text:
Hi, welcome to Game of Thrones Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Tyrion Lannister page.
We welcome all contributions to the Wiki but please be aware of the following simple rules:
1) This wiki is meant for the Game of Thrones TV series and the TV alone. Spoilers from the novels are not permitted at all. Discussion of earlier events in the novels and the use of non-spoiler background material from the novel as regards specific events, characters and places in the TV series are allowed (in the 'In the books' section of an article) but future events cannot be discussed.
2) This wiki has specific permission from HBO's marketing department to use a reasonable number of promotional images and screencaps from the series to illustrate articles. The use of other copyrighted images is not permitted without either specific permission or fair use attributions. For example, this Wiki cannot use Amoka's portrait images or Ted Nasmith's castle pictures as these are copyrighted. In addition, the Wiki is focused on the TV series and TV series alone. Images from other media should be avoided without a very good cause.
Enjoy your editing and please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Opark 77 (Talk) 23:38, October 28, 2012
Editing issues
Hello maester,
Sorry you are having these problems, it sounds really frustrating. I am not a technical expert, just an admin here on this wiki (and a few others). Well done for finding community central; those guys are generally more knowledgeable than me about technical issues. I would also suggest turning off visual editing in Special:Preferences, using the source mode editor only might help with load times. I will ask User:XD1 if they have any further suggestions, they are an admin here but also an employee of wikia. I have no problems with you editing as an IP user, registering is entirely optional. It is just easier to remember who is who when they have a name, and as the automated message says it hides your IP address.
--Opark 77 (talk) 09:06, October 29, 2012 (UTC)
"In the books"
You have been making some mistakes with the purpose of the "in the books" section, particularly for Tyrion Lannister: http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/index.php?title=Tyrion_Lannister&diff=58351&oldid=58180
The "In the Books" section that you rewrote is almost as long as the main article. It contains entire sections such as this one:
- "The most important of the defenses for the city that Tyrion builds is a huge chain that stretches across the whole of Blackwater Rush. The wildfire is loaded onto several small derelict water crafts not one big ship, and wildfire is being catapulted in as well, and most of Joffrey's fleet is in the Blackwater with them when it all goes up (Tyrion explains that the ships would have been lost anyway and, if they hadn't sailed out to meet Stannis' forces, it would have seen to be a trap). Once all of Stannis' fleet had entered, (except for Sallador Saan whose ships had been ordered to stay out in the bay as backup) the chain was raised, this prevented the ships from leaving and the burning ships, pushed up against the chain by the current as they tried to flee the fire, allowed the spread of the fire from one ship to another."
This isn't about "Tyrion", it's about the "Battle of the Blackwater". It isn't "wrong", it just fits better on a more relevant article (the "in the Books" section for "Battle of the Blackwater"). Some of the more important cast members (Tyrion, Arya, Cersei, etc.) will eventually have quite long "in the books" sections, 4-5 seasons into this show. But on the Character biographies, they should stick to major differences. The episode guide is for the other differences in the "narrative" taken as a whole. I'll revise the Tyrion Lannister page to show you what I mean... --The Dragon Demands (talk) 19:23, October 29, 2012 (UTC)
- Brevity is the soul of wit (Hamlet Act II Scene II). I'm fixing up the "In the books" sections now (I lost power for two days). What you need to keep in mind is this: the "in the books" section on a given article is primarily intended to aid the TV-first fans. Thus they're not supposed to be an exhaustive and comprehensive list of differences between the books and TV series -- that would be handled in the Episode guide. Character articles in particular (and other non-episode articles) are more about...explaining the "significant differences" to a TV-first viewer. The focus in those sections should be on what's different, and even then only on particularly large changes -- for one-shot characters we'd probably give more detail, but with the amount of space needed to cover major characters such as Tyrion, Edmure, etc. we don't really need to go over a blow-by-blow of how their scenes might be slightly re-ordered and condensed in adaptation. Also, for characters, proceed from the general to the specific -- general differences about appearance, personality, and biographical details should go first in the "In the books" section, and only subsequently explain in chronological order what changed as the TV narrative progresses.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 18:27, November 2, 2012 (UTC)
- Your edits on Hodor were good. But this one paragraph here I removed: http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Hodor?diff=58460&oldid=58459 You've sort of got to ask, "what does this have to do with Hodor?"--The Dragon Demands (talk) 20:52, November 2, 2012 (UTC)
I'm afraid I've had to revert many of your recent edits from the past 24 hours. At present we have an "actor" category, which is probably sufficient. We don't have an "adult actor" category, so a "child actor" one is somewhat redundant. More to the point you were adding it to articles such as Bran, and Tommen, who are, of course characters, not actors. Furthermore you added it to characters who have not even been portrayed by any actor, such as Aegon. As for the "magic user" cat, again it seemed somewhat redundant, as Mirri Maz Duur and Thoros already had categories that are relevant to their usage of magic, and Hallyne practices alchemy, which is science, not magic. I hope this helps. Jayden Matthews (talk) 11:48, November 5, 2012 (UTC)
- Hey, sorry for the late response. I've been a bit recently. And try not to worry to much, you're just going through a learning curve, same as everyone else when they first join. In answer to your questions, I honestly don't think that a "juvenile character" cat is necessary, although you may wish to ask an administrator, such as Opark, who is a really nice guy, and is always very helpful. As for Hallyne, my memory's a bit fuzzy. I recall the conversation between him and Tyrion in the second book where he explains about the surge in production, but was this the case on the show? Remember that this wiki is devoted to the screen adaptation, with the differences being noted in separate sections. And yes, I did mean the Lord of Light cat, but now I think on it perhaps a "magic practitioner" cat would serve as a useful hub for all such characters, but like I said you should ask an admin to be sure. Also just for future reference, when starting a new topic on a talk-page you should add a new section headline to separate your topic from the ones above. Finally, I want you to know that although I'm not an admin I'm always happy to help with any problems you experience, or to answer any queries. Kind regards. Jayden Matthews (talk) 11:06, November 9, 2012 (UTC)
As Jayden has already pointed out, "child actor" is a redundant category, and you were adding it to the Character pages, not "Actor" pages.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 16:51, November 10, 2012 (UTC)
Re: Hello, Welcome!
Hi, Ch'vylthan, and thank you for the warm welcome. :) I, too, haven't been around here long enough to be an expert (lol, I only joined yesterday), but I'll get the swing of things. Anyways, as you suggested, I'll go hit up The Dragon Demands or one of the admins with a message regarding Tyrion's page - assuming nobody replies to my message on his article's talk page. Savannah Star 16:32, November 11, 2012 (UTC)
We can't really use a category for "magic users" because of how magic works in the A Song of Ice and Fire series: George R.R. Martin has made it a point that magic in the story isn't just "fantasy science", i.e. technical knowledge with complex rules, but which theoretically anyone with a playbook can master like a skill. It's much more like magic in The Lord of the Rings: magic is incomprehensible by rational rules, that's what makes it "magic". To a degree, you can *sort of* manipulate magical elements within the world, but Martin has pointed out that even people who THINK they know what they're doing with Magic -- Melisandre, the Alchemists, the Targaryens, etc. -- are really "screwing around with powers beyond their comprehension" -- and yes, they're often able to achieve certain desired effects, but they never truly master it. -- More to the point, as a result of this....it isn't "Dungeons and Dragons" where there's an actual character-class of "Spellcasters"....nor even like Star Wars, in which certain people are "Jedi/Sith" or not. People can use magical objects or incantations within the A Song of Ice and Fire series without quite realizing it. Melisandre claims to have magical powers, but there are also other things that come up in the books in such a way that such a category really doesn't make sense. Is Frodo Baggins a "magic user" because he uses a magical invisibility ring? Etc. etc. --The Dragon Demands (talk) 01:12, November 12, 2012 (UTC)
Book spoilers
Do not add information from A Storm of Swords or later books, these are also spoilers. And be careful with your writing, you are making several spelling mistakes.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 17:40, November 27, 2012 (UTC)
Iron Throne room
Hey Grand Maester! Just for future reference "see also" sections should go at the bottom of the page, not the top, and should be headlined. Also if an administrator puts an article forth for deletion it's not generally acceptable to just remove the tag without discussion. If you think the article should stay (which I agree with, by the way) you should make a case for it on the talk page. Cheers. The Knight of the Flowers (talk) 16:20, November 30, 2012 (UTC)
- It's not a problem, and you're right about Season 3, it's gibberish! Hopefully an admin will dispose of it soon. Also, remember to sign all your talk-page posts, and to start topics with a new section headline. Thanks. The Knight of the Flowers (talk) 17:04, December 3, 2012 (UTC)
The article has been rewritten, cleaned up and moved.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 03:54, December 5, 2012 (UTC)
This is the edit you made to Doreah two weeks ago: [1]
I was busy with Hurricane Sandy and mid-terms so I wasn't able to respond to this. The image you added has been up on there for over two weeks.
You added in an image the width of the entire text space for this wiki. You have no idea how to use image files. That, in and of itself, is no big fault: what shocks me is that you didn't have the courtesy to remove an image that distorted a wiki page so drastically. What part of your mental wiring decided that it was alright as it was?
This is an embarrassment.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 02:20, December 7, 2012 (UTC)
- I've noticed that in the past two days you've got right on editing other pages, but ignoring this direct criticism, making no attempt to explain or simply revert it.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 02:53, December 9, 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry about not correcting the Doreah picture earlier. I was under the impression that you had already done it. When the picture is at the bottom of the article in gallery, you don't have to put in the "thumb" notation. I didn't realize that it worked differently for the note section. When I mess up putting a picture in, it changes the width of the article, that didn't happen when the too large picture was in the note section, so i didnt realize it was wrong. I have changed it.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 03:04, December 9, 2012 (UTC)
- No, you only changed it because I pointed out your mistake. As you've admitted, you'd have just left it like that, as you already did for two weeks: yet more damage left in your wake. Do you even notice these corrections everyone else is making?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 03:07, December 9, 2012 (UTC)
"In the books"
Hey, Ch'vyalthan. Just a quick reminder about the "in the books" sections... they really are supposed to contain the absolute bear minimum, and not go into too much detail. All that "he said she said, to which he replied" stuff just isn't necessary. Thanks for understanding. The Knight of the Flowers (talk) 11:59, December 9, 2012 (UTC)
"Show preview"
Hi there. If I can make a quick suggestion? You might like to use the "show preview" button when editing. This allows you to see what your changes will look like without actually altering the article so that you can correct any mistakes before hitting publish. I say this because some of your recent changes have been somewhat nonsensical. On Lancel's page, for example "She reading letter" and "He ask if it all exciting". Also, you're still going into too much detail in regards to the "in the books" sections. The stuff about House Redwyne not declaring for Renly, and Horror and Slobber being held captive by Joffrey. As these events didn't/haven't played out in the show it would be considered a spoiler (albeit a minor one) for those who haven't read the books. Thanks for listening. The Knight of the Flowers (talk) 11:44, December 10, 2012 (UTC)
The Complete Guide to Westeros
"I've started working on the Complete Guide of Westeros. There it's easy, you just write down every single word."
No...no, you blatantly don't just write down every word. Yikes. It was an utter mistake to just write down transcripts. Your edits have been reverted.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 22:15, December 10, 2012 (UTC)
RE: Wordage
Well, I know it's not always easy to "put it into words", as you said, but that is somewhat the whole point of this. That is, to say creative, original writing, and not copying things down verbatim. Something you might find useful is using a word document, and spending a decent amount of time writing down what you want to say and making sure it's grammatically correct before transferring it to the wiki. The Knight of the Flowers (talk) 14:13, December 11, 2012 (UTC)
- Perhaps nonsensical was a tad harsh, considering that I understood the gist of what you were trying to say. "grammatically incorrect" would be fairer. The Knight of the Flowers (talk) 16:57, December 11, 2012 (UTC)
Describe what is wrong with this edit
This is an edit you made to the page on "Lancel Lannister" only three days ago. Click the link here to see the red lettering highlighting your change http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Lancel_Lannister?diff=61137&oldid=61074
Old version:
- "While Jaime is gone, Lancel is seen being sexually intimate with his cousin Cersei. He asks her a series of questions including wondering if war is exciting. Cersei is irritated and tells him to get back into bed."
Your version:
- "Lancel is seen being sexually intimate with his cousin Cersei. She is reading letter, Lancel asks her if it is about the war, and tells her that it all exciting. He asks what "our next move is." Cersei is irritated and tells him to stop talking and get back into bed."
Describe, in your own words, what the grammatical errors that you made in this edit are. This is not a rhetorical question.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 02:54, December 12, 2012 (UTC)
You really think so?? -- GrouchMan (My trash can) 02:16, December 16, 2012 (UTC)
- Not yet. -- GrouchMan (My trash can) 02:45, December 16, 2012 (UTC)
- Will do!! -- GrouchMan (My trash can) 02:54, December 16, 2012 (UTC)
Hey, Ch'vyalthan! I'm not sure if you knew this already, but users are permitted to create a an extension of their userpage called a "sandbox", which you can use to write up a draft (in wiki format) of whatever you're working on before submitting it. I think this is preferable to publishing half-finished edits with "to be continued" written at the bottom. Let me know if you're interested in this, and I'll show you how to do it. The Knight of the Flowers 09:42, December 18, 2012 (UTC)
- Okay, here is your new sandbox. Enjoy! If you let me know a particular time when you're going to be online tommorow I'll show you how to upload images. The Knight of the Flowers 18:21, December 18, 2012 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Just let me know when you're free. The Knight of the Flowers 08:59, December 20, 2012 (UTC)
Qarth isn't a particularly interesting visual, at least not in the screenshots you've been using. What is the appeal?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 01:31, December 21, 2012 (UTC)
How to load images and a question
You have been extremely irresponsible and rude in adding images to this wiki.
You don't know how to manipulate images, or even how to load images -- these are utterly basic functions.
Nonetheless, you then went on a weeks'-long binge of taking existing images already on the wiki, and copy-pasting them into other articles....even when they barely feature the characters involved. I.e. if Littlefinger was in the background of an image, and out of focus, you'd add the image and say it was about Littlefinger, instead of finding a better image...OR, simply doing nothing.
This is a serious, non-rhetorical question: why did you keep adding such a large number of images, after you openly admitted you didn't know what you were doing?
No, this isn't that you needed to experiment around to gain experience; you weren't trying to manipulate images and failing...you were just making the same mistakes over and over again, with no attempt to learn on a trial and error basis. I point to the mishap on the Doreah page: http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Doreah?oldid=59266
You simply abandoned the page after that.
Instead of taking one article and trying to play around with ONE image until you learned how wikis work, you burned through dozens of articles slapping in images so quickly it was difficult for the rest of us to keep up with the mess."
There's nothing wrong with not understanding how wiki images work. What *IS* wrong is that you've made no serious or significant attempt to learn, but kept on going and ignoring these mistakes.
That being said...
How to load images onto a Wiki
Step 1 - Do you see the bar along the top of the main page that says "On the Wiki - Episodes - Characters - Actors - Community"? Next to this on the same line is a button that says "Contribute", with a drop-down arrow. Click on Contribute to bring up the drop-down menu, and select Add a Photo.
Step 2 - This brings you to the "Upload Photo" page. On the very first line, you see a button that says "Browse". Click on this button to bring up a folder directory for your own computer. For example, you can select an image on your desktop. (You don't have to actually write in the source destination by hand under "Destination Filename" - using "Browse" does this automatically). Scroll down the page and on the lower left you will see a red button that says "Upload file". This will upload the file.
That's it, that's all you need to do to upload image files.
This is painfully easy, and had you put any actual effort into "experimenting around with images" you'd have tried clicking on the navigation bar buttons to see if any of them does this. ---at any point, did you pause and ask yourself, "hey, what does that button that says "Contribute" do?"
No, you weren't trying to improve your understanding of how images work. I see you've been starting to ask around about this....after six weeks of deluging us with bad or irrelevant images, and after FREQUENT complaints from other people that you don't know how to do this.
This was irresponsible.
Step 3 is adding in licensing information, but that's pretty easy, just copy-paste from other images. If worst comes to worst, just don't worry about it, the admins are usually careful about adding those.
Please drop what you're doing and make "learning how to use wiki-tools" your top priority. We will make the time to help.
...I'm sorry to be harsh, because I guess it seemed daunting originally; "you don't know what you don't know" and all. But adding images to the wiki is actually a fairly easy two-step process.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 04:14, December 21, 2012 (UTC)
- Not acknowledging this criticism is seen as ignoring it. Respond. The admins have already removed an image you loaded onto Petyr Baelish because it was out of focus and in the background, this is what I was talking about: http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Petyr_Baelish?diff=62674&oldid=62053 --The Dragon Demands (talk) 18:28, December 23, 2012 (UTC)
Okay, let's go in the chat room. The Knight of the Flowers 17:01, December 23, 2012 (UTC)
Creating articles
I'll write this out for you, just so you have a permanent record. Writing a new article is almost the same as uploading images, which The Dragon Demands explained for you above. You click the "Contribute" button in the top right hand corner of the screen and select "Add a page". You then choose "blank page" and there you have it. When transferring stuff from your sandbox you simply highlight the whole text and copy/paste it.
Following on from our discussion in the chat room... please try and be honest in the future. Like I said, I don't mind helping you, but I don't appreciate being lied to, or having my time wasted. Thank you. The Knight of the Flowers 17:59, December 23, 2012 (UTC)
- Let's not get into this right now. Just please try and be more mindful. I'm not spending all this time trying to help you for my own amusement. And, as The Dragon has pointed out above, you should try and make an effort to respond to messages on your talk-page, as it's rather bad-faith to ignore people when they're trying to help you. Also, once again, try and remember not to post messages in sections that aren't related to what you're saying, as you just did on my talk-page. Thank you. The Knight of the Flowers 20:44, December 23, 2012 (UTC)
- No, just frustrated. The phrase "exercise in futility" springs to mind. The Knight of the Flowers 12:22, December 24, 2012 (UTC)
The correct way to refer to women who have married names, such as Catelyn Tully Stark, is not "Catelyn Stark, formerly Tully". The correct way is "Catelyn Stark, née Tully." Moreover, you'd only really mention this at the beginning of her article, not in articles that happen to mention her in passing.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 04:10, December 28, 2012 (UTC)
Tournament vs Tourney
While both terms are acceptable, the actual title of the article used on here is "Tournament", not "Tourney". Why have you been exclusively using Tourney? I had to change them all to "Tournament".--The Dragon Demands (talk) 17:53, December 29, 2012 (UTC)
A Golden Crown recap
You have edited other articles. Is this one finished? With proper images and links to other articles?--Gonzalo84 (talk) 03:53, December 29, 2012 (UTC)
Not just any image
You have added a promotional image of the valyrian steel dagger and the Book of Lineages with the text: "Eddard consults the Book of...". Yet the image doesn't show Ned... use screenshots to illustrate... not just any promotional that is similar to the subject. That's the kind of shabby work that has the The Dragon fed up. --Gonzalo84 (talk) 17:06, December 29, 2012 (UTC)
- I'm happy you have noticed this Gonzalo: given that you describe it as "shabby", are you also not amused by this?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 17:09, December 29, 2012 (UTC)
Writing style
And to make matters worse. Just from "Scene 18":
- "Arya looks a bit sick"
- "You can see the wheels turning in Eddard's head"
- "Arya must practically drag Sansa"
This looks like the summary on a blog. We are not a blog, this is an encyclopedia and it must be written in the most serious way possible. We don't use sarcasm, or metaphores, or personal interpretation. Clean it up.
"Stunned Lord Eddard closes the book. He realizes that this is proof that Prince Joffrey is not King Roberts true born heir." Can you see the three mistakes you just made.?
I don't care if other recaps have metaphores, or sarcasm, or ironic comments. Those are mistakes that must be cleaned up. Get to work.
--Gonzalo84 (talk) 17:14, December 29, 2012 (UTC)
Info between parenthesis
It looks terrible, use commas or "-" --Gonzalo84 (talk) 01:32, December 30, 2012 (UTC).
- Indeed. It looks ridiculous to put entire sentences in parenthesis...and not just in sheer length. You don't just make a separate sentence ENTIRELY in parenthesis! "Tyrion meets with Littlefinger. (Littlefinger implicated that the Valyrian steel dagger was Tyrion's). Tyrion wants Littlefinger to go to Harrenhal." -- that looks absurd, but you've been doing it with alarming frequency.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 02:05, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
- Remember Ch'vyalthan that you don't have the explain every little detail and reference. Let the reader explore. For example, in Alton Lannister's article it is completely irrelevant to explain that Ned's bones end up being delivered by Littlefinger to Catelyn in Renly's camp near Storm's End. Character biographies are not episode summaries. Though in all fairness several editors have been making that mistake.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 02:08, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
I do put sentences in parenthesis, usually when I'm giving background information. However, the example that you quoted was not one of mine. Ch'vyalthan (talk) 05:48, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
- This is part of this conversation, stop moving it back to my talk page.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 17:01, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
New categories
This Cambrian Explosion of uncategorized new categories with a single article (like House Lannister of Lannisport) and, for example, adding Willis Wode to House Tully is completely unneccessary... please undo it... particularly the vassal houses categories with less than three articles in them.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 09:20, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
- The problem is having too many categories with too few articles in them. Personally I find that listing vassal lords in the houses of their liege lords is confusing. Under that logic all lords should be listed in the category of the royal house because they are sworn to their king.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 18:49, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
- Simple, just the house they DIRECTLY serve. For example, the smallfolk of Winterfell serve the Starks so it fits. Rodrik Cassel serves the Starks, so it is listed as a Stark. However, Loras Tyrell, ultimately, serves only his family, so he goes as Tyrell, not as KL Baratheon because, while part of the royal court he's not part of the King's household like... say Pycelle.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 20:15, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
Renly Baratheon didn't bother forming his own formal cadet branch for his faction. We don't really have distinct category names for "House Baratheon" before the War of the Five Kings and then Renly's faction. No, Renly's faction isn't "House Baratheon of Storm's End"....because even the "House Baratheon" of a hundred years ago was "House Baratheon of Storm's End" -- that's like "House Stark of Winterfell".--The Dragon Demands (talk) 03:31, December 31, 2012 (UTC)
Well met!
Hello there. I'm new to this site, having signed up today, I'm just taking this opportunity to introduce myself to users of distinction, such as yourself, and to offer my assistance in any way I can.--The Bastard of Bolton (talk) 20:50, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
- Hello, and welcome to the wiki. Don't know about being a user of distinction, as I'm still learning my way around here, but I do edit a lot. Hope to see your around.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 22:37, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
- Likewise.--The Bastard of Bolton (talk) 23:19, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
I must admit to a certain degree of annoyance at your recent edits to Melisandre. How is it that the Bastard of Bolton, a user who has been on the wiki for less that two days knows when you're doing something wrong (and has the good sense to follow policy) but you don't? You've been told again, and again and again about this, but you continue to do it. Why? To quote the Dragon Demands - this is not a rhetorical question! The Knight of the Flowers 19:18, January 1, 2013 (UTC)
- Not responding to these criticisms in any way reflects very poorly on your conduct. "Responding" could be as simple as posting "I'm sorry" (then even ignoring it). But ignoring weeks of criticism is petulant. --The Dragon Demands (talk) 19:59, January 1, 2013 (UTC)
IPad and editing tired
You shall answer these two questions:
1 - Describe how frequently you "edit tired"....because you need only look at our "Contribution" page records to see that I'm editing up to 2 or 3 AM EST, often at the same time you are...and I do not make the same sloppy mistakes which you've brushed off as "I was editing late at night and I was tired".
2 - Do you rely entirely on an IPad to contribute to this wiki? You've mentioned in the past that you think you make spelling errors because you're using an IPad. IPads are not designed for large-scale word processing...why would you rely on this to contribute?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 20:14, January 1, 2013 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but the IPad is all I have to use right now. And I am sorry. I am not ignoring you, I listen and adjust my editing. I used to do most of my editing on the "In the books section", now I hardly ever edit this section. I will stop entirely editing this section, if you think I make too many mistakes. I am doing much better with my spelling and punctuation. I reread several times. I always go back and correct anything pointed out to me that I did wrong. All I can say is that I'm sorry and that I will keep trying. I am definitely better than I used to be. Ch'vyalthan (talk) 22:00, January 1, 2013 (UTC)
- Do not respond to direct questions I've asked on your talk page by posting on my Talk page, it splits up the conversation...and I'm not the only one discussing these criticisms.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 16:11, January 2, 2013 (UTC)
- You hardly ever edit the "in the books" section anymore because multiple other contributors criticized you for weeks that you had no idea how to write one of those; you were just copying an entire page worth's of information from AWOIAF. The whole point of the "in the books" sections is to summarize for the sake of TV first fans, not to make an exhaustive list. So your answer was to give up? You haven't demonstrated that you are capable of "learning" anything? What was your final fallback? To make rote transcripts of episodes? Anyone with ears and a copy of an episode could have done that. No, you are NOT doing better in spelling and punctuation, otherwise multiple other editors wouldn't be pervasively criticizing you for this. It is irrelevant if you're sorry, don't start pleading or fawning, SIMPLY STOP MAKING SO MANY MISTAKES. No, you are not "better than you used to be".--The Dragon Demands (talk) 16:11, January 2, 2013 (UTC)
- The IPad is all you have to use right now? How is this our problem?! If an editor came on here and said "sorry, but the only keyboard I have to type on is messing all of the vowel keys"...would we tolerate that? But that isn't even the case....even if using an IPad means that you hit the wrong keys often....why the heck aren't you SPELLCHECKING before you hit "publish" on an article you're editing? If you know you have problems hitting the wrong letters on an IPad, why haven't you been proofreading yourself?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 16:15, January 2, 2013 (UTC)
You have NOT improved, and you are still making basic mistakes in spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Case in point...why the heck do you keep randomly capitalizing words in image captions which should not be capitalized? You do this pervasively....even when other editors (not just me) have pointed out how weird and incorrect it is. Serious question: have you...even noticed when we complain about this, in edit summaries? Take this edit to the "Roose Bolton" article which you made barely FOUR HOURS ago: http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Roose_Bolton?diff=64041&oldid=63988 You added the caption, "Robb Stark and Roose Bolton make plans to Retake Winterfell" ---why the heck is "Retake" capitalized?! This sort of random capitalization which you've been doing doesn't fit into any known capitalization scheme. I could understand if you were using Headline style and just capitalizing everything...which would be "Robb and Roose Make Plans to Retake Winterfell".....but you didn't capitalize every word. Again....haven't you noticed the frequent points when we edit these? When I've been making dozens of edits asking "why is this capitalized?" --->More to the point, this happened TODAY, only FOUR HOURS ago. Yet you're so myopic that you honestly think you've "improved" your pervasive spelling errors?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 16:50, January 2, 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry for snapping yesterday, but you must understand how frustrating this is for everyone? Surely at some point while you were writing that paragraph you must have thought to yourself "I'm going into great detail about a character and plot point that hasn't appeared in the show. I've been told not to do this. I should stop and not hit publish." Surely? And I'm sorry, but you've done this so frequently over the past two months that "I was tired" really isn't a valid excuse. In fact it sounds rather foolish. The Knight of the Flowers 12:56, January 2, 2013 (UTC)
- And why did you replace the bottom image in Roose Bolton's article when the one above it depicts the exact same scene? The Knight of the Flowers 13:09, January 2, 2013 (UTC)
Still making mistakes
From "Sack of King's Landing - House Targaryen"
'Possessive apostrophe: you wrote: "Aerys rule" "Aerys Kingsguard"... its "Aerys''rule" and "Aerys'' Kingsguard"... words ending in "s" require an apostrophe when the following noun "belongs" to the previous noun. Also, in "Aerys former friend the treacherous Tywin Lannister" you make the same mistake and forgot to add a comma between "friend" and "the treacherous". It should've read "Aerys'' former friend, the treacherous Tywin Lannister.
Be careful because this is one of your recurrent mistakes and one of the reasons I, for one, is getting tired of cleaning up after you.
BTW, "Precede" means "to happen before something"... the word you were looking for is "proceed", and in past tense its "proceeded". --Gonzalo84 (talk) 05:49, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
Theon's photo
I removed it because its a group image and Theon isnt' important in it. Hell, he's standing sideways. And while we are at it, capitalize "direwolf Mother" is incorrect.--Gonzalo84
- This isn't the first time that you've been warned about adding irrelevant images to articles...moreover, I TOLD you how to load up new images. You still seem to rely on just "finding images in other articles" and hoping for the best. And didn't I JUST warn you about randomly capitalizing words?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:31, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
New categories #2
All those new categories for noble houses... don't you think they should've been categorized?Gonzalo84 (talk) 00:23, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
What I meant is that categories with less than two articles are pointless (for example: House Blackwood, House Reyne) and should be removed from their respective articles... also you are writing CatAgories everywhere. BE CAREFUL!--Gonzalo84 (talk) 05:19, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
- You're also categorizing all wrong. When a characer is listed his birth house category, they should be categorized on a first name basis. For example, both Sandor and Gregor Clegane shouldn't be listed as Clegane, Sandor or Clegane, Gregor. Pay attention to how articles are categorized instead of just going nuts.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 05:26, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
I'll say it just one more time... its CATEGORY... NOT CATAGORY--Gonzalo84 (talk) 05:32, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
Character biographies
Character bios are not episode recaps. In Cersei's bio it is irrelevant thay a handmaiden discovers Sansa's bloodied mattress, Shae threatens her into silence but later the Hound finds the two trying to hide the proof. Why? because Cersei isn't even present in those scenes. What's relevant is that Cersei finds out.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 17:26, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
- And this is far from the first time you've been warned about this. You don't know how to write "In the books" sections, you write "transcripts" instead of summaries...and your concept of writing character biographies is to go on long tangents summarizing entire scenes that a character happens to appear in, instead of focusing on what parts of the scene specifically apply to that character.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 20:48, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
More "humor" blog posts will not help, but harm, your activity
Sitting down and reading these brief parts, I remembered that somewhere you mentioned that you wanted to set up another "Humor in Game of Thrones" blog post, of youtube parody clips, etc. You were warned when you made the first one that you are facing serious problems in the quality of your editing, and that making humor posts was taking time away from this. You start work you never finish on "real" articles.....why are you dividing your attention between Real Work and youtube parody blog posts? This isn't even a general news fansite, it's a wiki.
What is it, in your mental wiring, that seems to think that you'll "get back into good graces" or something by charming us all with a wonderful humorous blog post? It isn't going to happen! You've facing major, mounting criticisms from multiple editors about the quality of your edits...as recently as today from Admin Gonzalo84. Unless this was meant as a self-note that you intended to get to many weeks from now...why are you prioritizing making a blog post of youtube parody clips, instead of addressing the style errors in real articles that you've made?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 21:03, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps I've been a bit critical because I don't understand your work schedule. Are you a student or something? What is the nature of your vocation?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 21:04, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
- Because your mental focus struck me as indicating that you're some sort of archeologist.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 19:13, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
Infobox Images
Oh trust me, I love to fix up infoboxes images too, but usually we try to use the HBO Promo images as the infobox image. I don't mind screencaps usually, as long as they are crisp and pertain to the episode. Yours just didn't seem that high-quality that we need here. Where did you find them? QueenBuffy 19:03, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
Houses Categories
I am in the process of cleaning up ALL noble houses categories, removing redundant categories and deleting those categories with less than three articles (like House Blackwood or House Mallister). Take a look at the changes I have made (using the history option you can see each iteration of each article since its creation) use it as an example of how to proceed in the future.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 22:09, January 6, 2013 (UTC)
Busy this weekend and the next
You said you couldn't start major work on the wiki this weekend or the next because you're busy. Right at the top of your profile it contains a link to the (seldom used) "A Song of Ice and Fire" Wiki on Wikia. And right here is your handy and easy-to-reference User Contributions page: http://iceandfire.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ch%27vyalthan You've been spending a lot of time over there this weekend, investing time to write a large amount of stuff. How can you give the excuse that you can't do major work to do time constraints, when you're working on an overlapping wiki, this very weekend? How "busy" were you if you had the time to be editing so much over there?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 02:12, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
Your article in Ice and Fire wikia
Actually, Daenerys is not the first Daenerys (regardless what Xaro says in the series)... there was another Daenerys... and she never took the "Martell" surname. In the books most wives are referred to by their family surnames, not the husband's.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 05:04, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
- As I already explained in the "In the books" section on the Daenerys article, Daenerys Stormborn is "First of Her Name" because she's the first Targaryen Ruling Queen (or claims to be). There was an earlier Daenerys, but she didn't rule, but was married off to Dorne, and only rulers get numbers.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 05:11, January 7, 2013 (UTC)
The Charm Offensive: You seek to play me like a flute
Why are you going out of your way to congratulate other editors on their achievements? While I am happy that "The Bastard of Bolton" has been doing great work and got some of the shiny badges that the wiki ranks up on....you don't see ANY of the other regular editors trading compliments over random badges. This isn't simply being "welcoming"....this is blatantly sycophantic.
Nor is this the first time: it was...bizarre and unusual, to quite randomly create a blog post praising OPark77 on his one-year anniversary...a scant three weeks after you joined the wiki. Of course, I'm also happy for OPark77...but none of the other editors usually goes out of their way to trade such praises, particularly someone who'd been editing on here for under a month....moreover, if I were to congratulate some of the regulars on this if I noticed it was their anniversary, I'd make a note on their talk page....not sycophantically go out of my way to start a blog post in order to make a big show of your overwhelming gratitude.
The glib, shallow praises of your "charm offensive" aren't fixing any of the problems we've pointed out.
Hurling back insults at us then doing work we disagree with would be one thing, but understandable....but instead, you've been doing horrible work, then admitting it was horrible....but then you just made token apologies and KEPT RIGHT ON DOING IT, as if to play us like flutes (in the words of Hamlet). You're so desperate that you're randomly praising minor accomplishments of other editors in the hopes that your charming personality will overcome the serious defects in your contributions?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 02:33, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ch'vyalthan. Sorry for the late reply, I was extremely ill over New Year's, and am still not fully recovered. As such, I wasn't as patient as I should have been, and for that, I'm sorry. Anyway, new year, new start. I think you really need to resolve yourself to turn over a new leaf, and really start trying to do better. I'm saying this now, because in a few weeks time this wiki will be a mad house, and no one will have the time or energy to go around behind you cleaning up your mistakes. We will all be in the spotlight, and under an immense of amount of pressure, and anything that threatens the credibility of the wiki will likely be dealt with by way of a block; a fate which you've so far avoided, and I don't think anyone wants that to change. The Knight of the Flowers 16:35, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
- Well spotted. While I'm glad that you're getting fewer complaints, the correct way to deal with the issues that have been raised is not to just make fewer edits; it's to actually try and do better. This is a recurring theme that I've noticed with you. When you were repeatedly criticized for making the same mistake with the "In the books" section your answer was to stop editing those sections. After the fiasco with the "A Golden Crown" recap, your solution was to not write another one. What will happen when you learn to upload images, and someone points out a potential mistake? Will you promise to never upload another image, and so on, and so on, until there's no area of editing that you've not abandoned. This is a serious question. The Knight of the Flowers 11:16, January 9, 2013 (UTC)
"Nee" is the word employed to mention a woman's surname before she marries and adopts the husband's surname. Keep it that way.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 07:43, January 10, 2013 (UTC)
- Dear god, I warned you about using "formerly" instead of "nee" only two weeks ago... http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Ch%27vyalthan#N.C3.A9e ...were you just ignoring these complaints? --The Dragon Demands (talk) 13:27, January 10, 2013 (UTC)
- I'm sorry but this is ultimately the root of all your problems on here. You simply don't listen! The Knight of the Flowers 13:55, January 10, 2013 (UTC)
Grammatical errors
There were still some minor errors. There were comma's that didn't need to be in the sentence. Also reworded some things to make a more proper sentence structure- you can look and see the difference. QueenBuffy 17:56, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
Relationship articles
Yeah I started those, but got side-tracked and haven't done one besides Drogo's and Dany's. You want to title the page with the male name first, since usually it goes "Mr and Mrs" in the English language. You can refer to my page for layout on your relationship page. Good luck and I will be sure to check it out when you are finished. QueenBuffy 18:03, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
- Also, you may want to check out how I did Drogo/Dany page with the sub-headings. I just fixed them/added them on the Robb/Talisa page. I mark paragraphs of importance with "First meeting" or "Torn apart" or "A secret wedding".. know what I mean? That way readers could just click on the sub-heading if they wanted to skip down to that particular part of a love story...
- Oh, of course not, they can be any two couples of importance, ie Dany and her brother. --QueenBuffy 18:22, January 13, 2013 (UTC)
Do not reply to messages here on my own Talk page or they will be cut and pasted back here
Do not reply to messages here on my own Talk page or they will simply be cut and pasted back here. By responding on MY talk page, you are seeking to hide the issue. The ENTIRE POINT of posting complaints on YOUR talk page is in the hopes that other users or admins will chime in with their confirmation of these complaints and/or suggestions. This is done to shame you. Do not reply on my Talk page. I will simply copy-paste them back here. Attempts to move them back will only be reverted again, look petty, and draw complaints from the admins. These aren't personal two-way conversations but to draw group attention to the problems with your editing.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 19:49, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
Which Work?
I made very few edits, and I checked them repeatedly. Today most of what I did was to correct punctuation. I put in a couple of lines on Daenerys and some details about Bronn, but I checked over the grammar and spelling, and then went back to check again. Which work was the bad work. Is it just that you thought they were unnecessary? I put in that "Ser Jorah started advising her about leadership, and changed his fealty to her." As he had formerly pledged fealty to Viserys. I know that advise is a verb, and I meant the word advise. I am trying to be nice, I usually try to be nice, that is just what I do.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 04:34, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
- You, of all people, have a horrible record of punctuation and spelling standards...why the heck would you think you're remotely qualified to correct spelling and punctuation errors? And that's the whole point: "what work" - time that could be spent on substantive edits is being wasted on other efforts. Show some focus.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 15:50, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
Your Grammar and Spelling is as Bad as Ever
You have recently posted claims that your "spelling and grammar is better now". http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:The_Knight_of_the_Flowers?diff=65627&oldid=65576
Bluntly, no it isn't. Notice this edit summary made just yesterday, in which Gonzalo84 had to MASSIVELY rewrite your work, noting that it the "prose is filled with mistakes".
You haven't fixed anything.
To spell things out for you: the only reason you were able to mistakes as much as you have for as long as you have, is because I was busy writing my thesis in November/December (and busy cleaning up after Hurricane Sandy in late October/early November). You had a free ride since Halloween.
...until my Christmas break started and I got back to editing. I was at least able to keep a running list of articles you mangled with your edits; it also helps that every user has "contribution" tabs on here so I could check. Go through and check your contributions tab....are you back? Good. Notice that I have heavily rewritten and revised virtually every article you've stumbled through and muddied up since joining in October. It used up weeks of my time to clean up your mess - this is time you stole from the wiki and me personally; the fault is entirely your own. You have shown no consideration for other editors and ignored complaints we've made about your pervasive mistakes, instead just blundering on, taking away more time from the rest of us that we have to use to clean it up (I'm not the only one, thankfully).
Now, the "explanation" you made on The Knight of the Flowers Talk page is this:
- I'm making fewer edits, because I have not had the time lately. I'm not going to be able to spend much time here now either. I'm just scared of the "in the book" sections. When I first came here I spent most of my time there, but now everything I add that isn't just a physical description of the character is said to be a spoiler for the book, which I suppose is accurate if you think about it. Major plot point differences are not allowed, but minor ones would be unnecessary. As for unecessary details, I just can't seem to do anything right. In the Daenerys article it says that Ser Jorah swore fealty to Viserys. I put in where he later changes fealty to Daenerys. This was removed as being unnecessary. Or at the end of Bronn's article, it says that Bronn comes to the throne room to say farewell to Tyrion. I went back to watch the scene. They dicuss battle plans and Tyrion calls Bronn his friend, but when I put this in it was removed. I'm just going to read articles for awhile and study up. There must be a knack at being able to spot what is necessary from what isn't that I am missing. When my time is my own again, I am going to get back to the articles I've been working on. And starting a new relationship article. When I can get through a week without a problem, I'll try editing more. I understand how busy everyone will be, and I will try to stay out of the way, until I have a bit more confidence. Ch'vyalthan (talk) 05:30, January 10, 2013 (UTC)
You're making fewer edits because I started kneeling on your neck once Christmas break started, and I (and other editors) could start complaining about your crappy edits. You haven't "fixed" anything....you're "making fewer edits" because now you have to slow down to respond to the criticisms we've been making.
"Scared of the in the books sections"?
"There must be a knack at being able to spot what is necessary from what isn't that I am missing."
No, there is no "knack" to this, you're just shockingly bad at this. You can't shift the blame to the work and say it's not your fault because there's a knack to it. Look at "the Bastard of Bolton" -- he joined under a month ago and very quickly grasped these editing principles, yes, specifically for the "in the books" sections. Many other new users also grasped these principles.
You've said you don't know how to balance too much or too little material: major spoilers or information so trivial it isn't worth pointing out.
It's quite simple: YOU ARE NOT WRITING THOSE SECTIONS AS A BOOK FAN, but as you would explain it to a TV viewer that hasn't read the books and doesn't want to be spoiled. When you're editing "in the books" you're supposed to always keep in the back of your mind, "how would I explain this to a TV-first fan".
Moreover, you use "in the books" sections to describe entire plotlines not specifically about the character; i.e. information which should have gone in "in the books" for "Battle of the Blackwater" you LUMPED into Tyrion's article, to the point that it was as long as the body text of the article itself.
Keep in mind, of course, that thankfully those needlessly long entries you made to the "in the books" sections for Tyrion (and others) have been gutted: it's as if you never joined the wiki at all. All of it had to be cut out or rewritten.
You have contributed nothing of value, made more work for the rest of us, and I thank you for nothing.
Be that as it may, I'm genuinely shocked that you honestly seem to think the material is really hard, even as other editors are joining the site and finding the balance just fine.
And this...doesn't even BEGIN to extend to the bizarre grammar and spelling mistakes you persistently make.
Right now, I'm just talking about your odd choices for narrative description.
But to spell it out: "in the books" is supposed to be major background descriptions of the characters' life which were probably given in the books by the equivalent point - i.e. Book 2 A Clash of Kings for Season 2 - but don't really spoil anything for TV fans, mixed with some commentary on things changed between books at screen. I.e. "Jamie Lannister hasn't been described as having dsylexia in the books"
Don't run away from work. That was your actual response? To throw up your hands and say "there must be a knack to writing "in the books" sections? No, there is no "knack" -- indeed, we've REPEATEDLY tried to explain to you point by point what goes into an "in the books" section, you've just - yet again - been ignoring all criticism.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 20:07, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
Complete Guide to Westeros
The Sack of King's Landing House Lanister was done in December. Right now I'm working on a relationship article "Eddard and Catelyn Stark". Then I'll do Robert and Cersei Baratheon. Later, I might do one on Petyr Baelish Season 1. I've been primarily reading other articles. When I see a mistake that needs corrected, like an apostrophe, comma, or capital I put it in , but mostly I've just been reading. I'm also going to go slower, taking more time to compose. I think rushing has always been half of my problem.
I haven't been adding information to the "in the book" section, though I think I corrected a misspelling there a few days ago. I don't intend to edit that section again, other than perhaps rewriting a badly written line once in awhile. So you don't need to worry about it. I also haven't been adding lines to character articles, until I get a better handle on the "unnecessary information" issue. I do not ignore critism, but you are right that it took me a long time to realize how much care I should take in rereading. I sincerely hope that my work from now on will be acceptable. Ch'vyalthan (talk) 02:52, January 16, 2013 (UTC)
Congratulations. Seriously.
Whenever I check the Recent Activity page, I usually see edits you make, and usually another by TheDragonDemands undoing it, then usually some snide and/or rude mockery he posts on your Talk Page. Now, I may simply be blind, but I have yet to see a response to his comments where you insult him or argue pointlessly with him. You "keep your cool", when it would be so easy to fly off the handle and plunge into an argument with him. While you do make many mistakes when editing and should work on that, I wish to congratulate you for not being hostile and rude. Draevan13 (talk) 05:25, January 16, 2013 (UTC)
Movie titles
Movie titles are not written between quotes they should be written in italics. Pay attention.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 01:32, January 19, 2013 (UTC)
Relationship articles
Relationship articles should be about the couple only. In fact, with Drogo and Dany, I just copy and pasted the portions of the episode summary's that pertained to just them... it saved me a lot of time. Also, I was able to title each section with the episode name in case a reader was curious. QueenBuffy 02:08, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
- Taken out. Things left in should just be their time together, etc. There shouldn't be a large page on them, as they were separate much of Season 1. --QueenBuffy 02:19, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
"Image Needed" category
Trying to rack up experience points by slapping categories onto articles that physically cannot possess them? This is a new low, even for you.
An hour ago you went on a binge slapping the "Image Needed" category onto articles that cannot possibly have an image at this point in time.
To list a few of these edits you made:
Maekar Targaryen [2] Alannys Greyjoy [3] Luthor Tyrell [4] Willem (the guy who Yoren mentions he killed, who isn't in the books, and with Yoren's death, will never conceivably appear in a flashback) [5] Tysha [6]
...these are only a few. These are only "aspirational" at best. The whole point of "image needed" is "images conceivably exist of this and we need a screencap of an episode they appeared in, NOT "hey wow, Tysha hasn't even been cast yet, but won't it be great to have an image of her in Season 7 from a flashback?" -- It is tacitly implied that every article wants to have an image of its subject, but if that character hasn't even appeared yet in the TV series, no the image is not "needed".
Do you...conceptually understand, that we have History logs of what gets edited on this wiki? I just need to go to your contributions page: gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ch'vyalthan
And then scroll down to the night of January 20, 2013, to see that you cynically added no less than A HUNDRED AND TWELVE (112) articles to the "Image Needed" category in this fashion...and from the time stamps, this was done in a scant two hours! Simply looking at the Contributions tabs, you were slapping the "Image Needed" category onto a new page every minute for two hours. Give that 60 second time window, I don't think there was much time for....conscious deliberation or thought. You didn't sit down and think "hmmm, we need a Tysha image"....you were just trying to score experience points by adding categories WHERE NONE WERE NEEDED.
And surprise, surprise, we need only go over to the leadership board page:
To see that you just scored the "I added 250 articles to categories" badge for 100 rank points.
You....you...you counted how many more pages you needed to add to categories in order to get the badge, then started adding the category to RANDOM PAGES for a solid two hours, one page a minute, just to look like you're "working"?
You've been doing this and nothing else for a solid two hours, even now as I type. YOU JUST TOLD QUEENBUFFY THAT YOU HAD "A LOT OF RELATIONSHIP ARTICLES PLANNED" but instead you sank two hours into screwing up page categories so you could get shiny rank points?
You didn't really "earn" those. What do you think? That the other regulars in the top ten, frequent users such as myself, Gonzalo84, QueenBuffy, TheKnightOftheFlowers...were going to be DUPED based on your rank listing that you're an "hardworking vital contributor?"
And some of these characters aren't just "aspirational" but "IMPLAUSIBLE". We MIGHT...emphasis on "might"...have an image of Tysha by Season 7. but King Maekar I?! He died a hundred years ago. There's an outside chance they might show him in more flashbacks in the "Complete Guide to Westeros" but even that is pushing the wild extremes.
Moreover, when you ran out of those, you switched to "Quote Needed" - Case in point, "Dothraki Crone" - http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Dothraki_crone?diff=66838&oldid=55709 -- who does nothing but chant in Dothraki!
Yes, we need a quote on Black Walder Frey...WHEN SEASON 3 PREMIERES! The character hasn't appeared on-screen yet! How can we have a Quote already! Of COURSE all characters or pages hope to have a relevant quote eventually....but for characters from an UPCOMING SEASON who haven't been mentioned before?
I'm not angry that you did this, surprisingly.
What really baffles me is....seriously...did you honesty think we like....wouldn't notice that you made 200 edits within 3 hours, haphazardly adding irrelevant categories to pages?
I mean the sheer audacity of it. What do you think was going to be gained from doing this? Honest question. Do you actually, I mean seriously...stand by these categorizations? It isn't even the choices - which it is, actually - so much as ....you bufoon, we can read the time stamps on your contributions page, and tell you've just been sitting down for 2 hours straight adding a category to a page each minute, about as long as it takes to make the edit and refresh your browser.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 06:47, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
Images and Quotes
Sorry for not getting back to you sooner, I just got your message. Half of the new cast were already put into the "Image Needed" and "Quote Needed" categories. As for people that don't say a great deal, some of them still have quotes. And Quotes can be about the person, or things other people say about them. Ser Jorah translates what the Dothraki crone was saying. That can be used. Balon Greyjoy several times mentions, to Theon, his two eldest who died. I'm going to send this now and then write more after I read the rest of your message.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 22:38, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
Yesterday, I was doing Rea Separovic the actress, and she didn't have a picture. I know it started with her, because I do know about contributions. I talked about them with GrouchMan, I think, quite awhile ago. That got me going back to find other actors that were in the show who didn't have pictures. Which led me to thinking about characters. I was just finishing up with that when I ran into a character who wasn't in the "Image Needed" category, but who was already in the "Quote Needed" category. I can't do anything about pictures, but I can make a point about getting quotes for these people.
I can start finding quotes for minor character and put in quotes where someone is talked about. I would be happy to do that and then take them out of this category. There are people who are long dead who just have a picture of the lineage book. Can't that be put in to cover the people who show up in the HBO guide, I mean they are in there somewhere, since the show created both sources. It could be a picture of the closed book, and the author and title of the book can take the place of the quote. Or a picture of the map identifying the location of the House they belonged to. Or their house sigil. Or the castle if it has been shown.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 23:03, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
Yes, it took me hours, and I ended up with a terrible headache. I had to go through everybody twice. I, by no means, added everyone to these categories. I didn't add people long dead to the "Quote Needed" category. I also didn't put minor characters in if I could not remember them saying something or being talked about. And I repeat that many of the the characters were already put in these categories by others, including most of the Season 3 cast. Most of them were entered into the system as "Quote and Image Needed".Ch'vyalthan (talk) 23:17, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
Now, if this is wrong, I will be very willing to go back and take them out of the categories. I'll do the ones I did and the ones other people did. Just tell me who should be in the categories and I'll fix it. If cast members cannot be put in until their season starts for example.
I just had a thought about Willem the man Yoren killed. A picture of Arya and Yoren talking can be used. Or as he was hit in the head with an axe, a picture of an axe. Maybe there could just be a generic picture of the Game of Thrones Titles that can be used for characters that don't have a picture or are awaiting one. But for nobles, I think that their house sigil or the lineage book would be a better choice. Ch'vyalthan
If this was tacitly understood, then it was too tacit, because I found no rhyme or reason to which characters were in these categories. It really was the case of two in and the next one not. At least now there is more consistency. I have been inspired to try to get quotes for these minor characters. I'm sure I can find things said by them or about them if I look. And pictures can be found even if it is just a generic title page.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 00:27, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
- Undo every single edit you've made in the past day, including the 200 or so categories you needlessly added to pages. This will use up an entire day you could have spent messing up other pages - this is openly my intention. One day you use up undoing the ridiculous edits you did yesterday is one more day that the rest of us can make constructive edits without your interference.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:44, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
You have already been warned, stop responding to questions posted on your talk page by personally responding on my own
You have already been warned, stop responding to questions posted on your talk page by personally responding on my own. Questions and criticisms are posted on here so that other members my respond to them as well, i.e. Admin Gonzalo84. Replying on my talk page is tacitly trying to deflect the criticism. This is far from the first time I have warned you about it; and you've seen just how easy it is to undo the edits to my Talk page and repost them here. Realistically you can easily just ignore these warnings...but that makes you look uncooperative. Stop it.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:42, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
I have not been told to respond on my own page. Maybe I missed a message, I will do so from now on. I just left a message on your page let me go to see if it transferred.Ch'vyalthan (talk)
Why in hell do articles like Mace Tyrell are categorized as "Quote needed" when there's a quote on the top of the article? Remove the "Quote needed" category from every article with a quote at the top AS SOON AS YOU READ THIS MESSAGE and until you've corrected this mistake on every article DO NOT MAKE ANY OTHER EDIT on the wikia. Got it?--Gonzalo84 (talk) 00:02, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
- And the same goes for Category:Image needed for MENTIONED CHARACTERS. I mean... STAFFORD LANNISTER?--Gonzalo84 (talk) 00:09, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
Can't Stafford Lannister have a sigil as his picture?Ch'vyalthan (talk) 00:14, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
Gonzalo, I just want to be certain. You want me to go through the category of mentioned characters and remove them all from the "Image" category or from both the "Image" and "Quote Needed" categories. I will do this for the ones I added and that others have added. Please tell me which.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 00:22, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
I am going to go through the whole Character category and check for quotes and then go through the Mentioned Character category and take them out of "Image Needed". If this is wrong or if there are further things you want me to do, please get back to me. You probably won't see a lot of edits at first as I don't think there are many cases of people with quotes being in the "Quote Needed" category, but I may be wrong. Anyway, I will be working at it.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 00:53, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
I won't tell you which ones, check out your own contributions. Remove "quote needed" from articles with quotes and "image needed" from characters only mentioned in dialogue, like Balon Swann, your namesake, Stafford, etc. get to work--Gonzalo84 (talk) 00:57, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
I did find one right off the bat. Amory Lorch was still in the "quote needed" category though he had been given a quote. I've done the first three pages. Unless told differently, I will leave the season 3 characters in both categories as most of them were already in these categories before my edits. If this is wrong I can change them all from the season 3 category page. It's better going from the character page rather than my contribution page, as I can get all the ones that other people put in incorrectly. And catch mistakes like Amory Lorch. I'm also checking to see if mentioned characters are in put correctly in that category. Ch'vyalthan (talk) 01:30, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
What I want is for you to clean that confusing mess you made with the categories. I'll mention it again... if there'a quote you remove the "quote needed" category. Stop asking and work. --Gonzalo84 (talk) 02:45, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
Progress reports
I don't need any progress reports or explanations... I can see for myself. Carry on.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 02:52, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
You're not done
I specifically told you to cleanup the "Quote needed" category before doing other edits. Yet I've seen your work is not done but you are already editing recaps.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 21:00, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I thought I had finished. I went though every character. The people still in "Quote Needed" need quotes, and they either spoke during the show or were spoken about. I read the articles to make sure. I'll go through it again right now as you say I missed something.Ch'vyalthan (talk)
Found one, Grey Wind. I never checked him as he isn't even in the character category. Do you mean the season 3 people? I asked this several times before and never got an answer.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 21:28, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
P.s. Is Grey Wind the other wolves characters?
- What does "is Grey Wind the other wolves characters?" mean?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 21:41, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
Sorry. "Are Grey Wind, and the other wolves, characters?" I wrote that on the fly.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 21:50, January 21, 2013 (UTC) Found two wolves, the Red Keep, and House Reed in the "Quote Needed" category. I never put any of them into this category, but I have now removed them. They weren't characters that's why I didn't find them before. However now that I think about it, quotations on castle and event articles is a good idea. If they can be found. So maybe they should be in? There needs to be a discussion about this. Ch'vyalthan (talk)
Complete Guide to Westeros
I've been systematically blanking the sections you attempted to type up; I realized they were so riddled with errors that it was actually easier to start over again from scratch. http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Complete_Guide_to_Westeros?diff=66744&oldid=66239
What the heck was "the plan" anyway? To "impress" the rest of us with your diligent work? Your edits to Complete Guide to Westeros were a travesty.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:42, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
The name "Ch'vyalthan"
You have contributed nothing of value to this wiki. All you've done is make more work for the rest of us.
You only managed to do as much as you did for as long as you did because you were adding things into the wiki when the rest of us were busy, i.e. burning through over a thousand edits while I was bogged down with end of semester work.
Let's go down a list:
- You adamantly insist on contributing with an iPad even though it makes spelling errors and means you can't upload image files. (Why the heck haven't you tried to use a public library's computer to load images or something?). You can't add image files so you can't contribute that way...yet you insist on just shoving in images that happen to have the character out of focus in the background?
- You're so ridiculously bad at editing "in the books" that you've officially abandoned attempting to write them. As opposed to trying to get better at it, you simply stopped trying to, and insisted that there must be a skill to it...no, no, even new editors quickly grasp that the "in the books" section isn't just a COMPLETE re-iteration of a character's profile from A Wiki Of Ice and Fire.
- You started randomly adding categories to pages, in what I'm CERTAIN was an asinine attempt to increase your wiki points ranking. Either that or you honestly don't understand that we DON'T HAVE AN IMAGE for "Tysha" or "Luthor Tyrell". So you can't even add categories.
- Your writing in the Complete Guide to Westeros was so awful that I had to blank it. You contributed nothing to it.
- You still pervasively make bizarre spelling and grammar mistakes...even though you insist you don't; only because you're editing less than before because when christmas break came the rest of us had time to criticize you. And you insist AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY that you're getting better even though you're not.
- Amidst all of these complaints, you have a tendency to just "wander off" and start working on an episode recap....even when you were given direct admin orders to clean up a mess you made editing categories.
- Your bizarre attempts to write up a "relationships" article about Eddard/Catelyn met with general bafflement by all of the rest of us. You're bad at that too.
Worst of all is that even your username is an inaccurate understanding of Game of Thrones. Ch'Vyalthan the maester is said to have a very boring and monotonous writing style, droning on and on. You would only have a similar writing style if you wrote very long pages going on long tangents about a certain topic. That isn't your writing style. What you did most from October to December was BURN THROUGH a thousand articles a week, adding a sentence here or a sentence there, usually grammatically incorrect, or painfully oblivious.
I seriously think you have some sort of low-spectrum autistic learning disability. If anyone here has seen Big Bang Theory, trying to explain BASIC WIKI CONCEPTS and BASIC Game of Thrones concepts to you has been like trying to explain basic social concepts to Sheldon from Big Bang Theory...and you are much less endearing. Do you honestly think the token apologies were enough to just make us go away?
In summary:
- You can't add images.
- You can't add categories.
- You can't write "in the books" sections.
- You screwed up "the Complete Guide to Westeros"
- You can't write a relationship article.
- You've been ignoring ANY attempts at criticism - hoping that token and glib apologies will make the criticism go away instead of...a little thing called "actual work", or not making the same mistake literally a hundred times.
Checking off the list here...what the heck are you good for?
Seriously, what are you?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:42, January 21, 2013 (UTC)
I have told you several times that I am always finding things that I have done on this wiki. I have contributed a great deal. I put in that quote for Dothraki crone yesterday. I was going to go back in today to put in that Ser Jorah was translating, but I saw that you had already done it. Of course, yesterday you told me that I was an idiot for even putting Dothraki crone into the "Quote Needed" category, because it was obvious that no quote existed for her. As for the categories I added, they were accurate. Those characters, did not have images and did not have quotes. As there was only a tacit understanding that ones only mentioned in book sources would not be put in the "Image Needed" category, well how could I know that if it was tacit. Anyway I corrected that. I put all those actors without pictures into the "Image Needed" category, and there was nothing said about that being wrong. There is absolutely no way I can start spending lots of time in a library. Just getting to a library for an afternoon would be a chore. Eventually, I will be able to add photos, but I'm going to stop worrying about it for now. I take criticism very, very seriously. As for adding Tysha to the "Image Needed" category, she fit, she didn't have an image. I thought the picture could just be Tyrion telling the story about her or a Lannister sigil. The picture for "Brandon Stark" is a picture of a nightmare that Eddard Stark had imaging himself as Brandon. And that is not something that I posted. My grammar and punctuation is dramatically better. If nothing else, an example of this is the fact that, whenever you come to me now to talk about my poor grammar, you use as an example something I wrote months ago. The grammar in the relationship article I wrote is fine. I just need to rewrite it to take out scenes I had included and change long descriptions into brief ones. I need to save parts of it, because I want to do Petyr Baelish season 1. Right now I want to find some quotations for these mentioned characters. I have this whole list, but I can't shake this headache. I don't think it's the flu. At least I hope not.
I was thinking however of all of those mentioned only in the Lineage Book and HBO guide characters. The Complete Guide of Westeros is canon. We use it's information in articles and it's included in the Episode category. If it is useable for article information, can't it be used to get quotations for a lot of these not mentioned in the show characters, such as Lann the Clever, Orys Baratheon, Bran the Builder, and Mern Gardener. Just an idea.
Oh, and yes I do understand my username I wrote as much on my profile page.
Ch'vyalthan (talk) 04:32, January 22, 2013 (UTC)
- Well, what we've got here, is failure to communicate.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 04:45, January 22, 2013 (UTC)
What category are you talking about?--Gonzalo84 (talk) 23:45, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
Unnamed Characters.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 23:49, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
- Actually several characters should go there: Every nameless "Stark guard", "Lannister soldier", "king's landing whore", "Qartheen woman"... do you understand so I don't have to list every single one? .... But DON'T add the High Septon because him having no name is actually part of the plot.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 00:19, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
Will do.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 00:22, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
The Three-Eyed Crow
Just read all the books and you'll see why it is listed as a character.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 01:40, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
Point taken. Just wasn't looking at it like that. Need a break.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 01:42, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
Reocurring background
Both. And you don't have to explain yourself to me if you are tired or anything. We all have lives outside this site.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 08:02, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
Pages of notes
This was your grand contribution, which you had "pages of looseleaf notes" on? A handful of minor details on other series which actors appeared in...information any of us could have easily accessed from IMDB?
"Actor information" is stuff from interviews, where actors discuss information about the series. Consider this addition I made to "Julian Glover", summarizing information from a recent video interview he did, specifically about behind-the-scenes information on his portrayal in Game of Thrones. http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Julian_Glover?diff=66546&oldid=66089
All you did was copy information from wikipedia and IMDB. Not that this information is wrong or not helpful in bits and pieces...but it's FAR from a major or vital contribution. Any of us could have done this.
Yet on the page proposing that you be banned, you pleaded that you felt compelled to add vital cast information you kept on looseleaf notes.
Serious question: what do you think is going to happen? We're going to see how diligently you're adding IMDB info on actors, see how diligently you're adding articles to categories like "background characters", then turn around and say, "wow, we were wrong, Ch'vyalthan really wasn't a drain on the time of all editors on this wiki, who essentially shut it down since October by spam-posting hundreds of useless edits which had to be reverted?." Answer this question. TO WHAT PURPOSE is all of this? You're not "impressing" me by any of this; it isn't particularly vital or essential, you're not "contributing" things of particular "value".
Get out.----The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:01, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
I'll repeat it
Please! I don't want progress reports. You don't have to explain to me if your iPad is recharging or if you are taking your dog for a walk or taking a shower. As for quotes Guides quotes... I think I used them a pair of times so they can be used.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 23:11, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
Cut it out with these new categories
Talisa and Ygritte MINOR? characters? MINOR? Just because their actors are not mentioned in the opening credits they are not "MINOR" --Gonzalo84 (talk) 05:40, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
- You are placing characters that have major impact in the storyline in the same level as the likes of Ser Vardis Egen or the Tickler? This is not helping your case man.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 05:42, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
--Gonzalo84 (talk) 05:48, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
Temporarily Blocked
You have been temporarily blocked because you're not even READING the messages. I was talking about CHARACTERS not actors. [10] [11] [12]
Don't deny it because ITS on the BLOODY ARTICLES HISTORY.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 05:54, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
I am reading messages, it takes me longer to typeCh'vyalthan (talk) 05:57, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
I put all the "major characters" into the actor "starring cast" category, and all the "minor characters" into the actor "supporting role" category. I am changing it. Ros like Talisa was not listed as a major character or as a starring actor. If she is a major character, then I will change her too.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 06:00, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
Character levels
1. MAJOR Characters / Starring Cast/Leading Role 2. RECURRING Characters / Supporting Cast / Guest Stars 3. MINOR Characters 4. BACKGROUND Characters 5. EXTRAS
So, just because Talisa/Ygritte/Ros are mentioned as "recurring characters" you went ahead and categorized them as minor characters without even checking what the category is all about? I'm sorry but this has to go on the forum--Gonzalo84 (talk) 06:02, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
Recurring characters are guest stars. Good, now I know this. I will change them. However, I have done a lot of work on these recently, and I can tell you that a lot of recurring characters are listed as minor ones. They are in both categories. Just like yesterday when you told me tha someone could be recurring and background.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 06:11, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
Dude... you placed Wilko Johnson, who has appeared in TWO SEASONS and has a named character with the actress that plays a nameless wight. You know what? Undo all of it when the block expires and cut it out with the bloody new categories.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 06:15, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
The Actors should be in the categories you suggested Starring Cast, Supporting Cast, Minor roles, and Background Roles. There should be four corresponding categories for Characters. I don't know how long this thing lasts, but I can only stick around for another half an hour. Ch'vyalthan (talk) 06:37, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
Cut it out with the categories ok?--Gonzalo84 (talk) 07:05, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
"Editing tired" from Midnight to Dawn
Once again, I must explain this concept to you: edits have time-stamps which we can all read in their history page, or your contributions page, to see when they were made. http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ch%27vyalthan?limit=250&target=Ch%27vyalthan
You've frequently used the excuse that you make mistakes because you're just "editing tired".
Now, many of us may stay up late from Midnight to 2 am or so when we're in the middle of editing.
HOWEVER, I've noticed that in the past week, you've been editing from midnight to 6 AM! Sometimes even 7AM. By which I mean, there's a record of continuous editing from midnight to 6 AM, so there's no possible way you were asleep (as opposed to just waking up early after a six hour gap). We live in the same time zone, you're in Florida, so I KNOW that you're working from midnight to dawn (as opposed to being in the UK or Australia or something).
JUST TODAY, January 25th 2013, I can see that you started editing at 10 PM LAST NIGHT, and didn't stop until 8 AM! You were heavily editing between 6 AM and 7 AM.
There was a 2 hour pause between 2 AM and 4 AM, but then you went on again until 8 AM! I doubt you actually slept in that 2 hour gap (one full sleep cycle of REM sleep takes about 2 hours (though you need multiple cycles a night), and anything less than 2 hours doesn't yield genuinely restorative sleep). Or are you taking a god-damned nap or something?
Indeed, looking back through your logs...you started editing continuously at 10 AM on THURSDAY, and only stopped today, FRIDAY, at 8 AM!
You've been awake editing for 22 hours! And it's NOT the weekend!
Looking through your contributions page, you *regularly* make edits between Midnight and Dawn! Many days, at least, it appears that you sleep till noon to make up for that, but yesterday you were awake and editing for 22 hours!
Yet you have the audacity to use "I was editing tired" as an excuse?!--The Dragon Demands (talk) 15:25, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
Dragon the personal details of my life are something I don't want to go through in this wiki. If I did start giving you a bunch of reasons why I have to go through my life existing on just naps you would probably say that I was just trying to use it as a way to get people's pity, so that they would let me stay. Yes I am tired a great deal. And I was exhausted, but forced my self to work through those edits on actor categories, because I couldn't sleep knowing that they needed correcting. They are correct now. Ch'vyalthan (talk) 19:47, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
- You are a ridiculous freak, nothing more. And all of those nights working from midnight to dawn because you were compelled to add things to the wiki (due to wiki-addiction)? Remember that they were officially wasted: I have gutted articles you wrote, blanked crappy contributions you made; Gonzalo84 removed bad images you added (from other pages), and rewrote bad categories you tried to set up. All of this time was *wasted* you fool, and I seriously hope you took time away from work or school, irresponsibly staying up until DAWN to make these ephemeral contributions which have now been removed -- there's a reason we condemn that kind of behavior as irresponsible. You're no better than someone who stayed up until dawn every night playing video games: it had no long term benefit, and only took time away from work or school; I hope you reap as you sow, and that you seriously hurt yourself in the real world due to this self-perceived "sacrifice" on your part. Get out.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:18, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
Posting my article on Eddard and Catelyn Stark
I'm sure that I put in too much detail, but I just can't raise the enthusiasm or concentration right now to properly prune it. I ask for someone else to do this. Since I fear that I'm about to lose the ability to edit at any moment, I'm posting it. I'll work on it myself later as well. But please don't just delete it without thought. I'm going to try to finish up lose ends. I wanted to write several more articles. I hate leaving things half finish. I have a few more quotations to add. I want to read through all the episodes and put in commas for all the sentences that have two complete sentences joined by an "and", that is something often neglected.
I do want everyone to know that I have learned a lot here and my language skills have improved. I write so much better now than I did when I registered. I sorry that I'm not better skilled. I just want to say goodbye.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 22:44, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
- Your writing is terrible and has not improved; multiple contributors who voted to ban you noted that their attempts to instruct you have failed. No, we will revise - and if need be, blank and restart from scratch - an Eddard and Catelyn relationship page if we see fit. The only reason we haven't been touching your work on that up until now is because it was on a sandbox page and thus beyond our purview: now that you've publicly posted it, the knives are coming out. We reject it, tear it up, and rub your face in it.
- Who are you saying goodbye to?! The vote to ban you was unanimous! By a simple process of elimination, who the heck do you think remembers you fondly here? Me? Gonzalo84? TheKnightOfTheFlowers? QueenBuffy? All have rejected and renounced you. Again, you can just use the mental concept of "all the editors" who will "miss you"...but WHO? Each of us in turn has SPECIFICALLY rejected you. Can you name ONE person who would care if you "say goodbye"?
- I must again stress that I spent Christmas Break systematically gutting all of your half-assed contributions to this wiki. Yes, you say "I see my edits all over the place" -- here and there you might be a correction of "you're" to "your" which will stand up, but SIGNIFICANT contributions? Anything in "In the books"? No, we had to cut out all of the crap you added. Out of context images you added to inappropriate pages because you can't load images? They have been removed.
- Dear lord...do you understand that you are an UNperson? That you have had no impact on this wiki other than to slow it down while we REMOVED your additions?
- I thank you for nothing. I curse you, and I attaint you. I step on you and look down my nose at you. You are a living parody representing everything a wiki-editor should not be. And I swear to you, that I will (metaphorically) keep your head symbolically mounted on a spike on my userpage for the next projected five seasons of this TV series and beyond, as a warning to all new contributors that you represent everything they shouldn't be. Get out. Remember that a month from now you will be nothing but a memory, a bad memory that we hope will fade until it does (save for when I grin at your head on a spike on my userpage). Know that any contributions to this wiki you think you made have been blanked and rewritten from scratch. It is as if you never existed at all. Get out. --The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:10, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
- Dragon please show a little kindness and just say goodbye.Ch'vyalthan (talk) 23:16, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
- You are a Psychopath, without the basic level of Insight to comprehend what a horrible editor you've been. We all rejoice in your banning. Get out.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:22, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
Vote result
The decision has been unanymous. For all the reasons exposed here, which can be summarized in constant inability to properly contribute to the wiki and constant disregard to edit standards and admins' requests which resulted in near shut down of the wiki and turned contributors into cleanup crew. For this you are hereby blocked from Game of Thrones Wiki. Take this long time to actually READ so you learn you write properly.
(This talk page will be kept, under permanent lockdown, as a reminder to future contributors and as a record of events.)--Gonzalo84 (talk) 07:26, February 5, 2013 (UTC)


text:
High dividend strategies seem to go in and out of favor. Recently high equity yield strategies have been introduced as a novel way to escape the current low yield environment. If the best I can do is less than 1% on a Treasury, why not invest in an equity income fund that pays 3% as well as an opportunity for capital appreciation?
High dividend-paying stocks are particularly tempting when yields are low and stock prices seem to be stuck in neutral. Some have suggested that high yield equity strategies make more sense for retirees since they provide a stable income from high quality companies that are unlikely to drop in value. Dividend paying stocks have rebounded smartly following the great recession. So why not succumb to the dividend temptation?
Financial economists argue that dividends are irrelevant. A firm's profits can either be paid back to shareholders through dividends or can be retained for reinvestment. A number of ex-dividend studies provide evidence that payment of dividends reduces firm value by roughly the amount of the dividend.
The main defenses of paying dividends are (a) that the dividend signals a firm's future financial strength; (b) that once initiated, managers will be punished for reducing them; and (c) that they reduce managerial temptation to waste resources when too much cash piles up within the firm. Dividends may also be associated with bad firm prospects if they are a signal that there aren't any productive investments available within the firm or that the board of directors doesn't trust the CEO with excess cash. In terms of share performance, there really isn't much evidence to suggest that dividends are good or bad.
The other reason that dividends are seen as irrelevant is that anyone can create income from equity investments by selling a few shares. Dividends may best be viewed as a forced regular sale of one's equity portfolio. If a firm decides instead to retain its earnings, then it is up to the investor to decide when to sell shares in order to provide income. Taking capital gains gives an investor far more tax flexibility and is more tax efficient if dividends held in a taxable account are reinvested since the investor gains compounding benefit from tax deferral. And this assumes that dividends and capital gains are taxed at the same rate, as they have been since the Jobs Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act (JGTRRA) was passed. The Act passed by one Senate vote in 2003 and will sunset at the end of 2012.
Dividend stocks do provide the psychological benefit of paying a regular income to retirees without forcing them to sell securities. There is evidence that retirees loathe chipping away at principal to fund current expenses, and high dividends can provide a regular stream of payments without incurring the loss of liquidity and legacy cost of an annuity. Since there is little to indicate that the tax rate on dividends will remain 15% in the face of increasing budget deficits and entitlement obligations, it is worth revisiting what happens to equity prices when tax rates change.
When taxes go down, prices go up. If investors in 2002 were willing to pay $100 for a share that provided a $2 dividend with a marginal tax rate of 38.6%, they'd be willing to pay more with a tax rate of 15%. The JGTRRA was originally written to expire in 2010, so any change in prices should have been tempered by the short-term net benefit to investors. Nonetheless, subsequent studies by Alan Auerbach of the University of California, Berkeley, and Kevin Hassett of the American Enterprise Institute (among others) found that prices of income stocks rose immediately after the passage of the Act.
If a temporary dividend tax reduction resulted in rising prices for high dividend yield securities, then the expiration of the JGTRRA and reversion to a higher (and presumably more permanent) dividend tax rate will result in an immediate decrease in the value of an income stock portfolio. This makes the dividend income strategy particularly worrisome for retirees. Not only is the use of income equity investments of dubious advantage relative to a low-yield portfolio, dividend stocks are most likely to suffer a significant loss in value if and when tax rates increase.
Advisors should overweight dividend securities if they believe that dividend stocks will provide risk-adjusted excess performance within a sheltered account. In a taxable account, they only make sense if the greater performance of high dividend investments outweighs the tax inefficiency of forced withdrawals. In order to explore the performance of diversified investments in high dividend securities, I asked David Blanchett, head of retirement research for Morningstar Investment Management and doctoral student in Personal Financial Planning at Texas Tech, to estimate the total return on the fund category traditionally associated with dividend payouts (large cap value) sorted by magnitude of dividend and excluding index funds.
Each year between 1995 and 2011, we re-sort all funds within this category into groups of five based on dividend yield and hold those funds through the year. If higher dividend funds outperform then we might feel more comfortable defending a high yield equity fund strategy.
They don't. The top dividend yield quintile underperformed the bottom quintile between 1995 and 2011 by 1.94% per year during this period. Most of the underperformance occurred during the growth stock boom of the late 1990s which tended to punish dividend payers, but there is no consistent performance advantage in the 2000s. This result mirrors a number of more thorough analyses in the finance literature that compare the performance of firms sorted by dividend.
New York University Professor Aswath Damodaran documents dividend stock myths in his 2004 book Investment Fables, in which he shows how the highest dividend stocks underperformed the lowest dividend stocks even during bear markets in the 20th century, and that a taxable equity investor who held stocks whose dividend yield was twice the market average would have ended up with about half the wealth of a taxable investor holding equities with half the average dividend yield.
So the unfortunate retiree who invested $100 in a fund with a $2 dividend will likely see his portfolio fall in value following a dividend tax rate increase. He will also see his net dividend income drop from $1.70 to something lower ($1.60?, $1.30?). The double injury of reduced shared prices and lower net returns following a tax increase is further compounded by the possibility that firms will cut dividends if tax rates go up.
Between the firms that started paying dividends following the JGTRRA and firms that increased their dividends, Berkeley professors Raj Chetty and Emmanuel Saez found that total dividends rose by about 20% after the Act. Presumably, taxable shareholders of firms with good corporate governance were able to convince companies to increase dividends during a window of lower tax rates. These same taxable investors would then be inclined to talk firms into reducing dividends once they become a less attractive form of net payout. University of Chicago professor Eugene Fama and Dartmouth professor Ken French found that the percentage of American firms paying dividends fell from 67% in 1978 to 21% in 1999 during a period where share repurchases held a strong comparative tax advantage to dividends.
I happen to have a soft spot for dividends. All well-run firms eventually should pay their profits back to investors (even companies that are acquired by other firms eventually will need to repay investors). A firm sensitive enough to its taxable investors that it is willing to raise its dividends in response to a drop in tax rates is certainly worth supporting. Suggesting that dividend stocks are a good alternative to a non-dividend paying equity portfolio, particularly for retirees, might be setting investors up with more portfolio and income risk than they bargained for.

subset: commoncrawl