Template talk:Infobox region

Notes

• Gold and food are intentionally missing from this template, as they might change in the near future - see New Economy
• Knights, recruitment centers and such things do not - according to my personal opinion - belong to a region infobox. They can be listed in the page, if such is desired. But I believe the infobox should not contain data that changes all the time.

--Tom 13:03, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments

are you planning on including the weather area? otherwise it looks pretty ok and i could jump into using this one from the old (and now-broken?) infobox_regions i been using.

--Mr Jones 13:36, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

At the moment I did not plan to include these, as I'm not really sure they are of much interest. Also, there is no semantic notation, yet. It might be good to include it in the dataset, even if I don't (yet) use it, though. Thanks for the hint.

--Tom 14:03, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

oki. i concur; the weather area is only semi-interesting info. mainly useful for folks who are wondering about the food trading biz and harvest reports to plan out their trades. or to people who are planning to do some wiki project or whatever based on these. but the info is available in-game, just as long as they've a character on the continent. whereas the location data (inland, river, coast) i won't be missing. and since you're in need of a hand with the copy-paste-fun, i guess i'll go and make the jump to your new official template now with the 60 regions i'm maintaining. yar!

P.S. oh you already added the area parameter, good!

--Mr Jones 14:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

on another note, bishamon wanted the category: atamara tags to the regions i was editing in there... i was just wondering if this could be automated, since we do enter the continent name as the first field under this infobox setup. just parse it from that field and auto-add the category?

--Mr Jones 17:16, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

No more category for the continent, please. That was a crutch for something we have much better available now using a semantic search for the "located on" property. --Tom 18:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)