User talk:TiffanySmith.8216

Accessibility of LA

Hey there! I'm a bit curious about your edit on the Lion's Arch page. Are you trying to say that while Lion's Arch was being attacked, the map was not accessible? I was hoping to clean up your note a bit for clarity's sake. Thanks! G R E E N E R 19:56, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Now while it was being attacked, but afterwards while it was destroyed/being rebuilt. I have my information second-hand, as I was not there at the time, so if you can clarify it, feel free. I got more of the impression that most of the services normally offered in Lion's Arch - like the Mystic Forge, and perhaps storyline that took place there before it's destruction - weren't available, but the zone was accessible. I didn't know where else to add that information, so I chose the Trivia section. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TiffanySmith.8216 (talk) at 15:51, 2 August 2018‎ (UTC).

Thanks for clarifying! I have updated the trivia a bit. Going off of memory, the services did return to LA in three areas, Farshore Ward, Fort Marriner, and Sanctum Harbor. If there was a delay before they returned, I do not remember it. G R E E N E R 15:47, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

So are wiki editors always stupid (responding to a...10 years old convo?! WTF?!) AND rude or is it just you?????? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 174.225.37.157 (talk).

There's no need to attack this user for such a benign comment. Yes, usually 10 year old conversations don't see much action, but there's no harm in this user's comment, and it certainly doesn't affect anyone. Be nicer. —Ventriloquist 00:08, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Dates on Signatures

Just a heads up, I noticed you commented on several conversations that are quite old, to the point where the people in those conversations no longer edit the wiki(so basically dead conversation). To see when the comment was posted, check the date by the siganture, it should give you the month, day and year the comment was made. If you wish to continue these conversations, that's perfectly fine, but do it in a new section at the bottom of the page, since people go by default to the bottom, if they see nothing they're more than likely to ignore it. I fixed the Edge of Destiny page so you don't need to worry about being confused there, but I thought I'd give you a heads up for the time being. Cheers! - Do_odleplex 01:29, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Since you still seem to be very confused on how the dating on comments works (as per this edit), I thought I'd explain it better. The end of every comment should contain who said it and the date, unless the person talking didn't sign their comment, in which case you'd want to check out Help:Signatures for what to do then. That's how we know how old conversations are and when to make new conversations, when certain things were said, etc. While the time is in UTC, which even for me gets confusing, the date that appears after it is always written the same way, it it states the Day of the comment, then the Month, and lastly the year. For example:

In the picture above, the comment was written on July 24th, 2012, over 6 years ago, which is indicated by the part I highlighted in yellow, and shouldn't be added on to to at this point. So now that you hopefully understand the dating system for comments, here's what I need you to do: if you see realllly old comments (pretty much anything older than 2016 I'd say) that you think are interesting, you should pick one of two options. One, go to the user's talk page and leave them your comment there or two create a new conversation at the bottom of the page with the same header. Otherwise nobody ever sees your comment and it's pretty much the same as you never wrote one. Kinda sad huh? If you're still confused let me know and I'll try to think of something else. In the meanwhile I'll also try to archive/move all of the super old stuff off the talk pages that I can so you don't get confused and start adding on to any more super old(and dead converstaions), okay? Cheers! - Do_odleplex 05:36, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about that! I guess I never really thought about that. I know that some things I reply to are old (like I stated in my reply to the example comment) but I like expressing myself - it's better than saying it in a word document that nobody ever sees (better that a few people will see it than none, right?) because... I don't know. I just like talking and sharing my opinions, I suppose. Sorry again! TiffanySmith.8216 (talk) 17:29, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

No reason to apologize for sharing your opinion, I just want to make sure other people get to see what you're thinking too. =) Just follow my advice, and you'll be A-Okay. Cheers! - Do_odleplex 00:13, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the concern! It's appreciated. :D TiffanySmith.8216 (talk) 18:26, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Lord Rodrigo

Hey there. Re: this edit, the source for Lord Rodrigo being a leader of the Vigil is Elisabet Kardijn's dialogue (had to use Special:WhatLinksHere/Lord Rodrigo of Cormoch to find that). Perhaps the info should have a reference tag to prevent future confusion. –Santax (talk · contribs) 10:48, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Oh, okay thanks! I couldn't find any references, that 'what links here' thing sounds really useful! Did you revert my edit already, or should I do that? ~~TiffanySmith.8216 21:25, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

I haven't, but it looks like someone else has restored the information and added a reference, so no need for you to do anything on your part. –Santax (talk · contribs) 07:56, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Okay, cool! ~~TiffanySmith.8216 21:13, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Discord

Since you were wondering about the wiki discord, we have a link to it on Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Discord. We don't always have deep lore discussions there, but you can usually trigger one by pinging Konig. ;) —Idris 09:02, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! ~~TiffanySmith.8216 16:42, 22 November 2019 (UTC)