View source for TheKolWiki:Proposed Standards/archive3

Third archive of [[Proposed Standards]]: 

==Section Order for Familiars==
I think we should reorder the sections for [[Established Standards: Familiar Pages|familiars]] so that the Notes section is immediately below the header.  As is now, important information can be hard to find (see the [[Comma Chameleon]] for an extreme example).  --[[User:Gymnosophist|Gymnosophist]] 23:39, 15 August 2006 (CDT)
*Well, we could technically classify "Familiar Equipment Consumption Messages" as more notes since the messages make more sense aftering reading the notes. I'd be against moving the notes above everything else though; essential, standardized data ought to be shown at the top.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 15:01, 16 August 2006 (CDT)
**I think the problem here is that the Notes are essential whereas the Messages are standardized, so which should take precedence?  I lean towards prioritizing the Notes - they are much more useful to the user.  --[[User:Gymnosophist|Gymnosophist]] 22:11, 16 August 2006 (CDT)
Interestingly, a user just added some note information to the [http://kol.coldfront.net/thekolwiki/index.php?title=Comma_Chameleon&curid=14886&diff=126560&oldid=126558&rcid=127284 top of the Comma Chameleon page], apparently because the user couldn't find the already-existing information buried at the bottom of the page.  The edit was reverted, but the problem remains.<br>  P.S. I've always thought that the section order in the [[Established Standards#Item Pages|item pages]] should be reordered as well, bringing the notes immediately below the header. I just never had the energy to push for it, knowing that it would be a semi-major change.  But perhaps now is the time to plump for it.  --[[User:Gymnosophist|Gymnosophist]] 07:53, 25 August 2006 (CDT)
*Hmm, now that I think about it, it seems almost convincing, but I'll wait to see what other people think. Perhaps farther up is better, maybe the top, maybe somewhere near.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 20:57, 25 August 2006 (CDT)

*Bump* How about a "messages" section that goes below notes?--{{:User:Dehstil}} 22:54, 15 December 2006 (CST)

==New Weapon Hit Messages==
Discussion of how to implement the new weapon messages into the Wiki has now begun [[Talk:Player Hit Messages#OK, Now What?|here]].  --[[User:Gymnosophist|Gymnosophist]] 04:01, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

This is far-reaching enough to be deserving of discussion out here: The precise text of a lot of the hit messages depends on properties of creatures that we aren't tracking.  These are:
#whether the monster is male/female/neuter/plural
#whether <it> has certain hittable body parts, including head, wings, legs/feet, arms/shoulders (n.b. "arms&legs" might be a single property), and possibly torso/gut.
Since this information is functionally unimportant, I'm happy with just having it be in the Notes section for the monster, but I wanted to double-check if there were any pros or cons I wasn't seeing. --[[User:Jonrock|Jonrock]] 16:56, 10 October 2006 (CDT)

==melee, ranged, and myst?==
at the moment there are two categories of weapon, melee and ranged. these are each used to signify two different things interchangeably. melee: "causes melee damage" and "needs muscle to equip," and ranged, for "causes ranged damage" and "needs moxie to equip." with the coming of the clockwork staff and the silver fork perhaps these should be split out into four categories, with a fifth (needs myst) added to complete them. --[[User:Evilkolbot|Evilkolbot]] 09:12, 8 October 2006 (CDT)
:When the weapon type categories are converted into main-namespace pages, which has to happen anyway in order to accomodate the player hit messages of each weapon type, this information will probably be added in multiple places.  For now the explanation of the restriction could go at the top of [[weapons (by power)]], perhaps? --[[User:Jonrock|Jonrock]] 11:10, 8 October 2006 (CDT)

==Infoboxes==
I copied the discussion here onto [[Discussion/Infoboxes]] to make it easier to follow. --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 16:34, 15 October 2006 (CDT)

I thought it might be a good idea for [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Infobox infoboxes] to be introduced for some categories of article.  (Like how wikipedia does for [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispepsi albums], for instance.)  Monsters especially: it would be nice to see the level, statgain, elemental, and so on right at the top of the page.  Locations could use this too, having safe moxie, avg monster level, clover adventure, and so on in an infobox.  I don't know how to set any of it up, but I'd certainly be willing to help with adding these once the ball was rolling.  Thoughts?  --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 10:18, 10 October 2006 (CDT)
*I ''would'' like to see this information somewhere for the monster pages...hopefully in the near future.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 20:32, 10 October 2006 (CDT)
*I want to see this information on the individual adventure pages as well (I think monster combat messages could be pushed ''way'' down the page), so I'd like to see examples of possible templating. --[[User:Jonrock|Jonrock]] 21:19, 10 October 2006 (CDT)

It seems the standard way of doing this requires that a certain [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Common.css stylesheet] be in use, with all the "infobox" declarations.  I've copied the declarations by hand into a sample infobox: [[Template:TestInfobox]].  It would obviously be more elegant to include them in a common style sheet. --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 16:27, 12 October 2006 (CDT)
:I've mocked up what this could look like at [[User:Starwed|my user page]].  It seems to me that it would be nice if all the data associated with a monster could be stored on one page and then called via templates everywhere it's referenced; I don't know if that's possible or even desirable, but since all the information we'd want in infoboxes is already mentioned elsewhere it would be nice to have uniformity.  --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 16:43, 12 October 2006 (CDT)

I've experimented a bit, and it is entirely possible to keep seperate subpages for each monster with the data in it.  That data could then be reused on any page it might be useful (right now, probably individual monster pages and the monster summaries on adventure pages.)  It's quite possible that this would slow down the wiki, but it's at least technically feasible. ^_^  (You can check out my [[User:Starwed|userpage]] to see how this works.) --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 16:14, 13 October 2006 (CDT)
*Yes, it's feasible to have autoupdating metadata for different stuff, but it'd be a huge drag on the wiki. See [[Talk:Best Drinks]], {{tl|plural}}, and [[Discussion/archive3#A Companion for .7B.7Bplural.7D.7D]].--{{:User:Dehstil}} 16:27, 13 October 2006 (CDT)
**Actually, this particular technique probably would have resulted in ''less'' lag than {{tl|plural}} currently does, and it would allow storing not only plural forms, but also singular forms (for stuff like [[Item 13|Item #13]]) and image names (to be automatically included by {{tl|item}} and {{tl|useitem}}). Updating the 'infobox' template would still cause just as much lag as before, but updating stats for a single monster/item would not cause any significant extra load on the wiki. I've created an example at {{tl|test/acquire}}. --[[User:Quietust|Quietust]] 16:32, 13 October 2006 (CDT)
*The database administrator in me likes this idea but the usability consultant in me hates it.  Typical.  I'd want to make sure that the "data page" for a monster is clearly linked to its main page (or talk page), so that it doesn't require "wizard skillz" to make modifications.  We're already having troubles in that templates themselves don't have "preview", so they take much more care to make work correctly. --[[User:Jonrock|Jonrock]] 19:28, 13 October 2006 (CDT)
**Is it be possible to have an "edit" link in the infobox itself?  Also, we're mostly talking about data that has to be pretty carefully gathered in the first place; the sort of people who could alter it reliably are probably the same who wouldn't find editing a template too tricky.  --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 20:05, 13 October 2006 (CDT)
***If you show me what the heck you want it to edit and where you want it to go I can whip up an edit link in a few minutes.--[[User:SomeStranger|<font color="orange">SomeStranger</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:SomeStranger|<font color="green">t</font>]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeStranger|<font color="green">c</font>]])</sup> 23:31, 13 October 2006 (CDT)
****I messed around a bit and seem to have come up with a workable solution for infoboxes.  (Simply a link to edit CURRENTPAGE/Data)  Unfortunately I can't grok how to get the pagename of a template from within that template, which would be the nicest solution here.  (Using the CURRENTPAGE functions renders the page the template is called from; which makes sense but is unhelpful.  ^_^)  Still just using my userpage as a sandbox.  If there's real interest in adding infoboxes (with or without the metadata templates) maybe we should start a proper discussion page? --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 02:33, 14 October 2006 (CDT)
I quite like the general concept of using Infoboxes for combat adventures, locations, etc.  The example Infobox looks pretty good, and, with some formatting tweaks, will look even better. I also like the implementation, despite having something of a reservation over it's complexity. I share [[User:Jonrock|Jonrock]]'s concern that ordinary users are increasingly finding that making even basic edits is becoming prohibitively difficult.  That said, I definitely  see the value of having the data in a /Data page, at least for data that will be used in multiple places, (like the monster data). But all in all, I think the benefits outweigh the additional complexity.  We'll just have to do a good job on documenting the usage.  On locations, or any other type of data that will probably be used only once, I think it may be better that we not use the /Data page approach and instead use a simpler, more straightforward template wherein we simply drop the data values directly into the instance of the location Infobox template on the location page.  [[User:Starwed|Starwed]], great idea, and thanks for your work so far in illustrating it.  --[[User:Gymnosophist|Gymnosophist]] 04:31, 14 October 2006 (CDT)
*In the past when a user has been unsure about how to use a template/format a page they have either posted on the talk page with the information they wish to be added, or attempted to add it and an admin/someone who knew what they were doing fixed it. I believe that first and foremost this wiki needs to be useful to those who don't edit at all, the vast majority. If you want to edit you can find your way. (Besides most large updates are usually made by the admin, while the references/notes are edited by everyone else.)--[[User:SomeStranger|<font color="orange">SomeStranger</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:SomeStranger|<font color="green">t</font>]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeStranger|<font color="green">c</font>]])</sup> 09:09, 14 October 2006 (CDT)
**I agree wholeheartedly that first and foremost the Wiki needs to be useful to those who don't edit at all.  However I couldn't disagree more with the implied contention that the admins should be the users doing all the heavy lifting of non-reference edits.  That's certainly not how [[Wikipedia:Project:Administrators|Wikipedia]] runs things, nor should it be the way things are run here.  I also strongly disagree with the viewpoint that documentation is a lesser priority.  My own view of the role of being an admin is that we should be activly participate in developing policies and standards.  Additionally, part of my concern with things becoming more complex is that it also has the unwelcome side-effect of making the Wiki more insular and less open to newer and less experienced editors.  This is ranging a bit far from the original topic of Infoboxes, but here we are.   :)  --[[User:Gymnosophist|Gymnosophist]] 20:00, 14 October 2006 (CDT)
***I don't necessarily believe that admin should be doing all the work, but that in order to acheive a global standard they end up doing most of the work along with a few select editors. Why do we use templates? So that formatting is easier. The problem is that learning how to use templates is not always very easy. I think that documentation is pretty good at this point (I know that all the templates have it anyways) and that most people learn from example (they copy previously made pages). Removing templates in order to create "simplicity" just makes it harder for admin and those select users who have to go back and format pages constantly. I think the way we do it now is pretty straightfoward, the only exception being the plural template, I find it pretty damn intutive that variables named "name" and "itemid" correspond with an item's name and id respectively.
::Oh, and back on topic, HOORAY FOR INFOBOXES! Yeah....--[[User:SomeStranger|<font color="orange">SomeStranger</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:SomeStranger|<font color="green">t</font>]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeStranger|<font color="green">c</font>]])</sup> 20:21, 14 October 2006 (CDT)
****I almost feel like we're talking in circles here - I generally support the use of templates, and am not suggesting that templates be removed in favor of "simplicity". And yes, templates are generally well documented and intuitive to use.  What I was trying to make clear (and was apparently failing to do) was to note the fact that the /Data pages are a new wrinkle and would need to be clearly documented.  Hopefully, my positions on these matters are now pellucid.  :) P.S. - Not all the templates are documented - that would make a good project sometime.  --[[User:Gymnosophist|Gymnosophist]] 03:24, 15 October 2006 (CDT)

This section is getting unwieldy, so I copied the discussion here into [[Discussion/Infoboxes]].  It seems like there's support for the idea of them, so there are two main issues to be hashed out: Whether we should use some sort of /Data pages, and what information and format the infobox should have.  Luckily the two issues are orthogonal, so both can be worked on at once.  ^_^  --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 16:32, 15 October 2006 (CDT)

==Section Order==
I always thought "See Also" came after "References", but on [[Established Standards: Effect Pages]] it's the other way around.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 16:06, 22 October 2006 (CDT)
:It's like that on every established standards page. In fact, it has always been that way...--[[User:SomeStranger|<font color="orange">SomeStranger</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:SomeStranger|<font color="green">t</font>]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeStranger|<font color="green">c</font>]])</sup> 16:16, 22 October 2006 (CDT)
:Ok, now it is.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 16:30, 22 October 2006 (CDT)
*FWI, [[Established Standards#Item Pages]] still shows as References, See Also.  But I think that this may actually be the order that we want to use.  I say this primarily for practical reasons: at a guess, 90% or more of the See Also sections in the Wiki are in References, See Also order - it would be a big effort to change this.  Some history on this:  section order was originally nonstandardized and in a state of flux (at one point, the item standards read Drop, Recipe, When Used, Uses, Zapping, References, Notes, See Also!), but the order was frequently changed.  Just before the Established Standards were split up (late April, 2006), the order was See Also, References.  After the pages were split up, all of them carried the See Also, References order.  In June, the order was changed to References, See Also, but only for items (both on the main standards page and the Items page).  This section order discrepancy was first [[Proposed Standards/archive2#Section Order|noticed]] back in August, and a limited scope correction was made, resulting in Items being unchanged and the Locations page being changed to References, See Also.  Anyhow, I think we should change all the standards to reflect the actual usage of References, See Also.  Also, this is probably a more "pleasing" order.  --[[User:Gymnosophist|Gymnosophist]] 20:37, 22 October 2006 (CDT)
*I'm indifferent. Since item pages would probably be harder to change, sure, let's make it references then see also, unless there's a really good reason it's more "pleasing" for see also to come before references.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 21:24, 22 October 2006 (CDT)
*I put in the References, See Also ordering.  Now that that's done, I'd like to plump (again) for moving the Notes sections higher up in the pages (see some earlier discussions ([[Talk:Player Hit Messages#OK, Now What?|here]] and [[Proposed Standards#Section Order for Familiars|here]]).  This is especially important for page types that tend to have lengthy content like locations and familiars, but is true for items as well.  There have been some favorable reactions to this idea, but let's see if we can get some more discussion on this.  --[[User:Gymnosophist|Gymnosophist]] 01:20, 25 October 2006 (CDT)

==Infoboxes and Metadata Pages==
A discussion on implementing Infoboxes is currently occurring at [[Discussion/Infoboxes]].  --[[User:Gymnosophist|Gymnosophist]] 00:38, 18 October 2006 (CDT)

==NPC Stores==
Just threw together a useful template to handle easily generating tables for NPC stores: {{tl|StoreItem}}. Feed it the '''item''' name, the '''price''', any '''desc'''ription, and a '''currency''' (defaults to "Meat"), and it'll add a row to the existing table, automatically displaying the item name+image from metadata (caveat: item must have metadata, so users can't use this to make NPC stores on their user pages selling bogus items, but I personally don't care about that). --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 13:35, 29 November 2006 (CST)
*While we're at it could we make the stores look more like how they do in-game; there are a couple different styles so please check in-game before using this template for a store. [[Chez Snootée]], for instance, is not even tabular in-game but currently ''does'' match its in-game likeness. I don't remember where, but I thought I saw one store with prices on the left, not sure.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 16:53, 29 November 2006 (CST)
**Fair enough - I've just added {{tl|RestaurantItem}} for Chez Snootée and the Micromicrobrewery (and, presumably, the Crimbo Cafe) - those ones alone seem to use a different format. --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 09:57, 30 November 2006 (CST)
**I've updated all of the stores I have access to - anyone who can get into [[The Bugbear Bakery]], [[The Bakery]], the [[General Store]], [[The Hippy Store]], [[Laboratory]], or [[The White Citadel]], update the pages as appropriate. [[The Hermitage]] is sort of a special case, since items in his store don't have a listed price (but that could be faked easily enough by making the price and currency both blank). --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 13:50, 30 November 2006 (CST)

==Monster hit/miss messages==
These look kind of messy on monster pages.  It's unlikely that I'm looking at a monster page to determine the hit/miss/fumble/critical text, yet that's what dominate monster pages the most.  Monster infoboxes would help with the organization of information, but the actual display of combat messages will still be ugly.  In fact, with infoboxes it'll likely look worse, since if the monsters description is short the infobox will mess with the centering of the messages.

I'd prefer a simple, bulleted list in each category of combat message, rather than the current attempt to emulate how they look in game.  --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 21:48, 30 November 2006 (CST)

==See Also Details==
I've been using the wiki for some time, but one area that I feel isn't clearly enough described in the Established Standards is what exactly "relevant Game Mechanics pages" are, in regards to what should be listed in the See Also section. I know it's really petty, but it's about consistency. And hey, this may have even been discussed before, but I found no records of it. Anyway, there are some small points that I feel deserve clarification:

'''1''': When listing the Game Mechanics pages on an item page that when used causes an effect, are the Game Mechanics of the effect also supposed to be listed on the same (item's) page? It appears that most of the time, it is (for example, [[Knob Goblin steroids]], [[Cheap wind-up clock]], [[ennui-flavored potato chips]] to name a few). This makes some item's See Also section to be quite complicated, such as the [[hot wad]], for example. I feel that the Mechanics of the effect should only be listed on the effect's page. That's what causing to modifications to the Game Mechanics after all, not the item.

'''2''': Going along with "1", and I assume most people would agree with me on this one, but the Game Mechanics of an item don't belong on the the effect's page, right?  Just making sure because some pages (i.e. [[Steroid Boost]]) currently list the mechanics of the item there.  Of course this is dangerous since several effects have many different ways of being obtained... so "moxie substat" should be removed from the "See Also" section of that page (or maybe even from the item itself, see point "3" below).

'''3''': Also similar, do the substat pages belong on the page of every food and booze that modifies them (almost all)?  I realize that almost none (if any) food and booze pages do this, so I'm assuming that they don't belong there. Also, these are actually already directly linked to in the "When Used" section, so perhaps they shouldn't be listed on any page?

'''4''': When all stats are affected (or even two), are the results still supposed to be in alphabetical order? It appears that almost always, the order is Muscle, Mysticality, Moxie. And if they are supposed to stay in this order, are they supposed to appear at the beginning of the list, the end of the list, or at the m's in the middle? --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 19:42, 12 December 2006 (CST)

*The only consistent theme I've seen for the See Also section is that the Game Mechanics links are listed in the order that they appear in the enchantment section or whatever (I suggested alphabetization in the past). Past that the order hasn't really been discussed.  The Muscle, Mysticality, and Moxie order is the order used in-game pretty much everywhere, so we do the same throughout the wiki (the same goes for the order for elements). If something says +10 Damage to Hot Spells, I generally list Bonus Spell Damage, then Hot (even thought hot in the game mechanics section on the wiki, it is a bit of mechanics related to the page that is otherwise not linked well). Regarding your recent edits, other pages are generally not listed in See Also (so I'll leave that question to someone else: is toymaking supposed to be there?). I remember from somewhere that "See Also" is like a last-resort section if it is too cumbersome to actually explain the relationship between this page and the page you are linking to. Another question not really answered is whether wiki links are allowed in the actual game descriptions, effectively obsoleting almost all legitimate use of the "See Also" section. Currently, things like elemental damage and intrinsic effects. As for issue "1", if muscle is intrinsically affected by using an item, it's all right to put muscle modifiers in the "See Also" section because that wearing/using that item affects muscle, which it does; we're not shooting for aesthetic appeal for anything, just ease of use. "2", if you're reading about an effect and see something that has NOTHING to do with that effect, it probably shouldn't be there because that's just confusing. "3", no, generally if something is already linked to in a page, there is very little compulsion to link to it again, which is generally the case for the substat stuff. I already answered "4".--{{:User:Dehstil}} 20:56, 12 December 2006 (CST)

:I know that typically only "Game Mechanics" links should be displayed in the See Also section, but the reason I added the Toymaking type stuff to the See Also was for consistency with the Crimbo 2005 items. It appears that it was just [[User:Jonrock|Jonrock]]'s idea.  You can see the discussion at [[Discussion#Misc_.22Crafting.22_Categories|Discussion]]. Apparently it was the result of some category deletion. Otherwise, thanks for answering my questions! --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 21:12, 12 December 2006 (CST)

*Ok, made sure all base misc. crafting components noted themselves as such. I'm ignoring intermediates and non-misc. crafting components because they already have cross-linkage.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 21:21, 13 December 2006 (CST)
*Oh yeah, plus we never decided what to do about category:combines or meatpasting components or crafting product categories in general. See [[Discussion#General_Comments]].--{{:User:Dehstil}} 22:32, 13 December 2006 (CST)

==Effects Pages==
Now I'm confused specifically about the Effects pages. According to the "[[Established Standards: Effect Pages]]" the effects are supposed to link directly to the Game Mechanics.  However, almost none of the effect pages follow this.  Most of the ones that affect Muscle, Mysticality, or Moxie link directly to those pages (if anywhere at all), not to the respective Modifiers pages. Then the related Game Mechanics are listed in the see also section (such as for [[Steroid Boost]]). If the effects really are supposed to link to the Game Mechanics, what about the ones that affect all stats? Also, the examples on the Standards page show the stat name before the Stat Bonus, which contradicts how the game displays enchantments on items (not to mention how just about every effect page currently lists it's effect). Is this intentional, and if so, for what reason? Also also, (but unrelated) the header template on the Established Standards page should be updated on the page with the effectid field. Also also also, (and also unrelated) are the effects of an effect supposed to bulleted? Even if there is only one effect? It seems that usually when an effect has multiple effects the effects of the effect are all on one line. I'm guessing it would help readability if they were bulleted. --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 19:47, 19 December 2006 (CST)
*[[Steroid Boost]] is effect number 10, so since it hasn't changed in a while, it probably hasn't been looked at in a while.  Actually the effect of effect should be written the same way as they are in item [[enchantments]] (almost all of 'em are listed there) for consistency.  And for stat boosters, the stat name is before the value, in the form  (All Attributes|Muscle|Mysticality|Moxie)&nbsp;(+|-)X(%), so [[Steroid Boost]] is wrong, the stds are right.,, and those, like everything else, can become out-of-date rather quickly, either by a wiki change or an in-game one. --[[User:JRSiebz|JRSiebz]] ([[User talk:JRSiebz|&#x260E;]]|[[Special:Contributions/JRSiebz|&#167;]]|[[Special:Listusers/sysop|&#8225;]]) 19:56, 19 December 2006 (CST)
:Thanks for the info. That answers one of my questions, but still leaves several others unanswered. Is it safe to say that [[Vitamin-Maxed]] is formatted correctly? Or should the effect have a bullet? If the effect has multiple effects should they all be on one line (see [[Supafly]]) or bulleted among many? If it is to be on one line, should the effect ever have a bullet? (I think very very few effects currently have bullets.)
:The other main question that I was wondering about was if Game Mechanics should be linked to in the effects section, or in the see also section ([[Big Veiny Brain]] does both for some reason). Some effects are easy to link all the Game Mechanics in the effects section (such as [[Big Veiny Brain]] or [[Wasabi Sinuses]] had it been applied to it). When the effect affects all stats though (such as [[Heavy Petting]]), it would just get messy. In this case the see also section would theoretically only be used for the three stat modifiers. The only other thing is if the effect is for a single stat booster, should it link to [[Muscle]] and then [[Muscle Modifiers]] in the "See Also" or [[Muscle Modifiers]] right away in the effect of the effect.
:That's basically a summary of the unanswered portions of my post from yesterday. Oh, one other thing, is there any real reason why most of the stat boosters on pages such as [[Moxie Modifiers]] are listed as (+|-)X(%) (All Attributes|Muscle|Mysticality|Moxie)? --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 22:43, 20 December 2006 (CST)
I know this isn't a highly trafficked area of the site. But I'm just curious how close the changes I made to effects numbered 1 through 26 are (see [[Special:Recentchanges|the recent changes page]], [[Special:Contributions/TheDotGamer|my contributions]] or just the [[effects by number]] page) to the Established Standards. --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 15:38, 25 December 2006 (CST)
:Looks like the Established Standards will need a slight update (and some major ones in other areas?) when someone finds more time.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 16:02, 25 December 2006 (CST)
::Yup, that's basically what I've been trying to say and do here. I wouldn't mind updating it myself but I'd like some feedback which is what I've been trying to get here. At the very least I'm asking people to look at effects 1-26 and see what should be formatted differently. --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 16:43, 25 December 2006 (CST)
:Ok, looks good. My only comment is that I'd like effects to be always bulleted. We do it with Notes and everything else; it just looks out of place not to do it here. Plus, if we only did it when there where multiple effects, Effect sections would look mismatched from page to page. The only time we wouldn't bullet them is if we were centering them like enchantments. Also, while we're at it we could go and make all negative effects red, just because ;)--{{:User:Dehstil}} 16:43, 26 December 2006 (CST)
::Yeah, you're right. It would definitely look better if every effect was bulleted. I'm still not satisfied with the way Game Mechanics are being linked to in the effects section though. It just occurred to me that as long as I was linking Muscle +X to [[Muscle]] and not [[Muscle Modifiers]], why wouldn't we link Maximum HP +X as Maximum [[HP]] +X or Meat from Monsters as [[Meat]] from Monsters and just put [[Meat from Monsters]] or [[HP Increasers]] in the See Also section. So, I don't know what to do in regards to this. If we're trying to link to all the relevant pages we would have to do it this way with the See Also. If we only wanted the ''most'' relevant pages we would do the most relevant linking in the effects section and typically omit the See Also. I'm not sure which way would be better. Thoughts? --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 08:44, 3 January 2007 (CST)
One more thing, is that [[Template:Effect]] could have a little editing done that allows it to have a note for unverifiable effects such as those obtained from the [[:Category:Former Reagent Potions|former reagent potions]]. --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 20:00, 3 January 2007 (CST)

==Redirects==
*there's been a bit of a glut of redirects created recently. the 96 different redirects for pickpocketing seemed a little unnecessary. but are redirects needed at all? the standards say that a link should be to the real page, and isn't a redirect just encouraging sloppy editing? --[[User:Evilkolbot|Evilkolbot]] 06:35, 13 January 2007 (CST)
**I agree with you 100%. Although you exaggerate a bit, I do think that 7 redirects for pickpocket is 7 too many. Somewhat unrelated, I think the page should be moved to [[pickpocketing]] and just have that page have a disambiguation link to [[Gnefarious Pickpocketing]], instead of being completely a disambiguation page (just  like [[HP]]). And then [[pickpocket]] would be the only redirect worth keeping. I think the title ''pickpocketing'' fits our "standards" better. That's my $0.02. --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 16:54, 13 January 2007 (CST)
***I'm not a moxie class, so I've never used it, but I just realized that "Pickpocket" may be the "official" name of the ability so it should probably stay as that. Maybe. --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 18:05, 13 January 2007 (CST)
**On a related note. We do not need redirects based on alternate capitalizations anymore.  For example, "super cow" and "Super Cow", sure if both those pages were created, they would be different pages, but the wiki (as of an upgrade or two ago, is smart enough that if "super cow" is searched for it will automatically go to the "Super Cow" page (assuming it exists).  Hope that made sense.  So we don't need redirects of "a o b" or "A O B" for a page named "A o B". [also has no moxie class at the moment]--[[User:JRSiebz|JRSiebz]] ([[User talk:JRSiebz|&#x260E;]]|[[Special:Contributions/JRSiebz|&#167;]]|[[Special:Listusers/sysop|&#8225;]]) 23:00, 13 January 2007 (CST)
***So if the skill ''is'' "Pickpocket" then that should be the page, and Pickpocketing prob should be the disambig between Gnefarious and gnogn-Gnefarious Pickpocketing. --[[User:JRSiebz|JRSiebz]] ([[User talk:JRSiebz|&#x260E;]]|[[Special:Contributions/JRSiebz|&#167;]]|[[Special:Listusers/sysop|&#8225;]]) 23:02, 13 January 2007 (CST)
****Hmm, I was under the impression that it wasn't even a skill, just an ability but I don't know if that's possible. (Was [[Moxious Maneuver]] a skill (or did it have a skill id) before it was moved to the skill menu?... based on it's [[skills by number|skill number]] I would say it didn't.) Again, I haven't used "''Pickpocket''" but based on screenshots I've seen it seems like it is just a button like Moxious Maneuver used to be. Oh, and [[pickpocketing]] has existed as a disambiguation page for a few days now. --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 00:46, 14 January 2007 (CST)
***Just so we know the button name is "Pick His Pocket". I'm all for renaming it and avoiding a few of the sillier redirects.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 01:15, 14 January 2007 (CST)
****Hmm, is it always "Pick His Pocket", even when the gender of the monster is female? I know [[Player Hit Messages|hit messages]] vary so I wouldn't be surprised if this did. That would complicate it. --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 01:39, 14 January 2007 (CST)
*****as you suspect, it's gender and number specific: his/hers/its/their. --[[User:Evilkolbot|Evilkolbot]] 07:45, 14 January 2007 (CST)
**Should we still have redirects for some areas that have multiple names?  I understand the standard is to use the name that appears in the area's picture for these situations, but it can be confusing for some places, at least to me.  For example: [[Entryway]] shows up in the Last Adventure link as [[The Bat Hole Entrance]].  (I added a redirect for The Bat Hole Entrance a little while ago, before thinking to ask about this here.) --[[User:Nifty nobu|Nifty Nobu]] 08:22, 14 January 2007 (CST)
*I would actually prefer to have more redirects than currently exist. I have received many complaints saying that the one thing that the wiki lacks is an adequate number of redirects. While promoting incorrect spelling is certainly not our goal, at the same time various words are rather difficult to spell and should have logical redirects.--{{User:SomeStranger/sig}} 08:50, 14 January 2007 (CST)
*I created redirects for those too Nifty Nobu, anything that can be copy/pasted in-game I usually try to have a redirect for. Also redirects like sorceress to naughty sorceress mountain to the big mountains and the like are cool. I'd would probably be against anything like "th big mountains" because...just because. Redirects I'd make include short names like "baron" or "the baron", plain lowercase non-special-character names, acronyms/kolisms, and alternate in-game text.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 14:36, 14 January 2007 (CST)
*i know people like them, but what are they for? the <nowiki>[[link text|displayed text]]</nowiki> should get rid of the need for redirects altogether. i was under the impression that you should use the link to the real page, and not the redirect, under all circumstances. --[[User:Evilkolbot|Evilkolbot]] 16:01, 14 January 2007 (CST)
**Redirects are for the search box! When people don't know the exact title of an item or page they type the partial in and they get REDIRECTED to the new page. You are right in that we should never use redirects on normal pages but having them for the search box is very important.--{{User:SomeStranger/sig}} 22:03, 14 January 2007 (CST)
::Well, I created a redirect from Healing to HP Restorers, since searching for healing didn't really provide any useful results.  It's mainly about making it easier for a user to find stuff on the wiki.  --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 21:18, 14 January 2007 (CST)
*so people don't see the page of results? is that all? one fewer click? not understanding the way the search feature works isn't something we should be making allowances for. i'm sorry, people who type the what they think is the full title of the page and expect to be taken there in one click should get what they deserve. i wonder what the greek for search page is, we have ourselves a new phobia. --[[User:Evilkolbot|Evilkolbot]] 02:03, 15 January 2007 (CST)
**In some cases, knowing what you are searching for but not knowing what the name is can be annoying.  It's like trying to look up a word in the dictionary if you're not sure what the first two letters are... it can take a while to figure it out.  I could understand not adding redirects for typoed titles, unless the typo is particularly common/famous, but it makes sense to me to have redirects for alternate versions of area names.  Also making redirects for things like "Baron" is unnecessary, since the page title and page text searches are advanced enough to show all of the pages you could want from that title.  (Additionally, as was already mentioned, the searches are no longer case sensitive either, so lowercase/uppercase variations aren't needed.)  In the case of "The Bat Hole Entrance", there were no hits anywhere, despite being a valid in-game name for that location.  --[[User:Nifty nobu|Nifty Nobu]] 06:11, 15 January 2007 (CST)
*ok, so now i've 1, woken up; 2 read the page; and 3 had time to reflect. redirects where the new page name is an obvious synonym, like healing, make absolute sense. "the bat hole entrance" is a great example of an unnecessary redirect, though. searching for "bat hole" brings up the area page, and it's one click from there to the entryway page. typing the extra twelve letters is just bad searching. this absolutely makes my point that people who don't know how to search shouldn't be made allowances for. if you search for something that doesn't exist in the wiki it should bring up no hits. getting no hits makes you search differently, and maybe search better. --[[User:Evilkolbot|Evilkolbot]] 06:23, 15 January 2007 (CST)
* For me, the redirects dramatically improve usability. I'm on a slow connection, and if I can type in the URL directly, and a reasonable portion of the time get to the right place, it saves a lot of time. This is especially the case with case. I can never remember if its Hardcore_Checklist or Hardcore_checklist. One click or an extra search isn't a big deal if you're on FiOS, or a big US university network, but for the rest of us (low bandwidth users are again rising to the majority, with increased internet access in the developing world), one less click saves a decent chunk of time. I fail to see the benefit of "teaching" us that it's better to do things the slow way (through search, with one more click). It hurts usability not to have the redirects, and assumes your users are idiots who need to be taught.
*For the case of case, type "hardcore checklist", "hardcOre cHeckList", or "hardcore Checklist" and hit the enter key, tada you directly to [[Hardcore Checklist]]. What are you talking about? Nobody mentioned teaching and the redirects don't dramatically increase speed.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 17:15, 4 February 2007 (CST)

*further to the "no unnecessary capitalisation redirects" which should probably be added to the [[Established Standards]] page, may i propose that redirects be made uniformly lowercase? one rule is that the page name should match its title, but with redirects like [[Never Odd Or Even‎]] there's only the redirect. another is that capitalisation redirects be lowercase to minimise their number. applying the latter and disregarding the former as irrelevant would seem to be logical. --[[User:Evilkolbot|Evilkolbot]] 06:57, 8 November 2007 (CST)



==Tattoos==
We've got templates for acquiring items and effects - why not one for tattoos? The image could be determined using a Data: page, and it could provide a link to the tattoo's page. The only issue I see is that, as it is currently, the only tattoos that actually '''have''' their own pages are the ones given by the Pretentious Artist for wearing an outfit - all of the others (normal/hardcore ascension counts, normal/HC/HCO class tattoos, hardcore paths, martini) are listed only on [[Tattoo]] and on whichever page they are shown as being unlocked. Would it be worth creating new pages for the other tattoos, or just use this lack of pages to justify not making a template? --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 12:20, 22 January 2007 (CST)
*I don't see why we have separate pages for outfit tattoos at all. Wouldn't it be simpler to just have the tattoos on the outfit pages? &mdash;[[User:Yendor|Yendor]] 12:35, 22 January 2007 (CST)
*Hmm, we should have pages for those, and template would be nice, but the status quo and a no template would not be unacceptable. *adds to todo list*.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 22:43, 24 January 2007 (CST)
*"We've got templates for acquiring items and effects - why not one for tattoos?" -- well, you can acquire items and effects in man different places, so automating the plurals and images was much desired.  Why do we need such a template for tattoos, i mean they occur on very few pages.  I would advise against pages for non-outfit tattoos, I mean [[Tattoo]] pretty much explains everything about 'em (along with the ascension [rewards?] page too), only the outfit ones have anything interesting or any text messages associated with them.  I guess the Artist's/Paint Palette Tattoo  could have a page, but it'd have nothing on it but "Is awarded for completing the blah blah quest", it's already mentioned/linked on the quest and the tattoo pages.  Same with the martini tattoo, just be a one liner page, just copying the info on the martini and tattoo pages again.  Outfit tatoos are the only interesting one.  I mean having pages entitled Normal Ascension Tattoo 1, Normal Ascension Tattoo 2,... 12, Hardcore Ascension Tattoo 1, Hardcore Ascension Tattoo 2,... 12 is just overkill... right? --[[User:JRSiebz|JRSiebz]] ([[User talk:JRSiebz|&#x260E;]]|[[Special:Contributions/JRSiebz|&#167;]]|[[Special:Listusers/sysop|&#8225;]]) 00:05, 25 January 2007 (CST)
*I added the missing tattoos to the [[:Category:Tattoos|tattoo category]] at least. Hope that's alright.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 17:02, 25 January 2007 (CST)

==Noting the Original Location of Images==
Would it be useful if we (starting with new images uploaded, then slowly [no hurry] to the rest of the images) add an Original Location section on the description page of images. Sometimes we have to rename things, and it's nice to be able to easily find the original image and its name sometimes, especially when trying to find similar images.  Maybe a template like <nowiki>{</nowiki>{kolimage|''<nowiki>http://images.kingdomofloathing.com/otherimages/origpath.gif</nowiki>''}} which looks similar to one of wikipedia's "image copyright tags".  For example:
 
<div class="boilerplate" style="margin:0.5em auto;width:80%;clear:both;background-color:#f7f8ff;border:2px solid #8888aa;
                                padding:4px;font-size:85%;min-height:100px;vertical-align:center" id="imageLicense">
<div style="float:left" id="imageLicenseIcon">[[Image:leftswordguy.gif]]</div>
<div style="text-align:left;margin-left:84px" id="imageLicenseText">
This image is property of [http://www.kingdomofloathing.com '''The Kingdom of Loathing'''], copyright [http://asymmetric.net/ Asymmetric Publications, LLC].

The original location of this image was: [http://images.kingdomofloathing.com/otherimages/origpath.gif <nowiki>http://images.kingdomofloathing.com/otherimages/origpath.gif</nowiki>]
</div>
</div>

Ideas? Comments? Wording changes? Boobies? --[[User:JRSiebz|JRSiebz]] ([[User talk:JRSiebz|&#x260E;]]|[[Special:Contributions/JRSiebz|&#167;]]|[[Special:Listusers/sysop|&#8225;]]) 21:54, 25 January 2007 (CST)
*I think that it's a very good idea. More so to give the original location of the image, but it's a good idea to give credit where credit is due. I can't think of anything that would make your template look any better, although I think the white space at the bottom is a bit excessive. --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 06:19, 26 January 2007 (CST)
*Awesome, starting with [[TheKolWiki talk:Image use policy]].--{{:User:Dehstil}} 21:16, 27 January 2007 (CST)
*We should probably create a category for these images, if only so we can shrink down the list of [[Special:Uncategorizedimages|uncategorized images]] (and weed out any images which don't belong on the wiki). --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 13:38, 29 January 2007 (CST)
*Also, if there are multiple images for say, "pirate.gif", [[:Image:Pirate.gif]] should link to the other ones. That way, when [[:Image:Pirate2.gif]] is reused somewhere in-game, people won't get confused and reupload it. As for the category, something like "Category:In-game Images" or something more specific?--{{:User:Dehstil}} 16:38, 29 January 2007 (CST)
*Hmm, would be useful for pirate.gif linking to (and showing?) the other(originally) pirate.gifs.  A category would make it easier to use uncategorized images to parse these puppies.  We'd end up being only left with images that were "us"-made (and a few of those are based off an orig kol image [resize, crop, resolution, contrast, etc. edits for a variety of reasons, like crafting templates]). --[[User:JRSiebz|JRSiebz]] ([[User talk:JRSiebz|&#x260E;]]|[[Special:Contributions/JRSiebz|&#167;]]|[[Special:Listusers/sysop|&#8225;]]) 16:56, 29 January 2007 (CST)
**Should be have a more consistent renaming scheme for these too.  pirate2.gif (adding numbers) kinda stinks.  Keeping how kol names images, I probably would have renamed it something like  pirateghost.gif or pirate_ghost.gif. --[[User:JRSiebz|JRSiebz]] ([[User talk:JRSiebz|&#x260E;]]|[[Special:Contributions/JRSiebz|&#167;]]|[[Special:Listusers/sysop|&#8225;]]) 16:59, 29 January 2007 (CST)
*Is it our intention to host all the files hosted on ''images.kingdomofloathing.com'' or just the ones that are being used? Well, I mean, we have the images such as [[:Image:noart.gif]] that is most likely going to be used for an adventure in the future (or that's just my guess...), but then there's also renamed images such as [[:Image:asc1.gif]]-[[:Image:asc9.gif]], [[:Image:hasc1.gif]]-[[:Image:hasc9.gif]] which were renamed to [[:Image:asc01.gif]]-[[:Image:asc09.gif]], [[:Image:hasc01.gif]]-[[:Image:hasc09.gif]] to make the tattoos appear in numerical order on the view tattoos page in-game. The original images are still hosted in-game, although I don't think that they are used anywhere. As for my personal opinion, I don't see much harm in hosting both versions of in-game renamed images (although they are probably identical). Especially since the only version is currently used on so many user pages. As for keeping "leaked" images such as the "noart" one, I say they definitely should be here since they will come sooner or later, most likely. --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 07:39, 30 January 2007 (CST)
**In general an unused image from ''images.kingdomofloathing.com'' implies that we failed to document some aspect of the game...usually. For instance, I was planning to find a place to for [[:image:chamber6.gif|chamber6.gif]] along with the context for why it exists or at least a minor mention of it somewhere. In the case of renaming or copies of an image, I've usually [[:image:chamber7.gif|redirected]] them instead of reuploading, but either is fine by me.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 20:33, 30 January 2007 (CST)

===Altered Images===
Some of the images on the wiki have been modified by the users who uploaded them, frequently to add transparency (see [[:image:chorizo.gif|chorizo.gif]] for an example), while several other images have distinct ''duplicate'' versions uploaded in PNG format with transparency (see all of the "''foo''-mushroom-alpha.png" images on [[Mushroom Fields Strategy]]). This was apparently due to a [[Discussion/archive#Transparent Images|discussion]] from late 2005 and, in my opinion, should probably be revisited. Do we really want to store altered versions of in-game images on the wiki just so the colored recipe tables won't look ugly when they put the icons in, or should we just drop the images from them altogether? There are lots of other pages on the wiki which use similar colored tables with images (such as [[supertinkering]] and [[assimilating]]), and consistency is generally a good thing. --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 08:52, 16 February 2007 (CST)
*I'm sort of indifferent on the issue. I mean, I'm for consistency one way or the other but it doesn't matter too much to me. I guess I'm leaning slightly more towards the idea of scraping the transparent images and just sticking with the original in game images. Because, although it does look nice in colored tables, they just don't have the same "feel" to them. If we do decide to keep hosting and using transparent versions of the images I feel they shouldn't replace the original (such as [[:Image:chorizo.gif|chorizo.gif]]) and should be categorized into a category such as "Modified Images". --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 09:21, 16 February 2007 (CST)
**I don't think we should scrap the use of images in the tables altogether.  They're part of what makes the tables so easy to understand.  Transparent or not doesn't matter much at all, it's just a matter of how nit-picky we want to be about appearances.  The transparent ones look better on colored tables, but it's not a big deal to have a white square there either.  --[[User:Jinya|jin]] 19:06, 16 February 2007 (CST)
**I'm pretty on this neutral as well. My only question is, how are the transparent ones that much prettier? They seem to give about the same effect as the normal images.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 21:08, 16 February 2007 (CST)
*I don't even think that any page [[:Image:chorizo.gif|chorizo.gif]] links to uses the transparent background, as [[:Image:chorizo-alpha.png|chorizo-alpha.png]] also exists. [[:Image:chorizo.gif|Chorizo.gif]] should probably be reverted. Also, as I sort of mentioned earlier, does it sound like a good idea to make a new category [[:Category:Modified Images]] (or something of that sort) to help clean up [[Special:Uncategorizedimages]]? This would only leave user-created images that we have generally accepted as being allowed to be hosted, such as [[:Image:Elements2.gif|elements2.gif]], [[:Image:FamiliarML.png|familiarML.png]], or [[:Image:WheelDiagram.png|WheelDiagram.png]] for example. Are we looking to categorize everything? If so, they could probably be thrown in [[:Category:Other Images]]. Or you know, we could just keep it to two categories too and throw the modified images into [[:Category:Other Images]] too. --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 10:16, 17 February 2007 (CST)
*Personally, I would rather have a more specific category than "Other", otherwise, categorizing said images is no better than leaving them under [[Special:Uncategorizedimages]] because it'd be the same thing.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 14:59, 17 February 2007 (CST)

===Custom Avatars===
Another issue to think about in whether or not we want to host all the known files on the ''images.kingdomofloathing.com'' server is about the hosting of custom avatars. Currently there are about 50 or so being hosted on the wiki and apparently all but two of them are being used. They are being used almost exclusively on User pages. Given the fact that we are already [[Avatar#See Also|linking to]] [http://kol.coldfront.net/index.php/content/view/345/53/ Coldfront's List of Custom Avatars] a page on the wiki for them would be somewhat pointless, not to mention very difficult to keep up to date (without the use of a bot at least). So should we just host the ones that are being used on User pages, host all of them, host none of them, or something else? --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 09:21, 20 February 2007 (CST)
*I don't really think we should be hosting all of them on the wiki given that coldfront already does a pretty fine job at that...maybe we could make a template which automatically hooked into the coldfront page for those who wanted to display their custom images...--{{User:SomeStranger/sig}} 10:51, 20 February 2007 (CST)
*I think we're better off just leaving it as it is. In case I just thought wrong, a [[:Category:User Page Templates|user page template]] would be easy to implement, although I'm not sure how many users would be aware of this.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 23:17, 20 February 2007 (CST)

==Mathematical Formulae==
Does anyone have any thoughts about standardising mathematical formulae? Right now, things are a mish-mash of [[Sombrero vs Volleyball|images]] (no screenreader support, font settings independent of CSS), broken [[Sombrero vs Volleyball#Why does a Sombrero always win at some monster level?|MathML]] (uhh... broken, and even if it weren't, doesn't display in all browsers), and [[Safe Adventuring#Lower moxie limits|unappealing &lt;pre&gt; formatting]]. --[[User:Bagatelle|Bagatelle]] 14:15, 17 February 2007 (CST)
*There is code for MediaWiki that will generate PNG images for mathematical formulae expressed with MathML; however, it is not set up properly on this site (it requires additional packages to be installed on the system and some settings in MediaWiki's config file). --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 14:33, 17 February 2007 (CST)
*We could clean up all mathematical formulae manually and then keep that as our standard for the future if we wanted to go thru all that work. I'd rather have a certain package fixed, since it'd be easier though..--{{:User:Dehstil}} 14:59, 17 February 2007 (CST)
*Okay, then...I am going to go bother Mag some more...maybe we can get this working once and for all.--{{User:SomeStranger/sig}} 10:56, 20 February 2007 (CST)
**So is there going to be any movement on this, or are things going be left as they are? --[[User:Bagatelle|Bagatelle]] 15:01, 22 April 2007 (CDT)
*This has been bothering me a bit too. I don't really know anything about coding, but I think there should '''at least''' be some standardization of variables (for example, I have seen X, Y, and L all used as variables for familiar weight), also; and probably more significantly; I have noticed confusing use of the "-" symbol, which can be used to indicate subtraction or a range (for example, the range of damage a familiar can inflict). I think using the word "to" to indicate a range seems to be more common, and IMO is much more clear, and should the be standard, as pages which use "-" to indicate range have caused me much confusion when I mistook it for a subtraction symbol.--[[User:Knobula|Knobula]] 19:37, 8 October 2007 (CDT)

==Show Effect Effects on Item pages==
I find it fairly annoying that the effects of effects are not shown on the page of the item used to obtain the effect. For Example, when I search for [[Radium-flavored potato chips]] it shows:

You tear open the bag and eat the chips. Some of your hair falls out, but that's probably nothing.
{{acquireEffect|effect=Radium Radicality|duration=10}}

So I have to click the effect to know what the item does. It should be something like this:

You tear open the bag and eat the chips. Some of your hair falls out, but that's probably nothing.

You acquire an effect: [[Radium Radicality]]

(+30 [[moxie]] for 10 [[Adventures]])

But I don't know how to properly code that. --[[User:Popovitsj|Popovitsj]] 06:25, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
*We generally try to keep the various messages on the wiki pages looking the same as they appear in-game; besides, this particular suggestion would lead to significant clutter on the hundreds of pages which describe events that grant effects - '''one''' extra click isn't going to kill you. Besides, if this got implemented, then somebody would argue that the same thing be done for ''item'' acquisition messages, and that would be a total nightmare. --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 07:50, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
*I have to agree with Quietust. In one sense we are already listing the general outcome of using the item by having the see also section on the item page. Personally, I think these shouldn't be there (see my point #1 of [[#See Also Details]] above), although my main reason for desiring this is very more administrative related than general user usability related, therefore as long as there is a standard I'm okay with it.--[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 10:23, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
:I agree with Popovitsj.  It decreases usability of the wiki that examining an item's description does not indicate what it actually does.  I guarantee that the majority of page views on items are <i>not</i> because people want to see the in game text, but rather because people want to see what that item actually does when you use it.  Item pages are typically short, and it would <i>not</i> clutter them to include a summary of the effect.  <del>And since I believe this could be implemented simply by changing the acquireEffect template, I just don't really see any reason not to.</del>  (Ok, I looked and the actual effects of an effect aren't included in the effect metadata. :( I'd argue that it should be.)

:Regarding Quietust's first argument, I'm not really sure it would produce much clutter.  And regarding the second, I would say that most people expect to learn everything about an item when they visit it's page.  They don't expect to learn everything about an item when seeing it's acquisition text.  It's not a slippery slope at all.  

:I just had an interesting idea, however.  It should be possible to make it so that when you hover over the link to an effect, the popup contains information about that effect.  If the consensus is that the text not be included in the page, this method would be both useful and nonintrusive. Here's an example:  [[Heavy Petting|<span title="All Attributes -10%; +5 to Familiar Weight ">Heavy Petting</span>]]. This might not work in all browsers, but at least it should fail gracefully.  (Of course, this would require the effect's effects being part of it's metadata.)   --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 20:24, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
::I think it is a slippery slope. On the other hand, a popup is totally doable, although possibly annoying unless I disable the tooltip in process when writing it. <small>Also, sortable tables are ''this'' close to working :(</small><br><br>Edit: Actually, would the tooltip work?--{{:User:Dehstil}} 20:48, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
:::By "popup" I really meant the tooltip which shows when you simply hover over an element with a title attribute.  ([[wikipedia:XUL|XUL]] classifies this a type of popup, and I actually learned XUL before I learned html.  :) )  It just requires modifying the wiki link as I show above; and checking it, it even works in IE.  I don't think disabling anything is required.   <i>If</i> item effects are listed in effect metadata (And I believe there's some funky way to do arrays with template syntax that would make this pretty simple to format) this should be very easy to implement.   --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 21:11, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
:::Then that would certainly work, but maybe with one modification: [[Heavy Petting|<span title="Heavy Petting: All Attributes -10%; +5 to Familiar Weight">Heavy Petting</span>]]. Cool, never thought of tooltips as popups.--{{:User:Dehstil}} 22:24, 13 March 2007 (CDT)

I was thinking, isn't it possible to somehow direct link the info on the associated effect page to the item page? I think it would be convenient if changes on the effect page would directly effect the effect info on the item page. Even though, the little pop-up-on-hovering suits me fine as well.--[[User:Popovitsj|Popovitsj]] 14:03, 14 March 2007 (CDT)
*Not being able to directly tell what an effect actually does, and having to click on the effect page ''every single time'', has always struck me as a major usability problem here.  If I volunteer to go through and add a 'desc' field to all the effect metadata pages, would there be any objection to me doing so?  I have a tentative modification to add tooltips to AcquireEffect at [[Template:Test3]], for example: {{Test3|effect=Knob Goblin Perfume|duration=1}}
The only thing I don't like is that the tooltip only appears over the plain text and blank areas - the linkified text and the image already have tooltips, and I don't know enough about templates to fix that, or even know if it can be fixed.  Also, an edit to [[Template:Effect/meta]] will be required, which I can't do myself because it's protected. --[[User:Jasonharper|Jasonharper]] 21:17, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

: This is my first edit here, and I registered to propose the same thing. Given that the game itself doesn't warn players about what a used item will do, I use the Kolwiki for that a lot. And its a bit annoying that I have to click another page (the effect) when it could be put onto the item page itself and it'd be easy. [[User:ArsRampancy|ArsRampancy]] 23:37, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

==Pulverization Yields==
Could we add a section for pulverization yields on equipment pages? It's annoying not to be able to know what an item smashes into just by going to its page. --[[User:TechSmurf|TechSmurf]] 17:16, 10 April 2007 (CDT)
*I would say that it's probably unnecessary. Although it could probably be done, I can't think of a way to make in unobtrusive. Well, {{tl|item}} could probably be updated to include a new field for equipment... but I don't know. If someone is going to be pulverizing and really wants to know exactly what they will get without trying to read the power table (although it's really not all that hard to do) one would probably rather use a [[Talk:Pulverize#Items Obtained From Smashing|table with all equipment on it]], which has already been retired from the main pulverize page. --[[User:TheDotGamer|TheDotGamer]] 00:34, 12 April 2007 (CDT)
**While I think adding pulverize yields to the item template would be kinda cool, it probably would take up too much space; plus, if one already knows exactly what one wants (say, [[cold powder]] for cold resistance), that item's page already has a description of how to get it, including convenient links to conscise lists of exactly which items have the necessary attributes. If all you want to know is what a specific item breaks into, the pulverize page will tell you exactly what anyway. Seeing it in the item template saves having to go to that page, but at the cost of increasing the space used by the item template by probably 50%.--[[User:Salien|Salien]] 01:07, 12 April 2007 (CDT)
***Actually, I'd like the pulverization yields to be a little more transparent than they currently are. Four out of the five elemental powders don't list any examples at all, so it doesn't look like that part of the item pages is very well maintained. Perhaps touching up the "how much do you get" and "what do you get" tables in the [[Pulverize]] page so we have power/requirement along one dimension and then enchantment perpendicular and then filling in the cells? (There's potential confusion in that pulverizing doesn't necessarily yield all of the same type, though.) Then we can just hyperlink some arbitrary text to the table. Alternatively, can't the template be rewritten to just read the requirement and enchantment (assuming these are cleaned up -- some of the enchantments use templates, and some don't) arguments, calculate the result, and sticking it somewhere unobtrusive (before/after the plurals)? (Asks the fellow who knows nothing about templates.) --[[User:Bagatelle|Bagatelle]] 15:01, 22 April 2007 (CDT)

==Official Table Format?==
Is there an official format for tables? I've seen them done in HTML, such as the [[Armorcraftiness#Animal_Hide_Pants|Animal Hide Pants]] table, and in Wiki markup, such at the [[Armorcraftiness#Amorous_Turtles|Amorous Turtles]] table. The code for the HTML tables is a bit intimidating to edit, even just in doing minor changes. The Wiki markup is a LOT easier to mentally parse and edit. I haven't noticed any differences between the final products for the two. Is there any reason to continue using HTML over the Wiki markup? If not, I'd be willing to have a go at converting them all over. --[[User:TechSmurf|TechSmurf]] 18:40, 18 April 2007 (CDT)
*I've got no problem with using wiki tables for everything, but that's going to involve a LOT of edits if you want to cover the hundreds of item pages which include recipes... --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 18:43, 18 April 2007 (CDT)
**Oh, snap. I completely forgot that the recipes were in HTML. Umm. Is there any way those could be botted? If not, I could still do them. Just not sure how to. I do almost all of my Wiki editing using code from other pages to compare to. --[[User:TechSmurf|TechSmurf]] 18:50, 18 April 2007 (CDT)
***There's probably an HTML-to-Wiki converter you can adapt that's less automatic than a bot but more so than by hand. Here are some examples in [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Tools/Editing_tools#From_HTML|Wikipedia]]. --[[User:Bagatelle|Bagatelle]] 15:01, 22 April 2007 (CDT)
==Featured Articles==
I've noticed that only a certain few articles get rotated around the 'featured' section on the main page. I suggest that we have a way to flag a page for feature, which people may be able to vote on. just an idea...--[[User:Skyl3lazer|Skyl3lazer]] 12:46, 1 May 2007 (CDT)

== area requirement messages ==

Would it make sense to have a template for these?  I mocked one up at the test template:

<code><nowiki>{{test
|message=The screams from within the "Fun" House make you decide that you're not quite ready for any "fun" yet.
|req=15}}</nowiki></code>

gives

If your main stat isn't high enough, you will see the following message:

:The screams from within the "Fun" House make you decide that you're not quite ready for any "fun" yet.

:(You must have at least 15 <stat> to adventure here.)
--[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 02:11, 31 May 2007 (CDT)
:It should be possible to work some magic to pull the mainstat requirement from the zone's data page. --[[User:Jonrock|Jonrock]] 15:51, 31 May 2007 (CDT)
:Of course.  Maybe we should go ahead and put the messages on the Data pages as well.  I can't see any reason not to.  (Except the hassle of actually going through with it!)  --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 19:07, 31 May 2007 (CDT)

== Separate "History" from "Notes" ==

This has been tossed around before, but since it appears to need an official proposal I'll make it here.  Over and above the [[Tuesday]] updates, [[NS13]] is going to create a lot of changes to a lot of things, and for some time afterwards people are going to want to remember "how it was", even if only to argue on the forums about whether it should be put back the old way or not.  On the other hand, putting historical behavior in the Notes section of each item/adventure/zone creates confusion about the ''current'' behavior, for those who want to refer to the wiki for what to do ''right now''.  Therefore:

*Any page type which can have a "Notes" section should also be able to have a "History" section, containing Notes-style statements about changes/revamps/retirements.  This section should be as far down the page as possible, as it is not relevant to current game behavior.  In particular, it should be below "See Also", since that ''does'' link together items/adventures based on their current behavior.  For items only, it can be above "Collection".

This can be incorporated as policy at the same time as an overall standard of "Obvious bugs, which were repaired by TPTB within hours after rollout/update, should not be noted." to set a basic bar for what kind of historical data is interesting.

--[[User:Jonrock|Jonrock]] 15:49, 31 May 2007 (CDT)

*I'm kinda neutral about it, so either way ;-).  But I don't like having another heading added if it only has one "historical note", So maybe if there is only 1 "historical note", it goes under "notes", else 2 or more, it then gets its own section.  It may keep down a few extraneous headings on heading/section-happy pages ;-).  Eh, just thinking out loud.  Also (like mentioned above), where should it fit within the ultimate heading/section hierarchy... after "Notes" before "References", before "Notes", before "See Also", or at the top of the page?  Well maybe not that last one, but probably the first? It should be consistent across all pages, there is a list on some talk page (which I haven't refound [though I wasn't looking super hard]) in which every heading was listed all together to illustrate their ultimate order.  Man, I'm saying things in odd ways today.  On a side note, I think notes which say "This item didn't work right for a few hours" are not useful to anyone.  Anyone who's been around KoL for a while knows that everything new in KoL always comes with a few complications for at least the first day ;-), heh, almost everything could have a note like that!  There's a difference between something new being quirky for a while until it's sorted out and something being altered, changed, or unintentionally leaked. --[[User:JRSiebz|JRSiebz]] ([[User talk:JRSiebz|&#x260E;]]|[[Special:Contributions/JRSiebz|&#167;]]|[[Special:Listusers/sysop|&#8225;]]) 20:11, 31 May 2007 (CDT)
**Methinks the [[Established Standards#Item Pages|Established Standards]] page lists the order that's supposed to be applied. --[[User:Bagatelle|Bagatelle]] 22:14, 31 May 2007 (CDT)
**The only "didn't work right away" messages I would opt to keep would be ones that might explain otherwise impossible situations, such as the latest St. Sneaky Pete's Day items (hat, shirt, and tin star) being for sale (albeit at high prices) in mall stores even though they are marked as untradeable. --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 20:32, 31 May 2007 (CDT)
***Agreed. A History section should be reserved for when there is a defined and intended aspect of something that's been changed, not random little quirks that are worked out. --[[User:TechSmurf|TechSmurf]] 20:34, 31 May 2007 (CDT)
==Separate Monster Metadata from Location Metadata==
I noticed that the metadata for the [[Data:Fluffy bunny|fluffy bunny]] and the [[Data:Big creepy spider|big creepy spider]] appear on the [[:Category:Location_Data_Pages|location data]] page. If monster metadata is going to become standard, we should create a separate category page for it. --[[User:TechSmurf|TechSmurf]] 10:12, 1 June 2007 (CDT)
*Just a matter of updating {{tl|combat/meta}} to categorize its pages elsewhere, which I've now taken care of. --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 10:38, 1 June 2007 (CDT)
==Divide Stat Modifier Pages for Sorting==
As they are now, the [[Muscle Modifiers]], [[Moxie Modifiers]], and [[Mysticality Modifiers]] can't be sorted due to the headings and such. Should we split the tables into Absolute/Percentage/etc so they can be sorted? --[[User:TechSmurf|TechSmurf]] 18:10, 9 June 2007 (CDT)
*I can't see why not. Adding a blurb about the types of modifiers (absolute/percentage/...) in the introduction would be nice, too, or separating into discrete sections like [[Weapons (by requirement)]] so the table of contents shows up. --[[User:Bagatelle|Bagatelle]] 19:45, 10 June 2007 (CDT)

So, assuming there's no reason I shouldn't, I'm going to kill two birds with one stone by splitting up the tables AND incorporating the Hardcore Available modifiers into the pages, a la [[Talk:Hardcore Available Muscle Modifiers]]. --[[User:TechSmurf|TechSmurf]] 12:28, 11 June 2007 (CDT)
* *cough* you haven't done the [[Moxie Modifiers]] version yet. Also, what would people think about switching the requirements to read stat:number rather than number:stat? I think it would be handier for determining what the best equippable item is, when sorting is enabled. --[[User:Bagatelle|Bagatelle]] 22:05, 18 June 2007 (CDT)

== Bounty Hunter Hunter Items ==

Since we've got a vast glut of new [[:category:Quest Items|Quest Items]] from the BHH, how about creating a new sub-category, Bounty Items? &mdash;[[User:Dentarthurdent|Dentarthurdent]]([[User_talk:Dentarthurdent|T]],[[Special:Contributions/Dentarthurdent|C]]) 00:49, 2 July 2007 (CDT)
:Two problems: 1. The category contents are automatically tagged whenever the {{tl|item}} template puts the words '''Quest Item''' on the page, so trying to suppress that for a small subset of the items would be a real headache.  2. Creating a Bounty Items category would just be duplicating the work already done by the list on the BHH page itself, for no purpose.  (3. The vast glut of new quest items is really from the quests themselves.  Yay, content!) --[[User:Jonrock|Jonrock]] 20:53, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

== What to do when the Moxie for no hit is unknown ==

The error message '''Effects by number Expression error: unrecognised punctuation character "?"''' is ugly, and occurs frequently with new content. What can we do to avoid this? --[[User:Gausie|Gausie]] 20:08, 3 July 2007 (CDT)
:Are there people who use this even when it is working?  I wouldn't mind if the entire thing went away. --[[User:Jonrock|Jonrock]] 20:38, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

== "no adventure loss" choices ==

Quite frequently there are choice adventures of which some choices will cost an adventure, and some will not.  I would like to see an unobtrusive tag that could appear after the choices that do not cost an adventure, which says something like ''(no adv. loss)'' or the like. -- [[User:Antaeus Feldspar|Antaeus Feldspar]] 16:11, 7 July 2007 (CDT)

==Semi-Rares==

With the advent of NS13, a fair number of rare (but not ultra-rare) adventures have popped up all over the place, with accompanying powerful items, including (but not limited) to things such as {{plural|fake blood}} and {{plural|donkey flipbook}}. Perhaps there should be a new category for such things that can be set in the Item tag?

*...forgot to sign. D'oh. --[[User:Katarani|Katarani]] 07:45, 8 July 2007 (CDT)

I think this is probably a good idea. Stuff like the [[shrinking powder]] clearly isn't from a common adventure, but it's not by any stretch of the imagination an ultra-rare. It's also be useful for getting a listing of these items, as there appears to be one in almost every area.--[[User:MaskedLihc|MaskedLihc]] 13:18, 9 July 2007 (CDT)

I'd like a category for semi-rare items '''and''' adventures, and have the semi-rare  list moved from the [[fortune cookie]] page and onto its own page (Perhaps the [[Semi-Rare Counter]]?), as the fortune cookie provides a window onto the counter. The cookie doesn't have any bearing on the counter itself. --[[User:Flatluigi|flatluigi]] 23:33, 13 July 2007 (CDT)
:It definitely deserves it's own page.  I'd suggest simply [[Semi-Rare Adventures]].  --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 22:29, 17 July 2007 (CDT)
:So, I went ahead and moved a big chunk of info from the fortune cookie page to the one I suggested above.  Both pages could use some polish, but I think that'll be easier now the concept of semi-rare adventures is seperated out from the fortune cookie page.  --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 13:44, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

== Category for Effects that alter meta-game aspects ==

I think it would be useful to have a category for things that alter the meta-game. Just off the top of my head, you've got

* [[Wanged]]
* [[Sword behind Inappropriate Prepositions]]
* [[Encoder ring]]
* [[Liar's pants]]

--[[User:Gausie|Gausie]] 09:03, 19 July 2007 (CDT)

== Official Location Names ==

A couple of inconsistent location names have been brought to my attention. A couple of users noted that the image name and the "last adventure" tooltip text don't match. Another example is The/An Oasis, which I've already flipped a couple of times (sigh). A further look at the Kitchens uses "Cobb's Knob Kitchens" as the adventure again link. [[Established Standards]] doesn't seem to say whether we go with the picture or the "adventure again" text. Do we care one way or the other which is used? --[[User:Bagatelle|Bagatelle]] 20:10, 20 July 2007 (CDT)
*You know, that's been bugging me for a while as well. Honestly, I wouldn't mind switching them to use the area names for the "last adventure" link, as well as the "back to [area]" within the adventure itself. --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 21:01, 20 July 2007 (CDT)
*Whether this is better or not, in the past when the the Last Adventure Name and the name on the image was different, we went with the name on the image. The Last Adventure link wasn't always there, so originally, we only had the image name to go by. Of course there is the argument that we should always go by the Last Adventure link over the name of this image, but as long as we are consistent, if doesn't really matter to me.  Though, the naming via image was around first, and you can play the game (normally, via clicking ;-)) without ever looking at the Last Adventure name, but not without ever looking at the main map/location page images. I think we had this discussion somewhere before, and agreed on the image name, and by 'we' I mean the whole 4 of 5 of us at the time ;-). I looked through the archives of [[discussion]], but with no luck.  It could be on any talk page, anywhere ;-) . --[[User:JRSiebz|JRSiebz]] ([[User talk:JRSiebz|&#x260E;]]|[[Special:Contributions/JRSiebz|&#167;]]|[[Special:Listusers/sysop|&#8225;]]) 21:05, 20 July 2007 (CDT)
**You expect to be able to find things? What do you think this is, a Wiki? Anyway, [[User:Nifty nobu|Nifty Nobu]] [[Proposed Standards#Redirects|some ways up the page]] tantalisingly hinted at the pic name being the de facto standard. A Google search also yielded a snippet of conversation concerning [[Talk:Violet_Fog#Location Name Mismatches|Violet Fog]], which isn't exactly what we're looking for. --[[User:Bagatelle|Bagatelle]] 13:10, 21 July 2007 (CDT)
*I like using the pic name because of the infoboxes -- it'd look weird for the title to say one thing and the embedded picture to say another. (Though there's precendent for difference, where areas have been [[The Misspelled Cemetary (Pre-Cyrpt)|split]].) On the other hand, the more correct name would be the "Last Adventure"/back to X link, as that is what someone playing in-game would see most often, and is what is used by the BHH. --[[User:Bagatelle|Bagatelle]] 13:10, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

*I noticed someone added Wine Racks to the [[Safe Adventuring]] page, and to me it just doesn't look right, since everything else in Spookyraven starts with 'The Haunted'.  It's a new kind of map, like The Hidden City, and maybe The Junkyard (I haven't spent enough time there), so I don't think the pic names are valid anymore.  I vote for the Last Adventure name, and the Bounty Hunter Hunter name, and my obsessive/compulsive desire for symmetry. :) --[[User:Tzom|Tzom]] 09:31, 23 July 2007 (CDT)

== Location Data: pages ==

Creating the data pages for locations is kind of annoying compared to using the automatically created "create metadata" links the effect and item templates give you.  there prob should be a template location, which can include the locations category (well, maybe not, since many locations start with "The" and so have their categorical sorting overridden). It would also include <nowiki>{{Data:{{PAGENAME}}|format=INFOBOX_Location}}}}</nowiki>, but would also include for it not existing like other templates.  Havinga  templte preloaded is just, well, nice. Then <nowiki>{{Locations}}</nowiki> would just be added to the top-ish of a page. For example:
:<nowiki>{{#ifexist:Data:{{PAGENAME}}
    | {{Data:{{PAGENAME}}|format=INFOBOX_Location}}}}
    | '''<span class="plainlinks">
      [{{fullurle:Data:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit&preload=Template:Location/data}} Create Location InfoBox]</span>'''[[Category:NeedsWork]]}}</nowiki>
::--[[User:JRSiebz|JRSiebz]] ([[User talk:JRSiebz|&#x260E;]]|[[Special:Contributions/JRSiebz|&#167;]]|[[Special:Listusers/sysop|&#8225;]]) 00:24, 24 July 2007 (CDT)
*I agree, location data pages aren't done nearly as elegantly as I'd like them to be (probably because I wasn't the one who designed them in the first place - I simply got a request from Starwed to create them as they currently are). I could probably throw together a script to replace the existing tags with templates to handle it more intelligently - just create the templates ('''two''' of them - one for Location and another for DualLocation) and I'll take care of the rest. --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 07:56, 24 July 2007 (CDT)
*The location data page format I put forward was just an exact copy of the item data page format which was already in place.  The real problem is that since the infobox templates predate the data pages, they're not designed to play well with them.   (Oh, and the existance of a dual location could be auto-detected by whether the header2 parameter exists.) --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 09:36, 24 July 2007 (CDT)
*Also, would it be possible to add a section for semi-rare adventures to the template, like there is for clover and ultra-rare adventures? --[[User:Deusnoctum|Deusnoctum]] 20:14, 21 August 2007 (CDT)
**There already is such a section. See [[The Spooky Forest]] for an example.--{{User:SomeStranger/sig}} 20:21, 21 August 2007 (CDT)

==Ordering for location pages==
It just occurred to me that there's no real set order for location pages. So...
*Combat Adventures
**Regular encounter
**One-time encounters
**Semi-rare encounters
**Encounters resulting from choice adventures
**Ultra-rare encounters
*Noncombat Adventures
**Regular adventures
**Choice adventures
**Adventures resulting from choice adventures
**One time adventures
**Semi-rare adventures
**Clover adventures

Yes? No? Walrus? --[[User:TechSmurf|TechSmurf]] 18:47, 29 July 2007 (CDT)
*I'd place Superlikely (which you omitted and/or replaced with one-time), Semi-rare, Ultra-rare, and Clover adventures in their own category, since they're special in that they generally ''ignore'' the combat adventure probability. The same would go for combats only resulting from choice adventures, since those are special. --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 19:21, 29 July 2007 (CDT)
*Sounds good.  Are bad moon adventures normal noncombats, or special?  I know that some of the shirt adventures (certainly the one in the airship) are also not normal NCs.  --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 20:19, 29 July 2007 (CDT)
**One thing I definitely do not like is the current handling of [[An Oasis]].  When the one-time adventures are split out into their own major section, it is very unclear whether they can be bumped by combat rate modifier effects or not.  I definitely prefer that they be under the main "Noncombat" heading, with their one-time nature noted, as in [[The Haunted Pantry]]. --[[User:Jonrock|Jonrock]] 19:18, 1 August 2007 (CDT)

== Wiki itself-fix up ==

Maybe, something like (a bit vague, just an idea) a maximum of (eg: ) 10 pages that need certain types of content.

If there are more than this limit, no more pages can be made unless neccasary, this would help with cleanup immensly as users would have only one option-to fix up bad pages.

Beacause, many a page I've seen needs content, for a great example: the 5-class green ecto-larvae, the current IOTM, that page has so little real information, but yet users are working on other things.

Another example is the page on "a brick of sand", this needs content, but noone seems to be bothered. And the bottle-rocket-and a dozen other pages, at least.

I'm not just talking about content, this could stretch for a lot.

In short, it could help clean up the Wiki-a lot. <small>this unsigned comment was added at 07:53 BST, 7 October 2007 by DillyDally</small>

== new sub-category? ==

should there be a new sub-category of useable items about which ones can be used on other players?--[[User:Noinamg|Noinamg]] 20:14, 28 January 2008 (CST)

== Dressing for Success in Bad Moon ==

I think the [[Dressing For Success]] tables could use a column for dressing for success in Bad Moon.

== More drop information ==

The 'Drop location' formatting change pleases me greatly.  I no longer have to sort through location pages to figure out which monster drops the item I'm looking for!  I propose adding in the drop rate, which will save lots of people from clicking.  So for example, if we take [[Chef's hat]], the drop info would become something like this:


;[[The Haunted Pantry]]
:''[[Trespasser]]''
;[[The Haunted Kitchen]]
:[[zombie chef]] (5.2% drop rate)
;[[Outskirts of Cobb's Knob]]
:[[Knob Goblin Assistant Chef]] (33.5% drop rate)


maybe there's a way to do it better, but my point is that I think it would be useful to have the information right there on the item page :)  -- [[User:Zucker|Zucker]] 04:06, 10 June 2008 (CDT)
*It would greatly pain me to have to go through all the items again inputting drop rates. (and there are over 3000 items). In addition, adding a drop rate may be too much; I didn't quite like adding multiple parenthesis under multiple quotes. With drop rates, it could be something like (occurs semi rarely) (occur with torso awaregness) (X% drop rate). Information overload!  Kawaaaai! --{{User:Coolguy00001/sig}} 07:50, 10 June 2008 (CDT)
*Well, it's something that could be done via a bot.  (I'm a bit surprised you started editing them by hand, to be honest!)  You might well be right about adding the drop rate as being info-overload, though.  --[[User:Starwed|Starwed]] 09:09, 10 June 2008 (CDT)
**It would be overload.  Some items can drop 2-3 times from a single monster, each with a different drop rate.  And then we again run into issues with what to do about monsters that are encountered through noncombats, possibly after making more than one choice.  And the few noncombats which only sometimes give an item, or a variable number of an item.  The more detailed we try to make these listings, the more problems we're going to have with all of the wacky drop and adventure mechanics the game currently has and the new ones it will likely have in the future.  --[[User:Flargen|Flargen]] 00:00, 11 June 2008 (CDT)

==Inventory Section==
The "More drop information" just above has been a useful change to the wiki. I'm happy to see it here. It reminds me of a longing I've had for the item pages for a whilte now: what section of inventory is the item found in. Many times it's easy to find something, but some items show up in less obvious places. The [[reassembled blackbird]] is a quest item, and shows up misc/quest, but more than once I've looked in misc/misc for it. I think of {{plural|inkwell}} as primarily for {{plural|scroll of ancient forbidden unspeakable evil}}, but they also have a combat use, so that's where they end up. Could we add attribute of an item to the metadata info on the upper left of an item page? --{{User:Club/sig}} 14:33, 25 June 2008 (CDT)
*I'm not sure I understand... you want the Wiki to maintain a list of equipment sections so you can navigate to the page on the Wiki to figure out where to go in the Miscellaneous page of your inventory? Wouldn't CTRL-F be faster at that point? There was also forum talk of [http://forums.kingdomofloathing.com/vb/showthread.php?t=153082 customised inventory sections]. --[[User:Bagatelle|Bagatelle]] 20:51, 25 June 2008 (CDT)
*Well, I '''can''' find them. But it takes time. I default my inventory to every section rolled up, since I am a packrat and have boatloads of items. It seems like not-off the wall idea for the wiki to record where you can find things you have in the game. ("Find" in the other sense, not in the acquire meaning.) I probably wouldn't use the wiki as a resource for this, except perhaps to learn about something before I acquire it. Customized sections could make this less useful, but I'm not reading the forums to find out how likely it is. --{{User:Club/sig}} 16:53, 26 June 2008 (CDT)
*I mean it doesn't hurt having it listed, but is it really necessary?  You tell me the type of an item I've never heard of and maybe what it does when used, and I bet I can tell you exactly where it will be in your inventory, if not on the first guess, definitely the second. I wrote the following a long time ago, maybe it still applies. --[[User:JRSiebz|JRSiebz]] ([[User talk:JRSiebz|&#x260E;]]|[[Special:Contributions/JRSiebz|&#167;]]|[[Special:Listusers/sysop|&#8225;]]) 20:23, 26 June 2008 (CDT)
**Actually by looking at the type of each item you know were to look for it. Food/Drink, Booze, all equipments, quest items, etc. are obvious. Combat and combat/usables are in (Mostly) Combat Items. Miscellaneous Items contains hatchlings and misc. items. (Mostly) Potions: contains things which grant effects like snowcones, nuggets, powders, candy, etc. The only tricky ones are usable items, which may be in Miscellaneous, as spleen, restorative, or other, or in Miscellaneous Items. It's usually pretty easy to figure out where an item is listed in your inventory if you have any idea about what that item does or is used for. Worst case scenario, you have to check two places. --JRSiebz (☎|§|‡) 00:22, 28 December 2006 (CST)

==Hobopolis Boss Drop Order==
*the hobo bosses drop items in a particular order. should we replicate this? i'd say rather that alpha sort should be applied throughout. --[[User:Evilkolbot|Evilkolbot]] 06:56, 30 June 2008 (CDT)
**For the record, all other monsters drop their items in a specific order (usually ordered by item ID), but that hasn't stopped users (be they normal users or other admins) from reordering them alphabetically. --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 07:35, 30 June 2008 (CDT)
***so that's a go ahead, then? --[[User:Evilkolbot|Evilkolbot]] 14:25, 30 June 2008 (CDT)

== Pages that are basically lists of related content? ==

If there isn't already, we can have a page which lists, say, the Crimbo 2008 zones, and items dropped or derived from drops from that set of content. It would be useful for people who want to spoil themselves all at once. --[[User:Raijinili|Raijinili]] 00:09, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

== Needs Jick fixing? as a catagory ==
Basically, you know how blackberry polite doesn't have a use message and stuff has the framed frown as a picture, that will be probably updated?

We should make a catagory for that. Titled Jick fixing because Jick is to KoL what Bill is/was to Microsoft. --[[User:Brion thenotgiant|Brion thenotgiant]] 01:55, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

== Filenames ending in periods ==

Sorry, I added periods to the end of [[Heyyyyyy.]] and [[Exactly... what you need... right now...]] before I noticed the rule against doing it. I didn't notice any problems working with the pages, though. Maybe a MediaWiki upgrade fixed the problem? If so, that rule should be removed, otherwise tell me to move the pages back. Wikipedia doesn't seem to have a problem with "Inc." or "e.g.". [[User:Wtachi|Wtachi]] 20:58, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
*The rule against page names ending in periods indeed dates back to very old versions of MediaWiki where this caused problems - in the version currently powering this wiki, they're absolutely harmless, so said rule has been removed. --{{User:Quietust/sig}} 12:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

== Pastamancer Combat Entities ==

Now that the [[Summonable Pastamancer Combat Entities]] have become a fairly robust and standardized part of the game, I think it would be worthwhile to draft up some page standards for them.  They are not happily covered by any of the existing page type standards, nor do they fit into any category very well.  Currently, each combat ghost is listed individually in the [[Skills]] category.  It's a weird place for them to be.  Right now they are the only skills listed that are neither buff, combat skill, noncombat skill, nor passive skill.  They could be funneled off into the combat skills section, I guess, but the summoned creatures seem different from the skills used to summon them.  They deserve a new page type.  I would especially like to see the evolution of the each entity's abilities made more prominent.  Each entity has a level 1, level 5, and level 10 ability.  As it stands, the abilities and their precise mechanics are mostly buried in the Notes section on each page.  These pages would stand to benefit from a table or chart right up front that described the entity's abilities and evolution.  Thoughts on whether this is a good idea and how to best do this? -[[User:Quine|Quine]] 06:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

== Outfits ==

Perhaps we could, for the sake of convenience, include a chart on outfit pages that shows the individual effects of all parts of the outfit? I think this would benefit users so that they wouldn't have to go to the individual pages to see the full benefits of a particular outfit. --[[User:Ephinia|Ephinia]] 18:54, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

[[Category:Proposed Standards]]