Path of Exile Wiki

Please consider helping keep the wiki up to date. Check the to-do list of updates needed for version 3.14.0.

Game data exports will becoming later as the technical changes in addition to regular changes take some more time.

READ MORE

Path of Exile Wiki
Register
Advertisement

The Community Portal is the place where Wiki editors discuss issues on the Wiki. It's frequently used to talk about the project as a whole, and to initiate large-scale changes on the Wiki.

Languages

MediaWiki software has a built-in format for handling different languages; see here for documentation of the features. In particular, each page will have automatic links to any translations of it available in other languages, if you have it set up correctly.

I do not have a lot of experience with the language features of MediaWiki, but I strongly recommend that you use them instead of simple sub-paging. From what I have seen, they will save you a lot of headaches in the future. — DragoonWraithTalk • 04:24, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Page Deletions

I know sifting through bot-generated nonsense articles is our beloved admin's favorite thing to do, but if we had some patrollers/trusted editors with page-deletion rights, we could work out the spam until we have the appropriate amount of spam/bot blocking. This would also help move pages around as they probably don't contain any meaningful meta-data yet, and some people have been asking about deleting their own work. We don't even have a deletion template yet do we? We need a deletion template for articles which don't require immediate removal. That's simply a template which people can stick on a page to make the page appear in its own category and also points others to a discussion about deleting it. Ionface 07:20, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


Created Template:PROD for proposed deletions, Insert the following at the top of a page which you want deleted.

{{subst:PROD|Reason for Proposed Deletion Here}}

Ionface 07:30, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Note: Just leave bot spam alone, the admins will delete it when they see it, and it's very conspicuous. PROD is not for spam. Ionface 20:42, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

File Naming Scheme

Since we don't currently have one that I'm aware of, I was hoping we could use a proper file naming scheme in order to save headaches later. I think the convention of listing hierarchial "categories" before the actual name of the subject in the image should be used in the file name. I also think CamelCase and no spaces is a good idea. By this, I mean instead of calling a file "Elixir of Perceptitude.png" it would be named "ItemsFlasksElixirOfPerceptitude.png" so that the quest of the same name would not conflict, but would instead be in something like "QuestsActIIIElixirOfPerceptitude.png".

In addition to those two things, resized images should have addendums after an underscore, and be in lower case to avoid confusion with actual names with underscores or with modifiers of that kind at the end. A small resized version of "ItemsArmourTemplarPants.png" would be "ItemsArmourTemplarPants_small.png" and a high res version of "ItemsArmourTemplarPantsOfTheGiant.png" would be "ItemsArmourTemplarPantsOfTheGiant_giant.png".

Of course, we still need to nail down our hierarchy for the site, but item categories seem straight forward. Ionface 13:21, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Very Descriptive Passive Skills and the Mechanics They Represent

I'm seeing that a lot of these pages like Cast Speed (passive) are now merged with other pages and proposed for deletion. Will they be missed if they are deleted, or just recreated with a redirect?

I don't know how other pages are going to link to these passive skills, or how accurate the article names are if they contain just passive skills, for instance, Spell Damage should definitely be disambig redir to passive skill/Spells#Damage. I don't even know how we don't have that redirected to one or the other already.

This is one of the main problems with organizing the site, there are too many skills which are support gems and passive, and also affixes on items which really are mechanics. So we need like 4 different spots for some common phrase. Your take? Ionface 09:35, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


I don't find the pages dedicated to passive nodes very useful at all. Keystone abilities should definitely have their own pages, but a page dedicated to "+6% increased melee physical damage"? Not sure how a page like that would help anyone. TheRabbit 15:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC) After looking at a couple of the passive pages, I believe it is even worse. Spell Damage for instance, implies that every Spell Damage passive node increases Spell Damage by 10%. Well, some of the nodes are 5%, some are 8%, one is 9%, and some are 10%. Seems a little ridiculous to have a page dedicated to that. TheRabbit 15:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)


I'm totally willing to change things like this, and my recent edits to the Passives have been an attempt to streamline it. I think the weapon passives should probably redirect to the weapon page, for ex. Wands#Passives, etc. Would you prefer Curses to be placed under Spells or Buffs? I think there's some merit for them to have their own page. I think I'll also start moving the support gems to redirect to subsets of other pages rather than keeping them separate on their own pages. If you desire any specific categories or other consolidations let me know. For now I'll tinker with the support gems, and once we have a consensus I'll work on improving/filling in the passives.

Oh, and also would you want "Major Nodes" (or whatever we/GGG decide to call them) like Ambidexterity, Troll's Blood, etc. to have their own pages or just listed within their category? I don't feel that we they have enough mechanical significance for their own pages. Perhaps some of them deserve a little description, but it could be perhaps done with an tooltip/hidden box. --Aezlo 23:56, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

I like the idea of Wands#passives a lot more than the current setup, it would give people looking at the wands page an idea of what kind of tree they could build towards, at which point they could go to the passive tree itself and start working on it. As for "Major Nodes" (I've been calling them super nodes myself) I think they should also be in their category's page, ie. Ambidexterity would be under Dual Wielding#Passives. TheRabbit 16:43, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Do you want to move Increased Accuracy and the like to passive pages as well? Also, not entirely related, but since I'm editing Conduit right now, what about party mechanics? --Aezlo 01:42, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Increased Accuracy is a redirect to Additional Accuracy, was there a page there before? I was talking to Ion earlier about mechanics, as I wanted to create a full combat mechanics page, but the current wiki doesn't have wikimath loaded on it to be able to make "pretty" formulas. What were you thinking of as far as party mechanics goes? Something like the above that lists passive nodes you can pick up that boost party mechanics? What else is there beyond Conduit? Aura area of effect increase? TheRabbit 16:43, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I think mechanics will have anchors for things like Accuracy. I also think Increased Accuracy support gem and passives will have sections in their gem list and passive list in related sections. I don't think any of them need their own page, but it certainly needs a redirect from where I just linked. We need to figure out how people will use this information and format it so that it's not all over the website, but in a few small related clumps. This will mean passives for +3 foo and +10 bar will be in both foo and bar sections, or in a section for both foo and bar passives. This will be a bit tricky, but now is the time to be figuring it out, not when they have 1000x more people visiting here and making changes and comments. Ionface 17:33, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Well, Increased Accuracy isn't a support gem, that's kind of the problem, the support gem's name is Additional Accuracy. I agree we should probably standardize where information goes, we also need to standardize what information is on each page. For instance, some skill gems are also listing the amount of exp required to level them up, other's don't. I noticed UristMcDwarfy has been roaming around standardizing a lot of skills to one format, but there's still a bunch that aren't using the same template. TheRabbit 19:33, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Sorry about the support gem formatting, I simply hadn't gotten around to standardizing all of them yet. I'll work on that today. I think Passives-wise, I like the idea of the Weapon Passives combined into the weapon pages, but other than that, the Support Gems just clutter the passive pages. Also, what I was thinking for party mechanics was a center for the info about exp differences, drop rate differences, etc. as well as Passives which affect party mechanics. It's something that comes up occasionally in chat and people don't have a very firm grasp on it. Considering PoE isn't specifically built for multiplayer, it could be easy to overlook and it isn't something that's absolutely necessary at the moment. Once Cutthroat is put in-game, I assume it'll become more of an issue. --Aezlo 21:28, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Also, here's what I'm thinking of doing for the passives. Any requests/suggestions? --Aezlo 23:42, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I think Increased Critical Strike Damage Multiplier should not be mentioned in the same list as Critical Strike Rate/Chance/Whatever Section, but Resolute Technique which you put at the bottom should certainly be in the list. I think it needs to be in a two or three column table, with links to the passive skill page on each of their names.
The problem is maintaining any changes on those skills between the passives page and the mechanics page, and then there will probably be other pages which need to mention it and have skill stats in rows. I know how to get that to be shared and pulled in by templates, but the server would be hit hard with those for every single skill node and active skill, so I wouldn't.Ionface 16:03, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
(starting the indent over, getting a little long) I think the damage multiplier should definitely be mentioned on that page, since the only time it ever matters is when you're doing a critical strike. Now that I've seen how long the list of major nodes is, I don't think it should be included, like Ion said, it would be a beast to keep track of all the pages referencing things like that and keeping them up to date. Keystones are fine, since those are so few. Other nodes should be mentioned the way you have it, basically saying that there are nodes you can pick to get more crit.
So, in summary, keep "Current Basic Passives" delete "Major Passives" keep Resolute Technique. TheRabbit 18:29, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
I was figuring we'd keep the mechanics linked to the Passives page because that way they're connected to something, and somewhat easy to find. We could have a mechanics section all on its own, but I don't really like that idea. Also, as far as "Major Nodes" (or whatever their title will be), I kind of like listing them because they're searchable then, and it makes it easy to see what builds are possible. For example, a critical strike mace character is a bit difficult currently because you'd just have to snag general crit nodes (which seem to be concentrated around the witch and ranger), and there's no specific-mace one.
So, how about this? I've chunked it a bit better, and subdivided the Major Passives into categories. If you guys still think it isn't worth it, I'll bow to pressure and remove it.
Also, do we want to have Damage be part of the passives? We've currently got Damage Types, Element and probably a few other lone pages which could all be consolidated into one page describing how damage works in-game. It should really be a mechanics page, but I'll see what you guys think.--Aezlo 21:47, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
I like that a lot better. It doesn't get too much into the weeds, but still gives people an idea of what they can do. I'm not entirely sure what you're asking in regards to Damage. TheRabbit 15:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Non-Player Characters & Quest Reward

Also, if you'd like to help out the wiki by inputting Quest Reward data, we could use that information here: [1]. Once we get a substantial amount of data, we'll start moving it onto the wiki. Looking at Quest data leads me to ask, do we want an NPC page? Would you like it to be called NPCs, Non-Player Characters or something more lore-ish like Survivors? Also, if someone would like to tackle the locations in Act 1, and perhaps Act 2 that would be amazing. Currently all we have is the (dated) flavor text from the site, and we could do we some coherent info like enemies that show up in that area, bosses of the area, quests related to the area, perhaps lore or other flavor etc. --Aezlo 19:32, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Spell Cast Times

I think we should start collecting these, but they don't appear on the gem information in game or on the website. In order to find out the cast speed/time you need to actually equip the skill gem and find the casts per second on it. I can start collecting these tonight once I get a chance. TheRabbit 20:04, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

News

I just noticed that the News section on the front page is manually updated. Isn't there a way to set it up to automatically pick up news updates off of the PoE website itself? There's got to be an easier way to set that up. --Aezlo 22:10, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Will take a look into it, something that pulls an RSS feed would be much better for sure. Iamacyborg (talk) 11:42, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Spam

Does the owner of this wiki plan to maintain it in the future? Because something really needs to be done about these spam accounts. Special:RecentChanges is a frigging mess all the time. Danny 08:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I've installed a captcha plugin which obviously isn't working, so I'm looking into making it more robust. Currently working on getting the wiki updated to the latest version so I can give recaptcha a go. Iamacyborg 11:05, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Updated to latest stable version - added ReCaptcha. Will keep an eye on user signups to see if they're still getting through. Iamacyborg (talk) 12:08, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Great! I think it's working! Danny (talk) 12:56, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Google Analytics traffic reports

Traffic has really been picking up over the last month, so would you guys be interested in seeing regular monthly reports on how much traffic the site is hitting, what pages are popular, traffic sources and visitor info like browser/resolution/OS etc? Iamacyborg (talk) 10:48, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Advertisement