Talk:Transclusion of Variant item listing pages into Update X Pages

Currenly, we have duplicate data listed for variant items on both the 'Update X Named Items' page and also on each items disambiguation page. If we only had the data on the Item Disambiguation page, and transcluded it onto the 'Update X Named Items' page, would this have any effect on performance an page load?

I have done this on the U18 item Guidance of Shar and it seems to work OK. Snake (Contributions • Message) 08:51, May 22, 2013 (EDT)


 * I'm not entirely sure what disambig pages you are talking about. The main pages for each item that lists all of the various stats for the n/h/e/en/eh/ee versions or however it works for the individual item should be in the form of a table and not in the form of a list like Update XXX is suppose to have, so I don't know how they would be transcluded as such.  I'm sure that in my absence due to RL issues preventing me from being as active as I was (I haven't even had time to play, nevermind edit) there are likely a lot of item pages I need to fix up.

ShoeMaker (Contributions • Message) 20:59, May 23, 2013 (EDT)


 * I like the way the U17 items were done - just listing the items out - a lot better than the tables that were used previously. Tables actually make it more difficult to compare versions at a glance, not easier.

Cdr (Contributions • Message) 21:28, May 23, 2013 (EDT)


 * I think the 'disambiguation' was the wrong word.

Gianthold items now have 6 (or 7 if you include legacy instances) variants. Each variant has its own page eg Item:Arcing Sky (Level 23). However, there is also a simple 'variant listing' page for each item eg Item:Arcing Sky. The information that is on the 'variant listing' page for each item is also on the 'Update 17 named Items' page. The same info exists in 2 places meaning updates and corrections etc have to be done twice. On the 'Update 18 Named Items' page, I have actually transcluded the info from each items 'variant listing' page instead of duplicating the data. What I am asking is if transcluding the data from the 'variant listing' page to the 'Update ? Named Items' page instead of duplicating it negatively affects page load times or server effort. It would make updating easier if the data only exists in one place. My 2 cents: I also think the tables used in Update 16 are kinda ugly and an un-necessary amount of typing/code. Snake (Contributions • Message) 06:23, May 24, 2013 (EDT)


 * I agree that the amount of duplicated data around the wiki needs to be reduced. For example, Epic_Elyd_Edge has details on it's base page, on Named weapons by type, Unraveling_Enchantments, Named epic items by type and Sentinels of Stormreach epic items. That means, when Cacaphony got added in update 11, 5 pages needed to be updated to account for this change. I suggested in Sep-2012 trying to transition to a structure where an items "page" would seed the item data as variables which could then be passed through a template to determine how that data got displayed. My idea was dismissed as being impractical.

I think ultimately, if a serious effort is made to reduce duplication, it will have to involve the data being stored in a central place ( to me ideally this would be the items page ) along with other interfaces being designed to retrieve the data and display it ( can be done with templates ). An "item with details on one line without popups" template could be made, along with another version that displayed details with popups / links. -Joe Joenuts (Contributions • Message) 11:40, May 24, 2013 (EDT)


 * For a non-tiered item I took Item:Pale Green Ioun Stone as a test subject, added a Transclusion section at the bottom, added "noinclude" tags around the template. Had to write out every thing; bullet, links, ML, location on single line. Place the transcribe section in (its at the top) and   (remove duplicate info contain outside the item).  So far so good. Would have to have a uniform way how the lines would be written. Is this what is being talk about? or am I off the map? Multi tiered be handle on the item main page not the individual item page. Would have to break some page where it being use in small groups to prevent slow load times and breaking of a page with a large number of templates.

Bladedge (Contributions • Message) 19:56, May 25, 2013 (EDT)



Ok, I've created and transitioned two item pages Item:Alabaster of the Twelve and Item:Battle Coin to store item details in variables which can then be used in display templates.

The only part of the item base page that is contained within the noinclude tags is the portion with calls out to the display box template ( which retrieves variables from the page, and creates a display box accordingly ).

I've also created two example display templates which take as an argument an item's base page ( to retrieve variables ). Template:ItemDisplayNamedJewelry just transposes the item variables to the named jewelry template for a full display box of item properties. Template:ItemDisplaySingleLine will display the item properties on a single line in the format : Item Name - [ML] Enhancements,... (Item drop location).

( I've also updated references to Alabaster and Battle Coin to use the display single line template ).

One benefit of this approach is of course a standardized output for displaying item information on a single line. Just looking at the table of contents for trinkets, you can see that some items are listed with min level near beginning of the line ( Epic Bloodstone), some at the end (Bold Trinket), and some completely missing ( Dusk Heart).

Another benefit is that as information changes about a particular item, it will automatically cascade to every page that references the item via the display template.

I believe the approach of adding the single line display to the item base page solves the second solution of cascading the information correctly, but does not really handle the first issue of standardizing display output. A single line display template could be used on the base pages and the information can be duplicated to both the display box template (sectioned off within noincludes) and then again to the single line display template, but I dont believe it to be as elegant. You would then be defining the same properties twice. If an enhancement got added to an item, you're then adding it to two places instead of just one. Joenuts (Contributions • Message) 22:58, June 1, 2013 (EDT)


 * I have moved around line breaks, curly brackets, added some space to the Item:Alabaster of the Twelve article. It seems that I broke nothing while improving the usability for casual editors - it's not that much different from our current template use. I'm always hesitating when introducing stuff that increases the complexity for a casual editor.

What I am not sure about is the Enhancements variable, it seems to introduce different syntax from what we know. Would it be feasible instead to have around 10 variables, enh1 to enh10? Ideally we could plop the enhancements in the same format we're using in our current template (except without the asterisk at the beginning). Possible? Better? Irrelevant? --Cru121 (Contributions • Message) 06:38, June 12, 2013 (EDT)