Talk:Collecting for fun and profit

Sortable
To the anon editor who added the "sortable" class to the tables, have you tested this? It doesn't work because of the rowspanned cells - the table formatting gets completely screwed up. I'm going to remove it.

Oh, but I do like your title for the last column, "Lucrative," so I added that to the other two tables as well. &mdash;Dr Ishmael 16:50, 18 July 2007 (CDT)
 * I noticed it was broken, but I left it in hoping an editor better schooled in wiki formatting would also notice and elect to fix it. Perhaps you'll consider re-adding it? 15:40, 21 July 2007 (CDT)
 * (same editor) After all, adding sortability removes no functionality. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.130.9.41 (contribs).
 * I know one way to fix it: split the cells that are currently rowspanned. However, the reason I rowspanned them in the first place was to make it obvious when one item had more than one collector.  My assumption when making the page was that people would come here, already having collected a bunch of items, and they'd want to know which ones to keep and which to sell.  Thus, why I made the collectable names span the rows for all the collectors.
 * Personally, I don't really see the value of adding sortability, especially since the "best" trades are already marked. What else would someone want to sort by?  &mdash;Dr Ishmael [[Image:Diablo_the_chicken.gif]] 22:53, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

Doesnt iding an item give more potential for profit? &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.205.71.76 (contribs).
 * Not for collector items. They already have a set value to merchants. Imaginos 19:13, 5 October 2007 (UTC)