Guild Wars Wiki talk:FAQ/Archive 2007-2011

" Does Phil earn a living from selling ads on his site..."

Not sure that I like the wording of that part, does anyone else agree, how could we reword it? --Jamie 09:36, 8 February 2007 (PST)

This FAQ was copied from a post I made to Guild Wars Guru explaining why ArenaNet offered to start hosting this site. As such, many of the FAQ questions are related to the birth of this site and how this site would differ from GuildWiki and other existing Guild Wars wiki sites. As this site matures, there will be less of a need for the FAQ to explain the site's birth, and more of a need for it to explain topics that are important to current users and contributors. Hopefully we as a community will continue to revise and update this FAQ, possibly phasing out questions like this one that aren't directly relevant to this site, and replacing them with more topical questions. -- Mike O'Brien 15:39, 23 February 2007 (PST)

Some Distinction Between this and GuildWiki

I know this is meant to be a wiki that Arenanet can run, so can we have some distinction on the main page that Guildwiki exists and that this is under a different license type? Some people might not want to buy Guild Wars if they see that there's only a little unfinished site about it, from their view. I'm not bashing and rambling on I just think that this unfinished site gives no credit at all to the popular Guild Wiki and puts Guild Wars down. Could we please just have a Guild Wiki link, please? Thanks. Alreajk- GuildWiki user 69.123.220.234 14:26, 13 February 2007 (PST)

I disagree with listing any fansite more prominently than others. There is discussion on the talk page of the fansites article, and I belive the suggestions from there should be brought up in Guild Wars Wiki talk:Article retention as well. --Barek 14:47, 13 February 2007 (PST)

I disagree with not listing the single wiki fansite which has a content an order of magnitude larger. It's clear that GuildWiki is a cut above the rest and it should be linked at least until this website starts to approach its level of content. Banaticus 23:19, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

I just have to say that GuildWiki isnt really a fan site... its a wiki for guild wars and it has been going on for alot longer then this. A link could be posted saying "for more information visit GuildWiki." or something. Either that or maybe try and get the 2 merged somehow so that we would have 1 comeplete and official wiki for guildwars.

The suggestion is ludicrous. I acknowledge that guild wiki is more complete, but I don't think that linking it prominantly in this wiki is going to do this wiki any favours - as doing so sends users and potential editors elsewhere. If you read the FAQ whose talk page you're posting on you would understand that merger is impossible. --Aspectacle 19:33, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

Wiki Policy concerning capitalization?

We should get this right out the way. Is Secondary Profession to be capitalized or not? What about Ranger, when refering to the profession? And so on and so forth. Jack 20:17, 13 February 2007 (PST)

On GuildWiki it was "follow in game capitalization, otherwise use lower case." I would hope we would follow that here too. Most, if not all occurrences of profession names are capitalized in game so I would capitalize them here. My $0.02. --Rainith 20:49, 13 February 2007 (PST)

I fail to see

How these FAQ actually address what they comment on. Asked why ANet doesn't just pay Phil's bills they respond with a comment about working wiki info into their game, something that isn't even the subject of the question. Providing servers for Guildwiki would allow removal of the advertisements, would increase bandwidth and all that, and would be a nice thank you to those people who have worked to document the game. Doing so doesn't prevent running an official wiki, but deciding not to help guildwiki and instead creating a separate wiki is a pretty clear statement - especially when one sees that these responses dance around the issues rather than addressing them. While a vision of one day having a wiki that can be used for in-game information is perhaps nice (though that's debateable, and I'm not sure readily available spoilers are in the game's interest) it has nothing to do with the decision of whether to help finance and support the Guildwiki. --Epinephrine 08:29, 16 February 2007 (PST)

There are a number of other issues that prevent them from hosting Guildwiki or paying to host Guildwiki legal and logistical. Probably the primary problem is the licensing as Guildwiki is running under the CC na-sc license no the freedoc license the official wiki is using. This would prevent ANet from doing anything remotely commercial with the wiki and since they are a for-profit company that's a problem. Also, as Gaile stated somewhere, can't remember offhand, even if they did help finance Guildwiki it creates a whole host of other problems as to why they don't help other fansites and etc. If you want more information on the subject I suggest you read the thread : Should Anet host a guild wiki, found in the Guildwiki forum on GuildWarsGuru. Lojiin 08:45, 16 February 2007 (PST)

Why doesn't ArenaNet employ people to administer and contribute to this resource (Guild Wars Wiki)? -- A suggestion for how the Guild Wars Wiki team can be structured

The FAQ states:

"ArenaNet employees will try to help where we can; and together we can all start working together to populate this new site."

If ArenaNet wish to use this Wiki and the resources within it for their games, games that they profit from, would it not make sense for ArenaNet to pool some of that profit to employ a decent administration team? One could argue that this can be done without a paid team, but the level of quality would be vastly different between solely community based team and a community based team led by a highly coordinated ArenaNet-based team. That way the general community can still contribute, and certain selected individuals can become part of the administration team, although those with the final say (the say that is most beneficial for the Wiki) would be the Official ArenaNet administration team.

Think of it like a hierarchy:

First tier

The first tier would consist of the Official ArenaNet administration team. The team would consist of paid individuals who would be responsible for setting and enforcing the policies and formatting guidelines (in-coordination with ArenaNet such that everything is in the best interest of ArenaNet/the game of Guild Wars), overseeing the un-paid, community based administration team and ensuring that they (fairly and responsibly) enforce and maintain the policies and formatting guidelines, and generally administering the Wiki. This team would have the most privileges in terms of administration, as well as the most responsibility. They would also be in direct communication with ArenaNet, and any actions would be made in the best interest of “the greater good”, including ArenaNet, the game of Guild Wars, and the purpose of the Wiki (when that is specifically defined).

Second Tier

The second tier would consist of an un-paid community based administration team. This team would be responsible for upholding the policies and formatting guidelines, as well as assisting the Official ArenaNet administration team with the administration of the Wiki and all that entails. These individuals would have a high amount of influence on the Wiki, but ultimately the most important tasks and the “final say” would be left up to the Official ArenaNet administration team when/if there was a dispute or disagreement between the members of the un-paid, community based admin team about how things should be done. This team and its members would be assigned responsibility and privileges as the Official ArenaNet team deems appropriate/necessary.

Third Tier

The third tier would consist of the general community, including those who contribute to the Wiki, as well as those who only visit it for information. This “group” would have the ability to edit the Wiki but they would have no responsibility (other then to meet the policies and formatting guidelines) and their solve privilege would be that of contribution.

Conclusion

I believe structuring the system in the manner would offer the most flexibility while allowing a high standard of quality. I have seen a similar system used in another high traffic website, and it works flawlessly. You can definitely break it down further, and have separate, un-paid, community based admin teams for separate parts/categories/sections of the Wiki, etc, but essentially it follows the same structure.

officialness

Is this the Official "Guild Wars Wiki" FAQ, or is this the "Official Guild Wars Wiki" FAQ? If the former, then maybe this should be a protected article? -PanSola 20:37, 23 February 2007 (EST)

Time Zone

This wiki currently displays Eastern Time Zone date/time settings. Is it an option to select a time zone setting for this wiki? I work on the global websites on a daily basis, and I'm no stranger to time zone issues. In my opinion, it would be very productive to use Pacific Time Zone settings here, for that is "studio time," and such settings would put the Guild Wars Wiki in conformance with all announced start times for events, releases, and so forth. Apologies if this is off topic or misplaced. --Gaile Gray 14:34, 24 February 2007 (EST)

Really? This must have changed recently as most of the signatures in this page use PST. I agree that "studio time" would be best to use, but I might be considered biased as I'm on the west coast. --Rainith 18:45, 24 February 2007 (EST)

Er, as a multi-national, pan-global concern, wouldn't (UTC) make more sense? Then again, maybe I'm biased because (UTC)=(GMT) sometimes :) --Snograt whisper 18:50, 24 February 2007 (EST)

Want to know time around the world ? No problem : [1] But i think Gaile is right on that matter. TulipVorlax 02:38, 8 March 2007 (EST)

I noticed yesterday that some posts are timestamped EST/EDT while others are timestamped PST/PDT. At present, we cannot find rhyme or reason why that is so. Changing my personal preferences does not amend the time stamps--I changed to -7 GMT and I'm still seeing my posts set at EDT and on another page, PDT. Emily and I will see if we can learn why this is so. It's not really so troublesome that we're in a different time zone than the one we may prefer, but what is troublesome is that we're not consistently in any particular timezone at all. Mars time, anyone? :) --Gaile 20:31, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

Namespace?

Shouldn't this article be in the "Guild Wars Wiki" namespace? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 12:55, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Agreed, Guild Wars Wiki:Official FAQ, Guild Wars Wiki:FAQ or Guild Wars Wiki:Official Guild Wars Wiki FAQ?

personally I favor the first option. --Jamie 14:10, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

I hadn't really thought about what to name it. I was originally just thinking its current name in the different namespace - but that's both long and redundant. Given the list, I agree - the first option seems best to me as well. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 14:22, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

I like either the first or second option. Do we plan on only allowing answers made directly by ArenaNet? If not, I'd rather drop the term "official" completely. --Rezyk 16:19, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Based on this above comment, I agree that the term "official" should be dropped, as this should evolve into the site FAQ, with user developed content. So, how about the name Guild Wars Wiki:FAQ (the second of the initially proposed changes)? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:56, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Sounds good enough to me. --Jamie 18:07, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Make it so. --Rainith 18:12, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Jean-Luc spoke and it was done. :p — Gares 18:17, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Content import

According to the FAQ, the license used by GuildWiki prohibits ArenaNet from using using the content since they are a commercial entity. I would like to know how they can then get away with importing content from GuildWiki? For example, the Craft article. It wasn't much of an article on GuildWiki before I came along and added some actual content to it. Now, I find that ArenaNet has lifted the article almost verbatim. Yet, in the FAQ it is stated that they are not hosting GuildWiki because they can't claim ownership of its content. Would someone care to explain this to me? -- James Sumners

ArenaNet has not imported it, one of the users here has. If you find it being subject to copyright violation, I suggest adding a {{copyvio}} tag to the article, with a link to the GuildWiki article, for an admin here to review. — Anja 13:01, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

What it comes down to is: This wiki should not be using that material since you have not given permission to use the copyrighted content you worked on, but due to the open nature of wikis, it's impractical/impossible to ensure that it never gets posted at any particular time. (As Anja mentioned, it was posted by a user, not ArenaNet) It is something we take seriously and it's an ongoing effort to find and correct these violations (see How to help#Common mistakes). I've blanked and tagged the craft article so that it can be corrected there. One thing that might warrant clarification is that some GuildWiki content can be imported -- specifically, if the major contributors have given permission to do so (see http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/Category:Users/GFDL). If you want to allow your contributions to be imported here you can follow the directions on that page (it's entirely up to you). In any case, please feel free to point out any other violations that you notice, or tag them with the copyvio template. Thanks! --Rezyk 14:07, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

"The content on Phil's site uses the Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license..." If NCsoft never plans on making this a pay-to-play site, if it (for instance) never turns owning the game into a prerequisite for membership here, and if NCsoft never plans on repackaging the wiki into a help book and selling that book, then I don't see what the conflict is. Some might say, "Well, the site is promoting the game that they own and make profit on." Personally, I don't see a legal problem with that, but NCsoft already set up a puppet company in ArenaNet, Inc. They can just set up a dummy non profit company and run activities like this through that company, with the purpose of the non profit company to market and spread the word about Guild Wars. There are other ways to get around those restrictions, if the people who own GuildWars never plan on trying to make a profit through what is on this site. But since they aren't doing that and since they aren't even bothering to seed this wiki with some good content, I really don't see the point in contributing to this wiki. Banaticus 23:33, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Please, before you make comments like this, know what you're talking about. -FireFox File:Firefoxav.png 23:37, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

You're making a whole lot of assumptions there, Banaticus. I'm not sure if you've even read the article to which this talk page belongs to or not, but it's mentioned there in the very first section that there are plans to integrate the site with the game (that means, being able to access Wiki data from inside the game). That falls under commercial use (since this would be a selling feature for the game), and as such not compatible with the nc-sa license. Whether you see a problem with that or not doesn't really matter; fact is that nc-sa means no in-game integration. "Pay to play site" ? "Owning the game being a prerequisite for membership"? I very very strongly suggest you read the GFDL licence before making such statements. And I won't even touch on the "puppet company" part, since that's just flat out nonsense. Bottom line, read FireFox's message again. Dirigible 00:26, 24 March 2007 (EDT)

It depends on how they integrate it with the game. If they simply link to it from within the game, perhaps with a link that opens up your default browser and opens the page, that's one thing. If they create a web browser in game that can be used to access websites and set it to default to pointing to this site, that's one thing. Neither of those things are precluded by the current license of GuildWiki. Like I mentioned with bundling the information here and reselling it as a book or something like that -- if they take everything here and rehost it on people's computers (as a new update or something) or otherwise spoonfeed it to people, that's different. Not to mention, they specifically said that they weren't, as a company, going to bother actually seeding this wiki (as they so easily could). As to the company, check the newspapers from the early part of December, 2002. Banaticus 09:29, 24 March 2007 (EDT)

Game related entries

Can they be moved to Guild Wars Wiki:Game FAQ or something? They don't really fit here and any new user looking for game information is likely to get lost amongst the licensing stuff. :P - BeX 04:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with splitting but we can always just move the licensing questions to the bottom. So we have a "Wiki FAQ" and a "Game FAQ"? Which would GWW:FAQ redirect to? -- ab.er.rant 11:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I dunno, a disambig page? :P The FAQ entries you are adding are really frequently asked questions, but the licensing ones are more of a why or about page, and they don't get asked that frequently. I'm sure there is a better way out there to sort the data. - BeX 11:09, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Yea, they don't get asked, usually ppl just accuse GWW of being copycats and then disappear thinking they've done their part in supporintg GuildWiki ;) anyway, I don't see where else to put them unless u plan on rewriting Mike's words into something less question-and-answer style. Or maybe throw them into something like a "Mission statement" (we certainly seem to need something like that). And I think it doesn't matter if those questions are never seen. People who are actually annoyed that this wiki even exists is not going to click on a FAQ link at all. Unless it's labelled... say "Why not GuildWiki?" or something like that. -- ab.er.rant 11:19, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

The license stuff could be moved to Guild Wars Wiki:About. - BeX 11:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, good idea. So... how does one go about editing that menu? -- ab.er.rant 01:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, never mind, found it. So... do we need more opinions on this or can I just go ahead and make the change you think? -- ab.er.rant 01:44, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

wiki - other languages

When the wiki was announced anet said they will think about other languages. I'd like to have this in the FAQ.

Was there any update after "will think about it"? --RotzKotz ere 23:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

No. And as such all pages should have english translations or be deleted. And that's just my opinion because this is after all an English wiki. - File:Drago-sig.gif Drago 23:32, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Why shouldn't there be an entry in the FAQ about what Anet said? It is frequently asked. - BeX 05:26, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it's fine to just repeat what's mentioned. I'll go and add it. -- ab.er.rant 01:08, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

It is so Good Being A warier/ranger cause u can change whenevr u want to --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:84.227.63.214 .

Huh? Did you accidentally posted on the wrong talk page? -- ab.er.rant 01:08, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Can you mention that wikia has a few other language Guild Wars Wikis RT | Talk 15:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, given the name of this page is "Guild Wars Wiki:FAQ", I don't think it's appropriate to mention Wikia at all. I think it's more appropriate here. -- ab.er.rant 04:05, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, a year has passed, does anyone know anything about the project in other languages? How much more will have to wait for the translation? Thanks 84.78.182.165 15:14, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

No further news from one year ago either. So it might be safe to assume that it won't happen for GW1. -- ab.er.rant 13:59, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

user licence agereement

is this on the wiki? somewhere?75.165.117.51 18:30, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

It can be found here. --mira castillo 18:18, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

thanks sorry forgot to sign75.165.117.51 18:30, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Mac/Linux

Questions about it are being asked all the time. Could we add a part to explain users how to run GW under Mac or Linux? -- Karasu (talk) 11:19, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Trial availability worldwide

The answer for 2.5, how to get a trial account, is incorrect, at least for some areas. Probably/possibly americentric? Currently, European releases (the white-cover boxes with no printed manual) do NOT come with buddy keys. There is also a trial pack available in Europe, but it differs from the one linked in the answer: it's called "Discover Guild Wars", and offers 14 days / 20 game hours of play in all three campaigns. Yanna Cor & family 14:20, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to correct it. -- ab.er.rant 08:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I'm adding http://www.guildwars.com/freetrial/ to the FAQ. Not in my best day, so sentence could get some rewording. --NIN37 01:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Add an Acces KEy to exsiting Game account

I have an exsting Faction regular game account. I have purchased the collectors eddition of the Factions game. Can I add the collectors edtion to the regular edditon game which I have played for over 2 yrs. The collectors eddtion has certain emotes that I want on my account. Will it work? or do I need to make a new account with the new collectors eddtion ? 205.196.178.196usil

Your question has been answered in the section you created at Help:Ask an account question#Adding Access Key??. --Silver Edge 03:59, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Video card errors

A lot of these have been coming up. Usually, the poster is having some graphical glitch that messes up select components of their screen, and it is almost always due to video card malfunction. How about a section under About Guild Wars like so:

• Q: "While playing, Textures in the game become checkerboard patterns or scrambled bits of random colors and/or models turn into colored boxes."
• ""A: "This sounds like a problem with your video card. If turning down your graphics options doesn't fix the problem, you may want to consider getting a new video card." ~Shard 01:52, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Just add it :) poke | talk 08:53, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

lol jw

jw does any1 know who the oldest player is?

Someone from ArenaNet I would say. -- Lacky 02:51, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

lol ok here oldest non anet staff member

DIvine Aura

Will the divine aura that is on my current characters (coll ed package- 1st series) be tranferred over to my new account in GW2. My GWAMM title will transfer… why not the DIVINE AURA emote?? Would that be way too much for the developers to add... ?

I am not sure where to post this question on GW1 forum or gw2.. please advise appropriate place… Usil 70.140.16.146 18:54, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Things that you get on the collector's edition like special emotes, etc. will stay on that collector's edition. I feel Gw 2 may have it's own special editions as well. Kaisha 18:58, 2 August 2011 (UTC)