User talk:Silver4059614001

First post on my talk page
Can anyone create a personal page, or is it for admins only?
 * Anyone can. Lord of all tyria 21:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, it just seemed like only the top contributors and admins have them. Not that anyone will ever look at my page, but maybe I can prepare a resume of sorts.
 * I wouldn't call myself a top contributor personally ;) Lord of all tyria 21:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Everyone just copies off of someone else that seems like they know what they're doing. Don't use mine, it hasn't been updated in a year and it's kinda half-assed :/ --Gimmethegepgun 22:25, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe I shouldn't contribute to the Wiki...I feel like it's impossible to get anything done because of the red tape. I understand that there are policies and rules in place to keep it organized, but at the same time some things (like signing EVERY COMMENT that you make) are really tedious and prevent a lot of people from being more efficient. It helps to know who's doing what in case of vandalism or rabble-rousing, but really, what's the big deal? In that case you could just ban the IP address. Silver40596 22:31, 30 October 2007 (UTC) <-Something I almost always forget to do...sign my name.
 * Red tape? Did I miss something? [[Image:ShadyGuy.jpg]] 22:34, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I shouldn't have used a line like that. What I mean is, there are so many processes to go through...like putting a colon after every new entry on a talk page. Silver40596 <-Remembered again!
 * That's just a matter of making it easier to follow a conversation. If it was all on the left side, it isn't nearly as easy to follow the conversation, as it's not as obvious where a person stops talking and the next one stops, and it also breaks up subjects that aren't major enough for a new section. Signing and colons are just meant to make reading posts simpler for everyone, and they really don't take much time to do. After a few weeks you'll probably start doing it naturally, like the rest of us have --Gimmethegepgun 22:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * But what I mean is, little things like that make it really hard for non-computer savvy people like me to get involved. There seems to be a fairly clear schism between the haves and have nots. Silver40596
 * Back when we were new to wiki, we all had issues with it too. However, it doesn't take much time to get used to simple things like that. There are more difficult things on the wiki, like maybe adding to a table, but if you have trouble with it and can't figure it out from what else is in the table, you can put it on the talk page and ask someone for help. Someone will gladly assist --Gimmethegepgun 22:44, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Are there any new user's guides? Silver40596
 * The editing guide should work I think --Gimmethegepgun 22:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

An interesting idea.
A lot of people have said that rapiers would be a great addition to GW. Unfortunately, it most likely won't be implemented in this game, and only possibly in GW2. I think they have to do something to boost Mesmer's popularity, since (even though they are a GREAT class) everyone hates them, and for that reason I fear that they won't make it in GW2. They need something to make them a more desirable class, and rapiers would be awesome. Personally, I think that every class needs some sort of melee option, even if it isn't really effective--in real life, if you were holding a staff, wouldn't you opt to bash an incoming enemy in the face instead of using a fairly useless magical burst? (Even just for the sake of appearances) Or as a Necro, you have quite a few offhand options, namely the knife and the glove Cesta. And even Chakrams for Mesmers. To tell the truth, I had hoped that EOTN would introduce a caster-only "kick" attack that would help them when they were surrounded by a mob full of warriors and assassins. It didn't work out the way I had hoped it would. With any luck, this sort of thing will be addressed in GW2. Silver40596 18:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Question About Stubs.
According to the definition provided on Wikipedia, a stub is "an article containing only a few sentences of text which is too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject, but not so short as to provide no useful information." Whereas in the real world there is a near limitless amount of information that can be given about one subject, in the world of Guild Wars, some topics have only a few things that can be said about them. For example, the page for Garrisons is a stub, but it contains all the information on Garrisons that currently exists! The same goes with Imba--how much more could you possibly say about imbalancing stuff? In other words, many articles here contain ALL of the information the developers have released to us, and yet they will NEVER be long enough to qualify as encyclopedic articles. I may be missing something obvious since I mostly read wiki pages and don't edit them much, but I feel that this is a problem. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that GuildWiki needs to change its policy on stubs. Silver40596 15:51, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I suppose you suggest unstubbing on the talk, or something. Or just unstub yaself, if you feel it is nessecary. IDK if that is allowed, though... --[[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG]] -- (s)talkpage 15:55, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Can anyone, maybe an administrator, answer this definitively? I've been playing 2.5 years and I have a pretty good idea of how extensive a page's information is, i.e. whether the information given is exhaustive. Silver40596
 * Is there a policy about stubs? [[Image:ShadyGuy.jpg]] 21:06, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I think its covered in the S&F guide. Lord of all tyria 21:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, well most stubs are quite old, and if according to the S&F guide everything is added the stub can be removed imo. [[Image:ShadyGuy.jpg]] 21:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

So in other words, if the info IS exhaustive then I can un-stub it? Silver40596
 * Yes. Lord of all tyria 21:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * We actually need people who do those things. [[Image:ShadyGuy.jpg]] 21:25, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm currently unstubbing the Prophecies bosses. Silver40596
 * Just make sure that before you unstub it, it has every section filled out correctly. Sections that have no content should be omitted and everything should folloow the correct S&F. &mdash;♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 21:33, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, sometimes a boss may still be a stub because it doesn't have hard mode info on the boss. What level and what skills. If you know that it is still the same, that's fine but don't forget that. &mdash;♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 21:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, please use the minor edit button next to the save page button when making these minor edits, thanks. [[Image:ShadyGuy.jpg]] 21:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, but to be perfectly honest, the style and formatting page didn't really answer my questions the way you guys are. Now that I know what to do, I'll probably head out and confirm skills for HM. The question now is: do I need a screenshot to prove they don't change, or can I just provide the information without documentation if it does change?
 * Not sure, imo you can just add the missing info without a screenshot, we trust you you won't give false info. [[Image:ShadyGuy.jpg]] 21:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * We will take your word for it (See GW:AGF). If you ever don't know something about format and the s&f doesn't answer, point it out on the talk page for the S&f. Often, veteran guildwiki users forget to include stuff for new users because they are used to knowing how things should be done correctly. &mdash;♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 21:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * This is all so confusing... Silver40596