User talk:Werothegreat

From DominionStrategy Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to DominionStrategy Wiki! We hope you will contribute much and well. You will probably want to read the help pages. Again, welcome and have fun! Qvist (talk) 05:53, 31 October 2012 (EDT)


[edit] Archive fan cards convo

Werothegreat, I also love Dominion but I like to use fan expansions in many of the games I play. You posted the following on my user page:

I'm sorry, but no. This is not the place for fan cards. There is a specific page for Fan cards - you can add info there, but do not make specific pages. It doesn't help that these cards are wildly imbalanced and conflict with official Dominion cards. Werothegreat (talk) 10:35, 16 February 2015 (EST)

Reply: I'm not sure that I agree with your assessment of Fan cards, particularly the Fairy Tale set. The cards play well and mix well with other sets. The pricing seems reasonable based on the attributes of each card, especially as they have been play tested for years with minor modifications being made as necessary. As a result they are better play tested than some of the official sets. The only thing I had to watch for with conflicts is that there is another set that also has a SoothsayerSoothsayer.jpg, so I simply posted the one from Fairy Tale as Soothsayer (FT), and later I could add a disambiguation page if necessary.

Info added on the Fan cards page is not as expansive as the article I intended to post, hence why I started the article. I did search the site before I started, and I did not see a policy disallowing fan cards. If no Fan cards/sets are the official policy, I'll just go away and not bother anyone, but could someone post something on the site that officially says as much. Sean (talk) 11:15, 16 February 2015 (EST)

[edit] Vanilla?

I dunno, I kind of would think Kingdom Treasure cards don't count as vanilla. Ajd (talk) 17:28, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

Why do you not think kingdom Treasures can be Vanilla? Harem doesn't have any text - only icons. It's as Vanilla as it gets.
I guess my thought process was, Kingdom cards are Actions by default; for a Kingdom card to not be an Action card is inherently a non-vanilla situation. But I see where you're coming from too. (Also, I think wiki etiquette is to continue discussions on the same page they started on.) Ajd (talk) 22:39, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
I wasn't sure about that, since why would you get a notification about my page changing? And I would disagree with the notion of a default Kingdom type - sure, most of them are Actions, but that doesn't mean the standard Kingdom card is an Action. Werothegreat (talk) 22:58, 16 June 2013 (EDT)
Well, fair enough, I guess; I'm certainly not going to argue with you on this. (I think the idea is that, since I posted a question on your talk page, I'll be keeping an eye on whether you respond? But the whole discussion should be in one place.) Ajd (talk) 23:39, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

[edit] Other recent edits

I'm not sure I agree with some of your other decisions here.... I don't think it makes sense to categorically exclude deck inspectors from the list of sifters; I don't think anyone would say that Cartographer, for instance, from the class of "sifters". And Digger doesn't make a good article title, since it's not a term people actually use very much; Donald X uses "digging" as a verb for what Adventurer and Golem and so on do, but I don't think "digger" as a class of cards is a commonly-used term. Ajd (talk) 04:05, 17 June 2013 (EDT)

Should the article be titled "Digging" then? It's a recognized category of cards, and we have to call it something. As for sifters/inspectors - there is a difference between what, say, Warehouse does, and what, say, Cartographer does. Cartographer does sift, but it does so on your deck, and has more in common with Scout and the like than it does with Inn and Embassy. I'm not comfortable with having deck inspectors as a sub-category of sifters. Werothegreat (talk) 11:12, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
"Digging" would be better, I think, if "dig" isn't a good article name. I'm not sure it is a recognized category of cards—searching f.ds for "digger" turns up almost nothing—but it is a recognized thing that cards do, so I'd rather name the article after the verb. Cartographer is a deck inspector (it lets you look at some number of cards on top of your deck) and a sifter (it lets you discard cards you don't want and keep others), just like Torturer is a terminal drawer, a curser, and a handsize attack; the fact that it's on one list doesn't mean it should be excluded from others. Ajd (talk) 12:18, 17 June 2013 (EDT)
I'll make some changes, then. Werothegreat (talk) 12:36, 17 June 2013 (EDT)

[edit] User privileges

I'm not sure, but I don't think I can edit user privileges and create new admins. If I'm right, you have to go to Qvist or theory for that. If I'm wrong... well, I still can't figure out how to do it. Ajd (talk) 23:33, 21 September 2013 (EDT)

[edit] Translations?

How much longer is the translations project going to continue? At approximately 240 cards per language, and each card edit hitting the "Recent Changes" RSS stream, it's a bit noisy, and seems a pain to do, as well. Would it be better to have a single "Translations" page which has a chart, one row per card, one column per language? Then adding a new language could cause much fewer edits. Blaisepascal (talk) 16:12, 18 January 2015 (EST)

  • I think it's worth keeping on each individual card page, and most of the other forumers seem to like the idea. The problem with having a separate page is that it's unlikely it would ever be seen - what would you have link to it? And there a finite number of languages the cards have been translated into, and most are just for Base and Intrigue - it's really only French, German, Dutch and Finnish that have had all sets translated, and the first two are done. Werothegreat (talk) 16:27, 18 January 2015 (EST)

[edit] Engine page pics.

Thank you for changing the pics on the engine page! 20:49, 18 June 2015 (EDT) hi wero, can you please add pic to combo? thanks. 14:22, 28 June 2015 (EDT)

[edit] Squire/Watchtower

Is Squire/Watchtower notable enough to be on the wiki, on not? I think it could, but it's a very edgey case, probably not? Just asking your opinion on the subject. 21:12, 18 June 2015 (EDT)

  • I don't think so. And please feel free to register with a username on here. Werothegreat (talk) 22:07, 18 June 2015 (EDT)
I thought it wouldn't it is waste of time if your opponent is building economy. 10:55, 19 June 2015 (EDT)

[edit] Isotropic 404

Hi Wero, Isotropic remove all the links to its games, so any game not on councilroom or Goko Salvager will have to be removed. 13:14, 21 June 2015 (EDT)

  • Feel free to do that! Werothegreat (talk) 17:48, 21 June 2015 (EDT)
    • That means most card articles have to be redone, right. At least the examples section. 18:24, 21 June 2015 (EDT)
      • Just have the relevant sentence removed, most likely. And can you please register a username? Werothegreat (talk) 23:24, 21 June 2015 (EDT)

[edit] Template:Navbox card categories

Hi wero, thanks for changing the groups etc. I had an idea but the new one is better. Also the Combo page needs pictures. 20:19, 4 July 2015 (EDT)

  • Please register a username. Werothegreat (talk) 01:38, 5 July 2015 (EDT)
      • So it's easier to interact with you as a user on here, keep track of you, remember "oh yeah, it's that guy", rather than as just a string of numbers. Also, with a username, you can get messages on your own page as well. Werothegreat (talk) 12:26, 7 July 2015 (EDT)

[edit] Combo pictures

can you please put some good card on the page? 15:51, 1 September 2015 (EDT)

[edit] Japanese card names

I don't know where that IP got the alleged card names from (Google hasn't helped me so far), but the set did apparently release in Japan yesterday so I wouldn't be surprised if they started cropping up. I'll try to track down a source myself. ConMan (talk) 21:12, 12 October 2015 (EDT)

As a side note, while looking for sources I found that Hobby Japan recently released a combined Alchemy/Cornucopia box, so I've started drafting an article (mostly by copying from the Guilds/Cornucopia article) in my userspace. I'll also try to find out some more about that. ConMan (talk) 21:42, 12 October 2015 (EDT)

[edit] RfD

Is there an RfD page for consensus on conflicts? 08:16, 4 March 2016 (EST)

  • I don't believe we do, as I have no idea what an RfD page is. What conflict are you looking for consensus on? And I would encourage you to register as a user so you have a username, rather than just an IP address to sign edits with. Werothegreat (talk) 08:52, 4 March 2016 (EST)
Based on Wikipedia, it would be "Requests for Discussion". Basically a low-level dispute resolution page. Given the relatively low activity here, probably not a huge need yet, although I wouldn't mind having an AfD (Articles for Deletion) to request and discuss the clean-up of a few pages. ConMan (talk) 20:11, 7 March 2016 (EST)
What pages did you want to clean up? Werothegreat (talk) 20:46, 7 March 2016 (EST)
Well, I noticed you blanked a couple of pages like Fairy Tale and Combo : Scout / Secret chamber, which can probably both be deleted, along with Category:Combos and Category:Combos with Dominion cards, and probably Category:Cards illustrated by Joshua Balvin. Basically I just ran through a bunch of the stuff from Special:SpecialPages. ConMan (talk) 00:19, 8 March 2016 (EST)
Deleted both of this. Admin powers, ho! However, I'm wondering who figured out that Mr. Balvin was actually Mr. Stewart, and if they have a source for that. Werothegreat (talk) 00:35, 8 March 2016 (EST)

[edit] Where should discussions go?

I sincerely appreciate the effort you put into this site.

However, when I see changes being reverted, seemingly by your sole opinion, it makes me feel that the community is sometimes not welcome to submit changes, and that we should keep our suggestions to ourselves.

In short, it feels hostile.

I know that's silly. You want this site to be useful to everyone, and the more useful, the better.

So, where do the discussions about what new things to add, and which things to remove, and which things to improve, go? I'd hate to do a bunch of work that you don't see value in and immediately remove, and I'd hate for anyone to go through that, especially if that makes an enthused newcomer go away forever.

I think it's important to have a very visible "How to Contribute" that includes "How to plan Big Changes", not just a note on some templates to copy.

One thing I'd like to see, for example, is card text that matches the images, for every version of every card. There are a LOT of existing cards, and people should be able to get the official English text of any version.

I look forward to your reply. -- Whizkid (talk) 14:40, 4 January 2017 (EST)

  • Thank you for your interest in the wiki! You can start a discussion on any page on the discussion tab. I'm not sure if we have any place for wider discussions, other than on the f.ds site - there is a subforum for the wiki!
  • As for the changes in text, those are being rolled out as the new editions roll out. As I've said previously, I will not personally be buying the new editions of sets other than Base and Intrigue, but the wiki should reflect the most up-to-date text on cards, which is the text being used on the Online implementation. One discussion I think we need to have would potentially address this issue - should we continue to use physical card scans, or take straight from Dominion Online? Werothegreat (talk) 16:44, 4 January 2017 (EST)
    • Thanks. Newest card text is fine, but having it not match the image is jarring at best, and downright confusing at worst. I think it's a bad idea to have them differ for any reason. (My suggestion would be to remove the image if the most recent text is so important.) Who is the primary audience of the wiki? If it's you, then whatever you like is best. If it's online users, the newest text sounds great. If it's users of the print editions (I have not yet played a game on the new online system, for instance), then maybe newest text isn't even a little useful. If it's both, then it should be pretty easy (like with no more than one click) to get to every version of a card. I'll look into the wiki forum, though. -- Whizkid (talk) 16:46, 6 January 2017 (EST)
I just made a thread on the forum about just this topic. Feel free to chime in. Werothegreat (talk) 21:31, 6 January 2017 (EST)

[edit] Nocturne release date

It's on the main page of - in the New & Future Releases info box. Theres a RELEASE: 2017-10-18 next to Dominion: Nocturne. m_knox (talk) 09:46, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

Jay Tummelson mentioned the expansion size in his post on BGG - m_knox (talk) 09:49, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

Okay cool! Did not see those. Werothegreat (talk) 10:02, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

[edit] other language versions

(Let's keep this to one version per non-English language, otherwise these pages are going to get clunky, and this is an English-language site first and foremost.)

No problem. But then why bother with other languages at all? Don't know about other languages, but in German some cards have 3 different versions of text (HiG, ASS, ShIT) not counting any corrected versions. And how differentiate versions with and without errors?

Maybe keep the latest version of each card and provide a link to Übersetzungsfehler_(german_translation_errors) in each that has errors? m_knox (talk) 16:40, 11 August 2017 (EDT)
I concur. Where there are differences in text, I would defer to the Shuffle iT version. Werothegreat (talk) 18:12, 11 August 2017 (EDT)
I am bewildered. I read the "Where should discussions go?" section, also the thread "The Wiki moving into the 2nd Edition" on f.fs. All arguments about 1stEd vs. 2nd Ed and their online versions apply also to other language versions. So why should it be the online version only? On top that is not an official version at all, saying it will probably differ from any printed 2nd Ed version whenever they get published.
Well, a couple reasons. 1) The Shuffle iT translations are probably going to be closest to the current official English translation - people keep posting errors made in the print versions, particularly for German. 2) At this point, I would assume more people are going to be playing on the online version than the print version in German, though I could very possibly be wrong on that account. Really, #1 is the big one, though. It might not necessarily be the official German version from Altenburger, but the official version is the original English version. If it bothers you that much, I would not be opposed to having two columns - print text (most recent, so ASS) and digital text, but having multiple rows for one language is really just going to look clunky and will probably make things less clear. Again, this is primarily an English-language wiki. Werothegreat (talk) 20:25, 12 August 2017 (EDT)
Another suggestion - have a "Notes" column discussing current and previous mistranslations. Werothegreat (talk) 20:27, 12 August 2017 (EDT)

[edit] Delete the "Scout Jokes" stub

I merged the (little) content from Scout jokes into the Trivia section of Scout, and updated the template that linked to it.

So, Scout jokes should probably be deleted. I don't have any rights to do this, I guess. Could you remove this page?

Hornpipe2 (talk) 12:42, 28 September 2017 (EDT)

[edit] Categorizing pages

Hi Werothegreat,

Since you are the most active administrator right now, I thought I'd ask if you don't mind if I spend some time making new Categories for pages on the site. For the most part I will be replicating the menu items that are part of the already-existing Navbox templates. For instance, on the Strategy navbox, there is a group called Strategic concepts, which in turn would create a category called Category:Strategic concepts. That category would then go under Category:Strategies. I'd like to do this for all pages that are part of the Navbox templates. The reason is that I sometimes find it hard to find some page which I've been to before but can't remember where I saw it. Using categories would make it easier to find them. -- Julesreid (talk) 06:39, 1 November 2017 (EDT) That's fine. I don't really use categories much, though, honestly. Werothegreat (talk) 23:36, 1 November 2017 (EDT)

Werothegreat, would you mind deleting all of the category pages under Special:UnusedCategories? These are all products of me cleaning up (or in some cases renaming a page). There is no content in them anymore. -- Julesreid (talk) 17:39, 20 November 2017 (EST)
Personal tools