User talk:Theonemephisto

DUDE!!! Lower case before you start anything!! My suggestion: Category:GvG builds &mdash; Skuld 16:47, 25 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Lol, okay. Sorry if I make mistakes, as I'm still a little new to actually contributing to the wiki. --Theonemephisto 16:48, 25 July 2006 (CDT)

Note that blanking a messup will not delete the page, the page still exists. instead, type, it will show up like this:  This page is a candidate for deletion, because: reason 

If you disagree with this page's deletion, please explain why on its talk page. If this page obviously should not be deleted, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from articles that you have created yourself.

Administrators, remember to check if anything links here and [ the page history] ([ last edit]) before deleting (talk) 17:03, 25 July 2006 (CDT)
 * OK, TY --Theonemephisto 17:05, 25 July 2006 (CDT)


 * would you boys cut the poor kid some slack? he's trying to make good for the PvP'ers. you don't like his category style, give him a good one so he can get onto work --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 17:15, 25 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Zomg, you mean like this Mephisto? --Zui 02:33, 6 September 2006 (CDT)

Still PvP Builds
When you're sorting, don't remove the PvP build tag. Just because it's an HA or GvG build, doesn't mean it's no longer a PvP build. Just like we have Farming and Running builds as subcats of PvE Builds. Please put back on the builds you removed it from. &mdash; Rapta   (talk|contribs) 01:26, 26 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Wouldn't that then put the article in both the PvP builds category and the Ra/Ta/HA/GvG builds category? effectively making the whole organization thing pointless, since then there's still going to be lists and lists of random builds under PvP builds?
 * It's better to have the article in both the main category and its subcategory, where it is easy to navigate and to find a build that suits your purpose. Most people just head straight to the PvP section or the PvE section, and find their build there. Our current organization system is suitable for both veterans of the game, as well as newer players looking for a build. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 08:44, 27 July 2006 (CDT)
 * "There is something bad about putting articles in every step along a category tree. It's confusing and unhelpful. A build in the GvG category is a PvP build because GvG builds is in the PvP builds category. --68.142.14.19 18:47, 25 July 2006 (CDT)" I'm so confused. I personally think that we sohuld just remove the PvP Builds category... but I don't know...  What if we just have an effort to move ALL of the builds out of the PvP Builds category and into their respective PvP types?  It's not like the GvG builds aren't in the PvP Builds section. --Theonemephisto 09:45, 27 July 2006 (CDT)
 * People aren't going to show up and get confused because they look at the PvP builds category and see links to TA, RA, HA, AB, GvG categories. No other category tree on the wiki places things in every step along the way.  For example, windborne isn't in "spells" and "enchantment spells," just the latter.  The boss "pain eater" isn't in "gakis" and "gaki bosses," just the latter.  --68.142.14.19 12:31, 27 July 2006 (CDT)
 * We don't need that. Builds are better off being in this "tree". &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 22:35, 27 July 2006 (CDT)

Editing Mo/any Air of Enchantment Smiter
generally, if a build is approved, you should not change it. if the metagame has changed, or an update has rendered the old build invalid the votes should be restarted. Unfortunatly, the chages are pretty extensive, and i missed this before, please either reverse the changes, or move it to category:Untested builds and restart the approval votes if you feel this applies. thanks --Honorable Sarah 19:19, 27 July 2006 (CDT)
 * All I did was change attributes (which were apparently changed back or something) and add a res sig. Other stuff was just variations and equipment. --Theonemephisto 10:26, 28 July 2006 (CDT)