User talk:NuclearVII

Sig test: Nuclear 7 19:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC) YAY! Nuclear 7 19:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I want something special :D --Cursed Angel 22:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

How so? And I don't plan on doing anything until I get one of those welcome templates like Eloc's. Nuclear 7 14:15, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello, NuclearVII, and welcome to the Official Guild Wars 2 Wiki! If you need help with anything, don't hesitate to add a message to my talk page. I highly recommend that you check out the "Welcome to the wiki" page - it's extremely useful as an initial guide. Best of luck and happy editing! --§ Eloc § 16:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

like this one? --Cursed Angel 16:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

YAY! now I feel disgruntled and happy. Whoppie!

So, what needs to be done around here? Or better yet, what is this special thing you want? Nuclear 7 19:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

SPAM

Random spam related to anything goes here for the lulz. Wnat at least 5 archives before game rolls of the shelves. Nuclear 7 12:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

First?--MP47 (Talk) (Contr.) 19:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Wut?Nuclear 7 20:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Can somebody please help me make a siggy? I don't like blue. how do I upload iamges etc, name them aieee! Nuclear 7 21:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Test! nuclear VII 21:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC) Jacked mercilessly from CA

Need better colour.. Nukleaer VII 21:27, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

You can't used CA's sig image for yours.--MP47 (Talk) (Contr.) 21:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I know, that was jsut a tester-thing. I'll get rid o-done. Nukleaer VII 21:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

ROFL nice image!--MP47 (Talk) (Contr.) 21:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

You reminded me of Skuld. Only he edits this fast. Nukleaer VII 21:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't constantly RC watch on this one though, considering there's about an edit an hour here. Wait, why am I talking to you? WE ARE AT ETERNAL WAR! ETERNAL!!!--MP47 (Talk) (Contr.) 21:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

You failed to intdent correctly. how you managed the spam pyramids I cannot imagine. Nukleaer VII 21:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Your imagination obviously phails then.--MP47 (Talk) (Contr.) 21:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

My imagination certainly does not fail. It must the reality that is lagging behind. Nukleaer VII 21:42, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Reality is lagging? Anet must've made it. --MP47 (Talk) (Contr.) 21:44, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I blame botters and farmers, tbh. Nukleaer VII 21:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

0.o There must be a hell of a lot of botters and farmers to make Real Life^TM lag.--MP47 (Talk) (Contr.) 21:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Given that there are no policies on this wiki saying what Admins can or cannot do... we assume that they can do anything that their common sense dictates. I realize there's not much to "disrupt" on this wiki, but, looking at Recent Changes, I don't think there are many people who would see this kind of spamming as anything other than over-the-top. I for one will say that if this was happening on PvX right now, you'd all be banned. If nothing else, click the "Minor Edit" box so that people can ignore this inane spamming when viewing RCs... *Defiant Elements* +talk 22:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Got it. Yeah, taht spam thing was hilarious. Yeah, I'll hit minor edit from now on.. Oh, should this mesage be minor edited? What qualifies as a minor edit? Nukleaer VII 12:29, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

re:Culture Poll

I just wanted to ask you a quick question about your views on NPA. As I see it, the best way to make NPA "watertight," as you put it, would be to make it entirely unspecific, i.e. have the Admins make judgment calls in each case using "NPA" as loosely defined umbrella term. Loopholes can only exist if the rules are well-defined, because well-defined rules allow strict literalists to claim that if a certain edit doesn't conform specifically to what the rules say, then it isn't a violation of the rules. You, on the hand, seem to think that the best way to make it watertight would be to make it "the most specific policy on GW2W pages." May I ask what leads you to believe that and how you envision NPA in more specific terms? *Defiant Elements* +talk 22:11, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I read it as he figures an ultra-specific policy, ideally, covers every imaginable topic. If so, any situation could be resolved by going to the policy page. Any situation related to personal attacks, at least. Calor 02:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I understand that... I just don't see it as practical, and wanted to understand why he thought it would be. *Defiant Elements* +talk 04:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

It's practical in perfectly sterile and contained circumstances, but not in the real world. Calor 04:37, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that was an ambigious (hope I spelled that one right) sentence. Ideally, I can imagine only two types of policies to be specific. On one hand, the policy could be broad, undefinitive, giving those enforcing the policy power (example situation: Person A does bad thing, Admin says no u can't, Person A states act bad thing is not on policy B, Admin says clause T covers topic bad act and bans person A). On the other hand, the policy is written to be long, dooozey document, which separates into every possible imaginable possibility for a NPA. multiple examples are given, and there is a disclaimer at the bottom, stating that any possible holes are left to the Admin's discretion. Personally, I'm leanin' on the latter one, because I feel that the former has a more dependancy on admin power. When you write law, you make it to be as specific as possible, so it can stand on it's own without judge's intervention and such. In an 'open' policy, in a policy where you obey the spirit instead of the word, obeying the spirit can be... let's say misused. Nukleaer VII 12:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I like the umbrella, as it leaves no way for any loopholes to be lawyered. Or at least 99% of the holes are plugged up. I trust most of the sysops to do their work. Calor 17:18, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Personally, ( and this is pure opinion, with no fact involved whatsoever) I don't think think it is a question of trust. The policies are not tried against people you can trust, they are tried against malignant ones, and thsoe you cannot trust. I would believe that a huge policy has a better chance to withstand against those kinds of offenders. An example would be the alleged sockpuppeteer stabber. Now, it's not that I didn't believe her, it's not that I blamed her or anything, but her, shall we say, case has shown that clear policies usually trump ambigious ones, provided they are enforced by smart admins (Which, throught wiki's, was a constant). Nukleaer VII 20:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Aww

I'm not on your list of cool people! Oh well. :P

Oh, and hi! -- Armond Warblade 07:06, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Greetings, fellow heretic. It's not a cool people list per se, as you can see, because Cursed Angel is there... Nukleaer VII 12:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Aww, neither am I?? C'monnnnnnnn!--MP47 (Talk) (Contr.) 18:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

What about me? *pout* Calor 18:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

You forgot me! -- Plingggggg \ Talk 18:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I want to whine until I get on the list too! :P Lord Belar 18:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Nice, Pling. Belar will get on there for all the wrong reasons. I see Belar, It think redlink. Go figure. Calor 18:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

That is NOT a cool people list. That is the , ahem, significant people list. :P Nukleaer VII 20:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

And once again, I'm proven to be insignificant :) --- -- (s)talkpage 21:09, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

This is a surprise to you? :P Lord Belar 21:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Not really, no. Where did you get the idea I was surprised? --- -- (s)talkpage 21:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Saaad. How do I annoy you? XD -- Armond Warblade 02:26, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Question

What classifies as a normal, and what classifies as a minor edit? Enlighten me. Nukleaer VII 08:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I just glue down my minor edit button in preferences. Minor edits are stuff like punctuation fixes, formatting changes, etc. Basically, if it's not really important, it's a minor edit. I've heard arguments for and against the idea that all edits to talk pages are minor, as well, but quite honestly I think those should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

Keep in mind that the most useful function of minor edit is hiding minor edits from recent changes. That should help you decide if an edit's minor or not. They're also called out in history pages.

When in doubt, make it minor and blame it on forgetting to uncheck it. I do it way too often (I've created entirely new policies that have changed the way a wiki moves and forgotten to undo minor edit).

Also, I uploaded :image:User Armond RC.jpg|an image that might interest you. (Yes, every now and then I accidentally uncheck minor edit and automatically aim for save page instead of rechecking it.) -- Armond Warblade 09:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

mmkay. Thanks for the tip. Will glue downminor edit and blame you when people ask. That image got deleted, btw. Nukleaer VII 10:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

No it didn't, I just fail at putting in the .jpg. -- Armond Warblade 18:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

New siggy

Diss et cuss, sil vout plait. Nukleaer VII 16:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not working, because...? Nukleaer VII 16:10, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, what am I doing wrong here? Nukleaer VII 16:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[1] Use a hex code for the color gogogo. Where you have font color="orange", change it to font color="#FFCC00" or whatever. -- Armond Warblade 18:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Final testy: Nukleaer VII 21:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Insert Wtf chain here

I want to see my glorious new sig plastered all over this place. Nukleaer VII 20:03, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII

There you go. *nudge*, by the way. -- Mafaraxas 15:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Ahh... I sight for sore eyes... do some moar.Nukleaer VII 17:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII Nukleaer VII

Good enough? --- -- (s)talkpage 17:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

NO! MOAR! MOAR! CAPZLOK MOAR!!!!!ONE!!!! Edit: Forgot to sign... Nukleaer VII 18:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. It burns the eyes, and is very annoying. Calor 19:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

So you actually view my talkpage often enough to get offended by this? I matter to you? /faint Nukleaer VII 20:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

why do u want many archives and spam on ur talk? i dont get it.. and who the hell cares if u matter to someone on a wiki for a videogame? this is somewhat what makes me dislike guildwiki with all its 12 year olds who spam each others to get archives and think that they have internet fame and internet friends. --Cursed Angel 20:36, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

So I heard trolling on any discussion you can find is better? Discuss. Lord of all tyria 21:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

fuck yeah it is, funny too, guess what, ur opinion about me matters so much --Cursed Angel 21:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Good to know. I was honestly wondering which was better, I find the trolling pretty funny as well ;) Lord of all tyria 21:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Well cursed, if you look at the big picture I call nihilism, you'd see that all life is meaningless, our bodies will turn to dust to feed bacteria, and all of our accomplishments will be forgotten in 10 years or so. But hey, we keep living it. Games, the wiki's, they are all pointless, but hey, we do 'em anyway. And as for archives - I can't disagree moar. Arshay on GWiki has no archives but she is perhaps the member I respect the most there. Same goes for Dashface. Warwick, on the other hand, has filled up 15 pages, Grinch nearing 20 sumthing I think, nad skuld has over 24. Apart from skuld (most of it was build crapiatomo that he had to endure as the janitor) Warw and grinch are just spammers (pls don't hurt me!!!. But hey, they know it's fun to watch and participate in spam, and so do I) Quote: "the reason mankind searches the meaning of life is because life does not exist. " Nukleaer VII 15:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

now im even more confused, and i use to be the one confusing people :/ --Cursed Angel 15:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Another Question

Okay, so I was browsing talks, and I decided to see barek's page. Now, I see his table and I sayz "I gotta have me some of the hawt stuff!" so, I hit edit, and I look for the code of the table! A template! I jacked it, but I still want to make my own. So, teach meh. Nukleaer VII 21:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Nvm, figured it out. turns out mediawki has some neat fact sheets. kewl.(Read: None of you bozos helped me when I asked!)(jk) Nukleaer VII 16:17, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Mafia

Can you explain your note on my talk page in a way I understand? RT | Talk 11:48, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Simple answer: I want you to host a mafia game. Long answer: Apart from jamsters, yours was the best so far on GWiki so I want you to do one here. Because of the alrge playerbase, it might be epic. If you feel that you don't want to bother with it, well, gimme the permission and I'll do it meself. Nukleaer VII 13:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

OMG MAFIA

Hey! I've started another Mafia game - since you asked you might like this one. Hit me on The page to signup or flame me here thanks -- RT

RT | Talk 17:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Email

Why don't you set the wiki email system? -- pling | ggggg 18:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

what email system? --Cursed Angel 18:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

What CA said. I get free email? Nukleaer VII 18:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

No, you set your preferences so anyone can email you via the wiki by clicking the "E-mail this user" link under the toolbox nav. Just go to your preferences and look under E-mail. -- pling | ggggg 18:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

So, I ticked it off. Send me an emial for testing please? Nukleaer VII 18:21, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Done. Billion thanks. nuke7 20:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

new sig test

On related news, archive time is coming, at 30 kB :D nuke7 19:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

One pic only. Sorry to burst ya bubble --- -- (s)talkpage 19:29, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

There's no sig policy yet, but I would suggest you keep the the one image. I don't think I have the font face installed either, so it's really big for me.. -- pling | ggggg 19:30, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

(EC) But... but... wait a minute... that is a proposal, and by those standards, your sig is bust too. (The clause about that one pic being 19*19.) Nukleaer VII 19:31, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Darn edit conflicts... Imma gonna go over there and fight with all my heart with my multi-pictured sig. Also, how big is it? nuke7 19:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

It's goes just a little bit higher than your image (so it may change the line height). -- pling | ggggg 19:40, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

So, it's a microscopic diffarance? I don't really see the problem then. nuke7 19:44, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok. By the by, I think your sig looks ok on its own, but when lots of other uses decide to have dark 50x19 images, or more than one image, that's when it'll get ugly. -- pling | ggggg 19:49, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

We'll see. I'm attacking GW2W:SIGN so help me. nuke7 19:51, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I like gw1:GWW:SIGN as it is tbh. -- pling | ggggg 19:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Ew, that's horrible. I think sigs should be works of non distruptive art, so I am against that and GW2W:SIGN. nuke7 19:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I prefer this > GWW's. But I'll probably be one of the very few that wants that. --- -- (s)talkpage 19:59, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

NO. This is a new wiki. GWiki was to relaxed, GWW too serious. let it grow organically, let it be built from scratch. nuke7 20:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Lemme rephrase "imo" for a sec... *bashes keyboard* All done. --- -- (s)talkpage 20:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[2] -- pling | ggggg 20:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

So damn true. I gotta do Hw anyway, so catch Y'all laters. nuke7 20:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm no Mudkip, so there's no need to catch me. Anyhow, laters and have fun *lulz* --- -- (s)talkpage 20:05, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

People still do homework at home? Wow. Calor 21:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Needs some flamefest

I just made a blazing post to some dude back ın GWW, and I feel so riled up from that. Pls flame so I can vent my anger nuke7 16:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Which dude? Lord Belar 20:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Eh, it was at the skill page of "Fuck You from izzy", also known as wail of doom. nuke7 13:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Greetings

Salve, Nuke; greetings to you as well! - Alice 03:06, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Salutations! Imma gonna write the welcome template. nuke7 16:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. Templates are pretty much where it's at! - Alice 18:08, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Somebody hasn't met eloc yet... 19:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Spot on! Welcoming was will be Eloc. --- -- (s)talkpage 20:33, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Over my dead body. nuke7 22:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a challenge to me. I pwn at welcome templates. Single handedly because of me, they were removed on GWW. You get any templates removed single handedly? =P — ク Eloc 貢 02:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Lol! :D -- ab.er.rant 03:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Eloc, you don't pwn at them, you actually pwn them - thanks to you, the welcome template is damned. nuke7 15:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

You're just jealous ;) — ク Eloc 貢 19:47, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm in a mixed state of jealousy, fear, agitation, atrophy, and sentimental tbh. nuke7 00:37, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

can someone..

Nuke Image:Image-User NuclearVII signature 3.jpg|this? Thanks! NUKLEAR IIV 21:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Dusting

Yeah, this page needs more activity. Imma thinking of putting up some lame edrama and watch shit burn. Here we go:

BUSH IS AWESOME.

Flame meh. -- NUKLEAR IIV 21:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Bush is a lousy band.Alari 21:36, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I hate bushes. They are all over the place, you know. Cress Arvein 00:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

lolol there is a band called bush. As for as I know, there are 2 bushes. Good bush and bad bush. -- NUKLEAR IIV 12:51, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

And George Bush. -- pling | ggggg 14:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Ones from the 70s and they sold the rights to the name to the one I linked when they donated to some charity, don't ask why I know this.Alari 14:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Was it from reading the first 2 lines on the wikipedia article? -- NUKLEAR IIV 15:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't actually read wikipedia articles, just use the links...Alari 01:08, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Bushism. Sounds like a cult to me. — ク Eloc 貢 15:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't of expected to find this on the liberally led internet(and wikipedia by association),it appears much kinder tho.Alari 01:14, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Is there a social defect called "living in the USA"? -- NUKLEAR IIV 15:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

No, it's called "Republican." Lord Belar 03:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

O i c. Is it terminal, or can it be cured like cancer? -- NUKLEAR IIV 13:37, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

It's more of a chronic illness, but occasionally a miracle will occur and someone may recover. Lord Belar 16:24, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Am I the only one having trouble editing GWW?

-- NUKLEAR IIV 10:04, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

That happens occasionally. The wiki usually comes back fairly quickly. Lord Belar 17:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Ohaithar

Hai ~Shard 01:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Signature Images

Hi.

Please redirect this and any other signature images to your user page or talk page. Since you change the name of the image, you don't update old signatures. If you don't know how please tell me which you'd perfer (a link to each would be appreciated) and I'll do it for you.

Thanks (and wanks)! A F K When Needed 13:11, 26 May 2010 (UTC)