User talk:Ek1

Welcome!

Hello Ek1! Welcome to UESPWiki! It's always good to have new members. If you would like to help improve any of our pages, you may want to take a look at the following links:

• Policies and Guidelines: UESPWiki standards and expectations
• Help Contents: a list of in-depth Help pages
• Quick Editing Guide: a quick guide to wiki markup
• Getting Started: how you can help
• Uploading Images: Guidelines on image standardization

If you would like to spice up your userpage, click here for a list of userboxes you can use, including a guide to making your own.

When you're editing, it's always a good idea to leave edit summaries to explain the changes you have made to a particular page, and remember to sign your talk page posts with four tildes ~~~~. Also, the "show preview" button is a great way to view the changes you've made so far without actually saving the page (our patrollers really appreciate it!).

Please consider supporting the UESP elsewhere on the web:

• Facebook: our official Facebook page.
• Google+: our official Google+ page.
• Tumblr: our official Tumblr blog.
• Twitter: our official Twitter account.
• YouTube: our official YouTube channel.

Feel free to practice editing in the sandbox. If you would like to discuss the games or lore, consider checking out our blog, our Discord, or the forums. If you need any help, don't hesitate to contact one of our mentors. Lastly, thanks once again for joining the UESPWiki, have fun! Echo (talk) 00:19, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Notice

I understand that you're upset about your edits being reverted, but actions such as this are unwarranted and uncalled for. AKB did the right thing and took the discussion to the talk page, as is protocol when there are disagreements over edits on the wiki. I recommend that you log off the wiki for a little while to cool down so you don't do/say anything that you might regret. And in regards to your edit summary here, there is a little list of reminders below the save page button and next to the wiki markup list, and the first point states "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then don't submit it here". •WoahBro^►talk 09:32, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Removing other peoples work is not editing. Ek1 (talk) 15:49, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

"Editing" is anything that can be done to potentially improve the wiki. When you have a large community such as ours, there are naturally differences of opinion in what constitutes a "good" edit, and sometimes that means removing or altering what other people add.

I'm truly sorry that you are having a disagreement and are grieved by what was done, but getting used to the community editing aspect of the wiki is part of being an active and regular editor, and understanding that not everyone will agree with you and that you have to civilly work things out is part of being a member of the community.

I'm someone who has been here for the better part of almost 7 years, and I remember when I first started I had plenty of comments on my talk page with polite and helpful suggestions from a couple of the admins who were active at the time that were offering ideas on how what I was putting could have been done better. If you have any concerns you wish to bring up about content or style, the appropriate venue to do so is on the article in question, as AKB did in the above-linked talk page, or on a user's talk page. There are plenty of avenues appropriate to handling conflict resolution, even going so far as to make a community-wide thread about something on the Community Portal to provoke discussion about it. However, the issue here is that you disagreed with the edit and in the edit summary provided and in the body of the text you were condescending all the way down the body of the text, rather than polite and open to suggestion, and that's what hurt you in that case.

This is a matter that's been basically closed for the better part of a year, so I hope you and everyone involved are able to set aside your feelings and work at it with a fresh mindset. If you're passionate enough about what you feel should be in the article, then, by all means, feel free to make engage in discussions on the relevant articles or with users on their talk pages, but remember to be civil and assume everyone is making a good-faith change to the wiki. Everyone here is a person with feelings who ultimately wants the wiki to be improved for the better, especially someone like AKB who has been here long enough to become a Wiki administrator, and everything will go a lot smoother if everyone is able to put aside their personal feelings and work from a neutral, friendly, and polite angle to find a peaceful resolution on each article that makes everyone happy with the additions made.

If you have any questions or concerns, I'm more than happy to talk with you and help you out however I can! You can respond back here, or you can directly email me, post on my own talk page, or get in contact with one of the many mentors who are willing and able to help you out with any concerns you may have.

The wiki's current state was only made possible by a bunch of fans of the series such as yourself, and everyone's opinion, including yours, is valued and crucial to the success of the UESPWiki, so please do be in touch and willing to talk things out, and we'll be able to help you have a great time and hopefully you can be a regular member of our community! :) -damon  ^{talk ♥ contribs} 18:58, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Information Removal

Hi! I've reverted your edit to Online:Lord Warden Dusk where you removed an old quest from the page. The purpose of the wiki is to document information, and this includes deprecated information which is no longer in the game. The quest is quite clearly struck out and marked as old info, so there is no reason for its removal despite it being four years old. In future it would be more constructive if you help maintain older information on articles rather than removing it outright. —Legoless (talk) 15:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi! Ah, in that case remember to revert and report all buff, area, item and crow related articles and edits as they don't include the outdated and obsolete information. If you feel including such info somehow brings additional value to the wiki, please include such information to its own section, maybe history or version history, in the very end of a article so that relevant information is presented foremost. Ek1 (talk) 16:19, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

If you take issue with how we present deprecated information on pages, your best bet is the Community Portal or relevant talk page. —Legoless (talk) 16:52, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Item Set Format Changes

Just FYI, there's little point to changing the format for item set bonuses, as you did here, because they're largely bot-generated, so at some point, the bot's just going to come along behind you and clobber your change. That's not to say we can't change the format at all, just that if we're going to, it should probably be discussed on the Community Portal and then implemented in the bot, so that it's a universal change rather than a one-off.

There's also the question of spacing around the <onlyinclude> tags, but that's minor. I think it's probably better not to have any spacing (i.e., we should be doing it the way you did), but the space was there pretty much universally when the bot started updating sets, so that's how the bot has continued to do it, just to avoid any unexpected wrapping in any transclusions. So there again, if we're going to make a change, it's probably better to do so universally and maybe have the bot try to figure out if the vertical space in any transclusions needs adjusted as a result of the change. – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 20:05, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Oh, well. I don't really care at this point anymore. The 'community' has given its sign that discussing and making changes around facts, readability and usability is not of 'their' interest so I am mainly correcting some errors around topics that could be moved to new wiki. Sad fact is that most (collection) pages are bullshit, outdated or unnavigable.

Well clean transclusions area easy to do if the page would be holding the data. With the fancy data dispersion structure thingys keep things up-to-date is pain for everyone else except the one that made the data structure. Having the actual data in the actual page keeps things simple for other editors too. Ek1 (talk) 04:55, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Reverting ESO edits

Hey! I saw that you made several reverts of edits in our ESOspace. Instead of an edit war, you could try to talk it out on a talk page discussion about how to display certain information properly. It's always preferably to reach a consensus. That said, these kind of edit summaries are not acceptable. Besides your language, you removed a lot of relevant quest dialogue without a clear reason. Please be more mindful of other editors and understand that a wiki is a collaborative project. --Ilaro (talk) 11:16, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Notice - Policies and Guidelines

Hi Ek1, I reverted your most recent edit to the Online:Southern Elsweyr page, as the UESP only follows Wikipedia policies and guidelines in the absence of our own policies/guidelines on the same subject matter. For reference, the Policies and Guidelines would be beneficial for you to read, in specific the Style Guide for your recent edits. If you feel that our Style Guide needs amendment, please raise your concerns either on the Style Guide talk page or on the Community Portal to gain community consensus on the matter. If you have any queries about how to go about this, please feel free to contact me. Please do not make further changes against these policies until a consensus has been agreed. Kiz^{(email - talk)} 21:34, 24 October 2019 (GMT)

Hi Kiz,

please stop vandalizing other people's edits (deletion, or alteration of any content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of the wiki. Don't mess pages up on purpose. Blanking articles or sections, replacing content with jokes or other nonsense, and sneakily making articles inaccurate is considered vandalism) as you are removing the info of when the progression locked crafting tables are accessible or when the progression restricted dailys are accessible. Based on your actions on regarding these issues I suggest you refrain from editing the pages until you gain knowledge of the topic and/or have some reference points as you are now just butchering essential data. If you keep doing this we are forced to contact a byrocat or even an admin to revoke your editing rights.

For the style guide part, indeed there is no problem in making the list numbered as per uesp style guide there is not mention of making numbered or bulleted list, its up to editors decision which way is more informative. Frankly that would be quite silly to have such SoM as its quite situationally depend. In case of e.g. quests having the numbered gives immediately information how many different dailys can NPC offer.

So while your efforts of housekeeping seem to be warm hearted they are misplaced.

Have a good day. Ek1 (talk) 00:44, 26 October 2019 (GMT)

Kiz is a patroller on the site and is well aware of editorial and style guidelines here. There's absolutely no call to be as aggressive or uncivil as you're being in calling him a vandal or suggesting that he could have his rights removed. That's not likely to happen when he's doing his best to help you out.

While you are indeed correct that there isn't actually a formal guideline about using bullets versus numbers for lists, the overwhelmingly prevailing style on the site is bullets. He and many other editors have informed you of this every time you've tried to change a list to use numbers. That's not vandalism in any way. Nor is altering or removing your work...as it says just underneath the edit box, "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then don't submit it here".

That being said, there are plenty of times where numbered lists are appropriate (Skyrim:Enchanting comes to mind). If you feel that numbered lists are appropriate for quest lists, or at least certain quest lists, then please post on the Community Portal and discuss when and why you think they're appropriate (e.g., they come in a specific order or the count is useful, as you've suggested in some of your edit summaries). There are a great many editors for ESO articles, and consensus prevails on most wikis, so if you want to change the consensus, you have to make a case for it. Changing the lists on only a small number of pages is likely to lead to exactly the same thing that has happened in this instance: it goes against the current consensus, so it gets reverted. – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 03:18, 26 October 2019 (GMT)