User talk:Yoshida Keiji/Archive 1

Guild page If your guild is still active, please move it out of historical status. If not, it should not be edited. -- Wyn talk 07:52, 13 October 2009 (UTC) It appears you are trying to create a new guild page. Please do not remove the content from the historical guild page, and just start a new one. Guild:Peace Love Unity Respect Credo Thanks! -- Wyn talk 08:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC) I have fixed your guild page. I also fixed you use of my template on your userpage. -- Wyn talk 18:49, 13 October 2009 (UTC) Hi. -- anguard 05:33, 14 October 2009 (UTC) Suggestions I have fixed your suggestion. Please use the "Create a suggestion" box on your feedback page when you wish to submit a suggestion. Do not post them on a category talk page. If you have questions about how to use the suggestion area, please see HELP:SUGGESTIONS. -- Wyn talk 06:41, 14 October 2009 (UTC) Nav bar I have added the nav bar you requested, but as I don't know what the profession or names are of your characters it's the best I can do. To edit it go to User:Yoshida Keiji/Nav bar. -- Wyn talk 09:44, 15 October 2009 (UTC) X Knock Out X Guild Page Good to see you are updating it from time to time. It looks good. Keep it up! Mswheele 02:11, 20 February 2010 (UTC) You Haven't had any messages in over 2 years. But that isn't why I came here :p I found a link format for pvx you can use from my old userpage. *<span class="plainlinks">[http://www.gwpvx.com/PvX_wiki PvX Wiki]</span> PvX Wiki See how it doesn't have the horrible little arrow :D File:User Chieftain Alex Chieftain Signature.jpgChieftain Alex 10:55, 17 December 2011 (UTC) YAY!!! Thanks for dusting off my post box but... Where is my Christmas Card? Very helpful code, thank you Alex. Its good to realise that I handled myself pretty well during this time ^_^.Yoshida Keiji 11:50, 17 December 2011 (UTC) (I've recently been flamed for interfering on userpages directly..) Are those blue dotted line boxes on your userpage deliberate? They're caused by putting spaces in front of things on new lines. could remove them + indent the text like you do on talk pages using additional colons. File:User Chieftain Alex Chieftain Signature.jpg Chieftain Alex 11:57, 17 December 2011 (UTC) Those are intended. I like them because they create like a simple user box which highlights the content better than just another sentence. Like a click-able bottom of any webpage that sends you somewhere else. In my case, guild page and PvX user account. Thanks for asking.Yoshida Keiji 12:23, 17 December 2011 (UTC) Bomber Nice work on that page. It looks much better than linking to PVX. Drogo Boffin 14:16, 26 December 2011 (UTC) Most recent guild image I moved it to File:Guild Ancient Shinobi Imperial Army the 2 pier officers.jpg (removed the "-"), no need for the dash :P ~FarloTalk 07:28, 17 January 2012 (UTC) Hero Setup guide That's a really good idea, but first, it doesn't really belong in the Project section, instead, I'd suggest keeping it in your namespace until you have a solid article to post. Once you do move it to the namespace, something like "Guide to setting up heroes" seems like a more fitting name, that way it's in line with the other guides. My only worry about the page is that there won't be much information to add without turning it into a page about builds, which is something we've tried to lean away from since PvXWiki does a much better job. ~FarloTalk 05:03, 27 January 2012 (UTC) Yeah I am still surprised about how many things have not been addressed considering its 6 years life and the fact that the English GWW should be the most complete by the number of spoken languages users. OK I will create a space for that within my user. You are a sysop that can delete the "old" Project page, right? I will use your recommended title. Oh dont worry I am not going to concentrate on builds. Yoshida Keiji talk 05:14, 27 January 2012 (UTC) Yup, there seems to be a lot more of a focus on the technical data of the game than the actual gameplay of it, but all in due time ;) Although there's also the fact that this Wiki wasn't created until 2007, and we didn't (read; weren't allowed to) copy anything directly from GuildWiki. I deleted the page and I'm sure I'll be contributing to the guide sooner or later :P ~FarloTalk 05:28, 27 January 2012 (UTC) Hero behavior bookkeeping You moved some discussions from Talk:Hero behavior to someplace else. Please use {{moved}} to indicate where they went (using the "to" parameter) and on the new page, please indicate their original source (using the "from" parameter). I'm getting lost trying to find a discussion I was following. Let me know (here) if you have questions about how to use the template (although I doubt you will). Thanks. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 20:00, 18 February 2012 (UTC) Everyday, something new to learn. I wasn't awared that one existed ({{moved}}). I originally wanted to press the "move" tab that is on top of the pages with "user page", "discussion", "edit", "+", "history", "move" and "watch". But then, I realised I would also be transfering unrelated talks all-together... and leave the main page talk blank :S . So I thought passing the ones that were skill specific topics only and the ones after the last update. I have just checked the {{moved}} template for the first time. It doesn't seem complicated, looks very simple. I was awared that people would need notes to follow-up. That is why I left indications at all my edit summaries and also left the {{notice}} on top so people can easily track the new subpage. I will go fix that now. Yoshida Keiji talk 03:49, 19 February 2012 (UTC) Thank you for adding the notifications. I think you did the right thing moving the discussions. The rest is just bookkeeping (important, but not critical). The page is too long, however, to rely on a note at the top of the page...especially if the conversation has bounced around (or might also be taking place for specific skills on their respective articles). The {{moved}} helps keep track (normally, I don't mind doing maintenance follow-up for someone else, but it wasn't obvious to me which convo got moved where). Sometimes it's okay to move an entire talk page and then return a few sections back to the original (this happens a lot when people archive to make room for the latest discussion). Thanks again. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 04:49, 19 February 2012 (UTC) GWW:1RV Don't break it repeatedly. File:User Chieftain Alex Chieftain Signature.jpg Chieftain Alex 14:47, 20 February 2012 (UTC) Ooooops well... always a first time. Yoshida Keiji talk 15:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC) Wikis, consensus, growth by accretion, and related ideas see also: the original thread This is a long thread which basically says: in any community (but especially a wiki community), not every good practice will be documented and not every bad practice will be avoided/prevented. All we can do is the best we can to keep this a fantastic resource by working with each other as best we are able, filling in gaps, copy editing the excellent work of others, and maintaining high standards. The revert policy is meant to stop two or more people from having an argument in the mainspace. It is not meant to prevent someone from editing an article that hasn't been touched in months. The Iron Mines of Moladune is a good example: one person made a change, another person didn't agree, and the appropriate next step is to take it to the talk page. If next year, the same issue comes up, I hope that the participants will review that talk to find out why the page looks one way rather than another. But if they don't, it's not a big deal b/c the then-current community will decide what's most appropriate for the time. Gory details You are wondering about several things related to how internet communities function: Why do useful pages grow in size until they become useless? What should be done about it? Where are decisions documented? How do we handle it when the same issue comes up repeatedly (for same article or in parallel situations)? What should be done when I conversation dies out rather than ends with a clear decision? What should be done when someone goes against a consensus established a while back (whether it was well-documented or not)? All of the above are inevitable issues that result from the community being all-volunteer, nearly anonymous, and evolving. Because it's all-volunteer, a lot of people don't like taking care of the bookkeeping tasks required to keep track of what's been decided (on GW2W, there's even a suggestion that these are bad things to do b/c they limit people's ability to edit). Because the community isn't static, what's been decided once can come up repeatedly. The original participants might/might not be around, but newer members might have a different perspective. This can annoy veterans and newbies alike. Because of all of the above, a guideline established for one article might not be followed for another. Unfortunately, there are no set of policies, guidelines, or practices that can prevent any of the above. A community is only as strong as it membership; the policies/etc are only as good/strong as the community wants them to be. Therefore, if you (or I) wish to participate in improving GWw, we have to be prepared for articles to grow without reason, useless redirects, overlapping categories, and controversial data being added without documentation. The wiki will require veterans to help maintain order — to name just three: Konig (who tries to reduce overlaps/duplication and validates lore), Silver Edge (who actually reads the guidelines/policies), and Tub (who has recently fixed a bunch of broken or outdated templates). There are a few others, such as you & I, who prefer to overhaul articles so that they they are more accessible to more people and have an improved signal:noise ratio. But, again it's inevitable, that someone else will come around and attempt to improve the article by adding a small note. And someone else will add another. And so on until the page becomes bloated again and folks will have to again simplify advice, separate speculation from confirmed research, and so on. It's also inevitable that people are going to object to this or that and start a conversation that ends in ...nothing being done. And usually, no one will document this by saying, "hey, TEF proposed X, but people said what about Y or Z — we never decided, so no change was made." After all, there's usually something else that needs updating more than dropping a note that adds nothing to the conversation. In short, do the best you can (as you have done) to improve things. If people disagree with your actions, they will let you know and you can present your arguments for why one direction is better than another. This isn't always the most efficient way to editing an article, but it's the most efficient way to ensure that everyone agrees (or at least, no one strongly disagrees) with the final version. That makes it more likely that the mainspace will be more helpful to more people for long periods of time after the discussion. And if someone disagrees again a year later, then it's up to them to make a new case. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 20:21, 20 February 2012 (UTC) GWW vs Guild Wiki Guild Wiki was the original encyclopedic resource for Guild Wars. Its early incarnation included builds, which are now hosted at PvX. (Both those sites are hosted by Curse, which also hosts Guild Wars Guru.) Many of the contributors of GWiki contribute here (To make things more complicated, GWiki was hosted at Wikia for several years and there is still a GW resource there.) GWiki presents information differently, notably in walkthroughs and guides, which have historically tended to be written for novices as well as expert players. The communities have had different priorities and personalities, often leading to healthy competition in providing information. (e.g. when Nick first appeared, Guild Wiki was often the first to provide his location; similarly, GWiki has long provided an item-of-the-week farming guide, whereas this wiki resisted putting any farming notes on mainspace articles (at least, for relatively common drops)). It's often helpful to look at both GWW (this wiki) and GWiki to find different types of advice, approaches, presentations, and even sometimes, data (i.e. GWW might have data gaps that are filled in by GWiki). There are a lot of people who might offer the reasons that there are two GW wikis (and a lot of them might be wrong ;-). The short story is that ANet decided that this type of resource was too important to depend on fan donations to survive and offered to host it (under relatively minor copyright constraints regarding images and the suggestion space). – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 04:42, 22 February 2012 (UTC) Requirements sections Why are you changing the Requirements sections of Prophecies character-only quests to requiring no secondary profession (e.g. [1])? According to A Second Profession, a Prophecies character has to have a secondary profession before leaving pre-Searing. --Silver Edge 04:30, 29 February 2012 (UTC) Because any character with secondary Warrior can do them too. I just did them with my Elementalist. Those quests are not exclusive for Warriors only. I find these quest a cheaper way to get skills rather buying them. Of course, my account already has them unlocked and my heroes can equip them. I just like to play each character as if the skill unlocking procedure were character based and not account based... just for the challenge. Yoshida Keiji talk 04:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC) No, that's not how the template is used. See the parameters at {{Standard prerequisites}}. You're changing the template to {{Standard prerequisites|profession = w|secondary=n}}, which is incorrect, since that means the quest can be completed by "any character that has warrior as their primary or secondary profession" or "a character with any primary profession but with no secondary profession". It was correct before you changed it. --Silver Edge 05:07, 29 February 2012 (UTC) I will go check that template, you caught me in the middle of something else when you messaged me. I inicially changed it because the page displaying warrior profession is missleading in my opinion and wanted to tell readers that any one with secondary Warrior can do them too. In any case, maybe the template is confusing? To avoid any miss understanding, I dont mind if you revert it. This is not necesary a reverts war. Yoshida Keiji talk 05:19, 29 February 2012 (UTC) If a quest was only available to primary warriors, the "primary" parameter would be used (i.e. {{Standard prerequisites|primary=w}}), which isn't the case here. If a quest was available to characters that have warrior as their primary or secondary profession, the "profession" parameter would be used (i.e. {{Standard prerequisites|profession=w}}), which is the case here. --Silver Edge 05:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC) Templates Hi Keiji, great pages, when do you get time to play? I finished the example of a formatted template and now I am going to do the section on math templates. Maybe you could figure how to translate the GW skill code into the build or maybe someone has already made a template for that, I don't know. I personally understood your layout of the NPC build better than what TEF had in the sandbox. If you have questions, I will try to answer them or just just look puzzled and sigh. Hope to meet you online. --Wendy Black 06:50, 27 February 2012 (UTC) Hello Wendy: Thanks for accepting my request. I live in Japan (GMT+9), usually I arrive home a little after my 5pm. But now I am taking some time off work life and taking a long break so I am 24/7 at home. Just add me in your friend list under Yoshida Keiji. Regarding the template, the skills work better for me if you have to type the names rather a code, because it is intented for others to use and not just myself so the easier to understand the better. I still need to learn how can I fix the column and line sizes plus adding background color to headers and how can I make the text be center aligned. I will be studying your doing so I can learn more. At a first sight now I know the wikicode use of this symbol (!), also can see that {{{}}} are the boxes where the oranges will go after the (|). I don't understand what < includeonly > < /includeonly > is for. I guess < br > is used to separate...and now..the biggest challenge for me is the part of weapon upgrade components and rune/insignias. I am wandering if such things could be pre-valued so that users can go type the name in the template so it appears later...rather searching for image files. For example a user typing rune of vitae will later pop-up the icon image which would ease the usage rather having to search for the corresponding file instead. The same would go for mode for example, instead of searching files I would prefer users to either type attack, guard or avoid and then the icon appears itself. Yoshida Keiji talk 07:32, 27 February 2012 (UTC) The includeonly tag is saying that this is the only part of the code used in the template and anything found between is not shown on the template page. A real easy way to format text is using the "span style" tag; Large Centered <span style="display: block; text-align: center; font-size:1.25em; color:black;">Large Centered</span> Also, I just keep playing with values until I can tell what has changed. Look at other peoples work, Dervish of Ascalon has made his own character table in his sandbox. He said he used Open Office on his talk page it is like using HTML. I doubt you can get the images to text on such a large scale. There is a lot wiki can do but I don't think a searchable image database is one of them. Anyone wanting to edit the wiki is going to have to learn something. --Wendy Black 11:06, 27 February 2012 (UTC) Howdy Keiji - I just wanted to show you some code based on Wendy's table. It is a character sheet like she made but all the data is at the top. No template required and all in one page. You can see it on my talk page. --Jabhacksoul 02:27, 1 March 2012 (UTC) Wendy, do you have a list of all wiki available options for the "span style" tag for text formatting? Yoshida Keiji talk 11:22, 11 March 2012 (UTC) Talk:The Deep#Exhaustion That is not a discussion - that is a claim, completely unverified and untested by others. You added said claim to the main page without any actual discussion - thus my claim in the edit summary. You then proceeded to revert war while implying others were violating GWW:1RV. In the future, please try to bear in mind that in a game as old as GW, especially in areas as old as the elite missions, if you encounter something not documented, it's probably not the game's fault, and it's certainly not worth anyone's time and energy to revert war over. -- Armond Warblade 18:06, 6 March 2012 (UTC) Page moves If you want a page moved, I'd recommend putting {{move|<destination>|<reason>}} at the top of the page instead of actually moving the page. (e.g. due to the random name choices of the move destination we're going to end up moving the same page 3x.. ) File:User Chieftain Alex Chieftain Signature.jpg Chieftain Alex 12:14, 15 May 2012 (UTC)