Category talk:Invention Sets

I would like to see this page renamed to "Invention Set Index" or something similar, indicating its index-like nature. It's a great page but it's not an article, and I'd like to further disambiguate it from the ‎Invention Origin Enhancement Sets article. Anyone else have an opinion on the matter? --Colonel Jasmine 02:51, 30 April 2007 (PDT)

novices learn

Well, I figured out that this is a Category, not an article, but still as a novice user I found it difficult to find this page again later. --Colonel Jasmine 02:54, 30 April 2007 (PDT)

One of the oddball things about Wiki is that if you put a [[Category:foo]] link in, instead of putting in a link to the category page, it puts the page into the category. This makes it hard to have pages that link to category pages. I have no idea if writing it as [[:Category:foo]] will do things differently. --Lin Chiao Feng 07:01, 30 April 2007 (PDT)

[[:Category:foo]] is exactly how you create a link to a category, instead of placing whichever page into the category. The colon in the front changes the effect. - Sister Leortha 07:04, 30 April 2007 (PDT)

I made a note of its existence at Invention Origin Enhancement Sets, hopefully that'll help more people find it more easily. -- Sekoia 23:26, 8 May 2007 (EDT)

Naming Convention

Is there any particular reason that half of the subcategories are "Sets for improving ..." and half are "Sets that improve..."? If not, is there any compelling reason that this be not changed to be uniform? Draeth Darkstar 14:01, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

They are not compatible.

"Sets for improving" is what type of set category it's in. Absolute Amazement is for improving stuns.

"Sets that improve" is what type of set bonus it has. Absolute Amazement is a set that improves Recovery.

~ User:Aggelakis/Sig1 16:20, 1 April 2011 (UTC)