User talk:Bishop1383

Heh, Bishop, - Karlos answered my question. I was really asking for a more elegant solution, but hey apparently there isn't one. Thanks for the tip anyway! Shandy 23:11, 9 March 2006 (CST)

Not mercutio? Skuld  12:35, 3 May 2006 (CDT)
 * Nope, definately Mercurio for this particular reference. --Bishop (rap|con) 14:47, 3 May 2006 (CDT)
 * I'll give it a guess, although it sounds like Romeo and Juleit, is it from Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines? I just google'd it and this was my first result. :P - Unchain 15:07, 18 May 2006 (CDT)


 * You are absolutely correct. But, obviously, you get 0 points, because Googling is cheating. --Bishop (rap|con) 16:01, 18 May 2006 (CDT)


 * Ha ha, obviously. - Unchain 17:17, 27 May 2006 (CDT)

Nec build
your Sucky Sucky Five Dullah idea seems much like my N/any Leeching Necro build that i have created in the build stubs page only 2 differances. you must have a great mind cause we think alike. Fitzy 18:08, 23 march 2006 (EST)
 * Right you are. Inspiration was drawn from the gwguru forums. Considering how it's the exact same skills available to everyone, it's not a big suprise that builds with a similar basic idea has a lot in common. The devil -- on in this case the difference -- is in the details. As for the skill differences, I've experimented with both of the enchantment removal skills and while eating enchantments was nice, rending can completely throw someone off their game plan because it tears through cover enchants and nicks the most important ones in one casting. When you cast rend enchants and you take 250 damage, you know that you've just completely ruined that monks day. And it owns IW builds, coverenchants or no. -- 18:54, 23 March 2006 (CST)

What is a peeni?
Inquiring minds want to know. &mdash; Stabber &#x270d; 16:30, 6 May 2006 (CDT)
 * Inquiring minds indeed... well, in the spirit of full disclosure, peeni is, of course, the plural form of the word penis. Or at least it should be, since I just made it up. --Bishop (rap|con) 16:48, 6 May 2006 (CDT)
 * Interesting declension there -- not only does the ending change, but also the middle accretes an extra vowel. Highly suggestive. &mdash; Stabber &#x270d; 17:10, 6 May 2006 (CDT)
 * Yes, it is, isn't it? Be that as it may, I still find it vastly superior to the bland and uninspired form penises and as such, I think I shall allow it to stand. --Bishop (rap|con) 18:03, 6 May 2006 (CDT)

No Gem
Is this a conspiracy? You guys make me laugh every 5 minutes; I can't leave the wiki ever if you continue this. I hope you didn't start a new trend with that box, but only time will tell. ;) --Gem 17:55, 9 May 2006 (CDT)
 * I'm delighted you're taking it that way, I was hoping you would. It was just too obvious to take the joke a little further than PanSola. ;) --Bishop (rap|con) 18:03, 9 May 2006 (CDT)
 * And people are saying there is no community spirit in this wiki. This is why I have been able to spend most of my time here, the people are usually serious, but can lighten up when not editing the wiki with a "flaming keyboard". --Gem [[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png|Gem]] 18:18, 9 May 2006 (CDT)

Stub
That really was my intention. :P I don't know what happened, must blame someone, redirect attention to them. I choose you. ;) --Rainith 23:10, 9 May 2006 (CDT)
 * Awesome. I always wanted to be a pókeman. Wait, was that not what you meant...? --Bishop (rap|con) 23:54, 9 May 2006 (CDT)
 * I didn't quite mean it that way, but I can certainly see that it reads that way somewhat. What I meant was thanks for catching that.  ;)  --Rainith 00:05, 10 May 2006 (CDT)

Styling
[ [ edit] ]  Skill Details This currently renders to:

[ [ edit] ]  Skill Details

The actual code is inside Template:Skill box 2. But if you don't want to touch that you can just work on the snipped of code here. That is, if you are inclined to help making it look just like the other edit links. -PanSola 20:24, 14 May 2006 (CDT)


 * Hrm. It's not that I don't want to help you, but my first attempts at brewing something up have been foiled by guildwiki not letting me do raw html. It appears I'm only allowed a few basic tags like br and pre, but the pivotal tag a I cannot use. Instead, it mutilates my attempts, making it somewhat difficult for me to do alignment of, well, anything. :)
 * Observe: Google!
 * Oh, one thing that may help, though: it seems to me you're attempting to reinvent the wheel. You might wish to take a look at the basic way all the edit links on this page are done, as in:
 * Oh, one thing that may help, though: it seems to me you're attempting to reinvent the wheel. You might wish to take a look at the basic way all the edit links on this page are done, as in:

[edit]  Styling
 * Quite possibly, all you really need is to fix that link to fit your scheme, and Bob's your uncle... --Bishop (rap|con) 21:38, 14 May 2006 (CDT)

Categorizaton of Bestiary
Unless there was a discussion and the syntax of Style_and_formatting/Bestiary was changed, the categories are supposed to be placed under a stub, should a stub still be there, at the top of the page. --Gares Redstorm 06:35, 8 June 2006 (CDT)
 * lol, I just addressed this on your userpage... I'll follow whereever you want to take the discussion. --Bishop (rap|con) 06:36, 8 June 2006 (CDT)


 * So it seems there are 2 different rules in 2 different places. I actually have always liked the categories at the bottom, for the same reason you placed on my talk page, it clutters the top of the page. I will change the syntax of the Bestiary so no confusion like this will happen again. For one thing I was addressing here, keeping them at the bottom would ease one of my concerns about that little accuracy project of mine. I only got 3ish changes, I'll change them back and start updating articles appropriately. --Gares Redstorm 06:42, 8 June 2006 (CDT)


 * I heartily endorse this product and/or service. In fact, I was set to start suggesting changing the Bestiary template, but I see that will not be nessecary. --Bishop (rap|con) 06:44, 8 June 2006 (CDT)