User talk:Tennessee Ernie Ford/Archive 04

first spam!
hi!--El_Nazgir 15:11, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * greets! Thanks, that white space was looking anemic.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 18:07, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Second! Arnout aka The Emperors Angel 09:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

The notes section in a mission article
You seem to be shifting a lot of mission advice to the notes section, which isn't really what it's there for. The notes section is basically a collection of things that go just fine on a mission page but don't really belong anywhere else. In particular, it doesn't include useful advice on how to beat a mission, as that goes in the walkthrough.

I've reverted your changes to the Thunderhead Keep page on the basis that you cut out way too much. It's not a hard mission, but it does have a lot of odd quirks to it. It also reputedly gives a lot of people trouble, perhaps because odd details catch them off guard. From personal experience, failing the bonus because you weren't sure what to do with lighting the torches is not fun.

As long as the mission article is, it used to be much, much longer. What's left in the walkthrough is mostly stuff that could be of use to someone who wants to beat the mission. Quizzical 01:37, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Think of it as "would I find this useful if I have never ever done this mission before?" If you would appreciate the information, leave it be.  This mission has a loooooong boring into before the actual mission starts, so trial and error are just not the best way to learn, and it's always good to get all the info you can before you try it.  Vital information that pertains to the primary/bonus objectives should not go into notes.  RoseOfKali [[Image:RoseOfKaliSIG.png]] 22:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I have no problem with reverts whenever anyone thinks an edit does a poor job of meeting the article's goals. Especially in this case, since I am sure we have the same objectives (helping noobs, 1st timers, and hey-it's-been-a-while to succeed on 1st attempt). You have been around a lot longer than I, you know, and (without doubt) you play the game better, so I respect that you think my edit failed to do the job.


 * For what it's worth, my inspiration for overhauling was not the length. I found it far, far easier to pass mission/bonus by ignoring the text and using just the in-game cues. Even so, I worked hard to leave everything in the article. It's true I did move details from inline text to notes when they appeared relevant to only some people some of the time.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 17:40, 4 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The very last sentence I agree with, if it's only relevant in very limited situations, then it qualifies for notes. It was hard to see all the differences in such a massive edit/revert.  This is the reason it's usually wise to edit one thing at a time, so to speak.  If a lot of various editing is needed, reserve one edit to move a few things into notes and describe it as such, another for removing duplicate content, etc.  This way it's much easier to see step by step what you did, and only undo some changes that people may disagree with, and not scrap the whole thing, especially if parts of it were valid changes.  RoseOfKali [[Image:RoseOfKaliSIG.png]] 17:55, 4 April 2009 (UTC)


 * (indent to comment on my own earlier remark)
 * Quizzical: my apologies; I meant to make clear that the original article was both compelling and very helpful. It was the article's attention-to-detail that threw me; I found it hard to separate always important vs sometimes necessary vs beware, once in a while.... My goal was to rearrange valuable information to present the mission as straightforward with more than its share of oddities. (I believe that compels a rewrite rather than incremental edits). Obviously, I didn't succeed. (Sigh)


 * I also acknowledge we have a difference of opinion about what belongs in walkthrough vs notes; I am confident that we will work that out sooner (rather than later). I hope you'll bear with me until then.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 04:48, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * First of all, for some reason I'm signed up to Watch your talk page. Which I don't remember doing. lol. But anyway, since I'm here: Ten really, don't worry so much. If you make a well-meaning edit and it doesn't work out, ... no one cares. This is a Wiki, it's like a bad painting, it's meant to be abused, experimented on, scratched out and redone over and over again. Don't deprecate yourself for disagreeing on the perspective of an edit; it's unnecessary, but also, you may be folding on an issue that people might compromise on given more discussion. As long as your tone is civil and your arguments are cogent, it's OK to have even raging disagreements. That's what makes collaborative stuff great. :D -- AudreyChandler 08:25, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hehe, I don't think TEF ever had any problems with disagreeing or having his edits reverted. He's about the most civil person I know on this entire wiki. :P RoseOfKali [[Image:RoseOfKaliSIG.png]] 17:08, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * lol, he just seems so chagrined about the whole affair. But no need to be! :D -- AudreyChandler 17:43, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * It is a slightly awkward mission article to write, as it's a collection of a lot of things that could go wrong, but probably won't. There are enough such things that the probability that at least one goes wrong in a given run is substantial, however.  There are also alternate tactics with various pros and cons, to the degree that I'd send the whole group on totally different fort-defense tactics depending on which class I happened to be playing that time.
 * One other thing that you're running into is that I'm more defensive of articles that I've already put a lot of time into rewriting. If it's a choice between how I think a walkthrough out to be set up and how someone else thinks it should be set up, guess which one I'm going to prefer.  Yeah, I'm biased.  I'm more protective of some articles than others; if someone makes big changes to the structure of the walkthrough of Dzagonur Bastion, I'll probably revert it, almost no matter what the changes are.
 * Some of the things in the article are there primarily for hard mode. For reference, see the edits made while I was doing hard mode.  Things that you can gloss over in easy mode can often get you killed in hard mode.  Some details needed to go somewhere in the article, and sequestering them into the hard mode section would have been awkward.  The details apply to easy mode, too, and were far less awkward writing to stick them in the primary section, so that's where I put them.  Quizzical 06:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * At risk of sounding self-deprecating...sorry, didn't mean to sound self-deprecating ;-) I don't mind failing (as RoK suggests) (of course, don't like it much, either;-). So, only apologizing for a bold move not coming off as intended, not for the ol' college try. My wall of text here was to help explain the motivation, since I neglected to explain in the talk. (Did I fold on that? didn't mean to. Still think it needs something substantial.) Anyhow, thanks RoK, AC for nice words :-).


 * I did mean to make sure that Q realizes how good his stuff is: I wouldn't have been comfortable writing the article; however, the quality of the base article made a transformation possible. (Might be I'll give it another shot; I haven't had many reverts recently ;-)


 * Q &amp; I are going to disagree about walkthrough some more :-) (For me, I want to walk through it simply and then return to explore the nuances; as has been said, this mish poses problems for either style. And the short version of all this: it's all good :-)  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 06:49, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Yo
The image Kei Beach.jpg needs license and copyright details. It looks like a screenshot of some game, possibly Guild Wars. 03:15, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * did I forget? man, I was really, really trying not to be too tired to get that right. Will be fixed by time you read this (if not sooner). Sorry, dude.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 05:25, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

email community team
You should always use Special:Contact on the wiki you're emailing them about -- it's set up for all Wikia wikis, including ours. Fun fact: to have your personal info pre-filled into the fields if you're logged in was a feature request of mine. ;-) -- ◄mendel► 11:43, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * thanks. That is a cool feature. (And, for the uptime issues, I used that link from Central, since it seemed to be a central issue, not one specific to Gwiki)  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 16:26, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Your edit summary does not pertain to the public notice mentioned here, then? -- ◄mendel► 20:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hmmn. I did use that link, but from Central IIRC (since this issue was wikia-wide, not specific to this wiki). But maybe we're not talking about the same thing? (Any short explanation seems to be text-wall; maybe next time we're both IRC'd?)  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 03:00, 20 April 2009 (UTC)


 * A broadcast message alerting to read-only lockout! Awesome! (well, not the read only part)  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 07:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)


 * As much as I hate the content of those messages, I do like when they pop up. I only wish they could send them out every time something happens. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 09:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah
Morrowind is the best :D WOOT! --   † F1 ©  Talk  07:19, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Just read the ticket.
RSVP on User:Gigathrash/D&D IRC RP--Łô√ë îğá†ħŕášħ 00:59, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Wednesday May 3
Time would be 10:00 a.m. Pacific Coast time, and about 7:00 pm Mendel's time. Note to mendel: I am using the MODERN system of days, not the sunset thing you mess around with. Reply wherever you feel is appropriate if this time is acceptable.--Łô√ë îğá†ħŕášħ 07:33, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I screwed up the time zone changes, and ended up with a time that I can't make it.--Łô√ë [[Image:Gigathrash_sig_G.jpg|Roar.]]îğá†ħŕášħ 16:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Now with 100% less fail!
Monday, June 8th 11:00 p.m. pst. Tell someone if you can't.--Łô√ë îğá†ħŕášħ 17:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

You move like a Dwarf
Now that you can't escape, you must answer my questions three:

1. Are you back from your trips now? Because if so I want to update the Giga-RPG Schedule Table™.

As for the other two questions... I'll just let the uncertainty about them loom over you for the rest of your days, never knowing when suddenly you and your whole family will be queried!

*trots off laughing malevolently* &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by AudreyChandler (contribs) 16:10, 15 June 2009.
 * lol thanks Felix. /is juggling too many things at once today -- AudreyChandler 22:36, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Zoinks! Tripping is over, yes! Back is TEF, si! Update done is, da! Track questions losing is, ja! How was the original session?
 * Uncertain Looms &mdash; is that what Nicky is asking for next week, in Redundant Backroom?  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 02:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Uhm... my character was supremely irritating and pointless; Felix generally took the piss at every opportunity; Entropy/Vili was generally disoriented, frequently broke convention, and argued with the DM multiple times about the accuracy of his lore and planning; Mendel held up proceedings by focusing extremely stubbornly on the lack of motivation his character had for joining the party, while Giga stubbornly refused to play ball and cajole him, resulting in 30+ minutes of two characters arguing at a bar table while the other 3 wandered around aimlessly in the background.


 * In other words, it was standard-issue PUG chaos, and lots of fun. You must come next time. ^_^ -- AudreyChandler 03:33, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Like a true German, mendel refused to leave the table until all the beer was gone. [[Image:Felix_Omni_Signature.png]] 05:50, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I've got logs somewhere I can presumable send you if you wikimail me so I get your email address. -- ◄mendel► 09:49, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You should be warned, though, that no mortal who has ever gazed upon those logs has escaped with their mind completely intact ... -- AudreyChandler 18:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Consider me warned. And warmed! (warmed up, anyhow, as I still don't know what we're talking about) (plus: unintact TEF mind might be an improvement)  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 19:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

(re-indent) I heard that in Olafstead, there is a saying, Freeing yourself from a bar takes over 2 hours of real time. Is that true? Certainly, after reading these logs, my mind is no longer intact. &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 16:45, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Your bodies will ornate my chambers forever
The next IRC RP will be held at 5:00 UTC (10:00 p.m. pacific) THURSDAY Tell someone somewhere if you can't go. Also, RT, your schedule is basically opposite of everyone else's. Soz again.--Łô√ë îğá†ħŕášħ  06:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Additional
We need to speak off-wiki. Contact me either at my e-mail through the wiki or on GW at Damen Zrustky.--Łô√ë îğá†ħŕášħ 06:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget!
Tonight at 10:00--Łô√ë îğá†ħŕášħ 19:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Forget what?  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 20:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

The main character died, now WTF do we do?
The next IRC RP will be held at 5:00 UTC (10:00 p.m. pacific) MONDAY for most people, tuesday for Mendel Tell someone somewhere if you can't go. Also, RT, your schedule is basically opposite of everyone else's. Soz again, again.--Łô√ë îğá†ħŕášħ  05:14, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Ghachu Cave
Did you intend to upload a map? -- ◄mendel► 12:53, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Other people tend to make screenshots that are neater, more compact (kb-wise), and more elegant than I do. So I was generally leaving the maps and postcards for others to contribute. I probably have left a series of redlinks as part of the Landmark Consistency Project. If you desire, I will chase up those links before staring another GWiki project.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 16:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think something is always better than nothing. If someone feels like they can make a better one, they will, but for the time being there's a map/image there, no matter how "bad."  Just make them small and compressed (under 200k for sure, preferably under 100k), even if it makes it look ugly, because that way you're not crowding up the server with big placeholders, and the uglier the quality, the sooner someone will make a better one.  I, personally, feel more urge to correct a low quality image than to upload a redlinked one.  Also, if you upload something, it gives people a better idea of what should be there, as sometimes it's not entirely clear.  It also gives them more incentive to correct it if they can, because now they don't have to think about how it should look like and back off because of being not sure what to do, they just use the same/similar design.  And really, using anything but Paint to save images will make them much better, and probably remove the need for correction.  RoseOfKali [[Image:RoseOfKaliSIG.png]] 17:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * What got my attention was your use of "Image.jpg", which means that if somebody actually uploads from that, it'll get a bad name. If you create redlinks, use distinct names, please? such as "Guacho Cave map.jpg", for example? ;) -- ◄mendel► 18:10, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * oh, my apologies; that was probably a typo &mdash; I usually did a copy/paste and replaced "ThisLandmark" with the location. I might have done the cave before I had my system down.
 * @Rose: I hear what you're saying and I appreciate the support. Unfortunately, it takes me 20 minutes to make a bad image. I'd rather spend that wiki time editing, at which I'm better and more efficient.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 19:16, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hehe, fair enough. :) RoseOfKali [[Image:RoseOfKaliSIG.png]] 17:10, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

We interrupt your normally scheduled spam period for an advertisement.
GO SIGN UP FOR MY CONTEST. It's on my main page. That is all.--Łô√ë îğá†ħŕášħ is hosting a Card Creation Contest! 04:01, September 5, 2009 (UTC)

This is how your first card looks
The other two are going to take a little more time to get good images and ideas for.And yes, that is an artifact that is not a creature and has no effect whatsoever.--Łô√ë îğá†ħŕášħ is hosting a Card Creation Contest! 23:14, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * Picture is perfect! Could we change text to, ...it also allows you to get free Skale Kabobs Sundays at Kasey Bob's Kabob Stand, open weekdays... (Emphasizing the Badge's utter lack of value.) Nice work. Thank you.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 23:52, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, it DOES have a use for someone using the Salvage Kit card he made :P --Gimmethegepgun 23:54, September 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * Updated.--Łô√ë [[Image:Gigathrash_sig_G.jpg|Roar.]]îğá†ħŕášħ is hosting a Card Creation Contest! 01:26, September 6, 2009 (UTC)

This is how your second card looks
--Łô√ë îğá†ħŕášħ is hosting a Card Creation Contest! 20:09, September 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * Can we have Sarah (Gwen's mum) wearing the Shread?  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 06:51, September 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * If I can get my hands on a wider shot of that pic, I can do it. As it's cropped right now, it will look horrible.  And I don't carry empty slots.--Łô√ë [[Image:Gigathrash_sig_G.jpg|Roar.]]îğá†ħŕášħ is hosting a Card Creation Contest!  07:22, September 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * I have a perma pre; I will attempt to find Sarah (although I don't recall ever seeing her before).  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 15:39, September 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * Sarah in PRE. Maybe the shred goes on her belt?  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 23:28, September 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * LMAO. Excellent. (My apologies for missing the update of the pic.)  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 08:01, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

This is how your third card looks
--Łô√ë îğá†ħŕášħ is hosting a Card Creation Contest! 03:12, September 7, 2009 (UTC)
 * That's what I'm talking about :-) (Nice work, as always.)  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 06:48, September 7, 2009 (UTC)

Rollback
I have added you to the rollback group; you will be interested to learn that this entails the ability to move (=rename) images directly (you probably know what it's for; it saves you posting about needed renames so you can spend that effort on actually doing them :). Please read Rollback to familiarise yourself with the new functionality. -- ◄mendel► 08:27, September 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * Now I don't have to move it, yay. Also, conga rats, I suppose :> --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG]] -- (contribs) &emsp;(talk)  14:18, September 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you (and curse you &mdash; conga + rats is right ;-)  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 15:48, September 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * I just noticed that the Rollback group includes the power to Rollback! (at first I thought it was a random Wikia update that caused my history pages to look different.) I presume you entrusted me with this power both for the one-stop renaming mentioned above and b/c you trust me to to know when to revert rather than undo or edit. Naturally, I intend to use my powers to support the forces of Niceness and Good; please let me know if I inadvertently give aid and comfort to the soldiers of Badness and Eviel.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 06:06, September 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * Amusingly, you're the first person on this wiki to admit to taking 2 days to realize that being added to the rollback group comes with rollback links &mdash; should we edit Rollback to make that clearer?
 * Your presumption of me trusting you is correct, see [ here].
 * Go by this rule to avoid evil: When in doubt, don't roll back; use "undo" and provide an edit summary. -- ◄mendel► 08:40, September 10, 2009 (UTC)


 * re: editing Rollback &mdash; naw, I think it's fine. Either I'm just generally more clueless about the obvious or I was blinded by the context (..ability to move (=rename) images..). In my case, the rollback ability was the fringe conga rat to the rename (whereas, I suspect it's vice versa generally). My initial reaction was that I was going to use this solely for helping ppl maintain the Nick location image naming convention, so I was slow to read the Rollback article.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 16:51, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

This is how your fourth card looks
--Łô√ë <font color="Black">îğá†ħŕášħ is hosting a Card Creation Contest! 07:28, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * Super ! I love Gwen's quote.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 07:38, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you like the new iteration of Tapestry Shard?--Łô√ë [[Image:Gigathrash_sig_G.jpg|Roar.]]<font color="Black">îğá†ħŕášħ is hosting a Card Creation Contest! 07:50, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * (See late reply/realization above.) I'm having great fun looking at all the new (potential) MTGs! Nice work. (And reminder: feel free to render only those of my suggestions that inspire you and/or are easy. I'm aiming mostly for irony, which might not translate well into a card.) Thanks for doing this.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 08:04, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
 * BTw: I thought contest ended on 18th (today). My apologies for missing the deadline. :-/  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 08:08, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

Moss Spider Egg category
Is all very well to revert my +cat, but how about you have a go trying to work out where to put that article. --Wolfie (talk|contribs) 08:33, September 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * Are you asking for a suggestion on where to categorize the Moss Spider Egg? If so, I'm not sure there's an existing category that suits it. You could try Category:Items: the Egg is similar to that category's Tapestry Shred (both Egg and Shred have value only by turning them over to someone else). It's not ideal, I suppose; on the other hand, adding a 28th article to that category won't do any harm.


 * It's better, in my opinion, to leave an article uncategorized rather than fitting a round peg into a square hole. One can make it do so, but there's no need to do so. Consumables, in particular, are well-defined; adding the Moss Spider Egg to Category:Consumables obscures that clarity while doing little for helping us to understand the Egg's place in the GW world.


 * I hope that helps.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 08:54, September 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * It's an item, nothing more, nothing less. It can be stored, dropped, traded, but it cannot be grouped with anything beyond that.  RoseOfKali [[Image:RoseOfKaliSIG.png]] 09:32, September 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * Have been trying to find an appropriate category for that article for some time, but TEF's comment about "fitting a round peg into a square hole" is fair. Had rather hoped to avoid using the Items category, but yeah, was about the only other suitable one. Was thinking more along the lines of "gets used up = consummed", after several hours of categorising articles, the old brain starts to get frazzled and slow. :) --Wolfie [[Image:Wolfie_sig.jpg|19px]] (talk|contribs) 04:50, September 28, 2009 (UTC)

Style overhaul
There's an argument to be made about considering a style overhaul, but you won't catch me making it anytime soon. &mdash; if, hypothetically, you were to make this argument (which I understand you are not), roughly how would it go? -- ◄mendel► 09:30, October 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * First, I have to stop lmao. That's an admirably sneaky way of teasing out conversation from recalcitrant ppls.


 * Then, hypothetically, I might cleverly point out how much easier GWW has become recently in terms of finding info on the page, general navigation, presenting like data in an alike way, etc. And that those ease-of-use improvements have come in part due to style changes. GWiki has its own style, but it appears rooted in its origins (data >>>> form) rather than fit for its current purpose. Worse, the style hasn't been logically extended throughout: navbars sometimes, not others. Info boxes without (much) info. Awkwardly split pages. On longer articles, the most needed/used info is sometimes awkwardly placed.


 * So, theoretically, I imagine that I might be able to point out that we might want to grow from pretty good to good into consistently very good to excellent.


 * You might ask me why didn't I want to get into a style discussion sooner rather than later. Did I wish to avoid volunteering for significant work (and bot building/testing)? Did I want to avoid a style overhaul convention (which can be tediously dull)? Did I want to avoid implicit criticism of the loyal and more talented wikians who were here before me? Well, yes, all of above.


 * More importantly, I have been weighing in my mind whether there's a more fundamental shift that GWiki should consider and whether, with whom, and where to discuss it. Over the last few months, my watched-list has gone from active to quiet. Recent activity is more often measured in hours than minutes. Heck, the number of vandal-edits has dropped dramatically since I joined. Notably, (some) previously frequent contributors have moved attention from here to there.


 * I don't think we're asymptotically approaching the point where there's nothing much to edit (plenty of stubs, out-of-date guides, missing guides, old styles in use, ...). Significantly, this wiki still seems to be getting a lot of traffic (a recent estimate suggested it might still be getting 2x as much search-engine directed visitors as GWW).


 * So, with lots of traffic and relatively fewer contributions, what's the best use of time for GWikians? I don't have an answer, theoretically or otherwise. I'm convinced that there are things that GWiki does much better than GWW, but I have trouble articulating what exactly those might be. I am even more convinced that GWiki fills a critical function for players, but, again: what exactly is that?


 * So, before re-fitting this wiki better towards its purpose, I'd like to consider the purpose it does serve. My current brain dump about GWiki's advantages or unique place in the GW universe include that GWiki...
 * tends to embrace new concepts/approaches more quickly than GWW.
 * tends to support new contributors better.
 * does not seem to demand or assume advanced skills, titles, or abilities in offering advice.
 * is more likely to be able to offer something that's missing than either PvX or GWW (e.g. the Nick farming guide here that doesn't assume leetness of toons nor of players).


 * &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 23:35, October 8, 2009 (UTC)


 * Hah, now I see what's on your mind, and I look forward to the day when you might be prepared to make such an argument. :) What we seem to lack is a user interface designer (sometimes called information architect) who structures the presentation (and workings) of the wiki more along the actual needs of its users. It's a lot of work.
 * Another point is that we are the wiki with sister wikis in almost every Guild Wars language, and if we were in control of our skin, we'd have interlanguage links to all of them. As it is, we could probably use some custom Javascript in the meantime.
 * And I ought to actually go and look at gww. -- ◄mendel► 01:36, October 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * re: looking at GWW: yes. Take a look at any trophy, any title, any party item, and any holiday (for starters, anyhow). And, now that I've brought up the daily activity slow-down here, do you have any thoughts on that?


 * re: UI Designers &amp; info architects: I know good ones from bad ones, but I'm not one myself. I get the principles and can help a team avoid catastrophe; I can recognize good design-for-purpose. I'm not able to go much more beyond that.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 02:44, October 9, 2009 (UTC)