Guild talk:The Order Of Dii (historical)/Archive

So what's still incomplete here and how can we complete it?

Don't forget to sign! Add in four tildes at the end of your message so we know who you are. I think the page is pretty complete, aside from getting more members to add themselves. Alaris 13:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I can't believe I didn't sign. Looks good so far. Sonya Gladgul 16:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Inactive Guild?

Someone put an inactive tag... but we're active and well! So pls keep your tags off this page! -- Alaris 14:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I thought always they added inactive tags if there were no edits in 3 months.... Maybe that was the reason? |Cyan LightLive!| 14:50, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that was the reason... But I thought adding a comment here too wouldn't hurt. -- Alaris 19:10, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the rules say that it should be tagged if there has been over 3 months since last edit AND listed forum/webpage is inactive. So the tag was done in error. I have actually been complaining about the editors' inability to follow Guild page policy when tagging as inactive as our alliance members have been tagged several times in the past in spite of active listed forums.--Lensor (talk) 08:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for looking after the administrative aspects. I've added a note on current status which should help with new members as well. -- Alaris 17:55, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

You guys are experienced wikiers... just add it to your watchlist and when it gets tagged, come remove the tag. -- Wyn talk 17:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

We do watch it and catch any wayward inactivity template pretty much immediately (as seen here). Although considering how very active and accessible the listed forum is, it is somewhat of a mystery how the tag finds its way here to begin with.--Lensor (talk) 18:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, the simple fact is, that by relying on your forum activity to keep your wiki page active, you are placing the responsibility on the wiki community, rather than taking it on yourselves. The only way to remove the guild page from the "to be tagged" list is for it to receive an edit, so if you guys can't be bothered to make an edit in 3 months, whoever is going through the to be tagged list has to. I have to be honest when I say that to have to do that for a guild that has active wikiers as members is just less than majorly obnoxious imo considering how many guild pages we have to deal with that have few if any active wikiers as members. -- Wyn talk 18:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I really do not want to argue. Maybe it could be possible to have two "to be tagged" lists? One searching for links in the guild template, one without? Or maybe if someone want to remove a guild with an active forum from the "to be tagged" list they could edit in a break in stead? (takes no more work than putting in an inactivity tag, in total it will even be less because noone has to remove the tag again). Another alternative is to have an "inactive but with a forum" template one could use in stead of the normal inactive template. This could be a template that do not lead to archiving but still inform visitors that the Wiki page may not be up to date. In any case the guidelines are clear, so calling people out for wanting them followed does not seem like the way to move forward. --Lensor (talk) 19:17, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't want to argue either Lensor, I just want you to see my point as well, yes, those with active forum just get some bogus edit (comment added or removed) to be taken off the to be tagged list, but with a guild that has an active wiki presence, is it really that difficult to make an edit once every 3 months rather than placing that responsibility on people who are already busting their butts for the community? I mean, seriously... your guild never has anyone leave, or join, or never does anything interesting that you'd like to tell the community about? You say your forum is active which means you guys are on the internet... does it really take that much to come to the wiki and add a space or line break if nothing else once every 3 months? I mean, if you are playing GW, it's a single click from your F10 menu to get to it. I go through every new guild page that gets created here almost daily to clean up formatting, and do what I can to make the namespace better, and the pages usable, to have someone with your wiki experience say to me, "oh... I can't be bothered to make one edit every 3 months.. you do it for me", is just...... annoying beyond words. I do understand that the policy says forums should be checked, and I for myself can say I do during the very rare inactive guild tagging that I do... 97% of the time, so ok, occasionally I make a mistake. However, my entire point is and always has been (even when working on the policy revision) that guilds that create a page on the wiki NEED to be accountable for it, and take responsibility for it if they want it to remain here. It's very disheartening to encounter your attitude from someone who has made such valuable contributions to this wiki and this community. Spirit of the policy > Words of the policy. -- Wyn talk 19:48, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Bold text