GuildWiki talk:Community portal/Archive 19

PvP versions of quick references
I'm starting to create PvP versions of these pages. (See User:Ender-Alacran/Quick_References). I was particularly motivated by the Binding Ritual skills quick reference page, since every single binding spirit is split to PvP (and thus the page was nearly useless for PvP.) I'll start moving/creating them in the normal namespace sometime later this week if no one objects. Anyone is obviously welcome to help create them as well, or even take over the project if they've got a faster way (like using a bot of some kind.) --Ender A 20:54, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, after looking at the code, it seems to me that it would be helpful to create "-skill name- (PvP)" pages as redirects back to the normal version for all skills that aren't split. That way, if they're split in the future, these PvP QR won't need to be sought out and updated. Plus if people mistakenly search for a pvp version of a skill that isn't split, it'll simply redirect them to the correct page. Does that sound like a good idea? Maybe I'm just edit-happy right now. :P --Ender A 21:23, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see a problem with it. I wouldn't do all of them, but just the ones that you use in your QRs.  RoseOfKali [[Image:RoseOfKaliSIG.png]] 22:52, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, we're currently inconsistent on the "quick reference" page names. Do we want to go with "___ skills quick reference" or just "____ skills"? The former is more specific in case we need the other name for describing something more general, whereas the latter is obviously shorter. I have no preference, but I would like to make them consistent.--Ender A 00:18, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * (1) the general idea of PvP quick references sounds ok. Alternatively, you could also divide the pages into PvP and PvE versions. (2) The naming convention depends on usage. Mesmer skills fits the category better, Mesmer skills quick reference fits the comparison page best, and List of Mesmer skills makes more sense for either a similar page with no details (just the list, Ma'am) or an article with all the details.  &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 04:14, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
 * These will be moved into the main namespace once completed? (and clean up all the redirects left behind after all those page moves please). --Wolfie [[Image:Wolfie_sig.jpg|19px]] (talk|contribs) 05:01, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

Requests for Adminship
I would like to alert everyone that we have 3 currently active Requests for adminship. Everybody is invite to voice their opinion and contribute to the discussion on whether we want these esteemed editors to be given the powers and duties of adminship.

The fact that I have nominated two of them should not be seen as a foregone conclusion. Back in June, I was apprehensive of the summer holidays and feared we might need more admins, and these two (plus Wizardboy, who seems to have turned inactive now, alas) would have been my candidates even then. I procrastinated the nominations, and as it turns out we got along fine without them being admins, which of course raises doubt on whether we need them to take over that duty now. However, once Felix decided to nominate Rose, I decided to bring Jon and El Nazgir to your attention as well.

As the people who have witnessed the past RfAs know, running for admin is not a popularity contest. We are looking for people who can use the admin abilities (which, if it comes down to the nitty gritty, encompass only page deletion, page protection, user blocking, and the editing of interface pages) in a way that this wiki needs; convincing a Bureaucrat of this is what the RfA aims to achieve. Since Entropy has stepped back from most Bureaucrat duties, you need to convince me. ;)

In that light, I ask you to consider "my" two nominations to be personal, non-bureaucratic statements; while I am apt to consider these editors to be able to fulfil the task, based on my knowledge of them, I can be convinced otherwise if you are able to demonstrate to me they aren't; and I will be looking to see whether the community (and not just myself) wants them as admins, and whether we actually need them to be that.

Please help me make good decisions by contributing on these three Requests. -- ◄mendel► 11:57, October 7, 2009 (UTC)