Category talk:Builds

Other Wiki format for builds allowed?

I've read the FAQ and understand how the other site's content has to come into this site with the consent of the content originators and all that. My question here is more along the lines of what kind of content will be allowed in the "official" wiki. The builds section from the other wiki was extremely useful to the community, yet it's a subjective topic that changes constantly with the metagame. Will we be allowed to put similar/identical content, with similar/identical processes like "vetting builds" and so forth on this site? Are there already template links for the skill bar and skill template and so forth and will we be allowed to rebuild them like they were?Jkyarr 13:30, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

Look here. To make it short, the current answer to your question is no - there will not be a similar way of dealing with builds than the one used in GuildWiki. Erasculio 13:33, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

im completely new here and wondering how i can post my builds? maverick

Maverick: See your talk page for an answer. Thanks! MisterPepe talk 18:35, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

The old guildwiki is going to delete their builds if i copy and pasted them all here would that be violating copyright laws? or is it allowed?

1. Yes, you would be violating copyright with the vast majority of the builds. 2. You can't copy them here, GWW:CONTENT#Builds disallows all builds on the Guild Wars Wiki. Sorry. --Dirigible 18:10, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Seeing as how the other wiki has decided to delete their build page what would be the point in doingso to ours? "little as it may be lol" Morimoto 00:10, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

I think that in being the offical wiki it should be allowed for members to post builds they found helpful to help all members of the GW community. With http://gw.gamewikis.org removing there build section where will members turn for reliable builds? Zerosmileyguy 01:46, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

The current decision to not host any build here is (probably) temporary, as we would likely go into something that is close to the NOB policy on GWiki (no original builds, only builds that are so common in game that a new player might see it requested and thus try to figure what it is about), and even those are likely going to be guides, not builds. I can't believe the mess that exists in the GWiki was helpful at all, and so I'm relieved to see that the discussions here are going in a different direction from that methodology. Erasculio 08:09, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

So only common builds that people ask about, huh? Ever since the Soul Reaping nerf, my [Minion Bombing (very comprehensive) guide on Guru] is about to break 11K total views. The one day I take a break from LOTRO, and play some GW, I get whispers from people I don't even know, asking about my build. Not that I'm complaining or bragging, I'm just stating facts. BarGamer 02:20, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Varying thoughts. I think that ya the other wiki was a complete mess in the builds section and it is best that we wait to post builds on here until we have a community acceptable Build posting policy. Though I do know a lot of ppl that benefited from the old wiki's build section so I still believe we need some type of Builds section even if we have restricted rules. Merlin 00:05, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Ya i know in may the other wiki is gonna delite their builds, but why? I benefited a lot from the build website, and thought it was a much more organized way of finding and posting builds than say... in guild wars guru forums. What was wrong with it, the procedure seemed simple enough, you post a build, it is discussed (some very thoroughly), and if it recieves enough votes it is placed in the "favored" section for everyone to see as a workable build, and then if it begins to stink or people start to dislike it, it becomes unfavored and stored for reference. Crime Mob

First, THIS IS NOT GUILDWIKI. I'm just making sure that that's clear - simply put, if you post here saying that you don't understand the reasons A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT WEBSITE is doing something, no one will care. I suggest you bring up any complaints or suggestions on the appropriate site (guildwiki). Second, the builds policy is still being discussed - if you have any good suggestions for the way we should set things up here, we'd love to hear them. On that page, not this one. And remember, it's not bloody GuildWiki. Third, voting is an easily abused system, at least on the internet. For example, today, the site [1] organized a mass voting to promote the silliest possible answer to an online poll. It ended up winning with 76% of the vote, btw. Not that that's really a discussion for here, either - once again, the builds policy discussion page would be the best place for any of this, assuming it's not more about GuildWiki (which, last time I checked, was still a different site). Thank you. MisterPepe talk 21:50, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

We should just delete this category right now. Someone obvisouly started it up and there isn't even a single thing in it, so why keep it here?--Eloc 21:54, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

I actually found that the guild wiki site was VERY helpful. When i needed to learn new builds or understand one or find a build that was better than one that i couldn't use figure out or it just didn't work. I think that it was very smart and easy. You could possibly add a search bar like on Rune HQ which i used when I played runescape. The search bar made finding things a snap. If you do that then you will be able to do this just like Guild Wiki did but without the mess.

Not Bloody GuildWiki?

MisterPepe, woohoo, what a brain! Let's keep it civil, why don't we? People are really hosed that GuildWiki is deleting its VERY HELPFUL builds section. If this "official" late-comer wiki wants to make ANY inroads into being a helpful community reference for our beloved game, they need to do TWO THINGS: 1) Decide on how to host build info, and decide FAST; and 2) Get off your high horse and recognize that GuildWiki is (has been) THE definitive Wiki on GuildWars. The fact that ANY wiki is a community project means that dumb decisions will be made (as in deleting ALL builds from GuildWiki), and this wiki needs to respond in a SANE manner. Your response is just downright mean and unhelpful. --Queen of Spades 16:38, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

Congratulations. You missed the complete point of the post - that this was not the proper place to discuss any of these issues. Any build section discussions should be discussed on the builds policy talk page, not here. The other half, regarding GuildWiki, was that this is also not the proper place to discuss any issues someone has with the way GuildWiki is doing things - if you want to argue policy for this wiki, do it on the policy page I just linked (again). If you want to argue something about the other wiki, do it there. I hardly see how redirecting someone to the proper location does not qualify as "SANE." Of course, if you're referring to the way that I stressed certain parts of that message, I feel that it's perfectly justified considering the number of times I've had to redirect people to the proper location (really quite a lot - an absurd number, even) for this, even branching out into talk pages. If this is the place where people go to look for this sort of thing (which, once again, it shouldn't be), then it looks like I need to add the link yet again. Here it is once more: the builds policy talk page. That's the fourth time it's been linked on this one page, and yet, people still seem to think that this is the place to talk about build ideas.

Now, why do I feel it's important to stress the difference between here and GuildWiki? It's due to a couple of things - first, I never helped out on GuildWiki. Ever. Not a single edit. Did I mention ever? This is a different site, with different people working on it. Because of that, I really believe in the process of coming up with a new policy from scratch for everything - this is a different group of people with a different set of ideas, so I don't want to ever hear a "because GuildWiki did it" suggestion. That policy page that I keep linking (number five) has all of the pros, cons, and arguments regarding this issue, so it's not something that needs to talk about here. Second, I actually disagree that the build section of GuildWiki was ever any good - as a PvP player (actually, really only GvG), I was quite aware of the ratio of dreck to useful information. I'm not a big fan of GuildWiki's build section, but, once again, this is still not a discussion for this page. Once more, in case anyone here missed the entire point of this message: go to the builds policy talk page to help decide the policy. I hope that helps clarify things somewhat. Thanks =P MisterPepe talk 23:15, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

Amen! ~ Kurd17:28, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Just because you look at things one way, doesn't mean everyone does. One link is fine, you don't need 6, no one likes a smart alec. Bluemilkman 22:40, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

adding a build

I know were not PvX, but i think we should add an article for the 130 dervish. It's a staple build of the GW community, and should be included for people who are new to GW and/or want more information on farming and the rest of GW. I'd be happy to create an article for it in my free time ^^--Raph Talky 20:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead and edit it. If the build is common, we should describe it. --Xeeron 10:45, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

mk....not sure when itl be done though. Dou you want me to put it under User:Raph till its done or not?--Raph Talky 13:10, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

You can, if you want to, but there is nothing wrong with creating half done articles in the normal namespace. After all this is a wiki and there might be others who want to edit it as well. --Xeeron 13:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Alright, ill get started :D--Raph Talky 14:55, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Move from PvX Wiki, and other Such Sites

Perhaps we should move all the builds from those sites to here. Personally, after doing some scans on the sites, a majority of the pictures and links are safe, others hold Malware. These are from my own scans. If you have different scans, please post them on my talk page. Plus, how hard can it be to move a few texts and numbers to a new page? It would give this wiki a few more pages itself. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Thecutnut (talk).

What "scans" are you talking about? And before you start copying builds into the wiki, please read GWW:BUILD (as well as the talk page if you're interested in the discussion). We prefer not to host specific builds. PvXwiki is doing a good job about it and I see no reason why we need to duplicate the effort. -- ab.er.rant 04:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I do agree PvX wiki is doing a good job, but whenever I run through their website (attempted every page) I received a spyware notification by my Firewall. Then, I scan, and spyware ploop pops up. There are already a few builds on this page, why not move the ones on PvX Wiki? Does this Wiki not want specific builds? I've noticed that some of the builds describe some general skills used in that certain build. If not wanting specific builds is the case, I will back away from this topic. Thecutnut 02:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep. We don't want specific builds. Build concepts are fine. It was decided that we'd rather just have broad summaries or analysis of build types. -- ab.er.rant 03:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Spyware on PvX? I am not saying it's not true, but I would be very surprised if it was. A ton of people visits that page, why would noone else have noticed yet? My money is on your firewall messing up. --Xeeron 20:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

People may have not noticed it yet, because I only noticed a few times. It was on one spell that I was looking up. Not going to say which one for two reasons, I forgot and I don't to give people Spyware. It was a Ritualist skill, that's all I remember. Thecutnut 05:54, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, my apologies. Thecutnut 04:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Bunny Thumper

I added Bunny Thumper to the build category, any objections to that? (It was in the glossary already) Sylvavi 14:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Do we really need this article?

Sections like this belong to PvX and not here imo. Vortex ™ 08:05, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

See Guild Wars Wiki:Builds. -- Brains12 \ talk 16:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)