imported>An Adventurer |
imported>Arkalor's Bot |
| (19 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| That'd be fine too--[[User:An Adventurer|An Adventurer]] 09:12, 12 March 2008 (CDT)
| | #REDIRECT [[Category talk:Asheron's Call]] |
| ----
| |
| | |
| That's a good point, I moved Turbine out form under lore and just made it a standalone. There's only a couple articles that were internet only so I guess I'd be hesitant to make a category for them, perhaps just label them Lore, and reserve Text for in game items?--[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 07:55, 12 March 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| ----
| |
| | |
| I don't think the Turbine Category should be under lore, it really has nothing to do with the story of the game. Also, I think we may want to have a different category tag for the zone/turbine articles (lore articles only found on the web). right now they are tagged with "text" but I think that tag should only be for in-game texts. Maybe "Internet Lore Article"
| |
| --[[User:An Adventurer|An Adventurer]] 22:27, 11 March 2008 (CDT)
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| I added a "Turbine" category under lore to includes news, history, and game information that has to do with Turbine or AC in general.--[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 18:53, 11 March 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| ----
| |
| | |
| I was going through the Uncategorized pages and while most stuff readily had a category I came across a number of items that were interesting but didn't really belong in any category so I made a new category "Trivia." Otherwise the only way to find these pages would be to know exactly what you're already looking for. --[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 18:25, 11 March 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| ----
| |
| | |
| All of this looks fantastic so far, I think perhaps putting killtask as a subcategory under quest as it really is a derivative of quest s, other than that everything else looks good, I also think it's fantastic to get a general consensus on the plural and singular topic as that is a common issue. If we can keep things organized into the hierarchy of categories here, I think it should keep things quite well organized.--[[User:Sanguis|Sanguis]] 14:26, 10 March 2008 (CDT)
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| | |
| Yeah, that sounds fine. edit: there, all taken care of. --[[User:An Adventurer|An Adventurer]] 11:49, 10 March 2008 (CDT)
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| | |
| --[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 04:53, 10 March 2008 (CDT) as a group I'd guess about 90% or more of the items are solid food items rather than liquid items so how about just folding drinks into "Food"?
| |
| | |
| ----
| |
| | |
| just realized we have two categories that are basically the same thing: ''Food & Drink'' and ''Food''. I think we should rename ''Food'' to ''Food & Drink'' and have it as a category under both consumable items and cooking.
| |
| | |
| --[[User:An Adventurer|An Adventurer]] 18:20, 9 March 2008 (CDT)
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| --[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 04:28, 7 March 2008 (CST)I like it, the lore is such a large corpus that a good tagging system will be very helpful in navigating it.
| |
| | |
| ----
| |
| | |
| Idea for some lore categories:
| |
| *Isparian Character
| |
| **Aluvian Character
| |
| **Gharu'ndim Character
| |
| **Milantos Character
| |
| **Roulean Character
| |
| **Sho Character
| |
| **Silveran Character
| |
| **Soia-Vey Character
| |
| **Viamontian Character
| |
| | |
| *Empyrean Character
| |
| **Dericost Character
| |
| **Falatacot Character
| |
| **Haebrous Character
| |
| **Yalaini Character
| |
| | |
| *Tumerok Character
| |
| *Lugain Character
| |
| *Shadow Character
| |
| *Virindi Character
| |
| *Burun Character
| |
| | |
| plus any other creatures/races we want to add. These would be used to tag both NPC and creature pages. For creatures, we would only tag the page if it is a unique/boss creature that is important to the story some how, such as the renegade tumerok and lugain leaders. I would suggest though that eventually we tag ''every'' NPC with this, as long as they are not a generic NPC like "Leather Crafter", "Blacksmith", etc.
| |
| | |
| We could also possibly create other character categories for groups: Raven Hand, Tanada, Royal Guard, Rossu Morta, etc.
| |
| | |
| Thoughts?
| |
| | |
| --[[User:An Adventurer|An Adventurer]] 16:55, 6 March 2008 (CST)
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| | |
| --[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 19:41, 3 March 2008 (CST)<br> You're right, I had thought for sure I saw them as mu-miyah, but they're all undead like you said. I like the boss category too.
| |
| | |
| ----
| |
| | |
| I just went out to check, and Mu-Miyah are not a specific creature type. They are Creature Type: Undead. At least the Nomad and Imperial Mu-Miyah that were outside Candeth are Undead. I think it would make the most since to list them under both undead and Mu-Miyah (like Falatacot will be listed) since their creature type is important for the Undead Slayer property.
| |
| | |
| I suppose that raises an issue with the undead Ruschk. They are ruschk creatures but Creature Type: Undead. I suggest that they are listed only under Ruschk on the main creature page, but are tagged as both undead and ruschk for categories.
| |
| | |
| --[[User:An Adventurer|An Adventurer]] 19:02, 3 March 2008 (CST)
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| I have added the Boss Creature Category. So far Aerbax is the only member, but there are tons of creatures that will fit. I figure any unique named creature that is part of a quest will go in the category. So, Banished, Fallen, Dires Champs, and "rare spawn" (D Lord, etc) would '''not''' be tagged as a boss creature, but the Drudge Robber Baron to Aerbax all would.
| |
| | |
| --[[User:An Adventurer|An Adventurer]] 18:30, 3 March 2008 (CST)
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| --[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 09:57, 3 March 2008 (CST)Sounds good. I've got stat panels on most creatures now, I just need to finish putting them in and I'll add the tertiary classing for those. And yeah, the Rifts are Virindi. As are some other weird ones like the Ulgrims. I'd probably also consider Queens as matrons, but that have moved up to a particular position. And mu-miyah are their own class (arabic for Mummy). If you read the lore for the viamontians, the term knight doesn't mean what we normally take it to mean, the guy in the armor, but was used more in the sense of an elite attacker. I'd also lean against subclassing normal or default, rather just the explicit factions/varieties.
| |
| | |
| ----
| |
| | |
| Yeah, I thought about that for banished and fallens after. I don't think we should list them as a creature type on the main monster page, at least, not thrown into the main list. But yeah its fine as a category.
| |
| | |
| Some changes:
| |
| crafting - Each one should have a recipe category - Cooking Recipe, Fletching Recipe, Alchemy Recipe, maybe Lockpick Recipe.
| |
| | |
| New category under Item? Quest Item/Quest Trophy, not sure which. This would be for items that are only used as part of a quest - things like the uncharged focusing stone, chorizite ore, etc. This would not be a category for quest rewards (although some quest rewards might rarely fall into the category, such as the new quid seed ingots).
| |
| | |
| Sub categories for certain creatures?
| |
| They would be:
| |
| *Burun
| |
| **Ruuk
| |
| **Kukuur
| |
| **Guruk
| |
| | |
| *Human
| |
| **Bandit
| |
| **Raven Hand
| |
| **Shroud Cabal (if this turns out to be a major faction)
| |
| **Tanada/Nanjou Shou-jen
| |
| **Tusker Worshipper
| |
| **Zharalim
| |
| | |
| *Olthoi
| |
| **Grub
| |
| **Regular
| |
| **Flier (or is it flyer?)
| |
| **Matron/Queen
| |
| **Sentinel/Keeper
| |
| | |
| *Undead
| |
| **Dericost - might not want to include since its not always clear if undead are Dericost, some other Empyrean, or even Isparian
| |
| **Falatacot
| |
| **Mu-Miyah
| |
| | |
| *Virindi
| |
| **Regular Virindi
| |
| **Chaos Virindi
| |
| **Rift (I believe rifts are actually creature type: virindi)
| |
| | |
| *Viamontian
| |
| **Knight
| |
| **Mage
| |
| | |
| | |
| On the same thought as Banished and Fallen creatures as a category, what about baby creatures?
| |
| | |
| | |
| --[[User:An Adventurer|An Adventurer]] 22:07, 2 March 2008 (CST)
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| --[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 14:44, 2 March 2008 (CST)<br>I agree with the foot/head/hand armor and putting all clothing under one category.
| |
| | |
| For banished and fallen they would be double listed (their actual creature type) and also as a Fallen or Banished. Mainly because people will be more interested in a list of banished than having to search for them. For example, [[Fallen Marionette]].
| |
| | |
| ----
| |
| | |
| Good list. A few comments:
| |
| | |
| Banished and Fallen are not creature types. They should be included in their actual creature type.
| |
| | |
| I Added shield and Shoes to Armor. A suggestion for armor: Rename ''Helms'' Head Armor, ''Gauntlets'' Hand Armor, and ''Shoes'' Foot Armor, to go along with the Upper and Lower Body Armor. Also, I realized there are actually very few "clothing" quest pieces, and most of them are full body clothing anyway. We may want to just get rid of Full body/Shirt/Pants and make them all Clothing.
| |
| So armor would look like:
| |
| | |
| Armor:
| |
| *Hand Armor
| |
| *Head Armor
| |
| *Foot Armor
| |
| *Lower Body Armor
| |
| *Upper Body Armor
| |
| *Robe
| |
| *Shield
| |
| *Clothing
| |
| | |
| --[[User:An Adventurer|An Adventurer]] 11:59, 2 March 2008 (CST)
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| | |
| --[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 10:55, 2 March 2008 (CST)<br> I mocked up a complete Category listing on the [[List of Categories | article page]]. I decided to merge Clothing into the Armor category since there's some overlap with things like robes and masks.
| |
| | |
| ----
| |
| | |
| --[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 12:06, 29 February 2008 (CST)<br>I should add that by default I don't mean that every category has to be that way, just that when it could easily go either way, should it be singular or plural. I'm sure there will be lots of exceptions to whatever we decide.
| |
| | |
| ----
| |
| | |
| --[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 12:01, 29 February 2008 (CST)<br>Good ideas on the hierarchy. The subcategories aren't made explicitly, rather they are an emergent property, which isn't obvious unless you look for it. That's to say, something becomes a subcategory when the category page has a category tag of its own embedded. Where it can get confusing is where we also have entries that mirror the category name which also have the category tag. You can see how I dealt with the double listing issue on [[:Category:Monster Types]].
| |
| | |
| An example of creating a subcategory with relevant embedded tag after each:
| |
| *[[:Category:Monster Types]]
| |
| **[[:Category:Drudge]] <nowiki>[[Category:Monster Types]]</nowiki>
| |
| ***[[Drudge Mystic]] <nowiki>[[Category:Drudge]]</nowiki>
| |
| | |
| So now the category Drudge is a subcategory of Monster Types
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| here's an idea for the basic category/sub category list:
| |
| | |
| *patch
| |
| *Character Template
| |
| *Page Template
| |
| *Quest
| |
| *Killtask
| |
| | |
| *Creature
| |
| **Armoredillo
| |
| **Banderling
| |
| **Burun
| |
| ***Ruuk
| |
| ***Guruk
| |
| ***Kukuur
| |
| **...
| |
| | |
| *Weapon
| |
| **Dagger
| |
| **Bow
| |
| **Caster
| |
| **...
| |
| | |
| *Armor
| |
| **Head Armor (remove/replace helms category)
| |
| **Shield
| |
| **Upper Body Armor
| |
| **...
| |
| | |
| *NPC
| |
| **Shopkeeper
| |
| **Quest NPC
| |
| **Crafter
| |
| | |
| *Jewelry
| |
| **Ring
| |
| **Bracelet
| |
| **Necklace
| |
| | |
| *Clothing
| |
| **Shirt
| |
| **Pants
| |
| **Full Body
| |
| **Masks and Guises (Mask/Guise?)
| |
| | |
| *Crafting
| |
| **Cooking
| |
| **Alchemy
| |
| **Fletching
| |
| **Item Tinkering
| |
| **...
| |
| | |
| *Location
| |
| **Dungeon
| |
| **Town
| |
| **Point of Interest
| |
| **...
| |
| | |
| *Lore
| |
| **Text
| |
| | |
| | |
| One thing I'm not sure where to place would be the "Item" category. Nearly everything would be a subcategory of item. Although that might not be a horrible thing.
| |
| | |
| --[[User:An Adventurer|An Adventurer]] 09:55, 29 February 2008 (CST)
| |
| | |
| ----
| |
| | |
| | |
| I don't really care either way. On a single page, the singular would look better I think, for example a shield says category:Shield. But on the category page, the plural would look better, since it is a list of shields, not a list of shield. But... plural could be confusing for things with odd plurals like sclavi, thrungum (I believe that is the plural of thrungus used in a text).
| |
| | |
| I guess I would say go with singular.
| |
| | |
| Also, how do we make subcategories? I had never used a wiki before this one, so a lot of this is still new to me.
| |
| | |
| --[[User:An Adventurer|An Adventurer]] 09:40, 29 February 2008 (CST)
| |
| | |
| ----
| |
| --[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 06:20, 29 February 2008 (CST)<br>This is probably one of those arbitrary decisions which means there's probably not a completely compelling reason to do it either way but it would probably be a good idea to come to a consensus on whether the default for a category should be singular or plural. There's probably going to be some that will always sound better one way over the other, like "Patch" vs "Patches" and "Town" vs "Towns" but to avoid overlapping categories as much as possible it might be helpful to have a default. So that unless there's a reason to do otherwise, when making a new category (or cleaning up old ones where both variants exist) to have a default. My own vote would probably be to go singular. I won't change any existing categories until we reach a consensus and then we can add a line to the Help page on categories for new posters. Or maybe it's just too arbitrary to even have a default.
| |
| ----
| |
| | |
| --[[User:Tlosk|Tlosk]] 05:59, 29 February 2008 (CST)<br>This list is primarily intended as a resource for identifying categories that have overlap and might be merged, categories that already exist if you're thinking of making a new one, and areas that might need work.
| |