User talk:Surafbrov

Leaving a question/comment in the middle of the page and not at the bottom will be ignored.

Thank you!
Thanks you for the fix on my User page! :) --Ryo567 (talk) 10:17, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Version history headlines
The layout change you did on the Version history article was quite immense, and overall it looks both more stylish and systematic now. However, I frequently do find it annoying when I click on patch links (such as 1.2.2) and are reminded that those - due to the removal of headlines - no longer work as they did, instead requiring me to scroll down until I reach the patch in question. This can be rather tedious considering the length of the whole list, and this will only aggravate with future patches. I am not saying the layout should be reverted, but do you perhaps have any thoughts or suggestions regarding this? NoseOfCthulhu (talk) 23:08, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I too agree with this situation and right now I'm thinking of a way to dissolve this issue. My current idea is to separate into headlines like, ==1.1.x== and ==1.2.x, so on... And patches like, 1.2.3 will be placed under 1.2.x, otherwise this may have to be hold off. 01:40, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Since I have commented that above, I have thought of another idea. This idea will make Version history basically a highlight page for each version and move the patch-notes/change-logs on the actually pages like 1.2.2 change-log will be found on 1.2.2 instead of having the redirect. And if this idea goes well, I'll also make a template for the Patches release date, version, previous patch, next patch and some other stuff that may be useful. 01:43, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I have created an example for the template: Template:Zdroid9770/Sandbox. 02:28, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to answer! Hmm, let me see if I understand - you're suggesting each patch to have its own article, with Version history being a list of these (in similar manner to Boss and individual boss articles)? This could work well; it's already the case on the popular Wowpedia and Wowwiki. Perhaps that's where you're taking it from too? In any case, with such a system the hassle with scrolling would be vastly reduced. All in all I think this sounds like a good idea, if I've understood it correctly. NoseOfCthulhu (talk) 16:54, 22 February 2014 (UTC)