GuildWiki talk:Style and formatting/Skills/Everything Example

Discussion
I think this is out of date. 148.177.129.213 23:25, 10 Oct 2005 (EST)
 * Less out of date than everyone said "good idea!" and then ignored it. --Fyren 23:50, 10 Oct 2005 (EST)


 * Maybe I'm missing something, but this looks pretty much like every skill I ever look at. The sample here is missing the "progression" section that a lot of the skills have and there seems to be a lack of agreement on wheter to call the "notes" section "notes," "usage notes," or "usage."  "Related skills" also seem to get stuck in the usage notes a lot as part of the explanation, which seems like a natural point of confusion. But all in all, this looks like a pretty accurate description of what all the spells should and do look like.  Maybe we could just add the progression section and call it good.--Squeg 03:20, 11 Oct 2005 (EST)


 * The only thing that matches is the skill box and the description section which both predate this example. This was made to make sure people laid out the description (the bulleted points, specifically), acquisition, and links (related skills/articles) in the same way, but those are exactly where everything varies now.  We also decided that it should be "notes."  --Fyren 20:39, 11 Oct 2005 (EST)

I have updated this example to bring it up to date. The only thing I am unsure of is the elite bar at the top of the skill box, as I haven't seen this anywhere else. --Hewus 22:14, 2 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Might as well remove the bulleted points, I guess. Only elementalist skills would use them, since elites don't say "this is an elite whatever" as part of the descriptions anymore.  Unless we add "50% chance of failure" as a bullet.  --Fyren 22:37, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok for notes is it:
 * Notes
 * Usage
 * Usage Notes? Skuld  05:00, 13 May 2006 (CDT)

Kaboom
Someone should blow this page up and rewrite it. This one isn't even ready for factions. --Rapta 18:52, 10 July 2006 (CDT)