Canonically, in Shurima language, Sai, as in Rek'Sai means "desert". This is indeed a (near-)homonym of Turkic saï, yet the Turkic word means only a sub-type of desert surfaces, namely "desert pavement", not any kind of barren wastelands in general, like Shuriman Sai. So, it's likely that Sai is a native Shuriman word for desert & resemblance to Turkic saï is purely coincidental.
The full name of the great Shurima desert is Sai Kahleek. Kahleek sounds, perhaps coincidentally also like Arabic خَـٰلِقُ ḵaliq, which mean "creator" (albeit masculine; feminine "creatrix" would've been ḵaliqa(t)). It shan't take much of a stretch to to leap, meaning-wise, from "creatrix" to "mother" (just like "provider ~ protector" > "father" in Proto-Indo-European).
Is it possible that the Shurimans, whose language is fictional, borrowed Kahleek from a subtrate language based on real-life Arabic (the Stone Mage's name Taliyah is definitely non-native & borrowed from a Hebrew-based substrate)? Or because "creatrix" is ḵaliqa(t) in Arabic, & it is very unlikely that the Shurimans had borrowed the incorrectly-gendered word if they intended the meaning "Creatrix~Mother Desert", Kahleek is actually just native Shuriman for "mother" after all?
While I understand the intentions of your edits, they did make the values harder to read. Defiance's Shield Splash to nearby allies should be kept to the values right of Defiance's description, although this will cause the text box to be unusually large.
Therefore, AnataBakka's revert is justified. If you want info about how much shield allies get, I recommend putting it in the Ability Details (the tabbed section), not the ability description as something akin to the following: Shield gained as a non-targeted for Defiance gain 21 / 28.5 / 36 / 43.5 / 51 + 9 / 21 / 45 / 63 (+ 33% AP) shield.
I do notice that the way that AnataBakka handles edits is to perform something akin to an edit war, without giving much for reason than brief explanation. I do wish for them (and if AnataBakka sees this, this is my suggestion to them) that they treat these edits with more care than simple "oh this info is incorrect, let's edit" and at least attempt to explain in the edit description any issues or message the involved parties without being dry.
Got some free time during my university's vacations, upcoming birthday and country setting itself on fire to fully updating Izo's ability descriptions and details.
Be warned before hand of some minor changes to kit:
You'll see a few "X" values for elements that weren't set by your description, so you can fill them.
To avoid both clarity troubles and convoluted interactions, changed Vibrant Hoarfrost's damage to be autoattack damage from ability damage, so that Frozen Edge's description doesn't has the convoluted "non-basic attack related ability damage" or theorical convoluted/unfair interactions with other sources, otherwise works exactly the same.
Innate: Still a Fury system, however it works much like Renekton, although the Enraged version of abilities are more unique on its own cooldown (this means she can cast enraged Q without putting normal Q on cooldown, outside a gate of possibly 1 or 2 seconds to prevent spamming the two in succession).
Q is now does not cost Rage, instead being Sauna's main ability that'll grant her it.
Normal Q is more like a dash-AA, dealing one punch on the next AA.
Enhanced Q is much like current Q, dealing three instances of on-hit while going Master Yi.
W is either going to remain how it is, or change into the following:
Normal Q causes Sauna to mark a target, granting her a shield while gaining bonus MS when moving towards the target.
Enhanced Q has Sauna mark a target, nearsighting Sauna except for the target (and the terrain outlines), while gaining a strong shield and bonus MS when moving towards the target.
E now does not have Sauna "channeling." Instead knock-up is now 0.75 seconds default, and consumed Fury only increases damage. No more "hit nearby enemies" for normal.
Enhanced E causes Sauna to also damage nearby enemies, like default. Then, she follows up the knock-up with a Knock Down as she jumps with the target, slamming them to the ground to Stun them for a little longer. This means there is two instance of damage, instead of modifying the knock up damage any further.
R may activate instantly. Duration dropped to 10 seconds.
Her Rage meter remains full at all time, while reducing how often she can activate enraged abilities to 1.5 seconds.
Second activation is still an AoE, but also inflicts a decaying 75% slow for 1 second on enemies. It also Cleanses her, while making her immune to CCs for the next 1 second.
A person is entitled to play what games they want to play, be it Neopets, Club Penguin, or any other game. If you hold any issues to people who play such games, that is your issue with them, not a general consensus.
If the person is aggressive and rude, then for certain, they should be reviewed. However, I would also like to point out that at times, TAG, your attitude in the comments section lead to being an instigator of these other editors. As a result, you are also held responsible for certain incidents too, even if it was not your intention to do so too. It may not be a welcomed statement for everyone, but I would like to warn you again about your actions. Be aware of what you say, reflect upon them before you press that publish button, or else you are just a hypocrit when pointing out other people's flaws, when your comments may be just as flawed. We are entitled to opinions, but it's beyond irresponsible to just state opinions without a bit of conscious awareness of what is said behind the words; for you, it may just be that you too need time in the world, or that you may need to look up to other people on how to change your attitude for the better.
TLDR: your intentions are appreciated, and each of us can say opinions. However, TAG, you may need to review what you say, because sometimes, your actions can be hypocritical. Even if you want to help with the situations, I recommend that you comment less to prevent instigating the problem.
Tylobic has dealt with Darkesia already otherwise.
Seems like I did not specify on the template what kind of mistakes I was referring to. Updated it.
However, to summarize, you have been making many kit-based mistakes (be it unbalance or wrong identifiers of the kit's direction) or in the sense of creativity. I've pointed them out before, but you continue to perform the same mistakes over and over, as if you haven't reviewed what I have commented for you and for other content creators.
I understand that the community is purposed so that you can receive criticism for what issues there may be in your custom content. But when you repeat the same mistakes over and over, criticism on the matter becomes less tolerated, as it becomes "babying the mistakes you make." You are held responsible to critically review how custom content is made, and realize your mistakes. People can help you by pointing it out, but the best way to improve is to realize and know what mistakes are being made on your own.
The fact that I see a lack of this supposed development is, in honesty, why I haven't commented to your custom blogs. You keep posting new blogs, but your concepts have not appealed to me. Even if the concepts seem intriguing, the content of what you make of the kit or theme are not attractive, showing sight of your weakness in the creation of custom content.
Thus, I recommend to you again: stop posting more content, and instead review ALL of your older concepts, and any good concepts around. Review criticism you have received, see what you may have been doing wrong, and improve. And if anything, join the discourse of a more active community when given. That is the very reason why I made the Discord community, because commenting on a blog can become stale when interacting with "active" members.
Being wrong in itself is not wrong, we are flawed. If you continue to press wrong ideas around though, that is when it becomes wrong. It's just an acceptance that we are flawed, but have room to improve. And if you can't wrap your head around that, or do not understand anything I've said above, that is all I can provide. My ignorance of your blogs is nothing more than to show in a different way than criticism that you need to improve your concepts and not make new ones. May you have a good day.
I keep reviewing my last works and I consider every comments and reviews by other blogger.. I know you're telling me to interact with other blogger so that I can polish and get unique ideas from others.. I have a Discord but it seems I was out of place to involve and then talk about my work.. It's like a new foreign guy walks in and talks about his work just to help him to improve what I have done..that's why I prefer to consider the critics of other who comment in my work here in wiki.. And then critics in the comment is the only thing I have to do some rewoks in my blogs..thank you green for your guidance
I'm glad that you do review your works. However, your repeated publishing of new ones feel like you are publishing them just to get as many ideas out there in public. Yet, take my word, that is very counter-productive.
The reason why it is counter-productive is that the more you publish, the more you have to monitor and keep working on. Look at RITO and how they have so many champions, that to a lot of people, their update speed can be slow (seriously, they need to update some of the voiceovers to match their new lore). The more you have to monitor, the more stretched out the attention of the public is. Not everyone is going to zoom to each and every custom champion you make; for the creator, who is you, there is only so much attention you can give to any one concept when you have so many.
There is a reason that I don't just release champions on-the-go: because I rather develop each and every concept before I move onto the next. I have the list of potential ideas, boiling over time, but I don't publish them when I think the kit is complete. I have released for the most part, and would like to continue releasing, champion concepts that have an eye-catching lore and kit, and engage with those who comment on the long run. But if I released every other week... I can only expect that any creativity I have will be diced up, and I find that is the issue with your concepts. I won't say that it could also be an issue with your mindset from the start, but take it that seeing you publish blog after blog may look cool, but I see the pattern that a content creator publishing not-so-satisfying concept ideas.
I see that you have witnessed what is dissatisfying of some Discord communities. And if you have joined ours... then I can only apologize. However, I beckon you to come back, at least to the one I am attempting to foster with some of the other people on the wikia. Why? Because seriously, a person's creativity does better in a community. The comment-blog style of the wikia does do that to an extent, but I find that it is limiting. Not immediate enough.
But I find a personal problem with your attitude. "A new guy comes in, talks about his work." In a larger community, you will have ot face the wave of other people having their ideas. But that's the responsibility you should take on if you want to be a recognized content creator. As much as you may want other people to pay attention to you only, that is something you have to do for them, the readers. I find it closed-minded to just opt out for the wikia comments, because seriously, you are asking for a limited pool of comments, ones that may not even come. I don't like making this claim, but you are not fearing the right things. You are centering on your comfort, but not really the benefits of your ideas. To me, your ideas are greatly hampered by some of the habits or decisions you make, and I can only help so much if those actions do nothing in the wake of criticism. I've given you criticism, and even if you say you've absorbed them, to me you look like you have learnt none.
I still invite you to the discord. I invite you because you are to an extent capable of some possibly interesting ideas, even if not the best out there. I, or anyone, wouldn't take their time to lecture on your qualities, unless they are a jackass who likes insulting people. And you know me, I am not a jackass (or I'll claim so if you do think I am). If you seek to better your ideas, I beckon you to at least make satisfying connections on the discord. And if you don't, that is your boat that has sunk.
You are very much entering old Japanese history, which I too am not fully knowledgable in (nor is any normal native Japanese person). Maybe in a parallel vein to old English, old Japanese is a monster of its own.
Anyways, I'll bring this topic to my colleagues at my Uni (UC Berkeley), as they have likely encountered this before. However, from my current pool of knowledge, I wouldn't go as far back as old Japanese, as these names were likely made from only the modern interpretation (though this suggestion contradicts why other names have their old language etymology... so tell me if you still want to put them in).
Hardened "y" wouldn't have changed to "du" as I don't have any examples in mind of Japanese letter changing like that. There have been cases of the consonant falling off 思し->思い (not the best example, even for myself, but just one to offer what I mean), but none as grand as hoping consonant lines.
As for tu & du, take it that Japanese has always been an oral language, and tsu and dzu always existed before. Tu & du were simplified into being used along side tsu and dzu because of what some would call the softening of the language. Yet again, I wouldn't go as far as point this out on the wiki page as old Japanese was likely not considered into the naming conventions at all, as they differ from Modern.
Recently, I've provided my reconstructed forms of champions' names from Semitic language & also corrected many mistaken interpretations of Semitic names which I myself added in the past (my understanding of Semitic grammar is better now).
Now onto my main point, the name Janna definitely originated from Arabic جَنَّة "garden, enclosure, paradise". Officially, Rioters explain that the name means "Guardian" in Ancient Shuriman, a reasonable derivation considering that the root verb was g-n-n "to protect".
However, Arabic janna & the proto-Semitic form *gann-at always mean "garden" (possibly, a piece of land protected by a fence) & never "Guardian". Hypothetically, "guardian" (feminine) would've been *ganin-at > Arabic **Janina & Hebrew gonenet lit. "she (who) protects".
So should I add the hypothetical, yet grammatically correct Janina for "guardian," or just leave Rioters' official explanation as it is?
I would put in all those information. It would be very informational to know what approach RITO took, compared to what it should have been if fully correct. It would help readers know that not everything RITO has put out is supposed to be 100% perfect in the sense of translations, and have been derivatives with some changes.