Difference between revisions of "Talk:Erisian Pyramid"

As the original author, I understand that any comment I make on my own writing may distemper some aspect of bias. However, I feel that changing the tone would lose the relative atmosphere that is garnered from such a place as the Erisian Pyramid, and detract from the fact that it truly is a random place. I disagree that it is an advertisement, but there is a distinct emphasis on the aspect of Chaos and  relation to Eris, as well as a distinct rundown of locations within and peoples inside. I do agree that my writing style is certainly unique, however, this is one of the earliest articles in the Wiki, and although it may seem that I was spurious in choosing the manner in which I depicted it, I assure you that I studied the other articles at the time in detail to find a platform to work from. I believe the article's content is indeed objective and informative, but not in the same standard fashion of writing as perhaps other articles. However, this article is for free-editing, and I am willing to change what I have written to suit a stated, specified norm, but really, I'd prefer if some semblance of the tone was still tangible in some manner.

As the original author, I understand that any comment I make on my own writing may distemper some aspect of bias. However, I feel that changing the tone would lose the relative atmosphere that is garnered from such a place as the Erisian Pyramid, and detract from the fact that it truly is a random place. I disagree that it is an advertisement, but there is a distinct emphasis on the aspect of Chaos and  relation to Eris, as well as a distinct rundown of locations within and peoples inside. I do agree that my writing style is certainly unique, however, this is one of the earliest articles in the Wiki, and although it may seem that I was spurious in choosing the manner in which I depicted it, I assure you that I studied the other articles at the time in detail to find a platform to work from. I believe the article's content is indeed objective and informative, but not in the same standard fashion of writing as perhaps other articles. However, this article is for free-editing, and I am willing to change what I have written to suit a stated, specified norm, but really, I'd prefer if some semblance of the tone was still tangible in some manner.