Template talk:Infobox requires

Just a quick note... this isn't an infobox. It's a banner, or a top-note. Infoboxes go at the top right, not top center, and present a collated list of information about the topic.

Even though this is used within infobox templates, it doesn't actually appear within the infobox, unlike the other "Template:Infobox X" templates, so this seems somewhat confusing to me. —Dr Ishmael 15:38, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

This template is never ment to be called on it's own. I added a parameter to most infoboxes to have "release = ..." that will go to this template. So this is an extention of the existing infoboxes and that's where the name comes from. As for the banner at the top; that's currently being discussed. I'd rather it go as a line in the infobox instead but we havn't reached a conclusion yet.

I was copying the format of Template:Infobox status when I made this which creates a banner. I didn't know there was any specific naming convention. J.Tesla (talk) 16:08, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, this is just me coming back blind after a year away. I see a new template and think, "That name is confusing." —Dr Ishmael 01:42, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Locked behind, or released during?

Ok, so I think I may have not been using this template properly for a bit now, but I've heard so many conflicting statements that I don't even know anymore.

This template page states The release indicates the expansion/dlc requires to access the content, so is this the exact and only use for it? That is for example gem store items release today (during LWS3) would NOT qualify for this tag?

Or is this instead some sort of a historical marker for "this item was released during the time of <insert release name here>"?

If it is the former, I know I have a few pages to go back on, and as a whole, quite a massive amount of wiki articles will need to be edited as well I think. -Darqam 16:42, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

My interpretation is that it indicates how or if a reader can access it. My mental check is, "Next year, what will a reader care about?" In the case of Fire Orchid Blossoms or the Foefire Mantle, they'd care how to get them. G R E E N E R 17:00, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

So then that answer seems to cater to what the template info lists. So the Fire Orchid would be stamped <lws3>, but the Foefire Mantle would have no restriction? That would make the most sense to me as well. If there's no contradicting statement I'll stick with that. -Darqam 19:24, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

It was originally both. There would have been two tags eg: "release = lws3, flashpoint". The expansion or living world tag would be the "required to play" part and then the name of the release would show at the top with the {{temporary}} template but that idea was changed because we decided that temporary should not be used in that way and it was not that important to mention which release the item came from. You can still add multiple tags and it may some day include which release the item came with but for now it's only use is "what is required to play this content".

Edit: I don't think we ever decided wheather or not to include the release in the infobox somewhere. Here is the relavant edit to the template to remove the release options. Here is the discussion relating to it. I'd like to see the releases added back into the infobox at some point in some way. J.Tesla (talk) 20:22, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Just specifically dlc and LS?

I understand the original design for this info-box was to separate PoF, HoT, LS-2, and LS-3 content from the base game however, would it not be prudent to add base game and LS-1 distinction as well? Here is my reasoning: Quite a few people that play this game have free accounts and thus, base-game limitations. In addition, for the people who do own the full base-game but no expansion, it would be a quick glance to the top right of the screen and they would see a "Guild Wars 2 base game" content sticker indicating the content was released for Central Tyria. Here is a mock up I made, [[User:Endeavor7530/sandbox/Guild Wars 2 content|GW2 base game]] and [[User:Endeavor7530/sandbox/Living World Season 1 content|LWS1]].

As for the main template, which, is in my sandbox; I cannot, for the life of me, figure out how to make the GW2 logo appear. I'm hoping the idea makes sense. Now, as for the cons to add this, yes it would mean the eventual editing of base-game articles to reflect the change in template and yes, it is daunting. Again, just an idea. endeavor7530 10:36, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

LWS1 should be in there but I don’t think we need one for the base game. If nothing is specified then it should be assumed that it is base game. The idea of the template is to display what is required to use the content. Since LWS1 content isn’t going to come back it’s all been classed as historical and no one has through to change that yet. If there is a need for labelling pages as LWS1 content then we can easily do that.

I had a look at your sandbox. The icons require a unique indicator name or they will override each other. Also you were displaying the actual infobox template and not your custom sandbox so you were not seeing your changes. J.Tesla (talk) 13:39, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Ahh good point. Thank you. endeavor7530 20:43, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Raids

Should raid content have its own category for releases? SarielV 03:47, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Like for Defender's Brazier? I'm reluctant to apply this template to smaller than expansion/LWSx updates. That being said this template does have a lot of fairly rubbish shorthands and "options".. -Chieftain Alex 08:21, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorting

Indicators are apparently sorted by the name attribute from left to right, no matter the input order. If we added a kind of "sortkey" into the name on each sub template, I think this would then sort the indicators chronologically instead of alphabetically.

This change would need to be applied to the sub templates over a larger period of time (say one sub template every few days over a few weeks) to avoid a sudden influx of pages to regenerate.

Some example sortkeys that would work below:

Existing name attribute	Sortkey (first digit = version of game) (second digit = living world season)
Core	00
LWS1	01
LWS2	02
HOT	10
LWS3	13
POF	20
LWS4	24
LWS5 / IBS	25
EOD	30
Gyala hatchery	31

-Chieftain Alex 22:40, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. --Tolkyria (talk) 17:57, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

You may want to consider either adding an additional digit for each of the two purposes for a then total of four or using dates of the initial release (e.g. 2012-08-28) as prefixes instead.

Additionally, shouldn't the last be What Lies Beneath? And would it realy need its own template as it being listed above would seem to imply given that access requirements for it are effectively the same as the ones for End of Dragons and listing it separatelly might be confusing; or's that just me?

Also, wouldn't changing them all at the same time lead to less rebuilding overall as certain pages wouldn't have to be reprocessed more than once due to them listing more than one content requirement; or is the overlap/coverage low? Nightsky (talk) 15:27, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

This was mentioned again on discord. Looking back, instead of picking an arbitrary sortkey, I agree just using the release date is more straightforward. -Chieftain Alex 17:12, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Now implemented, awaits cache update to validate it sorts as expected. -Chieftain Alex 17:19, 4 June 2023 (UTC)