Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Community portal

From Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Community Portal

Lost in a sea of projects, formats, and debates? Look no further! These are the current hot topics, and you can find previous topics here.
Shortcut:
GW2W:CP

To begin a new topic on this page, use the "+" button at the top of the page.

If logged in, you can also add this page to your watchlist to track any changes and stay on top of things!

Old topics are archived to these subpages.

Newsletter of the week[edit]

This newsletter is maintained on User:Relyk/Wiki Newsletter and might not objectively reflect what happened on the wiki.

  • Some discussion on Armory embeds aka the wiki is too big.
  • Flashpoint is released. Time to document all the things and nuke the Recent Change log.
  • Template:Temporary is now being used just for seasonal/holiday thing and not for historical content anymore. Craziness.
  • You can now edit and create pages that have "&" in them.

Story Instance Map[edit]

Was pondering the idea of including the map of the instances for stories/story instances. Couldn't hurt to have I was thinking, and I have at least one HoT story map(The Jungle Provides) that indicates where certain achievements start/the start is found I think. - Doodleplex 01:25, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea; the infoboxes support maps so the only thing stopping you would be having already done the achievement. -Chieftain AlexUser Chieftain Alex sig.png 21:14, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Release-related content and categories[edit]

I've been looking at the current state of categorization with regards to release-related content; in particular, HoT and Living World Seasons 2 and 3. I'd begun by adding {{Living World Season 3 content}} to a few dozen Flashpoint articles, but I quickly realised two things:

  • Category:Living World Season 3 content was quickly bloating into something monstrous and I'd only barely made a start on one chapter;
  • Few editors who had thought to add the content tags were correctly tagging the articles as LWS3; they were usually tagged as either HoT (accurate, but unspecific) or Flashpoint (not accounted for by the template).

I've already addressed half of the latter problem by tweaking {{Living World Season 3 content}}, {{Living World Season 2 content}}, and {{Infobox release}} so there's an option to autocategorize by release chapter. Going forward, I want to organize the categories:

Proposed structure
Category:Living World Season 2 content
Category:Living World Season 2 storyline
Category:<LWS2 chapter name> storyline
Story mission articles
Category:<LWS2 chapter name> content
Miscellaneous articles
Category:Heart of Thorns content
Miscellaneous articles
Category:Heart of Thorns storyline
Story mission articles
Category:Living World Season 3 content
Category:Living World Season 3 storyline
Category:<LWS3 chapter name> storyline
Story mission articles
Category:<LWS3 chapter name> content
Miscellaneous articles
Current structure for comparison
Category:Living World Season 2 content
Miscellaneous articles
Category:<LWS2 chapter name>
Story mission and miscellaneous articles
Category:Heart of Thorns content
Miscellaneous articles
Category:Heart of Thorns storyline
Story mission articles
Category:Living World Season 3 content
Miscellaneous articles
Category:<LWS3 chapter name>
Story mission and miscellaneous articles

Changing the structure should be fairly straightforward, though {{Personal story infobox}} is tripping me up. It seems to autocategorize independently of {{Infobox release}} and I haven't figured out how as of yet. I'll also need to edit {{Living World Season 3 content}}, {{Living World Season 2 content}}, and {{Infobox release}}, but I already know what I need to do for those.

And as if this comment of mine wasn't long enough already: once the categories and templates are finalized, I plan on using a bot to tag pertinent articles correctly, but I'm having trouble seeing how a bot will be able to easily find pages that need categorizing, since release-content spans a wide variety of objects, maps, npcs, etc etc... I'm thinking I'll just find all the articles manually and post them to my sandbox in a nice easy-to-use list for the bot to comb through. --Idris (talk) 01:12, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

It is my belief that the only things that need to be in release categories are: story instances, achievement guides/lists, and overarching location articles (instances or zones). NPCs and the like do not need to be in them.
I'm rather doubtful that things like 13 Zephyr, 1329 AE even need to exist, truth be told, since they're just an achievement entry and the object linked in those particular cases are "Torn Page" or something like that.
Individual items like Druid Runestone or M.O.X. similarly I doubt need to be in a category declaring it having been released with a certain episode/season/boxed storyline. They should denote on the article they're part of that storyline, yes, but categorized in such? Unneeded, IMHO.
Given the three above facts, I think we need just two "layers" of categories. One for the overarching storyline (core, Season 1, Season 2, HoT, Season 3, etc), and one for the individual releases (Out of the Shadows, Flashpoint, etc.), the former only containing overarching articles like Living World Season 1, the latter containing aforementioned story instances, achievement guides/lists, and zones/instances (and similar overarching-of-that-episode articles). Konig (talk) 02:42, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Also looking through Category:Living World Season 3 content, I'm seeing a lot tagged for it that I wouldn't think should be - such as Foefire Wraps. It was released alongside Season 3, but Season 3 is not needed to obtain these things so I don't feel it should be listed as Season 3. In either category or article. Konig (talk) 03:25, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
I see what you mean with regard to item/NPC/etc articles. I reckon I agree. The trouble is, a lot of editors are prone to helpfully adding the release tag to articles like these, as well as arguably-unrelated articles such as the Foefire Wraps that you mentioned. We'd need a way to prevent these helpful attempts from bloating the categories. The best solution I can come up with is to alter the content templates so they no longer autocategorize, and add a new parameter to location/achievement infoboxes so they begin autocategorizing. --Idris (talk) 19:19, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
We should be able to remove the autocategorization from the release template that the infoboxes pull and attach it straight to the infoboxes we want to autocategorize (area and story infoboxes imo). NPCs and items released as part of the season should continue to be tagged as we've begun doing but not those added during the time span of the releases but independent from (like the new wvw rewards which are tagged as season 3 despite zero relation besides release date). 01:17, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
I agree with {{area infobox}} and {{story infobox}}, and I'd also like to add something for achievements. That will be tricky though, as both {{achievement}} and {{achievement list}} get transcluded on other articles, including items, NPCs, etc. My thought is to simply remove all uses of {{achievement list}} from any articles that aren't intended to be pure achievement lists and replace it with {{achievement}}, then add the autocategorization to the former. --Idris (talk) 01:44, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
...And I've just noticed that we have three story-related infoboxes: {{story infobox}}, {{personal story infobox}}, and {{living world infobox}}. I'm not sure what the reasoning for this is. --Idris (talk) 01:49, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Event Categories[edit]

I was going through the event categories trying to make the Category:Events page a little more complete with having the zone event categories contain their respective area event categories, but when I looked on the main events categories page, I noticed a large inconsistency. Many events were categorized to the parent zone, completely bypassing the area category completely. I dug around a bit in the community portal archives and couldn't find anything regarding any such policy on how events should be categorized. So, I felt that perhaps there should be some discussion on which method of categorizing the events should be used, rather than going rogue and further spamming the recent changes with dozens of changes and new pages as I see personally fit. -Yossitaru (talk) 05:31, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

In my opinion, events should go in their zone categories (not areas). I am aware of some buggy behaviour related to the category autodetection which is breaking their categories. I don't think there is any benefit to splitting the events further than by zone, you're going to end up with lots of small awkward-to-use categories with no content. -Chieftain AlexUser Chieftain Alex sig.png 06:13, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Not sure what caused stuff to break but I had my bot clear and restore the zone pages so all of the false event categories should be fixing themselves now and should be all gone shortly. I'm also of the same mindset as Alex, espeically when sometimes events are in the wrong spot, and upon correcting it, suddenly you have an empty category. - Doodleplex 07:39, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Well, my fault for taking such a weird bug as something that needed a more severe fixing. It's just rather odd it only affected some and not all. And the fact that the Mists, that one category for Tutorial events, and one zone for Ascalonian Catacombs are set up in a hierarchical fashion certainly didn't aid my judgement. -Yossitaru (talk) 09:27, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Warband Worms[edit]

So going through the orphan pages, I've noticed a lot of orphan warbands. At first, I would just attempt to connect the dots by adding in a sentence here and there. Then I happened to actually check the Talk:Warband page. There seemed to be a general consensus (2 years ago) that the minor warband pages shouldn't need to exist anymore, since the absolutely stupendous chart was included in the main page. So before I go haywire and start putting in deletion requests, is all this kosher? --Rain Spell (talk)

I'd say if it has 3 member or less mark it for deletion, as to me that's what I'd call small/minor. - Doodleplex 09:04, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Sounds good! I've been itching to get them off that list.--Rain Spell (talk)

Ascended Breathers[edit]

I'm looking at the following pages:

Darqam put these pages together when ascended breathers were just released - he didn't know for sure that they existed; he just expected that they did exist (or at least would exist sometime "soon"). Given how long it's been and how they introduced Wegloop breathers I don't think that these generic breathers will ever be released. Should we delete them all?

I can understand that they may be someday added, but if that happens then we can recreate the pages then. Un-burn that bridge when we come to it, if you will. --Imry (talk) 05:57, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

I don't think "future" is appropriate anymore, I'd suggest changing status = future to status = unimplemented. We know these items "exist" (they have IDs) we just can't obtain them. -Chieftain AlexUser Chieftain Alex sig.png 06:29, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Agreed, just leave them be, but marked properly. They have unimplemented value! —Ventriloquist 10:39, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
My only concern with unimplemented is that (in my opinion) that tag is usually meant for content that we have at least had hints about (data mine or otherwise). In this case the pages were purely made because I expected those armor pieces to exist because of logic (lol), and no actual evidence they ever would appear. Because of that I'd be alright with either deleting them, or doing what Konig suggested on my talk page "I'd suggest redirecting generic-named non-existent ascended aquabreathers to a page akin to Ascended armor (there doesn't seem to be an article detailing the available aquabreathers yet, so such should go either on Ascended armor or Ascended trinket), for those who would search for them, and have the article note that not all prefixes can be crafted but are available from Bitterfrost Frontier.".
That said, I've got nothing against it just being unimplemented content but I want to be clear that the original creation of those pages had no solid grounds whatsoever. -Darqam 14:24, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
(copy paste from talk page: I think it's ok to keep them for awhile longer yet. Anet took 4 years to come out with ascended aquabreathers, and people looking for an aqua-breather with that stat set will at least see that it hasn't been implemented into the game yet. (Instead of thinking they just can't find the right page)). I'm all for linking (or creating an ascended/aquabreather) them to the ascended page and just making a note that these were unimplemented. Even though they weren't officially "planned", they're a reasonable extension for people to expect. --Rain Spell (talk)
Oh wait, I got confused when I saw the skin id. So no item ids and pure guesswork? Hmm in that case these pages are misleading. (Sorry for the incorrect info)
Would it be more useful to redirect each of these non-existant items to a section on Breathing apparatus (e.g. #Heart of Thorn stats), or just plain up delete them? -Chieftain AlexUser Chieftain Alex sig.png 17:16, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Also, apparently the recipe template causes them to appear falsely on pages like Damask Breather Strap#Used in - I'd also delete/redirect the recipe sheet pages too. -Chieftain AlexUser Chieftain Alex sig.png 17:18, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
Ooh, yeah, we're gonna have to delete the recipe pages too.
Yep, they're pure guesswork. Turning them into redirects would work - I had an idea of putting a note at the bottom the armour set pages (like Maklain's armor) saying that there's no craftable aquabreathers in this set, but putting it on the breathing apparatus page looks much simpler. --Imry (talk) 06:38, 12 July 2017 (UTC)