Benutzer Diskussion:Stéphane Lo Presti/Archiv1

Dieses Archiv enthält Diskussionen, die im folgenden Zeitraum abgeschlossen wurden: January 2013-December 2015

Discussion about News, information and questions

Quality of articles

Community Managers may occasionally do - just want to say... Never ever seen a german Community Manager on this wiki. Ramon isn't even registered at all, Martin never wrote anything. So you can definitely say: No german-speaking ArenaNet person is interested in the wiki at all. (Personal feeling) -- 20:51, 9. Feb. 2013 (CET)

I think it's inappropriate to talk about personal feelings, in particular because my statement is true and probably easy to misinterpret. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 00:31, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

Well, it's not a personal feeling, but a fact just like your statement. It's nice that the community managers may edit the wiki, but the past experiences we made have been very different. --Think 09:21, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

For your information, it's not the job of these community managers to edit the wiki. The wikis are my responsibility and thus I'm the one you may want to blame. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 20:04, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

I'm not blaming anyone, and it's not even in my or anyones intent to do so. We never had any other experiences with ArenaNet edits and were simply stating that. You made some smaller edits, and I can imagine there could be so much potential, especially regarding some tedious things like text updates/verifications, skill, location and item data, and so on that could very much improve our article status. Or early updates on upcoming content. Or have ArenaNet post update notes here, too, or link to them on the forums (we're often explaining things or adding undocumented features). It all depends on what you can give us. --Think 20:17, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

I would suggest you gather requirements and ideas so that we discuss and can try to address this issue. Bear in mind I'm one person with many tasks beyond the wikis and I'm already overloaded. However I want to work constructively with each of the 5 wiki communities I manage to answer their needs, if possible. (note: we've made a minimal number of edits to the English wiki so this wiki is not really left out) --Stephane Lo Presti talk 20:21, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

Masthead redesign

I definitely don't like to have the english wiki design on this wiki. We never tried to be like the english wiki, and for me, I don't want to be like the english one in future. We tried to design our page, our infoboxes and so one in a more different style than other wikis did because we aren't a copy of another wiki, we are an independent wiki. -- 20:51, 9. Feb. 2013 (CET)

I agree. We don't want to look like the english wiki, because we simply aren't. Not everybody likes the header they currently use, even if it might look like the official homepage - we're not the official homepage, too. If it's simply about backlinking the homepage, these can be included either in the sidebar or on the top nav bar, without changing the whole design. Additionally, I don't think there is anybody who thinks this is not the official wiki, it's pretty obvious from page title, mainpage layout, and even the logo mentions it, did you get any feedback on that or is that speculation? --Think 21:17, 9. Feb. 2013 (CET)

If I leave aside the antagonistic tone, I'd like to know what the other 100s of active editors think. We won't impose any decision on this wiki or any other, but I want to stay away from the interpersonal discussions. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 00:31, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

There is a lot of people here who don't contribute to discussions, and even less to heavy topics than this. Announcing something will only help so much, with the added barrier of language. --Think 09:21, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

If you haven't mentioned it i wouldn't have noticed the link to wiki on the homepage, but i think there isn't a problem to backlink to the hp from the gw2 logo on top of the nav bar. Concerning the design...the only similarity with the hp is the black reddish head banner. But even this is only existent on the en wiki and on none of the other three. I like the different designs of the wikis and i see no reason why anyone could misinterpret this as non official. But if you say you prefer the same design for every wiki...k...it's the official wiki and when anet wants it a particular way then you could give the order that it has to made this way, but if it's better? And if we look further, for a consistent look and feel experience throughout the wikis the other things like infoboxes, article layout etc has to be equal but if i look a these things in the en wiki, well there are some points we could use but the overall "article design" .. i don't get to like this one. --Dusk 14:05, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

As more opinions are wanted: I also prefer „our“ design. In another similar discussion (German of course), one (other) person preferred the English design, 2 were neutral (liking both equally) and one was in favor of our current design. -- 18:46, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

That discussion is rather about our choice of links presented on the main page, not about our design itself. -- 19:54, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

Hey Dusk, I want to correct a piece of your reply that is absolutely not true: "when anet wants it a particular way then you could give the order that it has to made this way". We would never do that, unless there's a paramount reason (security). We acknowledge that this wiki is the space of this community and this community makes its own decisions. I (Wiki Liaison for ArenaNet) am only a "manager" and facilitator, with the goal to support and help improve all our wikis. When I ask this community a question, there's no expectation about the answer. It's also my job to try to convince you something and if I don't, the situation will stay the way it is. I do think that bringing all the wikis together under similar (i.e., looking close but no all the same) designs is of advantage to all of us, as it makes more people aware of our official channels. I'd also like to highlight the point about "navigation", which is part of design but can easily be decoupled from the graphics part of design. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 20:04, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

Default skin

I really love the "Vector" skin and I used it from the very beginning. There are no complications with our wiki pages and that style. (There is a clipping bug for very small resolutions, you can see it in the toolbar when you shrink your browser window). -- 20:51, 9. Feb. 2013 (CET)

I'm a Vector-user too. It's much more modern and I can't miss it anymore. It's also supported by MediaWiki, in contrast to MonoBook, which is considered outdated and doesn't receive anymore changes. --Think 21:04, 9. Feb. 2013 (CET)

New wiki for the pictures

The only place I can imagine this would be useful would be item icons. I strongly oppose to something like that, because (a) The files need names, and I don't want to reference english file names (which would probably be the main naming language) on the german wiki. We have many naming schemes fixed, to make uploading and referencing images very easy, and it would require a lot of work and problemsolving, to achieve no benefit whatsoever. We already have nearly every icon of existing articles uploaded here. (b) In my opinion, there is a very huge quality difference (and image policy requirements) for images here and in the english wiki (I don't know about others), which will lead to all loads of confusion (or ignorance) if this is required. --Think 21:04, 9. Feb. 2013 (CET)

I don't see what you say as a reason not to do it, since it oculd be done under the assumptions that multiple images of the same game elements could be saved? --Stephane Lo Presti talk 00:31, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

I'm saying this will require a lot of work for no real benefit besides that all wikis share images in another wiki (which will require even more technical support), and adapting people to no longer upload (certain) images here, but on the "common" wiki. --Think 09:21, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

What are you refering to with "a lot of work"? --Stephane Lo Presti talk 20:04, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

Uploading all of the 12k images we have to another wiki. Changing links to them on every page that has one (it's roughly 1 page for 1 image). We're using a strict naming schema, that we don't necessarily want to give up because it helps with the programming, and telling people what to do when they upload images (it's already hard for most people to upload something, moving that to "another site" will only make this process so much more complex). I'm not yet seeing the benefit of uploading all (or parts) of our images somewhere else instead of keeping them here. The argument of sharing images (or anything else) is in my opinion a very optimistic target that already fails on much simpler tasks (I'll just mention the word interwiki here). --Think 20:11, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

If we're going to go there, we (ArenaNet) have to come up with a solution that doesn't require the wiki community to do the work you mention. There may be tricky things to sort out (tagging, etc.). About the advantages of the solution: for us it's also a matter of organization on the backend (I don't think it buys us anything else, although there's one very practical thing I know would make the life of our tech easier); for all the wikis, it's being able to easily access, categorize and reuse all the pictures of all wikis. It's a sort of "cross-promotion" if you will where everyone can benefit from everyone else's work, including other languages. Best practices, such as name conventions and visual guidelines, could be improved overall. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 20:16, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

Global changelog page

Nothing bad that I can think of. It should be kept somewhere in the wiki namespace (and posted here, too, even if it is in english, we have people to translate if you guys can't do it). --Think 21:04, 9. Feb. 2013 (CET)

WikiChat

I'm sorry, this is absolutely relevant. Having a direct conversation with an ArenaNet representative is always helpful, even if it is in english. There are a lot of things the wikis share, and these things will always grow (with the upcoming version and extension updates, even more). --Think 21:04, 9. Feb. 2013 (CET)

That discussion is always possible here, the WikiChat is just a different format that I want to benefit an audience that is big enough. My time is limited and I already have to juggle with a lot of things, so this wiki community could jump onboard an English WikiChat or this wikicommunity would have to show me that there are enough topics that are different from the ones I'd do with the English wiki and enough people who could attend such a specific WikiChat, if that makes sense? --Stephane Lo Presti talk 00:31, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

I was merely saying in case there is a WikiChat (in english) it should be mentioned here, and possible topics should include specific requests from the german wiki - although I don't exactly think there are too many that would require discussion in an IRC chat. I don't want a chat for ourselves ^^ --Think 09:21, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

Ok then we're in agreement but just know that if it's only a discussion between me and you, I'll skip this as we can have the discussion other ways ;) --Stephane Lo Presti talk 20:04, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

GW2W twitter bot

No idea what we would use it for except for telling people that "There is now a page about feature X that you already know because you also have a subscription to "@GuildWars2". Since this is community-operated, there wouldn't be any short-time technical notices anyways, which should be on the GuildWars2 / GuildWars2_DE twitter anyways. --Think 21:04, 9. Feb. 2013 (CET)

Page counters

You know that we've been requesting this forever, and I can't personally wait to have that re-enabled again. :) --Think 21:04, 9. Feb. 2013 (CET)

Fansite list

This is a long-time to-do item of us, but there will need to be a discussion on the relevance topic before we can work this out here. Nobody really wants to have a competition of random pages that once mentioned GW2 in one of their blog posts fighting about a list entry here. --Think 21:04, 9. Feb. 2013 (CET)

For the sake of clarify: a site that "only" mentions GW2 should not be in this category, we're trying to look at engaged sites that have sections dedicated to GW2, one way or another. IT may be helped that the discussions on this topic should be merged (language permitting) at some point as other language communities may have ideas that benefit everyone. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 00:31, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

See, that's what somebody needs to write down and verify for each page - "engaged" is not exactly a nicely defined word. --Think 09:21, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

No it's not, but I think that there's a greater benefit to putting this page together (including for documentation purposes) than to shutdown the idea because decisions need to be made. I'd even go one step further and say that, apart from the alien examples of blogs mentioning GW2, there doesn't necessarily need to be a strict separation. When you're a new GW2 fan looking for fansites, I believe you can make your own decisions about which place to go to, if you have a list (one that wouldn't be a google search that is). This is something I already discussed with TEF on the English wiki. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 20:04, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

I'm not saying we're not doing that, I certainly want to, but that we'll need processes in place, from pretty much the beginning. I didn't fully follow the fansite discussion on EN, but I know there have been long discussions and rather big restructurings of that page :) --Think 20:13, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

Yup, I acknowledge the fact it's not straightforward. I see that as an opportunity for each wiki to become the repository of that list and thus document another aspect of the game. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 20:18, 13. Feb. 2013 (CET)

Translated and shortend downtime announcement

If you want to announce it anywhere here a translated and shortend tanslation version:

Im Rahmen einer Wartung sind die Wiki-Server in der Nacht vom 22.2. auf den 23.2. um etwa 01:00 Uhr MEZ für kurze Zeit nicht erreichbar. Während dieser Wartung können einzelne Seiten nicht aufgerufen und Änderungen an Artikeln nicht gespeichert werden.

--Grinhorn 21:56, 22. Feb. 2013 (CET)

Thanks a lot Grinhorn! I'll be waiting on the answers to the other questions I had --Stephane Lo Presti talk 21:58, 22. Feb. 2013 (CET)

I think the side notice would be the right place to avoid some annoyance about unsafed edits. But actually its in use for the 502/503-error-matter. On the other hand the problem seems to be solved. But one of the admins should have the final say about it ;) --Grinhorn 22:04, 22. Feb. 2013 (CET)

I'll put up the site notice, and I fixed two of your links, Stéphane (you registered your account with é-acute here). :) --Think 22:14, 22. Feb. 2013 (CET)

MediaWiki API bug

Hi Stéphane,

when I tryed to create a bot, I ran into a problem with the API. The French wiki also ran into it as posted here: fr:GW2Wiki:Signaler_un_bug_du_wiki. To reproduce, you need the writeapi permission, e.g. an account that is at least autoconfirmed. After that, you request the following pages:

1. POST /api.php?action=login&format=xml&lgname=USERNAME&lgpassword=PASSWORD
2. GET /api.php?action=query&format=xml&prop=info&titles=PAGENAME&intoken=edit
3. POST /api.php?action=edit&format=xml&title=PAGENAME&text=Test&token=TOKEN

The TOKEN is received in the second request (attribute: edittoken) and has to be escaped so it ends on %2B%5C. Please note that both POST requests cannot be done as GET. This causes the folling error message:

“

<?xml version="1.0"?><api servedby="dal-arena-01-04"><error code="internal_api_error_MWException" info="Exception Caught: Detected bug in an extension! Hook wfSpamBlacklistFilterAPIEditBeforeSave has invalid call signature; Parameter 1 to wfSpamBlacklistFilterAPIEditBeforeSave() expected to be a reference, value given" xml:space="preserve" /></api>

The French proposed a bugfix on the page linked above. -- 21:52, 12. Apr. 2013 (CEST)

Hi, has anyone had the opportunity to look at whether this bug was fixed after last week's upgrade of the wikis? Thanks. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 23:17, 13. Mai 2013 (CEST)

Opportunity for the wiki

Please post your feedback here ^^ --Stephane Lo Presti talk 00:30, 19. Jun. 2013 (CEST)

Weekly popular pages

Since you want to post every week about the most popular pages, I just created a page to collect them. Therefore you don't have to spam your news section every week. Feel free to post your weekly updates here: GW2Wiki:Meistbesuchte Seiten. -- 01:50, 6. Aug. 2013 (CEST)

Thanks a lot for that, it's a great idea ^^ --Stephane Lo Presti talk 01:52, 6. Aug. 2013 (CEST)

And thanks to Darthmaim, Hraun and Grinhorn for moving the data over there. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 21:39, 6. Aug. 2013 (CEST)

Buy/Try Link

I think the Wiki should not be a place for advertisement at all - i believe it's already enough advertisement that it's an "official" wiki. If someone wants to buy the game, he would need to do a few clicks to get to the official "buy page". However, a temporary "try" link which is usually part of a campaign wouldn't hurt on a prominent position. The wiki is mainly used by people who already bought the game and that way they could get friends to play. Edit: that being said - just a permanent direct link to guildwars2.com/de in the sidebar wouldnt hurt at all. --Smiley™ 02:20, 14. Aug. 2013 (CEST)

I agree to a no-advertisement policy on the wiki, advertising has always been a huge turnoff for most wiki communities (including wikipedia), and we've always tried to convince people with facts and not shiny ads - as an official wiki there shouldn't be ads (even for the own game). As smiley said, this whole thing is an advertisement for Guild Wars 2 already. --Think 09:53, 14. Aug. 2013 (CEST)

While I'm mainly here to hear the views of the community, I'll say one thing: the wiki by itself is not exactly an advertisement for the game, and it's not intended as one (and we don't want to turn it into a "regular" website). There's no "shiny ads" discussed here, although this feedback is consistent with the fact that the German GW2 wiki is the only one of the 4 official wikis that does not want to change its outline ;). Note that the idea of "try GW2" (instead of "buy") may be slightly more in-line with the nature of wikis but I'll let you share your opinion on this. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 20:09, 14. Aug. 2013 (CEST)

Wiki technical questions - September 4, 2013

I try to answer your questions and requests

$wgLogo I THINK it is http://wiki-de.guildwars2.com/images/gw2wiki_DE_6.png, but not sure. But atm it's fine as it is, so don't change it :)
$wgLocalInterwiki = de
$wgRightsUrl = http://wiki-de.guildwars2.com/wiki/GW2Wiki:Lizenzhinweise
$wgAutoConfirmCount = 15
$wgAutoConfirmAge = 86400*3 (3 days)

• I am fine with the captcha change so hopefully account creation spam (wich is also an issue here) will be reduced.
• The extensions RenameUser, spamblacklist, Loops and ImageMap would be fine to be acitivated. With CharacterEscapes I am not sure, if it would break any of our templates. Maybe someone else can rate this better.

Additional requests:

• Please set $wgAbuseFilterBlockDuration = 1 day
• Please move userright move-rootuserpages from usergroup "user" to "patrol"
• Please move userright move-subpages from usergroup "user" to "autoconfirmed"
• Please delete userright movefile from usergroup "user"
• Please add userright upload_by_url at least for usergroups "sysop" and "bot" - I think it'll be also fine with "patrol" and "autopatrol" (with that we could upload icons provided by the API easily.)

-- 14:18, 5. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

I'd like to wait with the change to the Captcha system to see how effective it is for the english wiki. QuestyCaptcha requires us to compile a list of questions and answers which needs to be more than a few to combat spam, but easy enough to answer for even very casual players.

• $wgLogo can be written as a local path and reduced to: $wgLogo = '/images/gw2wiki_DE_6.png';
• $wgAutoConfirmCount and $wgAutoConfirmAge: we only recently (some months ago) requested a change for these. I think our settings are a little more strict, but still completely alright for what that user group is trying to to do.
• I'm already seeing DPL 2.01 here. Is that another version from the one you're planning to install?
• CharacterEscapes: is there a specific use case for this? I've never a problem with the current "restrictions". This and all the extensions are already installed here: Spezial:Version.
• I suppose our autopatrol & patrol groups will stay intact, too?

Now, regarding Grinhorns requests:

• upload_by_url : this is unneccessary, since - at least on Windows - you can easily paste a URL to the file select window for uploading, and it will be automatically downloaded and a temporary file added to the file selection. It works equally fast and we won't need this additional overhead from the upload menu.
• $wgAbuseFilterBlockDuration is set to 2 days for us per a recent request, and it's fine like this. Since this will only affect spammers we are sure of, it's a little longer than our "policy" ban duration for vandalism of 1 day.
• movefile: this was originally restricted to "high level" groups because the technical implementation was considered unstable. This has since matured and I wouldn't want to introduce an arbitrary limit between "moving a page" and "moving a file". It's easily revertable and vandalism didn't ever happen with this.
• Similiar comments regarding move-rootuserpages and move-subpages: I never saw malicious page moves, so I wouldn't want to restrict this more (and potentially make config files more complex, even when this isn't a real argument imho). move-rootuserpages is only ever useful if a user is renamed, and this has happened just a very few times. --Think 15:24, 5. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

• Regarding $wgAbuseFilterBlockDuration: Okay didn't know that. Last Block I noticed was infinite. 2 days is also fine.
• Regarding move-rootuserpages: As Think said this is only ever useful if a user is renamed, what only a bureaucrat can do. So every other use of it would be vandalism. So I tend to restict it.
• Regarding move-subpages and movefile: At the moment move (page) is resticted to autoconfirmed usergroup. So move-subpages is useless for "user" usergroup. My request on moving movefile to autoconfirmed is to match existing rights. So it wouln't produce an arbitrary limit between "moving a page" and "moving a file", but solves an existing one ;)
• Regarding extentions: Oh yes - most extentions are active here, but "RenameUser" is still missing, even though its similar to User Merge and Delete .-- 16:06, 5. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

• RenameUser doesn't add anything, since we already have MergeAndDelete, and we can easily merge an old username to a new username for the same person (requiring confirmation from both accounts). So I wonder why it's even added.
• Point taken regarding the move privileges. I wonder if we should instead remove our custom definition of move from autoconfirmed instead, so we clear up the configuration instead of polluting it. move is on the user group at least in the current MediaWiki version (http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:User_rights#Default_rights). --Think 17:43, 5. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

• In any case userrights move, movefile and move-subpages should belong to the same usergroup - either "user" or "autoconfirmed".
• As I said MergeAndDelete is similar. When using RenameUser, no additional account creation is needed - could be a little more comfortable in some situations. Also an additional extention doesn't hurt anyone. There are a good deal more useless extentions active ;) -- 18:15, 5. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

Thanks for your feedback. We'll implement and test these changes (I'm aligning the value's on Think's reply since he knows about the history of this wiki's changes, Grinhorn: please talk to Think directly if a discussion about these values are needed). autopatrol and patrol will not be changed (we haven't changed any user permission but cleaned/organized them). Note that QuestyCaptcha will not be effectively enabled until we have a configuration file (with Q&As in German) for it. Poke is taking care of this for the English wiki and I think it's a good approach to wait for the result of this captcha on the English wiki before implementing it on other wikis. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 03:11, 7. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

Playday End of September

Hey Stephane, can you tell if we get a preview stream like the last two playdays, or will we be able to play on a preview server like the time before? -- 13:56, 24. Sep. 2013 (CEST)

It'll be in the same format as for the last few PReview Play Days. I understand that it's difficult for non-English wikis but I've thought of a slightly new way to manage this: I'll contact the representatives of the 4 wikis at the same time so that they can get in touch with each other. The goal would be to be able to create a good landing page for the release, that includes link to other articles that people will populate as soon as the build is live. By focusing on only one page and being able to synchronize with 3 other wiki editors, work should be easier with non-English speakers. Let me know what you (or any other editor) think, and if you have questions and/or comments. Thanks. --Stephane Lo Presti talk 19:07, 24. Sep. 2013 (CEST)