User talk:Dragon Legacy/Archive1

This is an archive, please don't edit it. If you want to comment on a topic here, leave a message on my talk page.

Licensing
As far as I was told, you cannot copy and paste articles over unless you have the permission of EVERY contributor to that article. At best you could post that stuff you specifically wrote, but until you get permission from the anons that edited, you can't use the rest here. - - BeXoR 23:41, 8 February 2007 (PST)
 * I guess you're right. ~ D.L. 23:43, 8 February 2007 (PST)
 * [Read this]

Signature
Hullo. I noticed this page, and just wanted to make sure you're aware of this section of the newly approved GWW:SIGN policy, which says that "User signatures should not be stored on a separate page". I'm not sure whether you're aware of that or not, or even if you've used that signature page yet or not, but thought I'd let you know anyways, just in case. Cheers! :) --Dirigible 16:57, 16 February 2007 (PST)
 * True. I missed that part of the policy. ~ dragon legacy  08:23, 17 February 2007 (PST)

Hi
Thank you for the kind offer, sorry I wasn't around to accept! >.< &mdash; Skuld 03:51, 4 March 2007 (EST)
 * Don't mention it. :) ~ dragon legacy  12:41, 4 March 2007 (EST)

uh
don't archive my stuff without asking, its kinda rude :-/ &mdash; Skuld 08:46, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Rude, and not allowed. - anja  [[Image:User Anja Astor sig icon.png|talk]] 08:49, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Anja: Policy link please. Skuld: You're teaching courtesy now? Seriously, what's wrong with you. ~ dragon legacy  08:51, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * GWW:USER. Firstly, it is stated that comments should not be removed from talk pages, but "you are allowed to archive your talk page". In my book, that doesn't mean everyone is in right to archive your talk page. Secondly, it states "Users should avoid making edits in another user's user space" and as I don't see any policy justification for that removal, I can't see how this would pass. Thirdly, it's just common wiki courtesy to leave archiving up to the user himself, or at least ask for permission first. - anja  [[Image:User Anja Astor sig icon.png|talk]] 08:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, right. Always happy to be an example. ~ dragon legacy  09:12, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Sig GWW:SIGN
Your sig is ugly. Just thought I'd let you know. &mdash; Skakid9090 23:40, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yea and the ALL-CAPS gives me a headache.- Hyrule 00:00, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Guild Wars Wiki:Block anybody the IRC channel suggests and NPA
Hai, you tagged this article for deletion with the reasoning, "This page contains a possible violation of NPA, may be confused with actual policy proposals and does not contribute community effords." The "may be confused..." part isn't covered in any policies (and thus can't be a reason to have it deleted), but where is the NPA bit? I see no such violation. I'm asking you directly because I'm sort of tired of people inventing new meanings for NPA that aren't actually there. - Auron 08:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Tired people need rest. A lot of people object to having their name involved in satire. As far as I can see, there are quite a lot of users who haven't been informed about the (mis-)use of their names. The page itself would violate the paragraph Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views. 'Affiliation' being a member of the IRC channel. ~ dragon legacy  20:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * This edit here could be an example of what I meant. ~ dragon legacy  20:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Then I just want to say I never found it as a personal attack, I'm just very tired. - anja  [[Image:User Anja Astor sig icon.png|talk]] 20:41, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Just to recap; your logic was wrong, DL. Don't make policies out to mean more than they do. - Auron 21:28, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No, actually it's not the policies job to tell people when to be offended, but offer tools for protection if neccessary. And as an American, you know that discrediting other people is problematic at best. People got sued for this. ~ dragon legacy  08:47, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * "And as an American, you know that discrediting other people is problematic at best." What is that supposed to mean? "People got sued for this." People got sued for what? I'm not really following you. --  Scourge  [[Image:User Scourge Spade.gif]] 09:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Trolling
Please don't do it. &mdash; Skakid9090 00:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * With pleasure. ~ dragon legacy  10:08, 27 September 2007 (UTC)