This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Infobox article.
Please start a new topic, when no such topic exists yet, to make comments for improvement(s).
Thanks a lot... :)
⇐⇑ @ 20:36, 12 July 2012 (CDT)
- This is exactly why these talk pages are for, to remind me of things :D
- Yes this is indeed needed, and was in back of my mind...thanks for putting it here!
- Same as an “Action(s) needed” property...
- I will prolly implement it in due time, but i have a more important issue at hand at moment, so it has to wait a bit.
- PS: Always sign any comment(s) you make, so all readers can follow who said what and when.
- Thanks a lot...
⇐⇑ @ 14:35, 18 July 2012 (CDT)
Animals & Creatures Infobox
Could you add the 'RequiresTech=' param to the example as it is required by most. Jord 16:03, 18 July 2012 (CDT)
- That's not logical to do, because you don't need a Technology to encounter these, and you can't craft or learn them either...
- The things you can gain from them is another story and fall under another type :)
⇐⇑ @ 16:16, 18 July 2012 (CDT)
- When you attack an animal, you do so to gain something from it eg. some Item, and will need certain skills and tools for the action...
- fe. The loot and dead corps is not location bound, so specific info related to those need to be put on a separate page...
- You *can* however mention the need for that technology to be able to initiate attacks as extra info in the about section.
- The “To Attack:” group heading you used on Rabbit is a very nice alternative indeed, but imho not fit for default copy&paste code by novice editors.
- I do like and prefer it though...
⇐⇑ @ 16:57, 18 July 2012 (CDT)
Don't use such grouping for RequiresTech.
The parameter is not a Record-like type, and will mess-up things, until changed to accommodate for it.
⇐⇑ @ 17:09, 18 July 2012 (CDT)
- I will just leave it so only the technology required to attack that creature is left for you until you change it. Jord 07:06, 20 July 2012 (CDT)
Silver Value and Compost Value Jord 06:45, 20 July 2012 (CDT)
Infobox visual design
The current visual design is starting to detract from the information. It is chunky and having the full sized picture (in some cases just an enlarged icon) up there makes the actual information appear too far down and off screen sometimes. Some others have commented on the infoboxes on the new salem forum too: <promotional link removed> Can I suggest one change that might go a long way to usability? That the full size image be moved to the about section or just as an auto generated image on the opposite side of the top of the page (ie infobox on left, fullimage on right) and/or on pages that just have an enlarged icon remove the large image all-together? 16:46, 3 August 2012 (CDT)
Promotional link? WTF? Did I post the wrong link? The intended post included people talking about how they didn't like the look of the wiki/infoboxes. Meh, here is the link I meant to post then: http://forum.salemgame.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=72 21:35, 3 August 2012 (CDT) (checked page history and yes I posted wrong link initially, sorry about that)
- It helps to check before blaming isn't it? :D
⇐⇑ @ 21:41, 3 August 2012 (CDT)
- I edited my reply to the link being removed before you had entered your reply lol. So blame was gone anyway. 21:45, 3 August 2012 (CDT)