User talk:Alexanderpas415

16:17, 27 April 2006 (CDT)

Please do not make pointless pages, putting PLACEHOLDER on something is un-wikilike, the placeholder is a red link for people to edit :| Skuld  05:19, 1 May 2006 (CDT)

Sig
Hello, please subst your sig so it doesn't use an include link. This is to prevent any vandals affecting the large number of pages that use the include and it improves performance when stuff doesn't need to be included. Thanks :) &mdash; Skuld  14:53, 1 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I subst-ed the links for you :) &mdash; Skuld  15:07, 1 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I personally find there are other templates in far more danger if any vandal ever decides to mess up GuildWiki via existing templates. One such example would be STDT.  Server load isn't also a concern IMHO, as the usage of talkpages is considerably lower than main articles, AND right now GuildWiki's main performance problems are that of bandwidth.  Of course my position is biased because I'm doing exactly what Alexanderpas is doing. -User:PanSola (talk to the [[Image:follower of Lyssa.png]]) 21:16, 1 July 2006 (CDT)
 * can you explain to me what's the difference between


 * and

Alexanderpas Talk
 * They both have an include link, the second takes more space in the database, the include on the second is not in my watchlist, and the actual reason why i did the include is to keep my sig uniform all over the wiki. 10:40, 5 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Performance differace and potentional vandalism, i've already said.. we don't want bad habits now &mdash; Skuld  10:42, 5 July 2006 (CDT)

massive babel rollback
Hi, I've fixed the autocategorization issue with babel boxes, and thus rolled back your changes so the nocat feature would work. If any of your edits involve more than manually inserting categorization links, I apologize and please re-edit them. -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 23:09, 31 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I'm NOT happy with this... you clearly didn't check the history of the pages before doing the rollback... i finally managed to get a certain degree of consistency into those templates. could you please undo the edits you made because i don't want to start an editwar... and please, check the history of those templates, for example the [ history of nl-N] 10:13, 1 August 2006 (CDT)
 * (after cooldown) secondly you'll notice that there is no consistency between the templates anymore, for example [ en-1] & [ en-4] and since both are changed in a different way, it is unclear which is the actual way to follow (thus i chose to go with both ways ;)) 15:36, 1 August 2006 (CDT)
 * (not so important: ;)) let's not forget how much time i put into getting those templates consistently... i was about to move to the next step, crating a stub-tag for some of those templates so afterward every template would look (exactly) the same. 15:37, 1 August 2006 (CDT)