User talk:Oblio
From Guild Wars Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Testing Small Link[edit]
Try one more time on that small thing, works in my sandbox. -- Oblio (talk) 11:44, 26 February 2007 (EST)
- you can't link to your talk page from your talk page. -FireFox File:Firefoxav.png 17:50, 26 February 2007 (EST)
Hi, I'm here to clutter your talk page![edit]
Ok, not really. I made some additions to the writeup on guide/build policy in your sandbox. Can you take a look and see what you think? Or just erase them if you think its junk :) Lojiin 10:04, 9 February 2007 (PST)
- I fully welcome any changes to my user pages (hopefully I have them all watched and will notice). Also, I will post some of this to the policy/builds talk page as well. My only comment on your specific edits is that things like skillbars aren't required at all. GWIki guides have been most successful when they take the form GWIKI:General Trapping Guide, but some builds are written so much like guides that I think they should also be viable candidates, such as GWIKI: UW Trapping team. One of them uses example builds, one of them lists builds, but lists variants. The key to both of them is they explain an environment and a strategy, and then they fill in useful and precise information about specific considerations of those environments and strategies.
- Regardless, I think this can be done, but I'm currently thinking that someone who is more eloquent than me can come up with precise language which will indicate what is beneficial and detrimental in as few words as possible (when I start to explain things, I talk to much, loquacious == bad for policy, IMO). Oblio 10:51, 9 February 2007 (PST)
- Question. What about having skill guides to avoid builds (though I'm all for role guides too like you dislayed for trapping)? For example, you could have a section on the skill page [[Distracting Shot]] that lists multiple strategies, skill synergies/combo's, common uses, places it works well/bad, etc. This would help people to decide how to best use the skill or include it in their build rather than displaying a set build. It would also seem much more like an encyclopedic entry that has all the info about that skill and how it's used/understood on the one page. No idea where I'm going with this but it's just off the tip of my brain for now.--File:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG Vallen Frostweaver 11:09, 9 February 2007 (PST)
- The issue that jumped to mind right away on that is how would you cover something like the UW solo farming guide? Also, is that information, or would that information be relevant on a skill page? Lojiin 11:13, 9 February 2007 (PST)
- I'm thinking more and more that builds should just be there as illustrative reference for something else, be it a skill page, a guide page, etc. Oblio 11:17, 9 February 2007 (PST)
- The issue that jumped to mind right away on that is how would you cover something like the UW solo farming guide? Also, is that information, or would that information be relevant on a skill page? Lojiin 11:13, 9 February 2007 (PST)
- Question. What about having skill guides to avoid builds (though I'm all for role guides too like you dislayed for trapping)? For example, you could have a section on the skill page [[Distracting Shot]] that lists multiple strategies, skill synergies/combo's, common uses, places it works well/bad, etc. This would help people to decide how to best use the skill or include it in their build rather than displaying a set build. It would also seem much more like an encyclopedic entry that has all the info about that skill and how it's used/understood on the one page. No idea where I'm going with this but it's just off the tip of my brain for now.--File:VallenIconwhitesmall.JPG Vallen Frostweaver 11:09, 9 February 2007 (PST)
Signature[edit]
Please review GWW:SIGN -FireFox File:Firefoxav.png 18:58, 25 February 2007 (EST)
- Haha, I had to go to your talk page to see what you were talking about. No sig pages. Dumb. Notice it was never discussed on Guild_Wars_Wiki_talk:Sign_your_comments. Anyway, easier to just change than to argue the policy (god knows we have enough of that going on already). Looks like small links are broken too. -- Oblio (talk) 19:16, 25 February 2007 (EST)
