User talk:Spymaster Cosades



Welcome, !

Hello, welcome to The Elder Scrolls Wiki! We're building a collaborative source of information for, and we need your help!

We saw you making some changes to our articles and thank you for it. We hope you choose to further this project, and we hope to see you around in the future. If you choose to stay, here are some links to help you out:

Editing policies
 * Policies and guidelines
 * Style guide
 * Media policies

Help out
 * Getting started
 * Pages needing attention
 * Image requests

User policies
 * User signatures
 * User images

FAQ
 * Help directory
 * Editing help

I hope you enjoy editing here! If you have any questions, see the help pages or ask one of our administrators.


 * --Atvelonis (talk) 20:49, November 23, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Hist/Sleeping Tree Sap
Those connections are pretty small and not that noteworthy, similar links can be made about any number of items found in the games if we looked at them with that mindset. It's not enough to warrant a mention in each other's pages, these would be best considered as just two small similarities rather than something closely relating the two. Rozty (talk) 23:08, November 23, 2018 (UTC)


 * Fair enough! Tastefulnoodz (talk) 00:19, November 24, 2018 (UTC)

Easter Eggs
To prevent miscommunication, I would add an explanation for each "easter egg" in the trivia section of each page you added the category to. Otherwise, it's just randomly there, and readers won't know what it's for.
 * Normally I would wholly agree with you, but even with a trivia section explicitly spelling-out the intent of some Easter eggs, there are those who would outright refuse to even so much take it into consideration, accuse it of being mere speculation and demand citing sources that don't exist even though no other similar page is held to such an absurd standard. After a certain point, it stops being a "miscommunication" and starts to look alot like deliberately spiteful posturing that sacrifices the comprehensiveness and propriety of the wiki for the sake of conceit. All over a muffin. Ridiculous. Tastefulnoodz (talk) 18:11, December 5, 2018 (UTC)
 * In The Cat Master and Blademaster Jauffre's defense, the only thing you put on the page was the category (along with a number of other pages), so there wasn't really anything to back the category.
 * Fair enough but it's hard not to get a little irked when you're putting time and energy into explaining your reasoning behind why you put the article in a category in the first place and all you get is non-responses one after the other; especially when it's coming from people who aren't administrators and have no business acting so petty. Tastefulnoodz (talk) 22:56, December 5, 2018 (UTC)


 * It would also do to expand the actual Easter Eggs (Morrowind) article (et al.) if you are adding the category to more individual pages. This keeps the information consistent for readers. —Atvelonis (talk) 18:14, December 7, 2018 (UTC)

Attribution
Good afternoon Tastefulnoodz, thank you for the edits recently. I wanted to inquire about the source of the image you recently uploaded to the wiki, "File:Cyrus the Gremlin.jpg," because you did not provide a licensing summary. Is it your own screenshot, or is it from another website? If it's the former, you can find some pre-filled licensing summaries in the "Redguard" section of this page which you should place in the "Summary" box while uploading in the future. If it isn't your image, then in addition, you would also need to provide a form of attribution under CC-BY-SA, the license that we use to host copyrighted content on the wiki. A link in the "source" field is usually sufficient, and if there is a known author then including them in the appropriate field in the template as well is encouraged.

While it's on my mind, you should also remember to add references to pretty much anything potentially contentious/not necessarily well-known, or really anything in the lore in general. So for a situation like this, our sourcing policy would have you add a reference to the end of the sentence with a link to the original material from which you derived this information. Experienced editors would be able to figure out where to look if they wanted to find something Kirkbride said, but the same cannot be said for most readers, so it's important to make things easy for them. In this case, a link to the TIL entry on Kirkbride's posts is fine, although you would have to give the reference tag an "unlicensed" group. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, and have fun editing. —Atvelonis (talk) 21:24, December 8, 2018 (UTC)


 * So this question was not rhetorical, I actually need to know what the source of the image is so that I can add the appropriate file licensing (or you can do so yourself). There are legal implications for uploading copyrighted content to the wiki without proper attribution, and I would rather not have Wikia or Bethesda on our case about that. We rely on each of them for a certain amount of sponsorship, such as the ongoing raffle and other things, so it's important to maintain a good relationship in this regard. If you do not provide a source for your file, then it will unfortunately have to be deleted! —Atvelonis (talk) 16:30, December 9, 2018 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I just saw this. The picture is taken from a screenshot of a review by The Cantina: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g1rv9aqHlw


 * I actually ment to add a summery of attribution but for some reason the option didn't pop-up when I uploaded the image and it completely skipped over my mind, so I do apologize for that. As far as unlicenced tags, I've rarely if ever had a need to use them, so I'm not quite sure how they work or how they're different from dropping refs in other cases. Let me know if you have any questions or how I can avoid this confusion in the future, thank you. Tastefulnoodz (talk) 16:40, December 11, 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you, I've updated the file description now. I'm going to categorize the image as a creature image even though Cyrus is depicted, since he is in the form of a gremlin.


 * It occurs to me now that you seem to be using Wikia's proprietary VisualEditor to edit the wiki, rather than the Source Editor. The last time I used VE to actually edit was in 2014, so I could be mistaken here, but I think there actually is not a way to add reference groups in VE (it is not the greatest feature that Wikia has released). I would recommend that you go to the "Editing" tab of Special:Preferences and set your default editor to Source, then scroll down and click Save. The Source Editor has more tools and allows you to edit in a much more nuanced/direct way; instead of relying on the UI of a WYSIWYG editor like VE, you are editing the actual code/wikitext for articles. Wikitext syntax can seem a bit daunting at first, but it's actually not super hard to learn. I have a guide on editing in Source here, and I would be happy to join you in the Chat for a live session if you think you would benefit from that.


 * In VE you can just click a button to make a reference, but this does not seem to account for reference names or groups, which are still important for many articles. A regular ref in Source looks like this:




 * You can attach names and groups to any references you like, although the only time we really use groups are for unlicensed references (almost the same thing as "unofficial lore" on the UESP or "obscure texts" on TIL or our old terminology, "out-of-game," but with a focus on copyright rather than those sites' more subjective groupings). Naming references is useful when you want to use them multiple times in an article:


 * First instance:
 * Later instances:


 * Likewise, you can also attach a group to a reference to split it off from the rest of them. Here is how you do it:




 * You can name references with groups as well. Other than separating unlicensed references, groups are only really used for the occasional ==Notes== section (not the same as ==Trivia==). If you're using a group in a reference then underneath Refs, you have to make a new reference list that refers to the group, such as . —Atvelonis (talk) 18:00, December 11, 2018 (UTC)


 * So an example of where the UL template and associated reference tag would be used is here. Kirkbride's Reddit comments are not copyrighted by a ZeniMax Media Company and need to be noted as such. This doesn't denote anything about the canonicity of a statement (not really definable, which is why we tend to avoid the term), but many readers find it useful to distinguish between licensed and unlicensed content nonetheless. —Atvelonis (talk) 17:45, December 22, 2018 (UTC)

Games vs. lore content
Hey, I wanted to elaborate on my reversion here so that you understand why this action was taken. Typically we do not record much information in the way of lore on a game-specific page such as this. Technically, the Alduin (Skyrim) article documents the collection of polygons that has been assigned the name Alduin in Skyrim and any associated game data, not the broader figure in the lore. For the sake of organization, that information is generally kept in a dedicated lore page on the subject (in this case Alduin), which should be linked in the hatnote at the top of the article for quick access. Game-specific pages may have brief history/background sections if they really need them, but you should try to avoid adding lore trivia in these cases. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. —Atvelonis (talk) 21:25, December 14, 2018 (UTC)

Skooma
Wujeeta points out how it worked. It doesn't matter if her claims contradict the written word; what we see is more important than what we read. A book suffers from the unreliable narrator, what we see take place with our own eyes, however, does not. Wujeeta doesn't just "claim" it's all she needs; it literally is all she needs, as the quest proves.

Wether you choose to accept this or not is irrelevant.

Also: Same thing with Falmer. If Bethesda wanted to have them be elves, their souls wouldn't be white. The established lore is that only Black Souls can capture the souls of an Elf or Man. Indeed, only a Black Soul Gem can take hold of Arch-Curate Vyrthur's soul, yet those of the normal "Falmer"? A white soul gem is enough.

Bethesda made a clear intention here, I suggest you take it. Blademaster Jauffre (talk) 21:06, December 16, 2018 (UTC)


 * I'll take your "suggestion" into consideration. Please keep in mind in the future how you choose to respond to people on their talk-pages. It can tend to come off as unnecessarily confrontational. I'm not a troll nor am I just going around writing fanfic - I am a contributor same as you. Your authority on here only extends insomuch as your experiance and dedication to the wiki have proven. That's all I have to say about that.


 * As I said before, addiction is not a measurable in-game mechanic in Skyrim . The Drangonborn can never be addicted and neither can NPC's. So yes, in fact, the only proof we have that she was cured is her own words. No, we do not see her cured because again, we don't see anything. We can't see anything. Her stats, appearance, and dialogue interactions with other NPC's remain completely unchanged before and after she is given the potion. I don't know how you could possibly insist otherwise. While we're on the topic, how exactly is an in-game book which has been published four times within the series an "unreliable narrator" but the word of one NPC is? Keep it mind, I never said she wasn't cured, only that a descrepency exists within the text between what we the player learns and what we're told. Hence why it is part of a trivia entry and not the main article.  


 * The fact that falmer are elves is self-evident. If Bethesda didn't want us to make the connection between Falmer and other Mer (Bosmer, Altmer, Dunmer, etc) they could have... named them something else? Written an entirely different origin and back-story for them? The fact that during the quest "Discerning the Transmundane" we are instructed to collect blood samples from the surviving elven races, which includes falmer, only further supports that position. The precise reason that falmer produce white souls is up for debate, but the most likely answer for this is game-mechanics - black souls are meant to be somewhat rare and powerful, while the falmer are abundant and generally quite weak, intended mostly to break up the monotony of dwemer ruins and serve as a "goblin" analogue for Skyrim. Yes, the game technically treats them as creatures, but so were orcs in Arena and Daggerfall. The soul-gem argument is, as far as I'm concerned, null and void. The article in question is a lore page, not a strategy guide. Let's keep it that way. Tastefulnoodz (talk) 22:43, December 17, 2018 (UTC)


 * You're trying to use gameplay over the sake of lore. Her addiction is cured; that's the entire purpose of the quest, if it weren't cured, she wouldn't be grateful for your aid in "curing", it. What a book says means nothing compared to what you see take place in front of your eyes. It's not "the word", of an NPC, she isn't just "saying" she's cured, she was addicted, and after you provide her the potion, she notices she's cured. Hence why she is grateful, and why she doesn't say "well, this potion didn't do jack!".


 * "Self-evident", yeah right. Let's all just ignore the way souls work in TES in favor of some quest bogus involving a Daedric Prince who tricked his servant, because that's clearly more accurate? Black Souls are not meant to be "rare", at all. Any human NPC carries a black soul; nothing else but that. Human, elf, beastfolk, all three carry Black Souls. Arch-Curate Vyrthur, a traditional Falmer, has a Black Soul, yet his modern day counterparts? They do not. Reason being: His modern day counterparts are no longer elven, nor humanoid. Bethesda made this decision for a pretty damn good reason. Or would you argue that zombies aren't undead, but just badly programmed humanoids?


 * PS: Stop adding the easter egg category to every page you come across, and cease changing pages which were perfectly fine. You're POV pushing to the extreme.
 * Blademaster Jauffre (talk) 17:34, December 18, 2018 (UTC)
 * It's pretty clear from our previous interactions that your motivations are wholy personal and spiteful in nature. I'm done talking to you. Tastefulnoodz (talk) 18:25, December 18, 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm certain an editor of three years is clearly in this for personal gain rather than the betterment of the wiki... /s. Alas, this is going absolutely nowhere, this isn't the first time people have pointed out your edits. I recommend rereading the guidelines, your edits are in good faith, but not according to policy.
 * Edit: It'd also be appreciated if (and when) you add the "Easter Egg" category you provide an explanation for the easter egg, like you did for Giant Nirnroot Island after being informed by staff. Another such article would be Temba Wide-Arm, though the latter lacks an explanation.
 * Blademaster Jauffre (talk) 19:40, December 18, 2018 (UTC)

I apologize for the lateness of this reply. I have been working on getting a script for AkulakhanBot running and it has eaten up a lot of my time.

I would like to clarify that everything in TES lore suffers from (or is enhanced by, depending on your perspective) the unreliable narrator, not just content that happens to be given to us in a textual format. This includes dialogue, and even physical events the player character observes with their own eyes. Since you are inhabiting an entity in the TES universe, your in-game perception of everything is subject to whatever slants said character happens to have (these could range from implicit biases about this or that to literally hallucinating, for example: who knows?). Nothing that you see is ever indubitably The Truth, so we are expected to accommodate varying interpretations of topics, even conflicting ones. That's just the way the lore is designed. As long as we do so in an encyclopedic fashion, it doesn't have a negative effect on readers' understanding; if anything, it encourages them to look at the lore less narrowly. They can come up with explanations for these things on their own; we don't typically need to decide for readers which one is definitively correct.

The initial edit to the Wujeeta page added the line, "Although she claims a healing potion is all that's needed to cleanse her of Skooma addiction, this is contradicted by in-game sources." The phrase "in-game sources" is not an adequate citation for such a claim. That would be like saying "peer-reviewed science proves that dark energy exists." It might satisfy a casual reader, but it's not helpful to anyone doing research and isn't becoming of an encyclopedia. You need to be extremely specific whenever you add anything to the wiki, because if readers cannot trace back the origins of content added to our articles, we may as well be making up everything we're saying. I would tend to think that the current line, "Despite Confessions of a Dunmer Skooma Eater stating a skooma addiction cannot be cured, Wujeeta's addiction is cured through a healing potion.," is perfectly fine.

I think Jauffre is correct about not strictly considering Falmer to be Mer, insofar as their souls have changed enough that they are more akin to an everyday creature than actual Elves, but this doesn't necessitate that their Merish history be completely ignored. The use of Falmer blood in "Discerning the Transmundane" is pretty clear evidence that their ancestry is still biologically relevant (at least more than it is for, say, Bretons). On the other hand, as Jauffre points out, the "-mer" suffix in "Falmer" is not standalone proof that they are still Mer; the term "Betmer" has the same structure, but the races it describes are considered Beastfolk rather than Mer. Although, from an in-universe perspective, I might attribute this to the Aldmer originally treating anything kinda humanoid (meroid?) or kinda intelligent as just another kind of Elf for the purpose of language (i.e. it is not a particularly scientific classification, more of a historical one). By extension, one could argue that this does not apply to the Falmer, whose name was definitely not misapplied from the start (when they were undoubtedly Mer). However, whatever conclusions we reach based on this are probably a little too shaky to really use as evidence. I personally think it would be fine to use Category:Mer on the Falmer page since their treatment in biology is somewhat ambiguous; anyone seeking to learn more specific information will quickly realize from the lead that it is not entirely clear-cut. The categorization system is not really the primary thing that people use to determine what is true, articles are. But I do not have an especially strong opinion on this topic, and defer to the will of the community.

I have a final comment to make to Jauffre specifically: you have been and are being needlessly hostile in your interactions with Tastefulnoodz. I'm not sure why you feel the need to so openly condescend (is it really just because you disagree with his analysis?), but such behavior is not wanted on this wiki. On the Talk:Muffin (Morrowind) page, your response to his initiation of a dialogue was literally just, "No." As I remarked on that page, such a curt response is rude and does not help improve anyone's understanding of a situation. Your comments on this page are certainly more thought-out, but the fact that you ended the first one with, "Bethesda made a clear intention here, I suggest you take it." is an indication that you do not respect Tastefulnoodz' point of view. It is a very "shut-down" sort of comment, implying that you are right and he is wrong and that there is no way it could possibly be the other way around or somewhere in between. This is not the way you want to approach a consensus. You need to be open to the possibility that what you have to say is not as accurate or helpful as you initially thought. You can still argue in favor of a specific perspective for the course of a consensus, but you should also be willing to concede the claim that you are undoubtedly and universally correct, because it is almost never the case that anyone is. —Atvelonis (talk) 18:29, December 23, 2018 (UTC)



Since Jauffre hasn't responded I'll consider the situation dealt with - thank you Atvelonis for your input (also sorry about the confusion earlier between the Dwemer Culture and Lore: Dwemer categories) - I just wanted to clear up a few things real quickly on the way out: Confessions of a Dunmer Skooma Eater does not say that addiction "cant be cured", and in fact goes out of it's way to state the opposite, it's just the addiction cannot be cured by a potion. It requires personal effort, willpower and self-acceptance. As someone who has dealt with addiction in my personal life, this description is much closer to the truth then what we see with Wujeeta, so admittedly there may be some bias here. That being said, practically speaking if a minor healing potion's base-cost is 17 gold and a bottle of skooma is 25, what stopping anyone from being cured? Why didn't Caius Cosades just take a healing potion insted of letting his addiction get so out of control he's re-called back to the Imperial City? I know it may seem like I'm nitpicking here but I'm just pointing out that this revelation has some pretty important implications to the lore that are worth commenting and arriving at a consensus on.

Also, I'm glad you pointed out the aldmeris use of "mer" being more akin to "folk" but for practical purposes is synonymous with "elves". Language is weird.

I have no hard feelings and I do appreciate all that Blademaster has contributed to the wiki, I just want a chance to be able to make meaningful contributions as well. Tastefulnoodz (talk) 16:46, December 27, 2018 (UTC)



Re: Glenmoril-Hagraven Articles
Hello, my point is that the transformation is not specifically pointing out to these coven sisters but to the hagravens. Also I don't know how you are assuming the sentence implies that they were already hagravens in Bloodmoon. Maybe then it needs to be changed to "Her and her coven sisters are depicted as hagravens in Dragonborn." --Rupuzioks (talk) 16:24, January 5, 2019 (UTC)


 * That's perfectly fine with me. Thanks! Spymaster Cosades (talk) 17:05, January 5, 2019 (UTC)

Planes of Oblivion
Hey Cosades,

Considering we started off on a rough start, I suppose I should apologize for the way I acted. It was uncalled for, and I was a tad bit stressed a while ago. So, apologies for that.

Now that I'm here, I felt like I should let you know that your new article is pretty damn good, congratulations are in place. I tried to spot the flaws, and aside from some very minor ones (namely the usage of the word "you"), it seemed to be in order.

As for the lore page of the same article, I felt the need to inform you that in a previous Moot we decided to try and rid ourselves of "(Lore)" articles, preferring to instead have the disambiguation page turn into the lore page. Kind of like we have on the Imperial Legion article, which covers the lore of the Legions and has a "By Game" heading for every game it appears in, in which details specific to said game appear.

I'll repeat what I started with, apologies for the rough start, I hope to see you around. If you have any questions, let me know, I might be able to help.

But most importantly, happy editing!

Blademaster Jauffre (talk) 14:43, January 6, 2019 (UTC)



I appreciate it, and don't sweat it, we've all been there. I myself was in a pretty weird headspace a few months back due to a personal tragedy, which is actually one of the reasons I hopped on the wiki in the first place so I had something constructive to do while I learned how to cope. I know if you've been doing this for a long while now you've probably had your fair share of "know-it-all" kids messing around with pages, I imagine it can get tedious. Just know that if I get heated it's only out of my love for this series, it's never personal.

Thanks! It's still very much a work in progress, but I wanted to get a rough outline and periodically update and move things around when I have the chance. I wasn't aware of the proper protocol, but I just wanted to make sure the pages were clearly distinguished from each other, so people looking for information specific to game-play in Oblivion aren't confused when they sift through an article discussing every plane of Oblivion in canon that doesn’t cover those aspects and vice versa. Duly noted.

And will do! Thanks again Spymaster Cosades (talk) 03:54, January 7, 2019 (UTC)

Image
Hi Spymaster, could you tell me where your file File:Caius.jpg is from? Did you take it yourself? How do you know that it depicts Caius? There is no entry for him in the Creation Kit. Would appreciate an answer when you have the time. Thanks. —Atvelonis (talk) 15:55, May 29, 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi, yes I took the screenshot myself. While he isn't in the creation kit, he appears on the ramparts of the broken wall well before Alduin comes down. As far as I can tell, he's scripted to be there. Went through several play-throughs using console comands to ensure that this was the same npc who gets picked up and thrown off the other side later during the argument between Ralof & Hadvar. Hope that clears things up, let me know if there's anything more I need to do, thanks. Spymaster Cosades (talk) 04:52, May 30, 2019 (UTC)


 * Ok. The dialogue you wrote is in the Creation Kit, so I'll take your word for the rest. For future reference, there's a link on Special:Upload to User:Atvelonis/Licensing, which has some pre-filled image summaries (ignore the "licensing" dropdown tab on the upload form if you do it this way). The source being the game for these snippets indicates that the uploader took it directly, as opposed to getting it from another website. Doing this covers attribution fully (see: CC-BY-SA).


 * For now your image has been flagged for reupload since it's not cropped to a 3:5 aspect ratio (e.g. 600×1000, 648×1080), per policy. It can stay on the wiki, but if you want the notice removed then you can follow the steps I've laid out in this guide. If you're taking screenshots from Steam, you can go to Settings -> In-Game -> Save an uncompressed copy to get a PNG version of your images. This is preferable over JPG as it is a lossless format.


 * P.S. I overlooked the bit in that paragraph about Caius being flung away, sorry. You should try to use an encyclopedic tone when writing here. i.e. use the indicative mood/be straightforward/avoid flowery language. I know it's less interesting than having fun with your writing, but it's one of the guidelines of the wiki. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. —Atvelonis (talk) 16:51, May 30, 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi, sorry to bother again. Could you tell me how you know that File:Emperor Crab Kirkbride.jpg is licensed as GFDL specifically? If there is no clear licensing at the original point of upload, it's generally best to go with fair use. You also have to provide attribution for legal reasons; I traced it back to TIL per your edit summary, but you have to include this on the file summary itself too. I don't like being a pain about such things, but the last thing I want is to get yelled at by Wikia over a licensing complaint from Bethesda or another copyright holder.


 * I'm also curious where you found the quote for the Emperor Crab article, "Once, the mighty and colossal emperor crabs ruled all of Vvardenfell! But they put aside divine pursuits in favor of mundane satisfactions, and were diminished to become the mudcrabs of today. And are we any different?" apparently from Visrula the Mad Prophet, a name I've never seen before. The only thing I've been able to find is this quote from the UESP's Twitter, which lacks an actual source. Could you clarify these things for me? Thank you. —Atvelonis (talk) 20:14, May 31, 2019 (UTC)


 * Disregard the first bit, we actually already had a version of your image on the wiki, here, which is licensed under fair use. But I am still curious about the quote. —Atvelonis (talk) 20:17, May 31, 2019 (UTC)

Ah, the quote is from an ESO loading screen - I have no idea who "Visrula the Mad Prophet" is either. I tried to add it but I couldn't figure it out. But yes thank you for the explaination and I'll get right on that re-upload when I have a spare moment. Spymaster Cosades (talk) 21:14, May 31, 2019 (UTC)


 * I see. That's acceptable, then. In the future, if a loading screen quote is attributed to a person in the screen itself, you would include the "—Visrula the Mad Prophet" (or whatever) as part of the actual quote (first parameter in Quote). You would then put the speaker (second parameter) as  and the source (third parameter) as "The Elder Scrolls Online." —Atvelonis (talk) 19:39, June 3, 2019 (UTC)

Image licensing reiteration
I notice that you uploaded another image without the full licensing again. Including this information is not optional: it is a rule of the encyclopedia. We are lenient about this with new editors, but you have been around for a while and I have personally explained this concept to you twice. I will do so one more time to be absolutely unambiguous.

When you upload a screenshot of yours to TESWiki, you must do it exactly like this:


 * 1) Go to User:Atvelonis/Licensing
 * 2) Go to the Table of Contents on my licensing page
 * 3) Click the game you're uploading an image for
 * 4) Find the particular template that suits the image, e.g. "Redguard Character"
 * 5) Copy it to your clipboard (Ctrl+C)
 * 6) Go to Special:Upload
 * 7) Upload your screenshot from your hard drive with the "Choose file" button
 * 8) Paste (Ctrl+V) the appropriate template into the "Summary" box on Special:Upload
 * 9) Do not select anything under the "Licensing" dropdown tab.
 * 10) Click "Upload file" to complete the process

In the case of a character from Redguard, the appropriate code is this:

You may adjust it as needed, of course. This format is valuable for multiple reasons:


 * 1) Having a standardized template for file summaries makes maintenance significantly easier.
 * 2) These variables allow for you to extremely clearly denote the source of your image, which is critical.
 * 3) They also ensure that any other editor will understand the important details about the file instantly.

Note also that if you are uploading a file that is not yours, you must include a link to the original source of the image, per CC-BY-SA. The Bethimage (or Zenimage) template will be on the file no matter what; it is not sufficient licensing by itself.

Generally speaking, I think most people here would agree that I am a pretty easy-going admin. I have no interest in exercising my authority for its own sake. My goal is not to enforce arbitrary rules, but to ensure that the wiki remains as reliable a source of information as possible. For over a decade we have been developing systems to maximize our efficiency and the ease of knowledge transfer for readers, and licensing is an important part of that. It cannot be ignored.

If you are having trouble using the proper licensing, that is a different story. The layout of Special:Upload is not especially intuitive, which is something I intend to address when I get the chance. It is not embarrassing to ask about something if you are confused, even if it seems obvious. I recall experiencing more than a certain amount of self-consciousness when I first joined the site. If there is anything that I can do to help you edit/upload more smoothly, please let me know on my talk page or elsewhere. Thank you. —Atvelonis (talk) 23:15, June 7, 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, I seem to always run into trouble with uploading pictures. I thought I had it figured out but apparently not. I thought the drop down tab was suffient in most cases, and trying to enter information to the image after the fact is confusing. I'm actually about to upload another image (for the Vander article) and I will use the parameters you've laid out to do so to the letter. Please let me know if I've overlooked anything or done so incorrectly, I appreciate all the hard work you do and don't want to make it anymore difficult. Thank you for your patience. Spymaster Cosades (talk) 23:51, June 7, 2019 (UTC)