Wikia

WoWWiki

Talk:Village pump/Archive29

100,552pages on
this wiki

Back to page | < WoWWiki talk:Village pump

Spellpower changes to existing items? Edit

Is there a way that all items with +heal or +dam can be updated with their spellpower, or should we do so manually?

In the past we had separate healing item pages (such as BC healing equipment (cloth) but what should the plan be to integrate those with their DPS equivalent?

-- Bregdark (talk) 20:20, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Manually. See Category:Pages which may need their tooltip template updated. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 20:23, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
I honestly think we should just run a bot or two over the tooltip list and have it search for the string "Increases [...] spell damage..." and straight up replace it. Don't know what to do about the pure healing items, if those are still in the game. --Sky (t · c · w) 21:33, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
It's "Increases damage and healing done by magical spells and effects by up to..." and "Increases healing done by up to [...] and damage done by up to [...] for all magical spells and effects." User:Gourra/Sig2 21:41, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Spell haste, spell crit, healing, spell damage, paladin gear, any gear with random enchantment including spell damage or healing or spell haste or spell crit. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 23:17, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
"Increases damage and healing..." is an easy change for a bot. So are spell hit/crit/haste. "Increases healing..." I think would have to be done manually, since there's no simple conversion formula and we'll have to cross reference each individual item with Armory data to get the new spell power numbers. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 00:20, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

User Name Question... Edit

How come my user name has been changed from Biron to WoWWiki-Biron. I have been over seas for alomost the past year and do not under stand this. Please leave a message in my talk. -- Biron Sig {TC) 01:15, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Is there any way to change my username would rather have something else then this silly one Biron Sig {TC) 01:40, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Take a look at our upgrades page and the instructions therein. We merged user databases with Wikia earlier in the year and there was already a Biron, apparently. If you own the Biron on Wikia proper, you can request a merge of the two accounts and you'll get Biron back. Otherwise, you can request a name change and one of the techs can accomodate that for you as well. You'll keep all of your contributions either way. Sorry for the inconvenience. --k_d3 02:27, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Can anyone make bot to add ood tag to all class pages Edit

Someone already did this to all the class builds pages but most of other class pages need the tag as well. XD

-- WakemanCK (talk) 05:01, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

No they don't. Easier to add a site notice or to update it otherwise. I'll just call it a really bad case of Templatecreep. --Sky (t · c · w) 05:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Haunted Memento doing strange things in Item template Edit

Code: {{item|icon=|Haunted Memento}}
Output: [}]

Why? --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 5:54 PM PST 27 Oct 2008

Nevermind: |arg={{{arg|}}}} --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 5:59 PM PST 27 Oct 2008

Theorycraft link blocked Edit

Lhivera was a leading image in both the official Mage forums and EJ boards. He created a very versatile tool for mage dps measuring called the Theorycraft-o-Matic. He has, however, has stopped playing the game and will stop updating the original version at: [1] ([2] corroborates this claim, also note the link is not blocked)
The following link leads to Zaldinar's continuation of Lhivera's Theorycraft-o-Matic: http://zaldinar.bou nce me.net/tcom/ . ([3] corroborates this claim)
The TCOM is a valuable mage theorycraft tool and the spam filter is blocking me from posting it onto the Mage theorycraft article. Can anyone with the power to do so help me with this and unblock Zaldinar's link? Adesworth talk to me 01:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't have any special rights, and I can edit Mage theorycraft. However there are some pages you need to be a user for a week before it will let you post - maybe this is one of them. -Howbizr (talk) 12:22, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Should work now. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 12:30, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
It does. Thanks! Adesworth talk to me 15:53, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

To Namespace Or Not Edit

I'm adding a namespace to all of the individual achievement pages (probably not to the old achievement pages). Please let me know if I should NOT do this. The reasoning is because there are enough name collisions it seems worthwhile. -Howbizr (talk) 12:29, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Don't do it. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 12:31, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
So conflicts should be Name (Achievement) then by design? -Howbizr (talk) 13:41, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Name (achievement) actually. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 13:46, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Let it be so! -Howbizr (talk) 14:50, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Ha, the discussions we've had about new namespaces... Kirkburn  talk  contr 14:21, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Steps to take before creating a new article for a new Wrath class ability? Edit

As I have access to the Wrath beta, I've been looking for articles of Hunter class abilities that have been added. I've spent some time with the ability boilerplate, but before I create the article, I want to know if there's anything special I need to do to my article to ensure that it's proper, especially given that it's based off of Beta information, which can (and sometimes is) be very frequently changed. -- Rilgon (talk) 15:28, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

As long as it matches the style of the boilerplate, it should be fine. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 15:34, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
So there isn't an additional template or the like that I need to add to it to denote that it contains Wrath-related/Beta-related content? --Rilgon (talk) 16:04, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Only thing you should really add is {{NYI}}, other than that, nope nothing special. User:Coobra/Sig3 16:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you both very much, and the new article is complete. :) --Rilgon (talk) 16:36, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
I would add a "Patch changes" section with a note that the content was added in Wrath of the Lich King beta. If the ability doesn't chnage after release, then just remove the "beta". --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:29 PM PST 30 Oct 2008

Can't preview or save edits in FireFox 3.0.3 Edit

Every time I try to preview or save an edit, I get the following error:

Connection Interrupted
----
The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading.
----
The network link was interrupted while negotiating a connection. Please try again.

Works fine in IE7 (which is how I wrote this). Anyone have any ideas? It started happening a couple days ago and the Firefox Error Console shows nothing. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:27 PM PST 30 Oct 2008

Been getting this a LOT myself, too, on Firefox 3.0.1. At first I thought it was my code being bad, because the first time I got it, I was working on my sandbox trying to finish off a page for one of the new pet abilities, but then I got it without my code, so I figured it was something server-side. At least the caching on WoWWiki is good enough such that I can hit back and save my work! Rilgon <t|c> 22:33, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
This is happening to me as well, even when all I'm trying to do is click is view a page through a link (from search and recent changes, at least). 3.0.3 here, for reference. --Flyspeck (talk) 01:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
As expected Firefox 3.0.3 Mac is fine... could be Win version or something with my network at work. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:58 PM PST 30 Oct 2008
Safari 3.1.2 Mac appears to be fine as well. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 12:03 AM PST 31 Oct 2008
Firefox 3.0.3 works just fine on both my home and work PCs. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 09:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
From further investigation, the problem only happens on long pages. I'm trying to narrow down exactly how big. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:44 AM PST 31 Oct 2008
Nevermind, it isn't long pages. Strangely, I had a window where I could preview and save edits, but now it seems to have closed. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:48 AM PST 31 Oct 2008

I'll ask about this, see if I can find anything out. Kirkburn  talk  contr 14:14, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh well, it seems to have fixed itself. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk ·contr) 5:53 PM PST 3 Nov 2008
Not quite, I got it earlier today when creating a page. Adesworth talk to me IconSmall Mage 01:20, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
It's still doing it in Opera 10 Preview as of today... I have no idea why. It only OCCASIONALLY does it when clicking "Preview" or "Save page", but doesn't do it at ALL in Internet Explorer 7... It's pretty weird. ~ Doc Lithius [U|T|C] 07:31, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Seeking image Edit

Netherwind Presence is in need of an image that I just know is being used for another spell(s) already, and isn't listed as having been introduced in any beta patch by WotlkWiki. The image I'm talking about is in [here], as the talent icon. Can anyone recognize it? Thanks in advance! Adesworth talk to me 02:22, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Never mind this. Thanks Gourra! Adesworth talk to me 02:49, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

High General Abbendis Edit

So it's been revealed that the younger High General Abbendis is called Brigitte Abbendis, while the father's real name is unknown. Does someone oppose moving High General Abbendis (father) to High General Abbendis, since we now know her real name? User:Gourra/Sig2 16:09, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

They are both High General's, so I'm not sure that's a good idea. Kirkburn  talk  contr 14:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
This wowwiki talk is about the named female High General. For her father whose name is unknown, see High General Abbendis.
Could use a rewording, but you get the point. CogHammer Ose talk/3721 15:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Mounts: Items or Spells Edit

I know before the big 3.0 patch, mounts were usually items, and they were actually in your inventory. But now all mounts have spell IDs, and only live in your inventory for a moment, before you learn to summon them. They're only usable as a spell, not really as the "reins" item, as they're often called. Shouldn't we start listing mount article as spells?

I entered a small handful of new mounts in this fashion, and they all got changed back to items, which I disagree with, but I'm not looking to start an editing war.

I was curious if anyone else had an opinion. I still find it kind of confusing when I'm looking up someone's mount spell, that I have to know what "reins" they used to learn the particular mount spell. -- Howbizr (talk) 19:33, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I would think the item versions are preferred since thats how they are first discovered (same with the small pets), also cause items show on other pages using {{loot}} or {{item}} rather than visiting the mount's page. User:Coobra/Sig3 22:09, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I could always make a {{spell}} template. -Howbizr (talk) 05:20, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
We had {{spelllink}} before, and I would strongly advise against it. Mounts that are learned are still items, you can check Wowhead or some other database if you're still unclear about the mount's properties... User:Gourra/Sig2 05:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
It seems pretty clear to me... I won't argue that there isn't historically an item. But in the end, you have learned a new ability that is a spell. Summon Charger and Swift Brewfest Ram seem no different to me, in the 3.0 world. -Howbizr (talk) 17:41, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
The mounts are still items in any case...the spell names can redirect to the mount items. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 17:53, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Summon Charger is exclusively a spell. Swift Brewfest Ram is an item that teaches you how to summon a mount. There's a difference right there. User:Gourra/Sig2 17:53, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Guild page being recognised as spam site Edit

Hullo, I am just a noobish editor taking care of our realm's page (EU Executus) and I was updating guild list lately. Unfortunately wiki does not allow me to save it, bacause of one of the links to one of the guilds. The URL is: www (dot) oprahwindfury (dot) tk. When you look at the page you'll surely find it as legitimate and c'mon it's one of the best progressing guilds on our relam :) I'd be greatful for any help.

Chris

-- Khanador (talk) 08:18, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

You mean http://www.oprahwindfury.tk ? I've added it to the whitelist. Kirkburn  talk  contr 14:06, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes, thank you :) -- Khanador (talk) 08:18, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Blizzard official spotlights Edit

Morning! I apologize for how little I've been around recently - been very busy and flying all over the place. But onto business...

As many of you know, Blizz has a community spotlight area on their main page. It draws a surprisingly large number of hits, despite it's location (which will hopefully be improved eventually). If there's anything on WoWWiki which you think would be good to highlight - or even anything from the general community which you think is cool - drop me a line at Special:EmailUser/Kirkburn and I'll pass it on.

Given the nature of WoWWiki, I know we're not prone to having specific things to point at, but if you see a really well written article, guide or whatever, just poke me :) I'll try and get Blizz to spread the word. Kirkburn  talk  contr 15:09, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Please Unban the following Turalyon EU Guild Addresses Edit

http://guild-reflection.tk

http://www.thesplitters.tk

Thanks :3

-- DaytimeTEEVEE (talk) 01:30, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Done! Kirkburn  talk  contr 15:18, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Druid Builds Page Edit

Getting a bit frustrated, seems some people don't know how to wikify pages. I've sorted the balance druid section, but the other sections are complete messes.

Can I do what I did with balance with the rest for tidyness?


-- Iravada (talk) 20:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Sure. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 20:28, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
By all means, be bold. --k_d3 20:29, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Cool, done Feral, moving onto restoration now. --Iravada (talk) 22:05, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Good job. Nevertheless, be prepared that it will be the same complete messes several weeks later. It is the nature of class builds pages. Time to time random people think they have "invented" a good build and should show it to everyone. After everyone add their own builds to the page, it will resume its messy form. To make thing worse, many of those random builds have major design flaws.
You can have a look at Paladin builds page. It has been using another approach for a few months. The main Paladin builds page should only contain incomplete basic builds with the core talents. The number of builds are restricted to PvP, PvE and leveling for each of the three trees. If someone want to put up their own complete builds, they put it in Paladin build samples, or someone will move it from Paladin builds to there. Pro: the main page can be kept relatively tidy and accurate. Con: end up with a messy samples page, but otherwise the main page would be the mess. WakemanCK (talk) 09:56, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
I think that could be a difficult line to draw for some classes. It remains to be seen how it will play out in 3.0, but splitting the specs effectively into "primary" and "other" for is likely to offend some folk. I only know the druid class sufficiently well for this particular point, but there were a good number of builds in 2.x which fell half way between balance and resto "best" specs, for example.
I suggest that it's better to worry about cleaning up the pages for 3.0 and getting a good set of information for both 70 and 80 (although I guess the real focus will be 80 in the very near future), and see how it goes, before worrying about splitting the pages. If some of them do need split, it's probably best done on a case by case basis, as it makes navigating to the desired information more cumbersome. --Murph (talk · contr) 15:36, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Mage talent analysis Edit

I'm rather new to the wiki and started awhile ago this new article inspired by Druid talent analysis.

Well not started, but 95% of all in there is mine. How am I doing so far? Any advice/tips are welcome. Everything in there is 100% updated and I've created all the previously red links in it. Could use some help from some Mage types as well!

Thanks, Adesworth talk to me IconSmall Mage 01:36, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Cleanse Spirit needs a new icon Edit

The icon for Cleanse Spirit was changed with patch 3.0.3, it no longer is the same as for Ancestral Spirit. -- Subanark (talk) 08:38, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. --SFSig-2009 09:17, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Offtopic StarCraft into Edit

Redirect StarCraft and StarCraft II to StarCraft franchise - yes or no? The content is not Warcraft related, and the information can better be seen on the Starcraft wiki. This is not a Blizzard wiki. User:Gourra/Sig2 21:58, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Starcraft wiki imo, but franchise is better than nothing. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 22:00, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Sounds like a good idea, Gourra. --Imperialles 08:53, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Raid Template issue Edit

I think there is an issue with the raid template box. Example: Under raid and Naxxramas. On the right side, click to show the WotLK raids. The Naxx page shows it right. But in raid, you get 2 extra "(closed)" raids, and the first and last raid doesn't show the players required nor the level. Maybe someone can look into it? --slxception (talk) 08:49, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. Widened the template. -Howbizr (talk) 18:09, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Please stop unbulleting subsections... Edit

I have seen some folks removing bullets and adding extra line breaks instead. DON'T DO THIS! It decreases the readability and makes it harder to separate the points.

Here is an example of the kind of changes I've been seeing:

Before
== Notes ==
* Blah blah blah doesn't stack with blah blah blah.
* Blah blah blah is useful when blah blah blah.
After
== Notes ==
Blah blah blah doesn't stack with blah blah blah.
 
Blah blah blah is useful when blah blah blah.

For one thing you need to put 2 line breaks between paragraphs in a wiki to make a noticeable separation, so if you have a bunch of short paragraphs with only 1 linebreak between them they just look like one big, oddly-wrapped paragraph or a big blob of text. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 7:22 PM PST 6 Nov 2008

I don't mean to be condescending... but I think most new people don't even know about this page. You might want to just address "offenders" directly on their talk page. Or maybe add some comments about it on the style guidelines. -Howbizr (talk) 18:57, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Most new member don't read the guidelines either though... least until they do something wrong and are told to review that certain guideline... but then again, I am generalizing. User:Coobra/Sig3 21:05, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
As I see the problem, I will link to here on people's talk pages. I don't want to explain it for every person who does it. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 5:42 PM PST 7 Nov 2008
The boilerplates for abilities and talents specifically says to "Separate each note by using double enters". If using bullets is to be considered standard for all articles, then the article templates should be edited to match. Right now editors are explicitly told that double enters should be used to separate subsections. Alltat (talk) 01:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Done. User:Coobra/Sig3 02:19, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
The idea was to suggest that a person use prose instead of simply listing. Ie, it is the editors' fault in that case and not the boilerplates. --Sky (t · c · w) 05:59, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Can't post to Korialstrasz server page, because of .TK links Edit

I was trying to add my guild to the various content sections on my server page, but another guild's link goes to http://www.darkomenguild.tk which keeps triggering the spam filter. -- Guido666 (talk) 21:26, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 21:28, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Faction Policy Edit

For example, when you have two quests for each faction that are identical, other than the location and the quest giver, do you make one article or two? It seems like depending on the author, some pages went separate while others were merged. I was just wondering if there was a general policy for this kind of thing, including quests but not limited to them. -Howbizr (talk) 13:21, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

If it's the exact same quest objective, description etc then it's merged to one article. If there's any differences then they should be on separate articles. User:Gourra/Sig2 13:42, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Hunter pet article edits posting blockedEdit

The TKA Something website is triggering the spam filter and prevents saving changes to the Hunter pet page. If the link is beneficial, the site should be whitelisted; if the link is spam, the link should be removed. I looked at the site, and it appears to be beneficial with spammy overtones. Can someone with a strong interest in maintaining Wiki neutrality look into this? The current situation is absurd. The link already exists on the page, and edits not related to the link are blocked. Madkaugh (talk) 00:12, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I commented out the TKA Something link. See if you can save some changes now. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:19 PM PST 10 Nov 2008
It works now; should, since that was what was flagged, just tried it to be sure; but is the removed link truly spam? It does not appear that the link is primarily self promotion. Madkaugh (talk) 20:45, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

It appears all .tk links were blocked, I've reallowed them. Kirkburn  talk  contr 13:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Achievement template renamed to achievementbox Edit

See Rename achievement box/tooltip template section of Achievement talk page. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:18 PM PST 12 Nov 2008

Looks good, except the redirect on Achievement talk is confusing. -Howbizr (talk) 06:16, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Ezra "Ephoenix" Chatterton Edit

The home page has a news item about the passing of Ephoenix last month. I think it makes sense to create a page summarizing the contributions he inspired, and putting it in Category:Memorials. (BTW, what's the correct syntax to link to a category page?) Should the page be titled Ephoenix or Ezra Chatterton? (With a redirect from the other title.) -- ScratchMonkey (talk) 14:16, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

It would be "[[<server> US/Ephoenix]]" per WW:PC. User:Gourra/Sig2 15:35, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Your syntax suggests that we're talking about a character, not a real person. -- ScratchMonkey (talk) 17:02, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I would suggest you make the page, if you consider it important. However, I suggest the above articles (Ahab Wheathoof, Ashes of Al'ar, Merciless Gladiator's Crossbow of the Phoenix, Kyle the Frenzied) go into Category:Memorials and not the article about the person. I would suggest making the article Server:Norgannon US/Ephoenix1 (with a redirect to it from Ezra Chatterton2) and putting it in the Category:Characters. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:07 PM PST 11 Nov 2008
Found some articles for you, ScratchMonkey. --Howbizr (talk) 02:36, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I do somewhat feel that a main namespace article is justified - he's certainly notable, and, like Leeroy Jenkins, he had a direct impact on the content of the game. Kirkburn  talk  contr 14:56, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Unlocking a locked page? Edit

Moved from Warcraft pump.

Im not sure if this is the right place to ask this... probobly not but this is my first time on the forum.

Is there a way to get a locked page unlocked? I wanted to make an edit to the Cenarion Expedition page to add that the DEHTA quests in Northrend result in Cenarion Expedition reputation.

-- EternalMydNyt (talk) 04:54, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Done. Feel free to edit as you will. --Sky (t · c · w) 07:48, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Title/Agnomen Edit

I sort of see why someone might put "Agnomen" along with Title, but without an article explaining its usage and why it is used, I think we should get rid of it. I'm also not particularly fond of the mixing up "Title" as a generic sort of vague term and the use of <Title> in WoW Icon 16x16 as it becomes very confusing as how the term Title is being used. For example, Combat 15 Malevus the Mad shows up in List of unaffiliated paladins as "Malevus" with Title/Agnomen as "the Mad", but doesn't have that as an in-game <the Mad>. Very confusing. Any ideas? --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:38 PM PST 18 Nov 2008

The nearest I can figure is putting all in-game titles in brackets like you did above. "Agnomen" is far too limiting a term. Apart from anything else, what about praenomens?--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 17:05, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Fandyllic, I'd generally agree it's confusing. I'd prefer if title was strictly bracketed titles, and did not include "the Mad" in your example. -Howbizr (talk) 00:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm not opposed to having the "the Mad" somewhere, but calling it a title when it will obviously confuse WoW players is not the right thing to do. I will have to think harder about a good alternative. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:52 PM PST 20 Nov 2008

Nomenclature for repeatable quests Edit

For a faction reputation table, should "repeatable quests" be listed by their correct name, or the name of the initial quest that leads to them?

For example, see Cenarion_Expedition/Reputation_table, which was corrected to list the names of the quests that lead to the repeatable, and not the actual quest the player will be repeating.

I believe the correct name of the repeatable (and correct rep value) should be used. Any lead-in quests (which often give more rep than the repeatable) should be lumped with the regular quests for relevant zone. Anything else is confusing to someone trying to research the actual repeatable (which isn't always identical to the lead-in), and calculate their requirements for rep. -- w.woods (talk) 01:05, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Contrary to Tekkub's edits, I would agree with you, Woods. I think its more intuitive as something like "Neutral 15 [67] Coilfang Armaments (Q)" than "Neutral 15 [67] Preparing for War (R)" (as it is currently). -Howbizr (talk) 01:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Yup, you should list the actually repeatable quest and put the lead-in quest in the Notes. Go ahead and fix it if you want. Having the (R) as a different click-able link after the lead-in quest name is non-intuitive.
I would prefer the table box either show Neutral 15 [67] Preparing for War / Neutral 15 [67] Coilfang Armaments (RRQ)
or have just Neutral 15 [67] Coilfang Armaments (RRQ) and Neutral 15 [67] Preparing for War in the notes. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:50 PM PST 20 Nov 2008
Thanks! You're right, that (R) thing really is non-intuitive. Until you mentioned it, I hadn't even realized it provided a link to the repeatable version. I thought it just meant "repeatable" :) --w.woods (talk) 04:03, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Category naming conventionsEdit

I thought that generally Capital Casing was frowned upon, so I re-created & re-categorized Category:Feats of Strength achievements as Category:Feats of strength achievements, to match the other sub-achievements in Category:World of Warcraft achievements, however it was deleted by housekeeping. Any idea why this might have happened? -Howbizr (talk) 01:22, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

As you said, generally it is frowned upon, but we try to preserve Capital Casing where it appears in game. In the Achievements window in game it appears as "Feats of Strength", not "Feats of strength", so we would preserve it in a category. Does that make sense? --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:38 PM PST 20 Nov 2008
If it's a proper noun, we leave it as is. --k_d3 01:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Then Category:Dungeons and raids achievements, Category:Player vs. player achievements, and Category:World events achievements need to be fixed as well. User:Coobra/Sig3 07:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I think the difference is that you would say "Feat of Strength" in normal typing ... but you would not say Raid (raid), Player (player) or World Event (world event). Kirkburn  talk  contr 10:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
It was just weird to me, because I could swear about a month ago they were all Capital Cased and have since been changed to First capital casing, and now they're getting changed back. As long as someone understands the convention. Smiley -Howbizr (talk) 12:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Loremaster categories Edit

It is not the case that any quest picked up on Kalimdor counts towards the Loremaster of Kalimdor achievement (I can provide examples on demand). The same holds true for Eastern Kingdoms. Possibly it also holds true for Outlands and Northrend, though I am less confident.

I think it would be a Nifty Idea to add to the Questbox template parameters that add the quest to appropriate categories, I.E. Loremaster of Kalimdor quests (Alliance).

To the best of my knowledge, most/all of the following are not counted towards the loremaster achievements: any repeatable or daily quest; any event (seasonal or otherwise) quest. I believe (but am not certain) that racially or class limited quests are also excluded, but I have not tested that exhaustively.

I have verified that at least some quest chains continue to count on the same loremaster achievement from which they started. Again, though, I have not tested this exhaustively.

I have also not tested whether (non-repeatable) PvP quests count. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 21:21, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Or, you can mark any quest you find that does not count toward the achievement. It's not an easy thing to modify {{questbox}} to do what you want. User:Gourra/Sig2 22:49, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Grand Master / Master division (JCers needed!) Edit

There's something of a dilemma when deciding where to add new WotLK jewelcrafting recipes to the designs page. I wonder if people involved in other crafts are experiencing the same thing.

In Burning Crusade, Master-level jewelcrafting took us up to a skill of 375.

But in Lich King, "Grand Master" training is available at 350, and new recipes were added for 350, 360 and 370 skill.

Presumably anyone with Master (but not yet Grand Master) training could also learn the new 350-370-skill recipes, though there's little reason for them not to train up at the same time. And I also guess that the only recipes they couldn't technically learn would be in the 380+ range, which is where I assume "Grand Master" recipes really start. Unfortunately I didn't check this out before I trained up.

Is there anyone with a jewelcrafter who has their skill at 350+, but hasn't trained in Grand Master yet? If so, could you please let me know if: (i) those new recipes are available to you before you train up in Grand Master (ii) if they're available through the Master-level trainers in Outland, or just the Grand Master trainers in Northrend

If the former, then they can easily be inserted amongst all the current Master recipes. If not, they'll have to be added to the Grand Master table, even though that will throw out the sorting by skill level.

Thanks for your help :) -- w.woods (talk) 04:11, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Euphonia is a JC, and while I didn't actually click on the recipies (I guess I'm a top down person), I remember them being "green" before learning Grand Master. So I guess to be consistent, yes, only the recipies that require 380+ are truly "grand master." But that's because of the whole 6 Inv misc gem variety 01business. Max crafting is really about the dedicated/hardcore now... not about the rich. -Howbizr (talk) 12:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Just what I need. Thank you! :) It'd still be handy to know if the lower trainers also offer those recipes, but not essential. A level 60 with 350 JC could still find ways to get to the trainers in Northrend. I'll add them under "Master" anyway, but probably later tag them with WotLK if I can confirm only the Nothrend trainers offer them. --w.woods (talk) 00:44, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
I looked at Inv jewelcrafting gem 22 [Bold Bloodstone] on wowhead for example, and it's only offered by Wrath trainers, which is what I expected. You could look as you go, but it's a pretty safe assumption that the new recipies will only be available in Northrend. -Howbizr (talk) 01:24, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Links to inappropriate sites alert Edit

Someone added links to http://paladinbuilds.com/ on several paladin pages. The left side of the site contains the following lines:


Need a Paladin Guide?

Killer Guilds- Has a good guide for how to play a Paladin.

Need WOW Gold?

IGE - Very good place to purchase WOW gold. IGE is the largest supplier of online game currency and currently has the best price on gold.

*Please note buying guides or gold at the above sites helps support this site.


So I consider it is an inappropriate sites that support gold sellers. (Besides, some of the builds were directly copied from Paladin build samples. The page also includes some of the worst builds I have ever seen. Imo these are clear indications that the site owner is actually a gold company instead of WoW fans.) I'll remove this link from the paladin pages.

That page also linked to several other page such as http://magebuilds.com, http://hunterbuilds.com, etc. Please help remove them if you see them on any pages.

-- WakemanCK (talk) 02:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

It's not quite the same thing as above, but I think WoWWiki:External links is lacking some clarity on sites which carry adverts which are contrary to EULA/TOS. That site made it quite clear that it was happy to support gold sellers, and I think you were quite right to remove them (and I wonder if we should even have them hyperlinked from this page?). It's fairly obvious that sites which actively encourage such violations will come under WW:DNP, but what about sites which may not deliberately be carrying them, just being served them by a generally respected ad supplier, e.g. Google? I've posted an example of this and raised the question on WoWWiki talk:External links. --Murph (talk · contr) 11:45, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
The WoWWiki:External links page refers to WW:DNP for types of content that could/should be removed. I think a policy for removing obvious advertising sites should be added to WW:DNP. The External links page already gives good reason to remove the http://*builds.com sites: 'If the website linked contains only information already present on the wiki (or you need to pay to access the extra content), the link should not be present.' ... 'Elinks to republications that do not cite their source will be deemed as "stolen content" and removed from the wiki.'
Sites such as Crafter's Tome have historically shown that they provide unique additional info not covered by WoWWiki. Although the inclusion of gold seller and hack ads is troublesome, the site is clearly not designed primarily to drive people to those sites. People will have to use their judgment, as many external WoW-related sites have gold seller ads and we can't exclude them just for that.
If you want to add to or change a policy, a good place to start is WoWWiki:Policy status phases. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 2:00 PM PST 8 Dec 2008
Yup, that's pretty much what I thought. For the record, I think we're quite right to remove the *builds.com links, and I don't have an issue with Crafter's Tome (for me, the balance of probabilities says the site is legit, just the ads cause concern). I do think that some additional clarity on either WW:DNP or WoWWiki:External links would be useful. I know we can't cover every situation, but it wouldn't hurt to clarify the obvious situations, e.g.:
  • Site created solely or primarily for advertising or affiliate click-through - not permitted.
  • Site actively encouraging EULA/TOS violations (e.g. voicing support for gold sales, as with *builds.com) - not permitted.
  • Site without the above issues, with real content, but carrying incidental adverts against EULA/TOS from a mainstream ad supplier - permitted (but we'd prefer not to have the problematic ads).
I dare say others can probably think of situations to add to the above, those are just the most obvious scenarios that spring to mind.
--Murph (talk · contr) 21:34, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Instance split/merge Edit

I thought I might bring this up again, as it seems boldness struck again. Should the WotLK instances that have a wing that shares its name with the overall winged instance be split or merged? Like The Nexus/The Nexus (instance) and Utgarde Keep/Utgarde Keep (instance)? Azjol-Nerub too. Merge or split? Whatever gets decided, it should be consistent.--SWM2448 18:37, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Good question, actually. I remember I hated when people referred to The Eye as "Tempest Keep", but this time, those are the actual instance hub names. I'd say keep it like Utgarde Keep is atm, instance page as a section of the hub page. ~ Nathanyel (talk) 17:46, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Currently, Nexus is split, Utgarde is not.--SWM2448 00:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
What's the word on this? I was thinking about working on WoWWiki:Zone category project again and I was going to start with Azjol-Nerub when i came across this. -- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 21:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Grand Master JC table added Edit

I finally added the Grand Master jewelcrafting designs table to Jewelcrafting designs today. The non-embedded table can be found at Grand Master jewelcrafting designs and its format mirrors the other design tables. I see some fast individual has already proposed it for merger with Northrend gems, though that seems inappropriate, given that (i) this table is a list of all jewelcrafting designs and includes rings trinkets and amulets, not just gems, (ii) gems aren't only just cut by jewelcrafters, and (iii) if it's merged then it'll destroy its intended use as part of the Jewelcrafting designs page. -- w.woods (talk) 11:34, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I removed the {{merge}} tag from Grand Master jewelcrafting designs. As a rule, if you don't explain why you want a merge or {{split}}, the tag can be removed. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 5:09 PM PST 2 Dec 2008
Thanks Fan! :) Yeah, I wasn't sure how to respond, since there was no discussion. And the merge policy page doesn't say what to do. --w.woods (talk) 00:43, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Check the ads being displayed Edit

There are reports something is setting off AV programs while visiting this site.

http://vnboards.ign.com/world_of_warcraft_general_board/b19789/109603188/p1/?10

-- SharlinTalk / Did 20:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Need info outlined at http://help.wikia.com/wiki/Help:Bad_advertisements. Send it to community@wikia.com. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 20:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Session problems Edit

I've been having problems with my session for a while now, especially when I open several pages at a time, e.g. from edit notification mails/the watchlist. The first handful show I'm still logged in, but later pages often show that I'm not anymore, which persists until I log in again. This happens in both Firefox and IE, and only with WoWWiki, so I don't think it's a local problem - as far as I checked, FF listed the corresponding cookies as valid for a month.
Still can't rule out problems on my end though, so I'll ask for suggestions here. Has anyone experienced similar problems?
Since someone will ask for it anyway, here's a tracert ~ Nathanyel (talk) 13:23, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm convinced there are bugs with the logging in, at least in regard to the homepage. Frequently, if not 100% of the time, the portal homepage doesn't show me logged in when I really am. But if I navigate to any other URL, I am logged in.
I don't use separate windows, however, I will tell you in IE there are windows that "share" session and windows that are a "new" session. For example in IE6, I believe if you use File - New Window, or Ctrl+N, you will get a shared session. But if you click on the IE icon, you get a new session - so you'll have to login again in that window. If you're using IE7, tabs should all be sharing the same session, but new windows again may not.
Hope that helps. I always recommend using a better browser, like Firefox or Chrome, at least until IE8 comes out. Smiley -Howbizr (talk) 14:21, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
I know about the IE Session thing, I always check that "remember my login" box anyway, so this can't be related, and as I said, it's happening in Firefox as well. ~ Nathanyel (talk) 15:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Assuming it's a bug with the "remember me" code/cookie, try not using the checkbox, but have your browser remember your password, so that you have similar functionality. Or you cout edit the URL's of the offending windows/pages manually to be in "edit" mode (&action=edit).
I don't think the admins of wowwiki can do anything about it because its probably in the shared code. Either way, if you could give exact steps to reproduce the problem (and I could verify for you) then it will be easier to get whoever is in control of the login code to put in a fix. -Howbizr (talk) 15:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, not seen it at all on Firefox 3. However, you might see some pages saying you're logged out when you're actually logged in, it's possible those pages were cached on your PC before you logged in - if you refresh while on them, they should update. Kirkburn  talk  contr 15:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

As I said, this persists until I log in again. Tried several forced reloads and opening other pages many times, never recovered my login. ~ Nathanyel (talk) 23:13, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I posted below without seeing this thread, under "trouble editing." Despite giving this months of time to get fixed, it's still a problem. That is, nearly every page that requires user privileges (editing watchlist, account settings, editing pages) has about a 90% chance to log me out. The only ways I can figure out to edit something are (A) hope for the 10% of the time that doesn't happen or (B) after being logged out, log in ONLY via the pop-up window login (the page-based log in will log me out when I navigate away). (Re: Kirkburn. This definitely has nothing to do with cached pages on my end. This is happening within a single browser window. My cookie preferences and block lists are clean, and I've been through many log-in/log-outs and restarts of Firefox.) One might be tempted to think that this is just happening to a couple people, but this may be affecting a lot of would-be users. You might not know if this was affecting 50% of the users signing up with Wikia because it's excruciatingly difficult to find out how to make a simple post like this asking for help (took me hours). I'm done with wikia and wowwiki, but I thought I should give you a heads-up before I go. WikiPhazz (talk) 22:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Image licensing templatesEdit

I've copied a bunch of image licensing templates to WoWWiki, see Category:Image wiki templates. We, er, really should be doing more about the licensing of our images, especially as we expand beyond solely game screenshots. They are direct copies, so they do need tweaking to "fit in" with WoWWiki. Kirkburn  talk  contr 15:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd suggest changing the "licensing" to categories, for example Category:User screenshots, Category:Mob screenshots, Category:User images etc. The main distinction between images and screenshots are that screenshots are directly from the game and not manipulated in any way. User:Gourra/Sig2 15:50, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
MediaWiki:Licenses is the dropdown that appears on the image upload page. That could probably be altered to aid this, for different image templates/categories. Kirkburn  talk  contr 16:00, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Why exactly does wowwiki:general disclaimer not cover us? --Sky (t · c · w) 16:10, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
IANAL, but I doubt that covers us that well. I'm not suggesting some massive purge or anything, but we do need to get our image licensing/categorising up to scratch as Warcraft becomes a bigger and bigger phenomenon. And especially if we have a live action film coming. Kirkburn  talk  contr 16:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
One issue that springs to mind is that only the copyright holder can license something under GFDL. That does not prohibit use of images via fair use or a non-GFDL license/permission, but they should be marked as such, so that someone considering further copying (copying from WoWWiki to elsewhere) does not mistakenly believe that they are entitled to do so by the GFDL. --Murph (talk · contr) 16:26, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I can't figure out how to change MediaWiki:Licenses to be categories instead of templates... I'm thinking of making a template such as "Template:Sscat" and subst: it for every type, but I'm not sure. User:Gourra/Sig2 13:45, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I suspect we should make templates or a template with choices to tag stuff based on the list in MediaWiki:Licenses. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:42 PM PST 9 Dec 2008

Trouble editing; please help! Edit

I've had a WoWWiki account for months now and I've made various minor edits. I recently became frustrated with the amount of information that had not yet been updated to WotLK material, so I decided to try to update some of it myself. However, every time I go to edit a page, I appear to be "logged out", and I'm informed that I cannot edit the page without logging in. Nothing changes this; logging in works correctly, will persist throughout visiting nearly all of the site, but only stops when I attempt to edit something. My browser cookie settings are fine. I've tried creating a new account and the same thing happens.

What do I actually need to do to get to edit a page?

Any help is appreciated!

-- WikiPhazz (talk) 13:40, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

You may want to contact Wikia with your problem. They may have changed the login requirements and you might have to confirm your account now. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 2:21 PM PST 9 Dec 2008
Has this been fixed? If not, I would offer the suggestion that you are taking so long to edit that the site automatically logs you out. This has happened to me, but I copy my edit, log back in and paste and the edit goes through. I think there's a box you can check for the site to remember you. I don't use that if I'm not at home though.
Actually this looks like a problem for other people too? Session_problems Maybe I just didn't notice. Haven't edited much lately. -- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 20:55, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for noticing that, Mordsith; I'm not sure how I missed that thread. I'm moving my discussion over there. :) WikiPhazz (talk) 23:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Need help removing AmpWoW links Edit

It appears that AmpWoW as it used to be (a decent resource for boss strategies, maps, etc.) is no more and the domain provider now has a message at the top of the site that the domain is expired and all the links go to what appears to be a hack, account seller and gold seller site. I've been going through links to ampwow, checking them and removing them, but there are alot, so I could use some help. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 2:27 PM PST 9 Dec 2008

Finished. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 23:14, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, Pcj. I've been looking into AmpWoW's parent site GameAmp and they still appear to have useful WoW info, but no apparent updates for Wrath-Logo-Small. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:40 PM PST 9 Dec 2008

Give me 10 days, and I'll give you 30... Edit

So I've been thinking about getting into WoW again, MIGHT be buying WotLK and another 60 days of time before the end of the year.

I noticed my account has been inactive for some time...

So, at the moment I'm not sure if I'm getting back in, but if I am I am also all for giving people free stuff. :D

Now, I MAY not be getting more game time, I MAY not get WotLK, I'll let you know after/around Christmas. :D

If I do get more time though, I would like to use it to give someone out there a month of time using that scroll of resurrection deal.

My WoW account name is Bluddo, and I ask you... why do you deserve a month of free game time?

Please plead your case here, and I will let you know when I decide to buy the game card/expansion in the near future.

A guild looking for rookie members would be a plus, I haven't been playing for a long time...

-- Bluddo (talk) 06:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Not really the place to do this, should use the WoW official forums... As for anyone wanting to "plead" their case, please do NOT respond here, use Bluddo's talk page. User:Coobra/Sig3 07:50, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Achievements categories and main articles Edit

I've been doing a little work on the achievements categories and articles to clean things up a little. Firstly, I split Dungeons & Raids achievements into sub-articles, pulling them back into the main article with {{ajaxtables}}. Secondly, I renamed "Dungeons and Raids" to "Dungeons & Raids" for consistency with both the game and armory UIs. Beyond that, there's a few minor tweaks and changes here and there, but nothing to get too excited about. I intend to split the other main articles similarly to Dungeons & Raids in the near future, and the only thing I'm still not sure about there is whether to split the articles which are generally ok for length, for consistency with their peers.

Looking at Category:World of Warcraft achievements, there's a naming inconsistency with Quest achievements and Category:Quest achievements vs. the other categories and main articles. All of the others are "<tag used in-game/armory> achievements", preserving case, plurals, etc, but "Quests" has become "Quest". I can see that it looks less clumsy in the singular, but it's inconsistent with everything else in there. I've thought about this for a little while, and the best solution I can see right now to both keep consistent with the Blizz UIs and stop anything looking clumsy is to rename everything from "<Blizz category> achievements" to "<Blizz category> (achievements)", producing the following:

  • General (achievements)
  • Quests (achievements)
  • Exploration (achievements)
  • Player vs. Player (achievements)
  • Dungeons & Raids (achievements)
  • Professions (achievements)
  • Reputation (achievements)
  • World Events (achievements)
  • Feats of Strength (achievements)

That's both consistent with the naming style used for disambiguation, solves any grammatical clumsiness, and even simplifies linking to them, as there is a wikitext shortcut causing [[Name (achievements)|]] to drop the portion in parenthesis, e.g. General and General. Per previous discussions, "achievements" should remain plural for the categories and main articles, as they refer to multiple achievements.

What do folks think of this change? Don't worry about the effort to do this - I'm quite happy to do all of the heavy lifting on this, the categories are fairly small right now, and the individual achievement articles gain their main category from {{achievementbox}}.

--Murph (talk · contr) 12:36, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

The Blizzard UI is just categorizing their achievements in much the same way how we are categorizing stuff here; we use Category:Quests instead of Category:Quest. Additionally, writing "Quests achievements" makes it a double plural, which doesn't look good at all with grammar and all.
As for achievement pages, making it "General (achievements)" instead of "General achievements" is not in order with naming policy. Additionally, things within brackets are for specific things under the same name; see Bonecewer (weapon), Emberwyrm (mob) etc. User:Gourra/Sig2 13:00, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Yup, I can see that's what Blizz are doing, and it both makes sense and looks right to me. Out of curiosity, which part of WW:NAME do you feel rules against it? (I could be having a blind moment, but I couldn't see it myself.) I agree with you on double plurals looking clumsy - that's what prompted this. Do you have any thoughts on whether or how we should resolve the inconsistency between "Quest" and "Dungeons & Raids", "Professions", "World Events", and "Feats of Strength"? --Murph (talk · contr) 13:17, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
I would lean towards breaking the naming policy, if this is even violating it at all, so that you can remove the double plural but not have parentheses, ie Dungeon & Raid achievements. Or since they are sub categories of Category:World of Warcraft achievements, why even keep the "achievements" word in the first place, and just stick to the Blizz UI name with the plural in tact? Aren't sub categories inheriting from parent categories so it's implicit that we're referring to types of achievements? -Howbizr (talk) 17:43, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure that it's such a great idea removing "achievements" from the category names - it seems to me like best practice to have category names stand on their own, even when they are in a hierarchy. There would also be naming collisions with some of them, e.g. Category:Quests, Category:Professions, Category:Reputation. There's also the question of the article names. Personally, I think it's quite tidy and coherent having the main articles sharing the names of the categories. --Murph (talk · contr) 18:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Can we all agree then that the article and category should be "Dungeon & raid achievements", with no double plural? Lower case for the whole category and article name as per WW:NAME, except for Feats of Strength as I find it more special compared to the rest. Any objections? User:Gourra/Sig2 19:12, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

If we're going to go with that, I don't really see why "Feats of Strength" should be an exception. Personally, I'm only 50/50 on that solution - it solves the double plurals, but it breaks from the convention of mirroring Blizz names on two counts (capitalisation and minor modification of the name). Let's not rush any solution, this doesn't strike me as a particularly urgent problem, so I'd like to leave it open for at least 3 or 4 days to gather any other views on the best way to deal with it.
I still prefer my original thoughts of handling it in the style of disambiguation, although I'll obviously go along with and respect any consensus and/or admin decision. Here's a rough explanation of my thought process that lead to my original suggestion above - "(achievements)", in case it helps. If this were a wiki solely about achievements, we could just use Quests and Category:Quests, and there wouldn't be a problem. Since we cover many different aspects of the game, we end up with collisions in naming. The traditional wiki way of handling naming collisions is either to use namespaces (I'm not proposing that - I don't think it's good or appropriate here) or disambiguation. Disambiguation typically puts the unique disambiguating word/phrase in parenthesis after the obvious name which would be used if there were no collisions. In this case, the obvious disambiguating words are "achievement" and "achievements", depending on the type of article in question (single achievement or summary discussion/list of achievements, respectively). --Murph (talk · contr) 19:52, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
The Feats of Strength isn't a really "urgent" issue, but some people around here like to rush things... Feat of Strength isn't something that sounds good to be honest, so Feats of Strength is something that I'd like to stick to.
I wouldn't want to rename the main achievement articles to "<category> (achievement)" - it simply looks ugly as stuff in parentheses are to specify what the article name is, if it shares its name with other things in the game. However, as there is an easy way to distinguish it ("Quests" vs "Quest achievement") I don't see the point to have the parentheses at the end. The article names are fine as it is now. User:Gourra/Sig2 20:09, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
I still (personally, but not really that strongly) feel "Feat of strength achievements" is the most grammatically sound, and the capitalization and pluralization doesn't bother me at all. In speech, I would still refer to one of these achievements a (single) feat, a (single) world event.
I see what you're saying about collisions, which I didn't really consider. So I guess I'll switch my vote to a)Single capital b)Single pluralization c)Achievements at the end vote: "Category:Feat of strength achievements," "Category:World event achievements," etc. -Howbizr (talk) 21:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't feel strongly about the pluralization vs. not and such, but I don't thing there is a good argument for including parentheses in the names. Many of the UI elements in the game cannot be reproduced exactly in a wiki because... it's a wiki and not the game. Also we support a whole variety of Warcraft info and not just WoW stuff. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:44 PM PST 10 Dec 2008

Ok, since there's no consensus support for my original suggestion, I consider it shelved unless anyone wants to re-visit it. I did have one alternative thought for the naming here - "Achievements/< type >/< sub-type >", e.g. "Achievements/Quests/Northrend", but I'm not really proposing that right now, just throwing it into the air in case anyone thinks it's a better way of doing it.

Having thought about the naming here a bit more, I think it's ok to leave things mostly as they are, with one exception. I'd like to propose renaming "Quest achievements" as "Quests achievements", despite it appearing slightly clumsy at first glance. Here's the rationale - feel free to disagree, but please spend a moment to think about it.

With only a few exceptions, each of those achievements requires multiple quests, so singularly they are a "quests achievement", and there's a certain logic to saying "quests achievements" when referring to many of these individual achievements. I did a little reading around to see if I could find any formal English rules for forming the plural of such a term, but I've drawn a blank so far. The closest thing I managed to find was "languages expert" - it does not seem clumsy to refer to a group of such people as "languages experts" [4] (example in paragraph 2 of that article).

So, on reflection, I'm now saying that I think the double plurals are ok (in appropriate context). I'll gladly revise that opinion if there are any pedants of formal English usage and grammar that can cite a reference to the contrary (I'm genuinely interested - I can usually figure out the correct grammatical usage, but this one has me scratching my head a little).

Do we have any support for or objections to using "Quests achievements" based on the above? It achieves consistency between all the articles, categories, labels used for achievements, and the Blizz UI. I'm not convinced it's actually bad English usage.

--Murph (talk · contr) 07:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Eternal transmutation Edit

Moved to Warcraft pump.

Adding WoWDB to external links Edit

As suggested by a few people I wanted to start a discussion about adding WoWDB to the e-links in addition to those already there. I know that site rating has been brought up, but I'm looking at data quality, and imo the sites are WoWHead > WoWDB == Allakhazam > Thotbott.

Also to be clear, I am a moderator on CurseForge/WoWAce, and my main mod ARL gets all of its data from WowDB.

-- Ackis (talk) 18:55, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I would argue against Allakhazam > Thotbott. Thottbot has been much better updating for Wrath-Logo-Small than Allakhazam which was far behind at release. Otherwise, I would agree we should reconsider adding WoWDB to the standard elinks, since Wikia used to have a partnership with Curse Gaming (seems over now, though) and WoWDB definitely has near equivalent presentation quality to Wowhead. Wowhead has way more helpful comments than WoWDb, though. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:56 PM PST 12 Dec 2008
Thottbot may be better at updating, but their comments and screenshots are god-awful. Allakhazam could need some better work at updating their info, but they use a client that requires user input, and there's not enough users using it. While Wowdb has more information, they really need to be better at filtering out their stuff... there's way too much crap on it. User:Gourra/Sig2 21:04, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Wowdb < Wowdigger, imo (mainly because of Curse), and if we were to consider Wowdb we should consider Wowdigger. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 21:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Previously we've generally gone by Alexa rank and user opinion (which gave us, overwhelmingly, Wowhead, and Thott/Alla trailing as 50/50). Should we do another vote? Changing the templates isn't a huge job, but there's lots of factors which could affect it. I think it's not a big problem to link to slightly more sites, as it encourages linking back and it gives users more choice. Kirkburn  talk  contr 00:41, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I have a simple and silly test for comparing DB sites: I call it the Inv misc enggizmos 27 [Overcharged Capacitor] test. I look up the item in a DB and if there are any comments, than I can tell there is an active base of user submitting to the DB. Why this test? Well for any Official alliance mini-icon who has quested for awhile (around level 71) and done most of the Fizzcrank Airstrip quests in Borean Tundra, you eventually get the quest Official alliance mini-icon [71] Just a Few More Things... which has the Overcharged Capacitor as one of its objectives. Invariably you hear people on General chat asking, "Where do I get an Overcharged Capacitor?" and than a variety of answers from, "I'll sell you one for 20g" to "Engineers make them."
If a DB has no comments on this item, then not many people are using it. BTW, Wowhead, Thottbot and Allakhazam have comments, but WoWDB and Wowdigger do not. --Gengar orange 22x22 Fandyllic (talk · contr) 12:38 PM PST 15 Dec 2008
Obviously, it's because we're not linking to them in our External links section. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 20:19, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki