Template talk:Effect box

Alright, I'm putting this up as-is for now so I can get started fixing up the various effects articles. There are probably a few categories I missed, and I know the color on the box header sucks. Suggestions for improvement are more than welcome. &mdash;Dr Ishmael 02:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Is there any need to "modulate" this template on the effects articles like we do with skills? We do skills that way because of the Quick References, but I don't see why we'd need to do that for effects, so I'm commenting out the "edit details" link. &mdash;Dr Ishmael 03:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Do any effects have different concise descriptions? It kinda seems ointless if both are the same.[[Image:Entrea Sumatae.png|Entrea Sumatae]]Entrea  [Talk]  03:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. Any that have a duration are different (since the concise puts that in parentheses), and a lot of the rest were reworded.  That's still a good point, though - any effects where they are the same don't need to have both displayed.  It should say Full/Concise: to show that they are the same.  But how to do that...  Add a boolean parameter, "concise_identical = yes"?  Or say "concise_description = (Full)"?  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 03:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * type? which ones aren't environmental effects? what other types are there? perhaps we can include info on location? or is that not templateable?&mdash;♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 03:42, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I refer you to Category:Effects. There are item-induced effects, disguises, conditions, blessings, and bounties.  Location would certainly be templateable, I hadn't thought of that.  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 03:54, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ahh, well then for item effects we probably want to include what causes the effect. &mdash;♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 04:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * So parms for "location = " and "item = "? Although there should probably be a distinction for item effects between bundle items and consumable items.  Ah, and for bounties, we should have "faction = " to show which group (Kurzick, Sunspears, Norn) they're for.  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 04:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You can call consumables "consumables" and other items "bundles" if you like. we usually use bundle as the term for things you carry around here. &mdash;♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 04:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I think I got most of the above put into my test version. Check User:Dr ishmael/Test Effect and the links at the bottom to see the different kinds of effects. &mdash;Dr Ishmael 05:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Full
shouldn't it look like

Full:Description

Consice:Description

rather than

Description

Consice:Description

to make it look like the skills?--Balistic Pve (T/C) 22:32, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

This needs
Heavy use of tags, because the effect categories are being put on the consumable pages as well. Unfortunately, I can't fix that, so an admin will have to.Entrea  [Talk]  16:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Specificly, the categories for Disguises, Consumable Effects, and Campaign Effects need to be noincluded.[[Image:Entrea Sumatae.png|Entrea Sumatae]]Entrea  [Talk]  16:57, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Is it right now? --Shadowcrest 17:15, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Except that there's a random }} sitting out after the box now.[[Image:Entrea Sumatae.png|Entrea Sumatae]]Entrea  [Talk]  17:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Try putting the noincludes around the categories instead of the whole globs.[[Image:Entrea Sumatae.png|Entrea Sumatae]]Entrea  [Talk]  17:23, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Doesn't that defeat the purpose of auto-cat on pages like Golem Form? With the noincludes, the only cat on the page is effect stub. Without, it's categorized properly, right? --Shadowcrest 17:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, but with it, Automatonic shows up as a consumable effect. We need someone who knows templates better to figure it out.[[Image:Entrea Sumatae.png|Entrea Sumatae]]Entrea  <font color="#4682b4">[Talk]  18:05, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I have an idea... gimme some time to work on it. &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 20:51, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Adding &lt;noinclude>s to the template wouldn't have worked, because they would've prevented whatever they wrapped from being included at all. There's no way to make a &lt;noinclude> pass through one call of the template, but then take effect if the including page is itself included somewhere else - trust me, I tried.  So I went back to the old idea of the   parameter from the previous version of the Skill box template.  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 21:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Would #ifexists: BASEPAGENAME (effect)|do not cat|cat work? Because the nocat is teh kludge. --mendel 09:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Nope, because most effect articles (even for consumable effects) don't have the (effect) identifier. &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 15:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I wrote that wrong. #ifexists: PAGENAME (effect)|do not cat|cat does not cat for "Golden Egg" because "Golden Egg (effect)" exists; it cats for "Golden Egg (effect)" because "Golden Egg (effect) (effect)" does not exist, and it will for the same reason cat for any effect without "(effect)" in the name. Of course that is not desired for effects like "Sugar Rush", which may be linked from "Fruitcake", and the only way to prevent it catting "Fruitcake" would then be to add a "Fruitcake (effect)" article and redirect that to "Sugar Rush".
 * The other solution is to examine the unexpanded wikitext of FULLPAGENAME and see if "{{Effect box" occurs in the text, like so (replaced {{FULLPAGENAME}} with Sugar Rush):
 * giving
 * In fact, searching for &lt;onlyinclude&gt; alone is probably sufficient and would work with any autocat. I wonder how much resources this takes - not that much. --mendel 23:24, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * In fact, searching for &lt;onlyinclude&gt; alone is probably sufficient and would work with any autocat. I wonder how much resources this takes - not that much. --mendel 23:24, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * In fact, searching for &lt;onlyinclude&gt; alone is probably sufficient and would work with any autocat. I wonder how much resources this takes - not that much. --mendel 23:24, 8 June 2008 (UTC)