Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Admin noticeboard/Issue archive 6

Deletion request 2016-12-15 update

The update page [[Game_updates/2016-12-15|2016-12-15]] was incorrectly made and should be deleted. It was moved to the correct date of 2016-12-14. Thanks. -- Tarun (talk) 05:12, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

The "correct date" is a matter of opinion. Tarun, I can't help but notice that this request was posted after my latest comment in our discussion, a comment to which you have not yet responded. Did you post here because you wanted to add a new voice to the discussion, or because you don't care to argue further and just want someone with authority to make the problem go away? --Idris (talk) 19:27, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

I've already answered you several times quite clearly. Is there a reason you feel the need to follow me around on the wiki and seemingly harass me now? -- Tarun (talk) 23:33, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Tarun, if you feel if something needs to be deleted you can simply mark {{delete|reason}}, you don't need to post requests to delete things here, unless it's something highly inappropriate and needs to be deleted right away. Not to mention, it was already tagged for deletion, I tagged it myself assuming it was just a move remnant, but now it's just pending the outcome of your discussion, which will be better off continued on either your page or the talk page of the update, than here. - Do_odleplex 23:44, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Doodleplex. It's unfortunately difficult to try and explain to people that this is how things have been done this way for the past four years on this wiki and they refuse to accept it, to the point of being pretty much followed/stalked around the wiki to be harassed with this. -- Tarun (talk) 01:41, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Tarun, you have refused to address my objections to your reasoning, opting instead to merely repeat your opinion as though that's good enough. Instead of engaging in discussion with me, you have ignored me and come running to an admin with a redundant deletion request, describing the date as "incorrect" as though that were a fact and not your contested opinion. If you do not wish to engage in discussion with me, then that is your right, but you don't have the right to pretend that the issue has been resolved. --Idris (talk) 01:01, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

According to my post on Tarun's talk page, I have changed the pages to show the update on the 15th. The forum met-data (or whatever we want to call it) clearly lists it on the 15th. -Darqam 01:21, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Per this Ask a Wiki question the page does indeed need to be deleted. "Stephane confirmed that the official patch notes on the forums use ArenaNet's time, Pacific." -- Tarun (talk) 03:27, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

So it was written, so it has been done. - Felix Omni 04:28, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Since I was bored, I checked forum patch note timestamps against wiki pages. Some pages are based on UTC format, but most are based on PST/PDT, as this should be the case based on the link above. —Nefastu 04:34, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Re: Recalibrating the Waypoints

I have added some information to a topic, which I believe will be relevant and useful to other players. It has repeatedly been defaced or deleted by several members. They have attempted to justify their actions by claiming my additions are unnecessary. However, that surely, in not the point. Spacial (talk) 01:46, 3 January 2017‎ (UTC)

For our later reference, you were referring to Recalibrating the Waypoints, and some effort has been made to analyse your edits to that page on your talk page.

In this specific case, the problem largely boils down to bringing a mesmer in PvE, which has one of the poorest DPS meaning that you apparently can't burst down the Mordrem Leyleecher fast enough whilst it is vulnerable in the vulnerability phase. I will play through the mission later today if I have time and see what I can add to the existing walkthrough to make it accurate. A separate section for solo play should not be required - it is inherently assumed that you will (at least nowadays, since this is not the current living world content) be alone for most missions, and the living world episodes are harder than regular open world PvE and so are expected to require decent gear (for example, level 80 exotic items with berserker stats + food).

These edits are not also "vandal" issues (i.e. they didn't replace the content of the page with chinese shop spam), rather a content disagreement between users which resembles 1RR. --Chieftain Alex 07:33, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

← moved to Guild Wars 2 Wiki talk:Admin noticeboard

Image merge request

Can "File:The Shattered Henge.jpg" and "File:The Shattered Hedge.jpg" be merged together? Same image, just the older one was made via typo, but looks better. - Do_odleplex 03:59, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Done, the cache might be acting up for a bit though. Note that Santax’ image is technically the better one, it’s obviously made with the better graphics settings (more details, more shadows, better shaders); but I’ll leave that decision up to you :P poke | talk 15:12, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Also, I changed the redirect back to {{ArenaNet image|screenshot}}. It was practically creating a wiki black hole with its self-redirect. —Ventriloquist 15:53, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Ooops, forgot about that, sorry and thanks! poke | talk 15:55, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! Found another one though, "File:Spentlung Depth map.jpg" and "File:Spentlung Depth Map.jpg" (the bigger one being on top). - Do_odleplex 03:07, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Done. -Chieftain Alex 10:53, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Merge would be great on "Yomms Merchantile.jpg" with "File:Yomm's Merchantile.jpg" (day shot is best shot). - Do_odleplex 06:55, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

"File:DP SC Abaddon.jpg" and "File:Dome above Abaddon.jpg", the first one is a better image, the latter has a better name. - Do_odleplex 01:55, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

"File:The Apothecary loading screen.jpg" and "File:The Apothecary.jpg", the first one has the name, the second one has the image, however if this story step is still using this loading screen, it might be better to delete those and just use File:Queensdale loading screen.jpg. - Do_odleplex 20:49, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Bam, boom, done. —Ventriloquist 21:27, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! <3 - Do_odleplex 21:31, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

(Reset indent) New ones: File:Hylek Fire Turret.jpg with File:Hylek Turret.jpg (just fix the link on Yoe's page) and File:Mushroom Fertilizer.jpg and File:Gunk.jpg as the former has the good image, the latter has the name, and the link on Mushroom Fertilizer would need to be fixed. - Do_odleplex 21:05, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Isn't the Hylek Turret.jpg better than the Fire one? It's less blurry imo. As for the Fertilizer/Gunk, is there a difference if I just move the Fertilizer image over the Gunk one? I don't see a reason to merge, to be honest. —Ventriloquist 23:05, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

I meant for Yoe's image to be merged with the current one instead of just marking it for deletion as he had it listed it on his gallery page, sorry for wording it poorly. And if you mean reupload over the Gunk and delete Fertilizer picture sure, that makes more sense. - Do_odleplex 23:17, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Beep, boop. done. —Ventriloquist 23:27, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! <3 - Do_odleplex 23:29, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

(Reset indent) A merge for: File:CaladbolgShard4.jpg with File:CaladbolgShard3 Dragon'sStandHeartofThorns.jpg and File:CaladbolgShard3.jpg with File:CaladbolgShard2 JellyfishGrotto.jpg. It doesn't matter who's on top, both the same image more or less(and the file name for both is pretty bad for both). Also File:CaladbolgShard1 TheCorpseGrove.jpg can be merged into File:Shard of Caladbolg - Verdant Brink.jpg. - Do_odleplex 10:51, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Apologies for noticing this so late. I didn't end up doing any merges since I moved the files to appropriate names, and deleted the other files. Like you said, they were very similar. —Ventriloquist 11:57, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Deleted icon

"Research Architecture Level 1.png" got deleted and is causing broken image links. I'm assuming because it was part of a group of duplicate icon, but as the icon is being linked to, can someone kindly restore it or replace the links to whatever icon it was a duplicate of? =) - Do_odleplex 20:41, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

It has been de-deleted - Felix Omni 20:55, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! - Do_odleplex 20:59, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Duplicated deleted images

The following images that got rightfully deleted because they were duplicated: "2009 Gamescom concept art 12.jpg"(found linked on File talk:Orrian Armor concept art.jpg) and "File:Heavy armor 03 concept art.jpg"(found linked on User:Leonim/Gallery). However, they were unfortunately still in use, and since I have no idea what these images looked like(Google search wasn't helpful enough) to relink them to the correct image, can an admin fix the links to whatever images those two files were duplicates of? - Do_odleplex 04:12, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Alrighty, so:

• 2009 Gamescom concept art 12.jpg = File:"Undead Gate Guardian" concept art.jpg
• Heavy armor 03 concept art.jpg = File:Dredge Heavy male armor concept art.jpg

I've restored the pages, removed them from any links they were attached to and deleted them again. Thanks for noticing! —Ventriloquist 10:18, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Scholar Glenna Issues

In order for it not to get buried I'll add the note here. I mentioned on Talk:Scholar Glenna#Too many templates that the page is once again having issues, this should probably be looked at and a decision reached on the new page format. I think it might be simpler to simply create a sub-page per raid (not wing) for items sold. -Darqam 04:15, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Subpages are sufficient, yes. Better to split than have the wiki melt down. —Ventriloquist 11:08, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Hiding edit summary

Brain fart for not bringing this up earlier, but could you please hide this edit summary as it contains some account information which I assume the editor did not intend to make public. G R E E N E R 06:21, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Looks like Alex took care of it, not sure how I managed to miss that one. —Ventriloquist 11:51, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

API not working

Hello, the Guild Wars 2 API is not working correctly, I tried to make several request for achievement details only to get 404 errors. Could you please fix the problem? Thank you!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 79.98.21.78 (talk) at 10:31, 20 March 2017 (UTC).

The wiki editors and staff(users) are not responsible for the API(ANet Devs). https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/community/api/HEADS-UP-API-temporarily-down Sythe 12:44, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

As stated by Scythe, this is not a wiki issue; however Lye (main API dev) has stated unofficially that he would try and bring it back on Monday (today) at some point during the day, so with some luck it will be back on soon. -Darqam 13:29, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Springtime Page Protection

Hero point has been a target for bots recently. Not to mention there seems to be a few more bots running around recently, though unfortunately I can't remember off the top of my head what they were spamming. - Do_odleplex 05:49, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a month. -Auron 07:07, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Serge Yseron

← moved to Guild Wars 2 Wiki talk:Admin noticeboard

Upgrade SMW to version 2.5.4

The installed copy of Semantic MediaWiki, version 2.4.4, is from December 2016 and doesn't support property chaining in Ask prints or sorts. This makes it impossible to directly obtain, for example, a list of all "X in Bulk" vendors including what cooking ingredient they vend and where they are in the world, because location->vendor->vend list->item exceeds the two hop limit. It's also not possible in a direct Ask to sort a list of ingredients by requires rating, because that's a subproperty of has minimum usable rating. While it is possible to obtain this information by performing followup Asks in wiki-markup, that's not available for a direct data export. (I'm trying to export relational data to figure out, for each chef recipe, where to go and what to do to be able to cook it; I can compare that against my account to see what I have left, and I'm trying to get the information with as minimal wiki impact as possible. I can grab most of the information I need from the GW2 API, but which vendors sell which recipe sheets or bulk ingredients, among other things, is only available here.)

Even if upgrading to 2.5.x is not feasable, upgrading to 2.4.6 would improve performance and stability.

--TwelveBaud (talk) 17:56, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

If you're using the wiki for an external tool, then you shouldn't be querying the wiki on the fly anyway. Get the data out once, then reuse your own database. The hardcoded tables on (1) + (2) have most of the information you require.

The above being said, sorting by subproperties will be nice when we get around to upgrading. ArenaNet's wiki tech guy is working on moving the wiki host to another provider at the moment, and we're about to see the release of Path of Fire - I don't think they'll be doing this upgrade immediately, but it's good to know what useful features we'll get in the future. -Chieftain Alex 19:42, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

To add to what you said Alex: we will not upgrade Semantic MediaWiki (or MediaWiki, unless there's a security upgrade) until we're done with our big migration project for the wikis. This probably means not until the beginning of next year (tentative timeline, TBC) and it could well be that we move to SMW 3.0 (pending approval by the community). --Stephane Lo Presti talk 22:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

CAPTCHA issue

Not sure if this is the proper place for this, but users who are having login issues are not able to properly login to this wiki, as the CAPTCHA is triggered after a few failed attempts, and the CAPTCHA is blocked to to an error message directed to the site owner, regarding registration w/ the service. Meaning, users can't bypass it unless they reset their password, as there is no way for them to complete the required CAPTCHA field. Islarose 18:11, 24 September 2017 (PST)

Hi Islarose. Are these users sure they're entering the correct credentials? Do they have ad-blocker or other apps that could affect websites? Any other information (when did this happen?) would help. Thanks --Stephane Lo Presti talk 01:16, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Islarose, I have been unable so far to reproduce the problem. Any details, such as what Stephane asked above, could be helpful, as could a screenshot of the error message. Thanks! Justin Lloyd (talk) 12:42, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Username change request

Hello! During registration, autocorrect corrected my username to my "nope cant have special characters or spaces" username. I tried creating a new account but the site says it is too similar.

I was wondering if I can have it changed to Félix Wolf? I am trying to keep all my wiki accounts with the same username, and would like to have my GW2 Wiki account to follow that consistency.

If this is not possible, that is fine to, I figured it is worth a shot since names can be edited, but some wikis have policies on name changes. --Felixwolf (talk)

As many English keyboards do not have easy access to é, I'm reluctant to have a target which users would struggle to access. There is the option of having Félix Wolf be a redirect to your name. Also, were you wanting to keep Felixwolf as one word? Or would you prefer to have Felix Wolf? Spaces are okay. G R E E N E R 16:09, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Unable to edit Open Skies: Domain of Vabbi achievement page?

Heya, I tried to update the item/acquisition table on the 'Open Skies: Domain of Vabbi' page with the hints found in the game. It told me the action was considered harmful and the edit disallowed. At first I thought it might be because I didn't have an account, so I made one, but it still gives me the message: "This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: disallow certain words in mainspace articles". I'm not sure which word(s) triggered the warning, as all I did was type out exactly what the hero panel in-game gives as hints. (I left the ones that were already filled out alone aside from entering the appropriate NPC names between the currently empty brackets for the 'Stone-Carving Tools' and the 'Guard Bribe'). Aethlin (talk) 19:22, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

One of our filters might have accidentally caught a bad word, could you type the text here, to see if it'll block you? —Ventriloquist 19:32, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Just a theory here: because they were editing from an IP address, and then a fresh new account, the filter saw the word "domain" and went NOPE. Autoconfirmed users I doubt have that problem or the page Domain of Vabbi wouldn't exist, but that's the only thing I can think of. (edit) Aethlin, I aded in most of your contribution but left out the top 3 lines. I want you to see if you can add the first line in by itself, and see if that triggers the filter, and if it doensn't try adding the names. - Do_odleplex 19:35, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

No, the problem here is that the page contains the NPC name "Nazimi", which contains the substring "nazi". Unusual cornercase. I've pasted your edit into the sandbox, can you copy that text and try submitting your edit again?

(Edit conflict) sigh doodle you EC'd me. -Chieftain Alex 19:46, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

It did save the edit with the text copied from the sandbox. Aethlin (talk) 20:28, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Awesome to hear, thanks! - Do_odleplex 20:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Image Upload Mistake

Please remove this page: [[1]]. Juvenile Lion doesn't exist, and the Juvenile Tiger that I was going for already has an image like this. Sorry for the trouble. --Riveted

No trouble at all, in fact I'll let you know a cool trick to tag things for deletion without having to ask here: simply put {{delete|<reason>}} at the top of the page if you think that page or file needs to be deleted. I will say I'm a little confused though, do you want to delete that image or the one you uploaded just like it? Because out of the two, I'd probably keep the first one, because it's zoomed in on the area with the pet. - Do_odleplex 22:04, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

My clumsiness strikes again. This seems to be one of those days when I shouldn't be touching things. I would like the image I uploaded to be deleted: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/File:Juvenile_Lion_Northern_Barbed_Gate.jpg --Riveted

Issue Creating Account

Hey! I've been doing a couple of edits to a Champion Bounty that was lacking information (Adal, in Elon Riverlands) and I figured I should create an account to be accountable for changes I make. However, when I tried to register, my chosen username (Drilling4mana) was marked as a "spam username" (?) and blocked. As far as I'm aware, I'm the only person on the internet that goes by that handle, so I don't see how it was marked as such. I tried creating an account under a different username, but found that my IP has been blocked from account creation attempts. Any assistance with this issue would be appreciated. I can be reached by email at Drilling4mana@gmail.com if necessary.

@ other admins, I'm wondering if filter 10 is still required. Some of the results in there look like name.fourdigit gw2 account ids. Shall we turn this filter off entirely? -Chieftain Alex 02:18, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Some of the hits look legit (namely the ones that use a regular word and then a number in between), but there's a lot of them with the <name><surname><number> combination. Maybe allow for numbers inside a name (such as drilling4mana), but disallow the ones that have the spam-bot-pattern. —Ventriloquist 10:14, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Filter 10 is now super weak. All names with numbers in the middle will now all be allowed, however 3 or 4 digit numbers on the end will still trigger it. -Chieftain Alex 22:21, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Superior Sigils and TP prices

→ moved from User talk:Doodleplex

Hi, why are you deleting the TP prices of sigil's weapons where there is high interests in due to the current meta? Who decided that it should not be provided by the wiki? Cheers Phil —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 37.201.4.106 (talk) at 14:45, 12 January 2018‎ (UTC).

For reference, Doodleplex and the IP have been undoing each other's edits for some time on the Superior Sigil pages. Neither user seems to be following the bullets at the top of Help:Reverting. The pages concerned are Superior Sigil of Force and Superior Sigil of Energy - check their history out.

@Phil (IP) - I'm thinking that the prices of the weapons to salvage Sigils from are probably useful - if only so that it can be seen that salvaging weapons for sigils is often without profit, but we should use a template instead of a raw SMW query. If we use the raw query, it will be difficult to track it down later if we choose to change the property names. I shall put together a template and see if we can reach an agreement with everyone concerned, in which case we'll use it, if not, we might go down another route.

@Doodle - Three things

(i) Most importantly - discuss things, especially related to reverts!

(ii) It seems the last time I discussed it was longer ago than I thought, but please can we both record what our robots are doing on GW2W:BOTS whenever we run them. I admit I've been worse than you at this and have failed to do this for my last 3 months (whoops) of bot runs (fixed). Without telling everyone else, the rest of the wiki can't review the edits since they don't appear in RecentChanges. This applies even if it is trivial and we are performing the edits ourselves and don't need help.

(iii) Don't use your bot to silently revert somebody you disagree with. It should be obvious to you that doing this undermines everybody's trust in bots and admins.

--Chieftain Alex 17:44, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

For number 1/3: sure, I'll explain now: I honestly had no idea it was the same user, I just set up J.A.R.V.I.S. on my bf's computer to go looking for acquisition sections that weren't the same and fixing so everybody would be the same, because none of the other sigil or rune pages have TP prices, and all use the same format(or they did last I checked) and went to work. Additionally, now that I think about it though, those sections should probably be using the {{salvaged from}} template, not a table. Also, when I looked at that tables most of the weapons you can buy are more expensive than buying the rune directly right away, only two or three weapons you can currently buy right away have prices that are lower than buying the sigil outright, so if anything, I'd put those two in the notes section. Roger on 2, will try to add those in when I get my computer back. - Do_odleplex 18:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

I prefer the tables with the prices. Since the wiki serves as a resource for players, their wishes (in a reasonable manner) should be respected. I've "allowed" prices before, such as Wanderer's Weapon Recipe Book, where the prices would be listed in the notes section in a neat way. I disagree with the reverts, especially with the reason for one of them that Greener listed below.

"I'd put [the cheap weapons] in the notes section" Honestly, that's a bad way to go about it. Prices fluctuate daily, weekly, monthly, so adding the "cheapest weapons" to the notes section would quickly become redundant. I fully support the decision to show the prices, and if Alex can makeshift something to show exactly that, it would be for the best. —Ventriloquist 00:09, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I am sorry to see that this series of edits has been happening. Admins are not the ones that decide what appears and what doesn't appear on the wiki. The community decides on the content through discussion and consensus, and the admin team enforces those decisions.

I am not happy in seeing a revert war over this, or any other, matter, even if it was unintended from one side. I'm especially not happy with the claim of "Vandalism" by Doodleplex in one of the edit summaries.

Please discuss the matter of the TP prices on the appropriate talk page(s), and thank you Alex for looking into a template which could run that code on high-valued sigils. G R E E N E R 18:12, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Any acquisition sources that can be bought on the TP should list the TP price on the page. We do need to switch to the standard pattern of collapsing after ~15 items so it doesn't push the rest of the content way down.--Relyk ~ talk < 23:27, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Afaik that's not a standard ever adopted anywhere on this wiki. -Chieftain Alex 19:48, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

I never claimed so.--Relyk ~ talk < 08:25, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

My input is that the TP prices of weapons pertaining to the sigils is superfluous and unnecessary. The wiki doesn't need to function as a TP interface website.
Anyways, I'm just here to report an issue with: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/index.php?title=Superior_Sigil_of_Air&type=revision&diff=1618889&oldid=1601199 - template is broken for the comma in "Khyrsaor, the Golden Sword". TehAnonymous (talk) 19:05, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Use the template per the above discussion. -Chieftain Alex 19:48, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Page protection request

Matt Forbeck has had at least 3 spam links added to it over the years, with the last 2 happening in the past 6 weeks, apparently from the same source. --Cali (talk) 16:57, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

2 edits in the space of 1 month is hardly an outbreak, besides, your removal of the external link should drop the number of spam targets on that page. -Chieftain Alex 17:02, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough if the level of spam activity on this page is not a cause for concern, but the legit external link Forbeck.com is still active on the page, if that makes a difference. --Cali (talk) 18:22, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Meh I guess it does no harm. Protected. :) -Chieftain Alex 18:51, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Heh, thanks. :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cali (talk • contribs).

Game updates - DPL issue?

← moved to Talk:Game updates#Game updates - DPL issue?

How to change Username?

→ moved from Guild Wars 2 Wiki talk:Admin noticeboard

Hello, I found instructions that said to "ask on the admin noticeboard" if you need your username changed but I really could not find a place to do this. The instructions talk about reporting abuse and what not. This was the only way I could think to ask. How do I go about changing my username to Mistress Elemental? Thanks! --Mistesrian (talk) 18:53, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

The user account, "Mistress Elemental", was created in September 2014. If you created this account, could you please log in to that account and leave a comment here to show ownership? If you did not create this account, then you'll have to look for another name :(. G R E E N E R 19:26, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

That is my bad, I did not know I created this account. It must be tied to my main guild wars account or something. Is there a way to merge or replace the Mistesrian account with this one? --Mistress Elemental (talk) 20:15, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

No worries. I just attempted to merge your two accounts and encountered a bug. Feel free to continue to use "Mistress Elemental" until I hear back on what caused the error. G R E E N E R 20:50, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

I realize you may be watching this page for updates, and not necessarily your talk page. Could you please go to both of the accounts that you created and clear your watchlists for them? When you have, let me know, and I can attempt to merge your two accounts. Thanks! G R E E N E R 19:12, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

SMW: Delete doubles of properties with the same name using the Object ID Disposal tool

There are a couple of Semantic MediaWiki properties that have gained doppelgangers with the same name but no relationships. While the old property continues to work, looking at its page or trying to use it in Special:Ask uses the new property instead, showing no results. While I have no idea what will happen if someone tries to delete these by name, it should be possible to use the Object ID Disposal tool to remove them by ID number.

Here are the ones I've found in the property list:

Property name	Working ID	Broken ID
[[Property:Gives resource]]	67190	1494729
[[Property:Has race requirement]]	None	2023657, 2023660
Property:Is part of storyline	2023659	2023661
[[Property:Recommended Level]]	None	2168393, 2168395

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by TwelveBaud (talk) at 20:27, 8 July 2018 (UTC).

Hmm I've never used these tools before... seems the SMW special page has been revamped since i last visited it. I'll take a look thanks. -Chieftain Alex 21:02, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=smw well I tried deleting the property assigned to Gives resource, with no effect whatsoever. -Chieftain Alex 21:15, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

"Gives resource" in particular annoys me. I might remove the property from the template, purge all the pages using that template, delete the property page, delete the associated table ids, and then recreate the property from scratch. -Chieftain Alex 21:20, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Why not just make a new property with a similar name to "Property:Gives resource" (maybe "Property:Gives item from resource"), plop that one in the template and nuke the buggy one permanently. Nice, clean and no chances for it to break again. - Do_odleplex 17:31, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Apart from the property not being visible on the property page, it otherwise works fine for the usual template. Changing property names is always an annoying nightmare, because you always find someone will have hardcoded property names instead of using templates. -Chieftain Alex 17:35, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Alright then, what if you make a new property name and have the old one be a redirect to the new working one? - Do_odleplex 17:37, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Blocked editing Guaranteed Yellow-Orange Dye Unlock

I tried to edit Guaranteed Yellow-Orange Dye Unlock to add the API widget to show what's unlocked on the account but get blocked with Non-talk page namespaces, large removal (not autoconfirmed)

For now, dumped the edit text onto my user page which lets me use it, but thought I'd mention here Amatyr (talk) 02:05, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Oh, that is so frustrating when it does that! A few things: I'm absolutely sorry this blocked your edit (going to scold that bot now); I am very grateful that you came here to let us know; and smart move in adding the edit to your user page! G R E E N E R 03:29, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Remove Page

Accidently Made a page that is already active

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Harrierattribute Please remove. We already have

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Harrier

MY mistake. Thanks

--❄ Brisky ❄ talk 00:01, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

It has been destroyed. Thank you for cooperating. —Ventriloquist 00:02, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Owl devotee broken

The hero challenge in snowden drifts that is initiated by talking to the Owl devotee is broken and doesn't work because the game thinks he has started fighting when he hasn't, this is happening in world kaineng, hope you can help. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 108.48.27.143 (talk) at 19:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC).

Unfortunately if there is a bug in the game, there's nothing we can do about it, as the wiki is run by players, not ArenaNet employees. Your best bet would be reporting the bug in game and bringing it up on the forums. Best of luck! - Do_odleplex 19:22, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Chieftain Alex on Legendary Imbued Shaman

Chieftain Alex (talk • contribs • logs • block log)

Vandalising the Legendary Imbued Shaman page by removing sourced information and leaving it blank. Frusen (talk) 10:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Dude, that user is an admin... 174.225.12.7 11:29, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

So? Deleting correct info and instead leaving it blank just for the sake of making it more confusing *is* vandalism. Frusen (talk) 12:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I thought your research was unclear, and the linked methodology on reddit was poor, so I've documented it properly on the talkpage like I asked you to in the first place. I consider this matter resolved. -Chieftain Alex 12:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Adding my comment here because I believe no person can be their own judge and jury. Thank you for continuing the conversations appropriately on the talk page and coming to an agreement on the content. Greener (talk) 14:17, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

First of all separating this from the Vandal section as this is a non-vandal issue.

Chieftain Alex, in his capacity as an admin, saw a revert war (that's bad; don't revert war) and acted to stop it. On the one side was the information that has been on the article for several years based on testing from trusted users in 2015. On the other side was a much more recent reddit thread linking to an inaccessible google document with comments on the reddit thread noting the methodology had flaws. Alex took the most neutral option possible of removing either claim, noting that it is currently in dispute, and locking the article in that state until more conclusive proof could be obtained. He then went out of his way to rigorously research the matter himself, post results to the talk page where they will be available for reference to all future wiki users, and put that information in the article. While it wound up being a slight mixing of sysop and editor roles that we do generally try to avoid, there was certainly no maliciousness on Alex's part and the end result is a more thoroughly researched article.

While you should certainly bring it to other admins' attention if you believe an admin is acting inappropriately, Alex was simply trying to bring a revert war to a peaceful end. - Tanetris (talk) 16:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Game update pages - sort order issues

Admins - I added a new page for the 2019-06-03 updates tonight, but noticed that it's sorting incorrectly on Game_updates, because the 2019-05-29 and 2019-05-30 pages were originally created as 2019-5-29 and 2019-5-30. I've moved them to have the two-digit month in the page name, but am unable to delete the offending 1-digit-month pages where the redirects now exist, since I believe page deletion is reserved for admins. As such, the "5" is still sorting as newer than the "06" in the sort order; and June 3 is now in between May 28 and May 29 in the infobox on the updates page, and May 30 is also showing as the newest update on the Main Page. I believe the correct action is to delete both https://wiki.guildwars2.com/index.php?title=Game_updates/2019-5-29&redirect=no and https://wiki.guildwars2.com/index.php?title=Game_updates/2019-5-29&redirect=no; nothing links to either, and I believe retaining the redirect pages is going to cause more problems than it'll solve. --Tengauge (talk) 05:03, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Done. This doesn't always happen when you move pages, but you were right on this occasion. -Chieftain Alex 06:08, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Konig & AbuseFilter 27

Konig Des Todes (talk • contribs • logs • block log)

Given his recent attempt to instigate a revert war with me, I would like to request the reinstatement of Special:AbuseFilter/27. I believe it was an effective technical measure to discourage Konig's "revert first, ask questions later" mentality on any articles that he considers "his". –Santax (talk · contribs) 09:26, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

In order to keep you informed: The request has been noted and is currently being discussed. Greener (talk) 00:09, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the update. Is it typical for discussions of matters like this one to happen off-wiki? –Santax (talk · contribs) 14:59, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Just dropping in to leave a link to this discussion I'm having with Santax; he brought up the possibility that both he and Konig could start adhering to a zero-revert policy during conflicts with each other, which I think is a good idea, and one I think Konig is capable of following, as he's been making a point to avoid further antagonising Santax since he was called out over the Mordremoth article. —Idris 15:16, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I was actually thinking a blanket zero-revert policy between Konig and all other editors, i.e. he cannot revert anything except obvious vandalism. I am not the only editor who has had these issues with Konig - there are years worth of editors who have reasonably decided that they'd rather stop contributing to the wiki than deal with Konig's belligerence.

This would effectively be enforced by AbuseFilter 27 in the case of disputes between him and myself; the downside of this approach would be that it would limit the ability to add and enhance on one another's edits while following the principle of preserving information and viewpoints. –Santax (talk · contribs) 19:00, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

The wiki community is a family of people who are doing their best to get along. We don't always do it well, we have disagreements, and we can frustrate ourselves to no end. But what we've been able to build over these years is a testament that working together can accomplish something great.

We, the admin team, understand the desire to have a filter implemented to separate editors; it seems clean and easy. We've reviewed the history of the filter and by our assessment it has failed in two ways. First, it has many false-positives, edits made in good faith which were stopped. Second, it removed the responsibility of collaboration away from two editors and imposed the belief that it cannot be done. We disagree with the latter.

Each edit the two of you have made over your years in the wiki community are valuable as they have helped the us take steps forward in our imperfect understanding of Tyria. And our understanding is imperfect. We need the perspectives that the two of you hold, even if they disagree. They help us shed light on hidden topics or point out possible connections between disparate happenings. And as to where the topics are grey or in dispute, we ask you to discuss the issue with each other rather than raise an argument.

A zero-revert stance is an achievable goal, one we hope both editors acknowledge and respect. If this plan fails, the admin team will take appropriate steps including but not limited to the implementation of a filter. Greener (talk) 18:46, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Konig has asked me to post a response on his behalf because he's on the road and has spotty internet. He would like to try the zero-reverts policy, but he thinks that the rules on what constitutes a "revert" should be laid out explicitly, since sometimes he and Santax will write over the other instead of literally reverting. In his words:

"How would I or he go about seeing an obvious error and fixing it. Especially if "changing aspects of the article he had written" is a revert (I would argue that it isn't since it isn't reverting to the previous state). If "changing something he changed" is considered a revert - either by just him or by externals - then that is no different than the filter. We just can't leave it at "don't revert each other" if something likr the DSD article changes is considered a revert."

—Idris 19:12, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

We could look to the well-tested example of the Wikipedia community for a definition. According to Wikipedia:Edit warring, "The zero-revert rule means a complete prohibition on reverts (as defined for the purpose of the three-revert rule) and is imposed on editors", where a "revert" as defined for the purpose of the three-revert rule is "An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert". I think the DSD article changes would, under this definition, be considered a revert, and that the way to settle the dispute would be to either discuss first and agree on an approach, or edit the article in a way that accommodates both viewpoints rather than editing it in such a way to establish the supremacy of one viewpoint over another. –Santax (talk · contribs) 19:37, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Konig asked me not to respond to this one on his behalf, so just a heads up that it may be a couple of days before he's able to get back to you. —Idris 21:20, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Let me start by apologizing for what started this. It was a very bad month for me in general, and the 19th to 21st was the worst of it and it affected my reaction to things. How I responded to being called out as reverting was most definitely too hasty and the reaction too greatly influenced by my mood.

I am more than willing to try to work with Santax, and believe I already have. Both Elder race and Talk:Kryta#Splitting the article can attest to such. Counter to some views that I cannot work with anyone on lore articles, I’ve had no issues with User:Kossage, even despite some disagreements in methods. So long as Santax remains willing, I see no reason why I cannot work with him or anyone else as well.

However, given the above and User talk:Santax discussions, I am doubtful that Santax is also willing. The suggestion of "a blanket zero-revert policy between Konig and all other editors", defining reverts as "An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part", effectively means that I would be unable to edit any content on the wiki that was ever edited by another user. Or as he put it "he cannot revert anything except obvious vandalism". I cannot consent to Santax’s request, as it feels like he’s not-so-subtly telling me to gtfo. In truth, I’m unsure the zero-revert policy with the Wikipedia definitions would be any different than the filter that, as User:Greener said, is flawed.

In a general sense I’m fine with a zero-revert policy between Santax and myself, but I believe people would grow tired if we came to others just to fix a small typo, add a source for {{citation needed}} tags, or other simple maintenance edits that don’t alter the context of the sentence. As such, something less restrictive than the Wikipedia definitions is more ideal. Konig (talk) 02:42, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

I think you're misinterpreting the definition of a revert. Maintenance edits aren't reverts - they're expanding and building on the work of others. –Santax (talk · contribs) 08:50, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Insecure connection

When attempting to visit the wiki at work, I get an insecure connection error. On the site information drop down (Firefox), under Connection info, I see that the "Connection Is Not Secure". This is a new issue, as I was able to use the wiki up until about a week ago. SigShane^Talk 13:51, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Username change request

I'm hoping my username can be truncated to ditch the period and numbers. I thought the username needed to match the in-game username, but I then managed to get the number wrong. If feasible, please change my wiki username to be: Jesself —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jesself.8619 (talk • contribs) at 06:35, 22 April 2020‎ (UTC).

It's certainly possible for Bureaucrats to rename users using Special:RenameUser. Traditionally this type of request is managed through Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Requests for user merge. Just state which name you want on there and they can rename you without you having to create another account. -Chieftain Alex 06:59, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

TYVM for your response and assistance! It was unclear to me whether the merge was different than a rename. Jesself (talk) 15:27, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Since the name you wished to use had not yet been created, I did a rename. If there are issues, let us know. Greener (talk) 17:25, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Current reconfirmations

Hello sysops,

I would like to kindly ask for the currently ongoing reconfirmation requests to be pinned at the top of the wiki the same way recent RFAs were.

Thank you. ❄The F. Prince❄ (talk) 17:44, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello. I'd like to reach out to Dr ishmael and JonTheMon and give them the courtesy to see if they would like to respond before putting a banner up. At the very least that two of the RFAs could be dealt with quickly based on their responses so that a banner would only be need for Tanetris. - Do_odleplex 16:28, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

It's been a week. Any decision about putting it up so that the entire wiki community is aware of the RFA? ❄The F. Prince❄ (talk) 16:51, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Banner is up courtesy of Greener. My apologies for it taking so long. - Do_odleplex 19:51, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you.❄The F. Prince❄ (talk) 11:45, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Conduct unbecoming a member of the wiki

Horrible (talk • contribs • logs • block log) See current contributions on wiki talk pages. —Kvothe (talk) 13:19, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

For the sake of transparency, we are closely looking at the recent contributions and are contemplating our options. poke | talk 13:31, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Afterwards, please let me know which edits count as personal attacks - I'm not quite sure which do. horrible | contribs 13:32, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

As per Horrible's request on User_talk:Salome, I would like to support this post. It is hard to point out a single comment that is a personal attack as over the past two weeks, as almost every comment he made after people disagreed with him was either a personal attack or an attack to the group of people involved.

This started on the Discord and lead me to send two complaints to Tan in two weeks (week 1: very negatively approaching Salome; week 2: calling everyone a racist because of BLM before we even had a discussion). After his Discord ban this moved to pages like Talk:Gender and sexuality in Tyria. Also people who made comments "against" him got personal notes on their talk pages. All in all I would have happily discussed the BLM matter with anyone interested, as long as we are all respectful towards each other.

I am still convinced that H sabotaged his own discussion by starting off negative, and now he's clearly angry. Over the last weeks his behavior has dominated a lot of my wiki experience, and I suspect the same goes for others. This is not the kind of negative environment I would like to experience on this site.

I would also like to point out to H that both skin color and learning disabilities like dyslexia are biological traits you are born with. You cannot heavily support one subject, and attack someone on the other subject in the same discussion and some out looking credible. ~ Sanna 13:46, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

I would like to say that I'm really happy with the way he handled Talk:Gender and sexuality in Tyria; he listened to others and made constructive suggestions and changes. His behaviour on the Community Portal and various talk pages today though... not so much. —Idris 13:53, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

(Reset indent) In my capacity as a regular user, I would like to make a formal complaint, too. I felt and feel wronged by Horrible's actions both during the aforementioned discord event as well as on the wiki despite me trying to act to the best of my abilities in a civil and respectful manner. I now see myself unable to perform my duties as an admin because of it and would like my fellow colleagues to take appropriate actions to make it clear that I am not acting out of bias. talk 13:59, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm gonna second this. I engaged with the conversation Horrible wanted me to engage with, he then came to my talk page to basiclaly tell me to shut up. He subsequently has visited every user's page who commented on my talk page in defence of my right to an oppinion, to argue with them in someway or another. This is starting to feel like focused harassment, utilising passive agression and snide comments, to bypass NPA. However none of us here are stupid and as I can see here, I am not the only one who is tired of his sophistry that attempts to hide his actual attacks. Furthermore I informed him clearly, that I did not want to engage any further with his advice on how I should adapt my disability, to suit his needs... he continued anyway. (which is just blatant abelism) Which has now resulted in a dicsussion about how readable my posts are; not a great feeling as someone with a disability. Really quite unimpressed. -- Salome 14:10, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

I've blocked Horrible for a week. It's my hope that upon returning he'll be able to participate in discussions around the direction of the community without being a jerk. - Felix Omni 14:33, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for taking action. talk 14:39, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

I believe it would be beneficial to indicate imposed penalty on horrible's talk page (similarly to what happened with Lon-ami when they received a temporary ban). ❄The F. Prince❄ (talk) 20:39, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

I've been in communication with Horrible, he knows the score. There's a public record here and in the block log. - Felix Omni 01:43, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

I just want to apologise for any part I might have played in his weird crusade on people's talk pages today; he seems to have started those immediately after I thanked him for his role in pushing us to address BLM, and that is absolutely not the outcome I was expecting or intending. In retrospect, it was a bad idea for me to not call him out on his behaviour as well. —Idris 17:38, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

← moved to User talk:Idris

(Reset indent) agreed, permaban this fucking SJW shithead. All Horrible does is cause pointless drama, and doesn't contribute anything to the wiki. As is clear from up. horrible | contribs 21:30, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Bump. Do I actually have to vandalize shit, or will someone honor this request? horrible | contribs 01:41, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

We are still reviewing his contributions and contemplating stuff or whatever. Rome wasn't built in a day. - Felix Omni 02:42, 16 October 2020 (UTC)