User talk:Santax

From Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Quick note about Magic edits[edit]

You had been, humorously, adding much the same as I while I was reworking the whole top section of that article. I just wanted to note a bit about your additions that I opted not to keep:

"Some creatures, such as Elder Dragons, their scions, specialised dragon minions, and chak, have naturally evolved the ability to feed on magic and utilise its power. Asuran experiments have been able to imbue ordinary dragon minions with additional magic, as well, increasing their power."

We actually see that any dragon minion can and will absorb magic. This is notable in the Megadestroyer event, your linked asura PS and its counterpart, The Concordia Incident, some Iron Marches NPCs that got added with the mordrem events there (not sure if that ever got documented... will need to look into it later), and a lot more. The Mouth of Zhaitan was specialized in eating magical artifacts, not in eating magic; the Leyleecher doesn't seem all that more specialized than other mordrem we see later on.

"Trahearne has speculated that as more powerful minions hold a larger quantity of magic, they may also hold more of the Elder Dragons' will, and that creatures infused with more energy by Elder Dragons act with more self-will."

I opted to leave this out because I'm not quite convinced this is related to the general magic article. Trahearne's statement was more of saying "stronger minions are smarter, but to make stronger minions Elder Dragons need more magic" and that's more relevant to Elder Dragon than to magic in my opinion. Besides, the sylvari more or less disprove his claim, as their intelligence and strength don't have a clear ratio comparison unlike other dragon minions, which shows that the intelligence and strength of minions are more of a choice by their creator - whether or not this requires magic being unknown. Konig (talk) 23:18, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Uhiwi[edit]

Just checking: you've marked Veteran Uhiwi as a giant and added the giant slayer achievement to his article -- does killing him actually progress the achievement? I wouldn't have expected that, given his ghostly appearance. --Idris (talk) 09:40, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I got bored of waiting for a response so I just went ahead and changed it. I can't check the achievement for myself as I've already completed it, but it can always be added back in if I got it wrong. --Idris (talk) 11:38, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
Sorry for the lack of response. My assumption was that he's mechanically a giant because he is the same as other mechanical giants in every respect except for the ghost effect. It probably does need checking though. Santax (talk · contribs) 11:40, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
I'll add a verify tag, which is what I should have done to start with. --Idris (talk) 11:48, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Magdaer and Sohothin origins[edit]

Except that they were stated to be twin swords, with shared origins and power that matches each other. This means that they're created in succession, if not at the same time, by the same person/group. Or is this just another case of you antagonizing every lore edit I make? Konig (talk) 16:01, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Friendly reminder to play nice, Konig. I don't think the last bit is necessary, nor will it do either of you any good. User Incarnazeus Signature.pngtalk 16:04, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
The citation on the statement that "Like its twin "sister", Magdaer, [Sohothin] is a powerful holy artifact once belonging to Balthazar, the god of war" says only that Sohothin was once "[Balthazar]'s own sword". How do we know that they have shared origins, or that they were created in succession/by the same people? Santax (talk · contribs) 16:18, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
They were always said to have the same origins, as early as Ghosts of Ascalon IIRC. This is why they're twins/sisters; if they weren't of shared origins, then one would be a replica of the other and not called twin/sister swords. Hence the edit summary of indirect confirmation. Konig (talk) 17:45, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Well-founded speculation is still speculation. It seems as though we don't have anything to confirm that Balthazar was Magdaer's owner, just your inference based on your recollection of what's in Ghosts of Ascalon and your understanding of the meaning of the term "sister weapon". We should continue to just state what we know, which is that Sohothin was once Balthazar's own sword, and that Sohothin and Magdaer are sister weapon. If it's as obvious as you say that Magdaer was Balthazar's sword too, then readers will infer it for themselves. But we shouldn't be making definitive statements such as "Like its twin "sister", Magdaer, it is a powerful holy artifact once belonging to Balthazar, the god of war", when actually we don't know that is the case. It's misleading to readers. Santax (talk · contribs) 21:33, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Concept Art[edit]

As an artist myself, I love looking concept art by other other artists, so I really love what you've found. My question is where did you find them? Nothing wiki related, I just wanna look at more concept art if possible, even if it's not GW2 related. - Doodleplex 17:37, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

I found them via this reddit post. There's a bit of a treasure trove of amazing HoT and PoF concept art from artists that I hadn't realised were working for ANet in there, and so most of it isn't on the wiki. I see that Konig has started the arduous task of getting it all uploaded, and I'm trying to do bits and pieces when I have the time, but it might be a while to get them all uploaded, properly credited to their artists, make sure the version uploaded is the highest res available, document any comments from the artist or other titbits, etc.. There were also some pieces I didn't recognise on GW2 website's concept art page, which gets updated from time to time, and some pretty nice high-res stuff in the asset kit. If you're after cool GW2 concept art, the best thing to usually do is find out the name of the concept artists and find their personal/professional blogs - I've found many concept pieces for the wiki that were never officially promoted by ANet in this way. Santax (talk · contribs) 18:39, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Idris is Watching[edit]

Just a heads up, your recent edits haven't escaped my notice. If Konig picks a fight over them, come talk to me about it instead, ok? --Idris (talk) 06:45, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

I don't have the mental fortitude to deal with Santax who is literally starting the same exact issues that no one had an issue with since he last left 6 months ago. I already gave an attempt to play nice and it already got spat back in my face. I do not have the civility to continue dealing with Santax's pretty blatant hypocrisy. Konig (talk) 13:07, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
I understand. Just so you know, I wasn't accusing you of anything when I said "if Konig picks a fight" -- my wording was accounting for how Santax views the situation. If you're feeling attacked by Santax or want to discuss an edit he's made without having to deal with him, my talk page is still open to you as well. :) (I recommend making a new section so neither of you have to deal with each other's comments or edit conflicts.) --Idris (talk) 16:14, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Mouvelian template[edit]

Hey Santax. It was recently brought to my attention that {{Mouvelian}} is buggy, which... doesn't matter at all since the Mouvelian and Gregorian calendars don't sync up at all beyond year anymore, so I was thinking of changing it so it only displays the year. Just wanted to give you a heads up, since you're still using it on your userpage. If you like, I could make a variant for your userspace that retains the current functionality (plus a bugfix, assuming I can fix the bug)? --Idris (talk) 07:38, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Nvm, Alex already fixed it. --Idris (talk) 18:16, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Landmarks in Vabbi[edit]

Hello, could you please explain the reason of this edit in Guild Wars wiki? You have added 3 landmarks which are never mentioned in the texts or dialogues, and you haven't created even a stub pages for these landmarks (at least looking at the history of your edits during that time). It would be reasonable either to create the mentioned pages or revert the edit back. I am against so-called "redlinks" which nobody wants to fill with real data from documented sources because of lack of them; it's a disruptive practice. The same for the Template:Landmarks in the Realm of Torment and Template:Landmarks in Istan --109.252.109.60 08:13, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Not Santax but I know the answer. They're gw.dat landmarks, much like gww:The Spider's Heart etc. Though AFAIK no region was ever able to be attributed hence why no articles made, or they're too minimal/duplucative like Kormir's Ascension. I have a list of all gw.dat locations/descriptions, pages can be made quoting those lines. Konig (talk) 16:24, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
^ What Konig said. As an aside, redlinks are a great idea and I think it somewhat goes against the operating principle of a wiki to be "against" them. Santax (talk · contribs) 20:47, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, I clearly disagree. I count the redlinks as a temporary measure or a specific mark, which points at information, which is not yet ready but should be filled in ASAP by an author with adequate knowledge. Creation of redlinks with clear understanding that they will never be filled (or, even worse, shall never be filled) is a disruption. Maybe my point is based in paper encyclopaedias and not wikis.
About these particular places: as Konig sais, they have been datamined. Should this be honestly explained to wiki readers? The permanent redlinks are not a good way to tell this; it's possible to use another way. For example, instead of including them to location template, write a special paragraph in the main article devoted to landmarks. Look at this from the point of inexperienced player: the red links without any additional explanation may irritate them. You (a redlink creator) clearly know why this article doesn't exist, but new readers don't have such information. So, please find a proper way to deliver your knowledge. --109.252.109.37 19:37, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
You're free to disagree. But that's how most wikis work, and that's how the Guild Wars wikis work. They don't have to be permanent redlinks either - you (or anyone else) are encouraged to make an article for them. Santax (talk · contribs) 08:29, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Lore[edit]

Hi. I think you may find the original authorship of the phrase "it has been suggested" in the revision template is quite beside the point being made on the lore page history notes -- that the suggestion is unnecessary to begin with. Your response confused me because it seems to avoid refuting this position, instead indicating the potentially erroneous language in the template being somehow responsible for justifying the change you wanted to make. Apologies if you misunderstood the situation. 146.90.165.210

Concept Art[edit]

Loving the concept art you've been adding, but I have a question or two for you. One, do you mind if I move "File:User Santax golem city.jpg" to a different name? Just want to drop the "this is a user image" part, but still use the image and link to the full wall paper. Two, I feel that the Largos and Krait page are a bit too image heavy at the moment, would you mind slimming it down a little? Otherwise, continue finding that lovely concept art! Cheers! - Doodleplex 03:51, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Go for it! And I'll take a look at those pages now. Santax (talk · contribs) 07:59, 23 July 2019 (UTC)