Difference between revisions of "Talk:NPC Template"

From Project: Gorgon Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Comment about the current Template:vendor table row and Favor.)
m (Quest Information on NPC Pages)
 
(8 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Regarding NPC Categories==
+
==Quest Information on NPC Pages==
The basic categories I'm using atm. Feel free to make suggestions or criticism I am by all means a WikiMedia beginner.
+
I'd love to hear any thoughts from folks about simplifying the ''Quests'' subheading on NPC pages. My initial thoughts and reasonings are below:
  
<pre>
+
Currently the same information is manually edited in two locations.
[[Category:NPCs]] (the top level category)
+
#On the page containing the quest information itself
  [[Category:Serbule NPCs]] (within a given zone)
+
#On the NPC page - if up to template standards that includes five pieces of information: Favor, Objective, Reward spoiler, Requirements and Hints.
  [[Category:Crypt NPCs]] (within a given dungeon)
+
This creates a duplication of work for wiki maintainers working on both pages, and leads to a situation where information may conflict (if one of the two locations is out of date). On an aesthetic note, the spoilers have always looked off to me in this section (being non-indented both in heading and expanded - as well as bold when quest names are not).
  etc.
 
</pre>
 
  
Note that I have started using these categories with DynamicPageLists in the Zone articles! Thus adding a new NPC to Serbule NPCs category will automatically show up under "Friendly NPCs" of the relevant Zone. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signatures#How_to_sign_your_posts Unsigned] comment added by [[User:Gorgonzola|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Gorgonzola|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
+
I'd like to propose the following:
 +
#Switch Quests subheading to be a DPL object pointing to the Category:Quests/NPC Quests
 +
#Remove spoilers, hints, rewards and requirements from the NPC page (achieved by using DPL instead of manually editing/linking quests pages)
  
==Proposed Changes==
+
This would achieve:
Should we have a category or some other notation for NPCs who will/won't talk to players in beast forms? [[User:Karunama|Karunama]] ([[User talk:Karunama|talk]]) 01:54, 7 October 2014 (CDT)
+
#A cleaner look to the quest subheading for NPC's (the look and information on NPC pages would be standardized).
: I don't have [[Beast Forms]] gameplay experience, but it makes sense if it is not super obvious in-game. So you mean like eg. the Suspicious Cow in Eltibule? Well if we have '''a category''' something like "Beast Form Friendly NPCs" then we can make a DPL (DynamicPageList) listing within [[Beast Forms]]. But... is it the case that some talk to spider but not wolf, some talk to wolf but not cow , etc? (I don't know). If not, then the category makes sense. Next we could potentially add that to a future [[Template:NPC infobox]] eg. "Talks to Beasts" yes/no. Until then, we can add it to the NPC pages so we don't forget. I think it would fit in the intro text? Another sentence "John Doe talks to players in [[Beast Forms[Beast Form]]" as it will be high up the page, and it won't clog most pages (I think it's limited to a few NPCs). We could also add a section only on relevant NPCs. I prefer the extra sentence so we don't needlessly lengthen the NPC pages for this small info. In time, we can move this info to the "NPC infobox" (another sidebar "info card" thingy). But either way is fine. Cheers --[[User:Gorgonzola|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola|talk]]) 04:48, 7 October 2014 (CDT)
+
#IMO aesthetics of NPC pages would improve by removing the spoiler blocks
 +
#Decrease the workload for maintainers by removing the need to duplicate information (and verify duplicate information)
 +
#Centralizes all quest information on the quest page. for a given quest.
  
==Shop Table Layout (new template with icons)==
+
This could impact users:
Btw, I realize now there is no column for Favor. It sounds like favor is often a requirement and may be worth documenting. On the other hand I think you soon realize as a player, that nearly everything of value is going to be locked with favor anyway. But that's just me. For the time being, don't worry.. with this template format, it is only a matter of adding a new parameter, if we ''really'' need to add favor as a column.. we can do it. Just i'd rather focus on other priorities as long as it works reasonably well. The template can accomodate any number of rows. It allows to make complex formatting of table rows with little code in the article. --[[User:Gorgonzola|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola|talk]]) 08:16, 7 October 2014 (CDT)
+
#Users who come to the wiki looking for a specific quest by name would likely not be impacted (landing directly on the Quest page)
 +
#Users who land on the NPC page first ''may'' have one additional click to access the information
 +
##Sort of... users have to click Expand for spoilers, and many quest on NPC pages don't contain spoilers, objectives or hints.
 +
 
 +
Now is a good time for this change because:
 +
#Except for Druid quests, all quests pages on the wiki have recently been updated/uploaded, following the standardized quest template.
 +
#All quests now contain categories for location (i.e. Serbule, Eltibule) and NPC who initiates the quest. This allows for the first time use of DPL to generate quests list (See [[Chirrra]] for an example)
 +
 
 +
Thoughts? I'll look for comments for ~week or so, and unless there is consensus against (or the admins say no!) I'll proceed with this proposed change and update NPC pages accordingly. [[User:Kedoch|Kedoch]] ([[User talk:Kedoch|talk]]) 14:49, 11 April 2018 (EDT)

Latest revision as of 13:49, 11 April 2018

Quest Information on NPC Pages

I'd love to hear any thoughts from folks about simplifying the Quests subheading on NPC pages. My initial thoughts and reasonings are below:

Currently the same information is manually edited in two locations.

  1. On the page containing the quest information itself
  2. On the NPC page - if up to template standards that includes five pieces of information: Favor, Objective, Reward spoiler, Requirements and Hints.

This creates a duplication of work for wiki maintainers working on both pages, and leads to a situation where information may conflict (if one of the two locations is out of date). On an aesthetic note, the spoilers have always looked off to me in this section (being non-indented both in heading and expanded - as well as bold when quest names are not).

I'd like to propose the following:

  1. Switch Quests subheading to be a DPL object pointing to the Category:Quests/NPC Quests
  2. Remove spoilers, hints, rewards and requirements from the NPC page (achieved by using DPL instead of manually editing/linking quests pages)

This would achieve:

  1. A cleaner look to the quest subheading for NPC's (the look and information on NPC pages would be standardized).
  2. IMO aesthetics of NPC pages would improve by removing the spoiler blocks
  3. Decrease the workload for maintainers by removing the need to duplicate information (and verify duplicate information)
  4. Centralizes all quest information on the quest page. for a given quest.

This could impact users:

  1. Users who come to the wiki looking for a specific quest by name would likely not be impacted (landing directly on the Quest page)
  2. Users who land on the NPC page first may have one additional click to access the information
    1. Sort of... users have to click Expand for spoilers, and many quest on NPC pages don't contain spoilers, objectives or hints.

Now is a good time for this change because:

  1. Except for Druid quests, all quests pages on the wiki have recently been updated/uploaded, following the standardized quest template.
  2. All quests now contain categories for location (i.e. Serbule, Eltibule) and NPC who initiates the quest. This allows for the first time use of DPL to generate quests list (See Chirrra for an example)

Thoughts? I'll look for comments for ~week or so, and unless there is consensus against (or the admins say no!) I'll proceed with this proposed change and update NPC pages accordingly. Kedoch (talk) 14:49, 11 April 2018 (EDT)