Category talk:Infobox templates

Perfect. (I hadn't ever really though of a category talk page.) Continuing from Talk:Deadbeard Quick summary of what happened there. I said we should use infoboxes more and revamp the ones we had... I proceeded to perform said revamping. We talked about potential new Infoboxes. Here is a list of those that were proposed at some time.
 * Djinn
 * Monsters
 * Towns
 * Psynergy

Djinn and monsters have good support, Psynergy was just introduced, and Towns didn't have much support. COMMENCE TO TALKING~ dkpat 17:40, 5 May 2011 (CDT)
 * I would think that for Psynergy, each individual Psynergy stage should have its own infobox, and that all three stages of a Psynergy series are stacked on top of each other in a page like Quake Psynergy series, rather than one big infobox that covers all three stages. For whether a page like Quake Psynergy series should have three infoboxes each for GBA and Dark Dawn, I'll point out that Dark Dawn has the different and bigger icons, has different names for a few of them (Starburst, Fear Puppet, Fire Orb), has DD Fireball be different from GBA Fire, and perhaps most of all, there's plenty of cases where each Psynergy has differences and changes between GBA and DD in what classes learn them and at what level. The class and level-learned thing should probably be included in the infobox. Erik the Appreciator 18:01, 5 May 2011 (CDT)


 * I'm not too sure about adding the classes in the infobox. Some Psynergies are learned by nearly a dozen class serieses (is that even a word?), which seems a bit impratical. Besides, when I originally proposed a Psynergy infobox, I figured we should try to keep it short, otherwise putting multiple boxes on the pages will make the article really long. But that's just me. If you can figure out how to make such potentially long lists practical, go for it!
 * As for your other points, I'll approve of adding the levels their learned at. When it comes to separate infoboxes for each game... Well, if there are significant differences, perhaps. If there aren't any differences, there's no need. If there's only a couple of minor changes, however, such as a new name or level learned at, I think we can just make do with a single infobox and specify the change, such as Blast (GBA)/Starburst (DD). I don't think the icon change is notable enough, no matter how you slice it ;) The World&#39;s Hungriest Paperweight 11:11, 6 May 2011 (CDT)


 * P.S. Something occured to me while I was on the toilet. Two things, in fact, both relating to Psynergy availability. First of all, some Psynergies are learned by equipping items, while a few are innately know by certain characters, making the idea of adding classes to Psynergy templates less and less reasonable. However, I may have an idea that can make up for it. Erik, I remember you mentioning recently that you were planning on coming up with a new format for Psynergy articles, similar to the new format we made for weapon articles. Perhaps, while typing up a draft, you could add an "Availability" section. This would encompass classes that learn the Psynergies, items that can be equipped to teach it, characters that always have access to the Psynergy, and other unique cases like Sand and Parch. Putting classes in their own section will make them stand out a bit more (as opposed to the current format, which just lists them in the beginning paragraph), making up for their not being in the infobox. If that doesn't sound like enough to justify a full section, though, you could also add a mini-analysis to the section, looking at which classes and characters would best be able to take advantage of the Psynergy/ies and which would be better off using alternatives. How does that soung? The World&#39;s Hungriest Paperweight 14:43, 6 May 2011 (CDT)
 * It soungs very good. I had wondered if stuffing that into the infobox would take up too much space in what I think should be an infobox horizontal in nature. Now, the levels each Psynergy is learned at would also be outside the infobox and in this separate section too, probably, because there are a few cases of different classes learning the same Psynergies at different levels. At least that was the case in GBA, I think. Erik the Appreciator 14:52, 6 May 2011 (CDT)

Does anyone think we should add an Artifact field to the weapon and item infoboxes? Also, maybe we should add a field or two specifying whether a usable item can be used in battle, on the field, or both. Just brainstorming out loud. The World&#39;s Hungriest Paperweight 15:34, 6 May 2011 (CDT)


 * Explain what you mean by artifact. and I can see the Where Used field being used. Also leave the Djinn one up to me, I've got some plans for it. (mwuahahaha...)~ dkpat 15:55, 6 May 2011 (CDT)


 * Thought it would be self-explanatory, but: A spot to say whether or not a given item is an Artifact (along with the link, if possible). After all, Artifacts can be repurchased if sold, so anyone even remotely familiar with GS items would find that bit of info useful. The World&#39;s Hungriest Paperweight 21:31, 6 May 2011 (CDT)


 * yeah... I was having a blond moment or something. Sorry bout that. doesn't help that I never really paid attention much to that, way I saw is if it had a special effect, you could buy it back, and I just went with it from that (though usually if I sold it I didn't want it back) Anyways, that would be a decent field to add in I think. ~ dkpat 21:34, 6 May 2011 (CDT)
 * Right, I'd like to point out that what would make the field all the more important is that not every item with something special about it can be purchased back from the Artifacts menu. The Fur Coat from GS1 and, more recently and more infamously, the Vajra Mace are "Common" items, and it's debatable whether those were oversights by the developers. Erik the Appreciator 21:45, 6 May 2011 (CDT)