User talk:Sandwichman2448

From Wowpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Past yellings at/praisings of/comments to me are archived here:

Past discussions archived to...

Typo account

I noticed that at times when logging on, I'd forgotten the capitalization of the "w" in my name. As such I have both User:Peterwind and User:PeterWind. Would it be possible to just have the two merged, or have my edits on Peterwind moved to PeterWind, and then having Peterwind deleted, to avoid confusion? PeterWind (talk) 09:41, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Azeroth

What does this "Right now, Azeroth is Azeroth" mean ? That page was about Azeroth the titan/world-soul, not the planet. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 01:00, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

And this comment probably has more content than the page did. Azeroth and world-soul are enough until the planet becomes a character that is not one of those two things.--SWM2448 01:04, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
That is because that page was a stub. Wowpedia:Stub_policy
- Azeroth is about the planet called Azeroth, as the name suggests, while that page was about the world-soul which already is a character. Its content would thus having nothing to do with Azeroth.
- world-soul has literally only 3 sentences about Azeroth as a world-soul.
The content of Azeroth (titan) would've had next to nothing in common with the two others above. Yes there would've been 3 sentences about its origins, but then it would've talked about other things, such as its interactions with Magni, how she told him about the Pillars of Creation, or the Emerald Dream, or its interaction with Sargeras himself who saw (or believed that he saw) her Eye and that it was magnificent and that he forged the Scepter of Sargeras so that it would look like it and so on and so on, for example, which aren't available anywhere else.
For these reasons I will ask you to undo this. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 01:10, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
The stub policy says "Do not create pages containing a stub tag but absolutely no content". Your page barely avoided that rule. Perhaps create a sandbox page while your work is under construction.--SWM2448 01:13, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
I mean, technically it had content. The policy was talking about "a page of article management templates and empty sections", so literally no content. This had content, and was about to get more. The following paragraph says "Throughout Wowpedia are articles with little or no content that have been created with the intention of filling them in. These are referred to as stubs and are tagged specifically to tell visitors that they are, in fact, stubs.." which means that this was exactly the intended behavior.
So undo your action so it can be filled. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 01:18, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
Are you going to fill in the content?--SWM2448 01:20, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
That is the intent. You also could've asked that before deleting the page with no warning. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 01:21, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Mortar Team

Hello. I'd like to have the Mortar Team page moved to Mortar team instead, the capitalized T isn't required since it's a page about mortar teams in general, while the Mortar Team unit is properly capitalized already. Xporc (talk) 12:25, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't get it but sure.--SWM2448 18:59, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you! Xporc (talk) 19:16, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Silver Hand/Scarlet Crusade

Hey man. I hate to be a bother, but recently there has been many back-and-forth on the Knights of the Silver Hand page the role of the Scarlet Crusade. Now I think the debate could be interesting, but the last few edits have just been repeated "undo". Could you please take a look? Xporc (talk) 18:18, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Behind the Dark Portal

Hello, could u move The Art and Making of Warcraft: Behind the Dark Portal to Warcraft: Behind the Dark Portal? It's the correct name of the book. TY! --Mordecay (talk) 03:34, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Completely unrelated but since I don't want to clutter up your talk page with a new section each time, could you please move Fallen Priest to Fallen Priest (Warcraft III)? Thanks! Xporc (talk) 14:24, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
I really really don't get it but sure.--SWM2448 17:41, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Well it's because the Fallen Priest (Warcraft III) page is about the Warcraft III-only creep, while the page for the lore of these guys is actually Heretics and not "Fallen Priest". Well, anyway, thanks a lot! Xporc (talk) 17:47, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
I mean that your naming project defies most disambiguation conventions. If Fallen Priest or Fallen priest do not exist, then there is no reason to call it Fallen Priest (Warcraft III). The same for literally ever other RTS subject that only has one page about it. Which I have said before. But consistency. If you really need to label it, we have banner-things.--SWM2448 18:04, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Well, I am trying to do more, I'm just limited by time. When I first joined wowpedia, I started working on Warcraft I and Warcraft II, and all the units and structures in those games have "(Warcraft I)" or "(Warcraft II)" in their URL, so I figured it should be the same for Warcraft III, but I see how that could bother you. Xporc (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Forum:Redundancy problem with RTS topics. Yeah. The thing with Warcraft III is that there was no Fallen Priest unit in Warcraft II. Just carry on.--SWM2448 18:42, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Cosmos

Hey, as everyone seems to have agreed on the talk page, could you move Cosmos to  [Cosmos] or something else so that Universe can become Cosmos ? -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 06:06, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

The conversation died before a consensus was formed.--SWM2448 06:13, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Chronicle established that universe meant Great Dark, and that Warcraft in its entirety was Cosmos, can't debate facts I believe. No one opposed it, do you see any point for opposition ? -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 06:19, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
For the name, you are correct. For the page to exist at all, I have serious doubts. People saw the "cosmos" image from Chronicle, and apparently thought that it needed multiple pages based around it: we have universe, magic, and plane. Each plane now has a type of magic related to it. We either need one page or two, not three. I actually want just magic and plane, but I also want to hear good arguments for a single page, which can be called "cosmos".--SWM2448 06:30, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
There may be a misunderstanding, I'm not asking for a fourth page. You quoted three, universe, magic and plane, I'm suggesting we just rename "universe" into "cosmos", the number doesn't change, you just have to move it since it's admin-locked I think. The rest is another debate for another day since it doesn't have anything to do with this renaming. But since you're mentioning it I'm personally on the side of having less pages. Plane may be incorporated into Cosmos for example, since planes are part of the cosmos, reducing the number to 2. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 06:44, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Where did I say fourth?--SWM2448 06:52, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Instead of debating here, maybe you guys could take it to the relevant page? I have my own opinions but I'd rather give them there. Xporc (talk) 07:58, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Thing is everyone including SWM agrees about the renaming so I just want it to happen, I don't want to debate the rest, Sandwichman. Please move it so that Universe is renamed Cosmos, as for its potential content, planes and stuff, we'll discuss that on the talk page, that's not what I came for, I'm here just for the renaming. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 08:36, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Bot request

Hey boss, would it be possible to make a bot which would correct all the basic Alliance and Horde reps in infoboxes (except the Bilgewater Cartel, they don't have separate rep page): city = Orgrimmar into affiliation = Orgrimmar etc...? --Mordecay (talk) 20:09, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

I've never run one.--SWM2448 20:15, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Oh, and who takes care of it? --Mordecay (talk) 20:30, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
No one.--SWM2448 20:32, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Both Coobra and Gourra have bots, yes? Xporc (talk) 20:39, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Do you have a them?--SWM2448 20:41, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Kaydeethree has a bot. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 20:45, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
I remember a "bot request" page where you'd write your request and eventually bots would take care of it, I can't find it anymore. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 23:25, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes you can.--SWM2448 00:03, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

A couple of questions

Might as well post here, considering the.. lack of pings, as we "discussed".. :^)
I was curious, would it be possible to add keyboard shortcuts for simple things like making selected text (or wherever the I-cursor is located) bold, by just going with the standard Ctrl + B shortcut? Ctrl + I for italic, and so on. Would speed some things up. Always nice with some quality of life improvements.
Second, I'm currently working on a dictionary page for an extended version of Zandali, and I'm not too sure on what kind of layout to use, so what I'm working with currently is (example)

Nouns
Zandali word - Translation


Zandali word - Translation


Zandali word - Translation
Is it possible to add columns between the horizontal lines? To cut down on the size a single, massive pillar of words takes up. Or uh.. do you have any better ideas for a layout? xD WarGodZajru (talk) 00:43, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

First question: Probably no. Second question: There are a few types of table that you can make. Just look at the code on other pages. If you need help with functionality, just ask.--SWM2448 01:23, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Awh, alrighty.
And suar, will see what I can find. And I'll keep that in mind, thanks. c: WarGodZajru (talk) 01:44, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Whaaat

Hi. Could you please take a look at the actions of Ollanor, Rownos and Narboll? These three acounts popped out of nowhere in the span of a single day, each working on different topics but with always the same editing style, that often involves mass deleting fine content : / Xporc (talk) 18:46, 17 March 2017 (UTC) I mean, what the fuck was the point of that edit: https://wow.gamepedia.com/index.php?title=Skull_of_the_Man%27ari&diff=prev&oldid=4344540 ? This is vandalism. Xporc (talk) 18:47, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes. 21-23 users share that IP address, 2017 join dates, and similar user name syntax/styles. Sometimes, users can share IP addresses. With that many exact matches alongside vandalism, this is probably not one of those times.--SWM2448 18:55, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
List of names to judge
What I don't understand is that most of the edits are pretty benign, as if they wanted to refresh a little some pages, but then they also cut whole paragraphs of completely fine text on the side Xporc (talk) 18:57, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
I don't see much vandalism, but I do see several similar edits by the same IP address. See below.--SWM2448 19:03, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Well vandalism is probably not the best word, but there's an extreme amount of unneeded trimming. All the Warcraft III campaign mission descriptions have been deleted by Narboll ... Is it possible to mass revert them? Xporc (talk) 19:07, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
I'm going to ban all but Narboll (for now), and then rollback the Warcraft III edits of the top three names. Any other requests?--SWM2448 19:12, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
That should be okay, I think... We still good after that altar of storms thing? Xporc (talk) 19:30, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Slantyface.gif--SWM2448 19:58, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
It's weird.. The edits of Rownos on set items seemed, to me, pretty decent, although I did not look through all 700 or however many there were. But other edits clearly took of way too much "meat" or flavor text of the articles... PeterWind (talk) 23:30, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Rownos too also cut a bit too much for my taste, though I was ready to accept it in the name of cleaning up a bit those articles Xporc (talk) 23:50, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Didn't check all of them but Narboll definitely might be a bot, several edits across several articles in less than a minute, all with the same purpose. It also caused great damage to many articles, entire parts of WC3 missions such as explanations and summaries were "streamlined" or really just removed. Edit: 200 edits in 1,5 hour. --- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 23:37, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Just so you guys know, I went through every single Narboll edit and fixed them when necessary. I kept the positive parts of what he did. So there's no need anymore to revert his changes. I'm gonna go through the other accounts now.Xporc (talk) 11:05, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Alright, now I'm done with Ollanor. Nothing major this time, but they did a lot of edits to pages like Anub'Arak and Kel'Thuzad that I have yet to check. Xporc (talk) 14:58, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
I went through the posts of all the other accounts. Most of the edits were pretty legit, even though I dislike how Rownos removed many notes from the armor set pages. Still, I don't feel like going through his ~800 edits to edit back the information ... I also suspect Enno 298, Tsutbib, Aarnios and Molloth of being new sockpuppet accounts even though they havn't done anything wrong. Xporc (talk) 19:58, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Molloth is User:Vellino, Enno 298 is at least on the same network as Tsutbib, and Aarnios is separate.--SWM2448 22:34, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Again some weird new users cropping up, with similar way of working, even though they didn't do anything wrong yet. Out of curiosity, could you check out the IPs of UserProfile:Dellonoz and UserProfile:Jornello? I'm still weirded out by the whole thing. Xporc (talk) 18:46, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Narboll came back with another 7 user accounts. Is this a public IP address? I can only mass-revert if they were the last user to edit a page.--SWM2448 18:50, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Well so far they have done nothing wrong, 95% of their edits were legit, besides some weird habit of deleting a random paragraph in order to streamline the text. Shit man I just don't know, this user could be nice to have with us, I simply don't understand why they persist in creating new accounts and working this way. Xporc (talk) 19:26, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Well it seems the filter isn't working... Xporc (talk) 19:05, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
The guy with multiple accounts seems to be back. Could u check User:Rethgen, User:Wroak, User:Xelleth. Not that they would do anything harmful yet, but still. --Mordecay (talk) 16:06, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Yeah it's definitively the same guy. Xporc (talk) 16:46, 5 July 2017 (UTC)\
Good job/call everyone. Even so, all I can do is ban them and revert their edits.--SWM2448 18:03, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
I assume bans are IP bans? -- MyMindWontQuiet 11:18, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes.--SWM2448 17:37, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Highvale

Hello, could u move Highvale high elves to Highvale? Thx. --Mordecay (talk) 11:03, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Don't Bite Newbies article

Why were the edits reverted? (aside from the strictures part) IconSmall Murozond.gifTime, is what is running. SurafSuraf (Talk/Special) 03:56, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

I saw that and assumed the other bits also were also not typos.--SWM2448 04:06, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Language tags

Hey, sorry that you had to fix this. Do you know why when using the live editor it'll change the language tags at the bottom from "[es:Oshu'gun]" for example to "[es:Oshu'gun es:Oshu'gun]" without my doing? -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 21:41, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

I use a source view and I have never touched the live editor for good reason. Unfortunately, this means that I can not help you.--SWM2448 21:51, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Third War

Hey man how you doin? Could you please try to encourage Gabrirt‎ and ShadowShade81413 to speak to each other rather than having an unproductive edit war on the Third War article? So far ShadowShade hasn't answered on Forum:Between the cross and the sword and Garbrit, is, well, Garbrit. They both mean well but I fear some information will eventually get lost during the edit war. Thanks Xporc (talk) 17:15, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Larger pages have a tendency to rot over time as people tweak and revamp them. Just wait until you can replace most of the page with information from Chronicle Volume 3. I realize that that answer is not the most helpful that I could have given, but ShadowShade has been blocked for edit warring before, and Gabrirt is Garbrit. If I ban them again, I will have to ban several other people for similar mild misbehavior and then even less will get done. Third War will not improve any time soon regardless of any action I take.--SWM2448 17:40, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
Alright, thanks for the input. Didn't saw things that way, honestly. Xporc (talk) 18:42, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
Don't thank me for doing nothing. Maybe I'm just being lazy. I will go try to talk to two people who will not listen, so a bad page does not become a worse one. Assume good faith and all that.--SWM2448 18:56, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Jandvik Jarl's Ring, and Finger

While updating the page for  [Jandvik Jarl's Ring, and Finger], I was wondering, from that line you added, did you mean that it belonged to, or dropped from Jarl Throndyr? I went with this, but I figured I'd just ask to be sure. PeterWind (talk) 13:07, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

It drops from the naga brute, but the Jarl is a short walk from the cave.--SWM2448 15:43, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Sure, but I am refering to "Originally Jarl Throndyr... but it now drops from Har'kess the Insatiable." I am asking whether the Jarl, who is now just dead, was killable on the beta and dropped this item, or if that sentence was just meant as a "this item belonged to this guy". PeterWind (talk) 16:58, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
It was a joke.--SWM2448 17:04, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes, but as you can see I based the notes section, which I suppose should actually be trivia in this case, on that edit of yours. I'm just asking if there's anything to that line, or if I should remove that part. PeterWind (talk) 21:22, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Reply

I figured they'd probably see it on the watchlist if not notified. And I've gone to user talks twice and been ignored twice.[1][2] Will you make the changes I requested? --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 20:33, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

I hate the constant fighting on that template, but sure. You win this round.--SWM2448 20:52, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes, but you must admit it's something that naturally needs to be updated once to a few times every expansion, right? Can you make these changes too? --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 22:31, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Can you simply give me the ability to edit both templates to make things simpler and easier? --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 01:26, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

I think the edit wars will return if that happens.--SWM2448 02:00, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
I made some changes that Gourra wanted. Will you update the templates again with the versions on the bottom of both talks? --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 22:25, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Can you remove the old former leaders on the Alliance one too? Looks like you missed that by mistake. --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 16:39, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

"A branch of WoWWiki"

Hey, when you google Wowpedia this is what shows up, is it normal? http://i.imgur.com/jeDWV76.png -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 17:16, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

I think they mean fork.--SWM2448 17:41, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Yeah it was forked, split, but now they have nothing to do with each other, this text is literally saying that wowpedia is a branch of wowwiki which is incorrect! -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 17:43, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
I don't know how to fix it. Ask Kaydeethree.--SWM2448 18:05, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Portal

Hey just to let you know that the Portal:Main page does not list the Trial of Valor, the Cathedral of Eternal Night, Return to Karazhan and the Armies of Legionfall. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 23:19, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Island

Hi, would you have any source for "They are the same island" (some game files/maps maybe)? I know they look alike but that's no fact for a wiki and should maybe be rephrased as "it likely was the inspiration for / was turned into ...". Far as I can see the warlock island though similar looked fairly different and had a cave etc. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 18:10, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

They are both revisions the "WarlockArea" map. Dreadscar Rift is a direct update of the unfinished island. Marlamin's list might help.--SWM2448 18:13, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Perfect! This is what I wanted with the {{fact}} tag. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 23:04, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Eonic Defenders

These are pretty interesting. Their name seems to be derived from Eonar. Do you know where they appear in-game? -- MyMindWontQuiet 20:56, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Right before Maiden in ToS.--SWM2448 21:28, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
A friend found them, not sure why didn't see them before. https://i.imgur.com/qcRCqlB.jpg -- MyMindWontQuiet 11:19, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for adding these little details about the rooms in ToS! These are interesting to read about Xporc (talk) 09:47, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Lei Shen Picture

Hey I know this is not a big deal, but I found that picture of Lei Shen on the WoW website under background images. Yes it's still made by an outside source, but wouldn't that endorsement by Blizzard make it factual? Just wondering, thought it was cool! Also on the bottom right is has a copyright by Blizzard Entertainment.--Dperrea (talk) 05:22, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Is it official or just featured fan art?--SWM2448 05:27, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure I guess it's ambiguous, it's mixed in with other official Blizzard art, but also other externally sourced photos. Here's the link http://us.battle.net/wow/en/media/wallpapers/other?view=udon-the-thunder-king if you would like to decide :)! --Dperrea (talk) 05:32, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
It says "submitted by". It is just good fan art that they made into a wallpaper.--SWM2448 05:41, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
They added "By Blizzard" though, so while it was originally made by an external artist it is now their copyrighted property, so it would count as official. -- MyMindWontQuiet 06:14, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
They added a copyright notice, but where is the "By Blizzard" authorship?--SWM2448 06:18, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
I was referring to "© Blizzard Entertainment, All rights reserved". -- MyMindWontQuiet 06:58, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
I don't think that that makes it into official art, just copyrighted fan art.--SWM2448 07:00, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
If they copyright it, it's theirs. Copyright rights don't always belong to the author. And contrary to what the name suggests it's not just the right to copy and distribute the product in question, copyright is technically a form of intellectual property. So it effectively is "Blizzard art". I believe. -- MyMindWontQuiet 07:09, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
It's not "effectively Blizzard art," at least not for our purposes. It's still fan art that was featured on Blizzard's website. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 17:11, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
I guess it depends on what you understand by "Blizzard art". Art made by Blizzard artists only? Art made by artists that were contracted/commissioned by Blizzard? Or just art that belongs to Blizzard? Because this would categorize as the latter, I believe.-- MyMindWontQuiet 09:33, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

The website has a specific section for fan art (which also bears Blizzard's copyright). The Lei Shen image in question comes from the "Other" section. It's not unheard of for Blizzard to co-opt fan art as official artwork. This happened in the Ultimate Visual Guide with File:Sargeras by Jian Guo.jpg. --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 16:47, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Old leaks

Hey man, I was wondering. I know about the Wowpedia:DNP policy but what about old leaks? As you may probably remember, Cataclysm was leaked on MMO-Champion about a week before its official announcement, but some of the things from the leak varied a lot from was was actually released in the end. Do you think it's okay to post about? Considering the leak was true about 90% of its content, maybe the remaining 10% is stuff that Blizzard changed mind about after the announcement, and to me that'd be nice information to put in the speculation sections. From my old forum posts, I see that Thrall was supposed to become Guardian of Tirisfal, the leader of the playable goblins would have joined Deathwing, and Azshara/the naga would have played a much bigger role. Besides those, everything else turned out 100% correct. With a link now. Xporc (talk) 15:14, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Thrall a Guardian of Tirisfal?? What the fel?! Nice info. --Mordecay (talk) 15:22, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
I think part of the issue here is it is essentially unsourced speculation without basis in lore. At that point you have to decide what speculation merits mention and then you're running afoul of WP:LORE and WP:NPOV as well as DNP. Probably best to keep it off-wiki as WP:DNP and WP:EL state. If the pre-release speculation is particularly notable, like if Blizzard were to mention it, then it might have a chance. But without revisions on quite a few policies, I feel it's no-go. --PcjWowpedia admin (TDrop me a line!C207,729 contributions and counting) 15:29, 15 July 2017 (UTC)