User talk:Sigm@

User:Sigm@/archive1

Rate-a-user
Favoured:
 * 1) Pretty cool, but PLEASE change that signature. Doom Music 00:25, 15 February 2007 (CST)
 * He changed it allready to a full black. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 00:31, 15 February 2007 (CST)
 * Ugly sig I got.. -- SigmA 15:36, 20 February 2007 (CST)
 * 1) Ofcourse I like myself ^_^ -- SigmA 14:06, 22 February 2007 (CST)

Unfavoured
 * 1) "Well I mostly rate builds (mostly without any reason because they're bad)". IF you have no reasons, please don't do it. Play more Guild Wars instead :) NightAngel 18:30, 16 February 2007 (CST)
 * 2) LOL SUX
 * 3) Agree with thoose above. - [[Image:Avatar of Lyssa.jpg|19px]] Leader Rat  16:45, 20 February 2007 (CST)
 * 4) Definitely can't be trusted. Defiant Elements 17:01, 20 February 2007 (CST)
 * 5) move to unfavored users--Coloneh RIP[[Image:Coloneh.png]] 17:50, 20 February 2007 (CST)

Does this mean Sigm@ needs to be moved to the "Unfavored Users" section now? {Jioruji Derako} 17:05, 20 February 2007 (CST)

Here you go: Defiant Elements 17:57, 20 February 2007 (CST)

{| style="text-align: left; background: #fee; margin: 0 2.5%; border: 1px solid #922; border-collapse: collapse; width:60%" cellpadding="0"
 * valign="middle" style="padding-left: 0.5em" | [[Image:Red thumbs down.png]]
 * style="padding: 0.5em 0.5em 0.5em 0.5em" | This User is not favored by the GuildWiki community.

The general consensus among users of GuildWiki is that this user is not viable.

/moan lol :P -- SigmA 02:57, 21 February 2007 (CST)

No no no, if you're going to do that at least use the correct template!

Hmph! (T/C) 06:40, 21 February 2007 (CST)

LOL :P -- SigmA 08:13, 21 February 2007 (CST)

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)

Yes I'm Dutch.
Just answering your question :D

p.s: your user page sucks, too! ;D Rickyvantof

Sig
Your sig contravenes GW:SIGN because: It uses too many colours, it's too long, the image file isn't exclusive and finally the image file doesn't redirect to your user/talk page. Could you fix it please? Sing out if you need a hand, I'm going to bed now but if I don't see it someone else will! --Xasxas256 09:28, 11 February 2007 (CST)
 * Yeah, could you please change it to go with the policy? --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 08:59, 12 February 2007 (CST)
 * What do I need to change, it's fine now isn't it? -- S i  g  m  A  09:29, 12 February 2007 (CST)
 * Quotes from the policy:
 * In consideration of users with vision problems, be sparing with color. If you must use different colors in your signature, please ensure that the result will be readable by people with color blindness.
 * Keep signatures short, both in display and markup.
 * The icon's image file should be exclusive for the signature, not shared with anything in GuildWiki. This allows for a redirect on the image file to the user page or the user talk page. Note: The image can be a duplicate of another image, if it's resized appropriately.
 * Okay, you've removed the icon from your sig so that mostly takes care of the length and the unique image problems, but the colors ar estill killing other users eyes. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 10:57, 12 February 2007 (CST)
 * Not my eyes... But.. all muggenzifters here.. I'll change it to black.-- S i  g  m  A  10:58, 12 February 2007 (CST)

Happy now? -- SigmA 11:03, 12 February 2007 (CST)
 * Happier than you I'd say! But doesn't the knowledge that you've possibly helped out some people with a vision impairment make you feel better? Plus, as a bonus, you didn't even have to give money, blood or travel to a dangerous place to do this! --Xasxas256 01:56, 13 February 2007 (CST)
 * I couldn't read it, and I'm not colourblind. &mdash;Ebany Salmonderiel 12:50, 17 February 2007 (CST)

Thanks!
You know what is kind of weird is that as soon as I made a sig for myself, I stumbled onto your userpage and read about your sig woes, which then made me very concerned about my own sig! Hehe, circle of life, eh? Thanks for the warning! :] DRAT! Now I have to make GWEN more readable....--VoteForGwen 18:18, 14 February 2007 (CST)
 * Don't make me go over there! --Xasxas256 19:59, 14 February 2007 (CST)

Your vote on N/any Virulent MM
THis is not a variant, since it changes up to 5 skills (considering taste and res as place-holders for a secondary you choose) and especially because it changes its elite. As you can see in the tested section, there is a MM with Aura of the Lich, and another one with Order of Undeath, and yet another one using Jagged Bones (which should probably be reviewed, since it was nerfed), and none of those were considered variants. Why would a Virulence be? :) You can vote unfavored for any reason you want, but at least pick one that makes sense please. If your idea is to merge ALL the Mm builds into one, be my guest, I look forward to your streamlining efforts, but until then this has as much right to exist as the others. NightAngel 17:42, 16 February 2007 (CST)

Vote on Mo/Me Mantra of Smiting
Your Vote:
 * 1) "Whats all with the PvE smiting builds? I repeat, No one will ever use a smite build in PvE (monk primary) or you have completely lost your head. --SigmA 17:29, 16 February 2007 (CST)"
 * I would just like to point out that that's pretty close to outright flaming considering you are essentially mocking the author's intelligence. There is simply no call for a statement like that whatever your personal feelings on PvE smite builds (which I have seen used and used to some effect myself).  Defiant Elements 23:42, 16 February 2007 (CST)

This is not flaming, but no one uses a smite monk I can assure. I am pointing towards that if you go smite your like weird, but thats my thought. I didn't intend it to flame at someone, sorry if I did that, but it was about 0.00 hours, I was a bit tired of voting on all the builds. -- SigmA 06:30, 17 February 2007 (CST)


 * Um, I use a smiter in PvE, thank you very much, and it works perfectly. &mdash;Ebany Salmonderiel 12:50, 17 February 2007 (CST)

QQ--Lania Elderfire 02:10, 18 February 2007 (CST)

Your vote on Build: P/D Nightfall Hybrid Spiker.
You voted against it, while several others voted for it. I understand your point of view, it might take time to get used to the build, so I created one with a little more hit points and energy management for you. Please read Build: P/D Hybrid Energy Fortress at your convenience, I would appreciate your vote (even if it hasn't changed). Ohm583 14:40, 18 February 2007 (CST)

R/N Shivering Marksman
In an attempt to improve my build, I was just wondering whether you might elaborate a little on your vote. Thanks. Defiant Elements 00:12, 19 February 2007 (CST)

Build: W/D Vital Tank
In your vote, you suggested using a IAS for increased damage. I've gone ahead and added Flail to the build as a alternate-use skill (see jus tbelow the skillbar). Do you have any other thoughts/suggestions? If I haven't already mentioned it, this is my first go at a serious Warrior build, so please, if something seems obvious, mention it anyway. :D Thanks in advance. {Jioruji Derako} 08:23, 19 February 2007 (CST)

Your vote on Build: D/A Lyssa's Fury.
Your vote: WTB IAS --SigmA 07:11, 17 February 2007 (CST). Could you please explain the vote, because it already had a IAS in form of Heart of Fury. -  Leader Rat  05:14, 20 February 2007 (CST)
 * Ya, I would like to know why also. Eloc jcg 16:10, 23 February 2007 (CST)

It appears from the edit history that the author struck your unfavored vote, then inserted a vote for you as favored - can you verify to me your intended vote on that build? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:33, 23 February 2007 (CST)

I did not favoured that build, I unfavoured it. -- SigmA 16:33, 23 February 2007 (CST)
 * Thanks, that's what I thought. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:35, 23 February 2007 (CST)
 * Wtf? You wrote WTB IAS. Then you changed it and wrote WTB IAS Good build. So that meant that you saw that you are an idiot and crossed out the IAS part and put Good Build because it did have IAS so I crossed out the rest and moved it to favoured. Eloc jcg 16:44, 23 February 2007 (CST)
 * WTB good build.. -- SigmA 16:44, 23 February 2007 (CST)

Aura of Faith
Best skill icon ever!! -- SigmA 11:00, 23 February 2007 (CST)