User talk:Konig Des Todes/Archives9

Open letter to ArenaNet, on the release date of Guild Wars 2

Dear ArenaNet,

I am not sure what I have done in this past year to you, at least I do not know what I have done beyond any good fan. I’ve done what I could as a test krewe member and I’ve been a fan of Guild Wars since the summer of 2006, when I bought the game. I was instantly hooked on Guild Wars, both the game and the story, especially the lore as anyone who knows me would know. I even one day, when finished with college perhaps, hope to apply into your company and help continue the game we all know and love oh so much. However, I cannot possibly fathom why you would do this to me.

I was quite surprised when I heard the release date of the third book, Sea of Sorrows, to be on August 28th, 2012. But now the game release is on that date as well? I am speechless.

Thank you, ArenaNet, from the bottom of my heart, for giving me the two best damn birthday gifts I could ever receive, as I was born on August 28th, 22 years ago this coming August. I have been a loyal player and tester, and I shall continue to do so because, even if by chance, this has officially made you undoubtably the best game company in my life.

So again, thank you, ArenaNet.

Sincerely, Konig

ADDENDUM: Today also marks my 6th anniversary of playing Guild Wars. Konig/talk 17:29, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Sigh. Konig: why couldn't you have just told GameStop your birthday in the first place? That would have reduced the number of times poor Rubi had to tweet, "there's no official release date."

More seriously: happy BD in advance. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 17:27, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Addendum: did you buy your lottery tickets yet? – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 17:51, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm apparently missing the subliminal messaging here. Konig/talk 17:58, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

You just won the trifecta of the Coincidences of All Coincidences. Are you seriously thinking that you can't pick a winning set of Mega numbers today? – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 19:09, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Stay inside if it rains. 20:01, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Weird coincidence. It's 103 degrees where I live, so it's not raining anytime soon.... (Unless you were referring to his birthday)-- Necr_ㅎ Шea Mo 20:49, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Dammit Felix, I just looked outside and it started raining! You jinxed the weather, despite it being over 100 degrees! Konig/talk 23:07, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Blindfolds

The last time I checked the Monastery and the priests of Kormir they were blindfolded. White robes with a gold rim and blindfolds. ~Nohjo 20:06, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I saw no blindfolds. I also have images of them without blindfolds. Konig/talk 23:08, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

a dolyak is an ox by any other name

I figure I'll let you (or other loremeisters) take care of updating links to Dolyak Spirit, since you'll have a better feel for things like whether the link should be piped or how the surrounding text might need to be modified. —Dr Ishmael 01:38, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Elon and Amnoon Oasis

Hey Konig,

do you still know where you found the info, that the Elon actually flooded The Amnoon Oasis? I've spent ages trying to find that out, because I consider that place kinda my home. So I really need to know whether it is true or you just assumed it, since it lies right on the edge of the flooded area.

87.122.149.90 01:20, 5 July 2012 (UTC)Krydiok

The map and map comparisons (such as this one from reddit). The western edge of Amnoon is now riverbed. Konig/talk 02:23, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

yea that map is a cool one, i think once the game comes out and we can get a non beta map of the game we should put that on the wiki.- Zesbeer 03:13, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

shadowstepping

You know your lore, and I've looked, but I can't really find an "official" stance on this. Is shadowstepping magic-based? I would assume it is only because it doesn't seem "natural," but then again maybe isn't.-- shew|make 15:50, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

gw1:An Empire Divided. It is magic. There's also the whole fact that the shadowstepping skills are spells. Konig/talk 19:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

arigatou-- shew|make 22:21, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Template

Konig, just wanted to let ya know I'm using your Character and Character/panel 2 templates on my character pages. I May Also borrow/Use some of the Archivists Sanctum Fannon within my Char Bio's. Thon Ghul Talk 14:09, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Need help documenting some dialog

so when interacting with Councilor Zudo and Councilor Lundo they both talk at the same time to you. how should that be documented on there pages? heres a link to what i am talking about. http://imgur.com/a/Tk24D#0 - Zesbeer 03:57, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your fix on King Adelbern, I wasn't too sure but thanks to you, I know. :) - Endeavor 13:21, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Sanctum

Konig, I made myself another Userbox for the Archivists' Sanctum. I wanted to know if you want to add it to your page or not. Link. It's basically the same thing as Niel's Roof Runners, but in a different place, and set up a bit differently. -- Thon Ghul • 18:50, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Code needs fixing. It's in the left corner and screws with the parent pages of the page it's on. Konig/talk 21:44, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I'll try to find a different placing, I'll let ya know when I'm done. -- Thon Ghul • 21:48, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Is that better? -- Thon Ghul • 21:53, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Ye. Adding to guild page as an alternative userbox. Konig/talk 23:52, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

(: -- Thon Ghul • 02:10, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Opinion.

• Moved -> User talk:Endeavor

- Endeavor 18:58, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, sorry for writing the question here and then moving it, thought it would be better on my talk page so you're not spammed. - Endeavor 19:01, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

HoM

I noticed in your sandbox, how you were "working on" a HoM template, thats better. Well, I came up with one using your border, and Shewmake's HoM template. Doesn't look too bad. Sizes could be increased to be bigger, Code could be added to ask which items you got(but I don't enjoy all that info entering hassle) but... Let me know what you think | Link #1 | Link #2 | Link #3 |. -- Thon Ghul • 18:39, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

This edit

Look at the talk page, look at the edit immediately after yours. There is clearly a bug, no? Wouldn't you rather have my version with a map than a random IPs? I also talked with about 4 other people in game who were having this problem. Misery 20:45, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

The IP on the talk page is referring to the map at the top of the article from the BWEs, not the in-game map, which is what the bug is referring to. I saw that heart on my map after I talked to the scout who showed it (it was the one west of Town of Nagling). I had no experience of such a bug. The BWE might not have been bugged either, but instead the person didn't talk to that particular scout and never went close enough to activate the heart. Hearts don't show until 1) you enter its influence or 2) you talk to a scout which talks about the heart. Konig/talk 21:08, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

You are not listening to me. I stood on top of it and it never showed on my map, even though I was standing in its influence, until I completed it. I never interact with scouts, perhaps that is the nature of the bug. It will only be revealed if you use the scout first. I cannot test it any further, as it is complete. Misery 21:19, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

"Look at the talk page, look at the edit immediately after yours." These two things were about what I said - about the lack of a heart on the wiki's map. So yes, I was listening to you. You didn't tell me before hand that you were standing in its influence, heart incomplete, with the map up and it not showing. You did not present a picture where the heart is missing despite being right atop the NPC/in the area of its influence. You can't blame me for "not listening" when all you said was "I also talked with about 4 other people in game who were having this problem." to show that it's a bug - four people can very easily make the same mistake.

But it's a bug to be denoted on the heart's page, rather than the zone's in the first place, and how it was worded previously is incorrect. Konig/talk 22:10, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I think I've decided the easiest solution, as I can no longer confirm the bug, is just to update the map. Also, at the moment there is no mention of the renown hearts available in a map on any of the map pages. This seems to be a massive oversight as you cannot search for the name of a heart until you know it and you cannot know the name until you have already found it. Misery 09:39, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Argh, the image is stiched, or someone has an absolutely ridiculous resolution, this may take longer than I thought. Misery 09:43, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I noticed the bug two days ago, you have to be within like 500m of the NPC for it to pop up and display on the map. The entire portion on the map was already unveiled, whether from a scout or me passing by. I had to reference the map on the wiki to find were it was located as I had done everything else already. I find quite inconvenient putting it on the heart page since the heart doesn't pop up, people with have to guess the name of the heart from the list of hearts on the map page (like misery said).--Relyk 09:47, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Which is what I did. Also, I just tried stitching the map and the fucking thing was one pixel off, ARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHH. Misery 10:08, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, I didn't have the issue you two had with the scout, which is odd, though the distance is not. However, I feel that there should be a list of hearts within a zone on that zone page rather than only listing hearts on said List of heart pages (which, tbh, are they even that needed?). If someone has all but one heart and cannot find the heart, they will go to the zone page and look for a list of hearts and try to find that one heart they don't have. Going to the heart page, they'll see "oh, it's bugged" and its location, or going to the map they'll see its location. Problem solved. The point of documenting bugs is to document them so that they're documented - if they're major ones, then they should be placed where players will see them, if they're not (like this one, imo) and seeing the solution is easier in another means, then that's better to use said other means - because, really, who goes looking at the notes section to see if there's a bug when they're not able to find one heart? Konig/talk 15:58, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Guild War Fanon Wiki

Hi Konig Des Todes - I was looking around your user page and I found that you love Fan fiction. You have created a lot of Fanon, so I would like to personally invite you to the Guild Fanon Wiki. It would be great if you could put some of your fanon there. Thank you so much.

(P.s: This is not spam) Joletole 16:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Abbadon picture

http://tinypic.com/r/erh0lk/6 not sure if it'll work

also, the largos that follows you around for a couple storylines

http://tinypic.com/r/2ce6f85/6

HoM rewards concept art

Out of curiosity (i.e. I'm not disputing the decision), why did you leave those two specific pictures? I would have thought the FDS would be more iconic and the raccoon significantly more cute. -- Armond Warblade 00:42, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Because those two are in-game images, not concept art. They aren't in the category either. Though tbh, I'd just have two category links rather than a gallery. Galleries of that size is just unnecessary on such a page. Konig/talk

You ommited one screenshot, then.

I'd argue that "is a screenshot" is a poor justification for inclusion in that gallery, as is "not part of the category"; since the category includes one concept art of each reward, I think we'd do better to include an extensive list somewhere on the page (instead of the outline under "Available Rewards") link to the concept art category, and include a few images as a sort of teaser trailer.

Currently, I take issue with how the rewards are presented; there's no easy, intuitive way to find links to each reward, though I think the outline has its uses too. I'm leaning towards making a navbox similar to the preorder items nav from GWW, but I could also see the merits in making a (new?) category and linking it, or having a show/hide box on the right of the outline. Further, making said list so easily available would almost negate the point of a gallery that isn't enormous, so I guess it could then be removed entirely. -- Armond Warblade 02:19, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Fixed my mistake. I agree that being a screenshot is poor justification. I would say that, with such a large subject matter, a gallery is best avoided altogether. However, people had placed the gallery there. I merely presented a compromise. Personally, I would prefer just a simple list of all items and each item's page gets an in-game screenshot and their concept art attached - as they all should, imo (and on Icebreaker at least, that is the case, though I think the infobox should be including those images rather than them being thumbs underneath).

Also, you don't need to make a navbox. one exists already. Why it isn't on the HoM page is beyond me. Konig/talk 02:42, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

That is... fairly derp. I shall add it, and perhaps tomorrow work towards removing the gallery. -- Armond Warblade 02:59, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

The category should remain - though the entire concept art category needs an overhaul. I said I'd do it a while ago, but then things got busy for me. It's still on my to-do list, but GW2 is constantly pushing everything else back besides school stuff. Konig/talk 05:34, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Huh.

I'm surprised to see you on here. Well, active at least. →[ »Halogod (talk)« ]← 04:33, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Why's that? Konig/talk 04:35, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

It's just so many people on the other wiki just quit gw or moved on. I figured you'd be in that band of brothers. →[ »Halogod (talk)« ]← 04:37, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm still active on GWW. Well, would be if GW2 wasn't sapping so much free time. Konig/talk 04:41, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Not like there's anything to edit on there lol. →[ »Halogod (talk)« ]← 04:56, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Except for the 400+ articles in Category:Stubs and its subpages. Konig/talk 05:01, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Eh, that's nothing important lol. What do I edit on this wiki? EDIT: (inb4 EC) I was talking about GW1, not GW2 :P →[ »Halogod (talk)« ]← 05:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Find something lacking, poorly formatted, or in the wrong place. Fill in and/or fix. That's what I do. Though I've mostly been trying to avoid such until the chaos dies down. I just have 300+ images in my screenshot folders (mostly images from vista cinematics which give good overhead views of PoI's or landmarks).

Edit: DAMN IT YOU EC'D ME! Now I'm confused as to what you're talking about. ._. Konig/talk 05:07, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Lol, I was talking about nothing to do on GW1 wiki. You gave me a link to GW2 wiki. So I thought you were talking about GW2, when I was talking about GW1. One thing I'll never understand: why is alpha NDA forever? →[ »Halogod (talk)« ]← 09:03, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Heh, woops. Meant to do gw1:Category:Stubs <- that. As to why alpha is NDA forever... maybe they saw stuff Anet don't want getting out? (had no idea alpha was NDA'd forever, and I'd think off the bat that only alpha members would know so... did you just break NDA!?) Konig/talk 18:56, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi!

We've edited on the same pages a few times recently. Just saying hi, and thanking you for the second opinion and tidying of some of the work I've been doing. Looking forward to working with you in future. (Also I'm not deeply invested in it but I've put up a reason why GW2 needs an article on The Searing above and beyond the existing GW1 article.) - DustFormsWords 04:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Norn names

Re: your removal of my names section [1], I've spent all day collecting the names from Hoelbrak, and plan to do the same for each race's city. I had intended for the list to be an aid in choosing a setting-appropriate character name, and thought adding the names to the wiki would be the best place to stick it. If not here, where would be appropriate do you think? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zamarren (talk).

That kind of list, imo, doesn't fit on the wiki. Category:Norn will eventually have all norn NPCs in there and already have a decent size, thus be a proper list of names (though not divided by gender). Such sections would be better suited to be worded akin to Asura#Names - describing the common aspects of the culture's naming, rather than just listing a name. Saying that norn names are typically inspired of Norse origins is far more helpful than a large list of names (and more concise too) - people can easily go to name generating/listing sites (such as behindthename.org) for such from there. Konig/talk 03:48, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

I shall skulk back to the corner then with the other linguists and compulsive name enthusiasts. Imo, having a list of names specific to the GW2 races is essential in the character creation process. I can say from personal experience that behindthename.com as well as similar sites are not going to get the job done adequately. I'm not sure which site would have better use for my list, but I shall take my efforts elsewhere. /hurtandannoyed Zamarren 05:29, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Like I said, list of NPC names already exist - they're created by creating articles for each NPC and placing them in the race's category (automatically done via correctly placing and filling out {{NPC infobox}}. There are also fan-sites to do the exact job you're wanting as well (though I don't know the urls), but that's not what the wiki documents (that is, those fansites aren't).

You can easily use that list of yours by making sure there's an article for each of those NPCs (using the in-game name for article title). I really don't see how you're "hurt and annoyed" and complaining there's no list when I've been saying from the very beginning there is a list (that's been around for quite some time in fact), it's just created differently. Konig/talk 05:49, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

you could also keep the old list on your user page.- Zesbeer 08:22, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

<br> vs <br />

I noticed you changed the <br />s I've placed back into normal <br&gts in the Explorer page :). Any particular reason not to use the closed br's? GW2W identifies itself as an "XHTML 1.0 Strict" document, and that require closing all tags, br, hr and similar tags included. While to all the main browsers it doesn't make any difference whether tags are closed or not, XHTML definition requires them anyway.
—Faalagorn☎/✓ 11:50, 18 September 2012 (UTC).

As far as I can tell, there's no difference between <br> and <br />, nor any penalty created by using <br> over <br />, so I prefer to the means of less editing text (same reason why I prefer File: over Image:). Konig/talk 19:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Using the closing tag is suppose to be good programming practice. It doesn't matter which one you use as long as you're consistent with them.--Relyk 20:06, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm consistent in preferring "open" tags, I guess. But that's because I never saw a coding difference and don't know "good programming practice" (I may have friends who're programmers and I edit the wiki a lot, but I'm no programmer meself). Konig/talk 20:17, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

the problem is when the wiki page indentifies itself as XHTML strict (which I think is really stupid to make such a claim in a wiki, but that's another topic) it is simply plain wrong to us this writing: <br>. That is good old fasioned HTML 4 but not valid XHTML code. In XHTML any tag you open has to be closed or has to be a self-closing tag. So <br /> is selfclosing and therefor correct. <br></br> would also be correct but most browser would interpret this wrong as two breaks, so you better not use this variant, but a simple <br> is wrong because it isn't closed and therefor violats the XHTML specification. Hope that clears things a bit up. - Yandere 20:54, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Considering I don't know what XHTML is, or what the difference between that and HTML 4 is, not as much. Konig/talk 21:41, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

BR? BR? Gimme monie plx i repot u 21:43, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

A kitten dies every time you avoid using a closing backslash.--Relyk 21:47, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

HTML is the Hypertext markup language. Since someone wrote the specification for HTML while high on drugs, HTML is one of the most complicated markup languages in existance. Later the people relized that you shouldn't write specifications while high on drugs. So they tried to fix HTML by forcing it into the far superior XML specifiaction. The result is XHTML a rather simple but also strict markup language, our wiki claims to use, which it doesn't (stupid, stupid wiki). But the real point of the story is that you should think about the kittens. ^^ - Yandere 23:49, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

What was that about kittens?
I can't hear you over the death meows.
Oh, there goes another one! Konig/talk 00:40, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

@Yandere: The doctype is specified in the $wgDocType configuration variable, and the MediaWiki default is XHTML. Probably no one at Anet cares that much which doctype we use or whether we adhere to it or not. —Dr Ishmael 00:43, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, it isn't as bad as I thought it is only transitional not strict. But either way we do not get an w3c approval. I just find it baffling that someone of the mediawiki people really thought that the wiki editors will use something like a halfway consistent markup O_o - Yandere 01:54, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Like I said, I doubt Anet cares about things like W3C validation. Most wikis don't. —Dr Ishmael 02:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Did you really just make a haiku about killing kittens? Really? -- Armond Warblade 02:26, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

.... Holy shit I do poetry without trying! Konig/talk 03:24, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I honestly cannot tell if that's better or worse than doing it deliberately. -- Armond Warblade 04:54, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

It isn't a proper haiku because the syllables dont follow the 5-7-5 structure. I am a bit unused writing them in english, but I guess now it fits:

What's about kittens?
I can't hear you when they scream.
Oh, another died! - Yandere 08:58, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I think you should take a <br> from the wiki for the day--Relyk 09:18, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

5-7-5 is the standard structure, but I was taught that 7-9-7 is an acceptable variant in some situations. -- Armond Warblade 20:38, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah I know but I always found the other syllable structeres odd, but I am pretty much a purist. - Yandere 07:58, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

You... you...

belligerizer. -Auron 09:44, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Me... me... what? *google searches* According to urban dictionary, you think I take out trash and fight bikes in Boston? o.O Konig/talk 19:30, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

was referring to [2] but apparently that was pretty obscure! -Auron 05:13, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Ah... without any real connection, yeah pretty obscure. I like to put annoyances behind me anyways. :P Konig/talk 05:15, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

location subcategories

Why can't we have categories for location types? Especially for PoIs and to split up the region/zone/area hierarchy. That's logical, not messy. We already have them for Renown hearts and Skill challenges, so it feels wrong not to have one for [[:Category:Points of interest|Points of interest]]. I know you keep linking to that two-year-old discussion, but I think it's time to reevaluate that decision.

I understand the desire to avoid the multiple category hierarchies that GW1W had (inherited from GuildWiki), I agree that that was messy. All I think we need is logical categories by type. —Dr Ishmael 13:02, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Renown Hearts are not locations (same with skill challenges). What aid does a category for 700+ points of interest give? Hearts give an aid because they're more than "go over to unlock" and act more akin to traditional quests, and skill challenges, while less so, share this kind of quality that areas and points of interest don't have. Furthermore, hearts and skill challenges aren't (or shouldn't, imo) be categorized with locations - though on a quick check, it seems they were - for some obscure reason - added to the location categories, despite not being, you know, locations).

Furthermore, this kind of category - while fine now - will need to be separated by campaign later, or by region now (which thus makes it redundant with the current set up), which will just result in the same clusterfuck of a hell hole that GWW's gw1:Category:Locations is where entries are placed in 4 or more different categories because folks want different ways to get to the same pages via categories (makes no sense to me, but we got Category: Continents, Category:Regions, Category:Explorable areas, and don't forget the different means of Category:(continent)->C:(region)->(explorable areas and lore)). I want to avoid that on this wiki, because once it's made it's very confusing to fix (I've tried figuring out how to solve GWW's issues, all I know is that it's caused by massive auto-categorizations - it's really hard to do without destroying the whole thing and starting from scratch, effectively altering 3+ infobox templates). I brought this up as the reason a while back (in 2010 I think) when we had learned decently about the levels of locations (which hasn't changed, except the addition of vistas and more knowledge on map completion), and it was agreed then that's something we want to avoid.

But in short, I just want to avoid heading down the path of GWW, and the best means to do that is to not start on the same footsteps. That's why I'm taking such measures. I don't mind Dungeons getting a category because they're so few - only 8 in release - that even after several expansions we won't likely have to split the category. But unless we want categories of 10k+ entries, we would have to divide PoI, area, and so forth.Konig/talk 21:58, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Fine, I've given up on arguing for the categories' existence, but at least explain what is "incorrect" about Category:Points of interest. That seems like the proper plural to me. —Dr Ishmael 14:47, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

---

I'll ask a related question: A Category:Lists of points of interest by zone would be useful for people doing 100% map completion, is that suppose to be covered by {{List of points of interest in <Zone>}} in location formatting as there's no need for the points of interest category? Those pages are currently listed as location stubs (i.e. Metrica Province, there's no list of them obviously), so what is their actual category, [[Category:<Zone>]]?--Relyk 15:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

@Ishy: Capitalization. Should be, technically, Category: Points of Interest. But that's just me being anal about how we capitalize articles (official terminology gets capitalization unless intentionally lowercase in game/by Anet, whereas unofficial gets lowercased). In the same regards, Category:Skill challenges and Category:Renown hearts are also falsely named.

@Relyk: I really hate those, imo, too numerous "List of <map completion objective>" articles. They're unnecessarily complex (formatting wise for hearts, categorizational and design wise for all) in my honest opinion. Those lists, should they remain in the long run, I hope are limited to just the list by region articles (as they were only divided, as far as I know, for transcluding into zone articles which is now no longer necessary) and those should thus in turn be in Category:Lists of hearts by region and the like. Konig/talk 17:13, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Where exactly should there be a list of waypoints/points of interest (or other objectives) for a particular zone for players to refer to? You don't seem to like having them listed anywhere, categories be damned ^^--Relyk 18:19, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Uh, how about on the zone articles? Waypoints don't get articles (there's nothing really to document other than its location and whether or not it can be contested, which is easily documented on zone and area articles). For instance, all PoI and Waypoints in Caledon Forest are listed under Caledon Forest#Locations. They're also all listed in the various area articles. The same sections also list everything else regarding map completion and explorer achievements. Konig/talk 18:32, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

mmk, just needed that page to reference--Relyk 18:51, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh if it's capitalization, then screw that, I'm going home. From what I've seen this wiki is never going to decide on a capitalization standard. —Dr Ishmael 18:38, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

That's only a minor aspect (and technically, the wiki has decided on a capitalization standard - a long while ago - it's just a matter of making sure new editors know this standard). Konig/talk 18:39, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Well yes, there is this (which would actually support "Category:Points of interest" since a category name is a page title and "point of interest" is not a proper noun), but then there was this discussion, which seems like it just stirred up the muddy waters again and didn't do anything to clear it up. —Dr Ishmael 18:47, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Well now, I guess I should pay more attention to the GW2W namespace. I didn't know of that discussion, but prior to that it was a 100% settled and mostly agreed upon consensus that official terminology be capitalized unless its lowercased in game. Konig/talk 18:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Point of Interest is a proper noun in game terminology and used that way in articles. "point of interest" is never used in the game as a common noun is it?--Relyk 19:23, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

A proper noun is the name of a particular person, place, or thing. A simple test is to see if you normally use "a" or "the" in front of it: if you say "a point of interest," then it is not a proper noun. Game terminology has nothing to do with it. —Dr Ishmael 20:50, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Arah

No, I haven't been inside the dungeon. Could you please elaborate on how that changes the name of the dungeon? —Dr Ishmael 13:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

The loading screen, as well as the location given on friend/guild list is "The Ruined City of Arah". Konig/talk 14:05, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

That makes sense, thanks for clarifying. —Dr Ishmael 15:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Shellfish vs. Shell

Just wanted to understand the preference for "Shell" as a race as opposed to "Shellfish" (ex: Thundershrimp. Shellfish is a proper (and relatively simple) term that is used for crustaceans and I thought it a good fit for crabs, shrimp, and similar aquatic foes to separate them from regular fish. Seeing the category "Shells" makes me think of items, not creatures. I know that most slayer achievements have the name of the foe type in the title, but I'd like to argue that "Shell Slayer" does not, and that "Shellfish" as a Bestiary category makes more sense. Jauranna 19:04, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

It is preferred to use official terminology when it exists as far as I'm aware and, while it may not make sense outright, "shell" is the name they're given by the Slayer achievement (I fail to see how an argument of "the Slayer achievement holds the race name for most foe types except this one and only this one" being capable of standing up on its own right). And while I'm not 100% certain, I don't think all that count to the Shell slayer are technically what one would call a "shellfish." Konig/talk 19:18, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Shell Slayer is not the only one that would be an exception to having the race name as part of the achievement name. There is also Indiscriminate Slayer, Zhaitan's Bane, and ones like Flame Legion Bane where "Flame Legion" may be in the name of the foe, but it is not their race. Do we know what counts towards the achievement? Because the only thing I can think of that I have come across with a shell that isn't shellfish would be Sea Turtle. Jauranna 22:13, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

For major races - and undead - yes, they go by the affiliation rather than the race, but "Shell" is most definitely not an affiliation. You're wrong on Indiscriminate because that is a "race" mechanically, that is to say all those white enemies are a single creature type (one of the two means of denoting things in bestiary, the other being lore-based species). Turtles do count to the Shell achievement, I believe - I'll check up on this. Off the top of my head, though, besides that it's crabs, shrimp, and sea scorpion. Konig/talk 22:29, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

The article on Shells should probably be expanded to explain which kinds of creatures are considered shells. I think that shell creatures are simply all the creatures with a shell. Slayer achivement titles don't mean just races or just affiliations - they should be taken as creature types. There's elixirs in game which refer to outlaws (increasing damage against them), which almost certainly means Bandits but could also include Pirates. Banditry is not an affiliation - it is a property or a practice. Ghost is a type of undead. Risen is an affiliation of undead. Insect is, by biological terminology, a class. So yeah, there's little point thinking of them as races. Affiliation is very close to game mechanical association of enemies, but I think creature type makes more sense because it's a little silly to think of insects of raptors as an affiliation in comparison to racial enemy factions like Svanir or Flame, imo. For instance; Ogres are beastmasters with wide variety of creatures in their ranks. I also think that, from an adventurer's point of view, the most important question that defines these creatures is, how do they fight? What kind, what type of combatants are they? It matters very little if they're with the Flame or with the Nightmare Court, all that matters is how they go down. BTW, are moas raptors? Mediggo 06:46, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

I was intending on making such a note on the Shell article. Regarding affiliation, I was talking mechanically (I used the term due to GWW using it, though technically it should be army) - the bandit affiliation (figured out by Bandit Slayer) refers to both Bandits and Separatists, though technically they're rivals and the former is White Mantle (plus those who got goaded into believing that Queen Jennah is a tyrant who's running the human nation into the ground, or were too poor to live a normal life and could only support themselves via crime). Ghosts are not undead - undead are reanimated corpses, and ghosts don't have corpses. In GW1, they counted as the gw1:undead affiliation, but that's a mechanical thing which doesn't carry over to GW2, where in GW2 they are a creature type.

In other words, GW2 wise: Enemy factions of the playable races are affilations/armies (Flame Legion, Bandit, Pirate, Sons of Svanir, Nightmare Court, and Inquest); the rest are creature types/families. Some may overlap with races/species, some - like Plant Slayer - only refers to a kind of what would be that race/species (Plant Slayer only counts for treants, ignoring all sylvari and the various kinds of Sylvan Hounds). Shell shouldn't be thought of as a race/species, just as the others outright shouldn't, though many are. Konig/talk 09:33, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Ghosts are undead by general definition. Would be nice to know if various undead creatures which are not Risen count for any of the Slayer titles (and any other creature types as well). Mediggo 12:16, 28 September 2012 (UTC)