GuildWiki talk:Style and formatting/Skills

Quick reference box layout
I liked them before, but I don't now that I've tried to actually use the skill list. The new boxes are pretty, but putting them in a list makes it exceedingly hard to actually read it: the icons are distracting, green/blue is too low contrast, and it difficult to quickly look at names when they are separated by descriptive text. A list that actually has all the names in a separate column would be much more user-friendly. &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 00:21, 11 June 2006 (CDT) )
 * The green wasn't my idea. Pick something. - 00:39, 11 June 2006 (CDT)
 * Maybe a lighter (pastel) gLink titlereen that lets the black lettering stand out better? Yes, I too miss the ! for questable skills.  -Pandelume
 * It's not just the green, mostly (same color as the regular background would be ideal, though, if you're asking). It's the fact that there isn't a column that just has skill names and nothing else in it anymore. Your can't scroll through the list with your eyes very easily anymore. &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 00:45, 11 June 2006 (CDT) )


 * Agreed. The previous lists were far more readable and informative. I miss the green "questable" exclamations. Seventy.twenty.x.x 00:43, 11 June 2006 (CDT)
 * The question mark has its own problems, and has been discussed elsewhere with no one ever proposing a solution that they favor personally, muchless trying to reach a consensus on what to do. - 01:14, 11 June 2006 (CDT)

Ok I just gave skill name its own column, but I think the rest of the row looks worse now than it used to... - 01:21, 11 June 2006 (CDT)
 * You're right: it's a bit uglier but way more readable. I find it much easier to look through the list now, at least. &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 21:13, 11 June 2006 (CDT) )


 * Might I suggest switching position of the Prophecies/Factions box and the skill stat box? It would be nice to see that skill stats near the skill name (all at a glance, so to speak :) Another possibility would be to use a narrow column on the right for the letters 'P', 'F' or 'C' since it's more a tag for searching skills. It would reduce some of the visual clutter in the main body (description area) -Pandelume
 * There are only 26 letters in teh alphabet, and I wouldn't be surprised if by campaign 6 we are already running into duplicate letters. I personally would like to see numbers ("C1", "C2") etc, but that hasn't garnered much support from other ppl.  As for location of the stats, it was placed there to mimick the location in hte in-game skill menu.  If ppl are used to the skill menu layout, this would be pretty natural. - 00:34, 13 June 2006 (CDT)


 * If and when that becomes necessary, I'm sure commonly accepted two letter abbreviations can be used, like Mo and Me (for Monk and Mesmer) for professions. If the stats are moved to the left, I'd suggest not even boxing it, since the icons would be distinct from the description below them anyway. Simpler is always better, IMO; it makes it easier to see each skill as a single big description block. And surely there must be a way to restore the ! questable. Just some suggestions. -Pandelume
 * The problem with the ! mark isn't not knowing a way, but that neither of the two ways to do it are supported by anyone. As for the stats, I am for keeping it boxed in order to keep them aligned between skills. - 23:32, 13 June 2006 (CDT)


 * In terms of usability, the Campaign vs. stats boxes should definitely switch location. The campaign is generally of very minor importance, while the stats are vital and essential to what people are looking for.  I do like the current form with the names in a column.  And frankly, I'm 100% about usability and readability, and overall "prettiness" is irrelevant.  It's not ugly if I can read it easily.  =)  --JoDiamonds 09:42, 13 June 2006 (CDT)

I love usability, too. Since most people seem to think the old one had more usability going for it, let's try this: everyone who cares, describe what works about the old boxes and what doesn't. Here's me starting... &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 23:54, 13 June 2006 (CDT) )
 * It's nice to have each entry on an individual column, as it makes it easy to scroll down visually. Though I think this is an ironclad requirement only for the name column.
 * Having some visual cute to a skill's elite status is good, though it needn't be egregious.
 * Factions/Prophecies/Core could've used some kind of symbol or color-coded letter. Just a word can be annoying sometimes.
 * Giving casting/recast times is absolutely vital.


 * Having skill stats be column-aligned is good. - 23:59, 13 June 2006 (CDT)

--Chi Li 02:58, 14 June 2006 (CDT)
 * Green and Yellow Backgrounds to distinguish Elite from usual skills is not necessary - I find it distracting and it makes things harder to read. The yellow border around the Skill Icon is enough, just like on the skill pages.
 * Factions / Prophecies / Core should go to its own column, and something else than just plain text would be easier to distinguish, maybe an Icon or an iconic Letter (F, P, C).
 * The Information that a skill is questable (green exclamationmark) should be included in the skill template to be evaluated by the list.


 * See User talk:PanSola for a quick rundown on the quest marker issue. The issue came up probably 5 times in the past, and no one, to the best of my memory, every expressed favoring one solution over the other.  Thus I never did anything with it. - 03:22, 14 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Thanks for that link, I havent thought that much about the issue yet, just saw the loss of information compared to the old pages. I'll do some testing in my User namespace and hopefully come up with a possible solution, but maybe not. --Chi Li [[Image:Chi_Li.gif|Chi Li]] 03:51, 14 June 2006 (CDT)

I personally have nothing against this new look (except the bold black border around the whole section which I think should be removed), however, might I suggest moving the Campaign link, something like this?


 * rowspan=3 width=64 style="height=64px; background: black;padding=3px"| [[Image:Diversion.jpg]]
 * rowspan=3 align=left valign=top width=130 style="height=1px; background: lightgreen; padding-left:6px;padding-top:3px"| Diversion
 * rowspan=3 align=left valign=top style="padding-left:6px; padding-top: 3px"| Hex Spell. For 6 seconds, the next time target foe uses a skill, that skill takes an additional 10...47 seconds to recharge.
 * width=1 align=left colspan=9 valign=top style="padding-left:6px"| Domination Magic
 * width=1 align=left colspan=9 valign=top style="padding-left:6px"| Core
 * width=1 style="border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right: none"| [[Image:QuestSkill.PNG]]
 * width=1 width=5 style="border-left:none; border-right: none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none"| 10
 * width=1 height=1px align=left style="border-left:none; border-right:none"| [[Image:Energy.png]]
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none"| 3
 * width=1 height=1px align=left style="border-left:none; border-right:none"| [[Image:Activation.png]]
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none"| 10
 * width=1 height=1px align=left style="border-left:none;"| [[Image:Recharge.png]]
 * width=1 height=1px align=left style="border-left:none; border-right:none"| [[Image:Activation.png]]
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none"| 10
 * width=1 height=1px align=left style="border-left:none;"| [[Image:Recharge.png]]

Padding could be discussed, though I never realized why wikipedians are so afraid of space that they want the text right next to the border. Also re-introduced the quest-marker. Even though the confusion of multiple campaigns still remains, I still believe it's better to have a marker that it's available in any campaign rather than not marking it at all. The skill name column has a fixed width of 130 px + 6 px padding since GuildWiki is being run in standards compliance mode, so all skills would have the same width on all columns (icons taking up 64 px, skill names 136 px, attribute/campaign/etc as much as it needs, skill description the rest). Only suggestions though. Also, obviously the attribute wouldn't be shown in quick reference pages. But since it's in the template, I put it there in my suggestion too. &mdash; Galil  20:12, 21 June 2006 (CDT)
 * After looking at the Mesmer skills quick reference page again, I saw it says this right after the quest icon: "This skill may be earned from a quest. See skill information for details.". Since it says in the description that you should check skill information for details related to skill quests, I do not think it matters if we have only one icon.&mdash; Galil  20:15, 21 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Finally! Someone who at least have an opinion on this matter!  BTW, I would put the quest marker by Campaign, instead of skill stats.  And I would move the Skill Stats row to the top.  I have no clue what this fixed width and standard compliance you are talking about though.  What standard is it from? - 02:39, 24 June 2006 (CDT)


 * I seriously don't understand what people are using the exclamation mark for. Do Questable Mesmer skills (Prophecies), Questable Mesmer skills (Factions), Questable Mesmer skills (All), and Questable Core Mesmer skills (Factions) do whatever it is that exclamation marks do better?
 * Here's the old standard array of skills in almost the same format.

{| width=100% cellpadding=0 border=1 cellspacing=0 style="clear:right;"
 * rowspan=3 width=64 valign=top| [[image:Unyielding Aura.jpg]]
 * rowspan=3 valign=top style="padding:2px"| Unyielding Aura [ Edit]
 * rowspan=3 align=left valign=top style="padding:2px"| Elite Enchantment Spell. Bring target dead ally back to life at full health and full energy. If you stop maintaining this enchantment, or if this enchantment is removed, that ally dies. Deaths while enchanted with Unyielding Aura do not incur a death penalty. (50% failure chance with Divine Favor attribute 4 or less)
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"| -1
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 3
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 45
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[image:Monk-icon.png|16px]] Divine Favor
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Prophecies
 * rowspan=3 width=64 valign=top| [[image:Glyph of Elemental Power.jpg]]
 * rowspan=3 valign=top style="padding:2px"| Glyph of Elemental Power [ Edit]
 * rowspan=3 valign=top style="padding:2px"|Glyph. Your elemental attributes are boosted by 2 for your next spell.
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 1
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[image:Elementalist-icon.png|16px]] No Attribute
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Core
 * rowspan=3 width=64 valign=top| [[image:Rush.jpg]]
 * rowspan=3 valign=top style="padding:2px"| Rush [ Edit]
 * rowspan=3 valign=top style="padding:2px"| Stance. For 8...18 seconds, you move 25% faster.
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 4
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[image:Warrior-icon.png|16px]] Strength
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Prophecies
 * rowspan=3 width=64 valign=top| [[image:Call of Protection.jpg]]
 * rowspan=3 valign=top style="padding:2px"| Call of Protection [ Edit]
 * rowspan=3 valign=top style="padding:2px"| Shout. For 120 seconds, your animal companions have a 1...11 base damage reduction.
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 115
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[image:Ranger-icon.png|16px]] Beast Mastery
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Prophecies
 * rowspan=3 width=64 valign=top| [[image:Offering of Blood.jpg]]
 * rowspan=3 valign=top style="padding:2px"| Offering of Blood [ Edit]
 * rowspan=3 valign=top style="padding:2px"| Elite Spell. Sacrifice 10% maximum Health. You gain 8...18 Energy.
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"| 10%
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 1/4
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 15
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[image:Necromancer-icon.png|16px]] Blood Magic
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Prophecies
 * rowspan=3 width=64 valign=top| [[image:Troll Unguent.jpg]]
 * rowspan=3 valign=top style="padding:2px"| Troll Unguent [ Edit]
 * rowspan=3 valign=top style="padding:2px"| Skill. For 10 seconds, you gain health regeneration of +3...9.
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 3
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 10
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[image:Ranger-icon.png|16px]] Wilderness Survival
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Core
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Prophecies
 * rowspan=3 width=64 valign=top| [[image:Troll Unguent.jpg]]
 * rowspan=3 valign=top style="padding:2px"| Troll Unguent [ Edit]
 * rowspan=3 valign=top style="padding:2px"| Skill. For 10 seconds, you gain health regeneration of +3...9.
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 3
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 10
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[image:Ranger-icon.png|16px]] Wilderness Survival
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Core
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[image:Ranger-icon.png|16px]] Wilderness Survival
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Core
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Core
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Core


 * --Cloak of Letters 09:01, 24 June 2006 (CDT)


 * How about moving the stack of stuff left of description? Like this:


 * Compared to having the stack on the right, which one do you guys think work better in terms of ease of reference? - 17:19, 24 June 2006 (CDT)
 * Edit: I think I like it on the right (Cloak of Letter's example) more than moving it left, but just want to toss the idea out there. - 17:21, 24 June 2006 (CDT)
 * Have to say I liked it more to the right too. Also, a quick search on google with the keywords "standards compliance vs quirky mode" led me to this. Basically, they are different modes in which web browsers render pages. Back when (X)HTML and CSS started getting standardized, web browsers needed to be able to draw the old pages which didn't follow the new shiny standards. So if a browser finds a page without a -tag at the top, it draws in quirky mode (old messy mode), if it does find it however, it draws in standards mode. This is also the reason most people used to hate browsers other than IE, cause other browsers drew a whole lot better in standard mode, but wasn't too good with quirky mode. That's beginning to change though as more pages becomes standardized. If you wanna see what mode a page is being rendered in, right-click it, click View Page Info, and it should state somewhere in the middle of that dialogue (Firefox, quickly translated due to me using a swedish version).


 * Anyway, about the skills, I could live with the first of those 2 suggestions (if we switch to the small icons for professions eg., , etc) and I really think some padding was good for the readability. Ohh, and by fixed width I meant that I had set the column with skill names to , so all skill name columns have the same width. I did indeed like the skill cost, recharge, etc more at the bottom though, but will go with whatever is decided. &mdash; Galil   17:53, 25 June 2006 (CDT)


 * Also, after looking again, I felt I had to add that I hope we aren't making the skill-boxes with that many links (as in the first suggestion with Unyielding Aura). One link to each page the first time it occurs would be enough. For example, enchantment. It's linked to twice. Once would be enough if it was at its first occurence. &mdash; Galil  18:01, 25 June 2006 (CDT)


 * I think the questable ! marker should be there: If a skill is questable, you'll look into the skill description to see in which quest anyway, but opening lots of pages to find out "which skills could I quest?" is wasteful. Also, I strongly dislike the horizontal splits in the new templates, it makes scanning the list for skills with a certain desired property a lot harder. Personally, I'd even prefer a true table that forces horizontal scrolling onto my browser over the "5e 1s 30s / No Attribute /Core" vertical stacking in the examples above. (And while I'm writing here where knowledgaeble people might read it: is there an easy way to change the alt tag for images from "Image:whatever.jpeg" to just "whatever"? That'd be nice.) 134.130.4.46 23:46, 29 June 2006 (CDT)

I use the quest mark to look for skills that can't be quested, which is a lot easier than opening up every skill trainer page, and the Questable Mesmer skills (Prophecies) page doesn't tell about them. As for their implementation, how about this: = skills questable anywhere = skills questable in Prophecies = skills questable in Factions That or make a "Non-Questable Mesmer skills" page. Also: Why do we need to see the skill pictures on the reference page? They can be seen on their own pages. And as I saw was said before, the green and yellow blocks of color aren't necessary, plus they're ugly. &mdash; Schnozzinkobenstein 15:47, 13 July 2006 (CDT)

I'm not happy with the quick skills formatting such as on the Mesmer page and no-attribute monk skills. It's hard to use as a quick reference! The cell with the skill desciption should be the full height of the line for each skill, so one's eyes can easy scroll down the page just reading skill descriptions. As it is with the newer formatting, ones eyes have to skip the campaign and attribute box that have been forced in to your field of view. --71.240.46.46 12:08, 23 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Finally. Some input. I strongly agree that the current quick references are bad design. Not only esthetically, but they are also confusing. I do believe the skill icons should still be there though, since sometimes you only remember skills by their icons. But perhaps smaller? Something like this:


 * style="width: 40px; height: 40px; background: #000"| [[Image:Diversion.jpg|40px]]
 * style="width: 130px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Diversion
 * style="text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Hex Spell. For 6 seconds, the next time target foe uses a skill, that skill takes an additional 10...47 seconds to recharge.
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|[[Image:QuestSkill.PNG]]
 * style="width: 85px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Core
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-right: none; padding-left: 6px"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 10
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Energy.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 3
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Activation.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 10
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; padding-right: 6px"| [[Image:Recharge.png]]
 * style="width: 40px; height: 40px; background: #ffd600"| [[Image:Offering of Blood.jpg|40px]]
 * style="width: 130px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Offering of Blood
 * style="text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Elite Spell. Sacrifice 20% maximum Health. You gain 8...18 Energy.
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|
 * style="width: 85px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Prophecies
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-right: none; padding-left: 6px"| 20%
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Sacrifice.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 5
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Energy.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 1⁄4
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Activation.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 15
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; padding-right: 6px"| [[Image:Recharge.png]]
 * style="width: 40px; height: 40px; background: #000"| [[Image:Rush.jpg|40px]]
 * style="width: 130px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Rush
 * style="text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Stance. For 8...18 seconds, you move 25% faster.
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|
 * style="width: 85px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Prophecies
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-right: none; padding-left: 6px"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 4
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Adrenaline.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; padding-right: 6px"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; padding-right: 6px"|


 * That seems to be about the best I can currently think of (it's 3 am). I tried without the images too, but it didn't look too good with that much inconsistency in line height. &mdash; Galil  20:02, 23 August 2006 (CDT)

Pan made this one long ago, but I don't see it here (doesn't quite look right depending on browser window size since UY's description is so long):

Here's something sort of based off a merger of Pan's immediately above and Cloak's from further above (might also look wrong):

The wiki doesn't scale the exclamation mark properly since it's a PNG (it's too tall at the natural 8x20). Also unfortunately, while I can match the gold border on the elite, I can't match the black border on the normal skill. Anyone want to reupload all the normal skill images with a lightgreen border? Heh. Anyway, I really do think these need some color used in them, so I just went with the gold/lightgreen already used. I think it looks best with the color reaching all the way across, so there's not just a mass of white on the right side. --68.142.14.80 09:40, 24 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I believe the colors were voted down upon a bit up though, and the biggest issue with these bars is stacked data, which also seems to have been dropped. Also, they're too big. Anyway, about the PNG-issue; nag away and perhaps something will be done for once. &mdash; Galil  10:41, 24 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I remember the discussion actually, but I didn't say anything because I didn't think it mattered either way. Of course, I wasn't thinking of putting colored backgrounds on the icons then.  In retrospect, it seems like it was a bad idea when we could have used HTML/CSS to get borders around them without fiddling with the images.  I remember someone bringing that up, but maybe it was later for the template discussion.
 * Back on topic, I'd agree that it'd be better if each skill used less vertical space, but I think it's worth using the space to get the color in there. Perhaps it could be arranged in a different way.  But, I think the color is good for functionality, since it helps separate each skill more than a black border of a few pixels, and is good aesthetically, so we don't have so much white everywhere.  Both make it easier to read, I think.  About the stacked stuff, I dunno.  I prefer it over all the horizontal arrangements.  In my suggestion, there's two columns to scan down when perusing the skills.  The name/description to find something "interesting" and then the right column when you want to look at the details.  Kind of hard for me to think of what the user wants since I wouldn't really use a QR page since I play enough to know the skills.  --68.142.14.80 11:05, 24 August 2006 (CDT)
 * On the exclamation mark, I think the simplest method is to just use standard text such as !, which results in !
 * If you prefer an image, there are actually several available exclamation mark images. I listed several of them at Template_talk:%21.  One of the others may work cleaner (I think there was a gif version - I didn't care for it much, but it exists). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 11:12, 24 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I strongly disagree with the use of these exclamation mark icons. The green exclamation mark makes sense, it means it's related to a quest. Anyone who has played Guild Wars could make this connection (you would hope). But the purple and cyan exclamation marks are pointless, what does purple or cyan have to do with prophecies or factions?


 * It is important that icons portray a meaning, i.e. even though the [[Image:Sacrifice.png]] image is not in the game (as far as I'm aware? Maybe it is, my computer is broken atm so I can't check) it's clear what it relates to. This is not the case with these exclamation mark icons. Please don't use them.  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 14:21, 24 August 2006 (CDT)


 * We've been using the exclamation for this purpose on various skill pages for a while. I don't think you can make an icon that indicates "questable" or "quest."  --68.142.14.80 05:13, 25 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I don't think you've really understood my point 68.142.14.80. I like the green exclamation mark icon, because it does imply that it's a quest. Good work there.


 * I don't like the other coloured exclamation mark icons. Having the same icon in a different colour does not imply Prophecies or Factions or Nightfall. It just implies quest.  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 14:02, 25 August 2006 (CDT)
 * I also like the idea of having the exclamation marks. See my suggestion below. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 19:26, 25 August 2006 (CDT)

Sub heading for quick reference box layout
Added subheading for easier discussion.

I was transforming the skill quick references to use the new skill boxes (See Ranger skills quick reference and Necromancer skills quick reference), but I soon realised that they are pretty unreadable, so I stopped. The discussion above seems to have turned into the quest skill exclamation mark, so I decided to bump this issue. I also made a suggestion for the looks of the quick reference lists. (Mostly copied from Galil)


 * style="width: 40px; height: 40px; background: #000000"| [[Image:Diversion.jpg|40px]]
 * style="width: 130px; text-align: left; background: lightgreen; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Diversion
 * style="text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Hex Spell. For 6 seconds, the next time target foe uses a skill, that skill takes an additional 10...47 seconds to recharge.
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|[[Image:QuestSkill.PNG]]
 * style="width: 85px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Core
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-right: none; padding-left: 6px"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 10
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Energy.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 3
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Activation.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 10
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; padding-right: 6px"| [[Image:Recharge.png]]
 * style="width: 40px; height: 40px; background: #ffd600"| [[Image:Offering of Blood.jpg|40px]]
 * style="width: 130px; text-align: left; background: #ffd600; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Offering of Blood
 * style="text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Elite Spell. Sacrifice 20% maximum Health. You gain 8...18 Energy.
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|
 * style="width: 85px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Prophecies
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-right: none; padding-left: 6px"| 20%
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Sacrifice.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 5
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Energy.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 1⁄4
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Activation.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 15
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; padding-right: 6px"| [[Image:Recharge.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 15
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; padding-right: 6px"| [[Image:Recharge.png]]

I hope we can come to an agreement quickly, because the quick references are really useful. All comments and suggestions are welcome. Please be fast with this. -- (talk) 19:26, 25 August 2006 (CDT)
 * I like the general layout of this latest proposal, but I would like to see a mention of the attribute the skill requires. I'm indifferent on if an asterisk is used; but if one is used, I agree that only green asterisks should be used.  The color coding of asterisks is not intuitive. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:04, 25 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Ah, I did miss the attribute. I was so sure it had everything in it. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 20:17, 25 August 2006 (CDT)


 * style="width: 40px; height: 40px; background: #000000"| [[Image:Diversion.jpg|40px]]
 * style="width: 130px; text-align: left; background: lightgreen; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Diversion
 * style="text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Hex Spell. For 6 seconds, the next time target foe uses a skill, that skill takes an additional 10...47 seconds to recharge.
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|[[Image:QuestSkill.PNG]]
 * style="width: 85px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Core
 * style="width: 85px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Domination Magic
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-right: none; padding-left: 6px"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"|
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 10
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Energy.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 3
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Activation.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 10
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; padding-right: 6px"| [[Image:Recharge.png]]
 * style="width: 40px; height: 40px; background: #ffd600"| [[Image:Offering of Blood.jpg|40px]]
 * style="width: 130px; text-align: left; background: #ffd600; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Offering of Blood
 * style="text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Elite Spell. Sacrifice 20% maximum Health. You gain 8...18 Energy.
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|
 * style="width: 85px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Prophecies
 * style="width: 85px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Blood Magic
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-right: none; padding-left: 6px"| 20%
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Sacrifice.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 5
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Energy.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 1⁄4
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Activation.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 15
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; padding-right: 6px"| [[Image:Recharge.png]]
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 15
 * style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; padding-right: 6px"| [[Image:Recharge.png]]

New version with attribute. -- (talk) 20:22, 25 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I'm biased, and would like to see *some* vertical stacking of stuff, liek the ones i proposed way up there. Gem's newest proposals have too many columns that wraps the text.  I'd like to minimize wrapping so that it usually only happen to the skill description cell, and perhaps the name cell if the name is really long.  The attributes look really weird when wrapped, whereas having attribute, the stats, and the campaign all be non-wrapping will make the skill description cell overly narrow in Gem's proposals. - 03:27, 26 August 2006 (CDT)

Another experimental design: {| width=100% cellpadding=0 border=1 cellspacing=0 style="clear:right;"
 * - bgcolor=gold
 * colspan=2 valign=top style="padding:2px"| Unyielding Aura [ Edit]
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"| -1
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 3
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 45
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * rowspan=2 valign=top| [[image:Unyielding Aura.jpg|40px]]
 * rowspan=2 align=left valign=top style="padding:2px"| Elite Enchantment Spell. Bring target dead ally back to life at full health and full energy. If you stop maintaining this enchantment, or if this enchantment is removed, that ally dies. Deaths while enchanted with Unyielding Aura do not incur a death penalty. (50% failure chance with Divine Favor attribute 4 or less)
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[image:Monk-icon.png|16px]] Divine Favor
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Prophecies
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Prophecies
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| Prophecies

- 03:40, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * It might look a bit weird, but most importnatly: It is as readable as the old quick reference. A contributor came on my talk page yesterday after I edited the necro quick reference, asking me to revert if I can't make the new layout more readable. If stuff is 'stacked vertically' a you say, it just isn't readable in such way that it should be in a quick reference. Also remember that we can hide the attribute cell in the most used quick references, the profession skill quick references, as they are sorted by attribute. We could possibly put the attribute and campaign cells on top of each other, so we could make the cella bit wider and not take anything away from the description cell. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 03:41, 26 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Edit conflict: Your suggestion doesn't make the quick reference any easier to read. :( --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 03:41, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * So you think stacking campaign + attribute is fine, but stacking campaign + attribute + stats becomes unreadable? Just want clarification because every individual may feel differently. - 03:44, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * No, the problem is having the large yellow are between each skill. It makes skimming through the skills pretty hard. How about this: --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 03:53, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * rowspan=2 style="width: 40px; height: 40px; background: #000000"| [[Image:Diversion.jpg|40px]]
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 130px; text-align: left; background: lightgreen; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Diversion
 * rowspan=2 style="text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Hex Spell. For 6 seconds, the next time target foe uses a skill, that skill takes an additional 10...47 seconds to recharge.
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|[[Image:QuestSkill.PNG]]
 * style="width: 140px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Core
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-right: none; padding-left: 6px"|
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"|
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 10
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Energy.png]]
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 3
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Activation.png]]
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 10
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; padding-right: 6px"| [[Image:Recharge.png]]
 * colspan=2 style="width: 140px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Domination Magic
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 40px; height: 40px; background: #ffd600"| [[Image:Offering of Blood.jpg|40px]]
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 130px; text-align: left; background: #ffd600; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Offering of Blood
 * rowspan=2 style="text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"| Elite Spell. Sacrifice 20% maximum Health. You gain 8...18 Energy.
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|
 * style="width: 85px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Prophecies
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-right: none; padding-left: 6px"| 20%
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Sacrifice.png]]
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 5
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Energy.png]]
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 1⁄4
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; border-right: none"| [[Image:Activation.png]]
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 15
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; padding-right: 6px"| [[Image:Recharge.png]]
 * colspan=2 style="width: 85px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Blood Magic
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: right; border-left: none; border-right: none"| 15
 * rowspan=2 style="width: 1px; text-align: left; border-left: none; padding-right: 6px"| [[Image:Recharge.png]]
 * colspan=2 style="width: 85px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Blood Magic
 * colspan=2 style="width: 85px; text-align: left; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|Blood Magic


 * With this layout people could go through the quick reference quickly, looking at only the specific detail they are interested in, be it the description, energy cost, attribute, quest availability, ... --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 03:55, 26 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Like I said above (while anonymous) I think the color stripe makes it easier to read. Maybe the color should be lighter, but it's much easier to read rows of data when the backgrounds are different.  --Fyren 04:31, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I agree with Fryen. If the color isn't taking up the entire horizontal width, then I would advocate not using color at all.  I brought back to color so one skill's details can be easily separated from another skill's details, when a ton of skills are tiled up vertically.  I also think questability should be in the came cell after the campaign, instead of having its own column. - 04:35, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I'm not opposed to the stripes, but I am opposed to the long blocks of text. There's 26 words on the first line on your example above, PanSola, I think that should really be reduced. It would also allow more room for the energy/recharge etc info.  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 04:45, 26 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Biro, I have absolutly no clue what "there's 26 words on the first line on your example above" is referring to. - 04:53, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I am still opposed to having anything between the entry of each skill. When going through the skills, I usually read the descriptions really fast, but that area between each of them slows the reading. Although it might look better, it's making the use of the quick reference harder. The wiki is more about the informations, not the fancy looks. (And having some sort of color, the gold and green, is really making it easy to spot the elites) I modified the above version to sow the questale icon next to the campaign. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 04:55, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I tend to use the word "better", in the context of skill quick reference formatting, to mean the ease of use. When I comment about ascetics, I use "prettier" vs "uglier".  I agree the wiki is more about information, and I still thing the stripes are BETTER.  In fact, I completely disagree the stripes make things prettier.  The ONLY reason I brought the color stripes back is to make the information easier to read/use, and without being strips, I think the colors are completely useless, as the icons easily distinguish elites from non-elites. - 05:03, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * After thinking about the colors a bit more, I do agree with you. The skill icon is enough to distinguish elites. However, the color brings some 'prettiness' to the list without disturbing. I'll test your suggestion in a longer list by myself, just to see if it makes the reading too slow for me. I would atleast change the icon to be the height of the whole skill entry, not just the bottom row. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 05:08, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * [[Image:Line.jpg]]


 * I think this line is too long compared to the size of the Energy/Upkeep/Recharge box. You shouldn't have lines that long in a summary. I also think the skill icon should be larger and the box for the energy/upkeep/recharge/whatever should be bigger. Does that make sense?  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 05:09, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Ah, thanks for the clarification. BTW, what window resolution is that at?  - 05:20, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * That line looks even more horrible on my 1400x1050 resolution. The last word on the line is 'Deaths'. :P
 * I was playing with the suggestions and the results are at User:Gem/Testing. The two last ones are from PanSolas suggestion. (Could someone please fix the icon cells so that there isn't any space on the right side of the icon?) Although I still like my suggestion a lot more, I could live with something like the third one on my test page. The extra area between skill descriptions makes reading sower, but not too much. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 05:27, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * My res is 1280x1024, which is possibly higher than average, but not among gamers. I would say it is close to the average for gamers. I would say it would be best to have fixed width for the text box but not for the other cells, but I'm not sure if that would look good. It would just ensure that lines didn't get too long.  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 05:32, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * The UY description is just really long. Even in 1600 pixel-wide window with a row width of 100%, it'll take up two lines at the default font size.  If it were in the examples above with the smallest "description" columns, it takes up four lines, which is taller than the full 64x64 version of the icon.  --Fyren 05:39, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * So? The height is not a problem. When reading a text, you read quicker if the width isn't too big. It's a fact which website designers need toknow. When having a lot of text on your page, you have to limit the width or your text will be slow to read. A plain text with no line breaks in 1400x1050 resolution is a pain to read, but if you limit the text area width to 800 pixels, the text cn be read pretty quickly. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 05:45, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I agree with Gem, the height is not a problem. It's the amount of words on a single line that poses a problem.  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 05:48, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * That's one reason why I like my suggestion most. It has a wider area of other stuff on the right, so the description box is automatically smaller. It's also easier to go through only one specific detail of all skills in the quick reference. (I know, I'm repeating myself. Time to eat breakfeast) --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 05:51, 26 August 2006 (CDT)

Mine from a while ago if anyone likes that User:Skuld/Skill box/index &mdash; Skuld 06:34, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Not really. If someone would be so kind and fix the icon cells in the 3rd suggestions at User:Gem/Testing I could post it here. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 06:42, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I can't see where the space is coming from Gem :/  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 07:47, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I set the cell width to 64 and it works now. :) Too simple... Here is the new suggestion. I still prefer my my original version (the newest version of it ofcourse) --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 08:15, 26 August 2006 (CDT)

{| width=100% cellpadding=0 border=1 cellspacing=0 style="clear:right;"
 * - bgcolor=lightgreen
 * width=64 style="background: #000000" rowspan=3 valign=center | [[image:Diversion.jpg]]
 * valign=top style="padding:2px"| Diversion [ Edit]
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 10
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 3
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 10
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * rowspan=2 align=left valign=top style="padding:2px"| Hex Spell. For 6 seconds, the next time target foe uses a skill, that skill takes an additional 10...47 seconds to recharge.
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[image:Mesmer-icon.png|16px]] Divine Favor
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=7 style="padding-left:2px"| Core
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|[[Image:QuestSkill.PNG]]
 * - bgcolor=gold
 * width= 64 rowspan=3 valign=center | [[image:Offering of Blood.jpg]]
 * valign=top style=padding:2px"| Offering of Blood [ Edit]
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"| 20%
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 1⁄4
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 15
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * rowspan=2 align=left valign=top style="padding:2px"| Elite Spell. Sacrifice 20% maximum Health. You gain 8...18 Energy.
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[image:Necromancer-icon.png|16px]] Blood Magic
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=7 style="padding-left:2px"| Prophecies
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[image:Necromancer-icon.png|16px]] Blood Magic
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=7 style="padding-left:2px"| Prophecies
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|


 * Btw, this one is my girlfriends favourite. Actually I think that the differences in opinnions depend on screen resolution. I have 1400 and this suggestions description box is too wide. For her 800 resolution my original suggestions description box should be wider. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 08:15, 26 August 2006 (CDT)
 * I'm fine with this one. I think Biro prefers skill name to have its own column, which is why I tried the "alternate" design of lifting it up, but that probably didn't address the issue one bit.  Also giving skill name its own column would mean the color strip would be gone, which would make the right end area harder to read. - 08:22, 26 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Check my test page. I tweaked the first suggestions right side by adding the background color to the questable icon cell and the campaign cell. This should take care of the readability issue you had. Or is there anything else that could be done to make the first suggestion okay to you? One more thing which I forgot to mention: I like it that the quick reference entries are as small as possible (considering height). That's another good thing in my originl suggestion. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 08:32, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * For me, suggestion 1 at 800x600 looks like it's gone wrong :P hehe, I don't know which I prefer at the moment... I like Suggestion 1 at most resolutions, but at 800x600 the box for text is extremeley small. See the image below:


 * Image:Gem quickref 800x600.jpg  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 08:50, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * LOL. Anyway: I'm doing a new version of suggestion 3 so that I place the skill name next to the description like in suggestion 1. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 08:52, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Here is Suggestion 4. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 09:09, 26 August 2006 (CDT)

{| width=100% cellpadding=0 border=1 cellspacing=0 style="clear:right;"
 * width=64 style="background: #000000" rowspan=3 valign=center | [[image:Diversion.jpg]]
 * rowspan=3 valign=center style="background: lightgreen; padding:0px 6px"| Diversion
 * rowspan=3 align=left valign=center style="padding:0px 6px"| Hex Spell. For 6 seconds, the next time target foe uses a skill, that skill takes an additional 10...47 seconds to recharge.
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="background: lightgreen; border-right:none; padding-left:4px"|
 * width=1 style="background: lightgreen; border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="background: lightgreen; border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 10
 * width=1 style="background: lightgreen; border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="background: lightgreen; border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 3
 * width=1 style="background: lightgreen; border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="background: lightgreen; border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 10
 * width=1 style="background: lightgreen; border-left:none;"|
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[Image:Mesmer-icon-small.png]] Divine Favor
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=7 style="padding-left:2px"| Core
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|[[Image:Quest.png]]
 * width= 64 rowspan=3 valign=center | [[image:Offering of Blood.jpg]]
 * rowspan=3 valign=center style="background: gold; padding: 0px 6px"| Offering of Blood
 * rowspan=3 align=left valign=center style="padding:0px 6px"| Elite Spell. Sacrifice 20% maximum Health. You gain 8...18 Energy.
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="background: gold; border-right:none; padding-left:4px"| 20%
 * width=1 style="background: gold; border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="background: gold; border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="background: gold; border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="background: gold; border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 1⁄4
 * width=1 style="background: gold; border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="background: gold; border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 15
 * width=1 style="background: gold; border-left:none;"|
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[Image:Necromancer-icon-small.png]] Blood Magic
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=7 style="padding-left:2px"| Prophecies
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|
 * width=1 style="background: gold; border-left:none;"|
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=8 style="padding-left:2px"| [[Image:Necromancer-icon-small.png]] Blood Magic
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=7 style="padding-left:2px"| Prophecies
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|
 * width=1 valign=top colspan=7 style="padding-left:2px"| Prophecies
 * style="width: 10px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 0px 6px"|

I like it! But can you use the small icons at full size rather than the regular icons scaled down? I realise this will probably increase the height of the cells slightly, but I think that looks better than the pixelated profession icons.

Also, can you centre align the skill name? At 800x600 "Offering of Blood" is split over two lines and I think it would look better if "Blood" was centre aligned underneath "Offering of" :)  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 09:17, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I actually tested it with 800x600 and it looked better on the left than aligned to the center. A small detail really as most people have a bit higher resolution nowdays. I also changed the icons per your request. I hadn't realised that they werent the small ones. (Copy-pasting ftw) The small icons don't seem to make the cell higher, so no problem there. I had to resize the exclamation mark, so we should probably upload a new one. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 09:26, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * In general, clean columns will almost always be easier to read than any kind of stacking. As was pointed out by someone above, the original lists were far easier to read than the new ones.  What's wrong with the concept of just replicating the original table lists, but add a column for the icon and color around the skill name? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 09:31, 26 August 2006 (CDT)

I'll make a suggestion that might blow your mind: {| width=100% cellpadding=0 border=1 cellspacing=0 style="clear:right;"
 * align=center bgcolor="#ffffe7" style="padding:2px"| Unyielding Aura
 * style="padding:2px"| Elite Enchantment Spell. Bring target dead ally back to life at full health and full energy. If you stop maintaining this enchantment, or if this enchantment is removed, that ally dies. Deaths while enchanted with Unyielding Aura do not incur a death penalty. (50% failure chance with Divine Favor attribute 4 or less) [ Edit]
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"| -1
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 3
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 45
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * align=center style="padding:2px"| Glyph of Elemental Power
 * style="padding:2px"|Glyph. Your elemental attributes are boosted by 2 for your next spell. [ Edit]
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 1
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * align=center style="padding:2px"| Rush
 * style="padding:2px"| Stance. For 8...18 seconds, you move 25% faster. [ Edit]
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 4
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * align=center style="padding:2px"| Call of Protection
 * style="padding:2px"| Shout. For 120 seconds, your animal companions have a 1...11 base damage reduction. [ Edit]
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 115
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * align=center bgcolor="#ffffe7" style="padding:2px"| Offering of Blood
 * style="padding:2px"| Elite Spell. Sacrifice 10% maximum Health. You gain 8...18 Energy. [ Edit]
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"| 10%
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 1/4
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 15
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * align=center style="padding:2px"| Troll Unguent
 * style="padding:2px"| Skill. For 10 seconds, you gain health regeneration of +3...9. [ Edit]
 * width=1 align=right height=1 style="border-right:none; padding-left:4px"|
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 3
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 10
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 5
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 3
 * width=1 style="border-left:none; border-right:none"|
 * width=1 align=right style="border-left:none; border-right:none; padding-left:5px"| 10
 * width=1 style="border-left:none;"|

The campaign is indicated by the article like Mesmer Skills (Factions), Mesmer Skills (Prophecies and Nightfall), and Mesmer Skills (Prophecies, Factions, and Redemption but not Nightfall). The attribute is indicated by the heading. Build skill lists use one of the more detailed layouts. You can put the exclamation mark on it if you really want to. Anyway, since this is almost all personal preference it should be voted by a radio poll linked on the main page to figure out what most people like.--Cloak of Letters 09:52, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * No offense, but your version is both ugly and the information is hard to read. It's also lacking a lot of the info. Remember that this isn't only used in the big skill references listing all skills of one profession, but also in smaller ones, which might need some of the information missing in your suggestion. Here is the old layout with some improvements as requested by Barek. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 10:10, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I'm thinking something like this but only more complete.--Cloak of Letters 10:48, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I see that you hav esome issues with my table. Image:Skill quick reference testing.jpg is a screenshot of my test page as I see it. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 10:57, 26 August 2006 (CDT)

Discussion on skill quick reference layout
New subheading for easier discussion

Now that we have a pile of suggestions, let's discuss their merits. There are five suggestions at User:Gem/Testing (number 2 is juut a test). Then there is Cloak of Letters' suggestion which is seen above. To see the suggested layouts as screenshots, see Image:Skill quick reference testing.jpg (Gem's testing page as a screenshot) and (Cloak of Letter's suggestion as screenshots).

I personally prefer Suggestion 1 and Suggestion 4 from my test page. It's pretty irrelevant which one of #1 and #4 is chosen. -- (talk) 11:09, 26 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Cloak of Letters' suggestion is too plain. It's ugly and the information is hard to read.
 * Suggestion 3 has the extra row between the skill descriptions of two skills above each other. This makes reading thorugh quickly a bit slow.
 * Suggestion 'Old enhanced' again is a bit ugly and the stuff on the right takes too much space.


 * I like #4. It looks good at all resolutions I've tried, 800x600 upwards. I also don't mind the "old enhanced" version, although I prefer the full sized skill icons. Also, I've made [[Image:Quest.png]], so you can use that if you want.  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 11:35, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * My preference is for the "old enhanced" variant (larger icon would be nice, but not critical to me), with #4 being my second choice. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 11:44, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Great job Biro! I updated my test page to use that new icon. Only the 'Old enhanced' uses the old one as the new one was too small for it. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 11:47, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * As Cloak mentioned, #1 does not look acceptable at 800x600. In fact, all the "single row" examples here look similar with the exception of Cloak's "enhanced" original QR, since it leaves out info and gives the description more room.  Could you add UY to OoB and diversion in your test page, Gem?  --Fyren 12:49, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I'll add it. I don't feel the need for the reference to be the best possible for 800x600 resolution. Very few people use so low resolution. Leaving out information just because a minority can't see the page well is not an option if you ask me. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 12:56, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I'm not suggesting we target 800x600, but by "unacceptable" I meant "unaccetpable." The QR would be unusable for someone at 800x600, not just ugly.  Out of Gem's suggestions, I prefer 3 but 4 is good enough for me.  --Fyren 13:10, 26 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I updated the screenshot with a new version (1400x1050 reso) at Image:Skill quick reference testing.jpg. I added Unyielding Aura. After checking with 800x600 resolution, the readable ones are 3 and 4. (I didn't add UA to #3, but you get the idea) After testing with lower resolutions, I'm not in favor of #1 anymore. I think we should use #4. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 13:23, 26 August 2006 (CDT)

I'm pushing this issue forward as fast as possible, to get the quick references fixed. No ones has yet opposed Suggestion 4, so coul someone please edit the skill box template accordingly? If we decide against this later, it can be changed again, but atleast this is some improvement to the curent situation. If no one will edit the template, I will start learning to do it. -- (talk) 11:28, 27 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I'm all for suggestion 4, except for two minor issues.
 * I do believe attribute is overkill on the quick references (and there can be too much information, despite one thinking that's not the case), since if you look at Mesmer skills quick reference, it does state at the top what attribute it is and it is rather hard to miss that. Also, at Domination Magic skills, I guess you all see the abundance. The only real use of it is places where the attribute isn't listed, such as Interrupt skills quick reference, but as you can see, those pages use a totally different template and as such, they won't be affected if the attribute is removed.
 * The percent-sign for sacrifice. ;)
 * &mdash; Galil  14:47, 27 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Yeah, fair point Galil. I think the attribute could be safely removed.  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 14:51, 27 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Remember that the template is used for other quick references too, so the attribut function must be there. In the profession skill quick references the field should ofcourse be hidden. And the percentage sign can be removed. :D Anyone editing the template? --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 17:12, 27 August 2006 (CDT)


 * But that's just what I said, with different wording. o.o I thought it was the profession skill quick references we were adding suggestions to, cause I think Interrupt skills quick reference & CO are perfectly alright. Also, I didn't ask for the removal of the percent-sign. I wanted it to be in there. ;) Other than that, I guess I could update the template. &mdash; Galil  17:30, 27 August 2006 (CDT)


 * now that I look at the link you put there, the others are ok. And sorry for the misunderstanding. The percentage sign is irrelevant to me. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 17:34, 27 August 2006 (CDT)


 * No biggy. :) Anyway, I just looked at, gazed through it a bit, and then closed it again. It's way too late for me to edit it. I will tomorrow though, if no one beats me to it. &mdash; Galil  17:39, 27 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I agree the profession/attribute cell is not needed for the QR articlecs where it is redundent. I think the percent sign should be included for health sacrifice.  I'm fine with either 3 or 4. - 19:43, 27 August 2006 (CDT)

I'm editing the template at the moment. It's actually pretty easy to undertand after I looked at it. Hope I don't make a mess. -- (talk) 00:11, 28 August 2006 (CDT)

Partially implemented
I took the template Gem made and completed the changeover to PF in it. I also "inlined" SkillBoxStats rather than including it since skill box row still depends on it. The new template is Template:Skill box qr. (I hijacked one of Pan's old templates that wasn't getting used anywhere.) I changed over the domination skills in Mesmer skills quick reference and Gem changed over Ranger skills quick reference. The largest "change" made was to get the "questable" exclamation to appear, quest = yes needs to be set in the skill's data template.

There are a couple minor issues but nothing to stop us from changing everything else over, as far as I can see. We'll wait a day before switching, just in case. The minor issues are the sizes of the cells in the bottom right of each row. Without the additional row with the attribute, the cells are kind of large. This campaign name doesn't really fill the space. The small exclamation Biro made recently is too small for the space, so the template is using a larger one. We could use one of the logos that are used at Quick_access_links instead of text, but we don't have one that says "Prophecies" or "core." Any suggestions about these issues would be nice. --Fyren 07:21, 28 August 2006 (CDT)


 * The cell could be filled with that kind of image. The logo 'Guild Wars' could go for the core skills, but I'm not sure what to use for Prophecies in that case. Biro made a larger version of the exclamation mark (which looks like a stretched low quality one. Want to upload a better looking one Biro?) which is in use now. I'll be adding 'quest=yes' to the ranger skill templates now for those skills which can be aquired from a quest. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 07:30, 28 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Not sure if your cache is outdated Gem, I've uploaded 3 versions of [[Image:Quest-medium.png]], all of them are done from scratch so they shouldn't look like stretched versions of the original.  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 07:40, 28 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Sorry. I hate the Opera cache. It just doesn't update automatically and I always forget to hit ctrl+f5. :( --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 07:51, 28 August 2006 (CDT) I will never forgive myself doubting Biro.

I absolutely hate the big black border surrounding everything. I'm fine with it as long as it surrounds only the skill tables, but the headings too is just too much. I'm changing this. >.> &mdash; Galil  09:26, 28 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Great idea. I tried to be faster to change it, but each wiki page loads 30sec - 2minutes. I'm wandering what the problem is. My computer and connection ar etop notch, and all other internet websites load really fast. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 09:45, 28 August 2006 (CDT)


 * It would seem to me it's gigantic edits affecting it. MySQL lockups if you so will. I have the same problem most of the time. >.> &mdash; Galil  14:32, 28 August 2006 (CDT)

I am bumping this. Anyone interested in any changes, please tell us now. I'll be implementing the new layout to other professions today. -- (talk) 03:22, 29 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I liked it so said nothing, but I suppose some feedback wouldn't go amiss. Good work. Do the others. Over and out.  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 04:27, 29 August 2006 (CDT)

Over at Talk:Ranger skills quick reference, someone suggested marking duplicate skills. We could have our crack icon making squad (Biro) come up with one we can stick in, maybe. Unfortunately we can't get the icon to link to the duplicate skill. Do we want to try to cram in the name of the duplicate somewhere? Do we even want to mark things as duplicates? --Fyren 13:35, 30 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I just replied at the talk page. I think we should mark duplicate skills, but we don't need to have a link to the duplicate. The duplicate skills name can be found in the skill article. Biro: Could you summon us one more icon, please. ;) --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 15:16, 30 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I really only asked since as skill box qr is right now, we have room under the campaign to fill. Since we might be able to fill it with something useful, it could help functionality and appearance at the same time.  No one seemed to particularly love the campaign image idea and it might even be distracting, anyway.  --Fyren 15:32, 30 August 2006 (CDT)


 * On my 1400x1050 there isn't really any space unde rthe campaign cell. It would look pretty stupid. I think that it should be between the campaign and quest icon cells. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 15:47, 30 August 2006 (CDT)


 * The campaign cell has a rowspan of 2. I mean where the attribute once was.  --Fyren 15:58, 30 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I made a suggestion at User:Gem/Testing2. It uses the ranger icon atm, but you get the idea. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 16:09, 30 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Nothing springs to mind... I can't think of anything that would symbolise skills, or duplicates really. Any suggestions?  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 16:58, 30 August 2006 (CDT)


 * All I can think of is a sig cap symbol. That's about as close to a generic skill symbol as I can think of for GW. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:10, 30 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I thought that since we're trying to indicate that there's another skill just like this one an equals symbol might make sense. [[Image:Equals.png]]. I don't know if it really says "there's a duplicate of this skill!" or not.  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 17:13, 30 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Technichally, wouldn't ≈ be a closer approximation of the meanin? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:21, 30 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Hehe, it's funny you say that, because I did try ≈ first, but then I thought that = was probably more commonly accessible, if less accurate ;) but I don't personally mind either!  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 17:30, 30 August 2006 (CDT)


 * heh, I also though about mentioning ≡ or ⇔, but figured those would be almost totally unknown by most people ;-) --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:35, 30 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Call me crazy, but my mind comes to a small version of the cloned skill's icon. For example Revealed Hex would display [[Image:Inspired Hex.jpg|25px]], possibly in another size. &mdash; Galil  18:23, 30 August 2006 (CDT)
 * I'm not a big fan of that solution, at least not yet. My concern is what do we do if Nightfall introduces a third comparable skill?  To use the skill icon of the comparable skill, I would rather wait until after Nightfall is released to verify that we'll only have pairs of twins, and not triplets.  Once we can confirm that two identical is all we have, then I would support this solution, as it's really the easiest to communicate visually. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:33, 30 August 2006 (CDT)
 * If we make them small enough (say 20px), two icons will fit on top of each other. A quick check with the DOM Inspector told me the table-cell is 41 px high. &mdash; Galil  18:38, 30 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Edit: If we don't want them that small there's always the possibility of making a new column to host the icons. &mdash; Galil  18:40, 30 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I think we could do it with the skill icons. I will edit the template very soon if no one has anything against it. We can ofcourse revert any time. After the remplate is changed, we just need to edit all duplicate skills skill templates to include 'duplicate= '. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 01:31, 31 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I think it makes more sense that using the equals icon. There will be difficulty if a number of skills have identical behaviour, but the equals sign is too generic and doesn't really demonstrate that this skill has duplicates. <span style="font-family: Georgia, serif"> &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 04:35, 31 August 2006 (CDT)


 * That isn't a problem as ther eis the explanation at the top of the page. However, the skill icons is more usefull as you can easily see what the duplicate is. As no one is saying anything against this, I'll make the change to the template. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 06:33, 31 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Go ahead. You should probably make atleast two parameters though. Duplicate1 and duplicate2. Who knows what nightfall has to give. &mdash; Galil  07:28, 31 August 2006 (CDT)


 * A second parameter can be added later if needed. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 07:39, 31 August 2006 (CDT)

Job queue
If anyone ends up editing the qr template again, check Special:Statistics before and immediately after the edit and note how many jobs are in the queue, please. --Fyren 10:00, 31 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Want to tell me how I or someone else should react to this? I'm not planning on editing the template soon, but what does editing it do and what does that mean to the wiki/a wiki user? Enormous slowness? Something else? --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 13:40, 31 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Horrible performance. According to MediaWiki's own page, it runs one job per request (guildwiki gets at least 200 requests per second). Updating each and every page where that template is used. &mdash; Galil  15:15, 31 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Gravewit has apparently turned the run rate down even further, but not set it to zero. I made an edit to the qr template and the queue went from 63 to 0 over the course of about 14 minutes with the wiki being slightly more responsive than before after making an edit.  But it's not really much of an improvement.  --Fyren 21:18, 3 September 2006 (CDT)
 * I guess I spoke too soon. For another 12 minutes, everything was still slow.  Perhaps the server was trying to catch up with the backed up page views?  --Fyren 21:29, 3 September 2006 (CDT)

External skill quick references
Even though I hate to suggest it, I feel there's little choise. As obvious, MediaWiki's template system isn't exactly optimal for dynamic lists. Quite the opposite in fact. So I hereby suggest an external php-page for our quick references, which fetches the data from a wiki page. Possibly as a Special-page. It would work something like this:

Note that XML and XSLT are W3C standards, and are incredibly easy to learn. If one of us creates the skill and layout data, anyone else will easily see how to edit it, or add more. This would also keep our quick references editable by anyone, while saving us the template job queuing since we're only using one single template. As it is now, every minor edit in a skill template has a major effect on performance, especially if you edit (which is why I asked it to be locked). Also note that this is only a suggestion. &mdash; Galil  12:18, 31 August 2006 (CDT)


 * This situation is really no different than template:skill box, though. It's just that we're editing the qr one but leaving that one alone.  --Fyren 12:25, 31 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Yeah, but also consider if we are to edit 30 skills due to a skill balance. One of them is "I Will Avenge You!" (only an example). Then we would edit Template:"I Will Avenge You!" to reflect the new changes, which in turn would set the cache state to old for "I Will Avenge You!", Tactics skills and Warrior skills quick reference. Then we go to edit the next skill, which is "Charge!". That will in turn set the state to old for "Charge!", Tactics skills and Warrior skills quick reference. Let's say we edit 6 more warrior skills, 1 of them are also a Tactics skill. That means Tactics skills would get renewed 3 times, and Warrior skills quick reference would have its cache renewed 8 times. Not very performance friendly. &mdash; Galil  12:50, 31 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Edit: Of course it doesn't get renewed if nobody's visiting it, but the risk someone might is high, considering the amount of visitors the wiki has, and how many of them visit the quick references. Also, setting the templates cache state to old takes performance aswell. Granted not as much, but to some extent atleast. &mdash; Galil  12:52, 31 August 2006 (CDT)
 * I already suggested to Gravewit we set wgJobRunRate to 0. This would mean the link table doesn't get updated till the job queue is run by using maintenance/runJobs.php (or the articles are edited, of course), which could be run once a day or something at a good time.  This is reportedly similar to what WP itself does.  --Fyren 13:10, 31 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Could someone please explain all of the above to me very simply. I understood it somehow, but I'm not totally sure i got it all 100% right. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 13:46, 31 August 2006 (CDT)


 * It seems I've missed that variable when setting up my local wiki (cause, well, it's local so no performance problems). I gave it a search though, and what I can see at MediaWiki's explanation of it, it does indeed seem like it would help alot. Updating everything and running maintenance/runJobs.php when you're done. Where was it you suggested this to Gravewit? I want to sign it. :p &mdash; Galil  14:08, 31 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Bottom of User_talk:Gravewit. --Fyren 14:25, 31 August 2006 (CDT)

I don't know what this php jibber jabber is about but I made a little text parser and some javascript and ended up with this. Could a single, overwhelming-target-of-vandalism page be designated as javascriptable? What is php and xml? Does you're computer have enough megahertz to draw a table with 902 rows? Discuss.--Cloak of Letters 00:26, 16 September 2006 (CDT)

Acquistion
I put the cantha and tyria subs for future consideration but it takes up too much space and i'm sure we can do that just as easily in future chapters. Number two is easier to read imo &mdash; Skuld  03:36, 12 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I think continent is not important, but campaign is. How about:


 * Sigh... in general I hate putting bullet points inside tables, the wikicode is just ugly, yet here I am... - 06:08, 12 July 2006 (CDT)


 * How does not using bullet points inside tables make wikicode look ugly? Without them, the generally structure of the whole thing ain't really that much different right? Using tables always makes things look complex. --Ab.Er.Rant @ User:Aberrant80 (msg) 06:19, 12 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I meant using bullet points inside tables make the wikicode look ugly (or messy).  This is because the bullet point has to start as the first character of a new line.   - 03:24, 14 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I personally don't think tables look good for this at all, especially seeing as the wiki is becoming tableholics. That said, I'm all for Skuld's proposition. Possibly in the form Name (Location, Campaign), but no tables. &mdash; Galil  14:59, 27 August 2006 (CDT)
 * A month later, but I don't really care, but deciding this is good. Skuld wasn't proposing using a table, he was just using tables to show which was in use and which was proposed.  I also hate the "before it's unlocked" part since it's ugly and people are ignoring it anyway.  If they don't already understand how the unlocking/availability works that notice isn't enough.  --Fyren 03:42, 26 September 2006 (CDT)
 * the "before it's unlocked" might not be sufficiently enough, but I think it is much better than NOT having it there. Peopel who didnt realize who things work before, might at least be curious and click on the link and learn something.  Every little bit helps, and I added that part in beause I was getting sick of reverting stuff.  I *think* it's been better lately. - 04:12, 26 September 2006 (CDT)
 * I don't think it's been better lately. --Fyren 04:19, 26 September 2006 (CDT)

Back to the bullet point thing, why use them at all? If you need to go to another line use  instead, same thing, no bullet. --Rainith 11:16, 26 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Br = ugly, bullets = easier to read. Why use html > wikicode? &mdash; Skuld 11:21, 26 September 2006 (CDT)
 * If there's no hierarchy involving the campaign in some way, I agree that there's no need for bullets. I also agree that HTML is pretty ugly in wikitext, so if there'll be no bullets, just insert blank lines to get the final output to be what you want.  --Fyren 11:25, 26 September 2006 (CDT)

Energy per second in Progression
Can we please separate the actual parameters from the random statistics? The specific ones posted are fairly useful (unlike some of the old Ollj info that used to litter various pages), but I really would split them off from the actual list of green number values by level. &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 17:07, 11 July 2006 (CDT) )
 * Tried it... thoughts, folks? better or worse? &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 17:13, 11 July 2006 (CDT) )
 * I'm torn. Two tables looks A LOT more cluttered to my eyes. Decentralizing information is more work on the eyes and brain. On the other hand, separating out the derived information from the listed skill information is nice. --Kryshnysh 19:51, 11 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I am biased towards my old edit for Energy Drain . Energy gain per second is overly ideal and doesn't scale linearly with the effects of being dazed, interrputed, and the need to kite etc, becauase of initial casting cost.  The two rows above gain per second seem to me are just there in case anyone challenges the math, or to help out people who cannot do simply arithmatics.  If there is any value to those, I really feel they belong to the Notes section and not clutter up the "Main" part of the article. - 20:02, 11 July 2006 (CDT)


 * For what it's worth, I think it looks alot more cluttered with a second table in the notes section. Also, changing it here means creating second tables for all the other energy gain skills that already have the merged information. --Kiiron 21:01, 11 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I don't feel any energy management scales linearly with any of those things you mentioned. I initially thought that putting the second table in the notes would be better too, but it seems to be more of an eyesore to me to split the tables up all over the article. I think the tables are probably best at least together (if not in the same table) or not at all on the same page. I think my preference (biased towards reducing eye strain) is Not on same page > one table > tables together > tables separate places. --Kryshnysh 21:07, 11 July 2006 (CDT)


 * As for presentation, I think I prefer the dual-table progression over split into progression and notes. I dislike the single table.  As for content, I'd be worried people would add in relatively useless or obvious statistics if this starts showing up in a lot of articles.  Personally, I think an energy gained or net energy gained row is a little too far into the latter.  --68.142.14.78 21:16, 11 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I think the extra sections should be removed, actually, because:
 * Energy gained: You only get the full energy if your foe actually has 4-6 energy.
 * Net energy gained: This value is only true if the above condition occurs, and is just the previous cell -5.
 * Energy/Second: all the stuff PanSola mentioned applies. Additionally, this is a Mesmer skill so it's not unlikely that the caster will have Fast Casting to modify the casting time. Overall, there's just too many variable. What if the caster has Mantra of Recovery or Serpent's Quickness? Et cetera. Writing "the skill recharge on this is pretty bad; consider figuring out a way to boost it if you actually want to use this to regain energy" in the skill description is easier than spelling this all out numerically anyway.
 * This is what I want to avoid at all costs. &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 22:09, 11 July 2006 (CDT) )
 * ... *looks at Energy Drain* Ugh. The same applies for all other energy gain skills. These giant tables are a terrible eyesore and contain a lot of overly generalized calculations presented as useful information. Who decided to make them all this ugly and complicated? &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 22:12, 11 July 2006 (CDT) )


 * "I don't feel any energy management scales linearly with any of those things you mentioned." Good (for the argument I want to establish). The fact that they don't scale linearily means the information isn't actually useful, considering I mentioned quite a number of things that are quite common on the field.  I think the additional info may have value, but if it does, it is of a very secondary nature that people who just care about the actual skill stats should be bothered with.
 * In other words, I would place the ease of use of users who don't care about that secondary information, before the ease of use of users who are interested. From my perspective, placing the secondary info above skill Acquisition is way too much.  I also agree with 130.58 on pretty much all his statements.
 * "Also, changing it here means creating second tables for all the other energy gain skills that already have the merged information." Wait, how many are there (originally I thought it was just Drain, when I was posting the previous note I thought it was just Drain and Tap)??? When did this happen????? o_O" -  00:56, 12 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Ok, i started to add all those extras to elite skills. This is a copy from JoDiamonds talk page since he supported the added tables
 * Copy
 * It was my intention to add the energy/second to the progression tables, so i have some basic information for such an article. GWiki lacks an article with all necessary information for choosing and comparing possible energy management skills. The only article, that covers many issues is the Energy management guide article. It's far from perfect, but provides infos to advantages and drawbacks. Energy/second is in my opinion the first guide value, when it comes to a comparison. Other values like recharge, beeing an enchantment etc are the secondary values. No one thinks about using a skill with a bad energy/second ratio. The problem is, how can you put all those variables into an article without overloading the layout. Adding just the progression tables and some pro and cons, is suboptimal. Usually, you have to know everything about the skill. Example, beeing an enchantment can be an advantage as cover, but a drawback is shattering. Adding this as a pro and a con? Certainly not, but what are important facts to players? Clicking an a skill shortcut like Offering of Blood takes time and the benefit of an easy to read table is gone. Using energy/second has some other problems. You have to make assumptions, like casting the skill in chain. Many skills need other conditions for providing the mathematicaly perfect energy/second. If you have ideas for a layout, i'm glad to help. Nemren 14:11, 20 June 2006 (CDT)
 * End of Copy
 * It was never my intention to add those energy/second to every skill with any energy gain for the caster. The whole energy gain/second is pure theorie. In fact, the best energy skills are elite skills and a comparision is needed. Look at the usual energy managment skills now, without any extra tables. You read:
 * Ok,skill 1, i could use it, the recharge time is 20, hm i get 6 energy,
 * Hm, oh theres another good skill 2, gives 23 within 45 seconds, bad, another attribute 
 * Ok, would it matter to put a few more points into attribute 1? hm now i get 8 energy 
 * Hm, what now, i could spend them into attribute 2, or lower it, hm, hm 
 * This happened to me everytime, when i was looking for energy skills. You can avoid it at least a bit by using the energy/second value. There are still more things to consider, but it shortens the whole process. 68.142.14.78 already reflected my opinion. Take out all the energy/second tables and make one seperate article for those, interested in those more theoretical information. BTW, i stumbled across this discussion, where are those matters usually discussed? --Nemren 06:18, 12 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I don't think any of this stuff is, definitionally, part of the "Progression", though. We've only been putting the empirically observed variable skill values there, not calculated statistics (that's different from just always listing the "green numbers": e.g. Balthazar's Spirit lists adrenaline gain because it's a hidden variable). I think there's good reason for this. And, like I said, if we start keeping track of random derived statistics in the table, there really is no end in sight. &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 08:34, 12 July 2006 (CDT) )


 * In my opinion, calculation 1.2*enchantment duration by head is a no-brainer. Doing this calculation for the energy/second for each skill that suits a build is a different thing. Sorry, but thats not what i would call random derived statistics. Yes, it's statistic analysis, but not random. From my point of view, it's one easy method to determine whether a build will face energy problems or not. Please have a short look at the discussion from this build and compare the first paragraphs. The part with energy left and gained enery is hard to read and to understand. My short calculation using energy/second is easy to read and finds a conclusion very fast. I agree on removing the calculated stuff, but not by deleting, but moving the table to an article, which deals with energy management like the Energy management guide article. --Nemren 11:07, 12 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I say we 1) scrap the energy gained by caster row and 2) scrap the energy/second row. For 1), if you can't multiply by two, you need to stop playing Guild Wars (this stat is always constant anyways). For 2), this isn't very solid information since it makes the assumption that the enemy always has energy to be drained. If just one cast happens to draw a little bit less than par, it really messes with the calculations. It sort of helps when comparing to other energy gaining skills ("vs P&H ok this gives more/less blah") but it doesn't immediately strike me as useful information as standalone. Inspiration Magic, energy lost by foe (standard progression stuff), and net energy gain are the real bits of information that will help players the most. --Vortexsam 02:40, 12 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I really think the energy/second row for energy gaining skills is important because it provides a quick, "at a glance" way to compare energy management. True, things like fastcasting or the enemy not having enough energy to inspire or whatever will skew the results, but not by so much that the numbers are unusable: they're still valuable for comparisons, and are hardly random stats at all. If the energy/second numbers aren't included in the pages for the skills themselves, then they should be included in Energy management guide or another energy management article. Other than energy/second, there's no real way to compare the skills that actually yeilds usable information. Energy Drain, Mantra of Recall, Ether Prodigy and Offering of Blood all also already have derived stats. --Kiiron 10:34, 12 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Sorry if I wasn't clear before. Yes, they're present all over the place, and thus the discussion is more general than just Energy Tap/Energy Drain. No, I don't like them in the article at all. The second option of Kiiron's above is my preference (move them to Survey of PvP Energy Management Skills or find a new place to put them, I just couldn't find that page earlier. Only if people want to keep them on this page would I argue for keeping them together. Personally I'd like them off the page and then all of these articles linked to a page containing general energy management. As an addendum, another page that I've seen with derived stats: Boon Signet. --Kryshnysh 11:04, 12 July 2006 (CDT)


 * The derived stats do have some value, but only under a certain evaluation framework. As such, it's best to put the stats with the article that sets up the evaluation framework (i.e. Energy management guide) rather than with the skills themselves. Whether the evaluation criterion works or not depends on what framework you're using, so these stats should live in the article that espouses that particular style of skill analysis, not in the general skill descriptions. Now, energy/second or whatever may seem like a no-brainer to you, but people often argue about skills based on more nebulous concepts like "healing efficiency" or "net DPS". Some people will think those are useful; other people will think they're crappy and pointless. It's better to just dump this kind of stuff in its own article rather than pollute every skill page. &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 12:50, 12 July 2006 (CDT) )

All things considered, I would prefer the analysis comparasons to be moved off skill articles and contralized into a separate article. If they are staying on the skill article, then I prefer the analysis to be moved into notes sections instead of being part of progression. - 12:07, 12 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Wow, I missed much of this conversation. I feel I should chime in as I added some of the offending rows.
 * Everyone's comments about the dangers of adding too much stuff seem reasonable and sensible. I do think some people are perhaps overreacting, though.  Just because things can get out of hand (by adding non-vital information) doesn't mean they will.  Yes, I saw the entirely bizzarre Healing Breeze version.  Sure, we want to avoid that.  We do that with tiny changes on a daily basis.  =)
 * As far as this specific change, my major concern is that the information not be lost. Personally, I consider the one-table method extremely useful as well as extremely unobtrusive.  That said, the information there probably should all move to another location at some point, so maybe now is as good as any other time.  (Also, the "Survey of PvP blah blah blah" article should probably be renamed and merged with all this stuff, but that's mostly another discussion.)
 * If the information is left above "Acquisition", it might as well be in the same table. Making two nearly identical tables next to each other is just ugly and obtrusive.
 * If moved elsewhere but on the page, shove it in Notes. That would suit me fine (although I like it slightly more as an integrated, less obtrusive one-table with all the information).
 * If people are really offended by having this information on the same page, I suppose it's not terrible to move it to another page entirely. I do believe it is at least as relevant as most Notes on an average Skill page, though.  For instance, I like the way Second Wind handles its extra information right now (while not actually being a 0-16 attribute progression).
 * As always, I'm willing to submit to the will of the people. My personal preferences are (1) Leave as one table (2) Move to Notes (3) Put as second table under Progression (today's Energy Drain version) (4) Something else that keeps the information on the skill page (5) All energy-related stuff like this moved to one page, put links to that page in the Notes on each of these skills (which should maybe happen regardless of any other changes).
 * Yeah, I know I'm bucking apparently popular opinion, but there it is. I don't feel the current stuff is over the line (and that we can keep over-the-line stuff out using normal guildwiki diligence).
 * --JoDiamonds 15:18, 12 July 2006 (CDT)


 * I will admit that Second Wind is pretty well-done. The information is fairly unobtrusive and is presented in a minimalist fashion. I've slapped the same table format onto Energy Tap to see how quickly it could be refactored. Took me about 5 minutes to figure out the table and another 2-3 to tweak the dimensions. Here's that attempt. Thoughts? (Feel free to revert to whichever format is preferrable, of course.) &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 17:06, 12 July 2006 (CDT) )


 * That looks much more preferable to me. Does anyone object to moving all of these elsewhere in the near future? Since that seems to be everyones' real preference. --Kryshnysh 18:30, 12 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Aesthetically, I think the table in second wind is poor. The background is dark, the first column is incredibly wide, and the whole table is centered.  Change these things and it ends up looking like the progression tables, minus the darker borders.  I also think the first two rows fail the non-obvious test.  I stlll greaty prefer the aesthetics of this version (and still would even if the first two rows of the additional table were removed). --68.142.14.98 20:18, 12 July 2006 (CDT)


 * My big objection to that one is that it's using the Progression table to display stats that don't necessarily relate to the Progression (note, for example, how Second Wind's energy gain is based on exhaustion instead) and that, as a result, there's a lot of wasted space. If these energy tables are going to live in articles (which does make sense, on some level), I think it's better to make them compact and to-the-point. Mostly by not having a column for every attribute value from 1-20 (which is good for Progressions since those are charts of empirical observations, but hogs a lot of space for other stuff, in my opinion). It adds needless clutter and only makes it harder for someone trying to browse 10 skill pages at once to actually figure out what the stats are. If I slap the Progression table style onto the smaller table, would that be good? &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 09:46, 13 July 2006 (CDT) )


 * Well done, good information content, packed in a concise table. The choice of the attribute borders is comprehensible. It doesn't disturb the general view of the whole skill page. My favourite until now. --Nemren 12:12, 13 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Agreed. Not quite my favorite choice, but close enough for compromise.  I'd be happy enough for them all to be like that version of Energy Tap. --JoDiamonds 13:32, 14 July 2006 (CDT)


 * i had not seen this discussion, and went to review Boon Signet for an unrelated reason, and saw the energy/second table at the bottom. i believe that article is the example for your proposed standard.
 * the stable looked so out of place that i stopped reviewing the build i was working on and changed the table into a standard progression. it wasn't until much later when Nemren pointed me to this discussion that i found it is the new proposed standard for this information.
 * perhaps you should consider a format that fits into the page more gracefully? the "3-6" break point style table is not used anywhere else. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 13:51, 18 July 2006 (CDT)


 * ok, after reading this thread's backlog, looking at all the examples, and the pages in question, i have to say the only path that makes sense to me is Survey_of_PvP_Energy_Management_Skills. people looking up skill descriptions are not going to need to know the efficiency per micron, and people who want to know the dilithium distribution per capita in PPM are not concerned about the text of the skill, or basic usage notes. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 14:09, 18 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Energy_Tap was the initial example. Those energy gain tables should show a small overview of the energy gain, so a player could decide, whether the skill is worth to use it. Thus, showing the full progression is unnecessary. A few break point are enough. For more backgroud information an article, like Energy management guide, is much better. I changed Offering_of_Blood's table to a format, that fits those points. If you are a primary necro and use blood magic, then Offering of Blood will be first choice. The numbers above 12 are therefor unnecessary. Anything under 8 is not worth using OoB. Any secondary necro usually will spend points for an attribute level from 9 to 12, so this is the informative part of the table. This is, in my opinion, a reasonable way. This has a few drawbacks. Skills from primary attribute, like Divine Favour, are harder to handle. A player will use the upper range of progression. --Nemren 14:22, 18 July 2006 (CDT)
 * my point was that none of that minutia belongs in a skill article. a seperate guide is ideal, thou. because it reduces this:

This presumes Offering of Blood is cast as often as possible (activation + recharge time) before any activation/recharge time modifiers.
 * into this:


 * for additional information on this and other energy management skills, see Energy management guide
 * --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 14:29, 18 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I wouldn't mind that at all. I just want all that extra stuff out of the "Progression" table and out of the "Progression" format (which adds a lot of unnecessary values to the charts). If we can get all that stuff out of the articles and into an Energy management guide, that would be great. &mdash; 130.58 (talk) 10:57, 19 July 2006 (CDT)
 * As I've previously stated, I'd personally prefer to keep the energy information in the Notes area in general (more or less as Boon Signet currently has it). Obviously we can all keep discussing this, but I'm against simply removing those tables from the skill pages.  I think they are as relevant as other comments in the Notes section, (such as the ones on Mantra of Recall).  To summarize, apparently this discussion is still going.  We've apparently only decided that it doesn't belong in the regular progression table.  --JoDiamonds 13:09, 19 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I don't think we've decided it doesn't belong in the regular progression table entirely. If anything, I thought the decision was to move it elsewhere. If we did so I think a link in the notes would be good. Personally, if it has to stay on the page, I'd rather keep it all together. Some of them are just going to be too messy to split down into tables, such as the one for Offering of Blood above. I think the ambiguous values detracts from the table. --Kryshnysh 13:27, 19 July 2006 (CDT)

Energy Gain/ Second Skill List
Please add more skills with Energy Gain/ Second tables, if you find them.


 * Energy Boon
 * Offering of Blood
 * Mantra of Recall
 * Boon Signet
 * Peace and Harmony
 * Energy Drain
 * Energy Tap
 * Second Wind

using templates for some related skills sections
There's certain clusters of skills are all related to eachother by a common property (spells with armor penetration, multi-target attack skills, damage prevention skills, energy denial skills and the numerous subcategories of damage spells), which would make it practical to just use a template for the related skills section. Then again, categories might be a better idea. -- Gordon Ecker 01:30, 21 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I'd certainly favor categories for some of these. For instance, damage prevention or healing skills (since they cross classes and attributes) would be fine choices for a category.  Possibly broken down (i.e. the utility is being able to say, "I'm a Ranger/Assasin, what are my options for self-healing / other-healing / AoE or multiple attacks / energy denial, etc.").  Certainly my current method is to just try to read all the skills, which will become less and less feasible over time (for the core professions). --JoDiamonds 23:46, 23 July 2006 (CDT)
 * I dunno, you're potentially going to have a lot of new categories, many of which will contain a couple of articles... Currently related skills are listed on the skill page, it's unwieldy to have a link to out energy denial category and having a list and which is exactly the same as what's contained in the category... We already have this kind of info anyway in Category:Skill_quick_references for major smiliar skills. --Xasxas256 00:12, 24 July 2006 (CDT)
 * On a related note to what Xasxas256 said--For example, if you want to see related skills on Distracting Shot, certainly not all of the related skills that also interrupt should be listed on its "Related Skills" section--as they're already somewhat easily accessible in the Skill quick references as he stated. It is really redundant and not to mention hoggish of space to list ALL of a related field on the Skill's page itself. But on the same subject: What should ultimately be listed in the Related Skills field? I felt silly when I almost tried linking ALL of the skills that Interrupt through the Related Skills field of all revelant skills... It just felt very wrong to do--so I ultimately only listed other interrupts in that Profession's field. So where is the line really drawn, in the higher authorities opinion? -- Feather 09:14, 20 August 2006 (CDT)
 * In some cases a template would be unwieldy since you might not want to break up the "related skills" and give them headings. In such a case the list may end up being "out of order" with skills not grouped by profession or in the prescribed profession order (not that people pay attention to that anyway).  --68.142.14.19 03:57, 24 July 2006 (CDT)


 * Might I suggest a template add-on(?) such as the mini Profession icons before each related skill as the norm? Its aesthetically pleasing and the images are of small size... One could easily recognize to which class the skill originates from--and it doesn't account for vertical clutter. (Stating the Profession in Text-form uses up a line.) -- Feather 10:21, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
 * I don't think anyone would complain if you went through and added the icons into the articles. --68.142.14.39 16:02, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Okies, I can see that Feather (who possibly was 24.23.114.242) has gotten onto this. Anywho, does any one else like/dislike the profession icon? Theres no note on it on the actual article so I thought it was worth furthering this discussion if we're going to add it to the S&F guide. My own opinion is that I don't mind it, it's certainly far perferable to having the skill icon. --Xasxas256 21:51, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Given that Feather/24.23.114.242 have now done about 100 of them, I've added it to the example and the S&F pages.


 * Strangely enough, I had started creating those related skills templates you speak of, when Karlos (who seems to be opposed to the templates use... in this part of the wiki) told me about this talk page. So, even if I've started the discussion on my user talk, here are my arguments :
 * (fact #1) related skills are actually outdated and unconsistent,
 * (fact #2) templates are the bread and butter of a wiki,
 * [fact #3) especially when listing repetitive lines (as shorter as a signature or a shortcut for an image, as long as a full article),
 * (fact #4) the same template can be tweaked for different usages and presented views (or emphasis as I may call that).
 * (fact #5) A few skills would belong to more than one group of "related skills" (but the decision can be made case by case).


 * (opinion #1) If you don't use templates here, you miss something useful and those "related skills" sections will stay outdated and give incomplete information to the reader.
 * [opinion #2) About the discussion on icon presentation and lost lines, "related skills" are at the end of those pages, with the "see also" section, no matter if they are about a dozen lines long (longer may means you have missed the point of this particular group of skills).
 * (opinion #3) "Related skills" are not for any skills, but only those exotic enough not to fit a recognized category (shout, chant, lead attack, binding ritual... and so on) and still have bear an interest.
 * (opinion #4) :Two words generally define this "related skills" groupings, like for examples : spell immunity, minion summoning, damage sharing, instant recharge... but you can also havelike distant armor protection, trigger on block or evade.


 * Anyway I agree those things need guide lines and discussion, but I must also add they are pretty irrevelent comapred to the content (i mean the naming can be changed in less than a hour, by minor updates in all the implicated articles).
 * So, my proposal is to create those few missing templates (I assume around twenty) and put them in the Related skills category, which talk page would be a better place to discuss the labelling of those templates and their contents. --Leonim 08:56, 27 September 2006 (CDT)


 * For your "facts:" I won't argue with #1. I reject #2 as simply false.  The users are the bread and butter.  Templates are merely tools to ease editing and not meant to be used everywhere possible.  #3 I reject as related lists shouldn't be that long.  #4-5 aren't about why a template helps.
 * I don't mind changing the formatting of the section, but I do not want to use templates to do it. In short, I don't think templates provide much of a help.  I'd much rather see skills in a plain list, sorted by profession.  A template doesn't allow insertion into the middle of its list to keep a sorted order.  If a related skills list is longer than a few skills, it should be culled to make sure the skill are similar enough.  When there's a long list with some kind of logical grouping, it can be done through a quick reference page as Skuld pointed out already.  With short lists, it's easy enough to maintain by hand rather than templates.  I think we disagree about how long "too long" is, since you mention a dozen as an example.  I'm thinking more like 5 skills max for most cases.  --Fyren 13:22, 27 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Anyway, not my role to decide of those things, i'm just proposing. Sysops are against it, no problem, I will use my time elsewhere. :) Could be nice to put the maintenance of those related skills in a todo list and have a talk page to discuss them (since they cover a bunch of articles). By the way, Skuld proposed using quick reference articles instead of templates, does that mean a simple and plain wiki link is allowed in the section (not mentionned in this formatting guide)? --Leonim 06:16, 28 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Because sysops are arguing against it isn't a good reason to stop arguing, though since three other people have said they don't like it (me, Skuld, Karlos), it might be. I'll never tell someone to stop arguing about it if you think it's better, though.  If you make a QR template for it, add a "see also" section with just a plain wikilink to the QR page you make (named " skills quick reference").  The minion spells are a good candidate for this, as Skuld said.  See Template:Frenzy, Template:Skill box ias, attack speed skills quick reference as references, though use ParserFunctions instead of template-ifs... which reminds me to rewrite some of those .  --Fyren 06:49, 28 September 2006 (CDT)

Skill icons in Related Skills

 * Why is it far preferable to the skill icon? I would prefer the skill icon. Some people have said that they recognise skill icons better than skill names for the beastiary pages. Also, simply by virtue of the colour of the skill icon is likely more than enough to identify the profession. --Ab.Er.Rant (msg Aberrant80) 22:15, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Oh god not this vote again! Look it's just the small related skills section do we really need them? It's overload for a small optional section which is often not even there. And hey you voted for the good guys last time! Damn swinging voters! --Xasxas256 22:24, 14 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Another point is that Bestiary articles normally only concern one profession, there's very few creatures with dual professions. With related skills there could be any profession. At that icon size Ranger and Necro skills can look the same, as can Assassin and Mesmer ones. To me it just adds confusion, adds a lot of work, makes standardisation a lot more difficult without much payoff. --Xasxas256
 * Ok, ok, I'll just... swing back! No to skill icons! :P --Ab.Er.Rant (msg Aberrant80) 22:58, 15 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Cheers big ears! ;) --Xasxas256 23:16, 15 August 2006 (CDT)

Summary of When/Where Decision Were Made
I haven't mucked about with skills in a long time, and looking at them now, I wouldn't know where to start.

When did this subtemplate nonsense become standard? I thought I, Karlos, Nunix, and <insert random other oldtimer names> shot this stuff down back when Ollj suggested it a year ago. It took me 10 minutes to figure out how to edit a skill article&mdash;there's absolutely no way Random McNewbie will be able to use them.

*mutters something about damned kids wrecking the place*

&mdash;Tanaric 06:06, 2 August 2006 (CDT)


 * lol, have I mentioned how glad I am that you're back Tanaric? :) <span style="font-family: Georgia, serif"> &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 15:48, 2 August 2006 (CDT)
 * it is a bit daunting, but it has it's uses. consider the attack speed skills quick reference. all that data is pulled from the skill templates, dynamically. should another IWAY nerf happen, one edit on template:"I Will Avenge You!" fixes that and two or three other references. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 15:56, 2 August 2006 (CDT)


 * The coder in me (and that's a big part of me!) absolutely loves the elegance of that solution. I'm not saying it isn't pretty or that it doesn't work. However, it's unwiki. The point of wiki is that, since we have a million pageviews every day anyway, if something changes skill-wise, somebody will see the wrong information on any page where it's redundant and fix it.


 * The current status quo of template use establishes an editor class within the wiki. There are editors who know what they are doing and therefore can contribute and control the direction of this place, and there's the rest of us, who are so in the dark that our voices are essentially meaningless, because we lack the ability to create change anyway. You guys with intimate knowledge of templates are the bourgeoisie, and I'm trying to get the proletariat to rise up against you. :)


 * In all seriousness, though, I believe the barrier to entry created by this current method far outweighs any advantage they can possibly provide. As Karlos noted on his talk page, much of our information is out of date simply because people don't know how to edit anymore. It's sad, but we were more current back when Nunix, Biro, Karlos, and I were writing most of the content -- there were a bloody ton of manhours dumped into it, and mistakes were definitely made, but there were so many anon and new member edits keeping us in line that it didn't matter. We've scared away a lot of these single-edit wonders, and I think the GuildWiki is weakened as a result. &mdash;Tanaric 04:25, 3 August 2006 (CDT)


 * I completely agree, Tanaric. I believe I said so during the discussion too, but my objections were not heard. I wish those who are now voicing this opinion would have said something back then instead of waiting 'till now. -- [[Image:Bishop_icon2.png]] Bishop [ rap|con ] 17:11, 4 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Reading up on the discussion, the above statement is not quite fair. There was indeed voices raised in concern (and right now I can't even seem to find where I objected although I'm sure I did). Just not loudly enough, I guess. -- [[Image:Bishop_icon2.png]] Bishop [ rap|con ] 17:17, 4 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Most of the relavent discussion can be found here and later GuildWiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive_5. Much of those discussion took place when implementation started on Mesmer skills, but haven't been completely spread over to other professions yet.  Anything I currently can think of to say on the matter have been expressed in those two discussions. - 16:39, 2 August 2006 (CDT)
 * BTW, maybe we should start some kind of campaign to promote contributors to edit via the edit section links. It helps auto-generate a edit summary and makes Recentchanges-patrolling much easier anyways.  It also would've saved Tanaric 10 minutes of his time. - 16:43, 2 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Section edit links are optional&mdash;users have the ability to turn them off in Preferences. In addition, I think some of the other skins don't offer them at all. We can't rely on those mechanics to make the wiki functional. &mdash;Tanaric 04:25, 3 August 2006 (CDT)


 * Personally, as I'm sure I've said before, I don't think that making the wiki less redundant is worth the price of increased complexity. <span style="font-family: Georgia, serif"> &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 14:06, 3 August 2006 (CDT)
 * some templates are harder to understand then others. i personally do not wish to repeat my experiances with attack speed skills quick reference, i had to ask another user to create the appropreate template for me (the fact that it was an anon that actually created template:skill box ias is rather... counterintuitive). however, some templates, like Template:skill bar and template:TOCright are great effort savers, and make it easier to edit. the skills data is fairly straight forward, all game data is stored in the template, and usage/progression/experimental data is stored in the main namespace. the game data will only change with a rebalance, which is fairly rare (a handfull of times in the past six months), and the bulk of the changes are to the main namespace. The Deep and Urgoz's Warren (Mission) are strangely free of the type of template we are talking about. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 14:24, 3 August 2006 (CDT)

Make it easier to edit skill articles
Let me repeat the above critisism. When looking at the recent skill balance, it took much longer than the usual 1-2 hours till skills where updated and (I might be wrong about this) there were almost no edits by anon contributers. I perfectly understand the usefullness of templates, but more should be done to counter their disadvantages. Looking at this article page, there is nothing to help a first time user understand why there is a template, how it works and how to get to edit it. A basic "you need to click here to edit skill data" is missing. Ideally that line would also be found (commented-out) in all the skill articles, to make anon-editors aware of what to do to edit the skill data. --Xeeron 06:45, 15 September 2006 (CDT)
 * I saw several anon edits. I think the extremely large download had more to do with the delay this time.  Using -image took close to 45 minutes to complete for me.
 * I really don't understand where you mean for inclusion of the "you need to click here to edit skill data" comment. There are section "edit" links, just as in every other article.  Can you clarify?  It's likely just too early in the morning here, and I'm just not awake enough to follow without a clearer explaination of what you mean.  ;-D  --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 08:28, 15 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Section edit links are disable-able by skin and preferences, and probably should not be relied upon. &mdash;Tanaric 10:55, 15 September 2006 (CDT)


 * If disabled via preferences or skin, it would be a site wide issue for the user, not specific to skills. Xeeron mentioned the link was to benefit first time / newer users, who would be most likely to be using the default skins and not to have changed the preferences to hide section edit links.
 * Keep in mind, I'm not saying it's a bad idea. I just want to understand better what is being proposed and why it's being suggested.  --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 11:07, 15 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I wouldn't be opposed to having some comments in the article saying to edit the template instead of the article itself. It might be a good idea to say something as standard in skill articles, such as:


 * "Skill data is not held directly in the skill article, as in some situations we need to use this information in other places. If you would like to change any of this skills' details please go to Template:Skill name ".


 * Is this the kind of thing you were suggesting Xeeron? <span style="font-family: Georgia, serif"> &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 11:44, 15 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Yes exactly. I clicked on the normal edit of a skill first when I wanted to check something earlier and didnt find the data. Of course then I remembered that it was outsourced to a template, but any new user would likely not come to the conclusion that fast. The edit link in the section is there, but unless you know how the wiki works, you will never get why you have to click there instead of the normal edit button. That is what should be explained in comments. --Xeeron 12:50, 15 September 2006 (CDT)


 * sigh* --Karlos 08:50, 27 September 2006 (CDT)

Typo?
The subst comment in the article says "{{subst:skill box qu" Does that make sense? --Karlos 08:51, 27 September 2006 (CDT)
 * It's correct as it is. --Fyren 13:29, 27 September 2006 (CDT)

Skill box revamp
So, there's a couple changes I've been wanting to make to the basic template:skill box. I'll separate them out into subheadings for discussion since they're all independent. My mostly-everything-in-one example is at Sandbox/Skill box. Its talk page has a list of example skills in the sandbox that use the template and a listing of changes (which I think are all described fully here). --Fyren 20:15, 5 October 2006 (CDT)

Auto progressions
Since we've got PF now and I've waited a long while to make sure there's nothing horribly wrong that would make us want to get rid of it, I think we should auto-generate the progression tables. I've implemented this by putting it straight into the skill box template. See Sandbox/Symbiosis and [ its source]. The three progression lines/nine progression parameters are the data used to generate the table for symbiosis. This isn't the only way to do it, but putting all the skill data into the skill templates seems like a good idea to me (as opposed to having most of it in the templates and progression data in the articles).

This would solve the problem of people making up data, inconsistent use of ? and N/A, and people filling in numbers for unattainable attribute ranks. It should also cut down on actual errors since there are only two numbers to check per range.

For users who don't edit the skill data templates or progression tables, this change is invisible besides that the progression sections will disappear from the articles. To edit a progression table, the only things to change are the row headings and the values at 0 or 15, all of which would be located in the templates. --Fyren 20:15, 5 October 2006 (CDT)


 * Sounds ok to me. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 00:21, 6 October 2006 (CDT)

valX/statX
Right now, upkeep/sacrifice/energy/adrenaline/activation/recharge need to be manually given the right "X." That is, recharge is always val3/stat3 (so in a template you always see "val3 = Recharge" and "stat3 = 5"). The change is to just have "recharge = 5." Compare [ the source for the real unyielding aura template] to [ the source for my example UY template].

I think the existing parameter names are slightly confusing and much more complex than necessary. When users misnumber a stat, then in the all the various skill boxes, the stat will show up in the wrong place. The positioning shouldn't be left to the user but to the template.

For users who don't edit the skill data templates, this change is invisible. I think it makes the templates more readable. As mentioned, this allows other templates (ones like template:skill box qr) to format the stats how they want, which is good. --Fyren 20:15, 5 October 2006 (CDT)


 * I always wondered why the names were so weird. Agreed. --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 00:21, 6 October 2006 (CDT)

Formatting
These are all independent of each other, of course, but I'll lump them together.

I don't like it displaying profession "common" or attribute "no attribute." I especially dislike that it links No Attribute. I'd bet the only reason common isn't linked is that's already a redirect for something else. I'd prefer to remove the rows entirely for such skills. See Resurrection Signet versus my example Sandbox/Resurrection Signet. I won't be crushed if people want the rows to stay.

In my example, I set fixed widths for the cells containing the energy/activation/etc. stats, I right aligned the text "type:" and such, and I changed the "[edit]" link that went to the templates into "[edit skill details]" (and changed its position a little). I can't really imagine opposition to these three changes, but maybe someone will surprise me.

These changes would, of course, change how the boxes are displayed. But for editors, there's no change to the data templates or articles. --Fyren 20:15, 5 October 2006 (CDT)


 * You should add some padding on the edges of the title (in the skill box). About the rows below the icon, I prefer the actual display, but it is a matter of taste and web-browsing general use.


 * "Title?" The skill name?  "Actual display?"  --Fyren 21:19, 5 October 2006 (CDT)


 * I would like to keep the No Attribute displayed. When I look at a skill and don't know if it is tied to an attribute, it takes me more time to realise that there is no attribute field than it would take to find the 'No Attribute' attribute field.
 * I would also like the boxes to have borders as as before. Your skillboxs don't have borders. (Using Opera) --[[Image:Gem-icon-sm.png]] (talk) 00:21, 6 October 2006 (CDT)

Other
Assuming progression data gets moved inside the skill templates, there's still duplicated information in the description: the ranges in the descriptions. We can calculate them, but we can't splice them in. StringFunctions would let us. On my test wiki at http:// MYUSERNAME.nimh.net/wiki, check out the build JS demo and any of the example skills. The thing to notice is that when you toggle the build there (as opposed to the test I ran here), the QR-like view has no ranges but instead actual values. The numbers for the skill ranges work in the same way, though you can't tell just by looking at the skill articles, so check the source for a skill data template to see where "RANGEX" is used in descriptions as placeholders. I'm not putting the SF-related stuff forth as a proposal yet, but I'd like to hear if people think it's worth doing. Adding SF shouldn't be a bad thing but it would require more thought (the version I run on my wiki has most of the functionality stripped out, only keeping pos/len/substr). --Fyren 20:15, 5 October 2006 (CDT)