User talk:Gares Redstorm

Archive1

Task List
As of May 12, 2006, my characters ages are:


 * Whoof. So, are you buying Factions for each account? And, for your later reference, they're adding buyable character slots... eventually. I hear. I want to say this summer but I have no citation for that. :) --Tinarto [[Image:Tinarto-gold-Monk-icon-small.png]] 16:33, 12 May 2006 (CDT)


 * Damn! That's like 1700 hrs total, or 71 days of straight playing. When I reach that much, maybe I'll have enough cred (and confidence in my ability) to make real edits at this wiki. Maybe I'll even have a fighting chance in PvP by then. You never know... --Fenris (talk) 17:16, 12 May 2006 (CDT)

Real World Guild Wars Class
Taking the quiz brought to my attention by Phoenix on Fun page created by Gem.

My results for the Prophecies quiz:

Mesmer 75% Warrior	75% Necromancer 50% Elementalist 40% Ranger 35% Monk 20%

Even had a tiebreaker question between Mesmer and Warrior, it was that close. --Gares Redstorm 09:52, 12 May 2006 (CDT)

My results for the Factions edition quiz:

Warrior	94% Assassin 81% Mesmer 75% Ritualist 69% Elementalist 63% Ranger 63% Monk 44% Necromancer 44%

No tiebreaker here, but I guess even with my charm ;), I still have a fighter mentality. -Gares Redstorm 12:51, 20 June 2006 (CDT)

Help with the green
Baozo's Wand Rydia Bazzr's Wail Rydia Bortak's Bone Staff Brimstone Wand Celes Chkkr's Pincers Kage Drago's Vampiric Flatbow Everthorn's Chakrams Kage Falaharn's Split Chakrams Kage Sskai's Sword Wroth's Holy Rod Celes Victo's Maul Celes Lian's Lantern Celes Orosen's Staff Celes Shreader's Talons Kage The Stonereaper Kage Zarnas' Wrath Kage Reefclaw's Refuge Kage Rotwing Recurve Bow

I think that is all ;)&mdash; ├ A ratak  ┤  11:18, 19 August 2006 (CDT)

Ranger icons
Might want to change R to, latest mediawiki broke it 16:31, 25 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Thanks. I've noticed the bug talk and corrections, but overlooked my page. -Gares 16:56, 25 July 2006 (CDT)

/resign update
Please see Talk:Game_updates/20060727 for my comments. -- (talk) 12:29, 29 July 2006 (CDT)

when moving stuff
When moving discussion from one talk to somewhere else (excluding archives), instead of completely wiping it from where it's from, please instead make a note of where the discussion got moved to (if you can't remember the name of the template:Move-to, you can simply type it).

I was trying to find the discussion regarding removal of green link, started from GuildWiki talk:Community Portal, followed a link to GuildWiki talk:Style and formatting/Weapons, when suddenly the trace just disappeared and it had no archive... ~_~""" - 16:55, 1 August 2006 (CDT)


 * At first I thought you were crazy, cause I haven't moved anything in well over a month or more. I did archive the green link vote as well as the discussion that went along with it. I checked to make sure I was archiving the vote to guildwiki standards, but I did not know a forwarding link had to be placed. There was no guideline stating it, and after reviewing some of the archived votes, some have links to where the votes were w/ information still intact, others have no links, and yet others have links to the page the vote/discussion was once on.


 * I was archiving(cleaning) from Category:Votes and was not aware of the link from the community talk page, nor was I aware that a follow-up link had to be placed, as there is no guidelines to archiving votes regarding follow-up links. :\ -Gares 17:52, 1 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I came up with some stuff along with Rainith on GuildWiki talk:Old votes, I *think* this is what you guys are talking about --Xasxas256 18:08, 1 August 2006 (CDT)

Tarlok's Flagon
Hiya, just reading about your collection of greens. I picked up a Tarlok's Flagon, which is useless to me (I don't have an elementalist) and I probably wouldn't use it (if I had an ele) and can't really sell it. If you feel that you want to collect the greens on your own, I can totally respect that. But, I figured I shouldn't let something potentially useful to someone go to waste. PM me in-game on any of the characters on my user page. I'm usually on any time past 9 or 10 pm EST but don't feel rushed (because I'm sporadically on). I'm not very busy currently (on break from school) so if another time would be convenient to you, please say so. --Vortexsam 04:12, 6 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I thank you for your generous offer to the Gares Green collection. I found out a long time ago that I will not be able to get them all myself, especially with the majority of Factions bosses dropping greens and research for the Wiki comes first before my hobbies ingame. Any help with my crusade would be most appreciated. And Ferndale scares me to death. I hate Dredge with a passion. *shakes fist at Dredge* -Gares 11:06, 6 August 2006 (CDT)


 * After thinking about what you said in-game, I paused to ponder a bit. In truth, no one really knows all the mechanics of Guild Wars. I have a wild guess that maybe in a full party, the drop rates may be altered and greens might drop more often. Of course, there is the logical fact that if a boss takes 3 minutes to solo (when you get to it), it would be equivalent to having two henchmen and taking out a boss in 1 minute. Well, that isn't great evidence to show that partying up will improve your drop rates but it's worth a thought, for those areas you can't solo. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if ArenaNet awarded things like that but that's mere speculation.
 * Also, don't think I don't have a selfish interest in giving away a Tarlok's Flagon. When you get the full set (hopefully before Nightfall or you'll never catch =P), I'll be proud in helping contribute to a great achievement, rather than sitting around and being jealous. =) --Vortexsam 20:21, 6 August 2006 (CDT)


 * This collection may be a fight I cannot win, but I have never backed down from a challenge, see my police record :P
 * In Prophecies there are 93 documented greens and I have collected 69.
 * In Factions there are 165 documented greens (only counting the Divine Path variants once, i.e. one Straw Effigy, one Exalted Aegis, etc, and counting the Shing Jea Island greens) and I have collected 44.
 * All in all, I need to collect 145 more to complete my green collection before Nightfall. I know I can solo farm for at least 23 more greens and have, but with no luck yet. I love it ;) -Gares 19:53, 7 August 2006 (CDT)

Admin status
Congrats! --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:41, 11 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Hmm, Gravewit jumped the gun, NWN2 and/or FFXII aren't out yet. :P  It's ok though as Gares is probably too busy on NeverWiki to notice this.  ;)  Congrats anyway.  --Rainith 19:44, 11 August 2006 (CDT)
 * I pass on my congrats also and I'm sure you'll make a fine admin. --Xasxas256 21:48, 11 August 2006 (CDT)
 * I'm late for thank yous, but thank you. As you can tell, I am sweeping the floors and taking out the trash, but I don't do toilets. And can I take down my "You've been nominated for adminship" banner now? :P -Gares 14:55, 13 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Congratulations! Seems like Gravewit doesn't oppose adding more admins. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 15:17, 13 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Yep, and I am still for the side of more admins. -Gares 15:31, 13 August 2006 (CDT)
 * If Gravewit hadn't done it, I would have. I haven't changed my stance that we should be extremely cautious in promoting more admins, but the discussion did sway me to believe that adding you as an admin, at this time, would be beneficial. In any case, it's good to have you; welcome to the team! &mdash;Tanaric 10:59, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Thanks. I hope I can live up to everyone's expectations. -Gares 12:35, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Atleast your living up to MY expectations. Thanks for deleting the images!  First Rainith tells me he'll do it. A few seconds later you start to do it instead. Must be sockpuppets!  Just kidding. :P --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 18:19, 15 August 2006 (CDT)
 * I don't mind being called a sockpuppet. Where I live I am called a character, but in the south that basically means I'm retarded. Go figure. *shrugs and smiles* -Gares 18:41, 15 August 2006 (CDT)
 * : D lol --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 18:48, 15 August 2006 (CDT)


 * A belated congrats. I am behind on everythign here. Sorry. --Karlos 05:35, 17 August 2006 (CDT)

Catacombs
It's one thing to argue about which map is better, but not only you removed my virsion from the Map article, but you also delete the file itself, (didn't we want maps which are our own? no need for external links and credits?), and you change the virsion displayed in MY user page!! (under the text "My large catacombs map without paths."). I'm talking the liberty to upload it again. please watch what exactly you are editing next time. Foo 02:12, 16 August 2006 (CDT)


 * (another thing, you removed the first part of the sentance, leaving "a detailed version by J.Kougar", but not saying of what) Foo 02:18, 16 August 2006 (CDT)


 * First off, I knew exactly what I was doing. The detailed version created by J.Kougar is actually another image entirely with POIs. I removed the credit regarding the catacombswithoutmaps.jpg image. He is still regarded for creating the map with the POIs, which is why that is still there. In any case, if credit goes to J.Kougar for the map and you are not J.Kougar, then how is it your map?


 * Second, two maps of the same area is a waste in my book. You uploaded a map, the same exact map, but your's is of poorer quality. Editing a user page with updated content has been going on for sometime. When ANet changed the names of greens, such as Drago's Flat Bow to Drago's Flatbow, user pages were changed, such as my green list on my user page by other users. There was even a discussion to see if it was the right thing to do. If you want to upload the file again, fine, but keep it to your page, since there was a concensus that the other image is better. And if it's not your work, add back credit that it was J.Kougar that really created the map. -Gares 07:34, 16 August 2006 (CDT)

I'll make it all clearer: was my map candidate for deletion before it was deleted? please read this, this, and the pages you edit, and don't be in such a hurry to test out your new admin powers on the expence of others. Foo 10:50, 16 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Image:Catacombsmapwithoutpaths.jpg is mine, as in, I made it.
 * 1) I belive Image:Catacombs_map.jpg was made out of it.
 * 2) this is not mine.
 * 3) (which means I uploaded only one map, and uploaded it for the first time).
 * 4) I'm not complaining about the map article, but of my user page. the note about the map article came to tell that you totaly removed the word 'catacombs' from the line and link.
 * 5) Yeah, update a user page, but first, check out what he is showing. I clearly stated that I'm showing MY map, while you changed it to another map, the one from 3, which is not mine.


 * I am sorry you feel so strongly on this issue, but as you stated, you will upload your image again. You are not the only user to be upset by the actions of an admin. There are always those that will feel wronged at some point in time.


 * Assumptions about how the Image:Catacombs map.jpg was created can only be answered by the uploader of that image. Image:Catacombsmapwithoutpaths.jpg was linked to the credits page giving J.Kougar credit for creating the map. I removed all links linked to "your" map and linked them to the concensus-winning map. Please read Image talk:Catacombs map.jpg. There is no reason to have the same, I use that word loosely, image with two different titles. I did not change your thumb description because that was not discussed. You obviously figured it out, so you could have changed it yourself, thus not getting into that debate. You were showing a plotted catacombs map and one without the plots. Why not have a better picture in place? Maybe there are others that can use image editing tools better, I know I can't do it, image editing is not my thing. As for the deletion, if I did not have the admin tools (yes, they are tools, not powers), I would have still changed all the links linking to your image and placed a delete tag on it. And, though I do not know this since it did not take place, we deleted a lot of images last night and I am sure yours would have been one of those. So, if I was a user or admin/user, it probably would have still been deleted.


 * As to your calling on the policies mentioned above, those two conflict in one area. Do not immediately delete unless vandalism or spam...correct. But under your second policy citing, it states, "delete articles to maintain our high quality of content." Since Image:Catacombs map.jpg was of higher quality than Catacombsmapwithoutpaths.jpg, but your map was linked to everything, I did what was expected, attach the links to the other image and delete yours. In hindsight, as long as it is only linked to your user page, I think we can come to a compromise. -Gares 13:06, 16 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I'm sorry, I'm the one who started this by putingt the link in the map article. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 13:17, 16 August 2006 (CDT)


 * It's just a little dispute between two users, Gem. No worries. :D -Gares 14:42, 16 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Since we allow users to upload Guild Wars–related content for sole display on a userpage, your changing of Foo's user page link was probably inappropriate. You could very well have changed all the other links, but not changed Foo's user page link or deleted his image. That said, since we've gotten to that result now, there's no permanent harm done. :) &mdash;Tanaric 16:08, 16 August 2006 (CDT)


 * If you cared to check out this before assuming the pic is NOT mine, you could have seen it is. (or just check who uploaded it!!). You still ignore the fact that you have deleted a picture I uploaded for my own user page, and edited the page to include something that did not fit in there. we deleted a lot of images last night is not an excuse for this type or mistakes, and as it can be understood here, you should add a deletion tag to items, in order to let people have the chance to 'defend' them. (yes, they are tools, but it looks as you are seeing them as powers.) compromise?! let me say it again, Administrate users, not content. Foo 16:19, 16 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Is this such a big deal really? Skuld deleted four sets of images earlier, all listed by me. No one had anything against such operations earlier. And this caacombs map thing has nothing to do with that mass deletioning as it wasn't on my list. People make mistakes, so give m´him a break. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 16:32, 16 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I've said my peace in regards to the image and citing of policies. Even Tanaric has commented on it. Let him get it out if it makes him feel better. -Gares 16:47, 16 August 2006 (CDT)

I'd feel better if I know that the people running this place cares more about it then about their egos, and your condescending tone and refusal to admit to any mistake surely does not help at all. Foo 16:54, 16 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Now you are both acting in a manner which I don't like. I'll better leav eyou two alone. *hides* --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 17:01, 16 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Not at all, it's that text can be terse at times and often misinterpreted. I made a mistake, I am human. I see your map has been re-uploaded, so there seems to be no damage done. I never thought I had an ego, although sometimes a proud man, and I definitely do not run the place, although I do care more for the continuation of the Wiki than you might want to admit. And no hiding Gem, it's all just a misunderstanding at least from my point of view. -Gares 17:15, 16 August 2006 (CDT)


 * For the record, I don't find the mistake made proportional to the hysteria caused. Foo, I don't know what Gares was thinking but it's easy to see he could have just thought you were linking to "the" image not to "your" image. Oversight? No doubt. Colossal mistake that warrants telling him to administrate users not content? Not at all. I don't know if you and Gares have had run-ins in the past or something, but I want to make it clear I find your words too hysterical for the perceived offense. --Karlos 05:39, 17 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I'll say it again, it's no longer the offense, but the way he is treating it. Foo 06:21, 17 August 2006 (CDT)

deleting some builds
could you go through the candadates for delete? there are quite a few builds that are ready to go, A/R Way of the Beast for instance --Honorable Sarah 22:42, 19 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Deleted those that could be deleted. -Gares 08:14, 20 August 2006 (CDT)
 * thank you very much, good sir. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 13:29, 20 August 2006 (CDT)

Build articles and site policy
You may already be aware of it, but if not can you take a look at the (long) discussion at GuildWiki_talk:Style_and_formatting/Builds and voice your opinion? I'm asking several of the currently active admins to take a look. The issue, to me, is one of interpretation of site policies and practices. I was involved in the discussions earlier, so I cannot consider myself totally unbiased in any attempt to resolve it myself. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:50, 23 August 2006 (CDT)

Question
The following was posted on Gares' user page by Timir11 (or something similiar): why did you deleted pvp woh monk? i really needed that I reverted the edit made to the user page. -- (talk) 15:30, 30 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Yeah, he had to have been referring to Mo/Me PVP WoH which was tagged for being ununique per votes and deleted by me over a week ago. How he could find deleted articles, but continued to blank every page he came across is beyond my comprehension however. -Gares 15:45, 30 August 2006 (CDT)

Weird Block
Hey, I just saw this in Special:Ipblocklist:


 * 14:29, 1 September 2006, Gares Redstorm (Talk) blocked #1296 (expires 14:29, 2 September 2006) (unblock) (Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Timir111". The reason given for Timir111's block is: "multiple article and user page blanking")

That something you specifically did, or is it something to do with Timir111 being blocked? Just curious. --Rainith 01:04, 2 September 2006 (CDT)


 * It was done automatically by the wiki itself for the reason described in the summary. It shows Gares as doing it because he originally blocked the user.  --Fyren 01:14, 2 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Kinda what I thought. --Rainith 01:17, 2 September 2006 (CDT)

Re: BLock on User:Lof102
FYI: See User talk:81.69.71.157 - they're the same user. As you did the initial block, I'll let you choose on the IP block as well. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 10:36, 11 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Correct me if I am wrong, but if it's the same IP when he registered, then that IP should be blocked as well. If its not, then a wipe and another ban will be placed. I do not think anyone but those on the server-side can access UserName IPs. -Gares 11:11, 11 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Hmmmm, I know that a ban on an IP will block the user from using a username account; but I'm not certain if it works the other way around (I would hope it does, but I've never seen anything confirming it). We could just wait and see if he re-posts under the IP - if he does, then reset to an IP ban. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:26, 11 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Look one section up Barek. :)  --Rainith 17:55, 11 September 2006 (CDT)
 * I've seen the autoblocks before on blocks that I've made, but I'm uncertain how those auto-blocks work. My impression is that if a person tries to login to an account that has an active block in effect, the system will create an auto-block for the IP used.
 * But, what if the user doesn't login? Would they still be free to post under their IP?  In the case of User:Lof102, no auto-block message exists, so I suspect that as long as he doesn't login, the system wouldn't identify the IP as being related and he would be free to post.
 * There's a chance that the system automatically identified the most recent IP address used, and also blocked that at the same time as the initial block, and didn't log it as it's bundled into the one block - but I honestly don't know enough about the inner workings of MediaWiki to know for sure if that takes place. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:05, 11 September 2006 (CDT)
 * It tracks IPs recently used by the user name and will block if one of those IPs tries to make an edit. I don't know off the top of my head how long "recent" is.  --Fyren 18:35, 11 September 2006 (CDT)

map alignment?
Just checking what issue is trying to be resolved with the multiple map alignment edits. Currently, the Style_and_formatting/Bestiary doesn't specify a location for the map. In most cases, the changes have no visible impact in IE6; but with articles with tall images in the BeastInfo box, there is some extra spacing being inserted as a result of the moved map location. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:19, 13 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I was placing the maps there for users that use different wiki skins. Placing the map links under locations seems to show the same results in every skin, while placing the links under the beastbox template leaves some maps under the beastbox, some aligned beside the beast box, and some just plain doing some crazy stuff with certain skins. Just seems a more eye pleasing experience and added conformity for those who like different skins. -Gares 19:06, 13 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Could you upload some screenshots of the weird behavior? --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 01:10, 14 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Instead of uploading 20-30 different screens for comparisons and such, I will just tell you the way I compared each skin/map link placement. Open up two browsers, one with your peferences, the other on a boss page with a map. Edit the boss page and hit preview. Now save different skins on your browser set to your preferences. After each skin change, hit SHIFT+REFRESH on your editing boss page to force the skin change. Change the location of the map link and preview again. Do this for a couple of places to see if there is any difference. Then move on to a new skin and continue the experiment. Use all skins, same placements of the map link with every skin, and use more than one boss article. Say one with a large map, one with a small map, long beastbox, short beastbox, to keep the study as extensive, but as controlled as you can. -Gares 10:10, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

I agree
I think it is sad that I would have to resort to using different IP's to access the guildwiki. But since Skuld came and blocked my Onlyashadow account's editing ability without proof, but a feeling that I did something wrong this is what it comes down to. I agree IP anonimizers(sp?) should be blocked and a maybe a few rules should be implemented for the voting system.-85.195.123.22 11:33, 3 October 2006 (CDT)