User talk:Tarun

9 contributions in 4 years? That's tantamount to spamming! Long time no see, by the way :) — snograt 17:36, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Jan 28 Update

Game_updates/2013-01-28 Be careful -- you are accidentally pasting over other edits. Some of what was lost is just formatting. But we also lost the second set of update notes added from Mark K 75.37.16.51 21:26, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Notes

Hi, the discussion over at Talk:Game updates#notes vs Notes seemed to favour "notes". Most updates already use the lowercase, as do section titles in other articles around the wiki. Either way, though, I'm not sure there's a consensus for changing "notes" to "Notes". It's a minor issue, sure, but there's now inconsistency. pling 18:14, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

These are titles of sections though, as such, title casing applies. That's a part of the English language/grammar.

See w:Letter case#Headings and publication titles. pling 20:32, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Maybe in newspaper headlines, but not in scientific papers, which is the model most wikis use for their overall style. Check Wikipedia.

The other headers on the game updates pages are copied verbatim from Anet's update notes, that's why we leave them in title-case. —Dr Ishmael 20:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Even some newspapers/news sites follow sentence case, like the BBC and Guardian. pling 20:36, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I personally prefer titles to use title case, including page titles and section titles. However, like a lot of grammar, it comes down to consistency -- there isn't a uniform rule about what constitutes a title, never mind when to use title case. Most news organizations and book publishers use title case for anything that isn't body text. A lot of wikis use sentence case. As much as I think sentence case looks bad, there are many in the community who think the same about using title case.

The bottom line is that this wiki's community decided to use sentence case. For a crowd-sourced resource, following consensus is probably more important than following any specific grammar rule. In other words, I would argue that you, Tarun, might be correct about what the wiki should do, but I would appreciate it if you could set that aside and agree that consistency is also important. I'd much prefer that your energy is spent on adding and updating content, since the wiki is still lacking a lot of data. Thanks. 75.37.20.148 21:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Consensus only arises when people have their say - Tarun is welcome to do that, like anyone else. pling 22:14, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

As a webmaster, I feel title case truly is the best in these scenarios (but that goes into SEO and other things of that nature). Having a smoothness of text, so to speak, prevents users from getting caught on these sort of hiccups. Plus, it matches how ArenaNet posts their updates which would mean having better consistency on the wiki. In addition, this is also considered/treated as a header/title of a section/subsection. Title case would also apply there as well. I know the English language is not perfect, but having a quality standard and following methods put forth by the very patch notes that are duplicated here on the wiki would be better overall. -- Tarun 21:19, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Do you mind if I move this section over to Talk:Game updates? The discussion's starting to fragment; one place would be better. pling 14:31, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

By all means, please do. -- Tarun 17:34, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

build number

What's the point of referencing a build number?--Relyk ~ talk > 03:32, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

What's the harm in referencing the build number? -- Tarun 17:34, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Oi, stop making update note pages without update notes on them. A build number is not why people go to look at update notes, they go there to see what was updated. Posting a page without that information just wastes peoples time, causes frustration, and it just looks like you are attempting to show off your e-peen. Which makes you look stupid. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.44.42.159 (talk • contribs) at 22:53, 26 July 2013 (UTC).

Whitespace

Is there any good reason you keep adding whitespace after section titles? It makes no difference to the parser but really disrupts the flow (imo) when editing the page. poke | talk 15:57, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Formatting and readability. You may see this a lot in anything involving a programming language. Sections are commented and there is a carriage return after the commented sections. Same applies here. It's cleaner/easier to read and update. -- Tarun (talk) 16:20, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

I don’t really agree with that. I personally find it harder to read and more difficult to maintain because the section affiliation isn’t as clear. poke | talk 16:35, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

[1]

Try not to revert other edits making changes, you should get an edit conflict message if you do and is likely to happen on game updates.--Relyk ~ talk < 18:12, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

No updates available

If you go to the forums, you won't read "No update notes available." anywhere in the latest Gamre Release Notes post. Any notes made by wiki editors go under the "Guild Wars 2 Wiki notes" subsection. If the devs do not make any notes, we don't make them up. We merely note in the "Guild Wars 2 Wiki Notes" section that there were no notes, and, as always, add additional notes for any changes that may have been noticed by players but not noted by developers. MithTalk 22:13, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

That's nice? It's also irrelevant. Not every patch has notes. This is not the first time it has been documented under the patch section (I.e. not Guild Wars 2 Wiki Notes) that no notes were made available. Please do proper research before attempting to criticize me on a practice that has occurred in the past on the wiki. Thank you. -- Tarun (talk) 23:30, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Two wrongs do not make a right. It was wrong when it was done back then, and it will be wrong when done in the future. We can't put words on the mouths of developers. MithTalk 02:57, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

No need for both of you to throw a hissy fit. The text indicating no post isn't a note, it's placeholder text. We don't want to leave the patch notes section blank because that may indicate that the notes haven't been added yet or post is empty (possibly).--Relyk ~ talk < 03:24, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

As it has already been pointed out to you, posting "No patch notes available" in the official section is incorrect; stop doing it. And including the official statement that was prompted to players visiting the official forums in the absence of an official update post is indicating what actually changed and was announced, and was posted with the update when Mike O'Brien announce it was happening "now."' —Mora 19:25, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

I'll echo what I said before: "That's nice? It's also irrelevant. Not every patch has notes. This is not the first time it has been documented under the patch section (I.e. not Guild Wars 2 Wiki Notes) that no notes were made available. Please do proper research before attempting to criticize me on a practice that has occurred in the past on the wiki. Thank you."

Additionally, a user is entitled to their opinion, even if it is wrong. The method being used is not incorrect, even if you disagree with it. Thank you. -- Tarun (talk) 19:27, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it is incorrect. Maintaining a pattern of doing it incorrectly does not justify doing it that way in the future. "... not going to read or care much about a copy of the official announcement..." isn't that the entire purpose of maintaining the update pages... —Mora 19:39, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Maybe this will clarify. Placeholder text is acceptable. Read the above.

"The text indicating no post isn't a note, it's placeholder text. We don't want to leave the patch notes section blank because that may indicate that the notes haven't been added yet or post is empty (possibly).--Relyk ~ talk < 03:24, 26 June 2015 (UTC)"

Seems quite clear to me. Quoting the entire official announcement is unnecessary clutter. Stating via the notes that it's F2P and having a link to the official announcement page is the correct thing to do, and it also allows players to visit the Guild Wars 2 website and read more about it and the game. This in turn can potentially generate new player base and revenue for ArenaNet.

Hope this clarifies much better for you. -- Tarun (talk) 19:44, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

The official post from the developers is not placeholder, so don't replace it with placeholder text... Stop reverting it. —Mora 19:48, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry you don't want to help the community and ArenaNet in getting new players and increase their revenue. There are no patch notes found here.

Allow me to reiterate.

Quoting the entire official announcement is unnecessary clutter. Stating via the notes that it's F2P and having a link to the official announcement page is the correct thing to do, and it also allows players to visit the Guild Wars 2 website and read more about it and the game. This in turn can potentially generate new player base and revenue for ArenaNet.

If you have questions, feel free to ask. -- Tarun (talk) 19:58, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you.

There's a lot of random house cleaning to do around here, isn't there? G R E E N E R 07:12, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome and yes, there always is. It feels like the Mediawiki software is the only software that doesn't really advance and improve much at all over the years. I was just discussing this with a good friend as I did a lot of work on my own Lunarsoft Wiki. You'd think the software would have improved over the years and made things substantially easier for users, and there isn't any competitor software either. So it's really up to users to keep an eye on it all and update it as they find it. -- Tarun (talk) 22:25, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Patch Bugs?

Where should one deposit bugs directly caused by a patch for note? I had put the note about removing skills on the page entirely due to the fact that the issue had caused me to wonder if those skills had been changed in some way, which they had not. Ravien (talk) 02:26, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

You submit them in game first using /bug as it will send them the most details. You can also refer to the following links:

• https://help.guildwars2.com/entries/98788978
• https://help.guildwars2.com/entries/98802888-Known-Issue-Tracker
• https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs

Hope that helps. Tarun (talk) 03:08, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

December 14/15 patch

I saw that you moved the December 15th patch notes to December 14th. Can you confirm the patch was on the 14th, bearing in mind that the wiki uses UTC? The official patch notes were posted at 00:26 UTC on the 15th; that said, the time the patch notes were posted doesn't necessarily correspond to the time of the patch itself, so I'm not sure which one of us is mistaken here. --Idris (talk) 06:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I thought the conclusion the last 20 times this was discussed was to use UTC time like sane people.--Relyk ~ talk < 07:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm not quibbling over the use of UTC, I'm quibbling over whether the patch went live before 23:59 on 14th Dec UTC or after 00:00 on 15th Dec UTC. Patch notes imply it was the latter, but they might have been posted late. --Idris (talk) 08:23, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Sure, I can confirm it by checking their forums. I've actually had to explain this many times before, no worries. It goes based upon the location of the developer, not UTC itself. Additionally, this wiki for the past four years has posted patch notes based upon the developer location. ArenaNet is based in Bellevue, WA, USA. They use Pacific Time. In this screenshot you can see the dates clearly and UTC on hover. As you can deduce, "Yesterday" in the screenshot is December 14, 2016. I hope this clears things up. -- Tarun (talk) 10:15, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure what your point is here, can you please clarify? To me, it looks like you're either saying (1) the timestamp on the forum tells us which timezone we should be using on the wiki; or (2) the wiki should use Pacific Time because that's ANet's timezone. If (1): The forum's timestamps change to match the user's timezone. Here's what the forum post looks like to me, someone located in the UK (GMT/UTC): screenshot. If (2): I'm pretty sure consensus is that the wiki should be using UTC, as Relyk mentioned above. --Idris (talk) 18:29, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

The forum timestamp shows that the patch landed on December 14, 2016 at 19:26 (7:26 PM) which should be more than enough to say what date the patch notes should say here on the wiki. This wiki is hosted by ArenaNet, just like the forums. Things should match. By moving the patch note that was erroneously posted as the 15 to the 14th, things have been corrected. As I also mentioned, for over the past four years now the patch notes have always been based upon where ArenaNet is located. But yes, as far as patch notes, the wiki should post them based on ArenaNet's location. -- Tarun (talk) 21:30, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Please take another look at my screenshot of the forum post. It is clearly displaying the time in GMT, which matches my location in the UK. You, I'm guessing, are somewhere on the west coast of America (correct me if I'm wrong), so it's showing PST for you. The forum automatically changes the displayed timezone of the stamp to match the location of the user. Change your computer's timezone settings and take another look at the forum post if you don't believe me. Further, as you noted and as both of our screenshots prove, the hover text always displays the UTC time regardless of the user's timezone. To me, this indicates that the forum defaults to UTC.

As for the wiki: You said, "for over the past four years now the patch notes have always been based upon where ArenaNet is located". You sound very certain of that. Given that patches are frequently pushed around 8pm UTC (12pm PST) -- a time which is unambiguously the same day in both timezones -- and given that the patch notes may be posted on the wiki by any user who is under no obligation to reference the timezone they're using, how can you be so sure that the patch notes "have always" been based on PST? Perhaps you have always made a habit of posting them in PST, but personally, I have always posted them in UTC. I will happily change this habit if you can convince me that the consensus is to use PST, but I'm currently not convinced. --Idris (talk) 23:41, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

"You, I'm guessing, are somewhere on the west coast of America (correct me if I'm wrong), so it's showing PST for you." I WAS wrong! I'd been trusting that your screenshot was displaying PST, since that was the entire basis of your argument, but I've just noticed that it's not even PST. It's EST. So I'll say it again: The forum does not display ANet's timezone. --Idris (talk) 02:25, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

(Reset indent) So, I went into the source code of the patch web-page (anyone can do this, it isn't fancy). I looked for the post id time, and found: "<a class="topic arenanet" href="/forum/info/updates/Game-Update-Notes-December-13-2016" data-topic-id="547155" data-last-message="2016-12-15T00:26:12Z">Game Update Notes - December 13, 2016</a>". So according to the forum internal time, this was posted on the 2016-12-15T00:26:12Z. Thus the patch should be labelled 15th and not 14th. -Darqam 00:33, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

edit: Note, I think this only works since that post was that subject's/thread latest message.-Darqam 00:36, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Nice catch! This is good evidence that the forums use UTC, because that's what the "Z" at the end of the timestamp means. --Idris (talk) 01:18, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

That doesn't change that you go by the timezone where the developer is located. I like that this is still being overlooked. For the past four years (since no one has mentioned checking the history for page creations) it has always been made based upon ArenaNet's timezone, Pacific Time. Forum meta data isn't much proof at all, either. I run forum software on several websites and they offer both UTC and local variations. You can set a forum to have a certain timezone yet users can still customize how they want to see the time. This is common for any forum software and is in no way "proof" that that was the correct day, which it was not. You can even do that right here on this wiki. Just as I have already illustrated in the prior screenshot and now explained about how most forum software works. <time class="changeabletime" datetime="2016-12-15T00:26:12Z" title="December 15, 2016 00:26">December 14th, 19:26</time> UTC is an easy time setting to allow conversions to a user friendly local time. See the changeabletime? Though that is simply html output from PHP, not actual meta data. The update there says Dec 14 for my time zone. Considering I'm east of where ArenaNet is located, that means it was earlier in the day of the 14th for ArenaNet. This one again shows quite solidly that the update landed on December 14th, 2016. The wiki also does not follow many of the standards that are ISO based. Such as ISO-8601 for dates. The wiki update articles have always been ISO-8601 but the date headers for each update are not. This is an inconsistency. But the dates that ArenaNet patches have landed on are always based upon when they were released according to ArenaNet's timezone. -- Tarun (talk) 01:38, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

I'll take your word for it that it's always been done that way, but considering the daily reset for Dailies, time-gated crafting, world bosses, dungeons, raids, psna stocks, number-limited merchants, home instance nodes, limited-use nodes in the world, WvW resets, and probably other things I'm forgetting, as well as the wiki's RecentChanges feed, are all at 0:00 UTC, why SHOULD it be done that way? The only thing I know of that ISN'T at 0:00 UTC is the time the psna's change location (which is different from their stock reset for some reason), and this --Gimmethegepgun (talk) 02:07, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

I actually recall back when server time in GW2 was based on PT back towards launch. It was later on that it changed to be UTC. This makes me wonder if that was part of the basis of how updates were posted here. -- Tarun (talk) 03:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

The only issue I have with checking the timing of previous posts is that the wiki post is not correspondent exactly to forum post, and the forum doesn't seem to have an exact "time posted" attribute, just "X days ago". So if there is a way to check this, then I'd be up for whatever habit we've been in. If there isn't a concrete way of doing this, then I think a new/separate conversation is needed, which would be According to what time/timezone do we post patch dates.

As for the change time, I'm aware it's possible, but all I can say is that I have not changed things from standard utc (I virtually never use the forum, only to talk about API stuff).

tl;dr (partially for me): If no proof can be shown that we made day selection based on one timezone or another, we should have a discussion about this on a more appropriate page, say the community portal. If there exists a defined choice of timezone, then let's see where that is and make it clear to everyone (including myself). -Darqam 02:27, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Re: forum posts: click on the text that says "posted X days ago". It will convert to a precise timestamp. -Idris (talk) 03:09, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Part of the reason I know a lot about how it's been done is because if anyone did check back in the History of updates, I've been one of a few contributors to the Game Updates. I'm not really sure, I may have the majority of them, I would guess? Not entirely sure though. The problem with changing over randomly is would we need to go back and correct this? If we want to make this change going forward I think it would be best to do it for the first patch that lands in 2017. -- Tarun (talk) 03:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Finally, Tarun. Thank you. I assume you didn't intend it to be so, but bringing up forum timestamps to support your argument in favour of PST was incredibly misleading. Why did you think that posting a screenshot of the forum post would make it clear what the time had been for ArenaNet, when you never bothered to mention what timezone was being displayed in the screenshot? If you had avoided screenshots and timestamps altogether and simply said "ArenaNet is PST, PST is UTC-8, therefore from ArenaNet's perspective the patch was unambiguously pushed on the 14th" then we could have avoided a lot of this nonsense.

So, as for whether the wiki SHOULD be in PST: I don't have anything to say on whether PST or UTC is better. What I am interested in, however, is which one we should be using in the future. A 4-year tradition of PST (if true -- I considered the burden of proof to be on you for making the claim) is nice and all, but if consensus has changed at some point in favour of UTC, as Relyk implied, then new posts should be in UTC. Would you happen to know where the discussions Relyk hinted at took place? I'm not sure where to look. --Idris (talk) 03:09, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

We could just match the forums and not create new game update pages for updates on existing release notes. Then we don't have to make up our own timestamps and it fixes the dumb way we show game updates on the main page.--Relyk ~ talk < 03:12, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

If we're going to start discussing potential changes to the way we display updates, then let's not do it on Tarun's already-abused talk page. --Idris (talk) 03:18, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

(ec) Per Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Ask a wiki question/Archive 04#What_timezone_used_for_when_game_updates_occur?: "Stephane confirmed that the official patch notes on the forums use ArenaNet's time, Pacific.". As long as Anet is using Pacific time for the dating for major updates, it makes sense to follow Pacific time as well, else we either use two different dating schemes for major vs minor updates, or our naming doesn't match theirs for major updates, both of which are unnecessarily confusing. - Tanetris (talk) 03:19, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

I completely forgot about that discussion being on here. Thank you for posting/answering it, Tanetris. -- Tarun (talk) 03:22, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

THANK YOU, that was perfect. I'm happy to use PST from now on. :) --Idris (talk) 03:28, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Thanks for clearing it up. That said, I do kind of like Relyk's suggestion... but that's for another topic. -Darqam 03:26, 17 December 2016 (UTC)