Talk:RuneScape/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Post replies to the main talk page, copying the section you are replying to if necessary. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.)

Please add new archivals to Talk:RuneScape/Archive02. Thank you. Kevin 22:44, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

---

Vandalism

I think something needs to be done about the heavy vandalism in the RS article.

---

New section for non-xp skills

I put a new section into the skills page for non-xp skills. Not sure if it was a good idea or not. Also added catherby and the seers village to locations. Working on getting them linked up.

---

Random events

I might just have missed it but is there a section for the special one off events like the Easter Bunny? If so can you please say so and I will add the easter bunny and the rubber chicken! --80.229.152.246 20:45, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

---

Two articles

Seems like there are 2 seperate articles, Runescape and RuneScape, with slightly different content This has been fixed.--63.249.85.209 19:39, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

---

Branching article

I'm of the opinion of creating a few pages, like Runescape (Skills), Runescape (Quests), etc. where we take the separate pages that we have and make them into sections and link to the specific sections. This also help since most of these pages aren't really going to ever be more than the size of stubs. --Ricky81682 06:08, Nov 3, 2004 (UTC)

In the meantime, I've merged the contents of "Cooking (Skill)" and "Prayer (Skill)" into this page. Hoary 02:59, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Agreed. The article is already too long, and the quests section isn't even finished yet. I'm going to go ahead and break off the skills since that part is mostly complete.RuneScape skills --Aqua 01:57, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)

• No, please don't. There's no reason to put skills into a separate page; in fact doing so will likely get induce someone to VFD it as fancruft. I'm currently in the process of sloooooowly rewriting the article to try to downsize/clean up a little. An article being long doesn't mean that's bad, or even that a split is necessary. PMC 02:02, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

---

Vandalism once again

For some reason somebody vandalized this page, I've brought it back to its last working condition. bsdlogical 05:06, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Was vandalized again by 64.12.116.137, but I've reverted it. --Aqua 06:54, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

New stuff

Made Category:RuneScape, Category:RuneScape stubs, and Template:RuneScape-stub. --Sgeo^TC 02:18, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)

Splitting articles

Since we're splitting articles anyhow, let's also make RuneScape locations, RuneScape monsters for information of that sort so that we don't have sixty separate substubs for all the RuneScape info. PMC 05:03, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Recent revert

Recently an anon attempted to clean up this page and in the process removed most of the information on it, reducing it to a stub. While I feel their edits were in good faith, I have, after some deliberation, reverted. If we are going to include a subject in an encyclopedia, we need to have all the information we can get on that subject; the more detailed the better. If anyone objects to my reversion, please leave a note here or on my talk page. (Click the "M") PMC 08:17, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Reply to above post

It was me who shortened the article. I did not have an account when I did it a few days ago, so it would have been listed as "anon". I didn't want to seem like a vandal or anything, so here I am.

The main reason I shortened it so much was because I was thinking diffefrently from you. I didn't quite agree with giving users extensively in-depth information. I tried to make it more of a brief summary of the game rather than go into the economics and outside communities. While the information on there is correct, I think there is far too much, and the notice at the top says that this article needs shortening. I do however object to the list of clan links at the bottom. They seem very out of place. There are hundreds of clans out there and none of them are official in any way, so I don't think they deserve a place on the article. Aside from that, I hope you understand where I'm coming from. :)

-Blodnatt

• I do, and thank you for being so polite about it =) The cleanup notice doesn't say that it should be shortened in any way, just cleaned up to conform with encyclopedic standards. That's what I've been trying to do lately, as you can see by the edit history. (I'm getting there. Slowly but surely.) Me and Aqua have also been working on creating a family of RuneScape articles so that the main article won't be so cluttered. When we're done, we hope to leave RuneScape like a summary of the game, ("This is the game, there's lots of players, you can have skills and do quests, go here and here to check it out in depth.") with the other articles filling it out for anyone who wants to know more.

• The 'Pedia aims to collect all encyclopedic information, and RuneScape, being such a massive game, is inherently encyclopedic. You may think the information is frivolous, but others (including me) might disagree. It isn't really in the spirit of the Wiki to delete massive blocks of information without even notifying the community. Can you see where I'm coming from? (I do agree about the clan list though, feel free to take that out with severe prejudice) PMC 01:58, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Section duplication problem.

A lot of sections were duplicated.

When I tried reverting to the last correct version, the preview gave even more duplication. I hand edited the sections, and it seems ok now. If the duplicates were different versions of the sections, some changes are probably no longer in the article. Iaen 10:11, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

My recent edits

Hope they make sense. I admit I do have reasons for having a pro-Jagex bias, but I'm hoping my changes have just helped move the enclyclopedia entry to being more neutral as per the Wikipedia guidelines.

I thought it'd be good manners to explain my reasoning behind 1 or 2 lines I basically removed. (Plus makes it more likely for me changes to not be reverted ;) )

I did remove the line about inflation being a danger, because it made no sense when the rest of the paragraph then went on to give an example of deflation. I would also debate the comment that new players cause inflation. New players come into the game with no money and take a while to start really producing wealth. Effectively reducing the average wealth per player. I think Runescape inflation is a real issue which could be talked about if people so wished, but you'd need an entirely different new paragraph on cause and effect.(It's sort of covered more accuratly in the section about partyhats etc)

The runescape economy is complex hence you get people ranting on forums about something going up in price while others are ranting another thing is devaluing. There is debate about whether these prices changes are a bad thing or a good thing.

I also removed a line which said there is a danger of low levels having to little money, I feel that there isn't a danger of low level players being too poor. Personally I feel that the game infact plays better when you are a low level and you can't yet afford everything and theres lots to aim for and work too. Possibly there is dangers with high levels being to rich but the sentence didn't seem to make much sense when I removed the bit about low levels (And I've seen high levels debate they have put so much effort into the skills they deserve to be that rich)

The section on random events I edited fairly heavily too. It seemed to overemphasise the scale of unpopularity of them to me, so I toned that down a little. I quite like them myself infact. It also implied that you could be unlucky and nasty things wwould just happen to you without warning when in fact most the bad effects can be avoided and if so cause no more annoyance than losing 10 seconds every 20 minutes.

Location Aditions

I added Canfis, the Wizard Tower, Castle Wars, The Tree Gnome Stronghold, Mort'ton to the location page. I added new information to Carne Isle, Entranta, Lumbridge, Miscellania and Draynor. In the skill section wood cutting article I moved maple trees to the members only sentence from the avilble on f2p sentence.

"begginer tips'

not sure if this section is really needed on wikipedia, at the very least it needs to be cleaned up quite a bit and moved to the bottom of the page not the top.bakuzjw (aka 578) 00:06, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• If it makes you feel any better, I'm embarking on a massive, article-wide rewrite. That section will very likely be eliminated, pared down, or merged in my eventual new version. [[User:Premeditated Chaos|User:Premeditated Chaos/Sig]] 01:47, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

errr

Is it really necessary to put clan advertising into an encyclopedia article? Please don't.

Quests

Could someone help me with some cleanup at RuneScape quests? I'd first like to get some views on what exactly should be written about each quest (see the talk page) and can someone help me with the numerous copyright violations being committed by the anonymous users? There's a least a half-dozen quests that seem to be directly copy-and-paste from different places but I can't figure out where. It's fairly obvious when you compare this writing to the typical misspelled mess that's usually added there. --Ricky81682 (talk) 17:54, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

Communities, Wilderness and Kalphite Queen?

I don't see why we should group the Kalphite Queen into Communities and the Wilderness. In the middle of a paragraph, the writer goes from talking about things to do in the wilderness other than PKing to talking about how the Kalphite Queen (which is not in the wilderness) is the most powerful monster and Hazeel (from an unrelated quest) is the second most powerful. Maybe we could start a "Notable Monsters" section or even a "RuneScape Monsters" article to help clarify this. --Peter1219 02:07, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)you use salmoues realm there all copy and paste

Vandalism

Someone had vandalized this page...I reverted it back. Just to let people know MrSpam 05:12, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)