User talk:Instantflash/Rare Furniture Values

Suggesting
Please add the follwoing format when suggesting/updating furniture here:

Name:

Picture (optional):

Value:

How you found the value:

Other:

Add your suggestions here: (Remember to use the format above)

Division by ocean
Values for these are not exactly accurate as things on Dub oceans tend to cost either lower or higher than on sub oceans and therefore it might be a good idea to split it into Sub/Dub prices. --Matt121493 09:42, 9 February 2008 (PST)
 * All of the furniture are not availble in stores therfore there is not associated Dub cost to it. It is also noted that prices are mainly based on the Viridian Ocean, I may consider spiltting it. --Instantflash 08:49, 10 February 2008 (PST)

Reference
I think for you to put up such a page, you should actually do some research on each item. Post links to known auctions for said items as some sort of reference point. To just say something's worth 90K without a reference point is kinda silly and doesn't really belong on the YPPedia in my opinion. --Stevensam
 * I agree. These numbers seem arbitrary.  Further, the numbers will vary by ocean because some oceans will have more of an item for sale than others.  For example, there may be a lot of Atlantean Seals for sale on Midnight and none on Viridian, or vice versa, even if there's a similar number of Seals (per pirate) recovered from Atlantis.  --Barrister 13:19, 11 February 2008 (PST)
 * What I did in making this page was I searched the item on the fourms and took the rough average of the prices and that is the price shown on the page. I also update these prices about once every week so that it stays up-to-date. Also as stated before, I may consider listing prices for each ocean. --Instantflash 16:09, 11 February 2008 (PST)
 * I still suggest posting your references. Include links to recently finished auctions from the forums to back up each determined price. -- Stevensam

A new look suggestion
I have done a little research towards what I think should be done. I decided to seach the forums (Post titles only) only looking at posts from the past 3 months for a few of the furniture items, here's how I propose the research is used. Please consider this set-up, as I think it makes the YPPedia article seem much more professional, rather than complete opinion.

--Stevensam February 13, 2008 10:17 PM PST.

A
. ..

Ancient pottery



Value: 90,000 PoE, Hunter, 1 (December 9, 2007.)

200,000 PoE, Sage, 2 (December 20, 2007.

Ancient Rumjug



Value: 150,000 PoE, Sage, 3 (January 6, 2008.)

100,000 PoE, Cobalt, 4 (February 5, 2008.)

--Stevensam February 13, 2008 10:17 PM PST

Petition for complete revision or deletion
I have been directed to this page 2 or 3 times since it's creation as "preset" or nonnegotiable prices for rare items. I don't believe that the 'personal viewpoint' banner is enough to stress that this article isn't the be-all-and-end-all. Secondly, I believe the ability for any unscrupulous user to change the prices and then present the prices as fact in order to (for want of better phrasing) scam another player into an 'unfair' deal for their rare furniture is both dangerous and avoidable. Coupled with the article's general inaccuracy and lack of credited sources, I'd like to see this article either completely revised with the excellent suggestions given, or, preferably, deleted. If the article is deemed worthy of the YPPedia then I will consider contributing to it, but I continue to doubt it's usefulness. --Domokun 1/Mar/08 9:34am GMT


 * I think pricelists can be actual useful (I sold my first tourny trinket for 1k, not knowing better), but are inherently difficult to maintain. Just giving a single auction post as reference is prone to be abused by fake auctions using arbitrary high prices. But yes, references would be needed. Having a wiki article about prices has the advantage of giving several people a chance to contribute, as opposed to external pricelists that could establish themeselves as the one and only truth. I agree, that the 'personal viewpoint' banner isn't enough to point out that there simply isn't such a thing as a true value of an item. In my opinion there should be a highly visible sentence stating this. --Alfwyn 07:51, 1 March 2008 (PST)


 * I have added a proposed deletion notice to this article because I was directed here AGAIN today, by a young Pirate. This page is not being updated with the most recent prices, the existing prices are based upon opinion rather than fact, and this article has certainly outgrown any previous usefulness. I have also removed the link to it from the Atlantis page. I don't believe this article has any place within the official wiki, and it's continuing existence as a UserPage does not shield buyers or sellers from it's apparent set-in-stone prices, including those of items that will never, and have never been available to purchase. EDIT: The changelogs for this article also dictate the sort of useless, sourceless bickering over prices that this article provokes. I only hope that the changes made to the article weren't used to a sellers advantage, in artificially creating a more desirable price for an item, and portraying it as fact, as I predicted would happen a month ago. Domokun 6/Apr/08 10.00am GMT


 * Now that this page is under the User: space, it is no longer appropriate for deletion by anyone other than Instantflash. Ironically, he's been permablocked from editing the wiki....  I'll stick an opinion at the top of it, however, for clarity.  --Barrister 02:30, 6 April 2008 (PDT)


 * In this case, might that rule be overlooked, considering the issues proposed, and the fact that this page will never be updated? AverageJoe can still find this page through searching. I appreciate the banner, but I don't think it is enough. Clearly the original author is not going to complain about the articles removal. Domokun 6/Apr/08 11.00am GMT
 * What would be the official word on me simply removing (just)the prices from the page in a single, simple edit. This is a user page, but it has been edited by others? As the powers that be, would you consider that vandalism, or allow me to make the changes? Domokun 7/Apr/08 9.00am GMT


 * It would sort of render the article meaningless, as it's all about the "values" of these items -- Vorky 01:02, 7 April 2008 (PDT)

I've given it some thought, and I'd be amenable to deleting the page entirely. The user didn't place it here himself; it was moved. Out in the main namespace, we were proposing to delete it. --Barrister 04:21, 7 April 2008 (PDT)


 * Rendering the article meaningless was exactly my intention, Vorky. Thanks for the proposed deletion, Barrister.  Domokun 7/Apr/08 5.37pm GMT