CGI pic of Leliana[edit source]

Hey Loleil, just something that came to my mind when I saw your CGI pic. It's almost identical as mine (mine's #3), but yours doesn't seem to be taken from an HD source? I might be entirely wrong so forgive me if you already know this: If you're watching in youtube, make sure you select HD or HQ and then take the screenshot, save as .png in whatever image editor you're using and this should take care of the blurry-ness. I'm happy if you use yours over mine, it just needs a bit of sharpness added to it :) --Gvg870 14:51, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

Recipes![edit source]

LOL! Not laughing, just sayin' hi. Zing! I wanted to give you a heads up - me here pardner and I be workin' on dis dem Recipes. And weesa feeegured dat yew should know.

So we're going to be uploading the recipes soon and the pages are going to look a little like this -- Health_Poultice_Recipe. Then we'll be putting them into Herbalism Recipes, Trap-Making Recipes and Poison-Making Recipes respectively. At some point we will reclaim Herbalism, Trap-Making and Poison-Making and making them about the skill and not about the recipes. It will be a fairly short page. That page will in turn link to the recipes. What's your opinion on that? --Tierrie 05:29, December 20, 2009 (UTC)

So it turns out you were scribbling on my page as I was scribbling on yours! Stop reading mah mind! I probably didn't redirect because I created the page yesterday, used it as a placeholder. Did a quick search on our wiki to see if Herbalism Recipes will return that as a result (it doesn't). And decided that people would actually be more likely to type in that as a search term. So decided to delete that page. Check out User:Tierrie/Sandbox. Love the new Recipe list? Its SORTABLE. Featuring new technology. --Tierrie 05:38, December 20, 2009 (UTC)

Okay don't look now, we're featuring TWO new things we didn't have before - solved the problem of auto-including categories AND the recipes allows users to sort. I will retrofit the other pages with these discovery. --Tierrie 05:38, December 20, 2009 (UTC)

Default templates.[edit source]

(In a reaction to your forum post at Forum:"See Also" How should it be formatted?)
The default templates are stored at MediaWiki:Createplate-list, MediaWiki:Createplate-Location, MediaWiki:Createplate-Character and so on. :)--Mytharox 12:36, December 22, 2009 (UTC)

Console Page[edit source]

Do you know if anyone has used the zz_epi, zz_ran and those debug console commands? Because they're really lacking in description and I don't even know what they do so anyone with experience using those codes should definately add a detailed description. --High Dragon 20:14, December 22, 2009 (UTC)

Additional Extensions[edit source]

Can / could you add three new extensions to this wiki? Specifically, I would wholeheartedly request [1], [2], and [3].

The ability template is coming along well, but the code is getting to be quite large and its rather inefficient by virtue of the fact that I can't store variables (ie I have to tokenize the same string 5 different times as I'm performing checks on it). Since looking at an ability page would call the whole template many times, this could potentially create a performance problem; I don't want to take down the wiki with my beautiful formatting Tonguesmiley.gif.

--Various Pickles 12:48, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

Riordin[edit source]

Not sure who keeps changing it, Loleil, but the section about Riordin being Kennel Master in Ostagar is back again. I viewed the page and it said you removed this edit a few days ago so rather than re-remove it myself, I figured I'd better leave a message in case something was wonky somewhere. Fritti Tailchaser 12:30, December 25, 2009 (UTC)

Merry Christmas[edit source]

Merry Christmas to you. --Warden Of The Dales 13:07, December 25, 2009 (UTC)

Deletion[edit source]

How do I put something forward for deletion again? --Warden Of The Dales 23:16, December 25, 2009 (UTC)

NUGS[edit source]

Do you know if the nugs you turn in for 12s in ozammar are the same nugs you give to the golems in your party camp to boost there level for the final fight??? --Aceshot86 01:44, December 28, 2009 (UTC)

Potential reversion oopsie[edit source]

I was just about to revert this edit as being unnecessary (duplicate spoiler tag) when I realised several other recent edits I'd undone as being unencyclopaedic, overly emphasised, etc were by the same user. They needed doing, but I'm reluctant to proceed due to concern that it might seem I'm picking on them. Thoughts about what to do in such a situation? I'd hate to kill someone's enthusiasm, but a few contributions could do with being a little more polished... --vom 12:29, December 29, 2009 (UTC)

I certainly find removing other people's work one of the harder aspects of wiki editing, but I think you are doing the right thing. If you find a lot of edits that need fixing being made by one user it might be worth dropping them a note to let them know why you've reverted their edits. I always appreciate constructive criticism, but then again it is the internet so you never know Tonguesmiley.gif. Loleil 00:11, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
That's probably the best way ahead, now that you mention it. I'm finding it hard to resist the temptation to claim that I'm not in a position to do so because I lack the authority - but that's unconvincingly disingenuous, the real reason is because I lack the diplomatic skill, or at least the inclination to put it to the test! I'll think on it for a day or two and see if inspiration grabs me; an awful lot of his edits need backing out or cleaning up, however, and it's not nice to do so without any sort of comment. My own writing skills were certainly no better once upon a time, and I appreciated being told how to improve them - and I took a lot of telling. Smiley.gif --vom 00:19, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
I'll see if I can have look through this user's edits. Then, if you would like me to write a note to the user as well as, or instead of, yourself, I can test out my diplomacy too! Loleil 00:34, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
I hasten to add that I'm not trying to manoeuvre you into doing this for me, tempting though the idea is! Tonguesmiley.gif I'll see what I can come up with once I've attained a slightly less marginal degree of wakefulness, though I may take you up on the offer of an additional comment in order to preempt any concerns they may have about me being a member of the local chapter of Grammar Irregulars... --vom 00:47, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
Well I've been a bit behind on doing this so far, due to having a somewhat crapulent couple of days. I'd like to put it down to over-eating... so I will! Anyway, I was thinking perhaps something along these lines - thought it might be an idea to run it by you first rather than just dump the comment on his or her talk page and hope for the best, though...
Hi! Thanks for registering and contributing to the Dragon Age Wikia with such enthusiasm. As well as saying "hello" I also thought I should drop you a note because I've changed a number of your edits: as a general guideline, if you can aim for a more "encyclopaedic" style of writing, that would improve them no end; by which I don't mean dry to the point of being dessicated, but a more neutral style than adopted for the introduction to the "elves" article, for instance, and try not to over-emphasise a point, even if it is important.
However, if this is taken as criticism at all, I want it to be of the constructive sort - your enthusiasm for improving the articles is appreciated!
You reckon that would be okay? Or too flippant? Too patronising? Too vague? I tend to avoid this sort of thing whenever possible, so it doesn't really come naturally! --vom 12:10, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
Hehe I am somewhat overstuffed with fruitcake myself! As to your message, I think it's really good. I always try to put myself in the other person's shoes, and yes I would be disappointed to see my work reverted, but I would really appreciate seeing a friendly message explaining why, and what can be done to improve future edits. Very nicely done. Loleil 02:38, January 1, 2010 (UTC)
Well, for better or worse, it's done. Panic! --vom 14:04, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

Second opinion sought - verra complicated codex entries[edit source]

Hi Loleil. Hope you're having some good holidays. When you have a mo, I'd really appreciate it if you could look at something for me and give me your views. I've been doing some work on the Codex: Characters page, adding in conditionality and missing text. However, presenting this intelligibly is proving a bit much for me - especially for nastily complicated entries like Codex entry: Anora. So that we can play around with relatively little effort, and for consistency, I've created two new templates and used them in the codex pages where there's conditional text. Template:CodexConditionalParagraph is for single paragraphs that are only displayed conditionally (currently prefixes condition in green italics). Template:CodexConditionalSection is for bigger swathes of conditional text, and will be of more use in the Culture and History codex section, but I have used it in some of the character pages, such as Anora's and Codex entry: Bhelen Aeducan. If you have any ideas about how these can be changed to make the codex entries clearer/tidier (or indeed, if you fancy playing around with them yourself), that would be great. Do give me a shout if you have any questions about this. --Zoev 14:19, December 29, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback - I agree. I've now gone for a subtler shade of grey (white just makes it too hard to see what's going on), lost the double spacing and made the conditional section headings just big text instead of proper headings (I really don't think we want them popping up in TOCs, which are long enough already). Still not perfect, but I guess we don't want formatting that's too fiddly. What do you reckon? --Zoev 09:11, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
Ta! It seems that the more I do with the Codex, the more I think of to do. It's an absolutely great displacement activity! My main goal at the moment is just to get the gross changes done - ie new templates, new pages - so that I and anyone else who fancies can then just tinker at their leisure. I think we're nearly there. I'm just doing a bit of thinking about codex entry categorizations then I'm intending to take stock and pull together a new to-do list/roadmap of what I think needs to happen with the codex so you all can see what's happened/going to happen and have a chance to comment. --Zoev 09:41, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
Ooh, and by the way, unless you have any strong objections, I think I'm going to ask Pwr to get Caridin to create new pages for spell combos and controls codex entries after all. I don't imagine anyone would actually look at the individual pages rather than the summaries, but they're much easier to edit (especially as section editing doesn't work with the new templates). --Zoev 09:41, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
Thanks - I've put in the request. It will be good to have all the pages sorted! You're quite right that people might start creating new entries, which we don't want at the moment. But, it strikes me, we might in future with new DLC. So we probably need a create template for codex entries like the ones for locations, etc. I don't like to mess around with this as it looks a bit admin-y, but I've stuck in a box on User:Zoev/Sandbox what I think the "blank" codex template should look like. Do you think you could maybe make a createplate from it or give me guidelines for doing so? Obviously no great rush! --Zoev 10:27, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
HAPPY NEW YEAR! Thanks for sorting out the template - it's looking good. Do you think that it's the list at MediaWiki:Createplate-list that determines which templates show up when creating a new page? Now that the Hogmanay festivities are over I'll get back to thinking about categories and be back in touch with a proposal for your consideration in the next day or two. --Zoev 18:23, January 2, 2010 (UTC)

re: Thankies[edit source]

Not a problem. - Pwr905 01:14, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

How do I take credit for something I wrote?[edit source]

I wrote an article called the 3-8 strategy without a account now it says unregistered contributor. I made this account and now I wanna know how i can say that I wrote it not a unregistered contributor. Any help would be great. Brad Rampley 02:09, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

Thank u. I didnt mean to put things in the wrong sections. I was so eager to help people who do things nightmare difficulty I paid little attention to where i was posting it. Thanks AGain friend =)!Brad Rampley 02:33, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

Hey its fine talking in my User page. Are their other ways to talk besides this? O and also ur welcome lol I think we both might of just helped eachother =).Brad Rampley 02:44, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

I have one question.....[edit source]

Hi man i want to ask you something about the console in dragon age origins.When you press tilde(~)then you are writting the cheta you want or there must be appeared one thing like board on the top of your screen?Because i have make a shortcut of daorigins.exe then i have write -enabledevelopermode in properties,i have change the Key bindings to open the console with tilde but still i cant access the chetas...............

Please help me i want to access the cheats because i cant pass the quest:urn of secret please help me.........

(Please tell if you have any videos on youtube)

Hi how are you?Brad Rampley 08:33, December 31, 2009 (UTC)

Reciprocity[edit source]

Happy new year, miss. Smiley.gif - Pwr905 04:29, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

The joy of over-linking[edit source]

I was about to drop a note on another user's talk page about the matter of over-linking, but thought I should run it by you first rather than attempt some random act of style enforcement that doesn't necessarily agree with policy.

As regards excessive linking to articles, e.g. every occurrence of Morrigan in an article linking to her page, for instance, this is generally considered bad practice as far as I can tell - the usual reasons seem to be that it makes the articles rather less easy on the eye, takes up more resources, and may incur a penalty with search engines (though it's always hard to be certain about them...).

There probably aren't hard and fast rules about this, like "only one link per article and it must be the first one", but you know it's got out of hand when every third word is a link to something!

But, as with a lot of things, however I make my case, it is a subjective matter that's more dependent on the local policy than anything. And I guess before I get carried away with getting in a strop about it... what is the local policy? Smiley.gif --vom 14:10, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

Ah you've reminded me, compiling a full page for site policy is another of my wiki resolutions. Anyhow, except on very long pages, where I think there is room for duplicate links, articles only need to be linked to once for the reasons you've already listed above Smiley.gif. Loleil 01:03, January 2, 2010 (UTC)
My new year's resolution involves not making too much work for myself - if I were you, I'd trawl the other Wiki(a)s and find a site policy that fits your requirements and swipe it! Tonguesmiley.gif Anyway, I think it's best that I wait for such a thing to materialise before I get too excitable about anyone's link fetish. --vom 18:50, January 2, 2010 (UTC)
Ah, plagiarism. Tempting! Loleil 01:17, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
I think plagiarism is an underrated pastime, personally. Unless I'm the, er, plagiaree? Almost as much fun as inventing nonsense words! :D But I do think it's a usefully stress-free approach to pick a set of rules that someone else has already done the necessary arguing about. Smiley.gif --vom 01:57, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

On broadly the same subject (well, inasmuch as being another "manual of style" type of thing) is the old chestnut of preferred spelling, the US/elsewhere dichotomy being a perennial cause of squabbling on Wikipaedia; I was reminded of this when I saw this edit, which does nothing other than change some spellings to that of its author's preferred locale. In a way it's almost tempting to say "stick with US spellings since that's what Bioware use" in order to prevent the antagonism inevitably caused by such things, even though I personally prefer non-US spellings; I think policies like Wikipedia's rather complex approach has shown itself to be unworkable, so I'm guessing that it's either that or "don't make unnecessary spelling changes". But I figure that it is the sort of thing that's probably better written down somewhere, as edits such as this one do tend to cause trouble. --vom 17:23, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, but the term "non-US spellings" jumped out at me when I was just leaving a message, and it's something I've been meaning to ask about. I'd support using US spellings as they're the ones in the game. However, I know that when I try to stick to this myself, habit often takes over (being from the UK myself). Whilst things like "armor" and "defense" are easy enough to remember given they're practically technical terms in the game, I find it hard to remember (or indeed bring myself) to write "center" and "color" and "honor". And, there are probably different spellings that I don't even know about. What I'd been meaning to ask is whether Caridin could perhaps trawl through on a regular basis to correct spellings to ones that would be found in the game? (At least we don't have to worry about faucets and sidewalks, and diapers won't be an issue until a possible expansion pack!) --Zoev 21:16, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
Probably a good point, and not just for semantic reasons (hopefully I actually used the word "semantic" correctly today, or at least hopefully I got away with it...), there's quite a few places where "armour" could cause links to go awry, for example. There's a few fairly straightforward rules for catching spellings, though I guess it's probably best to automate only a few specific examples to avoid the fun and games of "unintended consequences"! We could always reach a compromise on spelling, however, and write everything in the style of a 1980s VCR instruction manual: I think that should keep everyone happy! Probably. --vom 21:40, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
My two cents. Anything that is written in the game as US spelling we should follow (like armor). However, I use British English and find it tricky to always try and write in US English. What I'm hoping is that we can allow both, but maybe implement something where users follow the style first used by the author. So if a page is written in US English people try to make additions in US English, and for the same rule to apply if a page is written in British English. I don't know if this will prove workable, and I suspect people will continue to "fix" my BrE, but it might be a start. Loleil 00:36, January 6, 2010 (UTC)
Ha! I see your two cents and raise you two pennorth (sorry, seemed apt given the topic). Definitely my preference would be for either US/British English to be the "house style", rather than a mish-mash, and US definitely seems more defensible given the game spellings. But I do take your point that it's hard for those of us for whom it doesn't come naturally (I'd screw up frequently, I know). Your call, of course. --Zoev 01:23, January 6, 2010 (UTC)
Well I'll raise you tuppence ha'penny and... um... oh, it's all gone wrong. Well back to the point, my own preference would be:
  • Proper nouns go by Bioware's spelling; more specifically, links and stuff, to prevent things going wonky. Alternative spellings as redirect such as my recent(ish) addition of specialisations is probably not a bad idea too.
  • Rather than the article aiming for spelling consistency as a whole, I'd rather see people using their preferred spelling, as long as it's correct. I don't think articles having mixed spelling is really as much of an issue as, say, Wikipedia makes out.
  • That edits such as the one I quoted above that change an already correct spelling to the editor's preferred region are outlawed and punishable by fish-slapping, as these really do tend to cause offence and are much more bother than they're worth.
But that's just my opinion as a drive-by opinionate, and I'll defer to any workable policy that's deemed fit. Smiley.gif --vom 18:06, January 6, 2010 (UTC)
Hmm I like that idea vom. To the forums!

Annoyed[edit source]

I'm so annoyed at myself, I bought a new crossbow, leaving me with no money. Then after completing the quest I bough it for I get the same crossbow as a reward. --Warden Of The Dales 22:18, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

PC Game of the Year[edit source]

Not the most well known bunch, but good examination of it. Giantbomb - Pwr905 02:21, January 2, 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me. - Pwr905 02:33, January 2, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Will do! =)

(it's late but) happy new year!

Approval[edit source]

Please see TANKtr0n Talk Page and make your comments regarding "Approval Rating" -- Snfonseka 19:00, January 2, 2010 (UTC)

The Tower of Ishal[edit source]

Hi Loleil. I'm playing through picking up codex entry locations and doing some tidying of wiki walkthroughs as I go. I'm up to the Tower of Ishal and am not quite sure what to do. There's a journal quest "The Tower of Ishal" and I don't know whether to create a quest article for this, or whether to just fill in details in the Tower of Ishal location page. My temptation is to create a walkthrough article and move some of the info that's on the location page to it (you never know, the location could reappear in DLC or a future game with different items and enemies). But what do you think? --Zoev 13:16, January 3, 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's been a poor substitute for playing Return to Ostagar, but I've created a new Tower of Ishal (Quest) quest page. I'm not totally happy with the split between this and the Tower of Ishal location page (when there's only one quest at a location it's hard to have enough content without duplication). Do feel free to fiddle around/make suggestions. --Zoev 16:36, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

King Maric's Blade[edit source]

I've seen this on the wiki but where do i find it in the game? Is it part of Return to Ostagar?--Warden Of The Dales 16:58, January 3, 2010 (UTC)

See "Helping out" Heading[edit source]

Please check Forum:Front Page changes and comment on this. -- Snfonseka 03:54, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

Forum:Return to Ruins?[edit source]

I registered after getting your welcome message. Do I need to go back and fix the edit I made to included my name or can that first edit (Forum:Return to Ruins?) remain signed as "unregistered user"? Davinator 13:01, January 5, 2010 (UTC) Davinator 2010 January 5

Chevalier's Armor[edit source]

Why is it so hard to get the complete set? I've tried 5 time to get the boots from the pearl! BTW Does it sound like a good idea to add pictures to equipment pages? --Warden Of The Dales 16:52, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Policy on Alistair's background[edit source]

Hi Loleil. There've been a couple of changes I've noticed today where people (possibly the same person) has made claims on Alistair's and Maric's pages about Alistair's mother. (The latter even before any spoiler warning!) I've put in Calling spoilers and edited to make sure the claims don't go further than warranted by the book, and was just about to ask you if there's a policy on such info when it occurred to me to look at Alistair's talk page. Doh, would have done that earlier if I hadn't been carried away from editing Maric's page! Anyway, I see you left a note about undoing changes about Alistair's background just a few days ago, but it seems people are going to read the Calling and add in this "new" info again and again, so instead of reverting my and the previous user's changes, thought I'd flag this to see whether you think what I've put may work as a compromise that will stop people thinking they have new info to add. If not, then please do go ahead and revert. --Zoev 19:17, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and now I've commented on Talk:Alistair which is probably more appropriate - and public - than here. --Zoev 19:31, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Awakening[edit source]

Awakening is the sequel right? So you take control of your old character. But what if you sacrificed yourself? I'm confused we don't have to create a new character do we? That would suck! --Warden Of The Dales 22:07, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Re:Replies[edit source]

Phew! I saw in the trailer that the character they used is the one that they used for the original trailers so it seems that we will continue with our characters.

Character vs Creature[edit source]

Hi Loleil. I just noticed that my change of Gazarath from a Creature to a Character (as part of a tidy up I did) has now been turned back. Just wonder if you can give me some guidelines. I was assuming a named individual would be a character, even if not humanoid, whereas a type of potential enemy would be a creature even if they're human/elven/dwarven. I went off the example of the Fade Beast and Sloth. Is this wrong? I can see the distinction might be tricky, especially when all you can do with an individual is fight them! -Zoev 11:49, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Ta for the reply. I think there are two ways to go: either Character=Specific individual and Creature=Type (as I initially thought was intended), or Character=Human/Dwarf/Elf/Qunari (HDEQ for short - now I think about it, humanoid probably isn't specific enough as, eg, hurlocks could probably be considered humanoid) and Creature=Anything else. In terms of the templates, the Character template probably works a bit better for specific non-HDEQs than the Creature one (and the Creature template probably works better for generic HDEQ enemies than the Character one), but I guess that could be addressed. The main issue is what people are going to find most intuitive/helpful when browsing. My feeling is that, as there are already categories for races, the named individual/type distinction might be more helpful here, but you've had longer to think about it plus far more experience with the wiki and feedback from its users, so I'll happily abide with whatever you decide on this one. --Zoev 20:52, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Grey Warden Membership[edit source]

Okay, I thought a bit about that Tamarel page, and I reckoned it might be nice to have a page collecting info about all the Grey Wardens we know about. Category:Grey Wardens will only function like this if every single Grey Warden has their own page, no matter how little we know about them, and it would really clutter up the main Grey Wardens article. I've created a new Grey Warden Membership article with what info I can quickly collect, and linked it from Grey_Wardens#Notable_Grey_Wardens (which can still list the most important Wardens). I took as my brief/inspiration the words at the joining: "And should you perish, know that your sacrifice will not be forgotten.", and so approached the page as a kind of in memoriam with brief details of the Wardens and their fates, that can be added to if we find out about any more of them. (Though, actually, I guess the sacrifice mentioned is really death at the joining rather than afterwards, so perhaps it doesn't really work. But, damn it, I like the idea!) What do you think? Didn't take me that long, so please don't hold back if you think the page is pointless. --Zoev 14:10, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

rfc[edit source]

Requesting some of your thoughts on this. Thanks much in advance. - Pwr905 03:04, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Images[edit source]

Just wondering if you could take a look at this, please? I'm rather uncomfortable going to someone else about it, but the admin who made the decision seems to have bowed out of that conversation leaving it unresolved. --vom 10:26, January 9, 2010 (UTC)

Lore category tree[edit source]

(Zoev 11:29, January 9, 2010 (UTC)') Hi Loleil. I'm in need of a second opinion again. As I mentioned a while back, I've been thinking about categories for codex entries. In fact, I made a bit of a false start that will need to be tidied up once the real categories are finalised - sorry! I'd initially thought that the codex categories should be independent of the Lore categories (or perhaps should all be sub-categories of the Codex category that itself is a sub-category of the Lore category) but when I started applying this approach I didn't like it - I think it would be more helpful and less convoluted and repetitive to have codex entry pages alongside more general lore pages, especially as the titles of the codex entry pages all start with "Codex Entry" so it's clear what's what. So, with that in mind, I've had a go at proposing an expansion to the Lore category tree that would allow us to categorise codex entries and lore articles in a way that, I think, will make researching an area of lore more convenient and help show up connections between articles. My proposal is at User:Zoev/Sandbox. Would you take a look and let me have your thoughts? I would like to throw this open to wider comment, but a free-for-all might be a bit confusing. My thought was that if you and I could get a proposal we were both happy with that we then presented on the forum, it would be more likely only to need tweaking rather than the fundamental rethinking it might if it's from my head only! Feel free to add in comments/new categories/delete categories from the proposal in my Sandbox if you fancy. Thanks!

Thanks so much for your feedback on the lore categories. What do you reckon the next steps should be? Do I now put the proposal to the forum, or do you think that we can just go ahead and start making changes and respond to objections/issues if and when they arise? (I don't know how many editors/admins care that much about the Lore categories.) Zoev 07:22, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
Oh, and whilst I'm here, I've read the images forum and think it's all sounding very sensible and don't have anything to add to the discussion. I just want to check that the "hard line" approach means images with PCs in should be deleted even when it could be argued that the PC is distinguishable from an innocent bystander only if one happens to recognize the shot? I think they should be, but wanted to make absolutely sure. If so, then here are a couple I happened to spot today: File:Dalishcamp.JPG on Elves, File:DragonAge2008_12_1020_24_22_26.jpg.jpg on Tamlen. (A couple of potentials for replacing those images if needed - and particularly on the Tamlen page I'm not sure it is - are File:Area-Dalish_Camp.jpg and File:NPC-Tamlen.jpg, though I've used both of those images elsewhere.) And finally there's File:Location_ApprenticeQuartersMageOrigin.jpg - the only one of my images where I couldn't manage to get my PC out of the shot. I was never quite comfortable about it, and I've now nominated it for deletion so it may have gone already! Zoev 07:22, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
Thanks again. I'll get started on the categories over the next couple of days. I've removed the image from the Tamlen page but I'll leave Elves - I've just spotted the image was yours so thought you'd be the best person to decide what to do with it! They are both good pics, but I'm sure you're right about all or nothing being best. Zoev 07:49, January 10, 2010 (UTC)
Hi Loleil. I've made a start on the rejig of Lore categories. Still a long way to go, but I have tried to move articles from the main Lore category to one of the sub-categories unless they really are general articles. I think that there is an argument for linking other key articles, such as Grey Wardens and Ferelden, perhaps, into the main Lore category so users can get at them without too much rummaging through the tree. However, the articles that were so linked at the beginning of today seemed a bit of a random collection so I thought it would be best to start with a clean slate. Just thought I'd let you know what I've done so you could maybe have a think about which articles really should appear at the top of the Lore tree as well as in one of the sub-categories, if you fancy. Zoev 00:15, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

How embarrassing! I didn't think to look at the side menu for a lore category, sorry. I've now re-added all the pages linked from there to the Lore category. Zoev 02:42, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

noincludes[edit source]

why is it ok for the locations of some items to show on the table pages like light gloves but not others? I had formatted the location discriptions specifically to show on armor tables because they usually do show on the armor tables. Indeed, if a |location= line were added to the itemtransformer it would show. It seems inconsistent for the armor table template to explicitly show locations in one case but the formating guidelines to hide them.Tetracycloide 07:04, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

I don't really care how the information is presented I just want to know what the correct format is so I can use it and none of the locations get lost accidentally. Incidentally, I hadn't noticed any gaps on the armor tables as a result of adding descriptions, is it a browser specific issue?Tetracycloide 08:03, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

Out of curiosity[edit source]

Would it bother you if I inquired as to what your university degree is focused on? Forgive my forwardness in asking; and feel free to refuse Smiley.gif. - Pwr905 08:14, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

gamer tag thingy[edit source]

How did you do that? It looks great! --Warden Of The Dales 22:12, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

        • i don't have DA:O on PC so i can't put my character's face on it. Aggh!!! --Warden Of The Dales 17:48, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

Yet another vandal (repeat offender back for more to be exact)[edit source] has been going around vandalizing userpages and obviously hasn't learned from his first block. I've alerted another admin already but thought I'd better tell you as well just in case you get on first.--WouldYouKindly 14:01, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

Equipment Versus Inventory[edit source]

PWR905 and I were talking today and I came up with an idea on the current Equipment listing. Since finding an item is very difficult on here, I made some changes to categories and I would like to ask you to change Equipment on the left menu bar to Inventory. Sub-menu would list the subcategories.


   Usable Items
   Quest Items

I created an inventory category and also added the other sub categories to it.

Would be better reading and faster access, and also if they can't find it immediately on this wikia, then they will probably go somewhere else to find it.

--Polexian 16:44, January 11, 2010 (UTC)--Polexian 16:23, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

I have asked for a clarification regarding this request. Please see the talk page of Polexian -- Snfonseka 18:12, January 11, 2010 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.