First Frosty 16:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

First to do what? ZefirsigGod Zefir 17:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Didn't realise it will still the demo site :> Frosty
Even so, me and Chaos have already posted today. >_> ZefirsigGod Zefir 17:56, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Mwah. --The preceding trolling attempt was made by Chaos (talk) . 19:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
I guess the accounts are getting switched over? Cause crazycow013 is taken. :< crazyCuteMcCowcow 19:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
With some luck I'll get the "Chaos" name. --The preceding trolling attempt was made by Chaos (talk) . 20:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Did they move usernames too? (Anon here btw) -- 21:01, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
(Yes we know you're an anon ;D) Usernames are totally screwed up so far. I happened to have a wikia account. --The preceding trolling attempt was made by Chaos (talk) . 21:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
are they? I didnt have one - and since they've moved the database i do now...i think your confused --Darklɘs McChaosmongɘr Darwkchawossig 22:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
My account is working :> FrostrageFrosty po! 23:14, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Renames are ongoing. Please see user talk:Angela/renames. Angela@fandom (talk) 00:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

this new wikia...

Is fucked. I liked the old site. -- lyssan 23:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Is there anything I can help with? Please leave a note on Talk:News/20090217 or on my talk page. Angela@fandom (talk) 00:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Meh, ignore him. Lyssan, everything's being sorted out, and if you switch to monobook it's virtually identical. --Tai Sig 00:10, 20 February 2009
NOW SUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCKS XDDDDD cya guys, ill forget dis site now, like deh other suckin wikia... xD-- 10:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

anyone else

not have the little skill description pop up? LongCat 23:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't think they've finished porting pvxbig over yet. --71.229 23:56, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
That should be working now. Please leave a note on Talk:News/20090217 if it's not so I can collect all the bugs in one place. Angela@fandom (talk) 00:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
is that why my sig is boring again too? LongCat 00:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
No, that's a different thing. Did you own the account "LongCat" on Wikia before today? If so, it probably took your default Wikia sig in preference to your pvx sig but you can easily re-add it at Special:Preferences. If it would be useful, I can get a list from the backup of what everyone's sigs used to be. See Help:Signature for info on how to add a sig. Angela@fandom (talk) 00:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Ratings Wipe

Who would oppose/support a complete wipe of the ratings history? Pros: It'd go along with the "new start" theme, would encourage new member participation,... Cons: Experienced/old/anti-lukejohnson members would get pwnd.

Goodnight la sig 2 00:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Thats a really bad idea. Over 800 builds would have to be revoted on... Also, I doubt it would change that much except it would waste everyone's time. ressmonkey 00:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Bad idea, big waste of time, I would rather just go round all the bad builds and vote them down if I wanted to try and filter some of the crap out form pvx FrostrageFrosty po! 00:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Noooo! Not the rating's themselves. Just the people who've rated. EDIT: I've taken 5 minutes to think about this, and I feel dumb. Goodnight la sig 2 00:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
No huge reason for a wipe. Greater influx of new members = Greater outflow of ragers due to experienced PvXers, imo. --ShazamLovesObama obamaobamaobamaobamaobama 05:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Nooooooooooooooooooooooo don't wipe >.> It would screw things up too much. Invincible Rogue 23:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC) skills

It no skill database exists. Is this temporary or does a whole new database need to be formed? Or something else?--[[image:Healing_Hands.jpg|20px]]<b>[[user:Canderouss|<font color="blue">Cander</font>]][[user talk:Canderouss|<font color="yellow">ouss</font>]] 01:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

This should be temporary. Angela@fandom (talk) 02:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
k. sig fix.--Canderouss 05:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Enabling PvXwiki's unique skin

The old skin should actually be the default. To enable it, however, you need to go to Preferences (under "more options" or some such in the upper right) and click the Skin tab. Scroll down until you see the Monobook option, and make sure it's enabled. Then scroll to the bottom and disable the option to let administrators override your choice and click save. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image{{SUBST:bacon}} 02:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

i dont suppose

there is a way to block my userpage. i didnt think about this at first but i seem to be attracting /b/tards like a girl who is on the rebound attracts men LongCat 03:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Your page can be protected, but it'll prevent you from editing it as well I believe. ~ Tycncookiesig Tycn 06:32, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Ratings - names beside:P?

I kinda liked it :P - Any idea to show who rated on that etc? atm it just says, rated 5 and date. Massive Image-Massive Sig 13:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Also wtf upp whit all the votes done by ppl is renamed to something elsE:P? Massive Image-Massive Sig 13:29, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
something broke during the move, they're working on it =). ~ PheNaxKian Sysop 13:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

(EC)Talk:News/20090217#Ratings There you go massive go join the club FrostrageFrosty po! 13:32, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Keep adverts on other side.

I dont like that adverst are now to my right, it reduces the size of editable space making it too narrow, very disruptive. Is it possible to keep them on left side as it was on PvX if wikia really is so flexible? IMO that will appeal to many old and new users. --Anonimous. D: 17:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Add Block Plus is pro. ^_^ Brandnew. 17:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Use FF and get Add Block Plus, Anon. Right after the switch my ABP wasn't blocking everything, but now it's getting them all. Adorably shocked mcmonkey sig(17:36, 20 February 2009 - )
The editable space is still reduced though, and I have 'collapse blocked elements' checked. It's really annoying. ToraenSig1 Toraen Dirt to da face! 17:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
what skin are you using? Mine is almost identical to the old wiki with Monobook. Adorably shocked mcmonkey sig(17:43, 20 February 2009 - )
I've switched it to monobook and unchecked that box for allowing admins to override my choice. Everything looks good except for the space on the right. ToraenSig1 Toraen Dirt to da face! 17:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
yea, it has a little more space over there for their ads. I don't think there's anything you can do about that, sorry. Adorably shocked mcmonkey sig(17:48, 20 February 2009 - )
If you use monaco or one of the other skins, you won't see ads at all (except on the main page). Angela@fandom (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Too bad monaco is shit. —ǥrɩɳsɧƴɖɩđđɭɘş Grinshpon blinky cake 12:56, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


I HATE WIKIA!!! IT's the stupidest idea in the world. I had an account on gwiki, same name and password, and on two other wikis, also on here. All of these sites had changed to wikia. now i have like 7 account and i have no fucking idea what any of them are anymore. So, is this my origional account? or is this my pvx account? or is it my wikia account? or is it one of my 7 fucking other accounts? also, i hate wikia because its incredibly slow on my computer. now it takes me like 5 minutes to get to the main page, when before it was like 2 seconds. FUCK YOU!--FireTocksig2FireTock Rules! 20:05, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Umm.. Whenever a wiki moves to Wikia they have this page which clearly asks for people to say "HAI I HAS ACCOUNTS ON BOTH WIKIS MERGE KTHX". Apparently you're not reading anything, or you wouldn't've missed it. --- VipermagiSig -- (contribs) (talk) 20:09, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Guildwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaars. Lord of all tyria 20:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
(EC ×2)first, Chill. second, if you want to merge your PvX account with your wikia account (or a wikia account) go here and add yourself to the relevant list. Thirdly, yes the sites slow, but that's because everything's still getting set up, things still need fixing, when it's done, it will be quicker than it was before. ~ PheNaxKian Sysop 20:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Your account hasn't been affected since you already had the same name as Wikia. You can log in as Fire Tock using your normal password. If there are extra accounts that you want closed, I can remove those. Please let me know iIf you need to reset your password reset or if you're still having problems getting in. You should find that the username Fire Tock will work across all Wikia sites. I tried to email you this info, but the address in your preferences is bouncing. Angela@fandom (talk) 04:05, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Is PvX Decode Broken?

I just tried to decode a template and after clicking Submit Query, it throws me out to the Main Page. --Bubba 20:36, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

See here. Also, your sig needs to link to your userpage. ToraenSig1 Toraen Dirt to da face! 20:38, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Meta Category

There looks like some room to fit in a meta category in the PvP section (at least), since we have Category:PvP Meta Builds up and ready may as well display it. FrostrageFrosty po! 20:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

PvE will come later once i get around to it --Tai Sig 20:04, 23 February 2009

Shitty servers

Wikia's servers suck dick. They can't even load my talk page, or Readem's archive. On Gcard's servers, it was nearly instantaneous. Bullocks, tbh. —ǥrɩɳsɧƴɖɩđđɭɘş Grinshpon blinky cake 05:49, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I loaded both tbh. --- VipermagiSig -- (contribs) (talk) 12:57, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Archive? 800KB is insane :/ ~ PheNaxKian Sysop 14:53, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
inorite? --Darklɘs McChaosmongɘr Darwkchawossig 23:45, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
It's not the page, it's the servers. Always. —ǥrɩɳsɧƴɖɩđđɭɘş Grinshpon blinky cake 00:00, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
I load it in about 5 seconds, slower but not that bad considering its a massive page. Frostysig9000FrostytheAdmin 00:58, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
I have to agree with Mgrinshpon, servers really aren't very fine. Usually page loading timeouts and it might take few hours of pressing F5 for it to finally show up.. Same with GuildWiki, and actually most of wikia. But with few random proxy tests, I am able to view those pages via them. Seems like wikia's servers aren't geographically so robust... VazdeSig 18:05, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikia's servers work better for me, amazingly. Big sadface sigBiggles Strongfist™ Sysop 18:12, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Lawl downtime

Ha your shitty ass wikia servers went down today. Also i got my new comp today and it has vista. I would just like to inform you all of how enraged i am. Having to deal with vista (and abnormal lag at this moment despite my quad core and 4gb ram) and no pvx makes me want to go beserk with a sledge hammer and rampage my school.

System specs have little to do with browsing, because browsers barely drain RAM / CPU. And Vista just is slower than XP. Always. --- VipermagiSig -- (srs Viper) (talk) 13:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Firefox has a well known memory leak. It's perfectly capable of eating up a solid gig by itself after an extended use period. —ǥrɩɳsɧƴɖɩđđɭɘş Grinshpon blinky cake 12:54, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

The New Firefox

[| Google Chrome.] Mucho awsomeness.--Canderouss 06:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't troll Main Page. --Shazzydiddles 06:28, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
i thought trolling was calling someone an asshole or something--Newcandy2 05:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
trolling is pretending chrome has anything on firefox. -Auron 07:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
im about to troll on u in a second--Newcandy2 22:26, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Rit/P Spirit's Strength Spear

Hi guys, I'm new to this, so if I posted this in the wrong section, please forgive me... Anyways, I'm looking for the Rit/P Spirit's Strength Spear build, I can't seem to find was on here a while ago. Can anyone link me the build or something? It would be greatly appreciated.

I'm afraid it got trashed and then deleted. ^_^ Brandnew. 18:45, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, does anyone remember/know the skill list? I'm pretty sure I know what runes and stuff to put it on, I just can't remember the skill bar...

Spirit&#039;s Strength Sight Beyond Sight Weapon of Aggression Spear of Lightning Optional Merciless Spear Resurrection Signet Optional

most likely, in which the optional is disrupting throw or the one that makes you lose a condition. ;o Brandnew. 18:52, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

can't recall second optional. ^_^

it was OAmjAakbJTqTAZmh+iPYhiIbxbA before it got trashed -Auron 07:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Is it

Just be that sees a problem with the Guild Wars updates box? It says.. Failed to load RSS feed from! 17:46, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Have same problem. Probably deep in the bowels of wikia this issue is covered on some help page that you couldn't find unless you were a Wikia sysop, but for an average user, it would be like trying to find a polyp on and in your own large intestine using standard gastro intestinal surgeon's tools- and just as painful. Remoteluxury 20:42, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

panning over skill images, results in image being "locked" on page

When I try to pan over a skill image on any of the PVX build pages, the image of more detailed information will pop up, and then it does not disappear. I can move the cursor over another skill, and it will make the old detailed skill image disappear and replace it with a new detailed skill image. Once I am done looking at the fine details of the skills by panning over their specific images, inevitably one skill will remain visible and not disappear, causing important information regarding the build to be covered by the detail image. This is a source of frustration, and I would like the ability to pan over the image, and then when my cursor is no longer on top of the image, I would like the detail picture to GO AWAY completely; Making the ability to SEE the other information that is covered by the locked image. I use Safari web browser for wiki exclusively, but have the same problem when using IE. The detail pop up images will not go away once I pan over one of them, at least one of them remains and covers the text underneath it. I'm a VISTA 32bit user/ all microsoft/ intel PC high end gaming computer. I prefer Safari because it works with my Iphone, allowing me to work with PVX wiki remotely; and this problem does not relate to my Iphone but rather relates to issues when I use my PC to view a specific PVX build. As you can see I am not an editor, and I apologize for being overly verbose; Wanting to make sure I provide as much detail of the problem and provide my system information to help diagnose the issue and solve the problem if it is INDEED a problem. If it is inherent in the PVX wikia system that this is a normal function, I'd like to request that this be done away with, as it is annoying as hell. (To be fair, I believe a small percentage of people say I am annoying as hell too.) Thank you. Remoteluxury 20:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Hero and General builds - can separate pages be made, or at very least d/l for both uses?

This issue might in some people's eyes be more appropriate in a suggestion box rather than covering the problem here, but since a suggestion box link does not readily appear when I load a PVX build page, and the "report a problem" link button is non-functional, I thought this might be a good place to post my issue. I don't want to cause personal misunderstanding, so when I reference a particular author's highly thought out and excellent work, I don't want them to take my complaint personally. I recently downloaded what I thought was a hero build for my guild wars warrior hero. Turns out this code, when loaded on my hero removes 3 skills from the hero's toolbar. Double checking the author's page, I read at the top GENERAL and HERO use. When I download a hero build, I expect a hero build- not a general build. To be fair, the good authors will write in names of skills to use in place of general builds skills to be used when using on a hero. That's excellent, except there is no coding available for the hero build, which makes the fast download and save completely useless. Can PVX have separate pages for heros, and general builds? With correct coding available for download without the run-around of putting skills designed for General use amalgamated with Hero skills. I realize it's an extra page, and copy / paste works wonder's btw. So I don't see having a separate page being a problem for the authors to create. When I download hero builds, I want hero builds and information about HEROS not GENERAL build information. What are the preclusions to having separate pages for heros and general builds? I am hoping for an answer and Just want to know why it's set up this way, rather than having only one download and one set of skill pictures which oftentimes are not heros, but made for General use. At the very least, couldn't code be added to the page if a build is suited for both hero and general use, and I could easily download the hero build- or using the GW's game mechanics copy/paste the code into my hero's template box? Thank you for your patience with my rant, I don't mean to be troubling, and I can foresee others seeing this as a trite issue. But I spent the time to write this out, so it isn't trite to me- and I am hoping for some kind person to answer on why General Code and Hero Code Skill bars for download can't be included on pages where the two builds occupy a single page, where (usually) the hero build is covered as an explanation somewhere in the text below the General use skill bar, download link, and General variation and explanation text. Thank you Remoteluxury 22:02, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

No offense, but most will see this as tl;dr. I read it, and I think the builds are wrote like that for simplicity. Yes, I believe that having PvE only skills in the mainbar is bad if it has hero tagged in it. But no one really C/Ps builds anymore. Most run variants of what's been vetted as great. Load it onto your hero, customize it, then save it. I don't know what you mean for separate pages for heroes though. There is a hero section, though the build may be tagged PvE general. Unless you mean making a completely new page with the build as the hero can only run? That would be too complicated and time consuming. But you could possibly get the ball rolling on that if you'd like. Big sadface sigBiggles Strongfist™ Sysop 22:10, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Truthfully, i've always thought it made more sense to have the hero bar as the main, and jsut say "if you want to run it yourself, you can take PvE skills: X, Y and Z". As long as variants are suggested for the other (i.e. if the hero bar is main, variants for general, or general is main, and hero bar variants are listed) I don't see much of a problem :/ (it doesn't take that much effort to change a couple of skills, no offense meant here). ~ PheNaxKian Sysop 22:25, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I've been pushing for separate pages for a while, the pve squad have been obliging, the bars are often wildly different. Misery CowMisery Says Moo 22:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I thought the builds were always Hero + PvE-only under variants. With the obvious exceptions of builds such as the Discord team build, where the player's entire build is based around 3 PvE skills. I'd be willing to tidy up some of the PvE-tagged builds into a "Hero Bar + PvE skills under Variants" format. Goodnight la sig 2 00:01, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


There is a small minority of PvX users who roam around trolling and passing out poor ratings while do very little that is constructive. Some of these people have never designed a build for PvX yet claim they are qualified to trash an other user's work. What about the idea of making it so that a person with no submitted builds can not rate builds? Maybe this would be too easy to get around, but I'm just throwing it out there. --Bulldozer1 Captain Bulldozer Don't TELL me that you're right... prove it. 17:19, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Names or it didn't happen. ~ Big Big sadface sig sysop 17:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
there's a variety f problems with such a system. Like you've mentioned, it would be easy to get past (creating a build doesn't take much effort). Just because they've not made a build, doesn't mean they aren't qualified to vett builds. Perhaps the most important issue, is that if they've submitted a build and it's been deleted, as far as the database is concerned, the build never existed, and that user never made said contributions, so people could have their build deleted which would be an issue. These points aside, if you feel someone is abusing their vote, you can request they review the vote, and if needs be, post it on the Admin noticeboard where and admin or BM can look at it and decide if any action should be taken, such as removing the vote, and even banning if necessary. ~ PheNaxKian Sysop 17:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
theres alot: i dont like 1-1-0 and me like! 5-5-x going on here tbh Hydra 17:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
links please... ~ Big Big sadface sig sysop 17:52, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
U dont need links for that, you just need to look at 90% of trash and great builds. --- Monk-icon-Ressmonkey Ressmonkey (talk) 21:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
That's really productive. ~ Big Big sadface sig sysop 23:21, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
This is a test! 23:30, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
For an example, check out the build vs the ratings of this: Build: N/any Discordant Technobabbler. There's an issue with people using rating to express idea that the ratings are not intended to discuss. Ratings are, as far as I know, intended to evaluate universality and effectiveness, not other issues like whether a build that also works well in meta-teams deserves build space, or whether you like the name of the build. I don't want to single people out by naming names, I see this more as a general problem with the current rating system. As was mentioned above, a lot of raters use all 1s if they dislike something on the build and all 5s if they like the build. These are both forms of abuse, although the all 1s seems more serious, especially for builds that are clearly effective and universally usable. Just my 2 cents. --Bulldozer1 Captain Bulldozer Don't TELL me that you're right... prove it. 01:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
First off, that build IS pretty bad. People give 1-1 ratings or such because the build IS bad and deserves a trash rating thusly. You're essential arguement is saying that the rating system is "broken" because people use 1-1 most commonly on trash builds and 5-5 on amazing builds. That is just incredibly stupid. --☭Guild*talk* 01:22, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Guild of deals: Your opinion of the build not withstanding, (this is not the place to get into anyway... so please write about your opinions on its discussion page) you seem to be putting words into my mouth. I didn't say the rating system was broken. I'm saying that its being abused by certain people who wish the rate a build based on factors other than effectiveness and universality. My original intent was to suggest that perhaps we could have a better rating system that didn't tie up the admins' time going to check whether users rated a build badly for the wrong reasons, whether they be pure trolling or something the ratings are not designed to express (like not liking the name of a build lol). Perhaps the rating system should be expanded to include these other views/issue, or perhaps people need to be reminded/punished for not staying within the established guidelines. For example, considering a build to be "generic" says little to nothing about its universality or effectiveness, but does perhaps say something about its innovation, and as such does not warrant 1s in the other categories. I really just want a discussion about how the rating system might be improved, as the current functionality is not only inaccurate, but can also be a huge turn off to newer posters. Its a sure thing that each us will get at least one build mercilessly trashed, but I maintain it should be based off the build itself and its performance, not other concerns. --Bulldozer1 Captain Bulldozer Don't TELL me that you're right... prove it. 01:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Comming from a new user with little exp with this site that has an outside seems to me that it is "who you know not what you know".Xtreme Hunter 00:16, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

What about a general guide/rubric for how to rate? Something like:

  • 0 for effectiveness if the build simply doesn't function (deals little to no damage or has very poor supposrt if it's a support build)
  • 1 for effectiveness if the build functions barely (i.e the heals are substandard and costly, or the sources of damage are highly conditional and unlikely to be successful dealing very low damage overall)
  • 2 for effectiveness if its slightly better than a 1, etc... you get the idea. Having guidelines makes it easier for ratings to be objective, and also easier for admins to decide which ratings are poor/biased/factually incorrect. In theory it would also cut down on the number of all 1s and the number of all 5s. Currently many ratings are nothing more than basically a yes vote (all 5s) or a no vote (all 1s). As far as I can see, that's not how the ratings were intended to be used. Bulldozer1 Captain Bulldozer Don't TELL me that you're right... prove it. 16:24, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
This is gonna be a shitter wiki until rating system is just yes and no anyway, theres shit builds in great and 99% of good and other is shit. Rawrawr Dinosaur 16:34, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I agree with what you're saying about builds being rated into the wrong categories. I don't like the idea of a yes/no system because it clumps all the working builds together, not differentiating between those that work very well and those that just work. As an educator, I can say that no worthwhile teacher would either give As or Fs, and to prevent that from happening teachers generally use an objective list of criteria used to assign grades. I think a similar system is needed here, as clearly many users don't use any objectivity when rating, and even when they do one user's standards may be quite different from another user. Under those contexts, of course the ratings will be inherently flawed. Bulldozer1 Captain Bulldozer Don't TELL me that you're right... prove it. 16:57, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


Just a quick question regarding the Content bar (right under PvXConvert). It seems to me that most, if not all, of the links redirect to unexistent pages due to the lack of the Build: in the Build:X/Y_Build_Name link. Could anyone fix this? (or look it up ^^) Thanks, Goodnight la sig 2 20:39, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-NC-SA 2.5 unless otherwise noted.