Category talk:Obsolete
The how-to guide that once was here has been moved to a proper help page ⇒ Help:Obsolete.
Unusable versus Unobtainable
In going through the heritage rune pages, in the wake of both the new LI system (Update 30.3) and Reward Track (Update 32), it occurs to me that all of the runes are usable (for Reward Track), but in some cases may have become unobtainable (e.g. because of removal of drops/barterers, etc.). This talk page implies that, in the context of items, Obsolete tagging is for things that are unobtainable, regardless of whether they're still usable. It also says that Obsolete pages shouldn't be linked from non-Obsolete pages. But
- with respect to heritage runes, specifically, it may not be possible to comprehensively ascertain which heritage runes are obtainable and which aren't, since the resources for deconstruction and refining are, post-U30.3, non-replenishable/reproducible (old, unimbued LIs, and relics, respectively), and
- heritage runes are quite valuable for Reward Track; I think it would be a shame to exclude some of them from lists, since, even if technically unobtainable, many folks have them hanging around in vaults, that should not go to waste. This concern also applies beyond heritage runes, e.g. to other old-LI mats (e.g. crystals, scrolls, symbols) that aren't obtainable any more, but are still valuable to disenchant.
Random thought: while I wouldn't necessarily advocate a proliferation of article-management tags, an {{Unobtainable}} tag would be more precise than {{Obsolete}}.
Egarthur (talk)
- If we can't make sure that runes are unobtainable, they shouldn't be removed/marked as Obsolete. But I do think that they should be marked as obsolete if their only source(s) are obsolete as well. I'd rather have a rune missing from a list than include all obsolete ones. All runes are usable for the reward track, and I don't think anyone will throw one away just because it isn't listed in some list on the wiki. An Unobtainable tag is unnecessary, in my opinion.--Fanchen (talk) 21:22, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with Fanchen here. If we're unsure whether an item can still be obtained, I would not mark it as obsolete. Slightly related are the Relic pages. Relics are difficult to obtain at the moment since Shards are really not obtainable anymore, but AFAIK they are not tagged as obsolete (e.g. Relic:Eastemnet Rune of Courage). — RoyalKnight5 (talk) 07:48, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Me to agree that they should not be tagged as "obsolete". It may be value to add information they are "unobtainable" but not using a big banner as page-management templates do.
- Regarding "linking" guidelines, I think it should be reviewed. — Zimoon 10:17, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- I also agree that the Heritage Runes should not be marked as 'Obsolete'. Many of them are, in fact, still obtainable in-game, through other means than from (old) LI deconstruction; actually, I get them fairly frequently still (on Treebeard). However, with the changes made to their minimum levels after the new LI system, I can't actually use many of them (yet) though. :C
- But they are still there, and I still get more of them. Ergo, not unobtainable and per definition not 'Obsolete'. :)
- --Stargazer (talk) 16:30, 9 March 2022 (UTC)