Back to template | < Template talk:Loot

Revision as of 08:18, July 2, 2010 by WoWWiki-Skyfire (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ←Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
103,469pages on
this wiki


The template does not support replacing the item label with text of editor's choosing. This leads to problems when trying to pluralize item names when the context requires it. --Voidvector 18:14, 27 January 2007 (EST)

Er, when is an item ever needed to be plural? :s --Zealtalkcontrweb 19:00, 27 January 2007 (EST)
Item stacks, e.g. for hand-ins. Made up example: [Darkcrest Mark]. Hand in 10 [Darkcrest Mark]s for awesome uber trinketness!
Edit: I take that back, tbh you should never need to change the item's name. If an item needs to be plural use the format 10 x [Item]. Changing something like [Mark of Sargeras] to 2 [Marks of Sargeras] would be a bad bad idea, as that isn't the item name.  Kirkburn talk contr 19:06, 27 January 2007 (EST)

Which color does not belong? Edit

Which color does not belong?

You have 30 seconds. --Voidvector 01:42, 28 January 2007 (EST)

Lol, epic is messed up. Edit: should be fixed now!  Kirkburn talk contr 06:30, 28 January 2007 (EST)

Loot template breaking when nested inside tables. Maybe. Edit

Observe the effects of the loot template at this time on Lockpicking. --Drolfeir 23:58, 31 January 2007 (EST)

Learn to use wikimarkup correctly.. It's not an issue with the template, it's an issue with wikimarkup and your short cutting for columns. --Zealtalkcontrweb 11:25, 1 February 2007 (EST)

There are several dozens of pages that use markup columns like this however, the previous version of the template did not appear to suffer from this problem. you can't write it off as a markup problem. especially not if those pages were working fine before by using a different template, which got deprecared off by the bot converter. the least the new template should do is support the original functionality. such as Template:Lepic etc offered. You can't expect the rest of us to clean up after your unwillingness to test and make the template work properly ;)  - CJ talk / cont  12:17, 1 February 2007 (EST)
I have my suspecions why it's happening, the reason lies in the changes i made to the template last night, i just do not wish to mess with the template again and slow down the wiki to fix something that isn't its fault. The actually fault lies in the wikimarkup shortcuts, as they are not respecting XHTML properly, using the full markup (each column on a new line) does however. A bot could be used to make this replacement, to make sure pages are using full wikimarkup, not the shortcuts that only work in certain circumstances. --Zealtalkcontrweb 12:23, 1 February 2007 (EST)
As the template is currently not properly functional, i suggest reverting to one that is 1 version older instead until it can be properly fixed. This would take less time and work, and hence be the logical step to take imo.  - CJ talk / cont  12:27, 1 February 2007 (EST)
The templates is functional, it's those pages that aren't! >_<; I've edited the template to be usable with the broken syntax, just to stop this stupid talk, but i still want the wikimarkup fixed in pages using tables. --Zealtalkcontrweb 13:01, 1 February 2007 (EST)

Simplify code Edit

I was reading the code of this template for the first time, and I realized that color code for this template can be simplified to 1 line. I am sure a few other things too. Just do something like {{qual-color-{{{2|common}}}}}. (Use {{lc}} to fix upper case.) Also I think using {{#switch}} is better than {{qif}} for selecting from high number of choices. Just look at their code, {{#switch}} is a lot simpler. I have just documented {{#switch}}. --Voidvector 03:01, 1 February 2007 (EST)

That would require supporting lower case only, so no. {{lc}} does not exist. {{#switch}} does the same job of qif, but less efficiently and lacking 1 outcome when compared. If you look at the documented code, you will see it actually would have no difference in this case, so no. --Zealtalkcontrweb 11:22, 1 February 2007 (EST)

{{lc}} is an internal wiki function! (EXAMPLE: this sentence was typed entirely in uppercase.)
If you read {{qif}}'s documentation or code, it shows that it would check "test" and "else" first before displaying the testCase. If you look at {{#switch}}, it display the content of the case immediately. That is 2 less parser operations for the wiki. "1 outcome" difference you mentioned is not used for this template. "Then" and "else" cases are identical for all occurrences of {{qif}} in this template. --Voidvector 17:16, 1 February 2007 (EST)
That's because {{qif}} is more desirable for all circumstances. There is no increased efficiency you're suggesting from the way switch does it. It's got nothing to do with "checking", it's simply that if it contains no value, it displays else, that's desriable. I don't want it to needlessy run through test cases when it doesn't need to. So yes, {{qif}} is more efficient. Only if it contains a value will it then run through the test cases. The fact they are indentical, does not mean they will always be that way, and i does no harm to use both. It would do harm however to later have to switch to qif and make any changes if things did change. So once again, no switch. You're also mistaking wikimarkup for a programming language apparently..
Well if you used {{lc:}} and not {{lc}}, you might actually make that clear huh? I was unsure if we had access to it tbh. I'll test it out, though i suspect it's parsing order may complicate things, making it unusable.
I find it amusing how you've never made any suggestion to using these things before, but made plenty of complaints about existing usage. Did you all of a sudden decide to read up on them? ¬_¬ --Zealtalkcontrweb 17:35, 1 February 2007 (EST)
Are you assuming process mark up language doesn't take processing power? Obviously, the difference might not be significance, but I have no way of checking that.
I knew the existence of those functions before, they used to be used on wikipedia until ParserFunctions. I normally don't delve into "esoteric template" coding, because they are most of the time poorly formated. My original impression of {{qif}} is that it is a more efficient version of {{if}} with the catch that you have to specify variable names (Some people called for the deprecation of {{if}} with {{qif}}). I have never seen it used like a {{#switch}}, as you did here, so I had to look up the usage for those functions. --Voidvector 18:14, 1 February 2007 (EST)
Ok, obviously my attitude didn't come across there... I've gotten the impression that you've been purposefully trying to undo and comment on everything i do, trying to offer better ideas, asking why i did this and that. if that's not the case, i'm sorry, it's just grating on me now.
Prior to coming here, i've never touched a wiki, nad knew nothing of it's workings. I've quickly picked up what can do what, mainly from seeing what was in use and available already, and adapting it to suit my needs. So, most of the wiki functions, i have never seen in use, so have not tried out. {{qif}} to me, instantly seemed like if, but with the built in ability for switch->case scenrios, so ultimately, a switch with the added if fall backs. I've been using it as this since i found it, and it's not let me down yet.
I took another closer look at the code for both, and while switch is more simplistic, what i said before still holds true. The fallback of params collapsing is more than likely neglagable compared to template usage, so just because {{qif}} contains more, it's not likely to be an issue. The order would also make little differnce, but {{qif}} once again has further full backs for the params, but because of it's order, they would presumably never have to be resolved in most cases unless needed, so it equals out, if not better than, {{#switch}}.
I've not tested it yet, but {{if}} and {{qif}} would differ when it came to dealing with null values. {{if}} has some interesting quirks that allow it to handle things i suspect {{qif}} can't.
Anyways.. i'll test out {{lc:}} when i get the chance, if it works, then it settles the argument for case sensativity i guess. --Zealtalkcontrweb 18:33, 1 February 2007 (EST)
I just came here last night cause people reported the table problem. Otherwise, I wouldn't even have bothered. As for other stuff I mentioned, just want to bring it to your attention since I see those as obvious improvements. Choose whatever method you want for template coding, template coding is not something I like to do anyway. --Voidvector 19:24, 1 February 2007 (EST)
Well it seems {{lc:}} worked, so it excepts all cases now. Still have my issues with why i don't wish to support lowercase, but fed up with being asked about it, so it's done. --Zealtalkcontrweb 13:17, 2 February 2007 (EST)

Colors Edit

imo "unknown" should not add a color. currently it shows up as white, which would give the impression that it's a common item.  - CJ talk / cont  03:21, 1 February 2007 (EST)

I Considered white, common, to be an exceptable default for an item that has not currently been provided a quality. If enough people think otherwise, i can change it. I would also need to apply this change to {{tooltip}} if that were the case. --Zealtalkcontrweb 11:27, 1 February 2007 (EST)

Protected Edit

In light of this now being one of the most highly trafficked templates on the entire wiki, culminating the inclusions of all the previous item templates, I've blocked this article from casual editing. Any edits need to go through a proposal process and be approved by an admin for editing.--Hobinheim (talk · contr) 12:42, 3 February 2007 (EST)

*Grumble Grumble* ¬_¬ --Zealtalkcontrweb 12:44, 3 February 2007 (EST)

Replacement Label Edit

You can use {{lpoor|<item_name>|<label_name>}} (and various lquality templates) to have a quality colored link with a label name different from the item name, but it would be nice to use this (loot) template.


Seems to lose the [ ] (brackets) when you do this, though. --Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:36 PM PST 12 Feb 2007

People have asked for it, i've personally said i won't because there is no need for it to do so if the item namespace are put into place as they should be. Now however, having found out that conditional templates are what's causing the wiki issues and the wiki can not support their mass use, i won't be touching any templates until parsefunctions are installed, because any changes or new templates i make will have an adverse effect of the performance and stability of wowwiki.
If you still want to do it, then you can just replace {{{2|}}} with {{{3|{{{2|}}}}}} where it is used in the qif tests (titles, link display). Though dont forget to document the new label parameter in the documentation (syntax, add a note in description etc). --Zealtalkcontrweb 17:05, 12 February 2007 (EST)

Alternate Label/Disambiguation Edit

Ran into a case (Blackened Basilisk) where a disambiguation page is needed. May I propose:

  • {{loot|<quality>|<page name>|<optional display name>}}

This would follow the example of Template:Questlong and allow disambiguated pages to display correct loot names. This disambiguated name also caused me to discard using Tooltip for Blackened Basilisk (Food). --Eirik Ratcatcher 16:21, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

Sir, you are absolutely correct. I will put in on my todo list as soon as other loot/template-related changes are done. Thanks! And welcome.--Hobinheim (talk · contr) 16:26, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

Any possibility the title attribute could use {{2}} instead of {{3}}? I've been pluralizing a lot of items and when hovering over the link it shows up as "Netherwing Relics is a common quality item." (see here in the details section) which is causing the grammar nazi in me to have a conniption fit. Dunno if there's a way to make that work with the other case as above with Blackened Basilisk (Food), though. --Kaydeethree 17:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Autohiding of disambiguation terms Edit

Kael'thas Sunstrider (tactics) page the Devastation (weapon) link isn't automatically hiding the disambiguation term, looks a bit ugly. I don't understand the template enough to fix it.

I fixed it, unsigned poster! --Sky (t · c · w) 00:58, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki