RuneScape:Article of the Month/archive15

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape

Contents 1 Main Page 2 Agility 3 Lunar Spells 4 Prayer 5 Woodcutting 6 Barrows

Main Page

It is well organized, probably the most viewed page, and the one page we will not delete. Chiafriend12 20:23, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Support: 1

Neutral/Pending: 0

Oppose: 7

OMFG LETS FEATURE THE MAIN PAGE ON THE MAIN PAGE!!!!!!!!!!! Oppose. --Whiplash 20:27, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

That just doesn't seem right...Oppose. Cashman ^{talk|editcount}20:46, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

You guys aren't even giving good reasons :(...Chiafriend12 20:51, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Kinda, yeah... I mean, featuring the main page on the main page feels would be kinda wrong, as almost everyone sees it as they go to RSwiki. Also, IMO, AotM's should be RuneScape related, because otherwise we start falling down a slippry slope and soon we have User pages as FA's. Oppose =( Tes ^Fan 20:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose The reason to oppose isn't because of the content of the article, but because of a technicality on the fact that if you attempt to link a page to itself, it will display the link as a non-linked bolded text instead.

Example: RuneScape:Requested featured articles Tarikochi 22:15, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose... I don't think I've ever opposed anything up until now, but this is pushing it. Think from the perspective of the general reader. What's the point of seeing a page you're already on featured? Seems just like a petty novelty to me. --Themurasame ^Hiscores 22:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Comment: Tari, if you go to see this month's featured article you'll see that Falador is bolded, and not linked. I don't see how that's a reason to oppose. Chiafriend12 22:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Assuming that the Main Page article wins, that Read more.... would end up being Read more... since it'd be on the same page it's showing the featured winner. Do note the previous example I used is using the [[ ]] tags. Tarikochi 22:46, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, the "read more....". We can always do [[Main page|Read more....]] which will end up being Read more..... Chiafriend12 05:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Wiki-link to this project page. - The tag for what was just done was [[RuneScape:Requested featured articles|Wiki-link to this project page.]]. This is it not working, so doing that will not work on the main page where the link to featured articles would be placed at. Tarikochi 21:13, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

lmao whip is right. It would be just stupid to feature the main page on the main page. Im going to have to oppose. This dude is evil ^{like hell}

Oppose. This is totally unnessary; it has NOTHING to do with RuneScape, and even if it did, it'd be about RUNESCAPE'S main page. Not RuneScape WIKI'S main page. Yes, we won't delete it, but does a page not being deleted constitute to good information? If this is nominated, I'm sure that the next thing nominated will be this. Sorry, Chia, but I really have to oppose this. Stinkowing _{(WHAT'S IN IT?)}

Comment - The CVU can't be featured because that's not an article. Chiafriend12 19:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Neither is the Main Page... Stinkowing _{(WHAT'S IN IT?)} Stinkowing 00:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

It is, since it's in the mainspace. If it was "RuneScape:Main Page" then I wouldn't have nominated it. Chiafriend12 00:25, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

---

DISQUALIFIED

---

Yes Chia, we won't delete it. Yes it's well organized. But you've completely missed the purpose of AotM. We're trying to display a good example of a high-quality page, so that visitors will view it and not only see a great page, but see how good our content can be. If they're on the main page, they've already seen it. Featuring it would be completely redundant. I would've thought that this was a joke if you didn't seem so passionate about it. Try it on Uncyclopedia. You'll get a laugh, at least.  ^GANGSTERLS   _talk01:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

---

It is a good example of a high-quality page. -.- Chiafriend12 02:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Look at it this way Chia the main page is featured every month as it is the page everyone sees as soon as they log in. --Whiplash 15:39, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Chia, let me spell it out for you. As far as I know, you can't link to the page you are on. It turns bold instead.

Runescape:Requested featured articles is the result of [[Runescape:Requested featured articles]]. --Mura 23:52, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but if you put a redirect to RuneScape:Requested featured articles as a link on RuneScape:Requestes featured articles it will be a hyperlink. Chiafriend12 23:57, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

lolz. earth_(t)

Agility

It has loads of info and pictures, and it is lengthy too. I think it should be Article of t3h Month. Cashman ^{talk|editcount}20:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Support: 2

Neutral/Pending: 1

Oppose: 0

Neutral - All the templates and images crowd up the screen on my computor. Otherwise, good article. Chiafriend12 20:51, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Strong Support - Biased because I love agility (currently 74). =P Great article though. earth_(t)

support its a great article and lunor majic is more about a lot of pictures then info and agility has both--74.36.99.66 23:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

IPs can't vote. :( Chiafriend12 23:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Support Re-viewed looks good. Whiplash 22:53, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Lunar Spells

It's a change for those interested in the use of unique Spells, and there is a consistent animated image for nearly every one of them in the individual Spell pages. That and the fact that I'm in nearly all of the animated Spell images. Tarikochi 21:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Support: 8

Neutral/Pending:

Oppose: 1

Support Nice table and nice animations. Also, if I was new Rswiki and RuneScape, it would seem like a really cool page to check out. Tes ^Fan 21:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Neutral - Like with Agility, it seems crowded. Chiafriend12 21:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Support - Has lots of pretty pictures, and is very informative, though I do agree that the pictures are a bit cramped. --Themurasame ^Hiscores 22:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Support It showcases some of the wiki's great animated pics Atlandy 01:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Support - Many people would be very interested in Lunar spells, as it would give them good reasons to train magic higher. Doomedrusher^{|Talk||Contributions|} 15:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Support Just had to--Derial^{(Boywithbrain)} 14:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose Kind of a short article though that dosen't matter. I would probally switch to support if you can fix the images up a little they look like they're clogging up the page. --Whiplash 11:14, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Support looks better now that it has been cleaned up. Whiplash 22:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose Sure, it's got animations and details... But if one of the main reasons is simply because you're in the animations, then I kind of see that as arrogant. No offense meant and if I get banned because of that, then nothing I can do. Cool Spy0 05:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

That's not the main reason for it. The reason it was nom'ed is because it's a good article. Tes^Fan 22:40, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Didn't sound like it. "That and the fact that I'm in nearly all of the animated Spell images." sounds more like a quick, futile grab for fame rather than an actual nomination. Cool Spy0 23:51, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

She's in the Prayer and Agility pages too, but she didn't support them. Also, 7 other people voted because the page was good, not because Tari was in it =. Tes ^Fan 00:03, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I see this is getting nowhere. My lack of support remains the same however. I'm not trying for Combat room to a main page article because I'm in it. Anyway, I'm not going to continue this because I'll probably end up getting in trouble for flaming a user. Cool Spy0`

Good idea. You are, after all, entitled to your opinion. Tes ^Fan 00:44, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Not quite Support. Almost though - Not as cluttered as when I originally voted. Do not mean to be picky, but there is a whole lot of "you", "then you can", "puts you"-type sentences in it. Chiafriend12 07:40, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

All the instances of "you" have been removed =) Tes ^Fan

SUPPORT then! Chiafriend12 19:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Support: Looks great with all the of the animations and the runes table. Christine^Talk 22:51, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Prayer

Good article, has pictures, lengthy and worth reading. —Icecube022 (talk • contribs) forgot to sign this comment.

Support: 5

Neutral/Pending: 1

Oppose: 0

SUPPORT - Lengthy, filled with information, not cramped with images, and has a nice colored table with all the prayers. Chiafriend12 01:48, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

support ^_^ It's goodies. Syugecin^spam 23:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Support - great aesthetics, one of our best skill articles.  ^GANGSTERLS   _talk02:20, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Support. Looks good. --Wowbagger421 00:06, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Support Cool Spy0 20:39, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Support well done article. Whiplash 22:53, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Neutral: I think the last two sections (Trivia and Random events) could use a clean-up. Tables would probably work nice for the majority of text in the Trivia section. Christine^Talk 23:04, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Woodcutting

Maybe one of the longest and with more pictures skill article, it really deserves it--Jigo22_{Have A Nice Day!!!}^Yay! 04:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Support: 2

Neutral/Pending: 1

Oppose: 0

Support as nominator--Jigo22_{Have A Nice Day!!!}^Yay! 04:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

NEUTRAL - No necessary reason to oppose, nor support. Chiafriend12 05:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC) updating vote Support-Great info and also tells about the Woodcutting macros. BURN ALL MACROS!!!!!!!!!Altarius95_{The Master Cook!}^{Talk to me}

Oppose - Just dosen't strike me as particularly good. Whiplash 22:53, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Barrows

Support: 1

Oppose: 0

Neutral: 0

Support I fully support this nomination, not just because I am one of the major contributors to the article, but I think it has really inproved recently and become a lot more readable. (I won't of course say it is well written, as I am biased, I do think it is though ;-).) Plenty of information, and actually a useable easy to read guide, many of my freinds happily refer to this now instead of other fan sites. Bob2006ty^{_{(RUNESTORM333)}talk}

Oppose big edit dispute right now we don't wany an AOTM with an edit dispute. Whiplash 22:53, 29 September 2007 (UTC)