FANDOM


This Forum has been archived

Visit Discussions
Forums: Index > Wiki Discussion > Crafting pages overhaul (DA II)
Note: This topic has been unedited for 2017 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not continue it unless it really needs a response.

Hello. I'd like to overhaul the crafting related pages here for DA 2. I think they could use a more consistent look and there's much information missing, too. In addition I'd like to change some things in the info boxes so that they more reflect terms used in the game--that's why I'm putting it to discussion here.

For example type|Recipe should be called type|Crafting Recipe for that's the description in game. For recipes the supertitle shouldn't be also "Recipe" but "Other", because that's the inventory category where those can be found at merchants. Similar for runes: "Other" instead of "Item" (Item's so vague…).

I'd like to add more Effects for Potions and take them away from the Description. Perhaps with Duration, Cooldown, and such things, too.

I've thought about doing it in sandbox first, but there are too many different pages to test it all.

So, what do you think? Do I need someone's approval? Should I simply start? CompleCCity (talk) 04:42, September 18, 2014 (UTC)

Generally when you use the phrase "overhaul," you have to wait for the admins to sign off on it. Acting without consent is a sure way to get your revisions reverted, and thus hours of your life wasted (happened to me at the Mass Effect Police State -er, I mean, Wiki ;P Don't worry, the people here are much nicer). RShepard227 (talk) 05:08, September 18, 2014 (UTC)

You don't need admin approval, per se, but major changes to the wiki do generally require a community consensus (see DA:CONS). As all of the existing infoboxes, item transformers, etc were created long before my time and by people much smarter than me, I can't really give feedback on that part, but I'm always in favor of looking into ways to improve the wiki. I do like the idea of changing wording to more suit how things are labeled in-game. Trying out a mockup of a couple different ideas in a sandbox would be the best way to approach it, so that people can get a visual idea of what you have in mind. Kelcat Talk 05:39, September 18, 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I'm giving up the thought of adding Cooldown or Duration into the Info box for now--that would mean to change templates or something like that; I don't have the experience or knowledge to do that right. The other things I mentioned already are there with some items, so it's no great change to add them for other items, too. -- CompleCCity (talk) 12:59, September 19, 2014 (UTC)

So I've begun, first editing the recipes. Text now is similar on all pages. IDs added, descriptions corrected (they were often from the potions rather than from the recipes), layout improved … I replaced "crafted for" by "ordered for" because you don't really craft those things, you order them. Still being editing … -- CompleCCity (talk) 16:18, September 19, 2014 (UTC)


Done. I've changed the following things:

  • the supertype (the word in the info box above the item name) for runes is now "Other" rather than "Item", for that's their inventory category (and somehow all things are "Item"s, aren't they?)
  • most potions, poisons, grenades and runes now have their effect listed in the info box
  • redundant notes on mostly all runes were removed (such as 1. stating the dependancy on the item value, 2. saying that the bonus is X%, and 3. mentioning that no item bonuses are calculated)--instead the bonus respectively its relativity is stated in the first paragraph with a bold "base" (those notes are still mentioned on the runes' overviews)
  • at acquisition the order of options goes from cheap to expensive and for better reading the price comes first
  • where existing, notes come before crafting (with a clear added) for layout reasons--on not-extra-wide-screens otherwise the section line for crafting is positioned beside the info box and lots of empty page space are wasted (I had some discussion about this with Mostlyautumn)
  • I've tried to make the wording as consistent as possible, so that all those pages appear similar and are familiar to read

I hope I haven't forgotten too much and didn't make too many errors. Feedback's welcome but not necessary. -- CompleCCity (talk) 14:29, September 24, 2014 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.