User talk:Jazzman831

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
I prefer to have conversations on one page. If I left you a message, I will be watching your page; if you leave me a message, I will respond here. Thanks.
Archive
Archives

Please remove all my material from this wiki[edit]

I asked Green Dragon but he refuses. I would like all pages created by me to be deleted from this wiki. The reasons are personal and nobody's business but my own. Thank you for your cooperation. --Scryer's Eve (talk | contribs) 15:59, 26 March 2012 (MDT)

I've already explained why that can't be done. First of all, GD owns the wiki, so if he doesn't want it done there's certainly nothing I can do about it. Second of all reasons that are "nobody's business but [your] own" don't really fly well in a collaborative environment. I'm sorry that there's nothing I can do, but it's pretty clear every time you edit that you don't own what you are writing. JazzMan 16:04, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
you totally DO own what you write. Just that posting here causes it to be licensed under GNU, so it can be freely distributed on the site. That clarification is significant because he could sell his work if he wanted to: he owns the implicit copyright and so forth. --173.245.52.127 11:07, 15 June 2012 (MDT)
Semantics. I never said nor implied she couldn't do whatever she wanted with it off site, just that once it's here she no longer has full creative control. JazzMan 11:23, 15 June 2012 (MDT)

spam[edit]

So, apparantly, this is the thing with spambots. All that matters is that a) The hyperlink is in there, and b) Google caches the page. The rest of the text is just markov-chain generated padding. By the time we delete the page, its already done its job of raising the target's search ranking by a fraction. Sad, huh? Marasmusine (talk) 15:24, 9 June 2012 (MDT)

Wow. That actually makes a little more sense now. I should have known Google was to blame. Still, it seems like they could generate a fake page in one language at a time. JazzMan 17:30, 9 June 2012 (MDT)

RationalWiki[edit]

Oh boy, I just saw that you are involved with RationalWiki, which is a favourite of mine. Are you interested in science and skepticism in general? Marasmusine (talk) 09:27, 15 June 2012 (MDT)

Ha ha, funny story. I actually started at Conservapedia. I'm not really a conservative (more of a libertarian... less political in general now that I'm out of college), but it was fun to edit nonetheless. Of course, Conservapedia being what it was, I was eventually driven away by people pretending to be hard line conservatives, despite being given block privleges (though never night editing, thanks to a vast conspiracy invovling my IP address and one of the aformentioned pretenders). Somewhere along the way I found RationalWiki, because they, for the most part, appreciated what I was trying to do. Not that I didn't get called names in the process. Ironically, sort of the same things I didn't like about CP were the things I didn't like about RW, just in the opposite direction.
So the long way around to answer your question: yes, I am interested in science (technically my degree is in engineering, but this job market seems to want me to do anything at all NOT related to my background) and skepticism, but RW's particular "brand" left me with a bad taste in my mouth. JazzMan 09:44, 15 June 2012 (MDT)
I got to RW from the opposite direction, through skepticism from podcasts like the Skeptic's Guide the the Universe: If I recommend only one thing, this would be it. I haven't been involved in any communities, though. Looks like you had some kind of ideological burnout? Marasmusine (talk) 12:03, 15 June 2012 (MDT)
I'm still definitely a libertarian (little l), and I still enjoy politics on a theoretical level, I'm definitely burnt out on a practical level. I have the opinion of "I disagree with you, but I see why you think what you think", and I just got sick and tired of having political "discussions" with people who have the opinion of "I disagree with you, and therefore there's no way you can logically think what you think". I was putting forth so much effort and getting none back. This was not necessarily related to RW (for the most part, they don't have that sort of attitude, though I did sometimes feel looked down upon for my opinions), but when I was involved with RW I was also involved with all these other communities, and that's what did it.
I also had a hard time fitting in being a skeptical libertarian brought up in a conservative Christian household. I'm against drugs (i.e. people should not be doing them), but also against drug prohibition (i.e. the government should not stop people from doing them, whether or not they should be doing them). I'm pro-science but pro-religion. I'm good at playing the apologist (and enjoy doing it with a receptive audience), but most of the time I end up saying, "No, no, no, don't say that 100% of group X is wrong! It's only actually 90%!". I'll definitely be sure to check out that link. JazzMan 12:56, 15 June 2012 (MDT)

Question on formating[edit]

As you seemed, from you comments, to be the "Head Sheriff of Formatting", I thought I'd ask you some questions on it. For one, is there a specific format for use when making pages on additional rules? Second, is my formatting for Jet incorrect? If it is incorrect, what format should I use? When making races and creatures, where is the template I should use? Do I have to put (Fallout Supplement) after every page I make? I would like very much to keep all my work in line with the format that the peoples of the wiki are used to in order to make my work more valuable to the community. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joba Tett (talkcontribs) . Please sign your posts!

Uuuuuuuuuuuuuugh I just spent over an hour writing a response to this --twice, because I lost it once-- and I lost it a third time!! I'm going to eat dinner now instead. Stay tuned... JazzMan 16:25, 11 September 2012 (MDT)
Ok, sorry about the delay. I'm going to try again.
As you seemed, from you comments, to be the "Head Sheriff of Formatting", I thought I'd ask you some questions on it.
I'm not the Head Sheriff of Formatting (though I admit I like the title). I've just been around here a long time and I'm a little OCD and anal retentive. :)
The title looks good on you :) I understand.--Joba Tett (talk) 05:56, 17 September 2012 (MDT)
For one, is there a specific format for use when making pages on additional rules?
This is such a rare and varied category that I don't think it can really be standardized. The general rules for formatting are make it readable, useable, and aesthetically pleasing. Take a look at the Heroes Campaign Setting for a really good example of how additional rules can be used.
Then I hope I did a good job with it.--Joba Tett (talk) 05:56, 17 September 2012 (MDT)
Second, is my formatting for Jet incorrect? If it is incorrect, what format should I use?
This is another anomolous category, so there is no "correct", though there can be an "incorrect". The formatting's not terrible, though you would probably be served by using a wikitable instead of the hard line returns. I'd imagine an Addiction Rules page would look something like the D&D poisons page, with the governing rules at the top and a list of addictive chemicals below. If you are going to make a lot of drugs, it might make it easier if you made a template.
I don't know how to make a template(or do I?). I'm going to put the chems on their separate pages, I just used Jet as an example(and may change Jet later)--Joba Tett (talk) 05:56, 17 September 2012 (MDT)
When making races and creatures, where is the template I should use?
If you use the Add a New D20M Race and Add a New D20M Creature the templates are included as part of the preload.
I know, GreenDragon told me.--Joba Tett (talk) 05:56, 17 September 2012 (MDT)
Do I have to put (Fallout Supplement) after every page I make?
Yes you do! This and the footer are how we know that your contented belongs to a CS. This helps people from coming along and changing the CS-specific rules and fluff back to standard.
Ok, got it. Now how do I change page names......?--Joba Tett (talk) 05:56, 17 September 2012 (MDT)
I would like very much to keep all my work in line with the format that the peoples of the wiki are used to in order to make my work more valuable to the community.
If you use the "Add New" pages listed above, along with others as required, you will already be 90% of the way there on 90% of the pages you create (the other 19% you'll have to do the old fashioned way). I've also created a footer template for you to use ({{Fallout Supplement Footer}}) that should help you out. I've added it to Big Frigger Power Fist so you can see how to use it. In order to get the categories to show in the right order you will want to put it at the end of the category list. For the most part the stuff you have done isn't that bad, it's just that so many people have loved and left the Fallout CS over the years that it's in a state of disarray. If I sounded like I didn't like you work, it wasn't my intent; it's just that I've been saying the exact same things for years and it's still pretty much in the same state it was the first time I think it should have gotten deleted. For now, I would worry more about new content (especially rules), and you can deal with formatting the existing content later. A CS will never be deleted if the content's there but it just needs formatting; all formatting without content is exactly the kind of stuff I'm trying to keep off the wiki. Hopefully this helps JazzMan 07:45, 15 September 2012 (MDT)
Ok. I understand, it looks horrible so you'd rather put it out of it's misery than make it live in shambles. But before I can add content, I have to fix the format of other pages, I can't work knowing the rest is shit. Surely you can understand that.--Joba Tett (talk) 05:56, 17 September 2012 (MDT)
Sorry I haven't been around. Been a busy week and D&D Wiki is pretty low on the priority list. To rename a page, use the "Move" button along the top. Be sure to adjust any links pointing towards the old page (you can click the "What links here" button in the toolbox on the left-hand side. Also you said "I understand, it looks horrible so you'd rather put it out of it's misery than make it live in shambles." As I said on the CS talk page, that's not true. It looks horrible, but the reason I want to put it out of its misery is because it's not useable. If every page were filled out but were formatted like total garbage, the thing would probably still rate 4/5 stars. But there's so little content on it right now (or as of the last time I looked; you may have done more this week that I haven't seen yet) that the only reason it even gets 1/5 is that there's no definition for 0/5. And again, if it comes down to it, we're not going to actually remove it from the site, just from the main portion of the site. So don't get distracted from working on it because you're too afraid it won't be there when you wake up in the morning. JazzMan 07:44, 22 September 2012 (MDT)

Questions[edit]

Hi, I'm pretty new (a couple months?), but wish to learn more about the wiki. Unfortunately, I don't know anything. So I'm posting here praying it's the right thing to do. Do you basically use the discussions as a chat/forum? Do you post a question on a discussion if you want it answered by that person, or a topic if you want it discussed, or stuff like that? If I made a beautiful, beautiful class (Earth-Bound)(in my opinion, again, new so I have no clue what I'm doing), and it hasn't been edited or discussed in a month, should I be sad about life? Is this site active? -R2d2go 07:35 9 October 2012 (PDT)

Because I am feeling cheeky, I'm going to answer your barrage of questions with a barrage of answers: Welcome! That's ok. Works for me. Yes. Yes. Nope. Some days more than others. :)
The long and short of it is, this is an active site, but there's not a huge membership and some members (*cough* me *cough*) tend to disappear for periods of time then come back with a vengeance for periods of time. There's not a good core group of people who scrutinize every new entry, and sometimes (most times) new stuff falls through the cracks. If you want someone to take a look at your class you can ask someone you know or try the {{requestreview}} template. As for the discussion board, that tends to be used for very specific questions; it's not terribly conducive to actual discussions. If you have a question for a specific person it's usually much better to go directly to that person's talk page, much like you have done with me. If you have a question about a specific class, ability, whatever, it's usually best to go directly to that page, but sometimes your question can slip through the cracks as well. If you need help wikicoding, Wikipedia has lots of great articles in their Help: domain. Or, if you find something that someone else has done that you really like, just copypasta their code and change it to do what you want. Did I catch everything? JazzMan 14:56, 10 October 2012 (MDT)

Thanks for the help! --R2d2go 05:27 10 October 2012 (PDT)

Review[edit]

Ive been trying to get someone to look over some of my stuff and give me some feedback. Not all of my stuff is complete and ready to be looked over. Could you please look at my Dancer, Rellit's Reaper, Illusionary Weapons Master, Granadíer, and Eisenmeister? I would realy appreciate that. --Salasay Δ 18:18, 21 January 2013 (MST)

I will try my best. Probably won't be for a couple of days, though. JazzMan 18:21, 21 January 2013 (MST)
Thank you. --Salasay Δ 06:06, 22 January 2013 (MST)
A request for when you get the time to do any reviewing; could you start with the Illusionary Weapons Master? I kind-of want to nominate it for Featured Article (that is, if it is acceptable to nominate my own article), and I need it to be reviewed first. Don't rush to get it reviewed, but if you would please just review it before the other four. --Salasay Δ 17:14, 25 January 2013 (MST)

Helpers Page[edit]

I am attempting to implement a "Helpers" page to assist users with their problems. If you would like to help other users with wiki problems, simply add all of the following categories that you feel that you could assist in to your User Page. The Categories available are: [[Category:3.5e Balancing Helper]], [[Category:4e Balancing Helper]], [[Category:Proofreader Helper]], [[Category:Flavor Helper]], and [[Category:General Helper]]. If you choose to put one of the above categories, please also add [[Category:Helper]] as well. Thank you, Salasay Δ 13:44, 5 February 2013 (MST)

Thoughts on a new template?[edit]

So, the current d20 Modern skill template looks fine...until you get a really long skill page. So to combat that, I simply made some parts footers, thereby creating a table of contents, and easier readability. I didn't actually save any real pages with my changes, but I added an example to my user page if you want to see it. I am not really asking to change every skill to match, it's just...the skill page here looks kind of bad in its current state, IMO. I am not sure if you're who I should go through, or what? Just a suggestion. It's functional as is, just I think it could look better. Anyway, thanks for reading this!

P.S. I'll try to get on fixing those faulty Fallout weapon pages as soon as possible. I promise! --GamerAim (talk) 20:32, 5 October 2014 (MDT)

Seems like a good idea. You've got some unnecessary bolding in there and the "check" header is in there twice, but having a TOC for those long skill pages make them much easier to read. As for who you should ask... I don't really know anymore. I used to have hours and hours to spend here and now I'm so busy I rarely come around any more. That being said, most of the d20 Modern stuff is long abandoned, so I wouldn't worry about ruffling any feathers making the formatting look better. JazzMan 05:23, 7 October 2014 (MDT)
Personal tools
d20M
miscellaneous
admin area
Terms and Conditions for Non-Human Visitors