User talk:GW-Stabber

/archive 1

Welcome back
Welcome back ^^ 00:38, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

You silly girl, you completely blew that dramatic exit! How on earth are you going to top that the next time you decide to go all suicidey on us?

PS: I can quit any time. Just watch me walk away from the wiki. Yup. Walking away as we wpeak, yes ma'am. I can so quit this, I'm confident. I have confidence in sunshine! I have confindence in rain! I have confidence that spring will come again! Besides which, you see, I have confidence in me! esan 00:42, 7 April 2006 (CDT)


 * I see you have skipped Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression and Acceptance, and gone straight to stage 6: Showtunes. 00:45, 7 April 2006 (CDT)


 * Welcome back.. :) --Karlos 01:03, 7 April 2006 (CDT)


 * Now the wiki feels like home again. --Gem [[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] 07:48, 7 April 2006 (CDT)

I like your bird
Wow, Dumpling is pretty. Awesome pets really inspire me to care about my ranger again. Err, does all the gothful spikiness come preinstalled? --130.58 21:39, 9 April 2006 (CDT)


 * You mean the leg irons? Yeah, the bird came with them. Clearly the fauna in the Kurzick territories have evolved Gothic accessories to fit in in their hypergothic surroundings. &mdash; Stabber (talk) 21:42, 9 April 2006 (CDT)


 * *Snerk* . I just love animal companions that pretty much require you to blow 30k on black body armor to go with them. Here's hoping PVP rangers will get a different pet if they pick Cantha as their region of origin... Was this thing wandering around by itself? --130.58 22:20, 9 April 2006 (CDT)


 * I don't want to spoil it for you if you haven't encountered it already, but one of the Kurzick quests takes you to a region that has these bird(s). &mdash; Stabber (talk) 22:22, 9 April 2006 (CDT)

About "Tools for the Guildwiki Metagame"
Those templates (or, I suppose they're proto-templates at this point) seem useful. I would suggest flattening them out a bit more (so they're more like 1-2 lines of text in height) and changing up the icons a bit. That red exclamation point doesn't seem quite fitting. I'm not sure what a better alternative might be at this point, but I'll let you know if I think of anything. (Are they icons for Factions/Prophecies? Hmm, I guess we could make small ones based on the character creation intro art: how about some kind of arena-looking thing for Prophecies and an Asian-temple-looking thing for Factions?)--130.58 22:55, 9 April 2006 (CDT)


 * Yeah, they are far from final at this point. I agree with the points you raise. Perhaps this discussion can be rehashed/continued in GuildWiki talk:Style and formatting/Builds? &mdash; Stabber (talk) 23:01, 9 April 2006 (CDT)


 * Sure thing. I copied my comments over to there. Feel free to wipe the ones on this page if you want. --130.58 23:05, 9 April 2006 (CDT)


 * I'm going to move the suggested infoboxes there also in a bit. Just need to get my bearings with the new MediaWiki 1.6.1 template parameter expansion. &mdash; Stabber (talk) 23:08, 9 April 2006 (CDT)

I think the point of This build uses Prophecies-only skills is not that you HAVE to have ch1 to play it, but that you DO NOT have to have ch2 in order to. if a build contains ONLY one chapter's skills, it is not a limitation, but the thing that will allow more players to play it. I would make the This build uses skills from multiple campaigns tamplate red, while the others green, or green and blue, in addition of changing the text. Anyway, this is all very cleaver and useful. :] Foo 01:26, 10 April 2006 (CDT)


 * I really really like the idea of the templates, I (at their current state) really dislike the content and appearance.
 * First, they are to big and to bright. Unlike the big BEWARE THIS IS FACTIONS CONTENT AND NOT FINAL template, they should rather be smallish notes:
 * "This build uses Core skills"
 * "This build uses Core and Factions skills"
 * "This build uses Core and Prophecies skills"
 * "This build uses Core and Factions and Prophecies skills"
 * Then I dislike the sentence "The opinions held by the author(s) of this article are not necessarily shared by this wiki or the general Guild Wars community." a lot. This is a wiki and each article, including builds, can be freely edited by anyone. So if the opinions are not shared by you, you should change the build (or discuss it on the talk page). I would prefer something along the lines of: "There are many different builds which may or may not suit you" --Xeeron 07:34, 10 April 2006 (CDT)