User talk:Sigm@

User:Sigm@/archive1

Rate-a-user
Favoured:
 * 1) (your vote here)

Unfavoured
 * 1) (your vote here)

New userpage
Hmm anyone likes my userpage a lot more now? I've massively cleaned it up =) -- Sigm@  (talk|contribs) 15:24, 22 January 2007 (CST)
 * Speak in comprehensible english and people will answer.


 * Its alot neater now imho, see you still have 'it' though XD--Blade [[Image:smallscout.png]] (talk|contribs) 05:26, 23 January 2007 (CST)

Comphrehensible? I'm not native English, plz understand. -- Sigm@  (talk|contribs) 10:43, 23 January 2007 (CST)
 * Seemed like decent enough english to me... maybe the rude commentor without a sig wants to talk to Sigma in dutch to be respectful... hmm no? ok then... dont expect perfect english=P seriously tho be nice people... and sig, page is cool... much nicer looking than mine (mines a mess=P) lol=P --Midnight08 (talk|contribs) 11:21, 23 January 2007 (CST)

I like it. The videos made my laugh. I saw the last one before, I think you posted a link on GWOnline or something. I didnt see your userpage before this but it looks great now. I hope you dont mind if I use that evil user userbox ;) I will give you credit in my credit section. I must say Im sad though. Eles only ranked 6th and they are my second fav and necros are last =( I LOVE necros. Hexing people is just so much fun! As for the assassins ya for a factions only proffesion it was a bad idea considering so many things go boom when you kill them... And Midnight is right, if that one guy had said that for any other reason aside of to be rude he would have signed it. If we look at the history it seems that it was vega obscura... Ekrin 16:45, 23 January 2007 (CST)

That userbox wasn't mine, I stole it from gem's funpage =P What's so cool about necro's, I mean they are pretty strong, but I can't handle em. They are dead boring to me, you always do the same, raise minions or do SS. -- Sigm@  (talk|contribs) 03:05, 24 January 2007 (CST)
 * They just fit my playing style. And I only MM or SS when I have to or it is simply the most effective for a mission. I like making different builds. atm I mostly use my Reaper build featuring *gasp* Reaper's Mark I also like how flexible they are. You can degen people, mess em up with hexes, yes raise minions, deal DD and be a support class (not all at once though :/) Thats why I play them but everyone is different and Im not forcing you to play one just explaining why I love them ;) Ekrin 16:37, 24 January 2007 (CST)

Yo Sigm@, ok if I use one of your userboxes? The one about wikicode. -- Hyperion`   (talk) 04:41, 24 January 2007 (CST)

Yes, but you should leave a credit to loat. He made it. -- Sigm@  (talk|contribs) 08:29, 24 January 2007 (CST)
 * Man my new signature is awesome. -- S i  g  m  a  [[image:Aura_of_Faith.jpg|19px]] (talk|contribs) 14:58, 24 January 2007 (CST)
 * It's hard to read, but that's not the most serious issue. The problem is the code length. It takes over 4 lines on my 1400x resolution. The policy allows a length of ~3 lines on a 800x resolution. Could you please remove excess code? The coloring makes it hard to read and long, so removing most of it is the best way to make your sig better and not break the policy. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 15:12, 24 January 2007 (CST)

Is this fine? It's 3 lines. -- S i  g  m  a   15:14, 24 January 2007 (CST)
 * That's good. One more thing which I just noticed. Even if you want to use an image in your sig which is allready in the wiki, you should upload it again for your sig use after resizing it to the correct size. This serves two purposes. 1)You don't need to resize the image in your sig. 2) It's easy to check the 'What links here' of the sig icon to see where you have signed and the 'What links here' of the skill icon isn't polluted with your signatures. (I'm not nitpicking on you, I'm just setting things straight for everyone who I notice breaking the new policy and hope that others notice the messages and make corrections when necessary) --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 15:22, 24 January 2007 (CST)
 * Btw, you have an excess small tag in the end of your sig which only makes other peoples comments small. I removed it from this talk page so my replies aren't small. :D --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 15:23, 24 January 2007 (CST)

Sig usage
Hmm, I guess you could try to copy me. ;D 5 letters wont make for a full rainbow, but go ahead, if you want. -- B a  r  r  a  g  e

Ah ok, I'll try it ty =) -- S i  g  m  a   03:17, 25 January 2007 (CST)

User Page
Enlighten me please as to what "HOW COULD THERE BE NATIVE AMERICANS???" means. &mdash; Gares 08:19, 25 January 2007 (CST)
 * I was just going to ask the same question. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 08:26, 25 January 2007 (CST)

There can't be native americans, They were europeans, africans or asians. So how could ppl possibly say: Native American? -- S i  g  m  a   09:10, 25 January 2007 (CST)
 * How can you say native anything then? There were no human beings originally on earth. It's just a meaning given to a pair of words. When someone says 'native american' you know what he means, even though it might not be 100% correct. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 10:10, 25 January 2007 (CST)


 * The word Native American was given for political correctness back in the 1980s for the indigenous people throughtout the Americas.


 * As to the origin of humanity, the first evidence of anything resembling us today originated on the African continent and migrated to different areas around the world. First to Europe and the Middle East, then to Asia, then across the Berain Strait which was land during that time and migrated south. The words, Europeans, Asians, Americans, refer to the land in which they inhabit and the different evolutionary traits they developed in those areas. You, me, Gem, anyone are basically descendants of those who evolved on the African continent.


 * I hope that answers your question and shows you that your statement, "There can't be Native Americans" is the same as saying "There can't be Europeans" and "There can't be Asians". As your question could possibly offend any Native Americans who contribute or visit GuildWiki, I ask that you remove it and if you have any other philosophical you would like answered, feel free to contact me in private or ask one of you headr teachers. &mdash; Gares 10:29, 25 January 2007 (CST)


 * At first I thought that you were giving a history lecture to me and was allready forming an "I know this allready" post in my, but then noticed yo uwere talking to Sigm@. :) --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 10:39, 25 January 2007 (CST)
 * I'm a fountain of knowledge. ;) But no, I received an edit conflict with you when I was posting my response to his question. &mdash; Gares 10:53, 25 January 2007 (CST)

I guess you're not a math teacher... -- S i  g  m  A   15:23, 30 January 2007 (CST)

Actions on Build Talk Pages
In Build_talk:W/Rt_Dragon_Kuzu_Sen#Rate-a-build, you striked out a vote due to the fact that an author cannot vote. Please do not break policy again. You are not allowed to strike votes and authors can vote. Please read the build policy including build vetting procedure. Breaking policy again will result in administrative action. Thanks &mdash; Gares 10:53, 25 January 2007 (CST)

Build Page Moved
Thanks for moving the page, I guess, but I was leaving it in storage on purpose, since it's not ready for testing and didn't want it in stubs either.

Build:W/Mo Holy Decapitate
Please check the edits you are doing... Check the history when it was unfavored. It was unfavored roughly 2 hours before Zuehlke placed his/her vote. At which time there where 3 more unfavored than favored. It was 6 vs 9, with one favored vote striked out by the voter. Right now it is 7 vs 9, and in order to get it back to favored, it has to out number unfavored votes by 3. Check the Build vetting procedure. Please someone fix the catagories. --Lania Elderfire 11:56, 28 January 2007 (CST)