User talk:Maiovez

Welcome to D&D Wiki!

Welcome!

Hello Maiovez, and welcome to D&D Wiki! I hope you are enjoying D&D Wiki and have been finding the information here useful. Before you start contributing, we recommend you make sure your user preferences match your preferences.

Questions

If you have any questions about a specific page please ask it on that page's talk page. If you have a D&D-related question, you can ask it on DnD Discussions. Everything relating to D&D Wiki's administration can be asked here. If you need to contact another user, please use their talk page.

Formatting

Syntax can be very difficult, and if you need help a good place to start is Help:Editing on Wikipedia (or even their Introduction page). This will explain basic wiki formatting and should provide quite a few useful links that explain more specific areas of wiki formatting. Help:Portal also provides detailed explanation of information important specifically to this community.

Community

A strong and welcoming community exists on D&D Wiki, and I'm sure you will find us friendly. To enable the community to function, a number of policies are in effect. Most importantly, we follow and expect you to follow Wikipedia's guidelines on civility and etiquette when discussing anything. As most work has multiple authors, please do not delete content without following our removal process. When posting a comment on a talk page, please ensure you sign your name with four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the signature icon (). This will automatically produce your name and the date. I hope you come to enjoy D&D Wiki and the community. Welcome again, you are now a D&D Wikian. --SirSprinkles (talk) 06:51, 2 June 2018 (MDT)

"Do not edit" disclaimer

Hi, regarding the message on your userpage, know that because this is a wiki, anyone can edit (almost) any page. If you don't want others editing "your" pages, you can move them to your userspace, where other users are not allowed to edit, except for administrators to remove content that breaks sitewide rules. If you don't know how to do this, I or another user would be willing to help or do it for you. — Geodude (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 08:39, 27 August 2018 (MDT)

Having come across the proxy race, I'd like to reiterate this point Geodude671 is making. No page really belongs to any one person on the wiki. I hope things are good and well. ~ BigShotFancyMan (talk) 11:38, 6 December 2018 (MST)

Warning

This is a formal warning for transcribing content from Complete Arcane, which is not OGL. I have deleted the copyright-violating pages Superior Invisiblity (3.5e Spell) and Programmed Amnesia (3.5e Spell). If besides those pages you have posted any other content from a non-OGL source, please tell me or another admin and those pages will be deleted too. Please do not post copyrighted material in the future. Quincy (talk) 09:11, 5 December 2018 (MST)

You post here concepts from such sources all the time. Maiovez (talk) 09:42, 5 December 2018 (MST)

Concepts from such sources, yes, but we have to draw the line at copying content from books which we are not permitted to copy from word for word. Quincy (talk) 09:54, 5 December 2018 (MST)

Okey. I didn't knew. I thought it is fine. Won't happen again. Maiovez (talk) 09:58, 5 December 2018 (MST)

Thank you for coming to this understanding. Quincy (talk) 10:00, 5 December 2018 (MST)

Page Titles

Hey Maiovez. Why was the Reiko vampire variant moved back? I had moved it so it followed site standards for site infrastructure. It’s fairly common thing that happens, and it isn’t personal or that people don’t like the title. Hopefully that makes sense. If you got an idea how the site can handle page titles please suggest because I too struggle with them. ~ BigShotFancyMan (talk) 16:37, 22 February 2019 (MST)

You can't just name everything 'variant', because it will confuse people and would make it harder for them to differentiate between the articles. Unique names would help people both to differentiate between the articles and to remember them. Maiovez (talk) 05:27, 23 February 2019 (MST)

You can, and we have and do. I don’t disagree with your reasons, but they don’t help site infrastructure. ~ BigShotFancyMan (talk) 13:41, 23 February 2019 (MST)

Warnings

In conjunction with the other admins, it has been decided to issue you a number of official infractions.

The first infraction has been issued due to this edit you made to the Overvamp's talk page, which removed an administrator's comment. Removing content from a talk page is not done; the talk page is a place for all wiki users to discuss the page in question. This goes doubly so for removing the comment of an administrator. The contents of a talk page serve as an important transcript of all discussion pertinent to that page, and to remove or alter the words of another user is considered an act of revisionism.

The second infraction has been issued due to your repeated removal of maintenance templates on the Overvamp page, of which this is but one example among many. I would reiterate that maintenance templates are not to be removed without either thorough discussion between all involved parties on the talk page, or the relevant issues being addressed in such a manner that the templates are no longer relevant to the current state of the page.

Please note that a third infraction will result in your account being blocked for up to a week, as per the wiki's Warning Policy. If you take issue with these warnings, you are free to discuss them with another administrator over on User talk:Admin.

Thank you for your time. --Nuke The Earth (talk) 20:36, 23 February 2021 (MST)

First, I had no idea about the not-remove rule of the talk pages - I have never heard of it before. i just updated the article and adjusted things bacause they no longer fitted.

Second, the whole thing with the balancing was closed 2 years ago. It was agreed that LA +30 is high enough to balance it and fit it into the rules - by the admin Geodude671. So, unless the basic rules were changed and LA doesn't worth what it used to be, the page is balanced enough to stay - by the opinion of your fellow admins.

Oh, and third, I had an eye surgery - which, for the record, I am still recovering from - and haven't checked any of my talk pages in 2 months. So I didn't just ignore you or something. Unlike some trollish users around here, I truely want to contribute to the wiki. Maiovez (talk) 01:34, 24 February 2021 (MST)

I'm afraid you'll need to link the exact place in which Geodude said such a thing. I don't see it anywhere on the relevant talk page, nor in the talk page's history. --Nuke The Earth (talk) 10:10, 24 February 2021 (MST)

My guess is that Maiovez is referring to this edit where I changed the design disclaimer to a design note, which I could see being taken as tacit approval of the page. My understanding of 3.5e is limited, but based on the facts that the 30 LA limits the race to being used in epic level campaigns, the race lacks any racial HD and thus an overvamp with 1 class level would have 1 HD (again based on my admittedly limited understanding of that edition's rules), and the first-party epic rules seem pretty unbalanced in the first place (seemingly intentionally), I imagine I didn't take issue with the page at the time. I wasn't a huge fan of the page and I'm still not, but I do think the page falls enough within the bounds of both our site's rules and the rules of D&D in order to stay in the mainspace, though I'm open to being convinced otherwise. — Geodude (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 10:30, 24 February 2021 (MST)

The main issue is not necessarily one of balance, but of the user's insistence that the page be theirs and theirs alone. If not for that, all relevant issues could be easily resolved through conversation on the talk page and edits made to the page itself. The simplest and easiest solution is then to move the page to a user subpage, but the user seems not to want that either. --Nuke The Earth (talk) 11:08, 24 February 2021 (MST)

I don't wan't people to edit my works unnecessarily; I work very hard to make them as rich and playable as possible, and I already experienced several trollish edits in the past - one of which even removed all the statistics and wrote swears - hence my request. As far as I understand, all the point of this wiki is to allow D&D fans to share their fanmade works with others; by definition, this means they should be kept as per their creator's request, unless they ask for help in completing them. I don't mind that others will offer ideas, but this particualr race is among my earliest and most invested works and I don't want others to temper with it out of malice and spite - which already happened several times before. And I don't want it to be transferred into a user subpage because this will considerably decrease the chance people will view it, which is the original reason I uploaded it into the wiki in the first place. As of now, I already have 200+ works, about 100 of which can be utilized in normal campaigns in some manner, and about 50 of which can be inserted directly into normal campaigns without the need for further specification and editing. I only upload here those from the latter criteria, which I think people will benefit from. Transferring any of my works into a user subpage will be aganist the very reason I upload here to begin with. Maiovez (talk) 11:57, 24 February 2021 (MST)

I thought the design disclaimers use were far tighter than that, Geo, unless I'm misunderstanding, and we do allow disclaimer overpowered content after all. But back to the ownership bit, the wiki is sort of exactly what a community editing workshop is. Everyone sees your stuff one way or another, they give comments, they edit in ways they think see fit. If it was truly an edit in bad faith (making overpowered edits, eg), then yeah, reversion would be the right course of action. But if, as you say, you want the thing playable, then it seems odd to not want to make it more so and to deny others doing it too.--Yanied (talk) 20:00, 24 February 2021 (MST)

I pre-designated them to be overwhelmingly powerful. This was my very purpose while creating them: to create a race so powerful they can be a threat even to the mightiest mortal champions. Therefore, disempowering them is not an option.

I don't, nor I will ever try, to force people to use them. However, the fact remains that using them is a great way to show highly experienced, epic-level player characters new, interesting challenges - which, at such levels, are fairly scarce. Epic-level player characters are usually powerful enough to signle-handedly defeat small armies, so putting them against a signle creature that can naturally match the might it took them to long to develop will be a new, exciting experience. Maiovez (talk) 07:29, 25 February 2021 (MST)

There is a pre-existing method by which one can design a creature that matches high-level players. It's called building a creature. There are dozens of high-CR creatures on this wiki one could use for that purpose, and if the intention is not to allow this race for player use, but to use it against them, then making a creature statblock is the go-to method. --Nuke The Earth (talk) 12:07, 25 February 2021 (MST)

This is really not my intention; you must understand that I specialize in creating races and templates meant for unusually overpowered campaigns, in which most SRD restrictions - especially regarding character races - don't really apply. Truth be told, I actually also created a couple of races so powerful they easily outmach the overvamps; I didn't even bother to set LA to them, because they really aren't meant to be used by player characters, even in the most overpowered campaigns. However, Overvamps are indeed meant to be used such, albeit only in overpowered campaigns. Also, I seldom use statblocks, because I find them awfully inadequate; you can only put so much information into them, and one of the things I value most about my works is that they are very detailed. In all my works, I only used stateblocks on two occasions, and ultimately I ended up having to write so many specialized qualities that the stateblock was nearly pointless.

Regardless, personally I find no reason to saperate the article from the wiki so long as it has a Design Disclaimer with a proper warning - which it now has. The only reason I specifically requested not to unnecessarily edit my works is that several trollish users have vandalized my works before, which, as far as I concern, is as good a reason as they come for such a request. Maiovez (talk) 13:46, 25 February 2021 (MST)

So, can the Needs Balance template be removed? Maiovez (talk) 07:05, 28 February 2021 (MST)

As stated before, you will need to either abandon the notion that no other user can edit that page or have it moved to your user namespace. While it is in the public wiki space, it is subject to the policies and regulations of the wiki as a whole. --Nuke The Earth (talk) 14:37, 28 February 2021 (MST)

I have my works on more than just this wiki - I have them on my computer as well, and I keep them up to date and synchronized. Whenever someone else edits my posted work and I don't find it fitting, I revert it. If I do find it fitting (which, for the record, already happened several times), I update the file on my computer instead. By "unnecessary edits" I mean vandalism (which you disapprove as well) and overhauling my posted work (which I simply revert unless I think it benefits the work). Lesser edits, particularly beneficial ones, are entirely accepted. Maiovez (talk) 15:26, 1 March 2021 (MST)

I will say this one final time. You are not lord and master over any public wiki page. If you wish to maintain control over a page, you must move it to your user namespace. Elsewise, you must accept that the page is not yours, and never truly has been. Choose one or the other. If you have failed to choose by midnight as measured by wiki time, the choice will be made for you and the page will be moved. You have had a week to think about it, and to be honest I am tired of this game. --Nuke The Earth (talk) 16:16, 1 March 2021 (MST)

I already chose, and you should have at least waited for my answer. I don't have any problem with edits unless they are vandalistic - I never did. You are opposing a cause no one is fighting for - basically, you are fighting yourself. This page has suffered several vandalistic edits before, hence my wariness regarding the subject. I never claimed the page is mine, only that this a work of my creation (which it is) that I intent to keep editing and improving. Thus, I will appreicate it if you will restore the page. Also, midnight by wiki time is 8 AM by the local time of my residence area. I didn't have a chance to see you massage before I went to sleep, so so you really should have at least waited for my answer. Maiovez (talk) 07:43, 2 March 2021 (MST)

FYI, if this is the way you treat dedicated editors, it isn't surprising that so many abandon the pages they create unfinished. You have only youself to blame for the spreading of poor articles in the wiki - you never give people a chance to finish the editing before you discard and offend them. Maiovez (talk) 07:49, 2 March 2021 (MST)

You react unproportionally agressively to this trivial entirely and entirely managable matter - a Design Disclaimer would do, but nooo, you continue fighting your windmills. Newsflash: you act like a bully - overracting over nothing but having your authority challenged. And besides, according to the wiki's policy, a page's creator has priority regarding conflicting edits. Maiovez (talk) 08:57, 2 March 2021 (MST)

Can you please let me know what your main concern here is?

Is it that you do not want User:Maiovez/Overvamp (Super Vampire) in your userspace?

Is it that you do not want any maintenance templates on the Overvamp?

Is your main concern that you do not want any other editors than yourself to edit this page (technically not possible, but there are ways to move in this direction)?

Is there another major concern for this page?

In regards to the warnings, they where issued because you broke policies without using the proper methods for dispute resolution. My questions are not in regards to the warnings that have been issued here. So long that you do not make these mistakes again, the warnings will be removed over time. --Green Dragon (talk) 10:03, 2 March 2021 (MST)

There is absolutely no reason to saperate Overvamp (Super Vampire) from the wiki, which is what making it a user subpage does. Asking to not vandalize the page is not only entirely acceptable, it should be trivial. The reaction to this matter, which was technically set 2 years ago, was unproportionally agressive. Nuke The Earth basically claims that there is no place for individuality in the wiki. The warnings were understood long ago, but the Design Disclaimer I put as per the admins' reqeust was removed by another admin. Personally, I previously didn't understand the difference between a Design Note and a Design Disclaimer, but the latter clearly has more weight. The admins' actions led me to believe the opposite is true; thus, I didn't restore the Design Disclaimer, which, once it was noticed, caused this whole event.

My anti-vandalism request was clearly misunderstood. If you would thoroughly check Overvamp (Super Vampire)'s history, you would see that there were several vandalistic edits, which are the reason to my insistance regarding the matter. These are the only edits I have a problem with, as should anyone else, in overall. Besides, I checked, and according to the wiki's policy, a page's creator indeed has priority regarding conflicting edits, just like registered users have priority in this matter over guests. I probably should have been more specific and say that I specifically ask not to vandalize the page, but as far as I concerned the massage was clear enough. Clearly, Nuke The Earth comprehended it too literally, and thought I disapprove all edits, which I don't. Maiovez (talk) 10:56, 2 March 2021 (MST)

Apologies

I don't check often, and have only recently noticed the dilemma you experienced. I am sorry you weren't being understood and a bulldozer got you. The wiki has a history of admins forgetting they too are users, no more special than others but can perform janitor duties. That's it! lol
Again, seen your name for years, I was shocked by the events. Let me know if you ever need help. I hope your eye is doing better as well. Red Leg Leo (talk) 13:34, 2 March 2021 (MST)

I really just want Overvamp (Super Vampire) restored to a normal page. Maiovez (talk) 07:55, 3 March 2021 (MST)

copy that. I am not as active as I was but let's see what needs done.

Out of curiosity, what is the issue having it as a user page? Red Leg Leo (talk) 16:38, 4 March 2021 (MST)

I've briefly looked at the page and the big issue is the power level. I understand there's a design note, but this website has tried for a good couple years to curb the content that is just over the top powerful. This Overvamp page is close to if not the epitome of pages some users have been trying to remove. The wiki's image/reputation is hurt by these articles. Hence the moving it to your subuser page. I don't mean to offend by no means either. It is just what it is. The design note/disclaimer also carries misunderstanding here. They aren't intended for users to create extremely strong articles for no basis other than being super strong. They're templates that are misused often and too many users, including some admins, weren't around for the discussion regarding them. I hope we can continue to discuss this, but realize until the power level comes down to reasonable levels the page can't be "a normal page" :/ Red Leg Leo (talk) 16:47, 4 March 2021 (MST)