Back to template

Revision as of 19:25, August 28, 2009 by Howbizr (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ←Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
102,831pages on
this wiki

While I like the way this table is organized, there was a predecessor (now Template:Minerals) of this name that was a sidebar. Some pages still have the Gems template at the top, which looks REALLY bad IMO. Some pages got updated to have the Minerals template. And I've retrofitted Talasite and Dawnstone to have both.

There are valid reasons for each template, and different information on each. But I'm not sure how well they look together. ... And I haven't taken time yet to develop a firm preference. --Eirik Ratcatcher 17:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The major problem with this template is that it is not a general "Gems" template, but a BC-only one. It should be renamed and removed from places where listing BC gems is not appropriate. --Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:13 PM PDT 3 Aug 2007

Missing PearlsEdit

How should we add Inv misc gem pearl 03 [Purified Jaggal Pearl] as well as the new Wrath-Logo-Small equivalents? Because Inv misc gem pearl 02 [Jaggal Pearls] are used for things other than just jewelcrafting. -Howbizr (talk) 21:43, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I've added them. Every uncommon BC gem other than Shadow Draenite is used by at least one other profession. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:05, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Spell PowerEdit

No Spell Power gems? Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 13:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

...--PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 13:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Focus, name Edit

Having just edited {{Minerals}}, I come back to this template... It tries to do entirely too much, in my opinion. It lists raw materials articles, and it lists cut gem type articles. Other than both having to deal vaguely with gems, I don't see a particular reason that any one page would want to have both on it. And combine this with the Minerals template on the same page?

This could be turned into, IMO, a couple or three good templates that could coexist with Minerals. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 21:36, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

New version Edit

Please see {{Gems/dev}}. Edit as you see fit. This proposal is to replace both the current {{gems}} as well as {{minerals}}. The ideas is based off of {{mountfooter}}. Just Alerting You Small Howbizr(t·c) 3:25 PM, 28 Aug 2009 (EDT)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki