User talk:Wombatt

Hello. This is my first time contributing to a wiki. Long-time GW player, I approached BWE2 with an eye on getting as much documented info for this wiki. Now I'm learning to code as I go (mainly by copying existing recipes, etc) and trying to organize things. My main focus in BWE2 was jeweler, leatherworker, and some huntsman.Wombatt 21:12, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Hey man. Just wanted to say thanks for adding pics + organizing my pages. I'm new to the wiki so I'm bad with the layouts and the only info I have is from the videos I took in the last 10 minutes. How far did you get as a leatherworker, because I have a large amount of that information too, but huntsman is taking forever to edit too =X. Anyways, I hit 165 on both hunts and leather, so if you broke 150 on leather I probably won't need to add anything. Cheers, ~Ju!cy~ 20:56, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I only made it to 104 on Huntsman. I took screens of all my crafting window recipes at the crafter tables and then organized everything in Excel, using the categories listed below for my columns. Then I went through on the Wiki and found the materials names and added the item names under the recipes that use it and did the same for the second material and inscription. By that time I was getting more comfortable and after I finished up with all three that I had done I went and started looking around and found someone else's organization style that looked clean and compact and I've been working on recreating that ever since. Wombatt 21:12, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

PREFIX ITEM NAME QTY MAT #1 QTY MAT #2 QTY MAT #3 INSCRIPTION RUNE REQ LVLWombatt 21:12, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

delete tags

When tagging a page for deletion, please provide a reason so that we know why the page should be deleted: {{delete|reason for deleting}}. If the page is redundant, include a link to the correct page.

If you could update the delete tags on the following pages with a reason, that would be appreciated.

• Invisible Leather Pack
• Oiled Leather Pack
• Embroidered Festering Jute Insignia
• Embroidered Healing Jute Insignia
• Embroidered Mighty Jute Insignia
• Embroidered Precise Jute Insignia
• Embroidered Resilient Jute Insignia
• Embroidered Vital Jute Insignia

Thanks. —Dr Ishmael 15:43, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Done. I'm sure there are a couple more out there that I did wrong still. I'll see if I can dig them up, if you come across them, please go ahead and post them back up here, too. Thanks! Wombatt 20:55, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Most of these things could possibly be close enough to the real item name that a redirect could be justified instead. Let me know if you'd like me to do that instead of deleting. Wombatt 21:07, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

And also, instead of moving contents from one page to another and tagging the old one for deletion, use the move link. It screws up page history if you don't. It can be found if you hover the arrow by the search box. — Rhoot 20:57, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Will do that in the future. Thanks! Wombatt 21:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Okay, this is really weird - I created this alt account so I can see how things look to non-sysops, and guess what? I don't have a "move" command in either Monobook or Vector! No wonder we've been having so many soft-move problems lately. I think I know why, and I'm going to report this as a wiki bug. Dr Ishmael 21:28, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I see a Move tab at the top of the page (next to edit/+/history/Move) after I knew to look for it. Wombatt 21:29, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Really? Then I guess it's not as bad as I thought, and my new account simply hasn't met the requirements to be "autoconfirmed" yet. I'll keep an eye on that. —Dr Ishmael 21:33, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Anyway, before I got distracted by that, I was going to tell you to go ahead and convert any of those to redirects that you feel should be. I'll give you some time to do that, then I'll delete the rest. —Dr Ishmael 21:38, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Definitely have Move tab over here (monobook). Is it disabled for recently created accounts with little to no edit count, perhaps? Mediggo 21:39, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

That's what I was referring to - you can specify in the wiki configuration either a length of time or a number of edits, or both, as a threshold that new accounts have to pass to become autoconfirmed and receive additional rights. I have no clue what those settings are on GW2W because there's no way to see them on the wiki, only by looking at the config file on the server. —Dr Ishmael 21:43, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll redirect them all, they're close enough that I think it'll be worthwhile. Wombatt 21:44, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) New tip: when tagging a move remnant for deletion, please don't remove the redirect line, just put the delete tag above it. That way the sysop who works it can easily see where it was moved to without having to go into the page history. —Dr Ishmael 23:06, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Item icons

In case you're interested, I've got a listing of all the icons, pulled from the data file. Definitely better quality than screenshots. :) — Rhoot 00:34, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Warning though: Your browser may freeze for a while when opening that link. :P — Rhoot 00:35, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Ahh, awesome, thanks! Now if only I could mouse-over them and have them tell me exactly what they are... :D Wombatt 00:41, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

If I had that information, I would've had a bot upload them already. — Rhoot 00:44, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation & crafting

The whole crafting system is undergoing a process of determining HOW to best document it. Crafting materials are necessarily a part of that process.

The Ore page is intended as a 'Generic Material' page, not as a disambiguation page. I admit, it was somewhat incomplete, but that's the intended purpose for the page. The same holds true for other generic crafting material pages (Ingot, Band, Setting, etc...)

If you think that these should be disambiguation pages instead of Generic Material pages, please, I invite you to join us in the discussion for formatting crafting materials to discuss their status there. The same holds true if you have input in how to format materials and structure the content.

Additionally, if you have the motivation, you can draft up a 'Generic Material Page' document and [[Guild_Wars_2_Wiki:Crafting_formatting|publish it here]] for review & eventual use. -- Torrenal 01:21, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Side note: categories should be listed at the bottom of the page. This is a general MediaWiki standard that pretty much all wikis follow (although I have seen some that place them at the top for some screwball reason), so if you could follow it in the future, we'd appreciate it. —Dr Ishmael 01:40, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Can do. Like I said, this is the first time I've done any wiki editing of anything anywhere, so I'm just aping what I come across, for better or for worse! Wombatt 01:43, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

No better way to learn than by diving in head first. Honestly, with as much time as you seem to be putting into crafting, I'd like to have your help in getting some real structure in place for the whole system. Part of that is in defining how the bits fit together, and more of it is in putting that design into practice (thus pages like Ingot and Band). I'd love to have your help. The goal I have for the Jeweler page is to have it look more like this: User:Torrenal/Sandbox/Jeweler, mind however, that's just a draft version. The real one better have fewer red links ;) Torrenal 01:58, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I had kind of envisioned at first, but being as there's so many variations possible, I figured I'd just start throwing stuff on the wiki and get my feet wet and then go back and undo all the mistakes that I'm bound to make. I made a plank page and am working on logs and I'll get to whatever else you don't beat me to. If there's anything specific that you want me to do, I'm more task-oriented than I am goal-oriented, so feel free to ask me to do something specific. One caveat, though, in about 48 hours I'll be on vacation for 9 days ;) Wombatt 02:04, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Even with your vacation, you'll probably beat me to alot. I've got a paying job, and I'd like to keep it.... Enjoy your time off! Torrenal 02:34, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Eeep! You're copying t he slightly out of format Ingot page. The columns are reversed -- Tables and general recipes all should have the product on the left, with components on the right. I've updated the Plank and Ingot pages, but you've now churned out Dowel (Thanks for the help, by the way) Alas, I should have fixed Ingot earlier. Anywho, I'm off for the night, got more real work to do. :( Torrenal 03:14, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Fixed Dowel Wombatt 03:26, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

If you're looking for something to work on, you could take a look at the red-links on the page Bag and flesh them out from Bag (crafting)—Torrenal 01:30, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm fixing Ore to look like Log and then I'll do that. Keep em coming. Wombatt 01:31, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Fear me. I am currently looking at Insignia. :P    —Torrenal 01:35, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Haha, I'm only home for tonight, then it'll have to wait until Monday! Wombatt 01:37, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

editing tips

A few more tips based on what I fixed on plank:

• MediaWiki automatically converts the first letter of an article name between uppercase and lowercase, so there's no need to pipe a link like [[Plank|plank]], you can just use [[plank]] → plank.
• When you link to an article but want to display a simple plural, you just type [[plank]]s → planks. (This can also work for some conjugations, like [[Blinded|blindness]] → blindness; you could even do something like Bowl of Onion Soupercalifragilisticexpialidocious, but I don't know why anyone would ever do that. >.> ) It doesn't work for complex plurals, though, since those actually change letters within the original word - you have to do [[knife|knives]] and [[goose|geese]].
• To make a list of things, instead of using <br> to force linebreaks, use either * or # at the beginning of each line. * is for a bulleted (unordered) list (like I'm using here), and # is for a numbered (ordered) list. If you don't want bullets or numbers, you can also use : to indent them, like we do to indent talkpage comments.

If you've got questions about anything else, ask away! —Dr Ishmael 02:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Good catch

Thanks for fixing Bag — I was working from old notes and I had mangled the order of the adjective (Major Rune vs Major Holding). – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 02:42, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Ok, we need to stop working on the same page at the same time! This is what I came up with, and I see that you're working on something on Bag too. Wombatt 03:15, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Prefix	Feature	Activator (x3)	Discipline
Craftsman's	Looted crafting material is placed here first	Bone (generic crafting)
Invisible	Items do not show up in sell window and will not move when inventory is sorted	Dust
Oiled	Looted junk is placed here first	Bone (generic crafting)
Padded	Looted weapon and armor is placed in these bags first	Scale (generic crafting)

I like that presentation (not sure which I like best yet). You might link the "activators" to something like [[:category:bones|Bone]] (none which exist yet AFAIK) (when SMW comes online, there will also be a better way to handle that.) – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 17:54, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Bone/Dust/Scale/Claw/Fang are all on my to-do list, but I'm having trouble finding accurate info on their heirarchy. I wasn't able to get in on the stress test yesterday and take any notes. Hopefully something shows up before the next BWE. Wombatt 18:05, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Have you seen GW2 DB? – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 19:05, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it doesn't have any more info on those items than I already have. It only lists the first three tiers. Wombatt 19:08, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

It has some recipes, but not necessarily the items, e.g. the 18-lot invisi-bag lists silk, a greater rune, and Pile of Incandescent Dust x3. (Perhaps we aren't using "tier" to mean the same thing.) I'm sure there are bigger bags, too. (To find the bags of a certain size, I just searched for items with a number, e.g. 18.) – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 22:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll flesh out the bone and dust pages tonight. If you got the the talk page for crafting formatting, you'll find a link to someone's work on bank panes, good for having the info to flesh those out. —Torrenal 21:26, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

When I use tier I mean kind of like level, but since level has an exact meaning in the game, I try not to use it. By my meaning, tier 1 would be vial of weak blood, bone chip, tiny claw, pile of glittering dust, tiny fang, tiny scale, tiny totem, tiny venom sac. Tier 2 would be vial of thin blood, bone shard, small claw, pile of shimmering dust, small fang, small scale, small totem, small venom sac, and so on and so forth. Since different crafting disciplines can use the same items at different levels of proficiency, I thought "tier" would be more clear in that respect. Wombatt 21:35, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Dust (generic) moved to Dust. Properly belongs as 'Pile of Dust', but that's being used presently. Included adding some missing icons. On to review bone (previously created)—Torrenal 03:56, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Scale (Generic) is done, too. I wonder if we should give a general list of things that each of these is used for. For example, for Scale: Resilient Insignias, padded boxes, etc. Wombatt 04:43, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Pssht: Generic is I think too generic a term - vague even. In what way is the scale generic? I've already proposed (on the crafting formatting talk page) that we use (generic crafting).

There are 8 types of generic activator: bone, piles of dust, venom sacs, blood vials, teeth, claws, scales, and... Something else. Will want a page for each...—Torrenal 06:02, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Totems! Wombatt 06:35, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

and yes to the list of what uses them, but not a high priority, that. Once we get proper DB tools up, we can auto-populate many of those.—Torrenal 06:04, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

(not too sure where you're headed with bags. not too sure I agree, but enoug hto do that I'll blindly ignore that... and apologies for hijacking your thread)

I've dropped a list of the proposed generic component types here: Guild Wars 2 Wiki talk:Crafting formatting#Component Types Revise, edit, and if there's no disagreement, feel free to stub out the pages.

I'm not sure where the Bag page is going, either. We have two different tables that accomplish more or less the same thing. One is just less busy than the other, IMO (but I can't be un-biased!) That list of component types looks good to me, but it looks like someone has gone through and marked most of them for deletion because he doesn't think they're necessary. Wombatt 02:47, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Recipe Template

I spy, with my twitching eye (and e-gads, do the twitches suck. Wish they'd stop) a recipe template on your sandbox page...

I think we need a full page for each recipe, not a single infobox. Something that covers:

• These professions can make it: (you mean discipline, I assume)
• These are the ingredients it takes:
• These are the full stats and bonuses for using this recipe.
• This is how you unlock the recipe:
• These are the bits that make SMW happy: (I have no clue what this means)

Any interest in pushing things in that direction, or do you have other goals in mind for the template? —Torrenal 04:12, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

That's actually a slightly modified recipe template. I had logged on to gw1 and asked my alliance for volunteers that did no crafting during either BWE, and asked them then to look at Page 1 compared to Page 2 and give me their opinion as to which they though was friendliest for someone with no experience. The consensus was that they liked the generic recipes from #2 inserted above the non-collapsed tables of #1. In that case it's good to have the pages like ingot or Rifle stock so those generic recipes can link there and they can say "A rifle stock is made from 4 wood planks of the corresponding level of wood. Together with activators and a rifle barrel or harpoon, rifle stocks are used to craft Rifles and Harpoon Guns." The best comment I got was "I wish it would tell you how many logs/planks/ingots/etc you needed to make the finished product, instead of just listing components. Since I don't have the skill to create an intricate template like Recipe, and since I've kind of hit a wall on my contributions, I figured I'd try something new and take apart an existing template until I got something like I was looking for, and that's what I came up with. The other option was to make a table that broke it all down. I did that here. That took me a good hour to do by pure trial and error, something I'm loath to repeat for every single category of weapon, armor, etc. I know I could make it much easier to navigate, but that's probably 8 or 10 steps away from where we are right now.

The bigger problem I see is: we still haven't reached a consensus on what direction we are going to go in for general formatting, and I don't know what the next step is. Are we going for Crude Longbow (which is a bad example because that doesn't even exist...) or are we going for Embroidered Coat? Do we want a recipe page for every single item, or is that too much? There are half a dozen people saying "do this" or "no, don't do this," and I don't know who to listen to and who's just talking. I have no clue what DPL or SMW or node/leaf/root whatever else you guys talk about is, I just play GW and want to help :) So, in the interest of not wasting a ton of time on projects that seem worthwhile only to find out that no, they're not needed/wanted, I haven't been doing much of anything...

Ok, </rant>. If it's decided that yes, we need to have a recipe page for every recipe (not for every variation, but for Crude Longbow, Crude Shortbow, Bronze Pistol, etc) for SMW or DPL or FML or DMV, then yes, I would be happy to do that to the best of my ability and knowledge :D Wombatt 04:58, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

infobox

Please don't leave unused parameters in the template call. Providing a parameter with no value can have funky results - I think our infoboxes are coded well enough to handle that, but it's still not a good practice. —Dr Ishmael 03:17, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I see you've seen my identical post on the crafting discussion. I've just been running through RC and didn't know if you'd seen that yet. —Dr Ishmael 03:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

In case you're interested

I've put all of my information into a table with the link to it on my page. Specifically, Leatherworker Stats and Huntsman Stats. I thought you might be interested in comparing / adding to what you have. Also, if I get taken by aliens or my harddrive implodes - you have a place to find it ;P. Juicearific ~talk 21:51, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks! Wombatt 21:55, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Just posting here to say I'm going to update a bunch of the pages with my updated tables. You've edited some of them recently, so just giving you a heads up so you don't visit one and be like "wtf who changed all my stoof!?!" like I do. If you think one looks better as it was before, let me know. (all my drafts are in my sandbox, too.) Juicearific ~talk 02:38, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I won't take it personally :) Wombatt 02:40, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) no where better to put this, so I'll put it here. I'm updating the huntsman tables, like Journeymen Longbow. I have internal links back to the original page on the table, and because of that it displays the words in bold. Now I'm fine with leaving them that way, or removing the links all together and having just the name, but what about making singular pages for each specific weapon? (I.E. Journeymen Longbow/Pillaing, Journeymen Longbow/Ravaging, etc.) Should we make a page for each specific weapon, and have it link to it? also, what will happen when one searches for "pillaging journeymen longbow", if we do it that way? Would we have to redirect all those pages (in which case we should compile the singular info on them instead). Just curious what you think is best, as I really don't know.

I don't think redirects are needed for every variation. There wasn't on GW1W and I think it's too much. However, there's been talk of needing a recipe page for each variety, I believe for some sort of compiling. I'd put that under Crude Longbow/Festering Maybe we'll get lucky and Ish will weigh in. Wombatt 21:01, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm good with whatever, I just don't know what way would be best. I just searched pillaging journeymen longbow, and journeymen longbow was third on that list. I don't know if there is a way to make it on top - but I would guess after we change the huntsman page it will probably be on top anyways. As such, I don't think redirects matter as long as those pages don't already exist. Juicearific ~talk 21:52, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

For SMW querying of recipes, yes, the simplest-to-implement solution is to have every recipe on its own page. (I would prefer the page name matched the recipe name, i.e. Festering Crude Longbow instead of Crude Longbow/Festering, so that it looks better in query results). That way we don't have to worry about how to keep each recipe distinct from others on the same page (it's possible using certain data types, but it makes it more difficult to write queries). Related: we've had discussions before about whether these pages should combine the recipe data (input) with the product data (output), but we've never reached a decision on that. The complication is that not all recipes have the exact same name as their product: the recipe Garnet Stud, for example, produces a Garnet Stud of Might. And I think all recipes with a (Simple) or (Master) suffix don't include that suffix on the product, right? So yeah, that probably won't work. —Dr Ishmael 22:51, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

For the sake of not simplicity, would it be possible to list the recipe on a page, say Festering Crude Longbow AND have it redirect to Crude Longbow? Would the query still work? Wombatt 01:09, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Jeweler has a unique case. In the sense of jeweler, things are named based on the jewel, and the jewel gives it an additional name (as in said example, "of might".) Huntsman doesn't actually have that problem. Whenever you make a Mighty Crude Longbow (Simple), that is the name it actually has. The same holds true for the (Master) suffix. During the last stress test I was trying to test some exp rates, and I took a video of me making a longbow. here's the picture: As you can see, it actually does have the name master right in the product name, that's one of the reasons I've been rather adamant about including it everywhere. Making a specific page for each item very well could work, if we wanted to do it that way. Nevermind. I just checked my other videos, and it displays on the recipe but not actually on the item itself. On the other hand, that's not to say that we can't still make a page for them on the wiki? the game does atleast have a few places that they are listed with a master suffix. As for wombatt, what is the question exactly? I don't understand exactly what you're asking (though I assume it was at Dr. Ishmael). Juicearific ~talk 01:45, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) @Wombatt, no, SMW doesn't work with redirects like that. You can apply categories to redirects, but you can't apply semantic properties.

@Juice: in that image, it looks like the name of the recipe is "Ravaging Journeyman Longbow (Master)", but right below that it looks like it says "I have 1 Ravaging Simple Longbow," which I would assume is the item name. If you had a screenshot showing the item's tooltip, that would be more clear. Then you edited your comment. :P In that case, I wouldn't be opposed to making them dual recipe/product pages. —Dr Ishmael 01:48, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) If you want we can make double (triple in the case of simple variation) pages, or we could just make pages with (Simple) and (Master) suffixes on them, since they are after all listed like that in the recipes. Which brings me to the solution to your original problem: In my two jeweler videos (I only hit jeweler 24, so I only had enough for 2 videos :P) I noticed that the recipe is called "garnet stud" etc, while the actual item is called "garnet stud of might", etc. The exact same way huntsman recipe is called "Festering Crude Longbow (Master)", but the item itself is called "Festering Crude Longbow". It does make you wonder though, because any armor I made (specifically the mask I compared my ascalonian drop to) said "of Ravaging" at the end, due to the gem that was in them. Those item are made with the gem in it, so if you want to count it, you include the ending. If you don't, or if you want to go by recipe, then you don't put that ending on there. Back to huntsman, I have no preference, this really doesn't effect me since like I said, I'm the one updating the information, I won't be looking to the wiki for reference (and the time I've spent gaming, I've learned use guides as a last resort. The game is much more fun if you don't, including crafting.) So I probably won't ever look up these things, if I do need the info I've also probably saved it in excel on my own computer. Just tell me how you want it, and I'll put it in. (or Wombatt and I can, whoever lol) Juicearific ~talk 02:15, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

My question to Ish was basically can we have the cake and eat it, too: make a page like "Festering Crude Longbow" that has the {{recipe}} info on it for the sake of using this magical SMW that I know nothing about, and ALSO put a #redirect on it so if someone types that in, it takes them to Crude Longbow. Sadly, that doesn't work. I would think we'd do the "Festering Crude Longbow" with {{recipe}} info and a small blurb that says "This page is only a recipe page, for full details, see Crude Longbow" or something along those lines.

On a related note, I polled a half dozen people in gw1 that had no crafting experience in gw2. It was 5-1 for stacked ingredients, 6-0 for "list all recipes", and 3-3 for "put unique recipes in their own category". So, basically like this but with the Unique Items listed separately like this. (Forgot to sign) Wombatt 02:39, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Also, Ish, would {{recipe}} be the correct template to use for your purposes? Wombatt 02:39, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

ah, got it. Anyways, I'm good with that - only question is: do we display all the refinement, or just the generals? Aside from that, sounds good. I can't wait to get new discipline pages up. The current one bothers me :P (Mainly because I'm trying to combine the masters and regulars, and it has links to both) Oh, also, when Ishy comes back - can we go ahead and put the discipline page into effect for atleast the 6 disciplines that are weapon or armor related? (once we decide on refinement)? Juicearific ~talk 02:42, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

That template is the best framework we have right now. The biggest complaint against it is that it looks like an infobox - so if you want to change how it displays the information, feel free. Also, there may be additional info we want to put in there - like the category the recipe is listed under in the crafting interface - so be sure to note anything like that, too.

I'm trying to stay somewhat hands-off on this whole crafting project, just giving advice/opinion where I feel I'm qualified to. I do like what you guys have for the discipline pages, so if you think it's ready, I won't stop you. I would think that simply linking to the "shared" crafting like refinement and insignia/inscriptions is enough - they don't have to be repeated on every crafting page. If people really want it, though, we can set them up for transclusion from the main article. —Dr Ishmael 02:52, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) awesome - thanks Dr. Ishy. @Wombatt, I believe we settled on User:Wombatt/Sandbox/Juicebox_Huntsman, correct? I agree with Dr. Ishy that we should link to a general refinement area, are you good with that? If so, then all we need to do is change the refinement section, and transplant any of the things we have the information for (I.E. the first two tiers). I'm excited to finally be updating the pages. Juicearific ~talk 19:29, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Right. I'm going through it and fixing some things, I'll post it again when I'm satisfied with it and everyone can weigh in and make changes, too. Are you thinking of moving the whole refinement table to it's own page, then? I like that idea, I've said before that I think that only items that are unique to each discipline should be covered in great detail on those pages. Wombatt 19:34, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

that's what I was thinking, yes. The only question is: Do we split up refinement (link to ingots, link to leather, etc. etc.) or do we put ALL the refinement for weapons on one page (dowels, metal plated dowels, ingots, planks, leather) and allow the 3 weapon disciplines to link to them? Do the 3 weapon disciplines even share all the same refinement? And yes, I'm working on changes too (I copy pasted into a different link, so it doesnt mess with yours :D ) Oh, one thing I'd like to mention. With the vial of weak blood / green inscription, to me it seems an awful lot (when looking at it) that it says "this item, this item, blood, OR (just) green inscription" Is there any way we can make it a bit more clear that it's the blood or the inscription, not the whole thing with blood, or just inscription? Juicearific ~talk 19:48, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm thinking we put it all on the same page and break it up by type (Leather square, ingot, etc). Since it's multi-discipline, I'm putting that info in the table, too. Wombatt 19:58, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

edit: Weaponsmith has the same ones. Artificer seems to be very much so underappreciated, but it also appears to have the same things. (except what the heck is a green burl?) I would think we could compile a page for all of them. and edit again: you apparently posted right before me :L. Anyways, that sounds good. Here's the one I'm working on User:Wombatt/Sandbox/Juicebox_Huntsman3 Juicearific ~talk 20:00, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I think I'm satisfied. I'm going to post it on the crafting formatting page, but here it is. I have no idea what a burl is, it's not well documented. I'm going to work on Refinement now. Wombatt 20:55, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm good with inscriptions how they are, my version just has the inscription link below too. But, for the refinement, can we put them in a table like I have here? I think it looks a little more organized. On a sidenote, I've developed this for the "refinement page" if you want to take a look at it. It's already linked to on the huntsman3 page, as well. I'm going to go catch a movie, so I'll be back later. Juicearific ~talk 21:00, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

{ri}Check this out. I expanded it to include all crafting disciplines. Wombatt 22:59, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

99.9% happy. I posted the one, tiny complaint I have on the other page - otherwise, I say put it into effect whenever you like. I'll work on putting it into leatherworker format and applying it there. This is gunna be awesome :D Juicearific ~talk 02:00, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, actually, would you mind giving me some time to do a copy-edit on the new format? I noticed a few places where the wording could be improved and stuff like that - I hadn't really paid attention to the actual text before now. —Dr Ishmael 02:53, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I just put it up about 20 minutes ago. Feel free, though. Wombatt 03:11, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

That's why I took a closer look at the page just now. About the (Simple) weapons... could we relegate them to their own table? That would remove the complication of alternate ingredients in the main weapon tables, and any confusion that might arise from that.

Also, in the general recipes, why did you leave all of the component names in lowercase? I know there isn't an actual item named "Rifle Stock", but we're deriving the generic name from items named "X Rifle Stock", so it feels like the generic components should be in titlecase. —Dr Ishmael 03:19, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Make a separate table for (Simple) weapons, or give them their own line in the existing tables? The component parts were Title Case forever, and I changed them because they're not a proper name or title, and since there was never a consensus established, I decided to follow Anet's own style. I don't have a problem with going title case at all (I kind of prefer it). Wombatt 03:29, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I was thinking a separate table, to make it clear that "These weapons do not follow the standard weapon recipe of component1 + component2 + inscription." Although, making them a distinct line in each table would be fine too. —Dr Ishmael 03:45, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Finished the copy edits. The main thing was to use the {{main}} template in the bottom few sections for indicating "this section is very generic, for full info go here." —Dr Ishmael 03:50, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Refinement recipes

Hello, have the recipes from here been confirmed, or are they extrapolations made from currently known recipes? Erasculio 08:56, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Generally, the last 3 levels are inferred. They could very well be different, that's something we'll be looking at in BWE3 next weekend. Wombatt 16:49, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Which reminds me, should we perhaps remove the content 150+ from the huntsman table? atleast until we know more? Juicearific ~talk 18:35, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I see, thanks. I'm curious mostly about the ingots, as I'm not sure which are used for armors and which are used for jewelry. The progression of...

1. Copper from 0 to 74
2. Silver from 75 to 149
3. Gold from 150 to 224
4. Platinum from 225 to ?

...Hints that there are likely some more kinds of ingots used for jewelry. I wouldn't be surprised if Orichalcum, for example, were used in that crafting discipline. Erasculio 18:37, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I have the same question, but I can't answer it. I see three options: leave it as is, remove the information or put a verify tag and explain it. I think it goes without saying that basically ALL content on the wiki is incomplete and subject to change at some point, so having the information there wouldn't be completely out of line. Removing it or replacing it with ??s could be the best to spell out exactly WHAT needs to be proven/verified. If we/you/I remove it, I'd ask that you use <!-- --> around the info, so it's not gone, but it just doesn't show. Wombatt 18:43, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

What I got from my Jeweler experience is that alloyed ingots (bronze, steel, darksteel) are not used for jewelry (bronze and steel I KNOW are not). That leads me to infer that either a) there will be more alloying lumps introduced, or b) mithril and orichalcum will be used for both jewelry and armor/weapons. Wombatt 18:45, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I put a notice on the refinement page that spells this all out. Wombatt 19:57, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Anything above 150 is a big question mark to all of us at the moment. I hit 165 in two disciplines, but with the stunning lack of materials for 150+, I doubt anyone broke 175. With that in mind, all we know is the tier1-3 refinement, and tier 1 + 2 items etc. @Wombatt, I vote we put in the arrows to leave the information there, as the page looks a little "disorganized" (for lack of a better word) with all the red and ?'s. I do not think we should have them filled in, since we honestly haven't even the slightest clue. I think it better portrays that no one has seen any stats, and really anyone can draw the conclusions we have as well. Best to do ?'s or arrows, but I think arrows is cleaner, myself.

edit: the above was in reference to discipline pages. I believe we should allow the first table on discipline pages (the one that says items made level 0-75, bronze armor, etc.) to display expected levels, as well as refinement table information. The rest of the discipline page (specifically, the higher tiered weapons and armor) in my opinion, should be hidden. Juicearific ~talk 21:48, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I like having the left column like "? Longbow" etc, I could handle not having the components on the right filled in. I think that the question marks and red links spell out exactly what's missing, making it easy for others to see what information is still needed. I'm afraid that if we hide them it will look like the categories were complete. Wombatt 22:22, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I think we should put in ?? Longbow stave, ?? bow string, etc. for ingredients. For this moment though, I don't think we should assume any names. Even if we think we know the name for 225 wood or metal, I don't think it should be under assumption aside from the refinement table and the first table of the discipline. Because while we may "know" it, we don't know for sure. And we don't want to give someone information than change it, we can just put verify tags on the refinement table and the first table on the discipline pages. Juicearific ~talk 04:29, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

per our email discussion

See here. —Dr Ishmael 23:26, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks! Wombatt 23:48, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

[[User:Wombatt/Sandbox/Tailor#Crafting_components|Finished (kinda) setup.]] Should cut down a ton on the length of the section while still having all info readily available. Wombatt 00:03, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

BWE3

Have fun sorting through all that (unorganized, as you say) information. Anyways, if you need help with any of it let me know.. and thanks for the cash at the end. I totally unlocked a few sigils and runes in the disciplines at the end :). Juicearific ~talk 07:06, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
edit: I've updated all the information on those docs regarding weaponsmithing and armorsmithing, that i obtained. Also, just to tell you, I removed "mighty" from the tailor one, since we know it's mighty and it makes it alot harder to compare the tables/makes it look bulkier. On that note, it appears cloth armor is 3-5 defense under leather, which is 3-5 under heavy (for tier one, tier two has about double that in gaps). Interesting factoid. Anyways, I've started sorting my info and I suggest going through and naming all your videos relevant to what they are, seperating by discipline, (unrelated discipline videos here), then if you like bigger breakdowns within the discipline itself. I'm just naming all mine "axes", "maces", etc. 63.239.152.224 08:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I got a pretty good handle on it. I have good videos of everything that I need, and I take screens of the videos so I have a quick reference without having to FF or rewind, etc. I got most of Artificer done last night, as far as the tables go. Check out the artificer page on my sandbox. Wombatt 21:37, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm working on icons for my stuff mostly atm, but I'm also working on pages for unique items on the wiki whenever I get tired of staring at pictures. Anyways, I updated that weaponsmith table you put on my talk to include all the new recipes I got (basically, sigils and uniques). Also, I updated Bronze Sword, is that a fine layout? It's the same idea as the ones we used for huntsman recipes, but I figured since I'm going to sleep now anyways I'd post and get your opinion. Also, for future reference, I'm trying to figure out how to display chef information without overloading the page. If you get an idea, let me know.

Just looked at artificer, and I like it! Three complaints/nitpicks/OCD moments: 1.) Can we center the crafting components / potions (the collapsible) tables? They look... strange, to me, while alligned to the left side (the table itself, not the contents in the table.). Which brings me to point #2: can you center the discipline level and required level within the table itself? I think it looks nicer. 3.) "Difficulty" is a slightly vague term. I think most people will get what you mean, but when paired with "requirement level", it can be quite vague. Someone lacking common sense won't get it, I think it's better off if we just label it "Discipline Level" and "Use Level", or something to that effect. Otherwise, Ace. Also, I'm going to steal that sigils table for the weaponsmithing one in your sandbox. Give me a day and I will implement it, I just want to make a few tweaks. Juicearific ~talk 07:30, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

move

You can move pages on your own, no need to tag them. —Dr Ishmael 03:38, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Lots of stuff links to that, will it all redirect or do they have to be individually fixed? Wombatt 03:42, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, moving a page leaves a redirect behind. —Dr Ishmael 12:27, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't suppose there's an automated way to go through and change all the "Festering"s to "Malign"s? Wombatt 13:37, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I assume all the item names changed as well? You go ahead and make all the page moves (see Special:PrefixIndex/Festering), I can use AWB to update the links. —Dr Ishmael 15:05, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Almost everything on that list was a redirect of some sort (like Festering Simple Shortbow --> Simple Shortbow), should I just go to the pages and flag for (speedy?) deletion, since the items that they reference are no longer in the game? Wombatt 21:35, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Tailor Rewrite?

Are you planning to list tier specific recipies on the main tailor page? —Torrenal 02:04, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I plan to list only the recipes for a tier, not every recipe within the tier. In other words, show a recipe for Embroidered Mask that's linked to the Embroidered Mask page that has all the variations. Below that, Student Circlet with a link to another page. [[User:Wombatt/Sandbox/Tailor#Armor|take a look]], it's not as lengthy as you're thinking. I asked a number of random players in both GW1 and BWE3 (all had no crafting experience) for input on what they found easiest to understand and most helpful, they overwhelmingly chose the layout that I just linked, which is a near mirror of Leatherworker and Huntsman, and what Artificer, Weaponsmith, and Armorsmith will be. Wombatt 02:10, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I've already seen it, thus my question. It's too long. If that's the preferred format, please pull it onto a 'Tailor Recipes' page. The main point of the Tailor page is to describe Tailors, not to list their recipes. The main page of the Warrior Page is to describe Warriors, not to list warrior skills. —Torrenal 02:47, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

It's not too long, it's complete. Crafting discipline pages will by necessity have more information than many. Wombatt 02:48, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

This is faulty reasoning. The Tailor page is to describe the tailor. It is not to detail every last thing a tailor can do. The Recipes are what the Tailor can make, but they do not individually define the tailor, just as the skills and traits are what a warrior can do, but they do not individually define the warrior. By the reasoning of being 'complete' as you are using here, we should include all the warrior skills, traits, and abilities on the Warrior page, but that is not and should not be the case. Just as Warrior and Warrior skills get separate pages, Tailor and Tailor recipes should be split. —Torrenal 05:00, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

There's a big difference between professions and disciplines. Giving a thorough description of the former will take up much more space than doing so for the latter. If you remove all the recipes from a discipline page, what are you left with? A short description of what they can craft, a list of master craftsmen, and links to the recipes. And that hardly constitutes an article. —Dr Ishmael 05:50, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

To add my input, I basically have to say - what Dr. Ishy said. Also though, recipes DO describe the tailor. If I look at that page as someone completely unrelated, what do I see? I see the common recurrence of cloth and leather. I see the common theme bags follow, and also see many of the runes that tailors can craft. You might argue all of that is possible with generic recipes, and that's true. What isn't possible with generic? This:

• Any player looking to decide what discipline to choose (if we were to list JUST the description, that would be their only purpose for even visiting that page) will also like to know what items can be crafted (specifics are better than generics), also what types of sigils/runes, unique items, and what resources are going to be used.
• Also to go past that point, any tailor can refer to this page to see most/all runes, they can plan out alot of their crafting, and in certain cases (bags/runes), they can even see the direct ingredients they need.

On the argument that it's too long, I don't like short pages to begin with. Add in the fact that this is the main page for 1 of EIGHT crafting disciplines in the entire game, and you understand that it should be bigger than most pages anyways. Plus y'know, each header is very appropriately labeled and information is easy to find. And we have the advantage of not having to cater to those on dial-up, since no one on dial-up should be playing GW2 to begin with. (meaning, we can make pages that are a little bigger and have pictures on them.) Juicearific ~talk 02:42, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Simple Longbow (crafted)

Since you placed the delete tag, I figured I'd ask you to clarify the status of this page. It also has a merge tag, so I'm confused as to what needs to happen here. If you could verify all the information is on the correct articles and then clean up the tags so the appropriate pages are clearly tagged, that would be appreciated. —Dr Ishmael 20:39, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I guess I could have asked you about Green Carved Burl at the same time. —Dr Ishmael 20:41, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

There's no such item as Simple Longbow, the tier 2 longbow is named Journeymen for both basic and masterwork variations. I believe the merge tag was put on there by someone that wasn't involved with the crafting, rather was looking to consolidate pages with similar names. Simple Longbow (crafted) should be deleted. Green Carved Burl is an item that I don't think is even in the game. It was created almost a year ago (before any betas) from info from unknown sources by a user that hasn't posted anything since September 2011. I made it to lvl 156 Artificer in the last BWE and stress test, and I never made or heard of the thing (or any of its resulting recipes, for that matter). I also scoured the trading post and took video of everything offered, there was no such thing there either. Wombatt 21:15, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for updating my links (not to mention attacking some of the issues with cultural armor in the main namespace, woo!) — Rari 01:40, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Woah!

Woah there! Slow down before your fingers fall off! Great work on your edits thus far! - Endeavor 04:53, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Haha, thanks. I thought to myself after BWE1, "hey, I should document crafting stuff for the wiki!" Little did I know what I'd be getting myself into! :D Wombatt 04:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Haaha I know exactly what you mean. I hit "random page" and found an error that extended over an entire category. - Endeavor 05:02, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Hopefully not one of mine! Wombatt 05:03, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh we shall see... mwuahaha. Nah. No worries. - Endeavor 05:05, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I just bought GW2 presale at gamestop. I really want Kodan to be the first add on race. - Endeavor 05:08, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Skritt would be fun, too, I think. Wombatt 05:21, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Totally! Are the cinematics good so far? - Endeavor 05:48, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Fixed

Heya! On pages like this one where you're quoting please use a — it'll look like — I'll keep on format with the other pages that were fixed. - Endeavor 20:26, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Benefit Templates

I've seen that you layout the whole weapon tables without templates. There is a benefit template for Accessories: Template:Accessory infobox/benefits.
Perhaps we should create a common benefit template with this as basis, so that the layout will stay consitant though the whole wiki. - Yandere 20:52, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the majority of the things I've put up were from before that template existed. The problem with that template is that it puts the value (+12 etc) after the attribute, not before it like it's listed in the game. I've been using it since I noticed it getting changed around but I don't know if I like it, or if it's worth doing. TBH, I don't see what the benefit is to putting a template inside a template, unless you really like templates. Why wouldn't I just type "+13  Healing Power" and save myself all the extra typing? Wombatt 21:09, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Because if you have a template a layout change will only cost one edit of the template. If you type down everything by yourself, you will have trouble to keep everything consistant. I need one edit to get all Accessory page to your layout variant, you will probably need a few more to get everything to the layout currently used in the Accessory section of the wiki. That is the reason why I would like to promote template use, because it saves time in the long run. I think at the moment is really hard to keep the few Accessory pages consitant, because people tend to right karma cost in the value section etc. It would be impossible without the template use. - Yandere 21:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

That's logical. Do us all a favor and fix the ordering of the number and benefit so I'm not tempted to play with the code and mess everything up. Wombatt 21:34, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

help

Sorry id this is in the wrong place... How do u put the itens under the special itens?

If you scroll down past the different weapons (or armor) there is (or should be) another heading that says "Unique Weapons" or "Unique Armor", please put your recipes there for items that are made from Recipe Sheets. Wombatt 23:12, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Here's an example, if you find a page that doesn't have one of those sections, let me know and I'll put it in real quick. Wombatt 23:13, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

thx a lot, and sorry for making u creating one for me... XD, i will see the others, don't recall if i get they in karma recipes... got to check the images again...--Gargoyle 23:21, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

If you can upload images for the items, too, that's great. If you only have screenshots and can cut out and use the little icon from the screen, I will find the right icon for a good picture. Wombatt 23:22, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

suffixed pages

Since you took care of de-suffixing most of the crafted items the other day, I found a few accessory pages that still have suffixes:

[ all deleted ]

Would you mind verifying that the info exists in the appropriate non-suffixed page (and merge it if not) and then flagging these for deletion? Thanks! —Dr Ishmael 18:31, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Done. I need to look into the sapphire heart more, and fix the turquoise amulet page. Everything else is flagged. Wombatt 20:31, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

If I recall, sapphire heart was a quest item i obtained while doing my personal storyline. it was one of 3 options. Juicearific ~talk 20:49, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! —Dr Ishmael 00:11, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Stress Test 4

Hey, I dunno what you plan on doing during the stress test, but I'm going to try to figure out a way into the secret garden in lion's arch. It has cabbage and grapes, 2 cooking items I haven't had a chance to get yet. If I get in, you TOTALLY have to come and harvest them for me too lol. And if you know how to get the iron legion armor set for armorsmith, please let me know so I can and get it's stats etc. Juicearific ~talk 17:42, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm as far as I'm gonna get for jeweler and the other disciplines, so I'm going to make a toon of each race and find as much Cultural armor and weaponry as I can. Wombatt 17:45, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Suddenly, servers are down and we can't login for the stress test anyways, lol. I hope it gets an extension, or I may never figure out how to get in that bloody garden. Juicearific ~talk 19:41, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Sounds stressed. Wombatt 19:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

If you can get into the garden for me tmrow, I'd be super greatful. (I didn't get any freakin grapes today, I forgot to equip steel sickle, my iron ruined them T.T). you need a steel sickle, and I believe that constitutes level 20+. I have so many recipes left to do with them, if you have any friends that would do it too i'd be super happy. Also, one of us should do crafting. Since I already have a ravaging inscription and an axe, I should be making that. I would think that I should perhaps focus on the weapons, and allow you to do the armor. That would let us both get total stats (Atleast, in boots) for armor and weapons. We might not have the power or defense for everything, but who can expect that when we need 105 small venom sacs, or some other "small" crafting material. X= Juicearific ~talk 02:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

edit: this is the link to the youtube video that shows how to get there. The starting point is the vista above the trader's area in lion's arch (there is a waypoint right below you, that is the one beside the mystic forge).

Yeah, I'll give it a shot. Also let me know where a good place to farm the sacs is. I should get some scales too, and claws. Man, this is gonna be work! Wombatt 02:23, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I have a spot for Small Fangs, so that'll work. Also, if the mail system isn't fixed or functional tomorrow, it won't do me any good to get stuff for you...Wombatt 02:24, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I have hope that marketplace or mail (ONE of them) will work tomorrow, today was so full of bugs lol. For small venom sacs, you should try going to the northeast corner of Gendarran fields, there is a skill point there and alot of fireflies. I managed 10 small venom sacs in about 15 minutes. You can also try some canyon I found that has weird flying squid things, it had more guys but I think it was about the same rate of drop. Claws are best found uhhh, drakes, skelks, I believe. Ettins drop bone chips often. Minotaurs appear to be best for blood. Scales come from underwater enemies alot, especially sharks. Also from drakes/skelks, other amphibious enemies. Totems come from high level norn enemies (22-25), grawl / sons of svanir. I have yet to find another source. That about covers the fine crafting mats. On a slightly different note, I obtained a fang and a bone today. They came from a cave of level 32 ooze, i killed in total about 20 and managed only those two. If you killed them for awhile, you might get enough to make a bag (if you had enough cloth). On another slightly different note, I'm high in chef, so if you go farming let me know. I can make items that give +% magic find for half an hour. Juicearific ~talk 02:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Sounds awesome. Now I just keep my fingers crossed that the mail works. Wombatt 02:50, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah... me too. lol. I'd like it even more if guesting finally worked xD Juicearific ~talk 03:36, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Inscriptions

(If you're wondering why I'm working on the wiki when I said I'm going to wait, it's because I'm currently on a GW2 high. Crafting system (my favorite part of any game) like no other. <3. Anyways, back to business. Inscription page is good, I like it (alot more than the previous page). My only question is: is there any way that you can make it so that it says Pillaging: Power(main), Magic Find (Minor), at the moment it just says it has both. What if I were wanting one attribute and it were the minor here, and the major elsewhere? Also, just saying, but pillaging is magic find and power. not precision. :). I'm working on an updated table for the individual inscription pages, I'm not sure if I like it better or worse atm. It's located here, please tell me what you think. (I.E. the tier 1 section table vs Green Inscription. Which do you prefer?) Ignore the top of the page, I copied the inscriptions page and updated the top part with the new imbued inscriptions while i was at it. Juicearific ~talk 04:01, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Instead of 1 and 0 I could just put in Main and Minor in the chart. That'd be the easiest way to do it. I would keep Imbued Inscriptions separate. On all the other pages, we've separated Discoverable and Non-discoverable recipes. I would put Imbued Inscriptions in their own separate category for that exact reason. Wombatt 04:04, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

In reference to the new tables, or updating the inscriptions page? Because I agree as far as the inscriptions page goes (good point btw), but I think if we make a small mention of it, it will be fine for the "green inscriptions", "soft inscriptions", etc. pages tables. Juicearific ~talk 04:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

edit: just realized my new table has no way to link to both (malign green, malign bronze) at the same time, or in the case of soft, pillaging soft, pillaging iron, pillaging imbued. have to work on that now. Juicearific ~talk 04:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I mean for the master list up top, wherever that's going. Down below I think it looks good. As far as linking to every item goes, is there any reason we couldn't put all three on the Malign Soft Inscription page, and have Malign Iron Plated Inscription and Malign Imbued Iron Inscription redirect to that page, like we do now for weapons? Maybe it's not the same. Wombatt 04:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that's a half bad idea, but we'd have to make a working model. Incase that doesn't work out, I've made a second table that will be beside the other one in about 20 seconds. Juicearific ~talk 04:26, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) A working model? It's my shot at it, thoughts? I like the whole recipe table and stuff, but they're bulky and they don't like the information I try to give them lol. Juicearific ~talk 05:15, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Cultural armor page names

Just wanted to let you know, I redirected Asura Cultural Armor to Asura cultural armor. I just can't move Divinity Coast armor yet, because someone made Human cultural armor a redirect to it and then fiddled with it (and with modifications in the history, I can't just move-overwrite the redirect.)— Rari 15:49, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

(set)

Why are you naming pages for armor sets like Warband armor (set)? There's no need for a disambiguation suffix on those. —Dr Ishmael 12:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Instead of breaking the cultural pages down further, we could combine that information into the (Race) cultural level page to do something like this: User:Rari/Cultural armor? It wouldn't work for dungeon armor, since those have several possible attribute combinations, so I've just been listing the possible combinations at the top of each dungeon armor overview page without any "totals". — Rari 13:20, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Ahhh, I know what happened. I copied the code for the Charr nav from the Human nav code and just changed the labels. Within the human cultural armor, the heavy armors all have a chest piece named Armor (Commander's Armor, Avenger's Armor, and Protector's Armor) so I used (set) to make it unique from the single piece. When I copied the code I didn't take that out, and I used the red links from the nav to make my pages. I didn't even notice it, I was in such a groove (when I finally quit for the night, every entry on the Special:RecentChanges page was mine!). I'll fix the code and move the three charr categories to pages without the (set). Wombatt 14:50, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

edit- I went and checked the other nav boxes that I did last night (Sylvari), but I had copied and modified them from the asura templates, so they're okay! Nice catch! Wombatt 14:55, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

And Rari, that's almost exactly what I have atHuman cultural armor, just with a little more info in the grid. I personally don't like only having the icon for the attributes, and your Defense totals don't match up ;) Otherwise it's basically a dead match. I like the idea of having a page for each set (like Researcher's armor) in addition to Human cultural armor, I think that with time there will be more information or notes about a certain set that would be best suited to the set page instead of the overall page. Wombatt 15:00, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I hadn't originally wanted to only use the icons, but including the name in the columns (particularly for Condition Damage), really stretched out those columns too much. Icons keeps it nice and consistent, and provides the same information. Thanks for letting me know the numbers don't add up, I just copy and pasted what was on the set pages since I threw the idea together rq before I had to leave for the morning. I see what you mean about the subpages though - I'm going to suggest we link to them with the first table headers then (like [[Auxillary Powered armor|Medium]]) to make it easier to navigate. Going to put the full article together (just need to recalculate the armor values) — Rari 17:47, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

If you limit the column width in the table header, it'll break the line and keep it short. For example width=75px|{{Condition Damage}}. See Arborist armor. Wombatt 17:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I had tried that originally, and thought it was still too wide, particularly with three tables next to each other. I just tried it at 50px though and that may work. I'll apply it to T3, lemme know what you think. — Rari 18:09, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Kubrick?

rifleman's creed has been around long before kubrick quoted it in FMJ... sayin' [1] 108.235.29.152 03:16, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I know, but it's much less fun to paraphrase Rupertus. Wombatt 03:23, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Steel Plated Dowel page

Could you explain to me the revert? For comparison, why do Bronze Plated Dowel and Iron Plated Dowel have their own articles? Thanks. --Emelend 22:10, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, my bad. I was thinking of Bronze Plated Inscription. My apologies. Wombatt 22:40, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Seraph shields

Do you know if they have a defense bonus? - Yandere 19:00, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure they do. I'm not at my computer now but I'll look at the videos when I get home. Nice catch! Wombatt 19:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

delete-tagging redirects

When tagging a move remnant for deletion, please don't remove the redirect line, just put the delete tag above it. That way the sysop who works it can easily see where it was moved to without having to go into the page history. —Dr Ishmael 01:38, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok. Maybe I labeled it wrong, dunno if that's actually a "move remnant." I uploaded a pic under the wrong name, then moved it to the right name about 30 seconds later. Wombatt 01:40, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

'Move remnant' is correct, just don't remove what's already there. —Dr Ishmael 02:44, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Smithery

Cultural armorsmith and Cultural weaponsmith and Category:Cultural armorsmiths to go with Category:Cultural weaponsmiths — Rari 04:17, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

recipe sheet articles

From your own screenshot, there is a space after the ':', so there should be one in the article names as well. —Dr Ishmael 22:46, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Mmmm. Okay. Self-sabotaged, damn! I noticed a problem earlier while trying to upload a picture, say for Recipe: Eda's Apple Pie, that I could upload a picture and nothing would happen. I don't know if there are too many colons in the destination name that one of them gets kicked out, or if my computer is being stupid and just not showing it. I tried ctrl-F5 and all that, nothing. Wombatt 22:54, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

mw:Manual:$wgIllegalFileChars - by default, ':' is the only character not allowed in filenames. I'll put a #replace into the item infobox to handle this. —Dr Ishmael 23:02, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Fixed - Eda's recipe is no longer vaporware. —Dr Ishmael 23:05, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Renown Heart NPCs

Check this out please: Category_talk:Renown_Heart_NPCs — Burfo 03:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Spooky Wombatt 03:56, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Eerie, I'd say. —Dr Ishmael 04:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

deleted crafting pages

I deleted Simple Harpoon Gun and Simple Longbow (crafted). There are pages that link to both of them, however, so since you updated the tags to speedy, I'm expecting you to take care of that. :) —Dr Ishmael 15:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Can do. Wombatt 16:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Done Wombatt 03:04, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Imbued and Intricate

Curious what you think we should do about the equipment made by imbued inscriptions / intricate insignias? The generic armor was called "scale" armor, but this is called "Gladiator" armor. Should we make it a set? Should it just go with the rest of the armor? Should it have its own page but not be a set? And what about weapons? They have significantly different names as well. Juicearific ~talk 05:20, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

My initial thought would be to put them on the crafting page as part of the non-discoverable category. They could be included in the /Iron Recipes page etc in the same way. I don't think I'd consider it a "set" like for cultural armor, though. If you look at the tailor/jute recipes page it has a second set of armor listed there. We may need to have another section for armor pieces not learned through discovery. Wombatt 06:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I have no idea, for the moment I put it as a "Set" on the armorsmith page, (partially because the wiki was done mid renovation and you couldn't respond, etc. etc.) but also because I think it's ALOT better than putting it with the other ones from that tier, and I don't want to put it as a unique recipes section (despite that it may be unique, it really isn't. there is 5 sets..) I think our best option is to make a small portion of the page that recognizes intricate / imbued recipes, makes note of them, and either we put ALL intricate helms (lv35, 50, 65, 80, 80) on one page, or we put JUST the 35's on their own page. Either way.

(Reset indent) on a slightly unrelated note, we have a slight problem. We have pages for simple shortbow, journeymen longbow, etc... Well I broke tier 3 hunts and leather. And go figure, tier 3 weapons are JUST their name. "Longbow", "Warhorn", "Harpoon Gun". That's a pain. Also, tier 3 leather armor is called "Leather Mask", "Leather Shoes", etc. Also a pain. To add onto this pain, they changed crafting materials. What used to be "cotton (piece) padding", is now coarse. Every crafting material in leatherworker is now labeled with the appropriate leather as its prefix, instead of a cloth. So there's that too. I'm probably not going to update the wiki much (I have college, but I'll prolly be doing schoolwork & high school work from now on in my breaks, I just didnt have homework yet) until a few weeks from now, I want to MAX leather and hunts first. and unlock most of the discovery tab stuff. Anyways, we can change those maintenance kits, cuz they added them to huntsman now. Jug of water, 3 x tier # (tier 1 -> 3, tier 2 ->6, etc.) and 4x dust. Now called Maintenance oil. I'm almost positive armorsmith or tailor has the equivalent that just isn't oil, though who knows. I'm 228 leather and 224 hunts (Ran out of materials on 224. freaking go figure.), but I should be going up the ranks pretty fast. Hoping to get the market back online soon, I NEED to sell crap to people, I'm among the highest on Ehmry Bay (i've seen maybe a dozen higher, and maybe 4 dozen or so my level-ish), and I need to be able to sell them armor when the time comes lol. Juicearific ~talk 21:26, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Any Ideas?

I require your assistance, old chum. (that was me wanting to feel like an old detective for no reason. 'sall good now.) Anyways, there is 14 recipes per orichalcum imbued inscription for huntsman... which is curious since there is only 7 weapons. And since you're probably thinking what I was, yes, there is 2 for each weapon. Which brings me to the conclusion:

• two recipes per inscription for each weapon
• inscriptions take 5 ecto, 5 dowels, 5 of the F(ine)C(rafting)M(aterial).
• the alternate version does not take ecto, FCM's, or dowels.
• the alternate shouldn't take another inscription, since 7 spare recipes, 6 spare inscriptions.. I can't think of a way for that to work.
• I havent tested the above method due to being too poor. 2.5g per inscription rather sucks.
• the alternate piece is not a high level chef ingredient. I checked.
• It's not a tier 4 dowel, ingot, leather sq, or the section/log/ore.
• (edit): it's also not a tier 6 jewel, atleast not a regular one. I've got to try the imbued ones yet.. but I need to get karma for that first... It won't let my thief buy jeweler recipes. So now I have to play necro. Happy happy times. lol.

What could it be? I've settled on probably something from the mystic forge, or a random item like crystal lodestone or something... but I'm freakin clueless.

Unrelated to above, but another question I've been meaning to ask. There are recipes for satchels of armor (Which according to google, is a pack that makes the entire set of armor), as well as trays of food for chef, and interesting weapons like "crystal shortbow (Which makes a freaking AWESOME looking "ice" bow.). But I've got 64% map completion, and I haven't seen a single recipe. You know the odds of that. Which means it's probably mystic forge or something... so if you can confirm or something, that'd be AWESOME.

Also unrelated.. but since I have 4 maxed crafts, I'm on my way to being able to make the gifts required for legendary weapons. And I'm getting there on skillpoints too. Which means I need an exotic that is used in it... do you have ANY idea how to get it? Google says mystic forge by combining 4 of the type of weapon you want, and it's random... but who knows how accurate that is. There's also the chance that they come as a rare drop from arah explorable or something...

That's all I can think of for now. Cheers Juicearific ~talk 20:00, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Reverted my changes?

Edit: nevermind, I see what you did. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RabbitRed (talk) at 21:17, 24 October 2012‎ (UTC).

Categories

Don't add :Category:Unique exotics to pages.--Relyk 06:23, 6 December 2012 (UTC)