Profession Link

<pvxbig> [build prof=monk/warrior][optional][optional][optional][optional][optional][optional][optional][optional][/build] </pvxbig> Clicking on the icons screws up. If you hover mouse over the first icon, it says ranger. Clicking either takes you no-where. ! ‽-(єяøηħ) no u 18:01, 9 July 2007 (CEST)

Thx. Fixed. gcardinal 20:56, 9 July 2007 (CEST)
Theres still an issue, the links work great and all, but the first emblem, no matter what proff it represents, always says ranger if you hover over it for about 1 second. ‽-(єяøηħ) no u 21:44, 9 July 2007 (CEST)
Heh it only shows wrong in IE :) But yeah thx for detailed bug report, fixed now. gcardinal 21:53, 9 July 2007 (CEST)

Wrong Page

Clicking on a skill with 2 words in it will bring you to a page on Gwiki where the seconds word isn't capitalized, and the page doesn't exist. - Skakid9090 06:52, 11 July 2007 (CEST)

Do you have an example? gcardinal 08:47, 11 July 2007 (CEST)

<pvxbig> [build ass/any dagg=12+3+1][black lotus strike][optional][optional][optional][optional][optional][optional][optional] [/build] </pvxbig> Click on the picture for BLS. That is what he's talking about. You can get the right thing if you click the words, but it still should be fixed. ~~ User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 16:59, 11 July 2007 (CEST)

Yes it is fixed if you capitalize and everything, and no one does that.... if you want to make it known that they have to capitalize go ahead, probably the simplest fix. ~~ User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 17:18, 11 July 2007 (CEST)

After a lot of testing its finally fixed. Thx for bug report. gcardinal 16:27, 12 July 2007 (CEST)

no problem, thanks for fixing it. ~~ User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 16:32, 12 July 2007 (CEST)

Rating Table Stretch

Well... this may be more of an opinion but. Check this page out. [1] See the removed rating at the bottom by Wakka. The length stretches up the innovation part of the table. Perhaps a small reorganization of the table is in order to accomodate for lengthy texts. --Flag of South Korea.png Grumpy (Talk | Contrib) 20:34, 16 July 2007 (CEST)


Recent Ratings

Real good job, but when a vote is removed it says it was rated as a 5, everytime. --User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 05:23, 20 July 2007 (CEST)

pve Images not appearing

<pvxbig>[Eternal Aura]</pvxbig> It semms if these skill pictures get uploaded, they dont appear in a pvx bar - Skakid9090 03:06, 20 July 2007 (CEST)

Thx! Will fix it gcardinal 03:10, 20 July 2007 (CEST)

Fixed gcardinal 20:36, 27 July 2007 (CEST)

Template codes not working

skill bars with sunspear or kurz/lux skills seem not to work correctly in GW. probably a problem with the bbcode, but just a heads-up. - — RAWR! Skakid9090 04:26, 27 July 2007 (CEST)

They do work but in a very strange way. You have to be a part of alliance you are trying to use the skills from. In other words if luxon icon/skill code was used in build you must be in a luxon alliance in order to load it. For more information you can check out: [2]. gcardinal 04:31, 27 July 2007 (CEST)

Recent Ratings

*"16:58 . . W/N Plagued Headbutt; Rating: 5 (great) . . E:0 U:0 I:0 . . Krowman (Talk | contribs)"

  • "16:03 . . R/P Pressure Spear; Rating: 4.7 (great) . . E:0 U:0 I:0 . . Skakid9090 (Talk | contribs)" Neither build is categorized as 'Great' and both votes were 3 zeroes, so what is that (great) tag in Recent Ratings for? - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 18:51, 27 July 2007 (CEST)
As you can see there is a bug, no need to ask what great are for you know perfectly why its there. I will work to fix the bug. gcardinal 20:36, 27 July 2007 (CEST)
Fixed. gcardinal 20:40, 27 July 2007 (CEST)

Expertise on Touch Spells

Expertise cost reduction on touch spells doesn't seem to show up properly.

<pvxbig> [build prof=r/any expertise=12+1+1][mending touch][vampiric touch][blackout][throw dirt][/build]</pvxbig> --Edru viransu//QQ about me 22:18, 28 July 2007 (CEST)

Works on the necro and mesmer skills. - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 07:12, 29 July 2007 (CEST)
I know that it displays the reduction on touch skills fine. Not on touch spells, though, which are affected by expertise just like other touch skills. --Edru viransu//QQ about me 07:18, 29 July 2007 (CEST)
Please make a bug report on [3] maybe they will fix it. gcardinal 09:39, 29 July 2007 (CEST)


Request for Demotion

This is a request, by me, for the immediate demotion of Readem. I know I'm just a user, but I'm sure I have some admin support on this. To summarize my reasons:

I will answer any questions that you might have about me being mistaken. I am ready for on onslaught from the admins, as they seem to take his side whenever I bring stuff up about him. It's time to find out what he does that over-rides the fact that he doesn't act in a respectable manner. Bluemilkman 21:06, 23 July 2007 (CEST)

Blue...what is wrong with you?

  • I don't like R-spike as it is generally less effective then almost all other organized HA builds.
  • People constantly say "Have you tested this build?" I have played this game more than most ever will. It gets frustatring after a while.
  • I have removed more bad vote, then any other admin. That makes me a horrible person, correct?
  • I fixed the damn main page, get your facts right.

Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 21:20, 23 July 2007 (CEST)

Trust me Blue, its a loosing battle. If theres one thing I learned its that admins here stick together no matter what the issue is. I have no idea what readem did now or if he even did anything for that matter. But from experience I can say any attempt to question a admin form a non-admin wont work.
Now, Back to lurking in the shadows.--Sefre 22:38, 23 July 2007 (CEST)
As you can see Sefre Shireen tryed to talk to Readem on his user page. Anyway here is the thing, with current voting system people have a problem understanding what to write in a comment box. To use an example (not personal Auron):
-
Auron
Insert comment here.
-
Thats a candidate for deletion as comment is not complete. And its posted by admin. I can understand that rating a SF build that all people do know work - you just run out of ideas of what to type in. But if 1 person think that SF sucks and have stated "why" he thinks it sucks - he can rate it zero as long as his comment backs up his vote. In case of vote casted by Auron it was on positive side and as build going for the right direction - there is nothing to say. However if build are under discussion - post your comment negative or positive - but explain precesly why you rated it as you rated. Based on the build and not on "my ranger dosnt have a bow" or other crap like that. When it comes to Readem and if users feel that there is a real "problem" we will wait for all admins to get back from vication and will discuss it with him.
For now I can say that a better guidelines is needed when it comes to removing a vote by admin. And users can write a purpose a policy. And if there any questions about any admins action please feel free to contact me or suggest a change.
I work hard to get more users and I am quite intended to keep them. No admins action sould lead to users leaving this wiki. gcardinal 00:15, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
I lean toward Bluemilkman's side in this one. I support sysops wholeheartedly until I see a reason not to do so... in this case, his actions on the reaper's mark build (rv warring with skuld, protecting the page to save his edits) really shook my faith. I'll put him on notice. -Auron 00:24, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
Now I do not mean to be a smart ass or interfere but I think I can safely say my early accusations of poor admin behavior from readem were rather accurate. After actually looking through many of readems actions on votes I do however agree with above comments. I saw quite a few palces where his only comment on deleting a vote was something stupid like " >.< " I'm guessing he didn't agree with the vote so he just removed it.
I wont interfere more tho. In a couple hours I will be leaving for 2 weeks. Later.--Sefre 01:03, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
k, have a good time Sefre :) gcardinal 01:07, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
I have discussed things with Shireen on multiple occasions. I have saved a good portion of our conversations. When I get my Labtop back (Currently visiting my father's house), I will show you that all of our opinions differ Significantly. We disagree about life, about people, about everything. Since he was unable to change my opinion about reforms, he designated me as an idiotic bastard who hates the world. Sadly, we even got along initially :/. On to Sefre's comment: the ">.<" refers to the user who believed SoJ Monk sins are better then Shadow Prison sins. Please, the few people who go on a "Smear Readem Campaign", please get your facts right and in context before; not after. Finally, imo the only thing I did truly wrong, was protect a page that was in a RV1 war. I was talking to Skuld on MSN, and he changed the build I wrote. I asked him why, and he said that he made it more suitable for TA. I argued that the original GvG build (What it was designed for) was vetted before his changes. I then RV'ed his edit. He then broke RV1, by RV my RV. We discussed it on MSN, and I then decided that since no agreement was made, it should be RV'ed back to its original form (My mistake) and protected. Auron then later explained to me that breaking RV1 was unacceptable in all circumstances. It was my mistake, and I will not do it in the future. Everyone makes the occasional mistake, no? Another point I would like to bring up, is that many of you regard me as an "Elitist". Though this may be true, you should never use this to insult me (Which many continue to do) or anyone else in that matter. I generally try to offer good advice (Skill synergy, things from my personal expierience, ect). If I see a failed concept, I have no problem telling the author. Many of you believe that I am far to harsh by doing such, and that it is my fault for losing users. However, does anyone take into consideration how many users we lose, due to them recieveing an unfavored build? I would rather users blame me, then have them blame the site and everyone involved with it. They don't fall as hard persay, if in the very beginning I am straight forward with them (Further discussed on my very long talk page). Sure Shireen can build people up by placing the "Cleanup tags" on poorly formatted builds, but what happens when the users spend a great deal of time working on their builds, to then have them be unfavored in the near future? Finally, onto the topic of vote removal. If you would care to look through the votes I have removed, you will see 2 things in common (One more obvious than the other). 1:A very low vote (perhaps an outliar to the other very high votes, and offers limited explanation or is Biased) Or 2: The vote simply does not make sense :/. It contradicts itself! Even if the person rated fairly, it is in my opinion that if the comment makes little sense, it should be removed! People complain to me, time and time again that I removed their obviously biased votes. People then start to blame me, for doing such. Also, blue mentioned my removal comments. What am I supposed to say when a user votes 4/3/3 on a BA ranger, and his/her comment is "Good build overall, countered by Deflect arrows and Aegis though..."! Really now? Finally, when someone questions my viability, they have drawn the line. I am one of the most active administrators on this site; one of the most active users (only one I can think of that is even comparible, is perhaps Skakid; but then again he's just wierd :P)...no one can deny that. I have spent countless hours in the attempt to improve this site. If you want to believe the few people who wholeheartedly dislike me (Sefre, Blue (Apparently speaking he has been gathering evidence against me), Riven (He's just kind of a jerk to everyone), Solus (Just doesn't like me, can look at my GW Talk archives to see that), and Shireen (who just recently took up a grudge against me for whatever reason). Almost all of these people, dislike me for disagreeing with them at one point in time...so feel free to believe that I am a horrible person who hates the world. Go ahead, I don't mind. BUT DO NOT question my loyalites and contributions to this wiki. If I have left any bases uncovered, discuss them on my talk page. If you believe I have done something terribly wrong, feel free, everyone makes mistakes. I attempt to make things better, and if you are unable to see that for whatever reason, there is nothing I can do to help you.
Sincerely, Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 03:18, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
weird? u phail - Skakid9090 03:46, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
Now i know making this comment will make everyone say "zomg your just his friend thats why you support him" but i could care less. we need a person like readem, to clear out all the bs mending/hh, sword necros, firestorm rangers, ect. he's taken up the resposibility to be blunt and not be a pushover. i dont want bad builds in our tested section, and if we're too soft-hearted to flatout say "this is not a good build" then this site will fail. plz stop your anti-readem crusade, thx - Skakid9090 03:52, 24 July 2007 (CEST)

(Reset indent because I'm doing a bunch of paragraphs and I'm lazy) Hmm. Sefre of all people should know how I felt about his initial accusations towards Readem (that they weren't always accurate and/or put out the right way), but I decided to look over the information here. I suppose I'd better go back to my tried-and-possibly-true method of responding point by point...

  • He made a user leave the wiki by removing his votes unjustly here. (By the way, is there any way we can undo that?)
  • He rudely attempted to enforce his views on the rest of those on the forked arrow spike talk page, bordering on PvX:NPA.
  • On the Contagious Aura Bomber, I'm not seeing much against him except that he lacks the ability to use constructive criticism.
  • He removed a large number of "bad" votes. Looking around at some of these removals, I'm going to deem - based on my sample - that a large number of them were unjust.
  • He messed with the builds table and ended up fixing the main page. Mistaken information on the part of Blue.
  • He engaged in a revert war, as Auron said, and protected the page to protect his edits.

Points one and five are unacceptable. I cannot emphasize this enough. If I had seen points two and three when I was first asked what I thought of him as an admin right after he became one, I would have said he shouldn't be one.

Overall, I have to agree with Shireen's opinion here. Were I still a bureaucrat, I would debate taking what I call administrative action and demoting him immediately, given Auron and Shireen's apparent support. As it is, I can only encourage Auron to demote him immediately.

However, I have to say that I feel this isn't quite just. Had a normal user done as Readem did in points two and three, he would likely have been officially warned of NPA, possibly banned as new evidence came into light. Also, any normal user that did as Readem did in points one and five would almost certainly be facing a week long ban (bear with me and ignore the fact that those are admin-only privileges). However, we're talking about merely demoting Readem. This does not seem just to me. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image.png{{sysop}} 04:10, 24 July 2007 (CEST)

Edit conflict means additional thoughts. I've read over the added comments (Readem's and Skakid's), and the first thing I want to say is Readem, archive your freaking talk page.

Also:

  • "Smear Readem campaign"? Don't go anywhere near the pity route. You're about fifty feet off of it, it's a short walk away but you're (clearly!) not there yet, back off.
  • The 1RV war is much more of a problem than you make it out to be. Just because you say you were wrong, and you won't do it again, doesn't make it not a problem in the past. Take it from someone who has said those exact same words a HUGE number of times, and has learned that's the proper response to them.
  • Yes, we lose users to unfavored builds. That doesn't make it acceptable for you to shoo them away because of their votes. It's your responsibility, and as a sysop, you need to be accountable for that. (Watch me be a hypocrite, at least according to some! But it's true nonetheless.)
  • Putting a cleanup tag on a build is also an attempt to make the build better. Putting a cleanup tag on a bad build introduces the possibility that the build will be made better and not voted unfavored after all the work put into it.
  • A vote that is contradictory to itself is not necessarily a bad one. Yes, Aegis stops BA rangers and the like, but the counters usually aren't bad enough to make the build worthless, hence the 4/3/3. Blind counters pretty much all warriors, but that doesn't mean I can run around putting 0/x/x on all warrior builds because I can blind them; the counter is not as effective and/or common as the build is effective.
  • Similarly, admins don't have the right to remove a vote without a proper explanation, just as voters don't have the right to vote without an explanation.
  • To be quite frank, you're only the most active contributor because I lost my modem for almost a month. I was, by far, the most active contributor as of the bone dragon contest, and I maintained that activeness long after. (I count myself as surpassing Cardinal because he had something like 30,000 bot edits at the time, as he said to me.)
  • People who dislike you and don't question your loyalties/contributions/etc: Getting close to that pity route again.
  • Discuss on your talk page: We will discuss it here, if you please, because this is where the topic was brought up.

Skakid: Once I am sure that I have my modem back and can contribute actively, I will gladly take Readem's place in the job you described. It's what I did back before I lost the modem, after all.

-- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image.png{{sysop}} 04:10, 24 July 2007 (CEST)

Armond, you never have contributed much, you never will. Please define the term "Smear Capaign" Armond, or look it up in the dictionary, you would be surprised :O. If you think I am a bad administrator, for removing votes such as the one you mentioned, go ahead. Ofc, at that stage, I have lost all faith in you. HB meta cannot kill, good one ;). On to me "shooing" users away; when have I done this? I don't remember ever pulling out a broom and wacking the kids on the sidewalk...maybe it's my dementia. Oh well, I guess I am the #1 reason users leave then right? Not the whole "Unfavored builds make unhappy users thing" at all. Also, please be less biased, whehn making comments that others find offensive. "He removed a large number of "bad" votes. Looking around at some of these removals, I'm going to deem - based on my sample - that a large number of them were unjust." (Oops, that slipped!)
Votes that contradict themselves are good, huh? Riiiighhht. you know what the word "Contradict" means right? Would hope so. Now onto my favorite thing you said,"Pity route" lololololololololol. Of all admins, you honestly have the nerve to say that to me, Armond? I, unlike youself, have no pity; for anyone. I have a small few I respect; you are not included. I could care less about respect, Armond, That is quite obvious, as I find no need to include "sysop" in my sig, like many of you do. I make no mention of being a sysop on my User Page even. So please, I pity you more than I pity myself. Finally, stop lying to yourselves that this is a Democracy. If I hadn't checked in, at the exact time, you and a few others would have bad-mouthed me, behind my back. With no chance to defend myself. Yeah Armond, very respectable. If you have something to say about me, don't be a coward and say it to me. When you can do that, know a respectable amount about Guild Wars, tell me how to travel through time to stop the RV1 War, and tell me what what your "Oh so valuable" contributions are, let me know.
Sincerely, Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 05:21, 24 July 2007 (CEST)

The problem is Readem, you just keep digging the hole. You don't try to fix something you did wrong, you just act like it doesn't matter. When someone finally calls you up on something, you start to attack them, or someone else involved. But in your own words, "I have a small few I respect." I don't even need to say anymore. You are saying it all for me. Bluemilkman 05:40, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
I just saw that he was blocked. Now is not the time to do that. Let him defend himself, he should have that right. Bluemilkman 05:51, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
It does you little good to attack your fellow admins.
Pity route: Getting others to pity you and thus garner support for your cause.
Shooing people away: A link to your talk page was provided for where this occurred, and furthermore, I provided a link to where the vote was removed for reference.
"Something slipped" and the "contradictory votes": I have no idea what your points are here. Explain yourself clearly if you wish to garner support at all.
Respect: At this point, I don't care how much you respect me. I'll be flat out honest with you. As for the sysop tags, if I may quote Cardinal from so long ago (I have no idea where from, and so I might be slightly off): "One of the biggest things [he] had with gwiki was that it was so hard to find an admin. I see that one admin already has {{sysop}} in his signature, maybe more of us should do that too." It is there for notification purposes. I am not a braggart, and neither are any of the other administrators, as you seem to imply.
Democracy: You are right, of course. This was realized long ago.
Talking behind your back: I don't know where you got that from. Don't make unfounded assumptions of me.
"Coward": Do. Not. Call. Me. Coward.
"Know a respectable amount about Guild Wars, tell me how to travel through time to stop the RV1 War, and tell me what your "Oh so valuable contributions are":
  1. I don't need to prove to you how much I know about guild wars. I know enough to do my job as a sysop here and make votes on builds I'm experienced with. I'll freely admit that I may not have as much experience as you, but I am willing to learn from others' experience.
  2. You didn't have to travel through time to stop the RV1 war, you just had to not participate in it in the first place. You did, however, and that's a mark against you.
  3. My contributions are just as valuable as yours. Look them up if you want to know what they are.
Your entire post carries the tone of an attack, or at least general asshattery, which Auron banned you for. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image.png{{sysop}} 05:53, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
Edit conflict 1: I have to agree with Blue's comments, as well. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image.png{{sysop}} 05:53, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
Edit conflict 2: I'm neutral on unblocking him, I'm too close to it. Bring it up with Auron, DE, or Cardinal. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image.png{{sysop}} 05:53, 24 July 2007 (CEST)

The builds table he did fix, but after protecting it against another admin's decision, as well as the consensus of other users. That was what the Builds Table Template was all about. Bluemilkman 05:54, 24 July 2007 (CEST)

That does not shine well on him. (Two double edit conflicts in a row...) -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image.png{{sysop}} 05:59, 24 July 2007 (CEST)

stop your petty bickering, and do something resourceful PvXwiki talk:Community Portal. your clogging up gc's talk page with crap. - Skakid9090 05:55, 24 July 2007 (CEST)

I would argue that it is, in fact, reasonable debate, but that's me. I would also consider the potential demotion of a sysop at least as important as clearing out CfD and/or the builds that fall under DELETE. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image.png{{sysop}} 05:59, 24 July 2007 (CEST)

Skakid, you are already well-known as one of Readem's supporters. Please do not try and distract us from the issue. This isn't petty bickering, this is a serious issue. Unless you have something constructive to add, please refrain from adding it. Thanks. Bluemilkman 05:59, 24 July 2007 (CEST)

Okey no more fighting here. Readem is unblocked. Auron have no right to block another admin.
This discussion is over. Feature of Readem will be discussed as soon as at least half of admins are back from vication. Until that time Readem will retain his admin status, but will not remove any ratings or rate any build. He can monitor and report any votes to other admins. He will retain his full admin status when it comes to all other issues.
And to all admins: admin status is a given right, by me and by community that trust in you. Please show us that it was no mistake.
gcardinal 06:00, 24 July 2007 (CEST)


Notice Acknowledged. Shireensysop 06:02, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
One more thing, my talk page IS THE PLACE for this kind of discussion. Please feel free to post here anything. And if you do have something to say "about this kind of issues" better post here then on some hidden page. gcardinal 06:10, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
Well that's what archives are for :P. Anyway, there's an old saying that goes Better to do and ask for forgiveness than to ask to do. Aside from that, it is within my realm of knowledge that Readem practically lives on Guildwars. The fellow has played roughly a gajillion hours over the past 54 years and while he comes off as an ass at times, there's no doubting that
  • his intentions are for the best of the users of the wiki
  • he's extremely knowledgeable in many fields of PvP, moreso than most regular users
Just a little something to toss around. —ǥȓɩηɔɧ/〛 06:14, 24 July 2007 (CEST)

So, you want the admins' input here, or on a separate page or...? - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 06:16, 24 July 2007 (CEST)

Admins post here as well but keeping in mind that actual discussion will not take place here and no action will be taken until official admin discussion of this issue. gcardinal 06:27, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
And for my comment about Readem's right to rate and remove ratings, it just to put this discussion on hold. I am 100% neutral to all sides of this discussion. However I think admins could handle this situation more carefully and without getting personal. gcardinal 06:44, 24 July 2007 (CEST)
Just decided to add in my opinion:D. I am neutral on this matter for a few reasons:
  • Nearly all of the votes readem removed weren't tested, didn't make sense, or were just completely noobish.
  • However, this is a WIKI, and although you don't like it, everyone's opinion counts. Now I would still agree to take off the noobish ratings, but...we ahve one guy removing bad votes. What if he thinks different tahn all of us? Then only the rating he wants get through and we have a dictatorship. Poof. GG PvX, the chances of you living are gone (if taht were to happen, however, I do trsut readem and am counting on him not to abuse his powers).
  • My only complaint is that I'm seeing a new Skuld in the making. Please tone down the harshness, try to be gentle. If they keep doing the childish thing and saying "noooo! I won't believe you! You're wrong! Mending forever!!!!!!!" then you should be more " blunt". (You kinda forgot the gentle part to start:O Even if you were right most of the time).

Okay I'm done rambling...but please take what I said to heart. Don't be as harsh...and you've got my support.—Cheese Slaya's Sig.jpg Cheese Slaya (Talk) 06:32, 25 July 2007 (CEST)

i don't know how appropriate it is for me to comment, but to offer a user's perspective ... Readem does know the game, and he does try to help make builds better--unless it's a concept that he's against (and, yes, i'm talking about the scythe sin thing and his "fail" template). but in my experience he does come off as highly abrasive, and often downright antagonistic, and frankly it is alienating and off-putting. yeah, we need someone who can say, "this echo/mending build is a bad idea and should be deleted," but he often does so in such a way as to appear confrontational and therefore invite drama. it's possible to be blunt without coming across as quite so dismissive/aggressive.--Reason.decrystallized 16:21, 25 July 2007 (CEST)

Heh, yeah he's a lightning rod for controversy. - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 19:55, 25 July 2007 (CEST)

"Auron have no right to block another admin."

I just noticed that line, actually, and I'd like to disagree. I have every right to block any user on this wiki; for pretty much any reason. As Armond has pointed out, any "regular" user would have had substantially more than a 3 day ban placed for that amount of rudeness and jack-assery that Readem showed; Readem, as a sysop, has no right to act that way. Thus, I blocked him for violating policy. Sysops are not magically immune to policy restrictions. Like I said before (on MSN), your reason for unblocking him is utter crap - you don't unban someone just to talk to them. That's what MSN is for. The ban was placed because he violated policy, and the message you just sent to the entire wiki was that it's okay to break policy, because we aren't going to punish for it. That is a very very bad precedent to set, and is utterly pointless as well. If, on GuildWiki or GuildWarsWiki, someone was trying to make a point and started breaking NPA, they'd be blocked. Hands down. That is why blocking exists. Nobody would unblock him simply because they wanted to hear his argument. He broke the rules, he does the time.
On the other hand, though - if I'm not allowed to block sysops for policy violations, would you prefer I desysop them immediately next time? -Auron 07:50, 25 July 2007 (CEST)

I'd like to reinforce what Auron said above. On GuildWiki, GuildWarsWiki or even Wikipedia, policy is policy and no one is above it, not even administrators (or should I say, especially not administrators). On all these wikis admins have gotten banned for violating policy, and it's the only way to make it absolutely clear to anyone that they really do matter. Admins are supposed to be those leading by good example, not users who have been given carte blanche to walk all over wiki policies. --Dirigible 08:27, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
Which policy are we referring to here? NPA? 1RV? Another? - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 08:42, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
Any and all that were violated, which yes, includes NPA and 1RV. -Auron 10:18, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
First of all discussion with Readem was not over, I did not had a chance to ask him a single question or have gotten answer on any. Blocking was done why discussion was still going on and was done as I see "to fast". I unblocked him so we could finish this discussion and so I could get answers I need as well as all other admins that was not around at the time of the discussion's.
I would like to point to my post where I say that Readem can not rate or remove any rating and that his faith will be decided on as soon as we have all admins back. He was appointed by all of admins and its just not right that 1 or 2 will decide where to block him or not.
He got his rights restricted and got a clear warning both from admins and users. If he does anything that breaks any policy now there will be no delay in actions.
His story has been going in in the "shadow" for quite some time, now its come out from the shadow and me as well as other admins needs to digg into what happen. It is not okey by any term to break any policy on this wiki. Readem is on hold until all admins are back. Nothing more nothing less. gcardinal 13:35, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
And yes we have discussed same question with you on msn, just on MSN you was agreed with me and had no problem with my action of unblocking him, 1 day later looks like you changed your mind.
People was asking Readem questions and discussion on what he did or did not was still going on, give a man a chance to answer for his actions! That the vary basic of any democratic right you can give a person - give him a chance to talk for him self. Use your admin powers to block him and make him "stfu" while he had no chance to answer is not a way to go for admin or for anyone. gcardinal 13:46, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
And specially for you Auron, when you first bring it up, lets discuss your actions where you see some one breaking the NPA:
E/Me Savannah Heat
* Fuck you — Skuld 11:01, 13 July 2007 (CEST)
 :* You say that quite frequently Skuld...hopefully you know I have a Penis :) Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 18:49, 13 July 2007 (CEST)
 ::* He's probably counting on it tbh -Auron 15:36, 17 July 2007 (CEST)
So lets sum it up. You see that someone breaks NPA and what you do? You take part of that discussion without giving any warning? And you tell him that you hope he has a penis and ... ? :) way to go Auron. gcardinal 14:01, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
To be frank... what the fuck are you talking about? I have not changed my stance from a day ago, or else I would have re-blocked Readem.
You said "Auron have no right to block another admin," which is a load of bullshit. I have every right to block admins.
Readem broke policy. Readem is subject to policy just like everyone else, and just like everyone else, he got blocked for violating it. Admins don't sit there and chat with you before a block to discern whether or not your actions are warranted, they make you take a 3-day break to think about what you're doing before continuing the discussion. I saw that the discussion with Readem was going nowhere, as evidenced by his continued hostility, so I blocked him. Unblocking him was stupid for two reasons - one, because it didn't allow him a break from the wiki, and two, because it sent a message out to everyone that breaking policy is okay, because you're just going to unblock any violators to have a chat with them. Like I said before, the discussion isn't going anywhere - he can come back and answer your questions in three days, or you can message him on MSN and ask the same questions without setting such a poor precedent. Any questions? -Auron 18:37, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
First of all words like "what the fuck" in my address are violation of NPA. I think we will start with a 3 day block? Will you be a good admin and do it your self?
Its not your call to decide where discussion is going no where. Discussion wasnt even a 6 hours long. One bad comment and he got blocked. Give him a chance to answer for his actions. If he did something wrong and break a policy and can't be admin anymore I will be the first to ensure he will never so much as see this page.
That is not your call to block someone in the midle of the discussion and not your call to decide where discussion is over or not and specially when it goes on my talk page.
People posted a request for de-oping him and we was discussing it and Readem is a vital part of that discussion. He will be unlocked until all admins are gathered together and will decide what we going to do with him as admin. gcardinal 19:45, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
Really, if I were you, I'd get over the unblocking. Us admins can just unblock ourselves, so there wasn't much of point to it anyways. If you're going to be really dogmatic in your adherence to site policy, you should ensure that site policy is applied as evenly to Skuld as Readem. I realize you two are buds, but if you're going to make this situation into something it's not, you have just as much reason to block Skuld as Readem. Heck, they were involved in NPA breaches and revert wars with each other. Readem posted on his talk page that you two have worked out some kind of 'solution' to his 'harshness;' in your place, I'd get over this and let him enact it. - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 20:08, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
And that is the only thing I want Krowman. I just hope Auron can see it. gcardinal 20:22, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
Point out exactly how me asking "what the fuck" you're talking about violates NPA?
When it comes to blocking, you frankly have no idea what you're talking about. "Its not your call to decide where discussion is going no where." Correct, but it is my decision to decide if he deserves a block for his actions. I don't care if you're in the middle of talking to him - you can wait just like everyone else until his ban expires. That's how policy breaking on wikis works. "One bad comment and he got blocked." I'm sorry, but you are incredibly misinformed - weeks of complaints via email and on his talk page, followed by his response of "i don't care sry" isn't anywhere near "one bad comment."
To Krowman; Why haven't you told him to stop? Is it any less your duty than mine? -Auron 20:31, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
Just as an after thought, we should really discuss different types of blocks. The way I see it, we should use admin blocks as a way to warn an admin to cool off before they do something stupid. (this doesn't mean i support or oppose readem's block). ‽-(єяøηħ) no u 20:34, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
I place an incredible amount of trust in the admins here. If one of them circumvented his block by unblocking himself, my faith in him would be shattered and I would be forced to desysop him without discussion. Just because you *can* unblock yourself doesn't mean you should. -Auron 20:35, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
See here, Auron. I realize it's an admin responsibility, and I am living up to it. - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 20:38, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
Is it just me, or is that a very bad example? They've been known to exchange insults with each other, although I doubt either of them takes it as a personal attack. — Rapta Rapta Icon1.gif (talk|contribs) 20:45, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
It's hard to circumvent policy by claiming "That's just the way I am." Tbh though, I don't remember which user I was warning Skuld about, but I doubt it was Auron or Readem; they can stand up for themselves. - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 20:49, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
I was referring to penis conversation above (hence the new indent). =P — Rapta Rapta Icon1.gif (talk|contribs) 20:50, 25 July 2007 (CEST)
Plx stay on the general topic that I am a dick. One person at a time ty. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 00:54, 26 July 2007 (CEST)
Can you get on MSN Readem? gcardinal 00:58, 26 July 2007 (CEST)
will try< but this comp sucks to a degree i would not like to discuss>>>can"t even use caps or periods> the screen lags when i scroll>>>and everytime i try to edit it highlights everything and i cant un_highlight it >< also everything opens into a new tab>>> cant even respond to that guy>>> Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 01:49, 26 July 2007 (CEST)

Feel free to "attack" me as much as you like lol, and if me and readem can't have playground battles, then its a sorry state of afairs indeed :p — Skuld 22:35, 28 July 2007 (CEST)

/attack — RAWR! Skasig.jpg Skakid9090 22:42, 28 July 2007 (CEST)

Mallyx

Just a quastion... How do you kill Mallyx after that stupid update? I finaly got my monk rdy for that monkey and now no one knows how to kill it? gcardinal 00:43, 26 July 2007 (CEST)

ask skakid> Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 01:56, 26 July 2007 (CEST)
Wave your magic wand.—Cheese Slaya's Sig.jpg Cheese Slaya (Talk) 02:06, 26 July 2007 (CEST)
since they nerfed the gate trick, you can't glitch him to get stuck inside a wall anymore. nobody has beaten him yet, he's just too hard. there's been petitions for ANET to lower his difficulty, since he's pretty much impossible to kill atm - Skakid9090 05:11, 26 July 2007 (CEST)
ehhh... thx. Please let me know if you hear of a solution, thx! gcardinal 05:26, 26 July 2007 (CEST)

Suckage

On these builds, you removed votes because of 'inappropriate word usage.' I strongly feel that none of us admins should be using that a reason to disqualify someone's vote, especially since we haven't made mention of such a criteria at Real Vetting, and it isn't an GW:NPA violation as it pertains to the build and not a user. I know it's too late to restore those votes and that they wouldn't make-or-break the build's rating, but in the future, I think it would be best to give the users a heads-up and a chance to edit their votes before we remove them. Also, I know your English isn't perfect, but the word 'censure' is a very emotionally-charged word for many people. On that note, I have a question that relates to the script for RV. Once we remove a user's rating, can they place another one on that same build? Would their new rating overrule the old one, or would they not be able to cast another vote at all? If we need to test, you can remove my vote here and we can give it a shot. Thanks in advance. - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 20:16, 26 July 2007 (CEST)

Users can edit a removed vote. This replaces the old vote and undoes the removal. Undoing a removal by someone else (like the admin who did it) is not possible atm.
About the 'word censure': I agree. We would need a policy to back this, and I'm not sure we want that. Users can be asked to avoid 'bad' language, but disabling the vote should be reserved to unjustified votes. We can still think about a policy in case asking doesn't help. – HHHIPPOsysop› 20:35, 26 July 2007 (CEST)
I removed ratings that has absolutely or reduced meaning and was of non or very limited interest to general public. Please keep in mind that builds are posted by people and reading comments "omfg this build sucks, this is complete suckage" is not nice and by many people can be found offensive. I would also refer to the rating of the game it self. By some ratings its rated as low as 12+ and assuming that a 12 year old can post a build here reading comments that are full of "fuck/suck/shit+++" are not nice. However I do agreed that currently we don't exact policy to back this up, but in anyway votes that were removed had no value anyway. Bad language or trash vote - result would be the same. gcardinal 20:47, 26 July 2007 (CEST)
If you're going to claim that "fuck" and "suck" are all in the same category of derogatory and/or improper language, and that saying "suck" is the same as saying "fuck," then you're going to have a LOT of deleting to do on this site. Unless you're prepared to write a very, very specific policy on what individual words constitute bad language, then you shouldn't be deleting content based on your subjective views. Censoring language is opening Pandora's box, and unless there's a policy in place to dictate what stays and what goes, then content (unless extraordinarily offensive) shouldn't be deleted. Furthermore, we shouldn't be removing content based on a policy that might exist sometime in the future. You can't hold people accountable for breaking rules that don't exist yet, and you shouldn't delete content that violates a nonexistent policy simply on the basis that you might get around to making one someday. --Ninjatek 21:22, 26 July 2007 (CEST)

I suggest to extend the description of comments in PvXwiki:Real Vetting as follows:

In addition, a reason for the vote must be given in the 'Comments' box. Please note that the whole rating page, including these comments, is part of the description of the build. Therefore the comments should be concise and factual. Low-level language that might be tolerated on talk pages is not appropriate on the rating page.

This should encourage both voters and admins to use reasonable language on rating pages. A specific definition of what will be deleted is not given, so as Ninjatek says, striking should only occur in exceptional cases. Anyway, striking a vote does not make the comment invisible, so 12+ readers can still see it. – HHHIPPOsysop› 21:55, 26 July 2007 (CEST)

I strongly disagree. There are some skills that just flat out blow in this game, and need serious rebalancing. To cut a long speech short, there's stuff that just simply sucks, and shouldn't always be copied repeatedly onto other votes. And after all, this is a vote, which means that admins should not be using the "remove vote" function so liberally. Only votes that are used in sockpuppetry or mockery should be removed, not votes saying that so-and-so is not good/sucks. — Rapta Rapta Icon1.gif (talk|contribs) 22:11, 26 July 2007 (CEST)
I agree that reverting votes should be the last resort, that's what the policy says and will keep saying. The two reverts in question here were indeed not backed by policy, as Gcardinal already said. However, undoing a revert is not possible atm so all we can do in these cases is wait for the voters to revote.
I also agree that a bad build or skill should be clearly criticized. However, a reason must be given. If the same problem has been criticized before and you don't want to repeat the whole story it each time, link to a build where it's spelled out. We can't expect each user to know these precedences (if they knew them they wouldn't have made the build like that to start with).
But finally, I still claim that build reviews should be written in a descriptive way. Many people write clear and informative comments (see e.g. the two rating pages in question), and this is what the comments are meant for. On the other hand, some write low-level language comments that are far from being helpful, sometimes even hard to read at all. That should be disencouraged. I'm not talking about enforcing this by reverts yet, that would indeed open a barrel. But a statement on how the comment box should be used is needed imo. – HHHIPPOsysop› 22:42, 26 July 2007 (CEST)
I disagree with Rapta on the topic of vote removal. Common sense should dictate. If a vote makes no sense, then it should be removed. For example the comment I removed from the SP Assassin. SoJ sins are not better. They will never be better. That is fact, not just my own opinion. If a vote is not properly justified then it should be removed without question. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 23:42, 26 July 2007 (CEST)
Guild Wars and common sense do not go hand in hand. What makes sense to you can be entirely different from the voter's viewpoint of "making sense". And again, this is a vote. Such removal of comments is completely unacceptable in a vote, unless the comment is horrid. Many of the votes you remove can make sense to others, commonly found examples being here, here, and here, found in the first three pages I clicked on. These are all valid opinions (regardless of whether you agree or not) and should not have been removed. I am not saying that I agree with those votes, merely that they should not be removed as they present a valid opinion of the voter (in this case, being SoR can't dealing with some spikes, natural squishiness and lack of self heal in the ele, Dancing Daggers spam being weakened by armor & lack of damage), all which being true, but having them removed recklessly. It's not as bad as "SF sucks" (which would be a valid removal) but removals like the ones I quoted have to stop occuring. — Rapta Rapta Icon1.gif (talk|contribs) 07:31, 27 July 2007 (CEST)

I agree with you totally. I just think "with proper justification given" should be added to that. You might know the reason, but make sure that they understand. Bluemilkman 02:17, 27 July 2007 (CEST)

lol, defending the removal of unjustified votes, when I don't justify my removal :P. Strange twist of fate, no? Lazy ftw! Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 02:20, 27 July 2007 (CEST)

Actually, all you would have to say is, "Proper justification was not given." Not very hard to do, eh? Bluemilkman 02:25, 27 July 2007 (CEST)

But that is 5 words..."No" is just one :P. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 02:29, 27 July 2007 (CEST)

That's not possible! It cant be! ‽-(єяøηħ) no u 02:29, 27 July 2007 (CEST)
Lets see what I actually did.
Generally votes without meaning:
Removed:
my comment is not to short, your comment is to short.
Reason: Please enter a comment in your rating.
Removed by: Gcardinal
Removed:
uhh... yeah.
Reason: Please enter a comment.
Removed by: Gcardinal
Removed:
lol lol lol lol
Reason: Please enter a comment in your rating.
Removed by: Gcardinal
Removed:
gd build! but very slow cash flow
Reason: Cash flow are not the part of the build and should not be rated as part of the build.
Removed by: Gcardinal
Removed:
my comment is not to short, your comment is to short.
Reason: Please enter a comment in your rating.
Removed by: Gcardinal
Votes with words like "suck"
Removed:
Life Transfer is teh suck. Bring Spoil Victor.
Reason: Word censure. Please don't use such words in rating comments. Thank you.
Removed by: Gcardinal
Removed:
Ultimate suckage in my opinion, no res, poorly written and done over a dozen times before.
Reason: Word censure. Please don't use such words in rating comments. Thank you.
Removed by: Gcardinal
5 first votes was removed as they count as spam and has no meaning or it's not build related. And yes currently in our policy we dont have clear guideline for what must be in the comment. However we have this line In addition, a reason for the vote must be given in the 'Comments' box.. lol lol lol does not count as a readon for vote. It does not explain why someone rated build as he did. Rating of a build based on the cash flow - well it says it all by it self.
Lets now move on to the 2 ratings with words "suck" in comment. Taking into consideration that game is rated 12+, kids does play and since ratings are big part of the build itself I removed those ratings. My removal of those votes was not based on the specific policy, but on simple common sense. However I do see now that it was maybe a bit “to fast” to remove those 2 votes. And I am sorry for acting to fast.
I will try to work out the proposal on a new policy. However I would like to note that even policy does not exist now it doesn’t mean that everything is allowed. gcardinal 02:47, 27 July 2007 (CEST)
The game is rated T for Teen, which at least in America, is 13 and older - and every 13 year old in america uses those words on a daily basis. Removing those votes is pointless. -Auron 03:41, 27 July 2007 (CEST)
He's right. And if you think "suck" should be taken out...well, seems kinda overkill. You can censor the language with things like "fuck" but not "suck".—Cheese Slaya's Sig.jpg Cheese Slaya (Talk) 06:52, 27 July 2007 (CEST)
We shouldn't censor language period. We're a builds site, not the government. -Auron 06:58, 27 July 2007 (CEST)
No one talking about removing or censuring anything. In my opinion words like suck can be avoided in rating comments. That is my point of view. I removed 2 votes, that was a mistake and I apologized, however nothing forbids me from having my personal opinion and from making a policy proposal based on that opinion (and I am not saying that I will do exactly that, just that I can).
And for Auron: game rated by PEGI: 12+.
And in general to close this subject, I would like to refer to Wikipedia, even we are not Wikipedia, I am sure we have a few thing we can learn from them:
Respect other contributors. Wikipedia contributors come from many different countries and cultures, and have widely different views. Treating others with respect is key to collaborating effectively in building an encyclopedia. (See Wikipedia:Civility).
Making a policy that will limit use of "suck" and other words from that group is almost impossible task. However I do truly belive that it wont hurt anyone if we will make some effort to limit use of that kind of words (again my personal opinion, not a policy and I am not enforcing anything here). gcardinal 07:12, 27 July 2007 (CEST)
The currect precedence from the admins AND the comunity is that we cannot censor anyone comments, EVER. We can only remove obvious vandalism, but never envoke cencorship, no matter how immature the poster may be. I know because I've been chastized and slammed in the past for attempting to censor certain users on this site from time to time by the user base AND fellow Admins. Shireensysop 07:24, 27 July 2007 (CEST)
We have NPA and it apply to ratings as well as to all other parts of this wiki. So if there is a personal attacks in a rating it will be removed and actions against user will be taken. gcardinal 07:50, 27 July 2007 (CEST)
Well, even after all this chit char, I still think my suggestion above is the most obvious solution. Talk to the users about changing their votes first, since they're the only ones who can remove the inappropriate or offensive comments. Removing them does nothing to prevent children from viewing any profanity (unless you're really counting on their short attention spans); they are just moved to the bottom of the page. Btw, NPA doesn't really apply unless the comments are being directed at a user and not a build. - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 07:52, 27 July 2007 (CEST)
The main idea behind removing a vote by admin, is to give user a warning, just the one you are talking about. Thats the very purpose of that function. User can click edit & save and his vote will be restored. Restoring a vote is as easy as possible. If user does not agreed with removed vote, he msg admin who did it, discuss and revert it back in old or in changed state - it is up to the user, Comment that admin gives in when reverting someones vote - is a note on what user can do to improve (quality) of his comment. That function was not made to remove ratings that rate build 0 while all other people rate is 5 - its a function for admin so they can temporary disable vote and give user instruction on what he/she did wrong.
We are not talking about removing user from his right to vote on builds or about blocking him. gcardinal 08:00, 27 July 2007 (CEST)
I feel like there is a strong need of documentation on rating system both for admins and for user, it looks like many thing are quite unclear when it comes to purpose of the comments in rating as well as when admin can use rollback function. gcardinal 08:04, 27 July 2007 (CEST)

new skin for overlib

Since current version are way to big for browsers like IE 5.0 and IE 6.0 and have a lot of bugs and works way to slow on old computers a new version for popup's are currently in development. New overlib will be CSS only based and has been tested with all current browsers with support for older versions like IE 5.0.

Please check it out at [4] and give your feedbacks. thx gcardinal 22:30, 27 July 2007 (CEST)

Just gray is so boring! Keep the old backgrounds or do something like on the official wiki, if possible. —ǥȓɩηɔɧ/〛 00:23, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
Official wiki has something like that? gcardinal 00:25, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
Well, look at Sloth Hunter's Shot for example, the skill template. See the background image? Like that. Faded out profession icon. —ǥȓɩηɔɧ/〛 02:38, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
Well its not completely grey it has a brown touch :) But I will bring more of a original style to it. gcardinal 04:26, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
Added some gfx, check it out. gcardinal 05:05, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
Awesome! More compatability FTW (I use Firefox but still). —ǥȓɩηɔɧ/〛 06:36, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
Nice layout, I like it! Two points:
1) In the last line, the lower parts of the 'g's and 'y' are cut off. This depends on local settings like font size or screen resolution, but the default settings of my firefox cut it, so it might be that more people have this problem.
2) The contrast of the 'factions' box is a bit strong for my taste. Shouldn't that have a bit lighter background? After all the campaign is not the key property of a skill. And maybe add slightly more margin below the campaign name. (Again, with smaller font size the margin is fine, but then it's hard to read on my 1400x1050 laptop screen.) – HHHIPPOsysop› 12:05, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
Thank you for your feedback :) Will be fixed gcardinal 18:53, 28 July 2007 (CEST)

Build ratings

I see a couple of your edits on my watchlist, in particular this one. These builds have less than five votes, and so are untested as per our vetting policy. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image.png{{sysop}} 06:16, 28 July 2007 (CEST)

I reverted edit since use moved a good build (old build imported from guildwiki) that by official vetting policy belongs to a Good build until 5 or more votes are given on that build. It was wrong to move a good build to untested just because it people did not had time to vote on that build. gcardinal 06:34, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
On that note, let me point you to Build:Me/D Extended Thorns, which had a "good" rating because it was favored on GuildWiki, and four votes that averaged to a 1.02. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image.png{{sysop}} 06:53, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
No problem with that. When 5 votes are in place it sould be moved according to the rating it has, but not before that. Me and Hhhippo (mostly he :) work on a script that will take care of builds that where imported from gwiki but has not been rated and has been untouched - it will be done automatically. gcardinal 06:55, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
I'm nervous about people in the mean time looking at a crap build from guildwiki that's been given a "good" tag. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image.png{{sysop}} 07:08, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
I am more nervous about mass edits that moves great builds to untested. Something like:
19:52, 25 July 2007 (hist) (diff) m Build:W/E Obsidian Tank (Reverted edits by Sirron Eblibs (Talk); changed back to last version by Skakid9090)
Obisidan Tank to untested? nty. gcardinal 07:12, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
It was in untested on guildwiki for a while until people proved it was good... Why not the same here? IMO we're not being as consistent with our policies as we should be. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image.png{{sysop}} 22:17, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
We had this discussion, we decided that we are going to keep favored builds in good sections until 5 or more votes are in. I don't see need or any reason to bring this discussion back on table. There is a very few builds in good section that doesnt have any votes atm, I am sure that one by one they will be rated and sorted by the rating. gcardinal 00:45, 29 July 2007 (CEST)

Investment

I have this rather "rich" problem, but it is a real problem I think. Let's say User A have 3 Armbrace of Truth he wants to sell. What will be the best deal in terms of investment and keeping the gold value (around 450k) stable for next half a year:

  • 100k + 70 ecto (ecto 5.5k at trader, 5k user price).
  • Keep ecto.
  • Sell ecto.
  • 25k + 15 gemsets (27-28k each).
  • Keep gemsets
  • Sell gemsets.

Selling 210 ecto will take time so will 45 gemsets. So what solution will ensure that money stays safe? Since its around 1400k at least 800k needs to stay in ecto/gemsets as storage full. gcardinal 10:09, 10 July 2007 (CEST)

I'd say the most stable way to keep the money safe (since no banks exist in GW) is to get it all in cash; utilizing mule accounts for the million(s) you can't fit on your primary.
Personally... I'd split it up (kind of like RL investing). Who's to say where ectos will be down the road? Who's to say that gemstones will be worth anything in the future? In the event I was unable to store the money directly (on multiple accounts), I would split my stock; trade an armbrace for ecto, trade one for gemsets, trade the last for rubies/sapphires (less commonly used than ecto, but still valuable; possibly overtaking ecto in the future). That way, you'd have a three or four pronged investment plan. But that's just me :p -Auron 10:25, 10 July 2007 (CEST)
Since it's the gold value that you want to maintain, I would recommend that you convert what you have into gold, or as much as you can hold (Assuming you have the typical 11 Character slots and a filled storage, that comes to around 2.1k plat). But if you have more than that amount of gold (which really, there's no point to having) then it should be traded for Rubies/Sapphires, as Auron mentioned. I guess this method isn't actually a way of investment, but a way to store your gold. — Rapta Rapta Icon1.gif (talk|contribs) 17:49, 10 July 2007 (CEST)

you could just give it to me to "hold on" to for you ;) Bluemilkman 20:07, 10 July 2007 (CEST)

Gem sets are worth about 20k ea btw. Would make most of your chars mules (100k ea+ storage). Put the rest into ectos. Would buy Ambrance on guru. Wait for a deal to pop-up. Don't invest in Gems such as Ruby or Sapphires as they will go down eventually. I personally invested a great deal in diamonds, as they are rumored to increase by 2-3 hundred %. Wouldn't take the chances however. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 20:25, 11 July 2007 (CEST)

While you're at it, keep in mind that lockpicks are almost guaranteed to stay at 1.5k ea at merch, 1.25k ea from players. -- Armond WarbladeArmond sig image.png{{sysop}} 21:51, 11 July 2007 (CEST)

actually, my question is how did you get that much money to begin with? Bluemilkman 22:35, 11 July 2007 (CEST)

Ebay lvu long time. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 22:36, 11 July 2007 (CEST)

2 mil is not that much. First I had around 7 bone dragons, one was given in lottery here. Then I got 2 mini Mallyx
GC-coffers.jpg
spending only 10 gemsets. A bit of luck and some farming = easy money:) gcardinal 17:50, 13 July 2007 (CEST)
And btw I like the idea of lockpicks it is sure it will stay constant and demand will always be there. And you can store almost 2mil in just 6 bulks of 250 lockpicks. gcardinal 17:50, 13 July 2007 (CEST)
Have you guys seen video from GW:EN? Looks like if you "unlock" FoW armor and other items it will be stored in GW2! Looks like ecto is a good investment. Gemset's dropping in price each day :( gcardinal 05:08, 16 July 2007 (CEST)

Guild

As I see you are the leader of your guild, is there any requirement to be in it. I've been in my guild for almost a year, and I'm starting to get tired of all the inactive people in it. I love the people, but they just don't get on that much. But anyway, I wish I could get lucky farming every once in a while. I went through Tombs 7 times and got one green. How awesome is that? Bluemilkman 18:01, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

Not really, its free to join :) I am alone in my guild, so its not much going on in it :) gcardinal 18:57, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

haha, sounds like fun, I'll leave mine the next time I get on, so if you would, send me an invite sometime. Maybe we should start a PvX guild or something. Bluemilkman 19:01, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

I know this was tried back on GuildWiki, but a PvXWiki guild would be cool... I would join it, and it would be easier to get people, as we can advertise it on the main page and stuff. ~~ User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 19:24, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

Don't recommend that... Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 19:29, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

why? Bluemilkman 19:35, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

We don't host guilds. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 20:03, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

But if it is a guild for the testing of builds, then wouldn't it be ok? You do have a good point though. ~~ User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 20:06, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

Advertise on your user pages then, or a universal userbox. Not the Main Page. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 20:08, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

And the "we" in your comment is.... you? See the funny thing is, you are not the sole master of the wiki. As much as you might wish you were, you're not. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think there is a policy that specifically states that we can not make a guild and advertise on the main page. If I get support from other admins, I'm going to go ahead with it. Nobody said you had to join. Bluemilkman 20:59, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

There is nothing wrong with people joining my own guild, however if anything (including in-game stuff like guilds) going to represent this website it must be approved and managed by administrators of this wiki. And please dont get me wrong, have fun and play together in one guild - np, representing www.pvxwiki.com by a representative in-game guild is something else. gcardinal 06:08, 14 July 2007 (CEST)

Guild Wiki does not Host, nor shall we :). Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 06:47, 14 July 2007 (CEST)

Trust me, I would be the last one to represent PvXwiki.com the wrong way. Heck, this gives me a reason to stop playing Guild Wars. If you want me to get admin support for a pvxwiki guild, I will do that. However, if I do get support, which I believe I will from most everyone except for Readem (he never agrees with me for some reason....odd), I will make the guild, though I would like it if you would be the leader. But for the first hurdle, getting support. Bluemilkman 06:52, 14 July 2007 (CEST) After trying to post this, I found the edit conflict with Readem. I did not see it before I wrote this bottom text. Readem- just because you say we won't doesn't mean we won't, and just because gwiki doesn't, doesn't mean anything for us. Gwiki doesn't have a builds section, does that mean we shouldn't? gcardinal- I will get the majority.

blue why are you always fighting with readem. seriously, you're beaing a hypocrite User:Bluemilkman/CWAGA - Skakid9090 06:54, 14 July 2007 (CEST)

There's a difference between fighting and disagreeing. I don't fight him, he just always disagrees with me, so I defend myself. Only once did I let my temper talk for me, I admitted my wrong there. Now we just agree to disagree I guess. He won't give me a reason, but again, it's not just between us, this is going to all admins and users on this wiki now. We'll see who's right. Bluemilkman 07:00, 14 July 2007 (CEST)

You know, sometimes a reason for not wanting something would be nice. He just says no, all the time, and then doesn't give a reason. Oh well, maybe I'm beating a dead horse. Bluemilkman 07:02, 14 July 2007 (CEST)

PvX:AR's Information We Don't Retain forbids articles about guilds. I'm not sure if that would apply to announcements on the main page about guilds, though. --Edru viransu 07:19, 14 July 2007 (CEST)

This is what it comes out to. User:Bluemilkman/Pvxguild Bluemilkman 15:59, 14 July 2007 (CEST)

With a quastion like that all current admins must agreed with the idea of the guild. My current vote is no. gcardinal 17:57, 14 July 2007 (CEST)

Are you cool with me sort of hosting the guild through my userspace. I'm sure it takes up room, but as soon as I can get a site, I was planning on moving it. I know you weren't thrilled with the idea of a guild, but I got mild interest from some people, and the admins didn't say anything bad about it. If you have any input, please tell me. I don't want to do this without your blessing. Bluemilkman 20:35, 18 July 2007 (CEST)

bbcode

It sounds as if the site updated. I'm not sure if you have to download something or what, but whatever needs to be gathered from the site should be ready now. ‽-(єяøηħ) no u 17:23, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

Nope. it isn't. We have no control over bbcode. I know they were having people take pics of the new skills and what not before the update. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 20:02, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

Isn't that all done now. If not, what does the following mean?: gwBBCode 1.7.4 Here is gwBBCode 1.7.4! Just check the main site, it's all, download here. ‽-(єяøηħ) no u 21:02, 13 July 2007 (CEST)

OMG Finally ! I was started to think they will never finish... Now I will need a day or two to convert it back to mediawiki customized style... It took almost 30 days for gwshack to rlz new version gcardinal 21:35, 13 July 2007 (CEST)
They have been working steadily actually. They has no volunteers to take pics of the new skills :/. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 21:47, 13 July 2007 (CEST)
First of all you need some level of access to get your hands on the source code. Why force own way on how they want to update db? Pushing print screen 1240 times is not a very productive way of keeping anything up to date. Second I dont understand why they need pictures in the first place and why they must have pictures of each skill? If you ask me, taking, croping, saving, renaming pictures is just as much work as to get right into the source code and update skill that has been changed and everyone they have been.
In general when new feature in game was made reality like sunspear skills and luxon and all that, first they had to do is to implement that as it needs only 20 or so pictures or what ever. Then start massive skills update project or what ever they did. Making both skill update, adding new features and updating tons of other stuff is how Microsoft work release updates for Windows 98. On any open source project under GPL you can get source code, what do to task and get down to coding without having to wait 30 days without any specific task to do. gcardinal 21:59, 13 July 2007 (CEST)
Don't ask me, thats just what the mod of bbcode said :/. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 22:08, 13 July 2007 (CEST)
Yeah I know it just so much pain to customize new version that has been changed so much... Now I am comparing old version to new version, then comparing old version to wiki-customized old version and trying to figure out where to insert what... I am afraid to think of end result :S gcardinal 22:40, 13 July 2007 (CEST)
lol. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 22:55, 13 July 2007 (CEST)
So, bout how long till we see it here? ‽-(єяøηħ) no u 01:11, 14 July 2007 (CEST)
Around 2-4 days I think, maybe less. gcardinal 03:52, 14 July 2007 (CEST)
Beta runs on our test server now, admins will test it during next 24 hours. gcardinal 05:09, 16 July 2007 (CEST)

Fixed gcardinal 20:25, 25 July 2007 (CEST)

Mediawiki

I was wondering if you were thinking of ever writing a short guide on how to do a basic integration of the gwBBcode into MediaWiki (minus your cool customizations)? I'm working on integrating the code, as we use it on our forums, into my guilds small MediaWiki but I seem to be missing something crucial... anyway, I'm sure you're busy, but I know a lot of small guilds use personal wikis for organization and it'd be a useful guide to many. TheSonofDarwin 21:18, 16 July 2007 (CEST)

yes we are working on a wiki optimized version, when its ready we will make it public gcardinal 20:25, 25 July 2007 (CEST)

Build Masters?

I've heard word of lesser admins known as "Build Masters" yet I've yet to see a list, or a Build Master at all yet, has the position been coded implemented yet? --Hikari 04:27, 16 July 2007 (CEST)

Why? are you planning on being one. ‽-(єяøηħ) no u 04:31, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
I thought Build Masters were only a part of one of the other vetting policies, one that had been rejected. Tycn 04:41, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
Don't use asterisks. -Auron 04:41, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
They are in a proposed policy right now, but that has stalled... here~~ User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 04:42, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
Main reason for that discussion was current right admins have on removing suspicious/spam/old ratings. Currently only admins can do it, but there was discussion on given such right to users who are not admins but who can monitor and "moderate" ratings, its not really referring to that policy - it was something that was discusses betwean admins gcardinal 05:03, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
I got the information from someone in-game, though I won't say who for fear of getting them in a situation that they wouldn't want to be in. My understanding, was that they would be put in, in the future, and that there were not very many people currently up for the position, and the person telling me this information said he would put me on the "Possible Build-Master people to be" list. I liked the idea of being one, so I was just curious if they would ever actually be implemented or not. --Hikari 21:54, 16 July 2007 (CEST)

testsite

[5] Notice that the skills will not change progression properly. (actually, they don't change at all). ‽-(єяøηħ) no u 19:16, 16 July 2007 (CEST)

I think that kinda makes sense... Sunspear rank isn't quite the same as attributes... You know what I mean? Just put a note SS rank of =>7 is wanted. B/c more than 7... ~~ User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 19:19, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
Yes, but the people on gwshak said they would add those as a attributes. ‽-(єяøηħ) no u 19:21, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
Those skills are nothing but a big stupid idea. No one will use them anyway, Luxon and Kurz skills generate different template codes so it will be imposible for someone who is luxon to import a kurz build even skills are the same. gcardinal 20:05, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
They should have it generate both codes then. ‽-(єяøηħ) no u 20:24, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
This is more of a game bug. Lets say you have friend who play on the luxon side, and you in kurz and what to have his build? You can't. I think we will wait and see what kind of "build" using those skills people will post, so far I cant see any of luxon skills that can be used for anything good. gcardinal 20:41, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
luxon and kurzick skills do the same thing. ‽-(єяøηħ) no u 20:47, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
Yeah, have a box for Luxon Side, one for Kurzick Side. The Luxon and Kurzick skills are same, but most of them arent very good... ~~ User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 20:43, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
I know they are the same thing, thats not the point - in game mechanics they are not - 2 differnt skills that has special req. And they will (if) be used for AB builds, thats like 1/100 of this site. But again we just have to see if people going to post any build with some of those skills. gcardinal 20:51, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
PvE onleh? Swiftslash \\ Impale.jpg (contributions *warrior guide) 20:58, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
I thought AB counted as PvP. ‽-(єяøηħ) no u 20:59, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
It does... the ONLY thing that will matter is PvE builds... but what if it's for PvE and PvP... ~~ User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 21:18, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
Its for PvP only. Sunspear skills will work normal. gcardinal 21:27, 16 July 2007 (CEST)
I meant what if a build was for both PvE and PvP. I guess it would be varinats, like everything else. ~~ User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 21:29, 16 July 2007 (CEST)

Meh, multiple skillbars ftw. Especially if we have miniskillbars. Will we ever get those with working bbcode btw? Or is it not even thought of? Swiftslash \\ Impale.jpg (contributions *warrior guide) 21:30, 16 July 2007 (CEST)

It sure is in our plans :) But there is only me and Hhhippo who does code and we does put a lot of work in this site and I do as much as I can, so for now we just focus on fixing the bugs and getting things running. Expanding plans - optional for now as we can't do it all like -> today but soon or later we will :) gcardinal 01:56, 17 July 2007 (CEST)
Nice nice, been wanting those "forever" :P Swiftslash \\ Impale.jpg (contributions *warrior guide) 02:19, 17 July 2007 (CEST)
If anyone have some PHP skills and want to help we have pleeeenty to do :)) gcardinal 02:22, 17 July 2007 (CEST)

Old. gcardinal 20:30, 25 July 2007 (CEST)

#1 @ Google

We are now #1 in google's search results on key words "Guild Wars Builds" :) gcardinal 03:23, 17 July 2007 (CEST)

Hooray! We are famous!~~ User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 03:39, 17 July 2007 (CEST)
Did you have to pay for that? I have heard that some will pay Google for a higher placement on their search engine, sort of like a hack on their relevancy engine or w/e. - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 08:19, 17 July 2007 (CEST)
Yeah I did pay for some google adwords when we just started, but that was a long time ago. This #1 place is all natural, like swedish girls - hot & sexy ;) gcardinal 08:41, 17 July 2007 (CEST)
Lawl, like anything's hot in Sweden. - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 08:52, 17 July 2007 (CEST)

"No profession" fix

Currently, builds that are */any have the "no profession" link to no profession, which doesn't exist. Can we change the code for each one so it links to Secondary profession instead of "no profession?" Fyren isn't going to allow a redirect on GWiki. -Auron 06:52, 17 July 2007 (CEST)

Fixed. gcardinal 09:03, 17 July 2007 (CEST)

IP check request

Heya, several users are suspected sockpuppet voters (on Build:Team - Fastway). Could you check IPs on User:Flon, User:Duch 127, User:Taan, User:C, User:Crusheer, and User:Ruiz? Thanks. -Auron 05:03, 18 July 2007 (CEST)

It hurts my eyes!

Is there a rule/policy against making all of your comments in bright red font? Because it hurts my eyes when I try to read it. --Wizardboy777 03:35, 19 July 2007 (CEST)

lolol. I'll go talk to him. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 04:14, 19 July 2007 (CEST)

Foreverwafer beat you to it. - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 04:15, 19 July 2007 (CEST)
lol, I got side-tracted. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 04:17, 19 July 2007 (CEST)
lol... Foreverwafer, thats a new one... ~~ User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 04:23, 19 July 2007 (CEST)
Krowman goes...I don't know lolol. Readem (talk*pvxcontribs) 04:26, 19 July 2007 (CEST)
Using colors (like most of things) are "ok" as long as people don't flood community talk page with pink/red text. I think its okey to use color to make your comment "glow" (or burn inside someone's eye's) but I can't understand why anyone would need to do so...:P In short: if its flood -> problem -> report -> action :) gcardinal 07:14, 21 July 2007 (CEST)

Recent ratings

Hehe, it says they're from January 1, 1970. Awesome addition, though :) -Auron 03:29, 20 July 2007 (CEST)

For now it works only for the Europe people :p Working on it now... gcardinal 03:29, 20 July 2007 (CEST)
Now it's broken, and u just changed new... lol ~~ User:Frvwfr2 frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 03:51, 20 July 2007 (CEST)
Fixed :) Its all f#¤/#¤ up:P it depends on that you have entered as time zone offset. Some put -02:00 some +02:00 some just -1 or -100 ... PHP just read's code it doesnt have brain... so do the code :) gcardinal 04:00, 20 July 2007 (CEST)
Yeah frvwfr2 I saw your post :P gcardinal 04:01, 20 July 2007 (CEST)

Fixed gcardinal 20:22, 25 July 2007 (CEST)

Orphaned Pages

Currently, Special:Lonelypages shows pretty much every single page under the "Build talk:" namespace. Is there any way to exclude that namespace (but still make Build talk: pages without a corresponding Build page show up)? — Rapta Rapta Icon1.gif (talk|contribs) 05:46, 20 July 2007 (CEST)

Hi, yeah we know about that old bug, Hhhippo and me was looking into it and will probably fix it very soon. Thx for remminder :) gcardinal 07:09, 21 July 2007 (CEST)
Similiar problem at Special:BrokenRedirects and Special:DoubleRedirects. I already spoke with Hhhippo about what we can do to correct it, so I guess this is just a reminder as well. :-) - Kowal.jpg Krowman {{sysop}} 07:36, 21 July 2007 (CEST)
Fixed. – HHHIPPOsysop› 02:00, 28 July 2007 (CEST)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC-SA 2.5 unless otherwise noted.