User talk:Gaile Gray/Archive Wiki Topics/Jan - Sep 1 2009

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

Quick heads up...

You have a duplicate of this section in your mementos page. I'm not sure if its intentional, and I have a feeling I'll get my hand bitten off if I edit it, so I decided to let you know here. ^^ -- Wandering Traveler 05:16, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

You're right, and thank you! I tidied that away right now. Thanks for watchin' my back, WT. -- Gaile 05:47, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I think I finally figured this out...

...after two hours of trying to figure out how to edit a talk page. >.< But all that was to ask...who do you go to if you find a typo in a dialogue? I only ask because my ex was watching me play for a while, who is an English major...and well she gets a tad upset with typos. --AquilusOrus 09:35, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Try ArenaNet talk:Text bugs :) ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(talk) 09:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

The Culture?!

I was wondering what the anet team thought of all the cultural refrences the community came up with. Sweet Escape 04:51, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

The team loved the input, and you may have seen a few of those references in Guild Wars. No telling where they might turn up in the future, I guess. :) -- Gaile 05:02, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Archiving Subtitle Question

I have been archiving lately. Yes, joy. ;) Today's project is the Support Issues page. While setting things into chronological order, I couldn't help but notice that most of the threads have pretty uninformative titles that don't give a hint as to the topic, such as "Help me!" and "I'm Sorry" and "Something I want to know."

So I wonder: According to Wiki policies and practices, could I change the title? Or append more info? For instance, if "I want to know..." is about a video card, could I change it in the archives (or even on the main page) as "Video Cards?" Of, if that's not on, could I add to it and make it "I want to know... (video cards)?" I'd prefer to rename, because titles are sometimes too long for a tidy ToC as it is. However, either could be good, and I believe either would make using the page and searching the archives so much easier, and it might reduce redundant questions and give wiki folks a faster answer than waiting for a reply. So, is either or are both acceptable practice? -- Gaile 17:27, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why not. This is a wiki, and we're talking about talk space. If a change makes things better, why not? You can, for example, change the title how you see fit, and leave the original one right below in bold font, but without the header formatting. You can also "demote" the original header to the lowest header level, which then does not show up in the TOC, but still works if you link to it using "pagename#header title" format (at least it works this way on the Wikia guildwars wiki, I'm sorry if it's different here). You can post a little note at the top of the page saying that this is something you do to organize things, so that people are aware of it. Rose Of Kali 18:30, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Generally, if you change what someone else has said, you'd want to leave some indication of it. Like "I want to know (video cards)" is better than "Video cards". I think titles can easily be changed to reflect the topic without needing this. I wouldn't edit what people actually said in the main text though. -- Alaris 18:44, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, main text was not the issue here at all. Gaile had the problem with "titles are sometimes too long for a tidy ToC as it is" and I offered to keep the old header at the lowest level (as a subheader), so that it's still linkable, but isn't cluttering the TOC anymore, as long as it works that way here, I'm testing it with this post. But either way, expanding the title to clarify it is perfectly fine. Rose Of Kali 18:52, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it still shows up here even 6 levels down, sorry for the misleading, Wikia is different. Rose Of Kali 18:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

You could remove the old title from the header and put it on its own line prefaced by a ;

Looks like this

And it doesn't show up in the table of contents. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(talk) 23:06, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Nice discussion, and thanks for the suggestions. :) I am going to try that newest idea with a few -- please don't hesitate to point and laugh if I make a boo-boo, eh? ;) -- Gaile 01:30, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

New Galery Exposition

Miss Eva is pleased to invite you to visit her Galery Of Love Letters From Eva's Fans Around The World. Yseron - 90.15.49.116 23:25, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

What types of feedback are and are not currently acceptable

I've raised the question of which types of feedback are and are not currently acceptable at User talk:Mike O'Brien#Handling feedback until everything's sorted out. An official response would be appreciated. I'm cross-posting this to Linsey and Regina's talk pages. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Guild_Wars_Wiki:Admin_noticeboard#Personal Attacks

If you haven't checked it in awhile, now would be a good time. I'm feeling generous. ~Shard 18:56, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

So after making comments suggesting a lack of professionalism and some sort of personal vendetta against you, you've been hit by the "generous" impulse, eh? ;) Please understand: I'm not worried about myself, Shard. I've been involved with games and gamers for a long, long time -- both on a gamer-to-gamer and professional level. So I'm not having one of those "hand on forehead, he's such a meanie" reactions; your comments are pretty much water off a duck's back. What I am concerned about, though, is that they form a body of inaccurate anti-ArenaNet comments. It doesn't matter who you're talking about, but it matters that you've made the comments, in all their inaccuracy, unfairness, and selective (un)reasoning. ArenaNet sets a high standard -- for the company as a whole and for each of its individual employees -- and it is on that basis that I protest what you have said. IOW, this isn't about "hurt feelings." This is about righteous indignation. :)

Now, you are out of the game because you misbehaved. You know that; I know that; that is fact. Isn't everything else just so much bluster? Pointing at others is easier than admitting, "I screwed up." But is the redirection true? No. Is it even fair to suggest it? No again. I don't really know too much about how Arbitration reviews work. And I don't mean to be mean, or return fire with fire. I just want an end to the untruths and the unfair allegations. I think everyone would be better off to see that end. -- Gaile 21:09, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Shard's proposed such an end on the admin noticeboard. --90.196.43.87 21:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow Gaile, I at least expected you to actually read a one-liner before jumping to conclusions. I tried to make it as simple as possible, but obviously you couldn't handle it. Regardless, the offer's still there. ~Shard 23:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

He's basically just offering to save you time, what he's asking is what the most likely arbcomm punishment will be imo. DarkNecrid 23:45, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

The ArbComm won't have a punishment for me. I just don't want to waste my time with it. ~Shard 00:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

lol, ArbCom doesn't require anyone outside of the bureacrats to actually do anything. --Cursed Angel 00:45, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Usually I'd have to defend myself, but in this case, you're right. ~Shard 00:57, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Nice try, Gaile, but if you're going to present an argument, you have to back it up. Shard's done that; his evidence is available for anyone to see. ANet's is nowhere to be found. I don't particularly care to read a wall of text either way on the subject, but I do feel it necessary to point out that something's not true just because you say so. -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 01:11, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to take off my troll face for a minute here, for once, since everyone else seems to be. To start with, I am very much an anti-authoritarian, anti-establishment kind of guy, mainly because I believe people with any sort of power have the tendency to abuse it and because it gives me something to complain about on the rare occasion nothing else is wrong. I oppose "the system" at every turn (which for me mostly means yelling at the TV, considering my general level of social interaction) and come up with mad conspiracy theories about aliens and the coming of the beast and the illuminati and what have you.

It's only natural I applied that philosophy to online gaming, where a faceless, heartless corporation concerned only with its financial success governs your existence in their little world. Which, honestly, is not an entirely unreasonable position; I understand that the whole reason the game exists is to make money. Like most hobbies, gaming is around mainly because people have the ability to make money with it. I'm not going to lie just because Gaile reads this page and say I like ArenaNet as a whole, I think they've made a number of huge mistakes -- the current state of balance in the game and the direction of the story during and after Eye of the North are pretty much proof enough of that. I've had my own altercations with support and been denied even the most basic of requests with no explanation or apology given. I don't have any personal vendettas or any other nonsense against ANet or its employees, but I'm not pleased with the direction GW seems to be headed in.

I'm also not going to say that banning people for what basically amounts to saying "omg!!1 i dont liek u!" is just, because it's not. As I have stated previously, I think bans should only occur when someone is doing something obviously detrimental or unfair to the game (botting, real-money trading, scamming, trying to hack the program, etc.) or repeated harassment despite the harassed making it clear they don't want to be. People who want to play or do anything online need to realize that they're going to be dealing with a bunch of assholes with no common courtesy, decency or sense, and that they're not very fun to be around. If using the internet is worth putting up with people like that, then by all means go ahead, but if not... well, don't bother wasting your money. Banning people for expressing one's opinion about a company basically amounts to capital punishment for sedition without trial. That's obviously a bit of a dramatization -- again, you can't take the internet as serious as real life -- but the point is the same.

Regardless of whether or not I approve of ArenaNet's decision, however, I can say that Shard really should have seen it coming. He broke the rules repeatedly, for certain on the wiki and probably in-game as well, and was punished for it. The rules seem unfair to me, yes, but a rule being unfair isn't grounds for breaking it, especially not in a loud and impolite manner that's only more likely to get you noticed and dealt with for it. I sympathize with him and still think he should be unblocked, but I can't say it should come as a surprise. While many of his concerns with ArenaNet policies and decisions (especially those concerning game balance) may have been perfectly valid, his method of getting the point across was... less than optimal. --Jette 01:19, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Thoreau. -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 01:32, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

a rule being unfair isn't grounds for breaking it. Oh yeah it most definitely is. A most basic example is a rule against drinking water. I'm going sip some H2O whenever the hell I feel like just to show how stupid a rule is and rebel to get it changed for others as well as myself because it is unfair. I agree his methods were not optimal, but only due to the fact that the wiki has a limited audience. Given the platform he should have adapted his style, but that's just not how he rolls it seems. However, if he did want to take things further there is always moving from the cyber world to the real world. It's not yet worth the time though imo (and definitely not worth Shard's time), there are bigger fish to fry than ANet with their bs power complex.~>Sins WDB 06:07, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I would not be so fast to assume what the likely outcome of any potential Arb Comm might be. The Bureacrats will be looking not at just the actions of the individual in one instance, but throughout their history here on GWW, and will make their ruling based on what is best for the wiki as a whole. This may or may not be restricting the user from posting on a single page, or namespace, but also might result in a permanent ban from the wiki entirely including removing any content deemed inappropriate that the user has posted. There really is no set "punishment guideline" that the Arb Com has to follow, rather it is a decision made by 3 individuals who are looking after the best interest of the wiki and it's community. -- Wyn 07:05, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

So rather than verifying the wild stories that emerged recently, most people (or at least the vocal ones) decide to blindly accept them as the truth just because they don't like Anet. And what's with the 'rules are unfair' stuff? There's nothing unfair about requesting people to be civil regardless of what some morons feel the internet is(n't) or should(n't) be. The sadest thing here is that people actually believe they're not doing anything wrong. Let me ask you a question though: if you treated people exactly the same way in real life, for 2 years, and even if they hadn't beaten you to a pulp yet, would you seriously think they'd still listen to you? Gaile has been more courteous than any of us could have asked of her, and I fully support her when she says: enough is enough. Now quit your constant Anet bashing outside the talk pages or get lost of our wiki. We want to document and improve the game here. Go to a review site if you want to say how much you dislike GW. 145.94.74.23 07:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I wonder who the IP is... *claps anyway* Rose Of Kali 14:51, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I am impressed at how misguided you are /applause. Pika Fan 14:56, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I am impressed at how persistent some people are at bashing Anet every chance they get, and clinging to evey single story, so long it's anti-Anet. And I'm surprised with the Anet employees on this wiki still putting up with this crap and even bothering to talk to these people, because it has gone too far. Instead of talking like people trying to resolve a problem, either by explaining what the problem is or offering possible solutions to see if they work or not, some choose to behave like monkeys and sling crap in all directions, and then act surprised that nobody wants to come near them. This is a game, not world politics. Like it or leave it. And if you want to offer input on how to improve something you like, stop the rampant NPA, ffs, it won't get you anywhere, and certainly won't make people listen any closer. And I'm still surprised at people trying to delicately deal with all of you, maybe in some futile hopes that you might actually stop throwing baseless dirt on them and offer a constructive comment one day. And yes, I hate obscure comments about how "misguided" I am without any explanation. Don't act like this is so far below you that you can't even be bothered to explain, but are free to throw around comments like this. Make sense, or say nothing at all. And yes, I was impressed with how Adrin's name reporting problem was handled, it wasn't a perfect process from either side, by any means, but the end result proved something to me, both about Adrin and about Anet. You can't take a bunch of unrelated problems, group them together, and then draw general conclusions about everyone remotely involved in one of the aspects. Handle individual problems on a case by case basis, and maybe you'll find a solution to some or all of them. But if you keep slinging crap at Gaile, Linsey, and whomever else happens to be in your way, hijacking posts, supporting any and all accusations with or without legitimate proof, and act like a troll in general, you're only stretching people's patience.

This comment was not about anyone in particular, but about a group of people that I'm seeing on this wiki over and over, doing the same thing and expecting a different result. Rose Of Kali 15:48, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

1. Pika was replying to the IP, thus why he didn't indent farther than you.
2. No one on this site (except perhaps Lena) clings only to anti-ANet stories. I personally am very happy with how the recent "A Net Blows" character name was resolved.
3. I like how the IP tells us that we shouldn't act like the internet is how we think it is or isn't, should be or shouldn't be, because he thinks the internet is like real life.

lol -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 15:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I know whom the reply was intended for. And I didn't agree with every single word the IP said. But I completely agree with what he said before getting into real life comparisons. And even though this is not real life, you are still dealing with real life people every step of the way. The problem is that many others also treat this whole thing like it's real life, like they have some kind of rights and whatnot, or like they are obligated to show everyone how corrupt/injust/biased/inconsistent or whatever the "government" is by any means possible. There are rules. Everyone knows the rules. Whether you like them or not is not open to debate. You break the rules, you get consequences. You don't get anything for yourself by telling everyone that you feel it's unfair that you got punished for breaking the rules. If you happen to be a "casualty" in the thousands of bans handed out every month, Anet is willing to work with you and set things straight, but if you broke the rules, the decision won't change. And yes, as I already said, I am impressed with Adrin's name report handling. Again, they are people, people have varying opinions, and the only reason A Net Blows got banned was because Adrin's name was banned, they were too similar, and they sure didn't want to unban Adrin, because that would cause even more problems than there already are. And so what if Anet employees have favorites an unfavorites (assuming that's the case, I'm not saying it is or isn't)? This isn't the RL America, you don't get to sue for discrimination. I'm baffled with all these complaints, attacks and demands put forth based on injustice to rights that weren't there in the first place. Rose Of Kali 16:46, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

In case you didn't know, I was advocating the recent updates as a step in the right direction, and I mostly liked and gave credit for the big content update. I have every right to criticize, and I know my limits, thanks for assuming I am the kind of person who strictly bashes anet for the sake of bashing anet. Gotta love people who are so superficial. Pika Fan 23:17, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) OK. Maybe people would like a time out? 000.00.00.00 23:32, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me, are any of you Gaile? No. Did I ask for any of your input? No. Did I already propose to end this? Yes. Thinking I don't want this to end when I clearly do only proves that you're the one(s) who blindly accept or reject things based on who says them. Honestly, if you want to show off your mighty powers of ignorance, do it somewhere else. ~Shard 23:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Because I find it rather odd that you need a block to stop posting here. If you really wanted to be a solution, you would have stopped posting in those areas to show good faith, not demanding to strike a deal first. And to the other posters: yes I do believe there are people making stuff up just because they dislike Anet. But I never named anyone specifically, so if the shoe fits... 145.94.74.23 06:55, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I also find it rather odd you need verification after adequate evidence has been put up. Or is it that selective reading is a special ability of yours? Either way, making accusations, especially sweeping ones, has to be actually backed up with some form of proof, not some half-hearted "I feel" or "I think" aimed at misleading people and fanning flames. Pika Fan 07:34, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

145, there's proof of it on this very page. Can you not scroll up? Also, you're still not Gaile. ~Shard 07:54, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Screenshots are evidence. Ingame movies are evidence. Chat logs and e-mails are evidence. Just copying mails or chat logs to the wiki and then clicking on Save Page doesn't qualify as evidence. At the very least they should have been backed up by a to see the original, click here. And yes, you're right, I'm not Gaile...you nicely dodged my previous comment there. 145.94.74.23 08:56, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

N.B. Of course I am only taking about the (growing number of) issues that have been posted without proof. 145.94.74.23 09:01, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

This is an issue between Shard and Gaile. Outside commentary should be kept to a minimal/non-existent level unless otherwise requested. Pika, 145, rose etc - stop posting here until the issue is resolved. This can very easily become too wall-of-texty to be useful to either Gaile or any sysops/bcrats that try to look here for information.

Shard requested a response from Gaile. It is up to her to give a response or not. If you have an issue with shard, you know where his talk page is - use that instead. Thanks in advance :D -Auron 09:02, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Not Gaile, perhaps User:Nicky_Silverstar?

Who Made the Cool Mini Images?

I was going to add my two new miniatures (common minis, alas ;) ) to my user page but I noticed that the wiki does not yet have the cool white-background, uniform images on which I and a bunch of other folks have relied for all our mini shots. I am not sure who made those images, but if you're still around, can we look forward to a new batch? *waves baked goods* :D -- Gaile 21:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I believe those were extracted directly from GW.dat by some folks here. The problem is, I think, that those people haven't seen those minis yet, and hence do not have the images in their .dat file. I think that if you decide to use them on your user page anyway, they will actually be updated sooner. ;) — Why 11:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

They'd just have to use -image and pull them out of the .dat file, but that would require them to be around and see this :P DarkNecrid 16:39, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

You can also extract them with texmod. -- Wyn 22:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I get them with GWDat Browser, however there are some caching issues with some issues where the icon has been uploaded but is not displaying yet, though some have not been captured yet also, please contact me if you have any of the missing ones and I will meet you in game to cap the icons :) --Lemming 23:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Wiki Alerts

Over the last week or two, I noticed that my alert emails -- the "Your page has been updated" -- have stopped coming into my mailbox. This means I may not be responding as speedily as I have in the past, and I apologize for that. I will do my best to check the wiki even more often than usual, now, knowing this is going on. Also, the folks who work on the GWW know about this and will get the alerts back up and running as soon as they can. It may take a bit of time, but they are aware of the issue. -- Gaile 21:20, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

And on a completely off-topic note, my cat just leapt on my keyboard and reset the font size for the Wiki. Dang, that's one smart TechnoCat(tm)! -- Gaile 21:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Now where was my cat when I needed to figure out why my new keyboard wasn't working? Seriously, my cats are way too lazy. They just meow for food or going outside. ^^" Katherinezoltin 00:24, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmm not had a problem with alerts here personally, if anything I got far too many today o.0 --Lemming 00:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Let me rephrase this topic, then, in light of Lemming's comments:

1. Are you getting your alerts, when you have a page on "watch?"
2. Are you getting alerts, if you've signed up for them, when your page is updated?
3. If you are not getting alerts, can you recall about when you stopped receiving them?

Thanks for your help! -- Gaile 04:48, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll check if I get e-mail if a change is made on pages that are in my watchlist, but have to change my preferences for that. I'll report back later. Qaletaqa 06:26, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I have just checked my e-mail and did not recieve anything in my mailbox about the changes that have been made on pages in my watchlist. On May 11 I did get an e-mail of something that had been moved from Linsey's talkpage to my talkpage. Qaletaqa 09:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) On Friday, I got an alert for the first time in nearly a month. We believe that this issue was specifically impacting ArenaNet employees, but we all seem to be back in business now. Hooray! -- Gaile 17:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Testing!

Let's see if our not getting notices may have to do with minor vs. non-minor changes. I don't think so, but it's worth a test anyways :) -- Emily Diehl (talk) 18:52, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Whee minor change? :L) --Star Weaver 18:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Nada. Still no alert. :( -- Gaile 19:04, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

1) Check prefs?. 2) Check Spam Filter? 3) You only get an alert when you aren't on the wiki, so you might have a tab open or something. Dominator Matrix 20:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I get emailed alerts all the time -- well, I got them all the time -- even when I was active on the wiki. -- Gaile 20:11, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

From wikimedia help. "This will not be repeated until you view the page. Note that you have to be logged in when viewing the page, otherwise you will not be notified of further changes. Optionally this notification system can ignore minor changes." Article has more...links to the whole mess of things. Dominator Matrix 20:19, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

DM -- I don't see the relevance, I'm sorry. I'm talking about having the wiki open, for instance I have it open along with 10-15 other pages on my bar. I may not be looking at the page, but it's open. If someone updates, I get a notification via email. What your quote means is that you get a single notification and if you view, without logging in, you do not get more because the wiki doesn't know you viewed the alerted update. I think those are two different scenarios, yes? -- Gaile 23:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes. But you only get 1 update if you are logged in or not. To get more you need to check the page yourself. That could be the reason, or something else. If its something else then its in Emily's hands. Dominator Matrix 00:59, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Understood and thanks. I'm not getting any updates. :( Emily is kindly working on this and we both hope for a quick resolution, as we're both wiki junki... fans. ;) -- Gaile 01:22, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Skill Icons

Oh hullo, I was working on some of my skill icons when I hit a brick wall and thought maybe you could help since you're one of only 2 ANet staff I'm familiar with. I make big skill icons from the skill card packs released several months (probably years at this point) ago usable in-game via Texmod (they look nice, all shiny and stuff). I also sometimes blow up the ones that weren't included using google and mah mad photoshoppan skillz. Alas, my google-fu has been unable to find some of the skill icons so far, and the files packed in the client are so small I can't realistically use them. I'm referring specifically to Shield Guardian, Blood is Power, Protective Spirit, and some others I could probably come up with. Anyway, I was hoping you or someone on the team could post those icons on the wiki (or anywhere, really) so that I could implement them in the mod and we could put them in the nice big icon gallery. Or at least explain why they were missing from the skill card packs (Shield guardian's icon, for some reason, was replaced with Stonesoul Strike's while many others, like Searing Heat and Protective Spirit, were obviously just blown-up versions of the in-game icons). --Jette 05:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Have you tried the large interface feature? It makes on-screen things much larger, making for better screenshots, and might just be big enough for you to use your mad photoshoppan skillz on. Rose Of Kali 06:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Exactly right, Rose! So Jette, can you give that a try? -- Gaile 06:52, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, what that does is stretches the interface. I'm going to provide a few quick screenshots to illustrate the difference. I've used the "Glazed Graphite 1.2" mod by RavenGT in both of these examples, which cleans up the interface a little so you can see the icons better. In exhibit A, we can see my mod working properly, showing big icons in crisp quality, alongside poor Shield Guardian, whose icon I could not find. Notice the heavy pixellization as a result of stretching the icon from the 56x56 resolution the game defaults to to my resolution of 112x112. In exhibit B, we see the icons at their native resolution with my mod working. As you see, Shield Guardian looks fine. If you look closely, you'll notice that my modified icons actually look worse than the normal sized one at this resolution because when you shrink an image, it usually needs to be sharpened. Forgive the white lines and invisible health/energy bars, I didn't want to have to reset all my settings so I didn't exit the interface menu. Finally, in exhibit C, we have the basic default Guild Wars icons, entirely unedited, stretched to 112x112 resolution. As you can see, there is a considerable quality difference between A & C. What I do is take some of these (remember to click the "redirected from" button to see the image, it redirects to the SoA page otherwise) and squish them in photoshop, sharpen them, run a couple other operations on them to make them work properly in GW, then make the mod itself. And everything worked just fine, but some icons I simply cannot find, even those that appear outside of the skill packs. Hence my dilemma. This includes all of the PvE-only skills, though I've started just replacing those icons with Magic cards. --Jette 07:38, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I hate to be a pest here, but if you are unable to provide the icons or simply don't know, would you happen to know anyone I would be able to speak to about figuring out where to find them? --Jette 14:23, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Wild guess: Emily? Rose Of Kali 19:18, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I have a feeling that Emily is super busy these days. But yes, you certainly could ask her. Sorry I can't be more directly helpful to you. -- Gaile 04:00, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

That's alright, thank you. --Jette 16:56, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Shard

I sincerely hope I didn't appear to discredit ArenaNet in any way. I hopefully cleared up what I meant, and that is that it is possible that corruption or bias to have effected actions on either side of this Shard - ArenaNet dispute. It's certainly possible that Shard has produced false records, and it appears to be undeniably true that some (I have not and most likely will not attempt to find all pieces of evidence which he has) of what he claims to be evidence is clearly anecdotal and incites much suspicion, but it is also possible that ArenaNet does have internal corruption. No safeguards put in place by humans and enforced by humans are or can be completely secure. Even if you were to externally audit your Support team, you cannot guarantee with absolution that error, bias, or corruption will not occur. I've had no dealings with Support beyond password recovery and the like, thankfully, so my intentions in any dealings with or regarding them are neutral or, at worst, slightly favorable.

This all being said, I'm curious about a couple things. I read, recently, though I can't recall where, that Support cases are spot-checked daily. If this is true, that would imply that there is an archive of cases to some extent. I would like to propose a journalistic and scientific approach to this matter. For now, I'll say that I'm associated with a reputable journalistic publication - I'll provide more details and contact information if this moves beyond a simple proposition. If you (or, rather, ArenaNet), would be interested in what would essentially be a journalistic audit of the Support team's action, I would be very interested in this "story", as would many members of the Guild Wars community, I'd wager. Feel free to direct me to whoever I should be contacting about this matter, if it happens to be someone other than yourself.

··· cedave 20:53, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I will take you request to ArenaNet, but I do not believe that any private company would subject itself to such a review. Guild Wars is played on private servers, and our players' privacy is protected by law and by policy. While it's fine to speak in general terms about issues that arise (my statements such as "there are no outstanding issues with these players" a case in point), it seems inherently wrong to suggest that a company should throw open its doors to reviews by external parties, no matter their purported or actual level of professionalism, objectiveness, or impartiality.

Because I want to allow the ArbComm to move forward without any more injections of irrelevant materials, I ask that this side discussion cease. -- Gaile 21:01, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Works for me. ··· cedave 21:16, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

For your convenience

In a very confusing turn of events to the wiki unwise, your question to me, which you posted on my bureaucratic election talk page, has been moved to my talk page, which does actually exist and I link here for your convenience. I've answered your question there, feel free to follow up. As a side note, while my user page doesn't exist, my talk page does and can be accessed either by clicking on my signature, which takes you to my non-existant user page, then clicking the discussion tab at the top, or by clicking the sneakily hidden secret link in my signature directly to my talk page. It's been stated before that my signature is too complicated as it is supposed to facilitate people contacting me and it was highlighted by someone else again after this event. As the first person I know who has been so vexed by my trickery, would you care to comment now that it has been explained? As an aside, due to the large volume of irrelevant traffic on this page, I don't have it watchlisted, so responses are best directed to my talk page if you would be so kind. Misery 11:02, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I responded on Misery's talk page, as requested. -- Gaile 19:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

ArbComm

Not sure if you've noticed already, but the ArbComm about Shard has been accepted and is currently being considered. I'd like to ask that you put forward a statement there, addressed to the arbitration committee (that is, direct your comments to the three bureaucrats, not at Shard and not at supporters or detractors on the talk page). What you believe is the center of the conflict, what steps if any you've taken to try to resolve them, what you think of the situation, desired outcomes, that sort of thing. Whatever you feel needs to be said for people to understand your side of the story, so to speak. Of course, if you prefer to say nothing, that's your call. I've asked the same of Shard. - Tanetris 21:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Just a small concern regarding the wiki administration

Eons ago when we were defining the rules for sysophood on the wiki, you stated your dislike for the idea of having "for life" sysops, and the discussion derived on a mechanic that was called "Request for Reconfirmation". Lately, concerns about some non-active sysops have been raised but the reconfirmation process has failed to activate due to the disagreement of the big majority of the people involved in that particular discussion.

Is being "sysop for life" a concern anymore? Was a concern from the community representative point of view at the time, or just a personal concern?--Fighterdoken 03:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

ANet handed the running of everyday wiki matters over to the community, so I'm assuming it was a personal concern. -Auron 04:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

My concerns were based on several levels of perspective, and were particularly based on my extensive experience with forums and other participatory media. The opinion/concern was stated as a wiki member, and I hold it still. -- Gaile 15:59, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Suggestions Page?

Gaile

What's the latest on this hype about suggestions and such, is there a suggestion page someplace? I've got one I think that support needs to see, it may have been suggested before, but it's ingenious (IMO) so I have to try. -- Tha Reckoning 21:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

They are looking into creating a place where we would be able to make suggestions, but atm there is no place for it yet. Also, don't wanna sound like an asshole but many people think their idea is ingenious, including me, but it often turns out not to be once you have thoroughly talked about it with a team that knows alot about it. Qaletaqa Hania 08:38, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

A team that knows a lot about it? That's a big check to write.... -- Tha Reckoning 08:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean by:

"A team that knows a lot about it? That's a big check to write...."

You think you know more about all the aspects that come into play when a suggestion is made then a team that have been designing, programming, etc... games for years? Qaletaqa Hania 09:40, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't overuse the quote template dude. He only said one thing, so when you're replying to it, just reply to it. -Auron 10:18, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Reckoning, we are currently building a whole new namespace for suggestions. As Qaletaqa noted, it is not up and running yet, but we are getting pretty close. If you are interested in the progress of building the new feedback namespace, you can follow along here and join in the discussion here. (Satanael 16:45, 15 July 2009 (UTC))

You can always post it on your userpage. At least you'll get comments from users. -- Alaris 16:50, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Or if it's for support in particular, you can email Gaile using the Email this user link in the tool box on the left. -- Wyn talk 17:01, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I would say that it would be best to place it on the wiki contributor's own user page, or wait for the Suggestions system to be put into place. At this time, I would not be able to accept an emailed suggestion, even if it was related to Support. Thanks a lot for your understanding. -- Gaile 17:08, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I never said anything about knowing more, I wouldn't presume to be so pigheaded. I just said that I don't have faith in the team, and I have a possible solution. Thanks again, Gaile -- Tha Reckoning 18:12, 15 July 2009 (UTC)