User talk:Gaile Gray/Archive Wiki Topics/Archive 1

Archives by Topic
Chit Chat & Miscellany Wiki Topics Community & Website Game Related Topics Product Information Misplaced Articles, Etc.

This article contains older materials from the category Wiki Topics on the User: Gaile Gray discussion pages.

Discussion of wiki startup

Hi Gaile! I've posted a summary of the discussion at Talk:Main Page. I'd appreciate it if you could have a read through in case I've made any errors. Thanks. LordBiro 08:53, 8 February 2007 (PST)

Looks good to me. I made a minor change to expand information, just because I think it was a valuable addition and we had not mentioned that during our conversation. Thanks for making the notes available. --Gaile Gray 23:37, 8 February 2007 (PST)

Official Guild Wars Documentation

Gaile,

Many editors are wondering about the possibility of getting official documentation, like the game manuals and website text, released under a GFDL license for use here on the official wiki. Please give us the official word so we can either begin porting content over or so we can move on and begin writing our own material.

Thanks!

—Tanaric 22:00, 7 February 2007 (PST)

See this article for my proposed ideas. — Jyro X 22:03, 7 February 2007 (PST)

Please see the Discussion page off of the article for a brief comment on the matter. --Gaile Gray 23:42, 7 February 2007 (PST)

Copyright, GFDL, and in-game content

Gaile,

Can you take a look at Guild Wars Wiki:Official content? I think we have a question for ArenaNet (and maybe their legal counsel) on the talk page for that policy. Currently, the policy states "Off-limits sources" ... "Content from in-game!"

I appologise if you've already addressed this and I just missed it. There's a lot going on in here!

The policy as currently written has caused some concern on the talk pages, and people are suggesting ways to deal with it based on their personal (non-legal background) opinions. While their comments may be valid, I would like to hear ArenaNet's stance on this. Are the images and dialog allowable under fair-use? If the GFDL is a concern, would adding this to the static-block at the bottom of every page resolve legal concerns: "All content is GFDL, except for content copied from in-game, including but not limited to images and in-game dialog, which are Copyright to their original creators, NCSoft, or ArenaNet"

Thanks in advance for any information that you can provide! --Barek 16:12, 9 February 2007 (PST)

If in-game text and images count as "fair use," no additional note at the bottom is necessary -- we can just clarify the official content guidelines. I'd really like to avoid introducing dual-licensing into this wiki in general. —Tanaric 17:31, 9 February 2007 (PST)

We'll be more than happy to get an expert opinion or even just some informed guidance on this matter. I should be able to post about in-game content next week, after we hear back. Thanks for the good questions. --Gaile Gray 19:00, 9 February 2007 (PST)

Any word on this? -FireFox 12:59, 18 February 2007 (PST)

I'm sorry, not yet. I am sorry that it is taking a bit longer that we initially thought it would take to answer the license question, but since we're in the early stages, it's important to get it right. I'll post it as soon as we have more info. --Gaile Gray 13:20, 18 February 2007 (PST)

We do have information on this now, and will be providing the specific language that allows uploads under the proper copyrights and licenses very soon. And yes, there is a major Happy Dance taking place at ArenaNet at present. :) --Gaile Gray 16:40, 23 February 2007 (EST)

Yay happy dance! Also, Yay Friday :) Lojiin 16:52, 23 February 2007 (EST)

Thanks Gaile! Several of us had already seen Emily's entries at Guild Wars Wiki:License information and had started talking about it. Thanks to both of you for making this happen - now the wiki can grow! woohoo! --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:02, 23 February 2007 (EST)

Gaile, I've posted a licensing suggestion/concern at Guild Wars Wiki talk:Copyrights#Please license under later versions of GFDL too!. I'd be glad if someone at ArenaNet could take a look at it. Thanks! --Rezyk 06:47, 24 February 2007 (EST)

Walkthrough-type articles...

Since I am generally more interested in PvE, and my first major contributions on GWiki were the mission walkthroughs, I would like to know what policy, if any, does ANet have on such content that is usually fairly subjective. Over time, mission walkthrough articles grow into beasts with users constantly adding bits and pieces left and right about how to beat a certain porition of a mission (and sometimes, how to exploit or trick a certain part).

I read in the debate that there will be less "opinions" in articles in this wiki. To what extent does that go?

See: this walkthrough for a look at what a mission article can morph into. I want to know what ANet will tolerate in terms of the long term vision of linking to that article through some in-game mechanism.

I am personally in favor of keeping walkthroughs in some form, instructing users on where to go and how to by-pass certain obstacles or do certain tasks in an easy manner. For example, the Boreas Seabed mission is 1000 times easier if one party member brings a fast recharging interrupt. While the Grand Court mission is siginificantly easier if every party member simply brings Hex Breaker. Certain users can get through any build with any profession, others need such tips and help. So, how much does ANet want to restrict such walkthroughs? Would be good to know now.

I would rather such issues are discussed here on the wiki and not in e-mails to community@arena.net because that makes referencing them in the future easier. Thanks, --Karlos 03:21, 8 February 2007 (PST)

I would not vision the in game help tool using content such as walk throughs. It would seem a bit weird to have a walkthrough with hints and exploits in the game itself. Therefor (in my opinnion) we could keep the walkthroughs mostly like they are in GuildWiki. --Gem (talk) 03:38, 8 February 2007 (PST)

Requests for technical administration

Hello Gaile, we are wondering on the Requests for technical administration talk page how to best contact ANet about useful software upgrades/tweaks for the wiki. The page Requests for technical administration is set up to provide a forum to discuss such requests and list those that everyone agrees are useful. Initially we thought that someone from ANet could monitor that page, but according to LordBiro, you said this is unpractical. What procedure should be used instead? A direct mail to someone from ANet's tech staff? Leaving a message here on your talk page? We need something that will get the person in charge of the wiki server to read the requests page when there is a new agreed on request on it. --Xeeron 08:43, 5 March 2007 (EST)

Just an FYI: The last batch were shifted to "Approved requests pending install" after a post on Emily Diehl's talk page - so I'm guessing that's the correct notification route; but we probably should ask for an official process. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 10:40, 5 March 2007 (EST)

Actually I had emailed Mike, Gaile and Emily about the requests for tech admin before you asked for their attention on their talk pages. In the email I asked ANet if they would have a look at GWW:TECH and give their opinion, in particular on the best way to communicate new requests with ANet tech staff.

I don't know what prompted Emily to get involved but I have received no reply to this email and no ANet staff have mentioned the communication process on the talk page. Since there has been no mention of the communication procedure from anyone at ANet so far I presume that Emily was prompted to act based on the talk page message and not the email, which calls into question the reliability of emails over on-wiki communication. LordBiro 12:13, 5 March 2007 (EST)

Update on this: As you know, our IT Team is still working very diligently on the Open Best Test for China. This means that our requests for Wiki assistance necessarily need to take a secondary position on the "to do" list. IT is aware of the needs and desires for an expanded list of tools, and I am sure they will get to those requests as soon as they are able to do so. Thanks for your patience as we move forward. --Gaile 03:01, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

GWW link on official website?

Will this wiki be interlinked to the main guildwars website via a navagation bar link? Or will it be hidden upon completion? - Drago 15:57, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

I would think ANet wouldn't want anyone to know about this place so they'd keep it stashed in a chest in the basement under lock and key. :p Heh, j/k. I, personally, would think they'll link to it once it's more completed.--File:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG Vallen Frostweaver 16:12, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Its already linked - just not with a "click here for the official wiki" type link yet. Doing a search from guildwars.com will show results from this wiki. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:15, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

By all means, the official GWW will be linked, just as soon as everyone agrees that we're in a position to essentially "throw the doors open." There are some policies that need resolution; some technical add-ons that are considered pretty essential prior to official launch, and so forth. We will be making an announcement and posting a graphical link to this wiki from the main page of the official site, just as soon as all our duckies are in a row. Your estimates on timeline for that are more than welcome, as are your additions to my citations on the need-before-opening list. --Gaile 16:46, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

It's already linked in the latest PvP Primer. -- Dashface 00:03, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

Yes, that's sure true. But an imbedded link within an article has quite a significantly different degree of announcement impact than a main-page news post and a graphical link. It is those on which we're holding, while we determine the before-launch needs and get things in place, awaiting the comments, suggestions, and requests of those who are most active here, those who are directing the development of this Wiki. We're ready to hear ideas on a timeline, any time! --Gaile 00:25, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

lol, hey DashFace, when are you going to put up that awesome pic from your GameWiki's page? :) 00:05, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

(ri) Asking a committee for when something is going to be ready is going to net you an interesting result. I think that changes to templates are the most disruptive and tedious to fix, if the templates are stable we can 'go live' without too much fuss. As most article 'types' have at least the template design which being finalised after the arrival of parser functions and many should be adequately "finished" soon imo.

To be more specific to an announcement time - I believe we should be announced when the skill template/page format is finished and no sooner. I'd even consider extending that to say all skill articles should be filled that way we can provide a resource which is usable for simple reference in at least one area. How close the template is to being completed is for others to say, I'm not heavily involved there.

I've been watching the quests and missions. While they are missing a lot of content I've stopped messing with the template and I think they are ready for launch. --Aspectacle 01:37, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

Official German Wiki

I'm writing on behalf of the German GuildWiki (http://www.guildwiki.de), where the users are unsure what to think about http://de.wiki.guildwars.com. I found it just by guessing and now the GuildWiki users are discussing about the topic. We ask ourselves some questions:

• Should we start writing and editing?
• Will there be an official launch and/or statement on the wiki?
• Who will become admin of the wiki?
• When will it be launched?
• Will ArenaNet's GMs such as Martin Kerstein be on the wiki?

We think, that there could be come disadvantages for us because of the later launch. We want an official statement on the German Wiki. I think that the French think so, too. --Numma cway 08:32, 9 February 2007 (PST)

Hello, Numma cway -- We most definitely intend to host a German-language wiki in the future but our objective is to roll out the Official Guild Wars Wikis over time. We feel the best way to move towards hosting Official Guild Wars Wikis is to start with the English-language version and support the community as they devise policies, practices, styles, and all the other "backbone" issues that help to make a wiki a good and valuable resource to the community. At such time as that has been accomplished, this wiki can serve as a foundation or a model for the other official wikis. That will mean that the Official Guild Wars Wikis in various languages will be likely to have a similar look and feel, while retaining any specific elements or decisions that best serve a particular community of readers.

We will definitely announce when we're ready to open the next wiki or wikis, and at that time, will invite the entire community to participate in the project. I am sure that there will be people involved from all parts of the community, including staff members from NCsoft Europe, such as Martin, as well as staff members from ArenaNet, as well. Do keep in mind that the purpose of our hosting the wikis is to allow the community to create and maintain the Official Guild Wars Wiki; staff members will not be playing an active role in the actual administration of the wikis. At this time, we are redirecting visitors to all Official Guild War Wiki links to this wiki, as the starting point for expanding into other languages to best serve the global community.

Thanks, and please let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns! --Gaile Gray 13:06, 9 February 2007 (PST)

Alpha leak handling

Greetings Gaile. I have started a discussion regarding the handling of alpha leaks. While Anet has expressed that we should decide our own policies, I think the topic of alpha leak might warrant different treatment (despite your trust in our collective common sense), and at the least bring it to your attention, in case Anet believes it should step in on this one.

The discussion is at: Guild Wars Wiki talk:No alpha leaks. -PanSola 10:07, 24 February 2007 (EST)

Thank you, PanSola. I've added a note to that page, and stand ready to help in any way that I can. --Gaile Gray 14:35, 24 February 2007 (EST)

Archive

Gaile,

It's traditional on wiki that, instead of removing older irrelevant things on talk pages, we create a separate archive page instead. I've gone ahead and done so for the recent pruning you've given the place. :)

—Tanaric 16:46, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

I already made an archive page. I cannot find it now, but I spent a goodly part of my morning moving, ordering, and archiving what was on my page that I adjudged to be appropriate to archive. So the question is, where is my work? --Gaile 16:57, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Click. --Dirigible 17:01, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

You make it look so easy. :) Thanks! I've amended the link on this page to lead to the archive page that I made earlier today. I appreciate the help, but this time (for once) I sorta figured out what I should do. My error was in not putting up the link, but then, I am sorta busy, what with the whole announcement of GW:EN, and GW2, and so forth. :D --Gaile 17:06, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

In the top right corner is a link to 'my contributions'. You can easily find pages you created and other important stuff from there. You could also use the watchlist to bookmark pages. Just click on the 'watch' link on any page. -- (gem / talk) 17:36, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

I had the bookmarking down pat, but I never remember the "my contributions" so thanks for the tip! --Gaile 18:02, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

No problem. :) You might also benefit from scrolling through the different special pages available. (The link to the list of special pages is on the left.) -- (gem / talk) 18:07, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Haha, my mistake. I didn't think to check if you had already made one. Glad we're all on the same page! —Tanaric 19:03, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

Let me know any time you have suggestions -- I'm very interested in learning how to do "the wiki thing" as well as I can! Right now, I'm eyeing that archive page and I'm wondering how to steal the nav bar that links, automatically, to the internal archive. So that I could have the nav bar for the main page but also display a full, secondary nav that lists all the subjects/topics on the archive page, too. (This allows navigating to the page and the topic, which I think is nice, like website bookmarking.) I'm considering setting up two archives: One for wiki-related questions, one for things that are more user related. I don't want to do straight-out numbering, but rather have two categories of archives, and so I'm contemplating how to do that. Maybe Gaile_Gray/Archive_wiki_stuff and Gaile_Gray/Archive_(something here, I don't know what.) Anyway, all this means means I'll probably experiment and hope that no one looks at the history. *lol* --Gaile 00:04, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

My GuildWiki talk page has the archives divided into 'wiki related' and 'personal', just like you wanted to divide yours, so you could look there for help. I used even numbers for wiki archives, odd numbers for personal archives. If you want to make links to the different topics, that is possible too. Do a normal wiki link, but add the # marker after the wiki adress and then the heading which you want to link to. Ie User talk:Gaile Gray#Release of Guild Wars Wiki into the public would link to your talk page to the release heading. -- (gem / talk) 05:59, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

I don't know if this is also an option, but my own archive on GuildWiki is organised by subject as opposed to date. LordBiro 12:15, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

User templates

Hi Gaile, templates for your userpage should really be in the user namespace and not in the main one. You can do this by using something like {{User:Gaile/mytemplatename}} --Lemming64 20:43, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

Thank you, Lemming64. The template was something on which I had help and I don't want to move it until I can do so correctly, so I'm going to leave it there until I can get guidance on the change. Thanks for pointing out that suggestion, though. --Gaile 20:46, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

FYI: I moved the template to User:Gaile Gray/sidebox for you, and fixed the links to it so that they are using the correct name now as well. There are two ways to move them, either recreate the article under a new name, or click the "move" tab at the top of the article. Once moved, it's just a matter of updating the links to it. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:56, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

Thanks, Barek. Now... when you say "there are two ways to move them" what "them" are we talking about? I'm a tad lost. The template is moved and working, are the pages ok and visible and all is in order now? Or do I need to rename... something to move this-and-that in some direction I don't know about? *boggled* --Gaile 21:05, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

Everything is working fine. When Barek says "them" he is referring to the templates article page. Basically you can move a page by hitting the move tab at the top of any article. Then tagging the old page for delete as it is automatically turned into a redirect. The other method is to create your own new page and copy the data over manually, then tag the old one for delete. They effectively achieve the same result. I am sure I just confused you even more, I confused myself, lol. However everything is fine  :) --Lemming64 21:09, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

I think I need a nice stiff cup of tea about now. ;) --Gaile 21:17, 28 March 2007 (EDT)