the fuck did you just do?" written on my talk page. And in any case, I'd prefer to have at least a few more people weigh in on the matter, simply because of the magnitude of the change I'd hate to do something and have "what. I mean, I know that you use it like that, it just caught me a bit off guard. I agree with changing it.- Relyk 22:04, 18 December 2012 (UTC) Jya voc 21:55, 18 December 2012 (UTC)Ĭhange it if you can be fucked- Relyk 21:59, 18 December 2012 (UTC) The only thing that would prompt me to talk about a change for these would be, even if they're entrenched right now, it'd be less work/less clutter for the histories if we changed them before more game updates are made/more instances of the template are being used/the first game expansion is release (imagine Tyria+Cantha :P). I mean, I can live with it, I suppose, because it's only showing to the wiki contributors, and it isn't the most egregious mistake that we have/could make. Area infobox is also another archaic term.- Relyk 21:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC) The misnomer isn't a big deal since trinket and accessory have pretty much identical meanings. It doesn't help that Talk:Accessory redirects to Trinket talk page. I don't know if we'd want to go about changing it now that it's this deeply propagated, but I wanted to bring this up all the same.
I'd recommend leaving these outside the infobox, displayed similarly to the to categorize rings, capes, necklaces, and accessories. Putting the item's stats ("benefits") in the infobox looks odd, especially when there is a slotted upgrade component.
0 kommentar(er)
