User talk:LegacymtgsalvationUser9909/July-August, 2007

From MTG Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


You've been silent latelly[sic]! How was the examns[sic]? Victory or loss? Have you recovered on the results? (No matter what they were). Faceless Wanderer 10:48, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Read the below, then read my MagicMage[sic][sic] mailbox: That's bad news! I hope at least that you will work on your inner peace. Care about yourself first! Everything else comes second!

I'm not abandoning this place, It has it's charms, but I will take other articles to, for example articles based on guides to scrubs! They are wellcomming[sic] such pages and basically I want to improve the qualities of scrub materials above all. I can't do it here, so I do it at the competitior[sic]. I find it ironical that one of my first "Aggressive letters" in here stated that you would face competitors and that those with more liberal approaches would win in the long run! To add further injury it turns out that it was made by someone from mtgsalvation[sic]. Faceless Wanderer 21:32, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

"Making a move!":

I have found a competing mtg[sic] wiki, which at least on their frontpage[sic] states that they want ALL magic info. I am currently in a dialogue with it's residents and if things go well I will be initiating my hive project there. This does not mean that I'm done with salwiki[sic][sic], it will just mean that My pages will become more "neat" in here, even though they will be less frequent. If there is a general consensus I will continue to add the brainstorms I have on [[Pagestructural research]][sic][sic] topics. I will also copy/paste any page from there to here that fits the style of this place, and pop in and out of here just to be nostalgic :P Faceless Wanderer 22:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

"Standard Wellcome[sic] Message":

I think we should compile a standard wellcomming[sic] message that can be dumped at the talk page of newcommers[sic]. To search for the necessary basics in this wiki is a hell for beginners (especially those without patience for such things, like me) So instead of having the first hundred conversations with the newcommer[sic], we should store a package explaining the simplest basics (and also some standards regarding behavior[sic], he he!) that can be copy pasted directly into the newcommers[sic] talk page whenever a usefull[sic] new contributor is discovered. This can be followed up with other "advanced user" packages. The important thing is that we care for the new people and supply them with things that they need. And from our perception of the reception a simple copy and paste action will be far more efficient than wasting time on 10 to twenty dialogs[sic] with the newcommer[sic] on what/when/where!!! (This was copy pasted from the page [[User:Faceless Wanderer/Pagestructural research]][sic][sic])

Perhaps I should have mentioned this too! Make the wellcoming[sic] template as personal as possible. The person that get the letter must feel as special as possible when recieving[sic] the letter. I Hope that you make your "own" pages instead of copying most of the wikipedian[sic] ones. being linked to a wikipedia[sic] page doesnt[sic] feel very personal, and is sort of disturbing when you are a salwiki[sic][sic] contributor. The more personal and in the spirit of this place you can make the wellcoming[sic], the greater the psychologicall[sic] impact will be at making the new user feel at home. I like the general outlay but there should be a short descripting[sic] of what each link leads to. people like to have a choice at what they will take a look at, and if they have a description they will feel more in control of their choices. That feeling may actually make them feel secure enough to read the whole thing! Faceless Wanderer 21:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear MagicMage[sic][sic]:

I can see that you have started some contributions in our wiki, which is a good thing, since we can allways[sic] need someone producing some nice pages :) However there are some small topics I need to tell you about.

(Remove irrelevant corrections before posting)

  • You need to sign your comments when you "talk" with other people in here, it is done by holding down the buttons ctrl[sic] and alt[sic] while you press ~ four times. easy as that.

(Personal notes inserted here)

This is a better example of what I was thinking of. compare it with the one I have sent to Geomike[sic] for a full conceptual understanding of how it may work.

please consider the above Faceless Wanderer 21:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I would also like to state that the lack of communication with people behind the wheels is critical! If this place fails to respond to your request of making GeoMike a sysop it is falling appart[sic]! That means we are in need of some structure regarding the key possitions[sic]. One suggestion I can think of is for the highest ranking people to give their e-mail to the lower ranked people (like sysops) so that these will be able to contact them in case of "Leadership abbandonment[sic]" This place will surely die if noone can give authority to anyone!!! The E-mail of those higher possitions[sic] should be kept secret to avoid spammail[sic]! Faceless Wanderer 01:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Jesper Ejsing (artist):

Thanks for the renaming of that page, also confirmation on his pictures regarding harry potter and wow are available at his gallery which IS available at the page should you want to verify those statements. I put the gallery there so that those interrested in the rumor[sic] regarding lorwyn[sic] may see what kind of art they can expect to arrieve in the future. Also the sole refference on that rumor[sic] is in DANISH!!! I am your only reliable source on that. If you cant trust me, then I must revise my view and reconsider if I trust anyone in here... Although I find the aspects of a "confirmation war" very interresting[sic] I doubt it will be very productive!!! (The artists own statement on working with wotc[sic] is here The exact statement is: "Siden 1998 har jeg arbejdet for Fanatsy[sic] flight[sic] Games i[sic] USA hvor jeg har bidraget med tegninger til en masse af deres produkter bla. regelbøger, spilæsker og spilkort. Du kan kigge på deres hjememside: og se en masse af de færdige produkter jeg har bidraget til. Derudover er jeg med i Drakor och Demoner, og Privateer Press´s Warmachines Miniature Game. Som noget nyt og meget spændende skal jeg til at tegne Magickort for Wizards of the Coast." Faceless Wanderer 01:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Category:All articles with unsourced statements:

I am wondering, is the category going to work alongside the [[User:Faceless Wanderer/Confirmation page]] or will it replace it?

In any case I think that only the "dark" side of the wiki (Talk pages) should get this category as discussions may evolve if there isnt[sic] found any confirmation... Faceless Wanderer 22:14, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Yesterday I stepped on GeoMike's toes by removing some data that was sourced in a circle, only to discover that it was alternately known right in front of me. Good citations would have prevented this. Uber mexico 19:30, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


I have been told to adjust the simulation page a lot of times, but I have no idea on how to do it! Everyone telling me to do so have failed at explaining which sections should be rewritten, and I don't know if I should increase the details or attempt to simplify the areas (More important I'm not sure I'd know how to simplify it, I have spent time on this since June, 1986) Faceless Wanderer 22:26, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Other pages:

I am generally making a choice between playing magic or writing about it. I choose to play it. This means I really wont have the focus in here I used to have, which is a shame! (But I have to choose!)

I will add concepts to the [[User:Faceless Wanderer/Research Page|Research Page]], from which you dudes/dudettes[sic] may pick and choose at a whim what should be considered as future implementations at salwiki[sic] (This means I will pop in once or twice a week and watch things. however I will first go to 4 days of Roskilde festival

P. S. I think I have upset GeoMike unintentionally! perhaps you could erh! Nurse him a little for me and tell him there is nothing to be scared about :P Or maybe you can even see where the misunderstanding occured[sic]!!!

I think it was the reply (Below this) to one of your statements on his talkpage, he wrote back that he would never ever touch my pages again which is kind of quite the opposite of what I want :)

"junk", uninteresting to the majority:

Storyline material, rules and clans IS the majority of what this place has to offer. I have been pressing this subject before in a rather aggressive way, but I have recently been contemplating this approach and have decided add suggestions as to what can be done, focussing on solutions rather than propaganda!

Now storyline material is for those who read the books and like the overall universe! These people are actually rather few and some prefer to read about the game more than playing it. Those who play the game may have interrest[sic] in the storylines (I have) but in general their focus is on the game itself!

Rules are for the VERY serious magicplayers[sic], but I have a feeling that they will tend to read the official rulings above all, and not rules in a wiki, mainly because a wiki will always be in danger of containing misinformation. Pro players does simply not want to take the chances with a wiki rules collection.

Clans are for the mtgsalvation[sic] users and IS a remnant of this wiki's origin. I have stated that I prefer ALL information on the many aspects of the game, but the are probably a lot of outside readers that gets scared away by the amount of clan-related material. To the eyes of an outsider this wiki looks like it is populated by a weird group of individuals creating wast imaginary stuff, and then justyfy[sic] it's existance[sic] by calling it clan-material. Again I have nothing against clans, but ""junk", uninteresting to the majority" is a matter of your general public image.

The Flashy stuff!!! You need to fill this place with information that interrests[sic] the general magic population, and fill it out so well that when you click the "random page" button you usually wont get one of the above types of pages.

The best inclussion[sic] currently have been an increase in decks and famous magic players/creators. Glamour is very important even to magic. If you can find the name and decklists of your favorite player and get some "intimite" knowledge about him/her you will probably return here to find out about others.

You need to think like a modern company, you need a marketing strategy.

The human mind has a very simple weakness in this area that can be exploited. We are all focus-based beings. What one person focusses on, others tend to focuss[sic] on as well. This means two things:

The people of this wiki must train themselves in avoiding this kind of focus, because it will lead to some sort of "insider world" only usefull[sic] to those who are brave enough to stay in here after seing[sic] the place for a while.

You must learn what the main public has it's focus on and change your inner focus by using your energy on the same focus, this will increase you popularity as you will not be considered as and oddball informationsources[sic] if you feature the publically[sic] demanded stuff.

About agression[sic], you will need it. Any company knows that it takes workers to maintain production. If a company needs workers, it tries to get some. The current attempt to gain "workers" in here have been to state "Oh, we need to be more people!". HEADHUNT!!! Gather a small crew of people interrested[sic] in the survival of this place, let them come up with some strategies for headhunting[sic] new writers. For example the increase in translation means that some of those translaters[sic] that migth[sic] have a good (but bored and with much sparetime[sic]) friend may actually ask if they are interrested[sic] in helping out, just to increase their own skills with languages. Hijack students and make them into translaters[sic]. Be aggressive!!! And the page for it, should you choose to adopt the strategy! = [[Headhunt (project)]] (I've deleted this page. It's stupid.)

I've obviously stepped on your toes, whoever you are. I never said that Storylines or Clans are "Junk" or interesting at all. Please accept my apologies, and I'll never touch those pages again, I'm sorry. --GeoMike 02:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi MM! Again

Sure, I understand that. But I didn't say to leave Internet completely and forever. I meant, that you probably need to limit the time you're spending there. This is kind of addiction I also had problems with (although my family claim that I still have :P). I noticed this on myself, that when you go to some forum day or two days later (rather than every day), you can easily keep up with everything what's written there. This way I limited my time in Internet by circa half. Really! And that's a lot. Of course, you don't have to do this at the moment, you can limit that time successively, what is important however, is to have control over passing time - that was also the hardest thing for me, but I got used to it... And of course, time you save, you can use for anything you have to fix in your life. Learn stuff, meet people, etc, etc. I know, easy to say, but it quite nicely worked for me and I believe that you will also profit from this. Organization of time is really something what can only help! re-hugs and see'ya later MM ;-) --MORT (T) 18:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


Yeah, I had the same concerns, I think if we make sure that it isn't something automatic. For instance if someone stands out here with a certain type of work, the leadership over here could send a message over to the boards and give them a special custom like "Wiki Rules Guru" or somesuch[sic]. Nothing formal, but it helps give the impression to people who see it that there is something going on over here that they are missing. If 1000 people see it and 2 or 3 come over and start working, then mission accomplished for very little actual work. The argument on my talk page stems from an incident where I changed the GeoMike article into neutral third person by replacing the pronouns but not changing anything else. I was criticized for it and he changed it back, my complaint is that while most of the User: pages are encyclopedic entries about those users habits and persona, quite a few look like wiki myspaces[sic]. Lists of articles to be written are fine in the talk page, but not on the article page. But even then, I only changed the POV and mentioned it to him on the talk page. The general impression I got back was that a person's article is somehow "theirs" which I find to be a completely insane concept on a wiki. The talk page I can totally understand, and I wouldn't modify that (save to leave a message), but the article on a username should be some semblance of an actual article, just like any other on here. If you go look at geomike's[sic] you'll understand what it is I'm talking about. Uber mexico 12:18, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


Disregard, I figured out a good answer myself. Uber mexico 20:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


Is it too easy to get an account here? What can be done to keep them away, something like "enter the numbers you see in this box" - but don't know how to implement that. --GeoMike 13:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

It's called CAPTCHA, lol; "enter the numbers you see in this box" - oh yeh, it's only one form of it. MM (talk!) 12:58, 17 November 2007 (GMT)


I just had an awesome idea for publicity. What if the salvation boards had a wiki tag. We already have card tags. What if there was a <w> tag that linked to the article with that name. It wouldn't be used as much, but it would be relatively easy to impliment and would do wonders for getting the word out. Uber mexico 13:12, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I must have missed it when I wasn't posting there. In terms of sysop-ness, I'd be up for it, but I would rarely use it, most likely.Uber mexico 13:26, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Deck template

I just noticed the 3 icons on the top right of deck templates. I clicked on each one to see where it would go. When each of them are clicked they go to mtgsalvation[sic] and the page says "Invalid Post specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator" --GeoMike 00:01, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


I'm generally specialised in storyline. (Although I'm rather casual player, I love the game as well and pay attention to what happens on this side of Magic). Recently, I thought about few things in the wiki.
First, is about templates. We should categorise all of them.
Second thing I wonder about is if storyline info should be connected with game articles. For example Slivers article could be splited into "Slivers (species)" - containing all storyline information - and "Slivers (creature type)" - about mechanics of their cards, etc.
Same things would go for other races/creature types as well as other things like characters/cards. I'm not sure if that's good idea in all of its aspects, but I'd like to disscuss it.
Another thing, debated before, is that if wiki encyclopedia should contain info about all cards or only those most notable... I don't have my own answere. Many says that it is waste of space. But on the other hand, it is encyclopedia! And practically all cards have something worth noticing or telling about IMHO.
I also thought about creating the timeline of Magic game (and its other aspects). Every year many notable things happens and timeline would be a good way to gather them all. That's all for now from red again ( ;-) )... --MORT (T) 11:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I just want to throw in my 2cents (wow that is old school, hasn't it risen with inflation yet) -- I really like the idea bout Slivers (species) and Slivers (creature type). I suspect Slivers (species) would include all story line information. Also, we could have all of these (creature type) articles linked together with a category (i.e. Category: Creature Types) --GeoMike 16:42, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
You know what? I changed my mind. Such slivers for example - their mechanics and storyline appearence are strongly connected. It's better to just add the category "Creature types" everywhere where it is needed to be and voila! The only problem with storyline/game-mix articles is that we have to decide what is more important to mention first: game mechanics or storyline information. That's just somehow hard to decide. But I think that mentioning storyline first is better, because it directly continues description of species which is always at the very beginning of each such article. That's as far as species articles go, other (like some character/spell articles) can be harder to decide. Anyway, as I'm writing this text I recall why I wanted to split game info from storyline info. It's the way of naming articles. I'm not sure, but as far as I observed, we call all only-game-card articles with "<insert card name> (card)", but if it has storyline info, it just keep its name. Is there any sense in this? Wouldn't be better to just use the name of card without "(card)" addition, and just give it Category:Card? MM, please comment on this all if you have any ideas. --MORT (T) 20:34, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Heh!!! This was what I was once babling about. There is not far from the Unicorn (species) to links leading to poetry about unicorns! Either Mort has been subconsciously manipulated by my words and actions or it is simply the natural developement of the wiki as an information tool I have tried to envision to you all. And it seems to be quite as I predicted then. There is a long way to what I dreamt of then, but I can't help observe that you have all started to flow in the direction i was once trying to force you to go. Perhaps I should never had applied any pressure!!! Faceless Wanderer 20:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

No poetry about unicorns is going to be linked from here, I can assure you. And you didn't manipulate me (but you can believe in it if you feel better). It's just natural thought to include in encyclopedia everything. Besides, I agreed with you on this back then, during wicked-war or how you call it. --MORT (T) 20:44, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
MM, regarding your comment. "It is good idea doing that". May I ask what? I mentioned many things above and I withdrew from splitting Species and Races in to two articles (that was really stupid, a lot of info would be probably written twice). So, what do you mean? Something particular? The whole rest? Anyway, I think we should concentrate on some one target for a turn. I think that we should create articles about creature types first (those non-existing yet). And that we should give them only "Creature type" category, and no "(craeture type)" additions in names of articles. Also, do you think that "(card)" addition in names of articles is really needed? These articles already have Card category. IMO, those all additions should be only added when there is no other choice, like when there are many similiar names in some disambiguation. GeoMike, if you read this, please comment as well. --MORT (T) 22:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

RE: (card). Im not exactly sure what you mean. Originally we created (card) to avoid disambiguation with clans who names themselves after persons, cards, locations and so on. Its a matter of consequence. If we only add anti-ambiguation on some pagenames people will not be able to search out specific groups as easilly. There has to be a solid pattern that you can follow, that will be easy to decode once you got the hang of it. We may have to change and adapt (qqq) contents over the time to fit those needs better, but I think it is best to use one overall approach! And since we are on to categories I have some new sugestions to categories. We have the category (card) But why not also include (common card), (legacy set card) (pump card) (goblin card) (creature card) and so on and on and on! That way we will gain categories that will be very usefull in explaining certain concepts (Like burn). Also it will be much easier to scan through what cards we have pages on or not. There will be many benefits from such an approach! Oh, and MM, sometimes science is about finding solutions. By finding solutions to problems I remain somewhat scientific ;) Faceless Wanderer 20:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

And then there are articles like Ivory Tower where we had no choice but to have a Ivory Tower (clan) and a Ivory Tower (card), why not be uniform and have all clans with (clan) after them as well as cards with (card) after them? Just my 2 (there used to be a cent symbol on keyboard at one time lol) --GeoMike 22:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

What I meant is that cards are more important than clans, and in their articles we can add at the beginning an info like: "for the MTGS clan see Ivory Tower (clan)". I've seen also another way in wikipedia. The most important disambig article was under original name, for instance: "Ivory Tower". And at the beginning of this article there was a line: for other uses of Ivory Tower/this term see Ivory Tower (disambiguation). It's important, becuse people who will search for a card won't write for example "Black Lotus (card)" but just "Black Lotus". So, if we're going to make every card article with "(card)" addition, we also will have to create as many redirects. Another argument is that when we leave the "(card)" part (and just use a Card category) there will be no problem with deciding where to use "(card)" and where not to use it (for example, many legendary character don't have it, but such storyline related Black Lotus have it - it's quite messy, don't you think?). Wicked, I thought about types-of-cards categories, but I think that there would be just too many of them... --MORT (T) 12:43, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Dark Confidant (card)

Sure, sure, whenever a page looks awfull pick on the wicked!!! I believe most of that page belongs to fishysua whom was scared away at the end of the wicked-war!!! I have on several occations tried to prod his page for a cooperative fix of his and my pages. But he is gone, and so is the knowledge he possessed to decode his pages, so that they could become more viewable for the common people. I still have an improved page about mana curves hanging on my projectpage but I cant understand what exactly he were writing, so it will be hanging there untill this place gains someone else with a higher mathematical sense! I must also admit that I took that precaution because I am one of the only people in here seriously involved in magic on a pure scientific level, and his knowledge deserves to be in here. So stay away from his corpse you evil girl! SNARL!!! Faceless Wanderer 20:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


I dislike the idea of creating archieves[sic] in a place that is supposed to be one big archieve[sic]. That's just to bueraucratic[sic]. Die PUSCHKIN!!![sic] Hmm, wrong place! Faceless Wanderer 20:56, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Deleting "grinding in"

It's not my page but I will defend it anyways[sic]. Nothing should be deleted. Change it for the better, but do not delete. To delete it on the basis that we all know what is is would be like stating that all holy books should be burned because true believers should know them in their heart! One day people will not know this phrase as well as we do. One day the phrase may even have other meanings. If we destroy the past, how can we have a future. This attitude you deleted it with is pure bookburning[sic], a destruction of something you dislike! Do you speak for all of us while warming yourself at that campfire[sic]? I'd prefer to stand in the cold and the dark rather than this. I have often claimed how much I hate seing[sic] the salvation[sic]-clans in this place, but I have always stated that they do belong here because they actually matters to someone. Please respect that other people share other views!!!

Besides, it's full moon where I'm at, so I'm tending to rage. you know LUNA-tic and stuff like that :P Faceless Wanderer 21:09, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Mail for you at my place :). Faceless Wanderer 20:14, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

creature types

I think they should be in plural articles (that are already created for species). We can just add subtitle like ==creature type== and write there Zombie is a creature type... We could also include some stats. Number of their cards, % in different colors, etc. --MORT (T) 14:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the names of articles should be in plural, like:

Zombies (-> name of article)

Zombies are... (general characteristics)

(storyline info)

==creature type== Zombie creature type is... (all info on this creature type)

Of course, there will be redirects from singular names of species to plural ones. Is that ok now? What do you think? --MORT (T) 21:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


I think we have to categorise them all. For now, we can just use Category:Templates; maybe later we'll add more. --MORT (T) 21:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


Which are these? 0_0 Do you mean Weatherlight Saga, Mirari Saga, etc? (these are not blocks but cycles.) --MORT (T) 14:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure. I've alsways[sic] seen them capitalised, also on forums. Maybe Weatherlight Saga is official way of writting it, later copied to Mirarii Saga, etc. I honestly don't know, but I'd left them so (otherwise, few thousands of articles would need that change = argh!) --MORT (T) 21:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

my blood

Hi. I'm wondering, why have you moved Glistening oil to Glistening Oil. I don't think it sould be capitalised. (But maybe I overlooked something?) --MORT (T) 20:26, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I see, it's just that in my eyes it was unpredictable action of yours. You usually tried to decapitalize everything. ;-) --MORT (T) 19:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

RE:Template edits

Oh, ok, thanks for noticing this. I'll deal with this. --MORT (T) 19:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Meow??? Fzzzzt!!!

Okay migthy[sic] clawling[sic], I obey! Regarding defense[sic]! Since when havent[sic] you seen me tear/rip people to pieces for deleting parts of pages I initiated??? Well it won't happen now! I will find it interresting[sic] to observe their degeneration! (And they tend to lose information whenever someone have problems understandig[sic] the more cryptic parts of my englishbased[sic] scrabbles! = part is deleted!) As to MY mental state! I feel pretty tired after only 4 hours of sleep! Typical behaviour on my part. Faceless Wanderer 05:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Get well:

That's an order. Dr. Wicked recommends mooning your diseases.

creature types

Well, I was watching Polish wikipedia[sic], and they have singular only for exact species (like "polar bear"), but for any kinds of groups/families of species and races singular is used ("bears"). Funny thing, bear article on english wikipedia starts with a word bears and tells about their family. I think it's ok to use plural in names of our artiles, as long as there are redirections from singular names (I think that's one of reason english wikipedia want to use singular - most of people will write rather singular names of things than plural). --MORT (T) 21:18, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I think we differ (and can differ) from eng. Wkipedia is some ways. I followed your link, and here are some fragments:
 Let's say you were writing a page about crayons. Should you call the page
[[crayons]], which is basically what the page is about, or [[crayon]], which
makes it easier to link to from passages like "Harold took out his purple
crayon and drew the curtains"? Probably the latter.
 Creating a redirect in cases like crayons is advisable as well, since third-party
websites started adding automatic links to wikipedia from their topics (see, e.g., [1]),
and many of them follow the opposite convention, i.e., pluralization.
 If you make a page title which is a plural, always consider making a redirect from
the singular to aid linking. This is particularly important because Wikipedians tend to
assume that the article title will be in the singular.

So the page is about crayons, not about (one) crayon. They only use singular because people searching for article usually write singular words (usually, species article will start with plural word anyway, like "Bears are..." - because it is about family of animals, not about specific species), and as they believe it is easier to link singular words in articles. But creation of redirect solves everything. As you see, while English wikipedia assumed singularization of articles, some other sites chose pluralization. It's a matter of chioce, not any must. If they think that singular forms makes linking from articles easier, then ok. But if they create plural redirects anyway, then the whole naming policy could as well work in the other way. They could also argue that too many redirects would have to be created, but they are Wikipedia, and they want to describe the whole known universe, when our small wiki describes only its small magical part ;-). To reasume, I believe that we can stay at plural nouns, we just have to pay attention and always create singular redirection. --MORT (T) 16:33, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Darth Cow/Poem

Okay! I'm here, and I'm listening!!! Everything in this world have an explanation... Faceless Wanderer 20:59, 29 August 2007 (UTC)