Template talk:Weapon infobox

Info Location

It really bugs me that campaign is at the top of the box. I think that when describing at item its the least important information. I would rather know the damage type and attribute first. - BeXoR 23:26, 26 February 2007 (EST)

Can we condense this into "Equipment infobox" with a type parameter: weapon/offhand/bow? - BeXoR 05:38, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Green Weapons

This is for green weapons also right? -Smurf 08:08, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

[1]; I'll take that as a yes :) -Smurf 10:03, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

Yeah, I saw your question and edited the template a little. I haven't found any other template to handle unique items — Anja 10:59, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

Because the stats are listed in the article, a template wasn't used at gwiki, but the thumbnail image instead. - BeXoR 00:00, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

As I stated in the formatting talk, I think it looks odd. My opinion is we should use a template on unique items too. — Anja 03:21, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

I think we should add a row that says type: Unique and perhaps have the Unique in a green colour and bolded to distinguish it. Otherwise I think it would be preferable just to stick to the weapon thumbnail instead. - BeXoR 03:22, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

Type

Please add in the weapon type whenever you see this field as "Not specified". The parameter was added so that a link to the weapon type is no longer needed in the stats heading. And also to identify when a weapon is unique. I was thinking about making the text green for uniques but I wanted discussion on it first. - BeXoR 00:11, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Replacement Infobox

From Guild_Wars_Wiki talk:Formatting/Weapons with edits to update status. I've completed work on an auto-categorising/typing modification to the weapon infobox that can be found here. Examples can be seen at User:Indecision/Sandbox. Could people please view and let me know what they think about implementing this infobox instead of the old one. The new infobox:

• Auto-types by attribute for martial weapons, bows and shields. This also auto-types uniques (unique=yes). Manually setting the type will override this.
• Auto-categorises martial weapons, bows and shields (by single-attribute).
• Auto-categorises by common crafting materials (single terms only).
• Auto-categorises by rare crafting materials (single terms only).

This will reduce the need to go through some of the existing weapon articles implementing the type parameter, and provide categorisation at the current level. Please feel free to examine the template and examples and comment, either here, or on my talk-page. --Indecision 09:12, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Nice work. So I don't have to go through all weapon articles to add that type param. Replace as soon as possible, I don't want to wait as long as for the item infobox. ;) - MSorglos 09:18, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

I'll give it a couple of days in case there is any feedback, then I'll go ahead with it :). Type will still need to be set manually for existing focus items, staves, wands and unique focus items, unique staves and unique wands, if you are looking for something to do :). --Indecision 09:31, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Unique wands done. Unique focus items I forgot a Unique in front of Focus item in type. Will do this later if nobody did till I have the time to do it. done - MSorglos 10:18, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

Replaced, it may take a little while for the replacement to propagate. --Indecision 19:54, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

auto typing

very nice based on attribute, however most non unique shields will have both strength and tactics as possible attributes. so we need another auto type for that really. --Lemming64 18:52, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

Extra line

Stoneherder's Flatbow has a blank space under bow class. I think because of the pvp reward things, but I dunno. - BeX 02:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

This is still happening. See Tundoss' Shortbow. - BeX 16:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Fixed... I think, was missing some formatting before the pvpreward check. --Indecision 05:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. :) - BeX 08:12, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Bowclass

would it make sense to add bowclass articles such as: Longbow (bowclass) and change the infobox template to direct links from the bowclass parameter to that article? or at least place the bowclass info in the generically named article itself? the reason i ask is that it seems confusing to click on the bowclass link for a longbow in the bow articles and be led to another bow. surely most ppl who click on that link aren't looking for info on a plain starter-ish bow rather than stats on how bows in that class perform right? --VVong|BA 14:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Categorization

This template is kind of a mess when it comes to categorization... --  (CoRrRan / talk) 17:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

See User:CoRrRan/Sandbox3 for an updated version of this template (and User:CoRrRan/Sandbox4 for a test page). Auto-categorization is kinda fixed, only thing that isn't working yet are caster weapons. That's for tomorrow/later. Comments? --  (CoRrRan / talk) 02:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Does the autocat work with all odd capitalizations of things? Most ppl would put in at least "Axe Mastery", not "axe mastery", so if that doesn't work, I think it should be added. Same for materials and campaigns. - anja 05:34, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Attributes are case insensitive AFAIK. The only thing I changed (input-wise) is the way salvage materials are designated. Instead of using commonsalvage = [[Pile of Glittering Dust]] you can use commonsalvage = dust.

I still have to do some work on caster weapons though. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 07:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Also attribute should be given without link brackets. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 18:08, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Rare salvage

What if there is no rare salvage, like in Communing Staff (Conjuring)? Can there be a parameter placed in so that it would remove it completely if we type None or something? — ク Eloc 貢 04:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree, that would proof useful. Those articles do not look very nice with an empty line.

I would also tend to do the same with the common salvage-line, as there are several items that aren't salvagable at all. —ZerphaThe Improver 18:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Parameter for basic weapons?

What do you think about adding an optional line for weapons that also have a basic weapon equivalent? It would be similiar to the pvp-parameter from the {{Armor art infobox}}. I'd like to add it as there are several basic weapons that use another name than the "original counterpart" ("Obsidian Earth Staff" uses the skin of an Earth Staff, or "Greater Ancient Daggers" that of rare Ancient Daggers.
The problem is, there are also basic weapons with a unique skin nowhere available elsewhere as "normal" weapon. No idea how their articles should look like... —ZerphaThe Improver 18:18, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

double "unique" under Type

Some unique weapon infoboxes seem to be written as for example: type = Unique Focus unique = yes

Which ends up saying Unique Unique Focus. See Ilsundur's Focus for example.

So should Unique be in the type or in the template? Eerie Moss 18:18, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

In the past the unique Parameter did not work correctly for that Matter and so some ppl worked around the Problem that using unique = yes did not display as Unique <Type> by using type = Unique <Type>. However that Problem has been fixed and thus all the old Articles which used the dirty workaround are displaying a double unique now. I already fixed some of them when I saw them and I think others did aswell. Even though there still seems to be a Problem with the unique Parameter (See Brain's talk) and categorisation its there and should be used and not workarounded by adding the unique to the type. The Fact its unique doesnt change the Fact its a Bow / Wand / Staff / whatever. Or in short: Unique is NOT Part of the Type so change it. --SilentStorm 21:51, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Auto categorization

Since I haven't really been involved in the creation of the infoboxes, I was wondering if there was a specific reason it doesn't auto categorize for attribute and bowclass? I'm working on cleaning up categories and creating galleries and it would really help this if it would, but I don't want to request further changes if there was a specific reasons why it wasn't done in the first place. -- Wyn talk 22:26, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't categorize locations for items from more than one campaign if one isn't "Core" either. See Chimeric Eye as one of many examples. Manifold 03:29, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Added auto categorization support for unique weapon type. For example | unique = y | type = [[Staff]] will now be categorized in unique staves rather than staves. Everything else in this template that should have this functionality already appears to. I don't think we should include "Unique" in the type parameter because its redundant with the unique parameter. -- Kirbman 21:33, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Oops, just noticed the topic above this one which addresses including Unique in type. -- Kirbman 21:35, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Unique item display

For unique items, shouldn't the template cause the infobox to at least mention that it's unique? Sure, the first sentence of the description is going to say it's unique, but it's also going to say list the weapon type and the campaign (both of which are included in the infobox).

So, can we figure out somewhere to put the word, unique in the infobox? Perhaps, since there will be no salvage note, how about a row that says, Rarity: Unique? – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 23:23, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

It's there. Do | Unique = yes . Kaisha 05:56, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

That doesn't cause it to display. I agree that it should be shown in the infobox, but I'm trying to fix things that are already decided first, which is a lot of fixes. The solution I'm currently leaning toward is to charge the background color from gold to green when unique = yes, since it would be an obvious difference and we wouldn't have to add any new rows or text. -- Kirbman 03:57, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Just had another idea: We could float a "unique item" tango icon to the right of the name in the infobox when unique=yes. Someone would have to make a tango icon for unique items though, preferably the same color green as unique item text appears. For a general idea of how that would look try adding this to a unique item infobox and preview:

| name = Example Name<span style="float:right;">{{n}}</span>

-- Kirbman 23:13, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Generalized material solution

We've had a lot of trouble handling the syntax for double mats. I've attempt to resolve this by adding a second mat drop for both common and rare sals, here: User:TEF/Sandbox/Weapon infobox. Please take a look; if it seems to do the job, let's replace the current info box with the new code.

On that sandbox's talk page, I will attempt to identify any pages that need to be edited because they use the manual line-break syntax instead. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 18:05, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

sigh. Some weapons can convert to one of three different common mats, so I've made provisions for that, too. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 18:34, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Campaign cat: unique *item* or *weapon* ?

The current switch puts unique weapons into category:[campaign] unique items. Shouldn't we place them into category:[campaign] unique weapons (and then make that category part of its campaign's unique items cat)? – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 19:39, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

PvP reward costs

Taking the idea from Talk:Dragon Rod#why, I've created a basic template at User:Chieftain Alex/sandbox 4, and created a simple example of how it could be incorporated into this template at User:Chieftain Alex/sandbox/Template:Weapon infobox (we could instead of passing the parameter to the template, just copy the code directly into this template). The basic idea is to display the pvp-reward cost in zaishen coins just beneath the pvp-reward type in the infobox. File:User Chieftain Alex Chieftain Signature.jpg Chieftain Alex 12:49, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Expansion

Can the template be expanded upon to the following for proper categorisation, gallery listing, etc.

Attribute requirement(s)

Damage type(s)

--Falconeye (talk) 20:30, 12 May 2020 (UTC)