User talk:Tessa

The reason I responded to your addition of DFONexus to the page.

Because DFO Nexus is infamous for having many of the less pleasant sorts that DFO Source had, and just it being added reeked of a stunt to marginalize DFOC (many there have a grudge against it for a mix of reasons), something many would not put past the DFON population.

Up to date? That's a decent point as without MMS0208 around, DFOC's lacking its major kDnF information source and whatever precise information we do get is from whoever feels like translating bits of it. Hell in PvP knowledge they likely have DFOC beat, though I wonder if it's their heavy PvP leaning that's responsible for its infamous unpleasantness.

I would like to note that there's a decent number of Core users being among hte updaters (Space Fish, RocWiki, Me) and LuminantAegis, the person that sparked the modernization drive. DFON actually tried to get her to work on thier stuff, but she didn't care for it at all.

I wouldn't say DFOC has a grudge for the most part, just quick to warn people that DFON is a place where one posts at their own risk as there's a chance it'll provoke bad treatement for a long time. Now that I think on it, I'm a bit worried about what a partner ship might do to the wiki as I have no idea how far they'd go to spite others.

What I'm hoping is for this partnership not to negatively affect this site and people's ability to add information.--Fishman46 (talk) 17:39, 19 March 2015 (PDT)

I added DFONexus without intent to divide the community, but rather, in an attempt to unify it in a way. Some of the users you mentioned (LuminantAegis, Space Fish) appear to be involved with both DFOCore as well as DFONexus and don't appear to prefer one over the other, and I find this commendable. I myself don't hold a grudge against DFOCore, but in and of itself, I find it somewhat silly that, as a result of long past drama between users at DFOSource etc, it is necessary for us to have all these separate DFO forum communities in the first place. Part of my decision was based on the relationship of each forum's administrator with communities. My experience at DFONexus has been mostly positive, and I've found David's dealings with DFONexus as well as in his interactions with DFOCore to be both honest and pleasant. As you can see from the post, it appear that DFOCore's administrator has been less than honest in his portrayal of his interactions with David, which reflects somewhat poorly on the character of DFOCore's administrator. This doesn't necessarily reflect on the character of DFOCore's member base. As I am also not an active member there and do not personally know DFOCore's administrator or many of their members, I don't hold a grudge against them. I very much appreciate members of all DFO communities for making contributions to our wiki, and once again it is not my intent to further divide the community, but would prefer it much more if the various communities could clear up their differences and unify in some way, such as here. Tessa (talk) 18:55, 19 March 2015 (PDT)

From the looks of things it was a misunderstanding, though it seems Puritas is a center of them, though it doesn't help that some DFON members want excuses to have grudges against him, likely because he wouldn't stand for toxic behavior. One particular misunderstanding is the belief he was the mastermind behind the www.dfoglobal.com incident (where someone snatched up the domain and directed to DFOC, someone). Also that thread in question was made by someone else, who realized the mess that was made as a result of the thread. He even admitted his fault later on and according to [this post] that he made things up with David, unless you're trying to tell me that's a lie. In my time at DFOC Puritas has been just as forth coming and honest as well as dedicated to making a friendly community and adding new features.

I wouldn't doubt that David means well, but it'd go along way to help DFON's reputation if he were to keep some of the less friendly members under control. The people I know that go to both tend to comfirm the tendency for DFON to have rather hostile/toxic members (many of them responsible for DFOSource's infamous reputation). These people are the main reason for the divide with a lesser one being different focuses (DFON seems to focus more on PvP while DFOC focuses more on PvE). Not saying DFON doesn't have nice people but the Hostiles are by far more infamous. If David actually started cracking down on them, things would be closer to becoming friendlier between the two. As it is, a DFOC member might poke in to see say the Rogue guide but not post due to the risk of getting verbally assaulted, and the DFON members vary from also poking in and posting to insulting DFOC members in some off topic thread.

I was concerned as DFON tends to be agressive in many ways (they seem to like pushing themselves forward and pushing DFOC behind) among other concerns (mainly DFON's influence upon new players), though hearing your intent, I'm not so worried now.--Fishman46 (talk) 19:58, 19 March 2015 (PDT)

Skill List Tables and Other Things

Hello Tessa. I've been looking around the wiki and noticed that the class skill list table formats are kind of inconsistent: some have two columns while others have one. Is there any particular way you want these to be formatted? Also, recently I have changed my editing priorities to armors, weapons and accessories. I've noticed that they only contain information on sets and the occasional purple and pink items, but not the basic or Magic Sealed equipment. Should I include basic and Magic Sealed equips in X Armor and Weapon pages as well? Including these would be quite easy since since I would only have to search through the DFOpedia tab. --Altair (talk) 12:55, 30 March 2015 (PDT)

I don't really have a preference on how they should be formatted, as long as it's consistent. Could you point to any examples of the inconsistency? And feel free to include basic and magic-sealed equipment in the armour and weapons pages if you want to! Tessa (talk) 18:07, 30 March 2015 (PDT)

Here you go:

• List of the pages with one basic skill list column: Slayer, Female Slayer, Soul Bender, Dark Templar, Berserker, Demon Slayer, Asura, Vagabond, M. Grappler, Fighter, M. Fighter, Gunner, F. Gunner, Mechanic, F. Mechanic, Spitfire, F. Spitfire, Male Mage, Elemental Bomber, Glacial Master, Priest, Monk, Exorcist, Avenger, Thief, Necromancer, Kunoichi, Knight, Elven Knight, and Chaos.
• List of the pages with two basic skill list columns: Blade Master, Sword Master, Nen Master, M. Nen Master, Striker, M. Striker, Brawler, M. Brawler, Grappler, Ranger, F. Ranger, Launcher, F. Launcher, Mage, Elementalist, Summoner, Witch, Battle Mage, Crusader, Rogue, and Shadow Dancer.

Apparently there are more pages with single column skill lists. --Altair (talk) 21:08, 30 March 2015 (PDT)

Can I jump in? I was the one who did those because some classes have few skills. Others have alot more, so instead of one long column, I made two. Chaos is way too long. If you want to standardize it, them maybe have 8~10 skills per column? I personally split them into equal length as much as I could. --Dfoplayer (talk) 21:51, 30 March 2015 (PDT)

Oh I see, that kind of makes sense to leave it the way it is then. Tessa (talk) 02:41, 31 March 2015 (PDT)

Custom CSS

Hi Tessa, is there any chance we could have custom CSS please? --Bumble (talk) 11:04, 5 April 2015 (PDT)

I'll ask some of the other staff and we will look into it. Tessa (talk) 22:21, 5 April 2015 (PDT)

References

Hey Tessa. I saw that you updated the MediaWiki Sitenotice. Could you be more specific on what falls under the category of what requires references? Are you referring to old pages or new pages in particular? Most of the older pages don't have available references other than the game itself and those who played during those times. If you are referring to new pages, then everything involving future content: 2nd Awakening, the Kunoichi, the Shadow Dancer, and the Female Slayer, will all require references. This will be quite difficult task since most of these pages were updated by wiki-ers who rarely edit nowadays.
Another question, I mostly update skill pages, but sometimes the skills aren't portrayed correctly in-game due to a formatting error on Neople's end. So, I use skill builders to fill in these values after checking if the values match. Do I need to site the skill builder I used as a reference? --Altair (talk) 08:13, 6 June 2015 (PDT)

Okay, well, the main reason I added it is because I received a message from Bellatrix (site lead for DnF Central), and in part it said "that there has been a fair amount of content lifted wholesale from DnF Central without attribution. Currently all I ask is that people link back to the individual page(s) with the relevant content for attribution purposes (author credit). I imagine it would be useful to have attribution in the first place, as of special note is some lifting of CDnF 2nd awakening lore which sometimes deliberately does not follow canon." As far as using a skill builder, if you're copying skill and damage values from the skill builder, then yes I would list the skill builder you used as a reference. Tessa (talk) 10:41, 6 June 2015 (PDT)

Alrighty then, where would you want me to put the references? Do you want me to create some kind of reference section at the bottom of the page like in Wikipedia and list them out by number and explanation? --Altair (talk) 11:02, 6 June 2015 (PDT)

That's fine. You only need to list a source once. Tessa (talk) 12:43, 6 June 2015 (PDT)