Template talk:Historical content nav

Move

I support the move to the new name. BigBluetalk 09:30, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

This is getting much to large for a navbar. Suggest making it an article, and linking said article from {{Historical content}}. Backsword 03:38, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, imho it's still some kind of a nav bar, it helps to navigate through all articles form Category:Historical content. BigBluetalk 08:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

EDIT: In the current form it's not much bigger than Template:Heroes' Ascent Arenas, I think it's acceptable. BigBluetalk 09:55, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

It's a good bit larger, and that other one is pushing it already. Moreover, this is only getting larger, and will tend to continue that way, since only if Anet reintruduces things will they be removed from this group.

I added Mantra of Celerity as so many were asking why Mesmers had only 9 Prophecies elites. But if all removed skills are to be added, then there is a whole bunch more. Not only nonmesmer skills from P., but those that didn't make the cut for Factions and onwards. Backsword 10:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

New design

As this nav bar is growing and growing, I believe there is a major redesign neccessary. I would like to have a nav bar (not as supposed an article link), in which all parts can be expand and vice versa, so we can save rare screen space. Is this possible in this wiki with the given syntax? BigBluetalk 14:10, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd suggest trying to recruit Poke for this. He seems to like this sort of stuff. Backsword 17:13, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

With our existing things this is not possible, but I could imagine we could add a javascript to common.js to enable this :) poke | talk 17:29, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

That would be really really great. :) So, how to do it? BigBluetalk 18:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll think about it ;) poke | talk 18:30, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I made minor improvement here ~ Kurd 16:09, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Lightning Storm was an ele skill. Air magic. IIRc removed due to AoE being unthematic for air. Backsword 16:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm thinking we might split this nav into several bars separated by subject. For example, skills in one, areas in one, NPCs in one. And then just provide a short link at the bottom to the other navs/a list somewhere with all of them. - anja 06:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

First I think we should try it with the expandable nav before we go "the old school way". Karlos did this in GuildWiki [1], can we adapt this, Poke? BigBluetalk 10:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

This is the code from wikipedia :/ I don't like it. Mine is much easier :P poke | talk 10:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, for the process of the javascript method, see this page. poke | talk 17:05, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Wrong skill descriptions

In many skill articles there is the sentence "This skill was removed before the release of Guild Wars Prophecies in 2005." Except from Mantra of Celerity and Spontaneous Combustion nobody is really sure that these skills are only planned for Prophecies. Solution: delete sentence until we know it better. BigBluetalk 14:28, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I played the alpha version during E3fE. And later in several beta weekends. All the skills are correct, as are a few more that was in but was delayed for Factions, sometime redone, sometime in their original form. Backsword 16:22, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

On the page List of removed skills the image for Unnatural signet is the image for one released in factions, instead of the alpha. I dug around and tried to change it but can't figure out how. The image on the alpha unnatural signet probably is correct.StatMan 02:42, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning. Replaced png with jpg icon, all works fine now. BigBluetalk 09:00, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Split or something

This thing is huge now! perhaps it should be split into smaller navs. Like Historical skill nav, Historical quest nav and so on... --Lemming 19:47, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

What about multiple show/hide sections? poke | talk 19:59, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Good idea, poke. BigBluetalk 22:21, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

That definitely constitutes a something. --Lemming 00:01, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking about multiple sections, and that would be fine with me, but I was thinking we should have a special secion for beta skills, since that's all the rage these days. Woild still categorise into hist cont, but into a beta skills cat too, so we could use that for the list. If so, we could make a beta skill navbar template too. Backsword 06:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

skills

Can I ask that people use | categorize = n on the historical skill infoboxes. It causes confusion when removed skills are categorised with the current in game skills. --Lemming 16:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Imo we should modify the skill infobox to handle those skills; those and to player-invisible skills as well. See also GWWT:SKILLS#Suggestion. poke | talk 16:31, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I was just about to suggest that :p --Lemming 16:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Merge with Template:Unimplemented content nav to Template:Non-live content nav...

...to something like the Template:Titles nav? Historical and unimplemented content in one clearly arranged nav bar. Ideas, opinions? BigBluetalk 10:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

2 years old and hasn't been done (or was and reverted) but going to comment anyways: No, they're two different things unlike the title nav. They should remain separate. -- Konig/talk 08:46, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Does this really belong on skills pages?

There are a lot of skills that have changed content. Does it really make sense to connect that with all historical game content since the the game was introduced? There's no particular connection between the removal of hero battles and the change to Eternal Aura. Since many skills changed at different times, I'm not sure that there's much connection between the change to Unnatural Signet and Eternal Aura either. This seems like overkill (even as a collapses navbar).  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 07:25, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

My one year-old discussion. Ive asked Silver Edge for a census on this issue. ^_^ --Falconeye 07:42, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't see how that suggestion has any bearing on whether to add this template to skill articles. Also, one might consider that no one responded because no one was reviewing that page. I don't object to grouping together skills that have been removed from the game; I only object to linking them through a behemoth navigation bar that has links to articles with little or no connection to the skills. I think it's sufficient to categorize the skills.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 07:58, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

So its the Nav bar that needs polishing/callapsing, and nothing else? --Falconeye 08:16, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

To counter-argue Teffeny's point: Arachnia has little to do with Utopia. Brick of Mud has little to do with Lo Pan, Slay Stank Reekfoul, and so forth. They're unimplemented or historical content and that's their connection.

Regarding the system, it's poor imo. Firstly, there's no need to split PvE and PvP skills (especially when PvE is only one skill). Secondly, the following skills are in both this nav and the Unimplemented content nav:

Accelerated Growth • "Aim True!" • Anthem of Aggression • Balthazar's Rage • Bloodletting • Boon of the Gods • Borrowed Energy • Cry of Lament • Dissipation • Embrace the Pain • Energy Font • Final Rest • "Forge the Way!" • "Headshot!" • Intimidating Aura • Lightning Storm • Marble Trap • Mimic • Nature's Speed • REMOVE (Leadership skill) • REMOVE (Soul Reaping skill) • REMOVE (Wind Prayers skill) • Recurring Scourge • Shadow Tripwire • Signet of Illusions • "To the Pain!" • Twisted Spikes • Unknown • Unnatural Signet • "With Haste!" • Verata's Promise • Way of the Mantis • Weapon of Mastery

These skills can be found in the section called "Unimplemented Skills" - wtf? This is the Historical nav, for things that were implemented and taken out, yet there's a section title unimplemented? That. Makes. No. Sense.

I suggest the following course of action:

1. Figure out which skills were never implemented and which were implemented but removed. Historical, btw, imo, would include alpha and beta versions.
2. Split the List of removed skills and move the unimplemented skills to "List of unimplemented skills."
3. Remove any unimplemented skills from this nav, make sure the unimplemented content nav is up to date. -- Konig/talk 08:43, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

My main point was that the historical content nav bar doesn't belong on a skills page unless that skill is historical; for skills still in the game, we have the skill history pages.  — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 09:22, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Sometimes PvP skills get removed - this should be added to those. Sometimes skill functions change - and iirc, there's a /skill history subpage for such incidents. This nav could go on said sub-page with 2 skill sections - one for removed skills, one for skill histories. -- Konig/talk 22:22, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I've removed skills that appear in {{Unimplemented content nav}} from {{Historical content nav}} and vice-versa, based on which template appeared on the skill page. Some listed skills in the {{Unimplemented content nav}} have a disambiguating page title (e.g. Balthazar's Rage (beta version) and Intimidating Aura (beta version)) and should probably be moved to {{Historical content nav}} if they were actually usable skills by players during the alpha or beta. --Silver Edge 01:16, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

The fact that they were beta and alpha versions implies to me that they were such in the game - unfortunately I wasn't a dervish in EN and couldn't really load up the open beta for NF so couldn't tell from memory. But typically if a skill isn't even in the game, it wouldn't be an alpha or beta version. It would just be... nothing. -- Konig/talk 03:20, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

So how do we solve inconsistencies (such as Signet of Creation (PvP)) where pages were moved/merged/etc.? Anyone curious enough to browse archive of Noncurrent content only to redirect to current content is confusing. Would it be simpler to move all that under "Skill histories" and just tag them as removed content? --Falconeye 09:36, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

PvP skills don't get removed from the game (rather, the .dat), they're just made inaccessible to players. As such, when a PvP skill gets "removed" from the game, the article should become a historical content page - not merged or moved. The real question is what to do with skill histories of skills that were removed. -- Konig/talk 21:23, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Template:Large navigation nav

This has gotta be one of the largest navigation bars in the history of navbars. I know it's hidden, but wouldn't it be more useful to point to a smaller list (e.g. categories of historical content) rather than try to list everything? It's so big now that I find it hard to find anything in particular. In other words, this looks like the article: list of historical content articles rather than the navbar. — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 20:09, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, categories are not smaller, just more spaced out. Secondly, I'd only be opposed to such an idea if there's no easy way to get from one list to another. E.g., if I'm on the page Baron Ulrikar, I want to be able to access the historical quests and other things.

My solution, though I don't see a rework of the nav necessary, would be to split the nav into "historical skill nav"; "historical quest nav"; and "historical npc nav" - as those are the three biggest ones - and keep this as a general. In each nav, there'd be a link to the other navs.

I would also like to note that I'm not opposed to an article, and for this to also be done for the unimplemented content. -- Konig/talk 22:22, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

That sounds more manageable, user-friendly, and almost easy to implement. — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 22:30, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) A year later, I have the same critique: this list is far too long to be useful. It lists everything, making it hard to find anything in particular. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 01:12, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Its a wiki... want something done, be BOLD and do it yourself. ^_^ --Falconeye (talk) 21:08, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

builds

Is there any reason to list obsolete builds on here? Historical they may be, but content they are not. Anyway, there are lots of other notable nerfed builds that could be listed, but if we put them all on here there'd be an awful mess. Mist Y (talk) 03:53, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Off the top of my head I was going to make a case for popular GvG/HA builds that dominated the meta but have since been nerfed or succumbed to power creep into an unusable state, but we don't seem to have articles for those. Literally every single historical build article linked on this template is trivial and can be removed, in my opinion. I also have trouble remembering a (team) build that broke the meta to the point where its status transcends any game updates. Maybe things like Bloodspike have a place in historical content due to famous exploits, but other than that I have no idea. Strongly in favour for removing. - Infinite - talk 10:46, 12 March 2018 (UTC)