User talk:Midoro/Archive 1



Welcome
Hey tGM! Welcome, thanks for joining!Light Knight of ZU 03:10, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Fix?
You say you'll have to figure out how to fix something... Mind if I ask what? 05:17, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Fixing my userpage. Don't worry, I've been a contributor to many wikis before. I know what I'm doing..... except I'm not sure how to get a wiki sig, mind telling me how please? The Goron Moron 05:19, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Aye, it seemed like you knew what you were doing. ;P
 * The best set of instructions we have right now on getting making a custom signature are located here. 05:23, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Stuff
Hi there, GM. (May I call you that?) I see that you put another glitch down... If the glitch has been proven, please put in on the correction section of the Glitches page. (Majora's Mask Glitches, etc.) If it is disproven, needs work, etc.- Then see the glitches talk page, and put it in the correct section.-Zien 02:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Just call me Goron. As for the glitch, I'm still pretty confused about where it would go. So I think I'll leave it at that talk page for now. -The Goron Moron 02:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I will look at it, then do what is necessary. -Zien 02:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Where to put it was a little confusing at first, but I think I know where to put it. I would do it myself, but due to the Wii's lack of the copy and paste features I can't. I could type it up, but I'm running out of fime tonighf. Could you put in the “Glitches Yet To Be Proven/Done” section on the Glitches talk page? Zien 02:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

That I'll do.

Edit: On second thought, I can't find the 'Glitches yet to be proven' page. >_< -The Goron Moron 03:04, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Here: Talk:Glitches. 03:13, December 8, 2008 (UTC)


 * So umm... Do you like South Park at all? Or are you just looking for the cameos? 06:23, January 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh I love South Park. I became very excited when I noticed the cameos while watching Imaginationland. The Goron Moron 07:32, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


 * OOOHHHH! Goodie goodie! I need good members on my wiki. The staff abandoned the South Park wiki on Wikia. I've taken over it. I basically own it. It is South Park Archives. I'm desperate for quality help. i think you'd be great. I'm Mjr162006 there. 07:37, January 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * Heh. I noticed the wiki and even have it in my favorites. Unfortunately I'm not as quite knowledgeable of South Park. In fact, I guess I'm still pretty 'new' to it, even though I've watched it for years and years..... even when I was a little kid. *Cough* >_> Anyway, maybe I'll join it someday. I'm sorry to hear about everyone who left. The Goron Moron 08:01, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

That's what South Park Studios is for. That is the official site where you can watch any episode whenever and as many times you want. So the is not a problem. I like it. And I most likely know about as much as you do. I manage. When I can't remember something, I just go and watch the episode. 08:05, January 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * I once went there, the site seemed hard to navigate. That and, I thought that the episodes weren't 'full' and all of them weren't there. I went to South Park Zone once though... :/ The Goron Moron 08:24, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


 * South Park Studios has gotten better. It has full episodes. South Park Zone is technically illegal. 08:31, January 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * Everything is illegal these days. Still not sure about studio's though, at least it doesn't give me pop-ups. The Goron Moron 08:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Studios is legit. It is run by the show's creators. 08:44, January 17, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well seems to me that they would be losing their moneyz!!!11! if they do that. Eventually, people will no longer watch it on the Comedy Channel, eventually no one will buy their DVDs.... as computers and internet slowly takeover households.... But then again, that's the same with everything these days. The Goron Moron 08:50, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

They run ads. So they just get more money. Most people watch it on TV. Because not everyone likes watching it on the net. The episodes are first tun on the TV. Then is available on the site a few hours later. For a few days. Then it is not available online for about a month. So they do a good job of balancing it. 08:56, January 17, 2009 (UTC)

Navigation Panel
Hey. Now to create a navigation pane for yourself, you need to follow the following steps:


 * Create a sub page of your user page named like this: User:The Goron Moron/nav.


 * Now go to the page you created and copy in the following formatting codes:


 * {|style="width:100%;margin-top:+.7em;background-color:#;border:1px solid #"


 * style="width:10%"|
 * style="width:40%"|


 * style="width:16%;font-size:120%;color:#FFFFFF;background-color:#"|
 * User Page
 * Talk Page
 * Link 3
 * style="width:16%;font-size:120%;color:#FFFFFF;background-color:#"|
 * Link 4
 * [Link 5]
 * }


 * Now alter it and change it until you get it how you want it. I can help you further with that.


 * Lastly go to the pages you want your navigation panel displayed on and type at the top.

That should do it. I will help you further if you need it! {{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 09:01, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I really appreciate it. :) I'll get to that eventually. -The Goron Moron 09:53, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Not a problem. Let me know if you need furthur help, and I'll check in later to see how you're going with it! {{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 10:02, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmm... There is something wrong with that code. It wouldn't work in the sandbox. You can try using this template I just made: User Nav.{{:User:Matt/sig|~}} 16:54, December 22, 2008 (UTC)


 * Well it looks good, but the template is... a little too circle'ish for my tastes. :/ The Goron Moron 19:56, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Ohh, sorry I must've screwed that code up somehow. I've just adjusted your template so it's the square design, so feel free to edit it up to suit you, just make sure you do so on the page here: User:The Goron Moron/nav and that will change it on your userpage. Do you want it on your talk page as well? {{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 23:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey thanks a lot for helping with both of my problems. :) I can do the rest now, thanks. The Goron Moron 23:41, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * No problemo, I'm here if you need any help! :D {{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 23:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh yeah, and if you want it on this talk page too, or any other page, just type this at the top: {{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 23:52, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Console Templates
Yeah, I know they all have the Wii logo. It's much easier to get all of them created, and then to upload the appropriate images, which I'm going to do now... and also another tip... Always write at the bottom of someone's user talk page when starting a new point otherwise it is annoying to find your comment. Cheers! {{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 10:35, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * There we go, all the correct logo's have been added! I will format each userbox moreso tomorrow! {{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 11:39, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Gallery
It looks like my creation of a Gallery is catching on! :D {{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 06:52, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Indeed it is. :) The Goron Moron 07:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Goron Page
Great job on improving the Minish Cap section. I've been trying to fix it up, in hopes it will be feature-worthy. What it really needs now, is a lot of references. 21:33, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to snoop around in some text dumps later, but for now I'm busy working on an art project. Anyway, your welcome. The Goron Moron 21:47, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Nav Panel
You nav panel's looking good. All that you've got left to do is change the picture, add your sub messages and fix your second pane of links. {{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 09:59, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I will. I'm just busy at the moment. The Goron Moron 18:30, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Commendment
Okay, seriously. Your edits are huge and awesome! You're putting the rest of us to shame! Don't stop. Keep up the great work! It's making the wiki a far more informative place. The summary you made here should be your slogan or something. It is a good one. 03:58, January 2, 2009 (UTC)


 * Smiles and rubs the back of my head.* Heh, heh. Your welcome. Well I try to make my edits as large and more informational as I can. I plan to merge that kind of ' informational format' with dungeon articles of other games soon too. Anyway, thank you. :) The Goron Moron 06:28, 2 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Indeed, I've though this myself. Your owl article was awesome. You're a good writer for wiki content! {{:User:Melchizedek1866/sig 06:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Dungeon templates
Hi, just a quick note about the edits you've made the the LoZ dungeon articles. That's not really the correct way to add something like that; you should really create a new template containing the same code that you used, and then link to that from each page using. Also, I'm not sure we really need that particular template since we already have the page Dungeons in The Legend of Zelda. Maybe just a link to that page would be better? 11:50, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hah. I guess I should have known, but then again I have a terrible memory anyway. Well, thanks for telling me. Anyway, no I prefer to that new templates like these are created, so that people can navigate faster. The Goron Moron 14:22, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Alter
Hey GM. Thanks a million! Yes, I did use the LA template. It appeared to be the best. GM, I don't hate you at all. All I did was disagree with your opinion. It doesn't mean that I have a problem with you. I was under the impression that you had issues with me. Not the other way around. Anyway, I hope you're not still mad at me. :)

Thanks again. It meant a lot coming from you. 14:08, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. And no, I'm not mad at you anymore. The Goron Moron 15:00, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm glad we're cool. :) 21:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey
I've always seen you around on ZU, but once I joined Zelda Wiki, I didn't see you for awhile. Now I've met you on here, too. Yay! :P 13:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Link's Awakening DX
Back in January 2009 you added the following sentence to the Link's Awakening page, on the section listing the differences between the original and DX versions: "Some areas have had their landscaping changed between the games." I'm curious - please could you elaborate on exactly what you meant by this? Apart from the presence of the photo shop, I'm not aware of any changes to the map. Thanks. (I've also posted this on the talk page for Link's Awakening) 18:35, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


 * It's been a long while since I last played LA DX, so if I had meant anything specific, I probably wouldn't remember them. I probably meant different graphical changes to the landscaping (not counting the addition of color), such as different stone graphics, but I can't remember, so. The Goron Moron 21:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

YOU'RE ALIVE!!!!
Hey Goron Moron. It's been a while.Pinecove 01:06, 21 February 2010 (UTC)


 * No I'm not alive at the wiki. >_> The Goron Moron 03:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

RE: Timeline placement on A Link to the Past
Why the heck did you replace the original "timeline placement" section in A Link to the Past. The original one had nothing wrong with it. It was well written WITH sources, and frankly I find yours to be very poorly worded, especially since it does not match up to the Manual of Style. I would have undid the changes myself if the wiki would have let me. Seriously, it was perfectly fine and did not need an outright replacement like that. The Goron Moron 16:50, 4 January 2012 (EST)


 * To further add to what I already said, it seems that you have also been replacing the older sections in other game articles with your "chronology sections", so I feel that I'm going to have to explain this a little more. I can get that you're trying to help, but what you're doing is unnecessary. You can help by adding onto sections, the sections we have now are fine and well worded, they do not need to be outright replaced with new sections.


 * Second, I feel that you may need to review the wiki's policies. We have policies on how the wiki is written. When we type out a game's name, we type it as, which would make it appear as . That is how we link to game articles, and you can get little shortcuts if you stroll down to the insert box while in an article editor. Another thing we like to see are when information are cited or sourced. When you replaced the older "timeline placement" sections, you also removed the sources. The sections were sourcing Hyrule Historia as its source for the current timeline, while also sourcing interview quotes for older proposed placements, which I feel should also be mentioned in the sections for history sake. Your sections were not sourced. Again, the older sections are perfectly fine.


 * All in all, I have to ask that you be more careful when editing. If you feel that there is a problem with something, I highly recommend that you discuss about it in an article's talk page first. Thank you. The Goron Moron 17:12, 4 January 2012 (EST)


 * Hey The Goron Moron,
 * No need to get offended ;)
 * I am doing some groundwork (plus I need the edits to be able to edit Zelda Timeline) for a great overhaul on the timeline articles. On the game's page, I just want information on how the game is placed within the chronology (better word than timeline I think), with the timeline story being explained in more detail in the Zelda Timeline article, while the history on the game's story being explained in a new article: History of the Zelda Timeline.
 * All of the replaced texts are backed up here, so that information is not lost and can be re-used.
 * It's unfortunate you caught this while in the middle of the work being done, but it will make much more sense once it's all done and dusted.
 * ~cheers Mighty Dekunut 17:21, 4 January 2012 (EST)
 * P.S. I'll go back and change the game-naming ;)


 * I find it unfortunate you choose to turn this into an edit war, rather than try and work together. However, I am not playing this game and will simply let things play out and reach a consensus with the other contributors. If you so love this wiki, I hope you too will one day understand the value of that. Mighty Dekunut 17:41, 4 January 2012 (EST)


 * RE: I have asked a wiki admin to help with this. And believe me, I do value this wiki, and I do value it not getting to such a point where an edit war arises, however it was you who had brought this. You must also understand my own viewpoint on the sections. I have already explained to you that the old sections are fine, and were going to be updated with the wiki's standards of writing in mind. I don't see why you feel that only your sections matters.The Goron Moron 17:46, 4 January 2012 (EST)


 * I look forward to discussing this with him or her then.
 * When I explain my vision, and ask you to wait to see how things pan out, starting an edit war is not my doing, but your own choice not to respect that request for a little patience.
 * The old sections try and cram all the timeline related things into one section, while I would like it to be better organized. It's unfortunate you are unwilling to give that a chance and more seem to be offended that 'your contributions' are being changed. Again, I'm sorry, but that's your problem.
 * But like I said, I'm not going to start that edit war on the pages you've reverted, so just wait and see what a consensus comes to. Mighty Dekunut 17:56, 4 January 2012 (EST)

Einstein95
I noticed that there is a new, one-month old account which appears to have mod powers; usually when I see stuff like this on other wikis, it would be a wikia staffmember, but obviously that wouldn't apply here. Just out of curiosity (definitely not complaining or anything), do you know if Einstein95 is a modbot or something similar, and if so, whether they take requests for bot cleanup edits?KrytenKoro (talk) 19:31, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Einstein is indeed part of wiki staff. And no, he is not a modbot. We have hired a few people in the past several months. -The Goron Moron (talk) 19:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Redirect links
Not arguing, no desire to revert, but just wondering: what is the principle behind preferring direct links to redirected links? My understanding was that linking to the redirect itself allowed the Whatlinkshere tool to work as intended, so that the links affected by a namechange of the section can be isolated and quickly fixed, the section can be moved or its article renamed without requiring every page targeting it to be edited, or just to ensure that the link is pointing to the correct breadcrumb. Basically, I was taught to use redirects similar to how one would use wire management. Does routing it through a redirect slow the processing down, or something?KrytenKoro (talk) 21:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * First, I'm going to be completely honest with you on something. You really don't need to elaborate and complicate your response over a very simple question of why I reverted that. I'm of simple mind.


 * To answer your question, this isn't really something I can answer all too well since the general census on inline redirect links is kind of split upon. Personally, it is of my opinion that redirect pages are better made so that people have something to search for in the wiki's search bar, and that might be beneficial for us, since we get high traffic here. When redirecting to the actual page or section through a link, I and always have preferred the use of a pipe in the link. There's a bit on this mentioned in our Quality Standards page. Ultimately it's not really wrong, I just prefer it the other way. -The Goron Moron (talk) 23:56, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I hope my response wasn't taken as me making a mountain out of a molehill -- I'm not trying to harass you. I recognize that the wikis I grew up on have a very different manual of style and ethos, and instead of trying to ram my own learned standards through and giving up in a huff when I'm rebuffed (or more likely, banned), I'm trying to make sure I understand the operating principles so I don't cause friction in the future.
 * In regards to the topic at hand: I've proposed elsewhere that there be articles created for the scenarios themselves, given that we could then cover enemies present, treasures, that kind of thing, in a cogent and non-split-mind method. Essentially, what are now redirects would become links. (On a parallel note, that's the kind of situation that I prefer redirects for on other wikis) Knowing that piped links are preferred on this wiki, would it be fair to change the links again in the future if this proposal is accepted by the community?KrytenKoro (talk) 01:45, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Actually forget I said anything about the piped links. Like I said earlier, it's something that has split opinions and not really decided upon. It's not really that bad. The only genuine wrong way is if you were leave a link with an incorrect spelling. Regarding Scenario articles, I believe the wiki staff already settled that by deciding to have the Scenarios within the stage articles themselves. It makes things a little more organized. The stages with multiple scenarios are still set in the same stage. -The Goron Moron (talk) 02:59, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

"And honestly, I really do not appreciate the sheer text wall size of your posts and how much you're typing up without waiting for a response first. Please be patient and maybe try making your posts smaller. I get you want to put your thoughts down, but it takes us awhile to read."
 * Okay, setting aside that I did wait for Justin to respond before posting a response to him, the reason that my responses get so large is because of the above. I don't want to be (and don't think I'm being) the guy who charges in, tells you you're doing everything wrong, and starts edit warring. But that means I need to understand how to contribute in a way that won't end up with many hours of my time having been for naught, and that means being given the chance to understand how the staff wants me to edit, and how they will respond to my edits. I've only been editing here off and on, so it will still take some time to absorb the guiding ethos and style of the wiki, even more if I'm told to simply be quiet and not ask how things are supposed to be done.
 * I really don't want this to become a feud between us, so could you just, whenever you get the time (really, no rush), help answer my questions? I'm in no hurry to edit, especially with how that's been met so far, so I can wait as long as you need.KrytenKoro (talk) 00:03, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I would have let Justin respond, but he wanted someone else to have a turn. He's a pretty busy guy. Anyway. I'm sorry for before about coming off too rough earlier. Smaller talk posts would be appreciated, but you don't have to do that. And I understand completely about feeling like your work "is for naught". Believe me, I've put my heart and soul into things before as well. But really isn't wasted. We do appreciate your contributions, really, and the info on the DLC scenario is still there. I'll admit that I may want to go back and clean it up some and add sources later, but I won't be doing that immediately. I can respond to your questions in a bit later, but if you'd rather talk to Justin then that's fine. -The Goron Moron (talk) 00:33, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I...know it sounds like I'm yelling at you guys, and I am trying to give some input, but mostly I just want to know how to change my contributions so that they don't get rejected. I'm sorry I come off confrontational.KrytenKoro (talk) 02:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Your contribution was not rejected. To be rejected, I would have to click the undo (or revert) button to instantly undo every single thing. But that didn't happen. It's still technically there, not all I admit, but there. Keep in mind, and I'm not saying this to solely mean you, that we also often patrol edits. We look over each edit and see if they're needed, need rewording, fixing, moving elsewhere, or whatever. We do quality checks basically. So it's not you, everyone's edits are looked over and frequently changed. I mean heck, even some things I add are changed by the other wiki staff. I'm not perfect, nor do I expect myself to be. These things just happen. This was more of a case by case thing. By which I mean I screwed up by missing a few corrections that were made when I was splitting up the biography.


 * Now, I'm not the best person at explaining things. If you're looking for ways to improve, even just little ways, citing sources are definitely a plus. We have a page on that in our Help Contents page. There's a bunch of other things there that you may like if you haven't already seen them. Practicing good spelling and grammar is a plus too. I noticed there were a few errors like that before. Otherwise if you're unsure of something, you can always ask on a talk page before adding something in. There's never harm in asking. But please don't go out of your way to make everything 'perfect'. In the end even though we do quality checks, there is really no such thing as a bad edit. We make some change sure, but only so the edit can be the best it can be. -The Goron Moron (talk) 02:57, 29 October 2014 (UTC)