User talk:Skuld/Archive 16

Official Plugin?
Hey there skuld, since you're an admin-type person I decided to forward this. If you use firefox 2.0+, I made a plugin for GuildWiki.Check it out here I think a lot of players would like this so maybe you want to add it to the main page? It's definately not needed but it saves me some clicks here and some scrolls there. If people like the idea I might consider working on a more complicated plugin, what do you think?. Spayced 04:54, 22 December 2006 (CST)

Little usebox for you...
Please don't kill me...

Did I really just click Save Page?-- ~Edo Dodo~  16:12, 19 December 2006 (CST)


 * Apparently so! :p I changed the colours, hope you dont mind ^^ And the next person to make a "this user is being oppressed by userboxes" box gets a slap :p &mdash; Skuld 16:38, 19 December 2006 (CST)

...Uh oh-- ~Edo Dodo~  16:53, 19 December 2006 (CST)


 * You got nothing to worry about Edo...

...Sorry Skuld :P&mdash; Azroth    22:44, 19 December 2006 (CST)


 * Lol, poor Skuld...--[[Image:Star-small.png]] ~Edo Dodo~ [[Image:Star-small.png]] 02:13, 20 December 2006 (CST)

-- ~Edo Dodo~  08:39, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * Add them yourself :p &mdash; Skuld 08:43, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * Nah it's rude to edit other peoples userpages :P--[[Image:Star-small.png]] ~Edo Dodo~ [[Image:Star-small.png]] 08:48, 20 December 2006 (CST)

Is the spam really annoying, I'll stop it is ;)-- ~Edo Dodo~  09:19, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * I find them really cool.. ;) Corsaire 09:30, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * I used the

tag to get rid of the extra empty lines. What comes to the user box spam, how about creating a new page for them. Something like User:Skuld/User boxes where everyone could post him suggestions. -- (talk) 10:01, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * lol :p &mdash; Skuld 10:04, 20 December 2006 (CST)

Omg, I was expecting retaliation, not my box being added to your page. As a reward for being such a good sport, I give you this box...

soon your page will be nothing but userboxs :)&mdash; Azroth    13:07, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * Stop! Stop before they mutate into barnstars! That will be the death of Guildwiki. ;) &mdash; 130.58 (talk) 13:24, 20 December 2006 (CST)

--&mdash; Hyprodimus Prime   13:35, 20 December 2006 (CST)

Glad to oblige. :) Cheers. --Karlos 17:08, 20 December 2006 (CST)

Last one OK?-- ~Edo Dodo~  17:22, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * I don't flame :( &mdash; Skuld 17:23, 20 December 2006 (CST)
 * I've never seen Skuld flame a person... A Bad Build on the other hand ive seen him burn to oblivion... but people? Never!.... --Midnight08 17:27, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * I'm kidding :P, by the way how do the icons for signature work, I tried but never seemed to get them to work.--[[Image:Star-small.png]] ~Edo Dodo~ [[Image:Star-small.png]] 17:40, 20 December 2006 (CST)

=)here ya go Skuld (Text might need a color change on that 1) --Midnight08 14:43, 21 December 2006 (CST)


 * I think that one will go in the foundry of failed creations :p &mdash; Skuld 14:44, 21 December 2006 (CST)


 * lol fixed... removed a few ['s by mistake in editing=) --Midnight08 14:45, 21 December 2006 (CST)

omg... had no idea it was going to go this far... >.> Absolute craziness! --  Vallen Frostweaver  08:08, 22 December 2006 (CST)

Question about builds
I was told that for rating unfavorable builds, you need not actully play test the build to leave a comment, and may make asumtions and make a comment based on it. Is this true?--TheDrifter 15:34, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * You can just leave a comment by guessing but really you should test the build.--[[Image:Star-small.png]] ~Edo Dodo~ [[Image:Star-small.png]] 15:36, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * You don't need to test or even comment on a build when voting. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 15:37, 20 December 2006 (CST)ù


 * ^ Which is completely unfair.--[[Image:Star-small.png]] ~Edo Dodo~ [[Image:Star-small.png]] 15:57, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * Not true in the slightest. Someone as familiar with skills as Skuld can look at a build and tell it's crap - because he's experimented with those skills before, he knows what they do, and he's tried different combinations with them. I know it's hard to envision ever being familiar enough with skills to know what they do without reading each one, but the users that have practiced builds enough (and gotten as good as Skuld) don't need to waste time testing a build they know is flawed. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|||My Talk]] 16:13, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * I mean it's unfair that people can vote and not leave a comment at all.--[[Image:Star-small.png]] ~Edo Dodo~ [[Image:Star-small.png]] 16:18, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * I'd agree with that and I wouldn't mind seeing less of some of the more glib comments like "no...just no" and "you must be kidding" . If a build is really that bad it should be pretty easy to take a few extra seconds and write a more informative comment on why you're voting unfavoured. --Xasxas256 16:30, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * I could re-type the Complete Works of Edgar Allan Poe faster than it would take me to write a list of why all the crappy builds on the Wiki suck. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|||My Talk]] 16:38, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * I'm not sure what you mean by that, I would have thought that that could be explained in a single sentence. Crappy builds by their very nature suck. However I don't see that adding better comments when build voting is much more effort. For example I see people writing comments like: "Horrible". Why not spend an extra moment and write "Too energy inefficient". For better or worse a lot of our new contributors' first article is a new build. By writing stuff like "Please no" as a build comment we're hardly encouraging them to stick around and become productive contributors.


 * I like Skuld and unlike a lot of other admins he's prepared to get his hands dirty with the builds, that takes guts and a thick skin, I think we should all be greatful for his efforts. But sometimes I read his comments on a build's talk page and see the OP coming after him and think that he's really digging his own hole. Sure an experianced player/GWiki/GWGuru might see that a certain build is "noobish" but the build submitter doesn't think that or they wouldn't have submitted the build. The build talk page comments are not for masters or GW, it's some feedback for the OP and other who are interested in the build. --Xasxas256 16:57, 20 December 2006 (CST)

I'm not going after him, on the contrery, he normally dosn't leave an unfavorable vote he actully leaves comments like "you should replace X with Y for better healing". I was simply asking the question on his talk page as he is the authority on such information and would be able to answer it. I jsut don't like it when people don't test the build and asue, especilly when a build is very paticlar. People should definitly be required to play test anything they comment on.--TheDrifter 17:38, 20 December 2006 (CST)
 * It'd be pointless, and a waste of Balth faction. -Auron [[Image:Elit Druin.jpg|||My Talk]] 17:59, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * I think you're right, he's been much more conscientious of late and I should have acknowledged that improvement. I should probably make a messaging saying "this user writes better than ever" or something, you know in these days of climate change, terrorism and userboxes! --Xasxas256 18:59, 20 December 2006 (CST)

Deleted?
I was working on posting a build in the "untested builds" category and it turned up "deleted" less than five minutes after I posted it. Why did this happen? --Myrrinth 17:01, 20 December 2006 (CST)
 * Was it the Life Transfer warrior? It was really bad, I just wish I could have told you that before you wrote it :( Life transfer is a bad elite in the first place, and you would be better running Healing Hands on a warrior than this, but even that is bad. "You're All Alone!" for example is a far superior defense/offense elite and doesn't require you to choose W/N or use any points in blood. I probably should have warned you, apologies >.< &mdash; Skuld 17:02, 20 December 2006 (CST)

No problem, thanks for explaining what happened. I'll put some more thought before I post builds in the future.--Myrrinth 17:05, 20 December 2006 (CST)
 * Wow, he took it quiet well :)--[[Image:Star-small.png]] ~Edo Dodo~ [[Image:Star-small.png]] 17:13, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * Ummm...wha...yea no..ehhh...ahhh...ummm, what just happened? I didn't think something like this was possible.  Skuld getting thanked for quickly deleting a new build?  Is this a sign of the apocalypse?  It has to be...right?  I mean, thing like this just don't happen...do they?  I cant accept this.  Something is wrong here.  This kind of thing just doesn't EVER happen...I think :P&mdash; [[Image:Azroth sig.png||builds]] Azroth  [[Image:Azroth sig2.png||talk]]  21:34, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * ^ My exact thought. Someone gets their build delted and they thank the deletor :S.-- ~Edo Dodo~  04:40, 21 December 2006 (CST)


 * Well, at first I was a bit irritated with him but after doing some more testing I found that he was right. Why argue with that? Better to admit my mistake than put nasty spam on his talk page ^_^    --Myrrinth 08:11, 21 December 2006 (CST)


 * <3 &mdash; Skuld 08:12, 21 December 2006 (CST)


 * If I'd known what delete meant when I got my first build deleted <i eouldf have flamed/spammed every single admin in GWiki ;)-- ~Edo Dodo~  08:20, 21 December 2006 (CST)


 * I find it irritating that an admin deletes a page without any prior discussion or notification, especially for something as subjective as a build. But then, I'm opposed to the whole Build: namespace, so I should really stay out of this discussion. ;) --[[Image:TurningL sml.gif|Tetris L]] 08:24, 21 December 2006 (CST)

Protecting page
I think that protecting that page is counter productive, as it blocks anyone from uploading a legitimate image. Now that a message is on the user's talk page, I would rather address it with a short (2 hour or so) ban to get his attention if he does it again, rather than blocking the image name. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:53, 20 December 2006 (CST)
 * OK, i'll delete it. Didn't see a note on his page, just you having a delete war :P &mdash; Skuld 18:54, 20 December 2006 (CST)
 * Just curious, I never tried - does just deleting it also remove the block, or does the block need to be removed as well? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:58, 20 December 2006 (CST)
 * Okay, now I know - deleting does remove the block - good to know! --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:59, 20 December 2006 (CST)

On a similar but differnet note, I think we should Protect Skuld's Userpage. There's a new entry every few hours or so. Must stop it from being spammed.--Silk Weaker 19:17, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * Well I could start spamming yours instead Silk, how come you haven't come up with a good GvG build for me? Hey? Hey! Actually I'm wondering where Tizzy is, he's missing out big time! --Xasxas256 19:32, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * Here's a good GvG build for begginers, it takes into account the short comings of bad players and PuGs!

3 Human Players:

Mo/Me Healer's Boon, Channeling, Holy Haste, Resurrection Chant, Heal Party, Heal Other, etc.

Spam Heal Party for fun. 2 Seconda Hard Rez for fun.

4 Heros R/N: Vampiric Touch, Vampiric Bite, Distracting Shot, Savage Shot Blood Ritual, Offering of Blood. Signet of Agony and Plage Touch

Inhuman Reflex, Blood Ritaul Spam.

1 Human Ganker: E/D Guild Lord Destructot, Cripshot, or A/Mo Assassin.

Whatever, this is the most boring part of the build. Kill NPCs. Yawn.


 * There! How's that for a build? This is my Wintersday Present ^^ Happy Wintersday.--Silk Weaker 22:24, 20 December 2006 (CST)

N/any Dedicated Minion Master
Hi. I see from the deletion logs that you deleted this build last night - can you restore its talk pages (current and archive) and move them into my user space please? --NieA7 03:57, 21 December 2006 (CST)
 * sure &mdash; Skuld 03:58, 21 December 2006 (CST)
 * Thanks for restoring the build, but it was actually the talk pages I was after - there's some interesting stuff about build vetting in them. As well as me throwing a hissy fit. --NieA7 04:08, 21 December 2006 (CST)
 * oops, sec &mdash; Skuld 04:10, 21 December 2006 (CST)
 * Cheers for that, I've moved stuff around and tagged the old redirects. --NieA7 04:32, 21 December 2006 (CST)

Question regarding policy on new builds
Hi, Skuld. I'm an experienced editor at Wikipedia, and love guild wars, so I find myself quite at home at this wiki. I noticed the recent discussion going on at No Original Builds, and wanted to mention a couple ideas to you that might help the situation. I thoroughly appreciate the desire to have this utility as a central repository for practiced, proven, and used builds. One thing that I have noticed, however, is that while such a thing is indeed a noble goal, and while the builds turned out by this community may not be elite material, I think that it is not out of the question for "pet" builds that do not come to fruition to have some place here outside of userspace as well. I was considering today trying to think of a happy intermediate between the two, and just offhandedly (I have not reviewed the entire history of the debate at the above policy page), I think that a new category under builds listing popular builds that have a place in high-level competitive play would be one of the stronger actions that could be taken. I have often wondered where I could get a more definitive list of some of the guild builds that I've seen in observer mode, and I think it would be a tremendous resource to have one place to look things like that up. As I said before, though, this may have already been suggested, just tossing the idea out there on the off chance it hasn't. Cheers, --Oni named Greg 15:50, 21 December 2006 (CST)


 * Its kind of lost focus and spanned off into about 4 different problems across 2 pages, but I for one would like to get rid of the current "ownership" of pages where the author seems to have to defend his posting, and the whole thing can be manipulated by just having a run around in game and getting friends to favour it >.< I'd like to see the good, tried and tested PvP and PvE builds, such as dom mesmers, minion masters, LoD monks etc stay, but not stuff like [Build:N/P Curse Chucker] . I'm thinking useful stuff, and not useful stuff, not "Only top 100 gvg" like some seem to think. &mdash; Skuld 16:15, 21 December 2006 (CST)


 * You might want to look at my suggestion [Build talk:Main Page#And yet another suggestion|here] . --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 04:29, 22 December 2006 (CST)

Hi skuld

 * im the noob in guildwiki, i was wondering about my user page that is it good enough for a noob? O u can delete this after u seen it talk to me in my discussion page it's kinda emty ;-)Shadow Ghost22:55 December 2006

Allowed?
Template:Wiki-1, Template:Wiki-2, Template:Wiki-3, Template:Wiki-4?-- ~Edo Dodo~  15:19, 23 December 2006 (CST)


 * Use . &mdash; Skuld 15:20, 23 December 2006 (CST)


 * Delete the templates as they aren't needed? --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 16:48, 23 December 2006 (CST)


 * Done. You put a template-in-a-template Edo? o.O &mdash; Skuld 16:51, 23 December 2006 (CST)

Reason for deletion?
One of my builds got deleted recently from the untested section. I did make a blatantly baad build in the past that went up for deletion, but I was given reasons prior to its termination. I was a bit curious as to the deletion of my D/A build Grenth's Assassin. I doubt it was bad to the point of immidiate termination (in fact I had a ton of faith in that one) and was wondering why it never went through any discussion on the talk page to argue it.

Does it have to do with the "no original builds" concept, (personally I have only seen 2 other people near my build so that seems very likely)?

The List
Hiya! Your the first to get your name on The List twice! Congratulations! (Btw, your talk page is screwed by the ToC) -- (talk) 21:18, 23 December 2006 (CST)


 * Yay! I'd like to thank my miniture fungal wallow for getting me here today. &mdash; Skuld 06:04, 24 December 2006 (CST)


 * Going for a third name sometime soon? ;D --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 08:31, 24 December 2006 (CST)

D/E Rodgort's Reaper
Hi. Can you restore D/E Rodgort's Reaper back into the build space please, nearly all the reasons for deletion are factually incorrect (there's no "waste of points" as they're distributed into the only two lines needed, "no energy" is mistaken due to the net gain of +5 energy for every use of Glowing Gaze, there were no less than two self healing skills, and a speed buff is totally unnecessary as the duration of burning is twice as long as the attack speed of the scythe). Thanks. --NieA7 16:53, 24 December 2006 (CST)
 * done &mdash; Skuld 16:56, 24 December 2006 (CST)
 * Thanks. --NieA7 16:58, 24 December 2006 (CST)

[Build:Me/A Promise Spiker]
Why did you delete my posted build, [Build:Me/A Promise Spiker] ? As far as my guild has used it, it's at least valid enough to warrant the unfavored pile. Aubray1741 20:21, 24 December 2006 (CST)


 * Unfavoured, not sure what the point is but.. :s &mdash; Skuld 20:22, 24 December 2006 (CST)


 * I love how people unfavor builds without testing them. We use this successfully in AB and PvE. And the point is to not LEAD with AP, but to use it when the target is about to die. [[Image:UserImage Aubray1741 ClassicIcon.gif]] Aubray1741 20:24, 24 December 2006 (CST)


 * I'm also willing to take you out to a zone and SHOW YOU why it works. [[Image:UserImage Aubray1741 ClassicIcon.gif]] Aubray1741 20:26, 24 December 2006 (CST)


 * Ahhh...music to my ears. Now this is more along the lines of what a normal response to an authors build getting deleted is.  Balance has been restored :P&mdash; [[Image:Azroth sig.png||builds]] Azroth  [[Image:Azroth sig2.png||talk]]  22:18, 24 December 2006 (CST)


 * Hey Skuld, I deleted the Promising Dominatrix. U know what? I like the build, I use it, and if you want to bury it, it's your -censored- problem. I don't even know what you meant by SF, but it's probably something like "hey, this isn't what I use. Must be crap". And I'm so not getting into another argument. So there. Problem solved. By the way, I wonder why you give a rat's buttocks about new builds. THe whole section is awful according to you, and if you look at the tested section there is a lot of mediocre crap. Anyhoos, it's gone and so am I. For now. :) NightAngel 23:25, 24 December 2006 (CST)


 * ???????? Hmmm...why is it that people get so touchy when it comes to builds? I have to admit, I was sad when my first build was voted down, and I pissed and moaned about it for a while. However, that was because I didn't understand the vetting process at the time, and some nice users (Galil, Honorable Sarah, and Thervold) helped me out.  But I just don't understand your response here.  Why take shots at Skuld?  I can see that your pissed, but I don't get why?  But even so, why take shots and say you don't want to get into an argument at the same time.  Those just seem like two conflicting actions, and it makes it look like you're trying to draw Skuld into an argument.  But whatever, that's just my 2 cents.&mdash; [[Image:Azroth sig.png||builds]] Azroth  [[Image:Azroth sig2.png||talk]]  01:51, 25 December 2006 (CST)

Ive had 6 builds either unfavored or deleted, the 2 succesful pages I wrote arent entirely mine. I keep coming back because I still love making builds and doing coll stuff with unusual professions. I dont really care if others use them or i get credit for anything, but its a nice feeling that you contributed to the commmunity in some way. Ive had a few people come up to me saying, "hey arent you that ele guy? What staff do you use?" But having a build unfavoured just means theres more to be worked on, or theres better ways in another profession. half of my builds were deleted because they were ele copies of another Primary build. Like the Ele runner, ele 55, ele SB(that was my only good one, but ANet nerfed it), ele IW and a bad nuker build. I like to do everything with my ele, but this wiki is about the best builds, so if you want to have ele fun, talk to me! When builds are criticized its not personal, its to help you learn whats best. You can always have personal builds on your own page. Thats what im doing. not done yet, but i hope ill have more time soon.--&mdash; Hyprodimus Prime   02:19, 25 December 2006 (CST)

I just have to /agree with Azroth and HP here, am very sick and tired of Unfavored Build posters Bitching and Whining so much. Some of the builds posted are Pure Crap and when Skuld deletes them it's a Good Thing(tm). Some are maybe okay but not the best and that's why they get deleted or unfavored. It's those ones - the ones that are questionable but mostly bad - that are the difficult cases. The author can argue endlessly about this or that aspect of the build, why it is good, take pot shots at those that voted unfavored, etc. But just like you said HP, Unfavored is all about helping you learn what's best. It's constructive criticism (usually), and I wish people would understand that before bashing Skuld. :) 24.6.147.36 02:38, 25 December 2006 (CST)


 * Ps. Skuld your user talk page is being hijacked again, sorry :D 24.6.147.36 02:38, 25 December 2006 (CST)


 * Oh, it's criticism alright, but constructive? Nope. I'm not sure what he said, but I think the "SF" in his comment (now gone together with page) refers to searing flames? In which case he's saying, why play a mesmer, or actually, any other character that does damage, when you can play an elementalist with a specific elite? And that's constructive? Right :) NightAngel 06:28, 25 December 2006 (CST)


 * Blah, thats exactly what i'm saying, eles do more dmg with SF, no 2 ways about it >.< &mdash; Skuld 06:29, 25 December 2006 (CST)


 * OF course I was pissed, but it was short-lived. The build is not worth too many arguments. It was a sufficiently effective way of using a mesmer in PvE imho, and that's about it. I have a nuker, skuld (which uses promise nuker, muuch quicker and more brutal than searing flames), and most of my characters carry around searing flame elementalists. I know it's good. I still like to play other classes too, you know. :) Ps: there's some generic crappy domination mesmer in tested section. Energy surge is nice. Being able to cast spiritual pain 3-5 times per battle, with good energy management - better. I really don't get what is your criteria, but someday i'll understandNightAngel 06:42, 25 December 2006 (CST)
 * Here's one: [Build:Me/E Flashfire] . FC Nukers don't get much better than that. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 13:35, 25 December 2006 (CST)
 * Meh. I already used a similar build. Having an elementalist, I just felt like a second class citizen (and yes, I realize how that sounds after defending the AD, but I have my reasons- the hero AI handles it much better than the dervish). No, I wanted a mesmer that actually USED mesmer skills. By the way, I saw you strike down a vote somewhere (unfavored, i think it was the Pve Dom mesmer?) because the fella didn't explain his vote. Shame on you, Rapta, shame on you. Do we need another lesson in guild wiki rules? :)))) NightAngel 15:10, 25 December 2006 (CST)
 * Someone nearly got banned for putting unfavored votes without proper explanations. I doubt you'd want to be the next. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 16:05, 25 December 2006 (CST)
 * That would be funny, if there weren't administrators voting unfavored without any explanations, and other administrators stating very clearly that you don't need to test nor explain your vote. NightAngel 17:30, 25 December 2006 (CST)
 * Hmm, usually, admins vote unfavored without posting anything because a valid reason has already been brought up and there's no reason to retype it. That, or the build is just horribly bad. =P But on builds where actual debate is occuring it, comments like "not feeling it" is not exactly considered valid. Often the case, is that there's no reply because the person just wrote the build for the sake of writing it and leaving it there. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 17:47, 25 December 2006 (CST)

My problem is not so much no one likes the build, it's that no one bothers to give a shit long enough to TEST builds anymore to confirm their comments (or lack thereof). Therefore, a 15 second review of the build returns: "lawl, AP sucks, must delete/unfavor since it's not a FotM". Aubray1741 15:21, 25 December 2006 (CST)

This is ridiculous. NO ONE in the history of GW can look at skills, no matter how "leet", and assume it works or doesn't work. I know for a FACT that this build works cause I have TESTED it, especially in higher level areas such as the Torment realm. I also know a lot of mesmers who have taken up using this build because it works, it pushes out insane amounts of damage, it ignores armour, and AP allows you to reload instantly for the next target. I think we all KNOW that AP itself, as well as most of the skills in the build, have stupidly long recharge times, but that's the POINT. I'd also go so far as to say Skuld's scared of being wrong, so he won't take up Aubray1741's challenge. Do it, if you think you're so right. And yeah. The FotM mentality is stupid, immature, and inane. Just cause it's not FotM doesn't make it bad. 124.187.94.151 21:45, 25 December 2006 (CST)


 * Terrified. Wtf. &mdash; Skuld 21:49, 25 December 2006 (CST)


 * Did you even read the preceding discussion? Unfavored != Bad build. It's constructive criticism. And as to "The FotM mentality is stupid, immature, and inane. Just cause it's not FotM doesn't make it bad." I think what's really immature is people like you who go around throwing insults and sounding presumptious, while at the same time falling back on generalizations like, "Oh, it's that FotM mentality", which is total BS. 24.6.147.36 00:50, 26 December 2006 (CST)

Merry Christmas
or whatever holiday you celebrate. Just wanted to wish all the regular's i normally deal with here a happy holidays... --Midnight08 00:02, 25 December 2006 (CST)

A Wintersday gift for you...
Happy Wintersday!

&mdash; Azroth    02:24, 25 December 2006 (CST)

... > < --Silk Weaker 02:45, 25 December 2006 (CST)

New competition
Sorry Skuld, I'm going to advertise my new competition on your talk page. It seems like all of the user box whackos are hoarding on your page. ;)

If you like creating user boxes or want to win something nice, visit User:Gem/User box competition.

Thanks Skuld! -- (talk) 02:48, 25 December 2006 (CST)


 * I'm fresh out of inspiration, BiP plz :p &mdash; Skuld 17:17, 28 December 2006 (CST)

Present Hunt
Had to fix Present Hunt again, please protect it :D <3

Little fix in winterdays 2006
Would have done it myself but the page is protected: the link to the quest log is not valid.. Corsaire 15:21, 25 December 2006 (CST)

N/Mo MM Support
Why was this build deleted? --NieA7 19:02, 25 December 2006 (CST)


 * We've got enough MM builds and that was a bad one. C'mon, healing burst intead of flesh golem, jagged bones, or even order of undeath. &mdash; Skuld 19:15, 25 December 2006 (CST)
 * I'm shocked to say I agree with Skuld. I mean, there is Heal area you know. :) NightAngel 19:17, 25 December 2006 (CST)
 * I used it a few times and I thought it worked pretty well, especially with vengeance and so on. Maybe not a primary MM build, but a very valid alternative... --NieA7 07:38, 26 December 2006 (CST)
 * Guess it depends what you think the builds section is for - basic builds or them + interesting alternative builds. Really need to get that one crystallised. I wouldn't mind just documenting the observed PvP builds, but that'd be pretty much impossible with PvE stuff like this. Ho hum. One more reason to split stuff I guess :p --NieA7 07:46, 26 December 2006 (CST)
 * It was only a minor varient, we've had this MM fiasco before :P If its too similar, it needs to go. &mdash; Skuld 07:49, 26 December 2006 (CST)
 * GAaaah, I had a huge message and it's gone because you edited the page. I loathe you Skuld. Anyhoos. I think some users are quick to dismiss new and interesting ideas because they can't be bothered. I don't believe this is the case here. Healing on a MM is a good idea and it's been done before, but... heal area is a better and non-elite way of doing what you want to do with burst. Haven't seen the build so can't offer many comments, but I'm open to constructive arguments, alright? :) NightAngel 07:53, 26 December 2006 (CST)
 * If you hit back to where it goes to the conflict message, your text is in the bottom window ;o &mdash; Skuld 07:55, 26 December 2006 (CST)
 * ooooh. Ok. thx. :) NightAngel 07:59, 26 December 2006 (CST)

No more builds on wiki
Where is the page about getting rid of them? I'm retarded and can't find it. :( - BeXoR   01:02, 26 December 2006 (CST)
 * Talk:Builds/Archive_4 &mdash; Skuld 07:43, 26 December 2006 (CST)

Spam Article Deletion Tag
GuildWars_Visions reeks of spam to me. It may be a real program (or it may not), but the page is basically an advertisement. The author got rid of your del tag, I reverted to put it back. I think the reasons for deletion are stronger than just being non-notable. I'd suggest as quick a deletion as policy allows. — HarshLanguage 07:02, 27 December 2006 (CST)

Bot
You'll probably need to know/learn Python or Perl. There's pywikipediabot, the most popular framework, in Python. There are at least a couple of MW-related modules on CPAN in Perl. --Fyren 16:31, 27 December 2006 (CST)


 * Heh, screwed there then >.< Would it be possible you use yours to change Skills Used and Items Dropped to lower case for me? &mdash; Skuld 16:35, 27 December 2006 (CST)

Improvement drive
Hi. Would you like to view and comment Talk:Main Page/editcopy. Thank you in advance! -- (talk) 21:58, 27 December 2006 (CST)

You deleted my build, you bastard
I wanted that for something. I suppose it's gone and I'll have to rewrite it now. Where else should I put builds, besides Builds? And can you please not do that? 24.36.167.55 10:58, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * Lol. This sounded like "they killed Kenny!!". I feel your pain, brotha. NightAngel 11:00, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * So what build was this that was deleted?--[[Image:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG]]  Vallen Frostweaver  11:06, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * Lolz. If you give me the name I can see why and put it back &mdash; Skuld 11:22, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * You can always put your builds under your namespace and when you've refined it copy to the Builds area. Then you'll have a back up. - BeXoR  [[Image:Bexor.png]] 11:59, 28 December 2006 (CST)

Hey Skuld
I can't find anything for or against it, so I'm here to ask! For Team Builds, is it okay to have a 3 or 6 Hero team posted? As in, the builds are all for heroes? Or do team builds always have to be a full 8 person set. Thankyous in advance.

Oh and btw, gg on build cleanup :) Entropy 21:57, 28 December 2006 (CST)


 * No rules, but what I do remember hearing and agreeing with, is that some articles on HB would be better than things similar to the current build pages. And cheers :p &mdash; Skuld 21:59, 28 December 2006 (CST)

Stop It
This is my offical statment telling you to stop harrasing me. I am not a "stupidass" and am offended by that phrase. I want you to also stop insulting my intelligence every chane you get simply beacuse I do nott agree with what you think. If you do not stop at this point then you will be further reported. You may think you are above the rules, but you're not.--TheDrifter 22:12, 28 December 2006 (CST)


 * Skuld is an admin. I'm not sure what sort of "further reporting" you're talking about, but threatening someone who can ban you is not a good idea. Sure he can be a lil insensitive sometimes. But you're getting pretty close to that yourself with your comments. Regardless, you're about 1 step away from a ban already, as seen on your Talk page. I'd suggest you go take a breather and clear your head before digging yourself farther in. Entropy 22:17, 28 December 2006 (CST)


 * I can't seriousy say anymore that Skuld isn't atleast partially guilty for some of the trouble. There have been too many people complaining about Skuld recently. I haven't researched the events in any case, but something must be going wrong when a dozen people complain. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 22:19, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * It's a build thing. =P &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 22:20, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * And while blanking user talk pages after someone takes a great deal of time to gather their thoughts and composing what they feel to be the best interpretation of those thoughts isn't against the rules, I can't help but deeply frown when it happens. =/ — Jyro X [[Image:Darkgrin.jpg]] 22:22, 28 December 2006 (CST)


 * In this particular case I am inclined to think Skuld is not at fault. This person has now asked me to stop personally attacking him. He's just paranoid. Entropy 22:24, 28 December 2006 (CST)


 * I must say that I like Skuld a lot and I think he does an excellent job as admin most times, but sometimes he does display himself as more of a normal user and lacks the higher qualities that an admin usually posesses (not a strike against Skuld, merely an honest observation). And yes, we're all held accountable as humans, but when placed in a position of great responsibility and trust, I think one must hold themselves to a higher standard than normal and put more limits on themselves so that they may better serve in their duties. However, this is all just my personal opinion. — Jyro X [[Image:Darkgrin.jpg]] 22:27, 28 December 2006 (CST)

You used foul langue and it was personally attacking. And, i did not blank the entire page.--TheDrifter 22:25, 28 December 2006 (CST)


 * All of the problems nowdays are build things. However, I'm getting bored to this stuff, so I'll research the backgrounds and tell my personal opinnion. Skuld might be acting as he should and the others just whine because they for some reason think they aren't treated as they should OR Skuld is doing something wrong. Wrong might be serious or just small things, but in either case there might be room for improvement. I like Skuld and I like the work he has done for the builds, but even then I can't turn my nack on any mistakes that might have been made. What comes to The Drifter, I answered to him on Xasxas256's talk page. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 22:26, 28 December 2006 (CST)


 * This is going too far, TheDrifter if you level an accusation of a personal attack you need to back it up with some evidence and some examples. You cannot continue to accuse others in this manner, these are serious accusations and are creating a lot of disharmony. Either gather some evidence and some examples, stop accusing others or continue in your current manner and face a ban. --Xasxas256 22:33, 28 December 2006 (CST)


 * Okay, I've gone through the recent events and every single page where The Drifter has made contributions. At first I couldn't even understand wihch page it was that started this mess and when I understood I realised that Drifter has no base for the accusations. Please let this go Drifter, you aren't on a firm base at all as you are the one who started attacking, not the others. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 22:38, 28 December 2006 (CST)

So are you saying it is alright to call someone a "stupidass"?--TheDrifter 22:59, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * seriously? i use that term to describe my very best friends quite often... dont take it so seriously. --Midnight08 23:09, 28 December 2006 (CST)


 * No I am not. But I am asking you to stop attacking other users because of a really small reason. It does you more harm than good. A small insult will not warrant a ban or any other action, opposed to harrasing and attacking others and blanking talk pages which might. If you want to push this further, I wont stop you. Instead, I'll go to bed now. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 23:10, 28 December 2006 (CST)

Me/Any Power Block Farmer
This afternoon, my build had no deletion tag and a favored vote. Now, it is deleted. Why did you do that? I would like it restored. Defiant Elements 22:57, 28 December 2006 (CST)


 * Can do. &mdash; Skuld 22:58, 28 December 2006 (CST)


 * Thanks. Is there any way I can find out why it was deleted?


 * Yeh, I did a big sweep of abandoned stuff, and evidently this was a mistake ^^ As you can see from my talk, I get a couple of requests each time, not bad going for 100+ at a time though hehe. Sorry for any inconveniance &mdash; Skuld 23:05, 28 December 2006 (CST)


 * Alright, I just couldn't conceive how a build was deleted in less than three hours. Defiant Elements 23:08, 28 December 2006 (CST)

Paragon Bonder
Could you please explain your vote on my paragon bonder build a little further just for my own understanding. I posted a response to it on the page because I honestly didn't understand what you were getting at. So, I would appreciate it if when you have some time you looked at my response and then elaborated. You say "bad filler." That implies that there is good or at least better filler. If so I would like to know what so I can improve my build. Thanks again. Defiant Elements 23:10, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * Since you obviously think the build still needs improvement, I erased the rate-a-build and put it back in stubs. I eagerly await your comments as to how to improve the build.  Defiant Elements 23:49, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * Hmm, I like my P/Mo. Probably want anthem of flame or something for use out of halls instead of song. &mdash; Skuld 23:53, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * Are there any improvements I can make to my build. Or are you saying you think your build is just better in general?  I can also make that change on your build if you would like.  Defiant Elements 23:55, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * Yeh, dump the fire part :P Don't try and do too much. You might want to have a look around what other ppl are using in HA &mdash; Skuld 23:57, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * My build was designed for PvE, not HA... Defiant Elements 23:59, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * Same thing :p &mdash; Skuld 00:00, 29 December 2006 (CST)
 * The "fire thing" is two skills which I don't think could really be used much more effectively... Defiant Elements 00:01, 29 December 2006 (CST)
 * Actually, our builds are quite similar. I have a provision for using SoA.  The only other difference is yours uses "Fall Back!" and Song of Concentration whereas mine uses Blazing Finale and ToF.  Honestly, the two in mine work better than the two in yours and I have "Fall Back!" listed as a variant as well...  Defiant Elements 00:05, 29 December 2006 (CST)
 * I can't give you much else, whatever you think is best >.< &mdash; Skuld 00:06, 29 December 2006 (CST)
 * Ok, then one last thing. For my main skill bar do you think I should replace Finale of Restoration with SoA?  Defiant Elements 00:07, 29 December 2006 (CST)
 * Yeh, it works great with life bond and angelic &mdash; Skuld 00:08, 29 December 2006 (CST)

Beware!!!!
Everyone...RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!! Skuld isn't wearing any pants! save yourselves before its too late! :P&mdash; Azroth    23:44, 28 December 2006 (CST)
 * hahahaha--Midnight08 23:45, 28 December 2006 (CST)