Sneak0r 33 Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 To lean on the Sacred UW Runes section example page. I want that runes for the Sacred 2 FA Runes section as well....I'd like to ask you guys what you thing about it?I prepared a few Shaddow Warrior Runes for feedback.*blow some credits to Flix* 1 Link to comment
Sneak0r 33 Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 (edited) if you use more pics like that our wiki could look better and better. This one does not even look like a "classic" wiki. I'm not sure if we want to have that kind of style... Damn, they look so official. God, they have everything media-wise. Here I am scrounging around for pics and videos and I could just be downloading it from there? And they have like a hundred new people registering on it every day? Aw man, look at all that extra stuff they have on their Dragon Mage page! Is Sacred like some kind of giant phenomenon in Italy? Where the hell is everybody to work on ours? WHY DID YOU SHOW ME THIS? XO Sorry @ gogo The "english" version for Flix over here As you can see, there is no more content of informations! I only show this site up to gettin some style ideas! not more not less! Edited August 29, 2013 by Sneak0r Link to comment
Flix 5,116 Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 I have a translator built into my browser. It does not help with the way I feel. Link to comment
Popular Post gogoblender 3,068 Posted August 29, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted August 29, 2013 if you use more pics like that our wiki could look better and better. This one does not even look like a "classic" wiki. I'm not sure if we want to have that kind of style... That Wiki stole our content from us, we were in battle with them for a year or two, and ultimately the owner of that italian site, Fabio, was BANNED from the official Sacred International Forum, and took articles and Schot's art, He would have kept it stolen until Schot and I found out and started email conversaitions with him asking him to take down everything he stole from Schot. His original Wiki was made with bad sofware, so he just attempted to steal all the work SacredWiki's contributor's put into our wiki He stole schto's icon work Schot's original skin All the lay out for our pages He stole personal aritlces that our writers wrote for our wiki, and just translated them into italian hoping that he could steal the content and noone would see him steal it gogo Uhm... sorry about opening old wounds... That was not my idea behind that... I only want to show, that the style is improved with more nice pics :/ No worries! We still have the greatest overall "content" around, the articles and quest write ups are first class here @ Sneak0r if you use more pics like that our wiki could look better and better. This one does not even look like a "classic" wiki. I'm not sure if we want to have that kind of style... Damn, they look so official. God, they have everything media-wise. Here I am scrounging around for pics and videos and I could just be downloading it from there? And they have like a hundred new people registering on it every day? Aw man, look at all that extra stuff they have on their Dragon Mage page! Is Sacred like some kind of giant phenomenon in Italy? Where the hell is everybody to work on ours? WHY DID YOU SHOW ME THIS? XO heh, they're wiki is connected to an auto registrant system, it's not really contributors they are signing in just names always being added on a dailyl basis, our wiki here has more content being added daily over the years, that's why Fabio tried to steal it. Original pix from the game itself, images, and videos are all property anyone is allowed to use, Schot's work with icons and photoshop is near legendary, and the work he can accomplish was what that wiki tried to steal, especially after he created the Sacred International Forum avatars which ascaron decided to use for their official forums http://www.sacredwiki.org/index.php/Sacred_2:Avatars gogo 2 Link to comment
Popular Post Flix 5,116 Posted August 29, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted August 29, 2013 OK...youre right. Actually, their quest section is utterly pathetic compared to ours. Ok, I feel a little better. For a minute there I felt like I'd been doing cave paintings while Monet's gallery was in the next room. 2 Link to comment
gogoblender 3,068 Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 They have some sacredwiki.it watermarks on some graphics... We can add some for our pics as well?! I realy hope that my runes post not getting lost for that >.< the watermark for sacredwiki.org is on all the set item pix that Schot did and pix that Knuckles did, there may be other that have been done by contributors, we're not averse to sacredwiki.org being on pix as watermarx if a contributor so desires. http://www.sacredwiki.org/index.php/Sacred_2:Daerwain%27s_Revenge sets gogo 1 Link to comment
Popular Post Flix 5,116 Posted August 30, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted August 30, 2013 You know what else? That other wiki looks artificial, sterile, and mass produced. Our Wiki has charm and soul. 2 Link to comment
gogoblender 3,068 Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 You know what else? That other wiki looks artificial, sterile, and mass produced. Our Wiki has charm and soul. gogo Link to comment
Ysne58 236 Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 I think watermarking is a very good idea. I don't have the ability to help with that. I do what I can though. I figure even adding one thing on the wiki every day makes a difference over time. 1 Link to comment
gogoblender 3,068 Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 I figure even adding one thing on the wiki every day makes a difference over time. it does gogo Link to comment
Knuckles 904 Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 water marks are nice but usually I'll only put on something I designed like the standard armor sets....if it's just in-game screenshots I don't bother 1 Link to comment
gogoblender 3,068 Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 water marks are nice but usually I'll only put on something I designed like the standard armor sets....if it's just in-game screenshots I don't bother ah, yes that's it ! The standard armor sets you did, all watermarked! -. gogo Link to comment
Ysne58 236 Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 (edited) http://www.sacredwiki.org/index.php/Sacred_2:Badawi#Quests_.26_NPC.27s Quests with Quest givers are now listed and sorted -- not all the involved with characters are listed yet and the quests have not been filled in so all are red linked. Edit -- I also went back into this page and added a note reflecting general differences between light path and shadow path. Edited August 30, 2013 by Ysne58 Link to comment
Knuckles 904 Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 I got all the NPC quest pages west of Thylysium done for standard quests...was planning on tackling the city today but found some probs in the class chain quests that need attention first.....so it looks like I'm sidetracked for a day or two 1 Link to comment
Ysne58 236 Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 It's amazing how much more quickly we get sidetracked as we get older. That work is all looking really good by the way Knuckles. Link to comment
Popular Post Flix 5,116 Posted August 30, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted August 30, 2013 Hi gang I'm proud to present what I worked on today, not least of all because it was a lot of fun! Today I made videos and pictures and added them to each individual Dragon Mage CA page. You can browse them all from here. Now the DM's CA pages match the other 6 classes. I also tried to add in as much details as I could on usage, pros/cons, etc. You may also notice that the DM CA's gained while transformed, formerly red links, have now been given the same treatment. I only had 2 strange things happen during editing today that I will have to ask about before I finish up this little project: I asked about them in this thread. 3 Link to comment
gogoblender 3,068 Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 http://www.sacredwiki.org/index.php/Sacred_2:Badawi#Quests_.26_NPC.27s Quests with Quest givers are now listed and sorted -- not all the involved with characters are listed yet and the quests have not been filled in so all are red linked. Edit -- I also went back into this page and added a note reflecting general differences between light path and shadow path. I got all the NPC quest pages west of Thylysium done for standard quests...was planning on tackling the city today but found some probs in the class chain quests that need attention first.....so it looks like I'm sidetracked for a day or two Nice work. I saw all the work going into Wiki today Robb, quests and npc's, this is so much meat of wiki, and lovely seeing it get accomplished Hi gang I'm proud to present what I worked on today, not least of all because it was a lot of fun! Today I made videos and pictures and added them to each individual Dragon Mage CA page. You can browse them all from here. Now the DM's CA pages match the other 6 classes. I also tried to add in as much details as I could on usage, pros/cons, etc. You may also notice that the DM Combat Arts gained while transformed, formerly red links, have now been given the same treatment. I only had 2 strange things happen during editing today that I will have to ask about before I finish up this little project: I asked about them in this thread. Bravo! I just saw the new pix and work you did for DM pages, the work is first class. Thank you for finding such love for these pages gogo Link to comment
Sneak0r 33 Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) For all the fantastic looking changes Flix has done, I have a question about using links in the text.In fact It's a wiki I think we should use as many links at possible like in the wikipedia. As an example: If there is a bunch of text and somehwere is the word Character showing, should we link that word to the character class page? I've made a "hardcore" version of that on here: http://www.sacredwiki.org/index.php/Sacred_2:Combat_Art_Modifications/dePlease let my know of how many words/text we should link on pages to other pages. Edited August 31, 2013 by Sneak0r Link to comment
gogoblender 3,068 Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Right now wiki standards is that in text article, and if there are multiple occurences to words that repeat and keep going to same/other page, just one link, the first time you read that word on page, is enough. When we started Wiki we started having multiple links all over for same word over and over, and after a few days, we came up with this guideline after using some of our other references in game wikis we found. That is to your first question And anotherquestion you are asking, is, if a word occurs and it happens to be to a page on the Wiki, yes it should be linked to it, create as many links as possible as long as each one is different per page, and each one is "useful" per page, all based upon increasing reader pleasure from uncovering information and ideas. Third question that you may have asked, but did not know it is... how about if if there is a word that should/could go perhaps to another page but not the page of that name/title but another one that could give a player bettter experience... In that case, Please post on forum, and we can look at it. I think a few times it's been done, but the situation is rare, most times we just create a sentence that has that page/word we feel the reader would/could find useful and add it in. gogo 1 Link to comment
Flix 5,116 Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Right now wiki standards is that in text article, and if there are multiple occurences to words that repeat and keep going to same/other page, just one link, the first time you read that word on page, is enough. When we started Wiki we started having multiple links all over for same word over and over, and after a few days, we came up with this guideline after using some of our other references in game wikis we found. That is to your first question And anotherquestion you are asking, is, if a word occurs and it happens to be to a page on the Wiki, yes it should be linked to it, create as many links as possible as long as each one is different per page, and each one is "useful" per page, all based upon increasing reader pleasure from uncovering information and ideas. Third question that you may have asked, but did not know it is... how about if if there is a word that should/could go perhaps to another page but not the page of that name/title but another one that could give a player bettter experience... In that case, Please post on forum, and we can look at it. I think a few times it's been done, but the situation is rare, most times we just create a sentence that has that page/word we feel the reader would/could find useful and add it in. gogo I'm in total harmony with this policy. I'm sure we can enhance many of our articles with more links, but readers (including myself) would lose their minds if every possible instance was linked over and over. Link to comment
Sneak0r 33 Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Ok to make it clear for me: on my example page is the word "combat art" more that 15 times, "aspect" 16x, Character(class) 7x represented and they are all linked. If I get you right, that is way to much, right? It is enough if its linked the first time it occurs on a page? So I need to change that back ^^ Link to comment
gogoblender 3,068 Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Right now wiki standards is that in text article, and if there are multiple occurences to words that repeat and keep going to same/other page, just one link, the first time you read that word on page, is enough. When we started Wiki we started having multiple links all over for same word over and over, and after a few days, we came up with this guideline after using some of our other references in game wikis we found. That is to your first question And anotherquestion you are asking, is, if a word occurs and it happens to be to a page on the Wiki, yes it should be linked to it, create as many links as possible as long as each one is different per page, and each one is "useful" per page, all based upon increasing reader pleasure from uncovering information and ideas. Third question that you may have asked, but did not know it is... how about if if there is a word that should/could go perhaps to another page but not the page of that name/title but another one that could give a player bettter experience... In that case, Please post on forum, and we can look at it. I think a few times it's been done, but the situation is rare, most times we just create a sentence that has that page/word we feel the reader would/could find useful and add it in. gogo I'm in total harmony with this policy. I'm sure we can enhance many of our articles with more links, but readers (including myself) would lose their minds if every possible instance was linked over and over. Thanks! Took us a while to get good guidelines that are helpful, eventually our standards became the gold, and this is the only reason why so many other sites on net use sacredwiki.org as reference Of cousre, we had our inspiration too...here's where a LOT of ideas for SacredWiki came from...I also believe it to be one of the five best game wiki's in the world: http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Oblivion So I need to change that back ^^ lol Ayup And remember you're also new at this, in a few months you'll be super pro! gogo Link to comment
Sneak0r 33 Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 I know you guys dont like to use the TOC for some important reasons. I don't want to through that away so simple...what do you think about that solution of TOC placement? http://www.sacredwiki.org/index.php/Sacred_2:Dragon_Magic/de 1 Link to comment
Flix 5,116 Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 I actually don't have a problem with that. My usual dislike of TOC is because it's unnecessary, or pushes down the content of the page, or makes headings off-center. But in this case, I think that looks kind of nice. I was going to ask this same question of Gogo and Schot, before I worked on anymore aspect pages, should I include the TOC? Right now, I've "completed" only the three Dragon Mage aspects, and they don't have the TOC. But I could add them back depending on what everyone thinks. 1 Link to comment
Sneak0r 33 Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 (edited) I actually don't have a problem with that. My usual dislike of TOC is because it's unnecessary, or pushes down the content of the page, or makes headings off-center. But in this case, I think that looks kind of nice. I was going to ask this same question of Gogo and Schot, before I worked on anymore aspect pages, should I include the TOC? Right now, I've "completed" only the three Dragon Mage aspects, and they don't have the TOC. But I could add them back depending on what everyone thinks. Allright I improved my first try of getting the toc there as it is and changed it also on the the dragon mage /de maiin page http://www.sacredwiki.org/index.php/Sacred_2:Dragon_Magic/de with the use of my first template I posted on here earlier (only with float right this time) ^^ Edited August 31, 2013 by Sneak0r Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now