Morrowind talk:Vivec Temple

Item Purposes

I've taken the purposes for items back off this page as well as two others (here and here). The purposes were correct but if the wiki starts listing the purpose of each item in place pages it will quickly double in size. The books are linked and on their main page has much more information on what they are needed for - that's the way it should be. –rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 10:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

In reality, few items actually present full uses. I am keeping consistent with all other pages which do include brief and small descriptions for quest items.Harkren 13:47, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

There are dozens of quest-related items, be they weapons, armor or books. The location page where they are found is not the right place to document their use. That should be done on the quest page or, where one exists, the item page. –rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 14:32, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes there are many quest items, but not normally are they all found in one spot at once. The location page serves as a general hub for what is in there and informs the player if there are any items of importance among those that are mundane without having to manually check or know beforehand. There are countless examples of this being done on a lot of the already made pages.Harkren 15:05, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

That's not what a location page is for. It's supposed to give an outline about what's present, not say that things are present AND used for. A good example is Jobasha's Rare Books, where it makes the general point that a lot of quest-related stuff is present but doesn't intrude by saying what links with what. The quest pages are where such information goes, so the location page simply points out that certain quests relate to the location and leaves it at that. –rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 15:29, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

So you say, yet there are pages that do just this. I'm having trouble understanding why location pages are not supposed to give additional information on important items that may be rare, or not found anywhere else. I'm sure I could find examples where the above I mentioned persists, such as the Dwemer Puzzle Cube in Arkngthand or say the Bonebiter Bow found in Urshilaku Burial Caverns. Perhaps this suggests that is how it is intended but involves too much effort in why it is not completely consistant for all pages. Even none quest items such as skill books are given a reference stating what type of skill they train. Or how about that extra note given when an item is in a place and may not be found anywhere else such as daedric pauldrons. Logic instructs us to give that note but what you have said suggests that the information must be kept on the item page for that particular item when this is clearly not the case in actuality. Yes perhaps it isn't included in Jobasha's Rare books; there could be a multitude of reasons for this. Perhaps it is a lack of effort, or perhaps the aspect of extra notes had not been brought to that page yet. Or perhaps it is that out of the 5 quests in Jobasha's area, 1 references him directly and no books involved. 1 Quest is directly related to one of his books, yet the book is incredibly common throughout Morrowind and is unnecessarily mentioned. Whilst the Main quest references him in that his home is where an informant likes to visit and meets you there. There are 3 books that are of actual use that should be referenced, not to mention the information regarding Jobasha's reward for you helping slaves. Or we could abolish every last bit of that and go on the basis that you have linked me an npc and not a location. Harkren 17:05, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

The ones you just linked are part of the main quest. They are also unique. You will need those items if you want to advance in the game, so it makes sense to mention the them. In your edits you highlighted an optional component that is present in several places. There is no need to do so since the information is present in several other places. –rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 18:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Several items that are not related to the main quest (or any quest at all for that matter) are still given their own notes, and by your logic it doesn't make sense to mention the main quest items seeing as they have their respective quest pages which neatly indicate their location and use. The item you are referring to is Galur Rithari's Papers, no? This item is rare, I certainly wouldn't call three locations "several" and this item is not restocked, therefore it is worth mentioning in brief. The other book which you didn't mention but did include in your response edits was Progress of Truth, which IS neccessary to the main quest yet you delete the note. Harkren 18:36, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Progress of Truth is required, true, but it's not unique as you can see on its page. You're taking this much too personally. I know you've just joined - have you read Help:Editing_Pages#After_Your_Edit_is_Saved? The fact I undid your edit doesn't mean that I think you're wrong and that's why I explained further on the talk page. –rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 19:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

The item is still rare nonetheless, not on the same level as the Papers, but it makes up for that by being a main quest component. I don't feel I'm taking anything personal, I am merely presenting you with what the wiki has been doing and pointing out a contradiction. I understand that you didn't think I was wrong, but I also understand you thought the manner in which I was doing it was wrong, and that is what we are discussing. I have read the Help:Editing_Pages#After_Your_Edit_is_Saved and whilst it does state that my contributions are subject to editing (as mentioned in the caption at the bottom of the page), the reason for it being done so was based so far what I can tell on "preference" rather than a set rule. The reason for my re-undoing one of the edits was more or less an interface mistake. Harkren 20:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

(u/d) I won't disagree that there are many, many contradictions on the site. The main reason for that is that it grew up organically rather than as a planned entity. That's doubly true of the MW space where it grew one way and then was chopped and started again in another way.

The basic idea behind recent site development is that the various pages operate as orthogonally as possible from one another: place pages should be about the place; NPC pages should be about the NPC; item pages should be about the item; quest pages should be about the quest. The alternative is that people put quest tips on item and NPC pages and so on. For instance, people keep adding irrelevant stuff about Umbra the sword to the Clavicus Vile page. This leads to duplication of information making it far more difficult to correct things if problems are found. Since every item on the wiki has a link, there's nothing wrong with saying "Item X is here" with a link to Item X. The Item X page explains what it's used for. The location of item X is typically not relevant to the place.

You're right that there are places where this doesn't happen, but that's a fault with the places where it does rather than the ones where it doesn't. In these case, saying "Item X is found here", where Item X links to the papers, is the right thing to do. If people look at the quest page, they'll find links to places and items. That's the way it should be. –rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 20:21, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Well everything has it's ups and downs. Where it has it's faults, it adds depth too. Rather than "That's the way it should be" it should be "That's one of the ways it should be. Without the other ways interceding." Harkren 20:41, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

At the risk of not equivocating, I fail to see a problem here. If there is a related quest, it should be mentioned as a related quest. Plain and simple. Everything is gonna go back to how it was. –Elliot ^talk 22:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

The debate was more or less on the additional notes of certain items mentioned in a location. The quest however is not related to the area and shouldn't be there, the quest is related to the book itself, but not the area. Either that quest disappears or the notes are added, this is another contradiction to the logic that convinced me not to mess with this stuff anymore. Harkren 23:08, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Can the quest drag you to a location? Yes? The it's related. I can't see how this is going to change anytime soon. And plus, this is beyond the definition of minor, it is becoming a mountain of an issue. And issues are only as big as you make them out to be. –Elliot ^talk 23:17, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Becoming? I feel the debate that Rpeh and I had was a long, enduring, but nice one. Throwing back that verbal retort here and there! I don't feel it could have ended better, we reached a nice conclusion that the way the page goes is just the one straw in the hat that was picked. You are right in what you say of issues however. Issues are the size that they are, they can be stirred up. Did I stir it up? I don't know I just posted what I felt may or may not be an issue, in some ways what you just did. As far as related quests going, It's still debateable, that stage of the quest is optional and the book is found in more places than one. Even so the funniest thing of all is that the original edit I made was just to remove the related cure for vampirism quest as according to the person I had been taking in the ways of which pages are written from, shouldn't be there as it doesn't really relate to the zone but more to the book itself and should be in it's description or respective quest entry. Oh well, I suppose that entries for quests are exempt of this rule as they are not so specific. Harkren 23:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC)