Guild Wars Wiki talk:User page/Draft A

I still stand by changing "In general, content that does not relate to Guild Wars or the Guild Wars Wiki should not be the main contribution of a user and should receive minimal time and dedication." to "While user pages are a fantastic way for users to explore creativity and practice with wiki code, content that is not Guild Wars Wiki related should not be the main contribution of a user and should not be the focus of your time and dedication." As I stated on the policy talk page I don't think we should be encouraging users to spend their time solely on their user pages. Any content made to this wiki will be either Guild Wars or wiki related (any other content is fairly restricted), and stating both there serves no purpose. We should be pointing out what we would like users to focus on, and that is what that sentence does. If it is unclear, then the restrictions and content suggestions area should be made more explicit. - B e X  10:34, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Rev. 164330 by BeXoR
''While user pages are a fantastic way for users to explore creativity and practice with wiki code, the purpose of the Guild Wars Wiki is above all to document the game. Users should ensure that Guild Wars Wiki-related contributions are the focus of their time and dedication.'' <-- this has my full support. It expresses that contributions to the main space should be the main work and this is positive worded (no "should not"). It is always better do say something like "you may", "you should", and so on instead of saying "you may not", "you should not" because the gets a positive feeling when reading this. The only thing I would change: "the purpose of the Guild Wars Wiki is above all to document the game." as this describes a fact and so such doesn't need to be heightened. Der moon 11:13, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * This wording is much better than the last one, thank you. The only thing is that I find the wording "Users should ensure" a little strict. I would prefer a variant with "make every effort" or "to the best of their ability" or something similar. But that is only my personal taste I guess.--Lensor 11:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Changed both, better? I think that make every effort is leaving it a bit too loose, but I will agree that "ensure" was a bit strongly worded. I changed the sentence to avoid the phrase altogether. - B e X  11:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The sentence is nice and simple. There is no option to missunderstand it and it makes clear what we want. *thumb up* [[Image:User_Der_moon_sig.png| ]] Der moon 11:47, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Much nicer now. Neutral and to the point, with no "value" attached.--193.10.20.22 12:17, 12 June 2007 (UTC)--Lensor 12:18, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict)As long as the emphasis on where the main contributions should be is still there, I'm fine with it. It does sound friendlier, although in a rather ambiguous manner. I noticed that you did not increase the scroll length Bex, but I have no problems with that. -- ab.er. rant [[Image:User Ab.er.rant Sig.png|sig]] 12:18, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well as I said on the other page, there is no reason for any article to be that long, especially considering the type of content and the freedom to use subpages. Long articles are discouraged in the main name space, so I don't see why they should be encouraged elsewhere. - B e X  12:31, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

One very small thing; All mentions of the "main user page" should be changed to "user page" (or the definitions changed), as there really is nothing called a "main user page" according to the definitions at the top. The term "main user page" implies that "user page" is not the main page after all. It becomes unclear what kind of pages the "user page" guidelines are for when there are additional guidlines for "main user pages". For instance, is the "suggested content" supposed to be for the user page only, or also for subpages? --Lensor ( talk ) 13:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed with that. I changed several wordings in the Main user page restrictions header to make the section consistent with the header, but the header itself is inconsitent with the definition at top. I suggest dropping all mentionings of the word "main" user page alltogether and changing the rest of the article to say "user space" instead of "user page" where appropriate (e.g. in the absolutely not permitted list, which also applies to subpages). --Xeeron 13:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)