Talk:General collectors

Wow, this is out of hand.

Having the image of what the collector Wants/Gives is not really necessary. That should be typed out. The location map is fine, but stick it on the right and shrink it down to ~250px, like this 250px|right. Gravewit


 * Sorry. Was just trying to follow what all of the others had done with loc + wants/gives. Will recrop and re-upload. Thanks for the info re: the image tag format. It might be useful to prominently note tose all somewhere like the help pages. MartinLightbringer(CS)


 * Aye. The Help and How To pages are still a work in progress. I'm working on Image guidelines right now, actually. Gravewit

Cedric Rogers should be under armor...

This is a consistency and editing nightmare, heh. I'm also confused why the line breaks are needed to make it look properly in some places. --Fyren 21:02, 29 Jun 2005 (EST)

Why has the mod Energy Regeneration been changed to Energy Recovery on this page? --Rainith 00:23, 30 Jul 2005 PDT Edit -- Or did they change the terminology in game? Like they did with Shadow Damage -> Dark Damage --Rainith 02:27, 30 Jul 2005 PDT
 * It says energy recovery in game. --Fyren 23:28, 30 Jul 2005 (EST)
 * Really? Strange, it shows Energy regeneration to me.  I'm curious if it is different depending on your region or something now.  I'm in America, does UK or other English speaking regions have it listed differently?  I'll see if I can figure out how to post a picture here.  Either that or I was going crazy last night (a possiblilty).  --Rainith 17:13, 30 Jul 2005 PDT
 * Edit- ok, here is a pic of what I'm talking about, this is from the collector on the beach in Lion's Arch. [[image:regen.jpg|250px|right]] --Rainith 17:43, 30 Jul 2005 PDT
 * What I checked was armor. I checked again and items seem to say regeneration and armor recovery. --Fyren 18:14, 31 Jul 2005 (EST)

Categorize!
This could very easily become many small indicies kept up-to-date with categories. What information needs to be searchable? We can develop the categories from that, and then break up this monstrosity. &mdash;Tanaric 20:46, 3 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Yes, this definitely needs to be split up. I'd say all collectors from one region (Kryta, Southern Shiverpeakes, Crystal Desert...) should stay on one page. So that you can go to the Kryta page for example, search it for "Swords" and you'll know where in Kryta you'll find a collector who'll give you the next best sword - without clicking through several subpages. --Eightyfour-onesevenfive 21:02, 3 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * I was thinking more along the line of making Category:Sword collectors and Category:Krytan collectors and allowing the user to search that way, making individual articles for all the collectors. A list that requires Ctrl+F to use isn't really that useful.  Besides, it's typical GuildWiki style to favor individual articles over big listings.  &mdash;Tanaric 21:19, 3 Aug 2005 (EST)
 * This seems like a good idea. --Fyren 04:08, 4 Aug 2005 (EST)
 * Has anyone started working on this yet? If not I had an idea for it, but I'm at work at the moment and can't give it my full attention.  I'll try to cobble something together in a few test pages when I get home tonight.  But if someone else has started on it, I don't want to duplicate/redo their work.  --Rainith 04:59, 25 Aug 2005 (EST)

Ok, I've set up some test pages here: That show my general ideas with some notes at the end of the first two. I de-wiki'd the categories so as not to have to make those yet, just in case everyone hates my ideas. ;) In fact, I may have gone category crazy, if so let me know.  I don't plan on expanding this unless and until I get feedback.  So let me know what you like and/or don't like about it. I did think that we should make a category for each location, then link those categories back to a main category so    would itself be a category of   .  (I think this can be done, as I noted in one of the test pages, I don't know much wiki code.)  I'm not sure what else to say, so please post your comments.   --Rainith 12:12, 25 Aug 2005 (EST)
 * User:Rainith/CollectorTest


 * I think this issue is actually kind of far reaching. If collectors are going to have their own article for categories, then the design of this article (and the armor one) will change.  The collectors article (which really should be singular) could list all the related categories and the two previously mentioned pages could be deleted.


 * I would say if there's going to be any location category for them, it should be by region rather than zone. When I've cared about collectors, I've always looked for info on all the collectors in the desert, or for info on collectors with fire staves, or for info on collectors that wanted troll tusks; never for collectors in Snake Dance.  Does anyone think it would be useful?  I don't really like having a category for so few members.


 * For item types, I'd say sword, axe, hammer, wand, staff, focus, shield, and miscellaneous (which would seem to only have the egg, bags, and pouches?) would be good. I don't know if a fire wand category would be better than listing something as  or the like.  Maybe even listed as "Fire (max, 20/20)" or "Fire (+1/30)" or some other code for the various common mod sets.


 * A last note, categories are currently all in title case. Dunno if that should be changed.  --Fyren 13:28, 25 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * I agree completely with your first paragraph, I would like to get rid the Armor/Weapon and charm divide. As long as there are collectors that do both (which there are in Pre-searing and the beginning part of post-searing Ascalon) then they should be together (IMHO).  The more I think about it, the more I agree with you about the region catagories as opposed to the area categories.  As for how to categorize the item types, I really don't care on that one.  I've never really used the items from the collectors once I got past pre-searing.  In fact, the first time I used got anything from a collector post-searing was the armor in the Crystal Desert.  (I did not realize that all categories were capitalized, I'll note that for future reference.)  Anyone else want to weigh in on this?  --Rainith 14:11, 25 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * It seems people are mainly interested in 20/20 focuses, 20 wands, or 15% >50% for weapons, so some easy way to mark their mods might be useful. I never used collector items till I got to the desert, after that I only used them.  --Fyren 15:13, 25 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Ok, after letting this sit for a couple of weeks, and then seeing someone else come up with a different idea, I decided to try to work on the suggestions I got from Freyn. I've flushed out the rest of the Pre-Searing collectors and have links to them here: User:Rainith/CollectorTest.  Again, I did not wikify the categories as I didn't want to add a bunch if there isn't a need.  Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.


 * If there is some sort of concensus that this is a good idea, I have no problem with going thru and doing the work on this. (*hopes he doesn't regret saying that*)  --Rainith 09:45, 5 Sep 2005 (EST)

Brilliant Idea
I don't mean to toot my own horn, but I thin I just found a brilliant answer to the collector listing crisis. See what I did with Molenin and Makar. The info is ONE article, but it can be displayed in many pages. I love that! All my data integrity anxieties are removed! :) --Karlos 15:31, 9 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Which... is what we discussed in the section right above this? Heh.  I think what you mean is what Rainith suggested and made a few test pages for.  Since I've regressed into "lazy admin" mode, I haven't actually done any work on it.  --Fyren 16:40, 9 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * As far as I understood. Rainith is doing this through categorization. What I am proposing is this:


 * Article: Molenin, has his picture his date of birth, his hobbies, a tiny map to him and also what he is collecting and what he is offering. It has a LINK to Enslaving Stone
 * Article: Enslaing Stone has its picture, all kinds of interesting info about it. Then it has a LIST of Enslaiving stone collectors. In that list instead of placing Molenin we place
 * Article: "Charm Collectors" or "Collectors of Sorrow's Furnace" or "Collectors with big teeth and no eyes" or any such listing of collectors would list thereby making the actual text much smaller yet the content remains quite rich.


 * This model has the exact same data across all different views of the information. Yet does not rely on a complex network of links and click to get the info to the user. --Karlos 17:35, 9 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Karlos, this sounds interesting, but since you haven't completed it by creating the article Enslaving Stone I'm not seeing what this would do. I like what I think you're saying though, please complete your idea with one or two collectors as I'd like to see it.  --Rainith 21:29, 9 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Edit- Ok, I just didn't look at this page's article (sorry I just got up, I'm a little slow). I like this idea, I think it could work well.  Anyone else want to chime in with their thougths?  I will be stuck at work on Saturday, with probably very little to do and a lot of time available to me.  So if people like this idea, I could work a lot on these collectors.  --Rainith 21:34, 9 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * I think this is a good idea, but I also think dividing the collectors by regions, into either index articles or catagories, would be good too. Also, these articles might be better named as Name (Collector) instead of just their names, in case some of them should become quest givers or involved with the storyline in the future somehow. For example, the article about what Molenin collects and what he has for exchange, would be named as Molenin (Collector) instead of just Molenin; and if he becomes a quest giver, an article named Molenin can be created with as a part of it's content.  --Thundergrace 03:09, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)

I swear I commented a second time before going to sleep. Anyway, I don't like including to make lists/articles because while the data isn't duplicated, the views are constructed by us instead of the wiki. With enough categories (which should still be useful, of course) making so many articles will be a large hassle. I agree that otherwise it would probably be better. I think there would be enough articles/categories that categories would be better. For example, the obvious ones would be by region, by zone, by weapon type, focuses, shields, by max damage or stat weapon, focuses, focuses, and what the collector wants. Then there's the more specific ones I mentioned above like "weapons with +15% damage when over 50% health." Assuming we have that many, I'd rather have the wiki do the work in maintaining the lists than have a person do it. --Fyren 05:28, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Like I said before, I don't know much about wiki coding, but couldn't we do both this and include categories on the individual collector pages? Or does combining categories and includes or whatever you call the {}'s not work?  I'd like to have something decided for this so that I can work on it tomorrow when I have time.  --Rainith 06:02, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * If you include a page with categories into another page, both pages get put into the category. That's a problem, but I'm more concerned with maintaining a lot of lists by hand instead.  --Fyren 06:12, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * This should be set up for ease of use and category trees are going to force people to follow 2 hojillion links. Main page to collectors to collectors by reward to death magic to death wands to max damage and stats death wands to Arliss Vaughn and Volsung Stoneketil? Or is it main page to collectors to collectors by reward to max damage and stats to max damage and stats death items to Arliss Vaughn, Volsung Stoneketil, Sir Pohl Sanbert, Luven Underwood, Volsung Stoneketil, Merin Trollsbane, and Radamon except only 2 of those have the item you're looking for? Main page to collectors to collectors by item to feathered avicara scalp to Volsung Stoneketil and Goran Grimyak? Would someone think of putting Category:Feathered_Avicara_Scalp in the search? Why not just go to feathered avicara scalp? Main page to collectors to max necro items and scroll down or use the table of contents.--Cloak of Letters 07:28, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Actually if it was by categories it would only be a few clicks: Main Page -> Collectors -> Category:Collectors-> Subcategory (Region/What they have/What they want) -> Collector That's what, one more step then there is now?  And you wouldn't have to scroll down 5000 lines if you're looking for a Crystal Desert collector.  --Rainith 07:44, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * I'd list the all the relevant categories in the collector article. So, if you wanted max death wands, it would be collectors to max death wands, to the collecors.  I'm not saying clicking on each collector is optimal, but I think it's better than includes.  With includes, we're making wands, death wands, max death wands by hand without aid of categories, and then modifying each when there's a collector change.  This is a problem if you do the same with all the caster attributes (14, if you don't count energy storage, fast casting, and soul reaping though I think there are at least energy storage collector items).  For just wands, that's wands (1) plus attribute wands (14) plus max attribute wands (14).  If you want to get more specific, like 20/20 focuses and +15% over 50% health swords, you've got a bunch more.  I'm trying to get more a lot more data views than just regions, items collected, and type type rewarded.  --Fyren 07:51, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Fyren- I was just giving a broad generalization there, as I didn't want to list a bunch of stuff here. :)  I do think however that your idea is overkill a bit.  Speaking only for myself, I thought most of the collector stuff was crap, even later in the game.  I only ever used it for armor in the beginning (pre-searing) and once I hit the desert.  I was always able to find weapons and off-hand items that were much better than what the collectors offered (maybe I'm just lucky).  --Rainith 08:00, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * I was replying to Cloak, you just got your edit in first, heh. --Fyren 08:14, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * It looks like most rewards have better numbers since the patch.--Cloak of Letters 11:03, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * I don't know who would look at a list of all the items collects from Ascalon to Southern Kryta that have death wands have(?). I want every collector item and every location to have it's related collectors in the article and I want a set of lists like User:Cloak_of_Letters. As you already said categories and includes (is that what this is called?) won't mix. Do you really want GuildWiki to be less useful than it could be for the sake of backend organization? I think this layout would answer any collecting questions (what can I get with these ___, what can I get now that I'm at ___, I'm at region ___ and I need a ___ so what should I look for).--Cloak of Letters 11:03, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * I'm trading having users click a few more times in order to get something that is more functional but still maintainable. As I said before, I realize more clicks is not optimal.  --Fyren 18:51, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Fyren, I think your maintenace point is not that big of a deal. I concede it is there, I just don't see it as something that stands up to making the views more accessible and usable.
 * Let's take an example. Let's say Molenin (again) offers a wand 11-22 dmg. Then Arena Net changes that to 10-20, inthe include model and the categories model, you have to change one page, Molenin's. Now let's say they go crazy and change the item he offers from a wand to a scroll of insight. The affected pages in the include model would be: a) Molenin's, b) collectors offering wands (delete Molenin's name) and c) collectors offering insight scrolls (add Molenin's name). In the categories view the change would be only in Molenin's article but you'd so a bigger update (remove the category:collecters that offer wands, and place the category:collectoers that offer insight scroll). While in the latter case one article was updated while in the first three were, the amount of information updated is the same. I don't see an overhead except on the update log. We are assuming a competent wiki contributor is doing the update or will check the update.
 * Now if someone knows a way to script or code on a wiki, Then we can simply write ONE page that asks the user what he is looking for and get it to him simply by us marking the collector pages with the tag "category:collector" --Karlos 14:32, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Well, I mentioned I was thinking in terms of a lot of views. I listed 29 just for wands, but then there's another 29 for focuses, 29 staves, and a handful for the rest of the types of items.  I think all those views are useful, since in my personal experience and what I saw on GWOnline/GWGuru/Guild Hall forums before the desert/Shiverpeaks collector maps were available EVERYONE wanted to know where to find a 20/20 whatever focus or staff or a 15/-1 whatever wand.  I don't actually think the non-max collector items are useful at all but the max ones are very, very hard to best with an actual drop.  --Fyren 18:51, 10 Sep 2005 (EST)

Frostty1 Updates
Ok, Frosty just made massive updates to the numbers on the items offered by these collectors. Can anyone confirm this stuff? --Karlos 09:09, 30 Sep 2005 (EST)

Yet another idea for collectors
Ok, see the discussion here Talk:Armor collectors for where this started. Brownlow and his entry on this page are my ideas. If we want to do categories for the collectors (beyond a Collector category) they can be done on the individual pages, and we can do lists (like this page) easy enough also. Any thoughts? --Rainith 14:18, 5 Oct 2005 (EST)

An idea
Seeing from the above heading's title there has been more ideas for the list, I don't know where though so excuse me if this is repeated

The page could be split into managable chunks for each region such as


 * Weapon and charm collectors (Pre-Searing)
 * Weapon and charm collectors (Ascalon)

Skuld &Dagger; 02:21, 6 Oct 2005 (EST)


 * I think someone proposed to categorize the collectors by region. I think once we created an article for each collector we can do that. --Thundergrace 11:49, 6 Oct 2005 (EST)


 * I plan on doing Skuld's suggestion (probably in the weekend), just because we are not supposed to have such huge pages. The page is literally unbrowsable. I'll cut it into a series of articles (based on regions) and keep this as the master article that points to the regions. The biggest crisis is the huge among of links that point here. :( --Karlos 14:44, 6 Oct 2005 (EST)