I edited the grammar and organization of this page, as well as added an image; it is much neater now and I will continue to monitor it.
Moviebaby 20:14, January 13, 2012 (UTC)
- First of all, don't bother to say that you edited something, since anyone can see the Recent Changes log at any time and see exactly what is happening on the wiki. I can see that you edited it, what you edited, and how you edited just by looking at that page, so you don't need to add comments on the talk page when there is nothing to discuss. That's what the "Summary" field is for, while the talk page is ideally for discussions on the topic of the page.
- Now since there is nothing to discuss with your comment, I am making something to discuss here, though it is only tangentially related to Legretta. I know I said this before, but it seems to have flown past you or something. When you upload any image whatsoever, you must not only state the source (ESPECIALLY if the image is your own screenshot), you must also categorize the image and provide a brief but concise description of the image content. All of this belongs in the large "Summary" box on the upload form - it exists for a reason, yes? Use it. It makes my life easier when I am checking for copyright violations, since I don't know if you just lifted these images from someone's blog or what.
- When putting the image on any article, the image footnote must also be descriptive. Something like "Legretta in the anime" simply does not cut it. Describe what she is doing, where she is, and any other details that relate to that specific picture. If you don't do that, it doesn't add anything to the page other than being generic filler content, aka images which exist for the sake of having images on the page. This applies to every image you have uploaded, and as I said before, one day I WILL perform a sweep of all images and delete anything without citations and descriptions unless I am able to upload something of my own to replace the images in question, complete with the required info. Just because I am not keen on enforcing this, it does not mean you should neglect the rules which I have laid out on the MoS, especially since I know you read my reply in which I stated these very same rules on Zolo's talk page.
First of all, you're rude. I posted here in case someone were to look at this page later on and see that something had changed - they can see what I did and when I did it on the Talk page. I didn't know I wasn't supposed to do it so I won't anymore. Where do I state the source when I'm uploading an image? And I was not aware that the image footnote had to be so descriptive. Quite frankly, I'm fairly new and I was just going by what everything else on this wiki looks like. I rarely see an image with a descriptive footnote (nor do I ever see a source), but I will gladly start applying it. I've really tried to clean articles up on this Wiki, but I only receive negative feedback. It was you who stated you wished there were more people who would edit the things they see wrong, or fix things up.
Also, each time I make an edit, you check it and point out the flaws of the articles, as if I did them or something. News flash, there are a lot of things wrong with a lot of articles on this wiki, of which I'm sure you're aware. Interpersonal commentary? Really? Okay, but did you read what I edited? I fixed "grammar and organization" and added an image. Did you read anything about me adding information? That's because I didn't. But about the title "Fighting Style" that you fixed, capitalizing it - I was only trying to make it consistent with several other articles I've seen which do not capitalize the entire title.
Moviebaby 06:31, January 14, 2012 (UTC)
- That was a statement about the page as a whole. I know you weren't the one who did it, and I'm sure I know exactly which user it was who wrote in such a style. It's just that the page was never fixed since then, and now that I happened to glance over its content due to your fixes being all over the page, I see all of the glaring issues which needed to be fixed ages ago but were never touched - probably because I was too lazy to do so at the time, a recurring issue that tends to mean that nothing at all happens if I'm not the one who does it myself as soon as I notice it. Call it egocentricism or what have you, but it's the way things are around here to everyone's benefit but my own.
- Now if someone sees that the content of a page was changed and wants to know why, that's what the "History" tab at the top of each article is for. The edit differences and summaries provided are listed there, along with the same edit comparison feature that is present on the Recent Changes page. I'm just telling you that it's something unnecessary and pretty much redundant for you to do, though I can't stop you from doing it since these are discussion pages, after all. As long as common banter does not make its way onto the articles proper, it's fine, and that was the issue with the page prior to my last edit - too much common banter and subjective statements which do not belong on the article proper. Again, I know you weren't the one who added those things. You were just the one who allowed it to be brought to my attention due to your minor fixes on the entire page, which I would never have bothered to read otherwise. Maybe my edit summary wording was off, I dunno. Shrug.
- And you should just be aware that I am a negative person. I just happen to be in control of this wiki, though it ultimately means nothing since my extra flashy buttons are only to be used to handle spam and vandalism. Everything else that would have been nice to have as an admin, such as the removal of this useless default skin which Wikia defaults globally on all of their hosted wiki sites, was removed expressly for the sake of strengthening the Wikia name and promoting other social garbage. But my rants against Wikia are like throwing pebbles at a mountain in an attempt to get it to cave in to my admittedly insignificant demands. Blahblahblah, point is, there are a lot of things I will complain about, and you're free to do the same to me. I don't mind, since it puts things into a perspective other than my own. After all, I consider myself to be just another user, and I've acted like this for years before I got the admin title, which, again, was to deal with an outburst of vandalism at the time instead of relying on an inactive admin or the Wikia bureaucracy to act on my behalf. I actually prefer to have people argue back so that I know I'm not just pushing forth my own skewed ideas on certain concepts, as it lets the community have an active voice in decision-making around here... again something which I don't see often probably on account of my abrasive mannerisms.
- Back to the image sourcing and descriptions, I know most images here don't have anything of the sort. I keep trying to get new uploaders to at least follow through with my demands so that my work load when I do clean up the images is not that much greater than it is now. But who am I kidding, I probably won't ever do such a clean up since I simply have no time to spare these days! I'd rather spend my time complaining about silly things like arte name consistency or the Tales Cycle or the status of this wiki.
- As for the source info, description, and category, all of it belongs in the big "Summary" box when you upload an image. Alternatively, you can upload the image and then open the file page, click on "Edit", and add the info that way as if it were an article.
Thank you for elaborating. I will try my best to display more when I upload an image and find sources for the ones I have already uploaded. Another thing, if there's something you have in mind specifically that needs editing for grammar, please let me know. I want to be useful because I'm a big fan of the series and this wiki.
Moviebaby 20:24, January 14, 2012 (UTC)
Ahh, one of my first arguments with Mayu. Good times. Btw, I know this has nothing to do with the article. I was just glancing over the talk page and noticed this.
The time between becoming Van's aide and her death, Legretta wrote a letter explaining her actions. The letter was written as thus:
"Dear Mysterica, If you are reading this letter, then I am no longer alive. So it is time I confess something to you. Tear... I am a criminal who tried to kill your brother, Vandesdelca. Van killed my brother. Though even that was foretold by the Score...
Followed by a scene involving Van and Legretta.
... And so I became Van's Adjuntant. I became your instructor in order to use you to kill Van. But through that, I learned of Van's past, and it resonated with me. So when your training was complete, I resolved to part with my former self. I felt your trust as I tutored you, and I betrayed you nevertheless. I do not ask for your forgiveness. But I was concerned at your unquestioning view of me as an ideal. I am a mere human being. I wish not for you to follow me, but for you to follow your ideals. May you find happiness. Be well. --Giselle Oslo."
Pretty deep stuff.
Well, I was just going to add it to the Trivia section, but now that I think, it should probably go in her History section since it's an important part of her motives. I'll add it later.
Moviebaby 18:45, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
Aren't you gonna add this part in soon?
Not the entire letter, as that would be considered a quote, and we try to avoid that. The information is pretty much in there already, so I don't see a need to add anything else. If you're saying that the letter itself, as well as the gist of its contents, should be included, then I suppose I could fit that in somewhere.
Moviebaby 02:26, June 24, 2012 (UTC)
That's exactly what I'm saying. This wouldn't be for a quote. It is an important part of her life. You could say it like:
During the time she spent with Tear Grants she wrote a letter which was to be opened by Tear after she died. It explained a full confession as to how she came to be who she is in present day. She also wrote some insightful parting words saying that she does not have to be exactly like her, but for her to have her own goals in life and wished for her happiness.
Something like that.
It is really necessary to specify Legretta is dead? If that so, every antagonist page would need an edit --Juan Ma 06:18, June 10, 2012 (UTC)
Why not? She's dead. As far as I'm concerned, any character who is undoubtedly deceased should be listed as such. Which means yes, there are antagonist pages that should have this listed.
Moviebaby 06:27, June 10, 2012 (UTC)
- I say it should be removed because it's blatant spoiler info. Even if she is an antagonist who might be expected to die, not every char who dies is an antagonist, and sometimes it comes unexpected as a plot point, like the massacre of the old people in Sheridan, or the revelation that Balir has been dead for so many years by the time Shizel is first introduced in Eternia. For every character who is undoubtedly deceased, that short of thing really should be added contextually into the char's history. Some chars don't even "die" so much as they are written out of history, like Elraine and Barbatos, while chars like Stahn and Winona actually do "die" but were never dead in different timelines. Then there are all of those supposed death/rebirth situations like with Luke, Leon, Dios/Dio and Meltia/Mell, etcetc.
-sigh- Point taken. It seems I am outnumbered. There are only a few pages that have the character listed as "deceased", anyway. I'll go change that now. I feel like the spoiler message on the main page is enough for a warning, but oh well.
Moviebaby 15:06, June 11, 2012 (UTC)