Path of Exile Wiki talk:Community portal

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

The Awakening to-do list

Here's a partial to-do list. Feel free to add new things or notify when you're working on something.

• Area progression changes (levels and structure) in the first three acts (Qetuth is working on this)
• New leech mechanics (Vini is on this)
• Reduced Mana and Enlighten changes
• Gem vendors
• "Shotgunning" changes
• Arctic Armour
• New Maraketh base weapons need to be added (Domokingu is adding these as well as updating any other bases that need it.)
• New skill gems
• Passives (especially Keystones) need updating (Domokingu has updated the notables and will be working on the regular passive skills.)
• New unique items
• Info about jewels
• Mention of div cards on the items they produce
• Add the new maps and new map icons. (You'll have to figure out which image belongs to what map, because they're just called "map12" etc in the game files.)
• Update map upgrade table
• Map mod changes
• New map levels
• Legacy items
• Changes to base items
• Changes to flasks
• Changes to Barrage and Split Arrow, updating values
• Reduced Duration renamed to Less Duration
• Item affixes changes
• Skill Gem requirements (check to see if the requirments are the same(shadows7114 working on Trap, Riposte, Herald of Ice, Desecrate and Devouring Totem skill gems))
• Herald Of Thunder and Herald Of Ash need to be updated
• Poison Arrow Cloud Damage needs updating (SitarDankur working on it)
• Map-only drops and particulary Item drop restrictions have been changed

Some act 4 stuff that needs work:

• Quests pages need to be created
• Highgate NPC's
• Monsters and bosses
• Flavour text of the new zones (no idea where to find these, I don't play the beta)
• Zone and monster screenshots

--Climmels aka SirProblematique (talk) 08:47, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I can take on the task of rewriting the leech article. Although I won't be starting on it right away. —Vini (t|c) 12:35, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I've updated the points from character to keystones, major changes to positioning for MoM and Vaal Pact, and the changes to Vaal Pact and Eldritch Battery functionality, currently working on div cards and respective items —lutem 13:58, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I'll be going through items/gems/zones/mobs updating their Version History as soon as the patch hits. Iamacyborg (talk) 13:56, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm working on skill gems. I don't expect to do all of the articles but I am prioritizing new skills gems and skill gems that have received major changes in the patch. Other skills with only minor changes have low priority. TheMipchunk (talk) 02:37, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

I plan on creating/updating pages with the new 2.0 uniques, in my free time. I'm also uploading the official art images (offline version of the images hosted on poe's cdn servers) for each of them - Haaxxx (talk) 21:06, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm going through the notable passives and updating them as needed, then moving on to the regular passives. - Domokingu (talk) 21:12, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I was working on item affix 2.0 when i got a message from Vini, i guess i did a mess so later i'll take a deep look to the wiki help and continue, tnx to Vini for the advice. Fucrem (talk) 19:24, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

You didn't necessarily do anything wrong. I just gave you a welcome message on your talk page with some basic tips for wiki editing to help you get started. Thanks all, no big deal :) —Vini (t|c) 20:18, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

It appears that some existing uniques have been changed as well (specifically, my Blackgleam differs from what is listed on the wiki page). Not sure how exactly to handle this as a single sample doesn't show the stat ranges, but I guess I'll just leave the information I have on the talk page of the unique in question for now. Alacia (talk) 21:22, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

I am updating the act pages. In the less direct acts (2 and 3) the progression tables we had were kind of hard to read. I tested giving borders to the arrow cells and find it much clearer, please compare old revision to new revision and tell me what you think. I think a background colour would be even better, but before I add that, I was thinking it'd be a good idea across all those tables to have the style saved in one place rather than copy and pasted everywhere. Before I do that, I'd like to know whether you think that kind of thing is better off in common.css or in a code inserting template like the version history tables use. --Qetuth-(talk) 10:05, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Launch Options page

I think we need one with a list of launch options and explanation what they do. TheFrz (talk) 17:55, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Cool. Make one. —Vini (t|c) 18:50, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Done, but I think I need some help with it --TheFrz (talk) 20:01, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Looks good to me, what do you need help with? Iamacyborg (talk) 00:14, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Item filter list ("moderated")

I see people adding their own item filters to the current page. I've had the thought for a while, but I believe we should separate item filters into their own page.

In addition, we should make it somewhat moderated - I've kinda seen it on other wikis, but often things can have potential to end up in edit wars - (people removing other people's filter, people thinking filter X is better then Y and remove it, and so on, filters becoming outdated / dead links etc). The second thing is we probably want stucture and some basic information about filters. If we have a list with 100 filters called XXXs Item filter or whatever, it won't be really helpful to people other then being a collection of filters. Instead, I suggest something like this (ALL required if someone wants to add their filter):

• Author and a means of contacting the author, e.x. reddit / GGG forums account / email / etc
• Name of the filter
• Link to where the filter is published
• Link to the filter to a place that makes it easy to see updates (e.x. github)
• an overview of what the filter does, possibly this could be split into a check box type of thing for generic features
  • leveling suitable
  • endgame suitable
  • hiding items
  • modifying certain aspects of the default
    • colour
    • borders
    • font sizes

Possibly also some other optional information such as:

• ingame screenshots/examples

Besides that, I think inactive or outright broken filters (i.e. author does not respond/update it anymore, in particular if people find out issues) can then be moved into their on section on the page, only keeping the maintained ones there. As for the moderation, basically just oversee that people follow the rules, remind they to follow them if they don't and act if needed (i.e. delete entries, or in the worst case of edit wars protect the page for a bit).

Anyway, first I'd like to hear what other people here think, in particular the wiki sysops, whether you think we should do this at all and maintain a policy regarding it. In the next step I'd post the info on reddit/GGG Forums for user feedback. --OmegaK2 (talk) 03:35, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

I need to understand what the issue is, exactly. There are already two pages (at least?) pertaining to loot filters. One of them is a general overview and missing some critical information. The other is a more comprehensive guide. It is my opinion that the information presented in the Item filter guide article should be merged into the Item filter article. Despite the fact that it's lacking certain information, Item filter is the main article. I don't see why we would need more than one article. —Vini (t|c) 04:03, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

My post was basically about expanding section Item filter#Popular item filters into it's own, moderated page (for reasons mentioned above). I didn't put it on the talk page because it also involves moderation and a page-specific editing policy, which is a bit larger scope then just chaging that page.

Regarding the guide vs the main page, I agree that so much duplicate content is not OK (strangely enough the user who created it links to a thread where some people had the wiki had "none", even though it evidently did for over a month). Some of the item filter guide contents are a bit over the scope or inaccurate as well. For example, I believe colours should get their own wiki page (Colours used in Path of Exile for example), since it's something that basically unrelated to the item filter itself and sees uses otherwhere (for example application programmers might want to look at it to match poe's colour scheme!). Same goes for a list of item classes (I mean, we don't really want to list every single item that's in poe there either -).

Then there is also the question of how much information should remain on the page, I think a more concise page is best, mostly because users aren't greeted by a giant wall of text when they're only there to read about what they do and how to use one. I.e. the information on how to create one could very well go into something like Item filter creation

That I would have usually discussed on the talk page of the filter though. --OmegaK2 (talk) 04:42, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

While it looks like a good idea there is a bunch of questions about how it would look like, who is going to moderate it and so on. I don't say I am against this idea but I can't imagine it at least right now.

On the other hand there is a problem Vini has mentioned few times already that there are 2 articles about the same stuff. Also Item filter guide has been written in the first person style and it's rather a forum post than a wiki page. In my opinion the whole new article should be written based of 2 existing ones. —TheFrz (talk) 16:38, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

The two pages have never worked out the way I pictured when I was thinking a guide page and a base page would be a good pair. To be a good guide, the guide needs most of the basic info the base page should have. I was originally thinking a step by step instructions page and a definition page would be quite different.

On the list of filters, I agree it is not that useful right now - each link is to a forum post, which then links to an external site for the code, and has differing amounts of explanation and advertising. Even most of the forum posts don't actually give a very good explanation for what the aim of the filter is and what kind of player it is for. We could of course have our own summaries to go with the links, but I don't know about keeping that maintained. Also note I think only two of the filter links we have were posted by the author.

On a related issue, how do you all feel about some standard filters being hosted on the wiki rather than a forum or upload site? I am thinking more of base files with some very common changes for other people to edit rather than start their own from scratch, so not files that should need updating (outside of expansion level patches). A "defaults" code which individually sets everything to default appearance might also be good to provide. But also, if we are going to have a "submission" process, we could use that to choose a handful of the best to host here if the author wanted it. --Qetuth-(talk) 23:38, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

I spoke with Iamacyborg and he mentioned something about having the wiki's own loot filter. That could be an option. —Vini (t|c) 01:58, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it could be a fun project. Iamacyborg (talk) 00:15, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, the wiki having it's own filter and having examples are two different things. It would need a maintenance as well. Maybe this could be something like a "community edition" filter? --OmegaK2 (talk) 05:52, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

I made a mockup on my userpage of what I had in mind basically User:OmegaK2/test --OmegaK2 (talk) 05:52, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

That looks good to me. In terms of the user submissions process, how do we see that working? We could use something like a Google Form to notify admins. How would we approve filters for inclusion on the page? Iamacyborg (talk) 15:34, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

I'd generally think leaving this in-wiki is good. It's not a problem to put the page on the user watchlist and use the patrol feature to approve of the changes. I am usually for lettings users edit it as long they follow the rules there shouldn't be much intervention required. The only time I see when it needs to go into protected mode is when people start to vandalize it or start edit wars, then I'd use the talk page for user submissions. --OmegaK2 (talk) 15:55, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

If nobody minds, I'll post to reddit and see what people think and then deploy that User:OmegaK2/test page. It seems the item filter page is already getting what I anticipated, with ziggy and hellcat editing and removing filters. Pinging Qetuth, Vinifera7, Iamacyborg :) --OmegaK2 (talk) 14:07, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. --Qetuth-(talk) 08:47, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

That looks good to me too. The edit war yesterday was completely unnecessary, we'll have to lock down pages and hand out temp bans if people continue dicking around. Iamacyborg (talk) 22:23, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Move to remove redundant boss videos on map pages

I would like to propose that we remove the redundant boss videos on map pages. If these boss videos should go anywhere on the wiki, they should go on the articles of the unique monsters themselves. The map walkthrough videos can stay on the map articles. This change should be uncontroversial. —Vini (t|c) 19:26, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

I think most people are likely to be looking for that info on the Map page itself, but your reasoning makes sense. I would think that a map walkthrough video that also happens to cover the boss encounter would be appropriate on the map page though. Iamacyborg (talk) 19:33, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

I agree - map walkthroughs on map video, boss specific on monster page once it exits. However, one thing I would really like to see is all map pages have text info on boss location - own section of the map or not, minions, does the room seal, etc. I added the info to some maps a while back but I really don't play maps often these days --Qetuth-(talk) 03:44, 22 July 2015 (UTC)