User talk:Prometheus77

From NetHackWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search



Hi, Prometheus77! Welcome, and thanks for joining NetHackWiki!

  • The How to help and Style guide pages are excellent starting points.
  • Special:Recentchanges is a great first stop, because you can see what other people are editing right this minute, and where you can help.
  • Questions? Need help? You can ask at the Community Portal, the forum, or on the discussion page associated with each article! Just remember to sign those posts with four tildes: ~~~~. That will expand to create a signature.

You can put {{NAOplayer|NAO player account}} on your user page to link to your NAO player account. Capitalization matters.

We are really happy to have you here, and look forward to working with you!

This is an automated greeting. -- The Welcome Bot 11:57, 12 Apr 2024 (UTC)

-- New user message (talk) 11:11, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


In your recent edit to the Lawful Quest page you added "(verify?)" after a statement. Please don't do that. There's {{fact}} for most of these cases (and {{todo}} for worse cases); in case you're not sure about whether something is true at all, just leave a note on the talk page.

The issue with adding "(verify?)" is that it's basically saying "I'm not sure, actually, perhaps this should be verified?" which isn't a great message. {{fact}} does have a bit of this, too, but it's more "this still needs a reference, don't rely on it too much yet". (Also, it doesn't jump out at the reader as much.)

Much more importantly, though, {{fact}} is a template; (verify?) is not, and for the reasons mentioned above likely wouldn't be a really good template. (A wiki filled with information that noone knows to be correct/incorrect isn't really helpful, after all.) This means it's easy for anyone to look at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Fact (specifically, the list of transclusions) and go through the pages listed there and "verify" the marked statements (or rather, add a source code reference – or remove the incorrect bit if it turns out to be incorrect, of course, though this shouldn't happen as much). Similar things apply to {{todo}}, though of course that's for greater issues.

Thanks! —bcode talk | mail 21:37, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit summaries

I noticed your recent edit to the Special level (SLASH'EM) page. Please add an edit summary when changing an article this much, especially (but not limited to) when removing this many bytes. (Of course, using edit summaries is generally a good idea, but this kind of edit might need them the most.)

In this case, other edits show that this was eliminating redundant information after it had been copied to more specific pages, but without looking at those, the edit would seem rather strange, IMHO. —bcode talk | mail 22:22, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, will do so in the future. --Prometheus77 (talk) 14:05, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

uploading lots of little files

Conversation moved to Template_talk:Alternate_tilesets