Template talk:Item/new

considering the VAST majority of item differences, I'm inclined to simply do templates for "each type" and not worry about trying to do an "everything" template.

And I'd rather give this some GREAT thought on how to organize, since yes Waered Pyramid is sold alot of places, but many things are not. How do we organize? --Callek 23:52, 23 May 2007 (CDT)

Eh, let's move the entire discussion back to Template talk:Item, it's going to get confusing talking about it in two places. --Farman 16:05, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

OK sorry for the confusion but I moved the whole thing to the Template namespace, let's discuss here.

My idea is something very simple with only the basic information that is common to all items; look and tap, cost/app value, weight, where to buy or obtain.

I think having a single 'top-level' template is better than several different ones since that will give consistency to item articles and make it easier to manage existing articles as well as easier to add new articles. Sub-type items such as weapons or whathaveyou could get a separate additional infobox with appropriate specific extra information. That would look nicer as well IMO.

I agree though, how to categorize will require some thought. We should keep it as general as possible and very very simple. At a certain critical mass I find that over-categorization makes things more confusing as opposed to less so, and can be counter-productive. But here's a quick list off the top of my head:

• Weapon
• Armor
• Fluff
  • Clothing
    • Pocketed
  • Jewelry
• Alchemy
• Fletching
• Tanning
• Forging
• Container
• Magic Item

Another thought is, there are zillions of items in the game and would it cause problems from a systems standpoint to have a huge number of little item articles? Is making a separate article for each item the correct way to go, or would it be better to have combined pages for shop items such as some of the shopping sites have? --Farman 16:35, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

"look and tap, cost/app value, weight" all those are NOT always the same for a single item.

Look and Tap, even cost/app value and weight can be altered by item "states". Some items have _multiple costs_ (some trader "jewelry").

TURN a Ratha Trader Shop knife, and look at it, then TURN it again and look at it, it is literally two different items, spidersilk cloaks look different as time goes on too (I think, but I know there are other items like that).

Some items, such as herbs can change weight after use, even the old dolls that you could pull/rip/kick limbs etc. from, can change weight iirc.

Basically, doing this as "much of a template" is really hard, considering the vast number and design of items.--Callek

Special items with multiple forms could get a see below comment in those fields instead of a description, then the Notes section of the article could give detail. Or just put both descriptions/looks as long as it isn't too bulky. In the grand scheme of things there aren't that many multi-form items (at least compared to how many 'normal' ones there are) so I don't see it as a problem. I'm not familiar with trader jewelry but the same can apply there.

For consumable items such as substances, I think it would be most useful to give the info for the most common, pristine unused form, and put them in Category:Substances, Category:Food, etc. Same for destroyable objects, the info should be for pristine state with notes about other conditions, although I don't think it's necessary to list every single possible look for a rippable shirt for example. Then again, whoever writes that article would be free to add it and whatever else they wanted.

Again, the mockup represents the bare bones basic stuff. Every item in the realms has info that will fit in there; the vast majority of items won't have any problems and the rare exceptions that might have multiple possible values can be explained in the item's article in greater detail, or expanded on in a separate additional infobox. --Farman 00:45, 25 May 2007 (CDT)

Added my thoughts. I'm going to start with a coding write up at Template:Item2.0. Oh, and personally, I think that armor and weapons should use a completely different template. It would be a HUGE pain to try to code up one that selects for all of those, especially to future editors of the code.Caraamon Strugr-Makdasi 17:05, 17 April 2008 (CDT)