Warzones 7-9

Hello Lkelche,

I undid your edits on the Warzones page. Despite popular belief, the dungeons you added are not called Warzones 7-9. They were never called that by CipSoft or by any NPC related to the quest.

Molx (talk) 17:21, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Admin+

Hey there! I’m reaching out to introduce the Admin+ program (if you haven’t heard about it already!) & let you know I’m here if you have any questions about it. Take a look at the details here & feel free to send over any questions you have. pikushi ✧.* 20:25, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

DPL Performance Improvements: Testing Next Week

Hello,

In recent weeks, our engineering staff has been reworking some code of the DynamicPageList (DPL) extension in order to correct a bug and, by extension, dramatically improve query performance, speeding up article page load times.

We are intending to push that change live on your wiki Monday, May 13th. This change should be invisible - the actual wikitext nor the visual output of DPL queries is expected to change. We are confident this should be a smooth rollout due to testing we did prior to this stage. However, as your community is one of the largest on Fandom using DPL, I wanted to proactively inform you of this change so you can be on the lookout for any unexpected problems.

If next week you notice any sort of unusual issues with DPL, please report them immediately through Special:Contact. You can refer to "PLAT-8725" in any bug reports to help us more efficiently triage the concern.

Thanks! --TimmyQuivy (help forum | blog) 16:11, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

New CM introduction

Hi! I'm ReverieCode, and I'm part of the Community Manager team at Fandom, focusing on gaming wikis.

I wanted to introduce myself as I've been assigned to be a point of contact and provide any support needed by the Tibia Wiki, whether it's technical help, bug reports, or answering any questions users here have about Fandom and any of our tools and features. I'll also going to be sharing updates from Fandom that are relevant for the wiki to know.

If you or anyone else are in need of assistance from Fandom or have something to report, feel free to message me, and I'll be happy to help! –ReverieCode 11:09, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Mass Creature ability edits from November

Hi, Towards the end of November you mass edited creature abilities. It looks like you did this to standardize the elemental types but in doing so you miss corrected all of the conditional damages. Element of `poisoned` is the condition but you changed it to `earth`. Same for `burning`, `electrified`, `bleed`, etc which linked to the conditions which isn't the same as `fire`, `electric`, and `physical`. Now all of those condition abilities are wrong.... The changes of `lifedrain`=>`life drain`, `manadrain`=>`mana drain`, and `poison`(no ed)=>`earth` is fine because all of those are elemental damage types and linked to the same pages.

Soul4Soul (talk) 18:10, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, @Soul4Soul. After I started with the change I realized it will be a lot of work to have it improperly coded. Therefore I stopped with the edits because I first need to prepare the Ability template itself to receive a "condition" field before continuing. But I haven't had the time to focus on it. Unfortunately, the work is then left half way for now. Nothing that I would consider worse than what we had before, since we were misusing conditions as damage type anyway. - LszTschis (talk) 18:18, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Its subjectively worse, it broke a parsing tool I use and now is misleading. I spent a lot of timing correcting the elemental fields up through 2022 data in the past and according to the template definition status conditions are valid for the element field. I'm not sure why we would need a "condition" field on the ability template when it already handle conditions. In the past I did consider adding alias templates for each condition, you can check the bottom of the ability template for existing alias examples. A poisoned template could look like `{poisoned|name|startingdamage|scene}` and converts to psuedocode `{ability|{name}|damage=up to {startingdamge}} turns per round|element=poisoned|{scene}`. A burning template could look like `{burn|name|turns|scene}` which converts to `{ability|{name}|damage=10 hp per turn up to {turns}|element=burning|{scene}`. We should even be able to calculate the total damage and include that information if we found it useful as well but most players don't think about conditions in total damage. Looking at recent changes to Template:Ability now critical shouldn't be a field unless its intended per ability but its not in the way its used today, critical should also be an ability template alias or just a field on Template:Infobox Creature.

If your open to these ideas I'd be happy to connect more on discord.

Soul4Soul (talk) 20:57, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Soul4Soul! Yes, we are always open to ideas and contributions, we have very few active contributors. Thank you for reaching out. Also feel free to reach me out on discord, and to chime in or to even be the tip of the spear leading changes :). I am sorry if it affected you/your scripts, I was not aware of other usages. In the end, it is technically incorrect and wrong, even if stated as supported by the template, since a condition is not a damage type, it is a condition. There is no "burning" type of damage input, there is only "fire". Misusing them might work visually on the wiki, but it is incorrect and can lead to a cascading effect of other templates being used or categorizations being done on the wrong assumptions. For clarification, this all started because I wanted to have categorized pages for monsters that deal certain types of damages. There is no category for "Monsters that deal burning damage", this makes no sense since burning is not a damage type. Therefore, we have to rework the template ability to support having conditions. With this, we could categorize then the monsters that have abilities applying conditions to have their own category, such as "Monsters the apply burning condition". LszTschis (talk) 11:10, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Key

Hello! Your edit regarding Key 0010 is inaccurate. The keys were in fact not kept by all players who had it. Only those who had brought it to Mainland kept it. All characters on Dawnport were reset (level, skill, items, equipment, everything) with the introduction of Newhaven. Hence, I added clarification that Key 0010 is now considered a collector's item. It's not a common item on Mainland by any means.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by KeyCollector (talk • contribs). Remember to sign your comments!

Hello @KeyCollector, was it hard to bring from Dawnport to mainland? If it was trivial, how would this be rare or owned only by "collectors"? Anyone could have it. Or did it normally disappear when coming to mainland? LszTschis (talk) 21:03, 30 October 2025 (UTC)