User talk:Ariyen/2009/Archive3

just wanted to provide you with a few links

[1] see the second definition [2] thought that might be helpful seeing as you don't seem to know what that policy says.- Zesbeer 09:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

ironylol. Calling someone a hypocrite is, in the general sense of the term, a personal attack (in that it diverts the discussion to the people discussing instead of the object of the discussion). -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 14:13, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

It is personal but not an attack. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 14:15, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

It is a personal attack. Armond is right. Zesbeer can provide links all he wants, but we know when it's personal. 72.148.31.114 16:22, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

go use more sock puppet accounts please. calling someone a hypocrite is not a personal attack, i was simply pointing out that she was being contradictory to what she was already saying i wasn't attacking. and ariyen has to revert it because ariyen cant handle the fact that they are contradictory. - Zesbeer 22:09, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Did you even read my reasoning? Also, since when have Noctarch or I been socks? -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 22:32, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Ariyen posting from her IP (above) is not socking. You can't have a sock account without an account. e.e elix Omni 22:35, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, hey look, more drama. When is this officially considered "out-of-hand" by GWW standards? Karate Jesus 22:38, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Yesterday tbh. Shadow Runner 22:40, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

@armond it was already off topic before i called her a hypocrite. and the following edit (being pokes) didn't throw it more off topic. also i am pointing out the fact that she has to use her ip to hid behind and vandalize my page and talk page.- Zesbeer 22:46, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

You were off topic when making the topic? Pro. -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 22:53, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I did not mess up Zesbeer's page, but according to the 'hypocrite' thing? It is an attack as defined here -) "Posting a link to an external source that fits the commonly accepted threshold for a personal attack, in a manner that incorporates the substance of that attack into discussion, including the suggestion that such a link applies to another editor, or that another editor needs to visit the external source containing the substance of the attack." Link: GWW:NPA. Posted this on this page and the page of which it originally was mentioned. I do know policy. :-) -- riyen ♥ 04:30, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

i posted the link after i called you a hypocrite, scrub. and you did vandalize my page using your ip. - Zesbeer 05:48, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Both of you just stop. Zesbeer, you are pushing the outer boundaries of NPA. Either cease and desist, or you will both find yourself in a time out for a day to rethink your strategy. -- Wyn talk 05:53, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Not your main page. Take the IP and scan it. Sides, who says i can't use normal code in a talk page? Just word your talk page better and stuff like that wouldn't happen. -- riyen ♥ 06:37, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

you vandalized my talk page with your ip i have the logs right here.- Zesbeer 06:42, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

That's not vandalizing. No where is there in doing this { { *your user talk name/subpage } } in your user talk. -- riyen ♥ 06:43, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Both of you, please, just let. it. go. I'm getting a little tired of your continuous bickering (with added policy breaking). Thanks. -- pling 15:14, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I heard that idol threats mean nothing when there's no action behind it. This has been going on for a while and only causing issues. I'm shocked that no action has been taken considering that I've seen people here banned for FAR less. I sincerely doubt threatening them, at this point, will do anything. Karate Jesus 15:28, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

The Hebrews learned about idol threats the hard way. elix Omni 15:58, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

gfdl

Please read it. Esp. the section on attribution. We are legaly bound to follow it. That's why you should move articles via the move page function. Backsword 03:25, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Wow

You archive fast. I'm only on me second archive O.o--Unendingfear 16:21, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I do it to end drama. -- riyen ♥ 16:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, lol. My page has very little drama. :o--Unendingfear 16:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

You're lucky. -- riyen ♥ 16:25, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't know. I wish I got a little drama, to be honest xP--Unendingfear 16:27, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

It won't help. Just cause problems (and more stuff I'd say, but I won't :-) ). -- riyen ♥ 16:33, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Ya, but it is fun for a little. Like the time trolls were trying to recruit me o.O--Unendingfear 16:34, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Yea, some don't 'consider' those who actually participate in discussions or actually help behind the scene sorta with stuff. Seems like personal judgement kinda gets in the way. -- riyen ♥ 16:38, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Your suggestions suck. There. Drama. Koda Kumi 21:32, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Hey, you archived my Old Testament joke. It was really funny. D: elix Omni 21:35, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

It was funny, it's for keeps there. :-) -- riyen ♥ 02:42, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

To save space, just keep putting stuff in the same archive page. I consolidated a lot of my archives not long ago. Made 5 blog archives into 2, made... SEVERAL talk archives into 2.-- anguard 03:27, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

That's what I'm doing. Thanks. :-) -- riyen ♥ 03:36, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I waited until my first archive reaches 52 kilobites before starting a new one :P--Unendingfear 03:39, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Not on big archives. I don't like scrolling through a LOT to find what I might look for. -- riyen ♥ 03:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

(moved from User_talk:Ariyen/ContactMe to here for archiving purposes only) Can I add your Facebook? :D 72.181.47.223 No.-- riyen ♥ 07:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Charr Hat

Any particular reason you decided to revert them? The renders I put up are more detailed, have far better lighting, are anti-aliased and are from the proper angles. It'd be nice to expand on the summary. ~Celestia 16:39, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

The others were more 'human' looking showed how it'd actually look on the character. Yes, your's is more detailed, but a white background wouldn't make it easy to 'show up' those details. -- riyen ♥ 16:42, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

The white makes it easier to see than the dark cloud background, but if you say so...better go change the Lion Mask, and all the weapon renders then... ~Celestia 16:47, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Dark? It had a blue skies background. The very first image was dark and hard to tell. -- riyen ♥ 16:48, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

bug

Where is it in the archive? I don't see anything. de Kooning 16:48, 2 November 2009 (UTC

When he was in Ascalon. It was in the history. Also happened to husband and I with him facing the wrong way , had to do it twice or so to get him facing right way. Annoying, really. -- riyen ♥ 16:50, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Links help. Karate Jesus 16:51, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Forgot to add that it was this past week as well as ascalon and also once or twice during other locations. -- riyen ♥ 16:53, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Karate, I don't have to prove links. when there's notations in the past. -- riyen ♥ 16:53, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I looked through the archive, I didn't see anything. I know Nick does occasionally face odd directions, but that is just developers not checking before going live. I would not consider that a bug. de Kooning 17:00, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Last one he looked the right way twice I went through there. And then twice he'd be looking the other way at the hill in minister's estate. In Ascalon I've seen him look the right way twice, the wrong way 4 times. When I see it again, I'll screenshot as proof. I just think it should be noted, just in case anyone else might have the problem. Which a few others have (and complained in all chat, guild chat, alliance chat, etc.) (cappachino time) -- riyen ♥ 17:10, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I beleive KJ meant Links HELP....not needed for proof----X 17:12, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

^ Karate Jesus 17:14, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

If you meant that, Karate. Honestly, you should have been nicer about it instead of just links help. That's a bit rude as some can consider it a demand/statement. Now if said like "I think links would help here." More of a good contribute. It might be a bit clearer on the response you'd get. Just offering two cents here. -- riyen ♥ 17:18, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Now, now. Let's not get our feathers ruffled. de Kooning 17:19, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Please, links help. Karate Jesus 17:23, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Wow first relax....2nd grow some thick skin if you are to misinterpret. Nobody will say things the way "you" want them too. Always follow this----Xtreme 18:06, 2 November 2009 (UTC)