File talk:Stun.jpg

What evidence do we have that this represents a stunned character? --hnzdvn 20:43, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

can I call speculation?!! Venom20 20:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I think the evidence is that a character looking like this in a video was lolling around dizzily and (presumably) couldn't move, which is what stun is supposed to be, if I remember correctly. --Kyoshi (Talk) 20:52, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't think we have recieved confirmation, but I find it highly likely that the picture is an npc 'stunned.' Technically speculation, but its highly logical.--Corsair@Yarrr 20:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Logical I agree, but until it is confirmed, I disagree with saying it. I'm sure we can all speculate about many things. For instance, I put forth that since the elementalist is standing in water while casting Water Trident, that he/she can only cast it in water because he'she needs to draw water from somewhere. and yes, I know this isn't the case accodring to ign Venom20 21:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Put up a delete tag.--Corsair@Yarrr 21:13, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

While it seemed inconsistently applied in the Static Field video, which stuns enemies on entry and leaving, you can see this same animation on each of the bandits. It is logical. -- Aspectacle  21:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Logical yes, confirmed no, and therein lies the problem. Ty corsair Venom20 21:25, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I do think that this is a screenshot of a stunned character, but we don't really know and I would rather keep speculation off the wiki. --hnzdvn 22:15, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm a little surprised it took this many days for people to notice. :) I don't mind.... but does this mean you all approve of the deletion of the Ranger and Necromancer articles? :D -- Aspectacle  22:30, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't think this should be deleted - Static Field, as we know, causes stunning, and it gives the stunned person this animation, which also happens to be universally used to depict being stunned or unconscious. I think deleting this is going a bit too far in the whole "speculation off the wiki" thing (and I'm an advocate of that). pling 22:35, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, this is pretty logical. Practically confirmed. I am also against deletion. This will be changed once GW2 comes out either way. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 22:55, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, I suppose. I just personally think we should wait for something like this, but I'm not going to rage about it if it is decided that we keep it. --hnzdvn 01:11, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

There's no reason to delete the image- at worst, move it to a different filename, because even if that's not the stun effect, it's definitely something. Therefore I'm removing the delete tag. 13:53, 22 June 2010 (UTC)