|
|
| (105 intermediate revisions by 20 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| * [http://forums.ac.turbine.com/private.php?do=newpm&u=299 PM An Adventurer on forums.ac.turbine] - recommended way to PM me. I rarely check the others.
| | Leave a message below: |
| * [http://vnboards.ign.com/PrivateMessages/SendMessage.aspx?usr=677908 PM An Adventurer on ACVault]
| |
| * [http://ac.warcry.com/profiles/new_message?to=An+Adventurer PM An Adventurer on CoD WarCry]
| |
| | |
| Or leave a message below:
| |
| ---- | | ---- |
|
| |
|
| I made a few changes to your sandbox this morning, I'm not arguing for their inclusion, just making suggestions so please remove them if they don't fit. --[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 08:12, 10 February 2009 (CST)
| | Re: exemplars |
|
| |
|
| ----
| | Great, thanks. I'll have a go at doing them. |
|
| |
|
| Do you think this [[Wisp Whipper]] quest, should be named in the proper '''Hunter Quest (Wisp Whipper)''' format? Was going to change it before too many articles link to it. --[[User:Atarax|Atarax]] 11:01, 12 February 2009 (CST)
| | --[[User:Arkalor|Arkalor]] 22:21, 24 December 2012 (EST) |
| | |
| : I'm not a fan of the kill task titling either. I just figured you or Tlosk made up the naming schema for it, so I wanted to stick with the standards. We should probably end up using the "Title" that it gives as the quest name, or Title Kill Task or something like that. --[[User:Atarax|Atarax]] 11:39, 12 February 2009 (CST)
| |
|
| |
|
| ---- | | ---- |
|
| |
|
| I'm working on the [[Sandbox]], trying to finish off the Cantrips section, but I ran into an issue. All the way down, I was using '''Skill Name (Cantrip)''' as my root page, however when I got to invuln, I noticed that I had already created a page for [[Invulnerability (Cantrip)]], where I should have created '''Melee Defense (Cantrip)'''. So it got me to thinking, which one is correct?
| | Hey! Good to see you back on here. Maybe we can fire up some interest again? |
| | |
| I see that we have [[Invulnerability (Spell)]], and on one hand it would make sense to stick with this format, but on the other hand, for almost all the other skills like [[Axe (Cantrip)]], [[Lockpick (Cantrip)]], [[Alchemy (Cantrip)]], etc... there really is isn't any consistency, since the spell is [[Axe Mastery (Spell)]], etc...
| |
| | |
| Some of the conflicts that I've already created are:
| |
| * [[Loyalty (Cantrip)]], which could have been '''Fealty (Cantrip)'''
| |
| * [[Magic Defense (Cantrip)]], which could have been '''Magic Resistance (Cantrip)'''
| |
| * [[Run (Cantrip)]], which could have been '''Sprint (Cantrip)'''
| |
|
| |
|
| Since there is no "negative" cantrip, I say lets just keep it '''Skill Name (Cantrip)''' to keep it consistent across the board. But I wanted to get your opinion before I went ahead and did anything. What do you think? --[[User:Atarax|Atarax]] 16:01, 18 February 2009 (CST)
| | My kid is playing and finding some wiki mistakes, so I'm making a few adjustments. It's good to be back. |
|
| |
|
| : Ok, well I'll leave it for now. However, if you think we should start over, I don't mind. But IMO it doesn't even matter because '''Axe Aptitude (Cantrip)''' doesn't directly correlate to [[Axe Mastery (Spell)]] either. I was wrong, there ARE negative cantrips. I mean, look at the [[Noble Armor]] page. It casts [[Ravenous Armor]], which is a negative cantrip. So, the answer is to either keep it '''Skill Name (Cantrip)''', and include both positive and negative cantrips on one page, or separate them like you suggested and create '''Skill Name Mastery (Cantrip)''' and '''Skill Name Ineptitude (Cantrip)'''. I think the "right" way is the latter, as you suggested, but since there are so few negative cantrips, I doubt its worth the effort. Any second thoughts before I just continue with '''Skill Name (Cantrip)'''? --[[User:Atarax|Atarax]] 18:00, 18 February 2009 (CST)
| | --[[User:Dr Doom|Dr Doom]] ([[User talk:Dr Doom|talk]]) 00:15, 19 June 2019 (UTC) |
Leave a message below:
Re: exemplars
Great, thanks. I'll have a go at doing them.
--Arkalor 22:21, 24 December 2012 (EST)
Hey! Good to see you back on here. Maybe we can fire up some interest again?
My kid is playing and finding some wiki mistakes, so I'm making a few adjustments. It's good to be back.
--Dr Doom (talk) 00:15, 19 June 2019 (UTC)