User talk:Green Dragon/Archive 26

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 26 |


Hi Green Dragon, if I can just get a clarification on what I've been calling "only author requests deletion" (which has mostly been cases where a contributor realizes they've made some fundamental mistake, and no other contributors have been involved). If I understand correctly 1) This is okay as long as it's gone through the normal minimum 2 weeks of being tagged for deletion without being contested, and 2) "only contributor requests deletion" itself isn't a deletion rationale - the article must be considered on its own merits. Correct?

Thanks again for your support and advice. Marasmusine 13:41, 29 February 2012 (MST)

Also... so much spam removed! I feel like I'm doing spring cleaning. Still a lot to do though. If you get chance, I advise looking into an alternative to reCaptcha, as apparently the spambot writers have found an exploit in it. This is why so many forums and wikis that use reCaptcha have been hit hard by spam from January onwards. Marasmusine 13:46, 29 February 2012 (MST)

I already mentioned this on Marasmusine's talk page, but there's a reCapcha alternative that uses a different system. Perhaps if we used both systems that would help. -Silverkin 14:24, 29 February 2012 (MST)
The page must be considered on its own merits. Keep in mind "I want this done", "it should be so", etc are not legitimate reasons. Deletion is about the page– we don't care what people think (it would make for too many situations where subjectivity rules). For example please see Blackstone Knight (3.5e Class).
I'll see what is a good route for this spam problem. --Green Dragon 08:56, 2 March 2012 (MST)
Oki doki. I've been at Wikipedia so long that their speedy deletion process is ingrained in me (in this case, their criteria G7). Clearly some of these criteria we do have (G11 for spam, and I would hope G10 and G12. Also G9 would effectively be your right as site owner) but I will otherwise adjust my thinking :)
On a related note, at Wikipedia an admin wouldn't delete an article that they themselves proposed for deletion. That way at least two users have reviewed an article before it's removed. Similarly, I don't intend to delete anything at Category:Candidates for Deletion that I've personally tagged (unless you think that's OK). Marasmusine 01:53, 3 March 2012 (MST)
Ya, all those speedy deletion reasons seem pretty good.
I would wait and see what happens to the pages you make candidates. If their reason is a speedy deletion reason then I would encourage the opposite behavior of waiting, but in other instances it makes sense. Use precedents when possible and if there are no precedents then use your judgement I guess. --Green Dragon 05:27, 3 March 2012 (MST)
Honestly, if we kept by a policy that you can't delete anything that you've tagged, the category would never get cleaned up. For instance, a while back I went through a bunch of the d20 Modern stuff to add deletion tags; there's not really anyone else on the wiki who's into d20 Modern, so nobody commented on the deletion tags. I just waited significantly longer than the traditional 2 weeks before deleting anything. JazzMan 08:02, 10 March 2012 (MST)
Silverkin, what reCaptcha alternative are you talking about? I'd be happy to implement whatever will help. — Blue Dragon (talk) 14:43, 18 March 2012 (MDT)

What am I doing wrong with starting discussions?[edit]

GD, I know I had this issue before, and thought I fixed it. Why aren't my discussions showing up in the table? I follow all instructions as far as creating them, but for some reason it will not show up in the table. Here's what I tried to put in today: Discussion:Has anyone played the Dragonheart Mage Prestige?. Thanks. -- Irykyl 09:54, 6 March 2012 (MST)

You needed the page to be in the discussion namespace. If that was the only one, then it is now showing up. --Green Dragon 09:33, 8 March 2012 (MST)

Unblock an IP[edit]

Hi GD, User:Geomax contacted me saying his IP is blocked. His actual account isn't blocked but I don't think I have the permissions to check is IP. Can you look into this? Thanks. Marasmusine 00:49, 7 March 2012 (MST)

Having said that, he appears to be able to edit pages. Marasmusine 07:59, 7 March 2012 (MST)
I just checked and yes, none of User:Geomax's IPs are blocked. --Green Dragon 10:15, 7 March 2012 (MST)

Tirr Campaign[edit]

The Tirr Campaign is a work in progress. Please stop vandalizing and removing its campaign specific pages. Jwguy 17:33, 21 March 2012 (MDT)

No pages have removed. They have been moved. I should have dealt with the links. See also 3.5e Environments. --Green Dragon 01:08, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
Those are campaign specific pages, and you're moving them to generic environment and deity categories, as well as changing names of pages to names that are incorrect and do not reflect the nature of the pages (Such as the Pantheon of Tirr), and you have not followed through on every conversion, as some links remain unchanged, even if you seemed to have reason for what you're doing. As I've seen, there have been no rules or guideline changes that support your actions, and you've only targeted the Tirr Campaign, and only few categories of pages, so any claim to otherwise is not supported by your actions. As such, your actions should be considered vandalism. Jwguy 02:10, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
You are claiming to be the sole author of pages that I have created and maintained in your reasons for deleting and moving them. Jwguy 02:14, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
Is that what their history shows? --Green Dragon 02:21, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
Since you have deleted said pages, I cannot see their history; Before the unnecessary moving and deleting, and after it, I was essentially the only contributor with the exception of your supposed corrections. Why are you vandalizing my campaign pages? Again, there's no policy defending your actions, and you've only targeted the Tirr Setting. Jwguy 02:26, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
I've taken this discussion primarily to the Main Page to gain perspective and forum, as well as to make suggestion in order to achieve clarification regarding this matter. I reserve further discussion for that. Jwguy 07:27, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
1) check the history before stating such things. 2) Do not bring discussions to the main page about a certain campaign setting (how do those relate?). --Green Dragon 13:24, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
Your edits on the recent changes page, regarding the deleted pages, are a part of the history, I assume. I cannot check the articles history when it has been deleted, but your statement as reason for a deletion is what I was referring to. Secondly, the discussion on the main pages is regarding the policies of campaign settings in general, though you know that, now. Jwguy 14:56, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
What deleted article's history do you need checked? I can look at them if you give me a link to the original title. JazzMan 14:57, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
It is largely irrelevant, now, though I appreciate the offer. When this was still an issue and the actions were still questionable, it appeared that he was moving my articles and deleting the old ones, saying he was the sole author in his editing reasons, which show up on the recent changes page. Now that I understand his actions, it is unnecessary. Jwguy 15:04, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
Ok. The only thing I could find that he deleted were the redirect pages that were created when he moved pages. In this case the "and the only contributor was Green Dragon" text that comes up is automatic from the system, not something GD would have added himself. Moving and removing pages can get a little weird sometimes. JazzMan 15:12, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
Thank you. I will keep that in mind, in the future. Jwguy 15:21, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
Histories are moved with the pages. Try it sometime. Look at a page's history, move it, and see what happens to the history. It will all go to the new location, the moving history will be added, and the old page will get a new history (the moved history). So removing one's edits are done in an entirely different manner. --Green Dragon 16:44, 26 March 2012 (MDT)


I thought I had made it clear I no longer wish for anything I've posted here to remain. "Not a good enough reason?" Must I copyright everything I've written or something?! --Scryer's Eve (talk | contribs) 14:40, 22 March 2012 (MDT)

This happens periodically and it's always the same: by posting to this website you are giving up full control of your work. It is not a depository of copyrighted information, it is a collaborative work environment. Every time you edit you agree to the disclaimer "If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here." There's been legal arguments back and forth, but short of a real copyright lawyer sending cease and desist letters the outcome will be the same as it always has been: "not wanting something" is not a good enough reason to delete any page on the wiki. If it can be deleted for any reason listed in our deletion policy, then and only then can it be a candidate for deletion. (Note that even when you delete something it is still accessible. Admins can read every edit of every deleted page ever put on the wiki. Even if you did have copyright over the things you submit the software won't allow us to permanently delete something so we still are in violation of copyright.) Note that IANAL, but the policy's been this way from the get-go, and I really don't anticipate Green Dragon changing it any time soon. JazzMan 21:15, 22 March 2012 (MDT)
I believe there was a clause in the v1.2 legislation that stated this only applied when "not the sole contributor of" the content; basically meaning that if you were the only editor of that specific page, it belonged to you. That said, I am not sure if that remains or of the status of the pages mentioned. Either way, given the unique nature of wiki machinations, copyright in regards to unpublished DnD content has an incredibly bleak level of enforceability, if there is such a word, and as above, nothing short of a legally binding cease and desist order will be effective if the administrator is in opposition to the removal. Whether we believe your content should be removed or not is irrelevant, in this case, I'm afraid, so I cannot offer help. It's either Green Dragon's Consent or getting a legal document to enforce the claim. Jwguy 00:05, 23 March 2012 (MDT)
Nope. --Green Dragon 01:07, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
This text has been removed as it is not civil. Please see the warning below and/or the Warning Policy. Jwguy 02:28, 26 March 2012 (MDT)
[1] (direct rudeness: ill-considered accusations of impropriety, belittling, other uncivil behaviors: lying) (1:1). Issued on 13:31, 26 March 2012 (MDT) --Green Dragon 13:31, 26 March 2012 (MDT).
What about that was lying, direct rudeness or ill-considered accusations? You cannot dictate what I think, after all. I know my thoughts quite well, and what I've thought in the past, and present. And we do have a problem with IPs and bots. And he can take his articles elsewhere, if he wants, leaving the ones he has here, well, here. You appear to be warning me out of anger for other concurrent discussions, as this hardly qualifies as what you've labelled it. Jwguy 15:01, 26 March 2012 (MDT)


Hi GD, just want to confer with you on this one. I see Anti-Christ (3.5e Class) was briefly discussed above as an example of an article that is "complete" but universally derided. As it has now been tagged for deletion for over a year now without improvement, and no-one has contested the deletion proposal, I've gone ahead and removed it (and good riddance in my opinion).

I'd like your opinion on that - I'll restore it if you think it needs to remain. Thanks, Marasmusine 03:05, 3 April 2012 (MDT)

Ya. If that page had been improved I may say don't, but it looks to me like someone just made it to but a lot of overpowered "dark" class features together to become a "critique on religion". Not only did it seem ineffective, it did not make use of D&D well and deletion seems warranted to me. --Green Dragon 08:15, 3 April 2012 (MDT)
Hah, yes, I've have been checking "what links here" but sometimes when there's a complete clusterflap of redirects I end up missing some. For example, Talk:Trolls, LotR (DnD Race) was listed for deletion and that led me on a merry chase to get Talk:Trolls —LotR (DnD Race), Trolls, LotR (DnD Race), Trolls (LotR Race), Talk:Trolls (LotR Race), Talk:Trolls (DnD Race), Trolls (DnD Race) and Trolls —LotR (DnD Race)! Thanks for catching the ones I missed.
I can also regularly check Special:BrokenRedirects. And, oh my goodness, have you seen Special:DoubleRedirects? Marasmusine 09:58, 3 April 2012 (MDT)
I should have looked closer as many of the deleted pages related to the same page (I now see that). When that happens I make mistakes sometimes too, since keeping track of the tabs can be lost in the process. I understand where you are coming from.
You can regularly check Special:BrokenRedirects. I keep thinking that sometime someone will make a bot (a kinda smart one) that will deal with those pages. --Green Dragon 11:04, 3 April 2012 (MDT)

Help - IP confusion[edit]

My brother(who I live with) is having some trouble registering an account.

He wrote a message to you that I am passing on, since he is unable to send it himself.

I hope you are able to help fix the problem.

That said, here is my brother's message:


When trying to create an account on the site, I got the first error, then when trying to contact you, I got the second error. However, my IP is not even close to the one that is supposed to be blocked. I used to double check, and with this message, I include a link to a screen shot, showing the results of that site.

First error:

Cannot create account

Account creation from this IP address ( has been blocked by Green Dragon.

The reason given by Green Dragon is Spamming links to external sites

Second error:

Permission error

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:

Your username or IP address has been blocked.

The block was made by Green Dragon. The reason given is Spamming links to external sites.

   Start of block: 15:05, 29 March 2012
   Expiry of block: indefinite
   Intended blockee: 

You can contact Green Dragon or another administrator to discuss the block. You cannot use the 'e-mail this user' feature unless a valid e-mail address is specified in your account preferences and you have not been blocked from using it. Your current IP address is, and the block ID is #2309. Please include all above details in any queries you make. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sirmethos (talkcontribs) . Please sign your posts.

I have unblocked the IP. Let me know if this helps! JazzMan 19:44, 3 April 2012 (MDT)

IP unblock works[edit]


This is the aforementioned brother, who has now been able to create an account, so the unblocking of the IP works. Many thanks :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kainboa (talkcontribs) . Please sign your posts.

No Problem. Welcome! JazzMan 15:29, 4 April 2012 (MDT)

Wrongfully IP Blocked[edit]

Hello friend, I attempted to make an account several days ago and was unable to until 4/5/2012, as apparently my IP specifically was blocked for 'spamming links' to outside sites. Unfortunately, I had no account to begin with until this moment here. So i'm unsure if someone was just using my IP to spam the D&D Wiki itself given I had no account at the time.

As such, I was unable to communicate with any of the personnel (admins) until 4/5/2012+, I think it might be in the best interest to provide emails on the admin user pages that do not require me to go to user only pages should this arise for other individuals, when one doesn't have an account in the first place. I've been fairly patient and merely want to let you know about this.

Thanks, Lord Valarath Ti'nirion

You may reach me at, or my talk page here LValarath Thanks again for your time.

I'm pretty sure that if you try to edit a page a message should come up with a link for you to email the blocker. --Green Dragon 13:55, 11 April 2012 (MDT)

Unfortunately, I didn't have an account at the time, so, editing wasn't an option and didn't bring up much of anything, but, I do appreciate the response, thanks! --Valarath


Ursanare vital stats[edit]

I found the Ursanare page and have decided to create a campaign that involves them. My problem for this is that the page dosen't include the ageing effects and random age/weight/height systems. I like to develop my NPCs based on these stats. If you could add that(or if you could let me do it), I would be grateful.

Thanks for your time, Rick Keller --JhessianZ

Feel free to add vital statistics. --Green Dragon 13:53, 11 April 2012 (MDT)

IP continues to randomly boost articles[edit]

As the title states, we've been having a number of anonymous edits lately, boosting attributes of various races, classes, and even some flaws and feats. They're also removing templates from articles, such as balance concerns and April Fools' Disclaimers. The IP in question is I know you've banned similar IPs, possibly the same person refreshing his addresses or something, but is there a way to take care of him, and if so, please do, if you've no qualms with doing so. Jwguy 06:07, 12 April 2012 (MDT)

Homebrew Disclaimer[edit]

On a forum I frequent, there was a common complaint about this site, this complaint being that most new players get confused thinking that the homebrew material is WotC material. Would there be a way to place a disclaimer or similar on the homebrew pages. If so then I would assist in placing the disclaimer on the pages.

This would likely increase the credibility of this site. --Milo High-Hill 02:30, 16 April 2012 (MDT)

So, at the moment, we have things the other way round, with the SRD pages having the disclaimer. "Homebrew" is mentioned in the breadcrumb at the bottom of homebrew pages, but do you think it would be better to have some kind of disclaimer at the top? Marasmusine 03:28, 16 April 2012 (MDT)
I am aware of the SRD in the Titles, the OGL templates, and the information at the bottom of every page. But it seems that isn't enough for others (not 100% sure why). I think it would be best for a disclaimer to be placed at the top of the homebrew pages.--Milo High-Hill 03:42, 16 April 2012 (MDT)
Homebrew, is part of the name. Part of the category. Part of the very definition of the word, for Pete's sake. 'Homebrew' in and of itself means, 'Not WotC material'. Break it down. Just look at the word. 'Home' and 'Brew'. Combined. Or? "Made at home." Thus, 'Homebrew' ...Now? Your saying you already know this? Good. Thats good. (But!) ...Some people don't. And 'we', the community, need to post a disclaimer to help these stray puppies out. Right? Som because they don't understand the meaning of the word 'Homebrew', which is everywhere! You click on it. ...We need to do more work?! NO WAY. That's nuts! Let em' rot! If you are not educated enough to understand the meaning of the word 'Homebrew', you are not educated enough to be playing this game. Let alone participating in the building and development of this website. This community does not pander to mobs. (All yours GD. Take it away.) --Jay Freedman 03:45, 16 April 2012 (MDT)
I know where Milo is coming from though. I recently spoke to a player new to the game, interested in using one of our 3.5e classes, and I think she was under the impression that it was "offical". In this case the class was rather complicated and undefined in areas and she was disappointed when I suggested it would need an experienced player and DM to run. Still, I'm not sure how any amount of disclaimerage would help. Marasmusine 04:04, 16 April 2012 (MDT)
Jay, while we understand the difference perfectly and see it as clear as day, it seems this is a huge problem in the eyes of the D&D Community. So if you don't want to help make this wiki a better site you shouldn't be the type of person allowed to participating in the building and development of this website.--Milo High-Hill 04:10, 16 April 2012 (MDT)
Milo. Your words wound me, my friend. Lets stay objective here. Your 'Forum Community' has a problem with this site. Not the D&D Community as a whole. Naughty naughty. Thus, you requested a massive change in size and scope. Come on. Let's be real here. If your 'Forum Community' can't understand the meaning of the word 'Homebrew'. Then no 'Disclaimer' this-side-of-Kansas is going to help them. I'm not insulting your friends. Just trying to avoid pasteing the words (Homebrew: Not WotC: Not SRD: 3.5e: Which is not 4e: Or 5e either:) ...above every article on the site. I have standards for intelligence. And my standard score for this website is +0 for rolled stats. Anything lower? And we shouldn't be pandering. --Jay Freedman 04:33, 16 April 2012 (MDT)
Jay, you don't seem to actually grasp the reason behind my suggestion. As it isn't intelligence that is the problem with the individuals. It is actually ignorance. People who have only recently started to play likely wouldn't notice the fact that the page doesn't have SRD in the title and might not have even heard of SRD, also they likely wouldn't read the footer of the page.
As for this sites reputation, it is commonly known in the D&D community as being horrible. The reason I mention the forum I frequent is because it was a Thread on that forum that raised this suggestion. My forum community does understand the word Homebrew (which is evident as it has a Homebrew section), but the problem lies in the friends of them who are new to play the game and end up asking to use the homebrew material. --Milo High-Hill 04:46, 16 April 2012 (MDT)
Alright man. I can't convince you. I get it. But is it really our communities job as a DnD Wiki to educate every single new gamer in the universe? Edit every article again and again until the world 'gets it'. ...I'll let you pick your battles. Go ahead and fight the good fight. But I've been there man. ...And your walking a long and lonely road. No good dead goes unpunished eh? Good luck. --Jay Freedman 04:53, 16 April 2012 (MDT)
I agree with Jay on this. This wiki has a very short learning curve. If you come here, and read the help file, you will know these are not "Official". I don't think having a template, or even making the whole page bright red will educate them. Also, a template at the top of just about every article would be hideous. --Ganre 07:01, 16 April 2012 (MDT)
Strangely I have been on this site for 4 years and has never been on any of the help pages. And this wiki's learning curve is rather flat, it expects everyone to already understand what SRD and Homebrew. While that is generally fine, most people outside of this site see this as a serious problem. As for the look, it wouldn't be like a Deletion Template, I was thinking more the OGL Top template. I suggest it says something such as The following content is unofficial content and is not endorsed by Wizards of the Coast. that at the top of the page would likely suffice.
This whole problem comes from new players who come to this site, they don't seem to come from the main page, instead coming from an article. This means they likely will not notice the page is part of the homebrew section. If one of the first things they notice is this disclaimer I believe it will help stop misunderstandings. I aim for this suggestion to help the reputation of this site.--Milo High-Hill 07:27, 16 April 2012 (MDT)
I think that it is unimportant whether any of us believe we should, or should not, teach people things we believe they should already know. We, as editors, and possibly the core of the community as it stands, only have one duty: To maintain this site, a wiki, in a way that leads to the greatest possible level of accessibility and communicates the greatest possible level of understanding of its content. If this change, a top-level policy change, can be considered ultimately beneficial with little to no change in the function of our little encyclopedia, then we should do it.
Simply put, its not a whole lot of work to just stick a new template into any page we see lacking it, and we are better for it. Whether we should have to, or not, is largely irrelevant to our duty as editors. Jwguy 08:27, 16 April 2012 (MDT)
I am definately in agreement with JW. People just need to pay attention to all details they read and apply some common sense rules. To me "Homebrew" means created by other players. Also, on the 3.5e Open Game Content page, it lists what SRD is. There shouldn't be any confusion. Isn't to me, and I know I am not the brightest bulb in the fixture.-- Irykyl 09:23, 16 April 2012 (MDT)
Can you change the background by namespace? Then we could just watermark such a message on the SRD namespace and a different one in the Main namespace (for example). Templateing all the pages with such a template is pointless. Working within the namespaces is the only real option. --Green Dragon 09:47, 16 April 2012 (MDT)
I always asked Blue Dragon and Tarkis about stuff like that. Somebody who knew more about Wiki Coding and shortcuts. I don't have an answer for you GD. Sorry man. Maybe one of these other guys is familiar with namespaces. --Jay Freedman 19:26, 16 April 2012 (MDT)

Images for OGC pages[edit]

I have talked to a lot of fellow D&D players located here in Saskatchewan, Canada and they seem to all have a similar request. They would love to see the Open Game Content pages to contain picture of the weapons/armor/items/creatures since most do not have descriptions. I know it is a big request with the massive amount of pages, but most of them feel that if the Homebrew pages are required to have pictures, so should the OGC pages.

I am a big fan of this site and use it all the time. I just wanted to say thank you for all the work you do here.

--Korminor 11:54, 22 April 2012 (MDT)

I think that is a great idea. Do you have some images to put on those pages? I can give you permissions to do that if you have some images. --Green Dragon 09:58, 25 April 2012 (MDT)
Sounds like a fun project... I am willing to take the time (when I have it) to add the images. --Korminor (talk) 20:22, 20 May 2012 (MDT)
Which images? --Green Dragon (talk) 20:40, 20 May 2012 (MDT)

Redirect deleting and Captcha[edit]

Hi GD, two quickies:

  1. Is it necessary for deletion proposals for "unneeded redirects" and "double redirects" to go through the two-week incubation period for deletions, or can I treat them as "speedy deletions"? I'm weary about having to add a delete template to every page in Special:DoubleRedirects rather than dealing with them straight away.
  2. Regarding an alternative to Captcha, MediaWiki suggests " Asirra CAPTCHA" as an alternative (which asks users to distinguish between cats and dogs), might be worth looking into. Marasmusine 14:00, 24 April 2012 (MDT)

Do people have to pass CAPTCHA to create an account? if so, it isn't working. --Ganre 16:33, 24 April 2012 (MDT)

It works generally, but there are tools go get past it ("decaptcha"). If it works 99.99% of the time, a modest 10000 daily spambot hits can still create 10 registered accounts per day. Marasmusine 10:10, 25 April 2012 (MDT)
I'd think it should be considered "delete at-will" or speedy deletion worthy in respect to content; In regards to Unneeded Redirects, there usually is no content on the page to be deleted, and therefore seems like a justified deletion. That said, still Green Dragon's call. Just making commentary in favor. Jwguy 07:15, 25 April 2012 (MDT)
As normal, Wikipedia:Criteria for Speedy Deletion is applicable. With regard to G7 the non-criteria below, "Author deletion requests made in bad faith", affirms that G7 is not a problem with its multi-sided nature. --Green Dragon 09:57, 25 April 2012 (MDT)
I hadn't noticed that caveat before... good call. Marasmusine 10:17, 25 April 2012 (MDT)
For some reason it is making me go through CAPTCHA and because of the blocks on my computer I can't click the request access button would there be some way for me to bypass it or something.----Milo High-Hill 21:23, 25 April 2012 (MDT)
Nevermind, for some reason it is gone. And I can access the site again.--Milo High-Hill 22:14, 25 April 2012 (MDT)
We had stuck with ReCaptcha for so long because I really appreciate the digitizing books aspect of it. It's a pity that it's not working so well anymore! I've moved over to FancyCaptcha now. Please let me know if it keeps on letting such large amounts of spam through. Thanks, — Blue Dragon (talk) 18:11, 8 May 2012 (MDT)
Thanks BD, I hope it works, as tagging all those articles is getting old. --Ganre (talk) 07:08, 9 May 2012 (MDT)
Well, we have a different kind of spam now, with long markov-chain titles. It might be less frequent now, I'll give it a few more days and then run some statistics. BTW my wife has given birth to a beautiful baby girl so I will be a bit less active for a while. Marasmusine (talk) 11:50, 11 May 2012 (MDT)
Congratulations, Marasmusine, best wishes to your wife and little girl! --Ganre (talk) 13:16, 11 May 2012 (MDT)
Congratulations as well Marasmusine! I hope all is going well. With regards to the spam problem, I'm trying something out that might set us apart enough from "the flock" that spam bots will decide to pursue their advertising elsewhere (I also tried to clean the spam up a bit, hopefully we're in a better place now). I setup the CAPTCHA so that one of the letters has been removed from one of the words. To correctly pass the CAPTCHA, the missing letter must be filled in. Of course, if a spammer really cares to counter this technique it would be trivial, but I'm hoping if D&D Wiki is the only site doing it, the spam will stop coming. Please let me know if anyone runs into any problems, or if you have a better idea! (I've had no luck getting Asirra working well across different systems---I might pursue this again in a few months). — Blue Dragon (talk) 08:35, 19 August 2012 (MDT)
It will be so cool if that works - I can devote more time to making content instead of trawling Recent Changes for spam. Marasmusine (talk) 09:56, 19 August 2012 (MDT)
Okay, so, this morning I check the Recent Changes and normally there's half a dozen bits of spam to remove. Today - nothing, all clean! Nice one Blue Dragon, high-fives all round. Marasmusine (talk) 00:53, 20 August 2012 (MDT)
Wow, that's great news! Of course, it's an arms race... so I'll keep any more tricks in the bag for now. Please let me know if it starts up again, and I don't notice. Thanks! — Blue Dragon (talk) 06:32, 20 August 2012 (MDT)

d&d wiki media[edit]

Hi GD, there are a large number of deletion candidates at our media wiki. Some are copyright infringements, some are unused images (I assume that D&D Wiki is the only site that uses D&D Wiki Media). I don't have admin privileges over there so I don't know if you want to handle it or can allow me to go through them. Marasmusine 03:02, 26 April 2012 (MDT)

Bump! Marasmusine (talk) 03:45, 10 May 2012 (MDT)
GD, In addition to the above issue, the media wiki is also reeking with spam. Please consider giving me admin status there so I can start cleaning up. Marasmusine (talk) 15:45, 20 May 2012 (MDT)
I made all the admins on D&D Wiki admins on D&D Wiki Media as well. Some of those images, though, actually are used so I would not delete them so speedily (make sure to check on D&D Wiki since the links do not work across sites). --Green Dragon (talk) 16:46, 20 May 2012 (MDT)
Okay, I'll find alternate images where possible. Marasmusine (talk) 00:24, 21 May 2012 (MDT)
I mean that images like [2] are actually used in Endhaven (I don't know how that was marked as "unused"). --Green Dragon (talk) 09:35, 21 May 2012 (MDT)
Gotcha, I'll double-check such things. Marasmusine (talk) 12:08, 21 May 2012 (MDT)
D&D Wiki Media Repository has been merged into D&D Wiki so the spam is countered. --Green Dragon (talk) 20:38, 27 May 2012 (MDT)

Page of traits and flaws malfunctioning[edit]

Hi Peter. So the page of traits and flaws has some problem. It has something with the database. Could you, or send some one, to see what's he problem? I would, but I'm new with the wiki technology. Thx for the atention.

Formatting Issues affecting a large portion of the site have appeared recently; Needs attention[edit]

So, here's hoping this isn't just my browser, but for some reason, I'm seeing a lot of strange formatting issues on most pages: Balance Templates are aligned left, and Category boxes are now vertical. I looked through recent changes, but couldn't find anything that would have been relevant. Anyone see the same things, and if so, got any ideas on how to rectify it? Jwguy (talk) 08:28, 9 May 2012 (MDT)

Its the upgrade. I think the alignment is a problem with MediaWiki:Common.css (the part about alignment options) and the categories we are still unsure about. Not positive how to fix the first problem though. --Green Dragon (talk) 11:41, 9 May 2012 (MDT)
The last update, as far as the wiki's history says, was on the seventh of April, though. I don't the problem has been around for a month, at least, not that I've noticed. It literally just seemed to appear within the last week or two. Did you mean an upgrade in the webshell/backend? Jwguy (talk) 10:46, 10 May 2012 (MDT)
MediaWiki's upgrade to 1.19.0. I should have got templates, but I am certain there are still more problems (e.g. categories). See the news for information on how to proceed. --Green Dragon (talk) 17:37, 10 May 2012 (MDT)

Klas Wullt and his Settings[edit]

Hello. I wonder if I can talk to someone generally about my setting. I have been working hard to add some of the features I was suggested to, in order to raise it to closer to 5/5 setting. It might seem pretentious. I have been off line a long time but now I am motivated again.

In particular I wonder about style advice.

Welcome script[edit]

I think your script is creating welcome pages for deleted spam accounts(example:Neurigere1983) --Ganre (talk) 11:34, 21 May 2012 (MDT)

Actually I don't use a script to welcome new users, so I just go down the new users log and click all the talk pages. It's easier for me to do all of them in case I make mistakes, so I can then see that they are all blue links. --Green Dragon (talk) 12:49, 21 May 2012 (MDT)

Permanent Access[edit]

Hi GD, for some reason the site it's bloking me still. My PC is clean. So can you give permanent access to the D&D Wiki? Thx

You will have to give me more information. Is it Cloudflare or MediaWiki? What is the error message that you are seeing? --Green Dragon (talk) 20:04, 28 May 2012 (MDT)

Preload typos[edit]

There are a few spelling mistakes in the Class/Racial Paragon Class preload ("mulitplying", "Abbrieviated", "innapplicable") and the Prestige Class preload ("persue", "thows", "abreviated"). There's also well over three hundred pages that still have the errors in them, but that's probably not fixable.

IP block problems[edit]

Hi GD, just want to let you know that This problem happened again. I've unblocked the source account so hopefully our contributor can edit again, but perhaps you could check the IPs and make sure she's clear. I am not going to block any more spam accounts (spambot hits are one-shot affairs anyway, hardly seems any point in blocking them). Marasmusine (talk) 01:29, 10 June 2012 (MDT)

Keeping track of new/ongoing discussions?[edit]

Hey, I asked a question on Help talk:Talk Pages but I figured my best odds of getting an answer were here. You might still want to reply on that page though (I'll put it on my watchlist). Thanks in advance! BOb666777 (talk) 08:48, 21 June 2012 (MDT)


Hey, I created a race called the Tisvelk. I was hoping you could take a look at it and give me some advice, or just tell me what you think.

problem adding a race[edit]

Hello, Just a quick question, I have put together a race to contribute on here and it says "When you're done creating your race's new page, don't forget to put an entry into the proper Level Adjusted Races table" how do you do that? I cant seem to figure it out. the name of the race is "Seafaring" It's a 3.5 LA=1 Thanks, Steve

Hi Steve, I've fixed this for you. The "comment" markers in Seafaring (3.5e Race) needed removing. At the bottom, it now says [[Category:LA1]] which means it's automatically listed at LA 1 Races. Marasmusine (talk) 02:40, 25 June 2012 (MDT)

Thanks. Learn something new every day. :)

I need some help with a build !![edit]

Hi, i don't know who i can ask this, i'am new on this community sorry. I need some help with this build :

about the armor class, how can the monk wear a full armor plate and that does not lose the flurry of blows, because the ability of the Shiba Protector from Faiths of Eberron:

Holy Armor (Ex): Beginning at 2nd level, you retain the AC bonus granted by your monk levels (including Wisdom bonus to AC), even when wearing armor or carrying a shield or a medium or heavy load. This doesn’t extend to any other monk class features lost when wearing armor or carryinga load (such as fast movement and flurry of blows).

does not let you wear armor and retain the flurry of blows ability.


armored flurry of blows feat, rating ![edit]

hi, i would really appreciate an opinion for this feat, it's my first contribution, i'am new here so i surely need some experience to become better.

and i would like to ask you, where can i find my feat on this site, what category or else ??

The Main talk page is really the best place to ask for page evaluations, but here's my advice. You should add some categories: type "[[Category:Flurry of Blows Feat]] [[Category:Martial Style Feat]] [[Category:3.5e]] [[Category:Feat]] [[Category:User]]" at the bottom. You could list it manually at 3.5e Martial Style Feats, but really that page needs rewriting so that it automatically lists the appropriate feats. Be aware that there is an almost identical feat, Armored Monk (3.5e Feat). Those more familiar with Monks than me should discuss as to which is the more balanced. Marasmusine (talk) 07:47, 1 July 2012 (MDT)
Also noticed that your feat doesn't use the preload. Try using the form at Add New DnD Character Option. Marasmusine (talk) 08:02, 1 July 2012 (MDT)

thanks, but where in the main page can i ask for a rating ? and what is this preload ? i did the feat with the add new dnd charachter option!

Hi Dean, you can sign your posts by type four tildes ("~~~~"). The main talk page is at Talk:Main Page. Using the "Create New Feat" button would have "preloaded" a template and some categories into your page. You just need to fill in the template fields and it organizes the formatting for you. Have a look at this example - if you like you can copy it over to your page and alter it as needed. Marasmusine (talk) 02:58, 2 July 2012 (MDT)

thank you for everything !!!

Fixing the linking in the powers.[edit]

Thank you very much for changing how the links work for those powers, I tried alot of combinations but couldn't get it to work properly. Also thank you for fixing the formatting in the class page I really appreciate it!
--TechyKat (talk) 17:37, 5 July 2012 (MDT)

Fox bad link[edit]

The link for Add your own Creature Overview says "page does not exist" on the 3.5e Creature Overviews page. Would it be possible to get this working or have a link to be able to create a 3.5 Creature Overview please?

Thanks --Korminor (talk) 14:01, 10 July 2012 (MDT)

Lesser Deity List[edit]

I submitted a new Deity, "Yusograd the Free." I specified information about him on the main page, but it didn't show up on the 3.5e Lesser Deities page (except his name). I saw that you were the main editor of that page, so I was wondering if you could explain and possibly fix the issue? I couldn't figure out how to edit the list (breadcrumb?), as it didn't show the actual items when I tried. -Yusograd (talk) 18:22, 21 July 2012 (MDT)

I also Submitted a new Deity Karura in the 3.5e Greater Deities Page and it did not show up at all... I was also wondering if you could take a look at it when you have time... --Korminor (talk) 23:15, 19 August 2012 (MDT)
Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!