Template talk:BeastInfo

From GuildWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

| {{{icon}}} ||'''Profession:'''||{{{prof}}} that line could be given as

| {{{{{icon}}}}} ||'''Profession:'''||{{{prof}}}

Then instead of putting icon= [[Image:Warrior-icon.png]], the much simpler icon= W could be used. template:? could be made as a blank page for unknowns. thoughs? — Skuld 07:23, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

If you are willing to personally go back and change those 400 pages of monsters, then by all means. --Karlos 11:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
You'd also need to come up with an icon for the "Unknown/None" profession. :) --Rainith 11:43, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

neat idea that doesn't work[edit source]

An idea that I thought was neat, but before doing it, realize it won't work:

Using the beast-info box to also fill out which category the creature is in. The problem is that categories are in plural form, and not all species can be done by adding "s" to the end. And the bestiary is furthur divided down (in some cases) by the political faction.

Then I thought of doing it for the professions. It would work in chapter 1, but perhaps somewhere down the line an expansion would come out with a profession that ends with "y", and will mess up the plural. Sigh. -PanSola 02:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

oppps mistake[edit source]

Sorry not a vandal - noticed that I was here and not on my own wiki . 24-feb-2006 GMT

For anyone who cares, this guy is most probably trying to curry sympathy by pretending he made the same mistake that I did with Template:Skill bar a few minutes back. — Stabber 09:22, 24 February 2006 (CST)
I'm sorry - I don't understand what you mean curry sympathy ? I like curry but sympathy is not edible! - I was in the process of putting back the edit, u gave me approx 60seconds to spot my mistake when I noticed that you had reverted the change, I was infact trying to work out how it got back to working again.

BeastInfo[edit source]

| style="text-align:center; padding: 1px;" | {{{image}}}<br>
| style="text-align:center; padding: 1px;" | {{{PAGNAME}}}<br>

Can I make that change? I've 84 putting that PAGENAME into the image variable, this would be better.

That would work unless there are pages with multiple boxes of these on, do any of those exist? — Skuld 20:31, 12 March 2006 (CST)

There are many creature articles where the name of the already existing image is not the same as the pagename (many have the space removed and not replaced by an underscore, for instance). Adding PAGENAME to the template would break those images, wouldn't it? --84-175 (talk) 20:35, 12 March 2006 (CST)
Yes and don't forget about the Upload Bug, there have been many a creature who's image would not upload with their correct name. --Rainith 20:41, 12 March 2006 (CST)

I didn't mean the images.. just the header — Skuld 20:46, 12 March 2006 (CST) i may hva edoppied the wrong text

Well then you raise the question: Do we want things like Rotscale (Boss), Minotaur (Warrior Boss), Minotaur (Shiverpeaks), Hydra (Crystal Desert), etc... to be labeled that way in their beast box? Right now I think it is mixed, I haven't checked, but I personally prefer that they are labled just as they are in game, with the differences only being in the article name. --Rainith 20:52, 12 March 2006 (CST)

Page name based defaults for name and image parameters[edit source]

I've added some defaults for the name and image parameters. This should make the template call smaller in the majority of cases. The following is a complete invokation.

{{BeastInfo | species = Human | prof = Warrior | level = 20}} 

You can check out Guardsman Tang to see how it looks. Existing template calls should still work as they did.

I also made the image size 200px when the image parameter is defaulted. That is enough to fill out the entire box when the profession is Necromancer. I hope the larger images don't cause bandwidth problems. Let me know if they do, or if the larger size is unappealing for some other reason. --Wee Tommy 21:11, 20 May 2006 (CDT)

I'm generally against this, but all I'm changing is the size to the standard 128px. Many of the humanoid creatures in well trimmed pictures are right around that width or smaller and making them bigger tends to make the look like crap. --Rainith 22:53, 20 May 2006 (CDT)
Your 128px revert is fine with me, but I'll still argue the case, just for fun...
The size embedded in the template only takes effect if no image parameter is specified, so the pictures in existing boxes won't be displayed at 200px unless those boxes are edited. If we have bad pictures that don't look good at 200px, we can just leave the image argument in specifying 128px and they will stay small.
The box does look better at 200px when we have reasonably large pictures. It is also more consistent across professions. At 128px, the text width determines the box width and boxes for professions with long names are wider than boxes for professions with short names. --Wee Tommy 02:13, 21 May 2006 (CDT)
Before I made the template change, I had been setting image sizes in BeastInfo template invokations higher than 128px for some of the NPCs I have been documenting. Should they all be changed back to 128px? --Wee Tommy 02:13, 21 May 2006 (CDT)
By the way, why are you generally against this? I assume you mean that you don't like the page name defaults either. Any reason? If there is a good reason that they should be removed, then they should be removed right away. It'll be a mess if they are removed after people have started using them. --Wee Tommy 02:13, 21 May 2006 (CDT)
There are quite a few creatures, usually bosses, with names the same as either the standard creature type like Mursaat Mesmer (Boss), Snow Ettin (Monk Boss), Frostfire Dryder (Elementalist Boss) or the same name as a quest they are invloved in, like Garfazz Bloodfang (boss), The Bog Beast of Bokku (Monster), etc... and it doesn't really work for those. Sure we can manually enter them for those as you say, but its just easier and less confusing for new people to do that for all of them. --Rainith 02:53, 21 May 2006 (CDT)

Time to adapt for categories[edit source]

giving this template the ability to add monsters to different categories would dramatically unify what monsters below where. We need the follow additions: Boss variable: yes or no as far as categories go, the logic is:

if(Boss==yes) {
[[category:<species> bosses]] [[category:<proffession> bosses]])
else {

locations have to be done manually. in hindsight that plan works fine but there are problems with Undeads Bosses.. lol... not sure how to get around it... but then again i'm an ideas man --Jamie (Talk Page) 08:49, 4 July 2006 (CDT)

Add map image to Beast Box[edit source]

What do people think about adding the option for a map image at the bottom of the Beast Box? Similar to what is done in the Template:Location box for the maps. This could be used to replace the thumbnail maps for the bosses (as depending on where the code is inserted in the article for those they may cause issues for people with different browsers/screen resolutions. --Rainith 17:06, 11 December 2006 (CST)

Bump. Silence indicates consent. No response by the weekend and I'll start on this. --Rainith 23:34, 8 January 2007 (CST)
Could somebody put the usage for this in the template file? I get that you pass in a map argument, but can't quite work out what's going on with "map1-text" and how to supply that. Biscuits (talk Biscuit.png contribs) 11:19, 3 March 2007 (CST)
I was waiting for more feedback at GuildWiki_talk:Style_and_formatting/Bestiary#More_on_maps. Once it's accepted, then the template at GuildWiki:Style_and_formatting/Bestiary can be updated with the usage. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 11:24, 3 March 2007 (CST)

Note the Hard mode level(s)[edit source]

Should we put a separate line for the hard mode levels of the creature:

  • Level(s): 1,2,3,...
  • HM Level(s): 22,23,24...

Or put then after the normal levels:

  • Levels: 1,2,3,22,23,24...

We could just add somewhere a table showing wich levels turn into others, like 1..5>>22; 24>>26, 28>>30 etc...

I propose hard mode levels in (parenthesis):
  • Levels: 3, 6 (25)
--Rainith 18:35, 20 April 2007 (CDT)
Yup, I also thought about bold:
  • Level(s): 6,9, 22, 23
Mithran 07:28, 21 April 2007 (CDT)

Font size[edit source]

I was thinking, maybe the font size should be like 90% (similar to Template:itemInfo), the current text size seems too big imo. –User Balistic Pve sig.pngalistic 18:33, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. I was planning on revamping all the infoboxes to match the new item box style and add semantic properties, but I've been holding back on starting any of that until after the move is complete.
For this box specifically, the obvious properties would be species, profession, and level. Campaign might be a good thing to have in the box; is there anything else that would make sense to add? —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 18:52, October 11, 2010 (UTC)
There isn't much else, also maybe have the profession param be optional for those who don't have professions. Also... is the icon parameter even needed? Couldn't we work the icon out with the profession? –User Balistic Pve sig.pngalistic 19:33, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
For single-profession monsters, yeah, that would be simple to do, but I'm pretty sure they implemented it this way because there was no other way to handle monsters with a secondary profession. Now, though, we could (re-)unify them to one parameter as a delimited list, using the #arraymap: parser function from the Semantic Forms extension to parse the list differently for links vs. icons - similar to how I'm using it for salvage materials in ItemInfo, only mapping the same list twice to different functions (one to wrap it with standard wiki-link formatting, one to wrap it with the image formatting). —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 20:37, October 11, 2010 (UTC)