Why did you lock off revisions to this page?

Look at the edit history to see why...

Eep, this page is part of the wiki's documentation effort. Due to the nature of this wiki (and most wikis), this page should allow registered users to edit it.
Locking it only serves to hinder collaboration and the accuracy of this page's content.

Eep, please have the maturity to not abuse your power as owner of this page. Weigh the pros and cons of your actions:
1. Enable editing, ignore an insignificant formatting disagreement, and allow this page to be updated as rapidly as humanly possible about the shadow situation; or
2. Keep it as it is now, effectively cutting it off from anyone who wants to add anything useful, making it wait for you and you only to update its content.

To both Keknehv and Eep:
You're fighting over italicizing a single word for crying out loud, it wont kill you if you just leave it be!

Please delete this Orphaned Page.

It's not just italics that are being changed, but capitalization and information as well. Like in color I had a reference to a program that can convert RGB, SL/RW (RenderWare), and HTML colors but Keknehv decided since he included his own RGB-SL color conversion script that my program reference was no longer important. Bullshit.

And you're one to talk about having maturity since you've locked out me from editing shadows...

I just thought it rather absurd to download a program merely to do color conversions. I thought I was cleaning it up, but since you seem to think that your program references are absolutely necessary, I'll leave them alone.

Eep, you've offered no evidence that italicizing every instance of words contained within a page's title is in any way useful. Despite this, you've gone on to do it anyway, on very nearly every page, including instances of function names, despite having your changes corrected as soon as they're noticed.

We use capitalization in titles because that's how English works. It doesn't matter if someone else chooses to ignore the rules, we're using standard grammar and layout conventions here.

Unless you can demonstrate a more compelling reason for adopting a new writing and layout style than "I like it better", please stop doing this. I may not like the letter "r", but the wiki is certainly not going to be improved should I attempt to remove all instances of it. This is a wiki; people are going to change your edits. Making pages for functions that don't exist, or locking other users from correcting errors in your pages does not help the wiki. It doesn't make it more useful, and it doesn't help users who may act upon misinformation contained within them.

As an example on this page, the "Shadows" option in Preferences does now work, and it doesn't matter if you had no problems yourself anyway -- you should have then corrected the original text to indicate that shadows may have caused errors for some users. Regardless, it's moot now, as the shadows bug has been fixed and shouldn't cause problems for any users.

If you want to argue your case for why a page should exist or should contain certain content/grammar/spelling, don't lock the page, don't participate in an edit war. Instead, post a comment with a reasoned argument for how the change improves the content or usability of the wiki. Namecalling and swearing at other contributors detracts from your argument.

My arguments stand on their own merit just fine. It's not my fault some people can't understand them. I've given PLENTY of reasons why I do the things I do--and they're not just "I like it better". I'm not restating them all over again because you and the others simply don't agree. Fine, whatever, but if *I* create a page I'd like it to stay as *I* formatted it. And I don't want USEFUL information removed like Keknehv did. Pages about non-existant functions ARE useful despite your belief to the contrary, Catherine--I've also already explained why in other comments on other pages. Hell, I wasn't even the first person to MAKE a page about a non-existent function yet I'M the one who gets reamed for it? Classic. Get off my back and quit screwing up my edits. I've contributed a LOT to this wiki and I have YEARS of history in editing a similar website for another scripting language: RWX so I'm a bit experienced in organizing and publishing this kind of information...

Oh and I NEVER had a problem with shadows causing crashes/instability in SL--EVER! It's ALWAYS worked PERFECTLY for me and I have YET to see a fix for it in the release notes since 1.6.7...

To quote from WikiEtiquette:
Q: People are editing my pages! How do I make them stop!?
A:It's a wiki, that's the point. Everything here is effectively GPLed. If you don't want your words edited, don't post them here. It's as simple as that.
Therefore this page officially vioaltes WikiEtiquette and I vote it either be write enabled or removed.

Corrections made to plural mirror, unable to make them here due to owner's PEBAK error.

That's PEBKAC...

And this page is orphaned. Someone needs to link this...

This page has been listed on WrongPageSetup for having a locked ACL.
This is also a concept that doesn't exist in LSL itself, it belongs on the Technical Wiki instead.

This page is still listed on WrongPageSetup for having a locked ACL. If you would like a page no one can edit, why not persue your own web space and stop wasting Linden Lab's.

To note something for poor misguided Eep... nobody owns a single page on this Wiki. It doesn't matter one bit if you created a page, that gives you no right to block anyone else from editing it. This is a Wiki, that means everyone can edit anyone's pages, and the creator (NOT owner, nobody owns a single page here) of a given page has no extra rights to declare themselves the 'winner' here. The most you can do is go home. You can't even take your marbles with you, because we can undo and recreate anything you can do or destroy once you leave.

My pages will remain. <shrug> I'll simply create my OWN LSL website (or addendum) if I need to, Wiki nazi.

You do that. Then you can format it however you want, and you can quit abusing everyone on this wiki.

*Sigh* Children...

Eep, unfortunately wikis tend to be democratic in that the majority opinion (or majority's convincability) will dictate contents.
Eep, Ice and everyone else involved in noticeable amounts of personal high horsery: please get over your egos, this sort of discussion doesn't work regardless of whether you have a bunch of good arguments or not.

It's the wiki's usefulness and accuracy that are, or at least should be the important thing here as tha's what people come here for.
That said, no pages should be locked and it probably shouldn't even be possible, (other than by perhaps admins and for administrative reasons). Imagine wikipedia working like that. It'd be shitstorm central.

Since you likely won't, Eep, at least be vaguely reasonable when it comes to alterations - the crash thing sounds like it should be updated. A single user's crashing experience is not useful (if they were that informational, crashes would all be fixed in minutes, ne?) and likely just means you accidentally have a setup that is less prone to errors but in general experience varied. Now that no one else can comment on this this information may or may not be or get out of date - there's no way to know.

Varying style is not very useful as it detracts from scannability. Eep, please either make your case and convince people or use this, or go with the the general wiki's style, It's nice to the rest of us and the new people. Frankly, everywhere else and in general text, italication is used most often for emphasis, while here it seems to just reiterate the already quite noticeable page name, so I doubt you'll convince many people...


My few cents, anyhow.

This information on removing footshadows is terrible; it will also stop all textures with tranparency from rendering. Since this page is locked, formatted different from all the others on the wiki and on teh wrong wiki to start with can an admin just remove it?