User talk:Batou

Hi. You might want to have a look at Guild Wars Wiki:Formatting/Quests before submitting all those quests, since they all seem to be more or less copied from GuildWiki, and we're not using the same design over here. The design you submit may also be in copyright violation, if you are not sure the designer has released his/her work into GFDL, so all your work may be undone and deleted because of copyright violation. Just wanted to make sure you know this :) — Anja 19:58, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Note: Blanking out the content does not remove the problem - in fact, it masks it as the links to an empty article are now blue (hiding the fact that the article is empty until you actually open it).

It's better to insert {{delete|copyvio}} at the top of the page, then an admin can delete the page completely. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:16, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Sorry! Made a mess, was trying to help. New to editing the wiki. Guess i have more to read up on. Also didn't realize i couldn't simply copy info from the other Wiki. Since both wiki's work with the knowledge that all info will be edited/changed/copied at will (public access) then wouldn't that mean copyright issues are not an issue concerning anything Wiki? -- Batou 17:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

while the format makes it kind of obvious that it came from Guild wiki the information which is included is stuff which is directly copied from the game - there are no walkthroughs, notes or maps or anything which is 'copyright' to the guild wiki - aside from the format. The information can come across from Guild wiki pretty much directly - just care needs to be taken with the format. --Aspectacle 20:34, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Yes, as Aspectacle says, the info is okay, it's the design that might be copyright. You are learning fast btw, and your help is appreciated. :) — Anja 20:37, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Ah, Ok thanks yall that makes sense. I have been updating my quest submissions as deletion candidates. I guess i will stay away from Wiki editing/updating until i further understand it all. lol. cheers! --Batou 17:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Copyvio template

Don't use the delete template for copyvio articles ( {{delete|copyvio}} ) but instead use the copyvio template ( {{copyvio}} ). Thanks :) -- (gem / talk) 13:50, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Normally, the copyvio tag should be used for tagging suspected copyvio issues. But, in this case, he had uploaded his own contributions, and had started blanking them out. I suggested to use the delete tag instead, as these were his own contributions that he acknowledged to be copyvio's. If the copyvio should be used even in this case, then I appoligize for any confusion that my initial advice may have caused. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 13:56, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Hmm, I can see your point in using the copyvio tag for 'suspected' copyvios only, but in reality all of the tags are on clear copyvio pages and I think that's the best way to use the tag. It keeps the candidates for deletion category clean so that anything more important to be deleted will be easier to spot. The copyvio category is a subcategory of the deletion category, so it doesn't really make deleting the copyvio articles any harder, it just categorises the pages for easier handling. -- (gem / talk) 14:01, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Vandal!

/ban! :P --Karlos 08:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh Noez! XD --Batou 17:32, 28 May 2007 (UTC)