User talk:Ariyen/2009/Archive5

That IP

isn't mine, I have a dynamic IP that starts with 220. I don't need to sockpuppet, or logout to revert like you especially when I have already violated the 1RR rule; reverting more under my username wouldn't make a difference. In case you didn't notice, the IP reverted while I was escalating the issue on the noticeboard. I don't expect to convince you, though, you aren't receptive to logic and common sense anyway. Pika Fan 12:37, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Note: I didn't logout. For you readers, you can see how stupid assumptions can go. You can have a static and a dynamic IP. They're just different. They have no 'proof' of sock puppet, of which I learned, they have done themselves. To accuse one of things, only shows what you have done yourself that is blind and denial. If they had common sense, they would have shut up and been a good little boy at school. Instead of, showing how blind they are to not see the truth. Logic actually they don't know. The logical thing is to ask the Knowledgeable person in question. Which, has been done. End of discussion here.

Instant archives now?

^-- FreedomBound 22:07, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Was archiving everything when you posted the other. -- riyen ♥ 22:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Uh, you've heard of tangled webs, yes? You archived my one section, that happened to (again) call into question one of your little thought out decisions, quite some time before you archived the rest. If it were an accident, you'd restore it, and answer the question. -- FreedomBound 22:14, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Meh, I'll answer it here. As this pertains to it anyway. Just a new discussion. My answer is Most were for it anyway. The previous discussions would have show strong arguments towards it. So anymore, after looking at pages like Rebel Yell It would be a great help towards trivia on many pages. I think that since most were for it, anyway. Let it be. What is it hurting? Nothing? Just hope Check User would be installed to solve some 'issues'. -- riyen ♥ 22:21, 14 November 2009 (UTC

Re: Wrong again

← moved to User talk:Silver Edge

One doesn't simply mass tag with GWWT his way into Mordor...

Example: Special:WhatLinksHere/File:Destruction_(PvP)_animation.gif. And that was just doing a quick check. Please stop until you are willing to do a manual check before tagging, in order to ensure not only that images are not used, but that they weren't uploaded for a certain purpose which hasn't been filled yet.

I mean, someone will have to do that check eventually...--Fighterdoken 08:26, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Fighter, I asked Ariyen to tag the orphaned images. If something doesn't belong in that file, it should be tagged or linked somewhere. -- Wyn talk 08:27, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Fighterdoken. It's been there for a long time. It's like saying one needs to check every single guild to be sure if it's active or not... If it's to be used, it will. Other than that, it's cluttering up the buffer. :-P -- riyen ♥ 08:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

You are not free from GWWT fault Wyn, just do memory from several months back. In any case, i will revert those which i catch now.--Fighterdoken 08:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Honestly, I didn't think Talk pages were where Images should be 'linked'. They're orphaned, not being used. IF that's the case. the catch should be orphaned images not used at all... meaning this system should only detect the ones not used period. -- riyen ♥ 08:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Fighter.... the sysops that do the deletes always check anyway, but I have reverted the tags on all the skill animations. -- Wyn talk 08:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

@Ariyen, for some reason, at times is not shown on the image (or whatever you use to look for orphaned images), but if you click on the "What links here" links you will find that some images are still linked.

@Wyn, "always" is an exageration, you know better than none :)

(Added) On what i talk about, an example is [1] which is apparently orphaned, but if you check on Special:WhatLinksHere/File:Mesmer_Primeval_armor_Underwater_f.jpg you realize that actually it is not. I am not sure what method for detection of orphaned images you are using, but certainly it is not working as intended.--Fighterdoken 09:07, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

That's what the admins are suppose to do before deleting. Not me. -- riyen ♥ 09:51, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Taggers have a responsibility to check that what they're tagging should actually be tagged. Admins double check to ensure that there aren't mistakes, and to make sure that what they're deleting should be deleted. Taggers should also make sure they're doing it right so as not to give admins unnecessary work.

So yes, that is what you're supposed to be doing as well.

But.. I thought we weren't deleting orphaned images just because they were orphaned (as opposed to being unnecessary)?-- pling 16:21, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

The storybook revert war

Some of your recent edits to the storybook article violate Guild Wars Wiki:One-revert rule, please attempt to resolve the dispute on the talk page, continued violation of the policy is likely to result in blocking. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 09:00, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Linguist

For someone that's gets so riled up when people assume things about her, you sure don't think twice about doing to other people. See, you assumed you knew what a linguist was without even going, say, here first.
Yeah, I speak English and Japanese fluently, so I suppose I am multilingual (English is my first language, however), but that has nothing to do with being a linguist. Rather, we study the science of language; that is, we don't just study grammar and punctuation, we study the ins and outs of language(s) and how they work. Suffice it to say that, while this may earn the ire of some English majors, some linguists know grammar (and all those other fandangled language thingamabobs) better than said English majors.
Just lettin' ya know that I'd consider myself qualified enough to determine whether a sentence is too long or incomplete. ;) --★KOKUOU★ 13:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I read that, but it's not the science of that sentence. It's the facts as Misery said. Any body, can mis interpret that as being they can do a mission and 2 months later get the reward to (boom) realizing they can't. That's what the current sentence had me puzzled on. I knew Joe's words, but that sentence needs to be a bit clearer. if not reworded better or shortened or something. See what I'm getting at now? Oh, sorry for my rudeness to you. I just let others get to me. -- riyen ♥ 13:40, 15 November 2009 (UTC)