Category talk:Alliances seeking guilds

Difference between categories

What I am trying to do here is make a "new" category. Because by "Recruiting guilds", it means guilds that want new members. But with "Alliance seek guilds", I am trying to make a list so all alliances can grow by getting more guilds aligned to them. Yoshida Keiji 10:37, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Before "moving" this page, make sure to read http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Talk:Alliance as clearly, there is a problem.Yoshida Keiji 11:33, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

That and this are unrelated. Konig/talk 11:41, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

→ moved from Category:Recruiting alliances

I inicially thought of using the word "recruiting". But I didnt use it, and you tell me that I called with "an incorrect name". That is because inviting "new members" is not exactly the same as inviting "new guilds".I find the procedure to be totally different. Of course both requiere you to enter name and 100g for member and 1platinum for guild. But my point goes beyond this. Because you are negotiating terms with an entire group that has a max capacity for 100 players. That is why "recruiting" didnt feel right to me. What you can expect from a guild member is not the same of what an alliance can expect from the other guilds.

That is also because alliances dont exactly need to spam messages in towns and outposts to get new guilds. Sometimes other guilds may already know people as to get in touch with the right guy. For instance, my guild has been in all major Luxon town owning alliances and after year and a half... I know the names of many guild leaders, even Kurzick ones. This is why I chose "seek" word as for listings, and of course for other guilds in search process, not mine.Yoshida Keiji 11:49, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Guilds seeking alliances

(Reset indent) Categories have to include a plural for the noun, since the idea is that there is going to be more than one article listed. Since the articles will always be in the "guild" space, the members of the category will be guilds.

Guilds seeking alliances works for an individual guild looking to join a bigger alliance, but it also works (with only moderate contortions) for an alliance seeking to add a guild: technically, only the alliance-leading guild can add new guilds, and therefore (technically again) it is that guild which is seeking other guilds.

Mind you, I'm not in the least convinced that GWW is a good place to seek a guild (either for members or other guilds) or a good place to recruit (either players or guilds)...which is vaguely borne out by the fact that there are only two members in this category. (There are also other metrics available suggesting these categories aren't as effective enough to be useful, but that's a separate topic.)

But, since we have other recruiting cats, I see no harm in adding one more (with arguably broader utility than many of the existing cats). – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 18:18, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

One day, I was going to come back for this, seems the time has been hasted oh well, let's face it. Going back to the roots, I don't know since when and how guilds were allowed to create their pages in wiki (and since I'm answering to TEF's comment I can hope and wish he is going to link me a page or two so I can read all the history, and you know I will read "all" the history).

I can understand why you say "(technically)". I will change the last word, because "technically", a guild can join one alliance only.

I disagree though about TEF's proposal of fussing both "Alliances that seek guilds" with "Guilds that seek alliance", because when (in a theoretical imagination) guilds/alliances were to start using this category the result itself would be very messy. The category would list both together and you tell me...: How is a reader going to find what he/she wants without getting the opposite results half the time? Like:...."-WTF...I keep getting what I don't want to read...-".

We need to realize the truth "behind" our reality. If we were to have both categories as I suggest above and those were already included in the Template:Guild. You would see the results growing better. Of course by the time I created this page, I was a wiki-baby and had little idea of how these communities work.

Now addressing utility observation: In all my years of GW, I have most of the time found that the best guilds/alliances were/are/and will be the ones with a wiki-page because it demonstrates the level of organization a group has, either poor or excellent (some guild pages suck, others are fantastic. The best guild page I know is Avalons Wraiths [AW]). It has been a very useful tool for those dealing with management. Any serious leader finds wiki a good source when dealing with Administration topics. There definitely should be a source for this but if it is not in wiki...then where? It will definitely pop up again somewhere... and that would be very sad if you ask me. We should have all in one place instead of going to several different places... maybe wiki shakes hands with another type of wiki and are inter-linked somehow. Yoshida Keiji talk 13:01, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

tl;dr version: I'm ok with YK's plan to create Guilds seeking alliances and Alliances seeking guilds.

My experience w/using GWW as a guild-seeking resource is different: every time in the last year I've gone searching for a guild via the wiki (using one of the recruiting cats and looking at the last edited dates on the wiki page), none of the named recruiters/contacts were online. Yes, some guilds are better organized on the wiki, but it hasn't actually enabled me to find anyone in-game. Further, this category currently only includes two articles. And finally: GW2 is going to leech a lot of people from GW1 to GW2. So... I'm not sure that any of these categories will have much utility.

That said, I accept YK's assertion that there's an important difference between Guilds seeking alliances and Alliances seeking guilds and I don't have any real objection to separating them...except why have two cats when there aren't that many guilds making use of them? If I were a guild or alliance leader, I'd just as soon not have to look at two pages...but I also accept that such is my personal preference, not necessarily shared by others.

Regarding truth behind our reality: the earth is located on the back of a large turtle (not the Luxon one). Not sure how that affects the wiki, tho ;-)

@YK: I'm going to post on your talk page my rant about Guild/Guild space/background. Short story: I don't know the exact background, I just know that no one was every satisfied with the setup. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 16:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Category was moved after three days and the alternative Category was created as well. Yoshida Keiji talk 22:52, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks for updating the convo with the outcome. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 03:30, 13 July 2012 (UTC)