useful for feedback on how i could edit/contribute better.

Hey Reskar! You left a comment about Rockbiter Weapon no longer having the bonus threat. I have not made any changes to this ability in the threat table, since my experience with Shaman mechanics is limited; the value that is there has not changed in quite some time. Since you seem to be more knowledgeable about Shaman stuff than I am, you get to do the honors of updating the Threat Table! =) The proper file to edit is the template for it: Template:Aggro:IncrementModifierTable. I'm working on restructuring the tables in the near future, but I'll be sure to incorporate any recent changes if I decide to overhaul the layout. Thanks! --Phaze 13:54, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

IconSmall Draenei FemaleRESKAR(Contr)

Thank you yet again! :) --SWM2448 17:38, 29 April 2007 (EDT)

Drama in edit summaries Edit

In regards to your revert on mage lore, keep the drama and discussion outside of the edit summaries. For however well-intentioned your reasons are, use the edit summary to summarize your edits. That's it.--Hobinheim (talk · contr) 16:40, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

i was giving a reason for the edit, so it wasn't just randomly done, thought justifing things was good ideas.

It's not a matter of if justifying things is bad or not. Justifying is great. Putting justifications in the edit summary is bad.--Hobinheim (talk · contr) 16:43, 1 May 2007 (EDT)


where should i have put it then? talk page?

Yup.--Hobinheim (talk · contr) 16:44, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

k i'll do that from now on then, sorry about the confusion.

Cockblock Edit

Not that I like the word, but the man has a point. Heh. Can you think of a way to include that word in the page somewhere? --Sky (t · c · w) 16:58, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

the word itself is the problem, sure it's "acurate" but it's still inapropriate, i'd use it myself, just not here....IconSmall Draenei FemaleRESKAR(Contr)
The question is whether you're more interested in providing complete and accurate information or ensuring that no one is even marginally offended. Most wikis choose to prioritize the former, but I'm a total n00b here, so I have no idea what the policies are. --User:Koutetsu 9:57, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

Warcraft I, II, III classes/units from 11 Edit

um? excuse me pal, but I have a little question, which articles in my category do you suggest i should get rid of, i mean should i get rid of paladin, mage or hunter or whatever? please respond i take your suggestions very valuable!!!

warcraft 1,2,3 class Edit

hi, i read your last comment. and i have a request. could you tell me which articles should i get rid of. please comment quick. thank you

Thank you for your suggestions, buti did not really didn't get your last comment. like should i keep mage, paladn, druid, hunter, warrior, warlock, rogue, shaman, and priest lore pages or not. User:11

Shaman tactics Edit

Howdy. Ive been updating the Shaman tactics page for BC, basically trying to clean it up for readability etc. Seems like you wrote most of it, so I figured Id say hi. I guess you are/were Enhancement? Im trying to focus on the Elemental/Resto side, since thats what Im familiar with. Ive been sticking to minor edits to the Enhance stuff (whereever possible anyway - I note you fixed my mistake about Enhance and fast weapons...) and trying to flesh out the caster parts. Do let me know if you have any dramas with my language or facts or whatnot. Metao 03:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

In retrospect, Im with you on the Elemental thing. I didnt actually add it (and was surprised to see it in there), but I did change it to make it say "one of the highest" rather than just "the highest". Ill also rephrase the bit about pulling - Im sure Enhance Shaman do use LB to pull, if they actually need a "pull". To attack in place, no doubt they would not bother (whereas we casters pretty much always do a proper pull). Metao 12:18, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.