User talk:Salome/Oct 10 - Jan 11

Hey 3

Hit me with a /msg on IRC or something sometime. I'd like to run a thought by you. - Tanetris 15:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I'll forward those pics to you as discussed. Sorry just taking some time to get them all together. -- Salome 10:29, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

White Armour

I have a question for you,.. Salome... I took some saved pic's of Elonian armor on my Paragon and I got it dyed white. I saw you made the galley or something on the armor art page there and was wondering if I sent u my pic's if u could add them under white dyed armor... I do not know how to and other ppl would like to see how tht armor looks dyed white too Im sure thanks, --Captain of the army 02:59, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Sure matey, although as part of the armour project im about to do dye previews once I've finished doing the existing format of things. SO that armour will have an example of itself in all available colours. -- Salome 10:29, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

oh ok ..than... I guess thts good enough .. unless u still want my pic's,,,, let me kno :) --Captain of the army 13:27, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Elite Enchanter Armor

I posted the "Gray components" for Elite Enchanted Armor not that long ago, because none had been posted. I just checked and you had replaced them with new images along with the comment "Clearer image, no background, neutral ambient lighting," all of which are true. But I can't find any record in the history of my images even being posted. Why is that? Also, I have images of the armor in all the different dyes, but have never been able to figure out how to post them in a table similar to the one posted for female warrior Elite Luxon. I took the images off the dye window, so presumably they do not suffer the same defects as the ones I took on the beach to illustrate the Gray components. May I send those to you for posting or might you suggest how I might do so? Sjhshh 16:20, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Your question

No, I'm not. -- pling 14:46, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

thanks pling. much appreciated. -- Salome 16:10, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Update talkpage

I had moved what I saw as an inane conversation to the relevant user's (IP's) talk page. In retrospect, I should have left your warning on the page, though I gave too much credit to the intelligence of trolls to check the moved conversation. Thanks for being more forceful on the page; it gives it the potential to be useful again in the future. G R E E N E R 22:32, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Salve

Next time, you'd better check twice. You are just another typical blind lawbringer that couldn't see the real world beyond his duty. If you did, you'd easily realize I am not Dark Mugen. Of course, this makes me circumventing my block now. You are creating more fuss with your self-righteous judgement than you prevent, let's hope you get that before you ban yourself. 95.154.230.191 02:11, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Direct quote from previous banned IP (AKA you): "We'll meet again when I am unbanned and you realize that laws do not exist to be enforced for the whole sake of enforcing them" - anything else to add? No thought not. If you are going to attempt to be clever, please bear 3 things in mind: A) Try harder, B) you're not doing it right, C) I'm bored now. -- Salome 02:18, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Contrary to you I can use my Crystal ball to look into the future. I knew you would ban me. But, erraneously as I now know, I assumed you would do so for the very post containing this future sight. I am harder, you bow down to memes and you are far from bored — you are merely giving in. 67.159.56.162 02:25, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Sigh. Either way you were banned for either furthering a pointless debate on the article (which has been expressly stated not to be the talk pages purpose) or for circumventing a block. I have not lengthened Mugen's block. So really the only thing in question is the why of the block, not the validity of said block. Go celebrate your strength of individuality elsewhere for a while. -- Salome 02:31, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Chill, and finish the chess game. →[ »Halogod (talk)« ]← 02:35, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Amazing, even the admins actually get baited into pointless discussions with their bannees, I honestly could not think of a more stupid thing to do on the internet as an admin...... 79.203.59.251 10:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Alas it's not baiting. Unfortunately I've always felt that a sysop is obligated to respond to the concerns of anyone who they have banned, even if it's just to tell them those concerns aren't warranted. -- Salome 18:03, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

People provoking an argument with comments such as "before you ban yourself", with no serious intention to start a decent discussion and clearly just here to rant and rave. Sounds like a typical /ignore case, since he is never ever going to turn around and say "sorry, I see that you were right now, I apologize for my behavior", he'll just have another go at you instead. As I respect the fact that you respond to the concerns of everyone, I think a line should be drawn. For instance, a man can try to convince the pope that there is no god, although I am an advocate of atheism I would not respect that man, I would declare him a fool. I don't think admins should turn into Don Quixote, just my 2 pennies. 79.203.122.210 12:00, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

About ban...

I apologize about not taking this here to begin with, it is not so much a question of arguing the ban. I just feel that perhaps an ambiguous link at the top of the page hardly constitutes a warning. I personally do not visit ambiguous links and had not looked there until after I saw that that person had been banned. Rogueonion 02:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

why are people getting banned for comments? i see it all the time, and it makes me want to rage about sysops with large dildos stuck in their asses, et cetera, because it is a decision generated by one person without other input and blah blah blah it's fucked up NALANA 02:41, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello Rogue, I understand your concerns and normally I would agree with them. However in this instance my warning was a request to follow our policies and how the wiki works. The link was a pleasantry and not at all needed. This is standard wiki practice and the sysop team have been incredibly lenient in it's enforcement (as on the whole we're a big bunch of carebears) however every update, we are getting the same troll posts and it needs to stop with a 0 tolerance approach. However to accommodate your concerns, I have copied the warning in full onto the page now. The existing bans will stay as the people concerned should have known better in the first place (their actions fall under vandalism, trolling and disruption), but now their is greater clarity as to the reasoning. I hope this helps Rogue and thank you for taking the time to voice your concerns. :) -- Salome 02:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I had noticed that and I am grateful thanks for your understanding =D. Rogueonion 02:49, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Also Nalana, the people aren't getting banned for comments they are getting banned for trolling game update talk pages repeatedly, en masse, for the past 6 months with their bitching and moaning about none relevant shite. It's not what the pages are for. Polite requests haven't worked in the past, so now i'm simply giving short bans to people who break the rule in the hopes it stops. As it WILL stop. If I have to ban everyone who does it, it will stop eventually. This is wiki rules 101, it's not a new funky thing i've just brought in, It's more the fact that we've bee nice, it's not worked. Now its time to put our money where our mouths are and start banning people. (okay really have to get back to this dungeon as its not col keeping people waiting for 90 mins while i dick about on the wiki) -- Salome 02:53, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

As witnessed in the last... 30 months or so, warning people is hardly effective. Many people choose to ignore the warning, thinking the internet is their personal battleground and nobody can do shit against them. I propose making a "WARNING" sign that spans across half the offender's screen every time the offender views a new page (think of the "you have new message" sign, but 100 times as annoying. Make it flashing, with a text like "Stop now, or your ass is FUCKED". Oh, my genius has solved yet another mind-boggling problem... Koda Kumi 21:15, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: "note to all editors"

Is it worth templateing a reduced version of this warning to include on update talk pages? I was rather confused when a warning about page content was only stated in a linked article which I thought was just going to be a link to information about the game update so skipped and read on. --Nela - (talk) 02:46, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree a template could be handy, the only reason i haven't done so is because im in the middle of a dungeon and currently kept 6 people waiting about while i sorted this out. ;) -- Salome 02:48, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Now I feel bad. Rogueonion 02:50, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Impartiality

Salome, I've used to enjoy your operations here. However, lately it seems like you may have lost sight of how some things go. I would ask if you could kindly refresh this in your mind? Thank you. Guild_Wars_Wiki:Sysop_guide#Cultural_reverence_of_sysops (Random page coming to mind: Talk:Wintersday_2010#Wintersday) --96.235.46.234 02:54, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello Mr I.P. My apologies if you feel let down by my recent actions. However I'm a tad uncertain as to what you are referencing with your links. As an editor i have no greater say than anyone else. However saying that, my admin actions are a different matter. In the link you referenced I asked a user to not break NPA, I then followed this by asking people to stop debating that administrative request as it wasn't pertinent to the topic at hand and in effect only increased the chance that the user would continue the debate and thus increased the likelihood of further NPA breaches. This is a standard approach used by many sysops to stop flame wars and to bring trolling to a close. My most recent actions have been to ban users who are breaching our policies on talk pages by continuing to moan about dev updates on none pertinent pages. When the derv update comes out, people can moan about it all they like on the talk page, as that will then be the correct page to do so, however until then the update talkpages are reserved for talk pertinent to THAT update and THAT update alone. This isn't censorship, it's following wiki policy. This has been requested repeatedly over the past 6 months in various ways by various users, but alas it just simply isnt being followed. Therefore I have decided to take a somewhat harder line approach to this. This is not unfair. Editors should know the general rules of the wiki in advance, if they don't their is a massive warning on the page now to inform them of what they shouldn't be doing. Again I apologise if this disappoints you, however I am known for being one of the most carebeary sysops (which considering how fuzzy we all are, is saying something), and I really don't like the fact that it has come to this. However every update has been mobbed by many users logging on to bitch about Derv updates and it simply has to stop. They should be using a Dev page to express their concerns or a forum, not abusing the wiki talk pages. I hope this has explained my stance somewhat on this matter and recent events. -- Salome 03:10, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I would have to argue that they should not be using the dev talk pages to do their bitching, they should use the fansite forums like Guru, etc. The dev talk pages are not for mob mentality trolling, if we wish the devs to continue to post here. Izzy and Linsey are prime examples of what I'm talking about. -- Wyn talk 12:34, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Ban?

Hi. My ip was banned by you earlier today. I just wanted to ask why. As far as I'm aware, I haven't vandalized anything. The message before I logged in was "Your current IP address is 184.32.204.98, and the block ID is #18172." Thanks in advance, I hope to resolve this issue without it getting out of hand. ---~=Ѧrtaxerxes 03:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello i just checked your ban. The IP was banned for this Edit. Over 9000 NPC's were not removed from UW, or added etc.... and as such the 4 accounts who took part in editing that comment to various different forms, have all been banned for 3 days due to vandalism. I hope this helps explain why the IP was banned. -- Salome 03:36, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Well as far as I knew, I didn't have the privileges to edit that. I assumed because it was a more official page. I believe I was informed of that at some point. When I realized that I didn't have the privileges, I just pointlessly goofed around the edit, since I was assured I was not able to make any changes. When I refreshed the page, everything was gone, and I assumed someone with the right privileges did it. Also, you said you banned 4 people. It appears you banned the IP that REMOVED the vandalism. I'm alright with your choice to ban my IP, I can see how this misunderstanding could have rendered my post as practical vandalism, however, unfairly banning someone else for trying to make the wiki a better place is seldom fair ---~=Ѧrtaxerxes 03:40, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

My mistake, it appears you did NOT ban the person who removed the vandalism. I guess you made a mistake in your above comment in this page. ---~=Ѧrtaxerxes 03:48, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Did I? Oh sorr if i made a daft statement above, what i meant is that i banned the 4 people who changed the edit into various forms of vandalism. The IP who removed it was not banned because as you say, he was making the wiki a better place. Saying that however, as I believe it was a genuine mistake on your part, I would be inclined to reduce your ban to 1 day. -- Salome 03:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

this thing

I like the all caps. I really do. Can I call you Salome Dhuum now? Pretty please? (note: I am not trolling, but the first two sentences were sarcasm. I really do want to call you Salome Dhuum now) -- Konig/talk 07:01, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

LOL. Call me what you wish matey. :) As for the caps, yeh it's probably a tad excessive but really wanted to make sure people read it. ;) *now where did I leave that scythe?* -- Salome 07:09, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Salome Dhuum! That is freaking AWESOME! Rogueonion 04:07, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Discussing pending updates

Where WOULD be the appropriate place for that? — Raine Valen 16:45, 8 Jan 2011 (UTC)

GW Guru, GWonline or any number of fan forums. If it's a question people have, then going to the dev's talk page would even be okay. I know this doesn't apply to you Raine, but too many people think this is a forum and not a wiki. We document the game, we don't need every update talk page to become a troll fest about where a derv update is. The talk page is used to discuss the attached contents of the main page, be that editorial debate, such as "i think we should have more pictures or that paragraph doesn't make sense etc..." or game content debate such as "That update broke this or I think that skill is overpowered due to this update..." etc...

If we were like many other wiki's, even the latter wouldn't be allowed, however we're not and that's something I love about this place as we do blur the line at times between wiki and forum and allow our user base to have a say on the content of the game. However debating future content about a future update which has no relation to the current update, is undeniably not relevant to the page. It would be akin to going over to the Abaddon talk page and then discussing the best place to tame a tiger.

I'm trying to think of anywhere this debate could take place and the only none dev page I can think of where it would be relevant is Talk:Upcoming_changes_and_features as at least that's actually about future content and even then bitching about it no being release would still be questionable, as you're not debating the page or the content, you're debating the delay on the content, but at least it's marginally related. -- Salome 18:53, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I was also thinking of the upcoming features page. Regulating the discussion about <upcoming feature> should, at the very least, limit the same posts by the same posters, while allowing them to express their opinions (I don't have a problem with people expressing their opinions!). Giving that page some publicity wouldn't hurt, I think. — Raine Valen 20:01, 8 Jan 2011 (UTC)

Um, no. Such discussion most definitely does not belong on the upcoming features talk page. If it "belongs" anywhere (and I'll get to why that's a faulty premise in a minute), the best place would be the talk page of the skill preview or developer update that announced it was coming. The whole reason those pages are in the Feedback namespace is so people can respond there and Anet can actually read it.

Asking where on the wiki it's appropriate to discuss upcoming features is a little like asking where in the grocery store it's appropriate to discuss celebrity gossip. Sure they've got those magazines in the checkout lanes, and sure they're not going to enforce silence, but if you get up on your soapbox to rant and rave, or you and your celebrity gossip club start loitering around every week, don't be surprised if you're asked to move along or even eventually thrown out. - Tanetris 23:01, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

^Is an example of a poor analogy, poor analogies have no place on a wiki about GW, or for that matter anywhere else. Poor analogies belong in classrooms to get redmarked by teachers at the very most. If you keep coming back with poor analogies, don't be surprised if you are asked to stop littering pages or even eventually to not post at all 195.240.213.35 15:25, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree w/Tanetris: the feedback space is already available for people to make suggestions. There are forums available for people to vent their frustrations. (I would prefer that developer pages are used to actually ask questions which cannot be answered elsewhere, but that seems to be a lost battle.) The upcoming features page should be reserved to show what ANet has announced; its talk page should be used to discuss the best way to present it. It is exactly the place where players can learn that the Dervish un-nerf is not late because (a) ANet never promised a specific date and (b) it was never intended to come out before Wintersday.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 17:19, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Sigh. Yes, I know that spelling out an analogy is like explaining a joke, but to those who need it:

• Grocery store and wiki => Places you can find what you're looking for
• Grocery store and wiki => Places where pushing inane views at great length is disruptive and inappropriate
• Leaving grocery store and wiki => Take it to a forum or fansite

G R E E N E R 17:23, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

It is still a poor analogy, you are basically forcing the similarities by overgeneralizing the two things. That aside I would like to point out that I am not disagreeing with his actual point, I just don't think one should try to bring it across with an analogy like that. 195.240.213.35 14:29, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Salome?

← moved to Guild Wars Wiki talk:Admin noticeboard