Wikia

WoWWiki

"(class) set" vs "(class) armor set"

102,285pages on
this wiki

Forum page

Revision as of 23:20, December 8, 2010 by Raylan13 (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ←Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Forums: Index WoWWiki general "(class) set" vs "(class) armor set"
(This is a dead topic, Please do not edit this page!)

Back in late December, I was fiddling around with the warrior T10 armor items, and found the armor set categories, and the armor set category names exceptionally disorganized.

The vast majority of the categories had "set name" pages pushed to the top of the sort order, and individual armor items in the same categories. This might have been acceptable when there were only a dozen or two sets total, but there are over 100 sets per class now.

I found Class sets to be in both "World of Warcraft Armor item sets" and "World of Warcraft item sets". If "class sets" specifically refers to armor sets, then it should not be in "item sets", it should be in "armor sets" alone. If it refers to both armor and non-armor sets (of which there are no current examples to my knowledge), then it should be in "item sets" alone, and the "armor sets" category as a whole is redundant. As both existed, I declined to remove one or the other on my own authority.

More, if there is a separate "armor item sets" category from "item sets" category, and if there's a Battlegear armor set category, why are they not "(class) armor sets" categories instead of "(class) sets"? I could find no answer to that.

So, beginning (again) in late December, I created Category:Warrior armor sets as a new place to put pages about the armor sets themselves, and Category:Warrior armor set items as a touchstone for the sets. Further, since many armor sets are interchangeable (for instance, all level 80 gladiator sets for a given class), I started creating subclasses for the items that fit those sets (ie Category:Gladiator's Battlegear set items).

Further, I've been altering both the set pages, and the item-of-set pages such that

  • set page gets its relevant (class) category from the nav template(s) used on it. It still has to have the "tier" category added directly, but it always has, so that's nothing new.
  • item pages get their "of this set" category from the set page inclusion.

My goal is to have...


  • Category:Class set items
    • contains Category:(class) armor set items
    • is a subcat of: Class armor sets, World of Warcraft armor set items
    • currently also a subcat of W.o.W. item sets, but probably should not be. (in favor of W.o.W. armor item sets if anything)

Class armor sets (new category courtesy yours truly) is currently in both "World of Warcraft Armor item sets" and "World of Warcraft item sets" because so is Category:Class sets.


I've recently been challenged on this new category arrangement, so I put it to you: New category arrangement or old? If there's useful discussion on the issue, I'll modify my goals, much as was done on the gem category resort. If there's opposition but limited consensus building, I'll put it to a vote.

In the mean time, unless categorically forbidden, I will continue refitting the set and item pages. Reverting the refitted pages to the old categories should be fairly straightforward, if desired. And using the new/old category differences to find work-to-do in the mean time is handy. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 01:44, February 18, 2010 (UTC)

Personally I find this order the best:
I'd like to hear what others think, too. --User:Gourra/Sig2 02:10, February 18, 2010 (UTC)
The reason for a "Gladiator's Battlegear set items" is that Wrathful, Deadly, etc all qualify for the set bonus. I have no objection to putting "Wrathful Gladiator's Battlegear" as a subcat to "Gladiator's Battlegear", though that makes for fairly thin (5-9 article) categories. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 02:01, February 18, 2010 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be better then to have it in "Warrior arena set items" under the category "Warrior arena sets" or something like that? Then there would be no question as to which set it is about.--User:Gourra/Sig2 02:10, February 18, 2010 (UTC)
Not really. Sanctified Lasherweave Garb is the same set bonus as Lasherweave Garb, for instance. I have no inclination to rename it (for example) "Tier 10 Druid resto set". I believe all Gladatior Battlegear sets (more directly to your example) are "(qualifier) Gladiator's Battlegear", and thus the "Gladiator's Battlegear" is the least common denominator, and so the most descriptive.
We do not currently consider the set bonus as an entity of its own separate from the pieces that compose it, and thus have no policy on how to handle them. If we did, we might have considerable rearranging to do, beyond what I've attempted. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:15, February 18, 2010 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki