Talk:Gold trim guilds/List of gold trimmed guilds

No Golds, No List

Any guild who does not have a gold trim should not be listed on this, even if it is due to a bug. 165.225.35.10 13:25, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Future of this list

Since we've missed last month's winner and I have stopped caring about the list anyway, I suggest a split: A list up to and including the February 2013 winner (Waffle Formation), since that's the last month which was engraved into the aTS Trophies at GToB and saved for posteriority. And then lock it. Second list, everything afterwards and open to edits. With a note that it isn't complete. Thoughts? I think something similar had been suggested before (by Auron(?)) Steve1 (talk) 18:25, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

The first page sounds good to me, the second one seems a bit pointless. I feel like if a user really wants to denote that their guild won, they can do so on their userpage. PvP is such a joke these days that I don't really think it's worth documenting "winners." horrible | contribs 18:37, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

There's a website that tracks tournament matches these days (https://memorial.redeemer.biz/memorial/all/). We could make the archive page and say "here are the old ones, check this website for new ones." That one relies on user-submitted builds and replays but it's probably more complete than we could hope to make a list. -Auron 19:11, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I think this is a good suggestion. I agree with having the list go up to the trophies and leaving all later guilds to memorial. Would you also take the time to correct the quantities on the guilds with multiple golds to remove any wins after this trophy period? If the post-trophy removes all the guilds falling under this classification, feel free to ignore this suggestion (I really have lost track and don't have much time invested in GW these days) Gladiator Motoko (talk) 21:35, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and removed the guilds who won March 2013 onward and made some other verbal changes to the page. If I missed any guilds, feel free to correct. Again, if you feel some guilds with multiple wins should have post-feb 2013 wins not counted in their total, I am up for it too. I added the memorial link to the bottom. If this is the change you would like to stick with, I recommend locking it when you are done to prevent unruly PvPers who overly care about a guild name from vandalizing the site. Let me know if you need any information from me to contribute to the page. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 21:55, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Just a quick add for reasoning - If THE list of gold trims has fallen to disarray and is poorly upkept, I can only expect that a secondary list of 2013+ would receive equal neglect and even less attention. The memorial site is still actively maintained and allows for commentary and notes often restricted by Wiki rules. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 22:21, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

I totally forgot about the new memorial ... oh well. My reasoning for splitting: The community has worked for over 7 years to keep the whole list up to date. And it is up to and including August 2020. Didn't want all that work go to waste by removing it. But I'm fine with not having any later winners on the wiki. ANd I'm for the change to chronological order. Steve1 (talk) 13:47, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

There has been a bit of an outcry from the PvP community (who aren't comfortable posting here) about the removal of info. I would support maintaining the info on more recent winners in some manner - a separate table or a separate page, either is fine with me. And maybe a requirement to link to an external source to prove a tournament win to prevent/mitigate edit wars or drama. We can also re-add the number of gold-trim wins, but not have it be the default sort for the old list (chronological makes more sense in that regard). -Auron 19:44, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

The outcry from a very tiny portion of the PvP community shouldn't dictate what is done here. I would find that methodology to be the same as having a the PC social media minority to get companies to make sweeping changes to cater to a few offended. The only reason the upset PvPers have given is that is useful information "to find out who played for the guild". Unfortunately, the guilds stopped creating webpages to show the players who played in them and therefor makes the claim of "finding out who played for that guild" to be a baseless claim. All of this information is available on the GW memorial in much more detail. Also, the amount of golds can be found by clicking on a guild's HTML assuming a guild has made one. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 19:51, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for maintaining the list of guilds for so long, and I understand not wanting to do it anymore. A lot of the 2013-2020 information here is not only useful to many players, but also unique to this site. You have players' commonly known names listed on the guild pages, instead of the potentially unrecognizeable character name they played the match with (which is how Memorial shows it). This page was also extremely useful for searching guilds by tag. It would be a shame to simply discard seven years of data, whether or not the list is discontinued & locked. I think the best solution is to keep the note about refering to memorial for data more recent than the cutoff, but also keep what was here before (whether it's part of the main page or some "sub-page").
Regarding the the 2019 bot guild drama, I think that the title of this page clearly states that it's simply a list of guilds with a gold trim. The insulting part is how the cheating players seek attention by submitting their own guild pages. Simply having the cheating guild listed as a "gold trim guild" with no hyperlink to a page of the players boastingly adding their names wouldn't bother very many people.
Motoko has grievously misrepresented GvG community opinion in this discussion. Every single person who discussed this change on the GvG discord today was opposed to him taking the initiative of needlessly deleting this list. Calling people who disagree with him "a very tiny portion of the PvP community" and "the PC social media minority" in his reply here is nothing short of laughable. If you'd like to read the discussion for yourself, then paste this page's link into Discord search on this server: https://discord.gg/74tKzsE
Anyway, thanks again for your work on this Wiki, and for containing Motoko.
Slamspam (talk) 00:14, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I have accurately represented the GvG community. Just because you disagree with my representation and the plenty of players who agree with it does not make it wrong. The players that agree with me just know better than to get involved with trolling discussions you partake in. Feel free to try and post an argument - but when you post personal attacks about something you know nothing of, you lose credibility. Thank you mods for facilitating an open discussion. I am thankful you do not simply bow to someone who discovered GvG last year. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 01:28, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Oh you absolutely have misrepresented the GvG community. I would like to quote this off the QQ discord, just so I don't have to type this myself: https://imgur.com/jCULh71 - you are the whole reason this whole page got messed up. The main purpose of this page was to be able to check who was in which guild, and when which guilds won. After the guild page creation was gone the newe information on this page were just the guild names, without the information which is unique to this site (names and further trivia, like Slamspam said). The page has been in a really bad shape because of that, and people don't bother adding stuff anymore. Can you believe it?! It wasn't just one person adding stuff on here, but if you lock it for members only to edit, disable account creation and remove guild page creation this is the exact result you get: a useless page. I vote for bringing back guild page creation, filling the blanks on the old page and keeping it as it was. I can't believe that people managing this website don't get the fundamentals of a wiki and keep on catering to Motoko. This wiki is sponsored by ArenaNet, referring to another third party website to replace adding the crucial information here is the dumbest thing I heard in ages. What if the other website shuts down? I guess it also applies to my screenshot posted above. Lynie (talk) 09:37, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect. Based on what you have quoted - you admit the botters are the reason the page was messed up. Botters refused to have their cheating noted on their ill-gained success. This supports all of the above notes where everyone is aware of your bot sympathizing/hacking attitude. If botters added their guild and their name to the list and could have accepted a note about their cheating, this page would have never been locked to begin with. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 14:10, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Pointless bickering and tangents aside, the goal of the wiki is to document the game. This page, the information it contains, and the guild namespace itself, are all secondary to that. I was in favor of restricting the list to those on trophies for two main reasons: 1) Those exist in game, and are easily verified as being accurate. 2) We do not need to document every player, guild, or chat message. From what I can tell, this clean up was triggered due to the people who were maintaining this article missing a set of winners. If they no longer want to maintain the list, and no one else wants to do so, then the choices are between having a limited, verified list, and an incomplete unverified list. I prefer the former. If members of the remaining GvG community want to participate in the wiki to improve the list, then I welcome you to do so - just don't expect other people to maintain it for you. horrible | contribs 14:35, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Agreed @Horrible. I find the way the list is right now to be in line with existing in game and verified by Anet. Two additional pieces at the bottom support this: rawr's temp trim removal and avg permanent cape removal from cheating. Both were recognized by Anet. Several other guilds have cheated but were unofficially recognized by anet for doing so. I also think the gwmemorial link at the bottom of the list is sufficient. The only other option would be to replace the link to gwmemorial with a link to a second player maintained list that would allow for notes about cheating etc. if the community consensus agrees. Maybe we even link to both gwmemorial and a second wiki page with 2013+ wins. It really doesn't matter. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 14:53, 21 October 2020 (UTC)