User:Dirigible/Archive 1

Careful: This is an archive page of past discussions. If you wish to leave me a message, please do so on my talk page and not here. Thanks! --Dirigible

Section 0

That post meant alot to me in the policies page. I really appreciate it. --Narcism 20:54, 7 February 2007 (PST)

Thanks for the support, you expressed yourself better than I did. I'll take my leave in the hopes that I don't further anger the sysops.--Trevor Reznik 21:02, 7 February 2007 (PST)

Thanks Dirigible, I was about to have a nervous breakdown. :)--Narcism 20:54, 12 February 2007 (PST)

Gwiki

Could u stop copying evrything from Guildwiki, its not allowed and will get removed ~ Kurd07:16, 15 February 2007 (PST)

I'm adding copyvio tags to articles that were copied directly from GuildWiki, not copying them here myself. --Dirigible 07:17, 15 February 2007 (PST)

LOL, stupid me sorry =] ~ Kurd15:53, 22 February 2007 (EST)

Guild Proposal

Can you comment on this? — Gares 10:56, 21 February 2007 (PST)

Blood drinker

Hi dirigible, I noticed you have been creating some new boss articles for bosses of the blood drinker species, however the species link you have put in links to the skill Blood Drinker there is no article for the monster type yet, but that should probably be named Blood Drinker (monster) as it is likely the skill will be a much more used article. That or create a disambiguation page but I am unsure how that would effect some skill templates. --Lemming64 14:40, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

Argh. I see what you mean. Looking on GuildWiki now, it seems not even Blood Drinker (monster) will do, since that's just one exemplar of them. Blood Drinker (species) would be more appropriate. Thanks for the heads up! --Dirigible 14:49, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

Your Comment

I responded to your comment on my page. J.Kougar

Of course you know, this means war

Hello Dirigible, and welcome to the Guild Wars Official Wiki! Here are a few links to help you get involved. Please feel free to contact me if you need help with anything on my talk page.

Don't be afraid to edit - anyone can edit almost any page and we encourage you to be bold! Find something that can be improved, whether content, grammar or formatting, and make it better.

• If you're new to editing wiki's have a look at our how to help article.
• For information on the way that our articles should be laid out see the formatting section.
• To find out what you are and are not allowed to do on this wiki have a look at our policy section.
• Articles should NOT be copied directly from GuildWiki - see this copyright section for details.
• For guidelines about personalized pages see our user page section.
• See the FAQ for more information on the history and vision of Guild Wars Wiki.

Best of luck and happy editing! MisterPepe talk 12:56, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

=P Also, you're supposed to use the subst: keyword, i.e. {{subst:Welcome|recipient name|MisterPepe|~~~~}}

Drago

Error?

I noticed you going right behind me and editing the pages I edited to fix the broken images, did I do something wrong when I put the code back to make the images show? Just curious, I won't learn if nobody tells me.  :) J.Kougar

Sorry, the e-mails finally caught up to me. I see, you just changed how the profession tag was listed. Thanks. J.Kougar

(edit conflict) Yup, I was simply fixing up something else that the last change to Template:NPC infobox broke (you can find the discussion of why that change was made here; hopefully this will be the last one). By the way, you can see exactly what change was made to each article by each editor by going to the history tab at the top of the page, and clicking on the (diff) of the revision in question. This is the diff of that last edit I did after you on Vatlaaw Doomtooth. Cheers! :) --Dirigible 14:00, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

Image Names

Cheers for help on image names...Hope i've got it all right now. If not let me know. There was no way to flag te individual file as far as i could tell so i had to flag on the Discussion page. Hopefully will get noticed though. --ChronicinabilitY 20:49, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

No problem at all, glad to help. And yep, looks good to me. The delete tags should be on the images themselves and not the talk pages, but it should still be ok. For future reference, when you open an image page, (such as Image:Joohsoevil.JPG) for example, there's an Edit tab at the top, like with all other article pages. You can drop the delete tag there, so that the pictures appear in the Media section of Category:Candidates for deletion. It's not a huge deal though. Do let me know if there's anything help I can help with. Cheers! --Dirigible 20:54, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

Lol...I was looking around for where i could add the tag and forgot the most obvious place of all. I'm not going to change them all now though, since Recent Changes already looks like a log of what i've done with my pictures! Haha. --ChronicinabilitY 21:00, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

Your knight in shining armor

"He doesn't. I do. But his comments are accurate and, I feel, should be respected." Smack down by Gaile on your behalf, haha. :D --Lemming64 08:22, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

Oh wow. Hadn't bothered to go back on those forums to check for replies, I guess I should have. Woo! Talk about feeling appreciated. :P --Dirigible 09:43, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

Funny how you seemed to be the only informed poster on there. I'm glad you were. There's too much anti wiki behavior going around these days.  :) --File:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG Vallen Frostweaver 15:06, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

Unique items

Thanks for pointing out the project to me. Unfortunately I'm going away now for the weekend and not returning until Sunday night. I'll check it out then and see how we are for things. Cheers,, Ibiris 09:55, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

YadaYadaYada

I noticed your comment on your user page. Made me think of me. I use this but I think you might like it as well.

..zzZ

This user is long winded in his replies and often rambles on beyond control so watch out...

--File:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG Vallen Frostweaver 15:01, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

Hehe, that's a nice one. :) --Dirigible 15:02, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

Reminder

I think it is deserving of me to remind you that you are not the police, and should not police users as you see fit. I'm going to ask that you not order me around, or anyone else for that matter. - Drago 16:32, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

My suggestion to you on your talk page was as much policing as this reminder of yours is here. Feel free to ignore my "orders", just like I'll take the liberty to ignore this friendly advice. Also, I added a delete tag to that template; feel free to discuss on its talk page why that tag needs to exist, and how it doesn't go against wiki spirit. Cheers. --Dirigible 16:41, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

Apology

Sorry, D, for being a bit spikey in the hotly debated White Mantle thing yesterday. You were, of course, correct, and I should have seen past my irritation that people were ignoring the template and user talk messages and just stepped back and left it for others to decide upon. Was a bad day yesterday for people ignoring polite requests and repeating the same mistakes over and over (see here lol). Should have just walked away. Anyway, hope you'll accept my apology :) Fox 07:50, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

I'm afraid I can't accept the apology, simply because there's nothing to apologize for. That kind of thing has happened and happens to everyone, no harm was done, it's all good. I'll most gladly accept the friendly thought though! :) Cheers, Fox! --Dirigible 11:28, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

Drazach Thicket

Cheers :) Fox 10:00, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Crystal Overlook bosses map

Wow, that's a really great image :) --Santax 11:42, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Glad you like it! --Dirigible 11:53, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Mapitymap

Gah! Recent Changes are being flooded by the sheer amount of maps! On a more serious note, there is a second tag that is in the map box. It is red and annoying to me. Since you are adding the maps, should the red links be removed? --User:AlbinobirdAlbinobird 11:52, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

I'll be uploading those maps in a minute. :) --Dirigible 11:52, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

So no more annoying red tags above the boss maps then? And another RC flood caused by Dirigible? --User:AlbinobirdAlbinobird 11:54, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Duck and cover, here it comes! --Dirigible 11:56, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Fly, you fools! :) --User:AlbinobirdAlbinobird 11:58, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Boss maps

I just wanted to thank you for moving that conversation. I was at work and in a hurry when I posted that note, and I just didn't think about moving it myself. Then I got busy and couldn't go back and move it after I realized what a bone headed move that was.  :) --Rainith 22:53, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Re: Skills in Templates

I still think using templates are better. Simply because of its ability to use variables. The old guildwiki where it didn't have templates were a mess, because the text in the quick reference don't match the one in the individual skill pages. Using template can keep these things in order, and make sure all the text are the same. Lightblade 03:26, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Nah, not really. Now we can use <onlyinclude> transclusions to do exactly everything we could do with templates back on GuildWiki. The only reason we were using templates on GuildWiki were performance issues. The discussion about this exact topic can be found in the page I linked you to earlier, Guild Wars Wiki talk:Formatting/Skills#Template, might want to take a look at it. Cheers. :) --Dirigible 03:38, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

NPC Categories

Thanks for the advice; if you see other improvements I can make please let me know :) --Jaguar Ogith 4/11/2007

Navbar

Your community/policy/etc navbar is great. Pages sitting idle and unseen in the GGW namespace have always been a concern to me, your navbar should give some more exposure to those that deserve it. Maybe it can even make the projects and community portal pages work the way they should work. --Xeeron 11:07, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

They just need constant updating tho, to work as they should. =\ --Dirigible 11:48, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

User talk:146.229.139.228

Hey, this is advice and I'm not trying to tell you what to do, but if could not repeat the foul language some vandal decided to post that would be great to keep the atmosphere mature and keep that type of language posted to a minimum. Thanks Dirigible. — Gares 12:34, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Gotcha. --Dirigible 12:36, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

/congrats

I suppose this would be the place to say congrats for getting article number 5000. --Jamie 13:23, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Who ... what ... where ... ? *le confused* --Dirigible 13:28, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

seems [[1]] knows something you don't :) --Jamie 13:31, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Man, you have to keep up with the times! Good job, Dirigible. And cool User Page, too! I particularly like the "reminder." --Gaile 13:34, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

hehe indeed Gaile... but zomg!! The Guillotine got nerfed!! :) --Jamie 13:37, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Thanks, guys. :) --Dirigible 13:38, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Wow. Talk about motivation. Plenty more people will come in now I'm sure with the possibility of getting their name posted on the GW site. Very cool indeed and congrats! --File:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG Vallen Frostweaver 13:43, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Congrats Dirigible!!! --Emily Diehl 14:18, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Congrats, you're famous now : D Erasculio 15:21, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Congratulations Dirigible! I'll never forget when you helped me out with my user images lol :D ~Cheers Buttermilk 16:38, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Congrats. Certainly an unexpected bit of front page news. :) --Aspectacle 16:49, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Gratz !, it should have been me :P ~ Kurd17:00, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Congratulations, you deserved it, you're doing a great job :) - Anja Astor (talk) 02:30, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

/congrats, unexpected news and keep on creating them pages!!!--Bane of Worlds (talk • contribs) 23:47, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

Mission moves

I believe that users can move pages 'over redirects' so if you change the page you want to delete to a redirect to the (mission) page you should be able to move the (mission) page over it. I think this will work, and this will mean you won't need to wait for someone to get around to deleting the page. --Rainith 21:38, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

Moving over redirects works only if the redirect page has only one line in its history, the creation of the redirect. The pages I just tagged for deletion had all more than one edit in their history, so it doesn't work. =\ --Dirigible 21:43, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

Ah, my apologies then. I was unaware of that. --Rainith 21:44, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

I think all the mission ones have been deleted now. --Rainith 21:50, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

There's more. Give me a sec to get through the Prophecies ones too. :P --Dirigible 21:51, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

That's all, I think. Thanks! --Dirigible 21:58, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

Maps

If you have spare time could you make some sexy maps for the artisans? I'm creating the articles, I'm hoping Emily will grab the renders, or someone can provide temp screenies, and I know you're good at maps. - BeX 04:18, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

I wouldn't say I'm good at it, but I do like making them, so sure. :) --Dirigible 04:23, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

So modest. ;P - BeX 04:43, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Image:Artisan Daved location.jpg ← is this ok? I figure I should ask before I get started with the rest. --Dirigible 06:20, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Looks great. :) - BeX 09:45, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Oo. Me likey. I hope you do those mission progresion charts for each chapter too. I love those and only saw one for Prophecies and Factions on the other wiki and thought they were very helpful. --File:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG Vallen Frostweaver 10:02, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

I'm not sure you want me to do diagrams of that kind. Check out this and this for the reason why. :) --Dirigible 10:06, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Heh, I see your point. But just in case, this (which is kinda meh), this (which I really like much better), and this (which is ok but still meh) are what I was referring to. They are all clear and help to navigate your way, though the 2nd one (Factions) gives a much clearer path option. Heck, without the Factions one I got lost a few times. --File:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG Vallen Frostweaver 10:18, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Categories and Infoboxes?

Hi Dirigible - Quick question, since you've helped me out in the past (thanks). I had gathered that the infoboxes generated proper NPC location tags, but perhaps I've got something wrong. When I set up the Tar Behemoth entry the other day, I didn't end up with Location NPC categories. Did I mangle the form somehow, or am I supposed to add the categories manually? TIA, and it's a huge amount of work you all have done these last few days reorganizing the missions. Kudos. - Sundown Solstice 22:30, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

NPC categories have to be added manually. -- ab.er.rant 23:15, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Great - I'll take care of it then. Much appreciated. - Sundown Solstice 23:32, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Info for a wikinoob

I was just wondering... During one of my obsessive trawls of the recent changes, I saw the note on your revert to the del-tag another editor added to your image User Dirigible Saint Anjeka's Shrine map.jpg - i.e. to check "what links here" first. Obviously sound advice, but why is it, in this instance, that the image page itself reads "There are no pages that link to this file." - and you only find where it has been used by following the "what links here" in the sidebar? Confused the heck outta me :) --Snograt 19:13, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

Blame MediaWiki for that one, it'd probably make more sense if the text in the image page wrote "There are no pages that are using this file." That section will only show pages that are actually showing the image, like I just did here on the right: →

If a user simply links to it, as you did above, it will only show in WhatLinksHere. Aye, it's sort of messy, and it's good to keep an eye out for that sort of thing so we don't accidentally remove something important. --Dirigible 19:49, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

I guessed it might be something to do with that - after I had to just find out how to inline link :) Thanks, Dirigible - another nugget of learningness in me head ^^ --Snograt 19:52, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

Yes, we do have a help namespace

See title =P Also, moving it borked several links. MisterPepe talk 10:17, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

Whoops, when did that happen? Not my fault! :P Reverting it in a sec.--Dirigible 10:18, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

Sorry about that. :) Looks back to normal now.

Should we try and connect those help pages together? Like for the Community portal & Co pages? Maybe they could have their own colour scheme + navbar header, with a link that moves from the Community portal section to the help one? --Dirigible 10:30, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

My next project for the help section is Help:Contents, since it's linked from quite a lot of pages. A navbar might be a good idea, I'll see what I can come up with. I've been sticking with one general color scheme for all of the help pages (just because I like the color =P) but I'll think about that too. I'll have that Contents page up in about an hour, and then I'll take a look at the navbar concept. MisterPepe talk 15:39, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

Maybe sticking to one colour for the help pages isn't a bad idea, it'd create an association between blue and help? Dunno, I suck at colours in general. :P

The navbar for the community portal page is here {{GWW navbar header}}, just in case. I'll be keeping an eye out for that Contents page. :) --Dirigible 15:44, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

Well, Help:Contents is up now - I kind of like the way it looks, but the fact that we only have four pages I could link there was somewhat pathetic. Maybe I'll add the FAQ or something, but it's not really all that helpful of a page. I'm really wishing for some more content =P I guess I know my project for the next week... MisterPepe talk 16:21, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

Firstly, thanks...

for spotting and reverting the vandalism to my talk page :) Also, for your input on the Sundown Solstice situation. I have replied on my talk page about that, although I think that SS had already decided to quit in a fit of pique anyway. I had logged in to make a few suggestions about their contributing to the more arcane aspects of the game when I found their farewell missive. While I appreciate your 3rd opinion on the subject, I have to say that I wasn't particularly optimistic that any olive branch offered by anyone - save 100% reversion - would have satisfied them. Anyway, thanks again.

Next point... Have you considered RfA? I noticed on the list of special users that your name is absent from sysops and I think you would make a good candidate. I genuinely believe you should think that over. I would support that, and I'm fairly sure that I'm not the only one ;)
Fox (talk|contribs) 04:56, 24 April 2007 (EDT) Edit to add: There are actually around three people I believe should be sysop'd - if I haven't got around to saying so on your talk page (I am cursed with procrastination :( although I fully intend to nip that trait in the bud. Next week), that doesn't mean I don't have you on my internal list of sysops :) Fox (talk|contribs) 05:08, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

Np about the vandalism. Still not too happy about how the Solstice story ended, but not sure what else I could have done to change the outcome. And sysop tools would be useless for me, I have no interest in either blocking anyone nor deleting any pages. Cheers! --Dirigible 08:27, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

NOP & policy articles

It seems that we have entirely different concepts of what a good policy is, let me just say that I view policy articles as good that are diametriacally opposed to GW's NOP. A good policy, in my mind, should be: Short, clearly formulated and easily understood. NOP is neither. Look at the example you cited:

"Discussion and acceptance of a build

When a build article is posted it is tagged with the {{tpl|build under discussion}} template and is immediately open for discussion. Users are encouraged to voice their opinnion on the build and suggest improvements and changes. After a long enough time has passed or there has been a significant amount of users taking part in the discussion, if there is consensus that the build does not belong to the build namespace according to the criteria listed above, the build will be moved to the user name space of the user who submitted the build. If the consensus is to keep the build in the build name space as it meets the criteria, it is tagged with the {{tpl|accepted build}} template. This does not mean that the build is complete. Users are encouraged to continue discussion and suggesting improvements to the article. It is important to note that if a build tagged with the accepted build template is changed drastically, the 'accepted build' template has to be changed to the 'build under discussion' template."

Does this anywhere give a definition of what is common? No. This is a lengthy diatribe, creating a complicated structure, when the whole section could be summarized as "We do not say here what common is, that is going to be decided by consensus". It could be much shorter, it is written much to complicated (I had to read it two times searching for that definition of common you suggested was there before I fully understood it) and furthermore it deals with so many structural issues (like tags, etc) which need not be discussed in a policy article that the policy content is almost lost.

In the current (as well as the old policy here) your example is very obviously disallowed. "frequently discussed on user forums" First of "frequently" can not conceivably be read as meaning less then 2 times, just like "forumS" only has one meaning: More than one forum! But lets disregard your bad example. When you say that the GWguru forums should count for more than some 5 person guild forum, you try to force the obvious into the policy. Everyone with their sane senses will know that being discussed on GWguru counts for more, no need to bloat the policy. Not to mention that, to put it into the policy, we would have to maintain an up to date ranking of user forums in the policy article. In the end there will still be a discussion on each builds talk page, in that discussion, the quality of the user forums cited will definitely hold sway over users opinions and thus the final decision. --Xeeron 08:09, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

Before everything else, I should point out that I don't support NOB either. :) The reason I compared it to the current policy proposal is because NOB suggests a way how it can be decided whether a build is popular or not. True, it may be expressed sloppily, could be tightened, could skip on the parts which should really be in the formatting guide, etc. But (unlike the old policy here) it at least gives an answer to a new wiki user's question "Who decides what build is popular" Answer being: "Community consensus via discussion".

And I guess this second part is where our disagreement really lies. Unless I misunderstood, you want a policy which relies on the assumption that those reading it have common sense, familiarity with the wiki and are predisposed to be "good WikiZens" . Which is, in my opinion, the wrong assumption to make and the wrong target audience. The way I see it, a policy should be explaining the wiki's expectations to

• those without common sense and/or troublemakers, in which case the policy can be described as law.
• newcomers who are unfamiliar of traditions and practices of this site, in which case the policy can be described as a condensed almanac of those traditions and practices.
• to clarify issues which can be complicated even for those with common sense and familiarity with the wiki and the question at hand, in which case policy can be described as an expression of community consensus which aims to find an answer which satisfies all sides.

What you are suggesting is a solution cheatsheet which can only be understood by those who already know the answers, instead of those that don't (and of course, I think that's wrong). "Everyone with their sane senses will know that being discussed on GWguru counts for more" ← 1. How about those that have had no experience with GWGuru before (new players or casual players)? 2. How about those who consider Guru "a bunch of PvE carebears"/"a bunch of PvP whiner elitists"? 3. How about those who will simply argue for the sake of arguing that "nowhere in the policy it is stated that Guru counts for more than my guild's forums". The NOB policy page gives an answer to these issues in the form of "as decided by community discussion". The policy here doesn't even do that, making the assumption that these things should be obvious to everyone. As I said it in the other page, it may be obvious to you and me, but it won't be obvious to everyone, and those people are who the policy should be talking to. --Dirigible 10:04, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

You are right insofar as an "... is decided by concensus" would be an helpful addition to the old policy. But then, how is *any* open question on the wiki decided if there is no prior policy in place? By concensus via discussion. It is true, writing it down is more clear, but it does not change the meaning of the policy. And, the build policy page is definitely not the place to describe in an entire paragraph what concensus is, like NOB does. --Xeeron 12:10, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

Admin noticeboard?

Am I using it right?? -- Scourge 05:07, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Yup! --Dirigible 05:10, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

woo *does happy dance* -- Scourge 05:13, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

:)

Mornin'. -AuronMy Talk 07:06, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Hi! --Dirigible 07:11, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Is it morning already? ;| I only have one eye open, am wearing an extra jersey which is not mine over the top of my own, and appear to have fallen into a brewery vat at some point. Still, we got home-ice advantage for the next game - Let's Go Rangers!! :D Fox (talk|contribs) 07:23, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Everybody look at me!

1 4m 50 1337 i h4ck3d y0ur 741k p463 n00b Fox (talk|contribs) 07:29, 29 April 2007 (EDT)

Yeah. :P He did the same on GuildWiki a couple of days ago. Found it kinda funny. :) --Dirigible 07:31, 29 April 2007 (EDT)

We won't have fun on this Wiki if there were no such people :) ROFL, Fox! - MSorglos 07:59, 29 April 2007 (EDT)