User talk:Green Dragon/Archive 17

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Its contents should be preserved in their current form. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 17 |

Confusing Edit

On Snake (4e Creature) you recently added Template:Wikify with the following explanation (and I quote): The ":" should not be in the Encounter Groups (see preload or Books for reference). Instead an extra line should be added. Also either a breadcrumb should be added or the current "Back To" footer condensed ("by Level" etc). I am not entirely sure what you're trying to say here. There is no colon anywhere in the Encounter Groups section, nor could I find anything else in that section that seemed off, much less something that warranted the template. The second part is also poorly worded, and all I pulled out of it is that you want me to change the Back To footers in some manner. Please clarify what you want changed, as I really am at a loss O.o --Dracomortis 18:44, 9 September 2009 (MDT)

I edited the page. If you look at my last edit does that clear up any confusion? --Green Dragon 00:56, 10 September 2009 (MDT)
Oh, I see what happened. You mentioned the Encounter Groups section, but you actually meant the Lore sections. I feel I should point out, however, that the colons are part of the preload and not something that I specifically added. Might be worth removing them from the preload if it is preferred that they not be added. Also, on the issue of the Back To footer, did you mean that instead of this:
Back to Main PageHomebrewCreaturesUser Creatures by LevelLevel 3 Creatures.
It should be condensed to this:
Back to Main PageHomebrewCreaturesUser Creatures by Level
If so, that's another minor error you might want to look into, as the preload includes the former example and not the latter. Thanks for the clarification. -- Dracomortis 12:46, 10 September 2009 (MDT)
Oh, your right. I meant the lore section instead, sorry. I must have not been thinking at the time. Although the colons have been removed from the preload for quite some while now ([1]). If you store a old copy of the preload on your computer you may want to update it (of course not using the old table and switching to the template (which needs to be updated on the preload sometime). And for the breadcrumb I would just use Template:4e Creatures Level 7 Breadcrumb, etc. --Green Dragon 14:00, 10 September 2009 (MDT)
Ah, that would be the problem then — I've had my copy of the preload saved for several months now. I've added a breadcrumb for each CR on the page (something I normally do but must have forgotten on that page). Thanks again for taking the time to clarify what needed to be changed. --Dracomortis 22:17, 13 September 2009 (MDT)
Ya, I know what you mean. I would imagine another main reason is because the template for the creatures is not added as well. --Green Dragon 12:33, 15 September 2009 (MDT)

Userpage Gallery Clean Up

Noticed you hadn't gotten around to organizing the gallery on your user page. I will probably arrange them for you soon if you don't find the time. As a professional artist myself, a clean gallery is a must. Oh, and your talk page is super long and has a million MOI's on it. Time to clean your room GD. Hehe. --Jay Freedman 17:50, 15 September 2009 (MDT)(The OCD guy.)

Ya, I know. I always clean my userpage with time (see all the archives). Also, I find that the current layout of the pictures has a nice artistic touch; I find the placement to not only invoke thought and wonder but also stretch the images. Although, to be honest, they are slowly getting old on my userpage and I may remove them soon. --Green Dragon 10:48, 16 September 2009 (MDT)
Sounds good. You da' boss. --Jay Freedman 17:04, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
It's my userpage... You are in charge of your userpage. --Green Dragon 20:22, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

Recent Tavern Changes

Hey, what happened to the tavern? It simply is not working, and the search doesn't seem to be working the same either. Changes? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dumai (talkcontribs) 17:52, 17 September 2009 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

I need to get a bit more RAM to be able to get the Tavern back up and running with the servers. Most likely I will spend some of the google ads money on buying some more RAM. --Green Dragon 20:53, 17 September 2009 (MDT)
What kind of funds need to be raised? Perhaps a fundraiser like years ago?   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   20:54, 17 September 2009 (MDT)
I was planning on using some google ads money for RAM but if people think that a little fundraiser should be organized as well I am more then willing. --Green Dragon 20:57, 17 September 2009 (MDT)
I'm sure every bit could help. $5 and $10 here and there can't hurt at least.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   20:59, 17 September 2009 (MDT)
Maybe we could have a vote and see if more users like the tavern or not. Thoughts? --Green Dragon 20:22, 19 September 2009 (MDT)
It could be a good idea. I like the idea of a wiki chat, but in practice it was nothing more than a distraction from the actual wiki. Voting would be good, especially if removing the tavern could assist in site performance.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   20:29, 19 September 2009 (MDT)
It is my solemn opinion that the Tavern Chat system should be repaired and remain. My love for it is unconditional, despite the fact that it tends to be immature in many ways and attract the least virtuous of viewers it was a place I could always count on to give me some source of entertainment or conversation, however minimal. One of the greatest delights I had when I used to frequent this site, as I am beginning to do again presently, was popping onto the Tavern in the middle of looking through articles and thinking about what would be useful in a future campaign. I would always find a witty conversationalist or a helpful tinkerer out and about amidst all of the chaos, and it helped to know I was not alone. The Tavern, in my opinion, is a reinforcement of the comradeship of this Wiki, and can be utilized to go there for quick instant messaging communication instead of relatively sluggish editing of each others pages. My piece has been said for now, and my vote is for keeping the Tavern. --Harry Mason 15:22, 25 September 2009 (MDT)
Taking the above, and giving it thought, The Tavern can be a great tool. Especially if the former abrasive temperaments are no longer present, it can be a really great way to bring in new wiki users. Combing through the old logs shows that many potential users were ran off because of the attitude within it. But as Harry shows above, even with that it did great things. Perhaps we should place this discussion on "hold" until the tavern is ready to come back online, and then hold it in a better place so all can discuss ways to make the tavern better and more manageable?   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   15:30, 25 September 2009 (MDT)
Bullocks. The crowd that used the tavern (with a few notable exceptions) constantly strayed off-topic, and it came out as bunch of sentence fragments that tried to be witty and failed miserably. Especially TK's "Your mama" jokes, for instance.... I go on there looking for feedback on my work, and everybody would rather take cheap shots than actually offer constructive advice. Although I hate to say it, but for all his snide attitude, Surgo did point me toward Frank Trollman's material... --Mythos 02:56, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
Well do you guys think it helped more or hurt more? All we need to do is vote... It is all opinion; nothing to discuss. --Green Dragon 13:27, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
It has been discontinued. See also Discussion:The Tavern: use, expansion, and availability.. --Green Dragon 04:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Recent Activity Lessening?

Do we even have anybody left who still posts here? Besides us three, that is... --Mythos 10:59, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

Yes, the site has been just as active lately as ever, only the 'tavern crowd' is gone. The site is improving on a daily basis and will continue to do so. In the last 30 days alone there have been over 42 active users (plus plenty of IP edits), so yes, yes we are very active considering.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   11:05, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
Thank God. I hated having to go in there to ask for feedback and getting sarcastic commentary. Maybe it's funny to the younger users, but to an old-timer like myself it seemed pretty juvenile and pointless. -- Mythos 13:09, 19 September 2009 (MDT)
Same here. I put up with it for years but recently started treating them the same way they treat others and they literally can not handle it. They freak out. Really pathetic actually. I hope this helps others learn how to be properly collaborative in the future.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   15:44, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

Media's Mediawiki

In going through the media side of the site, I've noticed many users have basically used it as a personal storage unit. It is filled with images that are not used in any articles whatsoever (though unlike wikipedia our images don't always say what pages link to them, odd...). I was wondering if a purging of the mediawiki would help improve the server performance?   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   14:52, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

I concur. Many of the images I uploaded, (as awesome as the are), are no longer linked to an article. It certainly sounds like a good idea. --Jay Freedman 16:58, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
No. --Green Dragon 20:20, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

Possible Ban Circumvention

I think Ghostwheel has already paid enough and his ban is over in two day, amybe we could unblock him so he can actually tell his version of the facts? I don't want to do it myself in case you disagreed, it why I ask. --Dhazriel 18:42, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

I strongly disagree with this. Firstly, there is no side of any story, as it was just a personal subpage note. Secondly, he showed his lack of respect to honor the ban when he broke policy and posted using his IP. If anything, his ban should be prolonged for that reason alone.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   18:47, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
You're both mistaken. With Check User Ghostwheel has not been posting. Or which IP do you mean? --Green Dragon 18:53, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
He admitted to it on Surgo's page on the other wiki as well as on another user's page there. I would link, but don't want to spam, as I feel as though that may be.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   18:56, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
All I would need is the IP... It's called "Chck User" (please use google at this moment if you are not positive as to what I am talking about). --Green Dragon 20:19, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

Green Dragon and I

This may seem redundant to you (GD) and I, but I thought it would be good to note that we are not the same individual, do not always agree (nor even agree a lot of the times), nor do we even know each other offline. Before the rumors get started, even though some already have.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   18:56, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

I don't know you... --Green Dragon 22:42, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

Removing Template:Author

Would you please refrain from removing author templates from (my) articles? Whether or not they've priorly been marked for deletion, they should remain associated with their respective principal authors, as per article 4B of D&D Wiki:Copyrights. Thank you. --Sulacu 00:01, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

History as well... As explained over and over again. --Green Dragon 20:17, 19 September 2009 (MDT)
And I am asking you over and over again to refrain from removing the author templates. Being the person identified in the history of these particular pages as the first editor makes this request more than reasonable. --Sulacu 08:04, 20 September 2009 (MDT)
It seems you decided to respond to my aforementioned reasonable request by making this and several other similar edits to my pages, in which you removed yet more author boxes and more references to my personal user category from my pages. What, are you just going to ignore me and merrily continue this scandalous behaviour instead without the courtesy of a direct response? I don't remotely care how much 'cleaner' you think the history is, I will not stand for seeing my work vandalized. Not even by site admins! Am I finally getting through to you?
If you want to erase all evidence of my existence from this wiki for what happened back in August, then fine. Delete all my stuff. All of it. And I'll be happy to stay gone. If you're unwilling to do that, then don't touch it. I expected such sensible and gentlemanly conduct to go without saying, but apparently the word ethics does not mean a thing to you. This is the last time I will ask you this in a civil manner. --Sulacu 12:57, 26 September 2009 (MDT)
Usercontributions. Like how one looks at my contributions to some articles. History. This is to see who has done what to which article. One more non-logical response and I will issue a ban to you. --Green Dragon 13:41, 26 September 2009 (MDT)
"Usercontributions. Like how one looks at my contributions to some articles. History. This is to see who has done what to which article."
... What are these sentence fragments even supposed to mean? The only responses I see that are incoherent and devoid of any logic are yours. Are you just being deliberately vague so you'd have a solid excuse to ban me when I respond? That's not to say that I ever saw anyone getting anything close to a ban for 'non-logic' back when I signed onto this wiki in May 2007. I never saw anyone getting their author box deleted from their articles back then either. Even omitting the fact that the author boxes disappear from my articles, what possible justification could you have for deleting my personal user-based category ([[Category:User Sulacu]]) from the article pages as well? That's like taking pages out of my user page's dpl lists. Isn't that like undermining the system of my pages on your wiki, as well as a form of 'orphaning pages' or whatever it is called (hence, 'vandalism', if you're too logic-deficient to see where I'm going)?
Seriously, I've had more than enough of your stupid antics, and your pigheaded falling back upon your new favorite word, 'non-logic', which you seem to invoke primarily when people say something you don't like. As a faithful and dedicated contributor to your wiki for over two whole years, and the creator of over three hundred standing pages of homebrew articles currently displayed on the site, please honor my final request to leave those pages be, and stop being such a freaking bludger. A little admission on your side will make this whole affair a lot less smelly, and both our lives a lot easier. --Sulacu 14:27, 26 September 2009 (MDT)
Banned. One needs to be understand civility and understand who is who on D&D Wiki. Stop just pestering people and making problems where none exist. --Green Dragon 13:25, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
Out of curiosity, why was Sulacu banned? She was obviously upset that her name was being removed from the things that she had created, so it's not like she did anything wrong. I mean, I know I've not been here a long time, but Sulacu seems to have posted a high amount of quality homebrew, so shouldn't she be entitled to have her name on what she's made? I guess it may just be thinking aloud though. But really, consider if someone should be banned for voicing objections to losing the right to the things they made. I think a good example is if say someone took the Dandwiki from you Green, and removed every trace of you from it. Wouldn't you be upset and slightly protest against it? Obviously I'm not saying that that should happen, but I feel that it is a good example. Please reconsider this flurry of author removals, people merely just want to keep their name on what they've devoted time and effort into. --Dersius 16:11, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
Although I won't comment on the ban, as far as comparing having a wiki that GD pays to maintain and content that a user freely posts online, it isn't really a good example.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   18:03, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
For the last time or your getting banned too; it's history and usercontributions. --Green Dragon 20:57, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
What? Is this really what it's come to? I've never talked to you before and you are threatening to ban me for attempting to give my opinion and suggestions on something? Isn't this supposed to be a community-run site? --Dersius 20:12, 28 September 2009.
I have never said anything to anyone from wikia in my life. You don't know me — don't say that. --Green Dragon 21:17, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
He said that Hooper was instigating things at wikia.. Geez, if this is the way the administration of this site is I'm not going to put my homebrew on here, I'm going to make sure the people I know don't ruin their work by having it stolen by this wiki. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 10:24, 29 September 2009 (UTC). Please sign your posts.
As I haven't even visited the other in seemingly forever, and you guys are here still causing problems - well, you get the picture. Are you done calling people who don't know each other "butt buddys" while also calling them the trolls (??? - Irony?) so that we can get back to work? You state "If you leave us alone, we'll leave you alone." yet here you are, when no one is messing with you. Either contribute or stop starting problems. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   06:34, 29 September 2009 (MDT)

←Reverted indentation to one colon

I don't have any take on Sulacu or any other user on this site, really. I only came in and started editing recently, after all, myself. I have been thinking on this for a while, though. Why exactly is author information being taken off of pages? Watch and History are reasonably insufficient in accrediting the idea of a creature or idea to authors, even if not so terribly important. Since it's homebrew, anyways, I am sure it's not so bad to afford someone that little bit of pride in seeing their name in the author template of their articles. Also, which articles are subject to this? So far, I've only ever seen creatures having their templates removed, which I don't quite understand. Jwguy 01:42, 6 November 2009 (MST)
I never said anyone was doing anything on Wikia. I could care less about Wikia — people going to a different site is not a war in my mind. D&D Wiki (about now) averages 8,000 unique visitors a day — I don't care about you. A war is a war in my mind. Think about logically — why would I care? As long as you guys do not transfer any content from D&D Wiki to Wikia (all the content here is under the GNU FDL v1.2 - putting it under the CC is a violation of the law and liable to be sued) or doing anything related (please see the GNU FDL - I, as the owner of D&D Wiki have the rights, additionally I, as the owner, can invoke aspects of the GNU FDL v1.2 as I wish too).
And why is the author template being removed? It hinders reading, and hinders a wiki-structure (editing for improvement not just saying "mine mine mine", etc.) Most people, before editing, do check history and before use many do too (seeing something from an IP is less likely as something, say, which comes from an established user). It just hurts the wiki - removing it helps the overall structure. --Green Dragon 13:19, 6 November 2009 (MST)
I personally feel as though the author template adds a bit of authenticity to articles of homebrew. Sure, while in some cases, items simply are corrupted or bettered by the many anonymous edits that are to be expected on the internet, but in other cases, it's a nice gesture of pride to find an idea or page that you're proud of, and have your name sitting at the top. All as well, while I may not agree, It's not important, and I suppose I can understand that as a sufficient reason. Thank you for answering. Jwguy 19:50, 6 November 2009 (MST)
(Haha, Jwguy is editing in above me.) Hopefully the author box will be completely removed from all articles and preloads. This is a Wiki. No article submitted to the site is considered static and unchanging. Should you wish to keep your pet projects to yourself, do not submit them here. Under every edit box are the words "If you don't want your writing to edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here." You have been warned and forewarned. Author boxes are a privilege, not a right. Again, hopefully they will be universally removed. --Jay Freedman 15:54, 6 November 2009 (MST)
Okay, I agree that's it a kind of a gesture of pride to see ones username on a page... But it's also a wiki. However another reason for the removed I see is that it creates editing problems. For example sometimes when I am playing I print something out, correct it, however do not change it since I do not want to have to talk to that author about it. If I was not the owner (rather a standard user or IP) I imagine I would feel more inclined and accepted to change it freely. I feel it creates more freedom for the perfection of content. However I see both sides. Currently I removed them from 4e deities, 4e races, and the preload for 4e creatures (and a few their). Personally I would like to wait a matter of months and see how those sections respond. Already I have seen positive improvements from the 4e deities section by IP's - which is a good sign - however it is still to early to say. --Green Dragon 20:39, 6 November 2009 (MST)
Sorry, it was my understanding from most of the wikis that I've been that the colon indentation is used to identify who is replying to whom, as well as keep track of subject. I read your post, Jay, but simply had nothing to say about it, so I went ahead and continued to reply towards Green Dragon's last post, which is the reason for the way I posted. I had assumed this was normal.
That said, I don't mind, either way. I appreciate you taking the time to appease my curiousity on this matter, however, Green dragon. As said, I like the idea of the authenticity and author templates, but they don't matter so much as to fight over them, to me. If it comes down to it, I'll go around taking them down, myself; I just wanted to get the reasoning for it before I conjectured any of my own, which you've provided, certainly. I can realize what problems you see for it, and they are well based and reasonable for it's exclusion, so really it's just my opinion that differs. Functionality is more important when it comes to this kind of site, I believe, and pride, while a encouraging thing as well, is subservient to that. Jwguy 21:49, 6 November 2009 (MST)
@ Jwguy. No problem bro. I figured you had a good reason anyway. Thanks for being so vocal about your opinions. Your not the only one who feels the way you do. Keep up the good work. Peace! --Jay Freedman 22:33, 6 November 2009 (MST)

Why Did You Delete the Bloodline I Posted?

I'd like to know why you deleted the optional Bloodline (Brachyurus) I developed and posted.

The only comment I see, and its only a single line in the deletion log, is "This is not OGL".

I would appreciate some explanation. At the very least, the minimum courtesy of informing me. To top it off, you also deleted the Discussion topic I started in which I asked for any feedback.

If you don't want new people posting anything, just say so. --reddir 21:29, 21 September 2009 (MDT).

It is from the Epic Level Handbook, right? --Green Dragon 23:00, 21 September 2009 (MDT)
It is also, according to your SRD:Brachyurus, in the SRD? And the Bloodline was entirely my own construction; I am not aware of anything similar that has been published. None of which explains why you would delete the Discussion where I ask for feedback - a perfect place, I would think, to have this discussion. --reddir 23:58, 21 September 2009 (MDT)
That's ones not from the Epic Level Handbook... That's SRD (probably MM or who knows). If the bloodlines was your own creation DO NOT put "this is from the Epic Level Handbook" on the bottom of the page. Also Discussions are for questions (not like a forum...). If you want something reviewed, like always, post it on the talk page. Not there. --Green Dragon 16:19, 22 September 2009 (MDT)
You are saying that you really thought I copied the bloodline from the Epic Level Handbook? Have you seen the UA style Bloodlines anywhere but in UA? And does that mean you did not even bother reading what I had written on the Talk page before you deleted it all?
Anyway, are you saying you would be fine with me posting the Brachyurus Bloodline I designed if I make it clear that I was the one who put it together?
re: Discussions, ok, I hadn't realized it was not a forum. Still, I would have appreciated some information somewhere about why you deleted my work. --reddir 16:48, 22 September 2009 (MDT)
This is what I saw:
==== Brachyurus ====
<!-- description of the bloodline and its origins. tell what sort of creatures this bloodline can be derived from and how it might have occurred (descension of celestials to live with mortals, etc.) -->[[SRD:Brachyurus|Brachyurus]] is the Platonic wolf/canine from the Epic Level Handbook.
{| class="{{d20}}" style="text-align: left;"
|+ {{#anc:Brachyurus Bloodline Traits}}
(from a deleted revisions preview). Or is that part just superficial? --Green Dragon 23:02, 23 September 2009 (MDT)
Should I assume you noticed the "SRD:Brachyurus|Brachyurus" portion of what you quoted? --reddir 23:11, 23 September 2009 (MDT)
That's called a piped link... Not sure if you have ever heard of formatting or not. --Green Dragon 23:33, 23 September 2009 (MDT)
It seems clear that you are taking the issues behind this discussion much less seriously than I am. Therefore I will stop wasting my time with you. --reddir 23:52, 23 September 2009 (MDT)
That is a PIPED link. Without the piped link it looks like: "Brachyurus is the Platonic wolf/canine from the Epic Level Handbook."... let's see... can that be here? --Green Dragon 13:23, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
I should have read what you were saying more carefully. I am sorry for this misunderstanding, it was my fault. It has now been restored. --Green Dragon 19:54, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Prestige Classes Rating

My Void Knight prestige class now has 2 ratings (3 if my own counts), and I was just wondering how/when exactly the unrated classes were relisted as rated. Desril 15:09, 30 September 2009 (MDT)

Really it is just a matter of doing the switch. You can alter that yourself.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   18:46, 27 September 2009 (MDT)
Once all the ratings have been added one can. Although one cannot just create rating; Hooper should have said that one can correct the ratings from the talk page onto the articles page. --Green Dragon 19:41, 27 September 2009 (MDT)
Yes, after reading my post I should clarify that once rated you can add that information to the class page with the proper rating it was given shown.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   07:14, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
Also, if you want to help rate things, please feel free. --Green Dragon 13:21, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

Tome of Fiends Spheres

The sphere pages connected to the Tome of Fiends, namely the Bone, Venom, Carnage and Bubbles, I believe, that you have already reverted, are not, to my knowledge thus far, User items, and are in the sourcebook. Adding the User Category, on that level, is not necessary, nor correct, and it also interferes with the function on the page for the Spheres listing, which has been separated so that User-made Spheres and Official Spheres from the Sourcebook can be better recognized.

If you feel that you are undeniably correct in maintaining that the Spheres you are moving are User made and that perhaps I have been mistaken, please state so and proceed, but if not, and I believe they are not, they should be as they were before the reverting. Jwguy 23:17, 27 September 2009 (MDT)

Tome Material is not official material from established publisers or OGL — it is just homebrew Frank & K stuff. Thus, it is User content. It is hard to define something as "official" when it is all entirely user homebrew — even if that user homebrew is well established.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   07:13, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
Well could we use that Tome article as the rule source? --Green Dragon 13:21, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
This is, admittedly, true, given the nature of the Tome of Fiends, itself. Even in that case, however, the Tome of Fiends has no user category, and as a sourcebook, I use 'official' to simply designate those spheres which were created along with the sourcebook. I feel it would be best to separate the Homebrew'd spheres, in respect to the Tome, from those included by the authors, if only to maintain that the standard provided by the author shouldn't be confused with the likely standards of added-in spheres.
That all said and done, I could simply use another category, which I don't have much of a problem with; I'm rather delightfully partial to the Tome of Fiends, myself, and the Spheres even more. I just want to get it looking nice and neat, and without as much clutter and fully distinguishing their authors. So, that said, what is going to be used for the categories? Jwguy 21:10, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
Category:User is present since it "fits" into the homebrew area. No matter how you look at it this is the case, see also 3.5e Open Game Content. --Green Dragon 20:02, 21 June 2010 (UTC)


I saw you had did some alterations to the navigation. I was wondering if a link to the WikiRPS site would help get some more activity over there? Or if you're even still interested in that. Just curious as to the goals/future of that project.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   10:36, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

They have their own wiki since a while now; WikiRPS (although using the same things, etc). I don't understand what your question is (see also 3.5e Rules). --Green Dragon 13:18, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
Yes, I know they do. I guess my question is: "Do you think it would be beneficial to include a link to that wiki on our navigation here, perhaps near where we link to the media repository?"   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   13:48, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
We do. It's linked to from 3.5e Rules; as discussed and implemented since a long time. --Green Dragon 13:50, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

Incorrect Adoptionations

Y HALO THAR. Recently I adopted a dozen or so pages because I have some future plans with them, and the original owner, Sulacu, is gone and all. I noticed you reversed those adoptions. Is something the matter, we're permitted to adopt unnamed and user-less articles are we not? Even more so if we actually have permission from the original owner? If you could redo those adoptions for me, that sure would be swell, it makes it easier to find when I don't have to comb through the history and just look up "User Eiji". Domo arigato desu desu desu-chan, ie! -- Eiji 21:00, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

Eiji, your recent discussions in the chat your splinter group is using showcases those adoptions as bad faith adoptions. However, even with that fact, I can't speak for GD's decision. I believe a previous editor said "just stay away and leave us alone" and that has been our wiki's attitude. I humbly request you follow suit. Thanks.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   21:02, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
Hi Hooper-desu! :D Well, it's very good faith actually, but the lower caste aren't supposed to talk to the upper caste. Wink wink, joke joke, nudge nudge. Anyway, I'm actually still active here (out of necessity, but that's a discussion for another time), so I can't leave.
Anyway, awaitin' the Green Drag-man. I'll just leave this 'ere. -- Eiji 21:11, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
As your most recent quote on the subject was the following: "the reason I'd adopt them is to keep GD's dirty mitts off them" as stated in your IRC channel, I'd say that clearly constitutes a bad faith adoption. Alas, however, GD shall tell us both how it went down, so I agree with your thoughts on waiting for him.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   21:14, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
Where'd I say that? That's silly Hooper. -- Eiji 21:16, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
If GD requests it he will be shown proof of that and other things you've said of recent regarding the adoption. Ever since that chat channel decided to bring up the idea of using pirate software against this site I've daily logged on and pulled that day's chats from it. Thankfully, nothing as vile as the pirate attack threats has been discussed since.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   21:18, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
Of course not. You know, internet... it's full of people who talk for the hell of it, and talk is cheap. Why just yesterday I was claiming to be wearing a dress, when I was really wearing TWO dresses. :D But Hooper, we've gotten totally off the subject, so, for Green Dragon's sake I'm reseting the indent and reposting my point (I hope he doesn't mind). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eiji (talkcontribs) 20:23, 1 October 2009 (MDT). Please sign your posts.
Just placing my 2 cents Hooper but is it entirely ethical/legal to record and store chats without notifying those being recorded? Just wondering if perhaps playing secret agent in the chat room is the best use of your time which should be invested in this wiki, not in the wikia. Back on topic: if an article is up for adoption, what makes one user more or less worthy of adoption than another? One who has made as many contributions as Eiji is certainly able to competently handle an article, unless you are saying you trust a complete stranger to claim ownership of the article over an established contributor to this wiki. --Ehsteve 21:34, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
You did it wrong... And D&D Wiki is fine; no malicious software should be able to do much of anything. --Green Dragon 22:49, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
Ah, I'm doing it wrong? Well then, how may I do it right so I can get them re-adopted? -- Eiji 22:51, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
Just don't. Just edit the damn things; it makes much much more sense (your name is added, what you did is shown, and you can create a link repository at a usersubpage of pages which relate to you, one can look with my watchlist the pages as they change, etc etc. Template:Author is just more of a hassle then much else (history; when created; does not change). --Green Dragon 22:56, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
Explain that second part to me again? I'm trying to get the pages to appear on my User: Eiji page so I don't have to search through recent changes (also, I'd like credit for adopting them too, but I haven't bothered yet to look/copy paste the ownership box/dunno how to go about that). Anyway, the link repository is what I'm currently doing with my pages right, having them appear in my User: Eiji page automatically instead of linking them one by one. -- Eiji 22:58, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
...and you can create a link repository at a usersubpage of pages which relate to you...
—--Green Dragon 22:56, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
--Green Dragon 23:04, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
Sorry, might be a little slow but... uh, I don't get it. Can you rephrase it in a different way, as right now it seems like you're saying we can't put things on our User page we didn't originally make and just adopted. Or... something, I'm not really sure. Thanks in advance. -- Eiji 23:08, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

←Reverted indentation to one colon

Right; for example I have nothing (theoretically) to do with the images on my userpage. --Green Dragon 23:16, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
Oooh. Aww, that makes me sad... that means we aren't allowed to adopt anymore (at least, not in the normal sense of "I now own this", we can only edit... but then, so can everyone's else so it's a moot point). Well, there's nothing I can do. :( They were nice articles too.
Oh well. /thread and all. -- Eiji 23:18, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
Ya, but I find that usercontributions are much better then Template:Author and I find that when using history everything is much more fair then under the Template:Author system (each edit is that edit; not under someone elses' name). --Green Dragon 23:22, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
To clarify, are you saying that the Author template is pointless to have on articles? Should we remove it from every article? -- 06:23, 2 October 2009 (MDT)
I apologize -- that comment was out of line and pretty immature. I'm still a little sore over what happened and when I do visit this wiki (in this case I was responding to a private email about an optimized build I wrote a while back), I do the stupid thing of looking at the recent changes and get bothered by what is going on. This was my "home" for a long time after all. I can take a conversation up privately with you if you want to discuss why I think many of your actions are bad for the wiki, but needless to say, I sincerely hope that Green Dragon does not make you an admin until your behavior changes. I say that out of my old dedication to this wiki, not my new found bitterness. But, as I said, this is something for a private conversation and doesn't belong here on GD's talk page.
To restate my questions to GD: "Are you saying that the Author template is pointless to have on articles? Should we remove it from every article?" --Aarnott 07:53, 2 October 2009 (MDT)
Thank you. I'm not seeking adminship, nor do I personally feel I need to be anything close to an admin, so I doubt such a conversation is necessary.  Hooper   talk    contribs    email   07:57, 2 October 2009 (MDT)
They do seem to hinder articles at time; however that is a long process. I say we should work on things which are a little more handalable at the moment. Maybe with in the year or two; who knows. Or what are your opinions and thoughts? --Green Dragon 22:43, 2 October 2009 (MDT)


Well, something very strange is happening here... I'd say adopting things to keep them safe is in good faith, and it is my perhaps not very humble opinion that playing secret agent in a chatroom is quite unethical. Additionally, I think it's unethical to remove an author's name from the front of the page, since that's where the focus is, no matter where else information on the original author can be found. Furthermore, I agree with some arguments brought in against Green Dragon, seeing as he acts in a seemingly random manner, getting angry and threatening with bans for little reason.

I tried (much earlier) to reason with both parties, and GD didn't even answer. Not ever.

I'm taking my creations. I created them, so they are my property, and I do not care which laws you quote. According to some test and multiple real-life experiences, I turn out to be CG, and I cannot abide a regime like this. I shan't use guerilla tactics or whatever to negative effect for this wiki, because it is rather pointless; it will be dead by itself without my interference soon enough. To summarize, I take possession of my work, and I will not comply with any attempts to restore them.

Further reasons for abandoning this wiki include a disturbing lack of interest in discussion pages; no one has shown an interest in several things I pointed out in several different discussion pages, and rather few of my own things where commented upon (seeing as I mean to implement those things I find interesting or design myself, I'd like a little more discussion about things like balance and powerlevel). Another point is the apparent failure of internal consistency in at least some creatures of the animal type and a tendency not to do anything about it.

I bid you adieu. I expect my pages to remain gone when I have removed them, and I expect there will not be a problem with that. I have no need for either wiki laws or dictatorial outlashings (they should be mutually exclusive, but reality proves to be otherwise, ey?), and I shall not abide either. Deranged 16:18, 2 October 2009 (MDT)

Imitating behavior/harassment. Banned. Content is content, usercontributions are usercontributions, and history is history. --Green Dragon 20:43, 3 October 2009 (MDT)

Tavern Down

Why is the tavern not working, still?! It's been nearly three months? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zetsumeimaru (talkcontribs) 17:52, 3 October 2009 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

I know... One of the servers got changed around a bit and as such the tavern is not configured right; another is that, as a discussion, we are not positive if we want a chat room. It seems to be there are differing opinions about. --Green Dragon 20:40, 3 October 2009 (MDT)
The Tavern has been discontinued. See also Discussion:The Tavern: use, expansion, and availability.. --Green Dragon 20:33, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Prestige Classes Epic Section

Discussion moved to Talk:Omniarcanist of Caladon (3.5e Prestige Class)#Epic Section --Green Dragon 14:18, 13 October 2009 (MDT).

Surgo's Deletions

I was just looking through some history and can I ask what MW is in reference to here:

"I restored all of the deleted pages right after they were wrongly deleted. Please learn something about MW before posting here (it's comparable to clicking the links above and looking at them). --Green Dragon 14:52, 10 September 2009 (MDT)"

Thanks. --Sabre070 15:15, 15 October 2009 (MDT)

MW is always MediaWiki. Where was this response? If you source it or supply a link I can better let you know what I meant. --Green Dragon 20:06, 20 October 2009 (MDT)
It is on Surgo's 2nd nomination for adminship. --Sabre070 01:44, 22 October 2009 (MDT)
Surgo was not following the deletion policy. I had to restore pages he/she wrongly deleted. For this to make more sense to you maybe this is a better associated link (the blue links are restored - the red are deleted). If you see any other problems please let me know (where he/she deleted good content). --Green Dragon 17:49, 25 October 2009 (MDT)
With the current deletion policy (that on Category:Candidates for Deletion) he did not break any rules. It states: "In most cases 14 days after a page is nominated for deletion it will be deleted." Hence, there was no reason for those not to be deleted. Either that or you use the argument that it also says: "When nominating an incomplete page for deletion please make sure that it is not being actively improved upon." Which implies that it must be an incomplete page, though on a wiki nothing is ever complete so that cannot be an argument against it. I would like to know how you think that Surgo wasn't following the deletion policy and then we can amend it to make it clearer. --Sabre070 22:41, 25 October 2009 (MDT)
The pages had zero reason to be deleted. Were nominated for deletion a day before and were deleted right after. That's breaking the rules. Watch out; or you'll get banned. I've explained this enough times. I'm done explaining it. --Green Dragon 22:47, 25 October 2009 (MDT)
Actually, you had never explained that on Surgo's nomination page (and I haven't seen it anywhere else). They were nominated for deletion at least two weeks before: Aug 13 2009 nomination and 4 September 2009 deletion for many of them. There reason for deletion was that the author did not want them on the wiki, in the past that has been accepted though after recent events it was decided un-officially that it would not be, this was not put on the deletion page. --Sabre070 23:08, 25 October 2009 (MDT)
Oh, your right about the times. That's probably why I did not say that on the nomination. It's because it is good content - one should never delete good content. "I restored all of the deleted pages right after they were wrongly deleted." --Green Dragon 23:19, 25 October 2009 (MDT)
I still think we need to clarify the deletion policy. Though my thoughts on the articles on this wiki are that they should be owned by the contributers and can be deleted by them if they wish. --Sabre070 05:03, 26 October 2009 (MDT)
That's not how they are. They are under the GNU FDL "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here." for example. If one reads the the GNU FDL 1.2 then you will see more as to what I am talking about. And the deletion time frame is a little variable — the important part is that no playable, good, etc content gets deleted. That's the main idea. If you read the "Adminship" message it explains deletion a bit from an admin side and the category explains deletion from a wiki-side. Please keep in mind that was just Surgo's 2nd adminship — not the reason for (h)im/er being banned. --Green Dragon 15:03, 26 October 2009 (MDT)

Edit Summary Question

You just told me what barnstars are, and I thank you, though I had guessed their purpose, 'twas a kind gesture. But I was wondering why you edited it with the summary "Discussions get archived not removed....". Would you care to elaborate on your reasoning, or was it not pertaining to me? --SgtLion 13:14, 20 October 2009 (MDT)

Basically, don't just delete something from your page, archive it. --Sabre070 15:09, 20 October 2009 (MDT)
Yes, you may not have noticed, but if you look at the actual diff in question, he re-added the welcome message you had previously removed. That was what he was actually talking about in the summary.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   16:16, 20 October 2009 (MDT)
I replied and used the edit summary to explain my edit. --Green Dragon 20:05, 20 October 2009 (MDT)
Ah, right, that was a mistake on my part. Thank you, everyone. --SgtLion 23:59, 20 October 2009 (MDT)
No problem. --Green Dragon 20:35, 21 June 2010 (UTC)


A few days ago, I created the talosoi, a race of apelike people who live in dense jungles and ride giant wasps around. I decided to put it here, to share it with everyone else. But, since I didn't know anything about wiki formatting then, I put all of the separate types of talosoi as its own creature. Before I could realize my mistake, I put 6 new creatures on here, each of them a different talosoi (eg Talosoi Archer, Talosoi Shaman, Talosoi Chieftan, etc.). I wanted to know if there was anyway I could move all of those creatures to a single page. If was not, I would want to know if I could delete these pages and start again with the same creatures, but just under a different name (instead of talosoi, then it would be toldosoi or something like that). Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Breo sabre (talkcontribs) 20:50, 21 October 2009 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

If you merge them all onto one page (save the ones you cannot - the mounts; wasps, etc.) and add Template:Delete to the now merged ones it should cover your problem. Although one can "merge" all the pages together with their respective revision histories it's a long process and complicated; it's easier this way. --Green Dragon 23:00, 21 October 2009 (MDT)

D20 Modern/4e Material?

Discussion moved from User talk:Tabris#D20/4e Issues --Green Dragon 17:42, 27 October 2009 (MDT)

Please do not move my weapon contributions (namely flashbang, phosphorus grenade and smoke bomb.) as they were not made for d20 modern but instead as homebrew weapons for the dnd 4e game which I DM for.

If there is a way to set my creations to private please let me know as I do not want my contributions to be edited at all. I like them as they are but I do not know how to change the editing options to locked/protected. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tabris (talkcontribs) 01:23, 27 October 2009 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

Please read the warning when you are editing on the site. It reads as follows: "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here.".   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   06:36, 27 October 2009 (MDT)
Thats not helpful at all Hooper, I'm aware of this however my equipment is posted under 4e equipment for a reason: It's 4e equipment. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tabris (talkcontribs) 15:27, 27 October 2009 (MDT). Please sign your posts.
I believe that the reasons some of the pages have been misappropriated is that they were not all originally coded the way fourth edition material should of been, giving the appearance of D&D or D20 equipment. Admins are busy so it is easy to see how that may have been the issue. Anyways, please note that the identifier on the pages should read "(4e Equipment)" not "(4E Equipment)" and in the future I wouldn't edit war with an admin, just make a nice and simple explanation and ask why they think something is not what it is (i.e. in this case just ask what is giving GD the impression it is D20 equipment and then fix that before doing all this reverting). Just usually not a good idea to remove admin edits.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   16:28, 27 October 2009 (MDT)
Please sign your posts using four tildes, like so: ~~~~. Please see your talk page for more info.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   16:29, 27 October 2009 (MDT)
You can move them to a subuserpage of your userpage area; at most (keeping them 4e) and changing the templates around so they do not show up anywhere. Simply flashbang grenades, phosphorus grenades and smoke bombs do not fit into 4e. --Green Dragon 17:42, 27 October 2009 (MDT)
I moved them back to 4e. 4e will be considered a rule set I guess with nothing to do with a time frame. --Green Dragon 20:46, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Designating Overdeity

Hey, I got a question about the deities. When making them, I'm confused about how to write the "What type of god is it" part. If you look Saran up, you see on the page, there is that error, I need help on that. Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CelticHippie (talkcontribs) 20:17, 28 October 2009 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

That should help. See the diff in question to see the edit change. --Green Dragon 21:52, 28 October 2009 (MDT)

Canidates for Deletion

Hey GD. I was looking through some of the articles in the Deletion Catagory. There are more than a few that have been unedited and abandoned for many months. I say this because I have about 15 articles I made myself that need to be deleted. How often does this site clear out those pages? Thanks. (Wow, I just noticed their are 3 pages worth of stuff waiting to be deleted. Almost 500 articles.) --Jay Freedman 02:31, 29 October 2009 (MDT)

It's getting worked on... Just keep adding them. A matter of weeks ago it was more then double the current amount (six or more pages) - so it's slowly getting cleared. Everything has to get by-hand looked at (since "What links here", talk pages, links, etc can be strange) so it's just a work in progress. They will get deleted though if need be (or authorship stripped). --Green Dragon 16:53, 29 October 2009 (MDT)
Sounds good. Thanks for the update. --Jay Freedman 20:19, 31 October 2009 (MDT)

Arcane Ranger Rating

I rated the Arcane Ranger class, but the number of ratings nor the overall ratings didn't change, why is this? --Zackrb 06:33, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

You posted your rating on the talk page. But, that is only half of rating. You must edit the article itself to reflect your rating. Their are placeholders for ratings when editing the article itself. Updating these causes a overall rating to appear on the article when viewed. (Please remember to sign your posts.) -- 03:04, 2 November 2009 (MST)
I got it. --Green Dragon 21:45, 21 June 2010 (UTC)


Her im kinda new here and a was gonna set up a page for my friends to use my Digimon and Pokemon races and classes. I know that might sound stupid but hey to each his own, any way you put up my renamon page for deletion and a wasen't done with it yet i'm not sure wether it was because of that or the fact that it's a digimon, if you don't want digimon and stuff on there a will not put it on there :) just let me know.

(p.s.) i did'nt understand the way you set stuff up till now so i understand if the page was just in the way. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Corycodered (talkcontribs) 01:00, 12 November 2009 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

Well what is it? A creature? It's not formatted like anything... If you follow a preload (go to a certain section and click the "add" button — that text) and update the current thing to fit that the delete template will be removed. If you don't want to do that of course you can move it to a subuserpage of yours (e.g. User:Corycodered/Renamon) then no formatting is needed. But one of those is needed for the delete template to be removed. --Green Dragon 01:17, 12 November 2009 (MST)


I'd like my user page deleted, if possible. Thanks --Palantini 16:51, 14 November 2009 (MST)

Done. No problem. --Green Dragon 21:28, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

WikiRPS Shutdown

Hello. I joined this wiki from the WikiRPS, and I've been trying to find out who is running that wiki. While I could and probably will eventually get active here, right now I'm more driven towards working on a more broad system, adapting historical, current, and sci-fi culture, weapons, and technology to an open RPS, not necessarily D&D. Thanks. --Madkcat 00:47, 18 November 2009 (MST)

Pretty sure Cuthalion is, although Blue Dragon may be as well (I am not sure), or DotHectate (Special:Listadmins). --Green Dragon 00:53, 18 November 2009 (MST)
As far as I have been able to find, Cuthalion hasn't been active since December '07, Blue Dragon June '09 and DotHectate (Special:Listadmins) since June '08 on WikiRPS.
I have some ideas of what to do, and how I'd like to do it, but I don't want to start messing with the Wiki until I can talk with someone who was/is active in WikiRPS to make sure I'm not stepping on toes, or causing problems by jumping in running. --madkcat 01:18, 18 November 2009 (MST)
I'm not in charge on WikiRPS. This wiki, where I did the initial setup, I know what's going on. There I do not — I have maybe only gone there a matter of times. You would have to ask one of them what's going on. Sorry about that. --Green Dragon 01:21, 18 November 2009 (MST)
This is Hectate, I don't recall if I have a login for D&D Wiki so I'm just posting anon-ishly. Cuthalion was about the only admin during my time over there and he stopped posted at the noted time frame, which — as the only other active user — promoted me to admin at some point. I changed IRL jobs and didn't have as much free time to keep working on my custom rule set ("Incremental") so everything kind of fell apart without anyone to maintain the wiki. It appears the wiki has been shut down as well, I suppose Green Dragon could confirm that for us since he was running the hosted server? Either way, if there's anything you need I might be able to recall the general details, feel free to email me at nathaniel (spamfree-dot) mitchell (spamfree-at) gmail (spamfree-dot) com and I'll see if I can help. -- 12:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes, WikiRPS has been shutdown. You would have to contact Blue Dragon for more details. --Green Dragon 21:33, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Language Style

As a born British English man, I'm somewhat accustomed to the British language. But I only could assume that this D&D Wiki is American, so in my language fixing, I didn't change anything like "armor" to "Armour" or vica versa, because I was unaware of what to do about it. So now I ask you, do I correct spellings to American or British English? Or something else, if that's how you roll. --SgtLion 11:01, 22 November 2009 (MST)

It's American English. I recommend taking a look at Help:Standards and Formatting (DnD Guideline). --Green Dragon 15:51, 22 November 2009 (MST)
Guessed as much. And thanks, I'll take a look at that. Your response and help is appreciated. --SgtLion 00:02, 23 November 2009 (MST)
Ya, no problem. --Green Dragon 00:36, 23 November 2009 (MST)


I am taking a short five day long vacation or so down to New Mexico. I will have limited computer access however if everyone could keep an eye out for malicious edits, vandalism, etc it would be much appreciated. --Green Dragon 08:23, 25 November 2009 (MST)

Slam Attacks Attack Type

Hi. I was trying to find out if a slam attack is like an unarmed strike for the perpose of feats. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Okamo (talkcontribs) 03:51, 27 November 2009 (UTC). Please sign your posts.

Please ask questions like this on DnD Discussions. --Green Dragon 21:45, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Donation Updates and Feedback

Im the one that sent the recent 7 dollar through paypal, can you keep me updated when you guys run donation drives so i can donate what i can. Also if you dont mind can you look over some the contributions that i made since i signed up to see if you feel they are constructive. Mainly I feel in love with aura guardian but want some feedback before i keep at it. Thanks! --Starcry 19:40, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I like the anime shadow skill and was wondering if you ever thought about making a class based on the sevaars, specifically on gau and elle. I liked your tenken class and the frost knight one, so I was just throwing the idea out there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 00:42, 11 December 2009 (UTC). Please sign your posts.
If I remember next time we have a donation drive then yes, I will remind you. --Green Dragon 22:06, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!