hi. i'm in the process of uploading some screenies of my UR's. However, I'm not too adept in making new pages. I'll just upload them and then maybe someone would be kind enough to put it in the right place. I already put some up, however, I failed to check to see if they were duplicates. Some of them are.
there seems to be a slight difference of opinion regarding the naming of categories. namely, if they should be plural or singular. right now, there is a category called "belt" with 8 entries (although missing the category tag for items) and one called "belts" with 3 entries. then there is rings, amulets, gloves and staves - as well as shield, helmet and armor.
since those are all categories, i think they should all the plural (even if there is only one entry) and if nobody objects (or is faster than me), i'm going to change them all
I'm going to use the following convention for creating races pages:
1. Create a page following this article's naming conventions (e.g., Arctic Dwarf, not Dwarf, Arctic)
These names seem better suited for article URLs
1. Copy the information from the forum over directly (it can be edited later)
The forum is the most recent source of sub race information
Once a page for each race has been created, we can categorize them according to base race, rarity, requirements, etc. Does that sound good?
(I could simply link to the forum page in which the race's description appears, but that means we can't have categories such as "Dwarven Races" or "Secret Races". That's why we need to create an article for each separate race - just like we're doing for items at this stage.)
i find it increasingly confusing how categories for items are handled and what constitutes a category.
i can see how "Items" is a category and i can see how we would then have a subcategory called "Belts", but then there are other denominators like "Ultra Rares" and "Cleric Items" and "Dustbone Weapons". All those different ways of categorizing things might be valid, but it becomes increasingly difficult to make sure you have them all when adding new items.
One way of doing it would of course be to include templates from the category into the subcategories. The "Belts" template (which doesn't exist atm) should probably include the "Items" template, for example. The problems start when you try to find an overall tree structure. Since both "Belts" and "Ultra-Rares" seem to be valid subcategories of "Items" and one doesn't necessarily is a subcategory of the other, you can't just include one template in the other and end up with 2 competing templates, which makes the "Divinity beckons" belt really hard to place. Not to mention, that there is also a "Cleric Items" category and it should probably be listed there as well.
So it seems the only practicable way is not to use templates for them all and add the applicable categories by hand all the time. Which means, of course, that the person adding an items needs to know all the ways in which items are categorized and has to assign them correctly too.
This is why i think less is more. Have categories that list the different types, like "Belts", "Amulets" or "Shields" and as a second tier have categories that tell you something about the origin, like "Ultra-Rares" or "Dustbone", but nothing like "Dustbone Weapons" or "Cleric Items". It is just to much and sooner or later we end up with which things like "Rare Level 29 Weapons", "Ultra-Rare Caster Belts" or "Dustbone Resistance Rings".
Nobody will know what categories exist, add their items to only some of them and we end up with a lot of incomplete category listings that don't really help.