User talk:Iansisle

SHADORAN - I was wondering if you where able to either delete this page or make sure that people dont get it confused and think it is the real Shadoran history because I have had a few people come up to me and ask if it was real or not. As the Shadoran Culture becomes more well known people will go in search of information on it and this can be very confusing for someone seeking info on the real culture. http://groups.msn.com/shadoran

Kind Regards r'cor ShadowSaj-------------------------------------------

Retrieved from "http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Talk:Shadoran"

Vandalism

Thanks, I've warned him. I'll block if he keeps it up. --Goobergunch|? 21:00, 27 Oct 2004 (GMT)

Re: (Message)

(Iansisle: I really like what you've done with your monarchs and am interested in doing something similar for Iansisle. I guess I am just writing to see if you'd mind me being a terrible copycat. If not, I'll think of another way to set it up.)

Sure, go ahead. Like you say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and its good kmowing that something I've done has attracted some positive attention. Feel free to use my style. I should confess I took most of it from the styles of actual articles on Wikipedia (the original one). If you have any trouble with it, drop me a message and I'll try my best to help out, but I don't suppose you will struggle at all. Good luck....

One last thing...mind if I ask how you came across my article? Just out of curiousity..... -- Falastur 21:46, 30 Oct 2004 (GMT)

• (Iansisle: "Thanks again, and best of luck with your own projects! I'll be keeping an eye on them.")

Thanks. I'll be keeping an eye on yours.... -- Falastur 21:46, 30 Oct 2004 (GMT)

Thanks for the vote

Just thought I should drop by and say thanks for your vote for my article to be a featured article. I hoped it would be good when I wrote it, but I wasn't really expecting such praise. Thanks :)

By the way, incase you hadn't checked recently, I've updated it a little, so it conforms more with Fris' ideas of a good article (more information, less boxes and less copy and paste, basically). Feel free to let me know what you think, supposing you have any comments. I may be writing the article myself, but I actively encourage advise from others as to how to improve it or what to add....

Your articles are also looking good, I should point out. Keep up the good work. I'm sure yours aren't far from being nominated for featured either....

Thanks again.... -- Falastur 20:39, 3 Nov 2004 (GMT)

re SeOCC vote and other things

Iansisle, just in case you didn't drop back by the Talk:SeOCC page, I wanted to reiterate my apology about comments. I went from a specific reply to a general rant without clear division, and it wasn't intended to refer to you. In fact, I found your responses to be among the clearer and better thought out. If we are looking for additional sysops for NSwiki, I think your name belongs in the hat. → Fris Θtalk 23:08, 12 Nov 2004 (GMT)

re: CACE edits

You know, it is not very polite to just remove someones additions when they are clearly meant to make things less NPOV. I understand that you want to defend your OOC friends but the Wiki *is* about giving an accurace POV rather then just boasting questionable things. And just saying that the CACE is open without mentioning the secret forums strikes me as rather akward. Why not propose an improvement instead? -- |Knoot|KNOOtalk 00:17, 15 Nov 2004 (GMT)

I do not doubt your motives, just saying that it is not a very polite thing to do. My issue here is that this removes any doubt about the very contestable claim of openness to a single byword (which will be not be given much note to by any casual reader). The point of the sentence was making the reader think that CACE is open (which, IMVHO it blatantly is not). When editing a statement like that, one usually provides an argument and this is what Rezo did.

Also, I am not offended at all. Just trying to point something out so that we can have a balanced Wiki without people madly editing each others stuff. Sometimes, dropping a note can do wonders. :) -- |Knoot|KNOOtalk 01:07, 15 Nov 2004 (GMT)

Other clarification: It also seems the person editing things back entirely to "The Coalition is a very open organization" (without the doubt you implied) was not you but Celdonia. :/ -- |Knoot|KNOOtalk 01:12, 15 Nov 2004 (GMT)

Tariff article

Why you have deleted the infobox on this article? The standardization of articles is an aim of the Wikipedia, also because it transforms the article in a more simple method to collect infos. Rufus T. Firefly 27 July 2005 15:57 (GMT)

Hey, I had only made a work that it is useful for the entire work. Also, clearly a stupid entry on the infobox is useless, but I dislike to read a long and boring article (and strange, this is a encyclopedia!) Rufus T. Firefly 29 July 2005 07:22 (GMT)

I mean only that if I want some fast infos about characters I read the infobox, then if I need more infos I read the entire article. This is why we have the boxes. Rufus T. Firefly 29 July 2005 09:18 (GMT)