Template talk:Location infobox

From Guild Wars Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search


Attempting to build this without use of ParserFunctions, at least, until it gets installed. -- ab.er.rant 21:22, 23 February 2007 (EST)


Do we want auto-categorization of what NPC services each location has? It could be useful, although the only problem I see if that towns and ports would have a really large number of categories. -- ab.er.rant 21:22, 23 February 2007 (EST)

Having 20 categories for Kaineng City is just awful. I would suggest to try to get this number down. Wouldn't it be easy to understand that a town like Kaineng has all of those services? -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 06:48, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
Is it really that bad that "awful" is the descriptive word? Oh well, at least I got more response from applying it than by asking about it. Anyway, if a couple more ppl voice their disagreement with the template, either here or some other place, I have no problems removing it. It looks bad for towns, but for outposts, especially those in NF, I actually find them pretty nice. :P But that's just me. -- ab.er.rant sig 06:41, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
Might be too little too late, as most people seem to think I cannot have a good idea. But why not have a category flag sort of thing like Category:Has merchant services, and if the person wants to look it up, they can. Or do hidden categories, so they are still active actual categories, but people want to see them, they specifically look for them. 42 - talk 07:40, 22 November 2009 (UTC)


What happened to the template? Now looks ugly, unwieldy and ponderous. Fox 08:56, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Ok, I suppose people could accept the "Contains blah" categories for salvage items but not the "Has NPC" categories then. I'll get rid of them soonish. -- ab.er.rant sig 02:12, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
No, the NPC cats are good; I see now what has happened -- the template changes have merely not recognised the old data and so led to some of the already existing articles going pear-shaped. If I go back to them and re-enter using the current template style, then all should be restored to former glory :) Fox 07:08, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
Okay, inserted the new version of the template in Arborstone (outpost) and it has gone back to the slim, functional version - the template changes you'd made had merely caused the info to spread the box across half the article, but with the values entered as per new version, it is fine'n'dandy. Gj Ab Fox 07:14, 24 March 2007 (EDT)
So you don't mind the large number of categories? Phew! Actually, the reason it hasn't spread to all articles yet is because I was applying it region by region, and I've just finished NF and only started on Proph. -- ab.er.rant sig 06:41, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

Image size[edit]

The guidelines state 160px as image size, although I see you are uploading and entering them as 196px.... I think they look better at the larger size, and have re-done some of my earlier contribs. In view of this I'm gonna go ahead and change the guideline to 196 :) Fox 06:28, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

Yeah, I just noticed that. Sorry. *goes to change it to 196px* -- ab.er.rant sig 01:40, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

Explorable areas[edit]

Would it be possible to add a function to also include images of maps for the explorable areas or as otherwise required? Fox 06:30, 29 March 2007 (EDT)

Of course! I didn't originally include it because there were no parser functions yet and it kinda slipped my mind. Feel free to add it if you on right now. I'll come back to it later. -- ab.er.rant sig 22:47, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
I've added a map and map-text parameter. It's basically delegating the the subtemplate that {{NPC infobox}} is using. Do you think there's a need for multiple maps for a location? Or maybe it's better to call them image1, image2, image3, etc. to allow for screenshots to be added as well.... hmmmmm -- ab.er.rant sig 01:40, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
At the risk of sounding "belt n braces" and requesting a template to be unecessarily modified, I would be quite happy that the ability to add an extra image is there should it be required. Like a Swiss Army knife, you never know when you're gonna have to remove that stone from hoof lol :) Fox 03:55, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
Done :) I added five parameters, just copying from the NPC template, I even extracted a template so NPC and location can share it. Anyway, it's pic1, pic1-text all the way to pic5 and pic5-text. Why "pic"? Because most location pages isn't only maps, so I thought I just named it more generically so that it doesn't seem weird when it's used for screenshots. You might not want to go all the to 5 without a significant page length though, otherwise, too much white space. -- ab.er.rant sig 06:52, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
May thanks :) The two I had already placed using "map" I have updated to "pic1", and will follow that convention from now Fox 06:59, 30 March 2007 (EDT)

Party size[edit]

Could a parameter be added for maximum party size? This would be helpful on all location infoboxes, whether for outposts, towns, etc. - BeX 15:50, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Good idea. Should it default to 8? or 4? or "Unknown"? -- ab.er.rant sig 22:09, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
I made it default 8, since most locations have size 8. -- ab.er.rant sig 23:41, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
Yeah, that seems best, as Factions and Nightfall areas are usually 8. - BeX 01:50, 18 April 2007 (EDT)
Is this the only infobox that needs the change? I didn't get much sleep and concentrating isn't easy. :P - BeX 01:54, 18 April 2007 (EDT)
Yep, unless there's some other location template I'm not aware of ..... or do we want to put in something similar to mission the infobox? Hmm... -- ab.er.rant sig 02:47, 18 April 2007 (EDT)
Depends on party size in hard mode otherwise I'm fine listing it if there it is different from usual. --Aspectacle 02:57, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Realised something just now. Should party size be omitted from explorable areas? Most notably in Prophecies around northern shiverpeaks and kryta. Depending on where you started, it could be 6 or 8. Should it just list the maximum possible (i.e. 8), the potential max sizes (i.e. 6, 8) or omitted? -- ab.er.rant sig 05:34, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Yeah, I think it should be omitted. The reason I wanted this added was because I was doing Defend North Kryta Province backwards from ToA, and you can't walk into any towns along the way because you'll lose 2 people. Technically you could have 8 people in Old Ascalon. - BeX 21:04, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Avatar of ...[edit]

I was in Nebo Terrace today and there is a Statue of Dwayna, which gives 2 blessings:

  • Holy Blessing
  • DP remove/Morale Boost

I looked on Nebo Terrace, but there is no mention of it there. Shouldn't this be included in the location infobox? Something like: hasStatueoftheGods = y? -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 14:53, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

That isn't an NPC service IMHO. But perhaps another row like "Blessing: Holy Blessing
Morale Boost"? I don't use these so input from others would be appreciated. -- ab.er.rant sig 21:19, 29 April 2007 (EDT)
I think either having Statue = Dwayna etc, in the infobox would be alright, but the blessing types should be in the article, not in the infobox. - BeX 02:05, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
Yep, I don't expect the Blessings themselves to be mentioned in the article, just that there is a statue of a god, where you could get blessings. I think Statue = Dwayna would be ok, although AFAIK all gods in Prophecies only give the two afore mentioned 'blessings'. -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 15:19, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
Ok, so how about a "hasBlessing"? Since we already have Blessing. -- ab.er.rant sig 09:49, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
I'd rather see Statue: Dwayna and have the statue article redirect or something. Just my preference. - BeX 10:07, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
You mean like a separate row on the infobox? -- ab.er.rant sig 20:41, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
Exactly! - BeX 01:04, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
Heh, I added a statue param to the template, which works the same way as exits (in that you have to manually link and manually add
tags for multiple. I currently placed it below npc services, but if anyone thinks it should be higher up the infobox, feel free to change it. I've updated Nebo Terrace to use the new parameter. -- ab.er.rant sig 03:46, 3 May 2007 (EDT)


I'm going to add the parameters hasPriestofBalthazar, hasKurzickBureaucrat and hasLuxonScavenger, updating the articles and then removing hasFactionRewards, since faction rewards can refer to Balthazar, Kurzick or Luxon faction rewards. -- Gordon Ecker 08:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

It's done. -- Gordon Ecker 09:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


Should this be henchmen or are we going with singular for all NPC services for consistancy? -- Gordon Ecker 04:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I went with singular for consistency. -- ab.er.rant sig 07:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


This could be also used with landmarks. Only some changes would be needed. If Type = landmark, then:

  • Exists is replaces by the 'area' they are in.
  • Party size is removed.
  • Category is changed to Category: Campaign landmark.

Since landmarks can be small villages with services, everything else would be the same and there is no need to make more templates. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:MithranArkanere .


How come there's always a blank line when you type in Landmark? See Devourer Cave for example of what I mean.--§ Eloc § 16:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

That is because of a mistake in the ParserFunction code, I do that all the time.. It seems to look ok now? - anja talk 16:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I tried looking through the format just thinking that there was an extra space or someone hit enter an extra time...exactly what is ParserFunction?--§ Eloc § 21:49, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
ParserFunctions. It's all the "ifs", "switches", "exprs", etc. -- ab.er.rant sig 01:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Makes sense, that's why sometimes when I use templates or coding, it says invalid argument, and then before I was like wtf? How am I suppose to argue with it?--§ Eloc §


Could we add two optional variables for dungeons perhaps. Dungeon Quest and Dungeon Chest for quick and easy navigation :) All dungeons have a different article for these options and it seems appropriate. Opinions? --LemmingUser Lemming64 sigicon.png 20:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Fine by me. Otherwise we'd have to use the See also headings. Not sure how large the infobox is becoming then though. Can you (or someone else) make an example on a personal sandbox? -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 11:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
The chest option could also be used by urgoz and the deep, I will make a test in a sandbox. --LemmingUser Lemming64 sigicon.png 20:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Ok you can see the test version at User:Lemming64/Sandbox3, let me know what you think. What we could do is have a subsection like Images with a title like Dungeon Info if the type is dungeon, but that coding is beyond me currently, I may try and get my head around it when I am more awake sometime. --LemmingUser Lemming64 sigicon.png 20:52, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Faction Scribe[edit]

| hasFactionScribe = y 

I don't think this one works. It won't show up under the services when I put in y in an article.--§ Eloc § 16:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. -- ab.er.rant sig 06:17, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Arena outpost[edit]

We need an additional switch entry for type = Arena outpost. (See Ascalon Arena (outpost), which currently falls into Category:All locations, instead of Category:Arena outposts.) -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 16:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

There is a problem with 'Ascalon Academy' in pre-searing. It has an arena, but is an explorable area, not an outpost. For that mater, why not a separate 'mission=yes' and 'areana=yes' parameter and simplify the categories?      mtew 18:52, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
(Duplicated in Quest infobox – it did not belong there. mtew 21:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC))

Add Game link information.[edit]

When dealing with the 'Game link:' name space, which is all redirects, it is not possible (per Poke) to get the name of the page pointed to. I would like to add a some parameters, that would not necessarily be used by the template, to provide the information. Specifically I would like to add parameters 'game link type' which would be the first part of the page name in 'Game link:', 'game link num' which would be the last part of the page name in 'Game link:', and 'ingame name' which would normally be the page's name in the main WIKI space.      mtew 23:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

There are some articles that are pointed by several gamelinks (EotN blessings, to give an example), which is the only problem i think could have this idea (meaning, we would need to split a few articles). In any case, what would be the purpose of this?--Fighterdoken 23:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
The purpose is to be able to enumerate all explorable areas, outposts, and eventually everything else the game links to, using DPL. As for multiple links to the same page, the parameter names can be varied by adding a digit on the end. It would help cross check the WIKI contents to make sure the various connections are consistant.      mtew 00:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Skills already do this. There is no need to add name and type parameters, those already exist. Backsword 15:25, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
But this is not the 'Skills infobox'. That discussion belongs with that template. These are also explicitly the game link type and number, which are assigned by Arenanet or NCsoft, not the community's consensus on the type.      mtew 15:42, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Which discussion? I refered to the Skill ib as a comparison so peopel could see how things are already done. They types we have are strict subdivisions of the ones Anet uses. Every listing here can be strictly mapped to one of ANet's classifications. Thus there is no need to do a lot of extra work; the data is already available. Backsword 15:49, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
I think BS may be talking about Guild Wars Wiki:Game integration, where you can already find lists that asociate a gamelink with the article in particular (not all, since it's done manually, but most of them at least). If i am not wrong, there are also zones (multi level ones like Tombs or Duncan's dungeon) that are pointed by several gamelinks, so that still stands.
Again... what would be the purpose of enumerating them using DPL? We can separate them by gamelink type using the list linked above already, and the number of the link is not really useful per se for documenting purposes on the wiki, so...--Fighterdoken 17:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Backsword: The first skill I checked did not have any back link information to the 'Game link' name space.
Fighterdoken: The purpose is to be able to check the consistency of the links. It also shows where confusion might occur. While I have not finished checking, there seems to be some minor difficulty with some of the WIKI categories, however I will raise that issue when I have more information. That Guild Wars Wiki:Game integration page is a pretty well kept secret; it is not on any of the navigation lists according to 'what links here'.      mtew 18:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Indeed, that page is well hidden (hence why i have a link on my userpage XD).
I think i could see what you intend to do ("disambiguate" multi-linked pages, allow more autocat, etc), but for now i think is better if we keep analizing the reach of this instead of just keep doing the changes as you are doing to articles. As it was said on your userpage, doing a full test is better than just going ahead with a change whose utility is not yet fully understood.--Fighterdoken 20:30, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
The page is sortof meant to be well hidden. While security by obscurity is normally a bad idea, it servs to keep people who have no idea how the integrqation works from messing things up by mistake.
I agree that it had been better if mtew comleted testing and discussion before going ahead. It saves both the job queue, RC and the histories of the inducidual articles. Backsword 18:18, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Add map size information - not displayed[edit]

While this information is usually included in a note, I would like to include it in some DPL reports. I do not expect the template to be modified to use this new parameter.

  • missing
    Indicates that the page has not been updated to include this information.
    Indicates that the location is not included in a cartography title.
    Should be displayed as '< 0.1%'
    (COBOL PICTURE, not any given value.) The contribution of the area to the cartography title.

mtew 03:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

The problem there is that the correct value for all locations would be "blank" as they in themself are uninvolved. And the notes are based on a misunderstanding which we've discussed bu don't have the energy to fight. Backsword 04:15, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
While I realize that the size information is 'derivative' and probably inaccurate, the exploration of an area does change the % completion of the cartography titles. There is some relation between the exploration of towns, outposts, ports and explorable areas and the titles. On the other hand, landmarks are part of other locations and do not contribute separately to the titles. Therefore, the appropriate value for a landmark would be blank, while something like Old Ascalon does have an approximate value. So, blank is not the appropriate value for all locations, just some locations.
I was asked ingame to help find areas where the other player was having trouble with the cartography title. Being able to point them to a regional report would help since there is way too much detail to explain in chat. mtew 04:58, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
A regional report is only helpful if players keep track of their percentages -- which most don't. Using Cartography made easy is a much better way to find missing unexplored spots. --mendel 14:28, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
Exploring one area may uncover portions of an adjacent one, and many areas can't be revealed completely at all. Unless ANet gives the information directly, I'm afraid is way too hard to acquire by players. Al we can say is "this area uncovers around X..Y%", but nothing really aproximate enough. MithUser MithranArkanere Star.pngTalk 14:45, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
If the project was useful (which it probably isn't, see above), a better way would probably be to categorize locations that count in a Category (e.g. "cartographed" or whatever) and poll only these pages for data (narrowed down by additional location categories), instead of editing locations you don't need to show "blank". It is also not strictly necessary to use the location infobox; if the information is to be retained in the notes (and not removed, as has been hinted), a simple template that returns the value or a canned note about the contribution (e.g. {{exploration|2.3%}}) could be put in place in the note section itself, in a simulation of what Semantic MediaWiki achieves for other wikis. In that case, a special category is superfluous, as you can select pages on their use of that template.
If you don't tell anyone about your ulterior motives, you'll be making this change "for consistency", so that all of the exploration notes are worded in the same (templated) way; everybody understands that. The fact that you can generate a DPL report from it then comes as an extra bonus. ;-) --mendel 21:05, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Add Dungeon Number[edit]

It would be handy in some cases if there was an additional line in the infobox that states the number of the dungeon as it appears in the Master Dungeon Guide. This could be viewed in that article of course, yet i think noting it in the dungeon articles themselves wouldn't be a bad idea. —ZerphatalkThe Improver 21:42, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Huge, unwieldy template.[edit]

This template is huge, and is somewhat awkward for a new editor to use. I think the problem is that it attempts to categorise too much into one template. Is it worth splitting out the Dungeon stuff into a new template of its own? I think that will solve part of the problem, and free up the location template to be trimmed down somewhat and make it easier to follow. I'm willing to do this if no one has an issue with that. User_Lyger_SignatureText.png‎yger talk 12:50, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I had a quick play around, and I came up with this as a possible Dungeon infobox template. Being a bit of a new wiki user though, I'm unsure if it is feasible/acceptable for me to just go ahead and create it in the wiki namespace, and add the template usage to the formatting guideline proposal for dungeons. A comment would be much appreciated! Thanks in advance. User_Lyger_SignatureText.png‎yger talk 13:55, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
some times you have to do it and then have someone revert it....- User Zesbeer sig.png Zesbeer 06:01, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
How often will new editors need to use this template? and while it may have a lot of parameters, generally, i'd imagine a user would just copy the usage of a close page. --JonTheMon 06:21, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
True, new editors may not use the template too much - but it does turn the creation of any new or editing of existing articles into more of an effort than it needs to be, what with figuring out the best parameters to use and such. For a location, the NPC stuff makes sense - but there is a lot of stuff in the template that is dungeon specific. And also, reading up this page, there have been requests for further dungeon specific information to be added to it in the past. I think with the dungeon discussion and the current size of the location template, having the dungeon stuff split out into it's own template makes a lot of sense. Also, it's something close to my heart since I'd like to see some settlement/agreement on a dungeon formatting guide, as a lot of the dungeon articles are marked as not up to standard - and a standard doesn't yet seem to exist! User_Lyger_SignatureText.png‎yger talk 09:10, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
It's always preferable to not split templates. In this case, the extra parameters you wish to add seems to be images? In that case, please consider that an infobox extening for most of ther article, or even longer than it, may not look good to many editors and readers. Instead, consider spacing out those images in various sections of the article. Backsword 07:21, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Ok, that's a fair enough comment. I've based the possible template on what is present in the current dungeon articles that *haven't* been marked as incomplete. So in some cases, the current usage is already following something along those lines. User_Lyger_SignatureText.png‎yger talk 09:06, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

NOTOC tag[edit]

I have seen on many of the pages that many infoboxes are used on, that someone has to manually add a __NOTOC__ tag. Specifically locations and NPC pages. I suggest adding this to the guideline to allow the __NOTOC__ tag to be added to the templates pages. 42 - talk 06:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Might make more sense to discuss this in only one location rather than two. --Kakarot Talk 17:01, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

More pictures, please[edit]

I wanted to add all 4 of my "getting there" maps for Heart of the Shiverpeaks, but there's only room for 2 of them, as there are 3 level maps. I also just noticed that the "getting there" map for Frostmaw's Burrows has cut off the level 5 map. Seven should be sufficient, and I don't want to risk screwing up the template, so could someone please expand the number of pictures allowed? Manifold User Manifold Jupiter.jpg 04:20, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Done. –User Balistic Pve B d-dark.jpgalistic 04:37, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Great! Thanks. Manifold User Manifold Jupiter.jpg 17:00, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Zaishen vanquish[edit]

I would like to suggest "Zaishen vanquish" as an optional parameter in the location infobox, which will provide a link to the corresponding article. Currently most of explorable areas will have soon the Template:Location disambiguation on the top of page, which is not well. Such link should be seen only if not empty, because it's not applicable to underground and other non-vanquished areas. After that, all disambiguations can be removed. Please tell what you think, agree or not, some kind of consensus would be good before any changes. --Slavic 01:27, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

If the viewed location is a zaishen vanquish explorable, I would like to see when is the next time it will be the vanquish of the day. Vezz 14:51, 18 June 2011 (UTC)