User talk:Dirigible3260

From GuildWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Replacing images[edit source]

Thanks for putting up the new image for Waeng. If you do replace an image could you please mark the old image for deletion (if nothing else uses it) by putting {{Delete|Replaced by [[:Image:new image name]]}}? Thanks. :) --Rainith 19:19, 2 July 2006 (CDT)

Will keep it in mind for next time. :) Cheers, --Dirigible 19:22, 2 July 2006 (CDT)

Re: Why is this being edited by Skinny Boy?[edit source]

Well, first off, I can't believe how fast you are attacking my personal info page, but I guess that should be expected. Don't you have work in the morning? Shouldn't you be in bed? I'm an insomniac and my children are home-schooled, that's my excuse. Skinny Boy happens to be my son. He is helping me with the edits. I don't understand why that should be a problem, but I'm new to Guild Wikki so I suppose I'm missing some heirarchy knowledge you appear to be privy to. I have 16 characters over 4 accounts - two of those are collectors editions. I think that an intelligent person would see that without having to question why I listed the number I have unless you are suggesting I have procured them through illegal means. I paid for all of them, and I also paid for the two separate accounts each that my children have. I have two children, in case that information is pertinent, and I have an odd feeling it might be in this place. I am 42, I don't smoke or do drugs, and I hold a valid driver's license. When I am done editing my pages I will entertain other comments. Before that, I suggest you have a large mug of hot milk and get some sleep.

Sincerely etc etc.The preceding unsigned comment was added by Skylark Amazonian (talkcontribs) 07:23, 3 July 2006 (UTC).

Cool it please, he just asked you a question. If one user edits another users page, giving it a similar look of course it's going to be suspected that the user has two accounts. It's suspicious when anyone edits another user's page in the first place. The rant is unneeded. — Skuld Monk 02:30, 3 July 2006 (CDT)
I'm not attacking either you or your son. Read my note again. Was simply asking about whether the accounts were related, as it's definitely not something you see often here, a user editing another user's page like that.
All that stuff about your accounts...no comment...what does any of that have to do with anything? Oh, and I just woke up, and now I'm supposed to go to bed again? Sheesh. --Dirigible 03:20, 3 July 2006 (CDT)
Dude cool off, I can explain she got upset becaus it's her personal page, and as for me eddting it she looked at mine and wanted one of thoese "My People" things The preceding unsigned comment was added by Skinny Boy (talkcontribs) .
Your message was ambiguous and it's 4:30 am. As for the rest: understood. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Skylark Amazonian (talkcontribs) .

Inspirex/Revealed/Arcane skills and accounts with only one of the games[edit source]

Very not sure where the correct place to mention this would be, or if it's already documented somewhere else, but... If you have only one of the campaigns, and use one of the Inspired/Revealed Hex/Enchantment spells to get a skill from the other campaign, you won't be able to use it. The same happens with Arcane Thievery/Arcane Larceny. (Maybe even with Arcane Mimicry? Haven't tested that one.) It'll appear locked (literally) in your skillbar. Screenshot:

Locked LT.jpg

Not sure where such information should be mentioned. Maybe in each of the relevant pages (Inspired, Revealed, Arcanes)? --Dirigible 14:11, 8 July 2006 (CDT)

I'd say thats probably the best place to put it, in the notes section I guess. Something like, Stealing a skill from a campaign that you do not have access to will still succeed, but you will be unable to use it. And just copy and paste to the relevant articles. --Chrono traveller 14:58, 8 July 2006 (CDT)
Thanks. Will do so. --Dirigible 00:15, 9 July 2006 (CDT)

Ascended Enchanters[edit source]

I want that armor! :P Very nice work on the pics. X) - BeXoR Bexor.png 16:02, 9 January 2007 (CST)

Hi. Just to know if you change the size of your image or that your mesmer is really short?—├ Aratak 16:23, 9 January 2007 (CST)
Well, if I remember correctly, her height is the lowest possible (supposed to be tiny and sneaky and tricky and mesmerish). I haven't resized the pictures at all, just cropped from the original screenshots. Maybe it was a weird capture angle, tho, dunno. Too used to how she looks to be able to tell if the pics look deformed or not. =\ --Dirigible 16:33, 9 January 2007 (CST)
Thanks! I actually used one of the armour galleries you had uploaded to guide me through the screencapping, till I got the hang of it. :) --Dirigible 16:33, 9 January 2007 (CST)

Re:Reverts[edit source]

Plase see [1] This favored build stayed vandalized for 7 days, just trying to avoid this being done to several favored builds. See Cwongs contributions.. Zerak-Tul 22:18, 13 January 2007 (CST)

To avoid it remaining so, contact one of the admins. You can be sure that no one here is going to allow vandalism to remain up on the wiki. Going through that build page now, to see what exactly brought that mess on. --Dirigible 22:20, 13 January 2007 (CST)
Well, apologize for any problems that I caused, merely used to the Wikipedia approach of 'feel free to revert blantant vandalism', and edits from a candidate for deletion don't really get more blantant if you ask me. Again, sorry Zerak-Tul 22:23, 13 January 2007 (CST)
I know that Wikipedia has an Assume Good Faith policy, just as GuildWiki does: GW:AGF. I don't think the guy was trying to be destructive or disruptive with his changes, even though those edits ended up resulting exactly in that. I just left a message on his user talk page about this, hopefully that'll resolve the issue. If this keeps going, we'll see what happens. --Dirigible 22:41, 13 January 2007 (CST)
See one of the first reverts I made, suggesting that he use the talk page before making big changes (I know little of Solo builds, so for all I know this could be viable, but there was no talk of such a major rewrite on the talk page, and the usage notes were not changed to fit the new skills, this striked me as odd). He then made 3 rapid edits to the same article; 1, 2, 3. These were then reverted by User:Blastedt. Blastedt nominated him for banning [2], but not before Cwong edited the same article again. Basicly I felt less inclined to AGF after another use nominated him for banning. Zerak-Tul 22:53, 13 January 2007 (CST)

GW:RFA[edit source]

Saw your comment and responded. Defiant Elements (talk ~ contribs)

Saw your rather long opposed paragraph and responded with one that is equally long. Hope I answered your questions. Defiant Elements (talk ~ contribs)

"Wings"[edit source]

Hey you know how to make coloums? -- Wingsthatheal-icon.jpg "Wings" 07:39, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

[Stuff]........[Stuff]........[Stuff]
[Stuff]........[Stuff]........[Stuff]
[Stuff]........[Stuff]........[Stuff]
[Stuff]........[Stuff]........[Stuff]

Yeah, use this:
{| 
| Cat || Dog || Mouse
|- 
| Snake || Picard || Monkey
|-
| Bunny || Apples || Elephant
|}
Results in:
Cat Dog Mouse
Snake Picard Monkey
Bunny Apples Elephant
The MediaWiki page on tables has this and a whole lot more, such as how to change width/height of columns, use colours, and whatnot. Cheers. --Dirigible 07:49, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

can you sign my talk page now since you helped out have this whole guest book thing going, (origonal idea), help me out a lot if you sign. thx for the help by the way only person so far to know what 2 do. -- Wingsthatheal-icon.jpg "Wings" 07:51, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

I'd rather not set any precedents of this kind, sorry. G'luck with the guest book. --Dirigible 07:56, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

dont worry you wouldnt be, you would only be like the 65th person to sign it lol. -- Wingsthatheal-icon.jpg "Wings" 08:02, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

Thank you for your help to see your great work you can check it out at [{user_talk:Wings That Heal|Here]] i can also add credits to my talk page if you wanted. -- Wingsthatheal-icon.jpg "Wings" 07:00, 21 March 2007 (CDT)


ARRGGHHH! WDF dude? -- Wingsthatheal-icon.jpg "Wings" 06:13, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

first off all let the user make up thier mind and 2nd you are ment to continue the conversation where it started Gem told me that, and you dont want to get into a revert war do u ill leave it removed if the user doesnt want it, but if you revert it i'll revert back-- Wingsthatheal-icon.jpg "Wings" 06:18, 22 March 2007 (CDT)
i dont really care what you think, (didnt sign my guest book, can all be solved if u will sign) and you also screwed your self over with the rules by editing a users page outside of urs. -- Wingsthatheal-icon.jpg "Wings" 06:33, 22 March 2007 (CDT)
Can you logon in GW? I'd like to tell you what I think of you and your guest book there, without having to worry about wiki policy and such. :) --Dirigible 07:16, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

not yet dont have acess to my computer atm, but say tommorow i will be on (australian time) -- Wingsthatheal-icon.jpg "Wings" 07:18, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Mkay, I'm a patient guy, I can wait. :) --Dirigible 07:25, 22 March 2007 (CDT)

Jaguar Sword Melee Mancer Build[edit source]

You're right, the build's strength from from it's adaptablity. That is why it fuctions so well in RA. Jagre 16:42, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

BTW, are you an admin? if so, can you please look at the Meleemancer page for possible violation of Revert Wars. My edits were justified in the comments - another user deleted the whole thing with the justification that it had a link to another wiki page. I reposted the edit without link, and then he deleted it again. ----Jagre 16:42, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

It was a little more complicated than that, and you were in violation of GW:1RV. And the "user" that deleted that link is an admin and has asked another admin for review of the situation as it is. - BeXor Bexor.png 17:33, 19 March 2007 (CDT)

Build Talk:N/Me Spiteful Haste[edit source]

Your own comment was not relevant to the build. Jagre 05:45, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Nomination for sysop position[edit source]

Check GW:RFA and indicate your acceptance. You'll accept, right? :) —Tanaric 21:30, 28 March 2007 (CDT)

Thanks for the consideration, but I'll have to decline. I'm not fit to be a sysop. Thanks again though, appreciate it. --Dirigible 21:33, 28 March 2007 (CDT)
Any way I can convince you? It's my job to judge that, you know. —Tanaric 21:33, 28 March 2007 (CDT)
I feel that being a sysop would actually hinder me, since it requires far more self-control than being simply an editor does. Not being a sysop allows me to push for whatever issues/opinions/ideas I care about with a clear conscience. When it comes to getting others to hear what I have to say, I'd rather have to yell loudly than speak from on top of a podium.
Furthermore, my interest with GuildWiki is questionable. I'm focusing on the new wiki, and for that reason it'd be silly to accept the position here.
And lastly, I know myself better than anyone else does (I've spent far too much time making sure of that), and I simply wouldn't be a good sysop.
So, no, sorry. Once again thanks, though. --Dirigible 21:56, 28 March 2007 (CDT)
Very well. However, I'm going to leave three points trailing off here:
  1. I've appointed sysops less qualified than you, and I'm more or less happy with the jobs they've done.
  2. Being a sysop doesn't require an inordinate amount of self control. On the contrary, I trust you to use your instincts and passion to make sure you do the job. Because of the unique (by wiki standards) role GuildWiki sysops play, lack of restraint is often a boon.
  3. The editors who matter don't listen to sysops any more than they do anybody else, in terms of policy concerns.
If you have a change of heart, just let me know. —Tanaric 22:04, 28 March 2007 (CDT)
I think you'd make a good sysop Dirig, but I understand that your focus has switched to the new wiki. I think a lot of people are in that boat with you. ;) - BeXor Bexor.png 04:48, 29 March 2007 (CDT)

Build Wipe stuff[edit source]

BTW, though I feel some of your statements during the wipe discussion were insulting I have nothing against you personally or anything like that. You think a wipe is best, I do not, some of your comments came across as insulting to me, to you they didn't or were unintended. We simply disagree. No hard feelings. DKS01 08:18, 6 April 2007 (CDT)

Congratz on GWW[edit source]

Congratulations to Dirigible, the contributor who provided that momentous 5,000th article, and a hearty thanks to all those who have made a contribution. Everyone at ArenaNet is thrilled with the success of the GWW, and we are looking forward to calling out others in the future who help with this splendid and growing player resource.

--Lania ElderfireMy Talk 16:40, 15 April 2007 (CDT)

Hey, I think Gailes got a thing for you *Wink* ;). Readem (talk*contribs) 21:41, 19 April 2007 (CDT)

url ...[edit source]

And may I ask you from where you got that url? site is open for beta testing only. Gcardinal 02:02, 18 April 2007 (CDT)

Licensing Question[edit source]

Regarding PvXwiki/BuildWiki, may I ask whether I have fulfilled the necessary attribution requirements on these pages:

  • PvXwiki:NPA [3]
  • PvXwiki:1RV [4]
  • PvXwiki:YAV [5]
  • PvXwiki:AGF [6]
  • PvXwiki:CONTENT [7]

Thanks. DE Sig Test 2.jpg *Defiant Elements* +talk 22:07, 19 April 2007 (CDT)

Looks good to me, I think. It's probably easier to just copy/paste the history as text rather than bother with screenshots, but that's your call, either works. Cheers. :) --Dirigible 03:53, 20 April 2007 (CDT)
By the way, I'm not sure if you guys want to just copy those policies over without discussing them first. Stuff like GW:AGF and GW:YAV can be inappropriate as policies, they're probably more suitable as essays of some kind. A law that regulates how you should feel towards others can be messy (which is the reason neither of those two was accepted on the new wiki). Basically, I think it'd be best if you guys discussed these in context of your wiki there, instead of taking them for granted. :) Probably not even necessary to even have most of these as policies at all until the need for each of them arises, (with the possible exceptions being NPA and 1RV). At least, that's my two cents about this. :) --Dirigible 04:00, 20 April 2007 (CDT)
Yeah, I know, and we will sort that stuff out, but a lot of that stuff seems like there is no reason not to have. AGF and YAV could be changed, but NPA, 1RV, even small stuff like SIGN is good to have. Anyways, this is all still beta, an "official" policy now may not be official when we actually get going. DE Sig Test 2.jpg *Defiant Elements* +talk 19:32, 20 April 2007 (CDT)
I'd like to see you note that further attribution is in the talk page of the article, as it isn't obvious. However, I think actually including the attribution in the talk page is okay. I agree with Dirigible that perhaps text makes more sense than screenshots. —Tanaric 05:39, 21 April 2007 (CDT)

Sorry to bother[edit source]

If you would be so kind as to look at what I am doing, you would understand that it is not possible for me to use the preview button. Thanks for informing me though :D! Readem (talk*contribs) 17:51, 23 April 2007 (CDT)

Hehe, my bad XD! Readem (talk*contribs) 17:51, 23 April 2007 (CDT)

Why exactly can't you use the preview button? From what I see you're simply adding build skill bars to User:Readem/Builds Archive. --Dirigible 18:05, 23 April 2007 (CDT)

Well, to reach maximum efficiency, I first must create the links (can do on Word) then I must copy + Paste most of the builds because for some reason it isn't linking auto most of the time. I then have to go back and fourth to the builds section to get builds but that hardly even shows. I then must paste the builds (a good % of the time, on to the newly created link). I then remove any Archive tags if there are any. I do this for every build in Tested. I then have to go indivdually into each archive and steal ea Skill bar. After I am finsihed with that and have pasted the bars below, I then must make all the bars mini (Only 1 edit). If I did not do this in the way I am currently, there would be undoubtbly close to 1000 edits in RC. I have limited this to perhaps 80-100 per proff. Sincerely, Readem and Reap

No offense, but your "explanation" makes no sense. 1) Keep the page open in that Word document. 2) Add each of those lines as you did from revision 823171 to revision 823233. 3) Copy the whole thing to the edit box on the wiki. 4) Save. Voila, 1 edit only. Go to Special:Contributions/Readem, see that huge wall of edits to User:Readem/Builds Archive? Those are all edits that you could have aggregated in a single revision (including making the bars mini). --Dirigible 18:43, 23 April 2007 (CDT)

Well my explanation (Through all the gramtical errors :D Grammer ftl) does actually make sense. I think you are on to something w/ the Mini Skill bars+ Links, however in the end the builds themselves are more then one simple edit. I appreciate your efforts on how to improve my system, and save the RC from a Communist ;). I'll try to do both at once, but be aware that I may slip now and then XD. Take care! (btw, congrats on mention) Readem (talk*contribs) 20:40, 23 April 2007 (CDT)

and again...[edit source]

User:-*

OK, you are faster than me. ;) Biscuits Biscuit.png 12:14, 14 September 2007 (CDT)

Adminship[edit source]

You declined adminship the last time someone nominated you. Would you consider accepting if nominated again, to make your current "temporary" sysop status more permanent on this wiki? --24.22.225.85 18:02, 14 September 2007 (CDT)

No, thanks. --Dirigible 18:22, 14 September 2007 (CDT)
I noticed that you are still an admin here. If you don't want the admin access that you still have, how about just extending the temporary period for a few days? Just from today up through Oct 1st .... in 2010? --24.22.225.85 09:50, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

Until this blows over, can you do a rangeblock on 89.0.0.0/8? That's the entire RIPE NCC in Amsterdam, but all the recent vandals have come from there. BftP 10:24, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

Woot! Take out how many million users?? LoL.

I'd prefer those few million couldn't edit if you fucked off tbh. Lord of all tyria 10:27, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

Go for it. I'll keep using anon proxies till u ban the whole world if need be :)

These threats have been made before by others. Yet here we are. BftP 10:36, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
Me too :)

User:89.243.249.209[edit source]

please ban. Biscuits Biscuit.png 10:26, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

If I were to ban him, I'd also ban everyone else who's revert warring with him, repeatedly breaking GW:1RV in the process. That said, Biro sysopped us only for that move vandal, nothing else, so it's not really appropriate for me to intervene. User:Xeon seems to be online, he's an admin. --Dirigible 10:35, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
OK :) I suspect it is the same person as yesterday though. I think people don't consider that you can use the history, and once a vandal reverts something twice, the evidence is there. Or do what I did and see the vandalism and fix it, without realising there was a revert war going on. It's just unpleasant to see a vandal's work go unfixed though. I don't really know what to think of the whole wiki transfer/anger/vandalism thing. :/ Biscuits Biscuit.png 10:44, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

Well said, D. I respect your opiniion above most others here.

are you...[edit source]

An admin? —ShadyGuy 10:45, 15 September 2007 (CDT)

Temporarily, yes he is. I wouldn't mind it being permanent, but oh well. 10:46, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
Damn, I wished we all could delete /ban/block:P —ShadyGuy 10:53, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
Then your name must be Gem. Power tripper.
If everyone could the wiki would implode :S Lord of all tyria 10:54, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
Put yourself up for sysop: GW:RFA. As I can see it from this angle, it doesn't look like there are enough active ones at the moment. --CoRrRan 10:55, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
There has always been a lack of admins on at this time, there is only one or two that patrol and those two cant be here all the time. -- Xeon 10:58, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
I propably won't be a good adminz:P —ShadyGuy 10:58, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
giving anons/spam accounts the ability to ban/block O_O -Ezekiel 11:00, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
Of course not, AFAIK, you have to be registered to be eligible for RFA. --CoRrRan 11:06, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
Ezekiels comment was to shadyguy's remark that everyone should be able to. Lord of all tyria 11:07, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
If so, my mistake. :-) --CoRrRan 11:08, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
No, I meant the more experienced users that have been here some time. —ShadyGuy 11:08, 15 September 2007 (CDT)
Nah, let em just range block Europe, or Australasia. At a whim.