Category talk:Items: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Item Search: new section) |
(→Names: new section) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Weight== |
|||
==Category Deletion== |
|||
I'm considering removing the automatic incomplete tagging for non-combat items that are missing weight. I'm suspect 90% of our users couldn't care less what that belt quiver weighs, and it would allow people to focus more on the important bits. Anyone have any thoughts either way? -Moderator [[User:Caraamon|Caraamon Makdasi]]<sup>([[User talk:Caraamon|talk]])</sup> 19:36, 5 August 2013 (UTC) |
|||
So, why delete the categories? This has to do with the reason we moved to Semantic Wiki. As most people can see, to get every combination of every important item stat would take thousands of categories, which is not something that is feasable to do nor particularly fun to hunt through or maintain. Instead, with Semantic Wiki, you can search for items that meet your criteria while ignoring everything else. In this, items are a perfect test of the system, and thus we have removed the categories since they are no longer necessary (we hope). Now, when when I say we, usually I mean me....so don't blame Naeya if it blows up and kills your pet cat. She's kind enough to support me, but my many mistakes are my own. If you want to more about semantic search, check the help pages that I just updated, in a strange coincidence :P -[[User:Caraamon|Caraamon Strugr-Makdasi]]<sup>([[User talk:Caraamon|talk]])</sup> 21:29, 28 June 2008 (CDT) |
|||
== |
== Names == |
||
The original rule of removing the capitalization was made way way back before I understood how things work. There's actually no more reason to do that anymore, so long as we make a redirect from the non-capitalized version (for backwards compatibility). I'll be making the changes slowly as I review the items. -Moderator [[User:Caraamon|Caraamon Makdasi]]<sup>([[User talk:Caraamon|talk]])</sup> 08:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC) |
|||
Should we be removing things like "Pair of" and "Some" from page titles? (E.G. "Pair of brushed silver earrings" to "Brushed silver earrings") I vaguely recall that we're supposed to, but not sure where it was mentioned and would like to know before I get to them while moving items off the Concept namespace.<br>-[[User:Glimmereyes|Glimmereyes]] 17:21, 20 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I believe so (at least a lot of the ones I saw when I moved most of the Concepts had those things removed.--[[User:Naeya|Naeya]] <sup>([[User talk:Naeya|talk]])</sup> 17:31, 20 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== A brass badge etched with a laurel and lion's claw crest == |
|||
I just added this item, and when making the page didn't add the Item: Is there a way to fix this, or should I just create a new page? Also, is there an easy way to use the template to add a new item? For this one, I made the item page, pasted in the template stuff, then went back and edited with form.--[[User:Martslyis|Celeres]] 08:58, 23 January 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:Not sure if anyone can do it, but someone will need to Move Brass badge etched with a laurel and lion's claw crest to Item:Brass badge etched with a laurel and lion's claw crest; the Move tab us along the top by Edit if you have permission to do it. To add new items, use [[Form:Item]]. There's also [[Form:Weapon]], [[Form:Armor]] and [[Form:Shield]]<br>-[[User:Glimmereyes|Glimmereyes]] 15:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== Item Search == |
|||
The item search lists "stringed instrument", "wind instrument" and "percussion instrument" as options, but those aren't valid item properties. Instead, there's a catch-all "instrument" property, which isn't an option in the search.--[[User:Antendren|Antendren]] 17:08, 8 June 2013 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 02:50, 19 August 2013
Weight
I'm considering removing the automatic incomplete tagging for non-combat items that are missing weight. I'm suspect 90% of our users couldn't care less what that belt quiver weighs, and it would allow people to focus more on the important bits. Anyone have any thoughts either way? -Moderator Caraamon Makdasi(talk) 19:36, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Names
The original rule of removing the capitalization was made way way back before I understood how things work. There's actually no more reason to do that anymore, so long as we make a redirect from the non-capitalized version (for backwards compatibility). I'll be making the changes slowly as I review the items. -Moderator Caraamon Makdasi(talk) 08:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC)