Guild Wars Wiki talk:Community portal/Archive 15

User warning templates

I think we should consider user warning templates similar to the ones on Wikipedia. I think the most useful warning template would be a template explaining why the GFDL attribution clause makes cut & paste moves problematic. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 03:42, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

i think it would be a good idea. some standardization would do us all a lot of good imho.- Zesbeer 05:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I actually disagree.. Templates (welcoming or warning ones) on talk page had lead to problems in the past, and personal messages work a lot better.. Also it is much less complicated with just writing one sentence about what you want to warn about, and you can give even special details if needed, instead of learning hundreds of weird template names that probably will never be used anyway (just looking at that Wikipedia page makes me crazy). poke | talk 10:21, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

The wiki is still too small for templates to actually be needed. Rarely does a type of vandal show up where they actually need to be warned; the most I've seen are vandal bots. Its not hard to type out a warning message for one or even five vandals. -- Traveler 15:34, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Poke and WT (and I think so has the consensus the last couple of times template-messages have come up). I'm not sure how many occurrences of copy-paste attribution problems we've had, but I think personalised and contextual explanations would be more useful than a generic template in most or all situations. -- pling 18:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I think in general, standardized generic templates have too much of a tendency to be dismissed as "automatic" warnings. I much prefer warnings stand as something that is clearly one human being talking to (presumably) another. If something requires more information than should reasonably be expected to be typed in a short note on a talk page, we can always make a Help: page for people to link to for further information. Also, my visceral reaction to that Wikipedia list of templates is that it's pretty ridiculous and you'd spend more time searching for the right template than it takes to type a short note. - Tanetris 20:07, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

No I don't think the template would be good. I mean look at my wikipedia talk. Templates get cluttered. --Dominator Matrix 20:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

What the others said: Personal message > template. Btw, Wikipedia does even have a template for people being annoyed with templates: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Don%27t_template_the_regulars --Xeeron 21:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

ratehr then gettin some warning templates (which none find funny ) why dont we get out this wole gdfl thing? it hasnt doen anything good for anyone and harms many cases many sites wouldnt complin about 127.0.0.1 22:14, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Sadly, we have to obey very stringent copyright law as the rest of the world does. And I agree with consensus, forgot to chip in last night, that personalized messages are far less and intimidating and far more effective. We aren't a massive wiki in which every corner can't be personally managed, so I don't see a real need for automated warning templates. calor (talk) 22:25, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

sadly almost every copyright owner allows noncmercial use specially when its a tiny thing as User:Unendingfears manga icon 127.0.0.1 23:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the only area of this wiki that the community has zero say over is the copyright. That is solely determined by ArenaNet. While the community can discuss it to it's heart's content, we can not change it. We have approached ArenaNet on numerous occasions to lift the restrictions on "Fair Use" images, and have received a resounding NO from ArenaNet. This however, has nothing to do with the use of warning templates, which I personally am against. A personalized note is a much better way to notify a user they have breached a policy. -- Wyn talk 23:21, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm against most warning templates, not sure what peoples views on my image naming template is since I haven't used it in quite a while but I've never had anyone complain about it so far when I have used it. --Kakarot 23:29, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I believe warning templates for cut & paste moves and merges wolud be particularly useful because the issues are rare and hard to explain, and we don't currently have any policy or guideline which explicitly prohibits them, or any page which explains why they're problematic. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:13, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Since the focus by the detractors seems to be on the automated messaging, wouldn't it be better to simply create the pages that explain why they're problematic, and allow users writing personalized notes to the user to link to said page? -- FreedomBound 13:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1 billion

The wiki has almost had 1 billion views according to statistics. Pretty incredible! Does anyone who has been watching more closely have a prediction for when it will happen? Manifold 04:43, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

5 more million. --Dominator Matrix 13:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

my feedback

Dunno if this is the right place to ask, but I'd love to see a "my feedback" link at the top next to "my watchlist/talk/preferences/etc." Would be very handy. Rose Of Kali 19:39, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Since feedback pages are not something everyone on the wiki has, it wouldn't be appropriate to have that sort of tab. If you wish to add it for yourself, I would think it would be possible as part of your monobook.css file. The easiest solution would be to simply add a link to your feedback page on your userpage. -- Wyn talk 20:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Can someone write the code for the .css? The coolest thing would be if it detected if the page exists, and only displayed the link if it did, but that's too much to ask. XD For now, I'll take your suggestion and add the link to my userpage. It's currently kind of awkward to get there. Rose Of Kali 22:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

If you want it to appear up near where it shows your watchlist/talk/preferences/etc., add this to you monobook.js page:

function addTopLink(label, url) {
	var userpage = document.getElementById('pt-userpage');
 
	if (userpage) {
		var link  = document.createElement('a');
		link.href = url;
		link.appendChild(document.createTextNode(label));
 
		var li    = document.createElement('li');
		li.appendChild(link);

		userpage.parentNode.insertBefore(li, userpage.parentNode.firstChild);
	}
}
addOnloadHook(function() {
	/**
	 * Format : addTopLink ('link label', 'link url');
	 **/
        addTopLink('my feedback', '/wiki/Feedback:User/Rose_Of_Kali');
});

^That will result in a my feedback link at the top of your page next to the others such as my talk etc.

Alternatively, you can also have other links down the left hand side of your page where the Main Page/Quick Links/etc. links are. If you want the code for that as well, please don't hesitate to ask.

Have fun! -- Lacky 08:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

If you use GWWT, you can just stick this into the gwwtLoadAfter function:

pPersonal = new PortletArea( 'p-personal' );
pPersonal.addItem( null, 'my feedback', '/wiki/Feedback:User/' +wgUserName, 'My feedback',
    null, document.getElementById( 'pt-preferences' ) );

It saves some black dots. Vili 点 15:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Or for those without GWWT:

addOnloadHook( function() {
  addPortletLink( 'p-personal', '/wiki/Feedback:User/' + wgUserName, 'My feedback',
      null, 'Your feedback space', null, document.getElementById( 'pt-preferences' ) );
} );

A lot shorter than Lacky's code.. poke | talk 15:43, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that wasn't a kick in the face... -- Lacky 20:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry ^_^ poke | talk 23:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

I think Galil made that code for my js ages ago... :P -- pling 23:37, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Should add these instructions to the HELP:SUGGESTIONS page. -- Wyn talk 03:43, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Lacky, it worked nicely. :) It appears between the clock and my userpage link. I wouldn't know where to put the "shorter" suggestions without specific instructions, I'm not a coder. :P Rose Of Kali 17:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, see HELP:SUGGESTIONS :P poke | talk 17:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

/doh... I do like that better because the link is after "my talk" instead of after the clock. Useful stuff. :) Rose Of Kali 17:22, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Adding Guild Wars 2 content to the GW1W

Some users feel we should add Guild Wars 2 content to the GW1W, such as listing Emperor Usoku at the list of Canthan Emperors here. Since this is something which affects a large number of articles, I think it's worth discussing it in a centralized page.
IMO, it's not worth adding GW2 content to this wiki. First and foremost, we can link to the GW2W whenever we would like to mention something; so mentioning Usoku here, for example, could simply be replaced by adding a link to the GW2W article about Cantha from our Cantha page. Otherwise, we would be just implementing twice the same content (once at the GW2W, and then here).
Second, this is a wiki about Guild Wars 1, not Guild Wars 2 or about the Guild Wars Universe. There is a lot of lore that was not created for GW1, or made to have any impact on GW1; again using Usoku as an example, the fact that he will be the Emperor of Cantha in GW2 is not mentioned once in GW1, nor does it have any direct or indirect impact on the GW1 game. Therefore, I see no point in mentioning it here.
What do you people think? Erasculio 13:16, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree. If it's relevant to GW1 it can just be linked to GW2W; Then there is less confusion and IMO is cleaner. --Lania Elderfire 15:51, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

+1 Rose Of Kali 07:57, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

There are some things which are revealed with GW2 lore that will influence GW1 lore, such as Sohothin and the Cauldron of Cataclysm have. Thus far, we have no implication that these things will even be relevant to GW2 - especially the later - and thus wouldn't make sense to have them there. But yet they are very important (again, especially the later) in the GW1 story. Even if they are not named, they are still important in GW1. Era uses Usoku as the only example, just to create a biased opinion for this (Usoku is obviously not going to affect GW1 in either gameplay or lore), but there are better examples, such as the two I linked, and more which affect GW1 - if not just in lore, than in new potential content as well. Will these be removed from the GW1W just because they were mentioned along with "GW2 lore"? I don't think they should, and I'm not the only one, as shown here, and here. This issue is not just a "GW2 content in GW1W" but also a "GW1 lore in GW2W" - and this content is just lore, which doesn't belong to either game, but the combination of the games. This topic isn't clear cut as Era wants or apparently thinks. There is nothing wrong with having things that impacts the game's lore in this wiki, such as Sohothin and the Cauldron of Cataclysm pages, especially when there is no proof they will have an affect with GW2. -- Konig/talk 09:02, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The Cauldron page should definitely be kept - it's directly relevant to the searing, even if it isn't mentioned in GW. -- pling 16:56, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think we should write whole articles on GW2 topics, but a short summary and a link in the context of another article is fine. For example, in your emperor case, a line in the article stating "In Guild Wars 2, [[gw2w:Emperor Usoku]] is the current Canthan emperor." seems like a good idea to me (assuming that's the correct information, I know absolutely nothing about the lore of Guild Wars). Summarization is sorely lacking on this wiki, and we need more summary redundancy, not less. —Tanaric 17:07, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Tanaric. Linking GW2 based information in an existing article is fine, but there shouldn't be an entire article on something that cannot be found in GW1. And also, Tanaric, it's not correct. He's just an important emperor, but not the GW2 current one.--Pyron Sy 17:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I would like to ask Tanaric and Sly (in particular), what they think of this revision of the Canthan Emperors page, it contains Usoku, but there is no article for Usoku. Same goes for the current version of the Timeline article - it holds dates that take place after GW:EN - such as Ascalon's fall, Primordus' awakening, the fall of the Shaman Caste, Ventari's death, and other dates given in the Movement. -- Konig/talk 20:04, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

GW2 info should be on GW2W. Links to it with short (preferable limited to one sentence) description are fine and welcome. GWW and GW2W should be seen as one entity, with cross-links. There's no need to duplicate info. For example, in the case of the Timeline article, why not make a GW2 timeline on that wiki, and link one to the other, separating the two between the two games? Rose Of Kali 20:35, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I've got no problem with that list. A brief mention like that in an already existing article is fine. As far as things like Sohothin and the Cauldron of Cataclysm, since those things exist in GW1, regardless of how much is known about them from GW1 lore sources, they should have articles here.--Pyron Sy 23:50, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

White Mantle, Shining Blade

I'm not sure when they first started (but it seems to be quite recent), but two hidden pages on the official website seem to be quite interesting - http://www.guildwars.com/white_mantle/ and http://www.guildwars.com/shining_blade/. In the Guild Wars 2 art slideshow on youtube (part 3) that was uploaded on 23rd March, the last few frames show White Mantle/OBEY images.

Also, take a look at the source code of the two pages - there's a comment on each page ("Mantle has discovered plans. Writing is on wall.", "Go, Discover Contentment. Truth is obedience.").

I'm thinking they're teasers for the upcoming content update - see the first paragraph here. These should be worked into articles, either by creating a new one or putting it on an already existing page, but I'm not quite sure how. -- pling 21:26, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

It's a viral marketing campaign that's been around for a few days. GWGuru is all over it, referencing some of Regina's comments and all kinds of other things. Karate Jesus 21:28, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Guess I should at least link the thread - [1]. Karate Jesus 21:31, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I saw the flashes indeed, couldn't place them.. So thanks, now we know (a bit) ^^ -- Cyan 21:32, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

It does indeed seem like it leads to the new content Linsey and Martin said would be coming. But the two lines (and the bit that the two lines replaced, which was "March 16") have been referring to the slide show pieces. March 16 being the date of the interview with Massively's release and the part 1 of the slide show, and the two lines leading to "Go, Discover Contentment." or GDC and "Writing is on wall." seemingly referring to the facebook/twitter/GW2.com new walls, which points to part 2 of the slide show. When part 3 was released, the wall note said "unseen" and 2 wallpapers were added to the mantle page, along with the three images that flashed by in the third part. It is believed by myself, possibly others, that part 4 will be accompanied by 2 wallpapers and 3 flashes of images referencing the Shining Blade. But it is a viral campaign for the combination of the new content (seemingly) and the slide shows. -- Konig/talk 21:42, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Well I'm just glad that they're keeping busy. elix Omni 21:47, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and Linsey said on her Facebook a week ago or so that she was writing NPC dialogue, so I assume there's some form of new content. Karate Jesus 22:36, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

It's White Mantle/Shining Blade, so more PvE content to blast through. It's something new to blast through, at least, instead of the same old stuff.--neshot 22:42, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I wonder what the bar codes mean... Anyway, I'd say a new article, since they're leading up to the 5th anniversary. The content can be added to the corresponding existing articles once we know what it actually is. -- FreedomBound 23:43, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Can't be much of a surprise considering the 5th anniversary is just around the corner.... -- Wyn talk 23:43, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Freedom Bound, the barcodes just lead to the official site (to their own pages). -- Konig/talk 00:55, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I thought that might be the case, so they're just the same images that were passed out. Thanks. -- FreedomBound 00:58, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Personally I think it should be added as its a ultra rare one time event in the history of guild wars and it has attracted a lot of publicity out there and many fans are tied up into it. It would be nice to have an article to archive the events that have taken place and have yet to take place. I kinda feel it will be a big part of Guild Wars History. Someone make the page lol..24.197.132.85 00:35, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

The newewst GDC slide show has a few Dismantle flashes at the end, to match the Obey flashes from Part 3.--Pyron Sy 01:32, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

yea i think we should make a page to at least document the content.- Zesbeer 01:51, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Anets Twitter account keeps dropping hints. [2]. --Dominator Matrix 05:41, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

That was a terrible simile. People eat chocolates, not drop them. elix Omni 05:41, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

There's going to be a Mursaat Day, and it will go down in GW Lore. --RIDDLE 05:57, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Didn't that already happen? I think it sounded super cool and should be brought back somehow. --Raj4h 19:51, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

That did happen and will happen for the fourth time, but it didn't go down in lore. :P I think MantleCon has become official. :) But this update seems to be more than the White Mantle and Shining Blade.-- Konig/talk 19:59, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Now it would seem when you visit the Obey site the shining blade has vandalized the image!! see here http://www.guildwars.com/white_mantle/ 24.197.132.85 02:25, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

And the shinning blades has been torn down... see here... http://www.guildwars.com/shining_blade/ 24.197.132.85 02:33, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

I like it, catfight!! -- Cyan 11:12, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Ooh first I saw about this. Certainly is interesting! Thackery and Gwen dialogue, and now White Mantle/Shining Blade images and QR Codes. Given that the HoM dialogue wasn't officially documented, it may be a good thing to check out WM/SB locations. Hopefully the prize is as good as the chase. Shining Blade all the way! ~Celestia 11:48, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

I've redirected obey and dismantle to their respective factions' articles. I guess it'd be better to create a page titled 2010 viral marketing campaign or something though. That's a horrible name for a page. — Why 13:12, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

How about 5th anniversary teaser campaign? Manifold 14:07, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Thing is, we can only assume it has anything to do with the 5th anniversary. Also I've got zero inspiration to actually make the page. — Why 14:19, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

That's a pretty safe assumption, given the timing... It's not like they're going to be working on both the 5th anniversary stuff *and* an unrelated content update. -- FreedomBound 14:32, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I say keep the documentations off wiki for now, wait for it all to be released, then make a page for the whole campaign of viral ads, and add information to other respective pages. -- Konig/talk 21:02, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

The more the merrier. Obey the Hotness (white mantle). --Dominator Matrix 01:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Facebook too. FB WM, FB SB. --Dominator Matrix 01:57, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

anyone make a obey user box yet? - Zesbeer 02:38, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I think since Factions has Luxon and Kurzick Title Track, Nightfall has Sunspear and Lightbringer Title Tracks and EotN has Asura, Deldrimor, Ebon Vanguard and Norn title tracks, and Prophecies has no title track, they're going to add this two factions, with title tracks, maybe skills, that way when we trade books in Prophecies we don't get only exp and gold, but also Shining Blade/White Mantle points. Just my two cents Snowstone 20:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Or we're all going to look like Livia and Justiciar Hablion tomorrow (gender respective). -- FreedomBound 20:22, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, if it weren't for the white mantle being batshit-insane human-sacrificing mursaat-worshipping enemies through out the prophecies missions... -Cursed Angel 20:26, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully Anet (specifically Linsey) has learned that grind titles and PvE-only skills=not good. Besides, it's more likely to be Ascalon Vanguard and Shining Blade titles. -- Konig/talk 20:52, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

It's not going to be skills or another title track. It's probably just gonna be the story moving forward in prophs to reflect that time has changed with some big mad battle between the shining blade and the white mantle, with one or the other coming out victorious. So quest chain in all likelihood. -- Salome 15:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Looks like the Shining Blade are winning the propaganda war - they've put another poster on top of the ripped one. -- pling 20:58, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Blade Camp. A new outpost maybe? - J.P.Talk 08:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Pretty blurred image of something. [3]. --Dominator Matrix 08:36, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The blade camp is in Talmark. — PmaN  08:38, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

To be specific, where Dakutu Village is. There are even new signposts in the area that replace old ones. And a lot of old Shining Blade guys are in the camp. A lot of page updating to do (I'll let others do it). -- Konig/talk 08:39, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

There's this on Shining Blade's Facebook page. - J.P.Talk 08:45, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

You guys are very far behind, so I'll recap. The Facebook Shining Blade page got 500 fans, and the [guildwars.com/shining_blade] page got updated. The new barcode had a phrase "Midnight clouds will part. The second symbol will reveal its Face like a hidden moon. /stnarytothtaed" - the last, when added to guildwars.com leads to a page with old Ascalonian runes, which translated to "blade" - then the SB facebook page uploaded a new barcode at midnight, which has the phrase "Create one from two. Unity Resolve Liberty. /neeuqsiamlas" - again with guildwars.com/neeuqsiamlas - which has again an old Ascalonian runes spelling "camp" - with the second line "create one from two. unity resolve liberty" you get "blade camp" or guildwars.com/bladecamp. Which has a hidden line of /warinkryta - which leads to guildwars.com/warinkryta. Right now, the shining blade camp seen in the guildwars.com/bladecamp page is in Dakutu Village in Talmark Wilderness with a lot of Maguuma Shining Blade NPCs. We're thinking that if the White Mantle Facebook page gets 500 fans, we'll go through the same thing again. -- Konig/talk 09:11, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) We really need to start documenting this. We should at least make the Shining Blade camp page, or something along those lines. It's real and it has a load of NPCs in it. NPC articles should be updated to include new dialogue, too. I can't do this now though. — Why 12:25, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I created Shining Blade Camp as a starter, so go nuts ;) Shadow Runner 12:41, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

@ konig the white mantle page has 505 users....- Zesbeer 13:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

It didn't when I posted that. And give the folks some time to update. :p Oh, and I never said I was right, I said "if what we're thinking is right" (well, I said "we're thinking that if the white mantle ..."). -- Konig/talk 13:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

i didnt say u were wrong also i think this discussion needs to be moved to a place were it actually apply's better imho like the new shining blade camp talk page.- Zesbeer 13:36, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I would like to see at least the parts related to the main page be moved to the main page/edit talk page.. I LOVE Santax's main page idea.... I think it's cool that the community is getting on board. -- Wyn talk 01:23, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Beta key hunt

Hmmm, maybe this has something to do with the recent updates. Or maybe not. --Xeeron 15:02, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm thinking probably not :P Zora also reckons that there are references to AWP's and the "Crystal Desert Eagle" in Gw.dat, but I can't tell whether that's an April Fool prank on his part or on ANet's :P --Santax (talk · contribs) 15:10, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Note: This event never took place. This page has been put together by the Guild Wars 2 Wiki community for the April Fools' Day 2010. --Silverleaf Don't assume, Know! 16:50, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion

→ moved from MediaWiki talk:Monobook.css

Seems like we should be acknowledging the viral marketing thing on the wiki a bit more prominently than we are, to catch the attention of people who may view the wiki but who don't go on forums and who wouldn't be following this whole thing (yet). For this reason I suggest maybe we use something like this? --Santax (talk · contribs) 01:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

One thing I have a problem there is that we would need to decide on one side, which is bad for a wiki imo. poke | talk 08:42, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Right. So I figure what we do is figure out a way to show both sides. I was thinking change the Main Page to all Mantle colours, put something like "Guild Wars Wiki is under new management" at the top, change the logo to the Mantle emblem or something, but then vandalise it all with Shining Blade propaganda. I'm willing to get it started, but I'm not amazing with html and all that, so we could ask around in the art section of guru and gwo for help if nobody else feels like doing it. --Santax (talk · contribs) 09:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Another thing to do would be to change the "Welcome to the Wiki" square at the top to include the two File:Shining Blade emblem.jpg emblems both with a "|link=War in Kryta" in the coding, and perhaps a line mentioning the viral campaign. Small, but eye catching if done right, holds both sides, and not messy like the vandalism idea. -- Konig/talk 09:21, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I've done that for now, Konig, and put a testing page up at User:Santax/Main Page, so we can edit that until we have something nice we can use on the Main Page. It still needs to be "vandalised" (obviously) but it needs to be done in a way that is (a) tasteful and (b) not obstructive to the use of the page. This is where I got the original idea, but it makes the page unusable (as it's just an image now) and stretches browsers when using certain screen resolution. It could also use some new colours, I think, if anybody has an eye for that sort of thing. --Santax (talk · contribs) 09:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, there isn't a way to make a page randomly display one of two things, is there? If so, that could be a good way to do this - have one be White Mantle focused, the other Shining Blade focused. If not that, then I think instead of vandalizing, it should just be a mix of WM and SB based content. Vandalizing would just make it, more or less, annoying, in my opinion. Unless it is very creative and non-obstructing. -- Konig/talk 10:04, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Vandalising the main page would be quite difficult as it resizes depending on the window size and resolution, meaning whatever works for one person may appear messed up to another. This means that creating "non-obstructing" vandalism would not only be difficult, but the vandalism in question would be quite restricted. I quite like the look of Santax's Main Page proposed changes though. Something like that would work well. Shadow Runner 10:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

(EC)Yeah, that's why I was asking for input here rather than rushing off and doing it. The idea of vandalising it is (I think) a really good idea, nice and fun for visitors of the wiki, except as you say, it's difficult to pull off effectively. That's also why I suggested maybe asking for help on a fansite - there are some very creative people out there who could help us. Failing that, I don't think we should mix WM and SB content on the same page, since that would be going "out of character" (excepting the "vandalism", obviously). Randomly displaying a different page each time could work, though (although I'm not sure how we'd go about doing that). --Santax (talk · contribs) 10:20, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I dislike the current main page editcopy - we shouldn't get rid of welcome text and the acknowledgement that we're a community-created wiki. Also, I'm not a fan of speaking in the sense that we're part of the Guild Wars world, like we're a character that's actually in Tyria - I don't like the roleplay aspect of the main page there. -- pling 15:06, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) what if you guys made a animated gif or roll over image for the main logo icon and have one icon be a vandalized obey and the other be a vandalized dismantle that way it would switch between each image randomly... kind of like santax's original idea.- Zesbeer 15:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I kinda like the idea of having a big "obey" or "dismantle" splattered across the screen (or the GWW icon topleft). Have it change depending on current time to avoid picking a side. — Why 16:24, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Zesbeer, we would need someone to volunteer to do that, but it is a good idea. Can I suggest us possibly changing sides every, lets say, three days or so? Keeps us more or less neutral and goes with the theme. Pling, I get what you are saying... I would like to keep the welcome message there but style it in a way that shows that a certain faction has taken over. Also, Pling, we do this for significant events like Wintersday and Halloween, I think it would be something fun for the wiki to be involved in (especially with all the hype over it) since we are part of Guild Wars in a way. I can try and make some suitable OBEY/DISMANTLE graphics for the main page, if you would like. I could also try to rework the logo to display both the Obey and Dismantle symbols as well. -- Phnzdvn 16:27, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

If we can change it based on times, why can't we just change it based on the final digit of the current time? If it's odd, it loads Mantle, and if it's even, it loads Blade. That way there's pretty much a 50% chance of it loading a given page. I'm not really an expert on this stuff, would it produce too much server load? --Santax (talk · contribs) 16:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm with Pling; no roleplay on a wiki mainpage thanks. Also, isn't the "choose sides" thing just a guess? Cuz it wouldn't make much sense to be on the white mantle side tbh. -Cursed Angel 17:48, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

The "choose sides" thing is a fan-made aspect. We have no clue if anyone will be able to join the White Mantle, and I doubt we'll be able to. -- Konig/talk 18:36, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, ArenaNet have been treating them in equal regard by allowing players to join the Mantle on the Facebook page. Although given their history, it would be a little odd that the great heroes of Tyria suddenly had a change of heart and decided to work with the bad guys. --Santax (talk · contribs) 18:38, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I personally love Santax's main page idea, and I think those of you that are arguing for keeping the wiki neutral and Pling especially concerned about losing the welcome text for what? maybe a month? The main page is stale... it's been the same other than holiday decorations and the addition of yet another link here and there for the entire time I've been here.... I don't think it's going to kill anyone, or permanently damage the wiki if we join in the fun for awhile....-- Wyn talk 01:28, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Couldn't have said it better! Amen, Wyn. --Musha 03:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I wouldn't mind, minus fanboiism. Couldn't we create a logo or design that fuses both sides together, without "lolalternatingthemesdependentuponwho'swinning!" or whatever criteria we are using? --RIDDLE 04:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I said to mix so that we don't get any "White Mantle sucks!" or "Shining Blade sucks!" in the talk page. Though I guess it's unnecessary. I also didn't want to show favoritism. If a way can be done to show both, then that will be nice. I'm 100% in agreement with some change, I'd just prefer it to be equal between the two. If it's too difficult, then I'm find with not doing such. -- Konig/talk 06:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll do a Shining Blade version of the page when I have time, in the meantime maybe we could ask poke for a script to load a page randomly? I don't know what the level of difficulty would be in that. --Santax (talk · contribs) 10:15, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I know that User:Seru used to (and I believe still does) changes colors every 2 hrs or something. There has to be a way that we could rig something automatic like that for the main page, that would change specific variables (unfortunately, the main logo is controlled by the css). If the text for everything but the "welcome" box is going to remain the same, and it's simply changing colors, and having rotating images, this should be very possible with a little creative thinking. Come on poke, and Pling... get into the spirit of it rather than just being giant sticks in the mud..... -- Wyn talk 10:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Looking at the source for this and this, what we are after definitely seems doable. I'll have a play with it when I get the time, see if I can get something to work. --Santax (talk · contribs) 10:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

{{#ifexpr: ({{CURRENTTIMESTAMP}} mod 2)!=0|possibility number one|possibility number two}} changes each second which means it's random enough to possibly change each page load. — Why 11:55, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Why, I'll give that a go! --Santax (talk · contribs) 11:59, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I changed the editcopy to show a possible use, I don't really like how it looks but it's just an example, knock yourself out making it prettier :) — Why 12:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

hey wynthyst couldn't we get Emily to change the main logo? im sure she would be happy to i think we just need to figure out the code and the image and we would be good to go also i think the white mantle main page looks awesome! lastly i like the "Attention, heroes of Tyria! War is brewing! Which side will you choose?" if you havent found the wiki by now then well...- Zesbeer 13:32, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't think this page should dynamically change based on the time. I think that would bring up caching issues which would slow the site down too much. In lieu of that, you could have a daily/weekly/whatever "edit war" between the two sides. --JonTheMon 13:50, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, it doesn't actually change every second, it just checks what the time is every time someone tries to view the page and then generates it based on that, which doesn't produce much load at all (although I might be wrong). The concern I have with having intervals too far apart is that (a) we don't know how long the campaign is running for, so we might end up running a Mantle MP for a week and then the campaign ends, and (b) it might give visitors the impression we support a particular side. I don't get any cacheing issues with this at the moment (I'm aware it's a bit broken) in the latest version of Opera, if anyone's running FF or Chrome could they test that? --Santax (talk · contribs) 14:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm running Firefox here, and there doesn't appear to be an cacheing issues. Shadow Runner 14:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Server-side caching, not client caching. --JonTheMon 14:58, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Whoops, sorry. Shadow Runner 15:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

The welcome/we're-just-fans text is all the more important if we're following Anet's footsteps and bringing the War onto the wiki's main page. Can't we just add another box instead of replacing that one? I think that's a fair compromise.

Seru's code would require the main page to be uncached, which will definitely cause the servers problems. I don't think the magic words (CURRENT-whatever) will work effectively on cached pages, but I'm not entirely sure. Anyway, we might still appear to be choosing one side with that if it does work - the page won't change while you're viewing it, just after you load it. And I don't think people will load it so often that it seems clear to them that it's supposed to be rotating. I think just separating the main page so that half of it appears to be White Mantle and half Shining Blade will be more effective, take less complex coding, and appear more in the spirit of the War. Something like having half the boxes use one colour scheme and images, and the other half with another scheme.

As an aside, I don't appreciate being called a "giant stick in the mud" for having a different opinion to you. I'm just concerned that we don't choose aesthetics over important messages to users; and regardless of how long it's been there, the welcome message is important. -- pling 15:33, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Pling's idea about another another box and the main page being half and half is entirely acceptable. -- Phnzdvn 16:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Half half solution was what i had in mind aswell. - J.P.Talk 17:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

As I brought it up in the beginning, I'm fine with half/half. -- Konig/talk 18:01, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

lets do half and half then my feeling is we need to get cracking on this asap because i think that anet isnt going to wait for us to get on the viral bandwagon.- Zesbeer 01:38, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

The viral bit has just ended - Regina said that the last bit was released today. Though I'm sure that new content is still coming. -- Konig/talk 02:02, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Heya guys! I've been busy working with the team on the War in Kryta stuff lately, but wanted to pop in and say that this is a really cool idea. The "sanctioned events" language made all of us laugh, so awesome! :) As far as the viral stuff goes, yes. We're not going to do any more search and find kind of stuff, but we'll continue to add content to the site as the event progresses. I'm not going to spoiler, but we don't want you to not do cool stuff here because you think that's it. Can't wait to see what you come up with. This is fun! :) -- Emily Diehl (talk) 09:46, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Emily, the support from the live team is definitely appreciated! Pling, I'd be happy to add another box with a message saying that it's a community-run wiki, but I don't know where that'd go. I'm still not convinced on the half-and-half idea, and this is why:

• As far as caching goes, it hasn't been a problem so far for me, and we could have it change every few hours if need be, rather than every second (although obviously that's preferable as it's "random"). We could always have it change every day in an "edit war" style thing if necessary, as suggested above.
• I don't think it would appear we would be picking sides. We get a lot of visitors, so even if one person did keep getting Mantle main pages they'd know someone who didn't, so it'd soon become clear that it was rotating. I think the importance of this is being overstated - as long as we're giving both sides representation here, it doesn't really matter if one or two people think we're in support of a particular faction. The main thing is getting more people involved with this, because although (relatively) not many players visit fansites, the wiki is a resource that lots of players use. That's why I'd rather get this sorted out sooner rather than later.
• I think having a half-and-half page would (a) be difficult, since the page isn't separated neatly into halves, and (b) not really be in the spirit of the war at all - if anything it'd look like a cooperative effort. It'd also lose all the fun of the "sanctioned events" sort of thing and just come across as pretty confusing.

That said, the general consensus seems to be that we'll do half-and-half. So if nobody else has anything to say, we'll do that. There's a Mantle main page here and a Shining Blade one here, I don't know how we'd go about merging those though to be honest. I'd really appreciate some help with that, actually, I've done most of this so far on my own and for stuff like going half-and-half and adding another box, there's a lot of people willing to talk about what should be done, but not many actually willing to do things themselves, and I don't really know how it's going to work. --Santax (talk · contribs) 11:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

or... we could just document the game. hard concept i know. -Auron 12:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Allergic to fun much? --Santax (talk · contribs) 12:13, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Well Auron.. this technically IS documenting the game... hard concept... I know... To Santax, I don't believe you personally would see any caching issues, they are talking about server side caching issues, not browser caching issues. While I understand their concerns, I believe it is being blown out of proportion, but maybe asking Emily to check with the IT guys to see if THEY feel this would be a problem would answer it. I personally don't know what kind of minute by minute traffic the main page gets, and this is what would be effecting it. If we had some of those statistics, maybe we could better judge the impact. I personally am not fond of a half and half solution, and the colors on your Shining Blade page make me nauseous, so that would have to be addressed. Unfortunately, I feel like you guys are all thinking this to death, and by the time we come to some reasonable consensus, it will be long over and we will actually be doing Dragon Festival stuff.......... -- Wyn talk 17:29, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

No, actually, it isn't. Documenting the game is detailing what has actually happened in Guild Wars by writing main space articles about it. Covering the main page with useless crap isn't documenting anything. -Auron 01:09, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Tying the mainpage theme into in-game activities has a long precedent for holiday festivals. This really is no different. It's yet another way of documenting the game. I'm gonna say it again... stop being a stick in the mud. -- Wyn talk 03:10, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, for now we could go with santax's static white mantle version: [4] --JonTheMon 18:13, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Assuming these updates continue to follow the pattern of Shining Blade update followed by White Mantle update (although we don't really know if they will yet) we could always change to a particular faction whenever there's an update to that faction. --Santax (talk · contribs) 19:52, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Here is my color proposal for the shining blade. Not sure how accurate the color select is, but meh. --JonTheMon 21:16, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

That made my eyes bleed a bit, Jon :P. Perhaps a bit of darker green (not much). -- Phnzdvn 21:18, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok guys... I've spoken to Emily about the server concerns that have been raised. She said that they would not have a problem with us trying it, but it has to wait until Monday at least so that the IT ops guys can monitor the server performance when we do, and she would need a heads up in advance. That gives us 2 days (at least) to decide, and then she asks that we give her advance warning so she can alert IT. She seems more concerned about potential complications with the netscalers than anything else. So... there is what technical information she has to offer. Take it for what it's worth. -- Wyn talk 23:57, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Uh... Green? Their logo is wine red. Red + green mix often leads to seizures... Rose Of Kali 00:47, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Their logo has have many color changes, but green has not been one. Blue/purple and gold, or red and white, tan-ish and black are all colors that were once used. I suggest not going red/white since that's also WM colors. -- Konig/talk 00:51, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

my suggestion is to use the colors from there clothing.- Zesbeer 01:02, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Back to the half and half idea, what if the entire page wasn't exactly "half and half", so that it wouldn't seem merged. Instead, you could do what they do on the Stratego and Risk logo, with Guild Wars in the center and the two opposing forces on the sides charging at each other. As for a banner the randomly selects any second, maybe we should have a vote on whether that would be a good idea. I would obstain. One final note: I didn't have any caching issues with the random banner. --Bold Baby Undies 15:45, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

so did this fall apart? if so i will pick it back up when i have the time (which seems to be non existent.)- Zesbeer 12:34, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) So are we just not going to do this? It seems that discussion has slowed... I think at this point its too late, since the whole thing is heading towards the climax quickly. -- Phnzdvn 18:31, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I sure hope so. --Emkyooess 18:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Going live

Ok, if there are no objections, let's try to push the editcopy to live within the next 24 hours. --JonTheMon 13:56, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I've responded to this edit here, Jon. It was also agreed that we'd acknowledge somewhere on the MP that we're a community-run wiki, so we should do that before merging. --Santax (talk · contribs) 14:29, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Remember that Emily needs advance notice of it going live so that she can alert the IT guys to keep an eye on the server performance in case it needs to be stopped. -- Wyn talk 15:15, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm against any sort of random selection on the main page. It's bad enough on articles (during events for example), but main page shouldn't be touched. poke | talk 20:00, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Then what do you propose as an alternative? There's a merged page here, but I don't really like that as a solution. --Santax (talk · contribs) 00:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Did anyone read my idea?--Bold Baby Undies 01:57, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

feel free to make that edit on a sand box page.- Zesbeer 03:00, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, this kinda got stalled. Since there are some concerns about having the main page automated, I think we'll try to stay away from that for now. So, again, let's try to get something pushed out. Either something else needs to be proposed (Bold Baby's idea) or we go with what we have. --JonTheMon 19:10, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Last call --JonTheMon 21:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I've de-awkwarded the wording on the editcopy, and as it's now clear we won't be getting to pick sides, I don't think impartiality is a concern anymore. I think (I hope!) we're ready to go! --Santax (talk · contribs) 23:51, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

An idea for the split page, but it would probably require more work than would be worth putting into it. If you want the page to be split 50-50, you would need to reorganize the main page boxes. There are 8 boxes, so you could have it 2x2|2x2. That unfortunately would need the larger 2 boxes to be sized down (And probably other difficulties). Another would be 1-on-2-on-1|1-on-2-on-1, providing for the even split, but requiring 2 additional boxes to be expanded to match the larger sizes (perhaps put the NPC render of the new costumes in the extra space). Other organization methods could be used, though it woulden't be as easy on a wiki (recently introduced to web-page design, sorry). I can try to make a mock-up of this idea tomorrow and post it here, college essays stopping me from trying it tonight (dang my procrastination). Good luck with the other ideas though, and so far, it looks great in my opinion.--Neithan Diniem 02:57, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

eh, my idea kinda fell out when I tried it. I think someone better versed in wikicode would need to be the one to attempt it.--Neithan Diniem 02:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Duration

A different issue is how long such changes should last. I'd say a week past the 5th anniversary, but just throwing that out there. --JonTheMon 19:45, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm... Well, not everyone can log into Guild Wars immediately, and not everyone checks the wiki every day, so I'd say give it at least a couple of weeks, since that is how long the featured articles last. -- FreedomBound 19:48, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Next version

Ok, now that the White Mantle version is live, I think we should get the Shining Blade one settled on. --JonTheMon 00:14, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Since it seems that there still need to be some changes to the white mantle version, editing Santax's SB version. New version with tweaked colors (darker green, more faded yellow) --JonTheMon 13:59, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I think we should have a Shining Mantle version. :P -- Konig/talk 17:27, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok people, keep focused on this. I'd like to have the Shining Blade up by tomorrow. --JonTheMon 16:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Wouldn't it make more sense to keep the White Mantle version up about a week, then have it 'liberated' by the Shining Blade and leave it that way through the event (which should be a little over another week, assuming it's coming with the 5th anniversary)? - Tanetris 16:21, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, I thought in lieu of a dynamically changing main page, just have it change every 2-3 days until about a week after the 5th anniversary. --JonTheMon 16:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Tanetris: That was the original idea, but it proved too difficult to create a "vandalised" main page. I still don't see the problem with a dynamically changing page - you know that can still be done automatically every day or every few days, not necessarily "randomly", right? (and even then I don't see the problem with that, but whatever). Of course, it is now clear we can't side with the Mantle as players, so the wiki choosing one side over the other is no longer comparable to us choosing the Kurzicks over the Luxons (as I think I stated somewhere else). I don't see the problem with just leaving it as it is. --Santax (talk · contribs) 17:20, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

@Jon: I realize that's your intention, hence proposing an alternative. @Santax: Not 'vandalized', 'liberated'. Very different terms. As in change it to a Shining Blade version and leave it that way. - Tanetris 17:28, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

TBH, I don't care what happens, just that something gets done to involve the community in the stuff around the 5th anniversary. So, if it's decided to let the mantle rule first, then have the Shining blade win, go ahead. I'm just here to help implement it and make it look prettier. --JonTheMon 20:03, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

It's a shame that at the moment the peacekeeper link actually links to the peacekeepers, it should have linked to the sysops. Would have been more wiki-tastic imho. -- Salome 15:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

[5] It has been up on copy-edit for a while, but I didn't want to sync my own proposal. --Xeeron 21:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, if no further objections, gonna push this out within then next 24hrs. --JonTheMon 17:03, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Last chance to object. --JonTheMon 16:12, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Item renders

I see there's no project which involves uploading these, that's why i post this here. But my concern is, do we upload a separate image for each item? Or should we do the same as with NPC model project, using the same image for those which share the same model? I personally see sharing the images as a better solution, though i know it might have it's problems, which are easy to overcome however (item model changed in-game, etc). - J.P.Talk 11:57, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

It depends on what items you are talking about. There is a project for weapon renders. Once again, I have to voice my dislike of renders in general, NPC renders in particular, as I feel they lose a lot of in game context when you remove the background. The same goes for weapon renders... there is no way to judge the actual in game size of a weapon if it is not being held by a character. So far, my comments have fallen on deaf ears, but I simply wanted to restate my opinion. -- Wyn talk 13:55, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Ide say in GW2 we should put a sort of Image that states how big the item is against a normal human--Neil2250 , Render Lord 13:58, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

That's fine, I don't really care what you do on GW2W... keep your comments about it there. It is totally irrelevant to this discussion. -- Wyn talk 14:23, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree that context is lost with renders, more so with item/weapon renders than NPC renders. I'd prefer to keep normal screenshots. I'm not really sure how a render is any more accurate than a screenshot - if anything, it's often less so. -- pling 14:31, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

"I'm not really sure how a render is any more accurate than a screenshot - if anything, it's often less so." i think you would then put emily out of her job >_>.--Neil2250 , Render Lord 14:36, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

HAHAHAHA! Emily has so much more important things to do than unnecessary renders for this wiki... -- Wyn talk 14:57, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Im getting the Feeling you still hate me.--Neil2250 , Render Lord 14:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't like renders either. Manifold 15:01, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Neil, I don't hate you, never have, I don't care enough about you to give you that much energy. Pling, I don't believe anyone thinks renders are more accurate, it's more a matter of "quality". I personally think it defeats the purpose of the wiki, where every contributor is encouraged to improve on things. I know some of the most fun I've had contributing here has been running around in game trying to get the perfect screenshot, or at least a better one than what there was. By converting everything to renders, these projects are cutting out a lot of community participation. -- Wyn talk 15:02, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Regardless of who hates who, Wyn and Pling are right. Renders look nice and stuff, but normal screenshots contain a whole lot more information than just the looks of their subject. While in the case of NPCs the relevance of this additional information is debatable, it certainly is important for items. — Why 15:13, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

(Yay im not hated) like stated many times already, NPC Renders arnt Bad, Item Renders(Mostly Weapons) ARE.is that right?--Neil2250 , Render Lord 15:16, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I also agree. I don't like renders for weapons so naturally I wouldn't like it for items either. It might look cleaner but it loses a certain feeling that a screenshot preserves in addition to the information. --Lania Elderfire 15:18, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I've never liked the weapon renders, as they tell so little what they look like while wielding them.

As for other item renders, i'm in a 50-50 situation. My question about these renders was not because i'm eager to have them in this wiki. I was just curious.

I personally like the NPC renders, but i agree with the concerns told above. Though i'd hate to abandon it after all the hard work people have put into it. - J.P.Talk 17:47, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

We shouldn't abandon the NPC renders. I may not like them personally, but many people do, and as far as I know many now-obsolete NPC images have already been deleted after being replaced with renders. Anyway, this is getting offtopic, apologies. — Why 17:52, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Not at all. I kinda got the answer for my question :D - J.P.Talk 19:42, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't even think about using screenshots for NPCs again... Renders look much better there. For weapons, I don't really care, but I think it would be fine to have both available. Which one is displayed by default then can be discussed. poke | talk 14:15, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

For NPCs, I stand by my statement that, while an absolutely perfect screenshot is better than a render, perfect screenshots are exceedingly rare (and impossible in some situations), and renders (excluding some of the horrendous fakerenders I've been seeing lately) are better than 99% of screenshots, so renders are better as a standard. I have no opinion on items. - Tanetris 14:45, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

For items, weapons in particular, you need the screenshot to get an accurate representation of size. While the render may look good, a screenshot is simply better. As for NPCs, I think the renders are better, since getting a decent shot of NPCs, especially hostile ones, is difficult.-- Pyron Sy 19:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

What about removing parts of the image that are irrelevant, such as the background? I think for weapons the perfect image would be a naked character holding the weapon, cropped around the weapon with the background "rendered" (as people like to call it for some reason) out. Misery 13:25, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Frankly i like the Isle of the Nameless idea, beaches Ftw.--Neil2250 , Render Lord 13:27, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Why do people insist on repeating this silly debate every now and then? yes, a few have an ulterior motive, but most of you..? Here's the necessary piece of info you need: the wiki is not about to run out of space. wiki is not paper. HDDS are cheap. Backsword 16:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Because the issue is still there. And what does it have to do with space? It's about presentation. And @Misery: rendered is not the same as removing the background in Photoshop, or worse, Paint... I've seen a lot of "cropped" images that look absolutely awful while pretending to be rendered. And I too think that weapons should not be rendered, or you'd have no idea how huge the Greater Sturdy Bow is or how tiny the Portal Staff is (*snicker* more like a wand...) Rose Of Kali 23:33, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I still totally disagree on NPC renders, but as usual, I'm going to be overridden by consensus, and that I can live with. I believe you lose sooooo much context by using renders, as well as using the generic version of npcs without weapons removes the keys to what their professions are... sometimes even npcs that use the same model carry different weapons. I think removing them takes away a lot. But if you guys all want a flavorless wiki, I guess that's what we will have. -- Wyn talk 00:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

In spirit, I'm with Wyn on the NPCs as well, and would much rather see a good screenshot than a flavorless weaponless render. Though, some of them use random weapons every time, iirc, so that would be a minor problem. But with all the existing "good" renders done by Emily and the complete lack of good screenshots, as well as the "concensus" of other users, I'm not gonna argue about NPCs. But I'm still completely against rendering weapons. In addition to what was already said about weapons, there's the issue of animated elements. For example, the Scepter of Orr has blue glowing orbs floating between the prongs, which are completely missing from the render. Same thing would happen with Platinum Scepter, Truncheon, Frog Scepter (loses the whole lily over the frog's head!), and many other weapons like that. Renders of these aren't worth even a half decent screenshot. Rose Of Kali 02:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Is there a strong reason not to have both a screenshot and a render for NPCs? Even a "mouseover to toggle" solution if it would take up too much space on the page. Manifold 02:43, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I too agree with Wyn, cause I always felt the screenshots provided a little bit more for the person. With weapons, renders remove far too much from the weapon (effects, scale) that people may become confused. The general nude close up shot of the weapon so far in my opinion has been working great, why fix what isn't broken? As for poor images, If people (if any) complain about it, why don't they step up and get some pics for themselves? Or even a dedicated person that would turn that into their project here on the wiki (with help of course from players) there are a few mods available that allow for high-detail to be forced on other characters, and I know several of the heavy-contributors to this wiki have more than capable computers to handle the increased graphics. Pretty much for me, renders of NPCs are iffy, where renders of weapons is a no.--Neithan Diniem 02:49, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

We can't have both? Wowhead's got player-submitted screenshots and the View In 3D option (which is basically a render). Both have their uses, and since both sides of this argument have their merits, is there a way to showcase both without detracting from the look and feel of the page? (Keep in mind we don't have to show every screenshot of the item on the page, it can simply be linked like the View In 3D option is on wowhead). -Auron 02:54, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Now if we can do that... that would be the best without a doubt. Is that something that's possible to make an actual 3D view on this wiki w/o breaking it? --Lania Elderfire 07:07, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

We won't be able to display things in 3D, no. poke | talk 14:12, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) 3-D would obviously be awesome, but alas, it's not, which makes my comment shorter (though I gotta say that 3D in the link looks exceptionally shitty compared to the 4 screenshots submitted for that weapon). Other than 3D, having a screenshot and a static render of the same thing seems rather pointless. What would the render add to a good screenshot? I think absolutely nothing, it contains less information. Rose Of Kali 14:35, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Renders simply look cleaner. Also let me ask a different question: Where is the point in removing render images when we have them? I see no problem with displaying both. We shouldn't hide "extras" we already have. poke | talk 15:26, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't have any problems with displaying both, since the wiki isn't in any danger of running out of storage space. --Lania Elderfire 15:34, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

An argument for displaying both as a addition to my comment above--> Renders are nice and clean and from my perspective I like to think of it as clothing on a mannequin at the store/website. It's stiff, unnatural and something that never occurs in game/irl, but at the same time you can see all the detailing of the item, weapon, armor; clothing etc. Screenshots are like someone posing with that said item, weapon, armor etc; and with clothing, having someone modeling it at the webstore shows customers a little about how it hangs on a actual person and how it moves but some of the detail is lost or hidden in the pose. I know it's a bit of a contrived argument/example but that make sense for me :) --Lania Elderfire 15:52, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, if they already exist, there's not good reason to remove them, just keep as a thumbnail in the article below the info box. But do not push projects to get more renders from Emily or whomever else. Rose Of Kali 17:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

We should still continue with NPC renders though. poke | talk 18:53, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Not really poke. I think several people here have voiced a dislike of replacing good screenshots with renders. That you are so completely adamant about it is rather counter to the community spirit here. You lose all game context with renders. The page becomes much more generic, whether you feel this is "cleaner" or not, they are not really true representations of the game any longer. I could see doing them in addition if people really feel that the detail they provide is important. If you don't like the quality of a screenshot posted, you can always feel free to upload a better one. If your only argument for them is that they look cleaner I don't think it's enough. Also, while I know Emily enjoys doing renders to a point, she does not have a lot of time to do them, and while some of the user provided ones are ok, I don't think they add that much. Also, there are some models that Emily is just not able to render for whatever reason, so then we are left with inconsistencies. There are screenshots available for everything. -- Wyn talk 19:02, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

(reset indent)A possible alternative for the item renders could be to provide a rendered image for the main image (the one in the itembox), and then to have a dye chart for all dyeable items. That will provide a similar effect as a screenshot, provided the dye charts are all done in a similar fashion. for non-dyeable items and items w/o dye charts yet, a simple screenshot would easily suffice.--Neithan Diniem 00:00, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

And that is how you get yourself into a total mess of inconsistency. Not everything can be rendered, and far from all the possible renders are done so far, so the boxes will be inconsistent. Far from everything can be dyed, and far from all dyeable items have a dye chart now, so again, inconsistent. And then you mix the two inconsistencies together, and get a trash bin of a final project. Rose Of Kali 11:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Well this could always be reversed. A screenshot could be put in the box like it already is, render below it if available in either a extended part of the box or a separate box, and dye charts can be made (albeit slowly) and placed in the dye section. If the dye chart were made as an integral part of the item template, then any item without a chart would be labeled as incomplete. Also a standard could be made for dye charts in how they are presented (so many dyes used in a row of the pic, dyes used in a certain order...could be easily done to modify current charts to match) to make the pages look "cleaner". Also the only items that would need a chart would be equipable things (of course) and anything else would just need a screenshot of the item dropped with the item shine removed (theres a mod for that), render not needed. If your worried about space, perhaps a standard size for the screenshot could be implemented, with the box a set height/width. Then a scrollable section could be inserted into the template box to allow for the render to be hidden from view, but still viewable easily. My warrior's character page has a similar set up for armor. That, or have the render in an expandable part of the template box, set right below the screenshot. Those ideas there makes renders an optional addition to the template, available if present, but the page isn't broken or muddied up in appearance compared to completed pages.--Neithan Diniem 13:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't know if a project counts as "official" but there is a standard for dye charts. What about two small links below a picture, one saying "render" and the other saying "screenshot". One or the other would be the default, and you could toggle which was displayed by clicking the link, without reloading the page. Manifold 14:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I dont think that would be possible to set a default that way. I dont think Modifying the monobook setting would do the trick either. I think Im gona try to work out my previous idea, see how it might work. Then Id have a visual aid for what Im going at.--Neithan Diniem 00:46, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Check here for my modified and working weapon infobox. It has an expandable bar within the old infobox that allows for the display of both the screenshot and the rendered image without cluttering the page or severely changing the appearance of the infobox that we know and love.--Neithan Diniem 02:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Detrolling the wiki

Could I direct people to User talk:Pling/Pruning to address the problem of large-scale trolling. I created it there since there are ongoing discussions already here, and I didn't want to bloat the community portal. Input from all users who have the wiki's interests in mind would be welcome, even (and probably especially) from those who usually don't dabble in administration/politics and focus on content. Thanks. -- pling 00:35, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Vector

I think this may be a suitable time to mention this. I'm sure many have notcied wikipedias change. Primarily switching away from the monobook skin. There are also some other changes. We should discuss what we can learn from this, an if we should adopt any parts of it. Backsword 23:24, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I personally prefer monobook. I don't really know what the other changes are. ~ PheNaxKian 23:27, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

The new autocompleting searchbox fails when it comes to usability. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 08:04, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Vector is not available for our version, and as we only upgrade to stable versions, it is still far away from being able to be activated here. Other than that, Vector is a nice skin that is somehow based (and compatible) with monobook, but needs a bit more adjustments before it is really perfect. poke | talk 13:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

You mean the part where they should make it not look ugly? ;) — Why 13:10, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I would like to see Vector implemented as the default here at some point, but only if parts of it are improved - as Poke says, it needs adjusting. For example, I think the edit and history tabs should be moved back to where they are in monobook, and the search bar should stay in the left nav menus. It's still pretty, though, and the editing tools nav is much more helpful than monobook's. The searching tools seem to be much better than our tools, but I think it's always been like that (did we ever actually install LuceneSearch?) -- pling 16:33, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I do really like the new edit bar, and defenitly would like us see adopt that. I like the tab shift too: current tabs are prsented as one level, both actually reflects two different tab systems. I would probably have done it in he reverse way, with read and edit to the righ, and article and talk o the left. Backsword 22:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

The only difference I don't like is the move of the search bar. But, the tabs are much more easily distinguishable, and the side stuff can be hidden as to not take up an amazing amount of space--Bold Baby Undies 04:35, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Ehh, I suppose I could get used to the new location of the tabs. -- pling 21:19, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

My vote would be to get Vector implemented once the stable version is released. It still seems to have some quirks but overall I like it better than monobook. I don't really mind the changes to the interface like the movement of the tabs and search bar. The edit functions are much nicer than monobook with some of the shortcut buttons (which will encourage more editors that aren't familiar with the basic wikicoding), and that's where it really shines I think. --Lania Elderfire 21:41, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Vector is in every way hideous. It takes the simple, clean interface of Monobook and makes it more intrusive with bigger buttons. The move button has been hidden under an arrow you have to hover to access, and the watch button is a meaningless star, while the search box placement is horrendous. I frankly don't see a single appeal, and can only imagine casual users being confused by it if they do notice at all. Registered users are, of course, free to change their own skin in their preferences, but I definitely don't want to see Vector become the default skin here. - Tanetris 22:07, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Vector is a lot more modern (not the "modern" the modern skin tries to show) and fits well into the overall development of the internet. Monobook is quite out in that way. Vector is based on monobook, highlighting the big plus of monobook, while adding new elements. That's definitely a good step in the correct direction. Both the move location as well as the star for watching pages are settings that can easily be changed.

Even if we had great support now to immediately change the default skin to Vector, don't expect anything happening there this year. So I think we can close this discussion for now. poke | talk 20:10, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I think "modern" designs are cliche, as the look has been done 1000 times before. What is really "modern" about it? Though I can answer about the search bar - it's now in line with Windows/browsers. Previously Unsigned 21:22, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

In terms of modern, I think it uses more gradients and softer lines compared to monobook, which is a changing trend in many designs, including OSX, vista and windows 7 in comaprison to OS9, and windows 98,2000 etc. Similar trends are seen in smartphone GUI's. --Lania Elderfire 22:08, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

War in Kryta

← moved to Talk:War in Kryta

Skill trainer pages

I was wondering if there was any way to semi-protect the skills offered by the trainers. It's rather tedious to keep on top of, changes by people can easily be missed for quite some time, and as GW2 comes around, less and less people are going to keep on top of it. Tanetris threw out a couple of options such as a transcluded subpage or having a bot looking after the skills, but he, like I, wanted more input. G R E E N E R 17:58, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me as long as Poke doesn't mind setting up the bot for the pages. In all honesty, I don't see any reason why any of the skill trainer skill selections should be changed since they have never changed, and game updates haven't changed anything either to my knowledge. A full protect could be a viable option too for that reason. --Lania Elderfire 18:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm still hoping to hear from more people on this. I'm thinking the bot way may not be the best way as it would require the bot listening or looking for changes either too often, or not at the right time. I noticed that Hahbe/Weapons and the like exist. Perhaps the same could easily be done for the skill trainers? G R E E N E R 23:48, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Protect, transclude, both sound good to me. Manifold 00:52, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Protecting random pages in the off chance they get vandalized is never a good option. -Auron 01:02, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

A page should only be protected if it is constantly vandalized and/or there is nothing that can ever be added to it (which is rather impossible so long as GW continues to get updates). -- Konig/talk 01:41, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that with the data difficult for older players to verify, if a change was made to the available skills list, it may go unchallenged for quite a while. While I'm not saying we need to protect the pages, there does need to be a consolidation of the data. I like the idea of a transcluded subpage, once all the skills are confirmed.-- Pyron Sy 01:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

It's not to protect against vandalism, it's to protect against well-meaning but poorly-informed users from making small, hard-to-notice changes to something that as far as I recall has only been changed once (skill trainers) and never (collectors). Manifold 02:03, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll be the first to admit I don't know much wiki-lingo, but am I right in assuming that the Hahbe/Weapons page is an example of a transclusion? If so, then using that method could keep the pages slightly out of the way (avoiding the well-intentioned yet sadly wrong edits). It would also allow us to keep a closer eye (perhaps by a bot) on the pages. Again, as far as I know, this could all be a pipe dream ; ) G R E E N E R 03:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

One last thing. How would lists such as List of Factions skill trainers be affected by the move? I'm unsure of how they gather their data, and if it is from the skill trainers page, then I'm not the one to edit them. G R E E N E R 09:14, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I gave it a shot on the Prophesies trainers. I removed some skills which appeared to have been added in error (and also based my conclusions on Poke being God). I'll leave the other trainers for another day. G R E E N E R 06:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh god. So I had to clear my cache to see the damage on List of Prophecies skill trainers. I'm reverting them all now. G R E E N E R 07:03, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

God I will think of a good solution for this, just give me some time. poke | talk 16:11, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Poke. I've come to the conclusion that most/all of the proph skill trainers are in good shape. Factions is the exact opposite. Without a clean account, I know I can't go any further in editing them, even using other sites as cross references. I haven't even looked at NF, yet. G R E E N E R 18:34, 16 June 2010 (UTC)