FANDOM


Line 99: Line 99:
   
 
:A small note about the ban itself: The 3 day ban was a lot less than he probably should have gotten for deliberately violating against an admins warning multiple times, especially as he has been banned for 2 weeks before for similiar reasons. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] <small>([[User:Gem|gem]] / [[User talk:Gem|talk]])</small> 08:36, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
 
:A small note about the ban itself: The 3 day ban was a lot less than he probably should have gotten for deliberately violating against an admins warning multiple times, especially as he has been banned for 2 weeks before for similiar reasons. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] <small>([[User:Gem|gem]] / [[User talk:Gem|talk]])</small> 08:36, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
  +
  +
::If I may toss in my EUR 0.02 at this point: If I (who by now probably can be considered one of the senior admins) had been aware of this whole mess and gotten there before Gem, the ban would've probably been closer to 3 months than 3 days. And the reason given would've been something like "sheer obnoxiousness". Yes, I can ban a user fo that. No, I don't need a policy to back me up with that (Actually, I ''have'' a policy backing me up there. Quoting [[GW:ADMIN]]: ''Once promoted, an administrator is fully autonomous: he may do as his powers allow, as he sees fit.''). So you can see, Wings can be glad that he got at someone as "inexperienced" and "power abusing" as Gem. :p --[[User:Eightyfour-onesevenfive|<font color="midnightblue">'''84-175'''</font>]] <small>([[User talk:Eightyfour-onesevenfive|talk]])</small> 09:14, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
   
 
By the time the arguing has finished the 3 days are gonna be up anyway, this game and everything related to it were created to create an enjoyable gaming experience. I don't see why everyone has to argue over something related to a game they are meant to be having fun in. If your not having fun why are you trying to ruin other peoples experiences (no pointing fingers). Just move along and enjoy the game, the wiki and everything related to it. --[[User:Atroso|Atroso]] 08:40, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
 
By the time the arguing has finished the 3 days are gonna be up anyway, this game and everything related to it were created to create an enjoyable gaming experience. I don't see why everyone has to argue over something related to a game they are meant to be having fun in. If your not having fun why are you trying to ruin other peoples experiences (no pointing fingers). Just move along and enjoy the game, the wiki and everything related to it. --[[User:Atroso|Atroso]] 08:40, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

Revision as of 14:14, April 5, 2007

I need help with my MM hero builds! Any comments and ideas are appreciated.


History of this talk page
Personal and off-wiki Beginning to May '06 June - August '06 September - October '06 November - December '06 January '07 February '07 March '07
Wiki editing and content related Beginning to May '06 June - August '06 September - October '06 November - December '06 January '07 February '07 March '07

"Unused" pictures

I thought I should let you know that some images are shown as unlinked, when in fact they are being referenced from the body of an article. Specifically, I'm referring to the images of chaos axes dyed black and white (labeled translucent and pure white, respectively, though I suspect this is more widespread than these two images alone. I'm bringing this up to you because I noticed that you deleted them, and I wasn't sure if there was a particular admin responsible for these kinds of things. In the mean time, I've uploaded these two images again, let me know if this is a problem. Thanks! --SmallMapleLeaf Imbril Shadowfire 17:26, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

PS. I did some testing in the sandbox, and I'm thinking the most logical explanation is that images referenced using the [[:Image:Chaos_Axe_Black.JPG]] syntax don't get included in the "What links here" section in the image's page. Apologies if this is a known issue, but I figured I should bring it up... --SmallMapleLeaf Imbril Shadowfire 17:32, 1 April 2007 (CDT)
I'm aware of the 'what links here' problem with images, so I've been pretty carefull when deleting unused images. The safest thing would probably be to make a sub page somewhere, probably your user name space, where you use those images so that they don't show up in the list and I don't delete them on my next unused images purge crusade. --Gem-icon-sm (gem / talk) 07:13, 2 April 2007 (CDT)

Builds Wipe

I posted a response to the builds wipe in a section that you commented on previously where you mentioned it was a good idea. Unfortunately a lot of other sections were made afterwards and it could easily be looked over accidently. Basically it was an alternative to the wipe by simply moving the builds to a new namespace and starting the new policy in the old (now cleaned) namespace. This would keep all parties satisfied. If it is said that it would be a waste of space, I would argue that the hundreds of users making backup userspace copies of the builds would total up to much more than that. Anyway, I just wanted to make sure at least one admin saw it and could spread the idea. GuildWiki_talk:Builds_wipe#Forming_a_new_policyRabiesTurtle (contribs) 17:33, 3 April 2007 (CDT)

Thanks, I had totally missed that one. I'm opposed to the idea though.
  • We've allready archived the builds multiple times on different users name spaces.
  • Having 2 build name spaces is definitely a bad idea, espcecially if one of them is staying as a copy the current build section. The idea was to get a fresh start, not to multiply the problems. --Gem-icon-sm (gem / talk) 17:43, 3 April 2007 (CDT)
Hmm, I fail to see the logic. I understand the fresh start and that is exactly what you will get by clearing the old builds namespace. Even if a copy of all the builds in a new namespace exists, it can easily be ignored by those who wish to only view/moderate the new policy guided builds. Also, even if the builds are backed up to userspaces already, the general public will never find them and prove worthless to all but that user. For instance I have no idea where to find a single one of these backups unless I do them myself. Heck, even if I did know, I wouldn't have any way to sort through them. If it is ok to keep builds because they seem useful to people, why not have them collectively stored instead of using more space for each person to try to make their own backups. Once people see the builds are remaining but just under a new namespace (UserBuilds perhaps) then they will likely delete their own backups. Not trying to whine at all, but more offer a constructive compromise which I don't see how anyone could complain about. Both sides win and get the positives they are looking for. — RabiesTurtle (contribs) 17:58, 3 April 2007 (CDT)
I'm not saying that your whining, your feedback is reasonable. :)
The reason for not making an organised backup like a new name space is to avoid moving the old problems to a new place. We want to completely get rid of the old system and its flaws so that users can easily change to anything new that is agreed on. It does cause a small downtime, but as the NOB is doing pretty fine atm, I don't think the downtime will be big. --Gem-icon-sm (gem / talk) 18:01, 3 April 2007 (CDT)
See I don't like the replacement with the NOB idea because it takes out creativity and promotes cookie-cutter builds. Either way, it is out of my hands. Can I make a proposal then... With the difficulty of copying over builds to my namespace due to having to copy the history separately, would it be possible to move the entire namespace over to my userspace? I propose that instead of wipe. It would still then be only in userspace but will be a fullbackup that can be sorted through by those who so desire. Odd request I know... but I figure it is worth a try and should be as simply done with a script as it would be to delete the pages. — RabiesTurtle (contribs) 19:09, 3 April 2007 (CDT)
It's not possible as far as I know. Note that the NOB policy might get an addition that allow original builds, as long as they are categorised differently. I'll write my proposal later on today and we will see what people think of it. --Gem-icon-sm (gem / talk) 03:41, 4 April 2007 (CDT)
Well bring up doing a mass move to my userspace too. It is a feature already programmed into Wiki to move a page, we just need to set it to do it in batch. Or even get Barek to write a bot. I just figure if we are allowed to back things up and put them in userspace, we might as well have them together. If a bot isn't possible, then can you discuss with the admins and grant me permission to manually move them to my userspace myself instead of copy/paste. I would need some time to move them though so it would be before the wipe date of course. — RabiesTurtle (contribs) 15:35, 4 April 2007 (CDT)
As far as I understood correctly, they've been allready moved to one or two user name spaces. --Gem-icon-sm (gem / talk) 15:39, 4 April 2007 (CDT)

Copying History?

Would Build:W/Mo Regeneration IDS Farmer (Archive) work? Other than that, I guess there's copying HTML. ~ GeckoSprite Pae 22:00, 3 April 2007 (CDT)

Is that the full history of the original build? The way to copy the history is to use the 'move' button to move the original build to your user name space, which copies the history too, then copy the build back to the original place. Note that most if not all builds have been backed up allready. --Gem-icon-sm (gem / talk) 03:41, 4 April 2007 (CDT)
Um, may I know how I should go about copying the build back to its original location once I've moved it to my username space? I would like to save a couple of builds that I've quite enjoyed, and I think the initial moving bit seems simple enough, but I don't seem to see any options for copying it back. Just wanna be sure of what I should do before I move anything around, lest I screw some pages up in the process. Thanks. Sleeper 19:00, 4 April 2007 (CDT)
Click edit, then copy the whole text, go to the original location, then click edit, paste the content there and save. :) --Gem-icon-sm (gem / talk) 19:05, 4 April 2007 (CDT)

Fire Blaster

Why did u clear the fireblaster talk???Stevo101 19:57, 4 April 2007 (CDT)

Woops, sorry. I was going to delete a talk page of a moved build, but the talk page acted as a redirect and I accidentally deleted teh real talk page. Fixed it now. Sorry and thanks for throwing me a note. --Gem-icon-sm (gem / talk) 20:01, 4 April 2007 (CDT)
Eh, NP just wondering what you where doing.Stevo101 20:02, 4 April 2007 (CDT)

Wings That Heal

Hello Gem,

You have blocked Wings That Heal for some weird reasons. He hasn't insulted anyone, he only said to Solus something like this: "People like you, who give Australia a bad name." This is no personal attack, nor insulting. Solus was exaggerating and did fully understand that it was a joke. He has been blocked for 2 hours, because he wrote something on Solus' talk page and he removed it. Is there a policy for these actions? If not that was a dumb action. Then there was a bit flaming on his talk page blablabla, and then he said nerd to you, you obviously can't deny the facts and agreed with him, in Wings' next comment he says you are a fool, this is not a personal attack etc. So your reasons are not good enough for a 3 days block, please unblock him. Else I'll ask other sysops.

SigmA </font> Omigod 06:38, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

You missed the point that why he was banned. I warned him to use any insulting words at all, and he immediately used the word fool (which I had specifically asked him not to use), after which I again said something after which he called me nerd. That's two repeated violations of an admin warning, intentionally. I am not going to change my mind in this case, so I don't even bother inviting him to talk to me in game this time. --Gem-icon-sm (gem / talk) 06:59, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
A nerd is no insult or whatever, it is the reality. If you can't handle the facts go do something about it. I can understand the 'fool' thingy, but come on, he is only 16 years old (lol look at me, I'm still 15) Maybe he had an off-day, maybe he did not meant what he said, but now we won't know because YOU BLOCKED HIM FOR STUPID REASONS. —SigmA </font> Omigod 07:04, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
He has really only had off-days in the wiki then. An off-day is not an explanation for bad behavior. Age is also no reason to behave how he does, there are more mature kids who are a lot younger than him. Maby I'm a nerd in one or the other meaning of the word, but that doesn't make it allowed to deliberately insult others or act against an admins worning. --Gem-icon-sm (gem / talk) 07:07, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
Is may not violate any policy, but if your going round calling people fools, editing userpages in a negative fashion then opening insulting an Admin, your not putting yourself in a good sitution. He needs to keep his opinions, and thoughts of other users to himself, and not get into silly arguements which lead to a ban. The fact is, even though he did not insult me or Gem according to the text, he was warned by Gem but he countined on with the bitterness regardless. I didn't even know why he felt that he had to edit my userpage, but he did and look what it led to. Solus SOJsig 07:09, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

Maybe if you didn't complain that much, he hadn't got banned for some reasons, however, you made a fuss out of it just to get him blocked. Well maybe you didn't had the intention to get him blocked, you would. I'm not sure if you can stand criticize, but he only said that you give Austrailains a bad name, wich is in my eyes correctly. He edited your userpage, so what? I mean it is not the end of the world, just warn him and do not call directly for an admin, and if you want to call an admin please call the right one. Gem in inexperienced in these things, let others with more experience do it. I think Gem is abusing his powers and is desperate to block/delete/other things an admin can do and we can't and show off his powers. I'm not sure why I am writing this, but whatever, now I cleared my thoughts of this and the whole block thing. —SigmA </font> Omigod 07:18, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

First off, this is the second time he's edited my userpage. He hounds people over the "sign my userpage" crap and he has called me a fool many times before. Gem acted as any Sysop would, Wing's acted out of line, and he got banned. Even after a simple two hour banned, he was bitter. He was warned by an Admin earier, and again by Gem, which he ignored. I hope he saw the errors in his ways before he comes back, hopefully not bitter and more postive towards other users. Solus SOJsig 07:28, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
I'm not sure what the problem of adding a userbox to a userpage is.. What was wrong with the userbox then? And besides he removes it, so no hard feelings. —SigmA </font> Omigod 07:31, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

Well, this doesn't make any sense at all, I think the case is closed here, Gem doesn;t want to unblock him... That'll be a long 3 days :P —SigmA </font> Omigod 07:36, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

It's vandalism. Plain and simple. Pretending otherwise would be pointless. He's done it in the past, and got banned for it. He continued it. When people questioned him, he didn't react innocently; it wasn't a simple "my bad, I meant to use your talk page;" he defended his acts of vandalism. Gares banned him for actions like that. Gem followed up the ban with a warning. He continued to ignore the warning, and got a *very light* ban from Tanaric. Gem followed that up with a warning as well. After Wings ignored that warning, Gem decided it had gone too far, and applied a 3-day ban. Nothing out of the ordinary. -Auron Elit Druin 07:38, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

Well, he is a friend of mine and I did a good word for him, but no... —SigmA </font> Omigod 07:40, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

Sigma, you may seem to think you are right on this matter, but as Auron pointed out Wing's pushed the limits and brought it on himself. Solus SOJsig 07:50, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
This community relies on rules that are normally rather strict in real life. However, this is not real life and these rules are here to keep not only everything in check, but everyone in check as well. Let him say what he wants off-wiki, but on wiki, everyone must abide by the rules set in place. I'm not going to question Gem's decision, because he was correct, plain and simple. Gem is also correct in that age is no excuse for immature behavior. If a user can't act mature and follow the rules of a site, any site, then they should not be on that site or risk the consequences for breaking those rules. Having a bad day is also not a valid excuse. If you are angry for something that happened to you in real life, don't go taking it out on strangers on some site thinking you can get away with it.
Defending a friend is something I believe strongly in, but defending is a last resort in this kind of situation. Instead of letting your friend continue and then defending his actions after the fact, you should have tried to persuade him that what he is doing was wrong and helped to end this before it resorted to a block. — Gares 08:29, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
I was almost going to ignore the rest of the discussion, but the "Gem in inexperienced in these things, let others with more experience do it. I think Gem is abusing his powers and is desperate to block/delete/other things an admin can do and we can't and show off his powers." comment needs a reply. I admit that I am one of the newer sysops and therefor I haven't had the possibility (or the need, which ever word you like to use) to use the sysop tools as much as the older sysops. However, that doesn't mean that I'm incompetent in using the tools and I definitely don't have any need to 'show off'. Deleting, banning, etc doesn't make me look great in anyones eyes imho, it is just a way to do my best to help the wiki. If I would 'show off my powers' without a reason, my sysop powers would soon be removed by Tanaric or LordBiro.
A small note about the ban itself: The 3 day ban was a lot less than he probably should have gotten for deliberately violating against an admins warning multiple times, especially as he has been banned for 2 weeks before for similiar reasons. --Gem-icon-sm (gem / talk) 08:36, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
If I may toss in my EUR 0.02 at this point: If I (who by now probably can be considered one of the senior admins) had been aware of this whole mess and gotten there before Gem, the ban would've probably been closer to 3 months than 3 days. And the reason given would've been something like "sheer obnoxiousness". Yes, I can ban a user fo that. No, I don't need a policy to back me up with that (Actually, I have a policy backing me up there. Quoting GW:ADMIN: Once promoted, an administrator is fully autonomous: he may do as his powers allow, as he sees fit.). So you can see, Wings can be glad that he got at someone as "inexperienced" and "power abusing" as Gem. :p --84-175 (talk) 09:14, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

By the time the arguing has finished the 3 days are gonna be up anyway, this game and everything related to it were created to create an enjoyable gaming experience. I don't see why everyone has to argue over something related to a game they are meant to be having fun in. If your not having fun why are you trying to ruin other peoples experiences (no pointing fingers). Just move along and enjoy the game, the wiki and everything related to it. --Atroso 08:40, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

Exactly. (Btw, I am enjoying GW, the wiki and life in general even while discussing this. I have multiple tabs open, multiple programs open, Mövenpick chocolate ice cream on the table, and the sun is shining outside. Life is just perfect. Discussing this at the same time can't ruin my day. :) ) --Gem-icon-sm (gem / talk) 08:45, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
Don't forget the music playing, and thanks for the welcome much appreciated, i mainly browse the wiki and making a couple of edits here and there...btw, was just looking at the touch ranger article, gotta change one of the notes reference from he to an androgenic describer --Atroso 08:56, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
Ah, I totally forgot music. ;) I'm listening to a cd of disney music. A little hint: Indent your messages with one or more colons to show who you are replying to. (See how I modified your post) --Gem-icon-sm (gem / talk) 09:04, 5 April 2007 (CDT)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC-SA unless otherwise noted.