Help talk:Contents

From Guild Wars Wiki
Revision as of 15:31, 7 January 2008 by Pling (talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

those icons...

scary... just scary... --Jamie (Talk Page) 17:09, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

D= I like those icons T_T MisterPepe talk 17:11, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

I hate them. Something less freaky and more GWish plz — Skuld 08:53, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

Gwen chan 2.gif
I've been messing around with some of the Gwen-chan and Dr. Boar images (, and I kind of like some of them, but I'm not sure if I can come up with enough different ones to fill out a page like this. I still like the Nuvola icon set that I've been using, but if there's enough people that want something more GWish, I'll see how far I can get with making a chibi GW icon set =) There is one tiny flaw in the image (I've got a fixed version, I just didn't want to reupload), but it's got transparency and all that good stuff.
Anyway, unless there's enough people that want something more along these lines (there are also smaller ones, and a few different versions - I even have one of the frog that I'm messing around with), I'll probably leave it alone, as it's a fair bit of work to make these and figure out how to reformat all of the pages to fit them =P Anyway, let me know what you think - if enough people want them, I'll finish making the set. MisterPepe talk 18:21, 29 April 2007 (EDT)
I think the idea of using Gwen-chan and Dr. Boar images is awesome and hilarious, personally. ~ Kailianna Firesoul 18:30, 29 April 2007 (EDT)
Here's a picture of the frog, also from that same section of the website. MisterPepe talk 18:51, 29 April 2007 (EDT)
I think we're getting there. These are a lot better than non-descript, no-Guild Wars icons, good work :) just do it tastefully. --Jamie (Talk Page) 04:17, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
Did you draw those yourself MisterPepe? They are really cool! LordBiro 04:31, 30 April 2007 (EDT) just saw the link to ¬_¬ ... nm! LordBiro 04:33, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
I'd also prefer icons that are at least somewhat related to GW. Even if they aren't all chibi. -- sig 02:23, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

(RI) I've been fiddling with it - take a look: User:MisterPepe/Sandbox (bottom of the page). Honestly, that's probably the best I can do - I phail@HTML and wikicode =P Formatting suggestions are welcome, though - I probably know enough to fix that ;) I'm usually pretty good at fixing something once I know what it should look like, I'm just really, really bad at formatting in general =P MisterPepe talk 10:47, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

Nice design, Pepe :) I changed the code to clean it up and removed the round borders because we don't use them anywhere else (and it's not valid css btw.) poke | talk 13:28, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
Help! Image overload!
No, but seriously, I think there is too many images compared to the amount of text on this page :) Maybe just use the big Gwens here? - anja talk (contribs) 13:43, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
I tried it with bullets and a few other options - this one looked the best by far. MisterPepe talk 13:44, 11 May 2007 (EDT)

Help pages needed.

Going to list them here as they pop up. If anyone wants to do them before I get around to it, you're more than welcome to. :)

Help:Reverting → how to revert, how to undo, differences between the two, and of course something in big bold blinking letters telling people to not start revert wars. w:Help:Reverting and meta:Help:Reverting should be useful.

--Dirigible 17:25, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

I'll see if I can whip something up. MisterPepe talk 20:34, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
MMk. Take a look. MisterPepe talk 23:18, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
Woo, looks great! Thanks. :) Do we link it from the Help:Contents page? --Dirigible 03:45, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
A while ago we discussed the ideal location for the redirects article. Since we encourage pretty much every kind of redirect on this wiki it was felt that it shouldn't go into policy, and while help was the obvious choice the help namespace at the time was empty. Since the help namespace seems to actually be taking off, I've moved the article to Help:Redirect :) LordBiro 04:20, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
I only just noticed this and I'm actually in disagreement. To me, a help on redirect is just the first section of Help:Redirect and above. A how-to for redirects is what fits into help. What tags it should be used and in what situation they apply should be left in the formatting guidelines, so yes, I'm suggesting splitting it. The top part easily fits into any help article on editing. The formatting article should focus on explaining what tags to use and what situation they apply.
This is, of course, assuming we even need those Wikipedia-style redirect categories. What are the pros of categorising redirects? If we do categorise them, obviously I think they need to be plural and every type of redirect would need their own template and category as well, for consistency. -- sig 02:21, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
Maybe we just can add the "How To" to Help:Editing. I want to restyle Help:Editing to fit the other help pages, so I could just add the redirect-"how to" there.
We also need a link to Help:Reverting. There is no help page that links to it. Should I put a link in the navbar? poke | talk 04:11, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
Possibly as a second row on the navbar? I also changed #REDIRECT to #redirect. I figure since we're using #if and #switch (lowercase) everywhere, don't see any reason why redirect has to be in all uppercase. -- sig 05:33, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

(reset indent) I don't think a link on the navbar is neccessary as it is not that big subject. I would prefer a new section here with helpful links. poke | talk 05:53, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

Help:Redirect needs some attention too. LordBiro 05:56, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
No comment on my comment regarding it above? -- sig 06:07, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
Oh, sorry Aberrant ;) Well... I don't really care. I don't think there's enough information to justify a formatting article myself. I don't particularly support categorisation of redirects, I don't particularly oppose it either :)
All I think is that there needs to be a help article for redirects, because we should be encouraging users to make redirects whenever possible. LordBiro 08:33, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
Hm, ok. Then I will restyle the page. And then I make a nice list on this page for Help information like this :) poke | talk 08:39, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
I'm currently working on a new version of Help:Contents that uses the icons mentioned a little higher on the page =) While I love this one as-is, the new version is a little cooler ;) Anyway, look forward to it in the next couple of days. Much joy. MisterPepe talk 10:16, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
(edit conflict - ah xD) Ok, I restyled the page. But I need to revise the content. I also added links to Help:Contents. poke | talk 10:18, 10 May 2007 (EDT)

"if help is going to be included in the template then the template should be here"

Disagree! :) It looks confusing with two bars like that. I just slightly changed both the navbars with a → at the end, so it's implied that you are moving from one section ("Community") to the next ("Help"), which is in my opinion a good excuse for Help Center to not have both navbars, but only the help one. What do you think? --Dirigible 06:04, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

I noticed the arrow, and I was going to ask what it was meant to imply! I don't think it implies that you are leaving this section, but anyway, I'll explain my reasoning :)
I was checking that the size of the GWW header was correct since I'd altered it, and so I started clicking through each page in the header. When I clicked on "Help" the template disappeared. This was a bit confusing. Of course, I can click the back button, but when you have a navigation template like this you expect it to be included on every page it links to.
I think that we should either keep the two navigation templates on Help:Contents or we should remove the link to help from the GWW header. LordBiro 06:23, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
To be honest I'm actually favouring removing help from the template all together; the purpose of GWW navbar is to navigate through the various sections of the GWW namespace. Help is not part of this namespace so it shouldn't be there. We wouldn't put "Policy" in the Help navbar, would we? LordBiro 06:25, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
Ok, I had missed your edit to the help navbar... and apparently we would. lol.
Needless to say I disagree with that as well :P LordBiro 06:27, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
Not sure, I kinda like the idea of connecting the two sections together, like one of those old style fansite webrings. :) --Dirigible 06:42, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
I like the idea of linking with the template with those arrows. Double navigation templates on help page did not look good. - MSorglos 07:09, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
To be honest, I dislike the idea of linking these two templates. I feel it is confusing to the average user, and could be better remedied by providing a help link on the sidebar. I feel that the two feel with fundamentally different topics: that one deals with average users looking for help on how to accomplish things, and the other deals with a bunch of different topics that either need help (RFC, projects, etc...) or should be compulsory reading (Formatting/Policy - for both experienced and new editors). To summarise, for me: GWW navbar header = what can I help with? and Help navbar header = How the hell do I do that? :) Just my 2c... --Indecision 07:37, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
Yes, I agree with Indecision. Help probably should be in the navigation sidebar (I had delayed adding this because I wanted to see how much attention it got first) and the help and GWW headers should be mutually exclusive. LordBiro 07:46, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

That "Help in nav sitebar" is even better than linking the templates. Linking I thought would be good for "here are some more pages which could help/where to help". With help besides community portal in navigation these two do not need inter-linking any more. - MSorglos 09:06, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

Le sigh. Once again outnumbered. But you haven't heard the last of me, I will be back! :P Separating the navbars now. --Dirigible 18:39, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
I'm confused about something... why are we making it difficult to get to the Help:Contents page? My first edit that probably triggered this was meant for people to reach here. If you're going to set up a "Help" page at least put a link that easily seen and easily reached. Right now, casual readers won't even know of the existence of this page... so if I clicked on the community portal, since it says "community", I don't expect to only find "things to do". I also expect to find things that has to do with a community, like getting help from the community... -- sig 21:23, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
Biro's going to place the help center in the sidebar, methinks. --Dirigible 01:42, 28 April 2007 (EDT)