Talk:Noob

Untitled

What's described on the page is techinically a "Newbie". A noob is someone who's played the game, but just sucks ass at it.--MP47 (Talk) (Contr.) 02:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

We're not describing the difference between newb, newbie, noob, and Marco. Although all four have the same meaning. Calor (t) 03:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

epic lulz. there still is a difference in the terms tho--MP47 (Talk) (Contr.) 03:03, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

+1337 to me. Prwnd. But I understand there is a difference. I'll work on it to make you happy. Calor (t) 03:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Newbie would be used as in normal English, and be factual. Noob isn't particular for experienced players, its use is associated with the leetspeaking subculture, whether the induvidual it's new to the game or not. By now it's lost so much connection with it's etymology that it can be considered a generic insult, not often connected by any objective facts. Backsword 12:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

well (at least when im using it) it's a person like LoL Leeroy Jenkins would've been if it hadn't been set upArthurperson 02:58, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Um, newb and newbie are the same, and noob isn't, Calor... CAD had a comic on it somewhere, but I cba finding it right now. -- Armond Warblade 02:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20060823. Good suggestion. Sums up the difference nicely. --Aspectacle 02:48, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Eh, I just pieced together a few facts to make a rudimentary article. Calor 02:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Delete

not GW2 related, noobs are in every game, not exclusive to GW2.

It's a glossary page showing what the term means. There's a similar page on GWW, gw1:Noob -- Plingggggg \ Talk 19:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I think you just showed why we need this page. :P Lord Belar 20:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

No reason why we can't just redirect to wikipedia, since this is a fairly encompassing term in gaming culture. Who ways we can't break from the GWW mold a bit?--Corsair 06:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

WTF!

Noob is NOT an insult and it DOES NOT mean that the person should know better it JUST MEANS NEW! i get annoyed with this cos noone knows what it means! IT IS NOT AN INSULT AND IF U USE IT AS AN INSULT U R INSULTING SOMEONE FOR BEING NEW AND THAT IS SAD! --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:86.3.145.68 (talk) .

Should we make an example section on the main page? :P Lord Belar 02:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

You should probably take a look at this before you get so annoyed. How you spell the word and how you use it has an implied meaning. -- ab.er.rant 09:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Newb != Noob. Newb doesn't know and wants to learn. Noob doesn't listen and screws up. Well, in general. Ofcourse the context also matters. --- -- (s)talkpage 15:12, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Noob vs. Newb

This "note" states that a Noob is a Newb. The difference is this: A Newb is a new player who wants to learn to play and doesn't flame you for being better. A Noob is generally an egocentric and horribly bad, bad, 'baaaaaddd player who refuses to learn. --- -- talkpage 09:34, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

"Noob" is a self insult these days :P --zeeZ 06:09, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmzk

I believe you should have asked me before writing about me.. Oh wait.. ^Teo^ 00:14, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Necessary?

I propose a deletion of this page. Any opposition? Venom20 23:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

None here, this kind of "slang" doesn't deserve a page on a wiki for a game that won't come out for probably a year or more. Eive 03:38, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

It's slang used in any kind of gaming anywhere. If it doesn't warrant a page here, then there should be a "slang and abbreviations" page, or something similar. --ஸ Kyoshi 03:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Also: "Any opposition" Yes, two (and a half?) people were opposed when the same question was asked four sections up. --ஸ Kyoshi 04:01, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

The first comment was an unsigned IP, the next was Pling back in 2008. I wouldn't exactly consider that argument relevant. And at one point we suggested (and made) an Abbreviations page but it was considered "not GW2 relevant" (much like this page is now) and was put onto Neil's user page somewhere for safe keeping. Eive 04:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, the purpose of this discussion is to have a recent one. Comments left in 2008 are not current. As Eive said, there was an abbreviation page (more recent) and that was deemed by consensus to be deleted. The act here of having a recent discussion is to reach a consensus as well. Based on the new posts, I will update the delete tag with speedy. Venom20 04:35, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

@Venom: Fair, except that I don't understand how one person agreeing with you (and one disagreeing) is a proper basis for forwarding your goal.

@Eive: "The first comment was an unsigned IP, the next was Pling back in 2008. I wouldn't exactly consider that argument relevant." It's the same argument at a different time, and it wasn't deleted then. Why isn't the argument relevant now (even if the opinions may be outdated)?

As for my own view on this, people will search the wiki for things like this, and by merit of convenience I see no reason to force them to look elsewhere unless there is a conflict in naming (with something else from the game, for example). --ஸ Kyoshi 05:54, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Luckily, the talk page for the now deleted accrynom page wasn't deleted. Comments can be read here in regards to the usefulness of items like this. In regards to searching GW2W for an internet related term, it is not needed. Noob is not a GW2 term, it is an internet term. That distinction should merit deletion on its own. If someone wants to look it up, they should use google (or a different search engine) for better results. Venom20 13:24, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

So anything that doesn't contain information completely exclusive to GW2 should be scrapped? I disagree, again, by merit of convenience. The acronym page was deleted on terms of necessity (and it wasn't necessary, per se) but in my opinion not enough to delete an article over. Forcing people to look elsewhere because it's "not necessary" to document it seems like we're being rude to the community. (By the way, if everything on the wiki must be "necessary," user images and custom signatures are looking pretty frivolous.) --ஸ Kyoshi 16:09, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

So we're documenting in-game terminology for a game that isn't released yet? --JonTheMon 18:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

But should we really have a whole page dedicated to a "slang" term? I don't think so. And that is why I say to remove this page. I would be fine with an abbreviation page, but this just seems like a waste of space (metaphorically speaking). Also, this wiki was completely different two years ago. What was acceptable/unacceptable has been completely changed with time, so using an argument from 2008 as support for yours is just wrong.

And you still forgot my original argument. As of now we don't even have a release date for this game, and as far as we know there is a whole year until it comes out, so this page most definitely isn't needed right now. Nor do I believe we'll need it when the game comes out. As I said an abbreviation page wouldn't hurt, but it won't be needed until release either. Eive 23:30, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

@Eive: Okay, you had me thinking before this post that your opinion was all-or-nothing (mostly nothing) on this. I have no problem with your view, as long as we have some kind of documentation of it.

@Jon: It's terminology used not just in MMOs, but in any kind of gaming. I want it here because it would be a quick reference, as opposed to forcing them to look elsewhere for information on relevant terms they'll hear in game.

@Both: While we don't need it now (I suppose wanted would be a better word, actually) we will want (or need) it once the game comes out. An abbreviation page would be easy to pound out during the stops of this stop-and-go news pattern. --ஸ Kyoshi 02:04, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

This page stands out. If it's kept, then we have to revive that awful [[Acronym]]s page for consistency. I vote remove, it takes five seconds to google noob...(Xu Davella 03:22, 15 October 2010 (UTC))

First, how does it "stand out"? In that it's the only page like this that we've kept?

Second, actually, keeping the acronyms page (with a more generalized name, probably) would be a specific reason not to keep this page, because we could make this page a redirect to that page. I'm certainly not against centralizing it.

Third, I've explained this already: while it can be searched elsewhere, why should we force people to do so?

This space is not likely to be used for anything else (and if it is, then we can change it when that information is revealed). This page is relevant to MMOs as a whole and will serve as a shortcut for community members who chose to search it on our wiki instead of somewhere else. It's a relevant matter of convenience. --ஸ Kyoshi 03:58, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

(Indent reset)While I do understand that the word is not limited to GW2 it is a word that we will (unfortunately) see in common use further the release. I do not see any reason to delete this page as there undoubtedly will be new players who do not know what 'noob' means and may assume it to be specific to GW2. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Decoinferno (talk • contribs).

I am for the deletion of this page. While, "noob" may be a term used in gw2. It is a term used in many games and if someone cannot find it here... I don't see why we can't direct them to wikipedia? After all, should we have definitions of common slang words or acronyms? Personally, I feel it'd be better to make a notice some where about things like this and to show that people would be better off looking on wikipedia. I don't think we should have things like "noob" defined. We don't have personal attacks defined here, we have links to wikipedia to help better define that. I don't see why that same person can't look there for this... It's just an opinion that I feel the need to express... Ariyen 02:35, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

"and if someone cannot find it here... I don't see why we can't direct them to wikipedia?" If they can't find it here, it'd be because we don't have it, so that point is moot. However, I'm curious, can wiki pages redirect to other websites or only internally?

I hope I'm not being too obscure about why I'm arguing for this, because it seems like every argument I get is the same and I answer it the same, but nobody's asked for clarification. --ஸ Kyoshi 04:53, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, to be honest. The way I see it is that, if we keep this page, then we're going to have to make a page for every other word like this (e.g. pwn). I'm currently only arguing against this, because arguing for anything else would be a completely different discussion. As of right now this page can't stay because it's existence would require the existence of similar nonsense. Sorry if I've made my side of the fence too difficult to guess with my earlier cryptic comments. Eive 05:02, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

It stands out 'exactly' because it's the only page that we have kept. This kind info categorizes with other types of info such as transcribing interviews from websites, documenting information released from a third party, and studies relating to the effects of social gaming. If they're going to go elsewhere for those kinds of information that we don't document anyway, it's not going to be because we forced them to go elsewhere. There's a category page on wikipedia here that we can link to and that's got more than enough to rule out a few questions. (Xu Davella 07:02, 17 October 2010 (UTC))

I also think it's just unneeded. Exactly how many people who don't know what noob means would specifically come here (a Guild Wars Wiki) when the first hit on most search engines is Urban Dictionary? That and real noobs wouldn't even use /wiki, let alone for a term that they think they aren't. Previously Unsigned 09:58, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Exactly why I proposed a deletion tag. As eive said, having a page like this would mean that each piece of internet game terminology would need to have a page describing what it is. This is not needed, not to mention that each variation would need a redirect (noob, n00b, newb, nub, etc.). These are not specific to GW2 and thus can be readily found on the internet. Yes they will be used in GW2, but they are not specific to it. Should we document what a computer is? or the parts inside a computer because you need one to play the game? When the game comes out, and things start to be abbreviated, then perhaps we could start an abbreviation page which may contain this terminology, but that it a little ways off. And I like what previously closed with, "real noobs wouldn't even use /wiki" because it is true. Venom20 13:46, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree with deletion. It's really got no place here as nothing on the page is GW2 specific. If anyone wants a wiki article on noobs or newbies or whatever, they can go to a fantastic one on wikipedia.Thering 16:21, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Kyoshi, I understand your reasoning for keeping this here, just like I tried to keep a few pages here. However, the reality is... This is a game site, not a dictionary. Why should we keep things that there's plenty of sites for? The things we should focus more on are GW2 related items and information. Noob is not exactly related... So, there's not enough reasoning I feel for it to stay here as others have said in showing different reasons as to why it should not be here. I do think the talk page should stay to show to anyone that creates the page - why we decided on deletion - that is if the page is or gets deleted. Ariyen 18:33, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Or we could have a page dedicated to in-game terminology and GW2-specific terminology.-- Shew 18:53, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Well as per Talk:Acronym - for the shortcuts, they're redirected to specific pages. So having a specific page dedicated to terminology, without knowing the said terminology used in the game (that's not out yet) is not necessary as of now. Ariyen 19:04, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

@Ariyen: So when the game comes out, you would support a "terminology" page? Fine. I'll start working on it in my sandbox or something.

@Venom: There's a certain point of abstraction that is obviously unnecessary to document, and I'm pretty sure you're fully aware of that. Also, you've got it backwards: MMO terminology will be used in GW2, but a computer will not be used in GW2, rather GW2 will be used on a computer. Concerning your linked page, no, only terms applicable to GW2 need be documented.

"real noobs wouldn't even use /wiki" We don't document just for noobs. We document for anyone who might not know one tiny fact. And I don't think it's anyone's place to judge whether someone who knows what a noob is will also know how the /wiki command works.

For the moment, though, it seems like everyone is against this page's existence, and as long as there's some kind of documentation (which is the point of mine many seemed to be missing) you can have your deletion. --ஸ Kyoshi 22:20, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I wouldn't support said terminology as far as what I feel you might aim for. I'd support something that's specifically gw2 related, not "noob" or any typical terminology that's used in any mmo game, etc. that anyone can find on wikipedia. I don't see that it'd hurt to tell someone - if they ask - to look it up on wikipedia - if it's not gw2 specific. Secondly, please be less harsh Kyoshi. Thank you. Ariyen 05:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't use the /wiki command ... I use F10 key ... YAY :-D I'm a Noob /cheer Bob soddoth 07:38, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

This discussion is a bit early: Whether GW2 will use Noob in the generic internet slang sense, or whether there will be something GW2-specific about the term, we can not know till the game comes out. In the former case, I would favor deletion, in the later keeping the page. --Xeeron 17:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Why don't we have a vote?

DELETE

1. Previously Unsigned 12:26, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

KEEP

1. 213.106.107.251 12:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

People who think votes are trash and wikis are founded on consensus.

1. -Auron 12:37, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
2. Venom20 12:55, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
3. Bob soddoth 13:18, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
4. 13:22, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
5. Erasculio 13:24, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
6. 165.29.184.7 16:39, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
7. The Holy Dragons 17:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
8. Riddle 18:11, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
9. Aquadrizzt (talk)(contribs) 22:52, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
10. DemonicFahrir 09:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
11. Nick123 16:50, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

People who think this is all MADNESS. Madness? THIS! IS!! ...Chliched, for one thing. The other is SPARTA. Zolann The Irreverent 18:59, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

So you guys are voting as to whether voting is trash, or if we should start voting whether continue another voting or make a consensus and thereafter either vote again or start discussing if we should allow voting which in turn could again result into voting as to whether voting is trash, or if we should start voting whether continue another voting or make a consensus since voting would now be allowed but the results of the now allowed voting could again lead to a vote which would disallow voting and thus make all previous voting negated, returning to the question whether voting is trash, or if we should start voting whether continue another voting or make a consensus? Noobs.. ***EAGLEMUT*** TALK 10:20, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

This post above mine clearly shows how humanity is broken once again. -- Cyan 10:24, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's very funny and ironic that we took a vote to determine not to take a vote. Ha ha ha. K, moving on. 12:07, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

More a Petition than a vote but ... ye moving on Bob soddoth 15:51, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

It's deleted. I think this needs to be let go of. There's no sense to keep this going. Going back to my FW game. Ariyen 19:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Ariyen is right! there is no 'noob' page anymore so who cares :P --The Holy Dragons 19:13, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Sighs

the noob page has been recreated...again... Aquadrizzt (talk)(contribs) 22:08, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Noobs lol Bob soddoth 22:57, 6 November 2010 (UTC)