User talk:Whitelaces/Archive 2007/09


 * 1) History
 * 2) Hacked!
 * 3) @ damage calculators for mages

History
Hi Whitelaces. I have just signed up to this Wiki, while relatively new to Wiki's I do have a little experience. My interest in this Wiki is to share my fairly large knowledge of the history of Rookgaard, its characters and developments since its creation... but looking around most history pages/comments are seperated from their respective main articles and are relatively unobvious to the average viewer - why is this? Can I include my history in the main pages of articles or must I create a seperate history page? I realise history can sometimes be considered biased/subjective (eg. I got the first ... item on ... server) but I am experienced in writing objectively and believe that history is probably the most valuable thing Tibia has going for it - the stories, myths and changes surrounding this game are some of the most capivating and inspiring reasons to play IMHO. Anyway, the help pages don't really answer this so I am hoping you can guide me. Regards, Rahotep.

Allow me to answer this. The purpose of the history pages are mainly to add stuff that has been changed throughout the years, for example the appearance of items or other information that even though has a direct connection to the item in question are clearly set out from the principal article space. You are free to add the information you want as long as it contributes to the page as a whole. :)

Moreover, I would like to give you my personal welcome to this wiki, Rahotep. Should you have any question, do not hesitate to ask! -- Maverick the hunter 19:35, 2 September 2007 (PDT)

Maverick gave a pretty good answer to your question. Just to further explain what he said...

Most people use this wiki for current encyclopedic information (weapon stats, creature loot, etc.), but I wholly agree that historical information is also very valuable to the community. In order to fulfill the needs of the majority of wiki users, all historical information, especially information that is no longer accurate because of game updates, is placed on a sub-page. I have tried to make these historical articles readily available to users, but if you have any suggestions about how to improve this aspect (or any other aspect of the wiki), please let me or another admin know!

--'' Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? '' --  Whitelaces &dagger;  Talk &dagger; -- 10:46, 4 September 2007 (PDT)

Thanks to both of you for your answers. While I do understand what the purpose of the history page is, I personally think it would prove far more valuable if included in the principal article. This Wiki isn't so in-depth that the pages are overflowing with information and sub-articles need to be created for each topic. Many items, creatures, servers etc. have extremely basic/limited information and a bit of history/lore (especially history in the storytelling sense, moreso than technical changes to the game) would surely do no harm, people aren't going to have any problem finding the information which is already there such as stats on creatures. Additionally some articles have historical context which is unavoidable or already included in the principal article (eg. Noble Armor), so the line of when a seperate page must be created is ambiguous already. Lastly as I pointed out I think it's not obvious where history pages are located when they do exist, if they *must* be seperate from the original article a clear contents (heading) with History as a topic which links to the other page or an addition of 'History' to the infobox template would work better. Let me know what you think :) - Rahotep.

The original idea was to prevent confusion. To do this we had to separate the idea of "in-game history" and "game-history".

Any information that is "in-game history" certainly belongs in the main article. Such as how the Tibia continent was created or why the pharaohs are exiled to underground tombs.

Any information that is "game history" is definitely interesting and people will want to know about it, but it would actually detract from the article in any number of ways. Maybe an item had a different name in the past. While this may be interesting, there is no in-game legend or explanation about why it changed, it was simply a change in the binary code of the game. In fact, as far as anything in-game is concerned, the original item had never existed.

Another example would be people that owned a "one-of a kind" item. There are no in-game books that talk about the previous owners, and this information had/has no impact on the game itself. It would only distract from the article that has pertinent information for someone playing the game now. If you look at the Magic Longsword page as it is now, you will see large paragraphs of information about the "game history" of the item.

Now for some exposition... hang on to your hat.

Naturally, when a person is reading a webpage they will glaze over large blocks of text. Anyone that is browsing the site to find some stats of the magic longsword (for example), will most likely just skip over that whole text section. If they are genuinely interested in the game history, then they will at least read the first sentence or two from each paragraph until they find something interesting. For the majority of site visitors, that text only makes the page more difficult to navigate, and reduces the overall value of the article (regardless of content). By moving this information to a separate page we can actually make a full-fledged article that is easy to read, structured for its specific content, and well organized, instead of just cramming the information into an infobox (which is supposed to be for brief summary information anyway).

I'm still convinced that having a separate page for history is the best way to go.

-- Obesa cantavit  --  Whitelaces &dagger;  Talk &dagger; -- 06:39, 12 September 2007 (PDT)

Hacked!
I'm Lord de los Druidas, I'm sory for all this =( Seems like I got hacked, and they changed my email so I can't request a new password. Please, remove the sysop right from my other account. --Lord Galarzaa 21:50, 18 September 2007 (PDT)

I can't remove sysop privileges, but Erig already has. He also extended the block on that account to infinite.

--'' Quanto sono infedeli, in realta, gli uomini italiani? '' --  Whitelaces &dagger;  Talk &dagger; -- 11:32, 20 September 2007 (PDT)

@ damage calculators for mages
hiya, i was wondering if you know if any of the damage calculators for peoples userpages take into the 8.0 client update where mages where downgraded and knight upgraded.

at the moment my e-vis is like 170+ according to my damage calculator but since the upate my max at the moment is 154.

ty =]

No, the damage calculator has not been updated for mages. To the best of my knowledge, the calculator is correct for knights (when using a weapon for your level).

--  --  Whitelaces &dagger;  Talk &dagger; -- 10:18, 28 September 2007 (PDT)