Talk:Items - Revision history

Zaventh: Reverted edit of Amaze, changed back to last version by Zaventh

2005-08-14T21:48:27Z

Reverted edit of Amaze, changed back to last version by Zaventh

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:48, 14 August 2005
Line 19:		Line 19:

	I think it is best because of a few reasons. One it is easy to find what you are looking for. Also, it is fairly consolidated but not all crammed onto one page. The most important thing is that each items still gets its own namespace [[Sonhi pipe]] for instance AND we can also have info for types of items (ie. [[Pipes]] which will bring up [[Sonhi pipe]] which will give you even more details]]. This can be useful when referring not to any specific item but rather groups of items. Example: An entry about Carnages might include the phrase: '''"Be sure to bring a bunch of [[Pipes]] with you"''' which would then link the reader to lots of pipes, instead of saying: '''"Be sure to bring some [[Herb pipe]]s with you"''' which gives you only information about Herb pipes.		I think it is best because of a few reasons. One it is easy to find what you are looking for. Also, it is fairly consolidated but not all crammed onto one page. The most important thing is that each items still gets its own namespace [[Sonhi pipe]] for instance AND we can also have info for types of items (ie. [[Pipes]] which will bring up [[Sonhi pipe]] which will give you even more details]]. This can be useful when referring not to any specific item but rather groups of items. Example: An entry about Carnages might include the phrase: '''"Be sure to bring a bunch of [[Pipes]] with you"''' which would then link the reader to lots of pipes, instead of saying: '''"Be sure to bring some [[Herb pipe]]s with you"''' which gives you only information about Herb pipes.
	~~-o9k~~

	== RE: New Layout ==		== RE: New Layout ==

Amaze: /* New layout? */

2005-08-14T17:18:19Z

New layout?

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:18, 14 August 2005
Line 19:		Line 19:

	I think it is best because of a few reasons. One it is easy to find what you are looking for. Also, it is fairly consolidated but not all crammed onto one page. The most important thing is that each items still gets its own namespace [[Sonhi pipe]] for instance AND we can also have info for types of items (ie. [[Pipes]] which will bring up [[Sonhi pipe]] which will give you even more details]]. This can be useful when referring not to any specific item but rather groups of items. Example: An entry about Carnages might include the phrase: '''"Be sure to bring a bunch of [[Pipes]] with you"''' which would then link the reader to lots of pipes, instead of saying: '''"Be sure to bring some [[Herb pipe]]s with you"''' which gives you only information about Herb pipes.		I think it is best because of a few reasons. One it is easy to find what you are looking for. Also, it is fairly consolidated but not all crammed onto one page. The most important thing is that each items still gets its own namespace [[Sonhi pipe]] for instance AND we can also have info for types of items (ie. [[Pipes]] which will bring up [[Sonhi pipe]] which will give you even more details]]. This can be useful when referring not to any specific item but rather groups of items. Example: An entry about Carnages might include the phrase: '''"Be sure to bring a bunch of [[Pipes]] with you"''' which would then link the reader to lots of pipes, instead of saying: '''"Be sure to bring some [[Herb pipe]]s with you"''' which gives you only information about Herb pipes.
			-o9k

	== RE: New Layout ==		== RE: New Layout ==

Zaventh: /* Searching for items */

2005-08-11T01:09:08Z

Searching for items

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:09, 10 August 2005
Line 30:		Line 30:
	== Searching for items ==		== Searching for items ==

	Just use the search box just below the nav menu on every page. ;)		Just use the search box just below the nav menu on every page. ;) --[[User:Zaventh\|Zaventh]] 21:09, 10 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Zaventh: Searching for items

2005-08-11T01:08:59Z

Searching for items

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:08, 10 August 2005
Line 27:		Line 27:
	Anyways, it looks good.		Anyways, it looks good.
	LordChrono		LordChrono

			== Searching for items ==

			Just use the search box just below the nav menu on every page. ;)

Lordchrono: RE: New Layout

2005-08-11T00:49:22Z

RE: New Layout

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:49, 10 August 2005
Line 19:		Line 19:

	I think it is best because of a few reasons. One it is easy to find what you are looking for. Also, it is fairly consolidated but not all crammed onto one page. The most important thing is that each items still gets its own namespace [[Sonhi pipe]] for instance AND we can also have info for types of items (ie. [[Pipes]] which will bring up [[Sonhi pipe]] which will give you even more details]]. This can be useful when referring not to any specific item but rather groups of items. Example: An entry about Carnages might include the phrase: '''"Be sure to bring a bunch of [[Pipes]] with you"''' which would then link the reader to lots of pipes, instead of saying: '''"Be sure to bring some [[Herb pipe]]s with you"''' which gives you only information about Herb pipes.		I think it is best because of a few reasons. One it is easy to find what you are looking for. Also, it is fairly consolidated but not all crammed onto one page. The most important thing is that each items still gets its own namespace [[Sonhi pipe]] for instance AND we can also have info for types of items (ie. [[Pipes]] which will bring up [[Sonhi pipe]] which will give you even more details]]. This can be useful when referring not to any specific item but rather groups of items. Example: An entry about Carnages might include the phrase: '''"Be sure to bring a bunch of [[Pipes]] with you"''' which would then link the reader to lots of pipes, instead of saying: '''"Be sure to bring some [[Herb pipe]]s with you"''' which gives you only information about Herb pipes.

			== RE: New Layout ==

			Hey,
			it really looks good. I think it's a good entrance to the item section. What it also could use is a way to search for items because sometimes you're trying to find info on items you have no idea what they are.

			Anyways, it looks good.
			LordChrono

Zaventh: /* New layout? */

2005-08-09T20:31:12Z

New layout?

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:31, 9 August 2005
Line 18:		Line 18:
	Would this layout be more straightforward and a bit more logically organized?		Would this layout be more straightforward and a bit more logically organized?

	I think it is best because of a few reasons. One it is easy to find what you are looking for. Also, it is fairly consolidated but not all crammed onto one page. The most important thing is that each items still gets its own namespace [[Sonhi pipe]] for instance AND we can also have info for types of items (ie. [[Pipes]] which will bring up [[Sonhi pipe]] which will give you even more details]]. This can be useful when referring not to any specific item but rather groups of items. Example: An entry about Carnages might include the phrase: "Be sure to bring a bunch of [[Pipes]] with you" which would then link the reader to lots of pipes, instead of saying: "Be sure to bring some [[Herb ~~pipes~~]] with you" which gives you only information about Herb pipes.		I think it is best because of a few reasons. One it is easy to find what you are looking for. Also, it is fairly consolidated but not all crammed onto one page. The most important thing is that each items still gets its own namespace [[Sonhi pipe]] for instance AND we can also have info for types of items (ie. [[Pipes]] which will bring up [[Sonhi pipe]] which will give you even more details]]. This can be useful when referring not to any specific item but rather groups of items. Example: An entry about Carnages might include the phrase: '''"Be sure to bring a bunch of [[Pipes]] with you"''' which would then link the reader to lots of pipes, instead of saying: '''"Be sure to bring some [[Herb pipe]]s with you"''' which gives you only information about Herb pipes.

Zaventh: /* New layout? */

2005-08-09T20:30:36Z

New layout?

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:30, 9 August 2005
Line 16:		Line 16:
	== New layout? ==		== New layout? ==

	Would this layout be more straightforward and a bit more logically organized? --[[~~User~~:~~Zaventh\|Zaventh~~]] 15:~~31, 9 Aug 2005 (EDT)~~		Would this layout be more straightforward and a bit more logically organized?

			I think it is best because of a few reasons. One it is easy to find what you are looking for. Also, it is fairly consolidated but not all crammed onto one page. The most important thing is that each items still gets its own namespace [[Sonhi pipe]] for instance AND we can also have info for types of items (ie. [[Pipes]] which will bring up [[Sonhi pipe]] which will give you even more details]]. This can be useful when referring not to any specific item but rather groups of items. Example: An entry about Carnages might include the phrase: "Be sure to bring a bunch of [[Pipes]] with you" which would then link the reader to lots of pipes, instead of saying: "Be sure to bring some [[Herb pipes]] with you" which gives you only information about Herb pipes.

Zaventh: /* New layout? */

2005-08-09T19:31:58Z

New layout?

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:31, 9 August 2005
Line 16:		Line 16:
	== New layout? ==		== New layout? ==

	Would this layout be more straightforward and a bit more logically organized?		Would this layout be more straightforward and a bit more logically organized? --[[User:Zaventh\|Zaventh]] 15:31, 9 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Zaventh: New layout?

2005-08-09T19:31:34Z

New layout?

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:31, 9 August 2005
Line 13:		Line 13:

	--[[User:Calhon\|Calhon]] 11:28, 9 Aug 2005 (EDT)		--[[User:Calhon\|Calhon]] 11:28, 9 Aug 2005 (EDT)

			== New layout? ==

			Would this layout be more straightforward and a bit more logically organized?

Calhon: Aiee

2005-08-09T15:28:36Z

Aiee

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:28, 9 August 2005
Line 5:		Line 5:

	This page needs to be reorganized. I am thinking making it four simple links (one for each page) that get more specific page by page. --[[User:Zaventh\|Zaventh]] 16:01, 8 Aug 2005 (EDT)		This page needs to be reorganized. I am thinking making it four simple links (one for each page) that get more specific page by page. --[[User:Zaventh\|Zaventh]] 16:01, 8 Aug 2005 (EDT)

			== Aiee ==

			Theres wayyy to many items to add to this page! :p

			What to do what to do..

			--[[User:Calhon\|Calhon]] 11:28, 9 Aug 2005 (EDT)