Talk:Main Page/editcopy/Archive 5

Moving the reveal images

So... When the guardian is revealed, I'm assuming the picture (let's assume is #7) will just be moved to the left next to the ranger? It's been so long since we had an odd number of professions I can't even remember what it would look like (and am too lazy to look through history). Just checking to make sure as to what we are doing. Eive 09:40, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I think that would be the case. ShadowRunner 11:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Correct. Aqua (T|C) 01:36, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Guardian image

My wiki-fu is too poor to start fiddling with the editcopy. Can someone kick it till it works? ShadowRunner 19:09, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Is anyone currently creating the new image so the main page can be updated? Venom20 19:11, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

There is no flash at this point to extract it from, so this will have to wait. - Infinite - talk 19:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

New Krytan

Once I've gotten the translator working properly, would it be possible to implement it on the main page? I thought it'd be kinda cool to have "Welcome to the Official Guild Wars 2 Wiki" in New Krytan above the English.-- Shew 04:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Extremely Guild Wars geeky. I like it. :) Is it a font or will the letters be images? -- aspectacle  05:13, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

They're images; we can't install custom fonts, can we?-- Shew 05:15, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I haven't the foggiest. I know CSS can allow for custom fonts loaded from a server location. Change the css and put a font on the server might do it? Not the easiest thing to try here without direct control of the servers... -- aspectacle  05:40, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

You do realize it would turn off anyone who isn't into gw lore, right? Which may be a majority of people once the game goes live. While it sounds cool, but I think we should avoid from making important stuff out of in-game alphabets.

Except for April Fools jokes. -- Konig/talk 05:57, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I would like an April Fools main page :P --The Holy Dragons 08:21, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

What about a view this wiki in New Krytan? (Xu Davella 11:35, 11 February 2011 (UTC))

Haha; love the April Fools idea.-- Shew 14:06, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I've made my own New Krytan Emoticons for MSN =D --The Holy Dragons 14:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

"You do realize it would turn off anyone who isn't into gw lore, right?" I don't think the suggestion was to replace all the text with New Krytan, just to write it also in New Krytan. As long as it's not at an overbearing "font" or image size, I don't know how it would turn anyone off. It's just a bit of geeky flair, like putting those images at the corners of the main page sections.

That said, I would love to see an April Fool's Day where we update the wiki to New Krytan "officially". --ஸ Kyoshi 14:43, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Konig. While it is nice to have that level of geek, I don't think that phrases or sentences in new krytan would be useful on the main page. It would be entirely too geeky. I don't have any issues if there was an image or something. But aside from that, I think the only time that it would be acceptable on would be april fools. Venom20 15:18, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

April Fools it is, then! Would it be possible for me to move the templates to the main space? It beats having to use "{{User:Shewmake/Template:Translator/...|string}}" for every 35 characters. Something like "{{nk|string}} would be much easier. Of course, I'm working on the character limitations, etc. I sort of agree with you guys now, though. Not everyone would appreciate the unnecessary geekiness. :p-- Shew 16:22, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, Venom, but I don't think I'm understanding the difference between using the images and using the images. What I meant is that we can put images of the New Krytan between the <br> markers on the welcome banner. Uploading an example now. --ஸ Kyoshi 17:08, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

[[:File:User Kyoshi welcome sample.png|har]] --ஸ Kyoshi 17:11, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Considering it would be meaningless gibberish for most (>98%) people, I'd rather not have New Krytan in the top banner on the main page of the wiki... pling 17:41, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

It's just meant for flair. Why do people have to understand it? --ஸ Kyoshi 18:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

People don't have to understand it. But if something exists on at the main page that is only known or understood by a small 2-5% fraction, then it imposes a degree of rejection to a small number of people. People may feel like they wouldn't know enough to fit in in this wiki community, or aren't geeky enough to fit in. To further elaborate on what I was saying earlier (sorry, I had just woken up :)), a character or two in a corner for artistic flair would be quite different than a sentence or a couple or words in a middle for artistic flair. It is a nice though to geek-ify this wiki with something like this. But I don't feel that the main page would be a place to do it. Venom20 18:35, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I can see this as being enjoyable to use in user space, but not really in main space. With an exception of an example on New Krytan and Languages of Tyria. Buuuut, screenshots and table. -- Konig/talk 20:31, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm just gonna throw in the fact that user box templates are kept in main space.-- Shew 20:38, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Technically, they're in the template namespace, and I think that's for convenience and technical ease (i.e. {{standard formatting}}) but also because they're for public use rather than one user's belongings. pling 21:07, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

And the NK template wouldn't be for public use? :P It'd be for convenience as well.-- Shew 21:14, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't arguing against moving it (I wasn't actually aware it was suggested), I was just explaining why userbox templates are in template space. Now that I've read the above comments more carefully, go ahead; but I'd suggest "New Krytan" instead of "nk". pling 21:17, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Could "nk" be a redirect?-- Shew 21:20, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

@Venom: I'm not sure where you get the idea that it would be intimidating. For most people, the flair on a main page just makes the page look pretty; I can't even name three of the icons used for the GWW's main page "flair", but I know that they look fine. Just the same, it makes it look good and geeky, but there's nothing intimidating about it.

Kind of a moot point when we can't see it to judge. Once this template that's apparently being made is done (or if someone wants to paste the images there so many times, but that'd be a chore), we can take a look. --ஸ Kyoshi 22:01, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

New Krytan shouldn't be used for navigational purposes anyway, and as per Kyoshi, adds an air of style to the design of the main page. Haters gonna hate, pay those no mind. - Infinite - talk 22:04, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Flair would be fine but I really like the suggestion for April Fools... (my bday anyway)... - Lucian 0:01, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

new colors

I figured it was best to suggest here. With every new profession debuted, perhaps we can switch to that color? After all are released (last profession color has been up there for a while and whatnot) we can switch back to green? - Lucian 1:59, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

This'd be the place to suggest it. That said, I don't have an opinion on it. --ஸ Kyoshi 03:03, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

New colors, old colors, either are fine. Although I don't like how the "guardian" color looks with the links. Eive 03:31, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Me either, think it should be a tad greener.. - Lucian 3:58, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh dear, not colours again. Venom20 04:44, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Haha! Whats' wrong? I guess I must've missed the memo. Was it decided for no colors? - Lucian 4:49, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

[1] :-P-- Shew 04:53, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

More like 1, 2, and 3. Venom20 04:55, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Lucian, I'm not sure if the color discussion (the painful day week month many months) was during your time here. It was, for lack of a better term, horrible ("This color is too bubbly." "That color is too intense" "That color is too dark" "That color is bad."...) Venom, I would say don't worry: it is not a permanent change, just for like a little after (week at most) the profession reveal. Though the colors would need to be about equal brightness and saturation to the current colors. Aqua (T|C) 04:56, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh damn... glad I didn't participate in that! I meant the best in my suggestion, guys. Not permanent; only for a week each, then back. I can see the complications with all those that are linked above (where one discussion brought 7 sub-discussions). - Lucian 5:02, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Rookie mistake. <3 (But I think we want a more expanded main space in the future, at which point you can propose a colour change as you see fit. I know I am. :) - Infinite - talk 11:25, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Would you mind it being reverted, so my all-resolutions friendly, original colouring variant is there again (preferably it was synched immediately, also)? - Infinite - talk 11:34, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Lol, sure. Reverted. I game a reason on history. - Lucian 16:59, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

April Fool's Day

We doing it? I figured we would do the New Krytan thing, but how much do we want to do? (Links don't work with New Krytan, unfortunately...) Aqua (T|C) 13:42, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure they do, it's just messy and complicated. Anyway yeah, I'd like to see it happen. --ஸ Kyoshi 13:55, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Anyway we could not do image links? (Using the typical link generates [[this|]]). Aqua (T|C) 14:04, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

If we had a full alphabet of New Krytan, we could easily make some script that replaces all characters on a page with their respective New Krytan symbol.. But we are still missing some characters :/ poke | talk 14:33, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I am more than willing to brute force various parts of it. I just need help figuring out how to do links. (Thinking about it, are the links necessary? No one will know what they mean anyway, so the only thing that's truly necessary are the pictures.) Also: User:Aquadrizzt/Sandbox/Main Page, for the note at the top about reading New Krytan. Aqua (T|C) 14:36, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Hmm...missing J, K, V, X and Z. I'm 90% sure that there are no words with Z on the main page. Ignoring news and wikinews:

K breaks Kodan and Kral. Skills and Skill bar, Kryta and Koda.

J breaks Jormag.

V breaks Sylvari, PvP, PvE, Player vs Environment, Player vs Player, Structured PvP, World PvPO, Official Videos, and movement of the world.

X doesn't break anything.

Z breaks Zhaitan.

I'm worried that to implement this properly, we would need to simplify the main page for a day. I'm not sure if that would work out with people. Aqua (T|C) 14:42, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

There's no way we can convert the entire main page to NK with the template. The length function is way too expensive. Already tried it once and it broke. Poke, how do scripts work? Can you implement #if statements w/ them?-- Shew 14:50, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Replace missing characters with: this and credit the person on Guru who made it. I am sure they wouldn't mind, everyone was free to use the image as emoticons, avatars, etc. - Infinite - talk 14:57, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Infi, that might ruin it. If anything, we should replace them with old ascalonian. It's not as if people who fall for it can tell the difference. Aqua (T|C) 15:01, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

We could always do a NK site notice (red), and it could introduce the "Shadowmancer" if we go through w/ that.-- Shew 15:29, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

That could work too. Help is wanted here. Aqua (T|C) 15:46, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't really like that idea.. I'm not too fond of the New Krytan thing either tbh, if it involved replacing important content with meaningless symbols. April Fools day designs should either be purely aesthetic (e.g. replacing logos, colours) or an addition of something instead of replacement. The beta key from a couple of years ago was a good example - it didn't get in the way of anything and it was obviously just a joke; a new Shadowmancer profession having a skill called Shadow Form is actually quite plausible, and it's not particularly amusing imo. pling 16:02, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

heh :) poke | talk 16:13, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

The out-going link on the Shadowmancer quote should lead to Charlie Sheen. - Infinite - talk 16:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) @Pling: If you read a single word on the shadowmancer page, it would be immediately apparent (or should be). EDIT: (Breaking my own no speculation rule). If ANet removed mesmers not only would they piss off a large percentage of their community, but also lack a very crucial and definitive element that makes Guild Wars Guild Wars and not, per se, WoW. (Sigh, my logic is lacking, as is my laptop typing ability) To get to where I was trying to get, mesmers would never get replaced by something like a shadowmancer. Aqua (T|C) 18:19, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

What if we go with mesmer, but make it seem like they ruined the profession? E.g. a love meter that rises somehow & when expelled, infatuates your enemy with illusions of love.-- Shew 18:57, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

We could contact a well-known blogger to "leak" the info & point to the wiki. Maybe Ravious?-- Shew 18:58, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

that would kinda suck (for aqua/infi and me) as we've already got lots of shadowmancer stuff :P --The Holy Dragons 18:59, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Well we could get him to leak the shadowmancer. :) May make it more credible.-- Shew 19:00, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Eh, the mesmer could be done... Though it would be harder. Aqua (T|C) 19:05, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

It's March 31

Are we doing the shadowmancer? New Krytan? ?-- Shew 15:24, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I would like Shadowmancer but I don't think we're able to finish it AND make it look nice and real at the same time. --The Holy Dragons 15:34, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

We're running the Shadowmancer, with plenty of time to spare. - Infinite - talk 15:53, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

We have 8 ish hours (assuming it's released only at 0:00 UTC). Most of it's ready, unless were doing individual skills (which I don't suggest doing, unless we keep all pages but the main shadowmancer page in my userspace. I wouldn't care at that point.) Aqua (T|C) 16:46, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Make all links that point outside of the single article go to the beta key hunt.. poke | talk 16:49, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

If only we could get a rickroll GIF. Aqua (T|C) 16:51, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

And we're linking to it on the main page, right (& putting the image up at the top)?-- Shew 19:08, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

By the way, are we collaborating this with the GWW? All we'd have to do is put a link on the GW2 page. --ஸ Kyoshi 20:01, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Nah, they have their own fun. Aqua (T|C) 20:02, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Ravious has agreed to leak the information. :)-- Shew 21:35, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

As have others. Aqua (T|C) 21:40, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Nice!-- Shew 22:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Wiki community

i guess the wiki news section is the wiki community section on this wiki if its not then i would like to add a wiki community section with the following links: Recent changes | New pages | Missing pages

• How to help
  • See how you can help contribute to Guild Wars Wiki!
• Register
  • Register an account to keep track of your contributions.
• Policies • Guidelines
• Get help, or ask a question
• Frequently Asked Questions

i would also like to see the links:

• About ArenaNet
  • ArenaNet staff who are active on the wiki

yes i just copy pastaed them from gw1 wiki but they are useful links that i think should be on the main page also i think that gw2wiki dosnt have policies or guidelins but we have to have something that's like them. - Zesbeer 22:32, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree, save one teeny tiny bit;

• "ArenaNet staff who are active on the wiki"

I rather we not inform users about which devs are active on the wiki, as to avoid flooding on their talk pages prior to them actually accepting such floods. Restressing the "wiki is not a forum" point for good measure. - Infinite - talk 23:46, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Check out the wiki news section of this and tell me what edits (if any) need to be made. Aqua (T|C) 03:44, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

do we really need all that text?- Zesbeer 05:24, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Main page + content portals design

Thinking about the current design and the design of the GWW main page there is a tendency to want to put as many links as possible on the page. While fitting as much as possible on the main page has its merits I think the style of the page suffers as more and more links get put into the limited real estate.

My proposal is to use a system of portals to give the main page a fresh style and reduce the proliferation of links there. I have made a suggested layout to give an idea of what I'm thinking of. I envisage each of the links to the right (Universe, Database, ...) to go to portal pages which might retain say the header style of the main design, but present content links in a more open and flexible style, utilising more images and giving clearer content grouping that the extra space allows.

At this point I'm hoping for feedback on just the portal idea and whether the community thinks such a design is worth pursuing. If there is agreement on the portal concept, we can then work on consensus on the portals there should be and those interested can start arguing about layout and colours. :)

So what do you think? -- aspectacle  23:26, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I think it's an interesting concept/idea. I'll being willing to see what it brings. Aqua (T|C) 00:12, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

needs a color layout that contrasts or matches the new logo imho.- Zesbeer 01:43, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to assume that by launching straight into discussing the colours you have no concerns about using portals, Zesbeer? -- aspectacle  01:55, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

i like cake...- Zesbeer 02:12, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

second edit: if you are able to get to the most useful pages quickly then i am all for them but i also think that the most importaint pages could be linked under the main link.- Zesbeer 02:14, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I like the structure in design, but I think that it suffers without at least links to races/professions. To this, I would prefer that we keep the upper layout of the page, like what Aqua has created. This way the page does not get cluttered with links, and satisfies the need for profession links. Venom20 03:09, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Directed towards Aspectacle, but others might seek to comment on this as well: perhaps it would be better if I and/or you made a mock up page of what one (or all) of the portals would look like... (I'm going to make the series of portals now, accessible from my Main Page sandbox). Aqua (T|C) 03:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Go ahead and do whatever you like to satisfy yourself (and others) that the idea can work. I have comments, but am resisting making them on anything but the overall concept of portals and the concerns around moving the main page to such a scheme.

So in general terms, yes it is good to link everything as soon as possible, but the busier the page the harder it makes it to find things and harder to make a short page with an uncluttered style which differentiates it from other wikis. Each thing you think you must link on the main page I see as a move towards the GWW main page and away from the portals being useful and interesting. The areas one person might want to quickly find might be completely uninteresting to another user. I believe what is interesting about the game evolves over time and while the main page isn't set in stone I think the tendency would be to add more links than remove them?

In short, I advocate the smallest number of general links which guide the user to the right portal and to the info they want. What topics are that general is open, but somewhat off the topic I want to stick to. :) -- aspectacle  08:02, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

While more links might make the page seem more cluttered, honestly, does it matter what's "beneath the fold"? Kinda like Aqua said, you could try using the Portal layout for the top of the page, but then retain some/many of the links below it. If you read from the top->down, then you'd hit the portals and not even really see a lot of the links. But if you wanted to continue you'd get some of the other links. --JonTheMon 13:59, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) For those willing to see what it would potentially look like, and those who wish to help with designing the portals, please see here. Aqua (T|C) 16:49, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

My comments on the overall idea (I'll comment on individual layouts via Aqua's userpage). I find it an interesting idea, and would certainly make the main page more appealing. But I'm uncertain of the actual ideas of the portals. In essence, portal pages are just lists of related links grouped by smaller divisions (such as how Aqua's Item Database is at the moment). In my opinion, this is heavily restricting - but mainly so for Lore, Player versus Environment, and Player versus Player articles. Take, for instance, how GWW sets up those very articles. gw1:Lore is a brief (though not by appearances) overview of the history of GW and the five storylines; gw1:PvE is a brief information page on the basics of PvE'ing. Same goes for gw1:PvP. If they were turned into portals, you just get lists of links and no background on them. You're forced to dig and you will almost never get a relation between the link. For instance, to go into my field of "expertise" in GW, if one were to remove the "walls of text" on GWW's lore article, in order to find that information you'll have to go through at least 10 lore documents and dozens upon dozens of quests and mission dialogues. In short, portals allow easy navigation, but it forces navigation.

So my sole suggestion is to not have portals, but links to actual articles with a group of lists at the bottom - akin to a navbar, but only on the pages that would otherwise be portals. Alternatively, make sure that the portals are not the actual pages, so that the information can still be documented in a more concise and put-together manner. Konig/talk 17:05, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Just to add on: What I suggest, overall, would be a paragraph-format to discuss the topic of the article, then have the portal at the bottom. Effectively, the links seen here would be underneath information about equipment and how it acts in GW2. Konig/talk 17:13, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I knew making links out would be dangerous. I figured someone (and yes I thought it would likely be you Konig ;) would take the example too literally. And now I have to go off my own topic to explain. By Universe I mean merchanise, concept art, links back to Guild Wars 1, links to the fansite lists and in game events, links to New Krytan, the religions and, yes, links to a few walls of text which tell us about the world of Guild Wars 2. PvP I was thinking the other day would possibly be better named "competitive" and might broadly include activities or anything which sets you against other players in some way, but is currently a small topic for a portal, but when we have more information it could have more links that you think. The topics do not have to be as narrow as the naming suggests, nor follow the names or themes which I've suggested.

Neither would I make the portal pages look anything much like Aqua has done, and perhaps he's forced me to make some examples of my own. For something like the PvP topic perhaps adding the additional text is a good idea, merging the portal with the scant information on the page. It is probably too soon to tell.

@Jon I guess it is about style, so yes it doesn't matter much what is below the fold, but only that it doesn't match my idea of a minimalise style and weakens the point of having the portals in the first place. I'm open to understanding that nature of the links below the line and how they would be presented? -- aspectacle  22:31, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

What you ended up linking, Asp, had nothing to do with my comment. If the links literally said "doodoo" and "silliness" I would of made the same comment (I actually chose the three links that I did simply because they're the common targets of what to link from the main page). The point was: I think that a simple portal would be silly and uninformative, but would rather like them to be real articles with a portal integrated within them. Effectively, my comment was merely a "make sure it isn't how Aqua's doing it right now" (no offense). Which things are actually chosen matters little to me, as is how they are presented, so long as there's something to tie everything together in a reasonable fashion (which, to me, would avoid forcing people to click multiple times just to get to a generic information page - such a thing should be available from the main page). Konig/talk 22:49, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I which case I doubt the portal scheme will give you what you want and we simply have to disagree. My suggestion gives a simplified style to the main page and extra space for link presentation on the portal pages at the cost of putting most information an extra click away. I doubt that much information could be introduced to the portals without adding the clutter which the whole suggestion was aimed at avoiding. I'll make a version of the item database page. Perhaps with it we'll be able to see if our ideas can overlap. -- aspectacle  23:45, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Konig, so you're suggesting something that has a similar format to say this? Aqua (T|C) 23:46, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

@Aspec: I'm in no disagreement with the mainspace aspect, and there would be plenty of room for spaced out links - just underneath text (akin to a navbox, just bigger with the same amount of links). The only thing I'm suggesting is on top of your suggestion would be to have some descriptive text on the subject matter.

@Aqua: Hmmmm, maaaybe. I'd like something a bit more stylized, personally, but that general idea I guess. Konig/talk 23:51, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Except for the oddity of the text not going full width, this is more or less what I meant. As a basic format. (Note: I went and combined PvE with Aqua's item database because I'm lazy). Konig/talk 23:59, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

How is the armor section of the "Equipment database" now? Aqua (T|C) 00:14, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

part2

so has there been any new news on this?- Zesbeer 09:36, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Most of it has boiled down to me waiting for Konig's (constructive) criticism. Aqua (T|C) 18:06, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I fail to see how a project stops in its tracks just because of little ol' me, especially when I gave my opinion on how I view it should be already (so if I were to answer your last question, I'd just be repeating myself more or less). I say just create a full preview system of how you view it should be done and then we work from there. Konig/talk 18:29, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I apologize. I was originally waiting for your opinion on the armor section of the item database, so I could base the rest of them off of that, but this works too. Aqua (T|C) 18:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I've stopped driving this for the moment. I'd like to put together some examples of portal design which fix with my mental picture, but simply don't have the time to make up for my lack of css/html/wiki design skills at the moment. :P I'll try to get back to this soon, but by all means, there is nothing stopping people chiming in on whether they think the portal system could work. -- aspectacle  22:03, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

i still think it could work and think it would be awesome if there was dynamic links that changed under the amount there visited in each portal so the top 5 links per portal would always be viable. maybe that's beyond wiki coding.- Zesbeer 23:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

If there were good categories(they can be hidden) covering all of the topics within the portal it could be possible to use dpl to generate a list based on the most visited in that category. I'm not sure whether it is desirable to have dpl on the main page though? I've got a few ideas for the main page layout too after your feedback. All I need is time. :) -- aspectacle  23:29, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

here is a idea why not try and convert the gww main page into portals that way you can show off what you are trying to achieve. - Zesbeer 04:31, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Wiki headline

I know it's very minor, but why does it say it's maintained by players. As far as I know nobody except for the Anet people on the wiki have a copy/account. Sennar talk 13:34, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Those who are alpha players and active on the wiki are not allowed to mention it either way. A lot of users are future players, for what it is worth. - Infinite - talk 14:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Maybe "fans" would be better for now. pling 16:53, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

We're all sexually manipulative nymphomaniacs, that's why it says "players." 19:16, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Fans sounds fine to me. Sennar talk 20:41, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

just putting it out there i still hate the header... - Zesbeer 20:47, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

It will be players whenever the hell the game is released. Not really any point in changing it unless some other change needs to occur. Aqua (T|C) 23:03, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

All Hallow's Eve

anything going to be done this year? Or have we confirmed that nothing will transpire on this wiki until game release (in regards to main page one-day changes). Venom20 02:16, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I'd be game for at least designing something... What did you have in mind? Aqua (T|C) 02:29, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

my schedule's been crazy for the last few nights, rotating weeks of overnight shifts and day shifts. I probably don't have to time to design anything, but I'd be happy to contribute to anyone who is. Thus, currently I haven't anything in mind. Perhaps something simple like a colour change. Since there are no new images, nor should we borrow from GW1, this might be the simplest. But I could just be tired, probably shouldn't listen to be rambling. Venom20 02:45, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Orange and black scheme on the main page with a message like "Happy Halloween from the official Guild Wars 2 Wiki..." seems like enough. --ஸ Kyoshi 05:29, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

That'd be really cool to see. We should do it on both wikis :D I'm an idiot. ~FarloTalk 07:19, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Bing! Opinions, inspirations, edits, color choices... I need ideas. Aqua (T|C) 22:18, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

ironically that new color layout works a lot better then the current one with the newer logo... but on that note i dont think there really is enough stuff out there to change the main page into a Halloween theme.- Zesbeer 23:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't believe it is about content so much as having a bit of fun. Also, I do like to classic orange. Venom20 03:33, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Anyone who can get inspired enough to write better headings for the sections, feel free. Aqua (T|C) 21:14, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Bump... Aqua (T|C) 21:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

May I suggest an inversion of colours. See below the "current" and the "proposed" Venom20 01:07, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Happy Halloween from the official Guild Wars 2 Wiki,
the comprehensive Guild Wars 2 reference written and maintained by the players.

Happy Halloween! Welcome to the official Guild Wars 2 Wiki,
the comprehensive Guild Wars 2 reference written and maintained by the players.

Venom's colours with Aqua's header flair, synch asap? Also Telepathy as the missing header. - Infinite - talk 07:25, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I personally like inverted colors, but people (IIRC: Pling) told me that the jump from orange on black to blue on white might be straining for some people's eyes... I'll upload the three new profession images in that color scheme... perhaps it will work. Aqua (T|C) 19:49, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

While that does sound mildly familiar, I see that GWW has done a black box with coloured lettering. This time it appears to be green. Venom20 19:59, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Happy Halloween! Welcome to the official Guild Wars 2 Wiki,
the comprehensive Guild Wars 2 reference written and maintained by the players.

How bout this (I tinted them a sickly green and then increased contrast by 90% and reduced brightness by 10%)? Aqua (T|C) 00:39, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

It's fine with me. I updated everything with a little background change to complete the picture. If we want to carry through, today would be the day to push it live, or no one will see it before Halloween. - Infinite - talk 14:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Looks very nice Waar Kijk Je Naar™ 14:12, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

nicely done folks Venom20 18:07, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh la la, me likey. +1 for the folkes behind this one. --Moto Saxon 18:44, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) WOW that is ugly if i wasn't so absorbed in gw1 wiki a game that is actually out. i would have said something it hurts my eyes to look at what you guys did.- Zesbeer 09:21, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

The point of Halloween is not to be pretty. But I am sure the two designers appreciate your input in one way or another. - Infinite - talk 09:33, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, input is always welcomed. Zesbeer, remember to check in next year. Although not as regular on this wiki, holiday celebrations may spark a temporary change. Now continue to be horrified? Venom20 14:13, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

What, specifically, do you not like about it? Aqua (T|C) 16:59, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

bright yellow on black. its like someone never got past the 1990's in web design.@infinite i never said anything about looking pretty, i do expect it to not look like someone is just learning how to make color layouts, and what not to do.- Zesbeer 23:45, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

shut up zesbeer --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.167.132.119 (talk).

(Edit conflict) Do you *really* want to seriously discuss this after a week of opportunity to do so, 2~3 days before it gets reverted to its original state? Really? So the colour scheme is Halloween-horrid, big deal. It's not like the GWW scheme is any better, but don't the cringe-inducing themes go perfectly with the season as they are? - Infinite - talk 00:23, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Firstly it is orange, not yellow. Secondly, this is the reason to join conversations. Thirdly, it will be reverted soon enough. Also @IP, comments like that don't generally aid in anything. Venom20 00:27, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

As said previously, the text is orange, not yellow. The profession images are coloured with sickly green and high contrasted to get that shadowy Halloween feel. And, at this point, it really is too late to bother changing anything, given that it's only going to be up for ~2 more days. Aqua (T|C) 01:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) @ip NOU, @infinite Aqua asked "What, specifically, do you not like about it?" @everyone else it still looks bad and yes i could have said something earlier but i didn't because i was working on gw1wiki. also you can make something look sickly with out looking like crap. @Aqua again i didn't say anything about the images i think those look fine, though the race images should have been changed as well. And regardless of being orange its still very hard on the eyes.- Zesbeer 01:48, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Instead of going on and on about how bad (you think) it is, how about you take one little teensy tiny ounce of initiative and show us what you were thinking. Aqua (T|C) 02:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

ill get right on that for next Halloween.- Zesbeer 02:23, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Deal. --The Holy Dragons 08:11, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

"ill get right on that for next Halloween" lol, I suppose we'll have to look forward to next year then. Venom20 14:21, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Wintersday

Wintersday is starting in a couple of days. Was wondering if there were plans to make the main page festive for the season. Mattsta 08:52, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Color scheme change as per Halloween would be nice. --ஸ Kyoshi 22:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

There's this one here,but I'm planning on deleting my "christmas" images used there, if any of you want to save and reload, etc. tootle loo Ariyen 00:05, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

It was used last year here. Ariyen 01:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

The news list

The latest blog post should read "Eric Flannum and Jon Peters discuss...", since it's Flannum covering achievements and Peters everything else. 83.131.40.11 23:59, 23 December 2011 (UTC)