Wikia

WoWWiki

Talk:Updating for Cataclysm

102,282pages on
this wiki

Back to page

Some suggestions Edit

  • add {{Cataclysm change type|<type-to-check>}} to {{removedwithcataclysm}}. It would emit a red warning message if the type specified with RemovedWithCataclysm did not match one of the current types. This might reduce removedWithCataclysm category errors.
  • a {{cataclysm/verify}} template might be useful to add to ... all the *unstubbed* old world quests to be removed as they get reproduced. Either as a hidden category or whatever. If the quest (or item or whatever) is currently a stub, well, we needed to fix that anyway, didn't we?

--Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 22:35, May 13, 2010 (UTC)

If we're going to use {{removedwithcataclysm}}, then change it to {{removedfromgame|<4.0.1>}} after release. We did the same with WotLK. --User:Gourra/Sig2 11:51, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
With so much being removed, I was hoping to be able to separate them by type: Quest, item, objects, mob, npc... zone and subzone seem to be very minimal, so they could stay in the main part. It's why I made {{removedwithcataclysm}}, but if we can add a category switching parameter to {{removedfromgame}} then I'm all for it. User:Coobra/Sig4 18:30, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Updates Edit

I've redone the intro to be a bit clearer for the different use cases. It was a bit daunting for those unfamiliar with the process, and could probably still do with improvements. I also toned down the language a bit - while we obviously want to guide users in the right direction, it was getting a little close to shouting at them even if they're doing nothing wrong :P Kirkburn  talk  contr 12:01, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

Tons of images Edit

On my flickr. Have more if needed Renmiri (talk) 00:50, August 24, 2010 (UTC)

After Cata Release?Edit

After cataclysm releases, will we put the new info as most of the page and the old info in a section, or leave it as it is? --Sheffi (talk) 11:46, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

We might move all the current info into a History section and move the Cataclysm info to the top, for the most part. Some things however might change so dramatically that it would be easier to preserve it by archiving the article before updating it. It will be based on the situation I'm sure. User:Coobra/Sig4 18:35, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
You mean "archiving" as in linking to a date of the revision history? --User:Gourra/Sig2 18:42, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, I'm thinking more along the lines of moving to <article name> (original) like we've been doing to others. User:Coobra/Sig4 18:46, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
But where do you draw the line? Because of for example items getting revamped stats, and spells/abilities getting down to 1 rank, would we have to archive those? A lot of theorycrafting would have to be removed/revised as the coefficient changes, not to mention it's a nightmare to keep track of how the damage/healing of the abilities scale after Cataclysm... --User:Gourra/Sig2 13:37, September 7, 2010 (UTC)
I think we might be getting a little out of hand with it... maybe just notable items get archived while random items, quest items and such which are being slightly changed shouldn't need a whole new page. User:Coobra/Sig4 20:31, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

Abilities Edit

So not only does abilities scale with levels (they only have one rank), but the cost to learn them scales too - or it really cost 10Silver 77Copper to learn Recuperate, when looking at the training cost at level 10. --User:Gourra/Sig2 15:56, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

I don't think the cost changes, but with how the abilities are becoming just the one rank and one cost, maybe we should just add that info into the {{Infobox ability}}, instead of having a rank table with just one thing. The template could have "what level it's obtainable", and "the cost". Then the rank table section could just become the character's level scaling with ability, "levels from when obtained to 85", "base damage", and "mana cost". User:Coobra/Sig4 20:29, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

Since cata was released... Edit

...this advice hasn't been updated to show what the consensus is now on how to edit. I've been seeing little bits slipping through the cracks, mainly stuff phrased in present tense and not in past, and I know it sounds like a grammar nazi thing but it can actually be confusing. And since in the start of this page it says "since cataclysm is still a ways off.." I think it may be helpful to update this. Joshuajohnlee (talk) 18:38, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki