Talk:List of Important items

Seperate Articles
Turns out every item in this article has a link to they're own respective pages. Is this really nesessary? I can understand if this article gives the reader alittle tid-bit of the item's information and then the link leads them to a seperate article with more info on it but that's not the case here. Each of the links has the same info on it so I'm wondering if the seperate pages are really needed. I already nominated Red Key for deletion a while back but I'm just wondering what every one else thinks. What are your thoughts?Zabbeth 14:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, the World of Warcraft wiki has a page on every little item (of which there's tens of thousands), oftentimes comprised of no more than a sentence and image. I can't help but feel this indicates that's the accepted "norm" for a lot of RPG wikis in general, and each of the key item pages here could probably be written even more in-depth than they already are. Erik Jensen (Appreciate me here!) 17:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Alright then, I'll go ahead and get rid of delete thing from the Red Key article.Zabbeth 17:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Merge lists?
Neither dkpat nor I understand why Important items and Rare items should be separated. Admittedly, the "rare items" can be sold/dropped and the "important items" can't, but aside from that there isn't much of a difference. So why not merge them? I'm sure we can come up with some other way of distinguishing between sellable and unsellable, such as italicizing one type or the other. Really, though, having them separate like this can be more trouble than it's worth... P.S. "Quest items" seems to be the natural choice for a new name, but if you don't like that we could call them "Key items" instead. The World&#39;s Hungriest Paperweight 13:13, 17 July 2011 (CDT)
 * One reason to merge the two lists is that Hermes' Water is in both lists – Rare in Golden Sun and Important in Dark Dawn. Hmmm…Marandahir (talk) 21:59, 23 February 2013 (CST)


 * I guess it's about time to look at this again, hunh. I think the main hurdle is how to separate sellable and non-sellable items. We could give them separate sections, like:


 * ==Quest items in Golden Sun==


 * ===Sellable===


 * ===Unsellable===


 * ==Quest items in The Lost Age==


 * ===Sellable===


 * ===Unsellable===


 * ...But I don't think that's the best of ideas. Another approach is something like this:


 * Quest item 1: blahblahblah Cannot be sold blahblahblah
 * Quest item 2: blahblahblah Can be bought for XXX and sold for YYY blahblahblah


 * ...Although I'll admit it might look a bit awkward. Does anyone have any other ideas? The World&#39;s Hungriest Paperweight (talk) 11:22, 24 February 2013 (CST)
 * No response? Guess I'll just go ahead and merge, then. If you don't like it, we can start the conversation fresh. The World&#39;s Hungriest Paperweight (talk) 20:55, 25 February 2013 (CST)
 * Ah, now the first idea with the separate section headers might work well, so I'm in favor of you doing it that way. If it turns out to look awkward, it wouldn't take much effort to convert to the second idea. Erik the Appreciator (talk) 21:05, 25 February 2013 (CST)