User talk:Gares Redstorm/Sandbox

Icons
Seems ok to me although I'm not a big fan of the icons. The profession icons are fine but it seems strange that the Wandering Priest and the cows have the same cross icon! Actually just generally a big red cross seems misleading, it's as if those characters are dead or need to be unlocked or something. Although looking over Marga Coast currently, it looks a bit funny on the characters that have no icons...LordBiro maybe we need you to dream something up! But then looking over say Kamadan, Jewel of Istan having no profession icon seems ok there, maybe because the character's level isn't written. I don't like the red crosses but I don't have an alternative I strongly favour at the moment.

Just one other minor thing, does Marga Coast need to be wikified under quests? --Xasxas256 16:25, 6 December 2006 (CST)


 * I don't know if we need another icon. I think it makes sense to have no icon if there's no profession. I think the x icon makes most sense when it's used as a secondary icon, like /.  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 17:15, 6 December 2006 (CST)


 * How about a question mark instead? --Xasxas256 17:30, 6 December 2006 (CST)


 * I don't know. It's an odd thing really, because in this instance I think it would look better with just... nothing. Whereas with the "optional skill" icon I like the use of a question mark. Hehe, I hope I don't come across as a hypocrite :P  &lt;LordBiro&gt;/&lt;Talk&gt; 18:23, 6 December 2006 (CST)


 * Well I'm happy enough to go with that. (Using no icon that is, not the hypocrite bit! :P ) --Xasxas256 18:53, 6 December 2006 (CST)


 * Location NPCs obviously aren't going to have a profession since they don't have the opportunity to face an enemy, so the no icons format is going to look more uniform. In explorable areas, there are more NPCs and creatures with professions and thus icons, so the X makes everything uniform, i.e. a straight line, in order, etc. I don't necessarily like the X or the ?, I'd rather see a small N/A, but I don't do graphics. &mdash; Gares 21:22, 6 December 2006 (CST)


 * Yep, I didn't really like the X as well, cos it just seems to convey a negative idea, like the npc was dead, restricted, or inaccessible. I'd rather just do away with the profession and level for the NPCs but Gares made a rather good point for it. I think something like a dash/hyphen or a question mark would fit better standing for unknown or optional. -- Ab.Er.Rant (msg Aberrant80) 02:06, 7 December 2006 (CST)

Exits
Looks good to me :) &mdash; Skuld 15:47, 6 December 2006 (CST)

It seems fine except maybe the "exits" section. I probably wouldn't place each type of adjacent zone under its own heading since in a lot of cases there'll be one or no towns and few explorables (maybe my PvE knowledge is weak, though). Also, the compass directions for headings is kind of vague when there's a town that's not at the edge of the zone. --Fyren 16:08, 6 December 2006 (CST)


 * Usually there are both types, but in certain cases you are right, there are not. It's the same way with Items. There is a common crafting material subtitle and a rare crafting material subtitle, though some items do not salvage rare crafting materials. It could be stated that if there is not one or the other, then omit that subtitle, like omitting the notes title if there is none. However, it is user friendly to look and know exactly what a neighboring location is (explorable area or town) without having to click on the link.


 * As to the directions comment, I know of very few locations "surrounded" by an explorable area. Two that come to mind though are The Mouth of Torment which is surrounded by The Ruptured Heart (looking at it from the explorable area side) and Ventari's Refuge which is surrounded by Ettin's Back. While cardinal/ordinal directions do not have an actual direction for this event, at least not in modern American culture, there is always the use of cardinal/ordinal directions in combination with the word center or any synonyms of said word. &mdash; Gares 17:11, 6 December 2006 (CST)


 * Rephrased it to suit the first concern. &mdash; Gares 07:42, 7 December 2006 (CST)

Whitespace at top
I think it looks really good. My only suggestion would be to remove the blank lines between the stub and the location box, and between the location box and the General information section, thus editing out some of the whitespace at the top of any articles. --Rainith 23:47, 6 December 2006 (CST)


 * Also note that the species/classification of creatures/npcs will either need a line break or an * in front of them otherwise they will be part of the previous line (if I know my wiki-code, which isn't always my strong suit).


 * Yeah, I spread out each section with a space, cause that's how I program so everything isn't jumbled together. It's a habit. I'll change it for this though. No need for a line break. My example at the bottom of the page, a copy of Marga Coast changed using the explorable area format, shows exactly what the code will look like in a real scenario. &mdash; Gares 07:26, 7 December 2006 (CST)


 * Edit: Took out whitespace between location stub and general information. &mdash; Gares 07:42, 7 December 2006 (CST)


 * Uh, actually it doesn't use your example exactly. Your example shows for Monsters to use:
 * species
 * *monster
 * But Marga Coast uses:
 * *species
 * **monster
 * That's what I was referring to. I probably wasn't very clear in my original explanation (I had taken NyQuil and was starting to feel the effects).  --Rainith 11:55, 7 December 2006 (CST)


 * Your not the only one sick and I have a job interview this afternoon. :P
 * But now you have me stumped Rainith. I've looked at my userspace copy of Marga Coast in the default and cologne (the one I use) skins and my code still shows as
 * *species
 * **monster
 * Now the Marga Coast mainspace article has listings in both types:
 * species
 * *monster
 * and
 * *species
 * **monster
 * No line breaks needed, but I'm still not sure why you can't see my bulleted species and double bulleted monster code. &mdash; Gares 12:51, 7 December 2006 (CST)
 * * laugh* I'm sorry, I'm so confused now, all I can do is laugh about it.  Between your copy of the Marga Coast article and the actual one...
 * Anyway, I think that you are correct and I don't know WTF I'm talking about, so nevermind. :P  I'm not sure that the monsters section sample in your S&F matches the one on your Marga Coast page, but I'm going to stop worrying about it now (my meds must be kicking in). ;)  --Rainith 14:09, 7 December 2006 (CST)