User talk:Somohexual

Hello

I'm not very Wiki-savvy but I try to contribute. :3

And you sure have been so far =) Let me be the first to say... Welcome to the wiki! Yoe Dude (talk) 00:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! :D -Somohexual (talk) 00:38, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Combat Abilities

The bullet lists are really hard to read. It's more readable to write it out like I did with Risen High Wizard. And use {{effect}} with effects, {{skill icon}} with skills.--Relyk ~ talk < 04:40, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Without the bullet lists though the skills section just looks like a big wall of text, which seems much harder to read. Also, I thought I have been using {{effect}} with effects and {{skill icon}} with skills. -Somohexual (talk) 12:21, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

It's the same as a normal skill list with descriptions, list the skill name then a description. Expanding it to include a set of pseudo-skill facts takes up way more space and makes it harder to read compared to writing the effects in prose.--Relyk ~ talk < 19:20, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

effect templates

Please don't create templates for obscure effects like that. Just use {{skill icon}}. —Dr Ishmael 14:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm assuming you're talking about the templates I created for Greatly Inspired, Inspired, and etc? I'm sorry for the clutter, I must have overlooked that template. D: When I make new pages I'm mostly just going off what I see other people use for similar pages, so thanks for the information. -Somohexual (talk) 15:18, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

It's the fault of all the boons and conditions have their own templates along with {{skill fact}}, which was implemented using individual templates for each effect. For general effects, the {{effect}} template works fine. You don't want to use skill icon because that trims the border (and they aren't skills). This hasn't been discussed much.--Relyk ~ talk < 19:20, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh, OK I think I understand. Thanks for the clarification. :D -Somohexual (talk) 20:49, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Is there a reason?

You use Ascalonian Healers instead of Ascalonian Healers etc, the plural is picked up as part of the link, it seems easier to me. --Claret (talk) 20:14, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

It just looks more "correct" to me. :P Is it problematic for you or others to deal with though? D: -Somohexual (talk) 20:17, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I guess I just get used to seeing others using the shorter form. As long as you are aware of it (and none of us are aware of everything :) ), then it's your choice ofc. --Claret (talk) 20:20, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

OK. Yeah, I'm definitely not always aware of everything, so thanks for asking about it. xD -Somohexual (talk) 20:21, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

The short form is preferred because it's less confusing. —Dr Ishmael 23:20, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll use the short version from now on then. Thanks, Dr Ishmael. :D -Somohexual (talk) 23:23, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Btw, is there a way to use short version for something like Globs of Ectoplasm? MalGalad 23:37, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Some prefer Globs of Ectoplasm as easier to edit, i.e. using a plural form redirect. Some prefer the way you used it above as more proper. 75.37.17.161 00:11, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

People shouldn't use plural form when they use templates, but it's reasonable for wikilinks.--Relyk ~ talk < 01:28, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Location links

I see you adding a lot to the location sections of NPCs, which is great. Since you claim to not be very wiki savvy, I was wondering if you were aware of the what links here function. It's under the "toolbox" section of the left margin. As you can see, there's a lot of pages that link to Rat, mostly locations that aren't listed on the page. I don't mean to say "you need to do all of them if you're going to do it" or anything, I just wanted to make sure you were aware of it in case it would be helpful to you. Manifold 21:17, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

:O!!! This. Is. Amazing. Thanks a bunch for taking the time to tell me, it's definitely helpful. :D -Somohexual (talk) 21:20, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

This got me thinking, why isn't there a set of templates that automatically creates these lists for the ==Locations== section of an NPC's page? I'm imagining something like how the Dropped by template uses the Drops template. What if there was a (Ex) [[Template:Located in]] that could make a list on an NPC's page of all the areas they're found in. It would include area pages with that NPC's name listed using (Ex) [[Template:NPC]], which would be written as (Ex) {{NPC|<npc name>}} ?

Would this be possible/functional? I was tempted to try making it myself but, like you mentioned, I'm not very wiki savvy. xP -Somohexual (talk) 22:16, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Unlike {{drops}} and {{dropped by}}, the Property:Located in is set in the NPC infobox. You can query the page for that property, but you are simply repeating what's in the infobox that way. To expand on why, what you're thinking of would be setting a [[Property:Has NPC]] property on the area pages, and then querying for areas that has the specific value for that NPC. In short, you are working from the area to individual NPC instead of NPC to area. The primary problem with how we currently set Located in is the infobox is too small if an article has ~15 locations, which is a problem for events as well as NPCs and something we need to work on.--Relyk ~ talk < 22:38, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I understand. Thanks for the explanation. <3 -Somohexual (talk) 22:40, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I've been saying all along (well, maybe not all along, but I know I've said it at least twice), location shouldn't be in the infobox. If there's one location, fine, but more than one looks ugly. It's easier to present and manage a list like that within the article anyway. —Dr Ishmael 22:41, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

But location is in the infobox and it's set to interpret lists. I would respectfully argue that some feel locations should be there. I think there is not a consensus on that or certainly not one that I am aware of. I do know that some people feel strongly about this. The fact that the display of the locations may be said to be klutzy is another matter. --Claret (talk) 22:54, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

"the display of the locations may be said to be klutzy" Exactly. If we can't present it in a non-klutzy way within the infobox, it shouldn't be there. I don't know of a good way to fix the klutzy other than leaving out the zone name and only showing area name, but most players don't know the areas well enough for that to be sufficient. —Dr Ishmael 23:21, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I guess that's where we differ, I would rather see the full information there, even if it's aesthetically poor. It's information, not aesthetics that the users are looking for. This discussion might be better continued elsewhere. There's a lot of redundancy in the average NPC article anyway, so much so that it can look ridiculous. --Claret (talk) 23:38, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Illusions

Hi, I noticed that you had edited Champion Corrupted Illusion and other illusions. The "race" parameter does not point to any known category of NPCs but to the mesmers' profession mechanic. I guess someone needs to define a Category of Illusion (NPC) but it's not something I would be comfortable doing. Also, not at all sure that they're "Risen" either. Sorry to be a PITA. --Claret (talk) 01:01, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

I've been meaning to make a page for the Illusion race but just haven't gotten around to it yet. I'm pretty sure they should be classified as Risen because they're illusions of Risen Gorillas and friendly with other Risen. Oh, and it's no problem. :P -Somohexual (talk) 01:39, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Forgot to mention that I did make Category:Illusions , for what it's worth. -Somohexual (talk) 01:42, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

yes, I see. Unfortunately, clicking race in the infobox takes you to the mesmer page as above. Also, Ascalonian Archers, for example, are ghosts, not ghosts, human. I am fairly sure that multiple categories were frowned on. Again, I may be wrong. --Claret (talk) 02:09, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Ascalonian Archers aren't Ghost/Human but they are Ghost/Ascalonian ghost. I see it as a way of categorizing one group as part of another group when "organization" wouldn't fit (Ascalonian ghosts aren't an organization for example). -Somohexual (talk) 02:24, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

OK, fine, it wasn't the best example. No matter, it's not something I feel strongly about one way or the other. --Claret (talk) 02:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Ascalonian ghosts are a subcategory of ghosts. They are not an actually race/organization as far as mechanically. There race needs to be Risen if that's what it is mechanically, pretty sure not all "illusions" are considered Risen.--Relyk ~ talk < 03:22, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

But Illusions can't be the same race as the "real" creatures they look like, that doesn't make any sense. :o They shatter when killed, they're only created by skills, and they don't drop loot; they're Summoned alies. -Somohexual (talk) 03:28, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that there is a diffrence between lore race and mechanical race. A thing might be an illusion lore wise but when my Risen Slayer archivement progresses it is mechanically a risen. Usually we tend to prefer the mechanics over lore even though you sometimes get a headache. - Yandere 03:58, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

I suppose that makes sense. OK, I'll change all of the creatures with an "illusion" race to "Risen". Thanks for the input everyone. :D -Somohexual (talk) 14:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Epic

Why did you switch it? World boss (or megaworld boss) is the official name unless you have a reference where they use Epic for these enemies.--Relyk ~ talk < 00:42, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Where did they officially name them "World Bosses" or "Megaworld Bosses"? :o -Somohexual (talk) 02:56, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

• [1]
• Game updates/2013-09-03: "Open world bosses"
• Game updates/2013-08-20: "Defeat Scarlet for a daily world-boss reward of two guaranteed rare items."
• Mentioned as "Mega world bosses" in the Ascended Crafting video.

And so on, hence why it was changed in the first place.--Relyk ~ talk < 04:04, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

But world boss is not used by them as a rank, it's just a term referring to bosses that reward daily bonus chests (and now, Dragonite Ore).

• Scarlet Briar and Admiral Taidha Covington give these rewards but are Legendary rank.
• Claw of Jormag and Tequatl the Sunless give these rewards but are "Epic" rank.
• Champion Svanir Shaman Chief and Champion Drakin Cinderspire give these rewards but are Champion rank.
• Etc, etc.

This is why I also changed Boss to include a World Bosses section -Somohexual (talk) 16:25, 6 September 2013 (UTC).

Epic is an unofficial term for the same thing, not sure of your point there. The rank is characterized by the yellow text, large portrait, and different targetting, not whether there is a bonus chest.--Relyk ~ talk < 17:26, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

You got what I meant mixed up. :P

• The rank of "Epic" is characterized by the text/portrait/targeting.
• The role of "World Boss" is characterized by awarding a daily bonus chest.

All "Epic" ranked creatures are World Bosses but not all World Bosses are "Epic" rank creatures, if that makes sense. There needs to be some way to differentiate between the two. -Somohexual (talk) 17:40, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Actually, not all epic creatures are world bosses: Blightghast the Plaguebringer is epic but does not award a world boss chest (as Relyk pointed out in a related discussion). —Dr Ishmael 18:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Ah, my mistake. Thanks for the correction. Regardless though, my point still stands. :P -Somohexual (talk) 19:14, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey

Hi, I've been tagging uncategorized images, and I've recently noticed that sometimes you forget to select the "screenshot" option from the dropdown menu. I'd appreciate if you could try and remember to press it :D thanks -Chieftain Alex 22:52, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Gasp! I've never even noticed that! I'm sorry! D: -Somohexual (talk) 23:20, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

PvP Resonator

copypasta on the "set = PvP Gear"?--Relyk ~ talk < 23:31, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

What do you mean? :o I did just copy -> paste each of the PvP Gear weapon pages and make slight alterations to each, if that's what you're asking. -Somohexual (talk) 23:35, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Why are they not all PvP Gear <x> /sigh--Relyk ~ talk < 00:21, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

They are... x.x

{{Weapon infobox
| icon = PvP Resonator.png
| gallery = Adamant Guard Warhorn.jpg
| type = Warhorn
| rarity = exotic
| level = 80
| bound = Account
| set = PvP Gear
}}

-Somohexual (talk) 00:40, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

It was rhetorical lol.--Relyk ~ talk < 04:20, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh... then what's your actual question? Sorry, I just don't understand what you're trying to ask me. xD -Somohexual (talk) 15:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

swiftness icon

We currently don't use the game textures for boon/condition icons. User:Alfa-R created a set of Tango icons at the exact size that we need (18px) that look a lot better than down-sized game textures. —Dr Ishmael 15:52, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sorry. I just made a page for Owl Shaman's Protection (which uses the same icon as Swiftness) and the icon appeared to be blurry so I thought uploading the version from your icon files (which are amazing btw, thank you xD) would be an improvement. -Somohexual (talk) 15:55, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Alfa also made larger-size versions for uses like that, i.e. File:Swiftness 40px.png that we use on the Swiftness infobox. —Dr Ishmael 16:58, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Ahh, I see. Thanks for letting me know! :D -Somohexual (talk) 16:59, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Also, duplicate icons aren't a bad thing. You don't need to go fix them. —Dr Ishmael 17:02, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

But why not fix them? There's no need for 20 different icons that are all exactly the same. :o -Somohexual (talk) 17:03, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Because it's a lot of work for no obvious benefit. I can't think of any good arguments either way, and in cases like that I think it's easier to just leave things as they are. Besides, users in the future may not be aware of these reused icons, and they'll upload new copies of them for new items. So the "problem" crops up again anyway and requires constant vigilance to correct. That's why I wouldn't worry about it. —Dr Ishmael 18:13, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Good point. Thanks for the tip. :3 -Somohexual (talk) 18:28, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Consumable versus Container

There is a significant difference - containers contain other items, consumables don't. —Dr Ishmael 23:09, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm aware that a container contains things, lol. :P Dragon Chest (consumable) is labeled as a consumable in-game though, just like sPvP reward chests.

-Somohexual (talk) 23:36, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

containers are a type of consumable and those are containers--Relyk ~ talk < 23:45, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of this since "container" isn't an official type of item. -Somohexual (talk) 00:50, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

No, Relyk, container and consumable are separate item types. But I just checked the tooltip in-game, and it does say "Consumable" - which is completely boggling, because in the API it's a container. —Dr Ishmael 01:00, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

All containers are labeled consumable, so it's semantics? So suggest using the item type from the API for the qualifier.--Relyk ~ talk < 01:10, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

You're absolutely right, Relyk - all containers are labelled "Consumable" in their tooltip. I'd been ignoring it for so long I forgot. So there's nothing anomalous here at all, the Dragon Chest is a container. —Dr Ishmael 01:49, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

redirecting icon images

don't do it, a better approach is to upload a duplicate of the image or use the icon parameter with the icon you'd want to redirect to.--Relyk ~ talk < 21:12, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

My first instinct was to use the icon parameter, but that doesn't apply to the mystic forge recipe window, only the item's infobox. Does redirecting an icon's image create any problems? I thought it would be better than cluttering up the wiki with duplicate images. D: -Somohexual (talk) 21:25, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

The mystic forge recipe uses Property:Has game icon, which is set in the item infobox. Redirecting means you are storing the Property:Has game icon as a page to a redirect. The only reason it works is because SMW is smart enough to grab the file it's redirected to, but you don't know it was redirected. This can make it hard to track what SMW templates are using to generate output. It's better to set the property directly with the icon parameter, this also reduces any "clutter" duplicate images produces.

I prefer duplicate images! Because we organize upload file names by article name to follow the File.{{PAGENAME}}.png format, which allows us to implement icon templates automatically, you are actually mapping one icon image to multiple item icons. I find it a little confusing to set an icon Basic Axe.png to the icon image for Snowplower.png when you can easily reverse that and set Basic Axe.png to Snowplower.png.

If you make an icon that doesn't use SMW properties (if you have too many queries or someone misses a parantheses, SMW can fuck up a page), you rely on the File.{{PAGENAME}}.png format to generate the icon by either redirects or duplicates. Since we don't like redirects when we use SMW (or in general, redirecting images can obfuscate where an image is and SMW let's us avoid that), duplicate images give us flexibility to use either approach.

If we didn't want duplicate images, we would upload the icon images by id name you see in the item archives. Keep in mind, one of the advantages of naming icons after pages is because it makes it readable, an item icon id doesn't mean anything to people and unfriendly in a wiki format. That's why I found I like the approach and format the wiki uses even though it was before my time (haven't read much discussion).--Relyk ~ talk < 22:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

skill histories

Could we discuss this on the Community Portal or something first? —Dr Ishmael 20:23, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh, absolutely! I'm sorry I didn't bring it up before now, I just don't really know how to use the Community Portal lol.

-Somohexual (talk) 20:27, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Update: The topic has been created on the Portal. :3

-Somohexual (talk) 20:51, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

pagename qualifier in infobox

When you create a page with a qualifier in the title (like Bull (NPC)), that qualifier is included in the infobox's title by default. To override this, use the name parameter in the infobox: | name = Bull.

Also if level is unknown or inapplicable, just omit it - setting it to "NA" or anything else non-numeric shows an "improper value" warning. —Dr Ishmael 15:02, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I completely forgot about the name parameter! I usually do that for pages with (critter), (npc), etc. Thank you for the tip about level. I only copy-pasted what someone else had put on another page, but I wasn't sure which was more appropriate anyway.

-Somohexual (talk) 15:05, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

You kicked off an Ishy-bot edit crusade, you should be proud! :D —Dr Ishmael 15:31, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

If my mistakes help in some way, I'll take it. xP

-Somohexual (talk) 15:33, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Moved character dialogue in instance

Hey, you moved Tassi’s dialogue to her character page here. I disagree with that. The dialogue is highly relevant to the instance itself, not only does it provide necessary information about that happening inside of the instance, but it is also a key part of actually initiating the continuation of the instance. You are required to talk to Tassi in that situation, otherwise you cannot progress.

I agree that dialogue from with an NPC which is freely accessible in an open part of the world (a zone, or a city) should be documented on the character article, but for dialogue that depends on a (story) instance or is otherwise related to some other part, it should be kept there. Just imagine how articles would look like if we collected all the dialogues for Destiny’s Edge members ;) poke | talk 13:17, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Giant Wintersday dooda

Are you sure that the gift drops Endless Princess tonics? Someone on reddit opened 20,000 of them and didn't get one. It makes sense that they would drop, but did you get one yourself, or is it just an educated guess? Also I noticed you changed the drops of the ascended materials from 1 or 50 to 1 or 10, however the person who opened 20,000 said that it was possible to get piles of 50, and this was also present on the first drop table before it was updated to the new format. 50 per box is definitely possible though very rare, but its also possible it is 1 or 10 or 50. Have you heard of people getting 10? Psycho Robot (talk) 18:06, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

I only added the recipe to the list, not the tonic itself. Honestly, I haven't found a Recipe: Endless Princess Doll Tonic in the Giant Wintersday Gifts myself, but I did get a Recipe: Endless Toy Golem Tonic. I think it's pretty safe to assume that if the giant gifts can drop one of the toy tonic recipes it can drop any of them. Changing ascended materials to 1 or 10 was a typo, Flawless Snowflakes where listed as 1 or 10 at the time and I accidentally copy-pasted it to the other materials. -Somohexual (talk) 18:20, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Its never a sure bet that anet is logical. Still I agree and I was just wondering if it was certain or just almost certain. Anyways, only scrubs make typos. Get it together man. Psycho Robot (talk) 18:23, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Words and numbers are just so hard. QQ. -Somohexual (talk) 18:59, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

fine/exotic trinkets

Ugh... why did you go and do that? Dual infoboxes on a page is just plain *BAD* because they're both setting the same semantic properties with no way to tell them apart. At the very least you should have used template:item variant table row, which encapsulates each item in its own subojbect. But for these items, even that doesn't make sense anymore because of the collections - the collectible version needs to be separate. —Dr Ishmael 18:22, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Curse you Ish, I was just meaning to post about this! Yes, as much as your goal is to unify the similar pages, it's actually messier (two infoboxes? yuck) and the majority of the trinkets is/were built that way. --Ventriloquist 18:27, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

1. You can very easily tell the Fine version apart from the Exotic version on the page.
2. You can simply mention that the exotic variant is part of a collection in the Notes section.
3. They have more similarities than differences.
4. I don't see a problem with two infoboxes. -Somohexual (talk) 18:29, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

It's been discussed before, two infoboxes is bad, both visually and in terms of SMW. No page should ever have more than one infobox. Period.

A "simple" mention in the Notes that one version is a collectible but the other one isn't will be missed by a lot of readers. Besides, we've added support to the infoboxes for collections, which is much more concise and visible than saying it in the Notes.

Also, please don't use {{drops}} on event pages. That template is meant to be used for loot drops on NPC pages only - it might make sense to use that on the chest page, but we don't have separate pages for each version of e.g. Glorious Chest. —Dr Ishmael 19:07, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I looked for the ability to add "Collectable" to the infobox and didn't find it, but that added support only makes the infobox setup a better idea. Also, that crosses the item variant table (seen at Rotbeard's Treasure) off the list because it would be confusing with only one variant being a collectable. In my opinion, having one page with two infoboxes is significantly better than having two pages about nearly identical items.

My mistake, I guess I'm just used to using {{drops}} for NPC pages, I'll change the template for items on event pages to {{item icon}}. -Somohexual (talk) 19:17, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

"that crosses the item variant table off the list" Yeah, I already countered myself in my initial comment about that. ;) I'll give up on the two infoboxes thing - I'm sure Ventriloquist or Alex (if he's watching) can do a much better job of explaining why it's bad. —Dr Ishmael 19:22, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I get that it's faster to just hit "undo" to revert my changes, but that also removed the missing info I added and the fixes to formatting I did. :( -Somohexual (talk) 19:36, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Two infoboxes can easily confuse a person looking for collectibles, as the first thing they'll see is the three-silver variant when searching for that specific collectible. Now with the new way Ish set it up (exotics being set as default, with the disambiguation leading towards the fine variants) is perfect because 99% of readers will be going to those pages to look for items they need in their collection, which is only the exotic variant. Also, slapping both variants on one page creates unnecessary clutter - which can easily be avoided by splitting the pages. I know that the items are extremely similar in every aspect, but that should not be a reason to combine them into one page that holds all of the information in a clutter-ific way. If anything, it makes it harder to distinguish specific information about the items, such as bugs or anomalies, as well as being a general annoyance on the technical side of things. --Ventriloquist 19:42, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

(Reset indent) (Edit conflict) Derp. What Ishmael meant to open with, was that you're a super contributor, and we were surprised you hadn't run into item variant table!

(Basically if we put two infoboxes on one page, then when you use stuff like {{item icon}}, then it spits out something which looks like [[File:Rotbeard's Treasure.png,File:Rotbeard's Treasure.png]] - which doesn't work.)

Documentation added for trinket infobox "collection" parameter.

We could stick an option for the collection parameter into item variant table row so that future automated lists point to the right one. I think that in the case of multiple items being shown on one page then we should probably note which rarity/version counts towards the achievement under a heading at the bottom of the page. -Chieftain Alex 19:52, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

@Somo: I did not "undo" the main page (e.g. Ulgoth's Tail), I edited it and removed the non-exotic information. I'm pretty sure I did not remove any information; as for formatting, if you're talking about {{clear}}, then that's another historical bad practice that we're trying to stamp out.

As Ventriloquist said, we understand wanting to document similar items together - I wrote Template:Loot variant table row in order to do just that for all the generic loot in the game! In this case, however, there is something special - collectibility - about one of the items, and that specialness makes it more logical to split the page. —Dr Ishmael 19:58, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Ah, sorry. I took a pretty long break from the Wiki so I didn't even know about Template:Loot variant table row until I saw it on Eternal Ice and Rotbeard's Treasure. -Somohexual (talk) 20:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Chaos Armor (effect)

What's your source for that being an aura? —Dr Ishmael 16:27, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

"Aura is a type of effect that provide an irremovable buff, harming foes attacking the character with the effect while also granting protection from attacks. Elementalists have access to each aura through different weapon skills and also have many traits that improve auras. Auras can also be granted by certain combos, traits, and upgrade components."

1. Chaos Armor cannot be removed. (Fire Shield, Frost Aura, Magnetic Aura, Shocking Aura, Light Aura)
2. Chaos Armor provides some sort of benefit to you when attacked. (Fire Shield, Frost Aura, Magnetic Aura, Shocking Aura, Light Aura)
3. Chaos Armor causes some sort of negative effect to your attackers. (Fire Shield, Frost Aura, Magnetic Aura, Shocking Aura, Light Aura)
4. There is a weapon skill that only has the effect of giving you Chaos Armor. (Fire Shield, Frost Aura, Magnetic Aura, Shocking Aura)
5. Chaos Armor is granted by using a Leap Finisher in its respective elemental field. (Fire Shield, Frost Aura, Light Aura)
6. Chaos Armor is granted in an AoE by using a Blast Finisher in its respective elemental field. (Frost Aura)
7. Auras are not actually an Elementalist-only mechanic. (Light Aura)
8. Auras do not need to have "Aura" in their name. (Fire Shield)
9. Chaos Armor gives your character a bubble/sphere effect. (Fire Shield, Frost Aura, Magnetic Aura, Shocking Aura, Light Aura)
10. Chaos Armor triggers and benefits from the 2/6 and 6/6 Superior Rune of Radiance effects. (Just tested this 5 minutes ago in game)

My final point actually proves what I said at first was partially wrong. It's not just technically an Aura from a mechanical standpoint, it's actually treated as an Aura too. -Somohexual (talk) 16:49, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

The final point is the only one that matters. Everything else is actually non-technical - that definition is written by players based on observed mechanics, all of which are shared individually by other effects (Distortion can't be removed, Signet of Vampirism provides a benefit when you are attacked, Obsidian Flesh has the sole effect of granting its effect, combos produce tons of other effects, etc.). In any case, I see you've already updated the pages to reflect the actual state of things, thanks. —Dr Ishmael 17:58, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

masterwork/rare splits

Okay, this time I'm asking why you're splitting those pages. They work fine on a single page with the variant table, and there doesn't seem to be any reason to split them. —Dr Ishmael 17:59, 9October 2014 (UTC)

I thought I should for consistency's sake, but after doing some research it made more sense for them to also be split.

Example:

1. Ring of the Catacombs has 2 masterwork versions (lvl 35 and 80) and 2 rare versions (lvl 65 and 80).
2. Ghostly Spineguard has 2 masterwork versions (lvl 35 and 80) and only 1 rare version (lvl 80).
3. Foefire Amulet has 2 masterwork versions (lvl 35 and 80) and 1 rare version (lvl 80), which has its own icon.

-Somohexual (talk) 20:59, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

That actually is a good argument to keep them on one page. If you're going to split off the rare version, then you should split the two masterwork versions.

Foefire Amulet is the only one I would support a split on, because of the differing icon. —Dr Ishmael 21:09, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Ghoul's Grasp description

That's odd, when linked in chat it [[:File:User Ventriloquist Ghoul's Grasp.jpg|clearly shows the icons]], as opposed to the actual live version, I'm assuming? --Ventriloquist 20:53, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

That is quite odd. Maybe the link still has a leftover idea from the developmental stages that was scrapped? It would make sense I guess; something like link code isn't usually seen in-game and would probably be a lower priority update.

-Somohexual (talk) 21:05, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Eh, it looks better on the wiki without the icons anyway. Much simpler to document, too. --Ventriloquist 21:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Email

Hey, I’m trying to send you an email, but you haven’t entered one in your preferences (or disabled it there). Can you set one please? poke | talk 02:59, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Oh, sure. Should be working now. -Somohexual (talk) 14:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

It worked, thanks :) poke | talk 15:46, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

sinister recipes

You should link to the generalized item page, e.g. Draconic Boots. —Dr Ishmael 19:45, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake. -Somohexual (talk) 19:46, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

No worries, I was able to catch you early in the process. ;) —Dr Ishmael 01:04, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Temporary on items

Please don’t put {{temporary}} on the Wintersday items. While they were introduced with the update, their availability is not restricted for Wintersday. The temporary template should only be used with playable content that is restricted during the release (e.g. content like jumping puzzles, missions etc.). poke | talk 18:05, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

My mistake, thanks for letting me know. :D -Somohexual (talk) 18:11, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Sure, and thank you too :D poke | talk 18:21, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

One more thing, since you are creating disambiguation pages right now. Usually, we would want such pages for things that people search for but may mean multiple things. So for example, when searching for “Leather” a list of all leathers would be useful. So it would be fine if you just placed such a list on Leather directly instead of having an article named with the qualifier “Leather (disambiguation)”. People are unlikely to add the “(disambiguation)” part; so adding that is only useful, if there is already some “Leather” page that directs people to the disambiguation page for more alternative things. tl;dr: You can just move “XY (disambiguation)” to “XY” if that article doesn’t exist yet :) poke | talk 18:26, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be more organized to make "XY (disambiguation)" and then just have "XY" redirect to it? -Somohexual (talk) 18:29, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

No. The only reason to include a qualifier in a page name is if the base page name is already taken. And I went ahead and moved the pages while poke was typing his comment here. :) —Dr Ishmael 18:30, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Mkay. Nice timing too, you caught me right before I was about to make Metal. :P -Somohexual (talk) 18:34, 17 December 2014 (UTC)