2006 (EDT)


 * I added the new part to Wowpedia:Vandalism and put ratified on the talk page for now. It's technically adopted, but I'm waiting a day or two to look over related links before changing to that. --Fandyllic 6:13 PM PDT 6 Jun 2006

Policy->Policies
I've moved all policy documents from Category:Policy to Category:Policies as per the category policy to-do list. Two protected documents refused to move their lazy asses though, even though they nicely pulled in the changed templates. I assume it's built into the wiki that protected pages simply do not get recategorized no matter what. If you move those two over, we can zap Category:Policy altogether. (Oh, and would you please use Policy followed by a manual recategorization rather than use Policysort? Silly to maintain two templates...) --Mikk 15:59, 6 June 2006 (EDT)

Tolkien/Warcraft Reply
I can see your perspective there, and for those who are familiar with the Silmarillion, your comments have merit. In terms of just lifestyle and outward cultural appearances, the Night Elves are Moriquendi. But I'm trying to cross just that boundry and cover the story/role aspect as well.

From a storytelling perspective, Teldrassil is Valinor, and it's precursor, Nordrassil, is Tol Eressea. Blizzard just blew the scale of the Titans/Ainur up beyond the scope of one world.

As for the Sindrassi-Sindarin link: That is and will always be a speculation because there if Blizzard ever corroborated it the Tolkien estate would sue them. If you want me to make speculative posts clearer, I can do that. But I believe the information is relevant enough to merit being on the site. -Piroko 08.06.2006


 * Hmmm... I'm not sure I would go so far as saying Teldrassil is like Valinor, perhaps more like Tol Eress&euml;a. Valinor is the place where the Valar dwell among elves, vastly unlike Teldrassil unless you equate ancients with the Ainur. Nordrassil his a historical precursor to Teldrassil, so really doesn't equate with anything in Tolkien. Teldrassil and Nordrassil are both World Trees, but Nordrassil was on Mount Hyjal and mostly destroyed to defeat Archimonde.
 * Regardless, I'm glad to see another Tolkien fan who sees the obvious "borrowing" by Warcraft. But then again, most fantasy games and books borrow from Tolkien. He changed the way we see many mythological creatures and basically invented Orcs.--Fandyllic 11:32 AM PDT 8 Jun 2006

Regarding Nordrassil: I'm extremely sorry about that Tol Eressëa flub, I meant to say Isle of Almaren, if that makes it make more sense. As for Tolkien, he really also created the high elves. Before his works, the word elf was synonymous with pixie or leprechaun. Tolkien took the concept and made them, well, into Men++. The way I read Silmarillion, it reads like the Elves of Valinor were almost Greco-Roman in their ways of war in the early days, with "... tall helms with plumes of red." ('Of the Silmarils'). -Piroko, 09.06.2006


 * Yeah, Almaren makes sense. And yes, Tolkien created the "noble" super-human (taller, wiser, etc.) elf. I wouldn't exactly call them high elves (at least in the Warcraft sense), so much as "big" elves. Tolkien was probably rting to make a more substantial combination of leprechauns, pixies, sidhe, faerie, etc. Something less magical, but more "real" and anthropological.
 * What makes me sad, as a Mac user, is that I won't be able to play LotR Online... :-(, but I might get an Intel-based Mac, so maybe I will be able to. The sys reqs seem pretty high last I checked, tho. --Fandyllic 11:19 AM PDT 9 Jun 2006

Main Page
I've made lots of suggestions for the main page - in fact I made an example of what I think would be better :) See User:Kirkburn! :) -- Kirkburn 17:15, 9 June 2006 (EDT)

→ Talk:Main Page plx :-) --Mikk 07:13, 10 June 2006 (EDT)


 * Is there a reason why you've not commented at all on the new main page design (WoWWiki:Main Page Dev 3)? It would be quite nice to actually see a new main page some time, as the current one is, in my opinion, inadequate and also now growing a bit out of date. -- Kirkburn 16:15, 24 June 2006 (EDT)


 * Hey, I'm not the only admin, you know! Why don't you go bug Schmidt! ;-)
 * Anyway, I'm not going to make a unilateral Main Page changeover just because one user complains alot and proposes a fancy-schmancy alternative. If you really want your change to get made, get Rustak to agree to it. He's the real master of WoWWiki. --Fandyllic 7:44 PM PDT 24 Jun 2006


 * I emailed Rustak about that. Because once we get good formatting on the main page, it will be easier to decide on how to design CSS classes. He hasn't gotten back to me. I wrote him Friday, I think. Schmidt 21:13, 24 June 2006 (EDT)


 * Hey, I'm not the only one who's not happy with it. Me and Mikk have worked hard on it and I did ask for a comment from you a while ago, since you're the main one who looks after it :( Meanwhile, many of the links on the current page need changing, as I have written on the talk page. Several times. :) The design may be 'fancy-schancy' to you, but to most others it's a welcome change from black and white dullness, and isn't ott. Do you actually want the site to look this boring when you see it for the first time? I'm speaking as a recently arrived member here. -- Kirkburn 06:56, 25 June 2006 (EDT)

New Wiki Logo with Black background
I change the background to black because it matched the Wiki skin I'm using. The white background matches well with the white Wiki skin, but the generic WoW Wiki skin is grey and black. The black background matches the default background better than the white background. --DarkTichondrias


 * There must something wrong with your web browser, since the background around the flags is transparent (although there is some dark fuzz around the edges...). I previewed it against a white background and it looks fine to me... you must be very particular.


 * --Fandyllic 1:36 PM PDT 12 Jun 2006

Mass Vandalism
Could you block User:Boredman82734. Looks like he's the same vandal from earlier today. Really tearing up the place. I added him to Known Vandal page. - ClydeJr 16:51, 14 June 2006 (EDT)


 * I perma-banned him. Looks like Alex Yoshi and Kirkburn took care of alot of spam also. --Fandyllic 4:43 PM PDT 14 Jun 2006

Wowpedia:Policies/Dev
Please please please please :-)

I yanked two of the "hey guys, we could possible do things like this, whatcha think?" sections from the end of the page. Those were not enforceable policy in any sane meaning of the word. I considered moving the "Preference for internal links" one to a guideline page also, since it does not really state firm policy, though I figured I'd need to talk to someone else about that first. If that last section disappears, we should even yank the Policy tag from the page, as it doesn't really contain policy. --Mikk 12:42, 18 June 2006 (EDT)


 * I removed the Policy tag, since it isn't policy, just a proposal as far as I can tell. --Fandyllic 10:57 AM PDT 19 Jun 2006


 * Aeuhm, no, not a proposal. A page reformat that I was hoping you could just plop into the protected page. o.O  --Mikk 12:09, 19 June 2006 (EDT)


 * Run it by . If he approves, then ask him to do it or bug me again. --Fandyllic 11:13 AM PDT 19 Jun 2006


 * Ah, ok, I figured you were the policy buff. I'll plop it in Schmidt's page. --Mikk 12:15, 19 June 2006 (EDT)


 * I am, but I don't want to cut Schmidt out of bigger decisions like redoing a policy main page. Its not something that needs a vote, probably, but should get some more eyes on it. --Fandyllic 11:22 AM PDT 19 Jun 2006


 * *cough* damn good point there. --Mikk 12:23, 19 June 2006 (EDT)


 * Good job. It looks great. If I don't get to it when you have the chance, can you do it? Schmidt 22:39, 19 June 2006 (EDT)
 * Nevermind, I did it. I redirected the dev page to the real page now. It doesn't make sense to have policy on a policy listing, especially since it's protected. So I didn't add that back in. Other than that, I didn't change anything other than the sort key, which shouldn't change much.

Sounds good. --Fandyllic 1:40 PM PDT 20 Jun 2006

Got a Mac question for you
I have a guildy that is also a Mac user, and we are running into troubles with TeamSpeak and Ventrilo. According to our research, we have found only 1 codec that is supported on the mac, but is sound quality is horrendous after more than 5 people joins a channel. Do you have any experience using the voice apps or advice/suggestions? Thanks --Dracomage 11:06, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
 * I just fired up the latest Ventrilo client the other night with about 8 people talking and it seemed okay for sound quality. The main problem seems to be buzzing occasionally and feedback. I haven't tried the TeamSpeak (TeamSpeex?) client, so I can't say. I haven't got my microphone to work right yet, so I'm not sure how I sound to other people. I used to use TeamSpeak, but on a PC when I played Shadowbane and it was about the same. --Fandyllic 1:40 PM PDT 20 Jun 2006
 * Just the straight forward Vent client? Mmm. I'll checkw ith the guildie again because he could not hear or speak without us converting each channel to a Mac-codec. Thanks for the reply. --Dracomage 14:49, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
 * As I recall, the Ventrilo client I'm using is 2.3.2 prototype 14. The codec is set to Speex, so I suspect I just got lucky with my guild's server. --Fandyllic 2:03 PM PDT 20 Jun 2006

Is the list of stubs actually policy?
My vote about getting rid of Stub/Section and Stub/Section2 is going absolutely nowhere. I assume it has to do with the fact that noone can be arsed to think about what it implies for all the pages around the wiki and whatnot. I guess stub classification is kinda boring to most =)

So, I have to ask: Is the list of stubs actually policy? Or is it just the fact that we use the stub list to tag pages as stubs? And, if the latter, would you object to me just snipping those two out of the list? Everything's prepped and ready for the change since quite a while back.

--Mikk 15:49, 24 June 2006 (EDT)


 * Well there is a Wowpedia:Policy/Stub, so I guess it is a policy and the list is in it. So sorry, you can't just yank the stubs you don't like. Patience, my son. People will vote on it. Maybe you can advertise it on some popular, but appropriate page. --Fandyllic 7:42 PM PDT 24 Jun 2006


 * Mikk plops it into Wowpedia:Community Portal/Democracy