Open main menu

UESPWiki β

User talk:Oath2order

Welcome!Edit

Hello Oath2order! 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!).

Please consider supporting the UESP elsewhere on the web:

  • Facebook: our official Facebook page.
  • Tumblr: our official Tumblr blog.
  • Twitch: our official Twitch channel.
  • Twitter: our official Twitter account.
  • YouTube: our official YouTube channel.
Feel free to practice editing in the sandbox. If you would like to discuss the games or lore, consider checking out our blog, our Discord, or the forums. If you need any help, don't hesitate to contact one of our mentors. Lastly, thanks once again for joining the UESPWiki, have fun! Jeancey (talk) 22:59, 6 February 2020 (GMT)

ImagesEdit

With the images you have been adding, could you please keep in mind the image standards as seen in Help:Images? NPC/Creature images are 1:1 (basically a square).--Talyyn (talk) 05:26, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Set TemplatesEdit

My edit comment was about what the dlc/boss/chest params are actually used for, but they are valid for the template. If it's only a single actual thing, it doesn't need a manual link, as the template autolinks. In addition, you duplicated params. I'm not sure what the params do yet, but they shouldn't need manual linking anywhere at all. Jeancey (talk) 20:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I found which template is using the params ({{ESO_Set_List}}) and I'm testing right now to double check that we don't need manual params... Jeancey (talk) 20:49, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Okay! I have confirmed that the entries are autolinking, so if the display page you want is identical to the page name (i.e. you previously were entering |source=[[Online:Crypt of Hearts II|Crypt of Hearts II]] then it will work just as fine with |source=Crypt of Hearts II. The only time a manual link would be needed is if the displayed term is different from what you'd normally get when doing something like [[Online:Pagename|]]. In the cases of the pages I reverted, this only applies to the Tel Var chest parameter you used, which I did not revert. :) Hopefully this all makes sense, and hopefully it makes it easier for you when editing! (also, sorry for the repeated talk page posts!) Jeancey (talk) 20:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, I didn't touch anything else while you edited. The main thing I was removing (the reason I saw the page at all) is that you had duplicated the |source= parameter (you had two of them listed). The presence of the manual link vs autolink doesn't really change anything for the end user, but it is "cleaner" as it were, to not have the manual links unless necessary :) Jeancey (talk) 21:06, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Quest StagesEdit

Hi, thanks for the work setting up Online:Bounties of Blackwood (quest)! In future, if you don't have the exact wording of the quest stages it would be more helpful to leave the entries blank so that others can fill it in. —⁠Legoless (talk) 09:00, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Health valuesEdit

Hello! I realize WHY you're making these health edits, but our current standard doesn't include the commas in health values. Different countries around the world use commas differently, and not an insignificant portion of Europe uses them to indicate decimals, not to indicate large numbers. This is evidenced by the fact that the templates that you replaced don't use the commas. Unfortunately, we do have to undo those edits, since it should be a sitewide community discussion that's required to change standard policy. And even if we DO change it, the templates would still remain, we would just be editing the templates themselves to change the process. I'm sorry for any trouble this will cause but it is an unfortunate reality! Jeancey (talk) 18:24, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Use a sandbox!Edit

Hi! I love that you're working on the Tales of Tribute pages (and on Online pages in general), but I heavily suggest you use a sandbox if you're doing a big restructuring project. You can just copy everything from the box on the desired page. I made one for you here: User:Oath2order/Sandbox

Bane of DragonsEdit

However, when checking dialogue in the LANG file, I can see a line that suggests a repeat? "Hail, Defense Force veteran. Yours is a welcome sight.\n\nThis one is curious. Are you here to chat, or do you wish to test your skills once more?" I would rather wait to confirm if it is actually in or not.--Talyyn (talk) 04:07, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

"ON:" vs "Online:"Edit

Hi again! I saw you recently changed a whole page's worth of "Online:" links to "ON:" instead. I asked about this on the Discord a few months ago and folks were saying "ON:" is for objects (like images) while "Online:" is for everything else (pages, etc.) But I'm curious if it's in writing, somewhere, on the UESP rules for updating pages. Is it? I've been changing ON to Online for months, every time I touch a page, but I'm guessing you've been doing the opposite, LOL, so I just want to figure out which one is correct. Solomon1972 (talk) 04:46, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, based on your comment on the other talk page, I thought I could clarify this a little bit for both of you. "ON" is an abbreviation for "Online". For filenames (example File:ON-npc-Lyris Titanborn.jpg), everyone will use the abbreviation in its name per image policy. While for normal interwiki links either one will work. Neither is really preferable to the other, and there isn't a need to make a page conform to one standard or the other. While I can't think of this as being a written policy or guideline anywhere, the generally accepted practice is to leave them as is unless you are making a larger edit to the page (usually a total revamp). I hope this helps, and if either of you have any questions about this, feel free to ask it here and I'll answer it to the best of my ability! --AKB Talk Cont Mail 05:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, AKB! Solomon1972 (talk) 05:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi there! I just want to reiterate what AKB said back in January about changing links like this. It's generally preferable to leave the existing namespace style for a link alone. There's no notable advantage to using one or the other apart from being shorter for an editor to type. Any difference in processing speed for the shorter text is negligible and is offset by the fact that ON isn't the default name for the space. Also, if there is any difference, it only applies to editing or purging the page; most of the rest of the time, Wikipedia uses a cached version which has the link fully expanded to "Online" anyway (as you can see when hovering over an ON link). About the only reason I can think of where it's a good idea to change one to the other is in a list that's supposed to be aligned when editing and has becomee misaligned because someone used a different style of namespace. You'll see the bot cause this problem sometimes just because, internally, it doesn't store which namespace style something used originally if it's altering a link. By all means, feel free to fix those if making another edit anyway. For general editing, though, there's no benefit. Thanks! – Robin Hood (talk) 08:46, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
I was doing that while I was making another edit. I added the link to the Necrom achievements. Oath2order (talk) 17:56, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
I noticed the other edit, but my point is that there's generally no reason to change ON to Online or vice versa. It's not providing any significant benefit either way. – Robin Hood (talk) 19:24, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Is it providing any sort of significant harm? What I'm not understanding is why, among site administration it seems, this is such a big deal. Oath2order (talk) 20:18, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

(←) It's not harmful apart from the fact that it's a needless change that obscures what else you might have done. Using that particular edit as an example, if you hadn't changed any of the namespaces, it would've been a single-line change that anyone could've understood at a glance. With your edit summary not highlighting the substantive change, editors then have to scroll through six screens of changes (at least at my screen size) to see what's actually changed. On the question of why people are bringing it up, it's because it's considered good practice to only change what actually needs changing. Plus, it's good to engage with editors when they're doing something unexpected, to find out why they're doing it. Sometimes, there's a really good reason for what they're doing that we just didn't think of, and we can maybe even learn from, and I think that was why Solomon asked you about it initially. But I'm curious to know myself why you want to change the namespaces. – Robin Hood (talk) 21:08, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

I can definitely be better about edit summaries. I changed my preferences to always prompt me to add one if I have a blank summary. As to the rest of it, for me it's pretty simple. On larger pages, or templates, or the pages that I focus on (basically, any of the pages listed on my user page), I just find it easier to read through on a page. "Online", or spelled-out namespaces are just words, whereas I view "ON" as an equivalent to a symbol, like a curly bracket, for example. There are very few examples on this wiki of anything that isn't an abbreviated namespace being in all-caps (the only thing that I can think of is ALMSIVI and that really doesn't show up often. So basically, yeah, I just view it as equivalent to a symbol as opposed to a word. Oath2order (talk) 22:01, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Someone else brought up the idea of using short names in templates as well earlier today, so you've definitely got some support there. :) For regular pages, I understand where you're coming from now which makes me a little more ambivalent about the changes. I suspect you'll still get a lot of pushback from other editors, but I'll let that play out however it plays out. This is a prime example of what I said just above about there being reasons to do something I hadn't thought of, so thanks for explaining. – Robin Hood (talk) 02:21, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
I probably should have given my reasons earlier, but communication is not one of my stronger suits. I'll try to tone back with how much of those I do, and especially not on pages with nothing else happening. Oath2order (talk) 03:15, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! – Robin Hood (talk) 03:56, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Update 39Edit

Hey Oath2order! Thanks for all the edits getting pages updated for U39. It would be useful if some of those changes could be noted on the page rather than just deleting the old information outright: see [1], [2], [3] example edits. —⁠Legoless (talk) 08:27, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

About templateEdit

Thanks for setting up those new achievement pages. Just FYI, {{about}} is not required on pages where a disambiguation is already made in the page title. For example, Online:Spore Savant Face Marks benefits from the template's use, but Online:Spore Savant Face Marks (achievement) is clearly about the achivement and therefore does not need it. —⁠Legoless (talk) 10:02, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Oh, okay, gotcha! I did that when I was doing the Set page revamp a while back, and nobody said anything, I assumed it would be fine here. Will try to remember that going forward. Oath2order (talk) 18:03, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Preliminary Page Filling for Crate RewardsEdit

Good afternoon! I noticed that you filled out Crate appearance/tier information for every collectible that was linked on the Buoyant Armiger Crates prior to the Crates' in-game release. I commend you for taking the initiative to prepare individual pages for a big release like that, but in the future, I would ask that you wait until the crates are released before filling in tier and crate information. Most of the collectibles that were listed on that page were not actually part of the Buoyant Armiger season: the page was filled speculatively by another editor months prior with recently uploaded Crate cards (and probably the hope that we could conveniently cull the list of whatever wasn't in the collection on the day of release).

I like your gumption, and you've done some great work over the past few years! I appreciate how diligent you were with tweaks and consistency edits on item set pages. I can understand the desire to be on top of upcoming releases, but with Crown Crates, it's a lot more efficient to wait and fill in the blanks with the official list than it is to go nuts and clean up the incorrect information later. This season, they pulled in three items that were present in previous Crate seasons to fill in some of the gaps in the Epic/Superior tiers: we can never be sure what's going to be in those boxes until they drop.

Thanks for helping out, and I hope the rest of your day is swell! -MolagBallet (talk) 20:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Gotcha, I'll remember that for next time! Oath2order (talk) 22:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Great Work!Edit

You have been given a cookie!

Your dedication and diligence to the wiki has not gone unnoticed. A user has seen the progress you've made, and has given you a cookie because of it. Good work! The user had the following to say:

Great work on updating collectibles and npc infoboxes with health values! There's a lot of them to do and its valuable info to have! Thanks for all your hard work The Rim of the Sky (talk) 23:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Cat Link RemovalEdit

Hi! Just wanted to write here that the reason why I had removed those links on the Cat page was that I saw on previous similar pages for NPCs like that one that repeated locations further down the list were not linked again. That specific thing was also applied within the Cat list itself, with locations like Skywatch for example so I was applying that same consistency to the other repeated locations. 184.160.183.116 01:06, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

That is absolutely the proper editing style; I am in the wrong here. I did not think of that. I'll fix. Oath2order (talk) 01:08, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Admitedly I should've specified that in the edit summary, not sure why I didn't think of that at the time but I'll try to be more diligent about that in the future to avoid stuff like this. Thank you! 184.160.183.116 01:11, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Online: or ON:Edit

I'm fairly new and noticed you updating a few things from Online: to ON:. Is that a functional change or just to save a few bytes? Regardless, I'm happy to start writing it that way. Also, thanks for your descriptive edit summaries! Zoidsberg (talk) 01:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Website mods and admins prefer people to use Online:, for me it's a habit I got into before I was told the proper stylization rules. It is definitely not something you should go seek out to change. Oath2order (talk) 01:53, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.uesp.net/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Oath2order&oldid=2991070"
Return to the user page of "Oath2order".