User talk:Bexor/Armor Project/Art

Crafting box
Is there any guidelines for how we should treat the case with more locations and crafters for the same armor level? Some put the materials in a rowspan=2, and some just put a in the location box and put the in the same cell. What do you think? I prefer the, since it looks nicer in Firefox. &mdash; Stylva  (talk)(contribs) 06:29, 10 January 2007 (CST)
 * You can pick and feel free to change the s&f to add the note in. :) - BeXoR  [[Image:Bexor.png]] 12:58, 10 January 2007 (CST)

Don't forget
For personal reference:
 * Template:Prophecies ascended armor - Add into s&f and create for factions and nightfall. - BeXoR  [[Image:Bexor.png]] 05:15, 16 January 2007 (CST)
 * This is safe to forget now. :p --Glynnis   16:19, 25 January 2007 (CST)

Art pages
The following pages need to be checked to ensure that they follow the new s&f guidelines:

Trading pages
The following pages need to be moved/created and edited to follow the s&f:

Crafting quick reference
I don't even know what these are.

Art galleries
See Armor galleries project for the list. I will add the actual links in later. - BeXoR   11:36, 26 January 2007 (CST)

Description
Could you please check if you think the descriptions I'm making is ok, I've always had a hard time deciding what should be there and what shouldn't. (Pages I have edited is Monk Ascalon, Tyrian, Krytan and Ascetic's Dragon so far). &mdash; Stylva  (talk)(contribs) 18:20, 29 January 2007 (CST)
 * I changed Ascalon to be more concise, but now I'm wondering if the way you have the art type linked is clearer. By the way, the function pages are going to change (not going to have A in armor, but there will be redirects for profession armor, see my function pages!), so maybe I'll start creating those pages now so that we can link to the right thing now. - BeXoR  [[Image:Bexor.png]] 22:23, 29 January 2007 (CST)
 * How will we link in the armor art box? To the professions-specific names or to the page names? &mdash; Stylva  (talk)(contribs) 03:03, 30 January 2007 (CST)
 * My function page has some of the planned links: User:Bexor/Armor Project/Function. It will generally be the name variant. I'll have some of this done tonight. - BeXoR  [[Image:Bexor.png]] 03:45, 30 January 2007 (CST)
 * I'm still working on it. Hopefully no one will delete the redirects I made so far. :S - BeXoR  [[Image:Bexor.png]] 04:46, 30 January 2007 (CST)
 * Okay, I'll start with the redirects. I made those monk ones a maybe til I can double check them. One problem with the ascetics is the lack of headgear. I am fairly sure both ascetics have headgear (maybe just star?) - BeXoR  [[Image:Bexor.png]] 05:13, 30 January 2007 (CST)
 * I have basically no idea about those :P And I'm having a bit of wiki overload, so I get stressed just by thinking of all the inaccurate information there may be :P &mdash; Stylva  (talk)(contribs) 05:28, 30 January 2007 (CST)
 * I checked and theres no dragon headgear, but there is a star one. - BeXoR  [[Image:Bexor.png]] 06:52, 30 January 2007 (CST)

Headgear (not again!)
One more thing about the descriptions you have altered. Why are we using the Monk Prophecies Headgear again? As it is now, there exists four different pages with information just about monk headgear (counting the Attribute headgear too) and it's all overlapping echother. We should make a clear statement on what pages to use and what pages should include what. Personally, I prefer Monk headgear and that one only, for art. (And it not including the crafting information found in Monk Luxon Armor etc) And then have Attribute headgear as the one and only function article. These articles is really a mess.. &mdash; Stylva  (talk)(contribs) 05:28, 30 January 2007 (CST)


 * The pages will be changed. Monk attribute headgear will be gone (that's not an art page). What's the other page? Mesmer Prophecies Headgear is an example. I believe it is necessary because they aren't part of any Prophecies art. - BeXoR  [[Image:Bexor.png]] 05:50, 30 January 2007 (CST)


 * Why can't that information be included in Mesmer headgear? The pages I was referring to is Monk headgear, Monk Attribute Headgears, Monk Prophecies Headgear and Attribute headgear. All these include duplicate information of some kind. If we have a collecting article like Monk headgear, why do we have a specific article on Monk Prophecies Headgear? And if we want the specific one (or several), what's the point in the collective one.. Do you see what I mean or am I just putting alot of words with no meaning here? ;) There's so much duplicate information at the moment, that it is hard to keep it up to date. &mdash; Stylva  (talk)(contribs) 10:05, 30 January 2007 (CST)


 * I absolutely agree Stylva! There should be 1 headgear art page per profession called " headgear" (total of 10 articles) and 1 headgear function page (called "Attribute armor" with a redirect from "Attribute headgear").  Also I fixed your broken link above.  Can someone please remove the "move" tags from the headgear pages before the situation becomes even worse?  (I'm at work at the moment.  Shh!)  --Glynnis   10:17, 30 January 2007 (CST)


 * If you look at the current headgear page, with crafting information AND galleries you have to scroll three or four pages down, and that's at a high resolution. The only reason the profession headgear article exists is to have a central location with all the pictures, because lazy people don't want to load each art page. What I want to have is Profession headgear with an index setup like the profession index. That uses the gallery index template I think is what it's called. Specific headgear art sets that don't belong to another art (for example the Prophecies headgear or Ele eyes) would get an art page with crafting and galleries (like Mesmer Prophecies Headgear). And then the function side will be on Attribute armor. That way if a user wants a headpiece but doesn't know what to get, they can look at the headgear index and see all the different types and then click on the link to go to the art page (whether headgear art or full art set) or on male or female gallery links. And on the other hand if users have only one campaign and want to know what they need for the only available headgear they dont have to scroll down a million pages looking for information. Does this make sense or do I need to make examples? - BeXoR  [[Image:Bexor.png]]  11:53, 30 January 2007 (CST)


 * In other words... you like Necromancer headgear and Necromancer Prophecies Headgear. --Glynnis   12:41, 30 January 2007 (CST)


 * As much as it pains me to say it, I believe it is the best alternative and it follows the format the art pages are in already. If someone wants Mesmer Ascalon armor, the mask crafting isnt listed there, but on the Mesmer Prophecies Headgear. If they want Mesmer Luxon Armor the headgear is included there as well as the crafting material. Mesmer headgear would be a portal to all of these pages. - BeXoR  [[Image:Bexor.png]] 12:46, 30 January 2007 (CST)


 * I will be in the corner crying... --Glynnis  14:56, 30 January 2007 (CST)


 * Aw don't be sad. :( *pats* - <font color=#3E7A90>BeXoR  [[Image:Bexor.png]] 15:02, 30 January 2007 (CST)


 * Although I don't agree fully on everythimg, I see the point in having those pages, and it can't be reduced. But naming, people, naming! We have been so strict before. "Headgear" is not an in game name or in game item. Mesmer Prophecies Masks, yes. Or Mesmer Prophecies headgear. Pretty please? :P &mdash; Stylva  (talk)(contribs) 14:21, 30 January 2007 (CST)


 * Of course. :) I would say to use "headgear" because if we use Masks (it probably should still be masks), then we'll have to use "necromancer prophecies scar patterns" and "monk prophecies scalp designs". Bit long. But if you think the url length doesn't matter then go ahead with whatever. Maybe "Monk headgear" as the index, and then "Monk Prophecies Scalp Designs". - <font color=#3E7A90>BeXoR  [[Image:Bexor.png]] 14:31, 30 January 2007 (CST)


 * Okay, I feel better now. I will propose article names for the headgear pages soon.  I need to think more about it first.  I'm glad that you both more-or-less agree on a format though.  --<font color="00D245">Glynnis   15:20, 30 January 2007 (CST)