Guild Wars 2 Wiki talk:Projects/Preview play day/Archive 1

title

Perhaps a bit overly pompous, but I like it. :) —Dr Ishmael 01:44, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I would like to know who that user is and why he's rotating. — snograt 15:22, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Haven't you heard? Rotating is the new planking.--Relyk ~ talk < 15:32, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqdpG6XNO6Y pling 15:39, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

damn. -Chieftain Alex 16:22, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

wut is dis i dont even...--Relyk ~ talk < 16:32, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Nominations

Some of the names that came up before were Relyk, Claret, and Yoe Dude. I suppose we could consider those nominations here. 01:59, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Yoe Dude basically said thanks but no thanks, I have no problem with the other two do you have any idea as to how we should do this in a formal matter?- Zesbeer 05:48, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I’d say just keep adding names to it, and let those users decide if they ever want to do this thing. And after that, let the community decide if we would support them and want to add them to the “rotation”. poke | talk 09:22, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

One of the points that came up on Stephane's talk page was that this would be good to give to relatively new-but-dedicated users. Making a list of users months before they'd be called on to preview stuff would be contrary to that idea. I'd rather we decide each previewer like a week or two before the preview. That way we could consider recent contributions and the likelihood people will be available. pling 14:07, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

That seems like a good idea, though it also wouldn't hurt to have a list of fall-backs. We should also ask Stephane if he can tell us roughly how frequent these Preview Play Days will be. 14:16, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I got the impression that there would be one for each big Living Story release, so about once a month, but definitely get that confirmed by Stephane. —Dr Ishmael 14:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

As I said on Stephane's talk page, I'm willing to be a fallback if/when things go terribly wrong and there's no one else to do it (not because I don't want to, but because I like the idea of giving regular wiki users a chance). - Tanetris (talk) 18:57, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

any one know if Relyk, Claret mind being back ups? also anyone have issue with tanetris? I think we should have about 5 people who are able to cover if someone else cant.- Zesbeer 07:27, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't mind having a go despite what I said before, if there's a week or so notice, I can usually arrange not to have to be available for work. No issues at all with Tanetris as a fallback. --Claret (talk) 13:42, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm available for backup any time.--Relyk ~ talk < 14:20, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I think Relyk would be a good candidate for next time around. He and I disagree on occasion but he's a solid contributor. --Claret (talk) 15:09, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

As long as he can resist leaving filthy, filthy edit summaries. 15:40, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

That may be asking too much--Relyk ~ talk < 16:05, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

His is no worse than mine. :D Vahkris (talk) 16:06, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I’d be willing to be a backup too, depending on the time this happens as I’m usually not around in the evening on weekends. poke | talk 16:50, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I am going to put poke,claret and relyk as alternates unless someone opposes and we can just remove them from the list.- Zesbeer 21:35, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

I’ve rewritten the project page a bit to make it clear that the users are considered backups and we still prefer and encourage new editors to take the role. poke | talk 12:37, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I'd love to be part of this project, if possible! --Ph03n1x (talk) 03:02, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

You are more than welcome to! We currently don’t have an idea when the next preview happens (given that the content releases just today…), but feel free to add yourself to the nomination list and we’ll consider you for the next time! :) poke | talk 16:43, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

And in the meantime, it would go a long ways toward showing us what you're made of if you participate in documenting all the content coming with Sky Pirates of Tyria. People chosen for this project need to be capable of creating excellent wiki articles as well as being familiar with our content guidelines. 16:46, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

SPoT info up

The main rush of prepared info is now up. Sky Pirates of Tyria. Feel free to begin tearing through it and making updates. I'll be continuing to update various pages. Please note, that the pricing on the armor skins is a placeholder, but it was giving horrible errors when I didn't have a gem price. Vahkris (talk) 13:36, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Nice job! Say why did you replace the complete Death Shroud page? Sure the is a new skill during Death Shroud but the old stuff will probably still be there, right? - Yandere 14:51, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Crap, yeah, it wasn't supposed to replace the whole page, just the skill list. Got into the habit of selecting everything and pasting what I had saved (for things like the dungeon, release page, Marriner Plaque, etc). Forgot Death Shroud wasn't one of the pages I had copied all of the text, so shouldn't do that. Vahkris (talk) 15:02, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

I got it. No prob. --JonTheMon (talk) 15:04, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Speaking of which, can someone take a look at the Tainted Shackles page? The code in the Skill infobox/effects template doesn't work yet with Torment, so it's not showing up. I'll put the info on the damage numbers on Torment talk page. Vahkris (talk) 15:10, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Should be good now. --JonTheMon (talk) 15:45, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Fixed--Relyk ~ talk < 18:14, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Not So Secret info is now up, feel free to tear through it and make whatever changes you feel are necessary. I'm looking into a way to make each step more distinguished...maybe bolding a Step # at the beginning of each step. Vahkris (talk) 15:02, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

(Reset indent) (Putting this here since not sure where else it would go) Okay, and that ends my tenure as the elected "news ambassador", since the last bit went up yesterday and we're already in the swing of the next release. I just wanted to say thanks again for the chance to do this, both to the community and to Stephane. It was a really interesting opportunity and I hope it worked out well. I'm not sure how free I am to talk about the experience and what I learned outside of the content, but I hope to at least be able to send the next ambassador (or post somewhere) some tips so that they're not walking in relatively blind, since unlike others in the preview we'll generally be cycling to new representatives each time. Vahkris (talk) 18:16, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your good work! From what I saw, I think you did more than just a great job! You certainly started this thing with a very good example of how to do it right, so thank you! And if you would be interested, I would surely like to see you doing it again :) poke | talk 18:31, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I'd love to do it again for some future release. Vahkris (talk) 19:12, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your work Vahkris ^^ Is there a new wiki representative for the upcoming playday? --Stephane Lo Presti talk 18:30, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure many saw your news post, I've got the page watched and it never appeared in my watchlist, so here it is in case anyone missed that Stephane's already looking for the next representative: Wiki representative for the next playday Vahkris (talk) 18:54, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Two important details

Hey everyone,

I forgot to mention that, after the "wiki playday ambassador" published articles, (s)he should send me an email with the links to the articles so that we can promote it. I forgot to do that for this first run but we'll make sure this happens next time.

I also discussed with various people the fact that the wikis would probably be rotating this responsibility, given the nature of the wiki. We're thinking that we could make an exception about sharing the playday account between players, from one playday session to the other. This is not something to do on one playday session (so that the wiki does not gain a huge advantage over other fansites). Keep in mind that we're not giving multiple accounts to the wiki, there's only one but the player that can use it for a particular playday can change.

Thanks!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stephane Lo Presti (talk • contribs).

we already have a list on the actual page that you can pick from.- Zesbeer 19:26, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Where is that list? I can't see it on the project page. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 19:29, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Wrong Zesbeer, the wiki community picks the editor for the each next time. And there are only back-ups right now. poke | talk 19:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Also: I was confused as Zesbeer's applied to both part of my message. On topic: once a list is pretty stable (it can always be changed later), please let me know on my page and I can get in touch with these editors. Thanks --Stephane Lo Presti talk 19:34, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I went ahead and sent you the list, and I'll send you the jumping puzzle one once that embargo ends. I already promote the pages on the forum anyway: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/livingworld/skypirates/Sky-Pirates-of-Tyria-Release-page-GW2-Wiki A kind moderator stickies them (this and Dragon Bash). :D Vahkris (talk) 19:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) my bad I thought the back up list and rotation list were one in the same Ill add a sub for the Participating users section but I dont see why we cant just use the back up list.- Zesbeer 19:50, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Please see two sections above and the changed text on the project page. We neither want to give this ability to regular and well-known editors (which are in the back-up list) nor want a fixed list/rotation for users. Ideally with each preview, we give the chance to a single new editor who hasn’t done this before. The original revision of the page did not reflect that, so I changed the project page. poke | talk 19:56, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Swinging a bit too far in the other direction

I've been giving this some thought, and I disagree with listing Relyk, Claret, and Vahkris as backup users. Not because they aren't good enough, but because there's no reason they shouldn't be selected (or selected again in Vahkris's case) normally. I would prefer to classify them as simply users who have expressed interest. Poke and I are back-ups because we would prefer to see regular users be given a chance rather than just always default to us because we're the "big names" on the wiki, but I definitely don't agree with ruling out all but the very newest users. It should be an incentive to start editing the wiki, but it should also be an incentive to continue editing the wiki and keep improving your contributions.

(it's also kind of silly to have Claret as a backup when Claret has specified they need a week or so prior notice; a backup would typically be brought in last-minute-ish) - Tanetris (talk) 21:25, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Side comment: we should have editors that can take care of this for a few playdays so that the wiki doesn't miss on this opportunity, until the wiki came up with a stronger process. I'm strongly in favor of offering this opportunity to other editors, but bear in mind that they'll represent the wiki and should be trustworthy people. If something goes wrong, and I'm not expecting that it will, the wiki may loose that opportunity; by "go wrong" I mean ignore our guidelines. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 21:29, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I kinda agree with you Tanetris. And Stephane, I actually think this is already a “strong” process for selecting new ambassadors. Of course we will be fine-tuning things, but the basic is there. poke | talk 21:31, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure why they were listed as backup users in the first place. It was definitely my intention in the above section that they be put forward as actual candidates. 21:37, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I didn't think being backup implied being exclusive with being nominated. I'd prefer we go to active users first for a "last resort" situation before available admins of course.--Relyk ~ talk < 21:52, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm leaving Poke and Tanetris there, the backup users should just refer to a emergency situation where we don't have enough time to choose a candidate. I don't think it will be an issue as we will have backup nominees to fallback on first.--Relyk ~ talk < 22:02, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Yep, I don't disagree with including regular users; my point in the section above was that if we decide the list of participants too far in advance, then newer users may not be considered. This is a hot topic now, so there's lots of discussion and nominations, but I don't want to end up in the situation where we're using the same users repeatedly simply because they're on The List.

Also, I would like to move this article to "Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Preview play days" or something, since we're not choosing a "news ambassador" or representative. It's also not really a project, as only one person (per play day) can be involved, whereas projects usually involve cooperation between multiple users. pling 21:57, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

@pling if we rotate users it will effectively have multiple people contributing- Zesbeer 22:05, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Was going to remove myself. Nice to see that the decision was taken for me. Comforting. --Claret (talk) 22:13, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I’d like to revive this discussion; in what direction do we want to go? With the two-week schedule for releases we won’t really be able to find new editors every time, so I guess some kind of cycling would make sense. Any further opinions?

I also think we should follow Pling’s suggestion and move this page to a more appropriate name. poke | talk 09:25, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, we definitely need to begin the selection process now if the next one is in two weeks (probably more like 1.5 now). If we can get this enough attention, we might have a good supply of new editors at first to choose from (I like Dr Ishmael's idea of beginning to advertise this selection process, since this is one of the easier ways random people from the community might get a chance to do this, provided they're good editors, and get more attention/contribution to the wiki like we originally discussed). If we find it takes too long to find a new editor on the two week, perhaps we could alternate previews between "new editors" and "alternate/backup users" (i.e. The List), giving us twice as long to find a new editor while still getting the preview, at least until such time as this ramps up. Vahkris (talk) 19:33, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Next playday this week

Per User:Stephane Lo Presti/News#Wiki representative for the next playday - June 28, 2013, are we planning to discuss this? - Tanetris (talk) 19:46, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I guess these are going to be pretty regular with the announcement of new content every two weeks. It seems like removing people from the backup list had a weird negative effect on the conversation; we do still have Vahkris though, I think. 20:34, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

We should probably advertise via sitenotice, maybe reddit or official forums. We'll have to make another quick decision to get someone set up for this weekend. —Dr Ishmael 20:36, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I might have to bow out for obvious reasons of letting someone else get a turn, but also I was figuring someone else would take the reins for this go so I never checked on how much time I'd have available this weekend. I'll check on that. If I do, though, the results may not be as good as the last one and we'll need more post-update contributing (from me and others). My nomination for Relyk from last discussion still stands though, as well as adding Claret. Unfortunately I haven't been paying much attention recently to newer contributors/editors. :/ Vahkris (talk) 20:48, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree Relyk and Claret are both good canidates if they can.

I guess it is save to assume that the 2 week release schedule means a two week test schedule for us. So we could put people in the pipeline in advance for these occations. - Yandere 22:12, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

You're correct and should assume a 2-weeks cadence on these playdays too (there may be some release or content that will not have a playday but that's currently the exception more than the rule). --Stephane Lo Presti talk 22:15, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

(probably wrong indent) Just checked, and while I can do it if necessary, I'd prefer we cycle through users as per our original idea. Vahkris (talk) 00:23, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

We already sent the first invitations to fansites and, while the English wiki community still have enough time to select its representative, I'd like to point out that Thursday is a day off in the USA. So I won't be able to send the information until Friday morning if nothing was decided before the middle of the afternoon on Wednesday (Pacific Time). (I almost wish that the wiki had an integrated Instant Messaging system ;P ) --Stephane Lo Presti talk 00:35, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Relyk and/or Claret are fine by me, if they can. - Zesbeer 22:26, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Claret indicated above that she wasn't interested in participating anymore. Relyk would be a good choice. 01:15, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm available.--Relyk ~ talk < 02:47, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good! With the two-week schedule, we might have to rethink our system a bit as I doubt we will be able to find a new editor every two weeks (we can still try though!). poke | talk 09:22, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

So is Relyk the chosen one for this preview or does anyone have any other problems? (assuming the above didn't cement it) Just pushing the issue a bit since if Relyk gets the invitation on Friday morning, that's incredibly short notice to prepare, and I don't know if Stephane is waiting for a straight "this is our representative" statement. Vahkris (talk) 19:18, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Can I suggest that we organize ourselves the following way? I'll send the new credentials and instructions to Vahkris (if he accepts) and he gets in touch with any other wiki editor (if any) that would be accepted for this playday. This way, we'd be able to make this work, event if Thursday is off for us. Thanks --Stephane Lo Presti talk 19:22, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

I can do that if needed (unless there's any objection) so the new person has time to set up, I'll still be paying attention through the holiday tomorrow and can forward the info on to whomever while you guys are out of the office. Vahkris (talk) 19:43, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

It's been a few hours and no objections to Relyk, nor other suggestions. There's a chance it's not long enough to allow response, but I'd say he's it for this release. :P Vahkris (talk) 21:13, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm all for it, go go Gadget Relyk-copter! —Dr Ishmael 21:21, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

I think if an objection came up it would have came up the first time we talked about someone to rep us.- Zesbeer 21:29, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Vahkris has all the information and can forward it to Relyk if needed. I think you should start working on the next one so that you don't have to rush it. Good luck! --Stephane Lo Presti talk 21:32, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

So I do. I hate not having access to a computer for hours. Relyk, send me an email via the wiki with your email address (if it's not the one you use for the wiki, otherwise just send something so I can contact you), I'll send you the info for this weekend's preview. Vahkris (talk) 04:40, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

(Reset indent) This is mainly for Relyk (hoping he'll get the change notification email or Vahkris can email him directly): can you please send me the link to the wiki articles you were able to write following the play day? It's one of the requirement of being part of the play day and we'd like to promote these links on our social medias. Thanks! --Stephane Lo Presti talk 16:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

In 2 weeks

here are some users already nominated:

• Psycho Robot (talk • contribs • logs • block log)
• Felbryn (talk • contribs • logs • block log)
• Dagger (talk • contribs • logs • block log)
• Mora (talk • contribs • logs • block log)
• Tsafran (talk • contribs • logs • block log)
• MithranArkanere (talk • contribs • logs • block log)
• Yandere (talk • contribs • logs • block log)

thoughts feelings please post below so we don't have to rush for one 3 days before hand.- Zesbeer 21:38, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

We don't have to rush at all. There are two on the list and two reserves. Vahkris did a marvellous job on his first attempt. Relyk has not has a go yet. These two names were the remnants of several nominations/criticisms and weeding out. The main question is should Vahkris continue or should Relyk take a turn.

As to your list of nominations

• Psycho Robot - very new only 2 contributions pre June 2013
• Felbryn - again, not a huge contributor, seems to be an item/stats person.
• Dagger - a busier contributor but again a WvW stats person.
• Mora - again, not story events person.
• Tsafran - done a lot of work on drops, not a story person
• MithranArkanere - done a lot of work on various, not a story person
• Yandere - a massive contibutor

My concerns with all of the new nominations apart from Yandere, is that their recent contributions are less "story" related and whovever does the review need to be able to tell the story and capture the mechanics of the new "stuff". Of these nominations, my vote is for Yandere as, by my observation of his work, he would be the best all rounder. This is not denigrating the contributions of other people.

I would be more than happy for Vahkris to continue, or Relyk to have a go. They are already on a/the list. --Claret (talk) 23:01, 3 July 2013 (UTC)--Claret (talk) 23:01, 3 July 2013 (UTC)--Claret (talk) 23:01, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

I would like to Point out that they are not "my" nominations but someone else added them that someone else if I am not mistaken was Relyk, I was merely copy pastaing the list from the page. as for what I think I think we should message the users and let them know of there nomination.- Zesbeer 23:35, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

@Claret, the point is the players do not need to be working on story-related stuff to be able to participate in preview day. Anyone who has shown commitment to the wiki through their contributions and the ability to create articles with proper formatting should be considered a nominee. Whether they are available for participation can be discussed. Like Vahkris said, not everyone will be able to create full-fledged articles for all related content. I don't think we should expect them to, the wiki is still a collaborative process and anything they miss will be added in the followup.--Relyk ~ talk < 23:59, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Each representative is going to have a different focus, we just need to make sure we get the basics in the pages even if it's not what they normally play. I like story, game mechanics, jumping puzzles, mini-dungeons, and scavenger hunts. If a PvP map had been released in SPoT, you'd have seen little info on it in comparison to the other stuff, since I don't do PvP in the live game. I normally leave those pages alone because of it, so you'd have just gotten basic info there if there had been a new one (okay, I'd have tried, but still probably would have been less detailed). I pay a lot of attention to story, etc but it's not required to be a representative. If it's not their focus, this will be a chance for someone to step outside their normal editing. Thank you for the compliments though. :) Vahkris (talk) 04:47, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate that different people will bring different skills. But if a user is a stats orientated contributor with no demonstrated ability to "write the story" about the new section then they're not going to be too useful. Some people, including prodigious editors, and I count myself in that group, just have not demonstrated any ability to write a rounded article. I know I couldn't write an articel 10% as well as Vahkris has done. If they can't then their contributions will be much less useful than the contribution of one that can. So, to clarify, if you want my "vote", write a page that I can find in your contributions that tells a story. Flesh out a basic boilerplate page. Others will have their own criteria. --Claret (talk) 15:47, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

As long as they make a release page, featured article, and have links to related content, other people can do all the work. Anyone with basic knowledge of the wiki can do that. I wish users could ask questions from more experienced editors for content they aren't familiar with though.--Relyk ~ talk < 15:56, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to mention that part of this discussion is a chicken and egg problem: they may not be editors that work on this kind of content but (maybe with a bit of guidance, see Relyk's previous message about global goals, could also be the opportunity to build templates) it could also be the opportunity for them to get to do different things, learn from it, etc. As long as they're able to do quality edits (and are people who behave according to the wiki values), it's an opportunity we should not take away. By the way, I also think that the wiki representative should first focus on giving a good overview of the content (the release webpage being a good basis) before they start writing articles about specific parts of the release (items, armors, weapons, etc.).--Stephane Lo Presti talk 16:16, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the nomination. In two weeks is the weekend from 2013-07-19 to 2013-07-21, right? Because I would have time during that weekend, if we don't find a more suitable person.

Anyhow I also think it is good to approach such a release with an open mind. I started basiclly as a pure PvE player and now WvW is by far my favored content in the game. I am not a huge fan of structured PvP but I like to explore new maps, even when 5 other people want to kill me and I should also score some points to be a team player. (Skyhammer looks amazing)

I guess what I weant to say is that: Even I my game focus is set on specific parts of the game - which is understandable in case of a MMO - I can explore new content these parts where I usually do not play. I can also look at the wiki structure and understand how these things were documented in the past or even better perhaps suggest a better method to document those things.

I have fun in wiki editing for reasons I can hardy put into words. And I guess most of you also have fun doing this, because why else are you here?

And to grow in something that you like is most of the time a great experiance. So I am all in for letting people which have not much wiki experiance learn new things and let them grow with their challenges.

Well, I hope this was halfway coherent because I am currently pretty tired. ^^ - Yandere 17:09, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I know this isnt a popular vote at all, but as a irregular IP that contributes sometimes, only Yandere was a familiar name to me. I would certainly not mind him to see and try it out some day. On the other hand, I suspect there is a non disclosure agreement involved and somehow I suspect that Dulfy broke it last time (released guides 24+ hours before release).Though we surely are not competing and it shouldnt be a competition, at a new release however people are desparate looking for good guides and info. So I would say to stay with either Relyk or Vahkris next round and consider Yandere in the one after.

Just wanted to ask if I now should document the new content this weekend or not? - Yandere 19:36, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

There's no playday this weekend but we'll be back in 2 weeks. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 19:40, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much, makes my weekend planing a lot easier. ^^ - Yandere 19:44, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) For what it's worth, I believe that Yandere would be an excellent pick for this weekend the next preview play event. I'm not entirely sure what the IP was talking about; if you extend the "well Vahkris or Relyk would do better this round so let's pick them again" then when will Yandere ever be able to participate? That argument can be extended ad infinitum.

As Relyk has said before: "anyone who has shown commitment to the wiki through their contributions and the ability to create articles with proper formatting should be considered a nominee." Dedication, a knowledge of proper formatting and availability are the three primary foci of being a preview editor and Yandere possesses all of those.

Also, we are not in the business of "competing" with Dulfy. We are a resource about the game, they are a resource about the game. Our interests are the same. Aqua (talk) 19:46, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

(Reset indent) who doesn't love Yandere? (I think its the heart () that counts.. :P -Chieftain Alex 22:14, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I love you to Alex, more than any other ever could. ^^ - Yandere 22:38, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I watched Future Diary because of you, so I'm not sure how I feel.--Relyk ~ talk < 01:26, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

It is considered uncouth to use English titles for anime. 03:40, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

If someone said Wan Pisu or Burichi, I would have no clue either. I'm a filthy casual on an english wiki.--Relyk ~ talk < 03:59, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

The japanese name of the anime is called Mirai Nikki or 未来日記 when you want to be totally hardcore. But Future Diary is such a nice english translation and everybody gets which anime we are talking about. I would say buy the way that the manga is a bit better, but the anime is still one of my favoreds. YOu can probably guess why. By the way I am on vaction for the next 3 weeks to Japan, so I will probably not show up in the wiki, and will not be able to play GW2. Just wanted to point that out, because therefore I will not be available for the next Preview Play Day. - Yandere 11:21, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

"more appropriate name"

This name seems more childish then the last.- Zesbeer 20:18, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be "Preview Play Day"?--Relyk ~ talk < 20:22, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

this name just reminds me of soccer moms asking other moms if they want to set up a play day for the kidos.- Zesbeer 20:36, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

"Preview Play Day" is the official name that Stephane used. —Dr Ishmael 22:33, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

While I understand where Zesbeer‎ is coming from (as a parent ;), but this is a name that is well accepted, in particular in a press/media context. For the sake of consistency and to avoid confusion, I'd suggest that the wiki keeps the same name. Thanks for the feedback --Stephane Lo Presti talk 16:19, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Somewhat related: I have an issue with the casing of the title; can we change that somehow to wiki standards? ^^ poke | talk 16:57, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Do you mean EU vs NA? ;P --Stephane Lo Presti talk 17:02, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Huh? No, I mean “Update preview play days” or maybe just “Preview play days”. poke | talk 17:04, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

It's a proper name, isn't it? 75.37.16.77 17:14, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

One person per update

I'm very intrested in participating, however, I fear I won't be able to provide 100% coverage over an entire content update, e.g. missing articles, or incomplete articles. Wouldn't it be better to let 2 or 3 people work on one content update, instead of one person per content update as it is at the moment? --Landon144 (talk) 14:20, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

It would be great if we could send multiple people and squeeze every last drop of information out of the previews, but ArenaNet needs to maintain parity between the wiki and other fansites so we only get one slot. It is very much by design, I think. 14:22, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Are any of the fansites the official wiki though? They don't have to pretend to avoid playing favorites, they've been hosting this wiki for 6+ years now. Getting it as complete as possible as quickly as possible seems like it should be more important than not appearing to "favor" their own resource. -Auron 14:28, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't see how you can compare this wiki with a fansite. A fansite is supposed to make a (p)review of the activities and their rewards, a wiki is purely objective and is focussing on providing information, not providing one's opinion on an upcoming update. --Landon144 (talk) 14:40, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I totally agree with you guys, but it's been my understanding that we don't get special treatment in this regard. Even though we are the favorite. 16:02, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Answers to the various questions and comments above:

• Yes the wiki follows the same rules as the other fansites, with one exception: you can easily rotate between representatives;
• Yes we want to have a certain level of parity to be "fair", so that it doesn't discourage other fansites to create previews, guides and other kinds of articles; we're not pretending but it's a core part of our Community Philosophy (to enable a community ecosystem);
• The above being said, the core constraint for us currently is that we can't have that many accesses created for everyone; when that changes we may reconsider our position;
• Yes the wiki IS considered a fansite within this context but it's also more than a fansite, obviously; it's the only fansites that has a member of the Community Team as a liaison; while we're mainly focusing on hosting the wiki, we also acknowledge a certain level of service to the community;

I hope this helps clarify the matter but if you have any question or comment, please let me know! --Stephane Lo Presti talk 16:32, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Some news about this project

Hi everyone,

I want to mention that there may be some changes to the way we're running the Preview Play Days, starting next week. This "could" mean (there are still discussions about a few aspects of this new plan) that it's less time-consuming for the wiki representative.

I wanted to mention it as early as possible and I'll update this thread whenever I have more details I can share.

Thanks. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 16:34, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Cheers for the update, Stephane! -- Lacky 17:15, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I now have more details about next week's play day: this time (and the next), we won't give sites free access to the content. We'll only give a preview of the new content in the form of a short presentation that will probably be on Friday, should lasts around 1h30 and the wiki representative will be able to watch it again. It's just a heads-up for the project and I'll send more information to the wiki representative. So as soon as you've selected one, let me know here and I'll contact them at the beginning of next week. Thank you! --Stephane Lo Presti talk 23:31, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Can you give us any insight as to why they've changed it so drastically? 23:45, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

I actually welcome this change, as it will prevent the participants from being able to create guides for literally everything the update has to offer. This will hopefully make the players themselves become more interested in finding out stuff themselves instead. poke | talk 14:11, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Poke, I think this is a much better way of doing it, not only because of as Poke said, the players themselves can become more interested in finding things out for themselves, rather than using a guide, but also because it should mean that the main stuff will be covered more so, rather than having to go in-depth with every little single thing, thus being less time-consuming and theoretically more fun. -- Lacky 06:52, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

It's not really significant, the people who read the guides before the release will read dulfy's guides that come out 3-4 hours after release. It does encourage people to contribute to the wiki though.--Relyk ~ talk < 17:06, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Representative for August 2nd

Since Yandere will be spending the next three weeks living out of maid cafes, we need to choose a different wiki representative for this weekend's Preview. Keep in mind that it will be a different format this week, as Stephane pointed out above. 16:51, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to have a casual contributor act as representative to try it out so we know where people need help with.--Relyk ~ talk < 17:09, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

When you say casual, do you mean someone who's relatively new or someone who doesn't participate regularly? 19:50, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Someone who doesn't participate regularly, which can also be someone relatively new. Relatively editors brings up Stephane's concern. Wiki editors are more responsible and more capable of following rules than the average player, so even a new user probably wouldn't be a problem. The different format also makes it a good testing ground.--Relyk ~ talk < 20:42, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to add a little bit of pressure on this but: 1) since the presentation will be on Friday, it'd be great if a decision could be made by Thursday noon(pacific time) at the latest; 2) I do strongly support opening up this opportunity to a wider range of editors but I'll kindly remind everyone that these editors need to be told about following the rules we set up as they represent the wiki (and in theory something bad happening could mean the wiki loosing its access to the Preview Play Day, although in practice I trust the wiki will learn from any mistake). You can proceed ^^ --Stephane Lo Presti talk 20:11, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

I pinged a few people on the nominees list, hopefully one of them will be available to participate. 21:00, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm available all throughout this week, and especially on the weekend. Even though I'm quite "fresh" to the wiki, I've still been a very active, loyal player ever since release, and can be trusted to adhere to the rules, and produce any and all guideline-followed articles with the information provided, and would be greatly honored to be apart of this project. —Captain Combat 23:00, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Apparently that included me... I responded on IRC, but I should repeat it here: I'm available, but I don't think I'm a good choice for this. My concerns basically mirror Claret's above; writing articles for new content isn't something I do (because I'm too slow at it), so there's probably better candidates. -- Dagger (talk) 01:06, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I am available this weekend if the wiki would have me represent them for Preview Play Days. I've been around for ages (even though I have recently come off of a year of hibernation) and I'm sure I'd be able to follow the rules and produce quality articles. Aqua (talk) 02:06, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm glad to see some responses. I think I agree with Relyk in that it would be a good experiment to see how a less established editor would tackle the Preview Play Day, so signs point to Captain Combat for me, but we could use some more input on that front. 04:38, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm glad to see some response also, but this is where democracy without structure becomes anarchy. Who decides? A "consensus" of a few people? Hmm. Aqua has just as good a claim, some may say better, others may not. But to open it up, Aqua has my vote of these two. --Claret (talk) 10:27, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I don’t mind which of you two does it this time, maybe we could just say that the other one can make it the next time (to keep it fair). Then you two could decide for yourself who goes first. poke | talk 11:00, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Like the others, I also was pinged a message from Felix, and would like to add that I also do have the time and would be more than happy to help and contribute to this project for the upcoming preview play day. Like Poke said, we can organise something to keep things fair and work out a schedule (so to speak), or, if like Stephane said, we could open it up to a wider range of people, and we can all help work on it? I feel I have a good knowledge and understanding of the wiki (despite recently undertaking an editing hiatus, I still monitored the wiki during that time, and I have previously been an avid wiki-er), and if a consensus is reached to allow me to undertake this opportunity, I believe my previous efforts will come in handy to help. -- Lacky 11:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

“we could open it up to a wider range of people” – it seems you misunderstood Stephane there; the play days will still be limited to a single person from the wiki. poke | talk 11:19, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Ahh yes, my apologies. I just reread all the information about it again and noted that. Still, working something out in regards to a timetable would be good then. -- Lacky 11:26, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

It would be great if we could put together a schedule of sorts for the next several Play Days so we don't come down to these pick-someone-in-two-days situations anymore. Hopefully Stephane can give us a more-or-less-stable list of the dates for those. As far as this week goes, we do need to choose someone by tomorrow, so if the people interested (I actually didn't expect all 4 people I contacted to be available, oops) want to work that out amongst themselves they will have to move quickly. 15:57, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind allowing the more experienced editors do this first, I didn't expect them all to be available/wanting to do it either so I figured I'd step up to the plate, but they've worked at lot harder and deserve the opportunity before me. —Captain Combat 17:10, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

If possible, I would like to take this weekend, as my availability for future preview events is questionable (starting college in a month). Hopefully, through my experience, I would be able to provide some instruction to future preview players to assist with documentation and article writing using the sources we're given. Aqua (talk) 18:30, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I can probably write something up if I have time, but it would be subject to change due to the new format.--Relyk ~ talk < 18:36, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I am happy to step aside this time and let Aqua step up to the plate given the circumstances. As I stated on my user talk page when I was contacted by Felix, I have exams in three weeks, and no more assignments due before then, and then I am on break for another two weeks, so I do have quite a bit of time as well, so not participating this time as I have time for it next time is fine by me. That being said, although Captain Combat's statement, I also think as a less experienced editor, s/he would also be a good candidate, as it was suggested new(er) users come to the playing field. Perhaps Aqua this time and Captain Combat next time? -- Lacky 19:06, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Dagger gave the go-ahead to Aqua via IRC, so he's got the seal of approval for this week's Preview Play Day. Now, Stephane said that there will be another preview play day two weeks after this one, and it will be in the same format as this one, so we can start talking about who'd like to take that one now. 20:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay, it's been five days now since Felix's reply and nobody else has commented yet, so I will put up my hand for this one if nobody else would like to do so. -- Lacky 23:17, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

The current one is being handled by Aqua if that’s the one you are referring to. It should have happened on Friday I think. poke | talk 23:51, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I believe Felix was talking about the next one (ie. in two weeks from now). -- Lacky 15:53, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh I see, that’s what you were referring to. poke | talk 16:00, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

No Preview Play Day next week

Hi,

I wanted to let you know that there won't be a Preview Play Day next week. I'll keep you informed of the status of the next one (in 3 weeks).

Thanks.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stephane Lo Presti (talk • contribs) at 21:30, August 7, 2013 (UTC).