GuildWiki has been locked down: anonymous editing and account creation are disabled. Current registered users are unaffected. Leave any comments on the Community Portal.



Someone had posted this on Explorable Areas.

Crucial Comment

Your terminology is wrong all over the place. They are not called "Adventure Zones"; they are called "Explorable Areas." Look at their main page where they talk about adding new explorable areas in the first big update.

Why is it that this user felt fine with editing the page to add a criticism but not correct the errors in terminology? hehe, odd... anyway, i am modifying the article to refer to Explorable Areas by the correct term, but mention that they are sometimes referred to as Adventure Zones. - LordBiro.


XP should be categorised in here, as it is both slang and a common game term. However, as it is currently a redirect, it can't be categorised. Is there a way around this?--Kathryn Maulhammer 17:24, 23 Jun 2005 (EST)

If XP has a seperate meaning to experience points (I'm not sure if it does?) then I would take off the redirect and add it to the category. <LordBiro>/<Talk> 20:41, 23 Jun 2005 (EST)

It's not that XP has a seperate meaning (except a crappy OS), it's that XP is slang, while Experience Points is terminology. As you said, this is an encyclopedia, it should have listings for everything. XP should be listed as slang.--Kathryn Maulhammer 04:45, 24 Jun 2005 (EST)

How do I add a new article? Editing the main page's content does not add new articles, nor does adding new definitions to existing articles.

Simple, go to and click the edit button! To put it in this category put this text somewhere on the page:
 [[Category:Slang & Terminology]] 
It will then appear on [:Category:Slang & Terminology].

--Skuld 20:04, 28 Aug 2005 (EST)


Related to the above discussion about XP being in the category and Experience Point not, we have DOT and DD as articles but not damage over time or direct damage. I think the latter should be the article names, but as pointed out, that means DOT and DD won't be in the slang category. Any suggestions about what we can do? --Fyren 10:09, 15 Jul 2005 (EST)


Should the ampersand be changed to "and" like it was for skills and formatting? Also, any ideas on the abbreviation thing above from a while ago? --Fyren 07:28, 11 Aug 2005 (EST)

I was getting back into the swing of standards crusades, and I just realized I missed this one. The only issue being I really don't feel like editing 250 articles' category tags. Do bots work on the GuildWiki? It'd be much faster to automate this one. If not, I'll bite the bullet and edit everything by hand. (For the uninitiated, I'm speaking of changing [:Category:Slang & Terminology] to [:Category:Slang and terminology]) —Tanaric 21:05, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

upper case vs lower case[]

I suggest to use lower case for all sentence abbreviations (like AFK) since that is the most likely way they will be encountered during gameplay or elsewhere. plus imo it looks better. --drone9 02:51, 22 Aug 2005 (EST)

I disagree, Afk is a word, AFK is an abbr. --Skuld 19:56, 28 Aug 2005 (EST)

Blank lines at the top[]

On a lot of the articles in the category the text is as follows

 [[Category:Slang & Terminology]]
 Text text text...

The line after the category causes a blank paragraph to appear above the text, I have removed some of these. --Skuld 19:54, 28 Aug 2005 (EST)

Check again, these new paragraphs aren't visible on the actual article, only in edit mode. They just make it easier to see the categories when editing (seperate from the main article text). --Midk 19:58, 28 Aug 2005 (EST)
Hmm, actually, perhaps they do, it doesn't seem to show up when browsing revisions but it does seem to appear elsewhere. --Midk 20:00, 28 Aug 2005 (EST)
MediaWiki bug do you think? --Skuld 20:05, 28 Aug 2005 (EST)

New Heading[]

Me no like.. :( --Karlos 00:13, 16 Sep 2005 (EST)

LOL, I just thought "Wherein there is a glossary of sorts" was kind of meaningless, so I changed it to actually DESCRIBE the category at hand. --Big Blue 23:24, 16 Sep 2005 (EST)
It's nice as an intro. But it is verbose, and with a lot of fanfare. The problem is that if we kept to the subjective, everyone will keep editing all the articles to have them their way. It is definitely better than what was there before. Ignore me. :) If anyone feels strongly enough about it they'll edit it. --Karlos 08:42, 17 Sep 2005 (EST)


Abbreviation for "Looking for runner". Commenly seen in town or outpost when people want other people to run them to another town/outpost/mission (often used like "LFR to augury rock")

Well then...go ahead and add it? --Big Blue 23:54, 16 Sep 2005 (EST)


Resurrect (sometimes typed Rez). "Res me!"

-Melly (ahha sorry, I dunno how to put the date and time and my username on here) --Melly 23:09, 21 October 2005 (EST)

Res exists as a redirect. If players search for "Res" the'll end up in Resurrect (Action) but it is not litsed in the Category unfortunately because redirects cannot be categorized. --Karlos 14:52, 22 October 2005 (EST)


Res sig. "Sig me!" "Anyone got a free sig?" " I used my sig!"

--Melly 23:10, 21 October 2005 (EST)

I don't think this should be added- there are lots of signets that do lots of different things, saying "sig" means "resurrection signet" would be misleading. Adding "res sig" makes more sense for me, though that one seems pretty self explanatory.

Actually, I hear sig used alot in reference to Signet Of Capture, i.e. to cap an Elite skill. So this term may need more robust design for all instances (PvP vs. PvE may have different intruptations for example) or this may need to be deleted.--Shadow 05:57, 2 November 2005 (EST)

Pwn, Pwned, Pwnage[]

Same as owned. :) --Melly 00:06, 23 October 2005 (EST)


Damage Per this the same as DoT?

No. DoT is what the article says and damage per second is... damage per second. An average. --Fyren 07:57, 1 November 2005 (EST)


Final assault (the quest). I had to ask what this was. It's used a lot in the war camp.

It is also a reference to a style of farming. FA farming... Meaning Farming using the npcs associated with the Final Assault Quest. Also called Keg runs, Barrel Runs, and Kegger Runs by players in game...Sometimes ppl just say FA to mean they want to farm, so a player has to clarify with that person what their intentions are.--Shadow 05:58, 2 November 2005 (EST)
  • I recreated the FA article, it was deleted a couple weeks ago, but it's obviously an abbreviation that's frequently used now. - Jersyko the Insane 03:11, 7 November 2005 (EST)

More Terms that could be added[]

I create an article for Primary attribute the other day, there was a few other terms I though should have articles created for them so I did! International district, Bug, Soft, Rez (it just redirects to Resurrect_(Action) ) if you think any of those are unnecessary please say so.

However I have two questions, 1) Why is Loot Stealing not in a seperate article from the Killsteal article?

2) I'm sure it's been mentioned before that redirects such as Vent cannot be categorised, could we instead have a definition for Ventrilo aka Vent so that people would at least see 'Vent' on the [:Category:Slang & Terminology] page? Just a thought --Xasxas256 04:42, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Acronym Redirects?[]

Ahh, shoot. I saw that clicking on CORPG in the Slang & Terminology category simply brought you to a page that stated what it stands for, where you then have to click on what it stands for it to bring you to an explanation. So I thought having it automatically redirect you would be easier and more convenient. However, I didn't realize that redirecting "CORPG" to "Competitive Online Role Playing Game" also changes what it looks like in the category section (so thus a new person looking for what CORPG stands for under this category won't see it right away).
If an admin wishes to undo this, please feel free to do so. Is there some workaround with the wiki so that clicking on the acronym in the category section automatically brings you to the whole explained page (and still remains an acronym in the category section)? --TheSpectator 00:29, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Gah. I did more digging around, but this time I found an example of how to get it to work. MediaWiki removes all lines from after the redirect line and won't redirect if the redirect line isn't first. The obvious solution works: put the category on the same line. Argh. --Fyren 00:59, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Okay. Now, do we want a subcategory "acronyms?" --Fyren 01:03, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Hmm, probably not. I think the acronyms fit well under this category already, since they constitute slang.
It'd be under this category, as a subcategory. --Fyren 08:37, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Now that I think about it, it might be good to have an acronyms subcategory, that way people searching for what 'FTW' means (as I was looking for once) can see it separated from actual words beginning with 'F'. --TheSpectator 18:18, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
How about just using common abbreviations and eliminating a whole useless category and a bunch of unused redirects? —Tanaric 02:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
No one seemed interested when I suggested such a page before. --Fyren 05:06, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
Ahh, very nice; we could also have the links to some of those articles from that chart as well. I guess it wasn't time for it yet, Fyren :-P --TheSpectator 11:59, 12 December 2005 (UTC)


I've seen this one a fair bit recently: GG. I'm not positive what it means. Good going? Golly gee? Garfazz gargles? Obviously I'd add the abbreviation (and possibly gj, "good job") if I had an idea of what it meant... --Nkuvu 01:30, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

"Good game." Besides the literal use, it gets used sarcastically to imply something is over (since it's usually said after a match). So at one end it's good sportsmanship, but at the other it's insulting or arrogant. --Fyren 02:52, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Yep, it stands for "good game." It's pretty sweet to see the PvP bots in the Battle Isles use it too. "gfg" ("good f***ing game") also exists in the communities and culture of certain games, and may be used both insultingly and admiringly depending on the disposition of the speaker. Don't automatically be offended, unless you're absolutely certain that the person is out to offend you; and then don't be, 'cause that's what he wants. I believe that the term was popularised with StarCraft, and often used as a parting congratulatory message between players on, but more commonly as "ggnore" which simply means "good game, no rematch/replay" meaning that one party of the game didn't want to indulge in a rematch. --Havral Glommon 10:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Lost in the database restore...[]

-sigh- just before the crash I went through this entire section, and fixed all of the items that should be both a redirect and a slang category ... and it was lost in the restore! Oh well, looks like I have a project for Thursday night now. :-( --Barek 04:32, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Sub-Category for Abbreviations?[]

May I suggest to introduce a sub-category Category:Abbreviations. This would make the Category:Slang & Terminology a lot cleaner. Plus ... we could add many of the abbreviation redirects to that category. I will create that category straight away. No harm done. The question is, whether it shall be a sub-category of S&T, and if entries shall be deleted from S&T if they are in the sub-category abbreviations. I'd say YES. --Tetris L 03:25, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I've started categorizing all those abbreviations that were not already categorized under S&T under Category:Abbreviations. Whether that stays a sub-category of S&T and what happens to those abbreviations that are categorized under S&T can be decided later. --Tetris L 04:34, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
The S&T section is getting pretty long. However, is a subcategory really needed? We already have an article for Common abbreviations that could be linked at the top of the category header area.
Either way; if we use the article or the sub-category, then my preference would be to place all abreviations in that alternate location and then remove those individual entries from S&T (provided that alternate location is still linked on the S&T page). --Barek 12:33, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Personally, I prefer the sub-category over the article: Much easier to maintain. If noone objects, I will move all articles that are abbrivations from Slang&Terminology to Abbrivations soon. --Xeeron 05:44, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
I say yes to Abbrivations as a subcategory of Slang&Terminology and moving all Abbrivations there. :) --Eightyfour-onesevenfive 05:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
As we've decided for NPCs to remove articles from the main category if they are in a sub-category, we should do the same here. Let's go for it! Unless anybody objects by tomorrow, I'll go on an abbreviation crusade with Xeeron and anybody else who wants to help.
That's regardless of the Common abbreviations article. In this case I really prefer the category over the article, because the article doesn't provide much more information or convenience, but is harder to maintain. --Tetris L 05:58, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes to Abbreviations as a sub-category of Slang&Term. --Karlos 07:00, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

E-Denial Mesmers[]

Need to add that Renegade of Funk 10:39, 20 April 2006 (CDT)

Re Roll[]

Can someone put in a definition for the term "re roll"?

I'll put up Reroll which seems to be more common. --Xeeron 08:43, 16 May 2006 (CDT)

agree with move[]

it's been bothering me for a while -PanSola, Table of The Lyssa Advocacy Front (sing) 09:11, 17 May 2006 (CDT)

If we bother to do a crusade to rename all of these, I'd rather call the category "Glossary". Clear, short and simple. --Tetris L 23:28, 24 May 2006 (CDT)
Bumping this issue. Glossary is a good idea. - Greven 14:51, 2 June 2006 (CDT)
I prefer "Glossary of Terms", but just "Glossary" is okay too. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:07, 2 June 2006 (CDT)
"Glossary of Terms" is a tautology. :p --Tetris L 10:56, 8 June 2006 (CDT)
It looks like Category:Slang and terminology was migrated into this one instead of the other way around. Oh well. Is there still consideration of migrating the whole bundle over to Glossary, or is this being abandoned for now due to the large number of articles that would need changed? I'm willing to assist in a crusade; but at 300 or more entries, I probably wouldn't be willing to change them all myself. I'm thinking that two or three users hitting it all at once, splitting the alphabet between them could do this in more manageable parts, if it's still being considered. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 08:23, 8 June 2006 (CDT)
I would be glad to help in this crusade. Just leave me a note on my Userpage discussion of what you'd like me to do and I'll pitch whereever needed.--Xis10al 08:29, 8 June 2006 (CDT)
Please use a bot (and get it registered before you start) if you do, i'm still recovering from chi li's skill box crusade! — Skuld Monk 08:34, 8 June 2006 (CDT)
Do we have anyone remaining who has bot creation experience? The only bot-master I knew of was Stabber; but I'm sure there's at least one more in the community someplace. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 08:36, 8 June 2006 (CDT)
I have achieved sentience and no longer require a creator or a master. Migration underway. Stabbot 01:22, 11 June 2006 (CDT)
I do agree that this would be the right job for a bot :) And please give me a little help with english language here: what's the meaning of "recover from" in this context? --Chi Li Chi Li 09:41, 8 June 2006 (CDT)
To get better, to gain your strenght and serentity back, to recreate, to relax, ... --Tetris L 10:51, 8 June 2006 (CDT)
Thanks, but what I really wanted to know was: is this a positive or a negative comment? --Chi Li Chi Li 11:41, 8 June 2006 (CDT)
I can't speak for Skuld, but I would read it as neutral. I think he's just commenting on the difficulty in monitoring the Special:Recentchanges page while it's filled with a change crusade. Bots can be registered, then are hidden by default on that page. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 11:56, 8 June 2006 (CDT)
I am fine if y'all wanna rename it "Glossary" (by design, Glossary means a Glossary of Terms, not a Glossary of Ectos or of White Mantle) :). My issue was that someone did an incomplete effort, started a "Slang and terminology" category, put some articles in it and left it at that. Then you had some articles in it and most back in S&T and someone put S&T into S and T. That was a mess, so I just undid that part. --Karlos 19:19, 8 June 2006 (CDT)

Link to second page only works if you're logged in[]

I'm a newbie regarding Wikipedia stuff. I had been using this site a lot to assist in my Guild Wars play, and I stumbled on the glossary. Great stuff, but only the first page would show up. Whenever I tried to access subsequent pages nothing happened. I bit the bullet and created an account (so I could complain about this - LOL), and then the link began working.

Is that what's supposed to happen? I figured all the links here would work even for visitors, not just site members. But, I'm a newb, so I'm prepared to be humbled by the answer... The preceding unsigned comment was added by Funkshn (talk • contribs) 09:17, 14 June 2006 (CDT).

It appears to be a caching error. When logged-in, I can easilly switch between pages with the links. When I logged out, I could only view the alternate page if I appended "&purge" to reset the cache each time. I'll post over in GuildWiki:Software_&_Technical_Issues/Bugs. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 09:21, 14 June 2006 (CDT)

This category needs stricter entry requirements.[]

This category's scope has creeped outward, and now nearly any article can justifiably be shoved in here, making the category useless. As it stands, everything that's not an item or a skill is being dumped in here. Actually, even some items and skills have ended up here too!

Some pruning appears to be in order, but I honestly have no idea how to go about it. Does anyone have any ideas?

Tanaric 07:03, 15 October 2006 (CDT)

How about Everything which is not a self-explanatory english word OR has an ingame meaning that is considerably different from the usual common language meaning?
For example:
  • Aggro is not a self-explanatory english word.
  • Alliance is.
  • Clean is as well, but has a considerably different meaning in-game.
So Aggro and Clean would stay, Alliance would go. --Xeeron 07:40, 15 October 2006 (CDT)
I don't even mind Alliance so much, as it can be further defined as "an alliance of guilds under a faction banner." I did remove glossary tags from the following articles:
Compass: self-explanatory
Combat: self-explanatory (though an article on, say, in combat, would make a good glossary article)
Commands: self-explanatory (though an article on, say, slash commands, would make a good glossary article).
(actually, moving this to slash commands or chat commands might be good, as technically hitting tab to cycle targets is also a command.)
My rule of thumb has been this: if you use the name of the article in the definition of the article, it's not a glossary article.
Tanaric 08:05, 15 October 2006 (CDT)


Grape means a Purple item from a chest right? Maybe someone can add it for people that dont know what a 'grape chest' is? Mrguildboi 16:29, 18 February 2007 (CST)

Rage quit / Ragequit[]

Is there a reason that Rage quit and Ragequit are separate glossary entries? They appear to describe the same phenomenon. The term "Rage quit" (two words) redirects to the glossary page Quit, while clicking on "Ragequit" (one word) takes you to a glossary entry of the same title. The definitions are nearly the same, though "Rage quit" focuses on party dynamics, while "Ragequit" expands the term to include ragequitting a guild or alliance. Maybe they should be merged? Niima 15:29, 5 March 2007 (CST)

Cut Scene and Cookie Cutters[]

I just noticed recently that "Cut Scene" is listed three different times under "C", and they either link to themselves or to "Cinematic". Should this be looked at or is there a reason for this?

Also, I think that "Cookie-Cutter" should be added - sometimes I forget the meaning of the term myself - unless its posted somewhere else that I can't find... Abs of Glue 22:48, 15 March 2007 (CDT)


some lore terms are in here. should we keep them? or maybe case by case basis?—JediRogue 19:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)