If you need any help just let me know.

Wiki will be nice. Until then, one suggestion that I would make is to ask that the people who write the original post also take it upon themselves to keep it updated. It would be much more helpful to the community if the OP was updated every couple of weeks to reflect what it going on with later thread. It is quite time consuming, as I'm sure everyone here knows to read through a 30 page thread to find one answer. It is also cyclical: as the thread gets longer people are less likely to read all of it and instead post to ask their question, which has already been answered, then they get responded to, etc. etc.

Post #20 just reminded me that a similar summarization post for the current WWS Megathread is similarly overdue. The problems people have with their raiders are almost always the same. There was an attempt to get a summary going... around page 60 or so, I think. Even with search, trying to find that is like trying to find a lost watch in one of the ancient cities of Troy.

(...good gawd. My guess of "60" happened to nail it exactly.)

I'll try to lay one out tonight if nobody beats me to the punch.

This is for everyone going to do the mage one:
Be careful on what values you post for coefficients.
And do not make a bold statement on spell penetration having zero use in PvE, there is some huge anomalies with the work I'm doing on Spell Penetration that support the 5% theory, and also deny the 5% theory. So just be careful as we do not have enough proof to support all of it, just some of it.

There are a few changes to the mage class in 2.3 that change a lot of what is true now, just a warning to be careful.

Here is the warrior guide I began a while ago:

http://elitistjerks.com/486397-post1259.html

I've been waiting for something like this to finish it.

Believe me, this doesn't get any better no matter updated you keep it.
We get spammed with "what weapon is better??" questions in the shaman thread.

Seems the warlocks aren't biting at this one. I've actually been digging through the warlock thread lately trying to cite some sources on x topics for reference and the amount of information in there is massive.

I was going to re-read through the thread this weekend (week, month =p)

I was thinking a good format for a collection of warlock info would be to start off with the sources cited, and once there's no arguments over what's in the thread go ahead and take off the citations so it's less cluttered?

If someone makes a Warlock post, I don't think think a works cited is necessary, since the post should contain common knowledge of the class, not unproven things.

Good point, I'll probably start on re-reading through it and copy pasting into a Word document and then proofread, edit, post.

A summary is the best way to present all the information by far. The Rogue DPS spreadsheet and the Rogue Gear spreadsheet threads may contain all the information, however getting said information will be a problem.

Taking a look at the Rogue DPS spreadsheet threat for instance, it's littered with 'Does anyone know x?' or 'What's the best y for z?' with the common retort of 'Didn't you read this thread?!'. Of course people didn't read all the way through a 37 page megathread. The 2 summary threads posted in the original post are absolutely spot on.

Ever since I first visited EJ, I thought the boss strategy threads should have their own forum. They seem out of place in public discussion when they take up half the space on the front page.

Benegesserit, tedv, and Balkoth, I will also be working on a complete works on shadowpriest. It will be as complete as possible, from gem selection, to itemization, all the way from the time you hit 70, until endgame. I don't mind if you three plan to do something similar, but I plan to go the whole nine yards. I'll also be including specs, and also the reasoning behind them. I'm not sure as to if i should go in depth for some rather sensitive boss fights, i.e. what should my tps be for gurtogg, and what should I aim for in a volatile fight such as that. Finally, I'll also go into spell prioritization. In honor of oom I'll call it something like... "Attention ShadowPriests: Stop Sucking."

I really do not think we need to list boss abilities setup in the first post because the information is readily available across the internet from Wowhead to Bosskillers. Classes are a bit different because as a whole there is no resource other as overpowering as EJs that crosses over all the classes and provides proven and continually tested and theorized information. Boss threads are perfectly fine in the Public forum because at times like the gap between 2.1->2.2 there wasn't much going on in news so most posts end up being about boss encounters and how others handle it. They are perfect filler topics for that forum because there isn't something new in the news of the World of Wacraft on a daily/weekly basis.

Since threads already get consolidated into general topics like 2.3 or WOLK speculation further separating topics will just make public look more bare with time. Public is generally about the PVE in the game anyways aside from the general business so they fit that anyways.

I was mulling over this but I'm not sure what there is to say. We don't have any odd class "gotchas!" like enhancement shaman do with fast weapons, or hunters do with clipping shot cycles. Our itemization is almost one-dimensional: get a whole ton of spell damage, and then a little spell haste. The only interesting talent decision is how many points to put in improved mind blast.

I'm a big fan of giving as much and as little information as necessary. While it's good to have all the information in one place, "all the information" doesn't feel like a Megathread. But who knows-- maybe there's more to write than appears at first glance.

My advice is this, and it applies to all megathread authors. Don't write any more than is necessary for people to understand their class in depth. The more superfluous information, the harder it is to find the important information. A section on "What are class tricks in the Reliquary of Souls fight?" seems like overkill. Use the Shaman megathread first post as an example. It's very comprehensive, so if that post doesn't have a section on the topic, it's probably not necessary.

For the record, I'm also a fan of positive titles than negative ones. Eg: "Shadow Priests: A guide to awesomeness" or "Shadow Priests: The next best thing to being a ninja" but whatever. I didn't volunteer to write the thread (yet).

Update the OP to keep track of everything?

Here's the Elemental Thread: http://elitistjerks.com/f31/t16947-s...lemental_shop/ (or see my Sig!)

Will try to work with Cheeky or anyone else willing to help consolidate the massive Hunter threads.

You may very well put a lot more into it than I may. I would gladly contribute to your thread after it has been created with any additional feedback I find useful.

Man, I love this place on the internet's.

Question: What wiki? I seem to be out of the loop.

Maybe these class summary threads should be stickied? Or at least labeled in some other way so people looking for information on a class for the first time can find it fairly easily.

The Hunter Lounge - Theorycraft Within
Me and Cheeky were planning on filling it out this weekend.

If we'd like to construct a list of these posts, here's the rogue one:

Roguecraft 101

Awhile back I had suggested to Boethius that the Enhance thread was a pain in the ass because it was like writing an article, but there were no table of contents, no formatting available to distinguish sections, etc.. Then we started talking about how half the info on WoWWiki is wrong because asshats keep editing out the correct info (because it doesn't appear to make sense at a glance), and the EJ wiki was born. Its still in development, Boe said he's getting close to opening it. It doesn't really look like a wiki exactly, but that's the idea behind it at least.

Right now its hidden to the general public. Articles are not free for all editing by the public and have to be maintained by the authors. Authors will have to write the article and submit it for review before its actually made available on the wiki. That way we generate a good repository of theorycraft info.