User talk:1x2white

You should avoid duplicating information when possible.

Hello there. Saw that you made some pages for Capes, Chat Rings, ect. to show the tables of all of those items. The problem is that you duplicated the data where instead you could use a redirect. The reason you'd want to do this is to avoid needing to maintain multiple pages for the same exact data. For example, if you wanted to have a page called Premium Hat that links to the existing Premium Armor page then you'd create the Premium Hat page with the following line:

#REDIRECT [[Premium Armor]]

Also if you wanted to redirect to a specific section (Ex: Capes on the Premium Armor page) then you'd put:

#REDIRECT [[Premium_Armor#Capes]]

A secret trick I've learned is that you can also redirect to specific tabs on pages. For example with the Circle Obols:

#REDIRECT [[Obols#Circle_Obols-4]]

This one is a little different than previous ones. It's possible because of how the tabbing system works, but basically the link will be PageName#TabName-N where N is the number, starting from zero, of the tab group. On the Obols page the "Obols by Shape" tab group is the 5th one listed So 5-1=4. You can also easily get what the link is by clicking on the tab and then reading the URL afterwards.

I do see that you descoverd this by the time you go to making the Monster Drops page, and I already fixed the other pages you made so you don't have to worry about fixing those.

Thanks for your help in updating the wiki, but in the future try to avoid duplicating data in this way. -Kiokurashi (talk)

Is it really duplication?

(Not sure if this is the correct way to reply, but I couldn't find a button for that as Google suggested.)

When looking at the source it appears to me the information is not actually duplicated, it's a lookup of that information which is somewhere else.

e.g. (pretty much looks like SQL to me in this specific part)

==Premium Helmets==
...
|where=type="Premium Helmet" AND NOT Source LIKE "%Unobtainable%" AND NOT Source LIKE "%Retired%"
...

Maybe I'm just not undestanding this part completely.

Of cource a redirect would be more performant, that's why I also switched to that aproach with the newest page(s).

--1x2white (talk) 13:26, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, strange that there isn't a reply button. There's probably some setting somewhere that I forgot to enable. Anyway, while it's less of a duplication than if we did whole tables manually, it is still duplication that we would have to keep track of if we ever were to make a change to the databases. For example, I'm considering removing the SlabOrder field since it doesn't really update properly, and doing so would cause some of these queries to break because they use that to sort by.

That being said, if you wanted to move the whole query to these other pages and then update the table on the main page to link to the new pages, that would also be fine as well. It wouldn't be duplicating it, and it'd make it easier to search for them. Although the way we have it now has worked fine enough thus far.

Well, it was good work regardless so thank you for your contribution. Kiokurashi (talk) 15:28, 28 February 2023 (UTC)