User talk:Nephele/Archive-2009-02

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

Recent Blocking[edit]

Hey, I was wondering if we might just want to block 199.202.104.233 indefinitely. I'm pretty sure it is an open proxy, as it has been caught on the French Wikipedia and a repeat troll on the official forums used a very similar IP to join once ( 199.202.104.227). Really, I'd wager all of those 'argonians are niggers' edits IPs are proxies.--Ratwar 15:29, 3 February 2009 (EST)

I'm also assuming that all of those edits are being done by the same editor. However, I couldn't see any evidence that it's an open proxy (even French wikipedia never identified it as an open proxy, just a repeat vandal). I'm personally not comfortable with placing an indefinite block on an IP based solely on an unsubstantiated hunch that it's an open proxy, especially when the IP has only made a single edit to the site. --NepheleTalk 15:44, 3 February 2009 (EST)
Alright, I see your point.--Ratwar 15:49, 3 February 2009 (EST)

mysql error[edit]

Yeah, over in the chat room, we found that any none logged in user that tries to access the Necromancer's Moon page gets a mysql error. Since you have some limited server access, is there anything you can do to fix it?--Ratwar 20:12, 3 February 2009 (EST)

Hello.[edit]

You deleted my edit on the page Oblivion:Gripes/Persuasion and Speechcraft. Your reasoning was "less gripe, and definitely not done to get 21 skills (see previous games)." I have a few questions about this. First, what do you mean by "less gripe?" This is a gripes page, is it not? Is there some limit to the quantity or degree in which we are allowed to gripe? Secondly, I've never played any other Elder Scrolls game, but I can't see how anything that could possibly be contained in those games could automatically be indicative of the fact that there is no way that in this particular game, the developers were specifically trying to get 21 skills for equal division amongst attributes and specializations, unless this 21 skill/7 attribute (minus luck)/3 spec arrangement has also been used in other games, and if that's the case, then perhaps they organized it this way prior for the very same reason. All in all, it seems to me like any issue you had with my gripe could have been handled with a reply instead of a total deletion of my personal feelings on this particular aspect of the game, particularly on a page that is not designed, necessarily, to be informative, but more of a forum on a particular topic (complaints about the game). I don't know you personally, but it comes off like you didn't like my comment, and so you just deleted it because you are an administrator and I am not and you can do that. I'm not saying that's why you did it, I'm just saying that's what it seems like, but perhaps you have your reasons. I look forward to a reply.

I was in the process of updating my edit summary when I accidentally hit the enter key, resulting in the incomplete edit summary. If I recall correctly, I was trying to say "Baseless gripe". Since your original edit was made anonymously, it wasn't clear that you would ever even visit the site again, let alone check the page's edit history. Therefore, going to extra lengths to explain the edit summary (i.e., with a dummy edit, or an entry on the talk page) seemed unlikely to serve any purpose.
You claimed there was "no rational reason" when in fact there are many rational reasons. You claimed that the only possible reason would be because the developers wanted to have 21 skills. However, in Morrowind, both Mercantile and Speechcraft were skills -- and Morrowind had 27 skills, which were not neatly arranged with 3 skills for each attribute. In Daggerfall, Mercantile existed, along with both Etiquette and Streetwise. In other words, these skills clearly predate Oblivion's 21 skills, were created independently of any 21/7/3 configuration for skills, and have already been condensed down from three skills to two -- not, as you claim, separated from one skill into two. So I don't see any foundation or justification for your assertion. In other words, it's a baseless gripe.
Furthermore, the gripes articles are not forums. They are still wiki articles; in other words, the information on the articles should have some purpose and should be relevant to the site's readers. Replies to gripes are most appropriate when the gripe is one that many readers have stated, and therefore many readers will be interested in the reply. A response directed towards the single contributor who submitted the gripe does not belong on the article; at that point, it's a personal discussion that only two people will want to read. --NepheleTalk 02:13, 8 February 2009 (EST)
I don't think I said that it was the only possible reason to have them separated into two different skills, only that it seemed that way. I don't know, I'm too lazy or perhaps not petty enough to go look up the edit history. Probably too lazy. Anyway, although I disagree with your reasoning, I respect your position and therefore remain compliant...for now >:D. Thanks for the swift reply, and sorry I keep forgetting to sign my edits. Kronos o 03:14, 8 February 2009 (EST)

Deleting Oblivion glitches[edit]

Hey. You deleted the entries I posted on the Oblivion glitches page. Not to complain, but I think we should talk about this. Go back to the history and take a look at the related video. It's quite obviously an anomaly in the game physics - just look at the size of the staircase and the distance and height of the jump. I've tried it myself and it's completely reproducible.

The other entries also seem unfairly deleted. The swimming on land glitch I posted is different from the other swimming on land glitch - there is a related video about this on YouTube by user oblivionglitches. Take a look for yourself and try it out - it works to 100% effect, while others don't or are difficult to do.

I can also personally vouch for the "dying in midair" glitch. I've tried this on both Xbox 360 and PS3, and it happens on both. It's also an anomaly because the character dies without any impact or contact with a surface. When a character passes out in midair, he/she appears to fall much more slowly but the game registers a normal falling acceleration, causing a premature, midair death if the jump was performed at a lethal height. If this isn't a glitch, I don't know what is.

As it says at the top of Oblivion:Glitches/Proposed:
Entries must describe a glitch, i.e., some type of game malfunction that results from normal play. Obscure or exploitable game features do not belong here.
and
Glitches that are caused by console commands or other forms of cheating are not glitches.
Therefore, jumping a longer-than-usual distance after fortifying your speed by 480 points is not a glitch. It's just a natural consequence of standard game mechanics after pushing the game to insane values by virtue of using another glitch (i.e., drinking more than four potions, not to mention duplicating to get enough skooma). There's an equation that dictates how far you will jump based upon your speed and acrobatics. If you plug in an extremely large value for speed, of course the equation is going to spit out an extremely large value for the jump: the problem isn't with the equation, but with the input speed. Or put a different way, if your character has super-human characteristics, then it's not surprising that the game turns your character into Superman. How exactly are you determining what is a standard jump for a person running at 60 miles per hour?
As for swimming in air, even if the details of what you are different, the chances are that the fundamental game glitch is the same: there is one coding problem/developer oversight that results in an incorrect animation being displayed, even if there are different ways of triggering it. Therefore, creating separate sections for each different sequence of actions doesn't really help anyone. The existing section should be updated or improved, rather than adding redundant information.
Finally, anything that is justified by "the shits and giggles are worth it" doesn't belong on the article, in my opinion. The purpose of the Glitches page isn't to provide a list of obscure ways for you to entertain yourself; the page is supposed to describe problems with the game. Having a set of dying animations play in an unusual order when you do an unusual sequence of events (again, triggered by another glitch) isn't a problem: you're still dead; you were supposed to die.
If you want to create silly videos from the game and post them on youtube, you're free to do so. But just because your videos are based on Oblivion doesn't mean that the videos automatically deserve to be advertised on UESP. The site's articles are supposed to provide information that other readers are interested in learning (and other readers doesn't just mean a dozen of your friends -- it means a significant fraction of the site's readers). Filling the articles with obscure information only makes it harder for the majority of readers to find the useful information that is buried amidst the flood of obscure details.
In fact, this discussion is really just serving to convince me that we need to update the guidelines on the glitches page, in order to explicitly make it clear that these types of entries do not belong. If you have a problem with the guidelines, you're going to have to convince the entire community, not just me, that a change is needed; my talk page isn't the place to do that. --NepheleTalk 18:48, 9 February 2009 (EST)
Thanks for the reply. Before I go on, let me say that I read your page and saw everything you've done here on the site, and I'd give you a plate of (real) cookies if I could. You're right - quality and usability are major concerns because of the intrinsic nature of a Wiki. However, in my opinion it's still a collaborative environment which means that sharing and collaboration should be encouraged, and leaving it up to one person to decide what gets put in and what doesn't seems very anti-Web 2.0. Now that you've explained it, I do agree with most of what you say, but judging from some of the comments above, as well as with my experience here, I will bring up the following points:
1) The existing section should be updated or improved, rather than adding redundant information. If it was a question of organization, then maybe it should have been flagged rather than deleted. Unorganized information is still better than no information. If you're concerned about usability, then maybe it should be separated from the other glitches, to keep it away from people looking for real glitches. Deleting is bad because it sends the wrong message, as I observe from some angry comments above, discourages the sharing of information, and removes information that might forever be lost because the original author might never return. If something must be deleted, then it should be left for the community to decide.
2) Finally, anything that is justified by "the shits and giggles are worth it" doesn't belong on the article, in my opinion. The purpose of the Glitches page isn't to provide a list of obscure ways for you to entertain yourself; the page is supposed to describe problems with the game. Having a set of dying animations play in an unusual order when you do an unusual sequence of events (again, triggered by another glitch) isn't a problem: you're still dead; you were supposed to die. First of all, it's "normal play" because passing out in midair and dying before hitting the ground can happen naturally - the "potion glitch" with skooma was just an easy way to trigger it for purposes of reproducibility. Also, your rationale makes sense, but it wasn't explicitly stated on the page. I couldn't have known that dying animations playing "in an unusual order" wouldn't count as a glitch. As you mention later on, the guidelines need to be updated to remove any doubt. Glitches have to be explicitly and comprehensively defined.
3) Or put a different way, if your character has super-human characteristics, then it's not surprising that the game turns your character into Superman. How exactly are you determining what is a standard jump for a person running at 60 miles per hour? I don't, but as the title of the page says "Proposed", I felt it necessary to submit what looked like extraordinary physics (even for someone running at 60 miles per hour) for others with access to under-the-hood knowledge to verify. If it wasn't the place to do this, then the title is misleading, especially because there is another page for verified Oblivion glitches. 173.68.117.70 02:31, 10 February 2009 (EST)

Thank You![edit]

Thank you for this! Didn't know you could do that. A straight indent was what I was actually looking for at first, but in my experiments, I thought a bullet might look even better and just couldn't get it to work. Now I'll know how for future. Thanks again. --Robin Hood (TalkE-mailContribs) 19:12, 15 February 2009 (EST)

Hello[edit]

New to this wiki but not to wikis in general. Since I just got done reverting all that vandalism I thought I'd read the article on vandalism itself (which I conveniently learned about after reverting vandalism on it!) I saw this neat page and thought I'd try it out. Too bad I took too long reading it and you beat me to it :P --98.213.150.63 20:48, 15 February 2009 (EST)

I agree with user below[edit]

Your deleting pages because they dont live up to your expectations when your judging us,..We do our best to improve and you delete our things when we aren't being "redundant" you just can't see our point, apparently,..No, she woulden't care because shes being idle as to delete pages that hardly have been seen by anybody besides her then complains,..This is a fantastic site, and your delting posts that we are getting more experienced in, and deleting our things in a way, drives uf from this amazing site,..My only question; WHY?

I originally placed the proposed deletion template on your page, Nephele only expanded it. I know you're only trying to help out, but starting a duplicate page is pointless. It would be more appropriate for you to expand the original Knights of the Thorn page rather than create another. Thanks.--Willyhead/t 17:41, 19 February 2009 (EST)
I've already answered "why?" on your talk page. Reading the site's guidelines, and reading the site's existing articles, really would be helpful if you'd like to contribute productively to the site. --NepheleTalk 17:45, 19 February 2009 (EST)

Neph, you need to stop abusing your power[edit]

You deleted 5 of my edits, none of them offensive. What yyou consider "Redundant" we consider helpful and actually, nobody needs to live up to your little "expectations" so stop deleting my pages with nothing wrong in them,..Sense you have ENOUGH complains, like one below, dont waste your time on good pages,.. — Unsigned comment by Oblivionisfly (talkcontribs) on 19 February 2009

YOU ARE VERY ABUSIVE[edit]

Neph, im sick of you; you went rhough all of my pages and marked them bad. You shoulden't be a kodorator, your ruining the site. I don't need to contribute,..Well I hope you are happy, even though you probabl are, im no longer contributing,..Thanks a lot Neph,..Ur suich a great pal,.. — Unsigned comment by Oblivionisfly (talkcontribs) on 19 February 2009

Before you accuse Nephele of abusing their powers, you should read the rules and see how you can improve your articles to the point where they will be accepted. Nephele has put a bunch of links to editng guides and tutorials on your talkpage; I suggest you read them instead of saying they're "silly little expectations" and expect any edit you make to be automatically kept. --98.213.150.63 18:41, 19 February 2009 (EST)
If the facts in your multiple spam-like posts were true, then perhaps I'd take them seriously. Or if you could bother to take the time to spell critical words in your posts correctly (for example, I'm not a "kodorator" and I don't think I'd want to be one), or otherwise bother to make your posts comprehensible, they'd have a bit more credibility. Nevertheless, to cover a few basic errors that I could decipher within your posts:
  • I didn't go "rhough" all your pages and mark them bad. Of the five articles you have edited during your time here, I'm only responsible for undoing the edits on two of those pages: Oblivion:Scrolls and Shivering:Greenmote. Of the other three pages you've edited, Rpeh marked [[Oblivion:Mythic dawn cult|one]] for deletion; Willyhead undid your edits on Oblivion:Skooma Den and marked Oblivion:Knights of the thorn for deletion. I'm not singlehandedly responsible nor am I the sole editor to conclude that your work does not meet the site's guidelines.
  • For both of the pages where I undid your edits, I provided multiple reasons for my actions in my edit summaries here and here). There were many things wrong with those edits, and lashing out at me is not going to fix those problems.
  • This site has guidelines, such as UESPWiki:Style Guide, for the content on the site's articles; those guidelines have been adopted based upon community discussions and therefore represent the preferences of the entire community. Ensuring that our site's articles follow those guidelines is not abusive. In fact, the community expects the site's administrators and patrollers to patrol edits and maintain the site's quality; decisions to give members additional authority are are directly based upon their understanding of the site's guidelines. You haven't even tried to argue that I've misinterpreted the site's guidelines. Rather, your complaint appears to be based on rejection of the site's guidelines -- for which you somehow blame me.
  • Before you started your series of tirades against me, the two actions that I had taken were not deletions of your work, but rather were attempts to provide you with explanations and advice: I provided you with advice on your talk page, and I added an extra explanation for another editor's proposed deletion of one of your articles. How exactly is trying to help you "very abusive"? Based upon that, and the fact that you have apparently ignored every other post and suggestion that I've made, I'm done trying to reason with you. If you don't want feedback, if you don't want to pay any attention to other editors' responses to your questions, and if you thank people for their responses with this kind of abuse, then you really can't expect anyone on the site to have any interest in helping you. --NepheleTalk 00:52, 20 February 2009 (EST)
Ok, so I'll admit, I was angry when I saw your note undoing all of my edits. I half-read your explanation, then I checked your user page. I was on by blackberry and I saw your userpage had complaints. I was looking forward to reading about what an abusive tyrant you were. Before I did, though, I actually read what you had written (when I had a full-size computer) and noticed that you were right (I made incorrect edits) but that there was also a factual error on the site. Neph was just as quick to acknowledge that there were some help pages that needed correcting. I came away from the experience realizing that no one likes to have their edits un-done, but best not to get angry until you've seen the whole story. I'm a new contributor, so I know I have lots to learn. Mstefaniak 21:26, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Marauder Page[edit]

Hey, Neph. I've been rewriting the Marauder page, very much like the Necromancer and Conjurer ones. I've finally finished doing it all here but I have a doubt: if you look at the original page it is set up differently from the Bandit page, with no table but sections for every variety. The pictures are also in the sections instead of a the end and finally there are tables with the IDs for each variety. My question is: do I follow this layout or do it like the Bandit page? I mean, all the other pages are done that way; I though that a table would make more sense than sections and that IDs weren't really necessary. Thoughts? Objections? Feedback? --SerCenKing 14:30, 21 February 2009 (EST)

Hey, me again, I would like to proceed with finishing this project by copying the info but I would really value your input. Should I just go on with it or not? --SerCenKing 17:15, 25 February 2009 (EST)
Sorry it's taken me a while to respond -- it's been so impossible to use the site most of the time lately that I keep giving up on editing before I'm able to get everything I'd like to do. So I'm just getting around to what happened in the first week of February right now ;)
I agree that a more consistent layout is needed for the pages on generic NPCs. Overall, I do prefer the layout of the Bandit page -- although that shouldn't be too surprising given that I put together a lot of it, and therefore it provides the information that I typically look for, and it's arranged in a way that makes sense to me. Trying to be objective, though, some of the reasons behind my preferences are:
  • I don't think that the individual FormIDs for each generic NPC are necessary. Even using the console, there's almost no reason why you'd need those IDs, especially since to control any specific NPCs you encounter, you need to use the randomly-determined RefID, not the BaseID.
  • Nor do I think that a list of all the specific race/level/gender combinations is really useful. The NPC you encounter in any situation is randomly determined and furthermore, there's no way to figure out which specific NPC is standing in front of you (the name is simply "Bandit" no matter what the NPC's level; even if you figure out the NPC's race and gender, the level is still unknown; if you use the console to figure it out, then you don't need the wiki article at that point). So from the reader's point of view, I think it's actually more informative to provide summarized statistics, such as the range of possible levels. Or, in other words, when I look at the tables on the (current) Marauder page, I end up just scanning the tables to extract the range of possible levels and I never use the individual entries, so why not save readers the trouble and present the information that way to start with?
  • I think that listing the equipment in a table makes it easier to find the information and, in particular, makes it easier to compare the equipment carried by the different NPC varieties. If all I'm interested in is the weapon, I can just scan that one column if the information is in a table; if it's in a paragraph, then I need to read the whole paragraph.
  • On the other hand, I can see that moving all of the images to the bottom of the page makes the page less attractive visually. I don't think that trying to add the images next to the table would work: on narrow monitors, the table contents would be too squeezed; on wide monitors, the images would force the rows to be taller. In either case, it would be more difficult to see all the table contents at once, and therefore harder to intercompare the various rows. However, based on Content Over Style, I think that the eye-candy is a lower priority, and therefore moving the images to the bottom for the sake of the table is an acceptable trade-off.
Having said all that, however, there are a few improvements that I think could perhaps be made to the layout:
  • On your new Marauder page, I'd suggest adding a single image at the top of the page (as done on the Bandit page) in order to restore a bit of visual appeal.
  • Did some of the images get lost in the reorganization? About half seem to be missing....
  • It would be useful to incorporate some of the NPC class information onto the article. I don't know that the individual skills need to be spelled out (as done on the current Marauder page), but somehow explicitly stating the individual classes, with links to the appropriate entries on the NPC Classes page, would make the information available for anyone who is interested. I'm not sure how best to do that, however: adding an extra column to the table seems excessive. Perhaps put the class in parentheses under the name (since the rows are already more than one line tall)? Or else provide them in the introductory text? It might take some experimenting to see where it fits best in the layout.
Thanks for all the work you've been doing on the site! --NepheleTalk 13:46, 26 February 2009 (EST)
Thanks for the suggestions: I've added the image at the top of text; although I've had to recycle one from the gallery and I've got all of the pictures on. The rest, I pretty much agree with you: IDs and levels aren't really important. In regards to the Marauder NPC Classes I added them as links in the text, rather than in table. Would you mind checking my sandbox again to see if it is better? --SerCenKing 14:19, 26 February 2009 (EST)
I don't really like the Marauder page either - and I'm speaking as the person who basically made it look the way it does. I certainly wouldn't do that these days. Having said that, I'm not a huge fan of the Bandit page either. I much prefer the Dremora page that Timenn set up, which offers a combination of the best bits of both (mainly from the Bandit page, I'll freely admit). I know the resistances aren't necessary on a marauder page, but Timenn's version does link images to classes, which the Bandit page doesn't do, and keeps an introduction, which helps break up the page and is more friendly than a bit list.
I know the variation in Dremora is more easily splittable than marauders and bandits, but I still think it's a better starting point. As it stands, the new proposal is still not something I'll like more than about 60%, although that's better than the current version.
And yes, I know this would be better on the article's talk page, but I'm replying here for the moment because it's probably on watch lists. –RpehTCE 15:05, 26 February 2009 (EST)
Except there's a lot on the Dremora page that doesn't translate to a page such as Marauder -- far more than just the resistances. For Dremora, you only have one race and one level offset (and basically only one gender). You also only have one name (e.g., "Dremora Churl") that covers multiple different classes (melee, archer, and mage) -- which is why the images are divided by class. Other than the Valkynaz, you're unable to loot the armor, whereas bandits and marauders are frequently targeted specifically to get their armor. Since the type of Dremora you face is leveled, there's a meaningful limit to the health range of any given Dremora. All Dremora have some type of spells, whereas only Marauder Battlemages have spells. In other words, I'm just having a hard time seeing how the Dremora page can be used as a starting point for a page such as Marauder, or even seeing what specifics on the Dremora page could be adapted to the Marauder page. Although I suppose coming up with any new page layout is SerCenKing's job, not mine ;)
As for the current sandbox version of the Marauder page, it looks good to me at this point. Thanks for making those changes. --NepheleTalk 16:06, 26 February 2009 (EST)

Badges[edit]

Hello Nephele! You probably don't remember me anymore, I remember you praised me a long time ago for teaching myself how to upload NPC pictures and add them while keeping the page in a certain style. Anyways, I am back after a long hiatus and would like to rearrange my user page. A first step would be to add those "badges" you have on YOUR page. (You know, being from the UK, Canada, being a female, etc...). Is there a particular part of this website where there is a list of those icons? I can't seem to find it! Thanks! --Vartan 00:31, 25 February 2009 (EST)

UESPWiki:Userboxes.--Ratwar 00:45, 25 February 2009 (EST)
Thanks! I had no idea that was how they were called! -- Vartan 00:55, 25 February 2009 (EST)