User talk:Aggelakis

Archives

Page 1

Talk Page Edits

Go below this line! ~ AGGE talk/cons 07:21, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Ex Libris

In regards to the information that I added to Ex Libris' page. What hostile wording? I simply wrote the exact truth. Since when is that hostile? She started work for X company on X date and was fired by the CEO of said company on X date. How is that hostile? Peregrine Falcon 02:33, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

That is why I put "hostile" in single quotes. It's not hostile, it's 'hostile'. We don't care too much about the circumstances of former developers and community folk, especially whether they get fired. Just a comment that they worked there works sufficiently. ~ AGGE talk/cons 04:22, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Although english is my native language, I honestly don't understand the difference between "hostile" and 'hostile'. I don't believe that my wording was in any way hostile, I simply want to add factual information and retain the same writing style as the original paragraph. I offer this version as a compromise:

On April 16th, 2009 Ex Libris announced that she would be ending her twenty-seven month stint with the 'City of' community and "moving on to conquer new online gaming horizons" while also re-introducing players to EMpulse, who had returned to his old job. She started work at Sparkplay Media as their community manager for Earth Eternal on April 22nd, 2009 as Wyrd, and left on May 19th, 2009.

Peregrine Falcon 13:19, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

That's acceptable. "Was fired" is considered "charged language" in most people's vocabulary - not quite hostile, but 'hostile'. The wiki tries to avoid charged language. ~ AGGE talk/cons 16:06, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

A quick thank you!

I just felt the need to drop you a thank you for the creation of the Reward Merit template for the Flashback page! I'm new to the wiki so lacked the knowledge to template it myself! ~ Bunny 17:06, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Quick request

Would you mind an opinion on the Animation Customization article? There isn't really much of anything similar I can base it off of, so I've just been going with the best I can think of to flesh it out. Also, do you know how to, or do you know who else I could ask to, make animated .gifs for that page similar to how Emotes's linked pages are (mostly) done? Draeth Darkstar 01:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Augustine Merits: Bug/Not Bug

Regarding the release notes at http://tinyurl.com/ycjylsu, if I read that correctly, those changes have only been deployed to the test server, meaning that the bug is still present on the live servers. We should probably leave the bug note in the article until the fix goes live, shouldn't we? --Eabrace 21:53, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

If you want to get technical, we should change the merit rewards to 24, and note that the bug that is making the rewards so low will be fixed in a future build, and that the merit award will then be 42. ~ AGGE talk/cons 21:56, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I would agree that sounds like the correct action. (I'd originally read the patch note backwards thinking that it was currently awarding 42 and should be awarding 24, but I think I've got it right now.) --Eabrace 23:28, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: Overview

There are a buttload of pages on the wiki without a section titled "Overview", so I'm not really sure where this guideline comes from. After your post on my talk page, I did look around for (and eventually managed to find) the Article Guidelines page, but it wasn't an obvious find. And even then, it's a ginle sentence buried in a page of guidelines, with the only reference being a post from TonyV on the Paragon Forums.

I hit Random Page a few times just now, and of the pages that weren't disambiguation pages, or tiny things that aren't really articles (such as the individual Emote pages), I found about a 1:1 ratio of pages with and without == Overview ==.

I guess my point is twofold:

1. The guidelines aren't obviously found, at least in my experience. Since joining, I've been working off of common sense and what I see throughout the rest of the wiki.
2. I don't understand the need or reason for this specific guideline, particularly when half the articles I look at don't follow it.

 FW (talk · contrib)  01:53, 30 November 2009 (UTC)