User talk:Cronocke

A question for the admins.

If you could kindly point to me where in the rules it is stated that one should not edit someone else's work for any reason without their express approval, and all such edits will be reverted, I would really appreciate it. Because the only such policy I can find is on the very editing page itself, and it states, verbatim,

“

Please note that all contributions to D&D Wiki are considered to be released under the GNU Free Documentation License 1.2 (see Project:Copyrights for details). If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here.

”

Show me where this is contradicted, and I will happily apologize for my edits, and remove my offending "fix" class. I will also develop and post my campaign setting here instead of on a private blog, for that matter, knowing that it can never be edited without my specific say-so. -- Cronocke 03:26, 3 January 2008 (MST)

There are no such rules that prevent editing, although you can specifically ask that a page you make is left alone, in which case the wiki community is obliged to leave the page. If you are worried about you CS being edited, you can leave a message on the page, asking for the page to be left alone, and the page can be protected from edits. --Sam Kay 04:11, 3 January 2008 (MST)

Generally it is more a thing of politeness than of strict rules. On a wiki, yes, you can change things. The big thing is that people put a lot of hard work into their creative works and don't want their idea changed. I'd say it isn't a rule that you can't edit other people's pages, but it is a courtesy (consider it like a local custom here). Though this really isn't the place to discuss it, you do raise a really valid point. I think we should have some sort of designator that a page is not to be freely edited without discussion. I would add it to the Template:Author. It would look something like:

Created By

Aarnott (talk)
Editing:	Ask me first please!
Status:	In Progress...

If you think this would be a good idea, we should post in the appropriate place (I think the main Homebrew talk page would be good). --Aarnott 08:16, 3 January 2008 (MST)

I agree... Usually I ask about editing via the discussion page, but adding an editing line to the author template makes sense.--Gruegirl 11:57, 3 January 2008 (MST)

However, my issue is not with the courtesy of asking permission before changing a page. I am willing - no, happy - to ask. My issue is that the rules of the site allow changes to be made freely, and if the creator doesn't like her work being changed, she can revert changes herself, or ask for a page to be locked for her own use. For an admin to step in over a change that was made with the approval of the page's creator, or an admin, or even to correct simple mechanical errors, is against the rules as I am aware of them. There are undo links in a page's history for a reason, I assume. I don't wish to start a fight, I merely ask that the rules set in place be properly upheld, changed, or made clearer, depending on the case. -- Cronocke 06:25, 5 January 2008 (MST)

First off I would like to direct readers attention to Talk:3.5e Homebrew/Archive 2#New Addition to Template:Author as that discussion relates to this discussion. Secondly, Cronocke, you are completely right, no written rules exist about editing other peoples work and, at face value it looks appealing, helpful, and completely okay as it can be easily reverted and no harm can be done. However, the reason I feel that etiquette about editing should be present is because D&D Wiki is not an encyclopedia. We are not relaying facts back to people, we are doing something else entirely. We are providing a place for people to post their creations. Now, I am not a psychologist or anything, but I think it annoys people, even slightly, when someone changes their creations without talking to them about it first. It makes them feel that their creation was not good enough and it makes them feel a bit of anger towards the editor. A good example of this has been the recent edits on Catgirl (3.5e Race) (and it's talk page) when Gruegirl took the liberty and edited the page without prior consultation (which, in her defense, would have been okay if the editor had left D&D Wiki or had given up their creation to the public, which may have seemed the case with Pz.Az.04Maus, but was not). Anyway, this slight anger that results from editing a authors page is why I am against people editing pages at will. I don't want this site to become a place where people get angry by just browsing through it, I want this to be a site where the merits of creations are discussed in a level-headed environment—the way it currently is. So, that is why I think prior consultation should be received before editing a creation.

However, prior consultation is not always needed. Many instances exist where editing without permission is needed an encouraged. All stub pages should be edited without asking. Formatting changes should not be asked about. If the author of something is no longer present on D&D Wiki their creation can be edited, however the changes should be discussed on the talk page in case they return (watch out on this one—some users may look like they are not present but they are, Pz.Az.04Maus, Findail, etc, are examples of this). I am sure there are a couple other good instances when one does not need to ask about editing, but I cannot think of them right now...

So, for the reason of making everyone happier, content edits should be discussed before implemented, even though this is a wiki and that is not needed or standard. --Green Dragon 00:01, 6 January 2008 (MST)

Nodachi

I posted a comment on the Nodachi (your creation) that I think you should read and seriously consider. --Nox_Noctis

I posted a response, and changed the weapon by making it exotic and cost more than some magic weapons. If that's not good enough, I don't know how to please you. -- Cronocke 17:41, 26 August 2008 (MDT)