Talk to ◄► Tephra ◄►

Talk Archives

Poor old articlesEdit

Thanks. I found a new bunch of them, though.

Hope this is the final wave. Pryamus (talk) 09:24, June 6, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Succubi imagesEdit

Hehe, I didn't know anyone's reading this :) It was more of a joke. Actually, it's just because the images in question are NSFW, of which there has been a discussion on the official forum (already reflected in the article). While it's not something unusual, I am not fully aware of whether or not mild nudity is allowed on Wikia, even in context of the article (ofc they are naked, they are lust demons, what did you expect them to look like, people, wear full plate bikinis?:) ).

I will put the image now, feel free to delete it if it's violating any of the rules. Pryamus (talk) 19:02, June 16, 2014 (UTC)

Good. I don't think anyone will mind, though. I am not entirely sure if this image is 100% official (even though it depicts nothing except unmodified in-game models), but similar images in other articles were never criticized. Anyway, thank you again, let's see what happens next. Pryamus (talk) 19:24, June 16, 2014 (UTC)

2.1 itemsEdit

I just finished every single Legendary item in Diablo III. Still got plenty of sets to work on, but still. I wanted to ask this: how to mark the seasonal legendaries that will be introduced in patch 2.1? Variants are:

  • A note on each item's page, next to required level: this item can only drop for seasonal characters, and will drop as normal past Season 1.
  • A note on each item's page, below the orange name/type box: Season One-exclusive.
  • Divide each template (like Template:LSword}} into two sections: Normal and Seasonal.
  • All of the above.

I will not start working on it until the items are confirmed (so far we only know the Sorrowful Countenance for sure). Need the format authorized now, though. Pryamus (talk) 16:29, June 23, 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I made an example of how it will look like: User:Pryamus/Sorrowful Countenance. Note three Seasonal indicators: the first paragraph, in the stats and in the navigation box. If that's fine, it will be how I do that when 2.1 is released. Pryamus (talk) 19:22, June 23, 2014 (UTC)

Yep, I saw those examples, that actually inspired me to ask :) anyway, if this sample is fine, then we're good to go. I am not sure if I will be online when it starts (may be a few days), so if someone else decides to do that instead, it may serve as a sample. Thank you. Pryamus (talk) 19:58, June 23, 2014 (UTC)


Hello. Well, I do not intend to steal anything. Those images are screenshots (appears to be Polish version of the game), so they can hardly be copyrighted by anyone except Blizzard (whose images we can use under the Fair Use rules). Besides, should any complaint come about those, I will remove them outright.

Honestly, I'd love to have screenshots of our own, but it's not always possible. So we need to borrow some from the Internet.

Please let me know if anything of it becomes a problem. Pryamus (talk) 22:44, June 24, 2014 (UTC)

Understood. I will try to contact the author, if no permission is given, I will remove the screenshots. Any word of advice? Pryamus (talk) 23:01, June 24, 2014 (UTC)

It seems that the author is not available as of right now. I will not use his pics in future, unless that changes. Can we try and keep the pics we already have? Erasing them all will be hell of a job, to be honest, and we have many better things to do. Pryamus (talk) 20:38, June 25, 2014 (UTC)

That's actually a good point. Then I guess the best thing I can do is source the images I encounter, except those that come directly from Blizz. Just in case. Nobody promised it'll be easy :) Anyway, thank you, and let's see what happens. Pryamus (talk) 22:21, June 25, 2014 (UTC)

AnDre has kindly allowed us to use his screenshots. Yay. Pryamus (talk) 16:22, June 29, 2014 (UTC)

Unreleased v Future? Edit

Hi Tephra, Just wanted clarification on the creation of Category:Future and Category:Unreleased Content. Since the Future template is using Unreleased, what is the purpose of the Future Category? I can only guess that Unreleased would be for things already finished development and are ready to release, while Future is for things that have only been announced or begun working on? ~ Demise101 ♥ Lets Talk! ♥ Blogs! ~ 01:52, July 31, 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough! ~ Demise101 ♥ Lets Talk! ♥ Blogs! ~ 05:25, July 31, 2014 (UTC)


Concerning monster categorization, should uniques/super uniques/bosses be considered exlusionary, or superlative? What I mean is that a super unique monster in Act I of D3 for instance would be categorized in the "monsters" category (blanket), "Diablo III Monsters" (game) and "Act 1 Bestiary (Diablo III)" (as per act appearance). However, while being super unique would give categorization in the SU category, would this prompt categorization in the "unique" category? I'm inclined to say no in that I'd argue that uniques/SUs/bosses are mutually exclusive in role (i.e. a boss will never appear as a unique or SU, a SU will never be randomly encountered like a unique, etc.) whereas the game/act/blanket categories are not at odds with one another. However, I've noticed that many monster categories have been superlatively categorized already.

Willing to go either way, but would appreciate clarification.--Hawki (talk) 12:58, July 31, 2014 (UTC)

Joining the discussion. I am currently planning to put SU monsters into the articles (currently they all have stubs), so by default I was putting both U and SU categories (that is, the monster does not stop being unique just because he spawns in every game). IMHO, the whole superunique thing is a D2 feature. Rare/Unique confusion added to this too. From this moment, I will put the SU category only, just in case. Awaiting admins' decision to keep it that way or change the course. BTW Boss category is not clear too: for example, right now the SU article lists bosses as SU monsters, which is technically correct. Not to mention that defining a Boss is not as easy as it might seem. Pryamus (talk) 15:16, July 31, 2014 (UTC)
I guess I'll reply here since there's multiple people involved... I think it may be redundant to have both Super Unique and Bosses, I think if it is Super Unique, it is a boss. If the Super Unique concept no longer exists in D3 (I don't really know) then the category may as well be thought of as "(Diablo II) Super Unique Monsters". The "Bosses" category may still be redundant in that case, and could just be removed from the wiki and replaced with a "Diablo III Bosses" category.
I do not like blanket categorization when a smaller sub-category would be more accurate, I've lately been removing these kinds of categories (from items) because putting everything that can be under one category creates a category with several hundred pages under it, completely defeating the point of categories (navigation). A blanket category like 'Monsters' should mainly exist as a parent category for the more specific sub-categories, and the only pages that should use it would be any that don't really fit under one of its sub-categories, e.g. a monster exclusive to a novel may not fit under any of the sub-categories. "Diablo III Monsters" is a lower rung on the category hierarchy, but it should be used in the same way, I do not think every D3 monster should be categorized under Diablo III Monsters, only the ones that don't fit into a sub-category. I would rather a parent category have only sub-categories and no single pages at all than to have hundreds of pages, making actually navigating them a nightmare.
These are my own opinions, of course, and I am open to other thoughts.
◄► Tephra ◄► 21:02, July 31, 2014 (UTC)
I can get behind non-blanket categorization. Sorry to use your talk page as a test bed, but as per the above idea:
  • Monsters: Parent category, few, if any monsters should be categorized in it (exceptions would be non-game creatures that don't have a defined type).
  • Sorted by game: D1/D2/D3. Similar in principle, no blanket categorization. D1 would be an exception due to the game's lack of acts.
  • Sorted by act: D2/D3 stuff. This is probably as high as is needed in most cases. So in other words, a monster that only appears in act 5 of D2 only gets categorized in "Act V Bestiary."
  • Uniques/Super Uniques/Bosses: I think there can be some overlap with the bestiary category, as I think the bestiary should be entirely inclusive of an act, unless further sub-divisions exist that are linked to that act (e.g. "super uniques of Act 3 (Diablo III)"). Which I'm iffy about. Concerning bosses, D2 is pretty clear in that there's only five foes the player absolutely has to kill (Andariel-Duriel-Mephisto-Diablo-Baal). D3 has monsters that are required to die to advance the story outside the end of act bosses, so I'd argue that such monsters that can't be avoided should also be categorized bosses - things like Maghda and Ghom, in addition to the five act bosses that exist so far. I'm happy to create separate boss categories for all three games, so for D1 it would be a few like Diablo, Na-Krul, and Lazarus, D2 it would be the five mentioned, D3 it would be the above paradigm.
  • Monster type categories are something I support, such as "category: demons" and "category: undead." These are not dependent on game (e.g. no "Diablo II demons" category), but can have sub-types. E.g. the Hell Knight would be categorized under "Diablo I Bestiary" (game categorization) and "Hell Knights" (type categorization), with "Hell Knights" being a sub-category of both "Category: Demons" (type) and "Category: Diablo I Bestiary" (game of origin). Similar lore based sub-categories can also apply (e.g. Diablo would only be in the Prime Evils category, not thrown into "Category: Demons," the AC members would only appear in the AC category rather than also being in "Category: Angels," etc.) As an example, a Death Maiden would be in "act 5 (Diablo III) bestiary) (game of appearance), "Reapers" (faction), and "Angels" (race), as far as categorization goes.--Hawki (talk) 22:54, July 31, 2014 (UTC)
I do not oppose multiple categories for one article, just using both a parent category and its own sub-categories. So if a monster is from a certain act and is also a demon, then I am completely behind it having both categories. As far as bosses go, I really don't think I am qualified to give any further opinions on that as I still haven't ever played Diablo III and honestly don't know its mechanics. I think that matter comes down to a 'you do what you think is best' moment.
Another thing I would like to add to this, though it may not be necessary to say. Have templates control the categories wherever possible, if a category needs to be changed later, it is so much easier to remove it from one template than twenty individual pages.
◄► Tephra ◄► 23:42, July 31, 2014 (UTC)
K, sounds good. I don't have time right now (or for awhile I'm afraid), but I'm happy to type up a "Help: Categorization" page to solidify the categorization style. Guideline for ourselves, and a guideline for others. Gives us some leg room in that a swing to one style categorization from the other will have to be done over time. Though that said, Pryamus will need to clarify the SU/U issue. I'm familiar enough with D3 for the boss issue, but he's far more qualified than me in most areas of the game.--Hawki (talk) 05:32, August 1, 2014 (UTC)
Can we get sort of a script to replace categories in all pages automatically? There's 803 pages in Monsters category, would be quite a pain to manually correct them all. Nebiksrazu is a software engineer, he might be able to help.
As for the Unique / Super Unique. This whole thing came from the confusion in terminology between D2 and D3.
D2 Unique = D3 Rare
D2 Super-Unique = D3 Unique
There is no SU category in D3. At best, Unique monsters that spawn in every game can be marked Super-Unique. Overall, however, were it my will, I'd remove the SU category from D3 monsters altogether, leaving only the list of guaranteed spawn monsters in the SU page (making a note that, although the SU category is gone, a number of Uniques, listed as follows, will spawn in every game, mostly for quests). Bosses probably do not have to be marked as Uniques too, for their purple name indicates that anyway. Pryamus (talk) 07:11, August 1, 2014 (UTC)
It would be cool to have our own bot here, I've never looked into how wiki bots work myself. This does exemplify why categorization via template is so very useful though.
◄► Tephra ◄► 09:00, August 1, 2014 (UTC)

Shadow of Mordor versus tournamentEdit

Hi Tephra! I'm Mark, from Wikia's Community Development Team.

I'm reaching out to see if your community would like to be a part of a versus tournament we're hosting on the Shadow of Mordor wikia. It would go live in September, and we would be pitting Diablo against Sauron from Shadow of Mordor. The voting would live in a blog on Shadow of Mordor and we would post a button on Diablo's page here encouraging your community to vote for them. On the voting blog we would link back to your wikia, and we'll be promoting the tournament around Wikia. If your community would like to be a part of the tournament, which would include the button on Diablo's page as well as a link back to your community from the voting blog, please let me know by 8/29.

Thank you! Mark@fandom (talk) 20:16, August 25, 2014 (UTC)

We will make every attempt to get as many users and visitors from all over Wikia to vote for their favorite characters, so hopefully the competition will be fair. I'm glad that the Diablo Wiki is taking part in the contest! I'll let you know once the contest is live.

New Versions of ImagesEdit

Hi Tephra, I just wanted to ask: is it typical that uploading a new version of an image file does not update it? Tried it today, does not seem to work properly. This may be a good example: tell me if you do see the difference between versions (I do not). Pryamus (talk) 22:32, August 31, 2014 (UTC)

Well, what I did is I tried updating some of the set items (which vary depending on character class) with images for their own class instead of the (default) Demon Hunter images. For the Jade Harvester Boots, this is the DH image, which the Game Guide (incorrectly) uses, and this is the WD (correct) image. I tried updating the former with the latter, but somehow it still diplays the old image. Pryamus (talk) 22:48, August 31, 2014 (UTC)

Okay, thank you ) Let's see what happens. Pryamus (talk) 23:21, August 31, 2014 (UTC)

Yay :) Pryamus (talk) 03:53, September 1, 2014 (UTC)

Set Items categoryEdit

I just noticed that you're removing the Set Items category from some articles. I can give you a hand with that, at least on when it comes to D3 sets. May I ask why it has to be done? Maybe we can come up with something to better organize sets, for example, with some means to categorize all set items of the same type together (like "Diablo III Set Pants"). Pryamus (talk) 05:23, September 1, 2014 (UTC)

Wikia Fan Studio Edit

Hey Tephra. This is Brandon from Wikia. I sent you an email yesterday about a new Wikia project related to Diablo. The subject line had "We Want YOU!" in it. Did you get that email? Are you interested in joining the project? Please let me know by the end of tomorrow (Thursday October 23rd) if you are interested. Thanks! - Brandon Rhea@fandom(talk) 03:02, October 23, 2014 (UTC)

We're all with you in it Tephra :D Pryamus (talk) 04:13, October 23, 2014 (UTC)

  • Thanks for getting back to me. Are you familiar at all with Reaper of Souls/feel you have expertise it in regardless of lack of gameplay? If not, is there anyone else you would recommend and that you know has played Reaper of Souls? - Brandon Rhea@fandom(talk) 04:22, October 23, 2014 (UTC)
    • Is there anyone in particular you would recommend? Another admin who plays the game, perhaps? - Brandon Rhea@fandom(talk) 18:30, October 23, 2014 (UTC)

Quick follow-up. Would you like to join the Fan Studio program anyway? It comes with no obligations, but can afford you opportunities that you may be able to take in the future. - Brandon Rhea@fandom(talk) 14:46, October 24, 2014 (UTC)

I absolutely love Reaper of Souls and play it extensively with my son

Di Mach (talk) 10:14, January 28, 2015 (UTC)

Templates Edit

Hey Tephra,

I'm back from vacation, so a late Merry Christmas/New Years to you! It seems that when I left Wikia changed something with tables (see here for an example, where the background for certain areas are solid white. If you can, please take a look (Hawki will likely read this, so he should also check it out as well). Thanks! ~ Demise101 ♥ Lets Talk! ♥ Blogs! ~ 02:23, January 11, 2015 (UTC)

Ah yes, I forgot you use Monobook. So far I've only seen the Infobox and a Location template, though there may be more. I'll keep an eye out for more. ~ Demise101 ♥ Lets Talk! ♥ Blogs! ~ 11:10, January 11, 2015 (UTC)

I'm afraid no one has corrected the white background, so we'll need to do it ourselves. It couldn't fix it from the template itself (I think I am doing something wrong, or maybe I am just not seeing any changes from correcting the #fff color to #000000). Pryamus (talk) 10:53, April 18, 2015 (UTC)
I am thinking about cloning the D3 skill templates (which seem to work fine) and making some changes to them (particularly, a number and names of fields). Let's try to make a few samples later and see which work best. Pryamus (talk) 07:50, April 19, 2015 (UTC)
Just checked. The D2 templates are more or less suitable for mobile display. D3 templates work fine too, but have some glitches (for example, using a VALUE template causes the highlighted number to appear as a separate line). Ironically, D2 templates work better for mobile than they do for the original site, as mobile version has white background. Pryamus (talk) 08:09, April 19, 2015 (UTC)
Hope so. I will play with them a bit later, and report to you on the results in a day or two. With some luck, we'll make a universal template to replace both existing ones. With superior luck, they will even use the same input format as before. Also, some fields may be redundant, for example, Class. But I will keep them anyway. Pryamus (talk) 08:21, April 19, 2015 (UTC)
Okay, so after some playing with these, I created a template that can be used for both D2 and D3: template:New Skill Template (sample skill conversion (Meteor): User:Pryamus/Meteor). It's a bit ugly IMHO, mainly because I am not sure where to put the icon. But you can take it as a basis and try to change it. I would suggest the following possible changes: horizontal borders; separate row for an icon; different colors and sizes for fonts (I deliberately erased formatting for now to make it easier to edit it).
The template is organized as follows: icon in the upper right corner; skill name; class; level required; skill tree (D2); skill category (D3); prerequisites (D2); type (Active/Passive); resource generation; resource cost; cooldown; description; damage type; synergies (D2); other (notes); skill image. All stats except icon, name, description and type are optional. Pryamus (talk) 10:34, April 21, 2015 (UTC)
I reviewed the final version; it now works fine. The only problem with mobile version remains: when we use templates like template:obsidian (which make the text bold and colored), they cause glitches in mobile view. It can be avoided by replacing the DIV tag with FONT. For experiment, I did that with template:value, and it worked just fine. So, if I format them all properly, we'll have fully functional mobile templates. As of design, I finally made a version I like; is there a way to discuss this with the users of original templates? Pryamus (talk) 09:31, April 22, 2015 (UTC)
Per Pryamus's request, I've looked at the templates. Both look good. The D3 template is a distinct improvement in that the image is in the upper right rather than left centre. The D2 one is an improvement for the same reason.--Hawki (talk) 11:16, April 22, 2015 (UTC)
Then I will start implementing them, but not before I solve the color text issues. Need to choose the most appropriate tag; FONT works fine, except for I need to manually set the bold formatting using the six ' symbols. However, this means that putting a colored text in a text that is already bold will make it normal. I will look into the coding later; any further feedback is very welcome. Thank you! Pryamus (talk) 11:21, April 22, 2015 (UTC)

Hi Tephra,

I started to successfully reformat D3 skills (with Hawki's help), the new template seems to fit very well for active skills. I wonder if it should be used for passive D3 skills too. They are doing fine with the current infobox, as passive skills do not really need any notes and comments in the template itself, and only have a single icon. Note that for passive D2 skills, I will use the new template (it even has a special line). I also want to ask if we should (need to?) edit the current D3 infobox to visually fit the new template (font size / color). Pryamus (talk) 15:31, April 27, 2015 (UTC)


Hi Tephra.

What are the rules and policies Diablo wikia?

Lars Alexandersson (talk) 21:38, January 23, 2015 (UTC)

I know what you mean about common sense. I was a bureaucrat in another site, my priority was to design templates, pages, categories (to images and pages), backgrounds, audio, and rules. But because of the hostility and malice of trolls and cyber bullies I left that site. Diablo Wikia this is relatively calm now, so I wanted to know more about this place and avoid screwing up. . .

Lars Alexandersson (talk) 00:38, January 24, 2015 (UTC)

SXSW Awards Edit

Hi, Tephra!

Diablo III: Reaper of Souls has been nominated for Most Valuable Add-On Content for the SXSW Awards, which Wikia is officially hosting this year! In order to drive any fans to the voting page that might be interested in rallying for their favorite game, we were wondering if we could place a badge on your main page that links to it?

Best regards,

Raylan13@fandom (talk) 19:54, February 4, 2015 (UTC)

Thanks ;) Hopefully it isn't obtrusive on the page where I've placed it. Raylan13@fandom (talk) 23:14, February 4, 2015 (UTC)

Re: RollbackEdit

Don't worry, I am cool :) Basically, I'm doing fine with current rights. But thank you for the trust :P Pryamus (talk) 08:05, February 28, 2015 (UTC)

Re: The Utilization of "Talk" pagesEdit

Sorry, for the misunderstanding. I did my best to keep things as neat and clean as possible, although I totally agree with your reasoning. Thanks for filling me in. This has been a great Wiki for a long time for me and my brother as well. :-)

Diotro (talk) 12:32, May 2, 2015 (UTC)

Page reversionEdit


Could you check the Unique Mesh Armor page Shaftstop?

It seems like someone of an unknown IP changed it inappropriately.

So I leave it to the Admin.

Greetings & peace

KassraArturia (talk) 03:23, May 8, 2015 (UTC)

Re: Diablo I affixesEdit

Very well, I got your point.

I've actually played Diablo I myself a whole lot so I know/have some or most of the affixes in my head.

There are also sources from,, not to mention Jarulf's Guide Online & Tristram.

Both authors of these sites which I've put an external link to have taken the data directly from the game files themselves.

I would never edit any page without knowledge of fact about the subject.

If you'd approve of any of these sites I could see if I can create an affixes section page for Diablo I.

Now I guess you've got what you inquired & quite some to inspect for that matter.

Greetings & peace

KassraArturia (talk) 16:54, May 18, 2015 (UTC)

Alright, that sounds like an excellent plan for the time being.
I'll see if I can manage to create a couple of decent pages for these Diablo I affixes.
You may help with contributing to these pages if you'd like to.

KassraArturia (talk) 18:05, May 18, 2015 (UTC)

Block mechanicEdit


Could you kindly check the Block page?

It seems like the mechanics of Diablo III have been mixed with those of Diablo I & II.

Exactly what is it that Warriors from Diablo I & Paladins from Diablo II are likely to make extensive use of?

And in addition to that, they've been put together with Crusaders from Diablo III.

It doesn't make any sense at all and only confuses me.

This page needs a thorough reading and probably some editing.

Greetings & peace

KassraArturia (talk) 21:03, May 18, 2015 (UTC)

Really well done.
I'll see what I can add about Block in Diablo I to the page.

Greetings & peace
KassraArturia (talk) 02:55, May 19, 2015 (UTC)

Re: Plural linksEdit

Very well.

I only thought it looked better to have the s within the link as well.

Cheers & peace

KassraArturia (talk) 23:59, May 19, 2015 (UTC)


I didn't know of this before, if I knew it was prohibited I wouldn't have spoken of it.

It was unintentionally.

Salute / KassraArturia (talk) 07:19, June 11, 2015 (UTC)

Portable InfoboxesEdit

We’re reaching out to a few of our top communities, hoping to get you on board with the migration to the new infobox markup. And we have tools to help!

Why we’re doing this

Simply put: Most current infobox structure translates very poorly to mobile experiences, and indeed any device that doesn’t use desktop-style displays. On desktops and laptops, they often look amazing. The problem is that Wikia’s traffic is trending mobile.

There is an important graph from our forum post about infoboxes a couple weeks back, and I want to share it here as well:

Mobile is the future. Not just for Wikia, but for the web as a whole. Take a look at the recent trends and future growth predictions for mobile traffic - it's staggering.

We partnered with the Wikia community to create this new markup to make sure that your hard work can be displayed on mobile devices (as well as any future technologies) easily and without any new coding conventions. It’ll take some effort up front, to be sure, but we’re here to help, and the work you put in now will pay for itself tenfold in the future.

Tools we’ve designed to ease the process

We’ve enabled two new features on your community. One is a tool for migrating the “old” infobox code to the new markup. It identifies templates on your wikia that look like infobox templates and places a box on the right rail of the template page. When you click the “Generate draft markup” button in this box, it opens a new tab containing a draft of your infobox using the new markup.

The second is a new feature on Special:Insights that will highlight which infoboxes on your wikia have not been migrated to the new infobox markup. It’s fairly intuitive - you can click on the infobox title link itself to see the old markup, or simply click the “Convert!” button on the right, which performs the same action as the “Generate draft markup” button.

This is our help page for the new markup. I’ll help get things rolling by converting a template or two as an example if you’d like me to, as well as watching this forum post for any questions.

Knakveey (talk) 20:09, August 13, 2015 (UTC)

Re: PotionsEdit

I dunno why it happened that way. But looks pretty smooth now :P

Pryamus (talk) 10:33, August 22, 2015 (UTC)

Re: AdminEdit

Thanks :) Will do one day. Most of these images are old versions of ones we have long replaced with better, higher resolutions, versions. Will try to remove them as I can. Pryamus (talk) 13:53, September 6, 2015 (UTC)

Is there a way to remove confirmation dialogue when you delete a file? Kinda annoying when you need to remove them in dozens. Pryamus (talk) 16:26, September 6, 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I have a question about that Immobilize effectfrom Diablo 3 if you can help me out here: When immobilized, the player can still attack. Does that mean they can move their arms and legs in order to attack? Flamerstreak (talk) 23:39, September 7, 2015 (UTC)


Pls don't ban me :) Just though they might be even better this way. Feel free to revert if you want. Pryamus (talk) 21:42, September 18, 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for that. I didn't even realize they were editable until I saw that button. Although, what I did is just changing the default titles, nothing else. Pryamus (talk) 08:44, September 19, 2015 (UTC)

CSS edit request Edit

Hi Tephra, I got this message tonight, think you know what to do with it ) Pryamus (talk) 19:44, October 13, 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I've coded some neat new features for navboxes, but they need site-wide CSS to work. If you get a chance, could you please check Forum:CSS for navboxes, and if everything looks good, copy the rules from User:Rigel Kent/wikia.css to MediaWiki:Wikia.css, and from User:Rigel Kent/monobook.css to MediaWiki:Monobook.css? Rigel Kent (talk) 18:45, October 13, 2015 (UTC)

Same topicEdit

As previously, Silver635 asked me to insert this into our code. Any idea what it does and if we should? Pryamus (talk) 18:47, December 10, 2015 (UTC)

Rigel Kent's accountEdit

Hi again, just wanted to find out: if I wish to mark Rigel's account for licensed botting (need that to fix the templates with color, as manually it will be too hard to do with several hundred pages), how can I do that? I mean, set his account so that he doesn't get banned automatically for using a bot. Alternatively, try to do this yourself, please. Pryamus (talk) 16:11, November 3, 2015 (UTC)

I'd have to request a bot flag for User:Rigel Bot from Special:Contact, since bureaucrats and admins can't set that user right. The bot flag would hide its edits by default on Special:RecentChanges, but they'll be visible through "Show bots" and visible in page histories. It's just a nice thing to prevent the bot from blowing up RecentChanges with 713 identical minor edits. Rigel Kent (talk) 19:45, November 3, 2015 (UTC)
Mira Laime with Wikia community support got back to me pretty quickly, but she'd like an admin's explicit approval for a bot flag before setting it. Rigel Kent (talk) 00:36, November 4, 2015 (UTC)
Is there a specific location to give this approval? I approve at any rate.
◄► Tephra ◄► 06:29, November 4, 2015 (UTC)
Same, but it doesn't seem like she got a talk page like us. Pryamus (talk) 08:35, November 4, 2015 (UTC)
Here is fine, and it looks like she's already got it done. Thanks! Rigel Kent (talk) 21:07, November 4, 2015 (UTC)

Header; Diablo III>Classes>Crusader?Edit

Just curious - and checked in with Hawki here - but it seems like the class list for Diablo 3 should include the Crusader, given the expansion. Also, you might consider adding the Monk from that expansion to the respective class list, despite it supposedly not being canon ...? - Just a heads up. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dsurian (talk · contr).

Mods and external linksEdit


Gear Guru page gave me an idea. May I put several links into articles for build calculators / guides that are frequently updated? Such as Icy Veins, for instance (I will still update our list of popular builds, but it's too brief, so I will basically write "You want details, check the link below"). Also, I think I may expand a Mods page a bit, describing and giving links to most known mods for D1-D2. But before I do that, I think I need to ask you. Pryamus (talk) 21:19, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

That's pretty much why I asked, and I still believe that we cannot allow just any link to be put in it. Still, I'd want admins to vote together and approve a list of external sources we can link to. Icy Veins being the largest guide, I don't think anyone will mind. It's much like linking to sources on Warcraft universe: after a while, Wowpedia became more up-to-date and detailed than Wowwiki (much like we are more detailed and up-to-date than Diablowiki, lol), so we now only link to Wowpedia; and Wowhead, although it's more complete than Wowpedia in terms of gameplay, does not contain lore articles, so it's usually not cited.
Also why I raise this question is that describing or even mentioning mods (which by definition are unofficial) requires us to more or less refer to external sources. So I guess we should also decide whether linking to a mod's official site is okay. About linking to third party sites with "100 best mods for D2" or something like that, I won't even bring that up. Pryamus (talk) 13:31, December 29, 2015 (UTC)
Cool :) Then we won't even need to change anything really. I don't want to make own pages for each mod / website, though. Just point where relevant. But after New Year, we can do a forum discussion. By the way, beware the incoming, MCaHNY! Pryamus (talk) 17:19, December 29, 2015 (UTC)

Diablo II skill information post level 20 Edit

It seems that most of the pages here list skill stats from 1-20, and then 25. But we don't have the info from 21-24 and 26 onwards. Should we start filling these out? I can probably get all the information together over time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brainwasher5 (talk · contr).

Thanks! With assurance that my work will not be deleted, I will. I like my wikis to have complete information. Brainwasher5 (talk) 10:29, January 10, 2016 (UTC)

Tiger Claw and Dragon Talon Edit

Both of these skills' pages go into detail about charge-skills and finishing moves. Neither of these pages are the only charge skill/finishing move, so it might seem confusing to readers as to why only these two pages get detailed explanations and examples and not the others. Do charge skills and finishing moves warrant their own pages? Brainwasher5 (talk) 00:58, January 15, 2016 (UTC)

Curses PageEdit

Sorry for the double-posting.

The Curses page is filled with authoritative, opinionated information. I would like to do an extensive rewrite, but I'm not comfortable nuking so much material. Do I have your permission to do so beforehand? As admin in other wikis I usually require my editors to contact me before they make sweeping changes, so I wanted to make sure with an admin here, too. Brainwasher5 (talk) 03:32, January 15, 2016 (UTC)

Standardization for skill pages Edit

The layout for skill pages are all over the place. Some have manual descriptions on the top of the page; some have them at the bottom; they're variously titled "Description", "History", and "Lore". Gameplay information is titled "General Information" "Usage", or "In-game". Headings are seemingly used indiscriminately. I was going to just stick with the most common one but I've seen such variation I think it might be good if you can give me a basic format I should follow. Brainwasher5 (talk) 01:03, January 19, 2016 (UTC)

I am leaning towards "Description" and "General Information" myself. Brainwasher5 (talk) 01:24, January 19, 2016 (UTC)\

I'd completely forgotten about your above example. Thanks for the update. Brainwasher5 (talk) 08:06, January 19, 2016 (UTC)

Re: ImagesEdit

My personal inclination is that when 2 or more images of a character exists, it can have its own category. While that's very little, it saves time in the long run if one decides after, say, ten images, that they need a category, and then having to re-categorize all those images. Looking at the category now, it seems okay - it could be further sub-divided into categories such as "demon character images" or "angel character images," and then have the characters in those specific categories.

Just suggestions though. But concerning Shanar and Jacob specifically, neither have many images in their categories now, but this is a case of me planning ahead. In both cases I have a graphic novel with plenty of images to scan for them, so in the long run, those categories will fill up significantly. That depends on me getting images for Shanar's article and expanding Jacob's, but like I said, thinking ahead.--Hawki (talk) 08:23, January 29, 2016 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.