Talk:Griffon (disambiguation)

Does anyone think griffons might be a tamable pet? I remember seeing in the manifesto a griffin swooping down to attack while a norn ranger, or could just be anyone with a bow, jumps across the screen. Ptarmigan 02:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Certainly possible. -- Konig/talk 03:05, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Griffon creatures vs mount?

Hi,

If you look for the word griffon on the wiki, this is the article that you'll automatically be directed to. Should there be a disambiguation page for the term to call attention to the mount?

Thanks --Stephane Lo Presti talk 23:09, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

There should have been as the mount and the skill to use the mount are the same, so I created one and tweaked the top of the page to refer to both the mount and the disambiguation page. - Do_odleplex 23:29, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Doodleplex! The disambiguation page doesn't show up when I search for "griffon" is there anything else to do? --Stephane Lo Presti talk 23:46, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Let's just move the race ([[Griffon (race)]], Griffon (skill), Griffon (primary article, mount)). Imo the mount should be the primary result -Chieftain Alex 23:47, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Honestly, I'd say in the long run the race is going to be more commonly searched than the mount, and a disambig should be sufficient to direct folks to the mount when they just search "Griffon" for it. There's only going to be a momentary high for searching for the mount over the race, given it's the latest end-game content. Konig (talk) 23:51, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Konig. Also, if you search for "griffon" and don't hit enter right away, the disambiguation page should pop up. 70.192.84.255 00:01, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

I also agree that Griffon should cover the mount as the principal meaning of the term in the game. Karra Archflare (talk) 16:36, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

I do not think the main "Griffon" page should be the mount, other than what has already been stated, it's a lot more of a hassle for normally editing to go for what's the current fad: there are nearly 250 pages that link to griffon, and barely over 50 that link to the mount. Switching the two I do not support nor recommend. - Do_odleplex 17:18, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

How about I volunteer to change over the whatlinkshere bits? If there were no links to any existing pages (i.e. ignore the current setup), what seems the most helpful? -Chieftain Alex 18:16, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

At the current moment? Mount is most useful. In the long term? Race. Once players have gotten their mount, they're going to stop searching for the mount. But even if they get griffon slayer, they may still want to go to the race page. More articles in general link to the race, meaning it's a bigger part of the game overall. And players who don't own PoF either now or in the future will likely never go after the mount. And the desire to link to the race over the mount (as well as search) will grow if ArenaNet adds more griffon NPCs. Desire to link to and search for the race over the mount will only grow with skins - if Anet does such - or as new players start looking for/doing the griffon collection. Konig (talk) 18:21, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

(Reset indent) You know I can easily do the same thing Alex, but I think it's a bad idea and that seems to be the majority feeling at the moment. If you want though, throw it up to request for more comments. - Do_odleplex 18:24, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Move

As per request I added a move tag. Though I'd still prefer not to move this page at all and find a race that's been around since the original Guild Wars more important than a mount. Especially as the Skyscale is more popular now than the Griffon. - Do_odleplex 16:22, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

I fully agree with moving this article from "Griffon" to "Griffon (race)". I also propose moving "Griffon (mount) to "Griffon", and leaving the disambiguation where it is because I wholeheartedly believe that most people searching for "griffon" in the wiki want to read about the mount, and the other articles are of very minor consequence. Also, in my honest opinion, popularity of griffon vs. skyscale is not relevant, this is about griffon creatures vs griffon mounts. Warming Hearth (talk) 16:35, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Heart says race, knowledge about average playerbase says mount.--Aylia (talk) 17:11, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Race should definitely be moved to "Griffon (race)". Obviously I'm also suggesting Mount page should be the main one as this is what people are talking about if you say Griffon ingame. Disambig can stay with its disambiguation suffix.

Its irrelevant to the decision, but I've manually reviewed the pages in whatlinkshere, and identified that of the 231 pages, 44 meant to link the mount page. I'll direct those to the mount page for now until a clear decision is reached. -Chieftain Alex 17:26, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

I agree with the move of mount vs. race. —Kvothe (talk) 18:02, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Since I think the race is more important, but I'm in the minority unfortunately, I request the disambig get the base name since they're both of nearly the same importance. Same thoughts for Raptor - Do_odleplex 19:09, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

I'd be in favor of keeping this page (as well as pages for other existing races like raptor) for the race as the race has preceded the inclusion of mounts for several years and is already well established since GW1 plus it's also used as the name of an actual NPC race in the dat. Lorewise griffon mounts have only been a very recent thing as per a dev answer (thanks in part to Tahlkora's teachings) whereas various types of griffons have existed as pets and predators on Tyria for far longer. Ditto for raptors. I understand, though, that for many players the significance of the mount is greater than the long established lore and game dat's classification of the race, but I still feel that the dat's long established use of the term (considering how many pages the race links to compared to the mount) should take precedence here as the game's griffon mounts are merely one member of the much larger griffon family. Just my two cents. --Kossage (talk) 19:52, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

I'd personally be inclined to believe that the race page is more important due to the points stated by Kossage above. Sunlion (talk) 20:04, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Considering that i've fixed all the links to point at the correct pages; the "race" page has 208 links, and the "mount" page has 249 links. Stephane asking at the top of this page shows you its probably one of the top search requests on the wiki. There's no way in hell anyone is searching for the race. -Chieftain Alex 20:59, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I'm personally really against the "this is older so it has priority over the name" argument. The mount is undeniably more relevant for 99% of the gw2 population. This race article is also really short, no matter how well established griffon creatures are in the franchise, there's not much to them, they're pretty irrelevant. Whereas the griffon mount has way more achievements related to it, masteries, items, cosmetics, a song, a spotlight in gw2 official site, and are much more relevant lore-wise and one of the selling points of an expansion.

While I do understand your arguments, your average player is not interested in learning about the griffon race. When was the last time you visited the article for Wind Rider, or Ettin, or Imp? How many times have you heard someone in map chat talking about any of those minor races over the past year? Probably a very low number, if not 0. But about the griffon? Or asking for help with griffon related events?

As for the .dat argument. The wiki is written by and for players, convenience to use and ease to reach the article you're interested in should weigh more than the internal naming schemes of anet and their coding.

Would be nice to get traffic numbers, how many views both these articles have got over the past year or so (while bearing in mind that this page's numbers would be inflated because it has the original name). And finally, the number of links argument is also pretty weak, I sincerely doubt those links are clicked regularly. Warming Hearth (talk) 21:07, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm in favor of the mount as the main article. Anet likes to reuse names, and we do move old articles to make way for new content with the same name. For example, No Quarter (trait) has been in the game since 2015 but was moved to make way for the story episode. What value does the race article provide to the average player? It's a few short lines followed by a simple list. Compare that to the mount article which has a guide, skills, achievements, masteries, skins, and artwork. From a gameplay perspective, the amount of content related to the mount should already justify moving it. ----BuffsEverywhere (talk) 22:44, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

I want to add that the mounts are one of the main selling points of PoF. I'm sure the interest in mounts vastly exceeds the interest in the race. ----BuffsEverywhere (talk) 13:15, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

I guess I'll officially add on that I'm in favor of the main griffon page being a direct link to the more useful mount page (just like we do with Skyscale vs Skyscale (disambiguation) vs Skyscale (NPC)). People don't look up the race page and basically all the links there are just from the NPCs that are said race, doesn't matter what article name that is. New players constantly are trying to unlock the griffon mount and searching for it. No one is looking up the griffon race page... I honestly wonder how many of the people that land on the current griffon page didn't want that and go to the mount page right after. I mean even looking through pages that link to Griffon many user made links are made expecting to link to the mount. I see no reason the less useful race page should be the main one. Dak393 (talk) 12:51, 24 May 2021 (UTC)