User talk:Life

ALWAYS SIGN YOUR COMMENTS BY USING 4 TILDES ~~~~

Page

This is a wiki. You don't seem to understand what that means, though. This isn't GameFAQs, this isn't Sleepywood, this isn't Hidden Street, this is a wiki. That means that the information should be like reading a manual, impartial, instructive, and most importantly, accurate. I'm going to fix the Page site again, not quite the same as before, but when I'm done, the information will finally be correct and helpful to anyone who reads it. As of now, it isn't. Please, don't vandalize it again.

-

Whoa. Good job with the new Warrior template. Personally it seems easier to navigate, especially for newbs that are looking for information. But does the old wordy version still exist for us to add info to (ie: warrior_edit)? --Bewnt 23:07, 4 September 2006 (CDT)

And I'm coming back once again to ask you: Can you put the info in Warrior Edit into Warrior/Long? Or to merge these two together, because warrior_edit contains some very useful information. --Bewnt 11:37, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm here again!! This time it's regarding your userboxes in your user page. Can you change the links? They are supposed to link to stuff outside the Maplewiki, not inside, since they appear frequently in the Wanted Pages.

....

Sorry to have edited your page! R.V.S.P please. May I make a guide to thiefs using part of your type of article? Exept about thieves?--Jokerta 18:26, 9 September 2006 (UTC) Thank you so much!I will!

SORRY SO MUCH

I kind of copied a lot of your guide! So sorry! Whaever you want it'll do! Is it ok?--Jokerta 21:30, 12 September 2006 (CDT)

reply to "signing your tagging"

SORRY!!!!! I keep forgetting. Sigh. But I know I should do it next time. Sorry!!!!! --Bewnt 11:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC) (remembers)

Unknown people editing Wiki

I know it is in good intention to allow those who do not have accounts to edit the Wiki. However after that move, a lot of vandalism has occured. I can see you frantically trying to revert that, but I think the root of the problem should be solved. Can you please only allow those with an account to edit the Wiki? --Bewnt 01:40, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

The reason I propose this is firstly, it's not just a few people doing it. In fact, you caught two of them vandalising again. Unless you are really comfortable with reverting their edits. Avid editors (like you :) would sign up for an account. Okay, I know vandalizers can also sign up for accounts and make their mark on the wiki, but last time, this occured with a far lesser rate. Anyway, my stand of this is that if you detest reverting the vandalism, then only allow people with account to edit Wiki. --Bewnt 06:35, 7 October 2006 (CDT)

And now, look. Vandalism is on the rise. If you can, I beg you to allow those who have an account to be able to edit the Wiki. I think out of 10 anonymous editors, only around one does constructive things. And the rest are let off unscathed, without even being banned. Please, stop this mayhem! --Bewnt 03:10, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Well... okay. I just hope that any vandal will get a straight ban (instead of a warning). And I also hope that you (and Champion911) are comfortable with all the reverts and bannings that you have to do. Yeah. --Bewnt 10:31, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll admit, it's pretty aggravating. It's becoming a pattern coming on every afternoon and reverting five or ten vandalising edits. --Champion911 17:04, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

OKAY. I had enough of this vandalism. Three questions:

1) Am I allowed to add those vandal templates to user talk pages? Or is it only for admins like you to do? I did that on one of the vandals, I shall apologize if I wasn't supposed to.
2) How do you revert vandalism the easy way? It is really, really difficult to revert a big page just relying on page history.
3) I know you are only allowed to revert thrice a day. May I revert more than thrice? Please? I want to see this wiki grow, but it gets really annoying when half the edits here are the cause of vandals.
And note that user IPs can change, banning them/warning them on talk pages is useless. That's why I always suggest: stop anonymous people from editing. Please. Don't make it get any worse. --Bewnt 12:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Monster Description

I am really, really sorry to bother you again. Don't worry, not complaning about vandals. I am just asking this: in every monster page, by default it should be divided into sections, and one of these is the "description", which usually contains the description of the monster which is directly copied from the Maple official website database.
Is it okay to modify, or add personal opinions to it? For example, the Crimson Balrog description section contains a sizeable amount of notes made by other players. Shouldn't these notes be given a separate section? I am willing to slowly change all the monster pages if that is the case. And if so, what about pages of monsters that do not have a description in the Maple official website database? Thanks for clarifying my doubts. --Bewnt 14:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

The Truth

At one time or another, we all use ACs or been in a party with ACs. Usually no ac = fail. 71.135.53.250 02:01, 16 November 2006 (UTC)