Category talk:Infobox templates

should it be renamed with capital T? --Xander 01:27, 29 April 2007 (PDT)

Dungeons

Is it a good idea to add a template for Dungeons? Unless I am blind-folded (again) there ain't one.

Reason: A dungeon, public or not, is an instance located in the worlds. It is not really a landmark, the closest is Area I guess, but it is nor really an area either. The template would simply add the dungeon to [[Category:[region] [dtype] Dungeons]]. (You guys may come up with sensible options for dtype, Public versus whatever, I am still fairly new to LoTRO.) And it adds the dungeon to [[Category:[region] Landmarks]].

This would resolve the current abuse of the Landmark template and be helpful in many other ways. The easiest thing, which I looked at but realized you are way better up to this, is to recycle the Area template and patch it for dungeons. Right? --Zimoon 09:48, 10 September 2011 (EDT)

I'm not sure what you mean by "dungeons" especially "dungeon type", but "Dungeons" like Goblin-town (there is also an instance called Goblin-Town) don't use any template so far. I like the idea of having a template for those, although I'm not convinced about the Category you want to put it in. I fear that those categories only have one or two entries each.

If you mean "World Instances" like DN or, "Skirmishes" like Skirmish: Attack at Dawn, those could make some use of a (small) template imho. You also might want to have a look at Category:Instances. --EoD (talk) 10:22, 10 September 2011 (EDT)

Ahem, there you see, dungeons ain't that good a word then ... maybe? There you see, I am still fairly new to LoTRO ;)

Have a look at what I did to Delotham minutes ago. Perhaps (or rather "probably") I need a fuller picture of how this subject looks like and how it is split up versus connected. I gather "world instance" is fellowship, and other instances are solo-able. But that is more of game-play than it is about geography, right?

Let me say this then: I envisioned a hierarchy where an instance (a dungeon), does not add unwanted litter to the region, as it is today. The inside of an instance, such as Delotham, is not part of the outside world. Yet it exists in that cave, water-system, whatever-the-devs-came-up-with-area. Of course the area (the instance/dungeon) has an entrance, which is a landmark. Neither is an instance an area in the sense Delving Fields is an area within the Shire. But behind that entrance it is an area with lots of "landmarks", maybe even a "settlement" with friendly NPCs, right? But still an instance of some sort.

Or, another approach is to simply say that an instance/dungeon is an area, dwarfe caves are huge and are indeed an area covering a large chunk of land, beneath surface though. Water-works is big enough to be an area in itself, but yet it is a dungeon and a landmark .. I think.

That is why I asked about making an area-lookalike for anything that geographically acts as an area but exists behind some entrance.

Whether some dungeons are sparse and do not contain much of landmarks is another story. Sprigley's Cellar for one, quite a long solo-able public instance, but no real landmarks, just loads of Spider MOBs.

SUMMARY: I mean out of a geographical point of view. Whether the instance, or landmarks within it, should also go into categories for playability is another animal which I have not yet looked at ;) --Zimoon 10:58, 10 September 2011 (EDT)

Ok, so dungeon is basically everything for you which is not in the "main world"? As a programmer you should know that this kind of differentiation of "areas" vs "main world" in a game is very vague. I'll try to sum up what you are proposing, please correct me if I'm wrong. You got two ideas:

1. Distinguish the "Area" Carn Dûm from the "Instance" Carn Dûm and write two seperate articles about it? I'm not sure how exactly you want the hierachy to be (especially as skirmishes/instances are on the same level)
2. Just abuse the landmark template to write instances as "areas"? This is really an abuse as you said before ;)

I personally prefer the idea 1., although that would require some more discussion. Are you sure you don't want to join us lot in IRC now/later? --EoD (talk) 11:23, 10 September 2011 (EDT)

Instance - done! — Zimoon 18:15, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Area - done! — Zimoon 15:28, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm a bit lost, not sure what you mean.

First, dungeons are place like instances, but then public. Delotham and Minas Elendur are actually quest instances, they're not public as far as I recall, although you can enter with a fellowship if you like. Minas Elendur is accessible from the outside (you need to go through the latter to get to Delotham), but this doesn't give the place a higher status, they're both part of the same instance. The Water-works is a region in Moria. The fact that you cannot see the sky doesn't necessarily mean it's a dungeon. The name 'dungeon' is not mentioned anywhere in-game. It's a term that I believe is inherited from World of Warcraft, and I'm not too fond of it in article descriptions. But since we don't have a better way to describe it... ^^

If you want to make an infobox templates for the pages in Public Dungeons then sure, go ahead. :) I don't think it's a good idea to remove them totally from the area infobox templates, though. Those dungeons are found in those areas, and they're usually also found as landmarks on the map. That they happen to be a public dungeon or an instance is not their fault. :P --Ravanel (talk) 11:23, 10 September 2011 (EDT)