User talk:PanSola

Past mistakes are moved into the User talk:PanSola/MistakeArchive

Other closed issues are moved to User talk:PanSola/Archive

Please stop recategorizing skills
Please let the discussion to take its natural course before making or editing new categories! 18:33, 16 March 2006 (CST)


 * There was a discussion, Category talk:Skill, and no one argued against it for about two months. -PanSola 18:35, 16 March 2006 (CST)


 * There is a current ongoing discussion about skill categories that will almost 100% invalidate all the stuff you're doing now. Have patience for a little while longer. 18:36, 16 March 2006 (CST)


 * Not really, I didnt see how it affected anything related to Skill types. All the discussions were between Profession and Campaigns.  Besides, if you haven't noticed, I finished doing everything before you told me to stop.  I wasn't creating a new category.  I was following the "Plural rule" with the usual "use parenthesis for disambiguation" practice.  Nothing new.  Skil types weren't even on your graph.  -PanSola 18:38, 16 March 2006 (CST)


 * But it's the same story, PanSola. Prophecies Skills by type, Glyphs by Campaign, same story. I think Tetris' chart was to illustrate, not dictate where the suffix/prefix will go. Basically we have to major trees right now, Skills by Profession (branching into attributes) and skills by type (branching into attacks/glyphs/signets/...). With the introduction of Skills by Campaign, we now have 3 possibilities of browsing:
 * By Profession x By Campaign
 * By Campaign x By Profession
 * By Campaign x By type
 * By Type x By Campaign
 * By Type x By Profession
 * The remaining case (By Profession x By Type) seems uninteresting. Yes, this is getting uglier by the minute. :) Anyways, just wanted to comment that the categorization is affected. (i.e. there will be Prophecies Signet, Core Signets and Factions Signets). :( --Karlos 19:21, 16 March 2006 (CST)


 * Well again, I'm not inventing a new category. I'm just applying the plural rule, and add disambiguation so it doesn't get confused with Category:Skills.  I wasn't touching the prefix/suffix system.  If someone created an article for the Domination Magic (Quest) article, but misnamed it to Domination Magick, I don't care if there is a debate on whether we want to add campaign suffix to quest articles or not, I am renaming the article to Domination Magic (Quest) in the mean time.-PanSola 19:52, 16 March 2006 (CST)

Progression - NA icon
Please see User:Evil_Greven/Aura_of_Restoration. What do you think about the insertion of the NA icon there? While I'd like to do it via the N/A template, it doesn't work properly with the table. - Greven 09:08, 17 March 2006 (CST)
 * Visually it look nice. Functionally I don't see the necessity.  To make a template that works with it will be quite a hassel.  But if you can get it to work without overly complicating the template syntax (some complication of syntax seems unavoidable to me), I don't see a problem with it. -PanSola 09:11, 17 March 2006 (CST)

Skill Box version 6?
Please see: User:Evil_Greven/Unyielding_Aura2 when you have the chance. Sorry, I blatently ripped off your design, however there's no way I'm entering it, I merely wish to address the concerns of two people who commented on the vote. - Greven 17:14, 17 March 2006 (CST) Oh yeah.. check out the little quick tip thing (mouseover energy/upkeep/activation/recharge icons), and incidently... is there a reason anymore to keep the larger Quick Reference List box (skill/profession icon & attribute) with the the hybrid format? - Greven 17:26, 17 March 2006 (CST)
 * While the final result is nice, I don't see any way to code the cool feature into the general template. And I am NOT going to make templates Energy1 to Energy25, Recharge1 to Recharge126 or whatever.  Exactly whose and which concerns are you suppposed to be addressing btw? - PanSola who can't log in due to stupid bug.
 * JoDiamonds and Xeeron both left comments right above this (GuildWiki_talk:Style_and_formatting/Skills) section. Yeah, I know, I don't like that either.. I was testing to see if I could use a template within a template like that, but I can't get it to work correctly. I'll be gone most of the rest of the day, so I won't be here until then. - Greven 23:41, 17 March 2006 (CST)
 * Agh one last thing before I go, check the history of the template and you can see the various versions that were made, the earliest looked more like the Comprehensive Box 2 merged with your Portrait 5, if you decide on entering you wouldn't have to rewrite that way. - Greven 23:53, 17 March 2006 (CST)