Guild Wars Wiki talk:Community portal/Archive 4

price list

→ moved from Guild Wars Wiki:Community portal

does anyone else think that we should have a price lsit just like that runescape site for gw items --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Explorer c dub .

No, because:

• Fixed price items already have their prices listed on both their own individual pages, and the pages for the vendors that sell them.
• Non-fixed price items vary widely in how much they are bought and sold for, a good part of this dependent on subjective decisions as to how much someone values a given item. It's incredibly difficult to keep a list of such items that's anywhere near accurate on a regular basis.

(Aiiane - talk - contribs) 19:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

And price lists open to all editors could he a target for vandalism, as buyers would lower the prices, and sellers would raise them so they could say "No, this item is higher/lower, check the wiki." Calor (t) 19:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree, and we have had the discussion before I am sure. Prices are very open for abuse, and very open to be inaccurate for all the reasons stated above me. --Lemming 19:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, we had the discussion on GuildWiki about eight or ten months ago. Not sure about here. 19:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Well it is part of the content policy, which was accepted. --Lemming 19:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I think a price guide would come in quite handy. Maybe have protected to keep away vandalism and to change a price, users have to agree on it? It would definitely get more users here to GWW which means more possible contributors. — ク Eloc 貢 22:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I think that project is very risky. Just see the results on guru, most of the prices are not updated from months, it is better to not have that than having that. Coran Ironclaw 22:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Something like a pricelist would be similar to the skill discussions in the Izzy namespace.. poke | talk 22:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Alright. — ク Eloc 貢 22:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Shortcuts

We already have GWW shortcuts for the Guild Wars Wiki namespace, but I miss the GWT (GWWT for us) links from GuildWiki. Simply shortcuts to the corresponding talk page. They were really handy when posting discussions across policies and formatting pages. Would anyone be opposed to implementing such shortcuts? - anja 03:02, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you show an example of this? I don't quite follow what you mean. — ク Eloc 貢 03:08, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Hm, maybe I was wrong, I can't find them on GuildWiki anymore. What I meant was simply GWW:NPA links to the policy and GWWT:NPA links to Guild Wars Wiki talk:No personal attacks. - anja 03:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

So basically create a new page called GWWT:NPA and have it redirect to the talk page for NPA Anja? Sounds good to me, not that I use it much but it would make it a lot easier to get to the talk page for those that do. --Kakarot 04:53, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually it's already used for two things including the Community Portal's Talk. --Kakarot 05:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly what I meant. I'm really good at explaining... :P - anja 11:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

So if someone wants to create those redirects: click here :) poke | talk 06:41, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll make some of the redirects ... *overdrawn dramatic sigh* ;) -- Brains12 • Talk • 15:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Aaaand done! (Apologies for all those watchlists that will be pinging with Guild Wars Wiki talk pages). Btw, couldn't Wikichu have done that? -- Brains12 • Talk • 16:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

<3 - anja 16:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Good job Brains, was wondering why no one had done it yet *attempts to not look for the person that suggested it* no idea who that would be :P --Kakarot 16:41, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

"Apologies for all those watchlists that will be pinging with Guild Wars Wiki talk pages" - :/ And yes Wikichu could have done that, but nobody asked :P poke | talk 17:08, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

/me hides. - anja 18:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Ya, damn it cluttering up my watchlist. :P — ク Eloc 貢 00:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Trial Account Exploits

I think the bots are related to the free trials handed out. They dont have a expirey date so that can be exploited till the next one is handed out. I ask for a time limit on those...as seriously the code in the email lasts FOREVER till you use it! Maybe just maybe that will put a damber on those routless bots! 68.151.27.108 02:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

But how can bots trade with those accounts? -- Dashface 11:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

They can't, trial accounts would only work for spambots. -- Gordon Ecker 11:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Trial Accounts are used to spam. Then after the transaction can go ahead it gets switched to a paid account. Which for some reason still work...maybe thats because finding EVERY trade/talk can take a long while/hours.

So the first part to break the chain is the limit the codes... 68.151.27.108 23:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, so they make an account so that if they get banned, they will just make a new account? — ク Eloc 貢 02:02, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

exactly. - Y0_ich_halt 15:44, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, *gets an idea* — ク Eloc 貢 01:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Something these wiki pages are seriously lacking.

A "How to get there" instructional guide on every article about a dungeon or town/outpost. Many of these wiki pages are extremely vague on a exact location of certain places. Some are even misleading or confusing (as in naming Umbral Grotto as a outpost in the Tarnished Coast region)and sadly most don't even bother to tell you anything about the locations of these places. An example would be to look up "Secret Lair of the Snowmen" it tells you that it is in "Depths of Tyria" well what if you don't know where that is? Is asking for a screen shot of the world map for these places too much? I don't mean to rant but if these wiki pages are meant to be helpful than why are they so ambiguous?--Worldly Tutor 23:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Good idea. Something I've been thinking about working on for a while now, but haven't found the time. Biscuits 00:32, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I had a few problems finding my way around after a long break too. Especially those darn dungeon pages. Well, until I found the text in the infobox on the right that says "Required quest", after which finding it was a lot easier. Click the quest, find out who gives it and where he is, then just go grab it. :)

Though I've been thinking about proposing a change in dungeon pages, so it will say more clearly (and so you can't really miss it), what is required to do them, and where they're located. I just... haven't yet since I'm still pondering on the details. — Galil 02:02, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

It's not just dungeon pages though, it's quite a few location-pages. I've even visited GuildWiki a couple of times while playing through GW:EN, simply cause I couldn't find how and where to go, here. Maybe a location-project would be in place? I know I would join. — Galil 02:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm working on the Landmark pages, so expect to see those done soon. — ク Eloc 貢 04:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, the formatting guidelines for the locations pages is just in it's final stages, so I think there will be some changes coming to alot of them. -- Wynthyst 07:54, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

A lot of the location pages look horrible. A lot are empty. Another wiki project soon.. Calor (t) 19:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. I've already started working on locations; reminds me of how it all started on GuildWiki... oh my time! :P anyway, I still consider the guidelines to be at an experimental stage right now cause I'm still finding bits and pieces that didn't seem so good. See Guild Wars Wiki talk:Formatting/Locations#Final call for comments for latest talk and which pages I've applied them on. -- ab.er.rant 11:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Special:Mostlinked

According to here, here & here, what makes Tanaric so special that he's at the top of the list? :P — ク Eloc 貢 04:24, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Tanaric's talk page is article #16 whereas Talk:Main Page for example is #31. poke | talk 17:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Where can you find out that number? --Xeeron 17:15, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

and why isn't main page #1? - Y0_ich_halt 17:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

It is (poke told me how to find it, put "javascript:alert(wgArticleId);" into the address bar of your browser), it's just that Main page isn't linking to Eloc, Aberrant or me, so it's not on the what links here list for us :P - anja 18:00, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

You've signed an awful lot of talk-pages though! Special:Mostlinked, #44. 2nd user-page after Eloc, but I guess all his welcomes have something to do with it. ;) — Galil 18:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I talk far too much, obviously ;) - anja 18:08, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Main Page is #1, but not the talk page. poke | talk 18:13, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

kk, finally the answer i needed XD - Y0_ich_halt 19:04, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I's the second link to Anja :D --Snograt 20:08, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) You must've been here a while with article id 30. :P — Galil 20:17, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Article of the Day

How about we do something like Article of the Day? — ク Eloc 貢 02:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

It'd probably take a bit more time and effort to identify good articles that rapidly given the relatively small consistent editor base as compared to, say, Wikipedia. Perhaps an article of the week, if someone wanted to maintain it. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 02:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

*volunteers* I'd maintain something like that :) — ク Eloc 貢 03:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Article of the week as something topical, a page for improvement or to show off someones work? How would you choose which page got honoured? --Aspectacle 03:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Well one idea I have to start to decide which would qualify for it is that it had to have the appropriate images, follow the formatting guidelines and have no stubs tage, move tags, or anything like that. An example off the top of my head would be something like Dzabel Land Guardian. There's like nothing wrong with the page at all, has a good map and an excellent picture. — ク Eloc 貢 03:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Do we get enough traffic that an "Article of the Day" gets enough views? I'm thinking "Article of the Week" is more likely. There's only a small number of users who visit daily. But if feels not much different from clicking on "random page" anyway. And I feel something like this is not going to be helpful. If you link to Dzabel Land Guardian or Shing Jea Monastery or whatever... personally, I won't bother clicking. Our wiki is mostly used by users who know more or less exactly what they're looking for. Most of them don't come here to randomly read an article, unlike Wikipedia. If we're really interested in doing a "____ of the Day/Week", it would probably be much better to do a "Guild of the Week" or a "Fansite of the Week" or something. -- ab.er.rant 10:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

All the "mechanic" pages (weapons, bosses, npcs) do not need an article of the day/week. They all look alike down to the formatting. The only articles which might need additional attention are the guides and I don't feel there are enough of them around to do even a "of the week" format. --Xeeron 14:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the Guild of the Week, it'll finally give some use for the thousands of guild articles we have. -- Brains12 • Talk • 15:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

One thing just occured to me, ArenaNet already does a Guild of the Week. Food for thought. — ク Eloc 貢 17:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

As we only have articles here, call it Guild article of the Week. poke | talk 17:17, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Volunteer for being the first Guild article of the Week Guild:Guardianes Del Honor with Minicomics, achievements, and even a Gaile nice feedback ;) -- Coran Ironclaw 19:52, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Those comics are cool. :) But your self nomination does raise the point which my rather terse initial questions wanted to start to explore -> how do you fairly choose the guild article to highlight? My mental worst case scenarios have voting, favouritism or massive whining. I haven't had much experience with selecting a build or random article of the week in a wiki - so can anyone speak for how well this would work in practice? I like the idea, but don't want to see it becoming a point of contention on the wiki. --Aspectacle 21:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Personally I don't see much need for either an article of the day or even week although out of the two 'Article of the Week' does make more sense. As Ab.er mentioned Guild of the Week might be more useful but as Eloc mentioned ArenaNet already does that kind of thing on the main site (although it doesn't appear to be updated weekly, seems to be more of a 'Guild of a Random Length of Time' :P). Also as Aspectacle mentioned, what fair way is there to choose a guild article to highlight for this? --Kakarot 05:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) How about starting slowly, with 'Guild page of the month', selcted by plurality voting? Backsword 07:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I think a month might be too long. We could give weekly a try and maybe limit nominations to say, 10 per week, and then just leave it plurality voting. I'm just wondering if it might be too little benefit to be worth the trouble. -- ab.er.rant 14:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking month both because I don't actually think we have all that many to show case, and becuase a weekly shedule means you have to be on top of it all the time, basically haveing a staff, while a monthly thing could be done when you had some spare time. Backsword 08:24, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Science of the Searing...

Okay...I maybe being just waaaayyyy too geeky for my own good here, but, while I think the significance of the Searing has been explained in the Lore, I'm wondering if anyone has given any thought to the science of the Searing? I mean, okay, yes, the crystals were "magic", but even magic has a kind of physics to it: some things can, and do, always work in certain ways.

So what exactly was the nature of the Searing? We know it wasn't about physical fire (although I'm certain that a great many fires broke out as a result of the Searing). So was it like nuclear fall-out? Was it toxic, like poisoing the land? Were the crystals actual living entities that carried some sort of disease that caused the destruction? I mean, we know that the Crystals destroyed the land, but how did they destroy the land? and why didn't they seem to have a more widescale effect on the minds and bodies of the people of the land?

Has anyone given any thought to this, or am I just waaayyy out there with far too much time on my hands? :) --Czernobog 08:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I always assumed that the Charr used the alter to either transport the crystals into the sky and release them, or summon/create them to/in the sky. Either would have the same effect (huge crystals falling large distances), both cause destruction and craters. Anything that can't be explained by the sheer destructive power of what was essentially a very pointy meteor shower can be explained by power imbued in the crystals during the ritual. -- Armond Warblade 00:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

It's a game, therefore it's magic & doesn't need to follow Science. — ク Eloc 貢 20:30, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay...I get the doesn't need, but that doesn't mean that it's not worth offering some explanation... I mean aren't you even a little curious how this lush green land was, within hours/days, turned into a verritable wasteland? --Czernobog 17:16, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

How was it within hours? There's a two year break between the attack and seeing the ruins of Ascalon. - BeX 01:54, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

The 2-year break is how long since the Searing, not how long the actual searing too place. So the current Ascalon is not an instantaneous change. Me thinks it's as simple as a humongous Fire Storm + Meteor Shower that the combined chanting of the Charr Flame Keepers summoned and released. I thought the very word of "Searing" made that pretty clear. Why should it not be normal fire falling from the sky? Why is disease even considered? If you dump bucketloads of fire and crystal onto green grassy plains and buildings, the former tends to burn and wither while the latter tends to go up in flames and/or get smashed. -- ab.er.rant 05:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Eloc, you forget that magic is simply science that we don't yet understand. At one point, campfires were considered magic; more conventionally, a magician's onstage performance is considered magic by those who don't know how he does it, and when they learn how, they understand the science behind it. While it doesn't work in the real world, in the realms of fantasy the world is sensitive to various incarnations of power, such as specific words, thoughts, or motions, and will react to such in specific. Everything is understandable; the idea that magic is random and produced randomly is disproved by its repeatable nature, and the fact that it does not happen accidentally (I'm sure you'll agree that rabbits cannot summon shards of ice by thinking and saying random combinations of words and symbols).

I once read a story in which programmers from our world were pulled into an alternate reality, in which their programming skills made them wizards (spells were, essentially, modified versions of real-world .exe's, running various magical components, such as a shard of light or a ball of fire, instead of, say, graphical interfaces); it's a very good analogy. Neither computers nor magic work unless you tell them exactly what to do, nor do either do anything but what you tell them to do (generally), and getting a new program (or spell) working right requires a lot of time, study, experimentation, and effort. (The skill trainers in Guild Wars shorten this time drastically, because what's the fun in going to a skill trainer, paying money, and not being able to do anything else with your character for a few days?) -- Armond Warblade 09:47, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd also like to point out Aberant, the the creators of GW replaced early AV's showing "fireballs" with the current images of the Crystals. As I understand it, the reason for this was that they didn't want the misconception that this was just a "big ol' fire". I mean, as you travel around Ascolon, during post-Searing, the land doesn't look so much scorched (except for perhaps a few areas), as it does blighted. That's what made me consider the "disease" angle. That and the fact that many of the creatures seem to be mutated, and have become massively more agressive. Admittedly, the hole in the theory is, why haven't the humans, or any of the other "intelligent" races been effected by the mutations? But...maybe these are just my own perceptions...I don't know. I just thought it might be worth discussing...--Czernobog 06:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The videos were changed the fires to crystals? I didn't realise that. In that case, it's certainly worth an explanation from ArenaNet. But I still wouldn't call the areas in Ascalon "blighted". I think the terrain is a logical result of a heavy dose of scorching followed by 2 years of constant war, famine, and death. The creatures haven't mutated. I'd say they've grown, because civilization retreated. During the 2 years a war, the countryside was probably mostly abandoned, with soldiers and able men and women being stripped from everywhere and sent to the frontlines, and the commoners leaving the devastation of the countryside and flocking to the cities and forts for protection and refuge. So the countryside just got reclaimed by nature, with animal growth unchecked. Being that food is scarce, it's natural for creatures to become more aggressive. And they're more powerful because they survived - the weaker ones are already dead. When an ecosystem gets as severely disrupted by falling fire/crystals, the food chain tends to get turned upside down too. -- ab.er.rant 15:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I guess the reason I percieve the land as blighted, is that you don't see a lot of "burned out" husks. Rather what you see is massive upheaval of the landscap, the water has been replaced by tar, the plants aren't burned, but rather they have become scrubby, and twisted, as if they are mutated, or sickly. The only places you see any scortching is in the places where the land has become so scarred that it litterally cuts down into the molten layers of the earth. However your observations about the wildlife are certainly appreciated, and seem to have a ring of truth to them. :) Well thought...--Czernobog 02:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

As to the change in plant life, that can be attributed to the arid conditions that would have resulted from a great deal of fire -- while they may not be sickly, there are likely fewer readily available nutrients that plant life can draw on, resulting in stunted growth. The recession of water can likewise be attributed to increasingly humid conditions or briefly intense heat concentrated at the source of the water. *Defiant Elements* +talk 04:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Meteor impacts and volcanic eruptions can really mess up the water table. -- Gordon Ecker 06:30, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah...but change the actual chemical compund??? I could understand making the water filmy, sooty, undrinkable. But that stuff we wade through can't even properly be called water anymore... I mean don't get me wrong - I'm not saying that there weren't fires, and that fire wasn't a component of what happened; I just think that to cause the types of massive landmass upheavals, and terrain changes that have occured in Ascalon, there had to be more to it than that. And admittedly, maybe the nature of the Searing is just one of those "mysteries of life" that will never be solved. I just thought it might make for an interesting excercise to examine the events, and look for understanding. My roommate feels like trying to explain the "science", destroys the "magic". But, me, well...I'm just one of those people who likes to know - to understand...--Czernobog 14:03, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

You should read more about tar pits (or asphalt pits). - BeX 14:55, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The big question is where the tar came from. Is Tyria old enough for geological processes to form it naturally from dead algae? Is Ascalon on top of a reserve of primordial hydrocarbons? Did the magic of the Searing transmute other substances into tar in the same way that the Jade Wind transmuted things into stone? Do some monsters produce tar as part of their metabolic processes? -- Gordon Ecker 06:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe it's just the taint of Abaddon :) He hates baths. -- ab.er.rant 06:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I think that the most "logical" explanation is that the formation of the tar pits was a by product of the Searing. Pre-Searing there was no indication of tar pits at all, and not enough time has passed post-Searing for those rivers of Tar to have formed naturally. I think that it's another example of the changes to the landscape wrought by the Searing - yet more evidence that the Searing was more than just "a bunch of fires"... then again, I could be completely full of shit, and have no idea what I am talking about...--Czernobog 16:12, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the tar was created by the developers simply because they wanted a slowdown effect rather than having thought about what could have created the tar ;) -- ab.er.rant 18:49, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

It's a game, which means it doesn't need to follow natural processes. End of story. As for the Searing, call it fireballs mixed in with a little abrakadabra. Calor 19:06, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

That's a foolish thought. -- Armond Warblade 06:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Rather than just dismissing this with a "it's magic" reason, I think it can be fun to sometimes try to come up with a believable reason. This the territory of the lore buffs and the roleplaying geeks :) -- ab.er.rant 16:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay...maybe it's just me...I don't know...but there seems to be a whole lot of effort put into what happened when, and why, but I'm one of those guys that likes to know the how. For me, knowing, or at least having a plausible explanation for, the "science" behind the events taking place, adds to the "realism" of the game. Then again, I could be completely full of shit, and have no idea what I'm talking about...--Kedowyr 23:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Guild Capes as badges of rank or postion

← moved to User talk:Gaile Gray/Guild Wars suggestions#Guild Capes as badges of rank or postion

Watchlist

Is anyone else unable to access their watchlist? When I try, I get:

Database error

A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:

    (SQL query hidden)

from within function "wfSpecialWatchlist". MySQL returned error "1: Can't create/write to file '/tmp/#sql_a21_0.MYI' (Errcode: 13) (172.30.129.83)".

Any tech-savvy people know the cause behind this? Nothing's changed with my connection, computer, login, or account since I used my watchlist 16 hours ago. Calor 19:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah it's happening for Anja and I too. - BeX 19:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I got something worse... the entire site went down with an "internal mediawiki error", followed by a bunch of junk I didn't feel like parsing into stuff that made sense. -- Armond Warblade 22:09, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I think it was IT on the way to fix it ;) It was reported to IT by Emily quite quickly :) - anja 22:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I posted this at Guild Wars Wiki:Reporting wiki bugs. — ク Eloc 貢 06:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)