Talk:List of recovery items in Mother 3: Difference between revisions

From WikiBound, your community-driven EarthBound/Mother wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 13: Line 13:
<br clear="all">
<br clear="all">
AKA, it would all essentially be one entire PAGE full of what this wiki classifies as stubs, which not only is hard on the eyes, but also less readable. [[User:Multus|Multus]] 21:46, 17 December 2011 (EST)
AKA, it would all essentially be one entire PAGE full of what this wiki classifies as stubs, which not only is hard on the eyes, but also less readable. [[User:Multus|Multus]] 21:46, 17 December 2011 (EST)
:Wait, that's what you thought I was talking about? No, I was talking about something like this:
{| class="sortable
! Name
! Japanese
! Amount Healed
! Notes
! In-Game Description
|-
|item || japname || restoredhp || note || ''description''
|}
...Though, admittedly, my wording may have been a bit vague.--[[User:Starman125|Starman125]] 22:14, 17 December 2011 (EST)

Revision as of 03:14, 18 December 2011

Shouldn't there be sections for the in-game descriptions of the items?--Starman125 20:34, 15 December 2011 (EST)

Same goes for the other items, not just in Mother 3, but in EarthBound and Mother as well.--Starman125 20:39, 15 December 2011 (EST)

Honestly, I don't think so. There's no easy way to make it as readable as the Mother lists without the large pictures next to it to help separate them, and a lot of it can be TL/DR. The way we have the lists now makes it much more readable. ESPECIALLY for the EarthBound lists. It turns into a jumbled mess of paragraphs that a lot of people skip over, and there needs to be a balance between readability and relevance. I think a table honestly works better in this situation, though eventually I plan to go back and add locations that you can get the items to the table, so it basically will say mostly the same thing as the Mother lists, just organized differently. Multus 06:36, 16 December 2011 (EST)

FFFFFFFF--alright, whatever.--Starman125 11:39, 16 December 2011 (EST)
...Wait. What about using a sortable table? The list is supposed to be sortable, right? And if a table works better for using descriptions... well, you get the idea. So how about it?--Starman125 19:05, 16 December 2011 (EST)
You're... entirely missing what I'm saying. We have a sortable table already, and the descriptions would make it a lot harder to read. The way we have it now presents the info outright, as well as being extremely simple to read. Multus 18:11, 17 December 2011 (EST)
Then what the hell did you mean by "I think a table honestly works better in this situation"? :/--Starman125 21:13, 17 December 2011 (EST)

First of all, relax~ EarthBound is a series where we have fun. This wiki should be the same! I just stated my opinion, and that's all. What I mean is, we're already USING a table, silly! We all opted to add the descriptions and stuff at one point in a paragraph format, and it ended up looking like a jumbled, unorganized mess. The reason the key items lists and Mother lists aren't simple tables is because they don't need to be. There's a lot to them. The thing with EarthBound/Mother 3's items is that a paragraph format would make them all look like... oh, what's a good example? Spiky Weapon, maybe? What I mean is it'd look like...

Bag of fries

Bags of fries are restorative items in EarthBound. They restore around 60 HP, but have little effect on Poo. They can be bought in Onett, Twoson, and Fourside.

In-game description

"Bags of fries are delicious and you should totally buy me one, because I'm hungry and this is a joke. But seriously, where's my fries?"
AKA, it would all essentially be one entire PAGE full of what this wiki classifies as stubs, which not only is hard on the eyes, but also less readable. Multus 21:46, 17 December 2011 (EST)

Wait, that's what you thought I was talking about? No, I was talking about something like this:
Name Japanese Amount Healed Notes In-Game Description
item japname restoredhp note description

...Though, admittedly, my wording may have been a bit vague.--Starman125 22:14, 17 December 2011 (EST)