Talk:Main Page/editcopy/Archive 2

Concept Art

How about adding a link to a page that involves all the Concept Art. There is tonnes floating around this site which can be used.--Eloc 17:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Does such an article exist? - BeX 04:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

No, but one can easily be made. The Concept Art is all uploaded onto the site.--Eloc 13:58, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you make the article before adding a link to it. :P - BeX 14:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't add a link to it. I merely suggested it.--Eloc 17:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

And I am merely suggesting the article be created before it is linked to. - BeX 04:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I need to make that some other time then.--Eloc 04:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Someone has a whole set of pages in their userspace, this could be transfered to the mainspace, I forget who it is though.. sanax mebbe? --Lemming64 16:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Promotions on the main page

Hi guys! Our marketing director mentioned to me that he would really like it if we had a spot on the main page of the wiki to list active promotions going on on the official site. Do you think that we could find a place to put them on the page, perhaps in the "Updates, News, and Events" box? When asked, he mentioned that the maximum number of items we'd need to find space for would be around 5.

Any thoughts on this? If you guys could see if you could find a good spot for the information, that would be awesome :) -- Emily Diehl (talk) 20:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean stuff like Return to Tyria Sweepstakes? --  (CoRrRan / talk) 22:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, we have GuildWars.com News on Main Page, this article includes every promotion and news stuff from the official site. --BigBlue talk 06:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I talked to Chris about the current contests page, but he would prefer that we have more prominent links directly to the current promotions. I asked him how many he'd have (maximum) at one time, and he was able to narrow it down to three. Currently, we have the Return to Tyria and Brand a Boss contests going on. I'll change the editcopy so you guys have an idea about what we're talking about. -- Emily Diehl (talk) 19:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Personally I'm not a fan of the idea... I really think that the wiki should be a reference tool and not a marketing tool (as Mike O'Brien said). I hope you understand my reasoning! I would have less opposition to these links being on the Contest article (even if they were more prominent on that article than on the main page) but I don't think the main page is the right place for this kind of material. LordBiro 20:19, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I have to concur with LordBiro. There already is a huge page dedicated to passing information regarding contests. I'm talking about the Guild Wars homepage itself. This wiki doesn't feel like it should be part of the marketing of the game, although I understand that "Chris" wants to catch the visitors who no longer frequent the main page, but go straight to the wiki. (Especially since every news item is also covered on the wiki...) --  (CoRrRan / talk) 20:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

As mentioned before by ANet staff members, this wiki has to be a place different to the main gw page. That's why ANet didn't wanted us to adapt the gw.com site layout, colors and other things. I have bad feelings thinking about a wiki - which purpose is describing the game - with press releases, press coverage, contests and so on. Yes, I know, you don't want to post press releases now. But what if your marketing crew falls in love with this new chance to reach customers? I know this is the official wiki and you are able to do everything you like - and I can't do anything against it. But please remember: The idea of this wiki was describing the game for ingame help to players. Not a marketing tool. The official wiki won't be the same if you do what you intend. It wouldn't be a community project any more. It would be only another ANet page for GuildWars and not an unique institution in the gaming scene. I hope you understand my concerns, it's late here in Germany... BigBluetalk 22:11, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

What are they marketing? Giving away free stuff to people? I think adding the links is a good idea. The contests are held for the benefit of players anyway. You don't have to buy anything to enter them. - BeX 05:19, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, this is marketing for the "sponsors" AlienWare, ATI, Logitech, Creative Labs (as seen on [1] with the company logos), for the German sweepstake Razer is even officially called a sponsor [2]! So this is marketing for the described companies. BigBluetalk 08:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

There should not be any external links on the main page. If we have meaningful wiki articles about these contests, we can talk about linking them individually, but main page space is much to scarce to host external links in my opinion. --Xeeron 08:35, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll pass this along and see what discussion sparks from the concerns. Thanks for talking about this, guys. -- Emily Diehl (talk) 23:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

In-game announcements and update notes

• User:Phoenix just added a link to Guild Wars login announcements to the Main Page edit copy. How does everyone feel about that? Ignoring the last two items (which have been on that menu forever), all other items can usually be found either in Gaile News, Game updates, GuildWars.com News or Weekend events. With the exception of this last one, all these other pages are already linked from the Main Page, so personally it doesn't seem too useful to me.

• Check out WoWWiki's main page, notice the patch notes link in the top-right corner. Any chance we could have something similar here, on our main page? For who knows what reason, people have learned to rush here when a new game update is launched, apparently we get those update notes before everyone else does. I kinda like the idea of making those notes highly visible, maybe through a trick like WoWWiki's.

Thoughts? --Dirigible 09:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I have no strong feelings about your first point, Dirigible, but I think a link to the latest update would be a great idea. Rather than embedding it in the main page I think it would make more sense to include it, maybe {{latest update}}? This would of course be protected, but it would save us (or Emily) having to alter the main page very often, and reduces the potential for confusion between the live copy and the edit copy. LordBiro 11:38, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I really like that update note idea :) - anja (contribs) 11:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I've knocked up what I was thinking, opinions? LordBiro 11:57, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Except that it's the wrong update, it's ok ;) I'd rather have a bit smaller font though, it looks so... thin. - anja (contribs) 12:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, it probably looks different for me :P I'm on my new macbook pro :P [/brag] I'll alter the font, I just grabbed the first date I saw, hehe, I'll update that too! LordBiro 12:24, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

1. I don't really fancy that "log in announcement" stuff, like Dirigible says, it's redundant.
2. I've changed your template in my sandbox a bit LordBiro, see User:CoRrRan/Latest update. What do you think of doing it like that? I have been toying with the image size a bit and the font-size, don't mind those changes, that's not my proposal. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 20:43, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

What's the difference, if it's not font and image size? :P Also, my mind says "Latest update was" sounds better, since it's a date not an article name. But I don't know what's correct - anja (contribs) 20:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, probably hard to spot: I changed the link from enclosing the entire text into only the date of the update. And what about "Latest update was on "? --  (CoRrRan / talk) 20:50, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah those changes look cool Corran. To be honest we might not even need to display the year. As for whether it should be "is" or "was on", either is cool. I think you're right, "was on" does make more sense! LordBiro 21:04, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, your work always inspires me Biro. Although the year might not be required (since the 'official' update-notes page doesn't use it either), I think it would be best to show it though. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 21:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

And I'm not really happy about the brackets myself at the moment. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 21:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Just a question: Why do we need two templates? One could do that alone. poke | talk 00:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

In mysterious ways, LordBiro works. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 00:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

hehe ^^ I mean instead of writing {{game update|20070628}}, you can also just use [[Game updates/20070628|Thursday, June 28 (2007)]] (especially since the game update pages list the formatted date already) or even (for lazier ones) [[Game updates/20070628|{{#time: l, F j (Y)|20070628}}]] poke | talk 01:03, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Lol, I love you guys :P

I really made two templates for ease of use. I was originally only going to produce {{latest update}}, but as I was writing it I realised that I could make it much more straightforward if the #time function was used to process the date. However, this meant that there was a big chunk of parserfunctions code that was a little intimidating. The user who updates Game updates (i.e. Emily) shouldn't have to bother about this code, so it doesn't make sense to keep it in there. I decided it made Game updates safer and easier to read and edit if the parserfunctions code was elsewhere. Of course, if you all disagree with that then feel free to change it :D LordBiro 09:10, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

It's just that I'm not a friend of using templates for such easy things ;) And because Emily already knows the exact date (it's the heading of the game update page) there should be no problem in changing it manually.. poke | talk 14:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind updating an extra few numbers if it makes it easier for you guys. Just let me know what you'll want me to do :) -- Emily Diehl (talk) 19:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion templates should be used for easy things, just like {{mo}} etc. Having the template makes life more straightforward and saves valuable seconds ;) hehe. There's a saying that if you have to do something twice you should automate it. Perhaps the argument should be that Emily shouldn't have to write the date twice on the game updates page! ;) LordBiro 20:17, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Hmm, the {{latest update}} template doesn't seem to play nicely with the elections site notice. --Dirigible 11:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Erk, yeah that's horrible! I'll have a play with the CSS, but we might have to simply switch styles depending on whether sitenotice is being used. LordBiro 17:01, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed that wikipedia get around this problem by left aligning site notices. LordBiro 20:59, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Tried something and found a reason. style="font-size: 1em; font-style: italic; float: right; margin-top: -45px;" aligns the update box nearly perfect on the Main Page (it does not work here because of the subpage notice) poke | talk 21:59, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Negative margins may not work correctly in IE, but give it a try Poke! :) LordBiro 22:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. Works in IE 6, IE 7, Opera 9.21, Firefox 2 - it's displayed incorrect on at the editcopy (because of the notice and the subpage) but on stand alone pages with the template as first content it should look equally to this. poke | talk 22:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

So what about trying this on the main page? poke | talk 14:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I would be happy to, if no one is opposed to a resync I will do one in about an hours time. LordBiro 19:14, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok :) poke | talk 19:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

*remind* ^^ poke | talk 08:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Lol, that was a long hour, wasn't it? :) LordBiro 17:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah ^^ But it's nice to see this finally working. Thanks, Biro. poke | talk 20:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Any objections to {{Latest update}} and {{game update}} being protected? --Dirigible 18:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

None from me :) LordBiro 19:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

As it's displayed correctly and Emily can edit protected pages -> do it :) poke | talk 22:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I don't fancy the way I've modified the way the date is shown (with the year in brackets). Any other suggestions, or is this a moot point, since it looks OK to you as it is? --  (CoRrRan / talk) 23:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

The recent change to the template made the template to get automatically the newest update date, so no change is needed from now on. :) poke | talk 00:06, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Update box on the left or right?

I dont care one yota myself, but there should be some agreement here before we do a big main page change. I'll change it back for now so other uncontroversial edits can be synced. Same for contest external links. --Xeeron 14:26, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it really matters. Either side is basically the same. One could argue that having it on the left means it will be read more because we read left to right, but on the other hand, I tend to look at the right side of the screen more because I'm used to having sidebars on the left. :P - BeX 15:26, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

That's a good point BeXoR; usually in magazines/papers the most important content is on page 3, since that's where people look first after opening. LordBiro 18:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, this rule belongs to the press and books, but websites use the western reading. This means left to right and so: important things left, they get the first attention because of our reading habit. BigBluetalk 20:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Is that always the case? It's not particularly important or anything, I'm just curious :) LordBiro 20:44, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, many studies proved this with eye tracking tests. I heard a HCI lecture and that was a part of it. :) BigBluetalk 21:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

"usually in magazines/papers the most important content is on page 3" - I thought you lived in Britain, Biro. In Britain, most of the boobies are on page 3. --Snograt 22:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I know why I look at page 3 first. Back to the topic though, I prefer it on the right personally. --Lemming64 22:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

As I said, important content :) LordBiro 23:47, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

logos.. again.

i added display: inline; in the style of the campaign logo, so thye warp on next line if window is too small. This solve all the issue i had whit the width of the image. (ps, i made the change before i login) --Bob 01:22, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

On my screen they're all smooshed up against the left side. Can we add a <center> or something? - BeX 02:44, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

It either your window that is too small or your rendering whit a funny browser. It work fine whit mozilla. I dont know how to fix, if no one else got idea it should be dropped and i will come up whit a other solution later. --Bob 06:34, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm using Mozilla Firefox. It's buggered on my screen too. MisterPepe talk 06:39, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm also using Firefox and my res is 1280x1024 so my screen is far from too small. :P - BeX 06:47, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Ditto, 1680*1050 :p:p --Snograt 08:01, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

All pushed to the left here too. - anja 08:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Is it fixed now? --Bob 10:54, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Yep. :) - BeX 10:57, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Great! Let push that on the front page. Getting tired of seeing images go off screen :) --Bob 11:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I altered it... there was a lot of unnecessary code. I've only tried it in Firefox, but I think it's correct. LordBiro 16:00, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Works fine for me on opera. --Xeeron 16:13, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Same, they're centered and everything, except they're a bit squished together. --Santax (talk · contribs) 17:51, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Collector Weapons

I posted on the discussion page for the collector weapons link from the main page last month. If anyone has clicked on it, you'd realise there is no point to it existing in its present format. All it does is tell you what a collector weapon is, not which ones are available and from whom. I'm not very good at all this wiki stuff, I just tend to edit little thing like spelling and obvious errors, and wouldn't really know how to start something like a collector list, so I'm hoping someone with more knowledge than me can make something happen, or just remove the main page link, as it's currently a waste of time. Thx Magua 07:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, having looked at it, it seems that the reason that's all the page says is because any actual list of collector weapons doesn't exist on the wiki yet - the armor ones do, but not weapons. A project for someone to work on. :) (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 07:30, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

New icons test

Ok what do you think of giving the main page a bit of a spring/summer clean and changing the icons so people don't get bored of seeing the same ones. When page goes live we can upload over the protected image names, I have simply replaced them here at the moment for example purposes. --Lemming64 23:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I really don't mind the new icons. Perhaps we should set up a schedule/proposal system for changing and rotating the icons. --trekie9001 23:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

More a fan of the old ones, but I'll go along with whatever people like here, doesn't matter a lot to me. --Xeeron 23:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I also prefer the old ones ... especially on "Gear and Equipment" - the others I don't care as much about. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:25, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Agree to Barek. BigBluetalk 07:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok I have changed gear and equipment back. --Lemming64 09:30, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I sycned the editcopy since I really wanted to get the GW:EN list up on the main page. However, you seem to have used the actual Koss icon instead of creating a copy for it, so I protected that. In the long run, we either want to have a main page koss icon or to go back to the old icon. --Xeeron 23:14, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Can I suggest that the icons be named for their section, such as Image:Main page game basics.png Image:Main page gear.png Image:Main page updates.png Image:Main page PvE.png Image:Main page PvP Image:Main page community.png? Then when we want new icons we can just overwrite the old ones rather than leaving a wake of images needing deletion. :) - BeX 04:05, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

A very sensible idea, Bex! LordBiro 07:55, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes it was just meant to be for example purposes. I fully intended to just replaced the main page icon named files --Lemming64 11:11, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok it's done, I think the image cache is being slow to update though. --Lemming64 11:20, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

You missed the first one. It is still pointing to Image:GWW-shield.png. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 11:43, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Although I think I understand why that has been done... --  (CoRrRan / talk) 11:45, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

The GWW-Shield is the name reserved for the icon on the main page, that one was not one that was changed --Lemming64 21:13, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Koss has been on the main page for a week now, but I'd still like to go back to the old icon: The main problem (which bugs me whenever I see him) is that koss can be used both in PvE and PvP and is therefore not a good image to symbolise PvE. Having a monster that only appears in PvE is much better. --Xeeron 09:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I see your point there, how about one of the other miniature icons, like hydra, or something? --Lemming64 12:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Fine choice. Hydra's pwn Koss everyday too. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 12:20, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't agree with the Hydra. All other icons are tokens representing the feature. A Hydra is not a logical link to PvE I think. Though comments are pointless if you don't come up with something better. I'll look around. --Moeilijk 08:42, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

New colours

What does everyone think about this revision? The faded icons would be temporary until Biro releases the full versions. --Santax (talk to me you did WHAT?) 07:48, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

A bit too much in my opinion, it gets so... bright. :) - anja 07:53, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

IMO the mainpage layout we have now with the simple white and blue looks good. Adding all of those different colors makes it look sloppy IMO. --Sktbrd341 08:18, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the idea is not bad but using the colors and icons of the professions for not profession related topics is not good. poke | talk 16:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Reminds me a bit of guildwiki. --Lemming64 17:22, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Community section

I strongly disagree with adding an IRC link to the community section. To me, that section should only contain links to in-wiki materials. I do not feel we should be playing favorites with external community links by giving one better placement over all others that exist. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 15:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Agree with Barek. - anja 15:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. -Auron 09:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused, if you're agreeing it shouldn't be there Auron why did you add it back again? Anyway, I also agree that we should not be playing favourites here. --Lemming64 08:40, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Because I misread it, lolol. Anyway, I don't think it's favoritism if it's the official gww chan - it's an offwiki resource just like the mailing list. I would understand if just some random people made it, but that's not the case. -Auron 08:43, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Lol I misread the channel name, for some reason I thought it was a link to GWP or something. If it is the official GWW Irc channel created by members of the community here, I can understand that being placed on the main page. --Lemming64 08:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't know, Auron, I consider you a pretty random person :P LordBiro 08:58, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Still, there are three people disagreeing with it right away, it should not go on the main page. --Xeeron 09:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Just a minor clarification, it's not the "official gww channel", it's the Initial Unofficial Official Guild Wars Wiki channel. For it to be official there'd need to be at least a couple of wiki policies regulating everything that goes on there. Right now we're as unofficial as it gets. :) --Dirigible 09:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I contributed the word "initial". Aren't I special? :P LordBiro 16:10, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Izzy's talk page

I think a major reason people come to this wiki is to see izzy's talk page... like "Galie's News"... but for PvPers. So... why not put it on the front page too? ^^ Kenshin 08:17, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Personally I think that Izzy's talk page is getting a little out of hand. I find it really good that Izzy is responding in such a way (do I dare say finally?), but the pages are getting huge, with discussions not really dying out to be archived easily. In the end, it would be best to have discussions on skills like it is happening on the GW:EN skill's talk pages. But the problem is, is that Izzy won't have every skill in GW that becomes point for discussion in his watchlist.

Perhaps we should suggest to him to revamp his talk page in such a way, that for individual skills, we only post a link to the article with a notification that his comment is appreciated, either for being under- or overpowered. And that for discussions like the one on hexes, that there are subpages made on his talk page.

But in the end it is his talk page, so it's his decision. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 11:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I see your point Kenshin, but I have to agree with Corrran. From a wiki point of view, we should not encourage more users to add to izzys ever expanding userpage, the discussion should be directed towards the skill talk pages instead. --Xeeron 11:17, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

How about two columns and three rows instead of 3 columns and 2 rows

Currently I think the main page is to wide and that a longer page would be easier to read --Primeval Sentinel 00:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Like this: User:Lemming64/Sandbox2 you mean? personally I think that is too long, it should fit on one screen without having to scroll down. --Lemming 00:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

For me it's perfect right now... but I have a 16/10 screen. 4/3 screen may find it a bit too wide. MithranArkanere 00:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I run on a 4:3 screen at 1280 and the main page is fine as it is. And I have tried it in windowed mode and shrunk it down and I think as long as you are over 1024 you are fine as it is personally. There is a lot of white space in the 2 column version. --Lemming 00:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Same, I am using a 1280x800 screen and the main page looks fine. :) --Alien 21:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

3 columns and 2 rows work for me. I think the other way around looks to be sloppy for some reason. --Sktbrd341 21:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I guess it depends on how wide your screen is... oh well its fine as it is i guess --Primeval 17:48, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Its seems to be fine on Firefox for me, but then when I use IE or Aol Explorer Browser, it gets crunched together and the GWEN logo is underneath the other campaign's logos. --- Raptors

Clean-up

Since the clean-up, the page (and the synced main page) look very crappy with opera, since the box headers are not stuck at the top and instead float (like a vertically centered text). --Xeeron 13:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

They look fine for me in Opera. - BeX 13:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I am using version 9.20, which one are you at? --Xeeron 13:51, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Apparently Opera does not understand vertical align set in table rows.. poke | talk 14:16, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

9.23, I just downloaded it a few days ago for wiki testing. - BeX 14:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Using 9.23 as well, and as Xeeron says, the header boxes move around too much when playing with the window size. Here's an image comparison of how it was before Poke's fix and after. --Dirigible 14:39, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah I didn't notice at full screen resolution, but I see now. - BeX 15:19, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Guild Wars Eye of the North

this should really be removed from upcoming features since it is now out, no-body seems to of remembered to remove it so i thought i would add a little reminder --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:79.67.34.133 .

Holidays

Any objections to theme-ing the icons at different holidays, e.g. Halloween and Christmas, we can thrown up a variety of eggnogs, pumpkin squash, witches brew etc. :) --Lemming 08:58, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a great idea. Should be doable at least for those holidays which have festival items ingame. --Xeeron 09:01, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Updated some icons for halloween, only a week to go, they will probably take an hour or two for the cache to catch up. --Lemming 16:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Great idea Lemming. The icons look really good, now we just need some for Game Basics, PvP and Wiki community to complete it. --Kakarot Talk 17:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Boo for grey fluff around icons :( Otherwise they are great :) - anja 17:22, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeh it didn't cut out quite as well as I had hoped, I will have another go at them shortly. --Lemming 17:38, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

In some ways I think the grey around the Gear and Equipment icon could look good, however it should only be around the top or the neck at most. Sortof like the smoke (or whatever it is) that is usually around a witches cauldron. --Kakarot 18:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok I have performed the "de-fluffing" operation, :) --Lemming 18:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Nice, but Kakarot is right: We need 3 more to complete the set. --Xeeron 21:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I am trying to get some inventory icons of the pumpkin crowns, I think they would be good. also there is still the and and the so we can use them too. --Lemming 22:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Everyone like the orange colour drago added? I kinda like it and will apply it if there is no objection. --Lemming 22:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

(Reset indent) just had a thought, we could use the File:Salvage Web.png somewhere instead of one of the boring-er tonics. --Lemming 23:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I like the orange, it makes it more Halloween-like and is a nice change from the normal blue. Also that spider web might be better because right now there are 4 potions/tonics, while each one is different they are all the same type of object. --Kakarot 23:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The new lighter orange that the editcopy uses is a lot better than the original orange that was used. It still keeps the orange look without being overpowering, hopefully the Mainpage will be updated soon with the changes. --Kakarot 01:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I like the spider web; it adds a bit of variation to the tonics and brews, Looking ahead for Christmas, I see Wintersday Gift, SPiked Eggnog, and Peppermint CC topping the list. Calor - talk 03:26, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I am already planning it :) --Lemming 23:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Gaile news, and frog talk

why would you want these links removed? True there hasn't been much frog talk lately, but the dev update news is very useful I find. --Lemming 23:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Basically to make room for the (in my mind) better ArenaNet information and ArenaNet user feedback. My main beef with the frog talk is that it leads users to a rarely updated, indirect news source, when we have better, more frequently updates pages around, which are edited by Anet employees themself instead of users reporting second hand. --Xeeron 23:53, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I love that we have the frog talk section personally, it is updated almost as often as it happens, (true we didn't have the latest one up for a bit), I enjoy reading it and I am sure other users do too. The two replacement link you have there could very easily be combined into one link. And there is no reason not to have them all. That box isn't that large at the moment. --Lemming 23:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

If want to combine them, go ahead do it =)

One thing to keep in mind though is that we currently only have one changing news item (Guild Wars Bonus Mission Pack) up, we regulary have two, which would take up the full box, since only one line is free atm. --Xeeron 00:08, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I've merged the two smaller articles all into the main ArenaNet article. Feel free to remove the delete tag if anyone disagrees. I also added that link to the news section. -- ab.er.rant 02:05, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Gaile News and Frog Talk are both pages that a number of users want to navigate to quickly, there's really no reason to take them off the main page. The News page feels unwieldy, having all of it mashed together when you know exactly what you're looking for - and there are far better ways to make space than to remove those links all together. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 20:46, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

As I explained on my talk page, I removed them as News contains all news. poke | talk 20:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but not everyone wants all news. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 20:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Then we would have to provide links to all news.. And that looks imo stupid.. poke | talk 20:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Says who? There's no "guild wars wiki constitution" that says if we list one or two, we have to list them all. Gaile news and Frog Talk are the two news items that aren't available via the launcher screen and/or www.guildwars.com - and thus that sets them apart. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 20:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Game Mechanics

Can we add a main page link to a Game mechanics section? It would make navagainting to such items as experience gain a lot easier. If so, I can help build the section, as it doesn't exist yet that I know of. LeFick 17:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

No, it doesn't exist yet as there's a red link to your link.--§ Eloc § 23:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Create it first and then we can maybe add it :) - anja 07:50, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

It's already been started: Game mechanics. We prefer lowercase page names where appropriate. I'll redirect the one above. -- ab.er.rant 01:42, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Stubbed it as I think it can be alot more descriptive than that.--§ Eloc § 01:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Leave a few specific suggestions on my talk page, and I'll add them. LeFick 01:58, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I added Game mechanics to the main page editcopy. Is that OK?LeFick 21:02, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's fine. That's the whole point of the Edit Copy :)--§ Eloc § 22:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Page overflow...

I'm not sure what cause this but the main page is totaly overflowing somehow. Maybe some unclosed tags ? 70.81.167.56 02:49, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

What browser are you using? I don't see any overflowing on either IE7 or Firefox. -- ab.er.rant 05:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm guessing he's using an extremely low resolution. I see that when I use the ones at the local library computers (less than 800x600) when I'm waiting for a ride home from the bus.--§ Eloc § 13:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

can i has sum halloween colur plz?

→ moved from Talk:Main Page

The front page now looks stupidly tacky. The orange is way too prominent, if anything it should be just a slight shading not a solid bloocking effect. The Blue is a nice nuetral colour, it looked nice. This shade of orange is not! ....and before you say it...i know i know i should have said something on editcopy but i dont check that tbh and just saw this and am horrified. --ChronicinabilitY 00:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, this is horrible. A lighter shade would be much better. -- (gem / talk) 00:47, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

As long as it's just a Halloween thing i don't think is that bad... but i guess what really could be fixed are those gray spots in some images for older web browsers...--Fighterdoken 00:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Why should we settle with something looking tacky just because its halloween? An event will probably bring more new users to the wiki, and with a frontpage like that it looks....well....cheap! --ChronicinabilitY 00:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The color of Mad King's head might be a better shade, and it wouldn't be Halloween without orange :P Fall 00:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Make it a subtle shade of orange like before it was a subtle shade of blue. It can be orange without looking tacky like now! --ChronicinabilitY 00:55, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Can i suggest #CC6600 or #CC6633? or maybe you could pick one you like better from here Fall 01:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

FFDD88 ? ...but its way too hard to see on that chart and i dont have the time right now to spend on setting it up on editcopy and previewing it.--ChronicinabilitY 01:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes please have a play on the editcopy and then we can sync the main page with that :) --Lemming 01:05, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

If anyone isnt too busy could possibly try?...i would but i'm busy with work and shouldnt really ne posting on here much right now let alone going thru changing editcopy --ChronicinabilitY 01:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I have posted a test with the light colour you suggested, the darker colours were worse imho. --Lemming 01:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

That looks good, reminds me of the inside of a pumpkin Fall 01:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeh thats more what i had in mind, thx lemming. Its much more pleasing to the eye, not as shocking. --ChronicinabilitY 01:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

WTB Sync ? =P --ChronicinabilitY 01:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

OMG!!! Please, someone sync! Please! The current Main Page looks more like a 10yo's personal web site experiment. The lighter shade on the edit-copy looks considerably better, far more of a professional image. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:44, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

(Resetting indent)Why? Oh, and btw, the inside color is a shade of yellow, not orange. And you really wouldn't and shouldn't have an issue with that orange unless your looking at your monitor from 2 inches away in a dark room. I picked those colors because they are a shade of orange, not yellow. I'm sorry if it's to dark a statement for all of you, but seriously, you don't need everything to be pastel shades. It gets boring after a while. It wouldn't hurt the wiki to make a bold statement once in a while. - Drago 01:47, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually it would...and it is hurting it. It looks cheap, tacky childish and totally un-proffessional. --ChronicinabilitY 01:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Bold = good ... Sloppy and unprofessional look = bad. It's a fine line, and IMHO the current colors crossed it. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Editcopy has been reworked with a lighter shade of orange. - Drago 01:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I like that editcopy better. Not so overpowering. Vanguard 01:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The revised editcopy is still an improvement ... please will someone sync? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Still too much IMO, check the editcopy before Vanguard. --ChronicinabilitY 02:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I prefer the paler version, but the current one is still an improvement to me over what we have now. It could be better, but at least it doesn't look like it was slapped together as a 3rd grade project like the current main page does. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 02:06, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Omg. Please stop it. How 'bout opening new articles instead of wasting your time making arguements about why you want the main page to have boxes on the main page, a frankly, ugly shade of yellow. - Drago 02:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The main page is what EVERYONE sees!! it has to look proffessional and not like its been made using the same color pallette as paint! --ChronicinabilitY 02:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

You know what, most people aren't going to look at it, and say, "Oh, well, you know, if they used an ugly yellow, it'd be more professional." They're going to look at it and think "Oh, hey, isn't that festive." - Drago 02:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The current version is tacky. This pale version doesn't look remotely halloween-y. Just use this one, it's the middle ground. -Auron 02:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Auron. At least someone sees the idea I'm trying to go for with the main page. And not be all uptight, and unwilling to change. Oh, yeah, and Chrono, do not police the wiki as though you are a sysop, they call the shots, not you. Drago 02:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Edit Conflict: No their not...the aim isn't to make them THINK it's professional....its for it to BE proffessional. Inwhich case if it is proffessional they wont think of the color at all, it will be subtle enough. If the color stands out then its too much....And stop reverting Editcopy as you are clearly the only one feeling how you do. --ChronicinabilitY 02:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

And no the sysops don't "Call the shots" the COMMUNITY does! They just enforce them. --ChronicinabilitY 02:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

If you re-revert again, you will be in violation of the revertion revert policy. Now stop, and oh yes, the sysops are the deciding factor in ANY decision on the wiki. Do not think you have as much power as they do. Drago 02:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

So you feel your one extra revert was fine but one more is too much hey? LOL at where you got that idea from. And please link me to this revert policy...i'm interested to see it, really i am! =) --ChronicinabilitY 02:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

My one extra revert was reverting the original change you made, not another revert. And as far as I know, it's against the rules to have revert wars on this wiki, i.e my idea of the revert policy. - Drago 02:20, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Well 'Your Idea' is not policy...and there is currently no revert policy. And you stance on Sysops is wrong, as any sysop would explain to you. You obviously don't understand the policies of this wiki and you obviously have no sense of proffessionalism, you just want it to look that color because 'you chose it' so you can feel good about it. That is NOT what the wiki is about! --ChronicinabilitY 02:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey guys, I have this cool idea. It's called not acting like elementary school kids in a playground.

Keep the discussion on topic. -Auron 02:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

If you want to discuss the reverting policys use this page Guild_Wars_Wiki:Only_revert_once, as for the color if no one can agree I think we should use a middle color among what everyone wants Fall 02:27, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Drago: Sysops don't have final say on this wiki. Sysops follow policies and act accordingly, that's it. Bureaucrats (together, not alone) are the ones who make decisions when policies don't cover the situation. -- (gem / talk) 02:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Reset indent I don't agree, Chrono. I've had enough of arguing with you Chrono. If you want the main page to look like horseshit, then by all means, go ahead. I just didn't think we needed to be so totally tied down to professionalism. We can loosen up around holidays times, and another thing, if you didn't like this idea. Wait until christmas. And in all honesty, I think this is more that you don't like the colors, everyone has said my latest revision is okay, and that's really a vote for me. No-where I can read did someone say "I like that ugly yellow more." Drago 02:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

So about this whole on topic thing... Middle color it is, then? -Auron 02:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know, the middle color would be my current revision. As it is a middle ground between ugly, and orange. Drago 02:35, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

edit conflict Well your first statement summed it up, "I just didn't think we needed to be so totally tied down to professionalism". We do. This wiki has an aim of maintaining the highest quality of content and presentation at ALL TIMES. If you want to change the color to fit with halloween, by all means do so, but keep it proffessional. We only got to the color we did because we started with your color and worked backwards until it looked more proffessional. And can we hurry up with changing the main page! It's Horribad! If needs be just revert back to the blue until it can be sorted in order to give more time for people to voice their say. Just don't leave it as it is. --ChronicinabilitY 02:37, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd love to know when you became the deciding factor for professionalism. Drago 02:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I've modified the editcopy to a slightly different suggestion for a Halloween theme, can we please try to actually be constructive and focused here rather than letting this deteriorate down to bickering between individuals. For now, I've synced the "middle color" to the live version of the main page. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 02:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that black border fits really well.

Is there a way to make the section header text/background switch from section to section? Like Game basics black-text-on-orange-background, and Gear and equipment have orange text on black background, etc? -Auron 02:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

There is, but I tried it and it doesn't come out well - the black backgrounds contrast way too much with the bright white background of the rest of the page and makes one's eyes hurt. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 02:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

K, scratch that then. Current editcopy is the best I've seen so far. -Auron 03:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The current edit copy looks rly good Fall 02:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll wait a bit to see if anyone else has comments, if no one has issues with the editcopy revision I linked above I'll sync it in tomorrow. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 03:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I really don't like the images we're using on the main page at the moment. They just arent the same quality as the icons we usually do an look fairly bad in comparison to the normal non Halloween version any way we can get better quality icons or possibly renders? Chukie1188 talk 04:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I think Smurf would be able to help with providing cleaner versions of the icons. - BeX 09:17, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

(ri) I think the random 'Happy Halloween' looks a bit out of place, btw. Ale_Jrb (talk) 09:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I just went ahead and "colored-up" the "Happy Halloween" greeting. It was really easy to miss when it's just plain bold. Do change it into something better. -- ab.er.rant 09:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Does it look nicer above or below the logos? Ale_Jrb (talk) 10:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

It looks nice placed below the logos, but I definitely think the color and style we have on the real main page is alot better atm. (Thin orange borders and orange boxes, no yellow and thick black please) - anja 13:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd have to agree with Anja, the orange on the main page looks much better than the one on the edit copy. Also the thicker black lines are a bit too much, maybe a thin black line would look better. Depending on how that looks, the thin orange border might be even better. --Kakarot 13:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... I changed a few things. How's that? Ale_Jrb (talk) 14:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I still think the color on the real main page is nicer, but I can agree it's also less halloween-ish. I made a tweak to the Happy halloween box to make it look less out of place, imo. I'd be fine with this design. - anja 14:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Wasn't there talk once of replacing one of the elixirs with the spider web? Or was it tried, and didn't look good? Oh, and back to colors ... the current edit copy looks good to me. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

As far as I've seen the spider web hasn't been tried yet Barek. Anyway about the colours, I like the present edit copy, although I still like the colour on the main page it just doesn't look as Halloween-like as the edit copy colour. The Halloween box looks a lot better now. --Kakarot 15:27, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

After re-looking at the edit-copy page - my main remaining disagreement is that the "Happy Halloween" box seems a big use of screen real-estate for such a small note. I would prefer if the note were made smaller, or moved to the bottom of the page. But, it's not something that I'm going to make a huge fuss over, so I won't try arguing against it further (so as not to slow reaching consensus if others like it as-is).

If I had time, I would also experiment with the spider web, but I need to go to work now. Later all! --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:55, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I changed that a bit; what do you think? poke | talk 16:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Move it to the bottom seems a better solution, I agree it takes a bit of space. The main page isn't so long it wouldn't be noticed, but it still isn't the most important thing. I definitely think we should replace an elixir with the spider web.
(edit) I really like this new revision. - anja 17:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmm I still can't see the Halloween picture for Player vs. Player - it still comes up with the green Guild Hall type icon thing, but blurred and horrible. Brains12 17:49, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Have you cleared your cache and temp files? I also purged it, might help. Ale_Jrb (talk) 18:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that did it. Brains12 18:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I just checked the Spiderweb image, and the edges actually look fine with a coloured background, so no cleanup would be required as far as I can tell. So we can use that instead of a tonic or the absynthe if everyone agrees with that. --Lemming 18:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I think the transmogrifier would be best to replace, but I'm not sure. I really like the absinthe picture though :) - anja 18:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I think the absinthe should be relaced :S. I dont like the shape of it... Brains12 18:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not too sure which one to replace but I'd say either the Absinthe or the Transmogrifier. --Kakarot 19:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

To me, I think the Spider Web should replace the Transmogrifier Tonic. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Changed my mind, /agree with Barek O.o Brains12 19:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok i'm gonna go out on a limb and change the tonic, I agree that it looks better with that changed too, mainly due to colours. --Lemming 22:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Competitive Missions

Just a suggestion, would it be worth while on the main page, under PvP, sub divide the lower half of the box into Role Playing PvP since a true PvP character can not get to Fort Aspenwood or the Jade Quarry? LeFick 11:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I thought they could? Shouldn't there be Luxon and Kurzick representatives in the Temple now that can take you to Alliance battles or FA/JQ? - anja 12:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Luxon Diplomat & Kurzick Recruiter. They can send you to either Jade Quarry or Fort Aspenwood, but no Alliance Battles.--§ Eloc § 13:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

The NPCs to get to alliance battles are in the guild hall. --Xeeron 14:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Doh. I was half right. :P Maybe you can tell I never AB or play PvP. - anja 14:24, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Aww, why not? PvP is like half the game right there.--§ Eloc § 14:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

All my characters are PvE, so I just thought that those areas were PvE areas, and not reachable. Thanks for clearing that up. I have 11 slots, and should probably make a PvP character before to much longer. LeFick 16:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

You only really need one slot for a PvP character due to easy recreation without losing anything.--§ Eloc § 03:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Halloween = Over :(

Aww, the page looks so crappy now. I liked the orange one ;P. Maybe we should start on one for Wintersday?---§ Eloc § 13:34, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

But not yet :P poke | talk 15:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Aww, why not? I recommend we atleast change the <font color=#ACD> to a different colour.--§ Eloc § 15:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

That's the background color :P - Wintersday comes in over one month, and actually it was not announced yet that there will be a wintersday.. poke | talk 15:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

We could still change it to major holidays or something (ie Christmas, Easter, etc)--§ Eloc § 16:02, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

It probably will be... just not yet :P. Ale_Jrb (talk) 16:20, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes I have to deal with Christmas starting at working without being reminded of it here just yet ;) --Lemming 19:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm against decorating for Wintersday before December. I'd prefer waiting until a week or 2 before the event, but at the very least let's wait till December. Otherwise I, and probably other people, are gonna be sick of the look long before Wintersday actually comes along. Of course, if you have ideas for making the main page look better aside from holiday decorations, well, that's what the editcopy is for. - Tanetris 20:46, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

It's bad enough that the shops here are selling Christmas decorations in September. :/ - BeX 03:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

They started selling decorations in September? Damn that's early, although it does seem to be getting earlier each year. Anyway about the Wintersday decorations, I'd have to agree with Tanetris, December is the absolute earliest they should be added especially considering that Halloween has only just ended a few days ago. --Kakarot 15:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

What about a seasonal theme? You still have the individual holidays of course, but each season could have a color set, and icons.LeFick 13:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Bad code on main page

Some one seems to have botched the code what should say last update was nov 1st is a string of meaningless garble cross the top of the page. I can't fix it so if someone could it would be appreciated ^_^ Edit Fixed despite no changes in the history. Weird It wasn't a one time occurrence but it went away without an edit Chukie1188 talk 22:03, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it was a wiki bug.--§ Eloc § 22:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Plurality

On the main page, Explorable areas and Towns are listed as Plural, but Outpost and Dungeon are singlular. I recommend making them all plural, and moving the page for Outpost and Dungeon to a page that is plural, rather than the more common redirect. LeFick 22:14, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind - I was confused. LeFick 22:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

:P poke | talk 22:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

User:201.51.216.205's edits

I preferred it the way it was before. Biscuits 17:14, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Yea, I liked those colors better. - anja 17:37, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, and undone. Gave ma a bit of a headache. LordBiro 17:39, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it's desert festival now! :/ Biscuits 09:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I've reverted the yellowness. Discussion is good. Ale_Jrb (talk) 09:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Since Halloweeen was all orange, a break is in order. However, maybe for next halloween....Lefick 11:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)