5322 total pages.
4164 content pages.
326 "stub" pages.
322 "day" pages.
284 "year" pages.
12 pages with Map Resources.
Add a new page:
This site has been visited:
View Site Stats
bit of a meta essay - heard this come up on several discussion boards online, but it struck me that a lot of the "of course it's bad" default responses are ignoring the two dimensional optimised drone characters that their input implies.
In case anyone missed it: All of wikidot was hacked this week, and every wiki were down for a few days. I would recommend changing your password, just to be safe.
Can we get a joke request for deletion posted for this page? (Possibly in Latin?)
I think this is spam … Swedish spam perhaps? Can you put lingonberry jam on spam? Should you?
Leather Collection gör jobbet bättre än någon annan när det kommer till motorcykelläderkläder. Med endast de bästa tillgängliga materialen och äkta känguru- och koläder tillverkar vi motorcykeldräkt och motorcykeljacka i läder för att ge maximal säkerhet på vägar och banor. Det är inte bara säkerhet vi är kända för, utan innovation, teknik och hantverk är också våra verkliga styrkor.
Looking at it further, I do note that the wikipedia page that I just reverted away did say that Sortes Sanctorum is different from Sortes Biblicae, and that sometimes the two are confused/conflated. So it may be that you were attempting to correct an error on our page. It may be that we've described Sortes Biblicae instead of Sortes Sanctorum.
If that's the case, I would encourage you to edit the page (perhaps on a smaller scale), to include some text that addresses this distinction or corrects the information here. If you do so, I would like to also encourage you to explain it in your own words, rather than merely copy-pasting text from wikipedia.
If the distinction is interesting enough to warrant the extra effort, you might consider adding a separate Sortes Biblicae page, and move the text from this page to that page, before then explaining what Sortes Sanctorum actually is on the existing Sortes Sanctorum page. Neither are topics that I know much about, I'm afraid. My gut instinct is that even if there is a distinction to be made, this page could probably fit both topics on it (at least unless we go into a much higher level of detail than we currently do).
Someone had replaced our Sortes Sanctorum page here with a large quote directly from Wikipedia, nearly the entire page from wikipedia.
I reverted it to the previous version. Here's why: We are NOT wikipedia. Our goal is not to just blindly duplicate wikipedia. Especially for a topic such as this where the wikipedia page is sort of a dry, dense, intimidating wall of academic text. (In fact, if you go read the talk page for Sortes Sanctorum on wikipedia, the only discussion there is about how the page there is a copy-paste job from an uncited older source with archaic diction. But that's beside the point, I guess.)
Arcanawiki is primarily a tabletop RPG site, so our articles tend to focus on interesting ways to use something in gaming. This means we're often writing in a more informal style, with an eye on what's interesting and usable for gaming or fiction writing, rather than what's of the greatest academic interest.
If there were specific facts on the wikipedia page you wanted to incorporate here, that'd be okay, but we should take care to:
a) focus on things relevant to gaming,
b) tell it in our own words instead of just copy-paste from wikipedia,
c) not delete entire pages of material written by fellow arcanawiki users without a very good reason to do so.
In regards to point c, I feel a little bad reverting your contribution. For all I know whoever made this change could also be the person who wrote the wikipedia page that I've not exactly spoken highly of. My apologies for any hypocrisy in my actions, or if I'm coming across as an overbearing gatekeeper-type. I'm not trying to chase you away, I'm just trying to explain why I undid your work so this is less likely to happen in the future.
Word Unscrambler is the perfect tool for you. It is an easy to use, free, online unscramble word game tool to help you ace all word games. Use this letter unscrambler to find all possible words forming with the given letters.
That makes sense. Indicating the type of media (movie, computer RPG, etc) isn't all that especially important most of the time, and we don't really have a consistent format or labeling structure. So don't stress over it.
The one media-type that I do strive to point out clearly is if a link goes directly to a video that might potentially auto-play. In those cases, I generally take care to make sure that I mark it as a video, for example:
: youtube : **Video:** [link-to-a-video-on-youtube Video-Name-goes-here]
Given the amount of asshole posts we've had to hoover up over the years, your reaction is understandable.
The post was inspired because quite a lot of those bullet points seemed to echo stuff from the game. The Fallen London universe has some really weird, deeply buried lore involving self aware stars and things … there are three games out there, the freemium browser RPG Fallen London, the underwater sea-skippering game Sunless Sea and the flying space steam engine game Sunless Skies. All three tie together and involve literal alien space bats.
Thanks - the step to disambiguating multiple "movie" or "cRPG" labels is what has been scuppering me. I'll see what I get wrong next time.
I will try to explain it.
The syntax is fairly simple, but must be followed very precisely. Any deviation will break the bibliography block. Here's an example, and instructions:
[[bibliography]]
: label1 : link or name
: label2 : link or name
[[/bibliography]]
After the label, there must be exactly 1 space, then another ":", then exactly 1 more space.
After that, you can put whatever you want in the place where I wrote "link or name".
And that's all there is to it.
So, for example, if we type in:
[[bibliography]]
: 28 : **Movie:** //28 Days Later//
: LastofUs : **cRPG:** //Last of Us//
[[/bibliography]]
It will display as:
I hope that helped. Let me know if any part of it is still confusing.
Someone wrote on this page, in response to a bunch of my bullet points: "Has someone been playing Fallen London too much?"
No, actually, I've never heard of Fallen London. What's that?
(googles it)… oh, I have played a bit of the computer game Sunless Sea, by that same publisher, which seems to be in the same series, but I can't remember any part of it having to do with the universe being conscious. Maybe I didn't play far enough.
P.S.: I knee-jerk-reflexively deleted your line on the page, because I didn't see how the random bit of snark without context helped the page at all. But that was really rude of me. There should be a pretty high bar for just deleting someone else's contribution. Far higher than just "I don't understand your reference." I apologize for that. I was just unnecessarily being a jerk, and really shouldn't have deleted that. My bad. I've since tried to revert to your version, but the reversion is not propagating just yet. Hopefully it will revert correctly given time.
thanks - never have been able to get the Bibliography section to work…
For those who love their old skool D&D, did anyone ever work out religion an "Eye of the Law" belonged to?
I've noticed on two different days recently, that the arcanawiki (and I'd guess all of wikidot) is having a strange bug, that could cause us to lose content if we're not careful.
Basically, if you save a page, and then re-open it within a few minutes to make another edit, it is sometimes not opening the new version you just saved, but instead opens the previous version. So then if you make a change and save it, the previous edits are either lost or hidden in the page history.
As near as I can tell, the way to avoid this is to wait a few minutes between edits. Eventually, the changes you made propagate to the editing function. I haven't played around with it enough to figure out if its an issue with a specific browser, or if it can be fixed by just clearing your cache / reloading the page. It's only happened a few times that I've noticed, but I imagine it'd be easy to miss if the previous edit was small, and/or was done by someone else.
The best work-around is probably planning out your changes in advance so you don't have to re-open the page twice in a row to add the little thing you forgot on the first draft.
If editing a page that someone else has recently worked on, please take a moment to visually inspect it and make sure that the version you've got open isn't missing anything. Thank you.
Ah, that explains it.
It was a redirect page, I just forgot to go back in and put the redirect tag on the page until you pointed it out.
Wikidot page links can get weird sometimes if the page title is beyond a certain length, or if the page title has any non-letter characters in it. The page in question has the title/header of "Why The Egyptian Army Didn't Shoot", but actually has a url of:
http://arcana.wikidot.com/why-the-egyptian-and-tunisian-armies-didnt-shoot-and-why-the
Note there's no apostrophe, and there's also extra words in two different places.
I was thinking of linking the "why the Egyptian army didn't shoot" myself, but ran out of steam, so more power to him. My first thought was a re-direct but there was no sign of it, so the board being weird is as good an explanation as any.
I'm guessing, but I see that r_bergstrom posted cluster of posts/revisions related to military/military units. I'm thinking that he wanted to link the "Egyptian Army" page to these other ones and something went wonky.
"All the World's a Stage and Everyone's a Critic" — Mervyn Alquist
