User talk:Ollj11771

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

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)

Green Numbers & Relative Increase
[...] 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
Ollj, please stop creating empty articles. This takes them off the "Wanted Pages" and so we no longer know what we need. If you have content to provide please do so. But to just create an ampty article means it will look like its there but when someone goes to read it they will find it empty. And only people who don't know info come look for it, so they won't be able to fill it up.

I would also like to ask that this massive creation of empty articles be rolled back. --Karlos 19:46, 28 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * I will fill them. but i want to sort them in stubs first, then categorize, then fill. You can still find them as dead-end pages


 * They do NOT appear on the "dead-end" paged. Have you looked there? All that has is 60 articles. You have created like 1000 in the past two days. :) (Example: Damned Cleric is not there.) the pages you create are not "dead-end" because you have category links at the end.
 * Wanted Pages is for "wanted pages." Now, maybe you will fill out all those articles or maybe you won't. We are not going to render all those articles dependant on whether or not you remember to do them. I do not question your resolve nor your intentions. You could simply die tomorrow. :) I believe you are breaking the process. At least wait and see what the admins say instead of doing all that work and then having it rolled back. --Karlos 20:04, 28 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * I agree, [...] 22:09, 28 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * Creating stubs that have no info is bad idea. [...] I see you have also been creating a lots of new categories. I think we dont need those either, there only should be few major categories, dont one for each little detail. --Geeman 01:13, 29 Jul 2005 (EST)

added to all created articles that are still almost empty.

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!
I have noticed that you have been creating a lot of new pages and stuff. I think you should stop making them. Lots of your stuff has no info and the little info they have is formatted badly. It's not helping. Others have keep fixing them all the time and you just make more of them.--Geeman 01:17, 29 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * theyre all stubs, im filling and formating them.
 * Better way would be make one page at the time complete. Not start 1000s of pages at once and not finish them..
 * most filled, or at least categorized, some became "Category:Candidates for deletion"
 * Add, don't put them in a new category.  Better would have been to not make them in the first place.  --Fyren 06:49, 29 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * I agree, I feel uncomfortable deleting articles without the full blown template, I am currently the only active sysop and I can't trawl through every article and figure out whether it deserves to exist or not. In future please use this template.  02:21, 30 Jul 2005 (EST)

Don't take any of this personally, Ollj, but the reason everyone's asking you to stop is that by creating your empty "stubs", you render the Special:Wantedpages utterly useless. Just in case you missed it, that page lists all references from all the articles in the wiki that don't have their own articles yet. by creating an empty article of a certain subject, the wiki removes it from the wanted pages list. This makes it really difficult for us to find out which articles need writing up and which don't. We don't want that. Nuble 07:53, 29 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * Using template on all empty articles created...


 * that's just the thing with wikis. it's much easier to create articles than it is to delete them. now that the articles are already there, might as well start filling them. start with basic informations for certain articles, like maybe NPCs(quests given by NPC, NPC's role in the story, pictures, etc), and redirecting others to more relevant articles(armor dealer NPC redirected to the Armor article, maybe). i haven't really gone through all of the articles you created, but i'd like to help. if you don't mind, start a list on your userpage of all the articles you've created so far. we'll sort them out, somehow. and no more bickering please. that goes to all of you. Nuble 03:07, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)

Why are you marking huge sections of the Wiki as deletion candidates because they're Empty? They need to be filled in, not deleted! Ambassador Zain is a Major NPC early on, he needed to be filled in, not randomly marked as a worthless article. --Talrath Stormcrush 02:19, 31 Jul 2005 (EST)

oh wasnt that clear? Ambassador Zain was mean to me, so all memories to his existance must be deleted!

cast
Now you need to stop linking to 'cast'. I think it is bad for these reasons: 1) There is no article called cast 2) Most of those pages talk about casting time instead of casting in general 3) the correct wording is 'to cast' 4) the game and most pages on this site use activation time --Geeman 22:46, 30 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * There is no article called "activation time" (there wasnt, bet you will make one now) and those pages talk about casting time also. so "1" and "2" are nullified
 * All ingame skill descriptions use "time to cast" or "cast slower" (without "to"), and im not starting a page that includes prefixes like "to" ir "the" if they are no nouns! so "3" and "4" are nullified
 * "guild Wars" "Casting time" wins google fights against "Guild Wars" "activation time". "4" nullified again by all the guild wrs comunity
 * Its called "fast casting and not fast activating. owned!

Okay, but atleast use Casting instead of cast. --Geeman 23:21, 30 Jul 2005 (EST)

Lets take a look at the skills, because the simple reasins i used cast are Guilt Shame Hex Breaker Backfire Powerspike Power Block Mantra of Recorery Arcane Continuum Interpitude Mantra of Persistence Channeling Power Drain Arcane Echo Divine Boon Peache and Harmony Blessed Aura Divine Spirit Virgurous Spirit Holy Veil Succor Mark of Subvertion Soul Leech Soul Barbs Beastial Pounche Concussion Shot Nsatures Renewal Quickening Zephyr Choking Gas Skull Crack... Only Rust uses the term "activate".

I dont want to use Casting, because its not any better for the noun-argument, and its worse because its longer for the wikifiing-agrument. And the -ing suffix is only a gennus, it changes relative to time, and "casting" is used in correct gennus in the skill descriptions above (but only used like 3 times)


 * Well, think about it this way: What do you think that should be in article 'cast'? I can't think of anything that is not explained in Skills. --Geeman 23:47, 30 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * I can, BTW this will be my last argument to you.
 * Could you share it with the rest of us? --Geeman 23:56, 30 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * Google count doesn't matter really, if you use proper english you only cast spells. Activation time is the term chosen to use, if you think this is wrong discuss it on the style and formatting pages. 00:07, 31 Jul 2005 (EST)

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
There is no point to creating Guild Wars articles for words like "touch" or "foe" or "attack". If people really don't know what common english words are, there is a dictionary for that. --Jackel 03:55, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)

last time I checked this was no dictionary. attack and touch are not as clear as you might think.
 * You are the one trying to make this a dictionary. Touch is the only term that might need a bit of explaining in a game sense. All the other terms you have wikified dont need explaining. --Geeman 04:25, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * tell that to all the players I killed with Empathy, spirit shackes, spinal shivers, clumsiness, inerpitude ...


 * There is no reason to have a an entry for touch. We should have an entry for Touch Attack, Melee Attack, Ranged Attack. Players die because of Empathy and Spirit Shackles because they never bother to learn what those little icons on the top left mean. Not because they don't understand what attack means.
 * Overall, please try to think in terms of a process, not just something you like or not like. As a process, if you wikify attack, you will have to wikify the whole article and explain go, come and enter. If someone doesn't understand what the word "Melee" itself means, they should consult a dictionary. We should only try to explain what a Melee attack in guild wars is and what can cause it and what can stop it and so forth. --Karlos 05:21, 1 Aug 2005 (EST)