User talk:Drone9

Thanks for working on the wiki, but what are you doing with the RoF mission? The proper name, as it already was, is "Ring of Fire (Mission)." --Fyren 03:55, 14 Aug 2005 (EST)

the bracket problem
the problem with the coop mission names is that they unfortunately have the same name as the locations they can be found at. distinguishing between location and mission by naming the entry xy (mission), xy (location) is not the best option imo, since this leads to many tags not working correctly (ie. if RoF is mentioned within a text, but the entry with the location info would have the name RoF (location) the text would also have to include (location) in order for the link to work). sticking to the plain name (ie RoF) for the location and name + mission (ie. RoF mission) in the case of a mission, seems much more logical and easier for the entry to be linked to from other entries (ie. it is more likely that a text would say "...during the RoF mission..." than "...during the RoF (mission)...". only that brackets have been used up until now, doesn't automatically make it the best choice imo.


 * You can do Ring of Fire to name links whatever you want. The preceding turns into this: Ring of Fire  --Fyren 04:46, 14 Aug 2005 (EST)

thanks. that helps. still, at least for the location entry I find (location) not very intuitive.
 * The plan, which no one has gotten around to, was the plain name would redirect to the mission and the mission would have a link to the location. --Fyren 06:25, 14 Aug 2005 (EST)
 * It's fine that you disagree. But you need to raise the issue somewhere appropriate for discussion rather than go implementing your own view.  I suggest GuildWiki talk:Style and formatting/Locations.  Everyone is free to edit because it's a community site.  --Fyren 06:40, 14 Aug 2005 (EST)
 * I agree with Drone (though disagree with changing the whole structure without talking first). Abaddon't Mouth is a LOCATION, if we want to put a distinguishing mark it should be for the Mission. i.e. I am in favor of Abaddon's Mouth and Abaddon's Mouth (Mission) not Abaddon's Mouth leading to misison and then having Abaddon's Mouth (Location). --Karlos 17:27, 14 Aug 2005 (EST)

Enjoy Domination Magic :)

Small images and thumb
When you add images that are small (example the images of various locations you added) and thumbnail them define the size of the image to the articel too so it won't get blocky. Like this: --Geeman 07:47, 14 Aug 2005 (EST)
 * I think we need to come up with a standard regarding image thumbnail side. For characters and for maps at least. This discussion doesn't belong here of course. :) --Karlos 17:27, 14 Aug 2005 (EST)

Mission Bosses and Skills
I've noticed you are adding the information about elite skills that can be captured during missions to the appropriate location page. Why? We have this information already on the mission page (where it belongs in my eyes). You are generating redundancy and redundancy is bad ;). --Eightyfour-onesevenfive 02:55, 15 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * since bosses do not only appear in missions but also in "normal" areas, it would imo be more consistent to have this information as part of the location info. (btw. many mission entries lack this info.)
 * I was referring to not only elite skill info but skill info in general. I have to admit I overlooked the entries in the coops where elites can be captured.
 * also, at many occasions I wanted to know what skills to get at my current location in the game, but sadly, no such information was available at that time or at least I didn't find it.
 * btw. rereading your post, I plan to add info not only for elites, but for all skills that can be captured like at the Fort Ranik entry.--drone9


 * I just don't like the idea of have exactly the same information on multiple pages. I know that the information about skill captures is incomplete at best. But adding another page where it can be found will not solve the problem, just spread it out even further. I don't know how everybody else is seeing this, of course. --Eightyfour-onesevenfive 03:45, 15 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Regarding Redundancy: I agree that having the exact same info in several pages doesn't help the wiki. BUT, in the case of non-mission areas, the bosses will naturally be listed under the corresponding location entry ie. Snake Dance. Therefor to keep consistency the coop mission bosses should also be listed in the location entry imo. I believe consistency is of high importance for user friendliness. --drone9


 * I agree with Eightyfour-onesevenfive, the redundancy is a bit much, especially when you have a link to the mission page right below your boss list... As for the boss skills in the explorable ("regular") areas, wouldn't it be more intuitive to have them listed on the associated explorable area pages themselves, rather than at the outposts leading to those areas?--Razorfish


 * I am not talking about putting boss/skill info on the location page adjacent to the area they can be found at. technically speaking ie. the Ring of Fire is the location the bosses are encountered, even if the area has to be entered by starting the mission. The name of that area still is Ring of Fire. --drone9


 * I think that the non-"(Mission)"-marked pages - Ring of Fire was the example you mentioned - are used to denote the outpost of the same name (i.e. "Location = outpost/hub that is reachable by map travel", rather than "Location = general overview or summary of explorable/mission area"). So, this "mission skills in location pages" seems to be a disagreement over terminology and what that is supposed to signify...--Razorfish


 * true it's a problem of terminology. too bad the hub and the mission have the same name.--drone9


 * I, and the current official formatting, agree with 84. The location entry is for information about the Location, not about what goes on in the mission. It may make sense to include that information in the location entry if the location entry was the default, but again, the Mission article is widely agreed to be the default article. --Talrath Stormcrush 04:14, 15 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Then it's sad that the mission entry is the "main" entry. Only because it gets more hits? --drone9


 * Only because it gets more hits? Only because more people read it?  Only because it's apparently more important?  --Fyren 05:29, 15 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * question: what is "main"? up until now, I considered a coop mission to be nothing else but a somewhat different sort of quest. in in-game terms ie. Ring of Fire will never refer to the coop mission but the location/hub. believing that in-game is more important than out-game, especially in an encyclopedia on the game, for me the hub is main and the mission comes 2nd. also you can reach the mission only through the hub, right?
 * But before this keeps dragging on I'll give in. have the Bosses listed in the mission entry, but then please list them complete with all skills, not only the elites. --drone9

Umm, the boss in a mission is IN the mission, he can only be found IN the mission, not in the outpost that starts the mission. Likewise, the boss in Snake Dance is IN Snake Dance (an explorable area) not in Camp Rankor. Mission areas are the equivalent of explorable areas, not outposts.

I have a better suggestion though: Talk. Tell us what you are planning to do and why and how and see if this is the general feel of everyone. Nothing more frustrating than editing 100 pages only to have them reverted three days later. Thanks. --Karlos 05:33, 15 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * of course you are right. not used to editing a wiki. only other sort of multi-user-input databases. I somehow miss a forum. where can I post suggestions? --drone9