User talk:Karlos8903

Hey Karlos, i noticed you added my damage note on final thrust to the article, i only just started making those... should i just put them in every article i make a note on that does not yet have a table? --Genveir

A small bit of randomness: the Diablo 2 collector's edition comes with a DVD with the cinematics on it. I know because I have it. --Fyren 18:55, 6 Jul 2005 (EST)

Thanks for the tip! :) After paying $40 for the game, I'll wait until the collector's edition is for $5 before I get it. "And the evil that was once vanquished shall rise anew... Wrapped in the guide of man shall he walk amongst the innocent... And terror shall consume they that dwell upon the earth..." Freaky stuff! :) --Karlos 19:15, 6 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * "Smoove" with the Regions category ;) 09:48, 8 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * Thanks. It'd been a long time coming. :) --Karlos 11:29, 8 Jul 2005 (EST)

Hi! Good work on the armor crafters! That's something I was planning to do once I had the chance :)

For the rest of them, could you use the same form as in Stingray_Strand_Crafter? You can just copy and paste the stuff, and leave all the areas blank. For the picture, type in whatever makes sense for the picture name. It will show up as "picture not found", but that's fine, because I'll be adding them within the next week. 17:53, 10 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * Done. I just looked at the wanted page and so all those missing armor crafters. There ought to be a better way of cross-referencing these things. Somehow if you say this armor is available at Hagen in the Armor's page it should also appear under Hagen's page. --Karlos 18:08, 10 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * Good job, it looks great.
 * The only way to cross-reference them would have been to make a category for each crafter. But, that would have really looked messy.  23:18, 10 Jul 2005 (EST)

It's rare to meet a Planescape: Torment fan. That is the single best story ever written. It's a shame that Bioware is leaning more towards the action-oriented games now. &mdash;Tanaric 22:07, 13 Jul 2005 (EST)


 * Amen to that. I have played that game over and over. It never gets old. It lacked a lot of the "cool" aspects of equipment and armor. But the sense of gratification from uncovering the story was sublime. The complexities of the characters. the conversations between the Nameless One and Dakkon and Vhailor are simply awesome. And then to uncover to Dakkon that it was all made up.. Dang! Oh, no! I am gushing again! :)


 * Nordom : Attention; Morte. I have a question. Do you have a destiny? A purpose?
 * Morte : Is Annah still wearing clothes?
 * Nordom : Affirmatory.
 * Morte : Then the answer is yes. :) --Karlos 22:37, 13 Jul 2005 (EST)

Well done on the conditions revamp. That sorely needed to be done! &mdash;Tanaric 20:46, 2 Aug 2005 (EST)
 * Thanx --Karlos 20:51, 2 Aug 2005 (EST)

Thanks a lot, that is the way I wanted it, but would not get it to be =) --Xeeron 19:38, 29 Sep 2005 (EST)

Titans
Aww, man, I wanted to do the Titans today. You beat me to it. ;) --Eightyfour-onesevenfive 19:17, 6 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * I knew it!! :) I was planning to break down that Titan article for a long time. Today I was aked to help someone in that mission and I saw the Lich Lord question and thought I'd do it.
 * Still much left to do... Can you get the Titan boss info. Also, the Armageddon Lords have no entry at all (the party I was with was in no shape to do bonus at all). :) I could not catch all the skills used by all the bosses. Screen caps would be nice too. So, don't worry, we still have a lot to say about the titans. --Karlos 19:23, 6 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * I still need some elite skills from that mission, so I will do it again someday. Yes screen caps... I forget to take them all the time, and when I think of it the mobs are already surrounded by henchmen and engulfed in sparks and fire... :-/ Hmm, Armageddon Lords... I remember they use Flam Burst, but that isn't enough to justify creating an article. :) --Eightyfour-onesevenfive 19:35, 6 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Ok so I betrayed you again. :) Sorry, went to help another friend. This time I got more coherent info. --Karlos 21:10, 6 Sep 2005 (EST)

Umm... is there a reason why you removed the "sort names" from the categorization of A Gift of Griffins (Gift of Griffins, A) and The Wailing Lord? Now they will be listed under "A" and "T", while they should be under "G" and "W". --Eightyfour-onesevenfive 09:34, 15 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Sorry, I thought it didn't serve any purpose. :)

Skill listings
I personally think that having the list of skills to cap right there when you're looking at an area is very convienient. At a glance I can tell if I need to bring a capture signet along when I'm venturing into that area, as opposed to needing to click on each boss name to find out what elite each uses. It doesn't seem to clutter up the listing, so I don't really see the point in removing them. 67.182.143.162 17:35, 15 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * The problem is the redundancy it creates. Normally you don't want the same information in more than one place in a database. Imagine ANet changes something about bosses and their elite skills. We will have to go through the bosses page, the elite skills themselves, the elite skills locations listing and the locations to reflect the changes. With every instance it grows worse. Chances increase that things will be forgoten to be changed and that leads to outdated and corrupt data. I understand your point, though. --Eightyfour-onesevenfive 18:12, 15 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Amen. :) If this was a programmable database. We would put in a few lines of code that would say: List all bosses whose "location" is "Mineral Springs" and next to their names, list their "elite" skill. This would mean the data would be in the boss and we can show it around in as many ways as we want. Unfortunatley, this database is simply searchable and linkable (and categorizable). I just think the hassle of one extra click is a lot less than the hassle of updating all those articles after a major change in the game (like when they removed elites from pre-desert bosses). --Karlos 19:06, 15 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * You could put the boss information in the zone articles and have the boss pages redirect. There about 5 bosses that are in 2 zones.--Cloak of Letters 05:48, 16 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * That would be poor data structure. We would be a website, not a database. The power of this wiki is that you define entities and then link them together and search them. If we start making the page about Mineral Springs also contain the info for Zameel the Unworthy and Willa the Unpleasant then the Wiki would lose meaning in my opinion. --Karlos 15:13, 16 Sep 2005 (EST)

Pre-Searing Quests
Karlos, as I know we've kinda butted heads on this before, take a look at what I did to the Pre-Searing quest list. I want to try to show the quests that you have to do, but as I noted in the discussion for that page, I don't like the way I did it at all. I do think that that information is somewhat important, and should be listed, but I want a second opinion. As I figure you're the most likely to tell me its crap, I'd like to hear what you think. :) I need to sleep now, but I'll respond to any suggestions/comments you have in the morning.  --Rainith 15:47, 16 Sep 2005 (EST)

Quests that happen nearby
Karlos, works for me. I was listing it as Quests Started: until I came across quite a few NPCs that had it listed as ==Quests Started==. I assumed that I had been doing it wrong before.

As for the "quests involed in" part, I think that if a character is an integral part of the quest (green ! over their head, must be killed in the quest, must be protected and kept from being killed) then it is warrented. To me that is what this wiki is about, information. Much of the info here I consider useless. Do we need a description for the creatures to play the game, or do we just need to know how to kill them, and what they drop? IMO we don't need a description at all, the game tells you what the creature is when you attack it, so it isn't like you're going to get confused. I feel the "quests involved in" falls into the category of what some people consider useless, and others may find useful. --Rainith 17:29, 18 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * True, and this is why I said, if you feel it is important. Instead of an ambiguous list of quests. You should say: He must be protected as he delivers a message in the quest ABC and he helps the players out in quest XYZ. I guess I am looking at it from a story prospective, you are looking at it from a pure usability perspective. What use is this guy to my XP and Gold caches? :)
 * I just see the list as being VERY subjective. The word "involved" is as loose fitting as the term "axis of evil" :) --Karlos 17:36, 18 Sep 2005 (EST)

ANTI missions crusade?
I spend the day updating all the links so they link directly to the missions page and now you go about and remove them all to make them double redirects? Errr, I dont understand. --Xeeron 10:57, 24 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Allow me to elaborate. Some time ago we had a clear conflict between the "Ruins of Surmia" (the place) and the "Ruins of Surmia" the mission. Some article "Ruins of Surmia" and "Rins of Surmia (Mission)" while others were "Fort Ranik (Location)" and "Fort Ranik" for mission and finally there was "The Wilds (Location)" and "The Wilds (Mission)"


 * After much deliberation, it was decided (against my personal wishes) that the wiki would go with the following format:
 * Location of mission will be "Ruins of Surmia (Location)"
 * Mission Article will remain "Ruins of Surmia (Mission)" (mainly because 90% of them were already like that.
 * Unqualified article "Ruins of Surmia" will redirect to MISSION page.
 * When editing, we will simply refer to "Ruins of Surmia" if we mean the mission and we'll use the Ruins of Surmia for the location.


 * The reason for the last point is to simplify editing of at least one of them. What you were doing is making it referring to the mission the hard way. I was undoing that and it was not based on own design. (My preference was "Ruins of Surmia" is the location and "Ruins of Surmia (Mission)" for the mission.) --Karlos 11:05, 24 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Shrugs, ok. I dont care whether its (mission)/(location), (mission)/nothing or nothing/(location). Just thought it would be nicer not to start doubling the redirects (plus it makes it clear to everyone doing future edits, which page is refered to, even without knowing the (mission)/(location) rule. I dont blame anyone for not using the hard link, but what harm is there in using it? --Xeeron 11:11, 24 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * More cumbersome edits for new users. Harder maintenance for the rest of us if we decide to rename it from "Ruins of Surmia (Mission)" to "Ruins of Surmia - Mission" then we only need to change the redirects, not the entire wiki. :) --Karlos 11:15, 24 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * OK =) --Xeeron 20:30, 24 Sep 2005 (EST)

Lists in Skill Type Articles
Here's some things wrong with your changes to the skill lists in Signet, Stance, Hex, Enchantment, Sacrifice, and Knockdown: For the information of how the skills relate to the skill type: unless it adds a lot of utility to the user and is objective enough, please consider keeping it limited to parenthetical information after each element in the list instead. --Rezyk 15:24, 1 Oct 2005 (EST)
 * The new list titles are way too subjective in meaning (for example, someone added Diversion to "Skills that harm/hinder Signet users", which would have much less of a case in the old list title).
 * The user can no longer tell that all skills that directly involve those skill types are among the lists, and that the lists are limited to such.
 * The lists are sometimes broken up into multiple very, very short lists; some have a single item! These are a lot less convenient for the user to navigate.


 * Let's take it over in, say, Talk:Hex? --Karlos 16:13, 1 Oct 2005 (EST)

Our little argument
I almost forgot about the False Gods discussion. Time to pick it up again, especially after your last remark. Sorry, I can't leave it standing like that. But I'll take it to your talk page, because this is about you (and me) more than it is about The False Gods.

That it was "my" remark being removed is clearly NOT the heart of the problem. It is perfectly clear to me that anything in a wiki is public domain and doesn't belong to anyone. Countless times in the past I've acceded that other people (including you) have edited "my" text. That's because I agreed that their wording sounded better (which is easy, considering I'm not a native speaker), their text was more elaborated, or they convinced me that there was an error in my text. Actually it's quite easy to convince me. I don't claim to be impeccable.

The point is that in this specialy case you did NOT convince me. Nor did you prove me wrong. There is nothing to prove here. It's matter of opinion. But you behave like there was a definite right or wrong here, and like YOU were the judge over it. I'm not at all convinced that this is all about me. This is about you just as much as it is about me. You like to see yourself as the Judge of Objectivity and the Keeper of the thousand Rules in this Wiki. You reserve the right for yourself to edit any article to your liking, but if somebody insists and reverts the edit you call that "childish games". Double standards, anyone?

You behave like you're an admin, which - as we know - may soon come true. I hope in that case we'll manage to come to a live and let live agreement. You're not dumb. An argument with somebody with a sharp mind can be fun, even if you disagree. But I'm afraight with one of us having admin powers, discussions are going to become a bit lopsided. You say I'm going to have a lot of problems here. Surprisingly, I haven't had any so far, except with you. I really enjoyed being a contributor of this wiki in the past, and I'd hate to leave because of a stupid personal matter like this.

Thanks for saying that I'm a creative contributor to this wiki. I can say the same about you. But I wish you'd focus on constructive work more than supervising and critisizing other people's work. Unless you become an admin, of course, which would officially make it your job to do that. ;) --Tetris L 04:48, 5 Oct 2005 (EST)


 * Karlos, these are pretty much the exact same sentiments (good parts and bad) I had in our clash. (I don't mean to start an argument or get involved in this one; just thought you should know.) --Rezyk 08:36, 5 Oct 2005 (EST)


 * I'm getting into the bad pattern of interfering in arguments involving Karlos. Nevertheless, there is something I need to say: admins do not have any greater say on content/style than anyone else, as far as I'm concerned. Even if Karlos does become an admin (I think he'd do a good job), that will not give him any more authority as far as generating or maintaining content.  This is a collaborative, democratic project, and all voices are equal. &mdash;Tanaric 09:49, 5 Oct 2005 (EST)

Let me explain things a bit from my side. There are two things I love doing in this Wiki:
 * Lore and Story: While I think the overall plot is like a Tom & Jerry cartoon compared to Torment's Shawshank Redemption, :) I like to understand the story of any game and fully explore the history and the characters. Not for any perceived in-game benefit, just out of love for adventures.
 * Editing: Not editing as in changing, but editing as in newspaper editing. Supervising the grammar, the language, the conciseness and the objectivity. I am a bit compulsive by nature and like for things to be tidy and make sense (according to me of course). But above that, I am an editor of an actual English language publication and in general enjoy checking every nook and cranny in every article and making sure things are consistent and to the standard. This is why I will push for standardizing Skill progression tables regardless of which format that standard takes. I like for things to follow a system and to be tidy and accessible to all.

Now, one of the reasons we have had friction, I think, is that we share the love of the first (you like and care about the lore and story angles too), and you do not seem to care (as much) about the second (i.e. that everything is in a system and that a process governs what we are doing). I think this is why we had so many "run-ins."

As Tanaric said above, I think you (and Rezyk) are understanding my role incorrectly. When I first came here, I used to think the same... That to challenge LordBiro or Dlanod, I'd have to take their permission first because they were admins and I am a lay citizen and admins have the final word. But I quickly learned that it's not like that. You'll note that in my quarrel with Rezyk, I did not plead for admins to "stop him" but instead I made a plea for the community to weigh in. That's all I care about. If I do become an admin, I will actually have to be very careful because some people might think I am "running" the site.

I edit left and right because I DO think my edits are good obviously, or I would not do them, but I DON'T do them because I think I am in charge of this place or that my wording is unchangeable. I do feel that overall few people here match my care for "editing peculiarities" such as punctuation and grammar and overall style and objectivity. But that does not mean that I feel my opinions on these issues are final and unchallengeable. I have tried since coming here to make this Wiki serious. i.e. articles look as crisp and professional as possible. That is why there is nary an article that pops up on the recent changes list that I do not touch.

As for defending my edits... If you look at the articles on this site you'll find many, especially in mission overviews, quest descriptions and lore that I have written. Some of them I no longer even recognize. I don't care and never tried to "defend" my style vs someone else's. Working in a magazine teaches you that pretty well. If you edit too much, the writers hate you, if you edit too little, the readers hate you.

With regards to our little struggle in False Gods, as I said then. I felt your advice was not that good. We had a tussle and then I asked for input from others. I should not have dragged it into a semi-revert-war, especially since you deserve better from me and for that I apologize. But I still think your comment should not be there.

So, in summary, I am the Keeper of a thousand Rules but I am not the Judge of Objectivity, I am the Pursuer of Objectivity. --Karlos 16:55, 5 Oct 2005 (EST)


 * Wait a second! I just noticed! I am an admin!! Mwah ha ha haah! To quote Galadriel: "Instead of a dark lord you would have an admin, not dark but annoying and persistent as an alarm clock!! All shall love me and despair!!" :) --Karlos 17:37, 5 Oct 2005 (EST)


 * Oh, crap! Who gave him the ring?? The ring to rule them all (and in the darkness bind them).


 * Seriously now: Congrats for becoming an admin! You had my vote. I understand your motivation to edit in this wiki (both in the meaning of changing and newspaper editing). And you're good at what you do. I'd say that 8 out of 10 times I agree with your suggestions (except when it comes to the thousand rules ;)). I'm an engineer, and like all engineers I like things to be well structured and organized. We're not that different in that respect. I am however, not willing to stick to all rules just for the sake of it. My first priority is to make this wiki as useful as possible for our users. If a rule hinders us more than it helps to make the wiki useful, then I'll gladly bend that rule, or revise it.


 * Anyway ... I trust you won't abuse your admin powers. If you disagree with somebody over something that is a matter of opinion, and no agreement can found in the discussion of the facts, put the matter to a vote by the community. Anybody should be willing to accept the result of a little poll. But never, ever should you say (openly or between the lines) "I'm right because I'm an admin" and then declare you opinion as the final decision. I trust you know that, and will act accordingly. --Tetris L 02:41, 6 Oct 2005 (EST)