User talk:Pling/Archive box/2009 Jan-May

January

delete ?

Shouldnt super igor's talk page be deleted or atleast protected till he gets back ? All it serves now is venomoth trolling him and jette trolling venomoth Lilondra *gale* 20:23, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

I consider that a perfectly valid purpose. --Jette 20:24, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you leave the question to brains? Lilondra *gale* 20:27, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

My talk page isn't the noticeboard. Try Guild Wars Wiki:Admin noticeboard. -- Brains12 \ talk 22:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Catagories

Actually, I am making these userboxes for the public. Using the catagory makes placing the userbox easy for the user and offers me the ability to update the userbox doable. That is why I have set up the Userbox page with the instructions, just like other Userboxes I have looked at and learned from. --Rycharde 02:39, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

It looks like they are for your own use, considering the templates are in your own userspace. Also, if you do insist on creating categories or templates, could you use proper grammar, spelling, etc and name them according to the formatting guides (e.g. lower-case for the page title)? -- Brains12 \ talk 02:44, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Just Bringing this to your Attention

I truthfully don't know where to go with this but I thought someone should check out the contributions made by 71.243.6.11. In both places it's pretty much a rant and not pertinent to the page. Blood Red Giant 01:06, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Nvm, it's been fixed now. Blood Red Giant 01:12, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I dealt with it. It's well into the, as Brains would say, "wee" hours of the morning where he lives. For future use, use the Admin noticeboard for administrator intervention in situations, as you will get a more timely response there. This talk page, contrary to popular belief, is for personal use in contacting Brains about matters he personally is involved in on the wiki or in-game, not for getting the bucket brigade to put out a fire. calor (talk) 02:36, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey Pling, you change the redirect of GWW:NOTICE to your talk page, and I change the redirect of GWW:BOTS to my talk page! Deal? ^^ poke | talk 08:03, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Calor. *ignores poke* -- Brains12 \ talk 12:07, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Poke, that sounds like a great idea, much more efficient. By the way, Brains, I have a fire I'd like you to take a look at... Lord Belar 17:05, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Calor. Blood Red Giant 10:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you help me?

You helped me get my signature going, and I decided to ask if you could help me. I'm trying to make my own user box, but I'm not very good at it. how do I shrink the picture and change the background to red?

This user wants Guild Wars Utopia.

--Unendingfear 16:24, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't know about the color, but for the picture, i just [[Image:Thehuboftimeuj2.jpg|40px] --JonTheMon 16:28, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Like that? If you mean the color behind the words, it's just the other hex parameter.-- Wyn/talk 16:41, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much!--Unendingfear 16:48, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I seek some Sysop knowledge on a matter

On my talk page it was suggested I change my name, by Kakarot, later another user came in under the name Forbidden Truth to which I started to distinguish myself as after Kakarot didn't like my longer name not being related to user name. Aba Malatu means Forbidden Truth, the english version sounds to english users (as my guildies have told me) better on reflection but I'm a geek and like both.

I just wanted to check, the new Forbidden Truth user has a total of 5 contributions at the moment, all after I started to distinguish myself as Forbidden Truth. I can not however check when the account was generated and therefore work out if this person is honest or deceptive in nature perhaps.

I do like the name and was wanting to keep it but am not sure about the situation. It seems suspicious to me especially since the very first contributions start after I started going by that name, yet as I said I can not check if the account was generated before the name distinction or if my case holds any water, so I defer to someone knowledgeable in such things. In the end if its for me to change my name I would do so without uproar, its just my signature that would require a change but I did like the name. ^_^

Any advise? Forbidden Truth 04:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Sysops cannot check when an account was created either, but I agree it's highly unlikely that it's an old account that just happens to be used for the first time today. If it is a troll, it probably won't stick around long but wanted to take advantage of this signature situation.

However, even putting that user aside, my opinion is that displaying your account name is more useful than displaying a translation of your account name - it's easier for the average wiki user to know who you are just by looking at your signature. Putting both in, however, probably won't be bad idea if you still want the "Forbidden Truth" bit - for example, you could have "Aba malatu (Forbidden Truth)" or something. This is more just user-to-user advice and opinion rather than sysop instruction. -- Brains12 \ talk 10:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

account pass is Aba malatu if your interested--Forbidden Truth 11:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice brains its greatly appreciated. Perhaps next time I'll know better before generating an account in a place such as this when using non-english names. The user Forbidden Truth has add a redirect to my page. As for my signature, I've changed it. Aba Malatu means Forbidden Truth 19:13, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I think the user gave you his account info, which means you aren't impersonating him anymore. The pass seems to work, so... -Auron 19:18, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

It's not an issue of language, by the way - if it were English, a complete fantasy name (i.e. a character in gw), or just gibberish, a sig that identifies a user is better than one that doesn't. -- Brains12 \ talk 19:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

90/10 Rule

I'm not entirely familiar with all it's interpretations. Could you perhaps elabourate as to how it is applicable on Raine's talk page? Misery 10:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

It was just a joke (probably one that only Vili would get, but a joke nonetheless) - the admins at http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page like using it as a reason to five-year-block people. -- Brains12 \ talk 11:20, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Ah, nothing they do makes any sense. Misery 11:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Like most things that are products of Conservative American society. Dark Morphon(contribs) 17:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Nowadays, most things are products of little factories in China.... calor (talk) 17:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

What IS The 90/10 Rule? — Jon Lupen 18:48, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

http://www.conservapedia.com/90/10, http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Guidelines#90.2F10_Rule.

Calor, a big "WTF" to that. :/ -- Brains12 \ talk 19:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I hope this wiki get some additional ruling like that one! There's some much pages that consist on spamming the bandwidth that sometimes the wiki takes a lot of time to load.--ShadowFog 20:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I hope you realize that under the 90/10 rule, you'd be banned right now. Mori no Kinoko ni go Youjin 03:48, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Vandals

I think we just broke the record for quickest revert, report and block of a vandal. — Jon Lupen 23:29, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Not really. It's been done quicker tbh. -- Brains12 \ talk 23:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

*Shrugs* — Jon Lupen 23:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

He vandalised like 4 times before being reported actually... Misery 23:32, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Just curious which one were you referring to and how fast was it? I know I've reverted and blocked in the same minute as the anon vandalized (probably around 8-10 seconds max), no report necessary although I was a little slow on the block and one edit got between the revert and block :( Kinda makes gibbers useless when they can be blocked and reverted that fast. --Kakarot 04:08, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

It really wasn't that fast at all, it vandalised like 4 times that I reverted over like 4 minutes, then Jon reverted and reported with Brains blocking at about the moment he reported. I seldom see the point in reporting because a lot of gibbers are single shot (for reasons I can't fathom) and there is usually an admin watching RC who just bans it anyway. I think most admins are more likely to hit refresh on RC and see the gibber/revert and ban than see the AN ping on a watchlist, go there, check the report, then ban. Misery 17:21, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Inherent <.<

Oh, silly me. I made more mistakes in one single article since.. ever. By the way, is now everything fine with that and the page it links to? Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 18:35, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I think so. -- Brains12 \ talk 19:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Big Red Button

We need that. calor (talk) 03:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion, blocking anonymous edits would be an improvement for GWW today. Vili 04:35, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Ive, and other users have brought that issue up many times, but there will always be bad anons and good anons. Though creating a account won't be the end of the world. At this point its 40% good annons 50% gibbers, and 10% trolls. Dominator Matrix 04:43, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

We have plenty of registered trolls, and I've seen a fair number of registered vandals and gibberes, but it would stonewall quite a few. — Jon Lupen 17:16, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

What comes to mind is the move vandal. He, as much as we loathed him, was genius. Forget adding massive templates to pages. Just move ridiculous amounts of pages over important pages and keep coming back. We could have used that page to deal with him and collect ourselves on IRC. calor (talk) 17:17, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

The Red Button was meant as a joke... I wasn't seriously considering such a thing, and I don't think we should be considering it. :/

Calor, stop admiring vandals, seriously. "Genius" has nothing to do with it. Anyway, we managed to sort the move vandal out without protecting the whole site. -- Brains12 \ talk 17:21, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

It's like the nuclear arsenal you keep stashed away for that on-in-a-million chance you'll actualy need it. — Jon Lupen 17:25, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

You can learn from vandals. And considering nobody had done it like that before, and he did it with incredible success for a period of time, he was decidedly genius in the area of wiki disruption. And no, I don't honestly believe we should have that either, it was just a joke idea conceived while reminiscing about a time of epic wiki vandalism. calor (talk) 17:44, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, we all learn from vandals... poke | talk 20:01, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Also since when they come up with new ways to vandalize it helps us eliminate the possibility of it being used in future by coming up with a solution. --Kakarot 22:13, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. I'd move Brains's page to LOL WUTS UP GUYZ VANDALISM IZ GUD HUH and this talk to the corresponding talk page, but that's going too far. calor (talk) 22:26, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Something about "not disrupting wiki to prove a point" comes to mind... Raine - talk 22:50, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

It's only brains, it wouldn't be disruptive at all. Lord Belar 22:53, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Why do I feel discriminated against? ;p 76.30.79.54 23:09, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I would no longer bother with minor edits and contributions if forced to sign up. Implement OpenID however, and that's a different story. 218.214.126.215 00:35, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of Vandals...

Sock Puppetry is not okay, Brains! Raine - talk 08:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

You will never find out who I am. NEVER. -- Brains12 \ talk 12:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I have found out who you are. :) Boro 13:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Story Line information General Kahyet

Hi, please stop reverting the content on General Kahyet; if you disagree with someone's revert, discuss on the talk page. Guild Wars Wiki:One-revert rule has more info. Thanks -- Brains12 \ talk 20:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

hello

I'm not sure just exactly how this works. Or all of the TOS of this wiki. I did look at your talk page and I would like to note that you youself said this

Yeah, reverted. If you're that sure of something, be bold and do it :) -- Brains12 \ talk 00:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I am sure of the Story line information I am posting to the wiki. Isn't that the point of the WiKi? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Raven78931 (talk • contribs) at 20:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC).

I've responded on your talk page. -- Brains12 \ talk 21:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

New messages for you on My talk page Raven78931 (talk

I've got your page watched, you don't need to post here when you've answered something. -- Brains12 \ talk 21:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Message from Oni

I don't know whether this is in violation of any policy but Oni wanted me to quote this from him to you: "Leave my talk page, and my page in general. It does not contribute to anyone with you whining on my page while were having fun without breaking any policies. Kthxbye.". Dark Morphon(contribs) 17:52, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

February

Thanks

I had completely forgotten to unprotect the admin noticeboard mainly due to Canthan New Year. On the note of an expiry, the reason I didn't set one was because that would of also affected the move protection and although we no longer have a problem with the move vandal like before there's still no reason for it to be moved. --Kakarot 23:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

np -- Brains12 \ talk 23:41, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

hai thar!

herd u lieks to bans me for three months :< --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 20:58, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

You want to do thunderhead keep bonus sometime this weekend? Enjoy computing!

Just Curious

Why not? — Jon Lupen 00:34, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Why bother?

There's no proof either way about whether Shard's using IPs to troll and there's no point in putting stuff like that around whenever anyone is banned for any amount of time - you can check the talk page for that.

69.109.167.110 00:37, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) We don't, and have never before, put warning boxes on people's userpages saying they're blocked. If someone wants to know who's blocked and for how long, they check Special:Log/Block - we don't go round posting it redundantly on userpages (that aren't our own). -- Brains12 \ talk 00:40, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

@Brains: Sounds fair. — Jon Lupen 00:42, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

First

i may be inactive, but i still notice brains archives ;P - Y0_ich_halt 21:48, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

And that's why I'll always love you. -- Brains12 \ talk 21:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Happy Valentine's Day!

Happy V-Day!!! - Tesla 01:02, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Just a query...

Why are you voting against Wyn in the bureaucrat elections of you are in the same guild? If you dont want to ask, or feel its inappropriate, thats fine. Just wanted to know. --Burning Freebies 19:10, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

i love how everything you say is wrong. you don't vote for people you like but for whoever you consider would be best for the role of a bureacrat. please stop posting without knowing. --81.233.248.107 19:23, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

How's this?

I made the font smaller and made the border thinner, is it ok now or still too distracting? Karate Jesus 16:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Answered on your talk page. -- Brains12 \ talk 18:38, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

sir pling

i need ur opinion on the trivia on Dancing Daggers. as many bugs have taken about the same time and more to be fixed there's either putting a similar trivia on about houndreds of other pages or taking this out. if u can't guess who, check history. --Cursed Angel 01:13, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Uh... did you know you signed that? Was that intentional? Misery 01:16, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

im reffering to shard and that he should look at the history of the page instead of the discussion, tbh talking to raine is like talking to a wall that echoes random unrelevant facts from another room. --Cursed Angel 01:32, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I briefly looked over that discussion yesterday, and wasn't really interested. However, I don't recommend anyone to ignore discussion - that's the right way to go about sorting a dispute like this. If the discussion begins to go in circles or an outcome can't be reached, look for a compromise - one can't have it completely their way. Use GWW:RFC to get more input. -- Brains12 \ talk 12:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

No need

any longer for you to continually contradict me. I'm on indefinite leave and will only be contributing to my userspace at this point. Enjoy yourself. -- Wyn 00:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but what? I'm confused about what's going on. Why are you leaving? :/ -- Brains12 \ talk 00:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Going out with a bang doesn't usually involve flames, contrary to popular belief. Vili 19:27, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Depends on what's making the bang. Lord Belar 22:57, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

March

And so

    * (diff) (hist) . .  MediaWiki:Sitenotice‎; 16:58 . . (+546) . . Brains12 (Talk | contribs) (The revolution begins.)

One of the best summeries I've seen in a while, save for this one. --Antioch 04:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Jokes over edit summary — Jon Lupen 04:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I aim to please. -- Brains12 \ talk 16:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

*cough* - anja 16:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

kormir follower

i tried to edit the kormir follower userbar template because i really dont like the image shown on it. but when i tried i noticed it was protected agaist editing by you. could you plz give me the template so i could edit the icon show? thanx in advance, IIFearII 11:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

You mean Template:User Kormir follower? It's not protected, and I don't recall protecting a Kormir template. You should be able to edit it. However, considering it's used on many users' pages, I suggest you copy the userbox code to your userpage and change which image is used (instead of editing the template directly, which would affect other users). If that's not the template you mean, please say :) -- Brains12 \ talk 12:22, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

greetings

{{subst:Welcome|Yo|MW 1.14}} :D - Y0_ich_halt 21:41, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi -- Brains12 \ talk 21:51, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I see you're doing good :) - Y0_ich_halt 21:56, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Reminds me of German guildwiki talk pages :P (poke linked it once) -- Brains12 \ talk 21:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, german wiki or not it's still fun, now I need help on this thing where I can't get the bars to divide the characters. -- Halogod35 16:49, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Weird. --Antioch 00:34, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Very... -- Halogod35 00:44, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay well forget that, now I just can't get the icons to be centered, and at least some background color that doesn't hurt people's eyes. -- Halogod35 03:06, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Is this like a template, because I've been doing mine manually. --Antioch 05:26, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

It could be made into a template. Vili 05:40, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

He's right. xDD -- Halogod35 05:43, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

We could also just modify the styles as the german GuildWiki did... But: Please not. poke | talk 15:59, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Vili stole Eloc's colors! Anyway, you oppose a template poke and/or the style change (I would also understand that)? I can see background color or light text being a problem. How about just simple border colors? --Antioch 17:59, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, if it was in the userspace I don't think anyone would complain. Vili 18:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Nah, it's not difficult to read or anything. Lord Belar 19:04, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Both, PoA.. poke | talk 19:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I made a template. :D Lord Belar 20:12, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

My code is shorter o.O Oh, and you indent fails. poke | talk 20:15, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

..can we stop with the boxes now please :/ -- Brains12 \ talk 20:17, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, after I fix the indents. :( @poke: But mine has background colors! And I have no clue what's wrong with the indents. Lord Belar 20:19, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

fixed. poke | talk 20:22, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your help...

mtew 14:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I aim to please. -- Brains12 \ talk 16:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

lulz. poke | talk 18:15, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Poke: Yes, very amusing, but to really understand check the time stamps on my posts.      mtew 00:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I was obviously thinking of something else, Mtew - what do you mean? :P poke | talk 01:10, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I think poke was lulzing at my "aim to please" comment - he and Anja (look up a couple of sections) seem to find it amusing :P -- Brains12 \ talk 01:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

e-mail perhaps?     mtew 06:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I need some help

Hey, could you help me out with getting a few things figured out (wiki newb still...)?

1 - Where and how would I go about doing something to change how something works on Wiki? Like changing how a page looks or works, I'm assuming a vote would be required or something, so how would I go about doing this? (without going into too much detail, I'm still working out the specifics.)

2 - Assuming I wanted to create a type of uhhhhh project I guess, involving research on the aggro system in depth, is there some kind of system on Wiki setup for that where other Wiki users can help me out and easily find such a project? If yes, how would I go about setting that up?

Thanks :). DarkNecrid 19:58, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

1. If it's a change that can't just be done outright (i.e. a major change), it should be discussed on an appropriate talk page - perhaps the article's talk page if it's one specific article, or a formatting guideline talk if it's about multiple articles. If it's not about articles, I'd probably more details so I can suggest to you the right kind of page. GWW:RFC is a good page to ask for input. Also, decisions are made through discussion and consensus, not voting.
2. We have a requests for research project already, so you could ask there. If it's a major project though, you could create a separate project page as outlined on Guild Wars Wiki:Projects.

-- Brains12 \ talk 20:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Alright, well I've been working at it so, what I want to change is the Guides section. I think in its current state it is pretty unwieldy and doesn't seem to have the casual user in mind. One of the problems with the GW Community imo is that we have all these great resources but they get buried or are hard to find. My idea is to rework the guides section so that the important VALUABLE game related ones are in front, and stuff like "Guild Wars on Fedora" is in a subsection instead. A casual player won't be playing GW on Fedora most likely, and if they are, they will probably be smart enough to find it or go to a Wine specific forum anyways. There's a lot of good guides on user spaces too, I'm not sure how the rules go on moving author's stuff, but seek permission from them to move them to a public space off of their user pages and add it to the guides. I want to try and make a project (separate from my #2 question) related to this soon after to try and create more guides that could be of use to players. A restructuring of the guides could be used to sort them by PvE or PvP related guides on the main Guides page instead of being sorted Alphabetically. I'm still thinking of other changes, but the main goal is to rework the guides section into something the normal casual user can find something and actually use. Right now all you have is some vague guide on PvE, Hard Mode, and character creation, plus making a build, that is in the open for the casual user. The rest of the good stuff is PvP focused or emulator on another OS focused, and this kinda sucks cause there's some good guides but they're all buried in sub-sections (that incorrectly state there is 0 things in them...). Eventually I would want this to section to be so well made and have good content that it might be feasible for ArenaNet to add a link to our guides section on the title screen of GW, to finally put the GW Community's resources out in the open for the casual player. That would do wonders for people, because a lot of people do check the title screen, especially on weekend events.

As for #2, I'm not sure if this would be a RAF or Major project issue. My current plan is sometime during next week I want to get started on completing a comprehensive series of tests involving the Masters on the Isle of the Nameless to determine exactly how GW's aggro system works beyond "the bubble". Is AL a factor? Is healing regeneration a factor? (making Mending possibly a good tank skill?) Does GW use a threat system like other MMORPGs where you generate threat per damage/healing point done? And so on. Would this be considered a big enough project to count, or would I just be safer doing a RAF and trying to find a few people to help me out and maybe creating a separate page like User:DarkNecrid/Aggro or whatever? DarkNecrid 20:49, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Maybe Guild Wars Wiki:Formatting/Profession guides would be a good place to discuss guides.

I think you'd be better off making a separate project page for the research and inviting people to add their results there (and link to it from GWW:PROJECTS or GWW:RFR). -- Brains12 \ talk 21:14, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Alright, will do for the Aggro project, thanks, but I'm not sure if the Profession guides page is right, by guides I mean reorganizing and restructuring this: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Category:Guides to put more useful (for casual players) and better guides out up front and putting the more technical oriented guides in the subsections. Should I just discuss it on that talk page instead? (maybe you got confused about what I meant with the guides thing lol. :P) DarkNecrid 21:19, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh right. The category isn't really intended as a search or browsing tool (for the average viewer), it's just for wiki organisation and whatnot. Anywho, yes, you could discuss it on that talk page - I'm sure other people can give a better insight into restructuring it than I can :P (maybe there's a way to make it both for organisation and browsing). -- Brains12 \ talk 21:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you for your help! :) (inb4iaimtoplease) DarkNecrid 21:30, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

:D -- Brains12 \ talk 22:17, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

April

Userpage

/doubletake. O_O -- Wandering Traveler 05:14, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

LOL! Nice try plinggggg, but I think poke won. :P — Why 12:55, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Brains <3

thanks for saving me from evil admins abusing their ban hammuhrs but can you also unban my IP adress please? :3 --Super Igor 16:17, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

LOL I'm not an evil admin. Well not normally anyway. Brains and I felt that my ban was OTT, however really mate please go light on the trolling especially with people trying to help you. As trolling so easily escalates into breaches of policy and I would rather not see you banned again mate. As for your IP, I'll fix that now. EDIT: oh Pling got their before me -- Salome 16:21, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I wasn't trolling, and I removed my comment. Besides, calling someone Nub isn't even offensive. D: Thanks for the IP and sorry if it offended her so badly though. --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 16:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

You didn't offend Wyn, nor did you offend me, thus the only apology that is in order is from me to you for overreacting in this instance. However I would ask you to steer clear from these kinda comments as it' too easy for people to see them and jump on the bandwagon resulting in flames and the like. Regards -- Salome 16:37, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

No problem, no need to apologize really <3 --Super Igor flame my shove sin bar! 16:40, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

One

Hi Pling. poke | talk 19:49, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

What he said. calor (talk) 19:49, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

You're evil ... and I hate you. -- Brains12 \ talk 19:50, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Think of a better solution then :P poke | talk 19:53, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and not to forget: Don't tell me how you would break it when I would copy it :P poke | talk 19:53, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

CAPTAIN OSRIC

Some idiots keep revising the one I posted saying npc Captain Osric have Meteor Shower. I even posted a proof on talk page. This is getting old and annoying when people do it. So I brought it to your attention. The funny part is the people that revise/undo the page have REDNAMES/UNREGISTERED do you see what I'm seeing here? VANDALIZE! --Ridz16 20:12, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

The reason Captain Osric may have the skill available to you is because you have already unlocked it on your account. Without the unlock, Captain Greywind is the first place Meteor Shower is available. This is why your edits have been reverted.

A red username simply indicates they do not have a userpage, not that they are unregistered. -- Wyn 21:20, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

reCAPTCHA

Ever since I saw that link on your page, I've been addicted to solving captcha. I don't know why. Maybe it's because they have a running score on the top. You know. --Antioch 03:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

maybe it's cos you're crazy -- Brains12 \ talk 18:05, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for helping me with my archive! =D--Unendingfear 15:39, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

np -- Brains12 \ talk 15:40, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Luxon Independence Day event

To be fair, there is a page containing the English translation of the event. There's also a link to the English page under "Language" on the French page. I don't know if this matters in terms of article retention policies, but just pointing it out. If it still warrants deletion, then delete away, good sir! :D --★KOKUOU★ 13:38, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I know, but the mainspace content is exclusively English. The only non-English content we retain is in the user or guild namespaces. Discussion can always change that of course, but that's the current condition. -- Brains12 \ talk 13:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

And why are you getting into the act?

Re: Gwen (Prophecies) – Are you a puritan too who can't stand humor? --mtew 18:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Does useless, uninformative, unnecessary, and random content belong in articles? No. Does thinking that make me a humourless (humourphobic, rather, going by your question) puritan? Lolno. Try to keep this one page if you can; seems to be on User talk:JonTheMon atm. -- Brains12 \ talk 18:21, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, I'm getting "into the act" because you seemed to ignore Jon and Misery and carried on doing things contrary to the norm or acceptable. -- Brains12 \ talk 18:25, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

They both act like this was something horrible.and are acting like they are the sole arbiters of what does and doesn't belong on the WIKI. I did not put it back until it was clear that this was a matter of their personal opinion and they had no standing in stated policy. Your joining them does not change the fact that they went well beyond policy in removing the item. I asked here because I see a difference between their action and yours. --mtew 18:47, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't vandalise the wiki, k, thx. --Lemming 18:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

The information is accurate, just stated in an odd way. NOT vandalism by any reasonable definition. --mtew 18:47, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Linking to sorces for your information is a good way to back up your case... otherwise it's opinion/misinformation IMHO MrPaladin 18:54, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

The source is the game itself. The note is about the absence of something. You're assuming 'misinformation'. The information is correct. --mtew 19:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikis use something called concensus, you are currently acting against it. That is how wikis work, you are in breach. Have a nice day. Misery 18:55, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

And as I said, you seem to think that your opinion alone is the basis for 'consensus' even though the item did not stay up long enough for more than a very few people to see it. So I call bullshit on that line of reasoning. --mtew 19:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

How did they go "well beyond policy"? What did I do that was different to anything they did? :/ -- Brains12 \ talk 18:56, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

They did not state a reason for the removal, just a personal opinion about its humor value. I think you just 'jumped on the band-wagon' without really thinking things through. Both reprehensible, but two different issues. Leave the discussion of the merits on Jon's page. --mtew 19:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Whatever that line is not appropriate and multiple people don't want it there. That is all that matters here. poke | talk 19:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

A little trouble parsing that. ONE person didn't want it there and forced that opinion on everyone else. It was NOT discussed, just removed. I'd react entirely differently if there had been objections stated BEFORE the removal, but that is not what happened. --mtew 19:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Eh what? Learn how wikis work! People add something, others revert; reversion = clear objection! And you even reverted once and it was again reverted (= objected); and we are discussing this on two pages now and there is nobody on your side so just forget about it; that comment is not wanted. poke | talk 20:04, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't have to be discussed. Part of a wiki is being bold, even undoing is an action that can be bold. Did you discuss the addition of the information before hand? Not that I saw on the talk page of Gwen (Prophecies). If we always discussed what happens here, very little would get done. I like living by this instead. If others revert you, it is a clear indicator of opposition. --Antioch 20:04, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Obviously not because then it would take ages if a consensus had to be reached EVERY SINGLE TIME someone wants something to be removed. You really need to learn how to wiki, this is not a democracy or something. Mini Me 20:08, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Poke: I let the revert stand until it became clear that the objection was based on personal opinions, not on specific objections. Then I objected. At that point it was not clear where consensus lay. Things have changed. --mtew 20:39, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Antioch: That process was what I tried to do, but Jon and Misery made it clear that they were NOT going to compromise. The line "He's saying we don't care about you :P --JonTheMon 14:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)" just about says it all. --mtew 20:39, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Mini Me: This is not 'EVERY SINGLE TIME'. This is a high handed imposition of one or two peoples opinion over the objections of someone else. --mtew 20:39, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

No, I meant wait for a consensus to be reached if someone doesn't agree. Be bold and don't a fuck about other people is what I do on a wiki and it works like a charm. Mini Me 20:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Typically a :P indicates a jest of sorts. But apparently that wasn't how it was interpreted. But honestly, we don't care about personal information put on main articles. Less personal/inside-jokeish and we wouldn't have had an issue. --JonTheMon 20:44, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

This really belongs in the other discussion, but... You are right about personal information but that is not at issue here. It was not an 'inside joke' either, but it was too obscure. If you had come right out and asked 'what in hell are you talking about', that would have been fine, but that is not what happened. As I said on your talk page, the failure to connect to all the 'evil Gwen' stuff by most people is where the whole thing failed. ...Brain's piling on and the associated process failure is what this discussion is about. --mtew 21:08, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

That's not how wikis work. You basically revert an edit if you object; and then discussion can take place on the associated talk page. Bitching at others because they reverted you is just not the correct way. poke | talk 21:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

May

Bcrat

Your the new one. Congrats. :) — Jon Lupen 02:13, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Grats. Definitely a worthy candidate. -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 02:24, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Grats! You get a nice break from heavy sysop duty!  :-D You'll do well, I know it. --Antioch 04:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Good work! -- Wandering Traveler 04:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations. I'm curious, would you have run if Sock hadn't nominated you? Vili 点 10:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks :). Vili - if someone else had nominated me, yes, but I probably wouldn't have nominated myself. -- Brains12 \ talk 16:06, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

/congrats Pling. Also, you need to update your userpage, it still refers to you as a sysop. — Why 16:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Grats... don't get too drunk with power ;) --Shadowphoenix 18:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations! --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 23:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Congrats. Well deserved :). Dominator Matrix 00:08, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

The little umbrellas for your drinks are on the top shelf. - Tanetris 00:45, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

grats ^^ - Y0_ich_halt 14:49, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:14, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey Brains

I'm gonna need those dirty pictures back... Misery 07:48, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Just look in your nearest newspaper, I'm sure they're all there. -- Brains12 \ talk 12:51, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

You are a monster. Children could see that, then how on earth am I going to convince them to get into my van? I'm going to starve to death because of you, that's one of the worst ways to die in the world and it's going to happen to me because of you. Good luck sleeping tonight, you monster. Misery 13:06, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

oh god... YOU the one who was running around pulling little kids into that mexican-themed van? if so, i have one question for you......

can a brotha' get a burritto? :D -Lena talk 16:52, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

I was going to make my own version of it shortly, just swamped with work, thanks for not just raging and deleting it, I'll add a "Profile inspired by <Your name here> on my page :-) -Baddock --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:SirBaddock (talk).

Yo Baddock sign your comments with four tildes(~~~~). --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:DrogoBoffin (talk).

Yo Drogo sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Mini Me 09:11, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, take as long as you need. -- Brains12 \ talk 11:08, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

mb

Are you a bot? --Antioch 00:33, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

bot revert; it's a feature, not a bug bot. poke | talk 10:20, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, so B-crats have this ability? I was not aware. : / --Antioch 19:10, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Sysops. poke | talk 19:13, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, okay, has that always been there? --Antioch 19:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, since multiple versions; but you need to know how to do it (it's a bit tricky ;) ) poke | talk 19:32, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

In other words: it's our little secret. :D -- Brains12 \ talk 19:50, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

:D poke | talk 19:51, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Amidoinitrite? 69.109.124.128 23:18, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Uhmm..

Tried to make a redirect page for today's Z-Bounty (for the darkness).... But... I don't think it works. Could you take a look? :\ -Lena talk 16:10, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

omg i think i did it. :O i had to actually create the page for the zaishen bounty that it was trying to redirect to. *feels proud* xD -Lena talk 16:31, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Looks fine :) -- Brains12 \ talk 17:22, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

w00t!!! i is the wiki master! RAHHHH!!!! >:D -Lena talk 17:50, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Dancing daggers

Why'd you lock that page AFTER the sock puppets had removed the Trivia note? ...when the time right before that you locked it with the agreed-upon version of the trivia note left in? If a consensus was reached on it to keep the note, then why did you change the status quo on that by Indefinitely locking the Vandalized instance the 2nd time around instead? Your final edit note wasn't very clear, can you elaborate? Check the history closer if you're not sure what I'm referring to plz --ilr 19:25, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, Cursed Angel is going around calling everyone retarded. Could ya ask him to knock it off or atleast ask him to come up with some new material? Thanks. --ilr 19:31, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Why don't you ask him instead of getting someone else to do the dirty work? — Jon Lupen 19:44, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Do you honestly think he's going to listen to one of the people he keeps attacking? --ilr 20:20, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

First rule of page-protection: You will always protect the "wrong" version, no matter which version it is. - Tanetris 19:44, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, consensus hadn't been reached. People were still arguing over it, but eventually the discussion died out. Personally, I'm not going to remove the protection just for the edit wars to return. Revive the discussion (without the trolling/NPA stuff that arose the last time), reach a consensus (i.e. a consensus), then I or someone else will remove the protection. -- Brains12 \ talk 19:53, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

The discussion didn't die out, it devolved into personal attacks on the week that you locked it again but no enforcement was used to set it back on track at which point it simply couldn't continue. And yes I can prove there was consensus as most of the month of March there were no more changes made and a 60% majority on the talk page supporting the trivia note as being relevant. Sorry for bringing this up now but I wanted to give the issue some time to incubate --ilr 20:18, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

60% majority isn't consensus. Misery 20:20, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Many changes have been made permanent with less than that. Edit note however: Wyn stepped in, it wasn't what I'd call a warning but maybe it worked. In either case: Far less openly demanded the note be removed yet Brain's action was to freeze the page in THEIR favor. He still hasn't told me why he did that instead of fully reverting it again and then freezing it. So I don't understand how your response here justifies that. Could you please elaborate?, because it looks like a double standard the way you stated it Misery. --ilr 20:29, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

No one will ever be happy with where it is locked so it is standard practice for an admin to lock it on whatever revision it happens to be on when a lock becomes necessary. As such, Brain's actions were correct. Reverting then locking would have endorsed one revision over the other, a simple lock endorses neither revision and requires that the discussion continues until consensus is reached, then the final revision can be made and the page unlocked. There is clearly still heavy dissent which means convincing arguments have not been made and concensus has not been reached. This is how a wiki works, no one is trying to skew the process. Misery 20:31, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

This is not the truth and you know it. Look at the history again. The Note was not being removed before April because it's existence was not what was being disputed, only the wording was. Then on April 2nd a rogue action was taken by an IP (a sock puppet) and I quickly reverted it back to the Version Brains had locked it to on that month. THAT'S when it should have been locked again. I attempted to restart the discussion but I was attacked. Is there some connection between you and the IP edit on April 2nd? Plz be honest if there is... --ilr 20:43, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I will be honest, I haven't been to that page since my last comment on the talk page until today. It's no long on my watchlist. I'm sorry you don't believe me, that that is what Brains did because that is what he is supposed to do. Misery 20:47, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, you are talking about what happened in April. The IP still wasn't me. Misery 20:47, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

indent reset Thank you but the other answer still sounds like a Non-Answer Answer. If there is no standard for timing the lock then why lock it at all? What I'm seeing being condoned here is exactly that: a double standard and I just want to see if Brains is going to contest that charge or if he's going to continue to reward rogue actions. --ilr 21:04, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

The time to lock is like the time to block. It's when you notice things are getting out of hand. Misery 21:19, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I locked the page because of the edit wars, not because I agreed or disagreed with any revision. If you can't stop thinking that only your revision is the right one (and others are "rogue"), the note won't get resolved; you need to compromise. -- Brains12 \ talk 21:22, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

How was that a compromise though? It is now locked indefinitely so there's no way any of us to revert it again, right? The point is you are being inconsistent. The point is also that the note had reached a point where it's existence at the bottom of the page was acceptable for many months. The only fight about it was the exact wording. Could you plz edit the page to put the last valid version of the Note back in so that discussion of it can continue uninterrupted? --ilr 21:54, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

It's locked indefinitely until there is a real consensus on that topic or at least until everybody has calmed down. It's as simple as that. poke | talk 21:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

But now that the note is gone, how can discussions for a consensus commence?? ...Anyone who didn't like the note to begin with can simply claim victory now because the Sysops already took actions in their favor. There is no longer room for discussion because of Sysop interference that was inconsistent with the talk page consensus. --ilr 22:04, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

If that's really what you think, how would changing the note (yet again) make a difference? The history exists, the current state exists, the talk page exists. Have at it. -- Brains12 \ talk 22:05, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Get consensus on the talk page and then report the final consensus to an admin and it will get unlocked and edited appropriately. However, consensus first! poke | talk 22:07, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

You are now telling me to reverse a Catch22 without providing any weapons to fight a Paradox. And I don't need a new consensus to prove that the old consensus was overthrown by Sysops. That is the problem here (Arbitrary enforcement). --ilr 22:19, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

You better get started then, hm? -- Brains12 \ talk 22:25, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I just want to iterate that I didn't come here to pick a fight but *other* persons here could goad me into one. --> Request plz: If I have any other questions, could I plz take them up on your *other* talk page? You know which one. --ilr 23:00, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

On GW2W? It probably wouldn't be fitting there, and I don't check that as often as I do this. If it's something that doesn't require others' input, you can get me through email or msn. -- Brains12 \ talk 23:19, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

We're done here then I guess, feel free to archive or delete this --ilr 19:00, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

>_<'

:rolleyes: --NIN37 23:50, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Lena

Shouldn't it redirect to User talk:Uchiha Lena, since the user page already does and both users are the same person? — Jon Lupen 17:48, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Commented there, but short answer: not necessarily. -- Brains12 \ talk 19:01, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok, wasn't sure whether or not it was required or policy so I asked. — Jon Lupen 19:02, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

xD

Ha :D See here. poke | talk 13:39, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

How in the world did you add that text? When I check on it, it isn't there? It only appears in Poke's link. Also, yes, I'll have a better sense for that now... :-)--Antioch 13:49, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

You need to edit the correct file ;) poke | talk 13:51, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Pfft, I always assumed editing a file never lead you to its redirect ever. Sorry I didn't catch that! :-/ --Antioch 13:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC)