Talk:Past Events

The items from the Advent Calendar need to be added. I don't have the sprites, and have no idea how to implement it into a table, since 15 items may make the table look less-important. Suggestions?

I could make a table featuring the Advent Dress-Up items, but I think it would be more appropriate to place the table on the Events page. - King Vesper

Chronology

Should this page be reordered to match that of how Events currently lists? It's not much content as of right now, but down the line, I feel that users might check this list more for what the recent events look like or if they missed an event during a hiatus more-so than users looking at the full event history back to the beginning, so having it list the most recent event first makes more sense to me. (This would remove the need for the blue highlight as well, since the most recent event would be right at the top) -Zephyr Foxworth (talk) 04:59, 29 July 2014 (BST)

New Table Structure

The table structure currently makes no sense, there's always at least one field empty because there was no Item or no Pokémon and in case of Custom Sprites no Shiny. It's also not possible to include what kind of Events it were, what was needed to do to get the reward and so on. Also I don't think that the Pokémon have to be hidden in spoilers, it's possible to see them in parties on PFQ so it doesn't seem like a secret information to me that has to be discovered. Anyway, I think the new table structure should include:

• Name of the Event (Mass-click Weekend, Voltorb Flip, Advent Calender, ... This should also have a reference to the Announcement Thread, if it exist)
• Duration (26/Jul/14 - 27/Jul/14, or only one date if the Event only lasted for one day)
• Description (Here belongs the requirements to get the reward, like making 10,000 Interactions or in case of 1st April that the Egg Sprites were changed)
• Reward (All kind of reward no matter if Item or Pokémon would belong here and link to the page it belongs to: Mega Stone, Consumeables, ...)
• Image of the Reward

The reward part will still be empty if there was nothing like on 1st April, but at least it's not empty most of the time. I'm still not sure if in case of a Mega Stone the Mega Stone and the Pokémon plus its Shiny Form has to be added or if every/most Event Pokémon should get its own page. --Uzumi (talk) 18:30, 29 July 2014 (BST)

Looks like a good format. I don't quite get what you mean for the descriptions, but I hope they'll be kept concise. Is this kinda what you had in mind?

2014

Duration	Name	Description	Reward	Image(s)
26th July - 27th July	Mass-click Weekend	Individual Goal: 10,000 Interactions	Floatzelite Q (Mega Floatzel Q)	File:Megastone floatzel q.png						File:Mega Floatzel Q Shiny.png
16 May - 26 May	Voltorb Flip	Minigame: Voltorb Flip	Sylveon						File:Sylveon Shiny.png

References

I wanted to get a visual idea to work with here. I think the table would look more impressive if we did our best to accomodate the mega formes. (Something like Megacharizard would get interesting...) -Zephyr Foxworth (talk) 00:58, 30 July 2014 (BST)

Yes, exactly! Sorry, I had to get going yesterday so I hadn't the chance to make the table myself. Oh and on Events like the 1st April the Espurr-Sprite could be used as an image, so it wouldn't be empty. And yes, the description is fine as it is, for detailed information (like what Voltorb Flip is) the referenced announcement thread could be viewed. But the description should give the user an idea what kind of Event it was, I think this is an important part about Events. At least the name "Past Events" gives the impression that this is about the Event itself and not only about what kind of Item/Pokémon appeared on what day, that was the reason why I thought that a short description should be added.

The chronology is also fine this way, maybe there should be a table for each year and then during the years with more Events (so when they get more established) it could be also possible to jump to July. Though, I'm not sure if this would improve the page or make it unnecessary long.

Also would templates make sense for this? Or is align="center" also okay? In case the table stays like this. --Uzumi (talk) 21:41, 30 July 2014 (BST)

Thanks for fixing my links, sorry I was a lazy halibut about that. I also somehow failed to realize I was using align="center" literally everywhere. I changed it so that it's only used once, at the beginning of the table. In testing the width-sizing of the table, I found that I don't like seeing it use the full width of the page. All the content seems larger than it really needs to be. My comfort zone is between 70-90%, with 85% being my current preference. Feel free to tweak this to see how you like it.

The formatting to get the Images column(s) working was janky at first, but was resolved with the inclusion of that black bar. I wish I could get it to work without that bar, but all my attempts to hide it or get it to work without it have failed. So I just made it black. The end result gives us freedom over the number of images per row, so we got that going for us, which is nice. (recommended max 5).

I like the table/year plan. I can easily add an anchor to the first event listed for a given month to allow for easy linking to that month later on. Separating the tables based on year would also free up some space for the duration column, as we wouldn't need to show the year anymore. That reminds me, should the name or date be listed first? If we list the date first, we can reduce its column size such that it won't appear as needlessly large as it does and it won't make it look awkwardly sized between the others. -Zephyr Foxworth (talk) 23:53, 30 July 2014 (BST)

No problem, I just thought it'd be nicer to see the table with the full beauty of it. And I actually really like the 85%, it's comfortable to read and the content isn't spread too much apart. Thank you a lot for the table, it looks great. The anchor probably won't be used until in a year (except if there is a sudden increase of Events), but it'd be nice if you could add the Anchor or put it as an example in the current table. I would probably just try to do it like they did it in the PF1 wiki and hope that it works.

First I thought the Name with the referenced announcement thread would be more important and should be listed first, but considering that it's sorted by the date of the Event putting the Duration first seems more logical. Putting the Name second and then the Description after it really makes more sense, because the Description belongs to the Name, not to the Duration.

But only 26/Jul - 27/Jul looks really odd, is this even an accepted date format? I tried to other formats just to see how it would look like and I guess the first one would take up too much space, especially with longer months like September. --Uzumi (talk) 07:41, 1 August 2014 (BST)