Template talk:Item

WRY
No, no, no! This is ugly. D: I am compelled to work. Damn you. D:< --EVA-251 18:44, 29 October 2007 (MDT)

Conditionals?
I saw use of #IF statements, I am curious now. Can I do variable statements, like == ?


 * Yes, you can.


 * Note that this is testing "If has a non-empty value"
 * To test equality or make comparisons, use #ifeq:


 * I know what you mean, though. I was so excited to see conditionals in here. Claytonius3 07:54, 31 October 2007 (MDT)

Cross-Compatible
Oh yeah! I found out how to fall back to another variable if one is not there. BOOM!

Turtle Shell now uses instead of !

--EVA-251 11:23, 31 October 2007 (MDT)

Yeah, I like how you have it using class OR category (since we meant the same thing anyway) Claytonius3 11:37, 31 October 2007 (MDT)

Parameters
Your last edit to this page: Just making store name bold, right? Claytonius3 07:44, 13 November 2007 (MST)
 * Yes. It looks nice. :P --EVA-251 08:49, 13 November 2007 (MST)
 * Yup.Claytonius3 09:29, 13 November 2007 (MST)

What is the reason for naming the new parameter more info| ? I mean, what is the Pipe for without a default value?


 * turns out blank if it is undefined. That is all. --EVA-251 16:04, 16 November 2007 (MST)

Armor
You do understand that armor is going to be a major bitch to do now? The way you have this set-up, it would require you go through every page that uses Template:Item and add the armor parameters? The workaround to me would be to make a Template:Armor and include that in the parameter. Either way, what are the armor variables going to be? I propose: to start. --EVA-251 06:44, 25 November 2007 (MST)
 * Until it is revealed exactly how armor works, and we have some of the stats, I will make the armor minitable. Currently, the info everyone is using is a guess of Xolah's.
 * Oh, and it will be easy for me to do. Using the conditional statements, It will not bother the non-armor pages if they do not have the parameter. that is why I prefer my to your.

Coins and not Gold
hope you dont mind if i change the 'sell for x gold' to 'sell for x coins' seen as though coins are the currency of SW. will change buy also. Deanodon 02:34, 30 March 2008 (MDT)

Upgrades Yo!
i added the stuff for upgrades, but a mod needs to edit the item template and add an "|upgrades=?" in there so the reference will work it looks great if you manually add the code to each item, but who the hell wants to do that :D check out http://wiki.scrollwars.com/index.php/Demonic_Sword to see how it will look when you update the template --Rotten Apple 09:19, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Me Too!
Apologies all around. I am new at this so please be patient with my fumbling while I learn! ---User:Sr22e 09:51, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

More Then One Sell Location
I was editing the Book of Demons and could not make the template work with more than one location to sell the item. Maybe someone can make it work or adjust the template to accommodate this. --ZZZpal 12:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I do not think this is possible, I will see. --EVA-251 [[image:macro.PNG]] 15:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * With the current set-up it is impossible. The template tries to link to the page with the same title as the text entered in shop type. When you list two shops (i.e. Book Store, Magic Store) the template will attempt to link to Book Store, Magic Store which is a non-existant page. It may be possible to edit the template to accept values that the user would define as seperate pages (i.e. This, of course would require an edit to the base Template:Item page as well as every single page that uses that template. -- 15:56, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
 * We should do away with the whole concept of separate item pages, perhaps following what Nexus War, UD or HR does. The current model is very inefficient in handling such additions, this is a problem I posed to Claytonius when he was still here, but he seemed to ignore it. --EVA-251 [[image:macro.PNG]] 01:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree that separate pages for items may be a bit excessive, however none of those games have such an large base of items. I think we may have to go a different route with a combination of both methods. Perhaps one page for Blunt Weapons, one for Thrown, one for Swords, etc. And then for the worn/equipped items, something like one page for Head items, Belts, Shoes, Pants/Leggings, Shirts. We would then have to work towards determining what items are equipped where. This page has got a good start on that. -- 18:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Upgrade Values
I was trying to set up a section for upgrade values for the upgrading components, but I couldn't figure it out. I was trying to make it so that it only appeared in the table if it was a defined value. I tried to follow the example of the weapons/shield table, but couldn't get it to work. Does it not work because it's not in it's own table? Anyways, if someone could figure it out, it would be appreciated. -- 20:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Claytonius was the only person with a decent understanding of the very complex wiki stuff, sadly. --EVA-251 [[image:macro.PNG]] 05:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * After extensive research, I figured it out. Yay me. -- 19:56, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Required Ammunition
Since all Ranged Items require a second item to function (Dart, Arrow etc) why not add another line to the item template taking this into account, furthermore, some items (I'm thinking the recently re-coded Pipe here) require an additional trigger item which can barely be classified as ammunition (Adhreni Herb), so, if this was to be added, the line should probably be kept slightly more vague a la 'required item(s)' as we don't know what else is going to be added to certain currently useless items. User:Lippsyl
 * I like the idea of listing items that can be used with the item to make it work as intended, but I'm not fond of the "required items" name. I'm not sure what would seem more appropriate, since I can see this being used for patterns, as well as many other uses. Perhaps just, "Related Items" or something along those lines. I can do this for you, but I see you made the attempt yourself (but I honestly don't know the outcome it had for you. -- 23:14, 19 November 2009 (EST)
 * "Ammunition" was too specific, "required items" sounds too vague, I had "Triggers" in mind at one time but that sounded too pecular, "Corresponding Item" or "Related items" would be what comes closest to the task, not too vague, not too specific. I tried a few things but I didn't want to shove it down everyones throats, and it seemed to not translate in the actual template so feel free to add a "Related/Corresponding Item(s)" line, "Corresponding", would be my choice here as it installs a direct link between two items, one that hints that both work together while "Related" could merely suggest analogies in type and function. User:Lippsyl