From Guild Wars Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Just while we are talking about policies...[edit]

You may not be aware of GWW:1RR. You breached it once and I assume you weren't aware of it. Not a huge problem in this instance, but you may notice Pika Fan then breached it in response as well. This can lead to edit warring, which is why the policy is in place. Luckily you stopped at this point and nothing got too silly. On a side note, I'll look at getting that guideline modified when I have some spare time. Misery 18:10, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Mis... yer I was about to just hand the issue off to the admins... tried to resolve it on the talk pages but it seems many folks are displeased with the guideline... Was keeping an eye on the 1RR knowing the policy and why its in place... seems theres a rev frenzy goin on there... good to hear that the guideline is being looked at... MrPaladin talk 18:16, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
If you dig deep into my contributions you will see a lot of notes and related skills removed from skill pages. This is a battle I fought before. I was never actually aware of the guideline, so it never got changed, but consensus at the time seemed to support me. If you do have reasons you think listing mechanically similar skills is appropriate feel free to enter the discussion when I do get around to trying to change that guideline. Misery 18:22, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
only that I know as a new player it greatly helped my learning curve to link to the similar skills... (and so on from the similar skills to others that were like it)... I know that experienced players are looking for is functionally identical skills... but it should never digress to things mentioned like the "Flail" example... Whatever policy change gets decided on I'm more then happy to go with... MrPaladin talk 18:29, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
I've opened discussion here and would like your input. Misery 13:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I think you hit the nail oin the head with the "Category:Skill type quick references" pages... those would be much more benificial MrPaladin talk 14:37, 28 October 2009 (UTC)