FANDOM


ZBoard

Hey folks, the zboard people dropped me a line wanting to send out a keyboard for review. The keyboard IS Guild Wars-specific, so I figure this is not out of the scope of the site. What do you think?

I personally don't want the thing, so I figured if one of you did, you can have it. Mods have first dibs. Gravewit 10:52, 15 June 2006 (CDT)

I'm interested, but if anyone has a viable contest idea I would support using it as contest prize. On the other hand, maybe PvP ppl should be given preference, since they might be able to review it better. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 10:58, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
It would be so cool to have one, but I think there are people who need it more. A contest sounds good. How about something that rewards helping the wiki in some way? --Gem-icon-sm 11:04, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
Btw: Can they send it outside North America? I don't think so. --Gem-icon-sm 11:05, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
Got a picture of it?--Draygo Korvan 11:06, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
A contest sounds good. --Xeeron 11:42, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
A link from guildwars.com: http://www.zboard.com/experience/guildwars/ --Gem-icon-sm 13:40, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
What a nice keyboard.. :D --WichmanN 15:04, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
The Zboard is overrated bullpoop. And no version exists for left-handed users. -- Bishop icon2 Bishop [rap|con] 15:08, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
What do you mean with "left-handed users"?... --WichmanN 15:21, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
Oh, and if you use anyhting else than a US qwerty, this is useless. The (in Finland) very often used ä and ö (and the useless å) are not to be found in the US keyboards. --Gem-icon-sm 15:24, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
Well then maybe its not so good if you, like me, comes from Denmark where we use: æ, ø and å... :'( --WichmanN 15:29, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
I tried it out at the GW display at E3, and I was not impressed. The side board doesn't have the necessary target keys close enough to the movement keys to make my style of playing practical. So all it gives after that are nice graphics and labeled keys. --Thervold 19:22, 15 August 2006 (CDT)
Hmmm, I would think we need to look at this more objectively. Who gets the keyboard is not as relevant as "what will they be looking for?" If we agree on that, it doesn't really matter who gets the keyboard.
Also, whoever gets the keyboard should have the time and the capacity to test it in different environments. Mainly, RA and TA then HoH then GvG and then Challenge Missions, Competitive missions and finally, PvE.
I would recommend Xeeron, he is an admin and a person able to look at things fairly objectively. The only catch is that he is in Germany I believe. Can you ship that far, Gravewit? --Karlos 17:12, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
Last time I checked I was no admin =)
More important, German keyboards use special keys as well (öäü), so I guess it would not work for me as well. Sounds like this will be for US/english users only. --Xeeron 17:37, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
Maybe I need one, stupid edit conflict, current non detachable keyboard holding me back! Xeeron should be an admin, the RFA vote is at 8/0/0 but Phil hasn't done it yet. I was going to say Xeeron would be good "because I think he's pretty fair and even handed, probably useful traits to have if you're a reviewer" so maybe we'll have to go for plan B, you know some kinda crazy deathmatch, 2 people enter, one walks out, and have a draw like the world cup. Geez Xeeron you could have just said yes instead of forcing the GuildWiki community to fight to the death over it, which is the only fair competition I can think of :P --Xasxas256 17:43, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
Just a quick side note on becoming admin: Skuld had the most positiv votes and he became admin, which is exactly the way it should work in my opinion. If we need further admins, we can go to the next person in line. --Xeeron 03:14, 16 June 2006 (CDT)
Hmm, you're not an admin? When did you get demoted? :)
Anyways, we need to know Gravewit's shipping abilities. I am in the US and I can do it. I can pretty much easily test it in any playing style. Those interested should indicate which playing styles they can or cannot cover. If you're an ardent PvE guy then you are not very useful in testing this. You should also be competent in PvP. --Karlos 18:21, 15 June 2006 (CDT)

I think it's a bad idea for the GuildWiki to host Guild Wars-related product reviews. By their very nature these will not be neutral articles. Note that we don't have guild pages, fanfiction, fancomics, "journals" (except in user pages) and so on because the reason has always been that it is impossible to be objective about such content. We don't even have an official review of Guild Wars! There is also the issue of whether we should have such overtly commercial content in the wiki (reviews, unless they are pans, are glorified advertisements). I think the gamewikis blog is a much better place for such product review articles. — Stabber  18:31, 15 June 2006 (CDT)

Upon further review, I agree with Stabber. It's not really what we do. This is product placement. The entry for ZBoard should be the same as that for Ventrilo or TeamSpeak. Just a basic description of what that is. Not a review/thumbs up/thumbs down. We're not gonna put a user manual in the wiki for how to use it either. --Karlos 19:13, 15 June 2006 (CDT)
Oh, the review is supposed to go in the wiki? That doesn't sound too good to me. But it's not too bad either because it is a directly GW related product. As long as the review is neutral and formal I'm ok with it. --Gem-icon-sm 02:10, 16 June 2006 (CDT)
I think it should be halfway between Team Speak and Prima Guide. The art work had to be licensed from Anet, and the GuildWars.com homepage has a square-ish banner for the zBoard. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 03:18, 16 June 2006 (CDT)

They must be desperate to get rid of them if they're trying to offload one onto you Phil ;) I don't think it's necessarily outside the scope of the site, but I agree with Stabber. Imagine if we were to create the article Zboard or something. What would it actually contain? It's always been understood that articles on the GuildWiki should only contain factual information, so we'd just have to say "Here are some pictures, it's used to control Guild Wars".

If we decided to change our policy and review it then we'd be opening the doors to all kinds of articles. By the time you've read this message Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer will be up for Peer Review. <LordBiro>/<Talk> 08:40, 16 June 2006 (CDT)

So... no one has any contest ideas right? -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 07:39, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

I suppose I can just tell them 'no', then. Gravewit 13:24, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
If they expect a review article on guildwiki, then the answer is probably no. If they just want to give one out for promotion, then I won't mind taking one. I can post a review on my person blog that no one reads at all d-: -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 03:57, 21 June 2006 (CDT)

Even though I do get mine delivered tomorrow (with swedish key layout), I agree with Stabber, Karlos, Gem, etc. It would just mean free marketing for them. So I believe it's safe to say no. — Galil Ranger-icon-small 16:08, 20 June 2006 (CDT)

Site performance issues due to June 15 update

According to Gravewit, the server load is doing fine. The problem is bandwidth bottleneck. In case anyone is wondering. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 11:05, 16 June 2006 (CDT)

Blocking Vandals

We had a vandal attacking the page today using multiple IPs. I'm not sure if there is a procedure for dealing with this, I blocked individual IPs to begin with, but then I blocked an IP range.

From a technical point of view, after looking at the block list [1], it appears User:Eightyfour-onesevenfive tried to block him earlier using a 0 to represent the range of IP addresses. For clarification, the correct way to block an ip such as 64.12.116.x is to block 64.12.116.0/24. This is because an IP address is a 32-bit number and it tells MediaWiki to use only the first 24 bits as a mask.

I blocked 64.12.116.0/24 and 64.12.117.0/24.

Because this was a range of IP addresses I only banned them for 1 week. Do you think this was the right thing to do? <LordBiro>/<Talk> 05:01, 17 June 2006 (CDT)

We could not let him stay without blocking so you did the right thing blocking him. One week seems ok to me, and if this happens again after the week, we can just ban him for another week. --Gem-icon-sm 05:04, 17 June 2006 (CDT)
Heh, only a week? — Skuld Monk-icon-small 05:06, 17 June 2006 (CDT)
Blocking a whole IP range for more than a week isn't a good idea. --Gem-icon-sm 05:08, 17 June 2006 (CDT)
Meh, I should've thought of that "/24" thingie... *rolls eyes*. I agree on only a short term ban for now, but I have the serious feeling that this isn't the last time we heared about that one. --84-175 (talk) 05:14, 17 June 2006 (CDT)
64.12.116.0/23! --68.142.13.99 05:40, 17 June 2006 (CDT)

yeah he only banned me for a week. too bad it didnt work. btw: poop

lol. I should be around most of the day, if there's any more vandalism that I miss you can spam my talk page. <LordBiro>/<Talk> 05:13, 17 June 2006 (CDT)

IP range bans can be bad, granted, but we're talking about AOL addresses here. I wonder if he was repeatedly connecting and disconnecting his dial-up modem or something (nothing against dial-up, it's just an idiotic way to change IPs). ;) — 130.58 (talk) (05:17, 17 June 2006 (CDT))

Yeah, it looks like that is what he was doing. Coincidentally 152.163.100.9 is also an AOL IP. <LordBiro>/<Talk> 05:24, 17 June 2006 (CDT)

Blocking IP Ranges: A suggestion

I've been thinking about blocking IP ranges, and I think we should come up with a guideline. When blocking an IP range there is a chance that we will inadvertently also block genuine contributors. This cannot really be helped. However, we can ensure that genuine contributors are not offended by the banning if we make sure the ban message is not insulting. i.e. I think we should avoid ban messages such as "Die Spammer, Die!" or even "let's play".

What do you think? <LordBiro>/<Talk> 05:34, 17 June 2006 (CDT)

IP range blocks should probably not stay in place for long unless absolutely necessary. I think it would be better to keep any non-insignificant range blocked for a week at most unless the vandal shows again. A message about IP range blocks should be added to MediaWiki:Blockedtext and perhaps something like "IP range block: reason" should be the ban reason. Non-insulting ban message should probably be used in any case. --68.142.13.99 05:41, 17 June 2006 (CDT)
I think the Blockedtext should have a general note about the error possibilities of IP based bans (dynamic IPs). --84-175 (talk) 05:48, 17 June 2006 (CDT)
I agree. Here's what the text currently looks like
Your user name or IP address has been blocked by $1.
The reason given is this:<br />''$2''

You may contact $1 or one of the other
[[Project:Administrators|administrators]] to discuss the block.

''(If this automated message says you have been blocked by Adam.skinner for vandalism, it is due to a known [[Project:Software_%26_Technical_Issues/Bugs#False Ban Message (Spam Filter?)|bug]].  Please wait a few minutes and try again.)''

Note that you may not use the "e-mail this user" feature unless you have a valid e-mail address registered in your [[Special:Preferences|user preferences]].

Your IP address is $3. Please include this address in any queries you make.

Which parts should we change to reflect this information? <LordBiro>/<Talk> 06:10, 17 June 2006 (CDT)

I'd suggest ripping off Wikipedia's and warping it to our needs. --68.142.13.99 06:42, 17 June 2006 (CDT)
I would also suggest contacting the ISP of the user and file an internet abuse report with their support department, if such a user is using a dynamic IP to continually and repeativly deface the site. --Draygo Korvan 18:47, 17 June 2006 (CDT)

Green green item wikilinks

→ Moved to Project talk:Style and formatting/Weapons

Request for demotion of User:Karlos

→ Moved to Project talk:Administrators

Stabber and "sockpuppets"

→ Moved to User talk:Stabber

restoring archived stuff

Request for backreferencing user IPs

Can someone who has access to the server logs please post all the usernames that have been used from the IP addresses 128.2.206.194, 128.2.196.71 and 128.2.141.33, as all three of them seem to be from the same organization that has been confirmed to be the location of User:Stabber, who has been confirmed as using sockpuppets and is suspected of tampering votes? This will settle the sockpuppet debate once and for all, and I am sure will be very illuminating for all concerned. Thanks. 216.9.82.85 18:43, 18 June 2006 (CDT)

This wont prove anything, if stabber is working at a university - backreferincing those IP's wont get you jack. It is highly likely that several of stabbers fellow workers might have gotten into guild wiki under stabbers influence. --Draygo Korvan 10:11, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

Where do we go from here?

→ Moved to Project talk:Sock puppetry

Let's come up with Fansite Friday questions

No we haven't been asked to solicit Fansite Friday questions (to the best of my knowledge), but I'm just trying to get discussion going on what are some questions that we would really like to see cleared up from the Anet devs. If you are affiliated with any Fansites that are being asked Fansite Friday questions, feel free to use what is here.

My question: "How does interruption vs Kuunavang work?" Because Fansite Friday has in the past explained how the Guild Lord's health/protection work before, I believe we should be able to get an answer for this question. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 06:16, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

I could just ask Gaile to pass some of these on, if you'd like. Gravewit
I think we should get a few more questions first. Maybe a couple about chapter 3 and NCsofts registration of certain domain names =P. Maybe we can also ask what the total HP of Rotscale is now? --Draygo Korvan 11:06, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

Make Guildwiki multi-lingual?

I suggest making several subsites of guildwiki (like gw-en.gamewikis.org gw-[language-code].gamewikis.org) to support multiple languages. I think in a game that covers several nationalities, having wikis in each native language would be helpful for the greater guild wars community. Anyway this is just a proposal.--Draygo Korvan 11:11, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

After all the drama just a few headlines up from here, I dont feel ready for the next "guildwiki in different languages" debate yet. --Xeeron 12:00, 19 June 2006 (CDT)
I don't actually feel confident enough making up roughly 5% of German the contributers here. Maybe if we had like at least 40 contributers for a language, such effords would have some perspective. It's not just the translation stuff, it's debating, copying news, patrolling, administrating, lending newbies a hand etc... --Nilles 13:43, 19 June 2006 (CDT)
Are you guys aware that there is already a German GuildWiki at http://www.guildwiki.de, which is essentally a copy of gw.gamewikis.org?! (They don't even try to hide the fact that they use the English GuildWiki as their paradigm.) I don't know if that's approved by Gravewit or anyone else, or if they even need an approval, considering the Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike. I'm German myself, so if you need somebody to contact and talk to the makers of GuildWiki.de, let me know. --TurningL sml 13:58, 19 June 2006 (CDT)
No I am not aware, and thats part of the problem, I think we should interlink to guildwiki's in other languages. Nilles, the problem with that arguement is that you cant quantify all the germans that have no ability to contribute in english. I also think this is a step back from all the drama, I dont forsee anyone flashing their e-ego's over this issue. --Draygo Korvan 14:16, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

Specific issue with GuildWiki.de

While contents under GuildWiki is under CC by-nc-sa, what about the name "GuildWiki" itself? I'm a bit disturbed that the logo of GuildWiki and the name "GuildWiki" is getting used by another site without our knowledge/permission. But if it doesn't violate anything, then of course there's nothing to be done. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 16:43, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

guildwiki.de is of course, different than guildwiki.org or guildwiki.com. So they are well within their rights with the domain name, as far as using the logo I think the logo, as everything within this site falls under the license, and because they gave the source of that logo to this site they are protected by that license. I'm no legal expert though =p. --Draygo Korvan 20:11, 19 June 2006 (CDT)
It's not about legality, it's just not cool. --Karlos 02:58, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
I agree that starting a copy project without at least telling us is very bad style. And I don't even understand why. I don't think that anyone here would've disagreed to that project (as mentioned, on what legal ground anyway?). If they'd come here, they may even had gotten a prominent link somewhere on Guildwiki (.org, that is) and with that cheap and effective promotion. --84-175 (talk) 03:54, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
Actually I have no issue with starting a copy project without telling us, as long as it's still CC by-nc-sa. My personal issue is using the name "GuildWiki" without letting us know. The French at least told us about it. -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 04:03, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
I'll try to get in touch with Chronos, the guy behind GuildWiki.de. Maybe he did ask for a German version of GuildWiki.org at one point in the past or tried to contact us. I'll try to find out. The problem is that my time for GWiki is very limited at the moment.
For your info, the introduction text on the Main Page of GuildWiki.de reads (translated): "This wiki is under construction and shall become the German issue of the English GuildWiki, without currently being linked to it directly." So at least they give credits and a prominent link to their rolemodel. I reckon they have good intentions and we should GW:AGF when dealing with them. --TurningL sml 12:10, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
I am fine with them using our name followed by ".de" in fact I think it's an honor. I just think they should have told us first. They don't have to tell us if they copy the whole wiki, but if they copy the name, style wise, they should tell us as many people will assume there is a connection.
I also want to note that there was someone asking about starting a german wiki some time ago and I think we all said go ahead and stuff. So, again, I would not be too concerned about the fact that they started a wiki that copied stuff from us. I don't really think it was done "behind our backs." Just the naming issue and what it implies. We have no editorial input on their content what-so-ever but the common name implies something. --Karlos 14:26, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
Uh, I have the same editorial control on guildwiki.de as I do here as a normal contributer. I think you are confusing terms a bit and mean "content control (administrative tasks etc)" over the actual site. --Draygo Korvan 14:33, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
Hello all, I think there's something to clarify. I am Chronos who put up the German Guildwiki. First some history. The idea to start a german version popped up after reading this article on the gamewikis blog. This was around April the 16th, 2006. After writing a comment there, I thought, if nobody starts a a wiki in another language, it will take ages to go multilingual - so before hoping that somewhere in the future a german wiki comes up, why just not do it by myself? I did some experiments/test with MediaWiki, and soon it was clear that its not so much work to set up the wiki. Then, on April, 25th, I sent an email to Phil to the gmail.com address. In this email I asked him if he has any concerns about a german GuildWiki, what he thinks about copying content from guildwiki.org, and how the licensing should look like etc. This was about 3 weeks before GuildWiki.de went "officially" online (by posting the news on the german fansite GuildWars.info). I never got an answer from Phil, so I thought this issue is of no big interest to him. So I just started the wiki, using the same licensing model though I prefered a totally free license. As far as I understand the "CC by-nc-sa" license it's ok to use/copy content as long as you use the same license, so I did use it. Of course, I mentioned on the licensing page, that content is/will be copied from GuildWiki.org. To answer some more of the above issues:
  • It's true, I did not officially tell the GuildWiki.org community what I am doing, and now I feel sorry for this lack of information, and I agree that this was bad style.
  • The idea was not to copy (in terms of steal) the idea, logo, name and content of GuildWiki.org in any way. It is just a german version, so many articles are are translated from the english "standard".
  • The use of the name "GuildWiki" is of course on purpose, to have a link to the original wiki."GuildWiki" is not a trademark and not protected, it is a part of the wiki which is under the "CC by-nc-sa" license. I think there is nothing wrong with it, as long as nobody claims any rights on the name (maybe Phil?).
  • Of course the (not official approved) relationship to the english version is not hidden. This is on purpose.
  • Apart from my "bad style" behaviour in information policy, why do you bother that the GuildWiki word is spread also in german? (Does anybody really bother?)
  • I think there are many native german speakers who have difficulties reading english but do like GuildWars and GuildWiki.org.
  • As mentioned above, I did ask about using "GuildWiki" and its content etc. Not the community, no, but the "guy behind GuildWiki.org".
  • Please be kind with my bad english, I can read but nearly not write.
Hopefully, this brings light in the GuildWiki.de issue... --Chronos 14:47, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
I like the fact that someone took the initiative to create a German GuildWiki. I do think it would have been cool to know about it beforehand, if for no other reason, than that it would have allowed the English GuildWiki to link to it. And honestly, since it's mostly the same content, I don't see why the translation shouldn't be using the same name. When you translate a book, you don't rename it (though you might translate the name)...why should it be any different with a wiki? Saying it's "uncool" or "bad style" or whatever is unnecessarily harsh, IMHO. Dtremenak 16:37, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
I personally don't care if guildwiki.de is a German copy of this one. Considering I play in the european districts (being swede and all), I am well aware of most germans' lack of knowledge in English. I simply see it as a way of german users to be able to get the information we have here, in a language they can understand as well. I bet many of you don't know another language than English if it's your native language. Then one might ask, why should germans be forced to learn English if it's not their native tongue? The only real problem I see with this is the confusion it could cause. Someone on a forum saying "I got THE map of Cantha from GuildWiki!", people wouldn't know if it was the German or English GuildWiki, since they're not related. The best way out of this I think would be if guildwiki.de put an English link on their Main_Page or some place visible, pointing to this wiki so English users don't just assume GuildWiki is all German. Also, if guildwiki.de were to do something guildwiki.org would have never agreed on, I can see how it is indeed annoying. As already stated though, there's nothing anyone can do. GuildWiki isn't a registered trademark, and as such is free to use. The logo is probably the only thing you could really go on, but considering 80% of it consists of ANet's graphics, I don't see how you would have copyright of it.
Galil Ranger-icon-small 16:51, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
By the way (off-topic and just for the records ;), every german is indeed forced to learn English at the latest by the beginning of her/his 5th school year (age ~10), sometimes even earlier, usually for a period of at least six years. On the other hand, if you perceive this "lack of knowledge in English" you mention, this maybe tells something about our school system ...
Regarding the potential confusion you mentioned, such problems also apply to Wikipedia, and they simply solve this by placing interwiki-links to the respective page of the other languages wiki. This should be no problem for GuildWiki either, especially if both sites would team up and work together (and as far as I can see, Chronos is more than willing to do so.)
My only fear is, that any GuildWiki in another language could draw upon the manpower of the community and weaken the english GuildWiki in its effort to reach perfection. ;) Since English is the language most commonly used throughout the internet community I find an english GuildWiki more valuable than a version for German-speaking users only. As I stated above, even germans should be able to speak and write English by the time they are old enough to play this game, while you can't assume the vice versa. --MRA 07:09, 22 June 2006 (CDT)
Again people are going into copyrights and what not. This is not about copyrights and laws. The question I have is: Chrono, do you not agree that by naming yourself "GuildWiki.de" there is an implication that your site is THE german version of Guildwiki.org? Let's say tomorrow, 84.175 starts his own copy and it becomes our "approved" translation of this site. Your site's name gives the misleading implication that it is THE translation of our site that WE are ok with.
I actually don't mind that. My beef is that our voice was never taken. It's like you making a site about Toyota and naming it Toyota.de (I know there are copyright issues there), it's misleading. Most people will assume that Toyota.de is affiliated with Toyota.com.
I would actually LOVE to put a link to your wiki on the main page that says "Now in German!" (with a german translation next to it) so that we can direct our German readers to your site (especially the not so literate ones like Xeeron) :). However, such a move would require Gravewit's approval and verification by Tetris/84.175/Xeeron that you guys are on the up and up in terms of adopting fair policies that will help your wiki reach the size of this wiki in due time.
So, for now, I would appreciate it if you places in no uncertain terms where you say this site copies GuildWiki.org that it is currently NOT affiliated with GuildWiki.org and is not some kind of subsidiary of it. --Karlos 18:15, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
My German is extremely poor; but it appears to me that http://www.guildwiki.de/ already mentions that it's not directly affiliated with this wiki. If I'm reading that correctly, then I have no issues. My only additional request to further reduce any confusion from those who may use the german version is that they also develop a unique wiki icon for the upper left of their site. I don't feel that's a major issue, but it would help in preventing confusion. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 20:23, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
Heh, to verify my translation, I tried using Babbelfish. Wow, and I thought my German was poor - Babbelfish makes me look almost fluent! --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 20:26, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
Heh, Babelfish is pure comedy. :D Most of those translation programs can't even translate single words correctly, let alone complete sentences. But you're correct, Barek, there is such a note on the Main Page of guildwiki.de, and if you scroll up you see that I've already translated it. Not sure if we consider it prominent enough and if we're happy with the wording, but that is something that can be worked on. --217.230.49.122 22:41, 20 June 2006 (CDT) <- This was me, not logged in. --TurningL sml 03:54, 21 June 2006 (CDT)
Can anyone who knows German well translate that part for us? Or can anyone who has better eyes find me the translation that I can "scroll up" to? --Karlos 01:00, 21 June 2006 (CDT)
Barek is right. This is the topmost paragraph of guildwiki.de:
"Welcome to the German Guildwiki, a wiki and guide for ArenaNet's online role playing game Guild Wars.
The wiki is still under construction and is aimed to become the German version of th English Guildwiki,
without being directly affiliated with it, at the moment."
Note the last line. While the wording can possible be improved (also note that my quick-and-dirty translation will probably not make it look too good, either ;), I am perfectly happy with the content. On a side note I would like to mention that I personally have absolutely nothing against guildwiki.de at all! If people are willing to put up the effort of translating guildwiki, by all means, go ahead! What I called "bad style" is not someone copying us. That is perfectly within the limits of the license and was to be expected sooner or later (actually, it has happened before, with sections). What I called "bad style" is doing so without telling us. But that issue has been resolved now. :) --84-175 (talk) 03:47, 21 June 2006 (CDT)
I know that we are not Wikipedia, but lets have a look at how they handle this. Wikipedia, consisting of 100+ laguange sub-wikipedias, is an entity, both legally and technically, legally run by the Wikipedia foundation, technically installed on their server farm, in one location. But still the individual language sub-wikipedias have a very high degree of freedom and autonomy. They do not even try to make one wiki a direct copy or a translation of the other. We all know that this would be impossible, as the content and design of each wiki is dynamic. You cannot possibly synch them all, keeping translations up-to-date. But not only is the content independent, but also the communities are autonomous. When you start a new wikipedia you only have to agree to some very basic policies that apply to all sub-Wikipedias. From that point on, each language has independent communities, admins, policies and rules. Each language works as a little democracy on its own. The head admins of Wikipedia do not expect to have full controll over each of the 100+ language sub-wikipedias.
With the Wikipedia model in mind, I could imagine a similar cooperation between en.guildwiki and de.guildwiki, with each of them being an independent community. There may be legal and technical issues that I have not considered yet, but that is something that Gravewit would have to look into first of all.
Also note that ANet's offer to host GuildWiki might affect the cooperation. --TurningL sml 04:36, 21 June 2006 (CDT)
Yeah, I am satisfied with the note too. Any talk of being affiliated with us will have to go through Gravewit. I'll ask him if he's okay with us posting a link to them in our main page for German users. --Karlos 04:40, 21 June 2006 (CDT)
The note is quite clear to me, I dont have any problem with guildwiki.de. That being said, I still see all the problems of translations of wikis, which means for me a single english wiki is the better concept. Of course anyone trying to get a translation going is free to do so and I wish them luck. --Xeeron 07:33, 21 June 2006 (CDT)
Notes: I have been working on getting multi-language stuff going here for awhile, and we may be at a point where we can try more languages. PanSola and I have been working behind-the-scenes on a chinese-language version of late. German may be up as well, if the server can handle the load. We'll probably be upgrading the webserver again anyway... one thing I don't like is them using the name GuildWiki, because GameWikis does 'own' the name, in the way that wikipedia owns the name wikipedia. Of course the actual content is free for them to use as they see fit, provided they follow the license. Gravewit 18:47, 21 June 2006 (CDT)
Wanna synchronize with Chrono to possibly merge them under our umbrella if our umbrella will be including German? --Karlos 19:31, 21 June 2006 (CDT)
I think the idea of merging the guildwiki.de version into an official version is very good. I have contacted Gravewit by email (again...) to talk about this. --Chronos 00:23, 22 June 2006 (CDT)
Anything new from Chronos oder Gravewit? I'm looking forward to see this two sites merging :) ~~

A request to native english speakers

The first part of this edit Seems to me as bluntly wrong. I will not revert it myself, but someone who can confirm this, please do. Foo 13:41, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

That doesn't actually point to a specific edit, but rather to a list of contributions. Unless you expect us to read minds and/or read through them all, you may want to be more specific. :) -- Bishop icon2 Bishop [rap|con] 14:10, 19 June 2006 (CDT)
Err Emm. fixed that. check again. Foo 15:07, 19 June 2006 (CDT)
Tweaked it. Tenses were fine, but some of the prepositions and such were rather wierd (wars are between entities, for example, not among them). — 130.58 (talk) (15:20, 19 June 2006 (CDT))

Meta-type

→ Moved to Project talk:Software & Technical Issues/Bugs

Skills on monsters/NPCs

→ Moved to Project talk:Style and formatting/Bestiary

Build

Where do I put in a custom build? I've been prefecting it for about 2 weeks, its almost done. I call it the Mind Fryer

You can eather put it under [Me/Any Mind Fryer], (or other proffesion, I'm guessing it's a mesmer), or register and create a user page. Foo 12:46, 24 June 2006 (CDT)
[GuildWiki:Style and formatting/Builds] has the advice for your build page. ~ Nilles (chat) 12:58, 24 June 2006 (CDT)

Skill Data

→ Moved to Project talk:Style and formatting/Skills

Copyright message

I think we are supposed to have the following text from [2]

© 2006 ArenaNet, Inc. All rights reserved. NCsoft, the interlocking NC logo, ArenaNet, Arena.net, Guild Wars, Guild Wars Factions, Factions and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCsoft Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

Should we put it at the bottom of the site, or on individual image pages? -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 18:56, 25 June 2006 (CDT)

Should involve Gravewit in this. He's the only one hwo can edit that part of the page anyways. --Karlos 23:12, 25 June 2006 (CDT)
MediaWiki:CopyrightSkuld Monk-icon-small 03:34, 26 June 2006 (CDT)
The fansite expectations just say to "display the appropriate copyright information." Project:Copyrights already exists, but isn't well linked (I think just in the text between the edit bot and edit summar box?). Perhaps the footer link should go there. That keeps the footer text compact. --68.142.14.40 04:38, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

Capitalization

→ Moved to Project talk:Style and formatting

Forgotten move tags

There are several entries in Category:Articles to be moved where the move tag was applied several weeks, if not months ago. If no discussion takes place on a move tag, should we:

  • Leave the move tags until discussion takes place?
  • Remove the Move tag - assume that if no discussion took place, then the current name is adequate?
  • Move the article - assume that if no discussion took place, then there's no objection to the proposed new name?

The other half of this would be how long to leave the tags until an action is taken on these forgotten tags? Two weeks? A month? Do move tags have expirations, or do they remain until someone cares enough to start pushing the change? --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 20:07, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

I'm inclined towards "assume no objections, go ahead". -User:PanSola (talk to the Follower of Lyssa) 23:19, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

Monster data revised

I passed trough each and every one of the monsters in Guildwiki and made sure the 4 main headings were present, skills had icons and listed alphabetically, elite skills unmarked and monster skills marked. Maybe someone may check it again to confirm since I might have forgotten a few things. --Arkhyn, 18:40, 29 June 2006

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.