Feedback talk:Rules

Re-releasing ideas and collaborative editing

"This means you can not move any post or idea from any other namespace here (User, ArenaNet, etc.) that have had any collaborative editing."

1. Can users repost here their suggestions from the ArenaNet namespace up to the last revision they made prior to any third part intervention?
2. Do multiple different suggestions from the ArenaNet namespace published in the same page/article (due to the sorting we had there) still count as a single "collaborative edit"?
3. Are rewordings of previously suggested ideas on the ArenaNet namespace allowed?--Fighterdoken 02:49, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

NO. Nothing from the ArenaNet namespace can be copy/pasted here. If a suggestion has been housed in userspace, with only the user/owner edits, it can be copy pasted here.

NO. No multi-idea pages are going to be allowed, since that would negate the entire listing system. Each poster takes responsibility for their own individual suggestion.

If you aren't the original poster of a suggestion leave it where it is. -- Wyn talk 02:56, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

That's pretty much the problem, i was the original poster of a suggestion that had to be posted on an already existing article due to the "related topic" rule, but whose suggestion was later edited by other users.

So... that means i can still re-suggest the same idea as long as i don't copy-paste my previous suggestion nor take anything from the other users? :).--Fighterdoken 03:04, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, of course. -- Wyn talk 03:06, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

For #1, I'd say yes. You're still agreeing to release your contribution under the appropriate license. It'd be the same as copying something from your userspace to here - it just happens to be another namespace. Just make sure you don't copy others' contributions, which is what the "collaborative editing" part is about. -- Brains12 \ talk 13:51, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

4. In addition to the previous questions, what restrictions are there in instances of project-partnerships (such as Lancy and I) or multiple collaborative users (aka Yullive's Ritualist Coalition)? ^_^ --Falconeye 03:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

In the case where you two have been actively collaborating on the ideas in userspace, one of you has to post it in feedback agreeing to the new licensing terms, and then every edit after is under the new terms. As long as you are still actively collaborating and both agree to release the ideas to ArenaNet, I don't see a problem. The issue starts where there have been annonymous or multiple edits by separate authors, and they either A)were IP's and therefore unidentified, or B)no longer active that there is a problem. We can't just "change" the submission licensing without someone's consent. You are giving consent by clicking on Save page in this namespace (not necessarily this page, but on the suggestion pages). -- Wyn talk 03:38, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Closing Filled Suggestions

Feedback:User/Ezekial_Riddle/Allow_heroes_in_the_guild_hall This feedback item has been resolved as far as I can tell. Is there any template that I can add to the page (or anything...) to indicate that? How are bugs pages marked when they're bugfixed? Should that same template be used for suggestions? --Emkyooess 21:13, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Post on the talk page and point out to the creator of it that it's no longer an issue. -- Wyn talk 21:32, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Ask the creator to add the "resolved" parameter to have the suggestion be excluded from the categories and lists. poke | talk 21:38, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Making feedback more friendly

Would it be reasonable for a template to be cooked up to add to suggestion pages (or only their talk pages) such that we can quickly have a table of "yes" or "no" (or a 1-5 number range perhaps) for how much people agree with the suggestion or its importance? I feel that such an organizational tool would be quite helpful, particularly as the area is already growing. This would help to reduce the simple "/agree" comment page posts by adding them to the template-table.

I see this achieving three goals:

• allow more people quickly to give rudimentary feedback ratings to suggestions.
• keep talk pages cleaner by reducing quick "/agree" posts that aren't otherwise constructive
• (most importantly) start to allow the community to develop a consensus of our desires for easier organization and, eventually presentation to ArenaNet. --Emkyooess

There's a lot of ideas and I'm sure few of us have time to review more than a small fraction. So, I like the idea of (a) encouraging more feedback and (b) helping peeps to see which ideas are well supported (and which aren't). I'd like to see more discussion about what constitutes a better feedback space; let's be clear on what issues we want to resolve before we get into details of the potential solutions.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 01:23, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

No voting, full stop. People need to verbalize their opinions about the suggestions, not just rate them. -- Wyn talk 01:27, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I have to agree with wyn here. I don't think voting on ideas would really accomplish much. As for "start to allow the community to develop a consensus of our desires for easier organization and, eventually presentation to ArenaNet"; the feedback space is the presentation of our ideas to ArenaNet. ANet is the only judge for these ideas, if they like an idea, they'll use it, our votes won't make a difference. Them not nerfing Shadow Form is blaring evidence of that. (Satanael | talk) 06:11, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

What constitutes as spamming?

First, I just want to say that I'm completely new to the whole wiki thing. I've never contributed to any wiki before. Please let me know if I am doing anything wrong.

"No suggestion spamming!"

I have a few dozen suggestions ranging from small UI tweaks to big-picture ideas. Should I limit my suggestions to only a few? --Arngrim 10:05, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Pick a couple of your favorite ones, post and develop them. You can add more as time progresses. It'd also be good if you checked the existing suggestions thoroughly first to make sure you're not duplicating any. (In that case, it's probably best you just contribute to that one on its talk page.) Posting a few dozen at once would definitely be overkill at this time. --Emkyooess 13:51, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

It may be possible to gather some suggestions together, too. Instead of making a page for "buff Fast Casting" and another for "nerf Critical Strikes", a single article with "changes to primary attributes" would be enough. Likewise, you could gather all your user interface tweaks in a single article, and so on. Erasculio 13:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

I have been looking through all of the GW2 suggestions, and I will definitely comment on those that are similar to mine. Also, is there a way to change the name of an article? For example, I want to add more ideas to a very specific suggestion that I had posted earlier. Therefore, it would be reasonable to make the title of that article more general to incorporate the added idea. --Arngrim 01:05, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Late response, but you can simply move the page to the new title, using the tab at the top. -- FreedomBound 14:37, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Must require template?

Without the {{GW feedback infobox}} the suggestions will not be categorized properly. Should this be added to the rules? -- Wyn talk 10:05, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it should be a rule, more a policy/guideline so that (other) contributors are empowered to add a missing template.

The existing rules are daunting to a notable subset of new contributors; I don't think adding another technical issue rule helps them. However, since Wyn points out an important wikicode requirement, we want to make sure that the rest of the community can quickly apply a fix. — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 16:29, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I will admit that I rarely go into the suggestions themselves to take a look at formatting. The error recognition for the feedback section does a good job in declaring the problems with big red letters. Perhaps under one of the FAQ or Help sections we can add what players must do if they see such a warning on their suggestion pages. I'm also not sure how I missed cleaning up Feedback:User/Kelvin82 on my last tour through the section. Thanks Wyn. G R E E N E R 18:00, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

TEF, I understand what you are saying, however, when it comes to Suggestions, we only have "Rules" we don't have a "Guidelines" page. I personally don't see adding this as being a huge leap. If people are following the instructions on how to create their suggestion pages, they have to actually remove the template from the preload. If they aren't following the instructions, they should be. -- Wyn talk 21:10, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

If they don't add the infobox, the suggestion won't be listed anywhere and as such isn't visible to developers. Just make that clear somewhere, and it is in implicit requirement. poke | talk 12:11, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Nested Pages in Suggestions

Hoping I haven't posted this in the wrong place or the wrong way, but couldn't find an answer easily available; is it against the rules of the suggestion section to have your suggestion link to subpages( that subpage being within the feedback namespace, of course) that explain that part of the suggestion better? For example, if I've posted a suggestion on a new race for introduction into Guild Wars 2, and I've got a section on explaining a location that will break the flow of the suggestion otherwise, is it okay to link that location as a subpage?

Apologies if this is badly written, still getting used to the wiki. Thanks for any reply. MularcTemplare 06:59, 17 September 2011 (UTC)