User talk:Ollj11771

Please see GuildWiki_talk:Style_and_formatting/Skills for my comments. 20:35, 31 Jul 2005 (EST)

Green Numbers & Relative Increase
What the heck is Green Numbers? I can't make heads or tails of it. If it's a personal page, please move it to User:Ollj/Green Numbers; otherwise, it needs serious cleanup (especially all that code). &mdash;Tanaric 17:04, 19 Jul 2005 (EST)

[...] Relative Increase helps understandin Green Numbers (or confuses you even more...) [Green number stub]

Ollj, I made some comments on your relative increase theory. Please read them at Talk:Relative Increase. Thank you.

im working on a template for all green number ranges.

Creating Empty Articles
merged to Category_talk:Candidates_for_deletion

Bestiary Maps (for elite bosses)
The standards for the bestiary have not been discussed yet, but the use of maps so far is pretty grotesque :P Please could we start a discussion on the proper standard for including maps in Bestiary articles? I recommend GuildWiki talk:Style and formatting/Bestiary as a place for this discussion to take place. 22:07, 28 Jul 2005 (EST) Hi :-) I'm Xennon, the guy who made the www.xennon.co.uk/eliteskills/ listing. I was contacted a while ago about the use of my information on this site. I said the information itself may be used, however the maps were not to be used. It was brought to my attention that the editor Ollj has been adding my maps under boss information without my permission (in fact, expressly against my wishes) so I was wondering if someone could get these removed :-) e-mail me at chriscox@ntlworld.com if you wish to talk about this. Cheers Xen Retrieved from "http://www.zerolives.org/guildwars/index.php/User_talk:Gravewit"
 * Ill only include maps on all Category:Bosses. I know the format is bad, but the information is good!
 * I'm not sure what you mean Ollj. 02:36, 29 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * Now i use "Image-" as place holder for elite-skill-bosses anyways.
 * I still don't know what you mean. Please add GuildWiki talk:Style and formatting/Bestiary to your watch list (click watch in the top of the screen) and get involved with the discussion of the formatting of bestiary articles. User:LordBiro 02:42, 29 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * Ok, now Xennon has posted this complaint on Gravewit's talk page, Ollj, please stop posting his maps:

all images removed.

Ollj, I got to chime in on that. You have recently edited a lot of your freshly created Boss articles, but the info on them is utterly lacking. For every Boss, you have entered the sentence "he has Skill x." This is quite unsatisfactory. Please look here for an example of a Boss article as we would like to have them. Just copy this article's code and fill it with the specifics of the boss you edit. I'm convinced this would earn you a lot more positive recognition than what you are doing now. Roland of Gilead 01:43, 30 Jul 2005 (EST)

Ollj, Please stop!
merged to Category_talk:Candidates_for_deletion

cast
Merged to Talk:Skills

Positive Note
I just want to actually thank you for being so dedicated to this Wiki. I second LordBiro's suggestion that you take a moment to observe what is in place and examine the styles, the templates, the categories that are in place before you revamp an entire area. Nothing wrong with trying, and none of this criticism is personal. I am sure you are trying to help, and I for one am grateful for all the help we can get. --Karlos 12:10, 30 Jul 2005 (EST)

Ollj Skills
Ollj, so far your unilateral action has been about as much trouble as it has been worth. How about before you do anything else you get involved in the discussions in the Style and formatting sections? 02:21, 30 Jul 2005 (EST)

Ollj: I'm using "Fear me!": Talk:Skill_Template_Guide I want to bring all skills out of stub status!

Im working on a template for all the "green number" ranges, to insert this into all skills.

Trying and Trying
Hey, Ollj, I noticed that when you are trying to do something, you keep editing, then saving, then editing then saving, then editing then saving. Instead, how about you hit the Show Preview button? This way you can see what the page will look like and edit it if you need to.

By editing and saving to check what your work looks like you are filling up the Recent Changes list pretty fast with about 5 articles. --Karlos 18:55, 30 Jul 2005 (EST)

doesnt work on sites with templates that use templates (templates in templates). And wiki table code made of templates (with fixed width) are tricky, i just made it. -24...-14

For testing, there always is the Sandbox, too... --84.175.70.38 00:14, 31 Jul 2005 (EST)

Ollj please stop wikifying common words
merged to Talk:Skill Template Guide

The Uber Categories
merged to Category_talk:Categories&action=edit

Category: What the fuck?
What are you doing Ollj? I've just gone to recent changes and the page is filled with categories. Category:WTF being one of them. Category:Item being another. There is already a category for items. What the hell are you playing at?? I really don't know what to do about you, you just seem to think you can do whatever the hell you like, and that your way is best. Well, so far I've seen no evidence to suggest this. 09:31, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)

Im actually tidiing up by categories. I was going trough the categories and found a lot of doubled and curious ones. like "category:none" so while going trough them i put those in category:WTF

Well please dont do this. If you can't put them into a category straight away then don't do it. I appreciate that some of the changes you make are worthwhile, it's just very hard to filter them out from all the wrong ones you make. 09:55, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Ok, one obvious problem here is that you keep categorizing things that have to do with the topic as bieng items in the topic. For example, you classified block and attribute point as being part of the skills category. They are NOT part of the skills category. Only Skills should be part of the Skills category. The fact that somehting has to do with something else does not mean it is an item in that category.
 * I storngly recommned you stop this categorization process you have embarked upon and talk about the categories you envision. I sense a gap between what you think is the category layout and what most of us think it is. I also sense, quite frankly that you should try and limit your submitted daily changes to a number like 50 or something. Once you've made 50 changes. Stop and come back next day and see how they hold up. Right now, quite frankly, I fell i must check every edit and change you make. Not because I think you are evil, :) but because I feel you do not know what you are doing half the time. --Karlos 17:06, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Part of the sorting progress is to first put everytrhing into global groups and than go trough those to sort it into smaller groups. You just dont know hpw ti cal lthe smaller groups unless you see all the content in one big group. Some global groups are Skills, Items, Locations, NPC ..., their content goes into sub-categories (or into something like "*-related") in the next step, that starts now.Ollj


 * No, this is not how the categorization process is going. If you want to build categories from the top-down then you have to discuss it with us, the rest of the contributors and authors. You are trying to categorize the entire site. Do you not think we should have a say? Some say? Please, list those major categories in here or some related talk page and let us talk about this. I would like to see what your vision is because right now you are not making a lot of sense. "Infusion" is not a "Mission" and "Avoiding Scams" is not related to items it is related to either a guide on being new to the game or a guide on how to play the game. It is this specific issue of me seeing things differently than you that means that this is a bad category. A good category is one that is clear to almost everyone. I highly doubt you'd get three other users to say: Yeah, Infusion is a mission and block is a skill. --Karlos 19:45, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)

DISCUSS THINGS FIRST
Ollj, you do a lot of very wide reaching things without discussing them. Some things are good ideas, like categories like "causes bleeding" and so on. Others are bad things, like putting EVERYTHING into categories for the sake of YOUR solo work. Others are questionable like your work on number ranges. The way to figure out which things are good or bad is to ask on a talk page somewhere, wait a day or two, and then see if you should still do it or not.

You have continued to do things even after people have asked you to stop and discuss things first. Even when one of those persons has been an admin for the wiki. Virtually everyone has yelled at you at some point. This is the reason. --Fyren 19:36, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)

Im not editing site by site, i edit "group" by "group", its faster (more repetative) and makes it harder to miss something because of more overview over the whole thing. That way I edit like 2000 sites a day, of course the more negative changes fall more into everyones eye when people look at a few sites only, without seeing the whole thing that unites all edits in all sites. That way of editing makes it hard to discuss all the changes because of the hypertext form, but there is discussion! Right now i KNOW half of all sites here :) but i can not keep track of all those discussions. Another problem is that this way of editing takes longer time intervalls so you may see incomplete stuff more often, just because its a project split over multiple sites that are linked to each other. Like the actual categories, wich is a 2 day project of cleaning up. discussion was planned between those days, discussing how to clean up...


 * Dude, this is exactly what we don't want you to do. Here is what you are doing wrong:
 * You are taking on a massive update of what the categories in the site are and you are not telling any one about it. You still refuse to simply TELL us what you plan to do.
 * You assume that we agree with and understand what you are doing. Neither assumption is correct.
 * Most of this public work (public because it affects what users of the site will see) is so that you can do your work easier, not so that users can find more information. This is not why we have these articles. These articles are for people to search and read. Not for us to put crazy/useless info in them so we can sort them out however we want.


 * This is the last time I will actually make this request. Please: Stop making massive changes without first discussing them. If my request is not heeded, I will turn to the admins and ask that they put a ban on your account and your IP address. I am starting to feel your influence has been far more negative than positive so far.
 * This is no threat I am just one user like you, I am simply letting you know how I feel about this in hopes you may reconsider. --Karlos 20:08, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Karlos, you are not alone. I feel exactly the same. --Geeman 21:37, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * I would not like to have to ban someone from the wiki but I will do if you continue to act in such an ignorant manner. 23:29, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)

GuildWiki_talk:Style_and_formatting/Skills

Very Large / Cleanup
Whatever can be discussed elsewere than here should just be linked here and be merged and discussed there because this place is getting too full...
 * That alone should make you think what you have done/are doing. --Geeman 01:56, 2 Aug 2005 (EST)