Talk:MapleStory/Quests

Standard quest layout
We really should standardize the look of each quest. Here is my suggestion. Once we decide on one, we can change them all to match.
 * Well, i created a template for this, and converted the biggs quest to use it. -- Prod-You 01:30, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Quest Name
Should this template be subst:ed? Illudin 18:24, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
 * No, since the template may change over time. -- Prod-You 22:59, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Some deleted the list of quests
As you can see here. I do not know if it was vandalism, or if the list was only redundant or irrelevant. --Kernigh 22:55, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
 * It's a list of quests not currently explained. I brought it back. -- Prod-You 00:37, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Request Clean-up: some of the quest have ping-pong conversations between contributors.

Length
This module is just way too long. I propose we split this into seperate modules. Each module will be one area; Maple Island, Victoria Island, Orbis & El Nath, Ludibrium, and Omega Sector. Kala  ni [talk] 22:12, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Will Aqua Road get its own category, or will it be combined with the rest of Orbis & El Nath? -EMP Demon 04:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd say put it with Orbis & El Nath since it's "part" of that "island" (not really land, and we aren't even sure if they're separate islands :P) -- Prod-You 17:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Once we move, we can split this into separate pages. I don't want to do it until then since its more pages to keep track of during the move. -- Prod-You 23:01, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Bold text
I'm a little concerned about all the bolded text in the second half of the page. Combined with the heading text, it just seems like too much bold. Could something be done about this? Kala  ni [talk] 08:06, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If it's relating to the Omega Sector quests, then my apologies; I must've gone overboard with the bold while typing out the quest information. Perhaps italics would work better than bold for some things? For example, monster names/locations and necessary items, but leaving bold for important information such as NPC names/locations or rewards for the quest(s). -EMP Demon 12:30, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Rewards are already separated so I don't think its necessary. How about, bold: NPC names, enemy that needs to be killed names; italicised map names, and items that need to be gotten names. -- Prod-You 23:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorting?
As the title says, how should the quests be sorted within their continent sub-categories? By level, name, or some other method? I've personally been grouping quests which are related together, but that may not work for some people. Any ideas? -EMP Demon 03:38, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorting by level just seems natural. I mean, why would you search through by name when you might not even know the name of the quest because you're not at that level yet? If you sort by level, you can look at ALL the quests you have to do at that level instead of all the quests with that same first letter that you can't do yet, if that makes any sense. —Illudin 04:07, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
 * It does, I'm just curious about some quests which are prerequisites for later quests (such as John's Jump Quests, which go from level 15 to 30 to 60). Should THOSE be grouped together, or split up? -EMP Demon 04:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Just questlink em, I guess.( I keep edit conflicting with you and i keep messing the page up. sorry. = —Illudin 04:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops, maybe that's a sign I should log off then. XD -EMP Demon 04:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
 * No, you're much better at this than I am (cause you dont waste time trying to fix the impossible. you just go change the headers.)—Illudin 04:48, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd say sorting by level is the most logical since that's the order people will perform the quests in. If someone missed a few quest sequences, by linking they can go through the quests one by one making grouping by who gives the quest useless.  I think that sorting by level and then by location would be the most appropriate.  -- Prod-You 11:20, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with Prod; sorting by level seems most logical. However, regarding my discussion up there, I still think we should split the page into seperate pages. Kala  ni [talk] 04:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, sure it be sort by level but this page is getting to long if picture is added it would be even longer. -- DarkNShadow 04:07, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I think the solution here is to make it into multiple pages like we did with monsters.IsaacGS 00:09, 10 February 2007 (CST)

Quest Rating?
Would it be a good idea to give a "Quest Rating", giving sort of a "Is this quest worth it?" value, or should we let the reader choose it for themselves? -EMP Demon 07:19, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I think we should just let the reader choose it for themselves. After all, we need to write from a WB:NPOV, and giving a quest rating doesn't reflect that. Kalani  [talk] 04:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Pictures
Can we have more pictures/screenshots of the quests? Some pictures will be more helpful.
 * What kinds of pictures? -- Prod-You 23:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Adding quests
We need to add the quests at the bottom of the page. GameFreak 19:52, 13 March 2007 (CDT)

Knights of Cygnus
Since Knights of Cygnus is being released to English versions(MapleEurope and MapleSEA) Do you think we should add a new section for koc exclusive chain quest? It will make the Koc quest guide easier to follow.

202.156.14.99 12:03, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Footers
Oh crap. Is the footer nav supposed to go in alphabetical order? -- Imjon 01:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It goes by whatever is in the table of contents. -- Prod (Talk) 01:28, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That's what I thought, but I went looking at previously-done footer navs and they're in alphabetical order. Should I fix them all to go by the TOC? -- Imjon 03:56, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I would say add it to the pages missing footer navs for sure. Some places, the ToC may not be ordered in the best way, so feel free to rearrange the ToC if necessary. -- Prod (Talk) 04:58, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hum, alright. I'll take a look at it in a few minutes. I'll update here whenever I finish up. :) -- Imjon 06:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)