GuildWiki talk:Style and formatting/Weapons

Where can i find those Firey Dragon swords?
 * In the game, or buy them from others. --Karlos 21:26, 13 Sep 2005 (EST)

Collecter reward listing in weapon articles
I find the tables been added having no real resource value, but that might be just me. If I care about where to find a collector for a certain weapon, it's because I am looking for a 20/20 staff for x attribute or a shield that gives me HP when I am in a stance. I'm going to head for Collector rewards for that list, instead of trying to figure out "Is a 20/20 staff in protection prayers going to be a Holy Staff or a Smiting Staff?" and check both articles for the listing. It's taking up a lot of space as a trivia. IMHO -PanSola 07:50, 16 March 2006 (CST)


 * I'll agree with that, looking for an item it is easier to look it up on the Collector rewards. However, I think that the notible collectors items, should be included on an items page. If no one else responds, I'll remove the collectors items that don't need to be on those pages. My 2 cents - Serenlo 04:41, 16 March 2006 (EST)

Formatting article for weapons
I've been going through the weapon articles (both Prophecies and Factions), trying to set them up in a similar format and adding info where needed. Once I've gotten it the way I like it I'll post a formatting article for them here. *EDIT: Formatting article has been added, as well as templates for the item boxes. I'll be tweaking it over the next few days, feel free to post any comments, suggestions, or criticism. -Scutilla 17:44, 06 April 2006 (EST) (Edited at 23:36)


 * At a quick glance it looks good. On a personal note, I'm glad you did away with the image captions in the item boxes as that is one thing that drives me crazy (why have the same thing listed above the image in the box and then below it too?).  One thing that may be problematic is the locations section.  A lot of 'coveted' weapons (cleaver, sephis axe) are pretty common drops in pre-searing, but no one really wants those because of the very low damage that they do.  But IMO if we have a location section and they drop in pre-searing, that should be listed.  --Rainith 16:03, 7 April 2006 (CDT)


 * On a related note, I'm not sure how useful the min/max damage values and the salvage quantities really are. As I understand it, the damage and salvage quantities are both somehow proportional to the difficulty of the area in which the item is found (correlation, though perhaps not causation).  That is, they're not really a property of the item itself but instead just indicate where an item can be found (e.g. anything findable in Pre-Searing will have very low minimum damage and only salvage for 1 unit of material).  If someone has an item and wants to check how much material he'd get from salvaging it, the listed range isn't really useful, since some of the values there came from entirely different areas.
 * There's also a whole lot of uncertainty with that information; we'll never really know when we've got the correct ranges listed, since there's always the chance that a new value will be discovered later. And if the range is edited, we can't be sure that the new information is actually accurate.  You can't check the game and find out that a certain damage value is impossible.  If a game update makes certain values impossible, we'd never be able to catch the change and update the pages.
 * Because of this, I think those things should just be removed from the info box. If something has really remarkable damage or salvage quantities (e.g. Icy Dragon Swords always having max damage, Candy Cane Swords having 10-10), this can be stated somewhere outside the box. --adeyke 18:01, 7 April 2006 (CDT)


 * Duly noted. I didn't see much point in the damage ranges either, took them out and added any specific damage ranges to the Location section (items with exact stats like the Candy Cane Swords will still use the Weapon Stats section). I'm aware that some of the rare weapons drop a lot more often at lower levels, I'll try to point them out when I go back and do all the weapon pages.
 * I've decided that the general section isn't necessary- most of the information from it can be found in the sidebar. Notes on whether the item is campaign-specific will be moved to the Location section --Scutilla 11:13, 10 April 2006 (EST) (Edited at 11:23 and 13:57)


 * Have you thought of adding the campaign info to the weapon boxes? That might be a good way to do it.  --Rainith 13:39, 10 April 2006 (CDT)


 * That might work- in any case, I'll be fixing the Prophecies item pages first, so I don't have to worry about it right away. If I decide to, it'll be a simple matter of adding it to the template. --Scutilla 16:46, 10 April 2006 (EST)


 * What's now with the campaign info in the weapon box? I had updated most of swords and axes and would like to continue with the other weapons, but when this will be changed, someone has to update it all again. --Trilo 09:33, 18 May 2006 (CDT)


 * I realize that I'm extremely late to this conversation, I missed it when it took place. But, on the topic of weapon damage, I really like having the max damage for a weapon type listed.  It's good information, especially for someone new to the game, or just new to a particular profession.  I don't want to see a "max range" and "min range", I agree, maintaining those is problematic.  But I think that a single max damage value should be documented. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 13:55, 16 July 2006 (CDT)
 * If someone is not use to a type of weapon they should just read on that type of weapon. Dont see why we should repeat it on each page.-- ├ A  ratak  ┤  14:01, 16 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I'm thinking of simplicity of use. It's much easier to locate the value in a table or info box rather than buried at varying locations within the text of each article.  If left only in the generic weapon articles, then I feel that those articles should be standardized, and possibly have an info box added to them as well. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 14:08, 16 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Still on this topic (bumping due to the upgrade disrupting visibility to it); I honestly feel a single "max damage" value (not range) would be valuable to list.   --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:09, 17 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I'm not against the idea, but if we do that we should have the bow range and all. Should be easy to make a template so we only have to type the bow type and it fill the rest.&mdash; ├ A  ratak  ┤  18:17, 17 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Huh? what do you mean single max?&mdash; ├ A ratak  ┤  18:19, 17 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Actually, I also like the idea of bow type and range as well. For single value, I mean for example, instead of showing "max damage = 15 - 28", just show "max damage = 28".  I could actually support either, but I think the single value is adequate. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:23, 17 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Well if we put it, we should put the range (15-28) that is the stat of the weapon, its not jsut 28 but that just me. The community should choose this.&mdash; ├ A  ratak  ┤  18:26, 17 July 2006 (CDT)
 * The Weapon details page must be changed to reflect the new WeaponInfo box. What about adding the infos for the damage there.--Trilo 17:14, 23 July 2006 (CDT)

image: item holder
why does it matter? o_O" -PanSola 07:50, 16 May 2006 (CDT)

Templates
Staves can use the WeaponInfo template too, because there is no more an energy line in the StaffInfo template. --Trilo 07:15, 18 May 2006 (CDT)


 * Also, Shield and Focus can be merged into a single "Offhand" template. -PanSola, LAFTable (sing) 09:38, 18 May 2006 (CDT)
 * What about changing the BowInfo template to include the bow class, not the Maximum Range, Refire Speed and Flight Time? --Trilo 11:51, 18 May 2006 (CDT)
 * I would support that. - 06:27, 25 June 2006 (CDT)
 * I would split the focus and sheild. The focus are often small and get strecht to 160px.  See this.&mdash; ├ A  ratak  ┤  10:02, 24 July 2006 (CDT)

Divine Path unique items, Merge or Split?
I find it semi-odd to split the Unique item version from the regular item version, yet between different stats of the "same" unique item we keep things in the same article. We should either fully split them, or fully merge them. For example, Straw Effigy should either have 1 or 25 articles, not 2.

I support a merge, and just use sections to separate acquisition/stats data of regular vs unique. And in all honesty, I see the non-Shiro weapons just like other collector weapons except colored green, and the item you need to trade with much harder to farm (keep deleting and recreating new characters to be run through the entire PvE... or just buy from other players). - 06:24, 25 June 2006 (CDT)

Inclusions
Will be fixed before the weekend is out. Guess I need to build a bot for the next time I do something like this. -Gares 18:57, 20 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Forgot about this statement. All items with new templates in place have been changed in regards to my improvement. -Gares 10:21, 24 July 2006 (CDT)

Multiple images
Have a look at the old version of Earth Staff. See it's got 3 extra images:
 * [[Image:EarthStaffCanthan.jpg|20px]] [[Image:Earth Staff Obsidian.jpg|20px]] [[Image:Earth Staff New.jpg|20px]]

Which are Canthan, Obsidian and the newer version (prestige I guess). (I've just added them to this page so they're not unused images and shouldn't get deleted.) The newest template only appears to allow for one image, .jpg. Do we want to include multiple images on our weapons pages? If so do we modify the template or just manually include them in the article somewhere? --Xasxas256 20:16, 7 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Template:WeaponInfo (since July 27) accepts image1 and image2 as parameters. If the former is missing, it tries the pagename as you mentioned.  If the latter is missing, it just doesn't use a second image.  I guess it was a bad change since before "image" acted like "image1" does now.  I'm not familiar at all with the item articles so I don't know what parameters are actually getting used in articles, but the template should probably take "image" and "image2" to not break old usage if there is any.  As for even more, it's an easy template change but I don't know if it's the best solution.  --68.142.14.88 20:36, 7 August 2006 (CDT)
 * I don't know either but I'm sick with a cold and at this stage it's the solution I'm going with. So I've made the change and readded the images back into Earth Staff. If someone can think of something more elegant...go for it ;) --Xasxas256 05:25, 8 August 2006 (CDT)
 * oopsie. my bad.  This image was tagged for deletion, and I accidentally deleted too quickly. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 09:41, 10 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Wait, we're okay - the article that was using it was already updated to use [[Image:Earth Staff Canthan.jpg|20px]] instead of [[Image:EarthStaffCanthan.jpg|20px]] --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 09:49, 10 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Yeah I think Aratak probably uploaded a nicer version of the image. I saved copies of those images at home but I'm at work now so I can't check but I'm pretty sure that's a better looking image than the original. --Xasxas256 18:21, 10 August 2006 (CDT)
 * The image wasnt the concern here. It was about the template that only use pagename, that I really dont like I might add, so I corrected it.  I choosed image1 because there wasn any in the template, but now that you said it, the old did have image as a parameter.  I doesnt really matter if you want to use image or image1 just have to change it soon enough so people doesnt get use to it.  I really try to get feed back about the info box but most people dont care or didnt take the time to check it.  But I really oppose to going back to pagename.  Multiple recompressing of image is a bad idea and you have to reupload the same image many time to cover all the weapon that use that skin. &mdash; ├ A  ratak  ┤  10:06, 11 August 2006 (CDT)

Weapon upgrade
I just noticed that the weapon format doesn't include a link to Weapon upgrades. That would seem to be a frequently associated item - especially for someone new to the game. I feel the link should be worked into the style guide. But, should we include some wording in the description area, or add a section for 'Related articles'? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:06, 14 August 2006 (CDT)