User talk:Pruano

Good job with the categories
Thanks for the hard work adding categories to the articles on books. It is much appreciated. Welcome to the wiki! Fw190a8 (talk &middot; contr) 23:13, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Inserting Years
Be sure to add the Category for years correctly by using the code view with Years| 35000 +/- the actual year as the case may be. Lethalox 23:52, October 14, 2010 (UTC)

Look at -837 DR
Take a look at -837 DR. Edit the page. Then select code view in the categories section. You will see that it has "Years| 34163" in the category link. That is to make the category page for years work out correctly. So every year is 35000 + actual year. 35000 + -837 is 34163. Or 1359 DR is 36359, et cetera. Lethalox 00:23, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

It took me a while to figure it out too. There is a page somewhere that describes it. But I could not find it tonight. Lethalox 00:41, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

109 DR
You need to cite your additions.Lethalox 18:33, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Articles with no content
I have to say, I don't really see the point in adding all those articles on years unless you're actually going to add content to them. It's serving to bump up the article count on the wiki, but isn't doing anything for the quality of the wiki overall. The wiki has a huge number of low-quality articles, and unless this changes, it cannot be taken seriously as an authority on the Realms. Fw190a8 (talk &middot; contr) 21:59, October 16, 2010 (UTC)


 * Year pages with only the template info are hardly devoid of info; they have the name of the year and era, which may not be so easy to find (as a matter of fact, the two most common links, and supposedly official) throughout the internet are broken (and havent found a new official one in the wizards site); it was by chance that i found this one which is the source i use (but no direct mention is done for it as far as i could find, more like a beta tool, like the encounter one).


 * Second, the Year pages have a very specific format, due to the template, and some of it (namely the sorting key for the Years category) isnt obvious.


 * Third, IMHO it WILL help improve the wiki, simply because then some of the work is already done; if a person has to go through the creation of a year page (with its specific format, and attached info) just to add an entry, they will most likely not bother; if the page is already created though, one only has to check other likely pages for that specific addition.


 * Fourth, the creation of the year pages (without current references) is very mechanical, and my current process makes this a quick process (the automation of such process, which i was in the process of implementing, makes such process even faster and less error prone than a manual entry).


 * But if you believe it does more harm than good, i will gladly stop; less work for me.


 * For the record, i hardly care about the wiki count; i care for the info i get from it, and as such, i agree that much work is required to bring the wiki to a more acceptable shape; thus i have fixed and added other info besides the "empty" year pages; i just dont think they are as useless as that, or i wouldnt bother.


 * As much as i would like a treaty on each and every one of the major (and minor) articles, they most likely wont happen, neither is that the nature of a wiki, which is more about collecting small contributions from the masses, which collectively will amount to such treaties IMHO  Pruano 23:21, October 16, 2010 (UTC)