User talk:BadCatMan

To limit the length of this page, content has been relocated to the following archive pages:
 * User talk:BadCatMan/2012
 * User talk:BadCatMan/2013
 * User talk:BadCatMan/2014
 * User talk:BadCatMan/2015
 * User talk:BadCatMan/2016
 * User talk:BadCatMan/2017

Enable Discussions?
Hi there BadCatMan! I noticed that your community was not yet using Discussions, our Forum feature replacement we developed for our communities last year. We realize your community does not currently use Special:Forums but please consider allowing us to enable Discussions anyway, as it provides more benefits to your community than it's predecessor. We have already switched all new communities to Discussions and are manually enabling it on established communities who are interested in having the feature available for their users.

Discussions is a feature that users can use to post questions, thoughts, images, links and even videos. They can upvote posts and even share them on social media. Users can edit their posts for the first 24 hours, but Admins and Moderators can edit posts anytime. Users can report posts they feel do not comply with our guidelines, or that of the community. Admins and Moderators can remove them. We give you the tools you need to monitor reported posts and users that report them. Since the introduction of Discussions, we have seen a pretty big increase in community interaction. You can find more information on Discussions here: http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Help:Discussions

Let me know if your community would like to have Discussions enabled on the community and the app. I would be happy to take care of it for you. If you have any questions or concerns, please let me know.Jamie (profile)•(talk) 21:16, January 10, 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the offer, we're discussing it on our old-fashioned forum at Forum:Enabling Discussions question. — BadCatMan (talk) 06:11, January 11, 2018 (UTC)


 * Great! Thanks for doing that. I'll check it out. Jamie (profile)•(talk) 23:51, January 17, 2018 (UTC)

Art from Legacy DDI
Hi, BadCatMan. I returned yesterday from my vacations and I'm already here bothering you again :D

I have a doubt. When I was a DDI subscriber I downloaded all the galleries from 4th edition sourcebooks and other sources. They are available for subscribers. I don't own that account anymore (as my gaming group decided to pay no more for an un-supported feature), but my question is, can we use the 4e images from that gallery here in the wiki? I ask because even if they allowed subscribers to download those galleries, we can't enter the gallery without an active account. And there are a few 4e images that I want to use to enhance some articles in the wiki, but I cannot find them in the authors galleries.

Thanks in advance, happy delayed holidays and sorry for bothering you again :P--Zero (talk) 23:53, January 10, 2018 (UTC)


 * They're the same images as appear in the books and magazines, aren't they? I would guess that yes, we may use those images, just as we might scan them from the books instead. Although they might be copyrighted, wikis and fan-sites like the FRW tend to operate under "fair use" arrangements, arguing that it's fair to use them for illustration purposes, provided we're not making a profit off them or ripping off their work. We go further by reducing the size and quality so it's good and clear enough for the wiki but not as good as the originals, so they're not reusable. We shouldn't just archive all the images outright, but only use them selectively as required. If ever WotC or an artist said we can't use something, we would immediately take it down. But they haven't yet in 12 years, and there are a lot of wikis for other franchises doing the same.


 * That's how I understand it, anyway. It might be worth checking DDI's end-user license agreement or similar to see what it specifies. — BadCatMan (talk) 03:59, January 11, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you
Hey man, thanks for helping format and cleanup all my new articles. I'm slowly re-getting the hang of this and finding my rhythm! Ruf (talk) 02:14, January 23, 2018 (UTC)

Dungeons & Dragons: Warbands
Hi. I've found info about this game here. It seems the game would have take place in Zhentil Keep. However, it was cancelled. So, should we write an article about it, in spite that the game was cancelled?--Zero (talk) 05:58, January 31, 2018 (UTC)


 * I looked it up, but couldn't find anything about it being cancelled. But yeah, I'd say it's of minor interest to Realms fandom, and even if it never eventuated it's worth archiving here for posterity. — BadCatMan (talk) 06:43, January 31, 2018 (UTC)


 * Well, the game was never released in spite of all the publicity it had (and the art was pretty good), and they also killed the Heroes of Neverwinter because of this game. So I presumed it was cancelled.--Zero (talk) 06:54, January 31, 2018 (UTC)


 * Okay. Huh, I played Heroes of Neverwinter. For a little while, until I couldn't beat a battle and got bored. — BadCatMan (talk) 09:23, January 31, 2018 (UTC)

4e themes
Hi, another doubt here. In 4e, themes were special backgrounds that gave you mechanical bonuses and new powers. Much like paragon paths, but for the first levels. There are a few ones that are general/core (I see the ones in Dragon magazine 399 as universal), and a few others related with the Realms or other settings. The Neverwinter Campaign Setting even has specific themes related to Neverwinter (like the Alagondar Heir or the Renegade Red Wizard). Should we create articles for those themes? At least the ones in Dragon 399 and the Realms-specif ones.--Zero (talk) 00:42, February 6, 2018 (UTC)


 * Hmm. Looking at a few, they seem basically equivalent to paragon and epic paths, and some replicate the kits or prestige classes of previous editions, such as Harper agent, so yeah, that would seem appropriate. — BadCatMan (talk) 01:14, February 6, 2018 (UTC)

Emblem of Neverwinter.
As pointed out in its talk page, the emblem of Neverwinter we are currently using is not accurate. A friend of mine bought Mike's map, so I cut the emblem from it. Can we use it? Or it would go against the rules of fair use?--Zero (talk) 03:24, February 16, 2018 (UTC)


 * No, if it's the official emblem, then it's more than fair use to show a copy of it for the sake of accuracy. — BadCatMan (talk) 05:42, February 16, 2018 (UTC)

Realms cuisine
As Ed Greenwood Presents Elminster's Forgotten Realms deals with this extensively (some places and races left me ill after seeing their dietary habits, lol), I wonder: should I make a single article about this, or should I copy the culinary customs of each race in their racial article?

Also, can you check the Common dictionary for copy-editing? Thanks. --Zero (talk) 11:32, March 4, 2018 (UTC)


 * Lore should be findable in as many places as possible, so I'd say, for example, the dwarf page should have a section about dwarven cuisine, with links to pages about individual dwarven meals and foodstuffs, dwarven drinks, etc. If there happened to be enough lore to make a whole article about general dwarven cuisine, then that could be done, with a summary on the dwarf page. If we had an article about general Realms cuisine, it would link to the section on dwarven cuisine, as well as to sections on elf cuisine, human cuisine, etc., and so on.


 * It's on the list! — BadCatMan (talk) 12:24, March 4, 2018 (UTC)

I need the robot!
No, not Mazinger. Just the linking robot to link articles about moneylenders and manycoins services to the Manycoins services article :D --Zero (talk) 03:02, March 17, 2018 (UTC)


 * Sorry, my bot program, AutoWikiBrowser, is still busted. You'll have to ask Moviesign. — BadCatMan (talk) 05:20, March 17, 2018 (UTC)

Kudos
Your attention to detail and persistence with connecting all the dots between related articles is always impressive! Thank you for all your additions to Glen and Dwarves Deep Cat! Ruf (talk) 04:41, April 23, 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks! And thanks to you for coming back to the wiki in such a fine way. :) — BadCatMan (talk) 05:16, April 23, 2018 (UTC)

Unregistered User Additions
I'm pretty sure that User:93.34.119.173 is User:Unknown user 11, so I blocked him for a year. The pages I was seeing had lots of sloppy mistakes and poor grammar and copied infoboxes, so I got suspicious and checked the IP. He has used User:93.34.115.173 in the past, which only differs by a digit.

I'd really like to make it so that unregistered users cannot add new pages period. I'm all for unregistered users editing pages&mdash;that's what wikis are all about&mdash;but I really want to see it impossible for them to make new pages.

~ Lhynard (talk) 18:39, May 9, 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm not so sure it is a second account/IP address. I don't know how IP addresses work well enough to say if being one digit off means anything. This user has been useful in adding missed categories and their pages, while not great, haven't yet been glaringly problematic, frequent, and or as badly written. They've only been active since December too. So I'd take it as newbie errors and give the benefit of the doubt. Besides, when I unblocked UU11 in January, they immediately returned to argue about it, which I guess means they weren't already active as an anon. The current block setting should block their IP addresses too.


 * Unfortunately, the only option I'm aware of for limiting anons is at Special:WikiFeatures, and it says "Require all contributors to log in: Do you want all contributors on your wikia to be logged in? When this feature is enabled, no anonymous visitors will be allowed to edit pages or participate in comments, Forum or Message Wall without logging in. Anyone can still create a Wikia account to join your community!" Preventing even basic edits and discussions, it would prevent any outsider from getting involved, so I'm loathe to do it. — BadCatMan (talk) 11:35, May 10, 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes, I agree, that option is far too harsh. Thanks for looking into it. ~ Lhynard (talk) 12:34, May 10, 2018 (UTC)


 * As far as IP addresses, I don't know a ton of them, but if I understand correctly, a small number in the first set means that the network is large and is defined by only the first sets, leaving multiple sets for assigning specific computers. In other words, whoever this new IP is, it's the same large network. ~ Lhynard (talk) 12:49, May 10, 2018 (UTC)


 * The four numbers of an IPv4 address are called "octets" for historical reasons (they used to be written in octal, or base eight). The fact that the last octet (173) is the same is probably pure coincidence, but 93.34.115.xxx and 93.34.119.xxx are both owned by the same Internet Service Provider operating out of Milan, Italy. It's not 100%, but it's a good bet that these are the same person, especially with the corroborating evidence presented by Lhynard below. &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 13:53, May 10, 2018 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the spam. Here's what I meant by the "copied" infoboxes: Whoever this new user is, he is not using the visual editor as most new editors do; he is copying from earlier pages made by User 11. User 11's pages always were missing a space after the = on the age field&hellip;


 * occupation    =
 * age           =
 * patron deity  = Cyric
 * &hellip;and they had the class and ref fields grouped together weirdly, like this:

}}
 * class         =
 * class1e       =
 * class2e       =
 * class3e       =
 * class35       =
 * class4e       =
 * class5e       =
 * refs1e        =
 * refs2e        =
 * refs3e        =
 * refs35        =
 * refs4e        =
 * refs5e        =
 * alignment     = Lawful evil
 * rules         =
 * source        =
 * page          =
 * Again, it was not the IP that tipped me off. I was tipped off by the kind of grammar errors (no understanding of English infinitives, for example) and then the infoboxes that were cleary being cut-and-pasted from User 11's pages. Then I checked the IPs and noticed that they were so similar, which means that the new editor is at the same place as User 11. Finally, the topics match. User 11 was adding content from one of the other Volo's guides when you last blocked him, as is this new editor.


 * Same grammar errors, same computer network, same source of wiki markup templates, same topic preferences, same editing patterns (several stub articles per day).


 * It's your call of course, but I wanted to at least clarify more of my reasoning so it seemed like less of a witch-hunt on my part.


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 13:07, May 10, 2018 (UTC)