Path of Exile Wiki talk:Community portal/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

From Path of Exile Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
>Tchek
>Aezlo
Line 33: Line 33:
I don't find the pages dedicated to passive nodes very useful at all. Keystone abilities should definitely have their own pages, but a page dedicated to "+6% increased melee physical damage"? Not sure how a page like that would help anyone. [[User:TheRabbit|TheRabbit]] 15:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
I don't find the pages dedicated to passive nodes very useful at all. Keystone abilities should definitely have their own pages, but a page dedicated to "+6% increased melee physical damage"? Not sure how a page like that would help anyone. [[User:TheRabbit|TheRabbit]] 15:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
After looking at a couple of the passive pages, I believe it is even worse. [[Spell Damage]] for instance, implies that every Spell Damage passive node increases Spell Damage by 10%. Well, some of the nodes are 5%, some are 8%, one is 9%, and some are 10%. Seems a little ridiculous to have a page dedicated to that. [[User:TheRabbit|TheRabbit]] 15:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
After looking at a couple of the passive pages, I believe it is even worse. [[Spell Damage]] for instance, implies that every Spell Damage passive node increases Spell Damage by 10%. Well, some of the nodes are 5%, some are 8%, one is 9%, and some are 10%. Seems a little ridiculous to have a page dedicated to that. [[User:TheRabbit|TheRabbit]] 15:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
----
I'm totally willing to change things like this, and my recent edits to the [[Passive Skills|Passives]] have been an attempt to streamline it. I think the weapon passives should probably redirect to the weapon page, for ex. Wands#Passives, etc. Would you prefer Curses to be placed under Spells or Buffs? I think there's some merit for them to have their own page. I think I'll also start moving the support gems to redirect to subsets of other pages rather than keeping them separate on their own pages. If you desire any specific categories or other consolidations let me know. For now I'll tinker with the support gems, and once we have a consensus I'll work on improving/filling in the passives.
Oh, and also would you want "Major Nodes" (or whatever we/GGG decide to call them) like Ambidexterity, Troll's Blood, etc. to have their own pages or just listed within their category? I don't feel that we they have enough mechanical significance for their own pages. Perhaps some of them deserve a little description, but it could be perhaps done with an tooltip/hidden box. --[[User:Aezlo|Aezlo]] 23:56, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:56, 25 June 2012

The Community Portal is the place where Wiki editors discuss issues on the Wiki. It's frequently used to talk about the project as a whole, and to initiate large-scale changes on the Wiki.

Languages

MediaWiki software has a built-in format for handling different languages; see here for documentation of the features. In particular, each page will have automatic links to any translations of it available in other languages, if you have it set up correctly.

I do not have a lot of experience with the language features of MediaWiki, but I strongly recommend that you use them instead of simple sub-paging. From what I have seen, they will save you a lot of headaches in the future. — DragoonWraithTalk • 04:24, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Page Deletions

I know sifting through bot-generated nonsense articles is our beloved admin's favorite thing to do, but if we had some patrollers/trusted editors with page-deletion rights, we could work out the spam until we have the appropriate amount of spam/bot blocking. This would also help move pages around as they probably don't contain any meaningful meta-data yet, and some people have been asking about deleting their own work. We don't even have a deletion template yet do we? We need a deletion template for articles which don't require immediate removal. That's simply a template which people can stick on a page to make the page appear in its own category and also points others to a discussion about deleting it. Ionface 07:20, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


Created Template:PROD for proposed deletions, Insert the following at the top of a page which you want deleted.

{{subst:PROD|Reason for Proposed Deletion Here}}

Ionface 07:30, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Note: Just leave bot spam alone, the admins will delete it when they see it, and it's very conspicuous. PROD is not for spam. Ionface 20:42, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

File Naming Scheme

Since we don't currently have one that I'm aware of, I was hoping we could use a proper file naming scheme in order to save headaches later. I think the convention of listing hierarchial "categories" before the actual name of the subject in the image should be used in the file name. I also think CamelCase and no spaces is a good idea. By this, I mean instead of calling a file "Elixir of Perceptitude.png" it would be named "ItemsFlasksElixirOfPerceptitude.png" so that the quest of the same name would not conflict, but would instead be in something like "QuestsActIIIElixirOfPerceptitude.png".

In addition to those two things, resized images should have addendums after an underscore, and be in lower case to avoid confusion with actual names with underscores or with modifiers of that kind at the end. A small resized version of "ItemsArmourTemplarPants.png" would be "ItemsArmourTemplarPants_small.png" and a high res version of "ItemsArmourTemplarPantsOfTheGiant.png" would be "ItemsArmourTemplarPantsOfTheGiant_giant.png".

Of course, we still need to nail down our hierarchy for the site, but item categories seem straight forward. Ionface 13:21, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Very Descriptive Passive Skills and the Mechanics They Represent

I'm seeing that a lot of these pages like Cast Speed (passive) are now merged with other pages and proposed for deletion. Will they be missed if they are deleted, or just recreated with a redirect?

I don't know how other pages are going to link to these passive skills, or how accurate the article names are if they contain just passive skills, for instance, Spell Damage should definitely be disambig redir to passive skill/Spells#Damage. I don't even know how we don't have that redirected to one or the other already.

This is one of the main problems with organizing the site, there are too many skills which are support gems and passive, and also affixes on items which really are mechanics. So we need like 4 different spots for some common phrase. Your take? Ionface 09:35, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


I don't find the pages dedicated to passive nodes very useful at all. Keystone abilities should definitely have their own pages, but a page dedicated to "+6% increased melee physical damage"? Not sure how a page like that would help anyone. TheRabbit 15:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC) After looking at a couple of the passive pages, I believe it is even worse. Spell Damage for instance, implies that every Spell Damage passive node increases Spell Damage by 10%. Well, some of the nodes are 5%, some are 8%, one is 9%, and some are 10%. Seems a little ridiculous to have a page dedicated to that. TheRabbit 15:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


I'm totally willing to change things like this, and my recent edits to the Passives have been an attempt to streamline it. I think the weapon passives should probably redirect to the weapon page, for ex. Wands#Passives, etc. Would you prefer Curses to be placed under Spells or Buffs? I think there's some merit for them to have their own page. I think I'll also start moving the support gems to redirect to subsets of other pages rather than keeping them separate on their own pages. If you desire any specific categories or other consolidations let me know. For now I'll tinker with the support gems, and once we have a consensus I'll work on improving/filling in the passives.

Oh, and also would you want "Major Nodes" (or whatever we/GGG decide to call them) like Ambidexterity, Troll's Blood, etc. to have their own pages or just listed within their category? I don't feel that we they have enough mechanical significance for their own pages. Perhaps some of them deserve a little description, but it could be perhaps done with an tooltip/hidden box. --Aezlo 23:56, 25 June 2012 (UTC)