Post by YodaBreaker on Jun 13, 2007 8:35:27 GMT -5
Howdy I make the worst lurker in history; and especially with a new project like this starting up, I couldn't keep my grubby fingers out of the pie any longer.
Basically, what I was hoping to do is create a series of Wiki templates for us to use to add figure information. Joe's got a nice start with the table box he made for Spidey, but it's still a lot of code that would need to be copied and pasted every time a new page is made. I was hoping to riff off Wookieepedia's character infobox template, with the following fields for each figure:
COLLECTOR INFO Series name (e.g., Star Wars, Transformers, Marvel, Ghost Rider) Series number (e.g., 1, 2, 3, or 4 for SW, 1 for TF or Marvel - for now) Figure number Rarity FIGURE STATS Universe class (e.g., Empire, Decepticon, Marvel Knights) Attacktix class (e.g., Trooper, Leader, Warrior) Point value Base size (i.e., small, medium, large, Mega) Attack type (e.g., horizontal lightsaber striker, large missile launcher) SPECIAL POWER INFO Power name (e.g., Attackback (3 Jedi), Recover (Trooper), Vanquish (opponent's defeated figure)) Power probability (e.g., 12/26 (46%), 18/26 (69%), 16/26 (62%))
Offhand, I can think of a couple of things that can be debated here. For example:
Should all of the collector info be reported in separate fields, or collapsed into a single field? If the latter, we've already got that captured in the figure name; should the collector info be entirely eliminated?
Does the rarity field belong here?
FIGURE STATS How descriptive do we want to be with the "Attack type" field? Is launcher/striker a sufficient distinction? Do we want to have separate fields for the basic launcher/striker distinction, with another field for "Attack specifics" or something like that?
SPECIAL POWER INFO
Do we want the figures required or affected by the power to be a separate field from the power name?
Do we want to report both the ratio and percentage in the "Power probability" field (hence why I used "probability" to cover both ways of expressing this)? Or should we just report one or the other, inasmuch as they're numerically redundant ways of expressing the same info?
Should each universe have different color schemes for the info box? I kinda like this idea to provide some immediate information about the figures, but I'm not wedded to this.
I don't like the mix of terminology with "Series name" and "Universe class", but things like Ghost Rider and Spidey Origins/Tourney set clearly belong to the Marvel universe (i.e., their universe classes are from the Marvel universe), even though they come from a differently named series (i.e., GR, SM). Any ideas about how to reconcile this?
Interesting... I have updated all TF1 figures with the template Joe provided, and have added pics for all but 2 of them... Ill update to any template that is determined to be a standard. Just keep it posted.
Post by YodaBreaker on Jun 13, 2007 13:43:29 GMT -5
Thank you all, for your kind wishes. I'll take care of any updating that needs to be done, but I just wanted to give people a chance to comment on templates before I started on 'em I doubt I'd be able to pass up helping to start a new project like this.
Grievous, I think your comments are valid. As for the colors, the hope is that with a template, the colors would be easy enough to adjust with a single code change I'm sure they'll go through a few iterations of "how ugly was that?" before we find something that's mutually agreeable.
webhead, good point. I'll make sure to keep that in mind.
Post by YodaBreaker on Jun 13, 2007 19:32:51 GMT -5
Welp, here's my figure info template, along with my example of how to use it, the Jedi Knight - which also features a quote template that I've used for flavor text. I'm thinking of making uber-template pages for SW, TF, and Marvel figures, so that we could have consistent color schemes and fields to use for each universe's figures. However, this is something I'm only willing to try with pages I'm actively tweaking around with.