User talk:Ollj11771

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
"green numbers discussion cut"

Personal page edit
"cut"

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, Wanted Pages shouldn't just be filled in for the sake of taking them off the Wanted Pages list. If you can create enough to count as a stub then you should, if all you can do is add a stub template tag then you are really lowering the chance that someone who could fill in the page as needed from ever finding it. 22:09, 28 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * Creating stubs that have no info is bad idea. we don't need 1000s of pages with no info. What we need is pages that have info that can be used. 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)

Maps
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. 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.

Category:Bestiary

 * Also, Bestiary is not spelt "Beastiary". 22:10, 28 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)

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, 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)

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