Guild Wars Wiki talk:ArenaNet staff presence

umm

Does this have any purpose? — Renuro Seru Talk 23:15, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok...I realize I have likely missed the discussion about creating this page, but looking around I couldn't find where it has happened, so forgive me if my concern has already been dealt with. But wouldn't it have been better to ask those wiki users if they're comfortable with their user pages being linked to like this? I think linking to this article from the main page without asking the Arena Net staff about it is a bit...Intrusive. Erasculio 23:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't see much use in this page unless you're a stalker . . . — Renuro Seru Talk 23:42, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

The users contribute in their own way - some answer questions about stuff we may not know (such as trivia or development issues), bugs, future events, wiki maintenance (such as software upgrades and technical administration). It's not a stalk list, it's a list of users who work for ArenaNet and edit to aid the wiki. -- Brains12 \ talk 23:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

It's not exactly a secret that any of these people work for ArenaNet. In fact, all of their individual user pages state it outright. This page is merely to help users who are new to the wiki recognize when they're receiving an answer from an ArenaNet employee, as opposed to a player. Discussions regarding whether or not it should be linked to on the main page don't belong here, but rather at Talk:Main Page/editcopy. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 23:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Mmk thx for that info :) — Renuro Seru Talk 23:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

i for one have found this page to be very usefull.68.167.249.120 18:54, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Contributions

Does anyone object to adding the 'user contributions' links to each A.net person known to be active on the wiki? Ex, http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Isaiah_Cartwright --71.253.35.203 22:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, it is accessible from each userpage under the toolbox to the left, but I understand that you mean to put them on this page. Hm... Well, we could have their talk and contributions in <small> after each name. Not sure how useful that is, besides removing one click. I'd say go for it, though. --Chaiyo Kaldor חיו 22:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I've replaced the links with the {{user}} template. How's that? -- Brains12 \ talk 23:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Brilliant. Thanks. --71.253.35.203 00:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

ok now before it want so stockeresk now it is. i for one think it should be removed. 75.165.126.130 08:43, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Rewording

Should the active presence be reworded to something like: ...have a userpage because Izzy isn't active anymore (I know, this sounds like trolling, but it isn't meant that way). 145.94.74.23 15:54, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

The problem is Izzy wants to be active, but cant find the time to do any thing. Besides the fact, and he says that himself, he is a bit of wiki noob. That makes updating pages painfull for your hours. Besides all this. Why is this page not semi protected? -- Cobra 16:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

It should be semi-protected because you don't find my comment constructive? That's an insult in disguise. I was just asking a general question, that's all. 145.94.74.23 17:44, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Your comment is very constructive. I was just answering your question. The confusion might come from the fact I was watching the edit history of the normal page before posting here. It has a lot of vandalism. -- Cobra 17:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I understand. My apologies. 145.94.74.23 06:51, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I wasn't fully clear either. I do not know if you can protect one page and still let the discussion page open for every one. If that is possible, I would advise it. -- Cobra 13:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

As far as I know yea it's possible. Putting this on the noticeboard talk. — Why 02:23, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Mike O'brien

Should he be added to the list? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Didis (talk).

Old comunity managers

what are the plans for there pages? its been quite a wile i think it might be time to add them to an archive and remove them from this page.-- Zesbeer 22:33, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking this myself. Perhaps, even just on this page, putting them under a Historical heading or something? ~~000.00.00.00~~ 23:11, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

agreed. like i cant think of another way of categorizing them, it might also be good to post warning tags on the tops of there pages that they have left/are no longer giving out "official" Anet answers -- Zesbeer 20:24, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

New additions

I made a few additions to this list based on the list of colleagues listed on User:Emily Diehl. -- Wyn 02:33, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Move?

why exactly is this being suggested to be moved? i see no reason as to why it should be.- Zesbeer 18:39, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Formerly this was ArenaNet:Staff presence. It was moved (which I suggested ages ago, but still :P) to Guild Wars Wiki:Staff presence because the ArenaNet namespace has been locked. However the new name doesn't make sense because it isn't clear which staff is being referred to. — Why 18:44, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

your reasoning makes sense. I'm in favor (don't forget to chanche the link on the mainpage because it's still ArenaNet:Staff presence) Rhonin Soren 08:08, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

The move sounds good. I still have the ArenaNet namespace page bookmarked. I never noticed when it became an ugly name because of the redirect. --Emkyooess 01:18, 6 July 2010 (UTC)