Help talk:Crafting

Cook Recipes

Lots of item names have changed for cook recipes, with small words added at the beginning like "Cup of", "Jar of", "Piece of", "Pinch of"... For example, "Vegetable Oil" is now "Jar of Vegetable Oil". If I want to update all cook recipes, any advice on how to proceed?

• Do I rename the item page and its icon?

  I can rename the item by "moving it" but it seems I can't do the same with the icon :

  • Is it possible to have this privilege, if any?
  • or I do a list of icon names to change?
  • or I copy actual icon images and create another with the new name and same icon?

  I only tried "Jar of Vegetable Oil" for now, and the icon is not showing in the recipe, defaulting to the ingredient's name (but I can choose any icon name for the ingredient itself)

• Do I need to update all recipes individually?
• Do I need to update all vendors selling it?

Goingbald 12:53, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

• Ok. For the items themselves, move page and rename to appropriate name. Then edit the new article to reflect the new name. You will have to do this with every item article you want/need to change. The icons cannot be moved, this is a wiki fault. The easiest thing to do would be save the old icon under the new name, upload those, then delete the old icons with the old name. Tedious work I know, but we all have to do it this way. As far as updating links to these items: recipes, npc's etc.. yes you will have to update each individually. if we all coordinate together this will seem less of a strain. Good luck and try to make it fun! Give yourself small goals. Start with the item pages themselves first and post your progress somewhere so we can all go GREAT JOB!!! CHEER! Because it is definitely a task not to take lightly. Rogue 17:35, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

• Wow, just trying to do 4 of them tonight, I bumped in lots of other changes on new farmer item names, and more recipes involving these... I fear I'll have to reedit many times the same recipe for a different item renamed, bit by bit... Goingbald 06:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Special Characters

Magill raised the question of whether it's still accurate to tell editors to create redirect pages for crafting items that have special characters in their names. I went looking and found surprisingly few items that are in that category, mostly things involving Khazâd metal, such as Item:Khazâd-gold Ring Recipe. But I couldn't find any at all that had non-special character pages redirecting to them, and none of them seem to be suffering from the lack. Since the search is now successfully finding â when you search for a, and the crafting pages are heavily interlinked already, it looks to me like there's no need for the extra redirect pages. -- Elinnea (talk) 13:35, 2 August 2012 (EDT)

Now that we have the advanced editor that can supply special characters with accents and all, it makes me wonder how necessary that whole class of redirects is. I'll endorse not requiring them for crafting items, at least, and try to remember to ask Lotroadmin for thoughts about the larger issue. Sethladan 19:59, 5 August 2012 (EDT)

I removed the sentence from this page, since nobody seems to be clamoring for the policy to stay for crafting. -- Elinnea (talk) 10:14, 6 August 2012 (EDT)

Cool. I posted a query to Lotroadmin on the redirect question in general. Now to tackle Lotro-Wiki.com:Crafting!

BTW: I wanted to start making Jewelry in preparation for RoR. And along with Armour, it is clear that the Top (read Best non-Raid) Gear available to a Toon was the various pieces from The Great River Armour Sets! (This obviously will change with the increase of the level cap to 85.)

I just started looking at issues with my Jeweler and other toons, who are level 75, but without Rep with The Great River. It appears that each profession was given a set of Guild recipes for the level 75 Great River items (as well as Theodred).

Not only does the Jeweler and Metalsmith evidently have the same identical problem as the Tailor, but they also NEED the comparison pages! All of the Recipes are 3-in-1. (Seth, when do we switch to the new recipe template?)

Wm Magill - Valamar - OTG/OTC (talk) 15:39, 7 August 2012 (EDT)

Re: Template, I'll update it within the next couple of days, pending any additional comments on the talk page and how good of a job I do studying for my Calc II final, heh. Definitely feel free to start copying and spreading the lootbox idea, though (see User:Sethladan/Sandbox2 for sample); that one met with universal acclaim and won't be integrated into the template (by me, at least) for quite some time.

I also have some thoughts about what you said regarding "sweeping" the stats from the item pages more efficiently into comparison tables, but I need some time to test that out before I put forward anything definite. The gist of it, though, is that we now have Semantic MediaWiki installed and can use properties. While it's not something I know a lot about yet, and Lotroadmin has warned that SMW takes a heavy toll on server performance, it has a lot of potential for doing some seriously magical things with our data.

Hope that helps - don't feel like you have to wait on me to go update recipes. :) Sethladan 16:20, 7 August 2012 (EDT)

I think it's fine to not require the redirect now that the search engine has been upgrade to support wild characters.

As for SMW, lets give it a go and see what it does. My suggest it to use for static pages, i.e. items included in section can be parsed to create a table, result will be a server side cache. Very minor hit to the server for what I would consider a killer feature. But avoid creating a dynamic page that lists all items with a certain attribute or sorting of an attribute, which won't be cached on the server and will impact server load. SMW provides a method to search much like categories and those results will be dynamic. If you feel you have a strong case for a dynamic page, please go ahead and create it, just drop a line on my talk page so I can monitor the logs more closely. If the only cost is RAM, I can increase that, but if the cost is CPU load, then that's a little more difficult with this webhost (so far a webhost that I like even though they have had a few problems). --Lotroadmin (talk) 01:18, 8 August 2012 (EDT)

An interesting conundrum

I want to include (transclude) the entire "page" for a recipe on this page as an example.

It is easy to do that with Sethladan's prototyping page, but that is not a complete "example." It is missing the Recipe.

However, the complete recipe page includes the <onlyinclude> </onlyinclude> wrapper around the recipe header of the page. The end result being (as you can see on the help page) only the Recipe ToolTip is included in the page.

• Is there a different syntax other than {{Item:Great River Armour Recipe}} to use which will do that?

Or is the only solution to create an "example" page without the "onlyincludes" ?

Which would not be a big deal as it would not necessarily have to "behave" as does a real Recipe page i.e. with a working ToolTip Pop-up. Except that it would wind up putting a bunch of bogus entries in Categories.

The page would likely be called [[Help:Crafting-Example-Recipe]] and just be a copy of some Recipe page with the "onlyincludes" removed. However that would cause problems if someone decided to actually COPY the contents of that page instead of using the "Create New Recipe" tool. ... :)

Although --- There is apparently a parameter: "|nocat=true" Talk page reference from main Wikipedia However, I have no guess how it would be used.
Wm Magill - Valamar - OTG/OTC (talk) 21:45, 8 August 2012 (EDT)

• Just noticed "another" issue... I have converted a number of pages (Great River items) to the new "lootbox" format.
  

Mouse over this: Item:Great River Armour Recipe and Item:Great River Pauldrons Recipe.

I don't understand why this is behaving as it does... the Recipe is wrapped with "onlyincludes" and on Pauldrons, the Lootbox is wrapped with "noincludes" -- so why are the Lootbox entries popping up on the Recipe ToolTip? Is that an issue with the Lootbox template?

BTW, the difference between these pages and User:Sethladan/Sandbox2 is the addition of the "Recipe" template to the Crafting Template page.

And, aside from the "positioning and lack of scroll capabilities" this is actually not a bad effect!

--Wm Magill - Valamar - OTG/OTC (talk) 13:36, 10 August 2012 (EDT)

Oof. Looks like my lootbox idea wasn't so ideal after all. I'm in the middle of cramming for my maths final, so I can't dive into the code (although my quick guess is that Template:Tooltip adds a CSS class to "flag" each of those little black item boxes as "pop-up material," meaning they're all gonna get displayed on hover). Pop-up uses JavaScript, which behaves differently from templates (and thus ignores the includes - looks like the best bet might be to hold off on the lootboxes for now, sorry! I promise I'll be back into the full swing of working on this stuff middle of next week.

Re: examples, have you considered using a screenshot if you just want to show what a full recipe/crafting page should look like? I would say leave the example templates on the template documentation page, where we (should) have an outline of syntax, a clean copy, and some examples (this is the gold standard that I'm hoping to work towards as I continue attacking templates). nocat=true is a parameter that needs to be manually added to templates; a few of ours have it so far, although some use doc=true instead. I favor the former (nocat), and off the top of my head I know it's been added to Template:Quest Rep and maybe Template:Infobox Quests among others. Sorry for the slapdash reply; hope this helps somewhat. :) Sethladan 14:59, 10 August 2012 (EDT)

Guild Recipe Vendors

Currently the crafting guilds each have two locations in Middle-earth: the original crafting hall, and the Craftguilder's Hall in Galtrev. This is not at all well documented on the wiki yet. The individual guild pages have no links or references to Galtrev, and most recipe pages link to the original guild vendor, but make no mention of the one in Galtrev: Item:Heroic Noble's Hooded Cloak Recipe, for example. Now that Turbine has added the guild representatives in Galtrev, they might decide to add another set in a big town coming with a future expansion. We don't know, but it's wise to look ahead.

I see a couple possibilities for updating the recipe pages.

• Don't. That is, leave the line pointing to the individual in the guild-hall and leave users to figure out the Galtrev connection on their own. This is trivially easy, but a bit lazy.
• Add the Galtrev individual to the line on each recipe page. Something like "This recipe can be purchased from So-and-so in the Guild-hall, or So-and-so in Galtrev." It's a bit problematic since the Galtrev folk don't have real names, just "Tailor's Guild Leader," etc. This would also be trouble if another set of representatives is added later; everything would need to be edited again. Bots can help, but still.
• Create a generic page along the lines of NPC Expert Tailor for each of the guild positions and link from the recipe to the relevant vendor page. Having a table with locations seems a bit silly for only two NPCs, but it would be nicely future-proof. To me this seems the way to go, especially since the NPCs in Galtrev are generic already. They don't really deserve pages of their own, but a mention on an overview page would do nicely.

Thoughts on any of this? -- Elinnea (talk) 23:20, 21 August 2012 (EDT)

With as many recipes as we've got and how often the formatting for the pages seems to change, I'd definitely be in favor of using some sort of transclusion/generic page. Another option might be to skip the individual naming entirely and just point to a subsection of the guild page, but I like that having a generic page allows us to update the formatting for everything at once as desired. Sethladan 23:44, 21 August 2012 (EDT)

The idea of directing you back to a guild page for further information appeals to me. Instead of identifying each guild vendor, simply say, e.g., "Purchased from a xx Guild Improved Recipe Vendor". This reduces the details that are duplicated at each recipe page. If you need to, you can click through to the guild page for details; if you don't, each page is not cluttered with the same details.

Instead of looking at a single page in isolation, and trying to pack all available information on to it, I believe we should use the most basic feature of web pages, the hyperlink, to allow easy access to pages providing more information. Most folk that arrive at the wiki already have some basic skills with using web pages. Instead of trying to anticipate the needs of your visitor, empower that visitor to easily find more information, should they need it. Perhaps the first few times they encounter a page they will need to click through to find where (e.g.) the guild recipe vendors reside, but after a time, they will have a pretty good idea where they are and not need that detail every time they come by to check the recipe ingredients.

- RingTailCat (talk) 01:09, 22 August 2012 (EDT)

I rather like the link to the guild idea too. That would mean future changes can all be made directly to the guild page, or pages linked from it, which is logical and would streamline updates. But maybe then the guild pages should be split off as standalone pages for each guild as an institution, instead of the redirect to the location, as they currently are. The Scholar's Guild-hall could then transclude the generic guild information, while adding the extra details about location and NPCs particular to the place. -- Elinnea (talk) 12:30, 22 August 2012 (EDT)

Can definitely get behind dividing the physical location of the guild-hall and the guild itself as an institution/reputation faction, especially since we're probably - as you both have predicted - going to see representatives from the guilds further and further afield (aren't some of the recipes in Lothlorien/Mirkwood also related to the guild?). Sethladan 15:52, 22 August 2012 (EDT)