Wikia

WoWWiki

Talk:Patched

101,678pages on
this wiki

Back to template

Bluenote display issue Edit

This is actually a CSS issue, but I'll post it here since I've only noticed it while using this template. An <ol> tag stops the application of class="blizztext". For example:

* {{patched|date=2009-03-06|bluenote=
We applied a few key arena hotfixes over the past couple days to both the live realms and the tourney realms. [...]
# We removed the gates. Players are now free to begin combat as soon as the elevators reach the floor of the arena. 
This one was a doozy but we think we finally have a good handle on it now. 
# We modified the small side pillars to start in the up position. They used to rise up a few seconds after the start 
of the match. 
# We made a fix to the flame wall that allows it to break fear / root / etc. effects just like any other type of 
spell damage would. (ie. x damage taken and overall % health)}}


.. displays like this:

  • WoW Icon 16x16 Hotfix (2009-03-06): "We applied a few key arena hotfixes over the past couple days to both the live realms and the tourney realms. [...]
  1. We removed the gates. Players are now free to begin combat as soon as the elevators reach the floor of the arena. This one was a doozy but we think we finally have a good handle on it now.
  2. We modified the small side pillars to start in the up position. They used to rise up a few seconds after the start of the match.
  3. We made a fix to the flame wall that allows it to break fear / root / etc. effects just like any other type of spell damage would. (ie. x damage taken and overall % health)"

-Howbizr (talk) 02:18, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

The only work around I know to this problem was this:
* {{patched|date=2009-03-06|bluenote=
We applied a few key arena hotfixes over the past couple days to both the live realms and the 
tourney realms. [...]<ol><li> We removed the gates. Players are now free to begin combat as 
soon as the elevators reach the floor of the arena. <br/>This one was a doozy but we think we 
finally have a good handle on it now. </li><li> We modified the small side pillars to start 
in the up position. They used to rise up a few seconds after the start of the match. </li><li> 
We made a fix to the flame wall that allows it to break fear / root / etc. effects just like 
any other type of spell damage would. (ie. x damage taken and overall % health)</li></ol>}}
  • WoW Icon 16x16 Hotfix (2009-03-06): "We applied a few key arena hotfixes over the past couple days to both the live realms and the tourney realms. [...]
    1. We removed the gates. Players are now free to begin combat as soon as the elevators reach the floor of the arena.
      This one was a doozy but we think we finally have a good handle on it now.
    2. We modified the small side pillars to start in the up position. They used to rise up a few seconds after the start of the match.
    3. We made a fix to the flame wall that allows it to break fear / root / etc. effects just like any other type of spell damage would. (ie. x damage taken and overall % health)
    "
Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 10:39 AM, 15 Jun 2009 (EDT)

Time format Edit

Is there some reason we are using the American date format rather than an international one? DD MM YYYY or YYYY-MM-DD for example. -Howbizr (talk) 16:45, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Much more logical to use the International format and also more easy for a non american or low english leveled people to read.
Problem is you'll have to come back on every article using this template in order to put the date in the good format ==> HELL ON WOWWIKI !
IconSmall Hamuul Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 16:49, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
If no one is opposed, I can update the template. We could probably recruit someone's fancy bot skills to get the hotfixes converted over, or at least the majority of them. -Howbizr (talk) 20:29, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
If we're switching over, I would prefer "27 May 2009" as opposed to "27/05/09" or anything else. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 20:33, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
"2009-05-27" works too. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 20:35, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I vote "2009-05-27" given Pcj's suggestions. Year first makes it easier to scan (IMO). -Howbizr (talk) 20:42, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Made a policy post and bot request. -Howbizr (talk) 20:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Went ahead and just changed it. -Howbizr (talk) 01:40, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Bluenotes Edit

I feel like something is missing with this template, and I don't have a good idea - other than what I've already been doing - to remedy it. When you want to add a bluenote, but it's not a hotfix, there isn't a good way to say where the bluenote came from. So I've just been adding a reference with {{ref web}}, but I know there are at least a couple of editors who don't seem to like that look-and-feel.

For example:


{{patched|patch=3.2.0|comment=Will become unattainable.|bluenote=...removed when 3.2 comes out <ref name="Bornakk">{{ref web
|url=http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=17367881473&pageNo=1&sid=1#4
|archiveurl=http://blue.mmo-champion.com/20/17367881473-ironboundrusted-protodrake.html
|archivedate=2009-05-29
|title=Ironbound/Rusted Proto-Drake
|author={{Blizz}} [[Bornakk]]
|date=2009-05-29
|accessdate=2009-05-30}}</ref>}}

=== References ===
{{reflist}}


WoW Icon 16x16 Patch 3.2.0 (2009-08-04): "...removed when 3.2 comes out [1]"

Will become unattainable.

References Edit

  1. ^ Blizz Bornakk 2009-05-29. Ironbound/Rusted Proto-Drake. Archived from the original on 2009-05-29. Retrieved on 2009-05-30.

Any ideas? Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 10:00 AM, 15 Jun 2009 (EDT)

Personally I'd put the "will be removed in patch 3.2.0" note somewhere else, and put the reference there. It may just be me, but references in the "Patches" section looks out of place. --User:Gourra/Sig2 14:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
You're not the only one, although I'm not keeping a scoreboard so I don't remember who else was bothered by it. I have a hard time seeing a bluenote and not wanting some kind of link, even if it's not a reference. Putting that "...removed when 3.2 comes out" all by it's lonesome seems like it's begging for a {{fact}} flag. I still feel like the source of the problem is the template. It already has {{patched|<link>|<bluenote>}}, we just need a way to display the link if both are supplied. Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 10:12 AM, 15 Jun 2009 (EDT)
I was thinking of something more along these lines:

This mount will be removed with Patch 3.2.0.[1]

Patch changes Edit

  • WoW Icon 16x16 Patch 3.2.0 (2009-08-04): Will be removed from game.

References Edit

  1. ^ Blizz Bornakk 2009-05-29. Ironbound/Rusted Proto-Drake. Archived from the original on 2009-05-29. Retrieved on 2009-05-30.
Comments? --User:Gourra/Sig2 14:15, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Yay for duplicating information. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 14:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I'd be fine Gourra's idea. I wanted to throw this out there too, if you like it better PCJ.


{{patched|patch=3.2.0|bluenote=...removed when 3.2 comes out|link=http://blue.mmo-champion.com/20/17367881473-ironboundrusted-protodrake.html}}


Patch 3.2.0 (???): "...removed when 3.2 comes out" (Source)


Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 10:20 AM, 15 Jun 2009 (EDT)
IMO, {{Patched}} should only be used for past changes (as indicated by the tense of the template's name). As we all know, future changes announced by Blizz may or may not occur, or may be delayed. For changes which still require a source, Howbizr's solution is better than the current model. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 14:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
PCJ I don't understand your change to the template at all. Past hotfixes always need a |link= parameter. Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 10:44 AM, 15 Jun 2009 (EDT)
Again, duplicating information. Gourra's change added your link (to the same post) at the end. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 14:46, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah. I was going to leave the link at the beginning, since the majority of the time, it's just a hotfix. But for the one-offs like the example, where they need a link to both a patch and a bluenote, put it at the end. Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 10:48 AM, 15 Jun 2009 (EDT)

Yes, but hotfixes would still look terrible because they would have the link at the beginning and the end. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 14:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
*raises eyebrow* I thought the edit I made would check if there was a hotfix and made the text link there, otherwise if there wasn't a link there would be a "(Source)" link at the end. --User:Gourra/Sig2 15:49, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Surprise, it doesn't. See the example on the template page. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 15:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I found the error. It's fixed now. --User:Gourra/Sig2 15:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
OK, that works, don't see why they can't be in the same spot though. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 15:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
It's just a visual thing. I think most of the time it's a string of patches, one hotfix, and only for content in development will we ever see the "(Source)" thing show up. And I'm confident all of those things will eventually show up in real patch notes, so we can get rid of the bluenotes. Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 1:16 PM, 15 Jun 2009 (EDT)
So what's the difference between an upcoming change and a hotfix where one should be linked to the source in the change type and the other should be linked by (Source) following the description of the change? --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 17:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I think the entire issue is that this template was never designed for upcoming changes ("patched", past tense). This template was designed around patch notes (the note param), hotfixes (bluenote) and undocumented changes (comments). I think the best solution is to make another template specifically for upcoming changes. This would also make it easier to track down what pages need to be updated to use this template when the patch finally drops. Then one could simply use: {{upcoming change|patch=3.2.0|note=This will be removed|link=blah}} TeжubԎ Ҩ Ѡ 21:42, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm down either way. Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 1:11 AM, 16 Jun 2009 (EDT)

If not red then Edit

Pcj, we really should use some color for "PTR" other than white, going back to your previous statements about it being past tense ("patched"), but PTR information really hasn't been implemented yet. Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 3:10 PM, 19 Jul 2009 (EDT)

Yeah, red is the color of broken links...maybe orange or something. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 19:16, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Problem Edit

Really have no idea how to fix this "1.1" and "1.10" always yield the same date, even though they're both listed separately in the switch/case statement. It's either a bug with MediaWiki, or we're gonna need some fancy code.

Code
{{Patched|patch=1.10|note=Newer note.}}
{{Patched|patch=1.1|note=Old note.}}
Yields

WoW Icon 16x16 Patch 1.10 (2006-03-28): Newer note.
WoW Icon 16x16 Patch 1.1 (2004-11-07): Old note.

Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 12:22 AM, 11 Aug 2009 (EDT)

In this particular case 1.1.0 should be 1.01.0 because 1.1 = 1.100 = 1.100.0 in math terms (Wikia web pages just use character not math but the template is using math -- (M o r p hJames E. Rooks, Jr. aka: Morph
Morphgnome & Morphdraenei
| CMorph has made 8,581 contribution(s) to WoWWiki. | TLeave me a message on my Discussion/Talk Page) IconSmall Gnome MaleMorphgnomeIconSmall Draenei MaleMorphdraenei 04:33, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
This is also one of Blizzard's blunders in their numbering of patches -- the only solution I know of is change 1.1 to 1.01 in the patched and make a redirect from Patch 1.01 to Patch 1.1.0
WoW Icon 16x16 Patch 1.10.0 (2006-03-28): 1.10
WoW Icon 16x16 Patch 1.1.0 (2004-11-07): 1.1
WoW Icon 16x16 Patch 1.01.0 (???): 1.01
-- (M o r p hJames E. Rooks, Jr. aka: Morph
Morphgnome & Morphdraenei
| CMorph has made 8,581 contribution(s) to WoWWiki. | TLeave me a message on my Discussion/Talk Page) IconSmall Gnome MaleMorphgnomeIconSmall Draenei MaleMorphdraenei 04:35, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
hmm looks like you have to use 3 numbers 1.1.0 and 1.10.0 not 2 number 1.1 and 1.10 to keep from renaming it to 1.01.0 -- (M o r p hJames E. Rooks, Jr. aka: Morph
Morphgnome & Morphdraenei
| CMorph has made 8,581 contribution(s) to WoWWiki. | TLeave me a message on my Discussion/Talk Page) IconSmall Gnome MaleMorphgnomeIconSmall Draenei MaleMorphdraenei 04:59, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
We're going to need to fix these and these references. Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 9:13 AM, 11 Aug 2009 (EDT)
Hang on, let me take a look at the code. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 16:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
This should now be fixed. Patches like 3.2 can now be defined (both in editing the template and in using it) as 3.2 instead of 3.2.0. However, for patches like 1.10 you need to define it (in editing, but not in using) as 1.10. (with the period at the end). --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 16:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Morph for the hold-over, and Pcj for working out a long term solution. I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say Pcj, so could you just update the documentation? Maybe use 1.10 as the example? Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 1:46 PM, 12 Aug 2009 (EDT)
The usage of the template stays the same (but works as expected now), when updating the template itself is what changed. Patches like 1.10.0 should now be defined in editing the template as 1.10., and in using the template can be defined as {{patched|...|patch=1.10}} or {{patched|...|patch=1.10.0}} or even {{patched|...|patch=1.10.}}. Patch 1.1 is {{patched|...|patch=1.1}} --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 17:46, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Bug Edit

For some reason, Patch 3.3.0's date isn't working, even though I just added one.

* {{patched|patch=3.3.0|note=Added.}}

Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 9:13 PM, 1 Oct 2009 (EDT)

Hi, the problem is the code that removes any extra .0s I've made a change that will fix it (3.3.0 and 3.3 will work in the template call) but a rewrite would be better -- sannse@Wikia (talk) 21:54, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
Rewritten. Check Category:Unmatched patch date in Template:Patched for potential problems -- so far, the only problem is that there's no date for 4.0 (Cataclysm) yet. If anyone wants to be really eager (and do some botwork), I'd replace this system with a set of small templates, one for each patch revision, that call a common formatting template with the proper parameters; that way, you don't need to change this template which is used on over 5000 pages every time a new patch comes out. --◄mendel► 22:27, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
I'm not seeing any problems. See the section above for the reason it's coded this way. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 22:43, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
Well, {{User:M.mendel/Patched|patch=1.10.0}} and {{User:M.mendel/Patched|patch=1.10}} both work fine with my version: Patch 1.10.0 (2006-03-28):
and Patch 1.10 (2006-03-28):
(vs. WoW Icon 16x16 Patch 1.10.0 (2006-03-28):
and WoW Icon 16x16 Patch 1.10 (2006-03-28):
). So there was really no reason to revert.
If you do not see any problem, you have not read this section. And I'd appreciate a comment on my refactoring suggestion (or ask if I need to explain it more). --◄mendel► 11:21, October 3, 2009 (UTC)
With your template Patch 1.1 (2004-11-07):
is giving the wrong date (versus WoW Icon 16x16 Patch 1.1 (2004-11-07):
). Please re-read the section above. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 12:10, October 3, 2009 (UTC)
I see where I went wrong now, and adjusted my template. I still would like a comment on my refactoring suggestion, it would avoid the problem altogether. --◄mendel► 15:36, October 3, 2009 (UTC)

This is the correct template Edit

For anyone else who has seen these Patch XXX templates, please do not use them. Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 4:32 PM, 6 Oct 2009 (EDT)

See Category talk:Patch templates for a discussion of the change. --◄mendel► 17:11, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki