There are problems with the EverQuest-related pages. Mulitple pages want to be the "main" EverQuest page. There is an EverQuest page, EverQuest Overview page, EverQuest: Original Release page. The EverQuest: Original Release page is about the expansion. The others are about the game. Suggest there be a disambig page and some cleanup for the various EverQuest pages. For now, the EverQuest: Original Release page will be for the expansion deatils (zones, features, etc.) and the other pages can battle it out for which describes the game. Spewspawns (talk) 16:27, April 11, 2013 (UTC)
I see a few important flaws in the way Categories are dealt with at the moment :
Some categories are singular (Ogre, Starter City ...) whereas other are Plural (Zones, Quests ...) This should be uniformized. Categories are always singular on Wikipedia (and most other wikis I guess), so I suggest we do the same here : Category:Zone, Category:Quest ...
Some categories are treated as articles, with "full" content. See Category:Achievement and Category:Achievements as two examples. This is wrong, the only (optional) text content for a category should be a text describing what is being categorized in it.
Some articles aren't even categorized, which is wrong too. Others have multiple categories with one being a subcategory of another, for example "Cleric Epic" (bad name by the way since it's only about Cleric Epic 1.0) is in Category:Cleric Epics as well as Category:Epics.
See Frizznik categories : NPCs is a subcategory of Browse < Organization < Site Maintenance < Organization < Site Maintenance < Organization < etc.. What does a NPC have to do with Site Maintenance anyway ? What is"Browse" for exactly ? and "Organisation" ? This is not clear.
It should rather be categorized as :
Frizznik < Mines of Gloomingdeep Quest NPC < Mines of Gloomingdeep NPC < NPC by zone < NPC < Term
Frizznik < Mines of Gloomingdeep Quest NPC < Mines of Gloomingdeep NPC < Mines of Gloomingdeep < Special Zone < Zone < Term
Frizznik < Mines of Gloomingdeep Quest NPC < Quest NPC by zone < Quest NPC < NPC < Term
Frizznik < Mines of Gloomingdeep Quest NPC < Quest NPC by zone < NPC by zone < NPC < Term
Other categories could be used (Level 62 NPC, Gnome NPC ...) but there would be so many articles in them that it wouldn't really be useful anyway.
In some cases though, articles could be classified into both a category and a subcategory, for example :
Frizznik < Mines of Gloomingdeep Quest NPC < ...
Frizznik < Mines of Gloomingdeep NPC < ...
- Categories being singular would seem to make sense. A list of zones should be part of the category Zone. However, what about the list of all zones in the game? Currently, it is called Zones. Someone added a category called Zones and transcluded the Zones article into the category. It goes to your point about not having a full article in a category. Agree. But...would the article Zones (that lists all the zones) be a member of category:Zone? Should not since it isn't a zone.
- The same thing can be said for Expansion vs Expansions. Each expansion article can be in a category of Expansion but the article Expansions itself should not be included.
- What category should these be included in if any...Zones (all zones listed) and Expansions (all expansions listed) don't seem to fit Zone or Expansion directly.
- Also, this wiki...while being a few years old...is really just getting started. Lots of things have to be fixed/worked out such as what you bring up...so keep sharing. Remember, not everyone is as comfortable with wiki's as others. Be glad they are adding content I say...--Spewspawns (talk) 15:47, April 16, 2013 (UTC)
- According to wiki standards, there should be :
- - an article "Zone" explaining what a zone is, as well as other informations related to the Zone concept : zone line, instanced zone, atlas ... Category should be "Term".
- - a category "Zone" listing either all zones (there are hundreds) and/or having subcategories like "Zone by expansion", "Zone by level range", "City", "Instanced Zone" ...
- - possibly an article "List of zones" listing all the zones, but if it's only a list, it would add nothing to the Category:Zone. The list currently displayed in the "Zones" article could be transfered to a "List of zones" article, so that it would not conflict with the "Zone" article which would be devoted to the general concept of a zone, including of course a link to the "List of zones" article, which would be itself in Category:List.
- - both the "Zone" and the "List of zones" articles could be in Category:Zone as long as that category doesn't list all zones but classes them into subcategories as well. Therefore, accessing the Category:Zone would show a few subcategories (Category:Zone by expansion, Category: City ...) as well as a few articles (Zone, List of zones, City ...) Someone looking for a specific zone through this category would then be able to find it through the "List of zones" article.
- Same goes for expansions :
- - an article "Expansion" inside category "Term", explaining what an expansion is, what an extension is (see Shadow of Fear released today), with additional generic info releated to expansions (Beta ...) and a short list of all released expansions with basic information like release date, max level ...
- - a category "Expansion" including articles related to each expansion.
- I agree that this wiki is still young and I'm not blaming anyone, just pointing out emerging problems so that they can be resolved fast and some conventions can be applied when creating and naming articles and categories. Drewie (talk) 10:56, April 17, 2013 (UTC)
Not Sony Edit
I am having problems with the fire elementals of Lavastorm mountains, I am running my lvl 14 rogue, and they are invulnerble to her attacks. I can't find anything on how I can defeat them.Pakula (talk) 16:44, December 10, 2015 (UTC)Pakula
Is it possible to get an updated style for the site? Full-screen images for webpages are pretty dated. Same topic, I created a page with tables on it (Planes of Power Progression) but those tables don't have any borders and don't really lay out very nicely on the page as .
Thoughts? Andrux51 22:03, April 8, 2019 (UTC)