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

User talk:Rainith/Archive

From GuildWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Dude, kinda stupid for us both to start editing the same piece, I had follwed the same way that the original big update was done, so that it would conform to the site standard, its yours this time! - Delphi 11:49, 29 Sep 2005 (GMT)

Not quite sure what you're talking about. Someone else did a major update on today's update. I just changed one small thing. And as far as I know there's no way to tell if someone is updating a page until you try to save it. So I'm not sure what your problem is, or if you have a problem. :) --Rainith 09:13, 30 Sep 2005 (EST)

Even though you are "not as big a contributor here," your contributions are valued, and we appreciate your opinions and edits. :) —Tanaric 17:56, 18 Aug 2005 (EST)

Huzzah! --Fyren 18:09, 18 Aug 2005 (EST)
Heh, Thanks. :) --Rainith 18:24, 18 Aug 2005 (EST)

Hehe .. thanks for updating the collector links in the outposts I update ;) Keep it up. kaarechr 05:09, 23 Aug 2005 (EST)

=) Its about all I can do while I'm here at work. --Rainith 05:57, 23 Aug 2005 (EST)

I noticed you're adding a lot of information about pre-searing. Could you please as soon as you come to post-searing with you new character make sure to document the very first quests you'll get? The one you get right after the mission, even before reaching Ascalon city (don't remember the name) and The King's Message are by my knowledge the only quests we are still missing (apart from some quests in the Underworld). --Eightyfour-onesevenfive 20:47, 28 Aug 2005 (EST)

Will do. I'm trying to go thru Pre-Searing pretty thouroughly tho, so it might be a little while before I get to those. --Rainith 20:50, 28 Aug 2005 (EST)
Thanks! :) --Eightyfour-onesevenfive 19:49, 5 Sep 2005 (EST)

Just wanted to say thanks for correcting my error with Karleen. Is this even the right way to message people? --Koorb 23:51, 8 Sep 2005 (EST)

Thanks[edit source]

Thanks for the headsup on the Creature Species pages, I thought I was making an improvement, but obviously not. --Koorb 17:06, 9 Sep 2005 (EST)


Hey Ranith I disagree with your recent change (marked "better English") on the Upgrades/Stacking page. The "do" there refers to the "effect" (singular) and not to the "runes" (plural), so it should really be "does" not "do".

Yes, "do" is correct. A little more verbosely, the subject is the singular "effect of runes." --Fyren 08:00, 13 Sep 2005 (EST)

Quests that happen nearby[edit source]

Yo Rainith! Before we do and undo more articles and waste each other's time. Let's talk about this here first. you have been doing two things which I have been undoing. I am going to explain here what I am doing. I think I know what you're doing, so let us try and agree on a course of action because this is getting silly. :)

  • You have been adding a section ==Quests Given== and I have been moving it to '''Quests Given:'''. Now, my reason for doing this is to keep all creature/character pages with the same structure (i.e. the main sections are: Description, Location, Skills, Items Dropped and Notes). If a character happens to give Quests, then it has been the custom (not devised by me) to put it as a SUB section of Description. This keeps the main sections consistent through out all creatures (which theoritically facilitates coming up with a template).
  • You have been adding a section for "Quests involved in." I am categorically against such a listing. A character involved with a quest is a BIG can of worms and an unnecessary piece of information. A big can of worms because think about all the characters "involved" with all the quests. The possibilities are endless (Rurik is "involveD" with the Gift for Althea quest though he is technically not in it, Wind Born Titans are involved with Defend North Kryta and Defend Denravi though they are not mentioned). It is also unnecessary because unlike "Quests Given" (which means you should seek that guy out for the rewards), this means nothing. If the quests requires you to go to this guy, it will be listed in the Quest's page with a link to his name, which when you click on it will tell you where he is. But you'll never go to the page of Molenin to see what quests he might be involved in (but not start). I mean, that's extreme Molenining! :) If the "quest involved in" is something important, then feel free to mention it in the description (like Unruly Slaves with Molachev, which was already there). But please, do not introduce sections into the character format. At least not without consultation and deliberation and the approval of at least 75% of the US Senate. :) --Karlos 17:16, 18 Sep 2005 (EST)

RE: monsterous fang[edit source]

http://guildwiki.org/guildwars/index.php?title=Monstrous_Fang&diff=0&oldid=18800 I have no proof but I did get one from there; it may have been from an Ettin --Skuld 23:30, 25 Sep 2005 (EST)

May have beena hydra, those are the only critters I have met who have dropped it before my eyes. --Karlos 15:56, 26 Sep 2005 (EST)
Might have been, I haven't seen any so I'm not going to put that in there but, I know it wasn't an Ettin or a Troll (what I removed from the article was that a troll dropped it), as they aren't in Ascalon Foothills. --Rainith 15:59, 26 Sep 2005 (EST)

Fixing Tables[edit source]

Looks like "nbsp" is the key to have borders around empty table cells. Thanks, I've been looking for this for a while. --Tetris L 01:42, 7 Oct 2005 (EST)

The first updates I did on the wiki were to the collectors tables and since I don't use IE one thing that I eventually did was to wipe out the "nbsp" tags. I just recently saw what the tables looked like in IE and realized the problems I caused. If MS would just code their web browser to html standards we wouldn't have the issue. :) --Rainith 02:03, 7 Oct 2005 (EST)

Category:Spellz[edit source]

Thanks for the work on shifting the spell articles. I for one am very grateful. --Karlos 16:25, 25 October 2005 (EST)

I think thats it now that you helped me finish up Hex Spells. It seemed to me that the categories for the skills are all over the place but I'm not offering to try to sort them out. :P
So, which ones did you do? --Karlos 16:40, 26 October 2005 (EST)
Not quite following you. What I meant was there doesn't seem to be one set way that the skills are categorized. Some have the attribute that the skill uses as a category (i.e. Category:Strength for a warrior skill that uses the strength attribute), some have "Profession General" as a category (skills that don't rely on an attribute i.e. Category:Monk General) and some have no reference to the profession/attribute that they rely on. Others have Category:Spells and Category:Hex Spells, some have just Category:Hex Spells. I think it would be a good idea to come up with a standard way of categorizing skills, but I don't want to get involved in it at the moment. I've got enough on my plate. :) --Rainith 01:42, 27 October 2005 (EST)
I think it's a combination of all, just like Molachev is a boss and a monk and a dredge and an NPC AND a creature in Sorrow's Furnace. Skills are a big nasty mess, but we'll clear it up, eventually. :) A skill like Lightning Surge is an elite skill, it is an Air Magic skill (which implies it is an ele skill no need to put both in my opinion) it is also a Hex Spell. Nothing wrong in having all these things at the bottom.
What I think is wrong is whwn a skill is classified as a SKILL and a HEX or as an ELE skill and a WATER magic skill. This is redundant.
My question though is which categories where you fixing? Just Hex Spells and Spells? --Karlos 02:05, 27 October 2005 (EST)
Yeah, just Hex Spells and Spells, those were the only ones I saw that weren't plural. I think I ran across a couple that were Enchantment and I changed it to Enchantments also. --Rainith 02:07, 27 October 2005 (EST)
Ok Enchantment moved to Enchantments. --Rainith 07:05, 27 October 2005 (EST)
Ok, thanks. :) --Karlos 08:31, 27 October 2005 (EST)

Weapon and charm collectors[edit source]

I can see that you've been making a lot of updates to the Weapon and charm collectors page and it's looking a lot neater and is surely more informative and accurate too now, however I would like to raise an issue. Previously all of the max damage bows had the bow type next to them. E.g. Ascalon Bow (Flatbow) now however they just say Ascalon Bow. I found it incredibly useful knowing what type of bow the collector bow was. I'd like to see the bow type information reinserted, I thought I'd leave you a note on your talk page rather than on the Weapon and charm collectors page because if you agreed that this information is important, one of us can just add it back in. If you disagree then I guess I'll add a comment to the Weapon and charm collectors page and see what others think. Thanks. -- Xasxas256 03:05, 26 October 2005 (GMT)

Hi, glad someone likes those pages, as I've spent a lot of time on them recently. The reason I removed that info was two-fold. Firstly it was really annoying me that people were trying to wikify it as Ascalon Bow (Longbow) which just makes no sense. Secondly those tables just show the info that the game give you, pretty much exactly as the game gives it to you. The game doesn't tell you that it is a shortbow, or a long bow or anything like that, it says Ascalon Bow, which is what I put in there. I do think that we should have that info, I think that would be a good thing to add to those collectors' individual pages. --Rainith 13:12, 26 October 2005 (EST)
Or how about put that info on the Ascalon Bow page.
  • Collector 1 has a Shortbow
  • Collector 2 has a Horn Bow
  • etc...
--Rainith 13:37, 26 October 2005 (EST)
You make a good point, perhaps a compromise would be to have the bow types under the Ascalon Bow page? The Weapon and charm collectors page is a problematic one because it is already so large and and nobody wants to see unnecessary info added to it. I do think the bow type information is important though and I don't think that the fact the game doesn't tell you should be a reason for omission. The GuildWiki is a reference and should detail things that are not in the game. But you are right I think, Ascalon Bow (Longbow) looks ugly and I don't think any of the Ascalon Bow type pages were ever created. I think having the bow type information in each collector's page reduces it's usefulness, you really want to be able to find out where you can get a Flat Bow or a Short Bow from etc. So what do you think of having a list of bow types under the Ascalon Bow page. E.g. writing John Verado is collecting 5 Topaz Crests outside Augury Rock for a Composite Bow and so forth in a list? --Xasxas256 13:43, 26 October 2005 (EST)
Ok you've edited while I was and suggested the same thing as me :) I'll add the information to the the Ascalon Bow page now. I'm only adding the max bows thought, I'm not testing out every Ascalon Bow in the game!!! --Xasxas256 13:45, 26 October 2005 (EST)
Hey, great minds think alike. :) --Rainith 01:03, 27 October 2005 (EST)

Innis the White format choice questions[edit source]

Hey, on Innis the White's main page, I'm curious why you modified it to show redundent information. He's a collector that deals in both armor (probably mesmer only) and weapons/charms, so originally it was split into General, Armor, and Weapon sections. Your edit essentially makes the general section as well as his name appear twice, which makes it feel like there is an armor Innis and a weapon/charm Innis and their locatoin and/or collecting differ (at a quick glance. Then ppl carefully check to ascertain that location and collecting are actually identical).-PanSola 14:09, 2 November 2005 (EST)

This was the format decided on in Talk:Armor collectors#New Proposal to simplify the process. There is some redundant information in the character articles, but as people want to have both Armor and Weapon/Charms on seperate lists and we want people to easily be able to edit the info even if they are not familiar with wiki coding this seemed to work out best. Plus that was the only collector of all of them that was coded that way and I so love uniformity. --Rainith 14:18, 2 November 2005 (EST)