Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Community portal

• Community portal
• Practices and processes
• Projects

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. 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.

Tango icons: 2025 edition Electric Boogaloo

See also: Guild_Wars_2_Wiki_talk:Community_portal/Archive_24#Tango_icons

(I want to start with that it's currently late and I am not healthy so I will keep this brief for now)

It has been recently brought up again that we should move from tango icons to ingame ones, this time not for profession icons but for events. I personally agree that we should use ingame assets when possible, but we need to take into question consistency across formats, templates, and pages. As visible from the See also link, the previous discussion took over a year to reach a consensus and thus it's not just a simple matter of "we should do it." Looking at the Template:Event icon page, it does seem that for most of the event icons we already use the non-tango versions as the default ones. Thus, in my opinion, making the ingame icons the default ones for the rest would help with consistency and better reflect the game. ~Sime 00:46, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

When clear enough to use, mirroring the in-game appearance sounds good to me. Could we bot edit places where they are not used? Adeira Tasharo (talk) 00:54, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

My take is same as before that we should be using more of the actual icons where applicable. I did previously update and change many of those icons back in 2021 too before it got reverted. I'd also like to bring up the {{Dialogue icon}} template and this example for it. --Dak393 (talk) 02:11, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Concur, will also bring up icons used by {{Tango icon sizes}} should be using ingame variants. --ItVictor (talk) 02:27, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Tagging User:Caeldom, since their edits is what prompted this discussion. ~Sime 12:53, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

I prefer the tango icons. They're much clearer/visually cleaner to read than the in game icons which were made to be readable in game and not so much for a wiki heh. - Do_odleplex 14:43, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

0

0

0

0

0

00

0

0

0

0

00

(reset indent) putting the comparison table here for reference (tango/map/overhead) in 20px size.

Shrinking the in-game icons probably not the answer, the tango icons look better in 20px size. but I would love to see some adjustments: recolor to match the in-game palate, redesign some of them (the boss icon come to mind), and make them complete—this is the real issue for tango icons, and we only have 8 of them in orange variant only. --𝙏ᴇʀʏ 18:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Yep that's one of the issues, some of the icons are tango and many are ingame, so we should try to achieve consistency in one way or the other. ~Sime 19:27, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

It's also worth a mention that we can crop many of thee icons like we've done in the past. Take this one for example Same as above but cropped in game for last icon. --Dak393 (talk) 20:41, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

I'd say that the tango icons for the new event indicators should be made if we're really going to decide on one or the other. If noone's capable and/or willing to make them then my vote goes to in-game icons by default. Myriada (talk) 14:52, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Yeah the cropped ingame icon looks pretty good, Dak. I think if we crop the other ingame icons for the resolutions we are using, that should somewhat solve the issues with the readibility/blurriness. ~Sime 19:58, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Emboldened Mode Incorrect Wing

Hi,

I don't know if this is the right place to post this or not, but the emboldened mode on the wiki doesn't match the wing that is currently emboldened in the game. It has been this way since the update launched.

Thanks for letting us know. Both Emboldened and Call of the Mists are updated to reflect current ingame status. — Asuaka (talk) 21:56, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Wiki Not Showing in Google Search Results

When I search using Google Chrome, regular wiki pages have stopped showing as top results. Instead, I get the Talk page, the wrong page, or a different website entirely as my first page results. I'm wondering if the wiki has an indexing problem. This only started happening in the last few days. Sorry if this is the wrong place to report this. (And sorry if it's just me!) SpiralCee (talk) 04:25, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi Spiral, thank you for bringing this topic up. It is unfortunately not just you that is experiencing this issue regarding search engines and the wiki. The de-ranking and lack of indexing are consequences of AI bots scraping the wiki for data and effectively DDoSing it. Efforts are being made to limit the impact they're having on the wiki and the Guild Wars 2 community, but the tools available are either limited or have side effects like you have noticed.

We're truly sorry that this is happening, and hopefully a solution can be found. Greener (talk) 05:30, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Event maps on <Zone> pages

So some recent reddit posts and chats with friends got me thinking, that we could have an additional interactive map on each zone page that would showcase all the events in each area. A WIP sandbox can be found here: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/User:Sime/Sandbox4 (Thanks Alex for the code, DJ and Tery for help). I would like to hear if someone has any feedback or ideas, and if there would be a support for this. I think it is pretty near, shows where events are concentrated, and the more info we have on main pages the better imho. ~Sime 17:31, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

I don't think there would be any objections to adding more info. Some idea, adding heart NPCs with boundaries would be helpful for the early zones but I not sure this might cause too much overlap or misleading if events within that boundary don't progressing the heart? --𝙏ᴇʀʏ 16:02, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

No objections but perhaps we should agree what the formatting will be, e.g.

== Interactive map ==
{{Interactive map}}

== Events ==
{{Interactive map with events}}<!-- new map -->

* {{event|Shoo rabbits back into their pen}}
* {{event|Prove you know a lot about Destiny's Edge}}

--Chieftain Alex 18:00, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Agreed Alex, and yeah that sounds good. ~Sime 18:36, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Would it be too much if the events would be included in the interactive map already there, so the page won't have two maps? --Txonä Atan - (talk) 22:35, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

imo yes, there will be many markers on the same map which will be a bit too confusing. -Chieftain Alex 05:39, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

I think it is a decent idea to have such a map, as it will help without extra effort (by opening event pages individually), to see in which areas the events are concentrated. It will not take anything away from the pages since the current events list will remain there. I agree with Alex regarding the formatting, and as a second option, maybe we could move the current interactive map to the top of the Locations section, as it showcases exactly the same information that is in the table? This way it would look better visually, as 2 different interactive maps wouldn't go one after another. So the formatting would be looking like this:

== Locations ==
{{Interactive map}} <!-- the current interactive map -->

{{Location table header}} <!-- the current locations table -->

== Events ==
{{Interactive map with events}}<!-- new map -->

* {{event|Shoo rabbits back into their pen}}
* {{event|Prove you know a lot about Destiny's Edge}}

However, I don't agree with having just one interactive map for both the current and the new (events) use, as it will just be a visual clutter and markers at some point will overlap. The interactive map is "interactive" for a purpose, aka so that you could actually click on the icons/markers and see additional information about it, thus "the more" is not always = "the better". The same thing applies to the suggestion of showcasing the heart's boundaries, I think it is good as is now and it's enough to display them on their own pages to avoid extra confusion and it being taken as some kind of "misinformation" since not all the events in the boundaries count towards certain hearts' progress. ฅ𓂃𓏧♡ vyѕɴɑιтε ᨐᵉᵒʷฅ (тɑʟκ) 08:59, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Some of the events will surely have to be excluded from this? I mean, we have event hubs that will have multiple icons at the same location, events that can happen in multiple places or anywhere in a large area (Caffeinated Skritt Burglar, Serpent's Ire zealots, Doppelganger (when/if not bugged) and such. Plus layers of the map for Verdant Brink, Draconis Mons et al. --Genie (talk) 15:05, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Couldn’t we use a single map with marker layers deal with the visual clutter? E.g. show the current map in its current state and then have prominent buttons—ideally outside of the map to make them more prominent—that switches through a pre-defined set of marker layers. E.g. “landmarks and areas”, or “events”. And when you click “events”, it enables the event overlays but also disables some less important overlays (e.g. hero points, area names) to make the events more visible. poke | talk 20:42, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Regarding event-dense maps where there are repeats; I think the current suggested smw query only pulls one set of coordinates per page, and most of the events with multiple locations won't be setup in the infobox to record their x/y - so potentially this isn't an issue (you did make me think about Verdant Brink in particular).

Perhaps we should mock up some examples to show the options or having everything in one map or not, or with layers.

Toggling sets of layers together sounds annoying to add to the widget, but if you're suggesting it poke then I suspect you have a method in mind. -Chieftain Alex 21:01, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

After the interactive map change, if we could toggle the custom marker that group by user, it would be great. e.g. Detected Treasure could use this function-a ways to show only mythical caches.--𝙏ᴇʀʏ 21:13, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

“but if you're suggesting it poke then I suspect you have a method in mind” – Nothing concrete yet. There are a few plugins for layer hierarchies (e.g. Control.Layers.Tree (example) and LayerTreeControl (example)) which we maybe could give a try. But I was thinking of a more simple approach for now with some buttons below the map that just allows you to select certain layers.

This is very hackish right now but if you have a reference to the map and the layer control, you can do stuff like _map.addLayer(_layerControls._layers[10].layer) (and _map.removeLayer) to add or remove layers programmatically. In this case, layer 10 refers to the POIs. If you now have a button below the map, you could for example turn on/off half of the layers and toggle a new layer that includes the events. Of course, this would require us to add more layers than the single “custom” one that we have.

That’s just an idea that would help us avoid having to use multiple maps to convey different kinds of information, since I could imagine that becoming confusing when it’s not super obvious which map you need to look at. So by providing all information on toggle-able layers and giving sane defaults and quick switch abilities, this might be a bit more useful. I can try to build some visual example of what I have in mind for this tomorrow. poke | talk 23:27, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

This idea is basically what I had in mind when I asked about using a single map: having toggleable layers or something (I just had no time to provide more details at that time). Also another reason I asked was that I was wondering if having two maps couldn't affect the loading of the page maybe. What Poke suggested seems good if it can be implemented. --Txonä Atan - (talk) 23:42, 8 April 2025 (UTC)