User:Lensor/Archive/091225

Wikichu's edit

Sorry for that edit. By default Wikichu is set to replace all occurrences {{PAGENAME}} to the actual pagename, whenever it processes a page, independently of if the original wanted change is performed or not. Also Merry Christmas! :) poke | talk 18:46, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem, figured it was something like that. Merry Christmas to you too :) --Lensor (talk) 18:48, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually due to this I noticed that I was making a mistake the whole time with it :/ Thanks for noticing/correcting your page and getting my attention ^^ poke | talk 18:54, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't help noticing...

A lot of people are useing your templates me included which i got from someone else :P --Razsel talk 22:16, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, happy that you are finding it useful. And feel free to edit it to fit your need. --Lensor (talk) 13:00, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I also use your template for ages, and I never thanked you 0.0 Bad me!!!!! |Cyan LightHere!| 14:55, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Norsk!

Den første norske personen jeg har sett på Wiki! :D

navbar

Long, long ago when I first started here, I was suggested to start a user page setup using my friends templates. Later I found out they were taken from you. I have since made a few improvements if you'd be interested in them... Check out my page and notice the difference between the navbars on your page and mine. If you'd like I can help you change yours here =) Good day. — Rappy 00:36, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Cool, I will have a look at it to see how it works. I didn't have the patience to figure out how to get the bottom colors to switch properly before, but now you did that already so I wont have to :) --Lensor (talk) 07:04, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Adding a style="margin-top: -xxpx" to the initial table will also get rid of all that white space above your navbar. A good number would be close to the offset you have the icons dropping down. — Rappy 07:18, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

How Do you Get one I need help--Hubbard The Dervish 11:55, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Basically you just copy a menu you like to your userpage (make a subpage with the menu that you include in all your pages) and play around with until it fits your style. However, the menu I use now is kinda complicated (I am still learning how it works) so if you don't mind a menu that has a bit less functionality but looks almost the same you could start trying out my old menu which you can find at User:Lensor/Navbar. --Lensor (talk) 17:34, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Bah, who wants one with less functionality?! =) — Rappy 17:38, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I miss the days when I could look at my menu and just know what everything did. Like a neat table it was.. *sniff*. The hazards of copy-pasta code from other people. --Lensor (talk) 17:42, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I can help explain what each part does if you wish =p — Rappy 17:55, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Nah, I'll figure it out eventually. I do like tinkering until I get the aha feeling I get when I get it, I'm just being lazy :P Thanks for the offer though :) --Lensor (talk) 18:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi from the alliance :D

Hi lensor, I was looking at your nav bar, witch I like ALOT...I have been thinking my wiki page...But I would really like to use your nav bar instead of mine (mine's to plane)...But im really not sure how to use the template :S...I wish you could let me usit...Tnx in advance (unimaster crane in the [PHX] guild) --Calerouxz 00:55, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing, I am only happy if people find my stuff useful. Sharing is caring :) --Lensor (talk) 07:05, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Remember to check forum activity before tagging as inactive please

Check the forum link yourself, the forum has not been edited in months to a year. I do check the links before I tag them. --Dominator Matrix 08:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Which one are you talking about, because you sure did not check our forum for activity. --Lensor (talk) 08:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

[1] --Dominator Matrix 08:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Last edit: Dim 28 Juin 2009 20:30. That is NOT three months ago. --Lensor (talk) 08:20, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Translation: French >> Sun June 28, 2009 20:30. 2 whole days its close enough. --Dominator Matrix 08:33, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

June 28 is not even two months ago. In the middle of vacation season. How is that "close enough" to three months? Besides, our guild forum sure isn't inactive and you tagged that too. --Lensor (talk) 08:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

June-July-August 28th. Easy math. --Dominator Matrix 08:42, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Are you serious? June 28 to July 28 is one month. July 28 to August 28 is one month. 1+1=2 --Lensor (talk) 08:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

W/e. --Dominator Matrix 08:53, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

It's not whatever. Two months isn't enough and you know it. If the last edit was in June, it should be tagged in September (including the the forum activity).

Yes, i know, your guild is active. This was just an example. - J.P.Talk 09:09, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

(ri)Is it really that hard to admit you made a mistake? You come in here guns blazing, and when it turns out it was you who made the mistake after all it is "w/e". Just check forums before tagging next time and it is all good. --Lensor (talk) 09:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I lol'd, but w/e. — Rappy 15:09, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Archiving

Please don't archive any more guild pages. I am preparing the list for Wikichu, and I will now have to go through and remove any that you have already archived, or it will interupt the bot run. -- Wyn talk 17:51, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Only archived the one, wanted to learn how to do it. Didnt know you were botting though, since there were guild sitting there since like forever I thought I would make an effort:/ Is there any way to know when people are botting? However, I have removed a bunch of guilds from the list that were tagged in spite of active forums. In total I have removed almost 50 inaccurately tagged guilds so far.. There were also quite a few guilds that had active forums when tagged, but now it has been more than three months. Not sure what to do with them though. Re-tag as inactive (i.e new date)? Feels wrong to archive guilds that should still have several months to check on their wiki page. --Lensor (talk) 17:58, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I use the Guild Wars Wiki:List of inactive guilds. Once we have a good chunk to be archived, I go through those ready to be moved and check them for activity since tagging (since editors don't always remove the inactive tag) and otherwise check them. Then I create a list which poke uses for Wikichu. There shouldn't be anything on my list currently that you have removed tags for since I have gone through all of the ones I've already listed. User:Wynthyst/Sandbox/Guild_pages_to_be_moved If the guild is tagged (erroneously or not) and has since had 3 months of inactivity, I don't see the point in untagging and retagging just to leave them sit another 3 months.. do you? I'm really not trying to be difficult here, but there are a very few of us who are actively interested in maintaining the guild namespace and keep it somewhat usable and yes, we make mistakes, but that's the beauty of the wiki, there are few mistakes that can't be easily fixed, and now that we dont' delete inactive pages, those corrections can be done by anyone. -- Wyn talk 18:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, so it was more bad luck that you were building the list right now? Or are you building it continously? I am confused :P Anyways, I am not saying that guilds have to be retagged, I just didnt know how to handle them so I let them be. On the one hand I feel that the guild should have three months after also the forum/website went dark (for the same reasons that we have both criteria to begin with), but on the other hand I realize it can be a lot of work taking it into account after the fact if you are to make a routine of it. Of course, if editors remember checking the forums before tagging, we wont have this kind of problem in the future. At least not on the scale it is now, more in the form of individual mistakes (which will always happen). Now I have no idea how the GWWT work really, but it is possible for it to take links into account when suggesting inactive tags (like a warning to check the forum/website)?

On another note I do appreciate the amount of work you guys put in the wiki. My complaints should not be seen as ungratefulness, but attempts to help the wiki become better. I firmly believe that predictable enforcement is one of the most important things when building a community. So when the rules say one thing and the enforcement something else, especially if the enforcement is stricter than the rule, I can easily go into zealot mode...--Lensor (talk) 18:43, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

It's mostly just bad timing on your part atm, since I've been waiting for enough guilds to be ready to be archived, and no, I don't build it continuously. Please understand I DO appreciate you are doing this to make the wiki better, but you also have to understand I have invested ALOT of time and energy into the guild namespace in the past year+, getting the policy revised, and working out the best and easiest way to make this archiving thing work for the majority of people and guilds. I do take this all very seriously, in fact too seriously most of the time, but that's only because of the personal investment I have made to make this namespace better, and more usable for the entire community. When the policy revision was approved, we did try to do all of this manually, and it was a maintenance nightmare, so we enlisted the help of poke and his bot, however, it doesn't make sense to have him set up and perform the bot run if there aren't a relatively large number of guild pages to be archived, since the bot actually performs multiple functions in the archival process. I don't believe there is anything that can be incorporated into GWWT that would force people to check forums prior to tagging, but you would have to take that up with poke. I guess I have gotten used to doing this pretty much on my own, and it just makes it difficult with "too many cooks in the kitchen" if you know what I mean. -- Wyn talk 19:00, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

The thing is that we (sadly) cannot really trust the inactive guild tag, and that is also why I still want Wyn to manually check the guilds and create a list for Wikichu instead of simply using the DPL list that is there. In the three months a guild is tagged a lot things can happen, inexperienced editors even change the guild page but forget to remove the tag. So because of that we have to check the inactivity requirements again, before archiving it as historical (as it is stated in the policy as well). I however couldn't make Wikichu check all that; the guild pages are edited by different people and there are far too many possible locations I would have to check, whereas a human can easily check it (by requiring more time of course). poke | talk 07:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Poke. I have of course no idea how such things work, was just a thought I had. However, would it be possible to make an alternate tag? I.e. that if an editor is looking at a guild page that has not received any edits he or she would have two separate choices; Either add the inactive tag as they do now, or add a commented date stamp, saying that the forum or website was found active? That way it would be very easy to tag the page in the correct way to begin with. --Lensor (talk) 10:13, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

As probably all people, that are tagging guilds as inactive, go through the DPL list which looks for the last edit date, it would be enough to simply edit the page and change a character or do whatever. There is no need to add a specialized comment or tag for that, just edit something and the page will disappear for the next 3 months from the list until it gets checked then (when someone else can edit something again when there is still activity). poke | talk 12:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I was just thinking that instead of changing a random character or adding a line break or whatever, a date stamp would 1) "officialize" it, so you've got consistency 2) not make it look like a random edit (that might get reverted or argued about) 3) gives the next person to try to tag it a head's up on what to check (i.e. "let me tag this, oh, wait, there's a note here that says the last time, the forum was still active, let me make sure to check that this time"). -- FreedomBound 12:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Aw, I just had my own response all typed up, saying all the things Freedom just said :) I'm just going to add that my thought was that if it was just as easy for the editor to choose date stamping as inactivity tagging, they would be less likely to get the tagging wrong. As with all things, it is better to prevent mistakes than having to fix them after the fact. --Lensor (talk) 13:04, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

It will be very hard if not impossible to force people to actualize some date; also checking the contacts is required by policy, so people have to check it everytime. Some date or tag shouldn't change that. Also random edits are not bad at all, even if they are reverted, your main point was to edit something; a revert is something too, so the page disappears from the inactive list. Also you should change something that will really not bother anyone (like adding a space after the guild tag? {{guild }}) and you should always be able to provide a edit summary that tells people what you did and why. However adding a timestamp somewhere in the code, that should be changed with every edit there anyway, somehow makes the point of the edit date in the history senseless. poke | talk 13:06, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Not sure I understand that first sentence, so I'll skip it for now, but if checking the contacts is required by policy, take a look at Lensor's recent contributions in the Guild namespace, you'll see that there are several people violating that policy, repeatedly. I do agree with you on the edit summary, and see your point on the random edit, it just seems that telling people to make random edits, rather than a (albeit marginally) useful one seems rather odd. -- FreedomBound 13:12, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I get your point, maybe some other way of doing it could be better. But the fact still remains, required or not, editors routinely tag guilds without checking the forums. I do not believe editors do this on purpose, they have just got stuck in a way of doing things where clicking on a link does not fit in. It is all about reminding about policy and making it easier to follow. If editors continue to tag everything with 3 months since last edit, you would basically need a second list for guilds that almost has gone 3 months since last edit. So someone like me could go through them and add bogus edits to those with active forums before they go to the "to be tagged" list and get autotagged. Of course that means that each guild would have to be gone through (at least) twice, making the combined work effort double. --Lensor (talk) 13:27, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, of course people forget to check all contacts or just ignore it, it's quite a bother after all to check all those things. And that's also part of why the policy requires another check before archiving it as historical.

If you want a list for all guild pages that might get tagged as inactive soon, here you are. poke | talk 14:08, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the list, but that cannot be a permanent solution. I mean, if it is ok to ignore active forums, why even have a human tagging at all, might as well bot it. For now I am going through tagged guilds as they appear. Partly so I might notice if people start tagging correctly (leading to less reverting), and partly out of the hope that seeing constantly reverted tags might eventually lead to taggers becoming conscious of the rules. --Lensor (talk) 15:03, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

This is a wiki; it's part of the idea of a wiki that people have to work on it. We are not some kind of completely automated database, and we also don't want to be. So yes, manual tagging and manual maintenance is a permanent solution for a wiki. poke | talk 17:13, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Which was kinda my point, sorry for being unclear :) My point was that the great thing with manual tagging is that it is people doing it, people who are smart and should be able to judge if a page is active or not. When people tag without using their gifts of reasoning, they might as well not bother and leave it to bots who do the exact same thing just faster.--Lensor (talk) 17:40, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, okay - misunderstood you then :) poke | talk 18:22, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Straight N Arrow

lulz =) A F K When Needed 21:16, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

well ye :) --Lensor (talk) 14:53, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Could you make me an topnav like urs ?

Hi i am neji could u make me an topnav pls? ,like urs , my charackters names and information are on this page here

--GreatNeji Hyuga 19:02, 3 September 2009 (UTC) :)

Hey, I am sorry but I really do not have the time to make content specifically for other people's user pages, especially as you have many more characters than me so it would mean quite an effort to adjust everything to make it fit. That said, it is not really hard to adjust it to suit your needs, it just takes time (my base configuration fits better with few tabs). I have copied the more easy variant I used before to the subpage in your user space and edited in a few of your character names to get you started.--Lensor (talk) 14:02, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

thx man ,very much --GreatNeji Hyuga 16:36, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Out of curiosity..

How is Guild:The Forgotten Warriors their forum considered active in your opinion? Nothing... absolutely nothing has been posted on since January [2]. -- Wyn talk 08:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong Lensor, you perceived a problem with how we were doing things, and you have stepped up to "do it right" and I appreciate the effort you are making, but at the same time, I'm trying to understand what criteria you are using to determine this "activity". -- Wyn talk 08:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

That was a border case, I agree, and it could have gone either way. Of course I do not expect people do the amount of "digging" I did in this particular case (activity should be obvious), and formally speaking it would have been ok to tag them as inactive. The reason I gave them the benefit of the doubt was that the site does show activity even though they have not posted. Members have logged 80 hours in GW over the last week. There are videos recently posted. And most of the officers have been on line on the site and logged time in GW in the last week (not the leader though).--Lensor (talk) 08:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Also note that the edit say that it is the site that is active, not the forum.--Lensor (talk) 09:03, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

K :P I'll give it to you on the vids posted :P -- Wyn talk 09:06, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

On a related note, don't do that with the comments. You add ugly whitespace to the top of the page. Compare before and after. poke | talk 07:33, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Hm, that is weird. I always thought commented stuff was, you know, commented. Something funky with how the wiki reads code? Anyways, I will figure out another way to do it, thanks. --Lensor (talk) 07:38, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Comments are ignored, yes, but the line break is not commented out. poke | talk 07:48, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Still, if I wanted to add white space I never was able to do it by just typing line breaks (enter), I had to hard code it in. Ah well, learn something new every day (hopefully). --Lensor (talk) 07:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

titles sick

i noticed u taged titles as inactive at the moment all the sick guilds have been disbanded but will be back soon --Nick123 16:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Aha, so that is why there was no mention of the guild on the website. I know KISS as alliance is very active, but that one guild was a big question mark. Anyway, just revert the tag whenever the guild is back up :) --Lensor (talk) 07:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

will do --Nick123 16:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

nm me.... nice page. ... oops ... forgot to sign, here. -- riyen ♥ 09:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

uhh...

All I did was make a miniscule edit to remove it from the inactive guilds list. There was no tag there in the first place, so the edit you made was unneccesary. -- Wandering Traveler 21:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Ops. I just opened the list of waiting to be tagged guilds, and that one was the last one I checked since their forum is kinda big. You must have snuck your edit in there while I was thinking about it. Didnt recheck the history between opening the link and saving my edit, so ye was a little double work there. No harm no foul though ;) --Lensor (talk) 21:42, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Just makin' sure. Last I checked the tag wasn't one character in size.... :P -- Wandering Traveler 21:53, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Happy Birthday 2009!

Happy Birthday! --Sharkinu 06:20, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Birthday Lensor :) --Kakarot 15:40, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Birthday! poke | talk 15:57, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Woo, I have friends! Or at least now I can pretend that I have friends! *happydance*. ahem. Anyways, thanks guys :) --Lensor (talk) 16:32, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy BDay! --Elven Chaos 19:08, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations! -- Cyan 19:13, 4 December 2009 (UTC)