User talk:Infinite

From Guild Wars Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Personal to-do-maybe-probably-not list[edit]

Armor sets to complete and add to HoM for completionist's sake[edit]

Other HoM things for completionist's sake[edit]

None of these will happen any time soon, especially not the PvP parts. Some of the armor sets are best of the worst scenarios. - Infinite - talk 22:34, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Wiki to-do list[edit]

  • Finish updating lists of skills to improved DPL calls.
  • Sort out Skills quick reference (this article was doomed from the start, considering how [one of] Misery made it).
  • Overhaul some articles up for a rewrite.
  • Remove every single instance of 'you' from the wiki's main space.

More added later. - Infinite - talk 08:10, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Ooo, so formal. And just so you're aware, the number of main space pages with "you" being used outside of skills is in the thousands. Not to stop you, but perhaps give you some perspective ; ). G R E E N E R 19:10, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Raisu Palace[edit]

While I am in agreement, the last two consensus argued against separating Raisu Palace. Try asking greener, alex, etc. for their opinions. Also read the relevant article discussions for insight. --Falconeye (talk) 22:21, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

I can understand the consensus against separating, as it is only the Proof of Legends that specifically isolate the palace from the rest of Kaineng City. For all intents and purposes, though, on the Proof of Legends page it should remain split. The split is an anomaly and can be listed as such. - Infinite - talk 22:35, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
One thing to note, I have not been a regular player of GW1 in years. That means I'm no longer aware of some of its idiosyncrasies. I will do my best to ensure that the wiki functions properly, but making judgment calls on what most accurately conveys information to users in these cases is beyond me. G R E E N E R 23:26, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
Also, an extensive search came up blank: where did this discussion take place, exactly? - Infinite - talk 13:55, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Nvm, found it. - Infinite - talk 13:59, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Per your flagging of my attention[edit]

I only see User:Classic Kiriyama/Miniatures as properly existing in the User space. Test number 1 and test number 2 (User Space is Name Space 2). Was there something else that was acting strangely? G R E E N E R 23:23, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Just this: [1] - Infinite - talk 23:44, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
That image is so odd. I can't reproduce it, so my best guess is that there was an error, but the wiki has fixed itself after your edit to the page. The new location shows me nothing inappropriate under Main space, nor does the old location.
Are you still getting it? If so, could you clear your cache and see if it's still there? G R E E N E R 00:09, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
I agree, hence calling out for someone with admin tools. If it doesn't show up at the new location, I'm sure it's fine now! - Infinite - talk 00:19, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Oh! You wanted me to use admin tools, sorry! I'll get around to blocking you for breaking the wiki later tonight ; ). G R E E N E R 00:23, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
I'm only reducing the wiki by thousands of characters at a time. [2] [3] Surely you can justify blocking me by now. :P - Infinite - talk 00:27, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Also, I am going to leave the remainder of the old Zhed file links as they are. The mainspace was fixed, major template uses were altered, the redirect can be removed whenever (like Shiro's once was). - Infinite - talk 10:20, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Topic split[edit]

While your new overview looks very nice, I have to admit that I preferred the old tables. Was easier to use when looking for stuff for me. But since I don't paly GW any more :( there's no point in arguing. :D Cheers, Steve1 (talk) 09:20, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
The main vice with the tables was both its design (it was not exactly... aesthetically pleasing) as well as its display on windowed/smaller resolutions (scrolling horizontally for life, amirite). For use now, simply click the zone you need in the ToC and in one quick glance all available skills in that zone are listed. Not a single link got removed, just the format for them.
I really wanted to work with div anchors and such, but I fear this wiki is very unfamiliar with such parameters. Also, I wouldn't have knocked off so many characters in the process! - Infinite - talk 10:13, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

And here I'd thought...[edit]

...you'd disappeared for good. What brings you back? I miss the wikiknight to my wikidragon. Aqua (talk) 22:58, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Haha, I never left GWW. Only GW2W. I'm still active on Guild Wars, after all! But the lesser desirable sequel, yeah, that one's dead to me. :] - Infinite - talk 11:06, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Fun facts[edit]

Now that was a neat little fun fact. G R E E N E R 20:44, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! It was definitely a stumble-upon moment. - Infinite - talk 21:15, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

"if a higher level character summons the Fire Imp and then zones out, the Imp will stay behind and follow the other party member around."[edit]

It doesn't work for level 20s, I think. Otherwise It'd change the face of survivor r2 and r3. But in a way, what you say is correct since no higher level character can summon the imp then.--Ruine User Ruine Eternelle Ruine Eternelle.jpg Eternelle 04:51, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, level 20s cannot do this. Then again I felt that was implied by the stone's description. :] - Infinite - talk 12:18, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
But what that maybe *does* mean is that you should level up your impway character to level 19, to have the highest level imp present you can get your hands on. If you don't already use a level 19 character, anyway. :] - Infinite - talk 13:10, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
I wasn't really clear, sorry about that. But I believe what you said about the imp to be wrong. I just tested it, and I only see the imp simply disappear when its summoners zones out.--Ruine User Ruine Eternelle Ruine Eternelle.jpg Eternelle 21:29, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
That's odd, it worked for me in the past. I don't have two account, though. Sneak update? - Infinite - talk 21:38, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Just to clarify, does it also despawns when the only party member remaining isn't level 20 yet? - Infinite - talk 21:40, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, seems like that (tested).--Ruine User Ruine Eternelle Ruine Eternelle.jpg Eternelle 21:44, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Then they have definitely updated this since. Originally I have levelled other players (and been levelled by them) by leaving the higher level imp behind and zoning out. The imp would then follow the remaining player and behave the same way it normally would. I will remove the note accordingly. - Infinite - talk 21:48, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

So we missed one, eh?[edit]

I noticed your creation of List of Factions dervish skills. I expected to go there and see a {{delete}} tag on it but lo, there the skill was, and I was chagrined. G R E E N E R 18:07, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I was genuinely impressed that the Paragon variant existed, but not the Dervish one. What is life! - Infinite - talk 18:13, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
I love the end result. Very well done! G R E E N E R 21:13, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you! - Infinite - talk 21:20, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Scatter[edit]

The page was deleted in 2008 because all it contained was the words SCATTER RUINS ME. Just in case you were really wondering ; ). G R E E N E R 15:45, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh fair enough, I thought that was the case. Still odd that it was never created properly since then. - Infinite - talk 16:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

You're too nice ;)[edit]

I was contemplating some landmark snark like "L2P" or "Read the effing walkthrough".

Admittedly your response was nicer and more helpful ... Steve1 (talk) 16:07, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

My mental comment was a lot more extravagant, to be honest! - Infinite - talk 16:18, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
I was laughin out loud!
I like you! :D ;) Steve1 (talk) 16:26, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Wintersday Secret Santa[edit]

For those not active on the Guild Wars subreddit, you may still be interested to sign up for My Wintersday Secret Santa Event. Bring on the holiday spirit! - Infinite - talk 13:47, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Lest I forget[edit]

I usually say a lot of things I'll do, or am in the process of doing and then internet-ADD into oblivion for some other contributors to pick up in a distant future. It would be super helpful if the wiki community could remind me of the things I said I'd do but haven't done yet. I'm getting old and all that jazz, which means I forget everything more easily. So, what did I forget? - Infinite - talk 21:39, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

I have no idea what you've forgotten, but I will say, "Welcome to my world." It's important that we group together in this time of need to remember all those who have fallen in the... wait, what are we talking about? G R E E N E R 01:50, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Ahaha. - Infinite - talk 19:10, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

minions[edit]

Hey Infinite, why did you add those table breaks? It really looks weird with literally 2/3 of the page being white and unused ... Steve1 (talk) 21:25, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

They look better on tablets and smartphones. --Falconeye (talk) 22:10, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
As per Falconeye, the lower resolutions require them to be broken to display correctly. If we replaced wiki table code with divs, we could have them wrap according to allotted width. Old-fashioned tables don't allow wrapping, so this was the only design choice that made sense. - Infinite - talk 22:33, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
An example is [4] - Infinite - talk 22:37, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
I see your point.
But I disagree that "this was the only design choice that made sense". Where exactly is it stated that pages have to look shitty and with loads of white space for normal monitors and laptops so that they "look better on tablets and smartphones"? I have accessed the wiki on my smartphone in the past and it didn't bother me. While this is clearly subjective it's enough (for me) to disprove "this was the only design choice that made sense". If there's general consensus that this is how it's supposed to be than I will obviously accept it. But at the moment it looks to me that one single user is forcing his personal preferences on everyone else while a second one agrees. Steve1 (talk) 07:02, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Oh dear, if I came off that entitled I apologize! No, I meant it in terms of wiki formatting, there aren't a lot of methods we can use to create/display tables. Since tables cannot auto-wrap their cells in a legible manner, we have to focus on making them work for as many users as possible.
This website tracks the average screen resolution for its own website: [5]. Considering the wiki doesn't have such a tracker of its own, code designers tend to use sources like it to determine what resolutions must have a working design. As you can see, the most used resolution (for them) is 1366x768. I used that benchmark to determine if changes were required.
It's most important that browsing is possible on all resolutions and that we don't force side-scrolling on users. I also have a large screen here. Since the new tables don't break the page on smaller resolutions, I personally feel the extra white space on larger resolutions is the lesser evil. That's why I also said "If we replaced wiki table code with divs, we could have them wrap according to allotted width." Replacing the table format by divs would allow the bottom part of the table to sit directly alongside the top part on any resolution that allows it to sit there, while jumping under it on resolutions where it cannot.
I hope that sheds a bit of light on why I made the change and why I had to go with this (potentially very temporary) solution. :] - Infinite - talk 12:11, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Gotcha. Thanks for the explanation. Cheers, Steve1 (talk) 17:13, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

"Not a profession"[edit]

You have reverted the edit of Touch of Dhuum article. Yes, from the point of common sense "Monster" is not a profession of Dhuum, he is obviously a monster by nature, so this addition is not required and may be perceived as excessive. But from the point of Wiki mechanics this parameter is important, you can see it, for example, in the Taste of Undeath article, where that parameter was added long ago. I hope you can understand why.
Please revert back. --109.252.109.239 14:26, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

The reason why I reverted it, was primarily due to the lack of use for that parameter. The skill type parameter allows monster skills to automatically be assigned to the Monster skills category, which is also something the profession parameter Monster does so it would be superfluous in this case. I can see that it appears in the infobox, but from a wiki technical POV it does nothing substantial except list incorrect information. Monster is not a profession, game mechanically or otherwise. If you could please elaborate as to why it should be listed as a profession, I can understand why it can be considered important. - Infinite - talk 15:15, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
OK, then please compare the current look of Touch of Dhuum and Taste of Undeath in the Life stealing table. If you think that it's a flaw in the current way how the professions in the table are shown (somewhere in the appropriate template) and you can easily fix this, then OK. After that, profession "Monster" can be removed everywhere in the Wiki. I, on my side, decided that more easy way would be to add the missing (according to how current templates work) parameter "Profession". Lack of my Wiki knowledge and/or lack of access to templates? Maybe... --109.252.109.251 18:55, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
P.S. Also don't forget the Vampirism (attack), which also uses this parameter. And maybe more other skils. --109.252.109.251 19:13, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Now I see why the parameter was added, which does pose only a minor logistical issue: a lot of monster skills have no profession specified, and some do (Earshot's list is an example of this). The question then is whether or not we should add it to all monster skills, or remove them from the ones that have had it added to their infobox in the past. Technically monster is not a profession, as we both agree, but at the same time it makes it easier to differentiate between player skills and monster skills in lists. However, it is also true that event skills and Bonus Mission Pack skills are listed as common skills, even though both cases are different to regular skills.
I think it would be best to change the skill infobox template to automatically add monster skills to a hidden monster profession parameter, which will then display the monster "profession" tango in any skill lists that are generated via DPL. When that is implemented correctly, the profession parameter can be removed from all monster skills. This way it isn't often implied monster is a profession, but it still makes the distinction of what is a monster skill in lists. - Infinite - talk 20:53, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I can only agree with this approach. So, someone (maybe you) with good Wiki code knowledge should add this internal "Monster" profession parameter automatically to all monsters in the case if it was not manually entered in the infobox (like for current Touch of Dhuum). Then, if all will be OK and in the tables all monster skills will have the appropriate icon, the excessive now monster profession can be removed. I will look after this :-) Thanks for good understanding! --109.252.109.251 23:15, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
I have been tinkering with this behind the scenes for a while now. I think it can be done, but I want to make absolutely sure that it functions properly before moving towards implementation. It does affect a very large amount of pages, of course. - Infinite - talk 12:51, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Shame on you![edit]

You spoiled my fun!

https://wiki.guildwars.com/index.php?title=Canthan_New_Year&curid=5334&diff=2625064&oldid=2620694

One or two years from now I was going to grandly brush up that table. Shame on Infinite! Hope you feel Guilty. (Now try casting anything in the next 6 secs ... ) Steve1 (talk) 15:41, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

I am so sorry, let me roll back my edits from the last 5 years and you can get everything I took from you. :] I think the hexes wore off by now, though, but have some energy anyway! - Infinite - talk 17:31, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Heroes[edit]

Example - is it possible to do this for listing "hero-proof" skills? --Falconeye (talk) 03:57, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

While possible, I'm not sure it's necessary. "Hero-proof" is a vague term I have used in the past to indicate skills that aren't used terribly by heroes. Skills like Discord are "hero-proof" in the sense that they won't use it if the conditions aren't met, but at the same time we would have to research all circumstances where heroes prioritise other skills over it to see if they aren't too trigger happy with it. If they use it only when conditions are met, but then spam it as often as they can while that situation is true and ignoring other skills that could've had more impact, is it truly a hero-proof skill? I certainly have nowhere near enough data to conclude which skills are flawlessly used by heroes.
A similar list that is much easier to research is a list of skills heroes and henchmen (and other AI) use incorrectly. To keep it specific, I would opt for a list of skills that are misused by AI due to game updates and synergy changes. Like Orion's new skillbar has an overcast skill on it, but he seems to use it like he would use the previous, non-overcast version. If heroes and enemies also use the skill like that, it would be on the list.
At the end of the day, though, I doubt we need skill list formats for such pages. It might be better to use bullet lists with level 2 bullets explaining why skills are hero-proof/not used properly due to updates/etc. - Infinite - talk 09:02, 12 February 2018 (UTC)