Talk:Main Page/editcopy/Archive 2

From Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

moved from Talk:Main Page#Logo

Why does the wiki logo still have the old GW2 logo? Do you guys not have the new one yet? --User Phnzdvn sig.png Phnzdvn 15:42, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I never did like the old one.Vidal 07:50, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
There would be some good images, like this. - J.P.User J.P. sigicon.pngTalk 01:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure I like the font on it, but I like the general idea of what the icon should look like. I think I'd prefer a sans-serif font.-- Shew 01:37, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
this any better? --User Phnzdvn sig.png Phnzdvn 22:00, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I made some favicon too... 16x16 32x32 --User Phnzdvn sig.png Phnzdvn 22:14, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I prefer the current logo, to be honest. The dragon-2 logo is too... flat and boring. Besides, I think ArenaNet will be making the logo - they'd have to configure it their side to change it anyway (or we can do it via CSS, but so far we've only done that for temporary logos). -- pling User Pling sig.png 13:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Wait and see (and drink some tea). I also like the old logo better visually, but in the end that decision is more up to ANets design team. --Xeeron 23:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
From what I can tell you as a guy who works with logos and fonts, the 'new' GW2 logo is far better than the old one. I won't go in details but a logo should have a simple design (think now at any logo you want). Phnzdvn above used a new text and Wyn used a nice one too, but I believe we should go for something that resembles American Garamond (the font used by Wikipedia). Also, some stated that the logo might be changed by ANet, might be true for gw2wiki (but not for GW2). For now, I believe we can safely change the logo without causing any problems. I will try to do one myself soon. Markus Clouser User Markus Clouser signature img.jpg 17:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
I made a logo, you can check it out here. Markus Clouser User Markus Clouser signature img.jpg 23:16, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
As said before, ANet has to change the main (top left of page) icon. What we could do is replace the icon currently displayed on the main page (File:GW2Logo new.png) with your version. --Xeeron 14:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
It would be possible via css to temporarily change the main logo, like we do with holiday logos on GWW. However, while I like the image, I don't think it looks good in front of the background; as I said above, it's too flat and textureless. (The favicon definitely requires anet.) -- pling User Pling sig.png 16:02, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Original logo background, more depth and less plain. This better/good enough? - Infinite - talk 19:56, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Transparent, though missing almost all depth :P
Markus' page has some idea what the logo and favicon would look like. - J.P.User J.P. sigicon.pngTalk 19:52, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Can someone just change it lol to stop the annoyance about "oh its not the current one"--♥Icyyy♥ 12:14, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
I think that the current logo is far too outdated and we should change it via CSS until we get an offical logo from ArenaNet. I do not like the logo Markus made, I prefer to stick with something that is similar to that of the current GWW logo (which is the reason why I made the one I made :P). If flatness is the issues, I can try to play around with it a bit in photoshop and see what I can come up with. I just don't think that we should use thje outdated logo :P. --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 13:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Is this less flat and boring? File:User Phnzdvn Guild Wars 2 Wiki Logo Orig Font.png --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 16:49, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Also, I have the logo in my CSS and it actually looks (well imho) quite good against the background. If you want to test it out the code is here --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 16:50, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I don't think we should change the logo - that's up to ANet. But what we definitely shouldn't do is change their design to create a "more interesting" logo, as above. --94.171.77.82 20:02, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm not proposing we change the logo because it is more "interesting", I'm proposing it so we can stay consistent with the official site and other Guild Wars 2 related websites. --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 20:13, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I agree that a logo which matches up a bit more with most GW2 branding would be a good move. I don't like saying such things without offering something toward the resolution, so please see this file. Pardon my poor wiki code skills. File:User_Coehl_Gw2wiki.png----Coehl 17:52, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Feedback Portal

I was told to post this suggestion here. I know it's on the Guild Wars 1 Wiki, but shouldn't there be a link to the Feedback Portal on this site? After all they are posting ideas for Guild Wars 2 there as well as ideas for Guild Wars 1.--Copper Legray 07:32, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree, linking directly to the GW2 feedback section is a good idea. --Kyoshi (Talk) User Kyoshi sig.png 19:51, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, since nothing has been touched or commented on, I'll add it to the editcopy now. --Kyoshi (Talk) User Kyoshi sig.png 19:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Ghosts of Ascalon

So Fall of Ascalon has been changed to Ghosts of Ascalon on this page, any reason why it hasn't been updated on the main page? Taros 17:08, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Me being slow. Done now. -- pling User Pling sig.png 00:21, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Professions

This is an official information, we can wait until all professions will be announced, or update right now (I think that wait will be better). --Itay Alon 18:55, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I think it's better if we add it in now. The Profession and Elementalist pages are definitely important pages already right now, and it's likely it'll be months before we know all professions. NilePenguin 16:10, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Okey, I agree. for now Elementalist and Warrior will be ok (updated this part, he's ready for the main page). --Itay Alon 11:52, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
They made a spoiler in Durmand Priory page-the monks are in guild wars 2 i copied a piece from it to show you through the monks are talked through out--"The monks of the monastery are part-scholar and part-fighter that fight to protect their "sacred charge" who are called by the same name of the monastery. The monks are of multiple races and players will be able to join them to combat the elder dragons."<--thats spoiler! Amanda(: 20:04, 16 May 2010 (UTC)IcyyyBlue

Background

IMO site would be more interesting with better backgrounds--Knighthonor 08:11, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Can we change the background its so ugly!!--♥Icyyy♥‎ 18:51, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Plain white has the lowest loading time, so I would say no. :P --Unending fear 19:56, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
why nott?--♥Icyyy♥‎ User IcyyyBlue Elementalist Blue.png 19:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protect talk page?

Hey, seeing the recent line of IP vandalisms on the Main Page's talk page, might it be better to semi-protect it for the time being. (IIRC, semi-protect is the one that disables IP's from editing?) Sirrush 21:30, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Professions and Races

What should we do about the capitalization? In this source it is clearly stated that professions and races are to not be capitalized, should we change the page, or not? Aquadrizzt My Contributions 00:29, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree with that statement.-- Shew 00:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
In what way are you agreeing??? Aquadrizzt My Contributions 02:06, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
ArenaNet's formatting rules don't apply automatically on the wiki. (Anyway, GWW/GW2W has been using lowercase for professions and races for a long time already.) The professions and races on the editcopy and main page are in a navbar-style list, so they should stay capitalised. pling User Pling sig.png 15:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
K...thanx Pling, I wasn't sure... Aquadrizzt My Contributions 16:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Link parameter

re: this edit

I removed the link parameter from those images earlier because I think people should be able to click thumbnails to see larger versions. As a compromise, linking to professions reveal would be better than to profession because the images are actually on the former page (and aren't in the latter). pling User Pling sig.png 19:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Gameplay Topics

Does anyone else this that it would be a good idea to add links to Traits, Attributes, and Skills on this page? Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 17:58, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't see any harm in this. After all, it would be good to have some basic mechanics linked easily for people to read Venom20 18:04, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
That was my thinking... Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 20:48, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Time to change

IMO, this page looks ugly and somewhat unprofessional. It manages to feel both empty (with the large empty spaces by the sides) and cluttered (with so much information condensed on a few sections), not to mention we know far more about Guild Wars 2 than we did when this sketch of a main page was done.
I think it's time for an overhaul of the main page, aiming for a more definitive look. I have began working on a sketch, seen here, basing myself heavily on the GW1W main page. And before someone asks, the red color chosen there is trying to match a more subdued version of the red seen on the GW2 logo; one of the changes we need to make is to change the icon above the "Official Wiki" text at the top left corner of this site. Erasculio 14:59, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

You are supposed to work on the editcopy to propose changes. Also it's a bit too much red imo. And in general I would prefer if we could manage to get a different Main Page layout than on GWW. poke | talk 18:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
I think a good number of the regulars have already posted their comments, as I have, on Era's suggestion's talk page. -- Konig/talk 18:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
What about one of mine? User:Neil2250/Main Page --NeilUser Neil2250 sig icon5 Anti.png 18:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Like I said on Era's talk page, I dislike changing the format as a copy of GW1W's main page. Also, with yours, while the color choice is better, you altered the main logo which shouldn't be done. -- -- Konig/talk 21:59, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Problems of the current main page:

  • It's inefficient in how it uses space: the page has two large empty columns by its side, while keeping all text cramped in the middle column with little space between sections. A design with less unused space leaving more room between sections would be better.
  • It's badly organized: the "Articles of Interest" section is a mess, listing things which do not make sense together (lore articles with trailers? Elder dragons between professions and mechanics?) and generally done at a time in which we knew far less about GW2 than we do today.
  • It's upside down: it talks about the wiki at the top, while placing news about GW2 at the bottom, making people scroll to find about the game. Considering how GW2 is actually more important than the wiki, the news section should be at the top, and the notice about the wiki at the bottom.
  • It's ugly: the current page was made more as a placeholder than as something meant to be pretty. The current images being shown were just thrown into the old layout, instead of being part of a planned concept.

While many didn't like my proposed suggestion, the current main page is rather bad. It would be nice if someone else could work on a different layout without those issues. Erasculio 02:31, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Here's one I'd suggest as far as layout. User:Ariyen/Sandbox/Main_Page. Ariyen 02:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Ariyen...although I like the idea to use a non GW 1 design, it seems really cramped up and somewhat difficult to read :S... Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 17:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
In addition, (sorry for dual post)... the article "Ecology of Charr" doesn't really seem to fit in the overarching concept of the main page (firstly, if you actually cared, you could look it up on the Charr page) and secondly, it is way to specific. Elder dragons are "old news" and quite honestly not that interesting. Just because they are supposed to be the main bosses of the game doesn't mean their "main page" material, you don't list Shiro, Abaddon and the Lich on the main page of GW1, why should the elder dragons be on here either. Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 17:38, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Still work on it, but you may see: User:Itay_Alon/Main_Page. -- Itay AlonTalk 18:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

@Aquadrizzt, you can help work on the one I have, if you want. But I like the type style of it and I do agree it's a tad cramped. i just haven't figured out how to make it wider yet and if I do. I feel it'd look better. Ariyen 19:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I redid some more. widen a few spots. I think it looks better now. Ariyen 19:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) BEFORE undoing a major revision, discuss it! There was a comment about the margins being empty and the obvious thing was to fill them with something. If the figures can be spread out to fill the space vertically, it would be better, but I'd have to dig out how in my reference books and maybe somebody already knows how to do it. --Max 2 19:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

It just looks fat now IMO. --Naut User Naut Dark Blue Monk.png 20:06, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Fat? How can a page look "Fat"? X-) Ariyen 20:07, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Well, Bulky. It looked a lot better before. --Naut User Naut Dark Blue Monk.png 21:18, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
I actually prefer Italy's to the other concepts... I do not like Ariyen's. --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 23:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Honeslty guys, I don't think it is needed to change the main page as of now or at least to how people are suggesting. Main reason for that is general lack of content; there is nothing to put on the main page really. Designs that use large boxes give an impression of a poorly maintained wiki. The design we got now on other hand, as someone accurately pointed out, gives an impression of a placeholder and imho that is the look to aim for a "young" wiki that is still being worked on as more content is released. Compacting small ammount of important information into a small space makes it look quite professional and well maintained. --Super IgorUser- Super Igor logo.png 23:57, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Okay, made 3 different areas of a few changes here, here(which most seem to not like), and here. Ariyen 00:04, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm currently making one that sorta changes yours up... (Profession shadows surrounding GW2 Logo like this : xxx(E)(GW2)(W)xxx Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 00:14, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
So...check out mine: Main Page Idea. Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 00:22, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
@Phnzdvn (you have the most vexing name ever...) anyway... we want to avoid using the same general layout as on GWW...we want this main page to be unique... Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 00:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
And (finally...probs my last post until someone else does)... here are the other color versions (using Neil's Gold and Erasculio's red color palettes): Red and Gold. Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 01:05, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
@Aquadrizzt, I apologize that my username causes suffering ;-). Anywho, I prefer your golden version... though I think the gold is a tad too bright... may I suggest a more neutral color like #F5DEB3, #EEE8AA, or #FFFACD? --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 01:22, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Also, maybe make the unrevealed professions just a bit smaller. --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 01:25, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Working on another idea. Phnzdvn, what colors do those three show up as? Ariyen 01:28, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Wheat, Pale Goldenrod, and Lemon Chiffon. --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 01:32, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) @Phnz...i changed my gold version to reflect your idea (it now uses wheat) click the above link...tell me what you think. Thanks... Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 01:38, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I like that, though I think I would like Pale Goldenrod better... but that boils down to what you want to do. Either of those are fine with me. --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 01:39, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Looking at it...I like pale goldenrod better too... (wheat is TOO orange) Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 01:40, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Click on the link...yet again... (make any edits you want...ill be back in half an hour or so :D) Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 01:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Here's another I did. User:Ariyen/Sandbox/Main Ariyen 01:45, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
@Ariyen, yours seem a bit too gaudy for my taste.
@Aquadrizzt, I made the border less thick and got rid of the roundness and it looks a lot cleaner to me now. That was my only complaint, yours is the one I would like to see go up. --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 01:49, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Redid it. Made the Articles take up less space - more to a taste I like now. Ariyen 02:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
That is better, though I still prefer Aquadrizzt's version. --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 02:03, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Cool. Took out the border and changed title color to match rest. Border seemed a bit "squished". Ariyen 02:11, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Thanks Phnz...Ariyen, I like the idea, but i still this the style is a bit excessive and (it pains me to say this) a little gaudy. Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 02:31, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I like many of the proposed layouts, and they definitely look better than the current main page. However, IMO, the "Articles of interest" section on the proposed pages still doesn't make sense. For example, why is there a link to "Trailers" together with a link to "The Ecology of the Charr" while "Concept art" and "Screenshots" are in a different section? Wouldn't it make more sense to add a Media section with both the trailers and the screenshots? What's the deal with the "Playable creatures", considering how the official terminology used by Arena Net is "playable races"? Why is "The Art of Guild Wars 2" given more importance than the announced professions? And so on. Erasculio 02:38, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Let me make the edits :) ... Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 02:38, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Done :) New Version ... Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 02:51, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
@Erasculio, Playable creatures was my idea actually... :-/ Ariyen 02:59, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
I dislike the color, to be honest. Personaly I really like the green we have on the main page atm. Also, keep it as Welcome to the GW2W and get rid of the exclamation mark. The bit afterwords and the exclamation mark makes it feel like a commercial. The articles of interest also feels a little empty, we could use something to fill it up.--Corsair@Yarrr 03:49, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

People who help with this page: plz read about eye tracking - borders use to focus the eye on the content. anyway, for now: User:Itay_Alon/Main_Page. need to work on colors, but I'll do it later. -- Itay AlonTalk 06:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

@Itay, the reason we wouldn't use Erasculio's or Neil's or one of them is that there is a general consensus not to use to same format as GWW. @Corsair: I have made the changes you suggested... (I still need help finding a good color for it), any suggestions...the green just seems a little bland... Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 14:02, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
I do not prefer the green color to the pale golden color. The golden color is a neutral while keeping it interesting; the green is too bland, as Aquadrizzt said. --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 15:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
I don't sure that all people really think that we must do it in other way- GW1W is really good, and he prove himself as useful. also people who not use wide-screen can see it as well. Moreover, the borders are used to focus the eye on the content, and you can link to a lot articles in smaller space. There are many reason for GW1W main page, and we cannot ignore them all. -- Itay AlonTalk 15:28, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
@Itay...my design is simply to enhance our current placeholder while still communicating the necessary information that we possess. Yours has a lot of blank white space (which the human eye is drawn towards) which causes it to seem unfinished and makes the wiki seem unmaintained...IMO.Plus, when not in widescreen, yours is as bad as mine...In addition, mine gives the impression of placeholder (albeit a better looking one than the current main page), while yours causes it to look like we have gotten all information we care to display on the main page, which I'm sure is not true... Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 16:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Update my design... anyway, I don't sure about which version are you talking about. I must say, you did a great job, I really like your idea, but we all still need to work on it. -- Itay AlonTalk 17:02, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
I was referring to your V1...your V2 is pretty much mine, with different borders... Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 17:04, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Remember, Aqua. I was the one who came up with the main design/layout it's self that you're using. Only difference is and was the Article of Interest. :-) Ariyen 17:11, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
I personally think we need an entirely new layout (i.e. not the current one nor the GWW one. I am stuck for ideas however... Shadow Runner 17:13, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) for the millionth time Ariyen...im pretty sure i based mine off of the disgusting one with the 3 columns :S...anyway...welcome to the party late Shadow... Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 17:15, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

@Itay, the main reason why I, personally, do not want the Main Page to have the same design as the GWW Main page is because I think that people need to be aware that GW2W is a separate wiki from GWW. Having a different main page reinforces this idea. Most that have been involved in the discussion have agreed to try and stay away from similar designs to the GWW Main Page. Any similar design to the GWW main page, I would be opposed to. --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 17:29, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
My name is ITAY (without L). We need do it right, not just different from GW1W. think about when we got more important information, or all professions will reveal, is the main page will still be relevant? It's what I consider when I used GW1W structure. -- Itay AlonTalk 17:42, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Apologies for the typo. If you are referring to the profession reveal images; then yes, I do still think it would be relevant. I see no issues with allowing the profession images to stay up after the reveal. However, if it is decided that the images should be removed... it looks fine without the images as well. I do not agree with a GWW design being on GW2W. --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 17:47, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict)  ::::All right...Ariyen and I have the EXACT SAME design now, so I'll just present the designs that I have...there is: Default Color, More Intense Green and Yellowish. If anyone wants to suggest new colors to test, message me or leave a comment here...Also @ Itay... we want a "unique" feel to this wiki, we all agree that the current placeholder is bad. My designs (See earlier) possess better formatting while stile maintaining a unique feel from GWW. I would like to mention (again) that we do not have access to nearly as much information now as we will when the game comes out, but we have far more than what the current main page really displays. Yours, as I said before, gives the impression of an unfinished/not well run wiki, while mine gives the impression "Hey, we dont have all the information we want, but when we do, we'll be sure to put it right up." :)

If you look at the time stamps, the one I had done with the 2 columns was up before Aqua and I had to redo Aqua's 3 column to 2 to make it work right... so layout was copied from me. I'm not bothered, what bothers me is someone else calling that layout/design their original.. when it's obvious as to not and only time stamps would show. Thanks and happy editing to us to find something that'd work right. :-P All IDEAS combined (hopefully). *silly expression* Ariyen 18:02, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
QQ...@Ariyen, when I say mine, i pretty much means it is in MY userspace...i did take from yours and changed them up a little, as you said I could...I did not want to imply that you had no influence in the way the idea came out... :( Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 18:05, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
This discussion isn't about who copied who, or what is original... it is about re-designing the main page. --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 18:06, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

OK, 4 versions: User:Itay_Alon/Main_Page -- Itay AlonTalk 19:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Made a different one here with two separate views, but even less scrollable than the previous. Still working on what could make it even less scrollable, but I think that'd fix it. Just I think the Articles of Interest would need more and may include more later on. Ariyen 22:00, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Nothing like seeing the creativ people go into overdrive! Nice work. So far I like Aquadrizzt's version best, though I would add borders to the boxes there (as in Itay Alon's suggestions). Seems like some nice looking new layout will come out of this. --Xeeron 23:08, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Xeeron...i tested adding the borders...it looks really bad on my new AoI version :S... Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 01:13, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Borrowing from Itay's and Aquadrizzt's layouts, I have made a second version here (scroll down to see it). That's more or less how I would like to see the so-called "Articles of interest" section. Erasculio 01:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Itay, would you mind trying to make the right and left columns line up at the bottom, it looks weird having ti staggered like that.--Corsair@Yarrr 01:25, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Erasculio...i like your design a lot...plus it might provide an end to the flood of RC :D Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 01:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
And 150 edits later (-_-) here is yet another collaborative masterpiece (me, Erasculio, Itay Alon and Ariyen). Hope you guys like this. As usual, any ideas...just message me (or one of the aforementioned users. :D Aquadrizzt The Weapon Master 02:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Too similar to GWW imo. I prefer the original Aqua did. --User Phnzdvn sig.pnghnzdvn 03:08, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Phnzdvn, this is nothing like GWW imo...that works horizontally, this is vertical and lacks the same general format. The new design has more in common with my original that it does with GWW...just IMO though, and looking at mine (in retrospect) it is somewhat bland :S... Aquadrizzt Main Page Designer 03:13, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I really like Aqua's current layout. IMO, it has a different orientation from GW1W's main page (which has its main sections set horizontally, while within each box text is arranged vertically, as seen at the first layout here), by having its main sections set vertically while within each box the text is arranged horizontally, and thus avoiding most of the empty spaces seen on GW1W's main page. Aqua's inclusion of the images from each race was a great idea, considering how we have five boxes and five playable races.
The only two things I would change (which is just nitpicking anyway) would be removing the "Create article" box from the "Wiki news" section (I don't think we need that box anymore, and it looks a bit odd in the article) and changing the height of the two main columns so they have vertically the same size (right now the column to the left is slightly bigger than the one to the right). Erasculio 03:54, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
People, we are not talking about the content yet... Anyway, great job everyone, we did together really nice designs. -- Itay AlonTalk 04:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Hey Erasculio, check it now. :)...best I could do, I'm not entirely sure how to even them up exactly, and as we expand the information presented, the columns will shift in length...(note: I will be unconscious for about 9 hours, so if you want anything done, do it yourself)... Cheers! And thanks Itay :D ; you did a good job too! Aquadrizzt Main Page Designer 04:46, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't like it for all the reasons I don't like GWW's main page (e.g. the way the indents create different margins that make things hard to skim-read, which is important for the main page). Additionally, there are also large boxes with little content and large images that make the page bigger than it needs to be, and the images aren't even related to the boxes they're in; half the page seems cramped (the right side, primarily the gw2 news box), while the other side looks relatively empty; the image in the gw2 news box makes the text weirdly formatted. See also Konig's comment in the colors section below.
I still prefer the current main page to all the proposals I've seen. Going by Erasculio's bullet points near the top of the page as to why he thinks it's bad:
  • whitespace on the sides - I don't think that's a bad thing. Empty space can often make things look cleaner and less cramped or "fat", and indeed it does in comparison to Aquadrizzt's proposal.
  • articles of interest section - that can be modified without redesigning the entire page. Shuffle the entries around, remove some, add others, whatever.
  • upside down - again, can easily be changed. Just take the news to the top, put the wiki stuff at the bottom. That said, I don't think this is a problem - on my screen, I can see the top couple of entries of the news section (i.e. the new ones) as it is, and I think it's important to introduce people to the wiki and explain things for existing users.
  • ugly - I don't think it's ugly. It probably was meant to be a placeholder when it was created, but that doesn't really mean the design is bad in itself. The only image that doesn't belong there is the Destiny's Edge image; the other ones are fine, and they're placed in good locations.
pling User Pling sig.png 13:19, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
I don't think the two of us are going to agree about this.
"things hard to skim-read, which is important for the main page": IMO, that's the opposite of what we should aim for. The main page isn't something we should incentive readers to dismiss with a quick glance; it's the one thing in the wiki that has to catch their attention. Of course, it has to be something in which it's easy to find a specific piece of information, and regarding that Aqua's design, having clearly limited and organized sections, is far better than the current page.
"and large images that make the page bigger than it needs to be": likewise, if there's a page on the wiki that has to be both functional and decorative, it's the main page, considering how it's the face of the wiki for new users. The currently proposed images help to decorate the page and avoid having just a bland list of links (like the current page) while not being image files big enough to slow the main page's loading time.
"half the page seems cramped (the right side, primarily the gw2 news box), while the other side looks relatively empty": which is exactly the problem with the current layout. The two empty spaces at the page's sides contrast with the incredibly cramped middle, in which there's a big mess of a list of links. And regarding how the left side would be empty, well, "Empty space can often make things look cleaner and less cramped". I don't believe it's empty, actually; it only has some room for the incoming announcements about GW2 that we know are coming.
"articles of interest section - that can be modified without redesigning the entire page": feel free to make a design solving this problem, but the suggestions of those who have actually tried to fix the problem all have big layout changes.
"on my screen, I can see the top couple of entries of the news section (i.e. the new ones) as it is": I don't think we should assume that most users have a resolution above 1280x1024 (which is my resolution, in which I have to scroll down to see the News section).
"I don't think it's ugly": I think it is. I think it shows exactly what it is: a placeholder made years ago to which content was added somewhat randomly without long term planning, leading to a very cramped and disjointed list. Considering how we know far more about GW2 than we did when this page was created, and considering how GW2 is often under the purview of both the media and players these days, I think it looks rather bad for the wiki to have such an obvious placeholder as its main page, of all things.
Regardless, while there isn't unanimity, I believe this section shows enough support to the idea of making a new main page in order to discuss and implement one. Erasculio 19:54, 24 June 2010 (UTC)