Talk:Game updates/2015-08-29

Revert wars and blocks

[Admin mode engaged!] User:Mora and User:Tarun, you should both know better than to engage in a revert war. That's why I've blocked both of you without giving a warning.

That hardly seems right or fair. Tarun was trying to maintain the integrity of the wiki and stop the undo reverts that Mora was maliciously making by being stubborn. their talk page even shows he's done it a lot and been pretty damn anal with people too. not a good member of the wiki. Punish the problemmaker not the one trying to solve it. 193.200.150.152 06:09, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

No, it was perfectly fair. The rule of the wiki is "don't revert someone who reverted you," and they both broke it. Only blocking one user would have been showing favoritism. And I warned you before, stop making personal attacks, or you will be blocked as well. —Dr Ishmael 12:25, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

[Exiting admin mode] As for the content of this page, there are no official update notes. We should not transclude a news post and make it look like update notes. Any further changes should be discussed before editing the page. —Dr Ishmael 22:18, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

honestly I don't see any reason not to include the message referred to in the update within the GW2W notes section. -Chieftain Alex 22:31, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

and assuming this was the update that introduced f2p content, that should be noted as the main subject of the bullet. -Chieftain Alex 22:39, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

"...within the GW2W notes section" - agreed. There may be no patch notes, but having something on the page that was added during the patch as a direct result of the changes implemented into the game seems appropriate to me. The GW2W notes section (usually) records everything not mentioned in the patch notes; in the case of a massive announcement as this one, a direct quote from the official page doesn't hurt anyone, in my opinion. —Ventriloquist 22:52, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm fine with adding more verbiage to explain things, but I'm still opposed to including the full content of the post. Why is a link insufficient? —Dr Ishmael 23:48, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Link is all you need with a good title. the wall of text was too much. 193.200.150.152 06:09, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Created the news post articles and linked to them. Cause I seem to be the only one that does that.--Relyk ~ talk < 19:48, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

• I felt there were 2 major announcements included in the post; Free-to-Play and release date of Heart of Thorns. Instead of deciding what was important enough in my opinion, I included it verbatim.
• People are claiming it's too much and clutter; it's the only information on the page so it's not distracting from anything, it is the entire content of the page.
• It wasn't handled like a normal news article because it isn't a news article, it was posted in the Takeover section. If readers closed the message after visiting the forums, it is fairly difficult to find it again unless you have a direct link (at least I found it slightly difficult).
• Updates without official posts in the normal forum section are rare, so I handled it with the most relevant post at the time. Previous cases have used "release notes" from Rubi through the official Twitter (Game updates/2012-11-27; source), so I felt an official statement from the president on the forums would be appropriate. —Mora 23:06, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

The wiki newsfeed is for any game news, we don't restrict it to official news posts.--Relyk ~ talk < 02:11, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

It was still posted under "News" even if it was under a subsection of it. —Dr Ishmael 03:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)