==Proposed ChangesQuest Information on NPC Pages==Should we have a category or some other notation for NPCs who will/wonI't talk d love to players in beast forms? [[User:Karunama|Karunama]] ([[User talk:Karunama|talk]]) 01:54, 7 October 2014 (CDT): 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. hear any thoughts from folks about simplifying the Suspicious Cow in Eltibule? Well if we have ''Quests'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 subheading on 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, My initial thoughts 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]]) 04reasonings are below:48, 7 October 2014 (CDT)

==Shop Table Layout (new template with icons)==Btw, I realize now there Currently the same information is no column for Favor. It sounds like favor is often a requirement and may be worth documentingmanually edited in two locations. #On the page containing the quest information itself#On the other hand I think you soon realize as a player, NPC page - if up to template standards that nearly everything includes five pieces of value is going to be locked with favor anyway. But that's just me. For the time beinginformation: Favor, Objective, Reward spoiler, don't worryRequirements and Hints.. with this template format, it is only This creates a matter duplication of adding a new parameterwork for wiki maintainers working on both pages, if we ''really'' need and leads 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 situation where information may conflict (if one of the two locations is out of rowsdate). It allows On an aesthetic note, the spoilers have always looked off to make complex formatting of table rows with little code me in the article. this section (being non-indented both in heading and expanded -[[User:Gorgonzola|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola|talk]]) 08:16, 7 October 2014 (CDTas well as bold when quest names are not).

==Proper Categorization of NPCs (including creatures) I'd like to work with DPL (Dynamic Page Lists)==propose the following:Some things that come #Switch Quests subheading to mind while testing be a DPL on [[Goblin]] object pointing to the Category:Quests/NPC Quests#Remove spoilers, hints, rewards and [[Arthropod]] requirements from the NPC page (creature typesachieved by using DPL instead of manually editing/linking quests pages). We have to take technical requirements of DPL in mind when designing the categories so we can pull useful lists.

* [[This would achieve:Category:Serbule NPCs]] #A cleaner look to the quest subheading for NPC's (the look and [[:Category:Under information on NPC pages would be standardized).#IMO aesthetics of NPC pages would improve by removing the spoiler blocks#Decrease the workload for maintainers by removing the Hand Bosses]] seem extraneous need to duplicate information (and have no purposeverify duplicate information)* Instead, we can pull DPL lists that include one ore more simpler categories, #Centralizes all quest information on the quest page. for example Serbule + NPCs, or Bosses + Under the Handa given quest.

For example [[Ancient Skeleton Guard]] This could impact users:#Users who come to the wiki looking for a specific quest by name would likely not be categorized as Serbuleimpacted (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, Creaturesand many quest on NPC pages don't contain spoilers, Skeletonobjectives or hints.

For DPL purposes I think we should use NPCs 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 friendly characterslocation (i.e. Serbule, Eltibule) and Creatures NPC who initiates the quest. This allows for things that can be attacked.the first time use of DPL to generate quests list (See [[Chirrra]] for an example)

Then we can pull (using DPL options): * Thoughts? I'''Friends''' (friendly characters) : [[:Category:NPCs]] & [[:Category:Serbule]] (zone, ptional)* '''Bosses''' (creatures) : [[:Category:Bosses]] (Creatures here is implicit) & [[:Category:Serbule]] (zone, optional) & [[:Category:Arthropod]] (creature type, optional)* '''Foes''' (basic enemies) : [[:Category:Creatures]] & [[:Category:Serbule]] (zone, optional) & NOT [[:Category:Bosses]] (DPL '''notcategory''' option!) Conclusion: * A global category that overlaps both enemies and friendly NPCs could be made, but then we could also pull all NPCs + Creatures with DPL.* A global enemy/attackable entity category that does not overlap friendly NPCs => Creatures* A global category that includes all friendly (non attackable) NPCs => NPCs (NPCs does sound like an overarching category ll look for comments for both friends and foes... but thats what we used ~week or so far, it's short so I'd prefer to keep using that, .. also NPCs is often used to refer to distinguish from "mobs" in many games).* A global category for named creatures, currently we use => Bosses Do we need a "named creature" category? I'd rather avoid adding more categories and unless there is a use case. Do we need a "mini boss" category? consensus against (or the admins say no!) I'd rather avoid adding more categories unless there is a use case. Though here we could identify the ones that have a curse through the use of the MOB infobox template and some DPL trickery (we have a curse parameter). For bosses we can make some trickery ll proceed with DPL to pull lists based on MOB infobox parameters: for example only those that have a curse. Any template parameter in [[Template:MOB infobox]] can potentially be used as a filter. --[[User:Gorgonzola|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola|talk]]) 15:31, 25 October 2014 (CDT) ===Zone Categories===I think we should use [[:Category:Kur Moutains]] instead of [[:Category:Kur Mountains NPCs]]. The latter creates additional categories that are not necessary since DPL can pull from multiple categories (eg. "Kur Moutains" AND "NPCs"). Such zone categories coudl potentially include other things like quests, points of interest this proposed change and so onupdate NPC pages accordingly. In each case, we can pull (zone) + (other category). --[[User:GorgonzolaKedoch|GorgonzolaKedoch]] ([[User talk:GorgonzolaKedoch|talk]]) 1514:3949, 25 October 2014 (CDT) ===Simplifying Categories 11 April 2018 (with DPL in mindEDT)=== '''Bosses & Creatures''' : a boss is implicitly a creature, so it may not be required to include both categories. I can't say as of writing we'll have to see use cases. '''Bosses & NPCs''' : NPCs should be used for friendly characters, so DPL does not need to exclude them. eg. All Orc Bosses are "Orc&Bosses" and no exclusion is needed. Adding the bosses to "Creatures" category here does not cause an issue. Adding to NPCs makes it required to use an exclusion in DPL which is a requirement that's best not used if we can avoid it.