User talk:TEVESHSZAT - Revision history

ZUERCAT: /* Template:Material question */ new section

2024-06-13T18:03:48Z

Template:Material question: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:03, 13 June 2024
Line 95:		Line 95:

	Thanks as always, sorry for the lengthy "note"! [[Kythryn]] 02:49, 10 January 2024 (CST)		Thanks as always, sorry for the lengthy "note"! [[Kythryn]] 02:49, 10 January 2024 (CST)

			== Template:Material question ==

			When you made up this template, did you envision all the foraged herb pages used with alchemy (ex. [[Hisan]]) to be updated with this template, or just the catalyst ones (ex. [[Seolarn]])? And I guess this question would also apply to all the various foraged items that might not (currently) be used with a crafting system (ex. [[Blue flower]]). Thanks! [[Kythryn]] 13:03, 13 June 2024 (CDT)

ZUERCAT: /* Additional Item Properties */ new section

2024-01-10T08:49:07Z

Additional Item Properties: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:49, 10 January 2024
Line 80:		Line 80:

	So I guess I am reaching out on if you agree it makes sense to add the Crafting Tool options to the Weapons form as well? The itype thing can be cleared up when the carving/skinning knife is an ITEM and not a WEAPON, however we would still need to assign an itype to all items going forward so that we continue to catch the weapons on those lists as well. Thanks! [[Kythryn]] 16:09, 6 January 2024 (CST)		So I guess I am reaching out on if you agree it makes sense to add the Crafting Tool options to the Weapons form as well? The itype thing can be cleared up when the carving/skinning knife is an ITEM and not a WEAPON, however we would still need to assign an itype to all items going forward so that we continue to catch the weapons on those lists as well. Thanks! [[Kythryn]] 16:09, 6 January 2024 (CST)

			== Additional Item Properties ==

			Sorry for leaving you "notes" here on the wiki, I'm not on Discord very often. I did read the other day though one of your Discord notes about how, since the wiki software updates, when you update some of the item properties/templates (?) that it initiates a long delay before you can re-edit again. So, with that in mind, I did want to just put some addition suggestions here for you to consider, and if you think they are worth rolling in, you can do them next time you are in tinkering with something else...:). Or just let me know if you agree with the list and I'll watch for a slow time and roll them in myself (I just don't want to interfere with any higher priority updates for these QoL additions).
			* '''Has item property''' new options:
			:* ''gem pouch'' that has a link to the [[Gem pouch]] page
			:* ''Trader appraisal item'' that has a link to the [[Trader jewelry]] page
			:* ''picked flora'' that has a link to the [[Picked flora]] page - I'm on the fence about this one, it's a niche set of items that not many folks care about, but there are so (so!) many of them. And I would love to eventually ditch my complicated Category adding system and move over to ASK queries but right now there is no single or combination of tags I can latch onto to identify them for that.

			* On all the '''Tool type is''' tool options, create a link to that tool-type page. There will still be a few red links as of this posting but I am making good progress on updating all those Crafting Tool pages and should have that project done by the end of January.
			: So the output would look like: ''This item is a [[bone saw]] with:''

			* Either update the '''Guild association is''' property to include Orders (Order of the White Rose, etc.), Estate Holders, Mentor Society & Province (and maybe City) names, or make a new field named something like "Organized association is" to be a catch-all for them. For example, I noticed that all the order pages have a "gift list" page but someone has to go in and manually update those tables. If they had a tag, they could switch those over to an ASK query. And I know I've done a search multiple times for Ilithi "swag", would be nice to just have those items flagged and have a list of items linked off Provincial pages. You get the idea.

			Thanks as always, sorry for the lengthy "note"! [[Kythryn]] 02:49, 10 January 2024 (CST)

ZUERCAT: /* carving & skinning knives */ new section

2024-01-06T22:09:26Z

carving & skinning knives: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:09, 6 January 2024
Line 74:		Line 74:
	IIRC, you set up all the various elements for the Crafting Tool specifications, so I wanted to check in before wading into adding an additional field. Plus, I'm not quite sure what to name the field (maxmanadj? maxadjust?) and would welcome your suggestions. Thanks! [[Kythryn]] 20:22, 5 December 2023 (CST)		IIRC, you set up all the various elements for the Crafting Tool specifications, so I wanted to check in before wading into adding an additional field. Plus, I'm not quite sure what to name the field (maxmanadj? maxadjust?) and would welcome your suggestions. Thanks! [[Kythryn]] 20:22, 5 December 2023 (CST)
	:Nice idea. Added! [[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 10:29, 8 December 2023 (CST)		:Nice idea. Added! [[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 10:29, 8 December 2023 (CST)

			== carving & skinning knives ==

			Hello again! So I've hit the 2 knives, [[Carving knife]] and [[Skinning knife]] on the crafting tools update project. Both the pages use the manually assigned itype=skinning knife or itype=carving knife to populate the variation lists. And that's obviously something we've been trying to move away from needing to use on common groups. Also on both of these, we are going to have quite a few that are Weapons. And, the Weapons form doesn't currently have an option to tag as a crafting tool nor the whole crafting tool section you added to the Item form.

			So I guess I am reaching out on if you agree it makes sense to add the Crafting Tool options to the Weapons form as well? The itype thing can be cleared up when the carving/skinning knife is an ITEM and not a WEAPON, however we would still need to assign an itype to all items going forward so that we continue to catch the weapons on those lists as well. Thanks! [[Kythryn]] 16:09, 6 January 2024 (CST)

TEVESHSZAT: /* Imbuement rod property */

2023-12-08T16:29:19Z

Imbuement rod property

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:29, 8 December 2023
Line 73:		Line 73:
	: ''This rod has a maximum effective mana adjustment of 45...''<br>		: ''This rod has a maximum effective mana adjustment of 45...''<br>
	IIRC, you set up all the various elements for the Crafting Tool specifications, so I wanted to check in before wading into adding an additional field. Plus, I'm not quite sure what to name the field (maxmanadj? maxadjust?) and would welcome your suggestions. Thanks! [[Kythryn]] 20:22, 5 December 2023 (CST)		IIRC, you set up all the various elements for the Crafting Tool specifications, so I wanted to check in before wading into adding an additional field. Plus, I'm not quite sure what to name the field (maxmanadj? maxadjust?) and would welcome your suggestions. Thanks! [[Kythryn]] 20:22, 5 December 2023 (CST)
			:Nice idea. Added! [[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 10:29, 8 December 2023 (CST)

ZUERCAT: /* Imbuement rod property */ new section

2023-12-06T02:22:28Z

Imbuement rod property: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:22, 5 December 2023
Line 67:		Line 67:
	:Yeah I have no idea what's causing that. I don't think it did it in the past. I need to poke around. [[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 17:10, 5 December 2021 (CST)		:Yeah I have no idea what's causing that. I don't think it did it in the past. I need to poke around. [[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 17:10, 5 December 2021 (CST)
	:Yep, it's from the links in the text all being sloot vs ilink. Either way, it shouldn't not make the shops themselves not show themselves as a source option. Weird! [[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 17:38, 5 December 2021 (CST)		:Yep, it's from the links in the text all being sloot vs ilink. Either way, it shouldn't not make the shops themselves not show themselves as a source option. Weird! [[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 17:38, 5 December 2021 (CST)

			== Imbuement rod property ==

			So I'm wading through the crafting tool list, going back and updating old items with all the shiny new tags. Just got to the [[imbuement rod]]s and it looks like they have a metric we don't have a field for. You'll see something like this on their info:
			: ''This rod has a maximum effective mana adjustment of 45...''<br>
			IIRC, you set up all the various elements for the Crafting Tool specifications, so I wanted to check in before wading into adding an additional field. Plus, I'm not quite sure what to name the field (maxmanadj? maxadjust?) and would welcome your suggestions. Thanks! [[Kythryn]] 20:22, 5 December 2023 (CST)

TEVESHSZAT: /* Recent reversible item documentation */

2021-12-05T23:38:07Z

Recent reversible item documentation

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:38, 5 December 2021
Line 66:		Line 66:
	Before you get into these more (ie. not sure if there are others in the pipeline to document), looks like the re-directs you edited in are messing with the SOURCE documentation. For example, on [[Item:Stunning red party dress corseted down the back]], I am seeing the SOURCE as also being "Item:Stunning red party dress corseted down the back". I'm presuming these are in a shop or from a raffle or something, which is what should be showing? Anyhow, this isn't the first reversible SOURCE issue that's on the wiki, the [[Bunglefoot's Tent]] ones are a mess too (see [[Item:Vivid blue gown of fine spidersilk decorated with tiny groupings of moonstone beads along its square neckline]]). Maybe it's time for a template for these? If you do want to make one up, I'll be happy to help wade through current ITEMS and clean things up. [[Kythryn]] 17:07, 5 December 2021 (CST)		Before you get into these more (ie. not sure if there are others in the pipeline to document), looks like the re-directs you edited in are messing with the SOURCE documentation. For example, on [[Item:Stunning red party dress corseted down the back]], I am seeing the SOURCE as also being "Item:Stunning red party dress corseted down the back". I'm presuming these are in a shop or from a raffle or something, which is what should be showing? Anyhow, this isn't the first reversible SOURCE issue that's on the wiki, the [[Bunglefoot's Tent]] ones are a mess too (see [[Item:Vivid blue gown of fine spidersilk decorated with tiny groupings of moonstone beads along its square neckline]]). Maybe it's time for a template for these? If you do want to make one up, I'll be happy to help wade through current ITEMS and clean things up. [[Kythryn]] 17:07, 5 December 2021 (CST)
	:Yeah I have no idea what's causing that. I don't think it did it in the past. I need to poke around. [[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 17:10, 5 December 2021 (CST)		:Yeah I have no idea what's causing that. I don't think it did it in the past. I need to poke around. [[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 17:10, 5 December 2021 (CST)
			:Yep, it's from the links in the text all being sloot vs ilink. Either way, it shouldn't not make the shops themselves not show themselves as a source option. Weird! [[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 17:38, 5 December 2021 (CST)

TEVESHSZAT: /* Recent reversible item documentation */

2021-12-05T23:10:57Z

Recent reversible item documentation

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:10, 5 December 2021
Line 65:		Line 65:

	Before you get into these more (ie. not sure if there are others in the pipeline to document), looks like the re-directs you edited in are messing with the SOURCE documentation. For example, on [[Item:Stunning red party dress corseted down the back]], I am seeing the SOURCE as also being "Item:Stunning red party dress corseted down the back". I'm presuming these are in a shop or from a raffle or something, which is what should be showing? Anyhow, this isn't the first reversible SOURCE issue that's on the wiki, the [[Bunglefoot's Tent]] ones are a mess too (see [[Item:Vivid blue gown of fine spidersilk decorated with tiny groupings of moonstone beads along its square neckline]]). Maybe it's time for a template for these? If you do want to make one up, I'll be happy to help wade through current ITEMS and clean things up. [[Kythryn]] 17:07, 5 December 2021 (CST)		Before you get into these more (ie. not sure if there are others in the pipeline to document), looks like the re-directs you edited in are messing with the SOURCE documentation. For example, on [[Item:Stunning red party dress corseted down the back]], I am seeing the SOURCE as also being "Item:Stunning red party dress corseted down the back". I'm presuming these are in a shop or from a raffle or something, which is what should be showing? Anyhow, this isn't the first reversible SOURCE issue that's on the wiki, the [[Bunglefoot's Tent]] ones are a mess too (see [[Item:Vivid blue gown of fine spidersilk decorated with tiny groupings of moonstone beads along its square neckline]]). Maybe it's time for a template for these? If you do want to make one up, I'll be happy to help wade through current ITEMS and clean things up. [[Kythryn]] 17:07, 5 December 2021 (CST)
			:Yeah I have no idea what's causing that. I don't think it did it in the past. I need to poke around. [[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 17:10, 5 December 2021 (CST)

ZUERCAT: /* Recent reversible item documentation */ new section

2021-12-05T23:07:40Z

Recent reversible item documentation: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:07, 5 December 2021
Line 61:		Line 61:
	::What, we missed something? Impossible! (heh)		::What, we missed something? Impossible! (heh)
	::I'll keep an eye open for other missed materials, and if I find another, I'll just post it here. Then when (if) you hear back from the GM's and they confirm the same template groups, anything needed to be added will be in 1 place. [[Kythryn]] 16:47, 6 November 2021 (CDT)		::I'll keep an eye open for other missed materials, and if I find another, I'll just post it here. Then when (if) you hear back from the GM's and they confirm the same template groups, anything needed to be added will be in 1 place. [[Kythryn]] 16:47, 6 November 2021 (CDT)

			== Recent reversible item documentation ==

			Before you get into these more (ie. not sure if there are others in the pipeline to document), looks like the re-directs you edited in are messing with the SOURCE documentation. For example, on [[Item:Stunning red party dress corseted down the back]], I am seeing the SOURCE as also being "Item:Stunning red party dress corseted down the back". I'm presuming these are in a shop or from a raffle or something, which is what should be showing? Anyhow, this isn't the first reversible SOURCE issue that's on the wiki, the [[Bunglefoot's Tent]] ones are a mess too (see [[Item:Vivid blue gown of fine spidersilk decorated with tiny groupings of moonstone beads along its square neckline]]). Maybe it's time for a template for these? If you do want to make one up, I'll be happy to help wade through current ITEMS and clean things up. [[Kythryn]] 17:07, 5 December 2021 (CST)

ZUERCAT: /* HE439 game prize templates */

2021-11-06T21:47:23Z

HE439 game prize templates

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:47, 6 November 2021
Line 59:		Line 59:
	Do we think that it was a material that just didn't get found & added last year, or that it's a new one to 439? My feeling is that we start a list somewhere, and if we find say 6-10 "new" materials, it would be worth it to make a new set of templates. Otherwise we just presume they were missed in 436 and add them in now. Thoughts? [[Kythryn]] 02:47, 6 November 2021 (CDT)		Do we think that it was a material that just didn't get found & added last year, or that it's a new one to 439? My feeling is that we start a list somewhere, and if we find say 6-10 "new" materials, it would be worth it to make a new set of templates. Otherwise we just presume they were missed in 436 and add them in now. Thoughts? [[Kythryn]] 02:47, 6 November 2021 (CDT)
	:Asked GMs yesterday and I'm waiting for a response. It's also possible we just missed nimbus garnet last year! --[[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 09:21, 6 November 2021 (CDT)		:Asked GMs yesterday and I'm waiting for a response. It's also possible we just missed nimbus garnet last year! --[[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 09:21, 6 November 2021 (CDT)
			::What, we missed something? Impossible! (heh)
			::I'll keep an eye open for other missed materials, and if I find another, I'll just post it here. Then when (if) you hear back from the GM's and they confirm the same template groups, anything needed to be added will be in 1 place. [[Kythryn]] 16:47, 6 November 2021 (CDT)

TEVESHSZAT: /* HE439 game prize templates */

2021-11-06T14:21:43Z

HE439 game prize templates

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:21, 6 November 2021
Line 58:		Line 58:
	So I wanted a 2nd opinion before I make a separate set of these for the new year. I just started cross-checking materials against some of the templates, and in general, I'm seeing the same things in 439 that we saw in 436. But, I did find a 'new' option; nimbus garnet on the GEMSTONE list.<br>		So I wanted a 2nd opinion before I make a separate set of these for the new year. I just started cross-checking materials against some of the templates, and in general, I'm seeing the same things in 439 that we saw in 436. But, I did find a 'new' option; nimbus garnet on the GEMSTONE list.<br>
	Do we think that it was a material that just didn't get found & added last year, or that it's a new one to 439? My feeling is that we start a list somewhere, and if we find say 6-10 "new" materials, it would be worth it to make a new set of templates. Otherwise we just presume they were missed in 436 and add them in now. Thoughts? [[Kythryn]] 02:47, 6 November 2021 (CDT)		Do we think that it was a material that just didn't get found & added last year, or that it's a new one to 439? My feeling is that we start a list somewhere, and if we find say 6-10 "new" materials, it would be worth it to make a new set of templates. Otherwise we just presume they were missed in 436 and add them in now. Thoughts? [[Kythryn]] 02:47, 6 November 2021 (CDT)
			:Asked GMs yesterday and I'm waiting for a response. It's also possible we just missed nimbus garnet last year! --[[User:TEVESHSZAT\|TEVESHSZAT]] ([[User talk:TEVESHSZAT\|talk]]) 09:21, 6 November 2021 (CDT)