Insert Generic Header Here

Pricing guide would be WAY too controversial. The reason it works on message boards and such, is that not all users can edit it, and other users leaving posts on fluctuations in prices and a dedicated member or two doing the adjustments helps keep things on track. The only possible way I could see this working on a wiki, is if it were a protected page, and users leave info on the talk page regarding price fluctuations. And even at that, we would probably want one or two dedicated people involved in the pricing guide adjustments.

Also, what are we looking for in "notable guilds"? Overall GVG rank is something more easily found on The Guild Wars official website. And HoH, well 12 minute updates in game as to who wins is pretty obvious too. So I don't quite see where that section could possibly go. Constructive criticism is appreciated :D -- Isk8 I~sk8 (T/C) 18:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

There are numerous guilds that would be called notable, and missed by your examples. [iQ] for one. Lord of all tyria 18:40, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Please let me know what makes them notable then... because I 1) don't pvp and 2) Don't follow other guilds. -- Isk8 I~sk8 (T/C) 18:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
[iQ] won 2 (?) gold capes. The problem with notable guilds is what makes you notable. Since guilds like [QQ] never won gold, which means you can't use purely that criteria. PvE guilds would be hard to do as well. Lord of all tyria 18:43, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Whoa whoa. Let me write the pages for these things and keep the discussions there first guys. And try to keep an open mind—JediRogue 18:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Okies, will do. I wasn't aware that you were going to be writing pages for them when I first started up this talk page. -- Isk8 I~sk8 (T/C) 18:49, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Gerroh also thinks anything opinion based being treated as "official" is a terribad idea. [LaZy] could be considered a notable guild, with them being huge and all, but i wouldn't want them on Gwiki. And i've never heard of [iQ] until now. Plus, a lot of "notable" HA guilds disband and create a new guild every two weeks or so, just so they can get a good laugh out of the name.--DNA 00:30, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

need moar links

I am checking to see what kind of link creates WantedPages. PLease don't edit this. --◄mendel► 07:57, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Delete implemented/impractical suggestions

I commented on one suggestion and as I looked through the rest, I noticed more than one is delete worthy. So should we delete them or should we keep them as a reference? Silver Sunlight SSunlight 15:36, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

We keep failed policies for reference, and I could understand keeping failed suggestions for the same reasons. We should categorize them and get them off the list, though. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken 18:12, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I'll get to it then :) Silver Sunlight SSunlight 18:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I have moved the following to "Old suggestions"

  • armour combo galleries
  • Better mission maps
  • Guild builds
  • Letters to arenanet
  • Navigation
  • Pricing guide
  • Henchmen skills
  • Notable guilds

If anyone wishes to move one of those back, feel free to do so.Silver Sunlight SSunlight 19:01, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I feel bad about changing so many of your edits because I really like that you've been working on the section - it's been mostly me up to now. I've disagreed with your responses mostly when I thought they didn't accurately portray the consensus on the talkpage (if there is any), so maybe we should just discuss them some more. I think the points you've made are good, but I can probably come up with some good counter-points as well. ;-) Oh, and the lists are alphabetic, to make it easier to check them against the PrefixIndex. --◄mendel► 04:21, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of this wiki

i didn't know where to put it but i feel this wiki is unofficial and GW already has an official wiki this one is unneeded The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) 17:48, 7 April 2009 (UTC). (spelling corrected, ◄mendel►)

We need this wiki, we get close to half a million page views per day, so your impression that this wiki is unneeded is not generally true. Also, the communities (and their standards) differ between the two wikis. --◄mendel► 18:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
This wiki very often has information the other does not. The converse cannot be said, with the minor exception of developer commentary, etc. - Ins420sig420 18:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
This wiki predates GWW by years, gave many of its best contributors, content, and policies to it, and was the de facto "official" wiki up until that point. So if anything it was the "official" wiki that was unnecessary. It's not wise to say such things without researching the facts first. Entropy Sig (T/C) 06:12, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC-SA unless otherwise noted.