Green Timeline is Now on the Wiki

[Cen]

Originally Posted by Furitor [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Got bored and decided to read more patch notes to relive Classic^TM and found something interesting.

If you look at the patchnotes for December 7, 1999 (http://wiki.project1999.com/Patch_No..._Brad.27s_post) you'll see that's when manastone is removed?

"- Removal of Manastone"

Removal of MS was not explicitly stated in with Rubicite + JBoots. These mentioned explicitly in the October 13, 1999 patch: http://wiki.project1999.com/Patch_No...ber_13.2C_1999

So is it still going to be removed with Temple of Sol Ro like Rubicite, Guise, and Jboots change?

If we're going by classic timeline, it should be removed in August and not June as stated in the "Introducing Project 1999: Green" thread. I mean given we probably just don't want too many MS around so it might make it more simple to just remove it all at once...

P.S. interestingly none of the patch notes say anything about Guise removal so I'm not sure what month that was.

I have no proof whatsoever so who cares, but I still remember guise being changed to MoD in december of 99 since I started the game in Jan 7 2000 and everyone kept talking about how it being removed the last month but thats probably just people who dont even know what they ate that day.

[zaneosak]

Stupid question and probably will get a "duh" response but are we good to fill in the timeline that Loramin posted on the wiki with other releases in the "Notes" columns based on the classic patch notes? I mean if Fear was July 1999 which is in line with classic patch notes then Hate should be Nov 1999 (June 5th, 2020 Green Release) and The Hole should be Jun 2000 (Jan 21st, 2021) etc. etc. I just wasnt sure if they were left off because it was not confirmed by P99 staff or what the deal was.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by zaneosak [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Stupid question and probably will get a "duh" response but are we good to fill in the timeline that Loramin posted on the wiki with other releases in the "Notes" columns based on the classic patch notes? I mean if Fear was July 1999 which is in line with classic patch notes then Hate should be Nov 1999 (June 5th, 2020 Green Release) and The Hole should be Jun 2000 (Jan 21st, 2021) etc. etc. I just wasnt sure if they were left off because it was not confirmed by P99 staff or what the deal was.

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I didn't have time to fill in the notes column, so please feel free to improve the page by filling it in (you can find note-worthy events, like the release of new zones, on the Patch Notes page)

And just in general never wait for me ... or anyone else for that matter ... to do anything in the wiki: it's a communal resource and everyone should just do their best to improve it.

And that's even more true lately: I'm trying to finish writing a class, and until its done EverQuest and the wiki aren't something I have time for (neither is posting on the forum, but ... guilty pleasures [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]).

[zaneosak]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And just in general never wait for me ... or anyone else for that matter ... to do anything in the wiki: it's a communal resource and everyone should just do their best to improve it.

And that's even more true lately: I'm trying to finish writing a class, and until its done EverQuest and the wiki aren't something I have time for (neither is posting on the forum, but ... guilty pleasures [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]).

Roger that, sir.

[Cen]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And just in general never wait for me ... or anyone else for that matter ... to do anything in the wiki: it's a communal resource and everyone should just do their best to improve it.

And that's even more true lately: I'm trying to finish writing a class, and until its done EverQuest and the wiki aren't something I have time for (neither is posting on the forum, but ... guilty pleasures [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]).

Now I did just make a small edit to someones Cleric guide (Kalanar cleric guide to heals) to add Bravery on the chart they had. They accidentally left it off. I didn't get to fill in all the numbers yet (since I disagree with his method of comparing to Complete Heal, since it doesn't factor in recast times)

I made only an edit I think a guide writer themself would agree with was missing 99.9%. Should we not touch a guide like that?

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Cen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Now I did just make a small edit to someones Cleric guide (Kalanar cleric guide to heals) to add Bravery on the chart they had. They accidentally left it off. I didn't get to fill in all the numbers yet (since I disagree with his method of comparing to Complete Heal, since it doesn't factor in recast times)

I made only an edit I think a guide writer themself would agree with was missing 99.9%. Should we not touch a guide like that?

Yeah the guides are tough.

In general, the wiki is for everyone. At the same time though, when someone puts their name on a guide, they do "own" it in a sense, and it feels wrong to make them "say" something they didn't.

Like many things on the wiki (eg. images) I think beggars can't be choosers, so a guide with a name on it is better than no guide at all ... but we should strive for what's best for everyone, and when it comes to that, the best guides for everyone are ones that don't have names, and thus everyone feels they can improve/correct them.

So what I'd suggest, if there's a "named guide" that you want to correct, is that you instead make a copy of it which doesn't have their name, and instead is called something generic like "Cleric Solo Guide". Put a quick note at the top with a link to the original, but also say that (unlike the original) it's not owned by anyone and everyone should feel free to update and improve it.

And then maybe put your generic guide higher on the list than the original, so people can find it more easily. That way the original author still gets to "own" their guide, and the wiki still gets to benefit from it ... but we move towards a system where we have the best possible guides, and that means the kind anyone can make better.

But all this is just my suggestion/opinion, for how to balance respect for guide authors with a desire to have the best guides ... it's not any sort of formal wiki rule.

[axisofebola]

Uh, where the "notes" for things like guise and manastone being removed? Who cares about bard AoE limit but that is apparently important enough to list as a "note"

[Jibartik]

Nice work Loramin!