User talk:Santax/Archive 1

Archive
This page: 29,888 bytes

---

• 2007–Jun 2012
• Jun–Nov 2012
• Jan–Mar 2013
• Sep 2013–Apr 2014
• Apr–Jun 2014
• Jul 2014–Oct 2017

Welcome to GW2W. — ク Eloc 貢 22:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Eloc your plan to raise your mostlinked is epic, lol. --- Raptors / RAAAAAAAAAA!

His plan is to hone his welcoming skills here after I did it on his talk page, and make a grand finale of it when (if) Ryudo pokes his head in here. Calor (t) 19:10, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I dunno...I'd probly get in a lot of shit if I welcomed Ryudo. — ク Eloc 貢 04:52, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

well we couldn't ban it on the basis of it being a sock because someone else could have made it (for instance i could have made an account called sock of santax). But we could still ban for the purpose of them being a vandal (sorry the routers port forwarding seems to bugger up a lot stopping me using IRC)PheNaxKian(T/c) 19:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice job

on the whole clearing up of those articles. -- Brains12 • Talk • 19:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. May as well get a headstart now and set a good example than attempt it when we have lots of lengthy, badly-written articles. I needed to get this done while Special:Allpages all fitted on one page :P --Santax (talk · contribs) 19:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I think we need a big notice on the front page that says "No GW1 info allowed, anyone caught posting such will be hunted down, drawn and quartered." Solve that problem. :P Lord Belar 19:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I was saying to Tanaric on IRC a few days ago we might need to bring out the dreaded <blink> tag :P --Santax (talk · contribs) 20:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

GO AWAY. imo :P Lord Belar 20:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Heh, a nice "nothing to see here folks, move along" notice might help Emily keep the wiki low profile :P --Santax (talk · contribs) 20:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Or a hit squad. :P Lord Belar 20:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Haha, I'll find one straight away :D --Santax (talk · contribs) 20:26, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

hah..!

Your "you have Nude Messages" actually fooled me.

God i'm a noob :p ^Teo^ 12:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

It says Massages, not Messages Teo. — ク Eloc 貢 22:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Lol, nude messages. Lord Belar 23:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

lol Cress Arvein 02:25, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

"WE LIKE LORE, AND WE DON'T CARE WHO KNOWS" I love this line!! Markus Clouser 18:05, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Question.

Where's your source for siege devices and mechanical traps being built at the Iron Citadel? It's been awhile since I've read the Movement, so I'll have to let the control of it by the Iron Legion slide for now, but I definitely know that I don't recall any of the above information that I'm inquiring about being mentioned in either. Thanks, if and when you respond! Gmr Leon 08:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I can answer that, somewhat. The Ecology of the Charr states that the Iron Legion specializes in "mechanical creations and siege towers". Though it doesn't say that they are constructed at the Iron Citadel. -- Konig Des Todes 11:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah..Nor does it state the Iron Citadel, although it very well may be, is owned by the Iron Legion. Gmr Leon 21:05, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Er... that last part, actually it does some where (think that is in the Movement), but that is stated, I believe. -- Konig Des Todes 22:15, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

concept

Could you tag future concept art images with {{ArenaNet image|concept art}} please :) -- Pling \ talk 15:38, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Okie dokie :) --Santax (talk · contribs) 15:39, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and we seem to have a few of the concept images around already (they should be in the category already), so I'm not sure whether we need those 'duplicates' from the video. Obviously, it would be better if we kept the best ones, the most detailed or largest. -- Pling \ talk 15:42, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The ones from the trailer are screencapped at the wrong resolution (1280x1024 rather than 1080p) and are missing edges or blurry due to the fact that they are moving in the trailer, so I think despite the capped ones being at a higher resolution, in the event of a conflict the "official" ones should be kept. --Santax (talk · contribs) 15:47, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

unused files

Why delete them? -- Pling \ talk 15:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

It helps to conserve server space and it's generally untidy to have them floating about the wiki, but if you don't mind them then I guess I can stop tagging them. --Santax (talk · contribs) 20:57, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Deleting files, like deleting pages, simply 'hides' them, it doesn't technically delete them from the server. Considering that, I don't think there's any use in deleting them. If these ones are in a category, it seems to be mainly in user images, and that category is rarely ever tidy at any time; I can't think what else would be untidy by having unused images. -- Pling \ talk 21:26, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Would you object if I took the deletion tags off? (I'll leave the ones that you uploaded yourself.) -- Pling \ talk 13:27, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Not at all. --Santax (talk · contribs) 20:12, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Source?

it was confirmed in an interview that more races have yet to be announced - Please link that interview --Grethort 11:32, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid I can't find it in any of the articles linked on the news page, it might have been on an ANet employee's talk page, we really need a references system like on wp. Try the editor who originally added the claim to the article? --Santax (talk · contribs) 12:08, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

It was said somewhere in this interview. The words were "The five playable races in the initial release of Guild Wars 2 are the asura, charr, humans, norn, and sylvari." The speculation of more races is due to "in the initial release." It was never confirmed. -- Konig/talk 19:13, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that it was actually explicitly stated, somebody asked an ANet employee and the reply was that there were more playable races yet to be announced. --Santax (talk · contribs) 19:53, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

That may have been the plan at some point in time, but the recent interviews they speak clearly about what will be the five playable races at GW2. I don't think that note is worth keeping. Erasculio 20:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Try this article instead. --Aspectacle 01:09, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

"Right now we've got five races announced, and we're not saying exactly how many, but that's not the total amount that we'll have, we're going to have more in the future": it matches the comment above about how the initial release will have five races, suggesting that in the future there will be more. However, for the initial release, five races it is (as described in the more up-to-date interview). Erasculio 01:35, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Erasculio. :) I was going to be more verbose but I had to talk to someone.... damn work. :P --Aspectacle 01:58, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Concept art images

We have been discussing here a change in the naming scheme of concept art pieces in order to make them more organized. What do you think? Erasculio 10:51, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll add my thoughts to it, cheers for the link. --Santax (talk · contribs) 11:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

redirects

Redirects like File:User Plingggggg sig.png are caused by file moving - the redirect ensures that usages of the original filename use the same image as the new destination's filename. These kinds of redirects should generally be left as they are.

Also, I don't think broken redirects from users' files or user pages to their talk or user pages (as applicable) should be 'fixed' by removing the redirect. If you're concerned about getting them out of special pages, it may be better to create the target page instead, so the user still has their redirects set up as intended. --pling  20:49, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, noted, thanks. I won't move your sig when I go through doubleredirects, which'll be when the next dragon gets named :P --Santax (talk · contribs) 20:52, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Change to File:Norn concept.jpeg

The image you uploaded is in fact not the same as the previous version. If you look at the female Norn, in the original titled "Eir" - the female Norn is wielding a bow. In the new, still unnamed, concept, the female Norn is wielding a sword. -- Konig/talk 01:08, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Edit, there are other differences as well, like the poles in the background, and in "Eir" there is a dead tree or bush in the foreground. -- Konig/talk 01:10, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll rv and reupload the second one then. --Santax (talk · contribs) 15:20, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Source of new images?

A lot of them, such as [[:File:Lifedraw003.jpg]] and [[:File:Chickblue.jpg]] do not look like GW2, and even [[:File:Norndudes.jpg]] is from EN. In fact, I recall seeing many of these from old independent works from Kekai. So where did you find these? -- Konig/talk 11:59, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

They're from the gallery of the recent interview with Kekai. I'm not sure about some of them, but there are ones that you can [[:File:Dragoncover.jpg|tell]] are GW2-related. --Santax (talk · contribs) 12:09, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Imo, most of em are not gw2, why? cuz then they whould be up conceptart.org or anywere else. They are not confermed gw2 art and the one you belive is gw2 I belive is for some other project, can't remember which though. --Talk 13:50, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Santax, I actually would say that is clearly not for GW2. Why? Because it is a "classic looking" dragon. Anet has stated time and time again that they are not wanting to have their dragons the typical kind of European Dragon for GW2. -- Konig/talk 23:15, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I thought that at first, but they've actually stuck pretty close to the "traditional" dragon with some of their concepts, like this one. They're probably going for a different style of dragon for each one, but the stereotypical dragon could appear in concepts that aren't tied to any specific dragon, like the 'defeated dragon' one. --Santax (talk · contribs) 23:19, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

It's not a GW2 dragon ([1])-- Shew 23:50, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Well that settles that then :P --Santax (talk · contribs) 23:51, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I have found a very cool piece of GW2 concept art like the ones you have uploaded here, could you upload it for us, please? Erasculio 20:04, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I can't tell if you're mocking me or just having a little joke, but considering that the last time you spoke to me you were very rude, I'd appreciate it if you didn't try getting all smart with me, Eras. --Santax (talk · contribs) 18:15, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Stealing....

Hope you don't mind, but I'm stealing your nude messages sign. -- Konig/talk 05:19, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Tis quite alright, I stole it from some other wiki in the first place :P you can have a snowman too ☃ --Santax (talk · contribs) 11:27, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Capitalized Names

To let you know, in the Art of Guild Wars 2 book, the only race names not capitalized are Mursaat and Ogre - the later being the first word in a sentence though. -- Konig/talk 18:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I don't own that :P I find it odd that non-"main" species are decapitalised, you'd think they'd reserve it just for the most prolific ones. I also find it odd that Mursaat is capitalised in that case. We really need clarification from ANet, but seeing as the art book is our only source on those races, yeah, we should keep them decapitalised. Thanks for bringing this to my attention :) --Santax (talk · contribs) 19:00, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

There is a case of asura being capitalized without being at the beginning of the sentence, so it might have been a typo for that and the one case of "Mursaat" being used. I think they are not capitalizing the race names now to have it in the same disambigiuity as "human" - after all, we don't capitalize that. -- Konig/talk 19:36, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Animations?

Why'd you remove them? They're much more useful than still pictures, and they were placed nicely how they were. Was there any purpose to doing that? :P 173.190.17.186 19:36, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

They were too tiny to provide any real detail (as oppsoed to the high-resolution screenshots), and they took ages to load (and I'm on 20meg!). I do like the idea of the skill animations, though, so I left them linked in the article, just not on the main part of the page. --Santax (talk · contribs) 19:38, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Really? But I'm on 10meg and they load instantly for me. o_O Is your graphics card ok? It would be nice to have a higher resolution for the animations... I wonder if we could make an animations category with an animation for each skill, so that people can see how they work, what they effect, etc. Granted these things can be explained, but sometimes it's difficult to explain something, and there might be misunderstandings (like when someone had previously described the phoenix skill as "the phoenix bounces from enemy to enemy" someone may interpret that as some giant fireball literally bouncing from one enemy to the next). I know such misunderstandings may be minor, but it'd be great if they could be avoided altogether by showing an example of the skill's performance. Do you know if there's any way to attempt categorizing something like that? 173.190.17.186 19:43, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

It's ok enough to run GW on max settings. And yeah, a Category:Skill animations could do for now on the image pages until we know enough to categorise stuff properly. There appears to be a skill animations project here on GWW, so maybe we could take a look at that and learn something from how that's done? But for now, I think linking to the animation from the page is better than displaying it, especially since readers are unlikely to miss it due to the small amount of information on that page. --Santax (talk · contribs) 19:54, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll be starting up the animations project on this wiki if nobody else does it first. I'm not nearly as well-versed in formatting, so I'll probably need help. EDIT: Oh, and this is also being discussed on User talk:Poke; we'll probably do the linking like GWW, with a link in the infobox. --Kyoshi (Talk) 19:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

And you don't find it strange

That only mursaat and titan would be capitalized compared to all other races? Also: GuildMag had seer and mursaat lowercase. Just fyi. -- Konig/talk 01:21, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit: Make that the pdf version of the interview has seer and mursaat lowercase. Which is interesting that the new link right to it has seer capitalized. -- Konig/talk 01:31, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

That's the interview that I read, and that's why I had it capitalised. Mursaat is also capitalised in-game in GW1 in recent War in Kryta dialogue, which I'd say is a better indicator of whether it'll be capitalised overall than Guildmag. --Santax (talk · contribs) 06:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh, also I changed Tome of Rubicon and War in Kryta to links to this wiki because (well, we've discussed War in Kryta) and because the Tome of Rubicon is far more relevant to GW2 than it ever was to GW1. --Santax (talk · contribs) 07:00, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

GW2W:Helper

Hey, I made a table with all of our respective nationalities and timezones...and after searching through your various accounts on the different wikis, I couldn't find your timezone or your nationality. Would you please put that information up on the aforementioned table, so that it is complete before I post it on the page. Thanks :) Aquadrizzt Main Page Designer 02:17, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Done :) --Santax (talk · contribs) 08:39, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

"blazeridge and shiverpeaks do not merge at all on the more recent map,"

Duh, because the Dragonband splits it. According to The Movement of the World:"where the eastern Blazeridge Mountains merge with the western Shiverpeaks." - The Dragonband removes that merge. -- Konig/talk 22:00, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, the Blazeridge Mountains and the Shiverpeaks are separated by the Dragonbrand, the Steamspur Mountains and, um, the whole of Ascalon :P --Santax (talk · contribs) 22:07, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

The Steamspur Mountains are on the opposite side of the Shiverpeaks. And seem to have been renamed since GW1. However, if you look at the GW2 map, you can clearly see a merging mountain range. And by the looks of it to me, said mountain range was crippled by flooding and the Dragonbrand. If you look to the right of the Dragonbrand were Ebonhawke is, you can see mountains. I wonder which range those belong to. I doubt they belong to the western Steamspur. -- Konig/talk 22:12, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

On a couple edit

"rv - neither is the great dwarf, or the spirits of the wild, or the eternal alchemy. destroyers are no longer considered gods by charr, but white mantle still exist" from Template:God nav - true, those are not gods (well, the Great Dwarf is), but the Spirits of the Wild are still actual deities - not false. As to the Eternal Alchemy bit: "suggesting move since Eternal Alchemy isn't a god but a faith" - and note I also turned it from "Gods of Guild Wars 2" to "Religions of Guild Wars 2"
In regards to this: Yes, we are, but do note that 1) The Stone Summit were defeated (in the war) in 1072 AE, where they were exiled to the Far Shiverpeaks (you can note this by some generic dwarf dialogues in EN), and Jeff implied during last years PAX, according to someone who went there and gave an overview, that the Stone Summit returns in GW2 - as such, they were never defeated, technically, in 1078 AE. And yes, we are allowed to deviate, but as that bit wasn't completely accurate, I used the official line since it also sounds better (in my opinion, of course).
In regards to this, nothing puts Kalla, or the Scorch warband, into the Blood Legion. If we go off of name, it belongs in the Flame Legion (and do note that in the Ghosts of Ascalon, Ember states that Kalla was able to rise an additional revolt initially because she was kept close to those in power due to the views of women, further implying she was of the Flame Legion). Just because she is the daughter of the Blood Legion's imperator doesn't mean she is of the Blood Legion - yes, the legions are always led by a descendant to the first Khan-Ur, but given the situation of the time, that is women being viewed as underneath men, I doubt that they would of cared about female descendants. In other words, to put the Scorch warband into the Blood Legion is speculation, so please stop adding it. -- Konig/talk 14:49, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Well by that reasoning, the Mursaat come under the religions of GW2, because they are held to be deities by an existing faction (unlike the destroyers, who have not been considered gods for 250 years). And from an orthodox human perspective, the Spirits of the Wild and the Great Dwarf are both considered false. I do support including all the belief systems, as long as the White Mantle's is one of them.

As for the timeline, I realise that the Stone Summit were defeated in 1072, but they continued to exist until 1078 when they were ultimately defeated (hence the wording). However, if this is incorrect, as you suggest above, they probably need an article on this wiki and we'll have to start looking for interwiki links to change :S it's a shame that there's nothing like Special:Whatlinkshere for interwiki links so when we discover something is relevant to GW2 we can make interwiki links internal links. I do still believe that the fact that the Great Destroyer's defeat prevented Primordus' awakening, the fact that the dredge were freed that year and that it was the destroyers who pushed the asura from underground are all facts worth mentioning in the timeline, which are not mentioned in the "official" revision.

Yes, I was working off the fact that Kalla was the daughter of the imperator of the Blood Legion for adding that. It seems from the Ecology of the Charr that Legion is very much hereditary and that charr are very proud of their lineage, so it wouldn't make much sense that they would drift between Legions in a single generation, even if the charr is female. The assertion that her bloodline would be considered unimportant because she is female has no basis in any known lore. --Santax (talk · contribs) 17:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

I'd hold out on the Stone Summit page for now, as it was merely "possibly implied" (or something of the like). If we make that page, it'll just go into the [[:Category:Articles possibly not relevant to GW2]]‏‎. I suspect that they'll only return in the form of a kind of icebrood (assuming that name, given from the Ghosts of Ascalon, is the name of Jormag's minions).

Regarding the mursaat bit - the thing is that they're not dieties at all. If we include them, we might as well include creatures like gw1:Sacred Griffon of Amnoon or gw1:Moa'vu'Kaal on such a template (no, I don't suggest putting those on the GW2 template). Those creatures have been proven to not be real deities (the first in the quest it is involved in, the second by Ree in an interview). From normal human view, the others' may be "wrong" but that doesn't make said humans "right." They are still deities - and not creatures pretending to be such. The mursaat - if they return - are no more than a cult. The only recognition they should get is on a GW2 version of this page.

In regards to Kalla: Yes, it does. With females being viewed as equals to dirt (exaggeration but you get my point, I hope), at that time females might have been cast out of hereditary lineage. We don't know enough to say either way though, but adding in the "Scorch" prefix to the warband implies otherwise. Still, it is speculation to say whether she is or isn't of the Blood Legion, so until it isn't speculation, it is best to keep it out of any legion. -- Konig/talk 01:50, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

GW1 Concept Art

Your GWW profile says you could use some help uploading and sorting out GW1 concept art. Please let me know on my talk page what I can do to help. -- Kirbman 05:02, 19 October 2011 (UTC)