Question and Answer/Archive6

This is page 6 of an archive of questions asked on the wiki's Q&A page. It contains questions 126-150.

Q126 Autoclose or Footer?

Since I've seen various templates using both, I shall ask here to make it 'official'.
Many templates have been using a {{TemplateNameFooter}}
And some are using |content=
Both are used to insert content inside a template. So, which shall we use?
Pros of {{TemplateNameFooter}}:

...I can't think of any.

Cons of {{TemplateNameFooter}}:

Waste of a template where the content is usually just a "|}"

Pros of |content=:

Easier to use, since no template is required at the end
Neater coding?

Cons of |content=:

...I can't think of any.

If anyone can think of any pros/cons, add them to the list. We'll use it to decide which way we shall close our templates, or we can do a majority vote. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 21:58, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

as far as I understand it, it was originally coded for variable tables. As in the various types of food, some were edible, and some were inedible, and some had recipes, and some didn't. The original code writer made the separate sections their own parts of a mabitable code, then slotted them together at need and added the footer template at the end. What you should be asking instead, methinks, is should we code

5 (example number) different templates for each item type, or code (content=)
3 (example number) different template types plus it's 2 support templates (ie. headers and footers) and then mix-match them at need. (templatefooter)

I'm of the personal opinion of just creating 5 different templates, because it looks cleaner and makes things easier to modify/edit in the long run, but then I have a vested interest in the outcome as I redid the 'templatenamefooter' styles to self-contained styles for the food templates. >.> I couldn't stand the rounded edges anymore, and attempting to fix the rounded edges using the 'templatefooter' style was giving me a headache. ~shrugs~ Anyhoo because I'm biased I'll stand by whatever decision others makes on this, but it's most probable I won't end up touching those templates (should they be of templatefooter variety) because it's a pain in the neck to work with, mostly because of having, essentially, several style templates in lock-step with each other.

tldr: templatefooter is a good solution when you want to cut down on the number of template styles. However it's a pain in the butt to code and to later modify should you need to alter any one template that the footer affects, because they might or might not act as a single table. Depending on where/how it's used. x.x; -- ladywinter ~{talk | contribs}~ 22:16, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

You said something about the food templates? I didn't understand. @_@ --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 22:27, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Eh. Since no one is paying attention to this, all my future templates will be made using the content= method. All my current ones will be converted sooner or later --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 23:45, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

But without the footer doesn't the template add an extra hard break when used? Like here. There is an extra hard break that we can't get rid of between the blacksmithing details box and the gachapon section. It's been bothering me ever since someone converted the blacksmithing template into a single template instead of the old header/body/footer trio of templates. Ignore this complaint if you're talking about something else entirely. --- Angevon (Talk) 23:41, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Fixed the line break. It was the template. And, you italicized someone, so I'm guessing I did it? But I don't remember doing such a thing, so.. eh. :D --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 00:07, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Btw, if you find anymore line breaks, tell me! I'll fix em. :3 --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 00:08, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Food templates used to be headerbodyfooter, but that made me nuts. So I changed them all. XD -- ladywinter ~{talk | contribs}~ 00:38, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Cool, thanks :) we can go with the content= format, then. --- Angevon (Talk) 00:41, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Q127 Dye Parts

If there are parts not used in dyeing, would it be a good idea to remove it entirely like here where parts B and C not used or just leave it as a " - " like here here. Just curious. --Δκυmσ - ταłκ 22:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

I prefer using the " - " method because it makes it more obvious that it cannot be dyed whereas if you don't put the section, it seems more as if it were an incomplete chart. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 23:03, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Q128 Missing Mob Pictures

Quite obviously there are some that are missing, but should the whole [[Category:NeedPicture]] thing go at the end of the monster's page (e.g. Skeleton Wolf), or on the template of the individual monster..?..--^Яειм ^'s Talk 18:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I would put it on the template of the individual monster, but doing that would end up putting it on the monster page too anyway due to inclusion. --- Angevon (Talk) 23:24, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Q131 Link color change

in Enchanting Sequences i'm wanting to provide links to the enchants.. however the current system has a few of the enchant enabled listed in Green how would i have the links color be green... i dont want to change the system just because i wanna link the enchants... also for curiosity sake how would i make a link look normal till you see you can click on it?--chrissy of hailfire 08:08, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Blue Link. Didn't understand your 2nd part ~kotarou3 ^TALK_CONTRIBS 08:13, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

For the hover part, you'd need to edit the css. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 08:17, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

aparently Green link wont show as green...

Because id="green" is not defined. use --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 08:33, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Of course Kevin would gladly add that into the stylesheet :D ~kotarou3 ^TALK_CONTRIBS 08:36, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Green link ok... good thing i have a refrence for hex colors.. didn't even dawn on me... thanks for the help--chrissy of hailfire 05:16, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

This is all you need for hex colours: #rgb OR #rrggbb. Mabi uses #aarrggbb though ~kotarou3 ^TALK_CONTRIBS 12:12, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

yesyes Mabi is verymuchso different :c Just wondering, is there a difference between the span thingy and the font thingy? As in, and ?--^Яειм ^'s Talk 02:44, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Span can use css style. Font cannot. Also, Font will no longer be supported in HTML5. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 02:55, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Q133 Food Template Proposal

User:Ikkisuki/DataBacon
User:Ikkisuki/DataBerry
User:Ikkisuki/DataSliced Bread
User:Ikkisuki/DataStrawberry
User:Ikkisuki/DataCream Farfalle
User:Ikkisuki/DataCream Sauce
User:Ikkisuki/DataPepper
User:Ikkisuki/Example Food
User:Ikkisuki/Template:StyleFood
User:Ikkisuki/Template:StyleFood2

Changes:
- Looks
- How stars/stat changes are shown
- Should be compatible with every type of food (cooked & consumable, cooked & not consumable, not cooked & consumable not cooked & not consumable, with stars & without stars, fish)
- Now with Resale Value! :D
- Automatically categorizes food that is cooked by method. (Only on the appropriate page)
- Labels food if not implemented.
- And..yeah...

--κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 22:02, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

as far as i've seen there is no food that is a cooked food with a resale value other than 0g i don't think its needed.--chrissy of hailfire 05:45, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Still used for food that isn't cooked. And it's also good for future uses, in case there ever will be one.--κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 06:31, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

The resale value kind of looks out of place, but it's not that important. --- Angevon (Talk) 13:47, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Couldn't really find a good place to fit it :\ --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 22:36, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Does this look better? -increased span of resale- --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 22:42, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Does look better. i've noticed the category lists... i'm guessing it will only show once if in a list format? or would it become spammed with categorys at the bottom...--chrissy of hailfire 08:40, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Repeated categories are never shown multiple times.. so... once. Unless multiple methods are placed in a list, but are there any cooking lists that use multiple method? I don't know of any. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 08:58, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. --- Angevon (Talk) 00:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

ditto. ^_^b--ladywinter ~{talk | contribs}~ 16:22, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Too wide x.x ~kotarou3 ^TALK_CONTRIBS 05:55, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Happy? :v --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 06:04, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Edited it a little bit. You can replace it now. Remember to modify the usage accordingly. Also, I vaguely remember angevon not liking centered tables, but I don't care ~kotarou3 ^TALK_CONTRIBS 06:30, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Added a style. 2nd part of page uses another template. Chkitout. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 01:51, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Bumpitybumpbump. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 02:25, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I kind of like the first StyleFood better than the second one. But ... I don't use food pages at all so it doesn't exactly matter to me. --- Angevon (Talk) 01:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Q134 A food status list

I wanted to get peoples opinion before i tryed making a page...User:Chrissyofhailfire/Sandbox lists all the foods that give a status boost. it lists everything so people can see all foods that give a particular status rather than just seeing the top 3 this would allow someone to see what they could cook for a status boost at there level. it is however a HUGE list somewhat comparable to the enchant list. --chrissy of hailfire 12:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Looks good. If the list is too long then then you could break it up into separate tables, each on its own page, where each table represents a method of cooking? However, I don't really have a problem with the single table. --ZRoc (Talk) 01:47, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

well i'm playing on a really high rez screen... so i can never tell what would be too long for most people...--chrissy of hailfire 08:52, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Looks fine. I wouldn't separate them since the table is sortable. ---Angevon (Talk) 18:20, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

ok... now for the next question... what the heck do i name it? Food stat list? make it seem more about the food than the status it can give... --chrissy of hailfire 14:22, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Food Status Effect List? --ZRoc (Talk) 06:18, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

works for me..--chrissy of hailfire 01:06, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Q135 Image Categories

Should we bother categorizing images? Apart from the artifact and fomor scroll ones.. Like, in terms of food, dropped-item appearances, equipment, monster drops, event items, etc.--^Яειм ^'s Talk 21:04, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

It could possibly help in finding an image. We have an Category:Images (general image category which hasn't many entries lol) and a Category:Wiki Media (this is for media specifically created for the wiki, e.g., icons, or used in specific projects on the wiki, e.g., book images). --ZRoc (Talk) 23:50, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's worth it. You can specify to search for "File" with advanced search and most of our images are named properly enough to find them that way should the need arise. --- Angevon (Talk) 14:06, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Q136 We get recognised by Nexon

Probably the wrong place for this but it does reflect on the wiki's standard of editing: Nexon mentions our site in the latest edition of Errin Walker (at the end of the zine). Well done everyone XD --ZRoc (Talk) 23:55, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

OH PINEAPPLE YES. Brb partying. Though they probably have known about us for a wh-...nevermind, I can't be so sure of that.--^Яειм ^'s Talk 00:01, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

It is not really a question (nor statement looking for any sort of answer), so I do not think it belongs here. It would probably be better on the discussion page of "Wiki Home", but that is just my opinion, and I cannot honestly think of a better place. Either way, congratulations to everyone for their hard work here at this wiki. --Rusty 00:27, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I get the feeling that Nexon sometimes refers to our wiki for information. Winwinwin :3 --Ryo (Talk) 00:32, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

lol, score? -- ladywinter ~{talk | contribs}~ 21:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Q137 Yes or No?!

Category:Monster Equipment. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 02:42, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

No!!! ~kotarou3 ^TALK_CONTRIBS 03:12, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

On an unrelated note, you guys should try to update Monsters' Equipment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hengsheng120 (talk • contribs) . Please always sign your comments with the button or by typing ~~~~!

i totaly agree no.. there is no point in having monster equipment if we ourselves can not make use of it.--chrissy of hailfire 06:44, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Who knows? A use might just come up all of the sudden, and once you've deleted it, you'd need to start over. This is why this question exists. Anyone any ideas of what this may have any potential use for? --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 06:48, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

You could always undelete it. The only point of monster equips I would think there would be is for modding ~kotarou3 ^TALK_CONTRIBS 08:18, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't see what's wrong with it o_o.. *neutral*--^Яειм ^'s Talk 18:56, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I think having monster equipment is pretty useless, but I also think this and related monster categorization is stupid but no one else agreed with me. --- Angevon (Talk) 14:09, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

The monster's scientific family somewhat helps, but barely, seeing as for the most part monsters of the same type (spiders, skeletons, etc.) are all grouped on one page.--^Яειм ^'s Talk 14:50, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

OMG. YES, ANGE. Scientific family categorization is stupidddddd. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 20:06, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Agreed with the inability to find reason for the family categorization. Um. What was the original editor's reasoning? o.o -- ladywinter ~{talk | contribs}~ 21:13, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Apparently because some other game wikis do it. --- Angevon (Talk) 11:14, 22 December 2010 (PST)

Q138 Another quick question

I've had a lot of those. Anywho, any reason why some monster's format pages have the whole "{{{{{1|{{{format}}}}}} thing? I've begun to remove a few as I was going through the monster table shortening the dungeon links, but I fail to see the point in them o.o there are like 160ish pages left that still have that.--^Яειм ^'s Talk 18:56, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

They allow previewing as the actual template before saving. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 22:45, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

But put extra load on the server when the template is updated. ~kotarou3 ^TALK_CONTRIBS 03:10, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

.....So should all the pages have them, or none, or the like 160 pages that still do? o-o;--^Яειм ^'s Talk 13:33, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I've already removed many of them while going over some templates. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 20:05, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

-too lazy to make a new section- Another thing, what's with the bolding of some of the section headings in pages?... Mostly the equipment pages (though they're probably all over)? It's another thing that has been bugging me; the fact that some of the pages have bolded headings and some don't (and some have bolded and unbolded headings on the same page :U)--^Яειм ^'s Talk 20:16, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

No idea. Also, if you can give me some templates that are being used with templatedadadada, I can remove em for you. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 20:19, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I think Wikipedia's info on editing styles suggests not to use bold section titles. Also, Wikipedia suggests not using single equal signs on either side of a section headings, that is, section headings should only have two (or more) equal signs on either side. However, these are style preferences for Wikipedia and I don't believe using bold section headings or the single equal signs will have any effect except making this wiki look a little less professional lol. --ZRoc (Talk) 06:11, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Well the single equal sign-thing was because it looked exactly like the title thingy of the page, so it would be 'confusing' (how? I have no idea).--^Яειм ^'s Talk 21:15, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Q140 tags

What's the difference between and ? I see both of them used all over the wiki, but there doesn't seem to be a noticeable difference. Is there one that we should use? --Ryo (Talk) 01:13, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Use because it is valid for both HTML and XHTML. is not valid with XHTML and only with HTML ~kotarou3 ^TALK_CONTRIBS 05:43, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

I have been wondering that.. so if we see we should go ahead and change it to ?--chrissy of hailfire 23:09, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Yep ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS2024:07:19:00:24 (Friday)

Q141 Wdf on talk pages?

Why is the edit button at the bottom now? and the "new section" button leads you to create a new "liquidthread"? ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 18:56, 25 October 2010 (PDT)

Also, I noticed that when my talk page was edited, I did not receive a message at the top of the next page stating so. --Ryo (Talk) 19:07, 25 October 2010 (PDT)

It's some newfangled thing mediawiki is implementing soon (?) that makes talk pages act more like discussion threads in a forum. On the plus side, it automatically inserts the user's signature. On the minus, it's not very intuitive to use and the edit button is hard to find =/ Replies aren't showing up, either. --- Angevon (Talk) 19:27, 25 October 2010 (PDT)

On the downside, siggies are limited to 255 characters again, even if it is included from a template (eg. mine and cosmic's) ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 21:32, 25 October 2010 (PDT)

Just checked. Seems IJ manually installed the extension for whatever reason we don't know (Special:Version See Liquidthreads). Time to beg to him to remove it? ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 21:38, 25 October 2010 (PDT)

So should we ask IJ to remove it? From what I see, every new reply is a new page, therefore might flood the RC during heated discussions. I also dislike it because it bugs up whenever you try to clear your "post" or "subject" and you also cannot delete "threads" on a regular user account. I dislike it, but that is only my opinion. It isn't going to do much. I'm wondering if any of you like it? ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 22:17, 28 October 2010 (PDT)

I don't like it much either. But mainly because I had to reset my preferences for it to even work on my browser, and so I lost my monobook skin =/ Maybe if it looked more like this wiki's LiquidThreads, where the replies are indented more, you can reply to specific replies, and the default signature automatically has a link to the user's talk and contribs -- then I'd rethink my opinion. Also, the dropdown box that says "More" shouldn't be used. The options it contains should be listed under every post. Extra clicks is bad and new users are going to have a hell of a time realizing that they have to click that to edit their post. --- Angevon (Talk) 07:37, 29 October 2010 (PDT)

IJ seems to be in a bad mood lately... ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 13:36, 29 October 2010 (PDT)

Q142 Default skin

For some reason, IJ disagrees that this wiki should use the monobook skin, and should use the vector skin. It would be okay if we used the vector skin if everything looked right. But it doesn't. I've told him about changing it and he says that I have no rights to tell him to change it. What should we do? ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 16:48, 28 October 2010 (PDT)

Go onto either MabiWiki's IRC channel or MWorldTech and ask someone like Khenta to change it, and with good reasons why. They have access to changing skins (or so I heard). I don't think IJ is mainly responsible for stuff like aesthetics. --Ryo (Talk) 19:21, 28 October 2010 (PDT)

Last I heard Khenta was trying to re-implement the monobook look. But I don't know if it will be made the default skin, since vector is apparently the new standard for mediawiki.--- Angevon (Talk) 20:32, 28 October 2010 (PDT)

Monobook is still here. I'm using the skin right now. It seems you can't select it from the list of skins anymore though. Changing the default skin requires access to LocalSettings.php so only IJ can change it. I'm also pretty sure re-adding monobook to the skins would also require access to LocalSettings.php. So only IJ and velocity can change it but velocity is inactive and IJ is refusing to change it ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 22:14, 28 October 2010 (PDT)

Q143 Items and Skills

Should we move the item and skill pages to their respective ID? And then we can use a title changer template to change the title to the name of the skill. This way people will know the skillid or itemid just by looking at the address bar but still knows the name by looking at the title bar or heading. This can also stop me creating duplicates of future content items ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 16:47, 5 November 2010 (PDT)

Bumpitybump ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 20:28, 6 November 2010 (PDT)

That would require too much work. I don't mind if you make some pages like "List of items by client ID" or start putting the ID number under the resell value or something like that. ---Angevon (Talk) 07:07, 8 November 2010 (PST)

We could just rename the pages slowly over time... ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 15:52, 8 November 2010 (PST)

But why? Then the categories would have IDs instead of the item's name. It's pointless. Just make the IDs as redirects or something. --- Angevon (Talk) 18:16, 8 November 2010 (PST)

We could make a Category:ID:Items for the real item pages and make the redirect pages have the Category:Items... ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 20:45, 8 November 2010 (PST)

Please, no. --- Angevon (Talk) 15:59, 9 November 2010 (PST)

Item and Skill internal ID codes serve absolutely no purpose to the end user. You need a tool just to see an item or skill's ID code in the first place, it wouldn't be practicle at all... Tellos 18:24, 9 November 2010 (PST)

It would help for modders... Ohwait, non-modding policy. ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 00:02, 10 November 2010 (PST)

Q144 New admins? wtf?

See [1] for a list of the admins. I notice some that have only registered last month o.o
List of suspicious admins:

Aurelie ‎(bureaucrat, administrator) (Created on 23 October 2010 at 19:24)
Recirah ‎(administrator) (Created on 26 October 2010 at 12:56)

I noticed this because of my "Special Users Colour" script that I added to the server, and it showed me that Recirah was an admin but only had 2 contributions. I thought something was wrong with my script, but I checked the admins list, and he was on it. I also saw Aurelie as an admin ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 18:15, 11 November 2010 (PST)

And Aurelie has no contributions at all! ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 18:17, 11 November 2010 (PST)

They are legit. They are admins on the forum. --- Angevon (Talk) 19:35, 11 November 2010 (PST)

Ah, I see ~◕Д◕ ^TALK_CONTRIBS 22:44, 11 November 2010 (PST)

Q145 Mainstream Items

There are a lot of pages for mainstream items that are used only once (such a Author's Notebook.). They're not needed, so should they be deleted? --kaede-kit 14:09, 11 December 2010 (PST)

You could make a single page with a list of all of them? Sorted by Generation?--Artsy 14:57, 20 January 2011 (PST)

Category:Mainstream Items? --- Angevon (Talk) 14:07, 21 January 2011 (PST)

Q146 In-Game Item/Monster Names

I'm completely confused why we would have pages/subsections titled in a way that is completely inconsistent than what is shown in the game. Wight being an example. Personally, I don't care about what's embedded in the "pack files" or what they were "intended to be" named. What shows up in the non-modified client should be what is shown on the wiki. Any less creates a ton of confusion. My specific example currently is Wight, which is shown as "White" in-game. When this page is changed to show the actual name shown by our North American clients (usually by new editors), it's consistently changed back to "Wight", which I believe confuses and chases new editors from the wiki. What gives? Is there policy regarding such things? -- Jspillers | (Talk) 01:23, 15 December 2010 (PST)

Extra attention should be paid to the actual image on our wiki for "Wight". It clearly shows "White". -- Jspillers | (Talk) 01:27, 15 December 2010 (PST)

You're right. It should be under the in-game name. --- Angevon (Talk) 07:36, 18 December 2010 (PST)

Q147 Possible Modifications to the "Sets page(s)

See [2] for the current list of sets. I was thinking it would help to Modify the sets page and separate the sets without effects (as they technically aren't sets despite containing the same names) and the sets that do contain an effect. Perhaps separate the page designer sets into 2 pages being Basic Sets (Clothing and armor that do not provide any additional bonuses) and Advanced Sets (Clothing and Armor sets that can create a set bonus) i understand its easier to have them both on one page however it constricts as to how much detail can be given about each. such as the requirements to access a set bonus (yes i know its on the individual armors and the like) this would also make it easier to alphabetize and categorize any possible up-coming sets that may be added on be they a set bonus outfit or not. i appreciate you taking this into consideration. --- Zetsumeitaka 06:20, 10 January 2011 (EST)

Sets that contribute to status bonuses are listed here, since that can be mixed and matched to create different combination effects. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 16:14, 10 January 2011 (PST)

If you think it would be useful, you could make something like Category:Designer Sets with Effects and Category:Designer Sets without Effects and put every set into the appropriate category. --- Angevon (Talk) 06:50, 11 January 2011 (PST)

Q148 Theater Missions

Mission's name pages just explain mission's pass. I think these pages should explain about missions. So, I made some test pages(User:Juff/The New King's Request, User:Juff/Guardian of Avon, User:Juff/Fortinbras's Expedition). and I want move to pages. What do you think? Is it ok? --Juff 05:24, 17 January 2011 (PST)

They look fine. --- Angevon (Talk) 07:35, 19 January 2011 (PST)

Q150 Inventory Icons

How do people get the inventory icons? For example, stackable items would usually have a number indicating how many are left in the stack in the corner, but the icons on the wiki don't have that. Blargel 19:48, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Hax image editing skillz ~小太郎 ^TALK_CONTRIBS 2011:02:21:19:55 (Monday)

I right-click the item in the game, which shows it in a large, clear box. This makes it easier to clean the background and crop, and the number on stackable items is no longer in the way. --Aramet (Talk) 20:21, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh, never noticed that right clicking removed the number for stackable items. Thanks Blargel 20:35, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Q129 Width > Height?

Why do we use height while setting up picture sizes such as NPCs, monsters, image previews? Using height can break certain templates or even extend the template too far (Tethra, DevCAT Ear Muff). If we used width, it would make sure that these templates would not extend too far or break a template! --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 23:45, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Q130 Add more peeps to the "minion" group?

I'd recommend User:KaedeKit, User:Hengsheng120, User:ZRoc, User:Ryo and ~~User:Bishop~~ User:Dramartistic‎ ~kotarou3 ^TALK_CONTRIBS 05:27, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

I think IJ is going to modify the minion group rights over the next few weeks. But when it's all set, maybe. --- Angevon (Talk) 23:35, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

IJ isn't changing any rights it seems. So bump? ~kotarou3 ^TALK_CONTRIBS 06:33, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Q132 Why do we use Template:Data's?

I don't see why we cant just make the Item page the data page, using <onlyinclude> so that nothing else will get added into the template. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 00:00, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Example

We don't even have to use an extra template for the potion! Sowhy?!?!? --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 00:07, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

It also frees up the "All Template Pages" from all these "Data" pages. :\ I see no cons to this! --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 00:11, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Using an item's page as the data template could get messy, as it can be far easier to accidentally remove the template data than having to go to the data template page. Also, when a data template is called won't it call the whole page and then use the data in the onlyinclude tags which means long item pages will take longer to load when used as data templates. A possible solution would be to have the template data as a sub-page of the item page which would avoid the above possible problems. --ZRoc (Talk) 03:22, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't get the 1st part, but your 2nd part has a point... --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 03:31, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Maybe we could make a new namespace for data templates? :v --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 03:36, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

For the first problem I mentioned: If someone edits an item page and that page also contains the code for the item's data template then they could accidentally delete some or all of the code for the data template. They could also mistakenly add something inside the onlyinclude tags or delete those tags. If the data template's code is on a separate page then this is going to be difficult (but not impossible) to do, as they need to specifically go to that page.

If it's not going to cause a problem then a new namespace would work. However, is it really worth the effort to edit all the data templates just to free up the "All Template Pages"? --ZRoc (Talk) 05:52, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Imo, it's more for organization purposes. I would totally waste all my spare time doing that. :D --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 05:58, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

If no-one else objects then, by all means, organise away XD. --ZRoc (Talk) 09:10, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Time to ask Irjustman to add a new namespace eh? ~kotarou3 ^TALK_CONTRIBS 12:55, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Q139 Race Pictures

So it seems like we're starting to get pictures of everything for all the races, but humans and elves use the same clothes mesh or whatever, so having both of them is redundant. Should we make it so that human or elf is acceptable for the base picture, and then add giant in the /Images gallery when applicable? I don't care that much of you all still want both human and elves, but I'm just pointing it out since it was mentioned on this talk page and probably lost among the recent changes. --- Angevon (Talk) 19:59, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I would have to agree using either human or elf as the base picture since they are exactly the same in shape. As well as humans and elves making up most of the community in Mabinogi (I think), so having them as the base picture would be more useful to players(?), and giant images may be placed in the Image Galleries. --Ɛαmes - ταłκ 20:58, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

i agree as well it just causes more space to be used on the server to have twice the pictures for what is basically the same mesh... unless someone can spot specific differences in the clothes for elves and humans there's no need to have both. only thing i see this happening in is perhaps headgear. --chrissy of hailfire 01:06, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

This is something related, since now Giants have a new character model, should every image with the old giant model be replaced?--钟国豪-BIassreiter 02:25, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Q149

Should we make a page for each of the artifacts here? Because the only information we'd have that isn't already on that page is probably just the description of the item, which is ohsovery exciting.--Artsy 13:02, 29 January 2011 (PST)

Q150 Homestead Indiviual Pages

I was thinking of doing individual pages for each of the farm objects, like pages for objects used in the house. Perhaps we could have the object's icon and a screenshot of how it appears on the farm, with it's effect, limitations, etc. The only thing is.. that they aren't actual objects. Would it be alright to go ahead and start making pages? ---Hershey687 1:11 1 May 2011 (EDT)

Yesplz. --κєνıи _{(»тαıĸ«)} 05:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Great :D I'll start right away. ---Hershey687 13:15, 1 May 2011 (EDT)

Search

Navigation menu