User talk:Admin/Archive 3

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Its contents should be preserved in their current form. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
| Archive 3 |

Delete page[edit]

Could you delete the page I created with my ip address I'll then repost it with this account, I didn't know it logged me using a ip address so I created a account, thabks

Shit I feel really stupid but I didn't click keep me signed in thus I posted it again on my ip address could you delete it again please thanks

World of Warcraft Undead[edit]

Posting here for widest assistance. I looked for something rated to the subject/headline and I’m empty handed. Does any admin know of a 5e version of a WoW undead race? BigShotFancyMan (talk) 09:56, 10 November 2017 (MST)

How about Blood Elf, WoW (5e Race) and Death Knight, Variant (5e Class)? --Green Dragon (talk) 11:16, 10 November 2017 (MST)
Player specifically wants the Undead one :/ but if I need something like this it’s great to know :) BigShotFancyMan (talk) 11:21, 10 November 2017 (MST)
I would just multiclass as a Death Knight, Variant (5e Class). Of course I know little about WoW. The Tavern is a good place to get this type of information. --Green Dragon (talk) 11:24, 10 November 2017 (MST)
Just an update, I found something called "Forsaken" that was done up by someone elsewhere. My player said it'd work for him so all is well in that regard. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 08:45, 3 December 2017 (MST)

changing archetype to subclass?[edit]

I've been a bit busy and noticed this change happened. Just curious about the reasoning? Consistency amongst all editions or did WotC/Crawford decide to change the category on these? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BigShotFancyMan (talkcontribs). Please sign your posts.

See Talk:5e Subclasses. It's what they're called in Xanathar's Guide to Everything. - Guy (talk) 08:14, 3 December 2017 (MST)
Thanks for adding my signature, I checked my other posts and missed another one! ugh. Thanks for linking the discussion too. A great read and glad I am up to snuff on things. Might have to get that XGE book, keep hearing good things. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 08:48, 3 December 2017 (MST)

Am I out of line?[edit]

"This might just be me, so any admin please correct me, but "username", you have "x" pieces of incomplete, hard to read, unbalanced work. I can understand getting bored and working on something different to break up monotony but you're just pumping hard to read content into the site daily." I am wanting to address this but is it worth the time? Am I being rude by wiki standards? I'd add more but wanted to ask admin/wiki before going forward. What am I not considering? BigShotFancyMan (talk) 12:16, 14 December 2017 (MST)

I am confused with your response. Could you please supply me with a link?
Otherwise, you should not attack another user. This comment could be perceived as an attack. Its hard to know without the context, since it could also be constructive criticism about time per edit, with regard to a quantitative measurement. As I said, we need a context. --Green Dragon (talk) 14:10, 14 December 2017 (MST)

Problems when login in[edit]

Guys, when a try to login with my original account, Kalkaham, it redirects me to an error message page, since it's in portuguese, my natural language, I'll transcript the lines of the message:

Line 1: "This page is not working"

Line 2: " can't answer (attend) this solicitation right now"

Line 3: "HTTP ERROR 500"

Blue Button: "Reload"

This mistake keeps happening every time I login with that account so I created this one just a sec ago to see if we could solve this.

--Hinokaki (talk) 16:54, 23 December 2017 (MST)

  • Sorry, didn't know how to put the print in here.
Try putting in "https" instead of "http" into your browser, and let me know if that resolves your problem. --Green Dragon (talk) 05:57, 25 December 2017 (MST)

Question regarding userpage content[edit]

I have a saved copy of a 5e class which was deleted because it didn't meet this site's standards for balance and quality of writing. Am I allowed to upload it verbatim as one of my userpages? And if I do so, can I reasonably expect that the page I create will not be edited or deleted? I know I'm encouraged to be creative with how I use my userpages, but still I'd like to ask. Quincy (talk) 17:38, 13 January 2018 (MST)

Yes, of course. You may add any pages you want to have within your userspace. --Green Dragon (talk) 06:41, 14 January 2018 (MST)
Thanks! Quincy (talk) 08:03, 14 January 2018 (MST)

Discussion topics for 3rd party content[edit]

Xanathar's Guide to Everything has the subclass Arcane Archer. I am curious if it'd be appropriate to put on the discussion page some home rules I found on Reddit that make the subclass legit good vs. a subclass you just don't feel sure about. (think how PH ranger feels vs UA ranger). BigShotFancyMan (talk) 12:32, 22 January 2018 (MST)

If it is something on Reddit, please don't post it here unless you wrote it. I don't know their licensing situation. I also have no idea what talk page you want to post it on. --Green Dragon (talk) 22:50, 22 January 2018 (MST)
Looking at reddit's user agreement, under the section "your content," they state "You retain the rights to your copyrighted content or information that you submit to reddit..." It's not okay to copy-paste or repeat verbatim something you found on reddit unless you have permission from the person who wrote it. It might be okay to restate the idea in your own words (disclaimer: IANAL), but it would be best to err on the side of caution and either ask permission to reproduce the content or just not reproduce it at all. — Geodude671 Chatmod.png (talk | contribs | email)‎ . . 23:34, 22 January 2018 (MST)
@Green Dragon, the Xanathar's Guide to Everything talk page, and it isn't like a homebrew class or and entire piece of work. It is some rule variations to the Arcane Archer subclass features that I'd think others could benefit. I'd of course be paraphrasing because I haven't the slightest clue what was said verbatim. I figured there'd be an issue with WoTC copyright stuff if anything, not what a post on Reddit says :/ BigShotFancyMan (talk) 06:45, 23 January 2018 (MST)
This whole site is full of modified WotC copyright stuff, so I'm not sure what the issue would be. There's nothing wrong with being inspired by a reddit post either, which is what it sounds like you mean. And are you talking about this page? Please don't add homebrew to that page's talk page, as it's not the proper place. If you want to create a homebrew variant of the Arcane Archer, you can! Just use the (5e Subclass Variant) page ID and the normal subclass preload. Again: variants of WotC content are many and allowed on D&D Wiki, so don't worry about it :) --GamerAim Chatmod.png (talk) 06:51, 23 January 2018 (MST)
No no, I am not going for Arcane Archer variant. The rest is correct. I will post to my talk page, but I would prefer it be somewhere people would actually seek the information out to where it could be helpful for their gameplay. If I cannot, so be it, it is why I asked. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 07:19, 23 January 2018 (MST)
You are right that "inspired" WotC content is not the same as possible "errata" for Xanathar's Guide to Everything. Since you are not copying anything verbatim, just add the errata into your userspace, and we will add a link from the XGtE page to your userspace under a "Homebrew Errata" title. End reason is that your page is also important, and many people may want to see it alonside the information about the XGtE book. --Green Dragon (talk) 09:26, 23 January 2018 (MST)
Thank you both. I've got links on my user space (I think, that is not the same thing as talk page I assume). If I haven't done this correctly, I'd love to learn what was meant. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 09:38, 23 January 2018 (MST)


i have a serious question i want to review some of the races and classes on this site on my YouTube channel but im afraid of copyright and things like yeah help me out with that plz Alucarddragonborn (talk) 14:48, 1 February 2018 (MST)

That is totally fine, and encouraged. The GNU FDL license works just fine with such a thing. You should mention the main contributor's for the page though. --Green Dragon (talk) 22:19, 1 February 2018 (MST)
Are there any pages in particular you were considering? SirSprinkles (talk) 22:21, 1 February 2018 (MST)
For the first video i was thinking i would do the overlord class the dark knight class and the arcane archer classes just to name a few.Alucarddragonborn (talk) 10:21, 2 February 2018 (MST)
Working your way through the Favored Articles might be a good idea. They're intended to be the best of what we've got to offer. --Salasay 19:18, 2 February 2018 (MST)

D&D Wiki was down for a few hours last night[edit]

Should I be worried? Quincy (talk) 10:40, 4 February 2018 (MST)

Sorry that this took so long to attend to. Blue Dragon is on vacation and was not available at the time this happened. --Green Dragon (talk) 22:36, 4 February 2018 (MST)

Collapsible Windows[edit]

Mr. Curious over here, is formatting discussions like the Talk:Decidueye (5e Race) page beneficial for the wiki? (like loading speed) I am not sure if it's just resistance to change for me or there's reasonable concern that formatting pages like this is tedious to make extra "clicks" to see different discussions. thanks BigShotFancyMan (talk) 08:56, 6 March 2018 (MST)

It does seem like a good idea to archive discussion when it is no longer relevant, though I've mostly seen people throw it onto a separate page. — Geodude671 Chatmod.png (talk | contribs | email)‎ . . 09:08, 6 March 2018 (MST)
I agree to remove irrelevant discussions. Not sure that applies to race/class talk pages is all. I'd rather it be collapsible than another page though lol loading times are a pain! BigShotFancyMan (talk) 10:09, 6 March 2018 (MST)

No kidding Alucarddragonborn (talk) 11:45, 6 March 2018 (MST)

You may choose to do this, but the recommended formatting from Wikipedia is to archive past discussions. --Green Dragon (talk) 22:56, 6 March 2018 (MST)
Great to know. Thanks GD. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 08:06, 7 March 2018 (MST)

Computer software/Video game, also commercial[edit]

Hi, similar to Vlogging question:

  • Do You allow implementation of Your work in proprietary computer games(cRPG), mobile apps(games, DM aid/helpers), interactive encyclopedia/spell book etc? OGL has Section 8(
  • How does it look like with GNU FDL? Do i need written permission of every contributor? Or is it automatic?
  • Do i need attribute every contributor or is enough? What is the proper form of attribution?


I believe you need to attribute every contributor, but you don't need prior permission.--GamerAim Chatmod.png (talk) 11:07, 5 April 2018 (MDT)
A link to the contributors should be enough, but what exactly is the context? --Green Dragon (talk) 13:20, 5 April 2018 (MDT)
There is no context yet, just checking my options for resources. The SRD 5e OGL cRPG game would be nice, but there are many features cut out from D&D 5e. I especially like Your Backgrounds and Subraces also maybe Feats(but they are complicating things quite too much). I would like to code first some kind of SRD bestiary/spell book/initiative tracker for Android(I know there are already such tools). With the aim to encode SRD OGC to some human(and machine) readable code(XML?, LUA?). Then we can think about something like Incursion roguelike, and eventually Greyhawk:ToEE-ish tactical one. I do not have any particular road map, just babbling around. Pure abstract level so far. Sorry for making such a fuss. Anyway thanks for answers - p0.

Create Account Page Inaccessible[edit]

Hello! I'm a new user, and I wanted to create an account so as to be able to make edits under an intelligible name.

However, I wasn't able to figure out how to do so. The "Creating an Account" section of the Logging In help page directs me to the "Log in" page linked at the top right of the site, but there's no option there to create an account, and trying to use the login form simply states that the username is not recognized. Looking through Special Pages, I found that the Create Account page is restricted to administrators.

Is this intentional (I.E. is the wiki not accepting new usernames), and if not, how do I sign up? Thank you! -- 02:34, 21 April 2018 (MDT)

Account creation is temporarily disabled due to a recent influx of spam :( It'll be back up once our anti-spam measures are updated.--GamerAim Chatmod.png (talk) 05:24, 21 April 2018 (MDT)
Thank you! Good to know what's going on. I hope things clear up. 05:57, 21 April 2018 (MDT)

Sorlock Page Removed Please[edit]

Could I have the page removed then I'll recreate it with this account, I didn't know it used my ip address? Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kazzican (talkcontribs). Please sign your posts.

Hi, I have cleared the page for you. Marasmusine (talk) 13:52, 30 April 2018 (MDT)

Assistance, please?[edit]

I've tried addressing an issue about creating content that's balanced for everyone vs articles that we just want to share with others. I'm not making progress, and think that there's a bigger issue. Any help would be great.
Links for reference: Talk:Card Slinger (5e Class), User talk:Rosewater, and possibly Talk:Alucard (5e Class) pending a response but discussion seems to fall in line with other conversations. Cheers! BigShotFancyMan (talk) 09:57, 1 May 2018 (MDT)

Requesting my campaign setting and its associated pages to be removed please[edit]

So I was rather disappointed to discover that by publishing my work here that I do not retain ownership of it. As a result I'd like to have my campaign setting known as "Teon" and the related pages to it (from this wiki) removed if possible. Should I post links for each of the pages or is it enough if I post this page here:

Essentially I'd like to remove it and the supplements that go with it. Again, if you want me to post a link to each page specifically I can do that too. Altrunchen

If you read the GNU FDL then you will know that you may move the campaign setting to your blog, but it still needs to be licensed under the GNU FDL (at least the edits done to it on D&D Wiki), with a simple licensing message and a link to the contributors (you).
If you just want your work to be removed, so you can repost it somewhere else, it still needs to be licensed under the GNU FDL. Nothing is ever really deleted, hence we can restore pages and edits, so to cover our legal situation the content on D&D Wiki adheres to the license.
We are only willing to delete any of your contributions if you are the sole creator of the page. --Green Dragon (talk) 23:08, 7 May 2018 (MDT)
It's worth noting that you still retain IP 'ownership' of your work (and your work alone, not including others' edits to it), in the sense that you can release your work elsewhere and even under any license as you please. But as it stands, the work as presented on D&D Wiki is rightfully licensed under GNU FDL, and it can only distributed as such. --SgtLion (talk) 05:51, 8 May 2018 (MDT)
Note: GNU Free Documentation License 1.3#2. VERBATIM COPYING explicitly states that you need to include this license with the work. Dual-licensing it may work. --Green Dragon (talk) 11:52, 8 May 2018 (MDT)
To be clear, we won't delete anything he posted that's of tangible value, right? Because I remember deleting good content on user request being a big no-no.--GamerAim Chatmod.png (talk) 08:49, 8 May 2018 (MDT)
Ah okay. So does that mean that because I retain "IP ownership" that it only needs to have a GNU FDL credit associated with it when it's on the wiki and that it's not required for the blog after all? Or do I need to put a credit to the GNU FDL when I publish it elsewhere regardless of my ownership of it? Also, even though there were some edits I made where I forgot to log in, it seems that nobody else made and substantial edits. At the very least I can just edit theirs out (if there are any) when I publish. If I'm understanding you guys correctly. Altrunchen
Assuming you didn't base the setting off anything you found on D&D Wiki, and no one else edited the page in question (check the history tab), you don't need to license it under the GNU FDL. In that case the work is (presumably) 100% your own work and you can do whatever you want with it. It someone else did edit it, you can use a prior revision that they did not edit (again, use the history tab). If you use a revision that someone else edited and/or if the page is based off something else you found on D&D Wiki, you need to license it under the GNU FDL.
Please note that what you've already posted on D&D Wiki is released under the GNU FDL. While you technically retain ownership of it, anyone who wishes to modify it under the terms of the GNU FDL can. So, in practice, you no longer have sole control over the copy on D&D Wiki. You can make a new copy of your own edits that no one else can edit without your permission, but the copy already on D&D Wiki is not "yours" anymore. Does that make sense?--GamerAim Chatmod.png (talk) 08:49, 8 May 2018 (MDT)
So whatever I post on the blog is mine and whatever I've posted here is "mine" under the terms of the GNU FDL which lets people edit it and claim ownership of what they contribute. Whatever I posted here on the wiki is shared by the terms of the GNU FDL which gives people permission to edit it and claim ownership of what they edit it to. But because I made it, whatever I personally contributed belongs to me as well. So I can post my own version of the setting on a blog without any problem as long as it's my own version and it does not take from anyone else's edits. Correct? Altrunchen
Yes, that is correct :) Though I would like to note that you're unlikely to face opposition while editing your campaign setting, should you choose to remain here. It's not impossible that someone else might want to contribute to your campaign setting, but I don't think that tends to happen. Just letting you know we'd love for you to stay <3 --GamerAim Chatmod.png (talk) 09:57, 8 May 2018 (MDT)

OGC:Necromancy Spells[edit]

OGC:necromancy Spells is listed as a redirect to OGC:Necromancy Spells at Special:BrokenRedirects. The only problem is, they both link to the same page, so I am unsure of how to remove the last of the OGC broken/not really broken redirects. SirSprinkles (talk) 16:14, 8 May 2018 (MDT)

This was the very issue I brought up at BD's talk page. It's a technical anomaly. --SgtLion (talk) 16:20, 8 May 2018 (MDT)
I've now fixed this issue by deleting the page straight from the SQL database. --SgtLion (talk) 10:29, 16 May 2018 (MDT)

Can I have something Un Deleted?[edit]

HI I was the writer of the Saiyan Fighter Combination (it was a work in progress and that was my goals because the classes sucked). It was incomplete and I feel like it was deleted for no reason by "ConcealedLight", I feel like he feels like he owns the saiyan fighter class... I want my work back because I put a decent amount of time into it

Saiyan Fighter Combination (5e Class) was deleted because it was apparently a recreation of an old, deleted version of Saiyan Fighter (5e Class). It has nothing to do with CL feeling that he owns the class. He made literally one edit to the page; the bulk of the edits to that page come from Blobby383b. Perhaps if you ask kindly CL or another admin would be willing to undelete it and move it into your userspace for you while you get it ready for prime-time television. — Geodude671 (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 14:49, 15 May 2018 (MDT)

Deleting redirects now unnecessary[edit]

Just for notice to ye admins, as per the recent automation of my bot, Broken Redirects and Double Redirects will automatically be purged/fixed. As such, there should rarely ever be need to manually deal with them. Obviously you can if you want, but you can also now deliberately leave the debris to be cleaned. --SgtLion (talk) 16:42, 19 May 2018 (MDT)

Oh wow, that's neat! Thanks a ton. --Green Dragon (talk) 16:53, 19 May 2018 (MDT)
How often does the bot fix broken or double redirects? Because I just checked both pages and there are several pages in both. SirSprinkles (talk) 16:55, 4 July 2018 (MDT)

Sharing Pages[edit]

A user just asked me how they would go about sharing the race that they had created. I informed them to follow the D&D Wiki:Copyrights page, but after browsing the help portal I see that there are no pages detailing how one would go about sharing creations on this wiki, whether they were the creator or otherwise. SirSprinkles (talk) 16:13, 24 May 2018 (MDT)

I mean, the Copyrights page you linked to explicitly states what and how people can copy content from the wiki. We can try summarise that in a friendlier help page, but rewording and summarising legal jargon is pretty hard. Unless you're talking about clarifying the IP issues around a sole creator technically having the ability to license their work under multiple licenses, that probably could use clarifying. --SgtLion (talk) 16:46, 24 May 2018 (MDT)

Getting my things locked[edit]

Could I get each of my Greenhorn/Novice Goblins locked after approval?

Footers and Categories[edit]

Is it possible that including Categories in Template Footers doesn't let the wiki recognize the categories on the page? Example:

Character Creation (Olyptia Supplement)

The page is currently on Special:UncategorizedPages but we can see there's categories on the page. Simple fix if I'm right but want to make sure. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 11:59, 15 June 2018 (MDT)

Blocking Users[edit]

Upon becoming an admin I did a lot of looking into different policies. I can't recite them but I got a warm and fuzzy. So, I think dandwiki has adopted its own process for warning and blocking users, and isn't communicated very well. Wikipedia has it's own section [[1]] that explains users should be advised of their wrongful actions and have a chance to correct their wrong doings, except in situations noted. Personally, I like this policy as it assumes good faith. In regards to a recent block, User:Roxasorganiz13 didn't receive a Welcome Message, or any warnings--which don't have to be done in some situations. A message had been posted for them but no time period to see if the user's behavior would change. We don't know if the user removed templates thinking the pages to be balanced. I am not faulting anyone for the block, there is a way dandwiki has been handling these and I learned Wikipedia has policy that is different. If I need to be educated on the dandwiki way, I think our users need something as well. Cheers! BigShotFancyMan (talk) 12:22, 20 June 2018 (MDT)

Blocking a registered user without so much as a 'Hi don't do X' is really rubbish, but disappointingly frequent behaviour as of late. The fact that BSFM made the effort to reach out, then Geodude671 blocked the user with no regard for BSFM's far more correct approach-in-progress, is even more upsetting. I've unblocked the user for the time being, as their blocking was clearly not the correct action in this case. --SgtLion (talk) 13:19, 20 June 2018 (MDT)
Yes, we need to warn users before blocking them. IPs, though, do not need to get warned. This policy is exactly right. If a disruptive user does not reach back out, then its fine to block them. --Green Dragon (talk) 22:53, 20 June 2018 (MDT)

Admin Guidance[edit]

Fellow Admins, I request help on something. There are numerous pages like Energy Core Generator that belong to the Autoplate Pilot (3.5e Class) which are explained in the class. I flagged a couple for delete because redundancy. If the class used links, then I could see cause for it but the pages themselves aren't really worthy of their own page. They aren't spells, feats, variant rules, etc. Their improvements to a class feature. I'd like to speedily delete these pages, but looking for approval first. Thanks BigShotFancyMan (talk) 09:09, 22 June 2018 (MDT)

Not that I'm an admin, but I noticed those clogging up Special:UncategorizedPages a while back. I would 100% support the deletion of the class and/or all aspects of it.
If someone insists on preservation of the supplements as opposed to deletion, I would suggest merging those contents onto the class page, and/or renaming every supplement to something like "Autoplate Pilot (3.5e Class)/Energy Core Generator" and categorizing it appropriately. - Guy (talk)
I hadn't considered the class. I think I'll abandoned on that. The contents are already on the class page, that's my reasoning for proposing the deletion of the "supplement" pages, but I am wanting to make sure a speedy delete for the "supplement" pages would be reasonable. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 09:39, 22 June 2018 (MDT)
On the talk page it looks like I made a start deleting the supplemental pages, I guess I left the job unfinished. As it's still not even clear what an "autoplate" is after all these years it's probably for the best that the whole thing be removed. Marasmusine (talk) 12:07, 22 June 2018 (MDT)
I'd seen that and wondered. Since a few of us are on the same page, I will start with supplement pages since their "easily" found uncategorized :) thank ya both! BigShotFancyMan (talk) 12:17, 22 June 2018 (MDT)

My Class Isn't Appearing On The 5e Classes Lists[edit]

Hello and good afternoon. I am here because the class I created isn't appearing on the 5e Classes lists and hasn't since created. When I first started it, I labeled it as Incomplete and WIP but it didn't appear on either. Now that I have removed both tags and added a balance request tag, it is still nowhere to be found. Not on the normal list, fictional, WIP, incomplete, april fools, or any other. Saiyan Warrior: . I wanted to see it listed so the community could see it and hopefully help me improve/balance it little by little since I'm playtesting it on July 2nd for the first time. EDIT: It doesn't even show on the "recent changes to all classes" list. SaltiestMeatBall (talk) 10:32, 23 June 2018 (MDT)

I'm assuming that was you guys who put it on the Incomplete area, thank you very much! Now others will see it haha SaltiestMeatBall (talk) 10:41, 23 June 2018 (MDT)
The 5e Classes list pulls pages based on their categories. The class was missing the needed categories, so I added them, which caused it to show up.
If you used the "create a new class" textbox on 5e Classes, it would have provided a preloaded format that included the categories already. - Guy (talk) 10:42, 23 June 2018 (MDT)

Call to Arms(per say)[edit]

Hello, my fellow administrators and wikians. I'd like to ask for assistance in cleaning up the backlog of pages that have sat with maintenance templates for over 5 years now, and eventually move on to those that have sat for over 2. I'm not as familiar with pre 5th edition content as I'd like to be so my solo progress is slow and I thought I'd ask for help in that regard. I've recently constructed a dpl table that lists such pages on User:ConcealedLight/ControlPanel#Grey so if I could get some aid with cleaning up that section I would be most appreciative. Thanks. —ConcealedLightChatmod.png (talk) 01:05, 6 July 2018 (MDT)

A nifty DPL. I think first I'd like some clarity on what would be appropriate. If I'm not mistaken, if something has sat with maintenance for over a year, its been abandoned. Should all these pages be PfDs in case users wish to fix them? Some of the pages like:
So, while I'd love to help with this, I'd like some clarity from Mara, GA, SirSprinkles, Sarge, and The Boss Themselves. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 06:35, 6 July 2018 (MDT)
Thanks, that's fair. Though I think it is interesting that a lot of these pages have sat for so long without such minor issues being addressed. I mean they don't turn up on the main pages due to the templates so are they really being used? 5 years is an insane amount of time for simply nothing to happen and we have pages that go back to 2009 on this list. I too would like to hear from our more senior administrators on what should be done about this, and if it is even worth individually reviewing these 500 pages of various editions and standings. —ConcealedLightChatmod.png (talk) 07:21, 6 July 2018 (MDT)
How about we add {{abandoned}} to all these pages? --Green Dragon (talk) 05:59, 7 July 2018 (MDT)
I thought about this too, however, the issue then becomes, in a years time, when the pages get auto marked for deletion and then suddenly, BOOM, 500 PfD's that need to reviewed who may or may not be valid candidates for deletion. Ie: a minor formatting issue like bsfm mentioned. So that would only really shift the problem down for later. However, if you're fine with it GD, we could very well just let them sit on {{abandoned}}, with a link to this conversation and if they aren't sorted out in a year and 14 days then we can automatically mass delete them. I've already skimmed through the output and removed the ones that look important so I don't think there would be any issues and if there are we can handle it on a case by case basis. ie: "You deleted my page!", "Can I have a page undeleted?", "It said work in progress!", etc. —ConcealedLightChatmod.png (talk) 06:38, 7 July 2018 (MDT)
If we want the reviewing templates to be taken seriously, then we also need to make them effect the pages. I find that {{abandoned}} is appropriate for these pages, since we have a years time to look over them. If we are worried about all the pages being CfD at the same time, add abandoned to the pages slower (and then people also have the chance to look at them in RC). But, yes, we have to take this measure so if we all agree on this concensus then it's the goal. --Green Dragon (talk) 23:34, 8 July 2018 (MDT)
Agreed. I'll notify Sarg. —ConcealedLightChatmod.png (talk) 23:57, 8 July 2018 (MDT)
I'm very much against the idea of adding abandoned to all these. We don't add Template:Abandoned to every page with an IRR template for good reason - because most of these pages have a meaningful degree of high-quality, useable content, and doesn't warrant deletion. (I daresay a good portion of content people use encompasses old IRR'd stuff.)
Doing this would destroy good content and piss off users with almost no benefit at all. I'm sure some need deleting, but I'm vehemently against possibly deleting an otherwise brilliantly thought out and constructed page just because its formatting hasn't been right for some years.
If you want to fix a backlog of IRR articles, then actually address the problem in each individual article, don't enable the lazy deletion of good, collaborative work just so some DPL looks tidy. --SgtLion (talk) 00:14, 9 July 2018 (MDT)
Heeeeeeeeeey! I, uh, don't think I intended to see if the bot could do this for us. When I looked at the issues on the pages, I sought clarity what was most appropriate: mark abandoned, propose delete, quick delete since issues sat for years, fix the page, or do nothing. I've seen some users get started on this and from the looks, they've been using judgment when to fix, when to PfD/abandoned-and admittedly after seeing them do that, I felt rather dumb for hesitation and asking questions. Apologies to all for that/this/anything! Happy Monday. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 07:12, 9 July 2018 (MDT)
Sorry - Not trying to antagonise, I appreciate and applaud the effort. But I think the most labourious of the answers: 'fix the pages', is the right one. (and, obviously, PfDing when appropriate) --SgtLion (talk) 13:43, 9 July 2018 (MDT)
I agree that making a bot label all of these pages as {{abandoned}} is not the correct procedure. How about if we say that after a user looks over the pages with maintenance templates for multiple years, that they (not a bot), can CfA the pages (not PfD like you posted above)? --Green Dragon (talk) 08:50, 18 July 2018 (MDT)
My main issue is that we've been PfD/CfAing a lot of articles for incredibly minor, or pretty much irrelevant issues. My super boring contributions the past few months have almost entirely been just undeleting unjustified deletions. PfDs are being placed even on current articles because of templates for a few typos, or minor wiki formatting, or 'doesn't seem to fit'. Admin discretion was helpful in the past because it was well-placed, but I (evidently) don't trust us all to make the right call on deletions now. Hence why I don't trust the proposed free-CfAing-on-old-articles with templates either.
If memory serves, our old general rule was "Totally unplayable / three meaningful templates = PfD; Barely playable / Two meaningful templates = CfA" I like that rule, can we just codify something like that? With perhaps the footnote that articles unimproved for over 2 years with one meaningful template can be bumped up to CfA? 'Meaningful' in my mind meaning that the issue severely impairs the playability or readability of the article. --SgtLion (talk) 10:56, 24 August 2018 (MDT)

Discussion Page Categories[edit]

I recently added categories to the wiki gaming discussion pages I think were archived and I’ve noticed they’ve populated where current wiki gaming discussions are.
a. Should they be there?
b. If not, what’s the right thing to do?
Thanks for any and all help! BigShotFancyMan (talk) 16:01, 13 July 2018 (MDT)

Recovering deleted pages[edit]

Hi I just found that my mystic reforged page was deleted. Is there anyway to have it brought back so I can save the data from it? I put a lot of time into it and one of my players is currently using it and no longer has the page to reference. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Masonhunz (talkcontribs). Please sign your posts.

I'm not an admin, but to save an admin a couple seconds, I'm pretty sure this is the page of note: Mystic (UA-Reforged) (5e Class). - Guy (talk) 08:38, 15 July 2018 (MDT)
Hi Masonhunz, unfortunately, I can't restore the page because it was deleted due to copyright violation. However, if you add a valid email address to your wiki account, I will email you that page. — Geodude Chatmod.png (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 12:40, 15 July 2018 (MDT)
Check your inbox; I've emailed you the class information. — Geodude Chatmod.png (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 13:20, 17 July 2018 (MDT)
Thank you so much :D

Unable to edit page[edit]

See Talk:Heavy Armor Modification (5e_Feat)#Changes. It seems like Androxios is unable to edit a page he recently created even though it doesn't appear to be locked. Would an admin be able to help with this? - Guy (talk) 06:14, 28 July 2018 (MDT)

Another user emailed me about this same problem. Maybe it has something to do with the new MediaWiki upgrade? --Green Dragon (talk) 23:08, 28 August 2018 (MDT)
See the discussion underneath the one linked. When you click on the "edit" button next to the subheader on that page, the site thinks you want to edit the 5e feat template. I imagine the user that emailed you is facing a similar issue. — Geodude Chatmod.png (talk | contribs | email)‎‎ . . 23:32, 28 August 2018 (MDT)
As Geodude671 pointed out, the issue is that the subheader's edit button links to whatever page made the header (in this case, the 5e feat template). I know this has been the case for a long time, and not related to the MW upgrade, but rather the way we've started to lay out our 5e pages. This is just the result of putting a header inside a template. I'll have a quick look, but I don't see any way around this. --SgtLion (talk) 01:22, 29 August 2018 (MDT)
Moo-ha-ha-ha, and other such evil laughs. I remembered seeing clever GamerAim use "__NOEDITSECTION__", and have pickpocketed this clever knowledge to hide the dysfunctional edit button from that feat template. It's probably necessary to do the same for some other similar templates, I'm guessing. --SgtLion (talk) 01:31, 29 August 2018 (MDT)
Nice job. Could you get your bot to roll out that edit or should I grab the big wiki stick? —ConcealedLightChatmod.png (talk) 01:43, 29 August 2018 (MDT)
This is probably a task better handled by wiki sticks, as the bot is likely to break a bunch of things for such a niche task. --SgtLion (talk) 12:53, 29 August 2018 (MDT)


See Special:Contributions/Poo. - Guy 10:02, 28 August 2018 (MDT)

Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!

admin area
Terms and Conditions for Non-Human Visitors