Talk:Developer and GM Commands

Confirmation
Fireworks is verified. Izzy spawned fireworks in our guildhall for helping in testing the automatic tournaments. http://www.ehhs.cmich.edu/~zha249/GuildWars/fun/ATtest/9.jpg --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:12.168.77.2.
 * So xoo ist still playing with gale warriors? Oh, the days... ~ dragon legacy  18:12, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

usefulness?
Other than being a compilation of unusable commands that may or may not have a function, what value is this to the typical user? It's trivia, yes. But much of it is comprised of "perhaps does ...", or "This most likely ...", or "Maybe ..." or a few other words that all mean one thing: the actual function of the command is a total guess. It can be confirmed that the commands are recognized by the game system, but it's a total unknown if all of these were ever fully programmed, and if so what they actually perform. Not the kind of factual content that should be tracked. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:46, 9 May 2007 (EDT)


 * I am going to have to agree with Barek and wonder why this content is on this page, since a good majority of it is labelled as "unknown" and is, in fact, incorrect information. Like Mike mentioned on the other discussion about this topic, it doesn't seem to make sense to "document" items that are speculation and of no valuable use to players. Additionally, this is not information that any member of the dev team will step in and correct, so it will continue to be a speculation page. In my personal opinion, pages like this really don't hold much benefit in the long run since wikis are meant to document facts and not possibilities. --[[Image:UserEmilyDiehlStar.gif]] Emily Diehl (talk) 21:37, 9 May 2007 (EDT)


 * i myself don't see much use for this article other than it's an interesting bit of trivia. i'm always eager to peer into the guts of a game, but i'll agree that the article is pretty pointless in all other aspects.  my additions were a result of playing around with the command syntax through trial and error.  perhaps appended it to Special commands?  68.99.1.100 21:59, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
 * If most of them is actually known and there's a way of verifying at least some of them, then I may see a point in mentioning them. But since most of them are only for Anet developers to test things on internal test servers, I fail to see the point in adding speculative information, especially information that can't be tracked. For all we know, some of these might already have been removed or renamed as development and testing continues. Any mention of this as trivia on Special commands should really be limited to a sentence or two.-- ab.er. rant [[Image:User Ab.er.rant Sig.png|sig]] 01:03, 10 May 2007 (EDT)


 * I think I can live without having these commands on the wiki. Still, we've compiled quite a list and even though most commands are unknown, the list is nice to look at. ~ dragon legacy  04:35, 10 May 2007 (EDT)


 * I suggest deleting all unconfirmed commands. At the moment the article looks bloated with unneccassary things from (sorry) "uber"motivated users. The verified parts are a nice trivia to me (and others). --BigBlue [[Image:Monk 20.png]] talk 06:40, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

Avoiding a Revert War
Could I ask that no more reverts take place on this page? Thanks. -  Drago 21:36, 9 May 2007 (EDT)