User talk:Ethereal1111

Preview Function

So, there's a preview button down at the bottom next to "Save page" when editing that says "Show preview". That little button lets you see your edit before you post and save your changes...just so you know. --Ganteka Future (talk) 02:44, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Edit Summaries

Edit summaries are really important for people to get an idea of what changed in an edit for an article. Without them, you have to sift through an article's history, edit by edit, to get an idea of its history. With them, you just have to take a quick glance through the history to know how something evolved. So, you might want to include edit summaries for your edits. You can do that through the little text box below your edited article. Just a thought. --Luigifan18 (talk) 19:47, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Self-rating

So, I'm a pretty active user on this wiki, and I keep a close eye on the recent changes. And I've seen you try to rate your own article, and get slapped down by one of the admins, twice three times now. So I figured I should give you a friendly heads-up before one of the senior users loses their patience.

Rating your own articles is not allowed here. It defeats the point of the rating system, which is to provide other users with feedback on their work — to point out what's good, what's bad, what's awesome, and what makes the game itself cry. I've been slapped with quite a few oppose ratings on articles that I'm rather proud of, simply because I have a penchant for rambling and can be slightly clueless about game balance. When I see oppose ratings, I try to address the concerns so that the article in question doesn't get forced into my sandbox — the shining example of this being my Viewtiful Warrior class, which I had to rework extensively to keep in the mainspace — and yet I consider it my magnum opus of sorts here.

Basically, don't try rating your own articles as a buffer against the dreaded "Community Oppose" status. It's not gonna fly. You're gonna write articles that you're especially proud of, and you're going to write articles that you're not so proud of. But author opinions shouldn't go in the official ratings boxes. If you feel the need to defend your article, do it in the main talk space of your article. --Luigifan18 (talk) 13:38, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Also do not create another account to rate your work.--Franken Kesey (talk) 11:41, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

I didn't. Hope you're not accusing me of such

Ratings

Hey, you know that ever time you post one of those ratings without anything in the comment box, it automatically negates itself, right? Go check the talk page of Material Composite you just rated and you'll see what I mean. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 04:16, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Blanked Pages

I see you moving a bunch of NPC to Builds. Want me to get rid of the old pages? -- Eiji-kun (talk) 08:32, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Reply: Yes please I would appreciate that. Thank you

Done. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 08:51, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Optimized Builds

A few notes if you want to make some of your NPCs into optimized builds; first, you'll want to change the format from NPC to build, detailing what things are taken at which levels. Second, there's a gentlemen's agreement to stick to WotC material when making charop builds, since not all DMs allow more than that, and material is all kinds of weirdness if you start taking from all kinds of third-party publishers. Lastly, the build should actually be optimized at doing something that would not normally be done by those classes/feats, greater than the sum of their parts, and that are less than obvious in order to actually be optimized, rather than just NPC builds as opposed to charop builds. Hopefully that helps! --Ghostwheel (talk) 09:16, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Reply: Yeah I'll get on that thanks. Thought they belonged in char-op, guess I'll have to put them back in NPC format.