User talk:Ashendant

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello Ashendant! Welcome to UESPWiki! It's always good to have new members. If you would like to help improve any of our pages, you may want to take a look at the following links:

If you would like to spice up your userpage, click here for a list of userboxes you can use, including a guide to making your own.

When you're editing, it's always a good idea to leave edit summaries to explain the changes you have made to a particular page, and remember to sign your talk page posts with four tildes ~~~~. Also, the "show preview" button is a great way to view the changes you've made so far without actually saving the page (our patrollers really appreciate it!).

Feel free to practice editing in the sandbox or discuss the games in the forums. If you need any help, don't hesitate to contact one of our mentors. Have fun! Jeancey (talk) 17:22, 30 April 2013 (GMT)

Redirect pages[edit]

While you are fixing the redirects, would you mind removing the {{DEFAULTSORT:{{PAGENAME}}}} from them too? It is completely useless :P Thanks! Jeancey (talk) 22:54, 3 May 2013 (GMT)

No prob.--Ashendant (talk) 22:54, 3 May 2013 (GMT)

Image Requests[edit]

Hey there Ashendant! Just letting you know as a polite reminder, please add an edit summary saying that you are "requesting more images" or something along those lines rather than leaving the edit summary blank. It saves time for us patrollers who are frequently keeping an eye on the Recent Changes. On another note, in your last edit to the request page you forgot to sign off your request to let whoever fulfills that request to know who you are. If you could remember to do so in the future, this would also be greatly appreciated! Thanks! -helenaanne  talk ♥ 19:33, 5 May 2013 (GMT)

On another little side note (not to pester you constantly - just as a reminder to help out us patrollers), can you also state in the edit summary that you're removing a finished request? In your recent edit you forgot to add that you were removing the finished request and it gave no pre-insight as to what you were editing on the page. Thanks! -helenaanne  talk ♥ 21:31, 8 May 2013 (GMT)

Bestiary entries[edit]

Hey! When you add new bestiary entries, please try to make them as complete as possible. Having just a name and a link to the general game page is no more useful than not having a name at all. They should all at the very least have a description, if not an image. Thanks!! Jeancey (talk) 23:17, 5 May 2013 (GMT)

I'm waiting to see if I get pictures.--Ashendant (talk) 21:43, 8 May 2013 (GMT)
Sorry, but I'm 200% certain you will NOT receive the Shadowkey bestiary images - and they clog up the Image Requests page. Take a look at this category. The only person who is truly knowledgable about SK is rpeh and he is not around anymore. I'll remove your request in a few days (I'll ask around a bit first to make sure), because such requests require something special. I'll see what I can do but your best bet is to actually seek out someone who owns SK, knows how to extract images from the N-GAGE - and get him/her to upload them. --Krusty (talk) 15:44, 16 May 2013 (GMT)
Is there a time limit in the image requests I don't see any on the rules?--Ashendant (talk) 20:37, 16 May 2013 (GMT)
No, but there is a "realism factor" - requesting images from N-Gage is an entirely different matter than asking a photographer to take an image of an NPC in Skyrim. It's like requesting an image of all the zones in Stormhold - you need to find and ask the right people. :) --Krusty (talk) 20:41, 16 May 2013 (GMT)
That seems a very arbitrary rule that's not written there... Also these pictures are very important for the bestiary.--Ashendant (talk) 21:11, 16 May 2013 (GMT)
If the size is the problem I can just reduce it.--Ashendant (talk) 21:16, 16 May 2013 (GMT)

Recent Lore Pages[edit]

Hey Ashendant, I really appreciate the help you've been giving me (And the entire site :) ) by working on the animal pages in the lore namespace. I would like to ask that you use show preview before saving the pages and please use edit summaries. On both Lore:Bear and Lore:Wolf you have left several misspellings, improperly formatted links, and red links. Without edit summaries, it is very hard for RC watchers to know what you did without having to click and view your changes. Thanks! ~ Ad intellige (talk) 02:08, 21 July 2014 (GMT)

I'll try my best, but neither english is my native language(so problems like that will appear) and to honest the link format for this wiki is a lot more confusing than others. I will try to use edit summaries more often trough.--Ashendant (talk) 02:14, 21 July 2014 (GMT)
Thanks! If the links appear red, the easiest thing to do is just not add them (Me and a lot of others occasionally do this). Another editor will come along and add them for you. ~ Ad intellige (talk) 02:31, 21 July 2014 (GMT)
Just as a note, not every creature needs its own page... Foxes and Rabbits shouldn't have their own pages. The entry in the creatures list is fine. The reason wolves and bears get their own page is because there are so many different types that a disambiguation page isn't useful, as most references deal with wolves or bears in general, rather than specific species. Jeancey (talk) 17:24, 21 July 2014 (GMT)
The problem is that without their own pages some of this info get's lost, like different variations throughout games, information on materials, mythological connotations. I will not do these articles for species that only have one "form", like rabbits, but Foxes have at least two different forms(Foxes and Snow Foxes (and maybe fennec foxes?)), so I would hate to make two very similar bestiary entries expounding every known fact about foxes.
So yeah like I said I will only do it for those that disambiguation pages are necessary(because there is more than one form/entry in bestiary). Hope you have not problems with that.--Ashendant (talk) 17:30, 21 July 2014 (GMT)
They aren't lost. They are contained on the game pages. Not every lore page needs to be so specific. The only ones that need full pages are those with CURRENT disambiguation pages which are unneeded, not potential future ones. Foxes don't need their own page. The differences aren't anything more than cosmetic, and there are really only two. Fennec Foxes aren't actual foxes, but even they have nothing different other than appearance. Basically what I'm saying is that wolf and bear are the only two that needed their own page. None of the others really do. We don't have to expound every known fact about any of them. The creature entries deal in generalities for a reason. The specifics are for the game pages. Jeancey (talk) 17:35, 21 July 2014 (GMT)
I rather not work based on if other editors did or not did disambiguation pages(there are multiple reasons why). So rather than that could you give me a clear requirement (like number of forms or something like that) to do these pages?
I guess I could edit that entry in the sandbox into something for the bestiaries.--Ashendant (talk) 17:47, 21 July 2014 (GMT)
There isn't a specific number requirement because it depends on many, many different things. I don't know of any other creatures that need their own pages. Editing them into bestiary entries would be best. Jeancey (talk) 17:53, 21 July 2014 (GMT)
Rats and Goblins I think are the ones I need to work with.--Ashendant (talk) 17:54, 21 July 2014 (GMT)

() Rat doesn't need a full page. Goblin might.... but it really is about the difference between the tribes, which is a game-specific thing, since tribes don't often appear in multiple games. Goblins in general are nearly identical in culture and appearance, thus don't need anything other than an entry. Jeancey (talk) 17:58, 21 July 2014 (GMT)

There are like a thousand type of rats :/. Goblin pages have been requested several times. I've also had to delete a lot of goblin entries from the bestiary in past because it was just minor variations with classes. I think the goblin page is indeed severely lacking.--Ashendant (talk) 18:02, 21 July 2014 (GMT)
They aren't different in any way. Cave rats are just rats in caves, not a fundamentally different type of creature. Classes have nothing to do with the actual goblin species. All goblins are the same, they may have different occupations, but they are fundamentally the same. A Goblin Skirmisher is no different biologically from a Goblin Warrior. They really shouldn't have ever had different entries. Jeancey (talk) 18:09, 21 July 2014 (GMT)
I'm gonna continue the rest of this discussion to the bestiary discussion.--Ashendant (talk) 20:32, 21 July 2014 (GMT)