FANDOM

Esbonl

aka The Author

  • I live in Brazil
  • I was born on July 31

Categories and name

Hello. Do not rename the article and do not add new categories to the articles about the game. Lord Vóldemort 06:05, July 1, 2015 (UTC)

re: merge

I am aware of the variations of the games and how they're different in some ways, hell I've even done video game walkthroughs and let's plays on my youtube channel for several of the variants. My point is that the articles that detail the variations don't really add anything to the wiki as a whole and the information included on them would be better served on its main video game article, so that the information is easier to find. The differences with each games could reliably be mentioned through a section called "Differences", where you make note of the differences between each (eg, differences between pc, ps2, ps1 etc etc). And I have no idea why you are bringing up Wikipedia at all, I never mentioned it. --Sajuuk 09:33, July 21, 2015 (UTC)

RE:Computer version of games

What do you want from me? Lord Vóldemort 06:15, July 27, 2015 (UTC)

Consideration of installing scripts?

Hi there! I saw you working on adding and removing categories on multiple articles to make the grouping more precise, and I totally commend on your dedication cuz that looks like a lot of work! I'm wondering, would installing w:c:dev:MassCategorization to either your global or personal .js make your life easier? Initially I was only aware of the "add" and "remove" function, but there's also the "replace," and you can import all the articles that needed changes to do them all at once, without having to go in editing each article individually. It's just a thought! =D --Sammm✦✧(talk) 00:34, June 19, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion! I'm trying to make that thing work, but I can't. I've tried adding the script contained in that page to my personal .js here, but no "Mass categorization" tool appears in the bottom toolbar. Could you help? - Esbonl (talk) 01:04, June 19, 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't see this reply sooner! It looked to be installed right... It will be in "My Tools," you'd have to hover over it, and you should see it? If not, bypass your browser's cache? Follow the instruction since it's different for browsers. --Sammm✦✧(talk) 02:09, June 19, 2018 (UTC)
Try adding it here. -- TheSonofCharlusPotter   Talk   Contribs 09:54, June 19, 2018 (UTC)
If I try to create that page, I get the following message in red:
"You can not perform this action right now. Please try again in a few minutes, or contact Wikia if you are having difficulties." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Esbonl (talkcontribs) 02:33, June 20, 2018‎.

Muggle boy

You did not need to create a page for the Muggle boy who complimented Voldemort's outfit.

There is already a page for him. It's called "Godric's Hollow Muggle boy".—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Harrypotter394 (talkcontribs) 15:29, June 20, 2018‎.

I searched the wiki for a page about him and I didn't indentified that one. Thanks for notifying me. I made the page a redirect. - Esbonl (talk) 18:24, June 20, 2018 (UTC)

Appearances removal

It is not ok to unilaterally decide that the Appearances section for many articles should be deleted and replaced with a vague comment. If you believe this is an important change then please raise it in the Forum for the community to discuss. Continuing to do so without establishing community consensus will be considered vandalism. Thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:21, June 1, 2019 (UTC)

As noted in the Layout Guide Policy the Appearances section is a "Bulleted list of films, novels, and games that the subject has appeared in" and "Includes even the smallest mentions in dialogue, narration, or visual appearance." Nowhere in this policy does it say that there is a limit on the number of appearances or any conditions where a vague template may be preferred.
Two users discussing this issue a couple years ago then two more discussing it recently does not make it a clear community consensus to change this policy. This is even more of a concern that the conversations were held in Category_talk:Candidates_for_deletion and Template_talk:Vague which most of the community is not aware of or participates in. Again, if you want to gather feedback about such a proposed site-wide change then the correct place to do so is in The Forum.
Similarly, General Policy states "Articles should be written in the past tense, as if the editor is writing from a point in the future after the events in the series have taken place. This is to maintain a consistent and uniform feel to the articles, and to eliminate ambiguity by switching tenses in the middle of an article." There has been some trending towards present tense for real-world topics due to the oddity of such wording as "Germany was a country", but the agreement has been to still use past tense for all in-universe topics. Just because some editors either unknowingly or purposely skip this requirement, does not mean it is not the policy.
These are not uncertain requirements that I'm trying to impose on users, but rather long standing polices established previously with community consensus, any changes to which require a similar degree of community consensus as established through a vote. As noted in the Voting policy - "When an issue is settled by either of these methods, attempts by any individual to counteract or violate these decisions without community support (as determined by a renewed discussion of the issue with participation equal to or greater than the original discussion) will be considered vandalism/disruptive editing under the blocking policy."
Hope all this clarifies the situation. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:22, June 2, 2019 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.