User talk:Backsword/No two

quotes

you made it in... - Y0_ich_halt 20:13, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Blocking policy

For the blocking policy proposal, do you feel that you have any major issues with it that would cause you to oppose installing it as policy? If you have only relatively minor issues (or issues with something that the policy wouldn't be at fault for anyways), shall we try to see if we can get it accepted as-is for now?

Same question for the bot policy proposal, too. --Rezyk 03:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

GWW:LOCATION

You said you would adress what you disliked. I simply want to remind you of that, I want to get this accepted as soon as possible. - anja 17:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Disguises vs Form

[1], you've been changing it to form, but the category still says disguise. Care to elaborate more on this? — ク Eloc 貢 17:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

This is not a form; it is a disguise. A form is a skill type whereas a disguise is an effect which causes you to change your appearance. poke | talk 17:15, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

GWW:NOTICE

Please use level 3 headers on the noticeboard. — ク Eloc 貢 22:07, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Allegiance rank

There are some comments about your suggested split of this page, please read up on the discussion. (Consensus right now seems to be to keep the page as is). -- Totte 15:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

War Preparations

Can you put something on the talk page to indicate WHY you are proposing a split? It really isn't clear what there is to discuss. --BramStoker (talk, contribs) 21:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

image substitution

Hey backsword, please remember to tag replaces images with {{delete|I1 redundant image|speedy}} tags, makes life a bit easier if it is done as you go. --Lemming 17:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion

May I say, please do not mark the deletion of a page as minor. That is not minor that is major. Sorry for an incovence --Shadowphoenix 00:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Quest articles

Not sure what quest formatting page you are reading but no where is there does it say to use and . You just can't change quests how you want them to be formatted without proposing a change here Guild_Wars_Wiki:Formatting/Quests. --Sktbrd341 01:02, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Good job at deleting my comment and not responding to it. The quest formatting is something that was put in place when the wiki was started and it is supposed to be followed if you want something changed you have to discuss it before you just go and change and already in use format. --Sktbrd341 01:09, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

thanks for breaking my talk page, why will you not just respond to this comment all I want to know is why you are changing things to something that is not in the formatting page. --Sktbrd341 01:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Formatting is a guideline and isn't compulsory to be followed. Of course, you can revert someone who doesn't follow it with the reason that formatting is an accepted guideline. But you can also make changes to the formatting guide more easily than a policy. Only controversial changes need to have consensus. If the yes and no templates are an improvement, then they can be left and the quest formatting page can be changed. We always look for improvements. - BeX 02:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

The yes and no templates have been suggested in the past or atleast mentioned and I think we came to a consensus to leave the formatting how it is with the accept and decline section. All I know is the first time I started creating quest articles and they didn't follow the guideline I was told it was wrong and I need to follow it. So I am obviously missing something if they are not to be followed anymore and are just suggestions. --Sktbrd341 02:37, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Read Guild Wars Wiki:Guidelines because it's explained better there. Guidelines aren't "not to be followed". They aren't as binding as policy, and changing them is rather easy. I simply posted that in response to your comment "You just can't change quests how you want them to be formatted.." If you were told in the past to follow the guideline, it is because the formatting is widely accepted on the wiki and if you didn't follow them your stuff would have been changed anyway. And we also probably didn't have the policy up about guidelines yet.

If the change has previously been discussed and shot down, and Backsword is aware of it (otherwise bring the discussion to his attention), then revert to the formatting compliant version. Any further reverts require discussion and probably will violate 1RV. - BeX 03:40, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I have only reverted Backswords stuff once and I believe I mentioned about the formatting when I reverted the article and then Backsword reverted saying incorrect. Looking at the formatting page itself it reads "Please note that these guides are meant to be a help, and shall be seen as a recommendation rather than strict law restricting creativity. If in any case the standardized formatting doesn't fit the purpose, you are free to modify it. Also, if you think that a formatting is generally lacking in any respect, question it! You are always invited and encouraged to suggest improvements on the respective talk page." Although it says it is recommended and not strict law it still says that if there is improvements then suggest the change. In my comment I was referring to changing the formatting on the article page while the guide said something else, and not even suggesting the change.

The bottom line is I was just trying to make Backsword aware that there is a guideline and that what was changed was not accepted into the guideline after I had saw that the formatting was wrong and that my revert was reverted without any comment. I am not trying to make a big deal out of this situation I just tried leaving a comment to talk to Backsword and then saw my comment was removed without a response and to me it made Backsword look like he was better then me and didn't want to listen. If all of the quest articles are already using one format I feel the yes and no templates are not adding anything to the articles. --Sktbrd341 05:04, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

To this day guild articles get deleted without a moment's thought, BeXoR, just because they don't comply with the formatting guidelines. Clearly that must mean they're more "to be followed" than you're giving them credit for.

Backsword, if the formatting guideline doesn't currently make room for those icons, at least try to have a discussion about it on that guideline's talk page and get some support, especially when someone like Sktbrd341 who has been working on quest articles since the beginning doesn't agree with their inclusion. Oh, and please do try to answer calls for discussion like his messages above here, instead of archiving them away silently. We can't get to consensus without communication, can we? --Dirigible 06:02, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

That's not at all what I mean Dir. - BeX 08:05, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Backsword isn't the only one doing it, just so you know. — ク Eloc 貢 21:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

How is that relevant? — Galil 21:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Hence the "just so you know" part. Also, I added restarted the topic at Guild_Wars_Wiki_talk:Formatting/Quests#Accept_.26__Decline incase anyone is interested. — ク Eloc 貢 22:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

FYI

I, for one, draw a line.

Things need to make sense, and it's not up to us to oppress the voices of those participating in the discussion. -- Armond Warblade 10:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

If you're going to insist on removing the comments, you ought to go through all of Izzy's talk pages and archives and remove all of them, too. Lack of consistency is damning. -- Armond Warblade 10:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Ya, removing comments under NPA would be up to Izzy, not anyone else. — ク Eloc 貢 05:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Check This Out

Hey there make sure u check this out and post here User:Shadowphoenix/User Birthdays --Shadowphoenix 05:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Removal of info

I was just curious, what was the reason for clearing Category:Campaigns? — Galil 19:00, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

It's duplicated at Campaign. - Bex 02:47, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, as seen on my talk page, I noticed he moved the info there. :) — Galil 03:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Ascalon Academy

So what if you skip the PvP match entirely? — ク Eloc 貢 02:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

about template

the chest like kanaxai don't say anymore that they are in the deep, and the text is put down under the infobox leaving a big blank, i don't call that an improvement. do what you want. lussh 10:46, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

rv yep

There can be skills in main namespace that have the historical content tag, so I was too fast in removing that line from the Elementalist's pages. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 14:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Are they dwarves?

Do you have some reason to believe that dwarves-on-top-of-beasts (i.e. Wroth Yakslapper) count as the same type/family as plain dwarves (i.e. Stone Summit Carver) by the game? I remember testing a while ago with either EoE or disease and found them to be separate types (and also that mounted snow beasts are separate from mounted dolyaks). --Rezyk 17:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

For your review: I added a "species" parameter to User:Backsword/Sandbox/RNPCI to (hopefully) make things seamless between steps in the transition. --Rezyk 00:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Regions and continents aren't considered "locations" according to Location. Whether correct or not, it's a discrepancy between this definition and that categorization. --Rezyk 01:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Any chance we could just..not have region location affiliations at all? =P --Rezyk 06:21, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, seriously..this is getting out of hand. I mean, now we have both Category:Istan wildlife and Category:Istan NPCs, and we know people will misunderstand the relationship between them.. --Rezyk 06:32, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmm..for whatever reason, I mistakenly thought it was going to be affiliations based on each location (i.e. Cliffs of Dohjok wildlife, Lornar's Pass wildlife, etc). I realize now that it'd be region-based instead, which isn't nearly as bad. I'd still consider/favor forgoing these entirely, but generally rescind my initial concern. Sorry.

Keep in mind that it would compound the issue of handling multiple affiliations through wildlife spanning multiple regions, such as lions (which would be much simpler to solve if it wasn't for autocategorization). ;)

--Rezyk 22:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

"Having the cats fixed."

I keep thinking, "The vet bills must be massive" and "Haven't they suffered enough?" You've used this phrase so many times I can't help but mention it now. :P MiraLantis 01:31, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

And now you've started fixing MY cats! XD MiraLantis 01:55, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Mad King Thorn

Yay! You fixed it! Just because I'm insanely curious after going over the page - where was the error? MiraLantis 03:03, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Undead

Sry for mixing up them as Species instead of Affiliation. Do you think Bone Fiends are Skeletons? —ZerphaThe Improver 10:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Category:Users in CVU

I know this looks like a guild category (as I'm the only one in it *sad face), but please don't mark it as such. I made this userbox as one generally anyone can have. --People of Antioch talk 01:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Attuned Was Songkai

Can you please explain on it's talk page? :) - anja 15:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Same thing with Aura of Stability to Brace yourself. Stop adding it. There not related. If we add it we might as well add every skill that prevents KD ~ SCobra 15:56, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Thanks for the comments on my RfA. It has failed, but I have learned a lot going through this session. Take care. --People of Antioch talk 17:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

RFC

http://wiki.guildwars.com/index.php?title=Guild_Wars_Wiki_talk%3AAdminship%2Fdraft_B&diff=824469&oldid=824013 --Rezyk 16:11, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Guild Wars Wiki talk:Projects/User birthdays

Could you explain your post, we were discussing the last time I posted; the initial discussion ended on the 5th --Shadowphoenix 16:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

i was going to post something similar over there, but i decided not to in order to avoid more conflict. - Y0_ich_halt 16:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I do not see why there should be conflict in the first place we were not discussing what was posted originally :P --Shadowphoenix 16:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

ye, but he was bringing it up again ^^ the following discussion woulda been about whether he knows everything as his msg seems to imply and what part of the given information is right. - Y0_ich_halt 17:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Can I please ask the reason why you deleted my addition explaining how you get hero rangers to charm pets? Jamest Kirk 00:38, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

"Brace Yourself!"

You've been told before. But i think you missed it. Doesn't matter. But stop adding Aura of Stability to "Brace Yourself!". There not related. Please revert ~ Kurd 15:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Why not? They both prevent KD. Well yeah, there are more similar skills out there, but the mechanic is not something that appears that often. For sure it'd be diffrent if you'd add the entire list of KD-causing skills to an accordant skill, but if there are only a few i don't see any problems adding them. Yet the Verata skills are all related to each other despite (at least Verata's Sacrifice) not having notable similarities with the other two. Those should rather be reworked. —ZerphaThe Improver 18:17, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

There only similar in that they prevent knock-down. That is not enough to make it related or you might as well add the entire list to it.Not one random skill ~ Kurd 19:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Reef Lurker affliation

The Jade Sea wildlife? Don't you think we should instead modify the template to hide afflication if the NPC likely doesn't have one? At least isn't affliation and species stated to know about their weakness/strenth, hence something that affects the game? Hellhounds for example take twice Holy damage as they are undead, and have +20Al against Piercing- and -20Al against Blunt damage as they are Skeletons. —ZerphaThe Improver 17:45, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

You have to be kidding

What is the problem? Everyone has agreed that the way it is is the way it should be. You have had 6 months to make your point but you have been silent. Why can the disputed tag not be removed? Must we get arbitration involved? Because I really don't want to do it that way. Don't be a brick wall. Accept consensus, or continue discussing. Saying nothing and being stubborn is the least proper way to do things. I am trying to be as straightforward and open as possible. Mohnzh 16:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm....

Ya know, I just looked through your archives and noticed that you have never responded to anyone on your talk page. It is a bit strange to ignore people when they ask you a question.... Anywho, hows it going? :o) --Shadowphoenix 17:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Redirect and deletion tagging

When you tag redirects for deletion, please place the deletion tag above the redirect, to break it. Otherwise it wont show up in our list. :) - anja 18:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

King Jalis Ironhammer

Why did you remove the links? These words weren't mentioned/linked before. —ZerphaThe Improver 14:13, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

RfC

Hey Backsword, could you check the RfCs before removing them? I know that the one about maps was still open and still needed discussion and saw that Shadowphoenix reverted several of the ones you removed. Thanks. Mohnzh say what? 15:56, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[2]

Mind explaining this edit for me please? I don't quite get what you meant in the edit summary. — ク Eloc 貢 20:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't know the rules very well

On the ursan blessing page im quoting a couple of things coz there are so many silly arguments out there and I feel I gotta collect the good ones or nothing will happen. Its a good read but ^^ I've double posted on something about invisible skills coz the suggestion was there twice. If you want, tell me what to delete and its gone. Spawnlegacy 06:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Woah there, all my rants have merit and relate to their specific sections + they're well structured and entertaining to boot. I don't think there's too much redundancy cept for the overall message that 'Ursan is bad' and 'Ursan users should feel horrible about themselves.' It's a discussion not an article afterall. Anyway, I'm done now. Hopefully there's enough heart wrenching evidence and anti-Arenanet remarks there to get it nerfed. Yours sincerely Spawnlegacy 12:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

hey

i wus not troling your wrong --Frozen Archer 22:21, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

oh end why dont u talk on ur talk paeg? --Frozen Archer 22:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Vote reasons

Just wanted to ask if the "A/not A" reason was just something coincidental, or actually your reason for voting. :/ (If you don't want to respond here for some reason, go ahead on my talk page.) -- Brains12 \ talk 15:16, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Since when

has there been a policy saying I can't discuss a skill on that skill page? We're not directly asking for ANet feedback, why would we discuss it there? Until you show me a policy saying we can't discuss the skill, I'm removing the note you put on Talk:Ursan Blessing. — Teh Uber Pwnzer 14:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Page merged?

You merged ArenaNet:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/More emotes with another page. Would you mind saying which paged it's merged with? az :D 16:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

storm kin

Are you seeing the same image I am? this is a render done by User:Boromir, this one is too. Fall 01:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

affiliations

Hey, since you seem to know alot about affiliations how would the deep npc's be listed? I was also wondering if Ophil and Gokir hekets would be like affiliation = Ophil or affiliation = Gokir, thanks :) Fall 08:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

dual affiliations

On articles like this, Dredge Gutter should dual affiliations be listed? Fall 12:29, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Unattributed merging

Please do not merge pages without attribution. -- Gordon Ecker 01:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, it would be appreciated if you helped sort out attribution issues for the pages you have already merged. -- Gordon Ecker 03:28, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Boreal Tonic

Guild Wars Wiki:One-revert rule. -- Brains12 \ talk 15:39, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I think some discussion is necessary, I've started one here and asked Tamil to join it as well. -- Wyn 07:21, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Tonics are not weapons

You relocated my suggestion for a dragon-corruption tonic to the items section to the weapons section. I did not suggest in any part of the article that the idem would have any use in combat whasoever, and, beyond that, I think it should be clear that a tonic is not a weapon but rather an item, and that it belongs in the items section. If you aren't going to undo this mistake and re-create the "Items" category, then you could at least rename the "Weapons" catagory.--Shai Halud 18:38, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk Pages

Who said anything about controlling content? I have no idea what your talking about. I just think that puting something like a tonic in the catagory of weapons is confusing. I mean, I do think you are acting like a presumprupous "asshat" as said above and fabricating convenient codes of ethics to back up your actions, but that's my opinion and entirely beside the point. I mean, tonics aren't weapons, and neither are potions. If there is not going to be a section for "items", then I at least think the name of the weapons catagory shouls be changed.--72.145.115.86 19:25, 30 July 2008 (UTC) (Shai_Halud)

I believe he was talking about the first five sections of your talk page; since none of them seem to actually be discussion, and rather suggestions for GW2 races, he's suggesting you put it in your userpage or move the sections to, say, User:Shai Halud/GW2 races. By the way, did you know you can make subsections? It takes three equal signs instead of two, and it makes the font and lines do what it looks like you tried to do. --Chaiyo Kaldor talk contribs 19:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Deletion tags...

You tagged ArenaNet:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/Assassin stealth ability for deletion, saying it's a duplicate of ArenaNet:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/Stealth, even though the latter was made on June 21, and the prior on June 19 (not to mention, it also has better information). I moved the deletion tag since, technically, "Stealth" is a duplicate of "Assassin stealth ability". az :D 00:39, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

yuletide

i gave a reason on the snowball talk page. also, see Spirit of the Festival and Rollerbeetle Racer. --VVong|BA 06:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

# # (diff) (hist) . . ArenaNet:Guild Wars 2 suggestions‎; 00:22 . . (-1,999) . . Backsword (Talk | contribs) (Cleaning old moves)

IT'S UNDER TWO THOUSAAAAND! -- Armond Warblade 14:36, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

failure -- NUKLEAR IIV 16:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

(diff) (hist) . . User:Great Darkwolf‎; 23:31 . . (-11,295) . . Great Darkwolf (Talk | contribs)

IT'S OVER NINE THOUSAND! --Wolf 20:15, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

This user's power level is >9000!!!!

? Spawnlegacy 17:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC) FailureStokoe Talk 15:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

hey!

You removed my comment from here, its was supposed to stop people from using the talk page as a place to post suggestions, now look what's happened :( (Terra Xin 00:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC))

Key

I brought your edit of key up at Guild Wars Wiki:Admin noticeboard, since the information is wrong, and was not agreed on the talk page as you stated, and I'm unable to revert it because of GWW:1RR. Biscuits 09:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Your revert of the information for a second time is a violation of GWW:1RR Backsword. Plus, the information you are placing in the article is incorrect. Phantom keys do NOT work in The Mists, since they don't work in the Fissure of Woe. Please leave it as it is. I believe the discussion page more than indicates it has consensus that way. -- Wyn 09:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Shai Halud NPA

I'm reporting myself for NPA. Please kick me from the website--Shai Halud 15:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Game link:Explorable 400

Huh? And where is self:Kaineng Center (explorable area) ? --JonTheMon 19:00, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind then :-P --JonTheMon 19:06, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Zone types

This seems a little extreme (i haven't heard anythign about this before), and have you considered how you will keep the current categories (faction missions, nightfall missions) in your new category? --JonTheMon 16:14, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Skill types

What is the Category:Skill types allowing slot sharing all about? B/c it's getting added to each of your skill types pages. --JonTheMon 14:45, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

bump --JonTheMon 12:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

bump --JonTheMon 18:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Click the link again. :P -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 22:03, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Can I ask you . . .

. . . to actually put a link in deletion tags, such as the one you slapped on ArenaNet:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/"Crowd" sound effects and ArenaNet:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/Pet skill bars, so we all have proof that it is a duplicate? I tried putting in ArenaNet:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/Visit Kaineng CIty some day, since that's what was on the deletion tag, but, oh! Look, it doesn't exist. And another thing, ArenaNet:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/Skill: I will win! isn't a Guild Wars 1 suggestion; it's a skill suggestion for Guild Wars 2 (notice the category it's in and that it has no attribute or profession in the skill box) azalea^chat 14:02, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Item infobox

Sorry, i forgot about those. But they're only a very little part of the entire item list that uses this template, and for other items it's a wrong or confusing information since those items are only available with a fixed rarity and therefore should better leave this out. What would you think about showing this line for salvage items only, and ommiting it for the other types? (Code example is hidden in this comment) —ZerphaThe Improver 14:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Level cap issues

If you feel the statement is biased, then please rewrite the whole paragraph instead of just changing one word which totally changes the meaning of the phrase.
Also, GWW:1RR, so please revert your last edit and discuss it first Ignore that, i can see Aiiane coming and telling me again that 1rr doesn't work that way.--Fighterdoken 18:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Guild Wars 2 Suggestions

Greetings!

I'm writing a canned message of sorts to a select handful of Guild Wars Wiki users whom I believe share a similar passion of mine: exchanging new concepts and ideas for Guild Wars. I chose you by simply jotting down names that showed up frequently in the discussion of the GW2 Suggestion Pages here on the Wiki. If you have no interest in the matter or feel that I'm imposing upon you, I will thank you for your time; please disregard/delete this message. If, however, you do have a creative streak and enjoy sharing your ideas with the hopes that they'll some day be adopted into the game you love, then read on!

I like to think that, on occasion, I have have a good idea. And when it's concerning something I'm very passionate about (like Guild Wars) I tend to go all-out. When Guild Wars 2 was announced back in March of 2007, I was very excited! Here was an opportunity to get some of the features I've really been wanting to see in an MMO integrated into one of my favorite games! The question was, how could I get the developers to actually pay attention to any of my ideas? In my naivety, I began posting them on “Guild Wars 2 Suggestion” topics on several forums of popular GW community sites, only to realize that, as more and more suggestions were posted, my posts became buried. I never got the feedback I desired (were any of my ideas even good?), and I could only assume that ArenaNet would have a slim chance of coming across them in all the drivel and flaming that accompanies forum topics.

Disheartened, but not defeated, I decided that I (and many other creative minds) needed a place where they could post their ideas without them being buried... where other players could easily vote on them, and post suggestions of their own! Thus, I created a site called NikiWiki. Unfortunately, either due to my requests for fansitedom going through the wrong channels, or a lack of understanding on ArenaNet's part, NikiWiki never really took off. At around that time ArenaNet set up a “receptacle” for posting Guild Wars 2 suggestions here on the Guild Wars Wiki. But I saw this as only a tiny step up from posting in forums. How does anyone know what new ideas really matter to the players?

So I've decided to take another stab.

I'll spare you any further ramblings, and introduce you to the Guild Wars Feedback Community. All I'm asking is that you take a few moments of your time and visit the site. Create an account if you wish – everything is free, there is no spam, etc... there aren't even any advertisements on the site. I do all this simply out of my love of the game, and a selfish desire to see Guild Wars 2 become the ultimate MMO!

The GWFC is not perfect by far, please understand that it's currently in beta. I hope that with some input from like minded individuals, this site can become a valuable resource for the developers at ArenaNet and folks like you and I who need a creative outlet. Feel free to criticize (constructively or not), make suggestions of your own, or brow-beat me in any way you feel necessary. I've set up a topic for GWFC site feedback you can use, but feel free to write to me on my Wiki discussion page, or holler at me in-game. Thank you for all of your time, and I hope to see you on the Feedback Community site!

Sincerely,

--Brokunn 03:22, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Voting

I rarely question other peoples votes, but after Auron pulled the same stunt, I have to ask: Why? --Xeeron 18:27, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

High lulz, low impact, maybe? Leave the "making a difference" part to people like me who are too lazy to change their vote at this point. -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 20:40, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Again, more of your deletion tags...

...are being posted on pages that are not similar to other Guild Wars 2 suggestion pages. Please stop tagging pages you see have a word in common (i.e. pets) without reading the article. Some suggestions may be merged under one topic. azalea^chat 15:33, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

You should discuss your disagreement with the deletion tag on the associated talk page, rather than telling the tagger to stop tagging pages they feel should be deleted. That is how you reach consensus on the wiki. -- Wyn 15:35, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

GW2 suggestions

Wondering where you moved my GW2 suggestions or did you delete them? And the most important, why? (Limu Tolkki - talk) 15:34, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

If they were tagged for deletion, and no one disagreed with the deletion on the associated talk page, they would have been deleted 3 days after being tagged. -- Wyn 15:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Where do i see whether they were or werent? I doubt they were cause didnt see anything like that. (Limu Tolkki - talk) 17:50, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps we should notify useres if their suggestions are tagged for deletion. — Wolf 21:20, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Gonna undo it if theres no signs of it being tagged for deletion. (Limu Tolkki - talk) 22:43, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Too bad that edit can be undone for some reason. Could someone please do something to make it undone and could stupid people stop deleting other people posts. (Limu Tolkki - talk) 12:57, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

What "edit" and page are you talking about? Also, the suggestion pages need some sort of maintenance, and Backsword is contributing to that maintenance - if that includes deletion, then so be it if it's appropriate and unopposed. If someone does oppose the deletion, they can post on the talk page (as the deletion tag explains); if you want to keep an eye on the pages you edit (or any other page), you can tick the "watch this page" box when you edit a page or click the "watch" tab at the top - these pages can then be monitored in your watchlist for future edits. You should also realise the difference between deletion tagging and deleting - Backsword only tags pages. If no one opposes, an admin will delete the page after 3 days. -- Brains12 \ talk 14:19, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Im talking about the GW2 suggestion page. And no, Backsword didnt tag my suggestions, he deleted them. There was no deletion tags. Please check the history of that page and undo the Backswords edit, if there was no good reason for deletion. (Limu Tolkki - talk) 13:25, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

That page shouldn't really be for suggestions - you should be using the format provided, i.e. create a page in the relevant topic section, with discussion going on the talk page. There's no need to take that page back to what it was, a mess of rants, walls of text, duplicate suggestions, and forum posts. -- Brains12 \ talk 14:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

It currently has 44 suggestions, go and remove them all. (Limu Tolkki - talk) 14:58, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

The reason given by Backsword in the edit summary was "Chat, duplicate suggestions, more chatting, some GW1 ideas, an insult or two, and some questions. ANd a buit of general forum chat", which are removed from suggestion pages anyway - that's nothing new. My opinion on removing them all isn't agreed upon by others, so I'm not going to carry that out. -- Brains12 \ talk 15:07, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

My suggestions wasnt any of those. Could you undo it since it seems Backsword is not going to do it. (Limu Tolkki - talk) 16:36, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

If your suggestions weren't part of that edit, then I'd rather wait for Backsword's reasoning before I revert. Also, it would help if you provided some links to those edits; it's a big page with a big history. If you still think your suggestions are valid, then you should post them in the format provided, as long as a duplicate suggestion doesn't exist. -- Brains12 \ talk 17:09, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

http://wiki.guildwars.com/index.php?title=ArenaNet:Guild_Wars_2_suggestions&diff=1198736&oldid=1198729 That's the edit by Backsword, it's the one you mentioned alrdy. My suggestions are at the end of previous version, which were deleted. We'll wait for Backsword comment. (Limu Tolkki - talk) 17:19, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

If your suggestion was removed in that edit by Backsword, then I assume the reason he gave for that edit applies to your suggestions (most probably they have already been suggested by someone else). -- Brains12 \ talk 17:32, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest you replace your suggestion on it's own page, as specified by the instructions at the top of the page. It's not that tough to copy/paste them to a page under the appropriate heading. The main suggestion page is simply a 'scratchpad' and items are removed periodically. You don't need a sysop to do that, just open two browser windows, one to the diff link you provided and one to the new page for the suggestion. Just make sure you've checked that your suggestion hasn't already been suggested. -- Wyn 17:39, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I've brought this up at ArenaNet talk:Guild Wars 2 suggestions#Removal of suggestions and comments. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 01:15, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

"or" was in my post... I don't care that it was deleted, it was ages ago :p just for future note Nikdanbro 03:04, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

would you say companions in GW2 would be (as far as we have been told) equivalent to heroes in GW? --JonTheMon 17:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Skills bug page

Please stop deleting things off this page. If you believe they have been resolved they should be placed in an archive for reference. -- Wyn 19:51, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

There is an archive....... I ask again will you please stop deleting things, and archive them instead? -- Wyn 13:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi, you (Backsword) removed my bug report on Ritualist Weapon Spells. I reposted the report with clearer details, and a past example of an addressed bug of the exact same type. If a report confuses you, ask for clarification before simply removing it. If you suspect a report wasn't a bug, move it to the talk page for discussion. Don't just delete them. It's rude, lends to edit wars, and contributes to a more hostile wiki environment. (Note: Not a wiki policy buff - this is wiki-etiquette.) MA Anathe 19:15, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Please stop

Moving users suggestions into userspace. This has not been decided upon, and until it is, anyone has the right to post suggestion on the suggestion page. -- Wyn 22:45, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

It is a good temporary measure, IMO. Allowing people to just add their suggestions to the page would lead us back to what the GW1 article was one week ago: just a big list. Now it's more organized, and I haven't seen someone whose suggestion has been moved complaining against this system yet. Erasculio 22:50, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Stop with the nonsense. Restricting the suggestion page to only registered users and moving suggestions into userspace is a bad idea. There is no policy requiring someone to register to submit a suggestion, there is no policy or guideline indicating that suggestions need to be maintained in userspace. If you are serious about wanting this change then propose it properly as a policy or guideline. Don't just come in here and do it that is NOT how the wiki works. -- Wyn 22:53, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Been following this for a bit now, and I have to say, Wyn has a very good and fair point. — Wolf 22:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

While I agree with Wyn and strongly oppose moving suggestions to user space, I fail to see where Backsword moved any suggestion to user space..?! poke | talk 23:00, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Why are we discussing this in two different places...? Couldn't we keep it at the GW1 suggestions talk page itself? Erasculio 23:01, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Poke is correct, I misread RC, it was Erasculio that moved the suggestion, and Backsword, I apologize. -- Wyn 23:12, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

GW2 suggestions (2)

[3] The poster of this page had serious problems with the way you retitled the page, so I moved it back closer to his original title. I would like to know why you then moved it again? I don't like constantly butting heads with you, but some of your actions are seriously lacking in common consideration and your title simply belittles his idea. You are welcome to voice your opinion on the discussion page, but especially after your original move created such a strong reaction, to move it again is seriously questionable imo. -- Wyn 10:25, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Bad faith

Bad faith isnt proper reason to remove deletion tag. I will add it again. (Limu Tolkki - talk) 19:26, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Disruption

From what I have seen here and here, you have a problem with spam/chains. That's fine and I can respect that. But please, not a lot upsets me on the internet, but your lack of input (that is, telling me or the others on my page) on what you wanted from us made things unclear. You made it clear on Auron's page, but not mine if you were upset with it. If you do have a problem with me or a page I edit, bring it up with me. I would/will (have) been/be happy to stop the chain on my page (can't speak for Auron's page though, though if you ask me I would stop). If you have any other concerns you want to voice with me, that's fine and I will listen. Please communicate with me, I don't know what you want unless you are direct (the internet/text is a poor medium unless one is direct). Thanks for reading. --Antioch 04:58, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

The anon is right. Just because points given may be contrary to what you think is the right way to go, it does not mean they constitute vandalism. Post on the talk page, and notify the user(s)/anon(s) on their respective talk pages that you've begun a discussion on the talk page, instead of senselessly reverting each edit they make to that page. calor (talk) 23:15, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

skill infobox

I don't recall where the consensus for change was (I'm forgetful). But shouldn't you have thoroughly tested your changes first? --JonTheMon 21:47, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, please test any changes in a sandbox, not live. The job queue hates you when you test live. - anja 21:54, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

He has mentioned those changes here. Erasculio 21:59, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I still wonder if it should have been signed-off on.... --JonTheMon 22:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

dual monitor

You marked it saying it was suggested before, but for the life of me I can't find where. Do you have a link handy? -Auron 22:01, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Only previous reference i can find is ArenaNet:Guild_Wars_2_suggestions/Scratchpad#Dual_Screen_Support.--Fighterdoken 22:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

ArenaNet:Guild_Wars_2_Suggestions/Scratchpad_Archive_July_-_October_2008#Support_for_multi_screens --VVong|BA 22:08, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Duplicate Suggestion Deletes

Hey, can you link the suggestion that its a duplicate of in the delete suggestion? --JonTheMon 22:32, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grind_(gaming)

"Grinding is a term used in video gaming to describe the process of engaging in repetitive and/or non-entertaining gameplay in order to gain access to other features within the game." Sorry, but I was listing facts. -Auron 22:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Everything in any game is a grind if you widen or narrow the scope enough, and disregard a few details. — Jon Lupen 23:12, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

No matter how wide or narrow the scope is, a title with 50000 points that requires literally hours of killing monsters in a wurm will always be a grind title. Also, nice red herring. -Auron 12:24, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

If you're talking about SS and LB points.. They're pretty balanced I'd say. (Except for the first two SS levels or so). If you do most of the areas on a regular tempo and perhaps a few of the very easy farms mentioned in the guides - you're maxed in no-time! Kurzick/Luxon/Treasure however.. -- Karasu (talk) 12:26, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Ur doin it rong

See Template talk:Skill infobox, another example, "It's Just a Flesh Wound!" is specifically not self targeting, it's under "skills that self target". Misery 23:25, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps if you didn't totally ignore all communications on the matter people wouldn't have to do stupid things messing up the job queue in an attempt to remove incorrect information. Misery 12:11, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

The Tribunal

If it's not an explorable area], doesn't that imply that the infobox should be fixed as well? If you're removing it from the navbar, got any suggestion on how we should change the article? Update the location infobox perhaps? -- ab.er.rant 02:31, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

1RR

You are in violation of GWW:1RR on this page if you don't agree with an edit, take it to the talk board. Additional reversions will result in a block of your editing privileges. -- Wyn/talk 17:14, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Your input has been requested there. It would be a good idea to answer, considering you were involved in reverting but didn't provide any reason for doing so. -- Brains12 \ talk 15:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Unattributed merging again

Please stop merging without attribution and tagging the source pages for deletion. The GFDL's attribution clause doesn't include any exceptions for merges from sandbox pages. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 03:33, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Moving Sections

IF you are moving Sections... then please add BOTH {{moved|to|Page}} on the Original Page AND {{moved|from|Page}} on the Target Page. Its needed to know where what came from... Thanks. --SilentStorm 23:18, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Also, please leave topic headers, for archival and reference reasons. — Jon Lupen 23:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

You broke Game link:Explorable 447 again.

The page you directed it to is a redirect page.  It should go directly to the page with the content.      mtew 18:00, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I've fixed the redirect to point to A Land of Heroes instead of another redirect; if that's wrong, please explain because I haven't yet seen a reason for it to be so. -- Brains12 \ talk 13:54, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

"Noone watches mainspace anymore?"

People miss things, it's only natural. Also, some people assume good faith and don't view every edit. -- Brains12 \ talk 13:50, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

"Before posting an issue here, consider the following:

• Post only issues that require administrative action, i.e. blocking vandals, protecting pages, restoring deleted pages etc.
• Mediation requests between users should only be made if a resolution could not be reached between users.
• Post here only if the user has made several disruptive edits and/or persists despite a warning.
• As a sign of courtesy, also leave a message on the talk page of any involved user. "

You have done none of this. I suggest you learn how to use the noticeboard before continuing to blather on about random bullshit. It is not a "whine to mommy" board - use it sparingly and post only what needs to be posted. Even your topic about the ancestors rage revert war left much to be desired - namely, users involved or even a link to the page in question. Cease your abuse of the noticeboard; however, as soon as you comply by the rules and follow the directions posted at the top of the page, feel free to post there again. -Auron 09:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Infobox changes.

I would get a RfC or something going when you have a finalized version of any changes you want to make to Quest Infobox. Just so things go smoother/get more eyes looking at it.--JonTheMon 21:14, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

ArenaNet talk:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/No max amount of money in bank Deletion

Tell me why this is "technically impossible"? If every single bank in the real world economy does this, why can't guild wars. Look at a mmorpg economical success story, EVE. They have no upper limit to the amount of money you can have, and that works just fine. If you disagree with me, why not have a discussion instead of proposing the page for deletion without even telling me why you think it is "impossible".Laurielegit 15:50, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Infinite money numbers=infinite memory=infitely big servers. You know, really INFITE! In fact, every bank as well as EVE just because of this has al imitation yet nobody came close to it to recognize it. 95.119.19.232 13:48, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Err, infiNIte of course. omg two times sorry for that 95.119.19.232 13:49, 30 March 2009 (UTC)