User talk:Gem/Archive10

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Question about my talk page.

Heya gem, i archived my talk pages however, is this allowed? i did this to get easy access to everything thats been talked about in my talk page. looks less messy now. could you take a look please? thanks in advance. Vega Underdark (talk) 05:17, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Looks ok to me. Archiving is definitely allowed, see mytalk page archives for example. -- (gem / talk) 05:26, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Candidates for deletion link

Try this :)

addOnloadHook( function() { new PortletArea( 'p-support' ).addItem( 'p-cfd', 'Candidates for deletion',
  '/wiki/Category:Candidates_for_deletion', 'Category:Candidates for deletion' ); } );

It adds a link to the support portlet on the left side. poke | talk 16:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, wanted one for the top bar, but maby the left bar is better. (less crowded) Thanks. :) -- (gem / talk) 19:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Protected deleted pages

"(Deletion log); 19:15 . . Gem (Talk | contribs) (deleted "Image:Example.jpg": Is there a way to prevent uploading an image with this name? :P)"

Theoretically it's possible. I'm just not sure how :P --Santax (talk · contribs) 19:21, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Just creating the page and then protecting it prevented uploading an image with that name. :) -- (gem / talk) 19:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Guild_Wars_Wiki_talk:Policy/Builds

You posted a note here saying that you still had issues but no time then to discuss them, if you get a chance could you elaborate? I'd like to keep this moving forward if possible, rather than having it stall out on delayed comments. :) -- (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 04:39, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I can do that next week. I'm at a 4 day long event and can only access the net for short periods. Besides, we can do without builds a few days more, it's not going to kill anyone. -- (gem / talk) 09:11, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Sounds fine, just wanted to make sure it hadn't slipped of your radar. -- (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 20:14, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Guild:Devils Whisper Elite

Why does it need to be deleted? I still had it in use and was going to change it but nooooo! I find it was deleted.--§ Eloc § 01:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll restore it for your use. There was a delete tag with 'guild disbanded' and after checking the page and the talk page I decoded to delete the page. -- (gem / talk) 04:13, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

DISCRIMINATION AGAINST DRAGON KILLAZ GUILD

This SysOp is routinely abusing the pages of our guild, Dragon Killaz. He is oppressing our rights as players in this game and I am voicing my strong displeasure with him for the following reasons:

1. Deleting our content. 2. Re-editing and changing our guild content as he sees fit. 3. Attempting to delete our entire guild page. 4. Harboring ethnic and racial discrimination against for our dragon killing ways.

I demand his admin rights be removed and the Dragon Killaz guild left alone.

--Black mischief 16:51, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

As I can see it the only edit he made was to add a time tag to the deletion template? --Lemming64 16:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

If you are talking about the single edit I made, it was to add a proper time stamp to the deletion template, which any user should do to have the template automatically categorise the page. I did not remove content from the page. You may view the guild page history to see who has done what to the page.

Also, in the edit note I told that I'm going to check this guild in the game for existance by contacting people in the list of members. If those player names don't exist, it confirms that the page is a joke page. If they exist and confirm the guild, then we will leave the page intact. Simple. -- (gem / talk) 17:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I just checked, some of the names exist, but some a few don't. eg Dodgeball Kuntz --Lemming64 17:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Also to be fair as stated in the guilds policy

A guild that harms or frustrates the Guild Wars Wiki may forfeit their privilege of having a guild page.

Which may be taken to be true here considering the amount of vandalism this page attracts from anonymous users. Whether they are members or not is a different matter. --Lemming64 17:26, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion this could all be clarified by someone taking a picture of the guild rosta - (therefore proving that the guild exists and has those members) --The Great Tomato 17:28, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I checked the names too. A few don't exist, but most of them do. One of the players was online and told me that he has a guild of his own (no other members) but that Dragon Killaz is in their alliance. I asked him to invite my secondary account to his guild so that I could confirm, but he said that he was in hard mode SoF. I guess we could leve the page to be, but it has indeed attracted lots of vandalism. However, removing the member list (as no member list is allowed) should prevent vandalism.

(edit conflict) A screenshot is easy to manipulate, I could create a guild roster for a fake guild in a few minutes. -- (gem / talk) 17:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Fine then - get someone to invite you/or someone else into Dragon Killaz, so you/they can check the guild 1st hand (it only costs 100gold to be left alone :P - i'll even pay it if there is trouble lol) --The Great Tomato 17:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me but do you have nothing better to do in your lifes then to check the authenticity of Dragon Killaz? Just leave us be. We haven't done harm to anyone. I'm tired of people lyin sayin what they want about me. Why can't they back up off me? Why can't they let me live?

Guys, Black Mischief is just a troll from #gwp (he likes to think he's the Leader of Trolls, but that's just details). That guild page is a genuine one, #gwp just used it as joking grounds. His whining here is also just a joke, ignore this idiot (or even better, ban him for disruption and being a general waste of good air). A correct version of the page to which you can revert. Everything else is just #gwpers adding each other, other GW players or other names as a joke.

BM, does trolling the wiki make you feel better about the failure that you are, both in RL and in GW? Go back to #gwp and stay there, together with your prepubescent band of trolls. --Rust Evariste 18:27, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Rust! -- (gem / talk) 18:51, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

That's not me by the way - someone is posing as me and apparently using it to slander Black. Surely this is somehow breaking the rules. I own the name Rust Evariste in game.--Rust 04:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I thought that it was just two different users with similiar names just like Fox and Firefox. If that is your in game name and he is pretending to be you, we might have the possibility to act or not, I'm not 100% sure without reading through the policies. -- (gem / talk) 14:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Guild Wars Wiki:Original Work

Mind restoring the talk page of this please? I need to get something off of the talk page.--§ Eloc § 20:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I've restored the main article, but the talk page was allready there. We never delete talk pages with interesting discussion. -- (gem / talk) 20:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh...I couldn't find the talk page when I tried searching for it. Ok tyvm.--§ Eloc § 20:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

You had the link to the main page. You could just have followed it and the talk page link on the top is shown as blue instea of red if the talk page is still there. :) -- (gem / talk) 20:24, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Or you can just add " talk" to the end of the namespace (i.e. "Guild Wars Wiki:" becomes "Guild Wars Wiki talk:"). (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 20:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Response to your answer "Confused" Article.

Hey, Im curious to how my video card isnt "good" enough for Guild Wars, its an Intel video card...which is highly capable of producing the graphics needed, but since guild wars doesnt support it i have no choice but to get one that does support it? what a waste of time. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:VidCardDrama .

Well, I'm not 100% sure about anything, I just responded based on my own experience. You didn't give us specs or anything so it was impossible to go further. Also, the GW support team is probably the best place to contact. -- (gem / talk) 22:03, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

When you say "Intel video card", I highly suspect that it's one of those integrated ones, and personally, I disagree that it's "highly capable of producing the graphics needed". But that's just IMHO, and I don't know about the previous discussion, but let me just add that Nightfall has higher system requirements than Prophecies or Factions. -- ab.er.rant 01:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah yeah, if it's one of those integrated cards then that's certainly the problem. Kalomelis laptop also had an integrated Intel card, so.... -- (gem / talk) 04:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

BATTLE LION IMAGE

Why would you remove it? Why would you do such a thing? 90.195.238.210 14:40, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

"14:24, 11 July 2007 Gem (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Battlelion.jpg" (image not related to GW)" - Is there anything which you don't understand? poke | talk 14:50, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Well I saw one in gw I was just unfortunate not to take a screenshot Kellogs 14:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't see how a tactical role can be presented by one image instead of a video, but if you succeed with that, I'll gladly edit the now protected article to include the image. -- (gem / talk) 15:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I see there is no tricking you, you are a worthy foe. May balthazar bless your guild with many battle lions. Kellogs 15:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Lol, thanks. Just a little hint: When you reply to someone on a talk page, indent your message by placing one or more colons at the start of the line just like I've done to this whole discussion. -- (gem / talk) 15:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip Kellogs 15:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Np. :) -- (gem / talk) 15:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Test image

Found this in orphaned, do you still need it? Image:User Gem test.png --Lemming64 13:44, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing it out, I was testing GWWTools and must have forgotten about it. :) -- (gem / talk) 13:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Question

I noticed the Eloc discussion regarding his nomination for bcrat. I decided to check on the page I removed the delete tag and find out you deleted it based on User request. However, if you read the talk page, the user of the article clearly states that he did not want it deleted. The only one that wanted it deleted was Eloc for reasons of his own. Well, it's two questions actually. Did you read the talk page before you deleted the article? Why did you delete it when it wasn't the user that requested it, but Eloc? Thanks — Gares 14:16, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

The request for not to delete by the user was posted first, but later on he posted on another talk page that he wanted it deleted. The deletion was based on user request. Thanks for asking though. :) -- (gem / talk) 07:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Mission Progression Icons

You are listed as the original author of the Mission Progression templates, as well as the one who uploaded the icons for those templates. I had a question about the icon consistency. Please compare the following images:

(table removed in preparation for image deletion)

Would it be possible to modify the images to have a consistent background, either white, gray, or (if possible) transparent? I believe that making such a change would significantly improve the appearance of pages using the Mission Progression templates.

The background color is my primary concern here, but there are a few other "quirks" that I want to mention (and I'm trying not to sound too picky)

• the position of the shields on the Tyrian icons are not consistent
• the hard mode icons appear to be a different resolution than the normal mode icons
• the hard mode image files are different sizes than the normal mode image files (21x24, as opposed to 21x28)

I have been hesitant to modify these icons myself for two reasons. First, they are flagged as copyrighted, and I am unsure if these types of changes would violate that copyright. Second, these icons (and the templates) are in use on numerous user pages, and my inexperience with wiki compels me not to make changes to things that will potentially affect the format, layout, or appearance of so many pages.

I do appreciate the effort you have put into making these images and templates available. I see that they are widely used throughout the community and I look forward to using them myself in the very near future. I do not intend these comments to be negative, but to be constructive recommendations for improvement. I realize that you are a busy person, as evidenced by your numerous high-quality contributions to the wiki, and I thank you for your consideration of these concerns. - JGouldie 14:25, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I will upload new images for all mission types later. (with full transparent background) poke | talk 17:59, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I uploaded a complete new set. I made them a bit bigger, you can see all images here. I saw that the template uses parameters 0-3 for setting progress.. So we have to change the template to fit the new names or upload them again ;) poke | talk 22:04, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

The new icons look great. They still appear to have a gray background, though. Also, check the filenames on the 3rd Tyrian icons in each set. You use "Master" on the Normal mode, but "Expert" on the Hard Mode. Also, I failed to mention the Realm of Torment icons in my original request, which are different than the other Elona ones. You may want to include those in the final set. - JGouldie 22:12, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

done :) poke | talk 22:28, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

now I'm being just plain picky :D All of the new image backgrounds have a bluish tint in them. And it appears that you updated the mission progression template icons, but some of them have that bluish tint, and some have a white (or transparent, can't tell) background.

I modified the table above to include the torment icons and the Cantha/Elona HM master's icon, and I noted which ones appear blue in my browser, in case they show up differently in yours. (I did clear my browser's cache first to ensure that the icons were loading fresh). The table contains the images currently in use by the progression templates. Feel free to tell me I'm being too picky! Also let me know if the wiki renders transparency in a different way than I may be expecting. - JGouldie 03:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Problems with transparency may be due to the browser you are using. - BeX 03:32, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

The icons that I uploaded were directly taken from GuildWiki, so it's not my fault if they are inconsistent or bad. :) What comes to transparency, all of the icons had a transparent background as I use the templates in a table with a colored background and the table bg color is shown instead of white. Well, uploading new versions doesn't harm anyone at all, and consistency is good. :) -- (gem / talk) 07:27, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

"And it appears that you updated the mission progression template icons" - No I did not update the icons which were used for the template and I did not changed the templates either ;) But if the new icons are ok, I will update the templates to use the new icons. poke | talk 09:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Go for it, they are much better. :) -- (gem / talk) 10:26, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

done :) poke | talk 11:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Looks great! Good work with the icons. -- (gem / talk) 14:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

ARGH. Don't change the template but instead upload the icons on top of the old ones. :/ -- (gem / talk) 14:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm using IE6, and I'm still seeing a grey background on all of the new icons, and a mix of grey and white on the old icons. At home, I use IE7, and the grey is replaced by a light blue. I tried to create a table with a very distinct background color (olive, green, red), and the icons did not appear to be transparent. Even on these pages, a transparent background should cause them to be surrounded with a white box (the color of the page) and not a grey one, unless IE doesn't support transparent images (which is hard to believe, but possible). HELP! - JGouldie 15:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

This is a problem with IE6. IE6 does not understand transparency of png files. It should work perfectly in IE7. -- (gem / talk) 15:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

"ARGH. Don't change the template but instead upload the icons on top of the old ones. :/" - why? poke | talk 15:39, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

There are other pages too that use the icons and it takes time to go through them all. -- (gem / talk) 15:42, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Nvm, currently it's probably easier to gothrough them than revert the changes and reupload. :) -- (gem / talk) 15:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I will start a bot for that :P poke | talk 16:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Did I forgot any icon: sandbox? poke | talk 16:17, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Is it just me or do the elona icons look more blurry than the older ones? Either that or it's way past my bedtime... -- ab.er.rant 17:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, all replaced. The only icons remaining are on this page, my sandbox, LordBiro's talk page and on your userpage, Gem ;) I would recommend you to use Image:Mission icon HardMode Expert large.png instead of Image:HardMissionProgression3.png/Image:Mission icon HardMode Master.png for your userbox. I also will now start tagging for deletion ^^ poke | talk 17:14, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

My opposition of your RfA

I feel like I owe you a little more explanation since I just opposed your RfA.

I like you personally. You make the wiki better and you've been instrumental in getting it set up and well oiled. The mistakes you've made along the way aren't much worse than the mistakes any of us have made, really.

That said...

Re: me appointing you on the GuildWiki -- you well know I had significant personal reservations about that. You haven't justified me removing you from the position -- you're not a complete scoundrel or anything -- and, again, I think you've done more good than harm. There are three things that I did wrong in appointing you, though:

1. I had significant personal reservations that had been alleviated only just enough. I still didn't really think you were appropriate for the position at that time -- I had merely been convinced to give you a chance.
2. I knew the ANet grandfathering was coming soon -- had I delayed your appointment by a week, I could have given you the trial run you deserved there without giving you a free pass to come here.
3. I backed down from my own stance just because the community wished me to. That is not my role there, and I should not have done so. I have not made the same mistake since. I suppose the gravity of this one is arguable, especially to people who opposed the builds wipe. :)

Again, I'm not going to remove you from your position there. It's merely that, if I compare you to the rest of my team, you come up a little short. As Karlos so succinctly put it, you lack the wisdom they have. I believe you will develop this in time.

Re: my opposing you here -- I don't think you're doing a bad job. I think you're doing an overwhelmingly prolific amount of good edits with a significantly higher fault ratio than the rest of us, with the possible exception of myself. I'll bold this for emphasis: I want you back as a sysop before the year is up. I just think you'd benefit from stepping back from your bot-like role and getting a feel for the more human side. Regardless of how we've attempted to write policy, there is still a significant amount of judgment required for this administrative role, and I'm not convinced you have a handle on that yet.

Hope there's no hard feelings. I just can't support you in good conscience yet.

—Tanaric 09:27, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

No hard feelings at all. Thanks for the post here, although I already understood your reasons fully from the explanation accompanying the vote and I respect them. It's not a bad thing to oppose an RfA as long as there is a reason for it and there is definitely no reason to appologise for an opposing vote. :) I put up the reconfirmation well knowing that there are users on this wiki who might not want to see me continuing as a sysop and I guess losing the sysop status might do me some good.

As you should know, most of my contributions to this wiki at the moment are taking part policy discussions and administrative actions (mostly deletions and bans). I know that people don't like how I handle disputes so I try to stay away from them, but I guess I haven't succeeded as well as I would have liked since users are opposing my reconfirmation (with good reasons mostly). When/if my sysop status gets removed, my time spent on the wiki will most likely go down a lot because I will lack stuff to do. I don't have time to play the game so I can't contribute to the main space, I can't do administrative actions anymore, I lack interest in participating in style and formatting discussions, I've had my share of massive crusades which are better done with someones bot, and the policy discussions are mostly inactive and don't require a lot of time. This will most likely also mean that I wont stand a chance being re-sysopped later on due to having so few contributions. For the community it's pretty irrelevant, but for me the wiki is a large part of my life, so this following week will probably cause a huge change in my freetime activities. :) -- (gem / talk) 09:43, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like you're almost hoping your RfA will fail. Not that I blame you -- there are significantly more interesting hobbies than textually duking it out with a bunch of prolific nerds. :) —Tanaric 09:47, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm not hoping for it, but I'm always trying to stay positive. :) I'm not ready for such a big change, but I guess Kalomeli would like it if my time on the wiki drops by a lot. <3 What comes to interesting hobbies, this is definitely one of the most interesting ones I've ever seen. Watching politics and community work in a smaller scale is very fun, especially as you can take part in it yourself. :) -- (gem / talk) 09:50, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

If you're really interested in this sort of thing, I suggest looking at A Tale in the Desert, one of the most interesting online games I've ever played. It's all about the societal microcosm that exists in an MMORPG. There's a 24-hours-of-playtime free trial available. —Tanaric 09:52, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I've read through the whole website long time ago. :P I just don't have enough time to play games at the moment so I can't really start a new game; I log in to GW once a week and play for a couple of hours. That's also the main reason why my contributions to this wiki will most likely drop if my sysop status is removed. -- (gem / talk) 09:57, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I hope you don't vanish altogether Gem, that would definitely be a shame. I can understand your reasoning for withdrawing though. Hopefully your zeal for the game will come back with GW:EN perhaps :) --Lemming64 00:53, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not deliberately going to vanish, but I'm not sure what I will do on the wiki from this point on to keep my interest to to the wiki and the game. I guess I'll figure out something interesting. :) -- (gem / talk) 04:05, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Move to Australia and start GvGing! Kalomeli can come too, Melbourne is as multicultural as you can get, we'll let anyone in! Actually speaking of travel I got my Visa application over the weekend, I'll have to send that off soon, start looking at flights, accommodation and work as well, scary stuff. --Xasxas256 04:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

No point in moving to Australia as you are moving away from there. We'll be visiting you once you settle down to Europe. ;) -- (gem / talk) 04:57, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Tanaric writes, "I suggest looking at A Tale in the Desert". I think someone is lonely. lol. You mentioned that to me a few months back I believe. It's on my to-do list though. — Gares 12:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd play it if I could get some of you to join me! As it is, I do the free trial thing once every year or so. :) —Tanaric 23:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm late, yes, sorry about that. But looking at the archive of Gem's RfA on GuildWiki, it seems that a huge portion of the community wanted him as an admin, and gave strong examples as to why. Maybe it's me thinking you should give the community what it wants, Tanaric, whether it's good for us or not, but you had your chance to try to convince the community to not support him and... it kinda flopped, to be honest. Speaking as he who nominated Gem for adminship, I can't quite see where you're coming from - but let's be honest, I haven't been paying a lot of attention to this wiki myself, so if I'm missing something(s) that is/are completely obvious, feel free to ignore this post. Armond 20:39, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Tanaric wasn't the reason for the opposition against my sysophood nor did he strongly oppose the reconfirmation. Also, he wasn't the reason why I voluntarily resigned from the sysop position before the reconfirmation had been completed. -- (gem / talk) 20:45, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

My job, on the GuildWiki, is definitely not to give the community what it wants. —Tanaric 21:51, 25 July 2007 (UTC)