Usuario discusión:Reinhartmax
Reinhartmax, we appreciate all of the great work you've been doing so much, but I wanted to ask if you could be a bit less aggressive with the mechanical changes--particularly involving infoboxes and categorization. We generally like to discuss these kinds of things before making lots of changes. Some of these edits that you've done have been great, but others we've disagreed with--and it's a drain on your time and ours when we have to go through dozens of articles undoing something. In some cases where we have been inconsistent there may have been a reason for it. And in others, it's possible that the example you're going off of is in error. So I just want to ask that if you think you see changes that need to be made to infoboxes/categories, we'd appreciate if you could run it by us in Discord first. Thanks! --Jofwu (talk) 19:39, 3 November 2018 (MST)
Reiterating Jofwu's point, we appreciate your work. The work on Arcanizing WoBs has been great. But you have recently been making several changes which have required reverting, mostly relating to Voidbinding. It's great that you want to help fill out missing information on the Coppermind! However, some of the information you've been adding has been speculation or factually inaccurate. In particular with Voidbinding, it is emphatically not clear that the Fused are actually utilizing it. These relationships are unclear and we're uncomfortable with these suppositions. In addition, we'd strongly prefer you not make additional categories without talking about it first. I think all these situations will totally be resolved if we talked more and we worked more synergistically. You also added some tags to Shards and I reverted them; I don't think the fact that Edgli having a letter in OB counts for "Featured In". This would be a wonderful thing if we could just discuss these changes rather than you unilaterally changing them.
To that end, we'd really appreciate to hear from you with a response to Jofwu and I's message so we can work together. We're concerned because our previous attempts at communication on these issues have not yielded any discussion or change in editing behavior. Come edit here, or come on Discord to talk further. If we don't hear from you we will temporarily disable edit rights. Thank you! I know Discord has made our Keeper team work 10,000x more efficiently and with more communication we can do great things. -- Chaos2651 (talk) 14:45, 16 January 2019 (MST)
Surge pages
Please discuss large structural changes to magic systems in Discord. The Surgebinding vs. Surge discussion has been one of much debate. However, I do not think separate Surge pages are correct in the current state. It is likely your edits will be reverted. Not that Surgebinding's page is great. Some stuff needs to be moved over to a Surge page, but individual Surge pages don't seem effective, at least in the current stage. -- Chaos2651 (talk) 20:02, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
- Just to follow up, thegatorgirl has placed a temporary editing lock on your account for one week to encourage you to go onto Discord and communicate/discuss changes with the community. Making large scale structural changes without discussion will lead to them being reverted, so do please join us. Or post thoughts on talk pages, or something. Then we can all come up with something that works and makes sense for everyone. We're all in it together. -- Chaos2651 (talk) 08:50, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Fortune / Spiritual Realm stuff
Hey Reinhartmax. I feel bad reverting the Fortune edits you made. Hopefully my comment made sense as to why I feel these should be separate. I do think there should be some sort of place where we can have stuff on accessing the Spiritual Realm. Maybe you could move that stuff over to a section on the Spiritual Realm page, called maybe Accessing the Spiritual Realm? All the stuff you listed is definitely accessing the Spiritual, we just don't have confirmation that all that stuff is definitely Fortune. We don't want to waste work, after all! :)
Later this week I will look in more detail and try to add relevant WoBs from what you wrote there. Cheers! -- Chaos2651 (talk) 20:15, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Rudeness towards other members
Hi Reinhartmax, it is an expectation of those who use this site to be courteous to other members and to treat them with respect. Passive aggressive comments in summary boxes are not in line with our Code of Conduct and are not acceptable. If you find yourself frustrated by other people's edits, take a step back and a breather - staff look through all edits and part of our job is to help out with fixing small stylistic changes. Regards, LadyLameness (talk) 22:27, 25 September 2020 (UTC)