Talk:To Zen Daijun

Who wrote the walk through....--129.21.100.55 20:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Reverts

I have fixed it to comply with the GWW:QUESTS Policy. Those who keep changing it to their likes, should Check that policy first. Thanks. -- riyen ♥ 17:17, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't add false info to articles. Don't remove valid info from articles. Don't invent policies to justifiy it. You've repeatedly viollated GWW:1RR. I should revert it as vandalism, but for some reason I'm agfing. This is your chance to give an actual reason. Backsword 17:34, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I did not add false Information to the Article. I did not Remove Valid information from the article. I did exactly as it shows in the Policy. Thank you. -- riyen ♥ 17:38, 25 October 2009 (UTC) Secondly, for your information. I have Done this quest with 4 Characters as well as Helping others with this quest. So I know what pertains in this quest. Thank you. -- riyen ♥ 17:40, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

There is no policy. What you linked is a formatting guideline, and the only thing in it relevant is the offer dialogue template. Clearified: If that's all you wanted to add, there would be no probelem, but even if your not that user, it is only for just offer dialogue. Your changes to the the rest of the article is the problem. Those NPC do not spawn as part of the quest, we don't bold list names, and most certainly there is not four different offer dialogues, that's valid dialogue as part of the quest that you've mangled. If you can't come up with areason for it, it needs to be restored. Also, even if there was a policy, it would not justify you breaking policies. Backsword 17:50, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

The Npcs are apart of the quest. You add All NPCs that are in the quest and party window. Do the quest, before you Falsely claim I'm screwing up the page. Secondly, I did it exactly as shown. You Do bold the names, it shows who's talking. Also placing the correct answer code as Most other quests have. -- riyen ♥ 18:02, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

The NPC section list quest spawns, not ever NPC related to the quest. It says so in the formatting guidline. But I can buy making that mistake. I could even buy that you misremembered and though something wasn't in a speech window when it was. What I don't buy is that you think that it was four different offer dialogues if you've played the quest. (nor is it a good idea to reandomly add ort remove links, but that's a different sort of issue). But even if you are mistaken you are not allowed to keep reverting. Backsword 18:24, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Backsword, coming from someone who has violated GWW:1RR more than any single individual on this wiki, I find it rather amusing that you are bringing it up. I don't see anything wrong with Ariyen's edit. Just leave it be. -- Wyn talk 17:58, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, Wyn, this is exactly the right time to rekindle our old fight about that policy. How sensible of you. Backsword 18:13, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

You claim Ariyen is "removing info," but her revisions have more information than yours do. Perhaps it falls on you, the doubting party, to verify her changes in-game? That is, if you really are AGF'ing. ;D elix Omni 18:25, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

The NPCs? The extra dialogue from Tai? The multiple offer dialogues? If the claim was actually that it had been changed in some secret update, then that may be justified. At least for first two, as the last one is technically impossible. Backsword 19:02, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

The multiple offer dialogues are correct at least; all the NPCs that move your party into an outpost in Factions require 3 confirmations before they'll do it. They thankfully reduced that redundancy in Nightfall. elix Omni 19:05, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Those comfirmations have nothing to do with new quests, and was what was on the page before Ariyen removed them. Backsword 19:08, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

The confirmations have everything to do with this quest. Please do the quest, before you say more. -- riyen ♥ 19:10, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

If you knew that, it's even harder to agf on you removing them. Backsword 01:17, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Should I presume no justification if forthcoming? Backsword 01:17, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I did the page by GWW:QUESTS and with the information that was already here. Nothing's missing. -- riyen ♥ 02:58, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

You don't seem to get it. Just because the formating guide does not spell something out, does not make it ok to remove from the wiki if it correctly documents the game.

Documenting the game is the fundametal purpose of the wiki, and what content policy specifies. Don't remove documentation. And false info correctly formated is no better than other false info, worse even since it will be more believable. The guideline is just a help to get things systemised. Backsword 03:15, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

You're the one to talk. I did not remove any documentation. I added documentation that you have reverted from, removed yourself. The information is already there, was there. Is in the quest and you fail to realize this, Please don't dictate to me about this quest, unless you have done it and realized the additions that I have placed are true. Nothing has been removed. -- riyen ♥ 06:18, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

So let me get this straight: You are no longer claiming that the formating guide justifies it, nor have you maked any mistake. Instead, you claim that the wuest is now like you've changed the article to indicate? (btw, about lies, people can just check your edit. Not a good idea.) Backsword 09:53, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Like someone can check your edits too Backsword. Just stop it. The things I added were already in the 'Discussion' Aka 'Description' of this page. You have not checked before me to see if I actually 'removed' what you said. I did, found what you have 'removed'. I have also played the game and added what was actually needed. Maybe you need to check the history and others too, before going to point fingers Backsword. I saw you have ruined a page that was accurate to a guideline. You want it your own way? Instead of letting it be by guidelines that the community has done? I only see trouble. Be thankful someone is actually doing it right, instead of pointing fingers at air. -- riyen ♥ 18:59, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Quest

I just did this quest on my monk. Everything is accurate. Also, Had an accomplish, had Hallucinating Dreams (level 15) doing this too. -- riyen ♥ 01:10, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, that's a t least clear. There is no formating justifies argument, there is no mistakes, the quest is like this now? So if I actually bothers to create a new char and takes it this far, i will find that this article acurately reflects that? And if the quest is unchanged, it is proff positive you've acted in bad faith? Backsword 11:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

You don't have to, but I do have a witness who's done this at the same time as it. It is accurate. The people Added are correct. If you look in the History, you would see I was not the only one changing the dialogue as it should be. -- riyen ♥ 18:11, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Backsword, what exactly are you disputing? From what I recall, this is how the quest is. --JonTheMon 19:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)