Online talk:Pets

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995
Jump to: navigation, search


Should we add the vanity pet that comes with the Guar Plush? 22:28, 18 July 2014 (GMT)

Yep, although it would help if we knew the name of the in-game item first. —Legoless (talk) 22:49, 18 July 2014 (GMT)
I have the guar pet and have a screenshot of it I can upload. Do we want that, or do you prefer the picture of the plushie? Captainecchi (talk) 01:14, 11 September 2014 (GMT)
The screenshot. Upload at File:ON-pet-Pony Guar.jpg. Silence is GoldenBreak the Silence 01:17, 11 September 2014 (GMT)
Okay, added the file and swapped out the image on this page. This is my first time editing a UESP page, so let me know if I messed it up at all :) Captainecchi (talk) 03:13, 11 September 2014 (GMT)
Would you mind confirming that the item is indeed called "Pet Pony Guar" in the inventory? Thanks. —Legoless (talk) 14:35, 11 September 2014 (GMT)
I believe it is, but I'll double-check the next time I log in. Captainecchi (talk) 16:11, 13 September 2014 (GMT)
It is in fact Pet Pony Guar in inventory. Captainecchi (talk) 13:26, 15 September 2014 (GMT)
Good to confirm, thanks. —Legoless (talk) 20:35, 15 September 2014 (GMT)

Table or No Table?[edit]

The Crown Store page divided into sections, each one having its own table, looks very good — clean, informative and organized. This page, however, looked more appealing, in my opinion, before it was divided into a table and a gallery. Now it's pretty much a duplicate of the section on the Crown Store page. Can we revert it to the previous state or there are objections to that?  ~Shuryard (talk) 12:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm also a fan of the original section layout, for no other reason than it's more visually appealing. —Legoless (talk) 13:52, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
I prefer the table. I did it to match the Mounts page and Crown Store page, and for the same reason: the page was already starting to get long, with not much text, and will just continue to do so. (Also, it's not a duplicate of the Crown Store page; there's even more non-Crown Store pets than mounts). ~ Alarra (talk) 20:23, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
I prefer the previous sectional layout, as it gives a bit more importance to each individual creature (like the Bestiary), and treats them more like creatures than items. The page is also a favourite on the ESO Forums as a good summary of the available pets, so I take that as an indication that the section layout is clear enough to be useful. I would also go as far to suggest that rather than making this one tabled like Mounts, that we make Mounts sectioned like this one was. --Enodoc (talk) 21:55, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Well, I believe the older version definitely looks better on mobile devices... And I like it when you see the image right beside the description and don't need to scroll all the way down to take a look at the pet. As an idea, we can get rid off the menu to make the page look a little shorter, since they are sorted alphabetically anyway. Also, the page is not that long, actually (not on the list of the first 1,800 longest pages), and 22 thumbnails are there in either version. And we can re-do the Mounts page in the same way.  ~Shuryard (talk) 22:05, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
I've undone the table for now, and wouldn't be against doing the same for mounts. I think the table of contents is important if we wanna go with a longer page though. —Legoless (talk) 22:10, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
We could always set {{TOCright}} right at the top of the page and change the {{NewLine}}s to {{NewLeft}}s to remove that whitespace by the contents list. --Enodoc (talk) 22:41, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
That would potentially mess up the right-aligned icons. —Legoless (talk) 22:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Ah right. I wasn't entirely sure whether they would be pushed down or pushed left, and was hoping they would be pushed left. I guess not    :P   --Enodoc (talk) 08:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

New Categorization[edit]

I'm not sure the new categories split up the page very meaningfully. The Daedric/Domestic/Exotic labels only appear in the Crown Store, meaning all free and promotional pets are left "uncategorized", along with the Bantam Guar and Striated Pony Guar which were retired from the Store before these labels were introduced. I guess we could split the uncategorized pets even further by adding sections for Loyalty/Promo/Crown Store: Other/Free or whatever, but I have to disagree with subjectively assigning non-Crown pets to Crown Store labels. —Legoless (talk) 17:12, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. These looked better in full alphabetical order, and an arbitrary categorization that splits this into 3+ separate alphabetical orders doesn't improve the quality or readability of the page. --Enodoc (talk) 18:22, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Since there's been no further comments, I assume there's no opposition to returning this to full alphabetical order. --Enodoc (talk) 18:40, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
I was actually meaning to get around to it recently. If you want to restore it, I say go ahead. —Legoless (talk) 21:16, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps we could split it into animal type kind of like the mounts page: Dogs, Cats, Wolf Pups, Bear Cubs, Goats, Pigs, etc, (and then probably "other"), since there's already a lot of reskins and will probably be more? ~ Alarra (talk) 00:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Yeah that could work, and it would match the Mounts page. While we're at it, which text alignment do you think works better? The previous has the image right under the header, and reduces whitespace, while the current has the description right under the header, meaning the image is lower and is out-of-line with the icon. --Enodoc (talk) 09:30, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
I don't think there are enough reskins to warrant the approach taken with ON:Mounts. There are so many unique pet models that it would just create even more unnecessary sectioning, and it seems even more arbitrary that the current setup in my opinion. —Legoless (talk) 17:36, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

() Update: The Housing editor categorizes pets under various subtypes. - KINMUNETALK﴿ 12:26, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

So it does. I would still rather have a full alphabetical, but if we want to use categories, at least we now have some to use. --Enodoc (talk) 13:17, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Seems ZOS have answered our prayers. I'm fine with either, but if they've given us categories we may as well use them. —Legoless (talk) 16:12, 5 January 2017 (UTC)


This page is very long, and is only going to get longer. Should be split into several pages for readability. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 06:48, 19 January 2018 (UTC)