Forum:"Lendable"

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > "Lendable"
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 17 March 2011 by Suppa chuppa.

Hey guys, I got an idea from "Thing O Doom", a less active user, to add "Lendable" as an option in Template:Infobox_Item. I personally would find this very helpful. However, this idea would come with a several (or if you can think of more) choices upon coding for all pages:

  1. Defaulted as "No" unless "Yes" is written in (As there are few Lendable objects [No Bot Needed])
  2. Categorie would not show unless "Yes" or "No" is entered. (However, a Bot would be needed to add a "No" to many many many items).

If approved, I can code the Infobox unless someone else would like to. Imdill3 03:59, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

Support - As Nom[Nom Nom] Imdill3 23:51, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Sounds good (especially when Jagex gets off their rump and add more items that are lendable). And I could code it. And Evilbot could add the no's and yes's from our current list. Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 06:25, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Sounds good, but maybe if it's not lendable we should leave that box out like we do for equipable or edible, I think one of them has that. Hunter cape (t).png Sentra246Blue hallowe'en mask.png 06:47, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Seems like a straightforward and beneficial change. 222 talk 07:07, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Useful information. An idea for the code would be that if the item is lendable, |lendable=Yes should be added to the infobox, placing it in "Category:Lendable items". The required code for this would be:

|-
!width="1%"|[[Item Lending|Lendable]]?
|{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{lendable}}}}}|yes|Yes{{mainonly|[[Category:Lendable items]]}}|No}}

Which should be added at the location where the bar should be included. The lendable items could easily be edited by humans(=without bots) as the list is not that big. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 09:41, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, we should add an auto category to the yes'. Nice plan! Imdill3 23:51, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Support - yay! User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 16:45, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Good idea. (: sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 17:37, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Support - per all. --Aburnett(Talk) 23:51, March 10, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Per above. --Quarenon  Talk 01:00, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Can't see why not.   Swizz Talk   Events!   07:50, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

Support (somewhat) - I believe I'm right in thinking only equipable items are lendable. Therefore I think the default action should be keep 'lendable' hidden, and show the 'lendable' box if the item is equipable (ie if 'equipable=Yes' is entered). In this case, I agree, the default for 'lendable' should be 'no', and 'yes' if entered as such (as above). So the code would be something like (borrowing from joey):

{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{equipable}}}}}|yes|{{!}}-
!width="1%"{{!}}[[Item Lending|Lendable]]?
{{!}}{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{lendable}}}}}|yes|Yes{{mainonly|[[Category:Lendable items]]}}|No}}
|}}

^obviously we shouldn't get bogged down in the code of it here but figured it was another way of explaining what I mean. --Henneyj 11:14, March 11, 2011 (UTC)

I can somewhat agree with this... I think it would just be easier for most items to see a "Lendable|No" just to remove the guessing (Which is kind of the point of this in the first place). But still, yeah I think we should default everything as "No" and do a bot for those that are "Yes". Imdill3 15:46, March 11, 2011 (UTC)
That's what's already done with my code. Henneyj's code would just hide the whole line altogether if the item is not equipable. I don't think this is a good idea, as it would make things clearer if it's included anyway. To prevent vandalism on non-equipable-item pages, we could use
To make sure only equipable items can have that they are lendable. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 21:14, March 11, 2011 (UTC)
Last thing, will a bot be able to do this with your code? (I haven't gotten into bots yet :/) Imdill3 23:17, March 11, 2011 (UTC)
We just add that to the template and the bots will add the |lendable=Yes to the correct pages (owner makes a list of the pages, has bot edit those pages adding that |lendable=Yes, done) . Not that tough. =D Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 23:22, March 11, 2011 (UTC)
Yea sorry should have clarified a bit more. My reasoning is that I don't think a 'lendable' box should appear for items that are reasonably obviously not lendable, since it would just increase the length of an already sizeable infobox. This is similar to how obviously inedible items do not show a box for 'edible'. I think its fair to say that obviously non-lendable items are any that cannot be traded (which I didn't think about before), and in my opinion also any that cannot be equiped. I don't feel that adding a 'lendable' box would be useful in these cases. --Henneyj 02:10, March 12, 2011 (UTC)
Well, the Edible box disappears if it's left blank, so why not incorporate a similar feature if Lendable is added? If the item isn't tradeable or equipable, then the Lendable box would be automatically gone, like the edible box. Achievements Coelacanth0794 Talk Contribs 02:17, March 12, 2011 (UTC)
LOL. That's what I'm trying (and clearly failing) to say. --Henneyj 02:22, March 12, 2011 (UTC)
Oh, now I see what you mean. Kind of like how we wouldnt add "Not Edible" to somthing like a rune sword. (Though possible irl xD)... Well, I think the only thing we should have the box invisible is for: anything consumable. Imdill3 06:53, March 12, 2011 (UTC)
Henneyj, I understood you at your first comment, (so you don't fail explaining) it's just that at first I thought it would be useful to have the information everywhere. After thinking about it another time, however, I do agree we should not needlessly make infoboxes longer indeed, so indeed your code is good for that purpose. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 12:50, March 12, 2011 (UTC)
Now I don't get it, wouldn't it only add 12 pixels going down? I think the 300px loss of the Right side was more effecting to the layout of an article then 1 line of content being shifted down and cropped. (Just Feedback, not arguing) Imdill3 16:12, March 12, 2011 (UTC)
Ok heres the thing I'm trying to say- It's obvious if somethings are not edible, thus the section is not needed. However, lending is a system that could potentially affect all items. Imdill3 16:14, March 12, 2011 (UTC)
Potentially, but right now (and since it was implemented) not many items are lendable, very few are in contrast to all tradeable items. ɳex undique 21:35, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - If we have it not there most of the time, can we have it appear when tradeable is yes and equipable is yes as things that are untradeable are not lendable (afasik). Like:

{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{tradeable}}}}}|yes|{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{equipable}}}}}|yes|{{!}}-
!width="1%"{{!}}[[Item Lending|Lendable]]?
{{!}}{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{{lendable}}}}}|yes|Yes{{mainonly|[[Category:Lendable items]]}}|No}}
|}}}}

Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 05:09, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good, sounds like we have a consensus. Do we need to do an official close to this thread and start on this code? Imdill3 17:29, March 14, 2011 (UTC)
You need to wait another 3 days till it can be closed. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 18:45, March 14, 2011 (UTC)

Closed - I've implemented the changes to {{infobox item}}. Lendable items will have indicate so in the infobox while non tradeable and/or non equippable items will not contain the row. Suppa chuppa Talk 08:55, March 17, 2011 (UTC)