Guild Wars Wiki talk:Formatting/Dungeons

Basic questions

There's a number of basic issues which need to be resolved:

• One article for the entire dungeon, or one article per level? If there are separate articles for each level, should there be a separate article for an overview of the dungeon?
• If there is a single article per dungeon, how should we sort the NPCs section? Should we just note the levels in each entry, or split the section into subsections for each level? Of so, where should we split it?
• Should the quest be incorporated into the infobox or the article? What about the chest?

-- Gordon Ecker 09:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Hm.. I would prefer one overview article with subpages for each level. Maybe with a navigation box at the bottom. Each level is treated as an own location (with all necessary information) and the overview article maybe should sum up some things like entries and chest information.. poke | talk 14:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I would have an infobox on the dungeon quest, reward, levels, difficulty" stuff along the lines of that. Then you have a little overview i.e. "Frostmaw's Burrows is a 5 level dungeon north of Jaga Moraine. It is one of the more difficult dungeons, but offers a great reward in comparison to others." Then one ===subheader=== for each level, and you inlude a small map, short description, notes, and monsters on that level. Any other information (Proof and Gate in Sepulchre, i.e.) could be put in that Notes section. Obviously that's a rough start, but perhaps something to build on. Calor| talk 15:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

"Difficulty" - disagree as it's very subjective..

The problem on having one page for all levels is that we do not create a consistent layout when comparing dungeon articles with explorable areas or mission entries. We would have to change the heading to one smaller level and by this we would lose a lot clearness.. poke | talk 10:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

We should keep it to one page. While it might not be 100% consistent with mission pages, it is much more user friendly. --Xeeron 12:40, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

What about Slavers' Exile's four sub-dungeons? Should they be treated as separate dungeons like how the four DoA sections get separate articles, or should they be incorporated into the dungeon's main article? -- Gordon Ecker 04:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest that until there is more information (Walkthroughs) that the pages stay the way they are. I would support either decision (page for each level, or each dungeon. I notice that the in game link suggest that each level has its own page. Archangel Avoca 00:44, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Dungeon chests

Can we please remove all Gold items subsections from the Category:Dungeon chests-articles? It is quite apparent that the drops are very random. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 10:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

It should go on the talk page as a drop-research section IMO. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 10:59, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. "Random gold item" seems to be the best solution. --Xeeron 11:39, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

location infiobox

I would like to see a change to the location infobox to add two optional dungeon parameters. Chest and Quest so these can be easily navigated too. I believe both should remain separate articles to the dungeon itself, but clearly need higher visibility for navigation purposes. --Lemming 11:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Tips for fighting bosses?

I think tips for fighting the bosses should be kept to the bosses own page or have their own section in the article, as strategies can become very extensive. I have nothing against a long wiki page - I prefer it to many sub pages but some of the tips/walthrough/notes sections are becoming increasingly large. On a related note I think the general dungeon tips should remain on the dungeon pages, an example would be "Bringing a MM into the Shards of Ore dungeon is inadvisable as there are no corpses in the entire dungeon to exploit aside from your own and boss monsters." Dancing Gnome 08:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Section Titles

At the moment they are very messy. Some pages say monsters, some say foes, some say enemies. Same goes with Walthrough/Tips/Notes. We should really come up with a uniform layout. Something like:

• General Description: Dungeon overview, description, lore stuff and location. NOT for tips on how to play it.
• Quests: The quests required for this dungeon and the quests which take place in the dungeon.
• NPCs: Collectors, quest npcs (not ones that fight with you), maybe divided by race with the icon used for them, unless they have a specific profession. Maybe collectors can have their own section or a subsection?
• Allies: NPC's which fight with you, also noting which quests they spawn with, in case they are not always there. Listing their profession and level just like opponents would be helpful.
• Enemies: Divided into their race, mentioning which levels they spawn in eg:

Charr:

• /24 Charr Blademaster (Levels 2 & 3)
• /24 Charr Seeker (Levels 1, 2 & 3)

Spiders:

• 14 Spider (Level 2)
• 24 Venomweaver (Level 2)
• Bosses: List all the bosses in the dungeon, and what they do eg Opens Blue Gate, Drops Yellow Key etc
• Boss-like Foes: Bosses which have a unique name, are different from other monsters, have some kind of significance to the dungeon but do not have the glowing aura thing. I've seen this on a few articles but I'm not sure this is the case in the dungeons, if it is I say include them in bosses and give them the grey icon like can be seen for Mallyx and Murakai, Lady of the Night
• Dungeon Boss: Should be seperate from the other bosses as they are special. Self explanatory really. This are should also say what kind of Chest spawns after beating the boss, and that once each player open the chest the three minute timer will begin. Listing the location they teleport to after the three minute timer would also be good.
• Walkthrough: Instruction on how to proceed, like on mission articles. Not detailed.
• General Tips: This is where you put tips like "Standing behind x prevents the spirit's attacks from hitting you, making the boss much easier to defeat." or "As the dungeon is mostly Undead smiting builds are especially strong here. Consider bringing Smiter's Boon monks with Smite Condition and other ally target smite skills to make the dungeon easier."
• Boss Tips: Tips on defeating the boss. Can either go on the boss page or remain in the main article.
• Notes: Normal notes section.
• Trivia: Normal Trivia section.

This is just a framework for a uniform style guide for the dungeon pages, which they badly needed. The idea is to have a good standard for each page giving people all the detail they need to find quests/maps etc and help us to know what is missing from these pages, so adding something I missed would be helpful. Dancing Gnome 09:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I also think it would be good to list the Faction Rewards for the quests, both the reward for first completion and the reward for completing it repeatedly after.Dancing Gnome 09:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you port that over to the article here and format it like the other formatting articles to start the discussion. --Xeeron 11:50, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry where did you want me to port it to? I'm having a blonde moment I think and don't understand your suggestion. Dancing Gnome 15:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Here with a formatting like Guild Wars Wiki:Formatting/Missions =) --Xeeron 16:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

secrets

as revealed by the Light of Deldrimor skill. They appear to have fixed positions but I think more research may be needed. --Lemming 17:59, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

They are all in the same location ALWAYS. But they are noted differently in each dungeon page. They should be noted in a section with the same name, in the same style. MithTalk 00:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Now that's weird. I've been reading that the secrets may be different, but every time I do a Dungeon, at least wen I do it with hH/H, they appear in the same place. May it depend on who enters the dungeon? Well, if some appearances are variable and random, the style should differentiate the fixed ones from the random ones. Something like:

• [Random] 0..2 Hidden Trasure(s) at <location>.
• [Random] Hidden Trasure or Dwarven Ghost at <location>.
• [Fixed] Hidden Treasure at <location>.
• [Fixed] 2 Dwarven Ghosts at <location>.

Or with some kid of icon. MithTalk 00:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Walkthroughs

Many of the Dungeons I've played through so far can be accessed through two different quests. Typically a primary quest (like Warband of Brothers) and a repeatable "dungeon" quest (like Temple of the Damned). If one looks at the Cathedral of Flames there's a walkthrough for the Temple of the Damned quest, even though not all of that information is applicable to the dungeon in general (since there are two nearly completely different sets of spawns for the two quests). Should all quest-specific information about a dungeon be removed from the main dungeon article? - HeWhoIsPale 12:42, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I think quest-specific information should be moved to the quest article. -- Gordon Ecker 01:53, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Walkthroughs in the quest articles, as there is not a given goal to a dungeon. Backsword 02:53, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Rewards

Should Dungeon Completion rewards be listed in a sepereate standarised section, the way we do with missions and quests? Backsword 06:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

So, no formatting guide?

As a new user to the wiki, I'm eager to try and start out somewhere simple, like on the articles that are marked for cleanup. I've noticed that a lot of the dungeon articles come under the 'cleanup' category. As a result, I ended up here to try and find a formatting guideline for dungeons. Was a formatting guideline ever agreed upon for dungeons (i.e. should they follow a mission layout?) or the dungeon article still under review? Odds are I'm just looking in comepletely the wrong place. I'm more than happy to try and write a formatting article myself, but I haven't had chance to read all the policies (if they exist) on writing formatting guides. yger talk 10:08, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thoughts on the guide proposal

Should a dungeon template be created, instead of using the location template? yger talk 14:24, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Maps showing the locations of the dungeon entrances

IMO the infobox should include a map showing the location of the dungeon entrance. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 05:19, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Looking at what I put together (using another dungeon page as a format) some of the other pictures displayed on dungeon pages are probably somewhat unnecessary. Maps are far more useful. yger talk 11:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Hidden Objects Headers

Is there a reason the Hidden Objects header is "lesser" than the headers for the levels they're in? The Hidden Objects header is a level 4 (smaller) while the level headers within it are level 3 (larger). ~FarloTalk 23:08, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I think it would be better if we overhaul the way we present LoD data. About half the current screen real-estate repeats the same line of text. We might try something like:

• Grouping similar items, e.g. Cats of Kath @Gwiki
• A chart, e.g. Darkrime @GWiki

Or we might simply list how many there are and point people towards the map. It used to be important to list every possible LoD because their appearance was horribly bugged. Now that ANet (i.e. Joe Kimmes) has fixed their appearance, new maps would describe the location better than any of our text might. Even if (when?) ANet goes through with plans to randomize treasure appearances, the locations will still be localized to within an aggro bubble of the spots we mark on the map... and our placement of the H-marks-the-spot is roughly as accurate.

We might make an exception for the Secret Switches (since finding them makes it possible to take a shortcut or find multiple other treasures) and any Dwarves located close to level entrances or just before a tough fight. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 00:44, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Overhauling it is probably the better way to go, and it's obvious that it needs it now that I'm actually look at the pages and not just clicking the maps, I was just wondering about that little bit in the way we have it now.

If we are to overhaul it, I'd like to set up something that would eventually mesh with the Interactive Maps but also work well as of now (assuming I die of old age before I finish Cantha). I don't really like the grouping example because it could look cluttered if there are ghosts, switches, and treasures on every level, but a table of some sort works for me and it can look clean if we manage it correctly. ~FarloTalk 02:00, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Altering format for better reading (test)

I will be overhauling Dungeon quests as I did with Missions, you can follow my progress here. I wanted to give some heads-up and tell that will be trying different displays. My first plan is to take the section maps out of the infoboxes and drag them down to the walkthrough sections. This is because when a reader is following the indication, he/she will have to constantly scroll up and down to get a picture of what the guidance is saying. Yoshida Keiji (talk) 18:17, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I think it looks scrappy if the images are staggered left/right. They would have to be the same size for it to look decent, which they are not. In my opinion they should be staying in the infobox. Chieftain Alex 16:21, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I need to find a way around that can help me divide sections like blocks or bricks. I thought about creating a table to split text or maybe even a template. Had been offline for a week since then but haven't forgotten about it. It will take me a bit more time to make it look cuter. Yoshida Keiji (talk) 09:41, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Can I suggest you make the changes you'd like to propose in a sandbox, and in the mean time I will revert your changes to the "example" in the mainspace. Chieftain Alex 09:42, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Implemented quite a bit of your text changes, reverted image locations back to the infobox. Chieftain Alex 10:26, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

GWW:BOLD

Planning on this format for all dungeon articles. Any objections, alterations, and so on? - Infinite - talk 13:03, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

I like it! --Falconeye (talk) 00:44, 19 August 2017 (UTC)