ArenaNet talk:Guild Wars suggestions/Archive 2008

Leap Year Suggestion:

This year we had a special event on Leap Year when Gaile left. Looking ahead, why not something each Leap Year Day? With three years to consider, it ought to be pretty easy. Some possibilities - Using a Pirates of Penzance theme, have drops of Pirate's Rum, a cutlass weapon, or maybe introduce a "Major General" Rune - something like Knight's, but for all classes. Or perhaps drop a Leap Year potion that randomly added 29 points of life or energy for 10 minutes, or removed 29 DP. Could be individual or party. How about a new skill - "Jump" - allows user to go between areas that might require going around a certain distance. Anyway, perhaps some more folks could leap into this idea and propose better ideas. 68.99.97.238 20:04, 17 June 2008 (UTC)Thalweg

Post this on the actual page, not on the discussion page. — ク Eloc 貢 01:52, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Proper use

Hm... we could use the page to list the suggestions (linking to the archived ones) and the talk to expound and discuss them. That way we could prevent a great deal of repeated suggestion and keep track of suggestions easily. MithTalk 13:04, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes this need organizing, its starting to look like a real suggestion box, the one that no one reads and gets thrown to the trash box if its filled(126 suggestion and we dont know which one has been attended).--ShadowFog 13:57, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

The system used for skills is good enough. Suggestions could be categorized in subpages, for example. MithTalk 15:59, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Commos suggestions

Should we include a list of common suggestions at the top of the page? -- Gordon Ecker 06:19, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

If someone can make one... Would cut down with the repetitive questions, since no one is looking through all the archive pages -_- — Poki#3 10:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone, other than the players, actually read the main suggestion page anymore? Ghosst 03:21, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

No one sees the coins in a wishing well... but wishes do come true, XD. MithTalk 15:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I dunno, I see a lot of wishing well coins. I paid for my PS2 when it came out by diving for all the pennies and stuff people throw in there in about thirty different wells. More fun than a nine to five, at least. My wish came true. --Jette 16:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Bugged

There's no border on the article. See for your self. File:User Horsedrowner avatar.jpg horsedrowner 09:32, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Part of the page (sumwhere in middle) has border, but most doesnt. Anyone know why?Crimmastermind 10:04, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I guess some kind of broken<div> File:User Horsedrowner avatar.jpg horsedrowner 10:17, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest that this page be marked for speedy deletion...

...because Anet obviously doesn't read it and therefore it serves no purpose. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.215.144 (talk).

gb2/bed --Jette 00:33, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Look in the archives. Look for my ideas about the Ursan blessing. The thing I asked most for them was "Make them ignore profession". They did that. So you can't say they don't listen to people just because they don't do what you want. You must consider that maybe what you want is not the appropriate thing to do. Suggestions are not orders. You don't say here "Do this" you say "Consider doing this". A lot of people suggest a lot of things, they consider most of those things, but many can't be done. They do only the ones that can be done. MithTalk 08:26, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Player suggestions contradict each other all the time. Buff Ursan or leave it alone vs. nerf it vs. kill it. Restore perma SF vs. remove it entirely. Add more content to GW1 vs. work on GW2 instead. And some suggestions just won't work in the game. So I would not even suggest that ANet should even consider doing everything fans suggest. But they have already implemented a lot of good suggestions that came from the community, proof that they are listening. -- Alaris 14:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

This section should have been left alone after "gb2/bed." He is trying to be ironic or sarcastic or wtfever and failing, or trying to troll and failing more. --Jette 20:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

low level pets in pvp

so what think ? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:92.12.27.5 (talk).

Change to Fit GW2 Suggestions Formatting

This page is a mess... Have we considered adjusting it to a style similair to the GW2 suggestions? We could archive all old discussions and then require new suggestions be formatted in the same way as GW2 suggestions.That way each suggestion gets it's own talk page and it's usually easier to navigate and more clearly laid out. How do I go about doing that if no-one is opposed? 122.104.161.96 19:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Well yes it needs somekind of archive system maybe like Anet's page for suggestion on skills.--ShadowFog 18:32, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion

Whos the judge on this? IP 72.71.230.18 judge "Pointless ideas..." on what? Wasting Anets times? Do you pay them? I swear the next really pointless deletion excuse... Removing. Get yout facts from someone in Anet if this is pointless. There a tons of suggestions. Decide which needs to gets deleted or merged for that matter and leave the rest instead of bombing the whole place.--ShadowFog 18:29, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

This time it doesnt have a reason to be deleted. Removing yet again. This was the idea for suggestions, your first excuse was "...it was wasting anets time." but this was intended for them to read so it would not have been created if it wasn't for the pure reason as to give Anets a report of suggestions and problem with games. First...find a good reason and not one portraying the opposite of what the page means and according to guidelines you must discuss why are you deleting it, if you cant and dont start one Im going to remove it and reported. Im going to remove again the deleted tag and put the Cleanup tag since it can be organize.--ShadowFog 13:31, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

If your purpose is to delete a theme(header) let it be know on the deletion note.--ShadowFog 13:35, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Do ArenaNet acctually read this page? doesn't seem like it. --Treasure Boy Talk 22:37, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

The deletion tag is only supposed to be used to request the deletion of an entire page. There's a discussion about creating a section removal template at Guild Wars Wiki talk:Community portal#Section removal template. -- Gordon Ecker 03:13, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Soul Reaping New Nerf delete tag

I have moved the whole thing to skill feed back.--ShadowFog 13:43, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup Tag

Theres a lot of pranks and out of place headers. I need help on moving, removing and improving this page since there's been a lot of Deletion tags but no discussion. First thing first, move all out of place headers to their appropriate page then look for headers that are clearly are pranks.I propose to make it look like the Skill feed back page.--ShadowFog 13:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I propose archiving it on the 1st of October, and then concentrate on that from then on. — Ebañy Salmonderiel 16:29, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

The problem with suggestions is that they are always valid until they are definitely rejected or what they suggest gets added. So the better solution would be to make the suggestion pages a list of links, like the Skill feedback pages, where we make subpages for categories of suggestions, and users add links to subpages of those subpages under those categories. MithTalk 17:06, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I asked Gaile about it in-game and she said that she would ask if someone would go through the suggestions, but she recommended asking other ANet staff as well (I think that's what she meant). "I can ask about it. Or you could post on wiki talk pages to ask. :)"— Ebañy Salmonderiel 07:18, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

make suggestion page neater?

I figured I should make a proposal on a new layout design of this suggestion page, it's actually the same as GW2 suggestion. -- WoB 22:46, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Makes it cleaner and more "We'll look at it" feeling -- WoB 04:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

The sidebox wont work for GW1 because the suggestions here are very specific. It could work if you wanted to filter out (as in delete) suggestions that request skill balances as well as bug and visual/audio fixes. Just keep in mind that we will very much end up with a lot of separate pages each asking for something as small as "add a new pet". I personally think that we should edit the titles of the suggestions to reflect the suggestion more specifically, because you can normally get the idea through in it's one-line title. This way, people can discuss the issues throughout and should a developer come along, they would only need to scroll through the contents box to get a feel for the community's concerns. (222.152.192.252 04:14, 8 October 2008 (UTC))

Well you're right, the sidebox could work to sort out suggestions that were already made, all that needs to be done is clean the articles and sort each little thing out. -- WoB 04:20, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Maybe adding a little link to where people can ask questions to add to the "Not for asking questions"- TheRave (talk) 09:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I fixed that part, I don't really know about putting a link there, I made the sidebox for that. Should it link to some rules or something? -- WoB 04:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

The GW2 suggestions have redirects to where questions can be asked. You should use those links while making a note to where questions can be asked. (Terra Xin 10:59, 9 October 2008 (UTC))

Didn't quite understand but I attempted to fix that. -- WoB 23:41, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Here is my countersuggestion. Just remove the "2". Backsword 01:14, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

We can put that up as the most obvious suggestions and have the table for other things, maybe? -- WoB 01:30, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

If we make a template to go in the right box that shows up the 5 common suggestions and add a small box underneath that has the most recent idea? And when are we going to make this page neater? -- Ψձㄅ 19:29, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

We like Backsword suggestion. I would just make some minor changes to make sure they are differentiated, like slight changes in colors or something like that. MithTalk 13:37, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

made my page the same with a few changes. -- WoB 02:56, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Its looking more believable now. :) Add in these links to help filter people away from your suggestion page also... like this:

• If you are wanting to ask a question about this wiki or the game itself, follow this link here and it will be answered swiftly.
• If your suggestion would more specifically relate to Guild Wars 2, we have a separate area available for you to submit it over here.
• If you have a suggestion requesting a change in a particular skill, then there is a section here for you to post in.
• If you have discovered a Bug in the game and wish to report it, use this page here and decide what kind of bug it may be (A.I., Art, Quest, Skill, Text or Misc).

(Terra Xin 00:04, 23 October 2008 (UTC))

Added =D -- WoB 01:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I think this is workable. I like the thought that has gone into it. However, I still am not sure people are going to try to find matching suggestions, because you know... no one's ideas are as good as 'mine'. -- Wyn 01:52, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

That is so true, people tend to think their idea is completely different then another one that to other people is exactly the same. -- WoB 03:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) We need to format this similar to the Guild Wars 2 suggestions, it is getting far to big and it is going to start messing with older computers soon. --Shadowphoenix 19:21, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Older computers? It's messing with newer computers! I have 2GB of RAM and a T1 connection and it still takes bloody forever to get the thing to load when I try to edit the whole page. Someone more wiki-savvy than I should do this at some point. --Jette 19:33, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

User:Shadowphoenix/Sandbox/GW Suggestions; same thing, but it is blue... Would call for a better way to go about these suggestions... and it will be eaiser for Anet as well! --Shadowphoenix 19:50, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Look up, there is a section on this already, your input is gladly accepted. -- WoB 00:25, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

It's in the ArenaNet namespace should use the red colors to follow the same format as the GW2 suggestions if it's going to be changed. Also, I dont' like everyone adding a new page for their suggestions. I would rather they try to find out if their suggestion is actually already there.-- Wyn 01:36, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Didnt see the above section --Shadowphoenix 16:02, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Wyn we realise you do not like the idea of having each suggestion on a seperate page but if we don't do that, how else do you propose we organize this page? Yes there are going to be people that copy ideas because they think their's is better, but they will just have to be handled the same way they are with the Guild Wars 2 suggestions. If deletion is a problem, get more sysops. I like Blood's proposal and its implementation would certainly make the page loadable for users. --Shadowphoenix 16:14, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

The question now on my mind is; When is this going to be implemented? -- WoB 23:25, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I think either of the two proposals would make the GW1 suggestion area far more user-friendly and managable than its current state. --Regina Buenaobra 23:43, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

This is chaos. Like it's hard to listen to many people when they talk at the same time. In order to make suggestions work better, they must be organized. So, we all agree with making changes? Should we vote the way or something? MithTalk 01:25, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

D'awww, you have a metroid in your signature. Usually my screen is so covered in filth I thought it was just a blue dot. ahem Yes, I agree it should be rearranged. --Jette 01:40, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh, Blood; add a link in the side box that says "Imported from orginal layout" or something so we can put all of the stuff that is currently on the page on that page, like we did with the stuff form Gaile's user space with the GW2 Suggestions --Shadowphoenix 02:41, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Added, thanks' missed that one =D. -- WoB 03:41, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Can someone help me with the "EXAMPLE" page? I need to figure out how to get the suggestions to show up. -- WoB 17:58, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, now MY computer is starting to lag when I go to this page. For the love of all things good and holy, please implement this soon! --Shadowphoenix 19:43, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

(RI) I would suggest removing the "easy page creation" system (this) as discussed on the GW2 suggestions's talk page, here. Making people manually create the proper pages at the proper place (and instantly deleting anything that is out of place, regardless of its content) would help in keeping this manageable, IMO.

Although I second MithranArkanere's suggestion - remove the suggestion's page and keep only the list of personal ideas. Each user would have a way to present his/her ideas to Arena Net and to the community while being charged of taking care of the presentation himself/herself. Erasculio 23:04, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

No, this discriminates against non-registered users. We don't limit their contributions anywhere else on this wiki, and to do so here is wrong. You can't force someone to register an account if they wish to submit a suggestion. -- Wyn 06:39, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually, they could even force register to edit anything if they wanted. Making an account it's so easy and fast that the only problem with it would be remembering another password. That's solved by keeping the registration mail with the login and password in a folder the mail account, and looking for it if you forget any of those. Why not register then...?

If you look at the contributions, more than 70% of the editions made by non-registered users are vandalism, baseless rants, misinformed additions (like changing a word to add a spelling mistake because they thing it's spelled wrong or changing real facts for rumors), unfounded trivia, etc...). Those are fixed quite fast, fortunatelly. But when it comes to suggestions, what is needed?

• Being able to answer doubts about it.
• Being able to change parts of it or the whole if the game changes or you see that there's a better way to do so.
• Being able to keep track of answers to it, especially answers from devs.

Those without name here will find that more difficult to do, specially if they have dinamic IP, since no one will know who they are when they write in a suggestion (Is that OP? ¿?¿?).

The least users wanting to be heard can do is registering and trying to write as properly as they can. Non-registered users can do a LOT in this wiki compared with what can they do in many others. You must register to play the game, you must register to enter forums about the game, you must register to receive support, you must register to bet in the Xunlai Marketplace... why shound't you register when you want others listening about what you have to say?

It would be even better is NCSoft account had automatically one Wiki account assigned to it they could use (or not, if they prefer other name), so just using the NCSoft login would allow you to enter, like it allows you to get support tickets. MithTalk 15:15, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm just curious what has happened to discussion and consensus here. It seems that this was mentioned by one person, seconded by another person and impletmented. Doesn't really seem like the way things should be done. "they could even force register to edit anything if they wanted" I am also curious who they are, and it's really irrelevant what could be done, as it hasn't been done. If you are going to start REQUIRING registration for input on this wiki, it needs to be proposed as a policy, discussed and have consensus by the community. I believe a change of this magnitude needs to be formalized as at least a formatting guideline for the suggestion pages, and then needs to be implemented for both GW suggestions and GW2 suggestions. -- Wyn 18:49, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

"They" are the owners of the Wiki, the content is made by users, but the servers are ANet's. Who joins and who don't is, in the end, their own decision. They could even close the server without any kind of explantion if they wanted to. It's their right to do so. We are guests here, not tenants. They, for now, allows anyone to join in, even those that do not have GW accounts. That's fine no problem with that, lately there are no more "WoW is better GW sucks" kids, so there are no problems about that. But in the case of suggestions, they grow big fast, VERY fast. There's a limit on how big pages can be on a wiki. And making users take care of their own suggestions solves that. Anyways, most people that suggest things register in the Wiki, and those that do not usually pop ideas (most of the time already suggested) without any kind of order and thought. Things like "hey yea me wanna mawr storage because i dont have storage add more lots or sumzin plz". Just look at the archives. I've been watching the Suggestions page since the first day of its creation, and visited it every single day since then. And I not exaggerating too much when I tell you that most of the suggestions were made by registered users, and most of the suggestions not made by registerd users were barely suggestions at all. Most of them were already made (sometimes even suggesting the same thing seen in the previous section), or too bad written that it's so hard to understand that people don't even bother in trying to, or just joke suggestions. The Wikipedia, if I recall correctly, currently requires a anti-bot code to edit. But it's not like that I won't do that here. The idea here it's not requiring registration. Is making suggesters the ones that have to take care of their suggestions, so the Suggestions page don't end up like a titanic suggestions box no one can put in order. Suggestions pages should not be like a wishing well, with people coming here, spiting their thought and leaving forever. Suggestions should be ideas with foundation, with a 'why', and if someone don't understand the 'why' the one making the suggestion should be able to answer that. We would not be stripping a lot of people from their voices if suggestions were had to be stored in users pages, because everyone can register. Having to register it's just a side effect of the best way to maintain suggestions: Keep them separate and maintained by the users that suggest them. If someone really cares about a suggestion becoming reality, they won't complain much about it. MithTalk 19:22, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, quite simply that's all besides my point. Yes, ArenaNet owns the servers, but the site is run by the community, policy is determined by and upheld by the community, so throwing in your statement that they could require registration is really besides the point here because it would be us requiring registration if we decide it's what we want. My problem with this is that this change to the wiki seems to have been determined by at most 6 people. You don't have to lecture me about how bulky and disorganized the suggestion pages are and how quickly they get that way, I'm simply saying there is an established wiki procedure to making major changes to how things are done on the wiki, and NONE of it has been done in this case. Propose a policy and a formatting guideline for suggestion pages that includes the requirement that people register and maintain their suggestions in their userspace, have the COMMUNITY WIDE discussion and reach a consensus. Don't just come here and say... let's do this, and do it. In the meantime, provide a way that unregistered users can submit a suggestion. -- Wyn 19:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

You act like if it has been already decided. I'm just stating what I think it's best. If any change has been made it was not by my hand. It seems that a wiki bureaucrat decided to trim the Suggestion page because it was being harmful for the wiki. That was the first step. Now we are deciding the next. Now... if you check the voting policies, you'll see that not only registers users, but only those that have a minimum of contributions are the on only ones that can decide in most 'official' votations in the wiki (namely the bureaucrat ones). So... in the end, it's registered users the ones that call the shots around here.

I just can't see how bad can it be to make people take care about the suggestions they made if they really care about them. Registering takes a couple of minutes, if not a few seconds. Why the need for anonymous users? Even if someone wanted to fake a lot of people agreeing with their own suggestion by using multiple IPs, they could make multiple wiki accounts for that.

We must just see the difference between 'registered' and 'not registered'. If you see the pros and cons, the only con for 'registered' is that people would have to bother in registering. Requiring registration does not stop anyone to suggest, just halt them a bit before they can start suggesting, and if they are serious and they have good suggestions, that' won't b a problem. MithTalk 20:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, first off, Backsword is not an administrator of any kind on the wiki, Bureacrat or Sysop he took an action that in his opinion was for the betterment of the wiki, that imo was presumptive. Secondly, the ONLY place we have a restriction is for Bureacrat elections, and that is written into the policy which was proposed, discussed and achieved consensus. The fact that it seems to have been implemented is what makes me believe this has been decided on. The only decisions the Bureacrats are responsible for on this wiki are in regards to ArbComms, they have no other 'deciding' rights here. -- Wyn 21:06, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Unregistered users have just as much weight in discussion and contribution as registered users. We don't force users to register accounts, regardless of whether it takes 5 seconds or 5 minutes - the point of the wiki is to allow any user to edit anything. That include suggestions. Our userpage policy is somewhat contradictory in that because IPs can change - it's not really possible to have a userpage on an account that will change at some point.

In order to let all of our users edit and create suggestions, we need to come up with a way that doesn't rely on userpages, or a way that makes it so unregistered users can also make userpages. -- Brains12 \ talk 13:32, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

IMO we should have collaborative suggestion pages like we do for GW2. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 02:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Page is harmful to wiki.

Therefore, I will move it to an archive. It's killing browsers, causing server issues and is a massive drain on backups due to the combination of huge size and frequent edits. (Due to how history works in mediawiki, just editing it will not be enough).

Obviously, we still need a suggestions page, since it's current state has made suggestions spill over on various other parts of the wiki (Anet talk pages, GW2 suggestions (which are often badly masked GW1 suggestions) and so on), rather than stopping them as some hoped. I will base a new page on what I think good (obviously), but I will use some of WoBs design. However, copying GW2 suggestions is not a good idea, as while it works OK, that's is very high maintenance in order to obtain. Backsword 05:45, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

By the way, could someone sort the topics chronologically and then split the page into archives by month? -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 05:56, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Maybe we could get a bot to handle the sorting. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Would cause attrib issues also, if not every post is signed, and I for one do not relish the idea to backtrack through history to find who made unsigned posts. Backsword 06:06, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia (specifically Wikipedia:Splitting and Help:Merging and moving pages), as long as the source page's history still exists and the destination page says where it was copied from, it should be adequate for the GFDL. If the current archive was blanked and moved back to ArenaNet:Guild Wars suggestions, would its' large history cause technical problems, or are the problems solely due to page size? Anyway, I'm manually sorting it right now in a word processor, which would make it easier to split if we decide to do so. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:28, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Mostly not. It would cantinue to be a problem in some situations, but the rate at which it got worse would be cut to normal levels. It will ofc be a problem where it is now also, if people continue editing it. Backsword 06:33, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Anyway, they're sorted now, with headings for each month to ease splitting. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:38, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

By the way, for anyone interested, we can do a history merge by deleting the current version, moving over the archive and then restoring the deleted revisions. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:47, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I think the 'make your own list and link it here' it's the best possible option. That way people will have to register to maintain their suggestions, and we can keep track better of registered users, and they will be responsible of keeping their own pages clean. I think I'll have a look n my own suggestions page and see what can I salvage there... MithTalk 19:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

That's already being discussed up at #make suggestion page neater?, this topic is about handling the archive and page history. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 03:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, design is over all 'ok' but add some sort of thing on the side where there is places to suggest armor, weapons, ect ect. Exactly how Gaile Gray has on her talk page but red since that is the Anet Color. -- WoB 23:47, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) The page states "If you add a page here it must use the provided template" but there is no template provided. This line should either be removed, or a template should be provided. -- Wyn 23:53, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Fixed since it was agreed upon that no new pages should be added as any sort of single suggestion page. -- WoB 03:13, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

My bad. Should have removed it or made a template. Don't think we need a template as suggestions by their nature is more varied than eg bugs. Backsword 18:30, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

So what now?

So what happens to these suggestions now? I see no archive link other than to the old page, and obviously someone is removing things that have been put here. Limiting suggestions to people who have registered, and can create their own page to link in the personal suggestions area is not adequate. We don't discriminate against unregistered users who wish to post suggestions. -- Wyn 23:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, design is over all 'ok' but add some sort of thing on the side where there is places to suggest armor, weapons, ect ect. Exactly how Gaile Gray has on her talk page but red since that is the Anet Color.. . . Making a page that not everyone agreed on is risky, especially when you edit with what was made. -- WoB 00:08, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

IMO we should copy the formatting of the GW2 suggestion pages. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 04:01, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

But then that leaves the question of "Who's going to keep all these pages in order, delete when needed and merge existing suggestions of the same outcome into one page?". No one wanted to do that unless an Admin or a Bot with special privileges starts. If ya get what I'm saying =[. -- WoB 05:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

This is all well and good, but has nothing to do with my question. I want to know where the items that have been added to this since it was changed have been put when they've been removed? -- Wyn 05:30, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Backsword's just been deleting them. IMO we should create a scratchpad subpage as soon as possible to keep the main page from getting cluttered. Also, if we're only going to use the main page to summarize common suggestions and link to personal suggestions and anything else is going to removed, I think we should include a warning at the top of the page explaining that anything which doesn't fit into one of those two categories, such as discussions or uncommon suggestions, can and will be removed. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:12, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I have to disagree with the idea that everything is getting deleted except the personal pages... goes back to my original statement of discriminating against non registered users who have just as much right to submit suggestions. We do not limit their contributions anywhere else on this wiki, and doing so here is wrong. Where was this discussed? I'm sorry if I missed it, but I will gladly add my voice to the discussion. -- Wyn 06:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Registering is so fast and easy that there's no reason not to do so. The only downside registering has is having to remember a login and password. Like you have to register in forums to suggest, people should have to do so in here. That way everyone can keep track of what is suggested and who has suggested it. MithTalk 14:59, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree and we'll have to do it fast because look at the sections below, people are already adding suggestions on the talk. -- WoB 18:41, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Nothing on the wiki happens fast, that's part of being a community run wiki, based on consensus. This is simply a small group playing ninja, and making sweeping changes to one of the busiest areas of the wiki. Until consensus can be reached, there has to be a way that people who are not registered can submit their suggestions to ArenaNet without them being deleted immediately. -- Wyn 18:59, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

If we are not going to set it up like the GW2 Suggestions than just revert the page back to what is was like before... because there is no change. Making it to where only registered users can use this and they have to create a list is a stupid idea. Like Wyn said, we don't restrict them anywhere else (except for bcrat elections) why do it here? The only thing I can say is, if the sysops don't want to deal with it than either 1) Get more sysops 2) Revert it back to the way it was and let it break the wiki (not recommended) or 3) The sysops have to deal with it. I am sorry but I see know other way to properly maintain this page other that the way the GW2 Suggestions are setup..... --Shadowphoenix 22:49, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

It is not a quextion of if the people doing it has sysop rights or not. Much of the work can be done without. The issue is that people don't want to do the work at all; it takes significant amout of time that could have been spent improving the wiki. And is not too entertaining. The wiki is an all volunteer effort; noone is reured to carry out chores, nor are they a desirable aspect from the perspective of making a better wiki. (unless one have a rather odd idea of what a good wiki is). Backsword 21:51, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

By "copy the formatting of the GW2 suggestion pages", I meant "copy the formatting of the GW2 suggestion subpages", I forgot that the main GW2 suggestions page still has a scratchpad. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 03:35, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

We already restrict unregistered users by forbidding them from having their own userpage. So IMO we either continue those restrictions and prevent them from adding links to their own suggestions (so people who are deleting stuff here would continue to do so) or we lift both restrictions and allow unregistered users to have their userpages and therefore to have their own suggestions. Wasn't this being discussed somewhere in the wiki? Erasculio 13:15, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Or we duplicate the GW2 Suggestion page templates and allow them to create a suggestion subpage here. There are always more than 2 options to anything. -- Wyn 03:18, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the GW2 suggestions system is working. Too often people don't look at the existing suggestions before adding their own, many need to be deleted for reasons that go from being too unintelligible to being a copy, etc. While sysops can take care of those things, a system in which sysops have to act in order for it to work isn't a good system, IMO. Here, like I said, allowing IPs to have their own userpage would make it possible to introduce a simpler system. Or at least we could have users making not suggestion subpages, rather user subpages within the Arena Net space and posting their suggestions there (like ArenaNet:User:Erasculio or ArenaNet:User:99.99.99.99). Erasculio 09:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

"Anonymous userpage" sounds liky an oxymoron to me no matter how I think about it. And no, I don't have anything constructive to add to this discussion. I'm just exercising my rights. (Random thought: in any case, doing something like this is the wrong way to solve the problem.) Vili 09:24, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

We don't really call them "anonymous" here, but I think we could use pages for this specific purpose. A page identifying an IP user may be redundant if that user has a dynamic IP, but a suggestion list by that user would still convey its purpose of presenting suggestions to Arena Net in a way that does not create a cluttered list like this page used to be, or a mess of moved pages like the GW2 suggestions; the matter of who's the author is less important than the suggestion itself (by the way, congrats on your Platinum Summoning Stone suggestion, that's one of the best ideas I have seen so far). Erasculio 09:37, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) In that case I suggest you propose the change to GWW:USER that would permit unregistered users to have userpages, since currently those pages would be a violation of policy. As you have pointed out, with Dynamic IP addresses, there is no guarantee of ownership, so your argument that this would make the suggestor responsible for the suggestion pages they create pretty much null an void, and the responsibility for them would once again fall to the sysops when we end up with hundreds of these IP address pages making suggestions. As for the sysops being responsible for maintaining the GW2 suggestion pages, that's not true, as it's mostly been other members of the community going through them and tagging them for deletion. -- Wyn 09:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

But an user who does not want to take responsibility over his/her userspace does not have to do so; and the other users would not be able to just edit content on said userspace. So an user who made a bad (as in badly written, repeated or etc) suggestion and left it there, no matter if a IP or not, would be free to keep it there. There would be no deletion, as no one here deletes anything in someone else's userspace unless it's again the rules. At most, we would just remove the link from this page, something that does not require sysop action (unlike deleting a subpage in the GW2 suggestions article). Erasculio 10:51, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

So we have hundreds of orphaned pages of horrible ideas because no one else can edit/rewrite? Seems more of a negative than a positive. -- Wyn 18:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

We don't judge userpages, Wyn. I for one find your page pretty bad, but I'm not putting a delete tag on it, nor should I. Each person is responsible for their own page, and that has worked perfectly fine as I see it. Backsword 21:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Do take note that the claim that bcrat elections are the only restriction is wrong. Both User and Del prohibits IP personal pages. For one thing, this means that current policy is that IPs can't have personal suggestion pages. Those would all be eligible for U2. SO if someone is suggesting IP user pages in ANet namespace, those policies must be changed first.

Also note that, unlike what was claimed somewhere, IP users may edit this page. There is no policy against that, nor is one suggested. But there is not a need to create a policy to allow registered user to edit it either; that is not how this wiki works. Nor could I see any wiki working like that. Backsword 21:44, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry you don't like my userpage, but that's besides the point. The simple fact that IP contributions to the GW Suggestions page have been removed with edit summaries that they are to create Personal suggestion pages without any detail of where/how these pages are to be created is bad. If the intention is that they create a subpage of the ArenaNet:Guild Wars Suggestion page, then it should be set up the same way that the GW2 suggestion page is with the page creator, and template. As for the restrictions on IP's having userpages, you are right, and was an oversight on my part, I was thinking more of restrictions to IP's editing articles, and contributing to content outside userspace. -- Wyn 21:59, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Why couldn't we just allow users to make user pages specifically for suggestions within the Arena Net space? This would allow IPs to have their own suggestion space without changing the current userspace policy. Erasculio 22:03, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Until there is consensus that registration is required to submit a suggestion I don't believe it should be stated on the page. -- Wyn 22:15, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Why not the same setup as GW2? Everyone including IPs' can make suggestions WITHOUT liking to another page (why, since they can't make user pages anyway?). -- WoB 05:31, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

If by "the same setup as GW2" you mean "categorized, collaborative subpages", then I agree. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Because. 1. It doesn't deal with Wyn's issue of allowing personal pages for IPs. 2. It has been tried, and it didnät work. 3. There is currently no need. The common section is not large enough to require sunbpages, and if it does in the future, we can split it acording to the sitution that exists then. Backsword 17:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Using the GW2 system is bad enough for common suggestions, it'd be a nighmare for personal pages. And as I said, disallowed by current policy. (Which exists for a reason). Backsword 17:57, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Iso clarification: Who takes responsibility over the suggestion? Is it the author/OP's responsibility? To use vague language, does the author of a suggestion "own" it? If not, here's an idea: Create a Suggestions: namespace. After all, "the matter of who's the author is less important than the suggestion itself". Thus you'd have Suggestions: Platinum Summoning Stone, Suggestions: Name your weapon of choice, etc. Use simple [[Category:GW1 Suggestions]] etc. to keep them in order, and perhaps a "mainpage" for this namespace with organizational links so that it's easier for ANet staff to find the relevant material to whatever they are responsible for/interested in. If you have ever visited the PvXWiki mainpage, I'm thinking the "mainpage" could have a layout something like that. Finally, this would avoid the sticky issues of "deleting pages in the User: namespace unless it breaks a policy". In other words, there would be less red tape in the way of cleaning up crap suggestions. As an added bonus, since they are no longer "owned" by the original authors, anyone is free to edit them for clarity/speeling/grammart/whatever. Maybe even make an "Adopt-A-Suggestion" improvement drive? :) (...too little too late maybe, though, in hindsight; anyway, my hat's in the ring with Gordon as the next best thing.) Vili 07:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

The thing is, that's already how the GW2 suggestions pages work. There, people make subpages within the main article stating what they think, and then it's left for the community to edit, delete or whatever as it wishes. Arena Net ends with a page showing the links to the suggestions. The problem is the extremely high number of repetitive suggestions, suggestions with extremely bad spelling, suggestions that don't make sense and etc: since the author is not responsible for his/her suggestions, the community has to act in order to keep the suggestions clean. In other words, the current GW2 suggestions system requires part of the community to be constantly cleaning up the subpages and the sysops to be constantly deleting stuff there. IMO, a self maintaining system that didn't need the community to be always acting as janitor would be better.

Adding some links to ilustrate the discussion about changing the GW2 suggestions system: here, here and the question to Arena Net that was kinda left without answer here. Moving the suggestions to the userspace would be similar to what we have done with the builds section. Erasculio 12:01, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

All can be fixed with a wiki bot that has privileges to delete "Guild Wars Suggestion subpages". Just put a tag on a incredibly repeated suggestion and or unused suggestions that were just created as spam and wait 2 days? I see no problem with 1-2 wiki bots taking over the Guild Wars Suggestion page unless people want more sysops positions. -- WoB 17:36, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Not a viable idea. 1. It would at most deal with about a third of the work. 2. It's the equivzlent of handing out sysop powers to eveyone, albeit in a limited namespace. All the resonas we don't give out sysop powers to everyone appplies. Backsword 17:48, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

(EC) We would still be left in a situation in which users are hastily making suggestions without bothering to look at what already exists and without bothering to have decent formatting, forcing the community to clean it up. I do think it would be better to try to solve the cause of the problem, while making a bot to delete stuff faster would be only dealing with the sympton, IMO.

A bit like a builds section. We could have allowed anyone to post any build and delete those who were considered outside formatting or repeated, but what was chosen instead was to forbid any builds article other than to document well known builds. Erasculio 17:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

No one 'owns' suggestions. But the one that makes the suggestion should have the right to change it anytime, and archiving comments that no longer correspond to the suggestion once changed. And should also have the duty to keep it clean and focused. What can't be allowed it's just coming here and spitting ideas without even looking for if someone else made a similar one, and coming here, putting a suggestion and never coming back again should be out of the question. MithTalk 20:25, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately Mith, by placing suggestions in Userspace people DO own them and the community at large is not allowed to edit/delete them. While the personal suggestion pages are fine for those who DO take the time to be responsible for them, the others need to have community oversight. I personally think the community is quite capable of maintaining the suggestion areas, while it may not be perfect it does work. I would still like to see a formatting guideline proposed and implemented, so that everyone is working from the same standard. As for creating yet another namespace, I think that is redundant. -- Wyn 20:54, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't work. It's probably as bad as the big list here used to be, given how the big list at least didn't require people to be constanly keeping it clean. The community members who actually perform that cleaning are complaining here and are the ones who have to stand being insulted over their work. Meanwhile, each day we get more and more copies of existing ideas.

IMO, the second best option is to move everything to the userspace, require users to register before posting suggestions (so hopefully they will look around the wiki before saying whatever they want to say, and maybe will then see all the other suggestions similar to their own) and ask those users to maintain their own suggestions or just be removed from the master list in this article.

(With the best option being to just remove the suggestions section from the wiki.) Erasculio 21:42, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, until consensus is reached regarding this everyone has the right to post suggestions on this page. -- Wyn 22:50, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

XDDD No. They 'own' the text, no one is allowed to edit other user's comments (except with extreme cases that require censorship measures from GWW bureaucrats) but never the suggestion, if they owned the suggestion, ANet would have to pay to add it to the game. So that would be senseless. When people come here and suggest, they give away their ideas for free. MithTalk 14:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Equal difficulty in Aspenwood Gate to both: luxons and kurzicks

It's more easier to make this PvP battle with the kurzicks than with the luxons because one kurzick's monk can keep the NPCs alive, and the turtle are stopped. I think, it would be good thing to switch luxons and kurzicks beetween many runs --Lolo 32 21:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

No, because if you can't win and you're lux, you're fucking bad. 1 SH or UG ele + 1 rend mesmer = GG KURZICKS. Plus, lern2prot/heal turtle and heal your luxon warriors. FA is balanced, if not LUXON ADVANTAGE, if you don't suck balls at gws. So l2p and stop qqing. 82.34.128.19 18:26, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Kurzicks need only to put up minimal effort to win. Although, it was almost the complete opposite before the timer reduction. Regardless, the large difference in population between the waiting kurz and lux says it all. A.net had the right idea reducing the timer, but it just needs more tweaking. --8765 18:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

People just can't stop failing and bring enchantment removals for once.152.226.7.213 03:37, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Don't vandalize others' comments and please read Guild Wars Wiki:No personal attacks before attempting to enforce it. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 01:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

So please direct us to the rules against offensive language, because it should be censored. It's a wiki, it should be appropriate to a general audience. -- Alaris 05:14, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

There aren't any, Guild Wars Wiki:Be civil is stalled in the draft stage. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:58, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Gordon is right. Unless it's an attack directed againt yourself and on your talk page, removal is not allowed for censorship reasons, only to preven further actions. Backsword 17:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

(In kurz team, you bring wrong skill, you dont act right YOU GET YELLED at in team chat,) I've fought and seen luxon warrior's who brings 5 fire spells, monks with spoil victor etc etc and do you know what's happening in kurzick team chat? we are laughing, some can't even control it so they talk in ALL chat insulting luxons for playing bad. ARE YOU SURE the issue is the kurzick/map/mechanics and not from the luxons? QQ some more it doesnt change the fact that you guys are bad. When you got a time come visit Kurzick FA outpost and you'll notice every once in awhile when players comeback playing, they start to talk about how luxons mess up as well as other strategy to win, what do you see in luxon outpost? what do you see in luxon team chat? NOTHING.--Ridz16 23:17, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Just STOP

Stop moving people's suggestions into userspace. No decision has been made on this, and until it has been, everyone has the right to post a suggestion on the suggestion page. If the poster wishes to create a personal suggestion page to link here they have that option, but it is NOT required, so stop making it seem as though it is. -- Wyn 22:48, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Everyone else also has a right to edit the page, Wyn. No decision to ban that has been made, so stop making it seem as though it has. Backsword 22:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Like I have just said on Backsword's page, it is a good temporary measure until people decide what to do on the sections above. If people just kept adding suggestions here, it would go back to the mess this page was a week ago, and it would have to be archived again, and so on. With suggestions being moved to the userspace they are still available, and so far I have yet to see someone whose suggestion was moved complaining about it. Erasculio 22:52, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Yet when someone DOES edit the page and add a suggestion you guys are pretty much immediately moving it into userspace, which you don't have the right to do by POLICY, and by doing so, you are removing the community oversight and the option for the community to edit/refine the suggestion since we no longer have the right to edit it as it is in userspace. Propose your policy/guideline for the changes you want to see. -- Wyn 23:00, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

But I'm allowed to edit the suggestion when it's placed on the community space, which means I'm also allowed to move it, just like many GW2 suggestions have been moved around. And the old list that was in place here at the GW1 suggestions page also didn't allow people to refine the suggestion, users only commented on it. If it would require a policy/guideline to change this formatting (and since it's only formatting, I don't see the point of a policy), it would also require a policy/guideline to change from the current GW1 suggestions style (seen on the archive) to a style in which the community actually edited/refined the suggestions. Erasculio 23:05, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Wyn, policy is not required to edit articles. This is how things always have been. Policy is needed in order to ban people from editing. Backsword 23:08, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

But consensus is required when the functionality of a page is being changed, which is the case here. As it is said above, until consensus is reached probably it would be better to leave things as they are. Forcing the changes so in the end we have to take one option because "it is already there" is not really the way to go.--Fighterdoken 23:13, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Funcunally, it's still a page on the wiki. So I don't really get you there. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "leaving things as they are" either, but if you are suggesting protecting the page from edits until a concensus has been reached, I could see that. I'd be preferable to a rw. Backsword 23:28, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

from GWW:USER "Unless correcting a policy violation or making a maintenance edit, users should avoid making edits in another user's user space against their wishes (not including talk pages). All such edits must include an appropriate summary message explaining the edit. If the reason for the edit may not be immediately obvious, add further explanation on that user's talk page." I don't see creating suggestion subpages in someone else's userspace to be either correcting a policy violation, or making a maintenance edit. IMO by doing so you are violating policy. -- Wyn 23:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

(EC)Fighterdoken: But that's my point. If we just kept the old design because "it is already there", we would be preventing the page from becoming better. There has never been written consensus on how this page works; there is no guideline nor any policy about this. The change we are (temporarily) implementing doesn't go against anything other than what was there and wasn't considered satisfatory in the first place. Changing it just kept being postponed and postponed.

Wyn: "against their wishes". See the discussion in the Admin noticeboard about Armond's edit on Noxify's userspace for an example of how editing an userpage is not forbidden unless stated otherwise. Assume good faith. Not to mention I have explained on the user's talk page about the move. Erasculio 23:22, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Still, a status quo was stablished for the page, since everyone used it in a certain way because everyone else was using it in the same way. In practice, the status quo should also be considerated "concensus", at least until challenged. Once it was challenged, we have to reach concensus on the changes, otherwise we end with troubles like this one.--Fighterdoken 23:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

We are going to run into trouble (as described here) if we just go back to the old format. Had it been the result of a discussion or been praised as something worth keeping, then I agree it would be better to default back to it. Also, if the users whose suggestions were moved had complained, I would also agree in moving their suggestions back. However, given how none of that has happened, I don't think the old status quo could considered a consensus, nor that the current changes are a breach in that consensus. They are changes, yes, but more for something that has always been seen as flawed than for something truly accepted by consensus. Erasculio 23:42, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

They are changes over something that has been always flawed, true, but contested changes related to an on-going discussion about the formatting of the page, and thus innapropiate unless you where intending on using them as example or to see how they work outside of theory. I agree that the old format was a nightmare, and the current one is an improvement in that regard, but still you can't just impose your opinion on how the page should work and expect no one complaining about it. It's to avoid that, and to avoid revert wars that we "discuss before implementing", and not the other way around.--Fighterdoken 23:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

But if it is an improvement...I would agree in doing nothing if there were two equally good options being discussed, but for now our options are between the old system (that has yet to be stated to be better than the current one, as far as a place holder for the definitive format goes) and the one being used right now. All being discussed is that the old format was older, not that it was better, to the point in which there has been no questioning about how the current system would be worse than what existed before. If it is accepted as being better, wouldn't it be wiser to implement it (temporarilly, of course)? Erasculio 23:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

The thing is, that "improvement" was challenged, and should have been reverted when that happened. Instead, i see that you guys just kept going ignoring the concerns in the discussions above.--Fighterdoken 00:03, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

I have seen questioned the idea of deleting suggestions made by IP users, something I also disagree with and that I have never done myself. Sincerily I haven't seen anyone stating that moving suggestions to the userpages of users who may have userpages is worse than the big list we had before. Erasculio 00:06, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Whether it is better or worse is irrelevant. I see someone in this same thread argumenting for suggestions staying on the page (and the "anon" discussion is just a fragment of the whole moving discussion as i see it). 1<>0.--Fighterdoken 00:12, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

That's where we disagree. IMO, it being better is the most relevant thing - if it is unquestionably better than the old format (instead of being better than the GW2 system, as is being discussed in the section above), isn't that reason enough to have it replace said old format? Erasculio 00:18, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

And that is exactly the problem. It is "your opinion" that the change is unquetionably better, not a fact. You giving your opinion a "fact" status is what has us discussing here on something that is not the real issue :).--Fighterdoken 00:28, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Ay.e I don't get what either of you are refering to. It seem like nonissues based on nonfacts to me. Backsword 00:31, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

But I don't mean "unquestionably" as in definitely; rather in that no one has questioned its quality so far. Had one of the users who have had his/her suggestion moved complained, I would have moved it back; had someone said "I have a better system that I will implement now" and that system were better as far as I could tell, I would not oppose having it implemented instead of the current one. But for now the current system is seen as better than the old one, and no one has questioned that - no one has questioned its merit in comparison with the old one, and that's why I say it is unquestionably better. And if it truly is unquestionably better...Why not implement it already? Erasculio 00:40, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Which is why I haven't. However, I'd assume good faith and believe those three people belived that the user in question wanted the suggestions preserved. Backsword 23:32, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

How about: requiring them to be in Userspace is removed. However, results in userspace get to be linked on the front page in that table. All others have to be properly categorized? --JonTheMon 23:36, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

What would prevent them from being preserved on the page? Or a subpage of Suggestions? You talk as though if they weren't moved to userspace they would not be preserved.... and why would/should that be? -- Wyn 23:39, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

All those suggestions are interesting, but they would be forbidden if we are not allowed to change anything about this page. I'm not claiming the current method is the best one possible or what should be the definitive answer. Rather that, as far as a temporary solution goes, it's better than the old list we used to have in this article. Ideally people would continue to discuss a definitive format (...instead of dedicating all their energy to complain about a temporary change to something that didn't really work). Erasculio 23:44, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

You know why, Wyn. Backsword 23:46, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I just wanted to see you say it Backsword but since you won't, I will... because you and Erasculio have decided that anything else is going to be deleted. -- Wyn 23:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

...What are you talking about? I haven't deleted anything, and I don't aprove deleting anything. Erasculio 23:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

@Erasculio "I haven't seen anyone stating that moving suggestions to the userpages of users who may have userpages is worse than the big list we had before." I believe I have mentioned that moving suggestions into userspace eliminates the ability of the community to edit/refine those suggestions taking them out of the community oversight and I believe poke also commented on not having suggestions in userspace in an earlier discussion. Which is why I'm asking that you stop doing it. Feel free to post on the user's talk page and offer them the alternative of providing a "Personal Suggestions" page but stop just moving their suggestions. -- Wyn 00:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Wyn, you are comparing the current format with one that has never existed here. I'm comparing the current format (in which you're right, the community does not refine the suggestions) with the old format that was in place here (the big list in which the community did not refine or edit the suggestions). If you feel you could implement a system like the one you and poke are basing your comparisons, like the GW2 system, then go ahead, it is better (as a temporary measure) than the system that we used to have here. But you would still be doing the same thing you're forbidding me from doing. Erasculio 00:46, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

I still don't understand why the system for GW2 suggestions was not implemented here, it should have been in the very beginning. As for implementing a temporary solution, well, imo the GW2 system would have been better and have less controversy than what is happening now. The GW2 suggestion page has the alternative for personal suggestion pages, as well as the option for all wiki users to submit suggestions. The only thing I would agree doesn't work and should be eliminated is the scratchpad. Keep the common suggestions as are listed currently, but require that each suggestion has it's own subpage, either as a personally maintained suggestion page, or a subpage of the suggestion page, categorized the same way the GW2 suggestions are. Again, it's not a perfect solution, but it is non restrictive to contributions, and allows the community revision/oversight that has been determined appropriate for suggestion pages. -- Wyn 00:53, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

IMO, feel free to implement it right now, then. I haven't done so myself because I lack knowledge to implement it and because I think the current system is better (although that's definitely something I would compromise about). I doubt very much someone would claim that the old format was better than the GW2 system, just as no one has said that the old format was better than the current system. Erasculio 01:02, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Folks, please take a chill pill. Why not make the page the same layout as it was then implement an AGREED UPON layout? I know I might seem a little harsh but seriously this is getting out of hand, what started as a simple observation now turned into a full on war, for my sanity and maybe others agree upon a layout but meanwhile have the page the same way it was linking to the archive. -- WoB 03:52, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone have any problems with using the same format as the GW2 suggestions without the scratchpad? And then wait for some sort of response from this and then either revise or propose simply removing suggestions all together? -- Wyn 09:03, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

No objection here, if by "without the scratchpad" you mean "without the scratchpad as part of the main page". IMO we should have a separate scratchpad in order to have a central location to move all the off-topic suggestions to (and possibly get half-baked suggestions vetted). -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 09:36, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

No objection here as well. Erasculio 09:38, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

This is what I had in mind. If you really feel we should add a separate scratchpad that can be done, however I think letting the subpage be created and use the discussion to deal with the 'half baked' suggestions and simply delete them is better. Having a page where people can just add a suggestion forum style will result in the same problem we had with the way this was before, and that we see with the GW2 suggestions scratchpad. -- Wyn 09:46, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

What about suggestions posted on other talk pages and talk-like pages? Currently, there seems to be an informal policy of moving off-topic discussions to the appropriate talk page (possibly a user talk page if the discussion or tangent was started by a registered user) or leaving them where they are rather than cutting them completely. Even personal attacks are only cut in extremely narrow circumstances. The only things which are casually cut are vandalism and spam. Only a few pages, such as Izzy's talk page and the "ask a question" pages have broader rules for removal, and those pages explicitly state the removal criteria. If we're going to start cutting misplaced sugestions throughout the wiki, I think we should mention it in the article retention policy page, or an appropriate guideline, such as a guideline for talk pages or suggestions. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 10:34, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe in having just a dumping ground. While it may start out as a place for people to move off topic suggestions, it will end up a simple place for everyone to post a suggestion. If we really want to try to keep this organized, going to the extra effort to move them to an appropriately categorized subpage is not an unreasonable idea. -- Wyn 10:40, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Moving the ideas to the proper place may be more time consuming, but it would keep things far more organized. Erasculio 11:51, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

No objection here as well. -- WoB 17:40, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Done. -- Wyn 18:32, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

I've forked off the scratchpad discussion. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 01:58, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Scratchpad

In response to Erasculio's post in the previous topic, what's the "proper place" for a suggestion which doesn't have a sugestion page yet? Should we make a suggestion page in order to have a talk page to move that comment to? What if it's a really bad suggestion is bad, impractical, a joke or trolling, and the suggestion page will probably be deleted? -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 01:58, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

If it's a suggestion, it gets a suggestion page, if it's discussion about that suggestion it goes on the talk page, if it's trolling, treat it as such, if it's a bad suggestion let it be treated as a bad suggestion and deleted. -- Wyn 02:06, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

If it gets moved to a suggestion page rather than a talk page, it could cause attribution issues if we strip out the signature and don't mention the source page. If we strip the signature off of a suggestion and then allow it to be collaboratively edited, the original suggestion is gone, how is that different from simple cutting the original post from a talk page and posting a suggestion entry based on it? How would we handle suggestion-related threads? Would the entire thread be moved to the talk page, with a suggestion written up on the suggestion page in the page creator's own words in order to avoid attribution issues? -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 02:52, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

That's a problem we already have at the scratch pad. I'm not sure attribution is that important regarding the suggestions, but IMO, move the entire discussion to the talk page and make a copy of the suggestion itself (what I believe would be the first entry in the discussion) in the suggestion page. So no matter how much the original suggestions is edited, the talk page would have a record of who made it in the first place. Erasculio 16:39, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

IMO that should would work as long as we mention the source page (probably with the {{moved}} tag). -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 02:45, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

issues

New Suggestions do not show up in their category as they are supposed to. -- WoB 05:34, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Never mind just takes a little longer to respond to new pages. -- WoB 05:35, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

It was broken, poke helped me fix it. -- Wyn 05:36, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Alright, phew =D -- WoB 05:37, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Small Guild Hall Enchancment

This isn't anything big or hard for anet to implement, but it would be great to be able to see who is the guild leader for a guild that is currently in your alliance. I'm running a guild and being the alliance leader its very difficult to contact guild leader of the alliance guild, when not knowing the name of the person. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:99.235.126.200 (talk).

Complete rosters would be troublesome, but as flags can be seen, Leaders should too. MithTalk 15:10, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I would like to point out that this talk page is not for the posting of suggestions. If you have a suggestion to make and discuss, please create the appropriate suggestion page. Thanks! -- Wyn 17:27, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I would like to point out that this talk page is not for the posting of suggestions. If you have a suggestion to make and discuss, please create the appropriate suggestion page. Thanks! -- Wyn 17:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)