A number of people are adding pages for all the different equipment items in the game, and that's great, but it seems to me that we should come to a decision about the best way to format these pages, before they're all added and all look different.
First, how exactly should a weapon/armor page be formatted? A completed page needs to show the item's stats, and should also show information on where/how to obtain the item (though this will often just be one sentence with a link to a quest page, or maybe a creature). The 'acquiring' information would sometimes need to go under a spoiler tag. Other info (history, trivia, other notes) would really depend on the item; for a great many items there wouldn't be anything else to add.
Second, should each and every item have its own page? Should rings, amulets and belts each have their own page? Should there be one single page for an armor set, or should each piece have its own page? --Rallion 16:20, November 15, 2009 (UTC)
I think sets should go together just because that's how sets are, but everything else should have its own page (that's why we have categories - to tie it all together). It makes it easier to find information that way. As for the formatting, I'm gung-ho for that and would gladly update the few pages I've made to have a new standard. I was looking for a standard formatting before making those pages, but couldn't find any so I did what I had time to do. The complicated thing is that some formatting looks really nice, but doesn't work for every item. Too bad I'm not so great with wikis and rely on my HTML knowledge over what the wiki markup is, otherwise I'd be more helpful on creating a cohesive format. If we come up with something, we should create a template for people to paste into new pages. --Socsaint 19:25, November 15, 2009 (UTC)
- Yes we should get on top of this soon. Here's what I think, one page for armour sets and a group page for generic weapons, i.e. all generic daggers (steel, iron, etc.) would go on one page. I think any unique weapon can probably have its own page. As to accessories, I think I would prefer to group them in a similar way, generic items on one page, unique items on a single page, though perhaps it might be easier to group the accessories. For formatting, perhaps we can use a little of what AshleyJames has been doing on the items pages, but I think what you've been doing Rallion, is quite good. As you suggested we just need to add things like acquisition and eventually pictures of the icons, and in-game shots. Maybe we can select a page, as a "test page" and experiment on it to get it to a standard we're all happy with and use that to make a template for other pages? Loleil 21:40, November 15, 2009 (UTC)
- My workplace has a wiki on our intranet, and one of my coworkers has it set up so that, with the push of a button, you can automatically insert a preset template. I don't know if this works on wikia, as some of the features seem to be different from the standard wiki. Unfortunately, I don't even know how he did it, and I rarely see him. We can, however, place a link to premade templates (maybe locked?) for people to use when creating new articles. There also should be something talking about how to write an article, what should be included, and what kind of information people shouldn't include (ie uncertainties). I'm still learning wikimarkup, but hope to know it pretty well by the end of the week, so if you need any help, my work and school is closed all next week :). Too many ideas, too many limitations. Why not duplicate a page with complete information and experiment on it? We'd have the history so we could view everyone's changes. Also, I've seen a few pages using a template already made, but they have empty sections and the image says "200px". It may or may not be a good idea to require people to unhide (delete HTML comment tags, which, sadly, comment out when I try and post them) sections if they plan to use them. -- Socsaint 04:44, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
- I have seen this page added less than half an hour ago, http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Ruby. We need to get started soon as this just doesn't look very professional. Not only is it just one item on a page, it is also only 2 short sentences and sounds more subjective than objective. --Grayewolf - A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi 01:16, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
- I agree, pages like that don't belong on here. Especially considering you could easily shove all the gems together anyway. Waste of space and the effort to find the page to begin with.
- Agree as well. Item categories need to be set up that handle items Tier 1 through Tier 7 (Unless there is a Tier 8 I am not aware of). Someone really needs to think about the navigation scheme for items. Cypherdiaz 04:54, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
- I might as well chime in, and mention that I disagree. Look at other top-notch game wikis, like WoWWiki. They have a page per item. This enables a *lot* of functionality that you can't otherwise do (like rollovers). They *also* have pages for related items (like our Gems page for example). Also, the Ruby article is actually a great reason why sometimes you really do need a page per item. Sure, at the moment Ruby is just a preview of the final page, but it has info that is actually useful right now. Eventually we'll add buy/sell values, images, etc. But all journeys start with small steps. Don't get me wrong though, we do need to follow a common format for items though. -- SkyeNiTessine (talk · contr) 00:24, November 20, 2009 (UTC)