User talk:Eloc Jcg/Devils Whisper

Note: This is an archive. The Guild has disbanded.

Devils Whisper Archives

---

/Archives

why

Umm..why delete it? I followed the format.--Eloc 17:49, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

We still havent decided on the GuildPages, until there were done, guild pages are not allowed ~ Kurd17:52, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

Ok, moved to extension of User Page then.--Eloc 17:55, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

See Guild Wars Wiki:Formatting/Guilds and Guild Wars Wiki:Guild pages. Guild pages are now allowed. -- (gem / talk) 15:53, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

The running guild, HA guild and GvG guild categories read: "This is a listing of guilds that primarily concentrate on Guild vs. Guild combat." It seems to me that this guild is not 'primarily concentrated' on any of those three. -- (gem / talk) 19:40, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

If you guys do all those forms of PvP, just stick with Category:PvP guilds. GvG/HA designations are for guilds which do only those types in the vast majority of the time. --Dirigible 19:47, 8 April 2007 (EDT)

Nice Format of Guild Contacts

I really like the way you formatted the contacts section for your Guild. I borrowed some and made some adjustments...just wanted to give you kudos! RicheyJay 23:28, 10 June 2007 (PDT)

Ty ^^. Don't mind if you take them.--Eloc 13:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Eloc

i took ur whole build page for my guild...yea thast wut u get for deleting me

GWW:NPA Don't be threating and following through with it.--§ Eloc § 01:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Could use a trim

Is it just me or does this page need a trim down. Many of its sections are not in the guidelines for guild pages, for instance: the professions of the guild officers, the repetition of the the alliance members, the alliance rules, and the history (which is not notable according to the Guild Pages guidelines. --trekie9001 01:43, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Srry, wasn't watching it all that much for liek 2 mins because I'm in RA. I don't see what you mean according to GWW:GUILD.--§ Eloc § 01:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

For starters, in GWW:GUILDS under Content it states "Contact information should be listed. This includes (but does not require) links to the website/forums that the guild uses, and a short (not a complete roster) listing of important in-game contacts. Note that only a list of names should be posted, not detailed information about the players." However in your contacts table you list the professions of the characters and their in-guild rank, which, in my opinion, goes against the "not detailed information" rule.

Second, under the GWW:GUILD, "Guild pages should be relatively stable. Do not list such information as who is online, what the guild's current rating/rank is, etc. (It is OK to list the final ratings from past ladder seasons.)" I believe that your history section is, in part, a violation of that because the history of your guild will change with time and both the the GWW:GUILD policy and GWW:GUILDS guidelines do not mention including un-noteworthy history of guilds.

Finally, although technically not a violation, GWW:GUILDS states that "Information regarding the alliance the guild is in should be represented by the {{alliance nav}} template. This template allows for links to the guild that leads the alliance as well as all member guilds in the alliance." In my opinion it seams that the information of the alliance rules really doesn't belong on the page, all you need is the template.

To conclude, I think most of what I mentioned is not a technical violation but goes against the idea of guild pages on GWW. I just recommend trimming down the page and removing the extraneous information. According to your guild page you have a forum so maybe you should list the alliance rules, your history, and your officer's professions there. --trekie9001 05:04, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, Professions are kind of a bonus, as for Rank, it shows who to contact to join. It's not like I'm listening all 100 members.

As for History, it's stable. I don't change the rank every day or rating of my guild GvG or post who is online. It's stable because it's in the past, not a current issue.

As for the Alliance Rules, where else am I supposed to send them to see the rules of the Alliance if they're new to joinining it. This is where I post the rules because I require all guilds in my Alliance to make a GWW page so it's just a click away.

For the Forum, that is Guild Only. No Alliance members allowed on it, therefore, if I posted Alliance Rules there, no one would see them except my own guild.--§ Eloc § 05:11, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

ADDED:If it makes you happy, I removed a bunch of the History section to trim it down and as we are at 100 members, not alot more will be added there from now on.--§ Eloc § 05:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I would like to add my points as well. The "no detailed information" part does not disallow just professions and rank. We were more worried about people trying to post long write-ups or long histories of their members, or upload pictures of their members. A short one-liner is still ok. The alliance rules is also fine, because if a guild would like to recruit people, it is understandable that they'd want to explain their criteria. The part about history is correct though. Currently, that "history" section reads more like an activity log. I would say that having a small section listing notable events or achievements is fine, so just be careful and not use it for guild news or recent activites. -- ab.er.rant 05:14, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

And after that edit, I think the "History" part is fine, since it's now kinda like a milestone thingy. -- ab.er.rant 05:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Omg, Eloc, Aberant you totally edit conflicted me IN A ROW! xD Vengeance Signet 05:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, ty for the confirmation of that Aberrant. I basically see the History as the activeness of the guild showing that it is still active and growing.--§ Eloc § 05:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I see the point you make there Eloc. The policy states that unnotable guilds like mine and yours need to have the pages edited every month or they will be tagged inactive yet the pages are supposed to be stable. Perhaps that policy should be tweaked to choose either one or the other. --trekie9001 05:36, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Off topic:Wanna ally with my guild Trekie?--§ Eloc § 05:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

LOL, surprising how something that started out as an argument could end up in alliance. To speak truthfully though Eloc my very small guild is still undecided as to which faction we should join. Also, we don't have many members with Factions (just 3) so I don't know if we would be able to maintain your no 0 Faction rule. However, I'll present it to the members as an option. --trekie9001 05:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, Faction is extremely easy to get and you only lose 10% each day which means it would take months.--§ Eloc §

Wtf? LOL!!!

"but unlike high ranked GvG guilds, we prefer to come up with our own creative team builds" that really made me laugh! --ChronicinabilitY 04:17, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

LoL.--§ Eloc § 05:17, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[DW]

does every single one of your builds have dw? - Y0_ich_halt 20:55, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

What you mean?--§ Eloc § 04:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

choosing [dw] as your short ;) - Y0_ich_halt 14:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok...?--§ Eloc § 22:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

wii r zeh deap wuund? - Y0_ich_halt 15:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

?--§ Eloc § 16:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

don't mind me... - Y0_ich_halt 16:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok lol.--§ Eloc § 03:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[D]eep [W]ound DOH ^^ --Fox007 20:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

XD — ク Eloc 貢 22:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

History is getting too long?

Hmm... I think your history part seems to be happening all too often. Is it really necessary to list down all that? It's getting very long anyhow. -- ab.er.rant 16:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll shorten it down.--§ Eloc § 22:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

There we go. I shortened it down by quite a bit ;P.--§ Eloc § 22:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Great! Thanks! -- ab.er.rant 01:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Np.--§ Eloc § 03:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Guild Type

It seems to me that most of the guilds in this section are roleplayer guilds. Wouldn't your guild better fit in the PvX or PvE category? It isn't really a roleplaying guild. MiraLantis 06:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

No, we're Roleplaying guild. — ク Eloc 貢 08:24, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh! You should include information about that in your guild information, then! I'd like to know more. MiraLantis 23:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I had some storys on my character pages on my userpage, but I deleted those. — ク Eloc 貢 00:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

While you might have had stories on your userpage, that is you as a player and not your guild. If your guild does not participate in RP I still don't see why you list it there. This is the description for the RP guilds forum: "This is a list of guilds that participate in actual roleplaying in the Guild Wars universe. These guilds take time to play out characters and create storylines within the lore of Guild Wars. They are not guilds that just play PvE." MiraLantis 21:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

i'd like to note that currently some of the more active people have started to run TA frequently... - Y0_ich_halt 02:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

That good or bad? — ク Eloc 貢 03:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

imo bad, looking at what noobs they are :P i owned our guild team with my RA team. yes, i met them yesterday and they got me my 17th win. - Y0_ich_halt 14:01, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

LoL, oh well. As long as they aren't f*cking up the guilds rating even more, I'm happy :P — ク Eloc 貢 22:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

No requirements but we require you to be 13+

Kinda contradictory ^^ LunarEffect 13:07, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Being online once a week is a requirement too...seems kinda harsh to me though, but I am in a guild that only kicks after 2 months of inactivity. :p Nicky Silverstar 07:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Can I join?

Plz?--Sum Mesmer Guy 10:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Categories - AGAIN

(Note: "you" = the guild and its page's maintainers) Begin message: Gem, The Great Tomato, Dirigible, and myself have all mentioned the use of incorrect categories on this guild's page, and yet you have reverted the corrections to these categories by myself and The Great Tomato. The purpose of the guildspace, and the wiki, is to document a game - not to recruit or boast about your guild (see the policy on guild pages). While members of the guild have the ultimate right to maintain their guild's page, including these categories in order to recruit (forgive me if I am assuming incorrectly) is not the goal of the wiki and I believe it harms the wiki (as false information does). Your infobox says that the guild is in the American territory - therefore, it would be logical that it is in the American Guilds category. If you have players from England, Canada, and America, then I suggest using the International Guilds category. However, your guild cannot be predominantly Americans, predominantly Canadians, and predominantly English - that's nonsensical. It's like saying you're both Kurzick AND Luxon. (Well, kind of... hopefully you get that analogy.) Perhaps choose a single territory, and make a remark about the international nature of your guild on the guild's page - that's what the page is there for, after all, to document the guild (and therefore the game). And once again, you have added the tag RP Guilds, but your guild is not an RP guild (remember "This is a list of guilds that participate in actual roleplaying in the Guild Wars universe. These guilds take time to play out characters and create storylines within the lore of Guild Wars. They are not guilds that just play PvE."?) Therefore I am once again asking the guild's maintainers to remove tags that are not relevant to this guild, in order to document the guild in a way that provides true, relevant, and important information. MiraLantis 02:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Umm, we are in the American territory, so we have that category for that. We are a Canadian founded guild, so we have that, and we speak English, therefore we have that category. I'm not using them to recruit people, notice in the past month we've gone down like 70 members because I stopped recruiting. As for the RP tag, how do you know that we don't RP? — ク Eloc 貢 03:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Frankly where the guild was founded doesn't really matter and the categories such as the English, Belgian, Australian ones are for guilds which have players from England not for which language they speak at the moment. If you want to contribute to the discussion about adding a category for language spoken (or even where it was founded) then you can find the start of it at either Category talk:Guilds or GWWT:GUILDS. But until anything is decided, I'm removing the Canadian, English and American categories and just leaving International. If you feel that you want to be in American more than International by all means replace it accordingly, but you should only ever be in only one category for nationality (unless something else is decided in the discussion). -- The Great Tomato 11:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Alliance Request?

Hey,

I am the leader of a guild that I have recently created, and I was wanting to know if we could be in your alliance please. I was thinking that if we were in your alliance, it would help us gain more members, and our gameplay would be alot more fun.

You can check out our Guild's Wiki page here:

Guild:Kill_All_Humanoids

Please send me an alliance invite if we can join your alliance please. Or, you can message me in-game.

Thankyou.

Lacky 02:39, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I sent you an email as you weren't online at the moment and your guild wasn't aligned with my guilds Faction. — ク Eloc 貢 20:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Seeing red

Hey Eloc. Since this guild has been moved from the guild namespace, it has left more red links than any other guild. Is it okay for me to fix those links to point here? Mohnzh say what? 17:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

pretty sure is. he doesn't seem to be active right now, so just do it and let him revert if he didn't want it like this. - Y0_ich_halt 17:09, 29 October 2008 (UTC)