User talk:LAISREN32622

Server page (June 26, 2005)
[ Apocalypse 23:44, 26 Jun 2005 (EDT) ] Regarding your Change at the Servers Page.

Actually the Page was used so far, and is still, as a list of Guilds by Server. You have the list of servers there, and when you follow their links, you end at list of guilds for this server.

I admit, not optimal solution, a catogary solution, with the each server as cathegory I guess would work better, though I have problems with getting this propper done in the wiki. (region > typ > server > Guilds)

Calling it a pure server list, is still I think misleading. Expecial when you get there from the main page over Guilds


 * [ Laisren 15:34, 28 Jun 2005 (EDT)] Apoc - Thanks for the comment. While I understand what you're saying, and how it was being used, I think we need to move to a more logical structure. A list of Servers is useful to users, and does not HAVE to be tied into a list of Guilds by server. A list of Guilds by server is really something entirely discrete (separate).
 * The info also appears in various places already. My changes do not not mean that server pages can't be used for guild lists; it just allows the Server pages to be used for MORE than just guild lists, if desired.


 * In a nut shell, a more logical structure is a list of servers on a page called Servers, and a list of Guilds on a page called Guilds.


 * You shouldn't get to "Servers" when you click on "Guilds". These are two different things. I've fixed that.
 * Note that the Guild list by Server pages can be easily fixed to be more logical, just add ==Guilds on the Server :== to the top of the page: Example.

Cloth for Rep (June 24, 2005)
Zarna wrote: - "An additional way to gain reputation are the new cloth quartermasters found in the three capital cities (2 in Orgrimmar and Ironforge) where you could turn in Cloth to gain reputation. You have to turn in 60 Wool Cloth, 60 Silk Cloth and 60 Mageweave a single time, then you could repeatably turn in 20 Runecloth." - [ Laisren 07:09, 24 Jun 2005 (EDT) ] Seriously? You can now turn in CLOTH to gain reputation? Do you have a link to this announcement? Thanks!


 * [ Zarana 07:42, 24 Jun 2005 (EDT) ] You asked me about a link for the Cloth donation...
 * here you are [from Patchnotes 1.5 ]

Quests All members of both the Horde and Alliance are reporting low stockpiles of various textile resources! Donations of cloth are now being accepted in the following locations: Darnassus, Stormwind, and Ironforge for the Alliance; Orgrimmar, Undercity, and Thunder Bluff for the Horde. Seek out an official Cloth Quartermaster for more information.


 * Laisren 05:10, 30 Jun 2005 (EDT)]] Thanks Zarna. Since the link was broken, inspired me to copy the Release Notes over to here... See Patch 1.5 (Release Notes)

Botched (June 30, 2005)
[ User:Ror 23:44, 30 Jun 2005 (EDT) ] Botched.

Hi Laisren,

I'm very new here, and love the concept but I really should have (and will do) done more reading before I hit the save page button. The Guild section Overview I have deleted a bit out (after putting something in that didn't belong). If there is a way for me to take it back to your last revision, please let me know and I'll get it done. On the other hand if you'd rather do it yourself while chuckling quietly at my stupidity, please do.

Again, sorry for the inconvenience, and I hope you/I/we can get it patched quickly.

Thanks

Ror


 * [ Laisren 19:26, 1 Jul 2005 (EDT) ]Ror- Thanks for letting me know. I fixed it. You can correct errors to an article by comparing two versions on the "history" page of any article. For example, view the "history" page for this article using the history tab, above.


 * You can add guild info to the List of Guilds, or add a link on the Server Page for your realm. See Category:Guilds, then click on your server/realm name.

Rare Stuff (July 5, 2005)
[ Ragowit 11:48, 5 Jul 2005 (EDT) ] Rare-stuff.

Don't know who to talk with. But I try with you. :)

About Rare stuff, I believe you added the Rare category, and that's great. But in there it's RARE TAILOR and stuff, most with caps. I believe the caps is annoying, is there a way to change that?

Also, I think that a Rare category is needed on this wiki, but the RARE TAILOR stuff is out of place, feels like it doesn't belong here..

And last, what classifies "Rare"?

Thanks for your time!


 * [ Laisren 02:40, 6 Jul 2005 (EDT)] Hi Ragowit. I didn't create the RARE WHATEVER entries, just added the category so whats-his-name would know that it was available. As to the classification and your other questions, that's why I added the following to the top of Category:Rare: "What qualifies something as 'RARE'? Ask User:Bryan. Why are they all written in ALL-CAPS? Ask User:Bryan." See Special:Contributions/Bryan. -- Laisren

Contact
You on MSN?

Mine is

Jemimus 15:25, 10 Jul 2005 (EDT)

RE: SI: 7 (July 11, 2005)
Hello LAISREN, I'm gonna answer your question about SI: 7 here.

I saw that you modified one of "my" pages ;) And added [ Character ] (newline) [ Fisherman ].

So I started to do like that, like [ Gryphon Master ] and stuff.

So once I camed to SI: 7, I did the same, [ SI: 7 ]. That is a Secret Intelligence group in WoW, I think theirs HQ is in Stormwind.

Hope that answer is enough, otherwise, bump me again. :)

--Ragowit 16:03, 11 Jul 2005 (EDT)


 * I guess my point was that we needed an article on SI:7... - Laisren

In-Game Books (July 12, 2005)
"The Dark Portal and the Fall of Stormwind moved to The Dark Portal and the Fall of Stormwind (in-game book)" was wrong action todo, I think.

Because, I don't think a page should explain what it is in the url. Like (in-game book). That should be, and is, explained in the article itself. I think it just got more messed up, and the ugliness of the url raised by 574% :/

My vote is to go back to what it was, The Dark Portal and the Fall of Stormwind.

--Ragowit 04:55, 12 Jul 2005 (EDT)


 * I think the reason he did this was cause we where trying to figure out how to define ambiguous page names when it came to books, and also how to deal with the nature of book titels as subjects, and how they where being indexed.


 * For instance: I had started renaming pages relating to real-world books as follows: The Well of eternity (Book), to differentiate from the actual Well of Eternity article. My initial thought was to turn the page Well of Eternity into a disambig page only, but the Way Wikiepdia does it usually, is to simply add a reference to the top of the Well of Eternity page, reffering to the book article. as in "Did you mean Well of Eternity, The (Book)? This works well because the article Well of Eternity, The (Book) is instantly recognisable in reference, and it indexes well because it starts with the same subject text.
 * How to deal with ingame-books is a different matter, I have to agree. I am unsure of how to deal with this, though i agree the URL becomes quite unseemly like this. Perhaps we should simply keep the names of these ingame books as it is. Also, because these books are actually reference material on the basic storyline, and are included as a whole. Jemimus 06:21, 12 Jul 2005 (EDT)


 * Yeah, I don't feel strongly about it either way. I can see your reasoning. So we could just have book titles for the article names, as long as it's defined immediately at the top of the page as an in-game book. Note however that this creates a problem for the Category list. For Category:Books, how will people be able to tell what's a real book and what's an in-game book?


 * Probably need a new category just for in-game books.... Laisren 06:20, 17 Jul 2005 (EDT)


 * Perhaps. But there are a number of texsts both included inside the game in the form of books, as not in the game at all, that all kinds of fall under the same 'catagory', in my head at least. They are backstory pieces. Pieces of text that tell the story itself, and draw from many sources. These texts cannot be catagorized under any specific subject I think, exept that of "Lore". Other examples are the texsts that are included in the game manuals, or summeries written by other people on other sites. My point is, I dont think we should treat these pieces of texts any differently just because they have been copy-pasted into an object in the game itself. So perhaps we should just stick them all under teh catagory Lore, leave the titels as they are, and simply add in the articles, that 'by the way' this text also appears in an in-game book at this and this location...    what do you think?
 * Jemimus 06:31, 17 Jul 2005 (EDT)


 * I think they should go under Lore, too, but I know from my own perspective I was interested in locating and reading the in-game books, in particular, outside of the game. (Also nice to note where books are located, so you could, if you wanted, do a "I'm going to find all the in-game books" quest.) So I think it would help to have a list of the in-game books. Easiest way to do that is with a Category... [ Laisren 06:50, 17 Jul 2005 (EDT) ]

Something else to consider, that I hadn't thought of: "In game accounts are the books, and the anecdotes told by NPCs. They are from the perspective of the characters, none of whom has all the facts, and is in some way biased.

The Lore, however is told to us from the perspective of the omniscient (about Azeroth at least *grins) authors of the setting. " (this is from the Forums, in reacation to an anecdote about an NPC troll telling the story of how Night Elves are descended from trolls; some would claim this is just the "troll's history", not the "history of Azeroth"...)[ Laisren 15:22, 17 Jul 2005 (EDT) ]

character-article Template (July 21, 2005)
What does the template (template:character-article) do? - Fandyllic 1:51 PM PDT 21 July 2005


 * Fandyllic- It adds a "[ Character ]" article type tag to the top of the page, and adds the category "Characters" automatically to the article. Please see Wowpedia:Article Type for the full explination. As an example, see Laisren 20:08, 21 Jul 2005 (EDT)


 * Thanks for the info... I understand how it works now... I thought it wasn't adding the article to the Characters category, so I was suspicious of it's use. I'll have to use these templates more often.
 * -- Fandyllic 2:35 PM PDT 28 July 2005

Article Types (August 1, 2005)
First: I thought I asked this question a little bit ago, but I can't remember where, so I apologize if you're answering it again.

Anyway, I was wondering about what the purpose is of these Article Types that you've been putting at the top of many pages. I went to Article Type and read all about it, but I still don't see how it's any different from the built-in Categories feature. It seems like it's just a lot of work to duplicate something that's already in place.

The only positive thing I can see is that the Article Type "tags" are at the top of the page - I wonder if the Categories box could be moved to the top of each page...

Don't get me wrong though - I'm not trying to knock it, and I'm definitely willing to learn more.
 * --FeldmanSkitzoid 02:05, 1 Aug 2005 (EDT)


 * In a nutshell, an Article Type idendifies what an article is about (provides a context); Categories do not. Keep in mind that we have a lot of different kinds of articles on Wowpedia. For example, what do you think a new visitor here would think the article API_UnitXPMax is about (if they weren't already familiar with the context)?


 * Consider the following example:


 * Article Name: Dolanaar
 * Article Type (what is "Dolanaar"?): Location
 * Possible Categories (what information does this article share with other articles?): World:Azeroth, Continent:Kalimdor , Night Elves , Zone:Teldrassil , Alliance Town , Town , Alliance , Professions , Quests , etc. , etc.

-- Laisren 08:03, 2 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Vandal List a Good Idea (August 5, 2005)
Good idea putting a vandal list on the Community Portal!
 * -- Fandyllic 4:15 PM PDT 5 August 2005

AllInOneInventory IS in standard cosmos distribution

--Zespri 18:13, 29 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Patch 1.5 article (Sept 30, 2005)
Nice work on Patch 1.5 (Release Notes). I don't think I would have spent that much time on it. Schmidt talk 22:03, 30 Sep 2005 (EDT)


 * Thanks. I get obsessive like that sometimes. Which is why I'm here I guess. ;-) -Laisren; 20 October 2005

Druid Spell pages (October 7, 2005)
I noticed you made a few layout changes to the Wrath page a while back. They look pretty good... except that Balance, Nature has been turned into a single link.

Due to some quirks in the Druid talents, these types need to be identified separately. For example, Moonkin Form can cast Wrath (Balance, Nature), but not Healing Touch (Restoration, Nature). Nature's Swiftness can be used to cast Wrath (Balance, Nature) as an instant, but not Starfire (Balance, Arcane).

I will probably apply the new page layout to the other Druid spell pages as I change over their talent tables.
 * --Powerlord 20:44, 7 Oct 2005 (EDT)


 * No worries, friend. You do what you need to do; we're all here to help each other fix stuff up (as you know) :-)
 * Regards, - Laisren 16:27, 20 Oct 2005 (EDT)

?
Diff - Please explain. -- &#8465;ilver&#167;&#8465;ide|undefined 22:18, 10 Dec 2005 (EST)


 * Why should I bother to explain to you, since you explained none of your bizarre actions to the current established user community?
 * I've seen your type before, and you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
 * [Quoted for Truth: Your "contributions"] (always without a Change Summary; started 25 Aug 2005 with a request for Adminship.) - Laisren 03:41, 12 Dec 2005 (EST)


 * Ha always without a change summary my rear end - since Fandyllic asked me to use the summary, I have done so almost every time... look at the last couple hundred changes.
 * Funny that you only just started adding them 'in the last couple hundred changes' when you claim to have
 * all of this Wiki experience. If you do have 3 wiki's that you're running (or whatever), and you've done all this great work
 * that you claim on Wikipedia, you'd know how to make changes that people could follow. Unless you were deliberately
 * trying to make changes that people could not follow and understand....


 * Whatever. I'll leave you to your conspiracy theories, after one more question - how old are for? --  &#8465;ilver&#167;&#8465;ide|undefined 06:10, 12 Dec 2005 (EST)


 * The thing about conspiracy theories is that sometimes they're true ;-) My suspicions are based on actual experience from other wikis and forums. Some people are malicious and have too much free time. Other people are just obsessive-compulsive. Hopefully, you turn out to be neither of these. - Laisren 14:36, 14 Dec 2005 (EST)

- - - -

''[ CrazyJack 12 Dec 2005 ] You really need to stop. whatever your personal issue with SilverSide is.''
 * [Laisren] CJ - I don't know who you are (and I don't think you know who I am), but don't make it sound like I've got some personal vendetta. All I have done is made a few changes (meaning 2 or 3) to draw attention to the changes made by SilverSide and (what appear to be) his aliases/sock-puppets . Compare this to the hundreds of changes put in by SilverSide. Actions speak louder than words.

[CJ]"...If you disagree with a change ask him about it, dont go about cleaning it up in the way "you" think it should look without a proper voting or discussion "
 * Tell that to Silver Side!
 * I know perfectly well how Wiki's work, and reverting confusing changes that have not been explained is an acceptable practice (provided it doesn't turn into a revert war, which it hasn't ). (The thing that really annoys me is that SilverSide is giving the impression of wanting teams, voting, and discussion, but made major site-wide changes without doing any of these things.)

''while labelling it as vandalism. That simply doesnt work here. If you feel the situation is out of control, take it up to an admin and ask them to deal with it while also explaining your "own" actions. (I did. -Laisren) I'm not defending him, (Sure sounds like it. -Laisren) but i dont see anything wrong with his actions either. Ask yourself who the real vandal is then? CJ 09:17, 12 Dec 2005 (EST) ''
 * If any of the people I've worked with on this Wiki had asked for an explination of my Vandalism lablelling, I would have been happy to provide it. But since I didn't have the same amount of freetime that SS had, I just put the label as a warning to current wiki users; if the consensus turns out to be "maybe slightly misguided, but not a vandal" that's fine by me. (For example, I trust Fandyllic's judgement on the matter.) Don't forget however, when reviewing these comments, that there is a chronology, and perhaps things are clearer now that they were during the week of Dec. 1 to Dec. 6. - Laisren 14:36, 14 Dec 2005 (EST)

- - - -

[ SilverSide ] Thanks, CJ; laisren, just calm down and take a look at my recent contributions list. The last 500 or so have edit summaries, I comment on the talk page of an article when i make a change more than 25% of the time (and 25% of the time I don't is probably on my own namespace or on a page I started) -- &#8465;ilver&#167;&#8465;ide|undefined 11:54, 12 Dec 2005 (EST)

[ Laisren ] SS - I am calm. Let's not confuse the issue by using your recent edits as evidence of anything, since these came after I called you out. (I'm talking about the vast majority of changes made Dec. 1 thought Dec. 6).

But '''I've had my say. I really hope you're not here to disrupt and take over this Wiki. I honestly do.'''

Only time will tell if your activities will make this site more (or less) useful to people who play the World of Warcraft game (which, I might remind you, is what this Wiki is actually about; not committees, policies, and stubs). I've done my bit by voicing my concerns. Hopefully, the rest of the users here might be watching what you are doing a little more closely now. If you are honestly trying to improve this Wiki, then you might want to stop and think why your edits looked suspicious, and what you might want to do differently in the future. (Showing up and acting like you own the place is not necessarily a way to build a collaborative environment.) Just something to think about.

Having said that, I hope that after some time has passed and things work out well that I can issue you an apology for being overly suspicious. (Jury is still out.) - Laisren 14:36, 14 Dec 2005 (EST)

~ Thought for the day: Trust and respect are earned, not mandated. ~

- - - -


 * "He's either an Internet Troll, or on a wierd Wiki ego trip. Either way, he's dangerous."  Well, since that post you seem to have changed your opnion and be willing to at least consider that I am out for the best of the wiki (-:
 * My work here is done - I am off to fix more stuff! -- &#8465;ilver&#167;&#8465;ide|undefined 16:41, 14 Dec 2005 (EST)
 * P.S. "Let's not confuse the issue by using your recent edits as evidence of anything, since these came after I called you out. " - wrong. It began after Fandyllic asked me (nicely) to provide edit summaries - after that point I did so almost every edit that is not on a talk page or my own space (User:Silverside/Something). -- &#8465;ilver&#167;&#8465;ide|undefined 16:41, 14 Dec 2005 (EST)
 * Also, ((Dang it I just keep finding stuff to PS on lol)) I don't know what aliases you are talking about - I have a single account here, and any admin can verify that Silver is the only account I have ever logged into from my IPs. If you are talking about fandyllic, well just because he is friendly to me dosen't mean he *is* me...


 * Laisren, I understand exactly how you feel. I don't know the extent, perhaps, but I know the feeling. I can't say you should feel any other way. Maybe I'm a sellout, but I have known for a while that where there is less organization there is less discipline and there'll wind up being articles all over the place covering the same thing, and two articles that could easily blended, such as for Goblin Jumper Cables and Goblin Jumper Cables XL. The only difference there is that one has a better hit chance; the end product is the same, basically. I made the necessary change some time ago. I also made navtemplates for herbs, metals, and so on. I also tried to get a policy organized myself to avoid future confusion.
 * Something tells me that SilverSide wants to make just such changes. I think as you said yourself, maybe a little misguided, and maybe a little too ambitious for his own good, but in the end, it's a good change. Maybe a little too fast for some of us fogeys (me included, you realize). But I've come around (or sold out), and joined a team. Now I feel a little more useful and authoritative, like I can actually do something when it needs to be done. Sure, this "authority" is given by someone who just started out, but where there's a power void, someone has to fill it, and none of us were willing to fill it. I'm sure I have a few more words, but I can't put them down right now. Schmidt 15:37, 14 Dec 2005 (EST)


 * In response to Schmidt (even though the comment was not directed at me), thanks for heading up the team. The power was not assigned by someone who was new, the power was already there.  It was undiscovered... Organizing the power that is inherent in lots of people editing for a common purpose is something that just seemed obvious to me.  The power you were given was invested in you by the members that chose to join your team - nothing else.  In the same way, I had no 'power' until people rallied behind me and started joining the teams.  Having know 'internet trolls' as you call them, I know that giving up any power they do get is very unlikely... the fact that I merely started the teams and gave them over to other helpful and active member should alleviate your suspicions somewhat (that was to laisren by the way). --  &#8465;ilver&#167;&#8465;ide|undefined 16:49, 14 Dec 2005 (EST)