Template talk:Elinks-item

WoWDB
WoWDB should be added to this e-links. Ackis (talk) 17:45, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

One line?
I'm a total noob when it comes to wiki formating so bare with me. Is it possible to use the elinks method to get them list across, not down. IE: Thott Wowhead Allakhazam Ampwow

Also is there a listing of the Spelllink somewhere. I looked all over for it and couldn't find one. Thanks in advance, Azshade March 27, 2007.

Armory link inappropriate
The armory link seems highly inappropriate for any item not equippable. We should have a separate template for equippable items, or at least a flag, for including that link.

Also, the tooltip template could be altered to look for "slot" parameters, adding the armory link only as appropriate. --Eirik Ratcatcher 17:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I beg to differ. Example... that's not equipable, but the armory does give useful info that's not always in the wiki (drop location here).  Granted, I find the armory to be a slow piece of shit, and would take head any day over it, but saying it is useless for non-equippables is wrong.  Let the user pick which site they get their details from... I have a feeling it won't be the armory till Blizzy greatly improves it's speed.   19:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Different databases
I am personally not very keen on using either Wowhead, Alla or Thott, having been hacked, and not wanting anything to do with the gold industry (yes, despite their fine words, the legal papers show that indeed IGE owns Affinity Media, so all of them are in it under the gold industry). Would it be possible to add in the wowdigger site in this, so that it is at least displayed as well when it comes to items? It can scan for the same item odd number as well, like this: http://wowdigger.com/item/view/1234 ? I know they say it is in Beta, but it has the same functionality now that the others have, just lacks a bit on the commenting/screenshot side. I know that Armory works, but it is soo slooow! Sorry if I write out of form, I havent commented on wiki pages before... Leord 16:58, 27 July 2007 (edited spelling errors).


 * If it becomes popular and/or frequently requested, then yes. :) 16:03, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, hi! =) What does exactly "popular" or "frequently requested" mean exactly in terms of a Wiki? Leord 16:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * That more than one person requests it, and that it has high traffic (e.g. at least within the top 20,000 sites according to Alexa) 16:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok. Well, it is still very new, perhaps it will grow on the WoW community. Leord 16:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Indeed. The main thing is, if we're too lax, we'll have a list of about ten sites, and that'd be rather silly :) 17:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * An alternative is to set up a script which co-opts, say, the Wowhead links and points them to WoWDigger:

addOnloadHook(function {	var links = document.getElementsByTagName("a");

for (var i in links) if (links[i].href) { var wd = links[i].href.replace(/http:\/\/www.wowhead.com\/\?item=(\d+)/, 'http://wowdigger.com/item/view/$1'); if (wd == links[i].href) wd = links[i].href.replace(/http:\/\/www.wowhead.com\/\?npc=(\d+)/, 'http://wowdigger.com/creature/view/$1'); else if (wd == links[i].href) wd = links[i].href.replace(/http:\/\/www.wowhead.com\/\?itemset=(\d+)/, 'http://wowdigger.com/itemset/view/$1'); else if (wd == links[i].href) wd = links[i].href.replace(/http:\/\/www.wowhead.com\/\?quest=(\d+)/, 'http://wowdigger.com/quest/view/$1'); else if (wd == links[i].href) wd = links[i].href.replace(/http:\/\/www.wowhead.com\/\?spell=(\d+)/, 'http://wowdigger.com/spell/view/$1'); else if (wd == links[i].href) wd = links[i].href.replace(/http:\/\/www.wowhead.com\/\?zone=(\d+)/, 'http://wowdigger.com/zone/view/$1'); else if (wd == links[i].href) wd = links[i].href.replace(/http:\/\/www.wowhead.com\/\?faction=(\d+)/, 'http://wowdigger.com/faction/view/$1'); else if (wd == links[i].href) wd = links[i].href.replace(/http:\/\/www.wowhead.com\/\?object=(\d+)/, 'http://wowdigger.com/gameobject/view/$1');

if (wd != links[i].href) { links[i].href = wd; links[i].innerHTML = links[i].innerHTML.replace(/Wowhead/gi, 'WoWDigger').replace('http://www.wowwiki.com/images/6/6e/Icon-wowhead-22x22.png', 'http://www.wowwiki.com/images/0/0e/Icon-external-22x22.png'); }	} });


 * Okay, so it isn't the most elegant code in the world, but it does work. [[Image:Smiley.gif]] Updated: changes "Wowhead" icon to "external" icon. 23:23, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm... will have to look into making that a Greasemonkey script. (Except I'd kill Thottbot instead of Wowhead, since Thott's data is getting extremely outdated.) --Thorn 02:00, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm going to second the request for Wowdigger. It's popularity is growing as the word is spreading about how Wowhead has sold out to the goldfarmers (like all of the other sites used in this template). --Thorn 02:00, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Personally? I'd say not; it isn't even in the top 50k on Alexa, much less the top 500, like Wowhead and ThottBot. And tbh, Wowhead just keeps getting lower and lower, as is thottbot atm. Your statement holds no ground until we see so much growth that that it enters the top 25k, or even that 50k, as I said. And one correction; Wowhead didn't sell out to the gold sellers; it sold out to the people who used to own the gold sellers. And another correction; the other two companies are also not owned by the gold sellers anymore. --Sky (t · c · w) 02:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not going to argue about whether they still support goldfarming or not — that discussion belongs on a different page. But popularity should barely even be a factor when deciding what sites to link. Accuracy, thoroughness, and pertinence of information are much better criteria to use, as well as how up-to-date that info is. —Thorn 03:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Then why did you even bring it up? The current sites used in elinks templates meet all of these criteria; I'd even say WoWDigger is a little lower than the benchmarks currently set by wowhead and thottbot. Really, I haven't looked over the site thoroughly, but it will be very, very, very difficult to compare any of the existing sites to wowdigger. --Sky (t · c · w) 03:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

On the same Main subject of Different databases how popular is Wowdb from Curse on Alexa ? mabye it can replace allakhazam in the sites ? - ( Morph  on http://Ikariam.com | Contribs | Talk ) -- 01:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Quick summary of the situation
Several months back we held a vote on which websites should be kept and removed - see The response was:


 * Wowhead - completely overwhelming keep [kept]
 * Thottbot - slightly more deletes than keep [kept]
 * Alla - slightly more delete than keep [kept]
 * AmpWoW - overwhelming delete [removed]

The main reason Thott and Alla were kept was the popularity of the sites, and because no viable alternatives had appeared. The situation now appears to be getting to the point where there are several new database sites around, and Alla is starting to drop. I'm wondering, how do others feel on this? Whatever sites we do link, they should be reliable, popular and good for the community. 02:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Was there any consideration given to making link sites a preferences item (as suggested on that vote page)? I don't know how technically feasible it would be to implement, but it sounds like a great idea. --Thorn 03:28, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Of course, we'd still have to decide on a set of default link sites, so it wouldn't alleviate the problem. But it could also assist with determining which sites are the most used/preferred by Wowwiki users, which in turn could be used to select the default sites. —Thorn 03:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * We did have the votes. You are more than welcome to start votes for the sites you would like, but I doubt you'll find much support for wowdigger here, as I know that there are at least 3 that would vote in defense of wowhead, if not more. :) --Sky (t · c · w) 03:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow Armory links are broken on some pages
When this template is imported on a page that does not specify an item id, the template is supposed to access a search URL in the format http://armory.worldofwarcraft.com/search.xml?searchQuery= &searchType=items. Because the US armory has been moved to wowarmory.com, the redirection breaks these links. Regardless of the search term, the link always ends up at http://www.wowarmory.com/search.xml?rhtml=y. The correct search path currently seems to be http://www.wowarmory.com/search.xml?searchQuery= &searchType=items. I don't want to change this of course if this is a known and temporary issue, or if there is a different landing page that the link should point users to. -- Wige  ( Talk -  Contribs ) 19:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)