User talk:Gamerhenky

On the reversion on the Wizardry Empire (Game Boy Color) page

I reverted a bunch of your edits on that page's gameplay changes sections back to what I wrote earlier for the following reasons:

• «Empire gameplay is most closely based on Gaiden games which reuses its same engine” is unclear and/or grammatically wrong and I’m not sure what it’s meant to mean. If you are going to rewrite my contribution, please don’t make them less clear. “but like the third and fourth game...» What is the “but” opposed to here? You removed the mention that the game is otherwise mostly based on the first two Gaiden games.
• “Mage and Priest spells have been renamed to conform more to English names. Oddly, all of the prestige classes spells are still in Japanese.” is blatantly wrong and a clear misunderstanding of what I originally wrote. There is no “conforming more to English names”. As I wrote before it is conforming more to WIZ6, by making the names English at-all, instead of the made-up spell language of earlier games. There is also no “still Japanese”, there were no Japanese spell names before this in the first place. Please don’t try to rewrite my contributions for no clear benefit if you don’t know what is being talked about.
• "Five new prestige classes and its own spells, which most of it are exclusive for the Game Boy Color titles." Makes it less clear that they all have full new spell lists compared to what was written before. Also it's grammatically wrong. It also ignores the difference between regular Prestige classes and this game's Special classes.
• "Added genders (male and female). Males get +1 to maximum Strength while females gain +1 to maximum Vitality." has been removed without explanation.

Also if you are going to chop off pieces of already short articles can you at-least link to the new sub-article in the main article? You made a new sub-article for the game's spells here, but I don't see any clear link to it on the main article. I also saw earlier on Wikia/Fandom that you had deleted a lot of content from the Classes page and just linked to pages that don't exist. If you absolutely want these short lists to have their own articles for some reason, please don't just destroy that content if you are not also going to do the work to actually make those individual articles. --Painocus (talk) 21:05, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Re: On the reversion on the Wizardry Empire (Game Boy Color) page

The text I reverted it to is mostly the same text I wrote over 6 years ago and added to that article myself. So it is content I wrote myself.

• "Mage and Priest spells in GBC Empire aren't too related or taken directly from Wizardry VI: Bane of the Cosmic Forge, and I believe most spells names using literal English word (not the usual naming conventions or others) have its own thing. Prestige classes spells are using Japanese word though. Should I had to correct it but lack of time."
  • My original write-up was trying to say it was more like WIZ6 by using English names at-all, not that it was using specifically WIZ6's. This could have been/could be rewritten to be clearer on my part.
• Not all new prestige classes were reprised on non-GBC Empire titles, instead iirc we have Ranger, Monk, Valkyrie, Berserker, and Wizard on PS titles (Princess of the Ancient, Legacy of the Princess, Ancestry of the Emperor), save for Kunoichi. And pretty sure my changes always have bad grammar, but please be understand that I'm not an expert at English. You are welcome to correct it.
  • My problem was not with pointing out that these classes were not reused outside of the non-GBC game. My problem was that the rewrite was less clear (and made the grammar worse than my also-non-natively-English grammar), when I saw no reason to do those rewrites in the first place. You have now given an explanation for why it was rewritten. So note you have my permission to keep anything I wrote for the other site.
• "Linking to sub-pages should be in navigation, redundant if we put it in main or game's article."
  • I'm not sure what you mean by navigation and I couldn't find it, unless you mean the collapsible templates at the bottom of the article. (EDIT: I noticed they are in the Category "Navigation Templates" so I guess you did mean those). The fact I have some issue finding it means readers who might not know the sub-article exists at-all will probably oversee it as well. In a lot of wiki-formats those bottom info-boxes also don't show up on a lot of phone-versions of the wiki, but I'm not sure if that's the case for wiki.gg. I also worry (especially with shorter articles) adding things like shorter spell and especially class lists to their own articles might just cause needless extra navigation for readers and make it easier for them to oversee that we have this info. But this is better than it originally seemed to me.

--Painocus (talk) 04:41, 30 December 2023 (UTC)