User talk:Vindexus

Welcome
Hi there welcome to the GuildWiki. I've done a bit of cleaning up after you tonight but that's ok, it's all part of the learning curve ;) Just a couple of tips, sign your talk page edits with ~, this will generate your username and a timestamp automatically. Also for minor edits, tick the This is a minor edit box. There's lots more editing tips on my user page if you're interested. Thanks. --Xasxas256 05:42, 24 July 2006 (CDT)

Sorry, but don't you think your adding a few redirects to many? -_- &mdash; Poki#3 06:20, 24 July 2006 (CDT)

How do I respond to these? Vindexus 06:22, 24 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Simple. Just like that. Listen. Most articles here come by one or two names. Adding redirects for every posible shortcut, variant, with and without spaces isn't really a good thing :/ Your still new to the Wiki, so am I (i think), so for a start I would suggest to restrain from bigger edits and talk them over on the Talk pages or something like that until you get a hang of how the Wiki operates. &mdash; Poki#3 [[Image:Poki.jpg|20px|My Talk Page :o]] 06:29, 24 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Okay for the major edits I'll try to do that. As for the redirects I know that I prefer them when I'm actually using a Wiki, so I like to put them in trying to help out. I'll try to cut down, but some of them I feel are necessary.Vindexus 06:41, 24 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Unlike Wikipedia, we're not particularly redirect happy here. You can have a look at GuildWiki talk:Redirects for more info. --Xasxas256 06:52, 24 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Nice to see you here vindexus, we really need some experienced PvPers. --Theonemephisto 14:33, 25 July 2006 (CDT)

I could have sworn I read a ragequit thread from you at TGH. O_o Does this mean that FnlD's reviving? --Lemming 00:58, 26 July 2006 (CDT)

I've come back but I'm not playing as much as I used to. I'm currently in [Shhh]. FnlD 4.0 may yet come to pass, but not for a while ;) --Vindexus 02:00, 26 July 2006 (CDT)

PvP builds
"This build is fairly laughable to anyone who's played a significant amount of PvP as a Warrior. I suggest it have its vetted status removed." It'll save you time to make this into a template if you intend on going through the builds here. That way you can just slap on. --68.142.14.19 07:20, 24 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I'd have to agree. I've been going through a lot of these builds and I'm beginning to think that there is almost no contributions to this site coming from the PvP community. Vindexus 07:22, 24 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I don't mean to sound arrogant (like your user page, heh), but I think GWiki suffers from the same problem as WP. The "experts" are simply outnumbered by the masses.  So information coming from them gets rewritten or changed due to popular opinion/conception.  --68.142.14.19 07:31, 24 July 2006 (CDT)


 * The problem with builds pages is that builds are re continually evolving as things improve/get nerfed but it's difficult to keep all our articles up to date. I think our vetting process helps somewhat, rubbish builds don't go through any more but there are not enough build testers vs build submitters. Yes there are probably more PvEers than PvPers on the GuildWiki, but this is also true in game, still there are some of us who do do PvP, we're just overwealmed sometimes! So you're help is very much so welcomed ;) --Xasxas256 07:38, 24 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Yeah that's what I'm seeing in a lot of these builds. That's understandable and just means I have to get more of my friends to contribute here :P --Vindexus 07:40, 24 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Remind them to not mess anything up. :P &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 02:04, 26 July 2006 (CDT)

The wiki and case
Article names (and categories and everything else) are all case sensitive after the first letter. The first letter of everything is automatically uppercased in the article's title, but in links it doesn't matter. Hence I can link to cover hex or Cover hex but not Cover Hex. --68.142.14.19 22:37, 25 July 2006 (CDT)

Editing Me/Mo E-Surge Mesmer
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. i've reversed the change, but feel free to reapply your changes and move it to category:Untested builds and restart the approval votes if you feel this applies. thanks --Honorable Sarah 19:08, 27 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Well I posted in the discussion that I was going to change it because the skill choices are subpar following the nerf to SoW. I then left that message there for a few days saying that I would change it unless someone posted the merits of the current build as opposed to my proposed changes. Since nobody seemed to object, I went ahead and changed it.--Vindexus 20:42, 27 July 2006 (CDT)

Voting
Keep voting on the Untested builds. Voting on already-vetted Tested Builds and digraced Unfavored builds are unneeeded. Although you're more than welcome to improve on Unfavored builds by offering them a rewrite. &mdash; Rapta   (talk|contribs) 22:26, 27 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Although if a previously vetted build is no longer a good build, that's a different matter...you can of course suggest/make changes to a build as the meta game changes (or if you just see something that could be improved), if a build is totally nerfed then it can become unfavoured. But as Rapta says there's no point on voting on a vote that's finished ;) --Xasxas256 22:34, 27 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Yes, also keep in mind that more or less often, the build would already be tagged with the inaccurate information template, signalling a possible "nerf" to the build in any way. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 10:24, 29 July 2006 (CDT)