User talk:Davidj3416

I believe the class field for mobs is meant to refer to their EverQuest class (eg. Warrior), not (for instance) "Monster" or "NPC". Mobs in classic EverQuest don't (to my knowledge) have their own special class system: they use the same classes as players, and the wiki (before your edits) reflected that. --Loramin (talk) 16:37, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

P.S. Wow, I didn't realize at first how many pages you changed! Kudos to you for spending so much time to help the wiki, it's awesome!

... but now there are literally [hundreds] of pages that need to be fixed. Could you please go back and restore the proper class on all the pages you edited (I think like 95% of them should just be "Warrior")? The alternative would be to do a mass rollback of everything you changed, and there was so many good changes that I'd hate to throw the proverbial baby out with the bath water.

P.P.S. The way I found out about this was through a forum thread, so I asked anyone reading that thread if they could help (since the hundreds of pages you changed will take the both of us a long time on our own). See [1] for further details.

In Allakhazam from any time period have I seen an animal described as a "warrior. A Warrior is a player-class." An animal is a "monnster." Also there isnt a race known as A "Qeynos Citizen." If they are an NPC they are a race of humans, Barbarians and so forth. A class of NPC, if they have quests included are known as Quest NPCs. I do not see any evidence to the contrary. Everything I have seen is clearly based on past practice.

For Example:

!. A Bat is refered to as an Animal.[2]

2. A Gnoll is refereed to a Monster. "Gnolls are one of Norath's common monsters." [3]

I have seen elephants' race listed as mammoth. Elephants are animals.

Skeletons refered to as warriors. They are the Undead.

Merchants have been refered to as Shopkeepers.

When were these changes made in Everquest lore? Or did someone arbitrarily decide that that sounded good.

The changes I have made come directly from historical evidence that has been "cited" as evidence with the external link so all can see the information for themselves first hand.

P1999 Wiki should reflect and respect the era of classic Everquest. The information I have recorded is based solely on information taken from the classic era. The wiki should not include any info collected after the classic era as we have seen.

I hear what you are saying, and clearly some of this stuff is subjective. But a lot of it isn't, so you have to understand that when you make a massive number of changes, without first understanding why they are the way they are in the first place, you risk making the wiki worse rather than better.

Remember, nothing in the wiki was entered randomly, nor was it just blindly copied out of Allakhazam (as much of the Allakhazam information is either inaccurate or accurate for live but not Project 1999). It was all entered by hard-working volunteers, who got it in-game or from carefully reviewed 3rd party sources, and they all wanted to have the most accurate and consistent entries possible.

Some of your edits are great, and I really want to see you continue editing ... but many also remove valuable information. For example, which class a monster has isn't subjective, it's a fact of the game. Wizard monsters cast spells, warrior monsters don't.

The wiki needs editors like you who care a lot about the game. But the wiki is a communial resource, and when you make it worse, ignore an admin who tries to explain things to you, and then continue to remove valuable information, it amounts to vandalism. For that reason I'm going to have to block your account, just until you're prepared mend bridges and not remove pertinent information.

Everyone would benefit from having you as an editor who respects the wiki, rather than as a blocked user, so I hope you'll choose that route.

P.S. I'm not sure if you can edit this page while blocked. If not please feel free to contact me via the forum private message system.

--Loramin (talk) 04:16, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Admin Note: David and I discussed the matter via forum PM, and since there is zero indication of any intent to vandalize (this really all seems to just be a couple of misunderstandings, both of which have been explained) I'm removing the block. --Loramin (talk) 16:29, 19 March 2018 (UTC)