Item Talk:Anniversary Steed

Consistency

Trying to make all mounts consistent with the way their information is presented. Opinions on this 'quick ref' idea?Savi (talk) 10:12, 6 May 2013 (EDT)

On your new item information bar, I think you are trying to present too much info in one line. The first half of the info is already presented in the barter information area more clearly (like where all the games-master npcs are). I think you could take the second half of your new item information bar and present it after the barter information as a Skills Granted section.

- Shardis (talk) 10:21, 6 May 2013 (EDT)

Hmm, perhaps. The only downfall to splitting it all up is I use that info to insert the property tags...trying to find a way to actually use them rather than just stick them in after the gallery...I also thought about adding a different header called quick reference...but once there are 4 headers the toc pops up which is not ideal. I personally dislike that all the mount pages are just slightly different enough I have to hunt for the info I'm looking for, so was looking for a consistent table with an at a glance view Savi (talk) 10:31, 6 May 2013 (EDT)

Another question for opinions...in consolidating the names for the mount skills (horse/pony) I'm also seeing a few different mounts that have the same icon ie

• File:Bay Steed(skill)-icon.png Bay File:Steed of the Dale-lands(skill).png the Dale-lands Chestnut

Is it better to retain these separately even though they share the same image, or just keep one?Savi (talk) 11:23, 6 May 2013 (EDT)

Don't know what to say since I don't understand using property tags myself so don't know if there is a way to pull info from multiple spots on a page.

As far as the TOC is concerned, you can add __NOTOC__ at the start of the page to disable the table entirely.

As far slightly different mount pages, you could create a template like Barnby recently did for Legendary Recipes to present a consistent look. Same idea applies to the tooltip boilerplate templates we use for items/quests/NPCs/etc. Then it is just a matter of having the mount page transclude the template with the mount particulars included in the template properties. That might also help your property tag concern.

If I remember, one of the icons is called Mount_Skill_1-icon.png which is used for several skills with the same skill icon. You can do the same thing with those 3 by just creating a new icon called Mount_Skill_#-icon.png. I think there are already 2 such icons so # would be 3. This is the same idea as the generic item icons that the wiki is moving towards for equippable items.

- Shardis (talk) 11:39, 8 May 2013 (EDT)

You can indeed pull properties from multiple parts of the page, the only annoyance I've run into is when using a template as part of the property value it only seems to work using the silent #set so sometimes, the actual information appears twice on a page, at least behind the scenes. -- Thanks for the heads up on the Toc removal

Originally the 'quick ref' table was the idea to put on all mount pages consistantly at the top as a sort of title page to an essay. So the info containing more details would still be present below. However, the unnecessary duplication does seem silly. I'm torn between keeping all the property values in one block so there is less confusion about it for future editors, and keeping the information simple and straightforward visually. I have a general surface idea of the templates themselves so perhaps I will do some more brainstorming and read up on the particulars. Ideally, the properties(though diff ones) will apply to ALL items, not just mounts, so I'm trying to take that into account with my planning.

The generic naming of the icons makes perfect sense, I will weed through the icons again once the first round of file consolidations are eliminated. I currently will only rename those with duplicates between diff mounts, but it does raise the question of whether all mount icons should then be generally named...browsing through such a long list for the right icon may be more difficult then though--Savi (talk) 12:18, 8 May 2013 (EDT)

As for the browsing through list looking for the right icon, check out the Category pages for the various item slot icons. At the top of each page is a table showing the icons (at actual size rather than the zoomed in images below) along with the name of the icon. You could create a similar table for mounts by copy and paste from one of the item icon tables and modifying as needed. Shardis (talk) 18:56, 8 May 2013 (EDT)

Tables of that sort are usually for presenting generic icons in a handy reference sheet, along with any background variations (such as item quality colors). Listing all the unique icons in the category that way would effectively duplicate the category listing beneath it, especially if you're organizing them alphabetically. Still, if you want to line them up like that, perhaps arrange them similar to their categorization on Mounts?

As for the quick ref header... while I can understand what you're trying to do, I don't think it serves the purpose of the page very well. The page itself is not very long to begin with, so a 'quick reference' serves little purpose. Someone who is looking for information on the steed can read when it was available in the intro text. They can quickly scan down the page to the icons and numbers for barter cost, or the item tooltip for basic item information. Duplicating that in a series of tiny boxes at the top makes the page look somewhat cluttered, while only presenting redundant information in a manner akin to jargon.

It seems to me that in most wikis, shorthand of that sort is usually saved for a table, an organizational page (ala Mounts), a boilerplate at the bottom, or a sidebar on the right of the page. And part of the reason is that it's a bit of an information overload to start someone off with. Not that the card its necessarily all bad an idea, but perhaps a more elegant incorporation lower in the page? -- JnK (talk) 19:36, 8 May 2013 (EDT)

I will concur it does appear cluttered with the top table. Just an idea that didn't really pan out visually. Rather than recreate it on the bottom or side of the page(which would interefere with the tooltip anyway) I will revisit Shardis's original suggestion to simply ensure the information presented is done so consistantly. Having different titled sections is handy when wanting to only edit a certain piece, and making a single template for the information would remove that capability. The 'organizational page' is actually already set up Here and requires no upkeep itself (besides setting up the column names). The chart uses the properties that are/will be included in the steed pages. I will revisit and fix the other steed pages where I popped in this quick ref, but want to nail down the finished look first.--Savi (talk) 09:44, 9 May 2013 (EDT)