 |
This page or section is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current project page or contact an administrator for aid if no talk page exists. |
|
| Archives |
|---|
| No archives yet |
Template:Inuse
There's really no reason for this. It's the same thing as the template, Under Construction.
- I say Delete it. --
Spencer (Talk | Edits | Contribs) - However, this is very different from the "Under construction" banner, because it asks users NOT to edit, while the Under Construction encourages users to contribute. --Aburnett001 {Talk} {#} 21:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmmm..... I guess I didn't catch that when I was looking at the templates. Well I guess there's no reason for this VfD. I guess someone can archive it now. -- Spencer (Talk | Edits | Contribs) 21:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Holiday Rewards
This whole page is really a duplicate of Discontinued holiday items and as far as I can tell adds absolutely nothing new. It brings out a good point--that "Discontinued holiday items" is really a misnomer for that page--but nonetheless, this page should be nothing more than a redirect. Endasil (Talk) @ 16:54, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps you are right, but this page contains alot more of information about the Holiday items. And, the Discontinued items and holiday drops does no longer have a list like this.-- Hapi007 Talk! Sign! . 15:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- We might be able to merge the 2 articles. -- Spencer (Talk | Edits | Contribs) 03:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry guys, I kind of only got halfway through nominating the article when my internet died. I forgot all about this. To be honest, I can see the use of two articles, though the new one needs heavy clean-up (the format of centering everything is messy, we might want to tablify everything). Because to be honest, I think it's true that people would go to Discontinued rare items for much different reasons than Holiday Rewards, we might as well keep the articles separate (though there would necessarily be overlap). So I cancel my vote to delete, as long as we make clear and maintain the difference between the articles. And we might want to finally name the one article simply Rare items. I've never really understood the idea of calling tradable holiday items "discontinued." They were never discontinued; they just ceased to be distributed. Endasil (Talk) @ 11:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- By the way, I'm actually going to place this on the VFD page to make it known, that's something I never got to before. Endasil (Talk) @ 11:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- I propose we re-write the Discontinued rare items with the added information from the Holiday Rewards page. There is useful info from the holiday rewards page that can be added the discontinued page. Any comments? -- Spencer (Talk | Edits | Contribs) 14:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- I propose we re-write the Discontinued rare items with the added information from the Holiday Rewards page. There is useful info from the holiday rewards page that can be added the discontinued page. Any comments? --
- I vote No for deletion. I found this page to be more useful in providing the information I was looking for. I did not find the Discontinued Holiday Item page useful. I do like the idea of merging them though, but just don't delete this useful information please. -- Ju Juitsu 21:47, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps you are right, but this page contains alot more of information about the Holiday items. And, the Discontinued items and holiday drops does no longer have a list like this.--
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
RuneScape:Editor's Tips
I remember this article - I started it when the welcoming commitee was started. I was bored and decided to make this page, hoping it would catch on like the Yew Grove (I was foolish at the time). I realised a couple days ago that this page serves no purpose, it would just restate what the style guide says.
- Seeing as you're the only contributor and the author of the page I'll simply go ahead and delete it. 18:24, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Template:Previous rfd
I don't think this template is needed. Smqr 03:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Delete - As nominator. Smqr 03:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Keep - This serves as a potential motivator to improve an article as opposed to dragging back through the process of VfD. As the proverbial 'they' say, it's better to light a candle...
- REDIRECT user:kytti khat/sig 04:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Weak delete / Comment - It isn't needed; we don't need a template like this instead of Template:Cleanup. And if this is kept, I don't think it should have a signature, or be in a subsection in the middle of a talk page, it should be at the top of the talk page. User:C Teng/sig 05:09, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Keep Although I don't think it will be used on hundreds of articles (how many articles have been VFD and we kept?) it is a very logical template and serves a clear purpose to keep unnecessary VFDs from clogging the system. Like this one.--Degenret01 12:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
- P.S. Agree that it should not have a sig, and it should always be placed at top of an articles talk page.--Degenret01 12:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
keep - This will stop vfd that have already been but kept.
Comment - Rather ironically, this template seems to apply to itself. --Crocodiles4 19:21, 26 August 2008 (UTC)\
keep for 2 reasons, 1 as he says, This will stop vfd that have already been but kept., and two, i want to beable to apply it to itself....
Corhen talk
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
White logs
- Delete this page has no point, i nominated it for deletion due to multiple facts,
- this is one of a kind page, if you have white logs, you need red, blue, green, and such (1 for every Gnomish firelighter color of fire.
- this has no relevance to any other article, as there is no signifigave in game,
please, consider this to be deleted, and replaced with an entry like Colored logs, with pictures and summeries for all of the colored logs. Corhen talk 06:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- How about merging them all into the Gnomish firelighters article? bufar(talk) 17:57, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
When the item is in your inventory what is its ingame name? Check the granularity policy, if its an item, it can have a page.--Degenret01 18:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- Merge - With Gnomish firelighters per Bufar. Karlis (talk) (contribs)
18:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- comment That is why i said we should then either create an overpage "coloured Logs", or create a page for each color,Corhen talk 18:48, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
18:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - All coloured logs have their page now. 116.49.128.126 04:06, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - I think merging them all with Gnomish firelighters would be a better idea. bufar(talk) 05:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - I think merging them all with Gnomish firelighters would be a better idea.
- Keep - If it is an item, it should have a page. Ianho1992 11:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
- Merge - I would say keep, but as there are also purple, red, blue, and green logs, whose articles have the same content (only the colors are different). User:C Teng/sig 23:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - It's part of the wiki's granularity policy to keep articles on all items. In any case, it's not as though it hurts to have these. Morian Smith 00:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - Per Morian Smith. Smqr 09:52, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - Per Morian Smith. Derilith 11:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - If it is any item no matter what, it should have its own page accourding to one of the policies. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rune445566 (talk) on 23:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC).
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Crafting Nature Runes
The pictures are really poor in quality and the article is unneeded because it should be merged with Runecrafting. Not all the runes need their own articles and it's got POV. If anything, it should be a part of the moneymaking guide. Arias
Knight 22:15, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Keep - This guide has its problems; it's largely outdated and needs much better images. But, if tweaked even a little, it has the potential to be a very good guide. The content is too in-depth and detailed to be effectively merged into runecrafting or the moneymaking guide; doing either would severely handicap its uses. As for POV, the RuneScape Wiki hasn't got a traditional policy on the subject. If you're making a helpful guide, it's impossible to write the article completely neutrally, otherwise you could add any method you thought up and nothing could be said to oppose its effectiveness. Morian Smith 22:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Delete/Merge - Do you see any other pages about crafting runes? (ex. Crafting Air Runes) No. I really don't think this article should deserve it's own page. I think we should delete it, or maybe merge with the Nature runes page. --
Spencer (Talk | Edits | Contribs) 00:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Delete- Planeshifted 00:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Delete- This page is almost exactly like the Nature running page, just instead of running, your crafting. Page is useless. 
Aburnett001 {Talk} {#} 23:35, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Tree stump
According to the Granularity policy, non-interactive scenery is not deserving of articles, this is non-iteractive scenery. 02:25, 13 September 2008 (UTC)- Delete or merge with Trees - All of the info that is on that page but not on the Trees article can be put there. User:C Teng/sig 02:36, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - Template:Stub. I like the novelty of it. earth(t) 02:54, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - Per Earth. -- Spencer (Talk | Edits | Contribs) 03:01, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Just because we delete the article doesn't mean the template will be affected. 03:02, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Keep - If we kept Mountain goat, then why shouldn't we keep this?CFLM Talk # Sign 03:06, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- I believe the reasoning behind keeping mountain goat was that it was a npc. 03:08, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well if we're deleting it, I say at least merge it with Trees. -- Spencer (Talk | Edits | Contribs) 03:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Merge w/ trees - Per Spence CFLM Talk # Sign 03:11, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Merge with trees - but make sure that the comment about the stump of a player grown tree is included in the farming guide Aburnett001 {Talk} {#}
- Merge with trees - Granted normal stumps are non-interactive scenery however farming tree patch stumps are interactive in the fact that they can be dug up.
- REDIRECT user:kytti khat/sig 13:20, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Tree stump has now been merged with trees. --Whiplash 01:56, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
RuneScape:Dragon desk
There's really no reason for this. It's barley used and if you have a question, just ask an admin or another user about it.
- I say Delete it. -- Spencer (Talk | Edits | Contribs) 23:10, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - Per Spencer. Use the forums' help desk if you have a question. Derilith 00:31, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- Keep Thenfixit. Seriously, put it on the community sidebar or something.
- Weak Delete Its quite useless. Golfmanthegod 02:54, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- Keep per Earthere. It's useful. It's barely used because it isn't linked to anything like the sidebar. User:C Teng/sig 18:26, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - I've generally experienced that if people have questions, they will ask it on the item's/skill's/etc. talk page. If they have questions about something regarding the wiki, they seem able to seek out an individual's talk page to ask there. Having those two options, both of which would probably get their question answered quicker, this seems relatively useless. While it might have been a good idea at one time, I feel that talk pages bound to each page are more beneificial. They allow the question and responses to be saved on that specific talk page, should another user have a similar question, they could look there and have it answered rather than coming here and us potentially having to answer the same questions multiple times. Karlis (talk) (contribs)
18:34, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - The forums are to our advantage. Use them =/. If not, ask someone on their talk page. Or ask on the associated talk page. Or ask on the yew grove. Or ask someone in-game. No need for a "Dragon desk". Derilith 23:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- sh0gm - Anybody with questions should go to the forums. 23:35, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
- Comment Perhaps we could use RS:DD to "list" questions. Say Editor1 goes to Summoning and asks "How much money does it take for 99." (lol) He could then quickly add his question to RS:DD for an easy answer. earth(t) 01:13, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
- Motion -- I would like to get a few more comments on my idea (titled "Comment") before this VfD is closed. Doesn't matter who; just wondering what the community thinks of a new dragon desk. earth(t)
- delete it looks pretty usless to me, few changes, empty at the moment...Corhen talk 06:17, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - Editors could use {{helpme|question}} for assistance instead. CFLM Talk # Sign 06:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- Comment- Help me question does not generate any help. Check my talk page history.--Varthlokkur 18:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - I'll be honest, I wasn't aware of this page. I made a suggestion for something like this back in May.... see RuneScape:Yew Grove/Archive3#"Ask the community" page for the discussion and some generally favorable response to something like this. Unfortunately, whomever got this page going didn't follow through and integrate this page to anything else in the wiki to draw attention to it. No, I don't think the forums are the end all to get all in terms of how this could be used, although the forums could be a tool to both seed and develop this feature of the wiki. It certainly needs a whole lot more work than assuming "If I make it, they will come". --Robert Horning 15:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- No issues with integration at all. It was created by Earthere, therefore no one touched it.
- Hell, I integrated it into Template:Talkheader and the Yew Grove header. I was considering "advertising" on my buddies' User talk, but decided against it due to the possibility of a month-long block for spamming.
- Please don't blame this on me. >=/ earth(t) 04:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I was first aware of this feature when I saw the VFd, and I thought, "Hey , that's what we talked about a few months ago.....why does someone want to delete it?" To make it come alive it should have a nice obvious link off main page, with a side note that questions should be directed there. Also maybe on the recent changes page, we have almost everything linked at the top, throw this into there as well. Given time it could grow into something very useful and helpful. Give it a chance.--Degenret01 16:17, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm... We're in quite the pickle here. Some (if not most) want to delete it, a couple want to save it, and some want to help it by promoting it in some way. I really don't know what to do. Personally I want to delete it. There are plenty of other ways to ask questions about something. (ex, talkpages, user talkpages, asking others in-game, etc.) There's really no use for it even if we do try to promote it. It's just as easy to ask a question on a talk page, rather than asking a question on a page no one has ever heard of. -- Spencer (Talk | Edits | Contribs) 23:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - Yeah, heres the situation.
- Hmmm... We're in quite the pickle here. Some (if not most) want to delete it, a couple want to save it, and some want to help it by promoting it in some way. I really don't know what to do. Personally I want to delete it. There are plenty of other ways to ask questions about something. (ex, talkpages, user talkpages, asking others in-game, etc.) There's really no use for it even if we do try to promote it. It's just as easy to ask a question on a talk page, rather than asking a question on a page no one has ever heard of. --
- Not everyone uses the forums.
- Its not on the sidebar.
- Its barely used.
- What do we do?? Derilith 11:41, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
- Try my earlier idea?
- If the DD idea doesn't catch on in a couple weeks, we can just speedy delete it. earth(t)
- I see this as a sort of Deja Vu for the resistance I originally had for the Grand Exchange Market Watch. The difference here is that I plowed through the criticism and got the thing up and running before the detractors could get it deleted. This is an amazing concept, and something that needs a whole bunch of work, including promotion and adding it to wiki features such as the sidebar/main page/linked into other articles. I could see this being a major feature of this wiki, but it will take more than a few minutes of work to make it happen. I just don't have the time at the moment to make it work, although that may change. I certainly don't want to see this concept get rejected out of hand, other than this may not be the best implementation of an idea like this. I certainly don't want a future effort along these lines getting deleted immediately by an overzealous admin using this VfD as a precedent before it can prove its worth. All ideas like this take time to develop, and this concept is no exception. --Robert Horning 16:20, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- What do we do?? Derilith 11:41, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Make it more known - The way it is now, after two months it got used one, maybe two, times. This is because it's not linked to any place easily noticable (sidebar, main page, etc.,). If we look on the sidebar, there's a whole three IRC links, which could easily just be narrowed down to one so the DD doesn't "clog" it.
I say that if after two weeks of being up where it is sure to be noticed, if it doesn't get used a whole lot (e.g.: <3 questions), then I vote delete, but if it does get used, I vote keep. 
Chiafriend12
Loon is best buttlord 17:35, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Duplicates the purpose of the forums (for RuneScape and wiki related questions). As stated earlier, ((helpme|question}} should serve this purpose. New users can also try asking experienced editors on their talk page.
- Comment- Help me question does not generate any help. Check my talk page history.--Varthlokkur 18:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
As for getting rid of some of the IRC links, I think that an IRC channel where a user can get live help would be far more useful than this page. Dtm142 20:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- The public computers at my library filter out both the IRC and forums (well, irc doesn't work properly on the comps but still). That's just me. Perhaps there are others in my situation. earth(t) 03:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
- You should then either use your own computer or ask an experienced contributor for help. I am guessing that too few users would be in this situation to justify keeping this page. Dtm142 18:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - Most people who have questions just ask on a talk page. I never used helpme, to be honest, but whats the point of it if its not going to be used? RS:DD whould simply defeat the purpose of IRC, RS:YG, talkpages, the Official and non official forums, and helpme. Derilith 11:59, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
- This can be something very different, but like I said, it would take some effort to make it work. The "right way" to get this done is to take advantage of the fact that this is a wiki... something that no other major RS fan website currently has to offer. What we don't have right now is a wikified Q/A frequently asked questions location that can be extended/expanded by those reading the pages. Where can that be found again? --Robert Horning 15:54, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
- There's RS:FAQ which can be improved at any time. Dtm142 02:06, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I wasn't aware of that page either (although perhaps I should). I find the name of that page to be dull and uninspiring, and Dragon Desk to be more flavorful in terms of something within the game, but I would agree that these two concepts need to be merged together. I'll see what I can do here. --Robert Horning 13:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
- There's RS:FAQ which can be improved at any time. Dtm142 02:06, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- This can be something very different, but like I said, it would take some effort to make it work. The "right way" to get this done is to take advantage of the fact that this is a wiki... something that no other major RS fan website currently has to offer. What we don't have right now is a wikified Q/A frequently asked questions location that can be extended/expanded by those reading the pages. Where can that be found again? --Robert Horning 15:54, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - Most people who have questions just ask on a talk page. I never used helpme, to be honest, but whats the point of it if its not going to be used? RS:DD whould simply defeat the purpose of IRC, RS:YG, talkpages, the Official and non official forums, and helpme. Derilith 11:59, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
- You should then either use your own computer or ask an experienced contributor for help. I am guessing that too few users would be in this situation to justify keeping this page. Dtm142 18:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Template:Infobox Food
This template is unused.Smqr 14:28, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Delete - As nominator. Smqr 14:28, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Strong Keep - How is it at all useless? User:C Teng/sig 21:11, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Strong Keep - This template is useful. 
bufar(talk)
} 22:48, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Keep - This template provides lots of relevant info about a food item, totally useful. Aburnett001 {Talk} {#} 22:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Keep, but use it - Its not used, but we might use it one day. 
Pablo (Derilith) Clan Wars 02:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Template:Infobox FoodItem
This template is unused. Smqr 08:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Delete - As nominator. Smqr 08:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Delete - Useless, as we have Template:Infobox Food. User:C Teng/sig 20:18, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Hardest quest
This article is incredibly one-sided and biased. Examples include: "The rewards are not generally considered to be the best", "extremely difficult foe" and "many players". 
CFLM Talk # Sign 06:34, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Delete As nominator. CFLM Talk # Sign 06:34, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Based on what criteria is it hardest? Most challenging? Most frustrating? Killed the most players? It calls for too much speculation and personal opinion. While Summers End took me 3 hours and 3 deaths, what I learned enabled another to do it in 30 minutes with no deaths. Wasn't hard for him at all.--Degenret01 07:52, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Just an opinion piece Hurston 07:55, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - I'd have to agree here with the above opinions. I don't see an objective way that such an article could be written as a combination of play styles, in-game experience (as a player, not exp points), and skill/combat levels all play a huge role in how difficult a quest may or may not be. IMHO Black Knights' Fortress was one of the hardest challenges for me.... way back when and given the combat ability I had when I first did it. This is also something that can change over time, such as trying to obtain planks for the Dragon Slayer quest... once an incredibly tough challenge by going into the old style PvP wilderness and taking them from PK'er campers. Now you just put a bid in the GE as F2P... and even easier as a member. More to the point, the way this is written is simply an editorial written from a single person's point of view. --Robert Horning 12:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per above. This could even be speedy deleted. User:C Teng/sig 16:20, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Template:Lowdetail]
This template has been superseded by [[Template:Sd]]. It is currently not used, and only redirects to the other template. az talk 17:36, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - Wow! My laziness pays off! All links and transclusions have been mashed out, so I see no reason to keep it. CFLM Talk # Sign 17:39, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Seeing as this is an unused and incorrectly named template that was turned into a redirect, I'll simply Speedy this.-- 01:54, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Site Changes
Reasons:
- Stub
- Badly written
- Information can be included in the event's article
What do you think? CFLM Talk # Sign 09:42, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - As nominator. CFLM Talk # Sign 09:42, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
- Neutral - I think the article has the potential of becoming a proper article. Information regarding "site changes" during major releases such as Summoning, Hunter, etc. should be added into the article. Just because it is a stub and is badly written does not mean it should be deleted. az talk 09:57, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
- Additional information - taken from Problem report #14836 - "May you delete this page? Since i dont need it.". Page qualifies for speedy deletion under author request. CFLM Talk # Sign 12:03, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Dual moderator
This page really isn't necessary. It is already covered in the moderator article. Although the information is important (that it is now impossible to attain both player moderator and forum moderator status and that only a few still exist), it isn't really useful to give such a narrow topic its own article. There is really no point in keeping an article as a stub if it cannot be improved - it should be merged and deleted. Dtm142 22:14, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Keep/Merge - They are real, worthy of documentation, and interesting to read about, so they should definitely have at least a subsection on them. Though, as for having a page, I made the article because the moderator page is a disambiguation. It wouldn't really seem fit to have a disambig looking like a full article. Unless it got converted it from a disambig to an article with {{main}} branching off to the other articles (*hint* *hint*), I'd still vote as keep.
I have to disagree, though, about the "it should be merged and deleted". Why not merged and redirected? Gotta' love them redirects. Chiafriend12I have 12 friends. 01:02, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Merge The information I just read about these dual mods did not answer one particular question for me. Is the title "Dual mods" official or just a player made term? It sounds player made, and if so the info should be simply added to the bottom of the Mod article. The only reason for keeping it seperate would be f it is a term that Jagex itself made and used officially.--Degenret01 21:36, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm 99% sure it's player made. I haven't seen it used in the knowledge base at all. Dtm142 22:30, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, it's probably players who made it, but I have seen J-Mods use the term on the forums. Chiafriend12I have 12 friends. 01:08, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, it's probably players who made it, but I have seen J-Mods use the term on the forums.
Merge I suppose moderators would be a better page than forum mods, so that way. tobylaneTalk 14:32, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Merge For simplicity's sake, just put it under the general heading of mods. Also, I do not remember the source, but, once again, you can become both a player and a forum mod.
Merge I agree, this information should be merged in, and it should be a redirect to the section that this will be created when/if the merge happens. - TehKittyCat 04:36, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Ladder
I found this orphaned. It may be interactive scenery, but do we really need a page for it? Hurston 10:43, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
- The Granularity Policy dictates that almost everything needs to have a page. bufar(talk) 18:46, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - It is interactive scenery, so we should keep it. CFLM Talk # Sign 01:59, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - Ladder and Door (which trapdoor and others redirects to) sort of needs reorganising, in which this could be deleted. tobylaneTalk 14:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - Per bufar. Karlis (talk) (contribs)
14:39, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - Per Cflm001.
- REDIRECT user:kytti khat/sig 03:08, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - Per Kytti khat. --Tealclocktalk 04:16, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- Keep per Tealclock. User:C Teng/sig 19:04, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Addy fire arrows
This article seems unnecessary, we have a Fire arrow article that includes all of the information and no other metal of fire arrows has an article ether. This article is not linked to by any page or links to any page(except for a link to Fire arrow I just added. - TehKittyCat 04:14, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Also, it barely gives any information - it only gives the examine info and the fact that it's used in the Underground Pass Quest.Trausten2 19:21, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- I would just redirect it to fire arrow. Hurston 14:06, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Keep - Per RS:G. It's really short? Then make it longer. It's the only one that has its own page? Then start the other articles. It will get unstubbed eventually. Chiafriend12Loon is best buttlord 04:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Keep and expand - Each of the types of arrows should be documented.
- REDIRECT User:Kytti khat/sig 13:41, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Keep per kytti and RS:G. User:C Teng/sig 19:05, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Comment - another important issue to address are the other types of firearrows. Should they become redirects to Fire arrow or have their own articles? Butterman62 (talk) 03:26, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Keep - Per Chiafriend12. Naikiw 12:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Keep - I agree with Kytti khat that we should make seperate pages for all the fire arrows. Babyvegeta93 21:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Keep - Per kytti. --
5chidori (Talk)(Contribs)(Edits) Play RuneScape 02:38, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Keep - I agre with the kitty 
Kayteen7 13:40, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Exchange:Opal bolts(e)
I believe this page should be deleted, because it is a duplicate page. The page this is a duplicate of: Exchange:Opal bolts (e). I recommend we just redirect this page to the other. Keeping as is leads to thinking you updated the price, when in reality you updated the duplicate. - TehKittyCat 00:36, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Opps, just realized this should be speedy deletion because it duplicate. - TehKittyCat 00:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Closed - Redirected. Problem solved. Chiafriend12I have 12 friends. 00:48, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Half cake
The factual accuracy of this article is disputed. I have found no evidence supporting this claim and it does not appear on the list of Discontinued rare items.
- I've never heard of this... :o WWTDD? 17:49, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
- Redirect - To Non-existency.
- Redirect - To Non-existency. Karlis (talk) (contribs)
18:02, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
- Redirect - To Non-existency. Allyofpikmin 18:09, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
- Redirect - To Non-existency. Andrew talk 01:36, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- Redirect - To Non-existency. Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 00:56, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Please continue discussion on Talk:Slang dictionary to decide the fate of potentially offensive content. Dtm142 19:49, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Slang dictionary
Just to determine what the majority say, below is a tally of support for possibilities. Chicken7 >talk 02:40, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Remove offensive content - 23
Delete article -16
Keep offensive content with warnings - 57
Move offensive content to subpage - 4
as of 03:27, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep with warnings. I think most users can handle some offensive content, though a warning about using the reportable terms should be placed. Also a warning that the 'reportable' column may not be 100% accurate. http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/5128/10finga0.gifPlay 19:34, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
PS. Doesn't WTF mean 'Welcome to Finland'? -.-
Neutral, but closer to keep I personally think we should keep this, although we should leave a message saying something like "We are not held responsible for any trouble you get in RuneScape or FunOrb if you use an offensive term and get reported." Lordgeorge16 12:21, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep, but place a tag for offensive Language. Same as Ninjasklord. -Alex10019
" I agree with ninjasklord and to those who do think of this, but I think people might get the wrong idea of what we are trying to do. So yes I do think we shud take it down in order to keep this site's reliability and professionalism to the max."
Keep, but place a tag for offensive Language.-Ninjasklord
Remove all Offensive Content - As per above - 11:50, 18 December 2008 (UTC) Keep all Offensive or non offensive content For me this shows what the words means for curiosity... please keep all content bout put all offensive words in the bottom and put a warning] 00:22, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Remove only Offensive Content - There are a lot of players (like me) that English isnt our native language, I for one, couldnt understand the slang people use. And of course I never use offensive language. This guide has helped alot of my mexican friends that play Runescape too... so pls reconsider its deletion, but not its modification Jd0064 15:15, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Remove all content The internet slang dictionary is endless. This page was discussed before to be removed, and once again, I see no need for it as a page. We already have redirects for all the runescape slang to the correct article i.e. addy arrows. It is also highly offensive. 
Atlandy
15:37, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Remove all content There is no need for this page on the wiki. If somebody does not know the slang, just politley ask the player to repeat what they said without the slang, or go to a website that shows you different slang. We just need to get this page of this wiki. Matthew 548 20:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Remove only offensive content - There are plenty of people who don't know a DDS from a DDP, so the majority of the content should be kept. A note at the top of the article to (try to) stop people adding such content back in would also be good. 
Hurston (T # C) 16:41, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Delete-Per Atlandy. WWTDD? 16:48, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
(Support transferred from talk page)
- Delete - Dh ranger2Talk#Edits 15:58, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete -
- Delete - Lanning9 16:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete -
Comment - Why are we following Jagex's rules on this one, but not other pages? What is wrong with the community? We don't want players to say "penis" but we'll let them see the Mod center? We need to focus on consistency... Karlis (talk) (contribs)
17:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - Then i'd say why not make all the pages follow the rules? (ps. i cant find the mod center, but ahh whatever) Dh ranger2Talk#Edits 18:55, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
19:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- Exactly, there is no consistency. Wikia's states right in it's policy that the rules of RuneScape must be respected. Thats why abolishing the Mod Center information is a must!!!!!! I totally agree with you!!!!!! 19:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - I would totally support in revamping the page and removing ALL offensive material, I personallly Use this page to understand what my fellow players are saying, the RsGG 'Player dictionary' does NOT cover a majority of the slang/abbreviations used in the game, these are almost essential to understand when playing the game. But I stand at Oppose for deletion of the article for that reason stated above. floppyc5 19:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Support 165.155.192.94 19:22, 18 December 2008 (UTC) anonymous user, Chicken7 >talk 03:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep for foreigners is this page VERY helpfull.TY.
- Kinda an oxymoron....confused? 20:03, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Remove All Offensive Content - I can see why Karlis want's to remove the page in it's interity, but it would still be consistent if we were to only remove the offensive parts of the page, and just leave slang for items or certain abbreviations such as, "LOL", "ROFL", "BGS" and etc.. Anything like, "STFU" would have to be further discussed, as all though it's common, people can see it incredibly offensive. 
Billy Bomb7Stories!
20:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- To clarify, I said neither remove or keep. I would just like to see the same rules and guidelines followed on two controversial pages. If we are going to delete this because it breaks Jagex's rules, then the other page I mentioned should not be formed. If the other page is formed, then this page should remain 100% as is. I remain neutral on this page for now. Karlis (talk) (contribs)
20:15, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Support Per above. But I believe we should leave the abbreviations in and simple describe them as being offensive, rather than explaining precisely what they mean. i.e. "stfu" could be something like "An offensive abbreviation meaning 'shut up'". Rendova 20:16, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Delete I agree. It's pointless and somewhat offensive. The last thing I want is for the Wiki to be known for telling other players how to bypass the filter. Cund4
Keep Please! Keep the slang dictionary as it is!! Half the stuff on runescape is so-called "offensive" anyway! Maybe you could make a separate dictionary without the coarse language. Please listen to the previous idea! 
jigenbakadoTalk
Neutral True, a slang dictionary may contain offensive language and content, but nonetheless, a dictionary of other languages, such as spanish, japanese, french, exc., is bound to have offensive language, correct? However, I am not sure if we should keep the slang dictionary on the RuneScape wiki, because although it is resourceful in knowing what a 'bgs' is, or the abbreviation of what 'stfu' means, a suprising number of terms, such as 'lol' or '1337', is in a category of general slang language, and thus, can be found on certain sites, such as wikipedia, perhaps? Plus, I find that 90% of the time, if I need a clarification on what the term means, I can always ask a player or friend.
Overall, I cannot make up my mind as to whether or not the contents of the Slang dictionary should be deleted partially or completely. But I at least like to convey this: "No matter what language of a dictionary you are using, there is bound to be a word or words that can be used to offend people." So at least keep that in mind if you are considering to delete this article. I cannot support deletion, but at the same time, I feel that I cannot oppose it either.--Pkthis 20:48, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep The dictionary helped me understand some of what my friends were saying, its helpful. --Nalyd Renrut 20:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Delete Takes 3 seconds to ask someone what they mean. There's not even a warning for offensive language. Just delete it.--Kodeman76 21:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep We dont need to follow Jagex' rules, every single dictionary contains offensive words, it might be helpful, and if we were to remove every page which is considered a bit offensive removre pages as Glitch, or go display quest spoilers only a day from release. Theres also no real need to remove it, because the so called "Offensive terms" need to be understood too, we cant make players believe a term like "STFU" is a welcoming term.
Delete - It's just Jagex's official Player Dictionary, with offensive language and ASCII art randomly thrown in. Delete it.
Keep - This is just another attempt at censoring the wiki. 22:28, 18 December 2008 (UTC)Keep - per InstantWinston. This is the RuneScape Wiki, not a Jagex controlled website. Andrew talk 22:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Strongly Keep - A user if offended by the article has the right to ignore it or not read it. It is that simple, Like InstantWinston and Soldier 1033 i do not want the wiki to be any more censored. So far the wiki is good there is no purpose in deleting the article. This isnt a Kids Playground and if anyone seriously feels offended just dont click on it. Seriously people learn "slang" words and swear words else where. God Of War 22:44, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- Censorship? Does a dictionary really need to say, "Yeah, As$ is a slang term that means Ass." Uh, no, that's not defining a slang term. That's instructions for evading the censor. And why do we have an entry for "<( (_Crayola_( ( )"? What's that supposed to be doing here? Why is our "dictionary" giving a definition for an ASCII drawing of a crayon? All the actual abbreviations and stuff are basically just copied from the Knowledge base. Case in point: (o), (a), and (d). Those are only in there because the Jagex version has them; it's obvious it was just copied from there. Nobody actually refers to a Ring of Charos as just "I used my (a) to get half price on Charter Ships." troacctid 23:01, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Strong Keep- As said above, if a user is offended by the article he/she has the right to ignore or not read it.--
Brux Talk 23:53, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Clarify - When I supported, I did mean to only delete the offensive material. Just thought I ought to point that out. Rendova 00:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Slight Delete - I find that some of it is useful, but a good portion of it doesn't work out. I think that we should keep the ones that do not bypass the censor and are also commonly used. For certain ones, it might be a possibility to remove offensive meanings. Some phrases are not common and aren't used or rarely at all, while others have partial or incorrect meanings. That's my idea (From my post on the Slang Talk Page) -Monkey139 00:59, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep This is a wiki. It's for reference purposes. Also, I find this article quite useful in order to understand some of the language on RuneScape. I give my support. No questions asked. 
Airblade86 Talk • HS 01:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- I think you meant to put "against". Supporting means you want it to be deleted. 02:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- I just clarified all the votes so they say "Keep" or "Delete."
Keep article, but revamp - The majority of items listed are completely unnecessary ("<( (_Crayola_( ( )", "@$$", "<(^.^<), ^(^.^)^, (>^.^)>, (^(^.(^.^).^)^)", things like that ALL need to be removed). If items pertain to RuneScape or general internet lingo, keep them, because there are some actually useful bits of info in there. "702/Jad", "p++", "Chins", etc, are all things that are common in RS but that a new player would have no idea what people are talking about, so the list could be used for that. If it can be made into a RuneScape slang dictionary and not a "WtfRandomInternet" slang dictionary, then it's highly useful. 
Regabuh (talk) (contribs) 01:03, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep - I know this isn't wikipedia, but since we are related to wikipedia, being an encylopedic wikia, we shouldn't have to censor what could be considered information of encyclopedic value. While I do agree that some of the material on this page could be considered offensive to some, it does provide information on commonly used slang in runescape and is therefore valauable to some people. 
Sir Lenehan File:Smite old.png|30px 01:47, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
The article should be deleted. Slang is not an inherent part of the game, only the people who play it. It's my belief that unless the information explicitly pertains to the RuneScape game or website, it should not be here. It may be useful to some players, but an article's usefulness and an article's notability are not the same. If I made an article pertaining to a tasty chocolate chip cookie recipe perhaps someone would find it useful, but it certainly wouldn't have a place anywhere on the Wiki. A less severe but similar scenario exists here.
I would be in favor of keeping the article after an extensive cleanup (which it needs anyway), but determining what makes for noteworthy slang or not would be a virtually impossible task and a waste of investment. --Neo Garland 02:39, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Delete only offensive content - Agreed we don't need to be teaching how to bypass the filters, but useful non-offensive definitions of abbreviations (etc.) should be kept. 
1000fast 
T-H 02:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Strong Delete - There is practically NO POINT in having this wiki here. I know that we do not have to read it if we don't want to, but it is a wasted wiki. Slang cannot be learned by reading a long list of all the different kinds of casual terms. It is simply a matter of being exposed and playing the game long enough. Also, a player who hears a word he/she has never seen before won't think "Hmm...what does that word mean? I'm going to use the RUNESCAPE WIKI for this!"...uh yeah...I didn't think so. Chungus 02:59, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- I do. And many others do, too. User:C Teng/sig 04:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Clarification - Okay, I know I suggested removing the offensive material, but we Can do something else. Kind of how we have the spoiler warning on the, Betrayal at Falador article, we can put one up that states something like, " WARNING! This article contains highly offensive content! The RuneScape Wiki WILL NOT be held liable for any offense to any parties, or damages to RuneScape accounts caused by avoiding the censor." Billy Bomb7Stories! 03:54, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Delete - Its pointless. As it says on the page, it will never be complete, and to say the truth, I havent seen most of those words in all the years I have been playing. Delete it, its a waste of time. 
Hess36talk 
03:58, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Delete - Per above. CFLM (Talk) 04:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Strong Keep - This is an encyclopedia. We should have everything that a RuneScape player needs information on. And this article is used by many people. I also find it very useful. And what happens if we get rid of the "offensive" material? People wouldn't find certain words they wanted to look up in it. Keep the page, and leave it as it is. User:C Teng/sig 04:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- I'm still keeping my vote as Keep, but I think that we should only remove the offensive content that no one's heard about, like "Ilyp." User:C Teng/sig 22:25, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep - per C Teng. €MØŠwô®L[) 05:00, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep - per InstantWinston. Naikiw 05:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep - I hadn't realized that this wiki was centralized around keeping Jagex happy (i.e. the current discussion on removing classified info) and making it "safe" for you very easily offended people. If we are going to start censoring and deleting "offensive" material, I believe we should censor all weapon images. They are pointy, you might get hurt. Dsctatom 06:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- So only the weak take offense to penis pictures and the f word? And this has nothing to do with Jagex. This is about decency. Rendova 07:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- If you are so easily offended, why are you on the internet? This is a very dangerous place for "weak" people like yourself. Dsctatom 00:34, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Strong Keep - This page is very useful. We're here to make an encyclopedia/fansite/whatever of RuneScape. This is about RuneScape. It helps. We're uncensored. What more could you want?
Though, there are some rather stupid entries. "N.@.K.E.D." means "naked"? Yeah, I'm pretty sure everyone knew that (not that we needed to...). The ASCII Crayola crayon is also pointless. Stuff like that wouldn't hurt to be removed. Chiafriend12I have 12 friends. 07:06, 19 December 2008 (UTC) (Edit conflict)
Keep As a fairly high leveld player, I often find myself looking at this page to translate some strange language. Hankmeister 07:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Remove Offencive im a seasoned RS player [2002] and i still dont understand alot of the abbreviations and slang used nowadays ._. 
:[talk]: xEmptySkies :[cont]: 09:47, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Comment - So what, we are not Jagex nor do we have to abide by there policy, but is it really necessary to teach it's users and our users the profanity. It's not necessary as Jagex block the language anyways so why is it necessary to post abbreviations or means to avoid the filter. By using these abbreviations, users continue to break the rules of Jagex and are reportable. Why are people so intent in have the wikia users knowing information that can harm there account? Delete the offensive material, that's all there is too it. If users wish to seek slang, they can do so elsewhere. We should not be an encyclopedia for useless nonsense that is not necessary. If you don't understand English and want to know an acronym or abbreviation, ask the user saying it. If it comes out filtered, it's not worth knowing.
09:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Delete All Offensive Content - The abbreviations like "AFK" may be useful. But how many of us use this page for the offensive content it contains? As far as I know, I have NEVER visited this page, nor did I know it even existed until it was placed on the main page. So I scrolled down the article, growing more disgusted as I went.
To those of you who want to keep the offensive language, tell me: have YOU used the offensive content in this article? If so, in what way has it helped you, besides bypassing the chat filter? Do you enjoy being able to curse in-game? Do you enjoy the risk of getting reported?
In addition, some of the individual slang words are probably only used by the person who posted it. For example, take the abbreviation "Ah." Now, how many of you know that it stands for "Ahrim?" That is the dumbest abbreviation I have ever seen; there is no way that a player could guess that "ah" stands for "Ahrim," not to mention that "Ahrim" is too short to even abbreviate effectively. Plus, I use the word "ah" all the time, and not as an abbreviation. -.- Tien 15:03, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep
hmm... there seems to be a big warning at the top ive heard players saying delete it because it encourages rule breakers,listen to this: the only players who use offencive language have to avoid the censor, not all players know what wtf means isnt saying that better then saying it outright? players wont know what it means if the page is deleated. keeping us more informed about abreviated language from this web sight. or how boutt having two seperate pages one for bad words one for good --Godpower49 02:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- Everyone knows what "Wtf" means. If you don't, then you shouldn't be on the internet. Even then, it would be better to say "What the heck" than "What the *uck". And there are much, much worse things than "wtf" on the article. Read it.
- And your comment about "the only players who use offencive language have to avoid the censor" only disproves your point. Avoiding the censor = rulebreaking. Tien 18:13, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
wtf is an example jagex says fansites should follow jagex rules rule 1 offencive language it can not be offencive in less you are telling some1 to fuck off where he page simply tells you what it means "the page is not telling you to fuck off" so any1 who is offended by the page should read the warning --Godpower49 02:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep and Reform
There's no reason for it to contain anything other than RS specific slang, if anyone wants to look up anything general they have the rest of the Internet at their finger tips. As long as it is a common expression it deserves a place. Also, anyone screaming censorship might as well stop, I've heard worse from twelve year olds. -[HAY]
- And these 12 year old learn it from school right? 17:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- Where any child learns any information regarded as offensive is beside the point, you can't unlearn it. God forbid they hurt their precious little ears. -[HAY]
- It's people like you as to why society is the way it is today. 17:58, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- P.S. Don't forget to sign your comments.
- At any given point in time there will be an opinion that society wasn't the way it used to be (which it isn't), and therefore is worse. -[HAY]
- Where any child learns any information regarded as offensive is beside the point, you can't unlearn it. God forbid they hurt their precious little ears. -[HAY]
Keep and don't change
players wan't to know, since it's used in Runescape anyway, there's no proper reason why it should be deleted, after all it already said that it contains offensive content, so what? we have our rights to use abbrevations like lol and we have a right to know them! 
Btzkillerv has entered the building! 
18:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- Lol isn't offensive. And there is no proper reason to keep the offensive material either. I'm pretty sure no one needs to know what "Ilyp" (I love your pussy) means. Tien 19:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- ILYP brings up no hits anywhere for said meaning, and was probably added by some bored kid. -[HAY]
- Delete only the offensive content Per Hurston C0ngratz406 (talk) 20:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete only the offensive content Per Hurston
Strong Keep. Just add a little thing at the top warning about offensive language. I find it really useful when my friends say a little abbreviation. Until I read it, I didn't know what lmao meant. ~ 
Sentry Telos Talk
DELETE This is WAY too offensive for this wiki and all RS sites. Why was it ever made? ShinyUnown T | C | E 22:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep and Modify
If you are offended certain words, first of all, maybe you shouldn't be on the internet. Secondly, why can't we compromise by using asterisks to censor the words we find offensive? People have been saying that this information is available on other websites, but pretty much everything on this site is available on other websites. This site is intended to be a convenient place for all of the information you need. We can't just refer everyone to a different site.
- You say you want to keep and modify, but then you tell people that they shouldn't be on the internet if they're offended by certain words. What is your real position? The Wiki is not an intended place to teach people the correct way to say "penis" in-game. Tien 02:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- The first part was a joke... This article isn't about teaching anyone anything; it's merely a reference for people. The jargon used by RS players can get pretty unique and confusing. It doesn't hurt to have a place where players can go if they don't understand something. I've modified it a little myself already, but if everyone really is offended by the word 'fuck,' then I wouldn't see much wrong with censoring it with asterisks. Gramczar 06:25, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
You're supposed to sign your posts. ShinyUnown T | C | E 23:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep and Modify I agree with Killr833. And also read this page. --User:5chidori/Christmas 23:58, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep Per Instant and CTeng.--
Bigm2793Talk 
00:47, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep and Modify
This article isn't supporting people to use bad words on RS. This is simply a guide for online slang just in case a player doesn't know what ROFL stands for. If this article is to be kept, they should modify all bad words to have censorship. Like in the meaning for WTF, they could just put it as "What the F***". No offensive content if they do that.
Justine2369 02:13, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep Runescape has it's own set of slang, and it is very convenient if it is all on one page. Mr.L Froslass 04:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep There is some very useful information here, and occasionally I find myself looking things up. I am sure that non-native English speakers find it even more useful. That said, some of it should be removed, for example "Heetler" and "hornee", since these only give people ideas of how to circumnavigate the chat filter. But conceptually the page should stay IMO. Leevclarke talk http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb290/leevclarke/RuneScape/Max%20Bulldog/Max_logo_mini.png http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb290/leevclarke/RuneScape/bulldog_puppy.png 08:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- And "offensive" entries like "ffs" should stay regardless! I use it quite often, and it's not against the rules. Things like ILYP (see above) should be removed, as they're obviously not used. Perhaps there should be a policy of talk page discussion before adding controversial entries, and adding suspicious entries without discussion first should perhaps be grounds for reverting. Leevclarke talk http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb290/leevclarke/RuneScape/Max%20Bulldog/Max_logo_mini.png http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb290/leevclarke/RuneScape/bulldog_puppy.png 08:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep' The article contains informative information. Even if some of it is "offensive", it contributes to knowledge and lets players know what is being said. Yes, players could use some of the entries to bypass the chat filter, but we are by no means encouraging them to do so; infact, we even tell players to report others for swearing. If a player misuses the guide to bypass the chat filter, that's thier choice, and it is not our responsibility to aid Jagex in the upkeeping of RuneScape's rules.--Pig HouseInane Ramblings 09:46, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep It's useful. People often use unfamiliar acronyms and it's handy to have a resource to look them up. Thezmothete 12:22, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep and edit Players deserve to know what others are saying even if its offensive. Instead of removing all offensive content we should just but a label saying something like "This word is used to bypass the filter. Using it may get you banned." Thevi0lence 13:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)Thevi0lence
Remove some but not all offensive content Rude or offensive language and ASCII art should be removed, e.g. the art concerning the genitals and as people mentioned earlier, words that show players how to bypass the language filter (@ss for ass). Some offensive language such as ffs, ftw can be seen quite often in the game. I remember wondering if someone was insulting me when they said "ffs noob". But only some should be kept of course. C.ChiamTalk 13:41, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Remove all majorly offensive content Bad language should be removed for younger users. Cj Pichu 14:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Comment I have made a new template for offensive pages: Offensive content Like it? 
C0ngratz406 (talk) 
14:41, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- If you take the first "some" out, it would be good. Gramczar 20:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- Much better! Gramczar 21:21, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep, but remove all offensive content All of the bad language should be removed as it offends some people and shows ways around the chat filter. Also, the new template: Template:Offensive content should be used until this matter is decided and possibly should be kept in use in the article after if this article is kept. - TehKittyCat (talk) 20:42, 20 December 2008 (UTC).
Keep, but remove offensive content Many slang words on there a useful, but ones showing basically how to say offensive things and get around the chat filter is similar to encouraging people to break the game rules Mizon 22:35, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep I like this page, it really helped me understand many slang words people used. I don't know what idiot would propose a deletion, but I wish them bad luck. Although I vote to keep this page, please delete the offensive language that's already been blocked after it was added to the dictionary, such as "g@y" because RuneScape blocks it now. Keep it up to date with new ways to bypass the filter, such as "g e y" or "b1 ch". User:Zezzima 20:45, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep and keep the offensive content. I'm sorry if it's offensive, but is it encyclopedic? However, I also believe that some of the more offensive things which demonstrate other players how to bypass the chat filter should be removed, as it is not encyclopedic. Knowledge is free. 
FIRZENR 07:48, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Remove unrelated slang This is a Runescape wiki, therefore the RS-related terms should stay, none of which are overly offensive. The unrelated slang should be removed; people can look it up elsewhere. Hardvolume 09:41, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Delete the page this is a wikia, so no offensive language. and there is a slang dictionary on the runescape website anyway, why bother here. Ippy97 10:28, 21 December 2008 (UTC) Comment The slang dictionary on Runescape doesn't have anything like omfg or wtf, and at first i didn't know what omfg meant. KEEP!!! User:Zezzima
keep This kind of "dictionary" helped me a little,because my native language is dutch (however,english is my second language). just remove de offensive language,but nothing else.i play Runescape for 3-4 years,and i don't understand all the appreviations (or something).so this page can help a lot of players!
remove all of them this is nothing like what you would expect from the name. i suggest delete the article and make a new one that does fit the article name. from a name, you would expect something like a list of things that are not allowed to say and will be censored on RuneScape. Not a list of abbreviation used by normal players daily. - KingBlackChicken
Remove all offensive content- As some of you may know, users under 13 are now allowed on. If they needed a help site for Runescape and came to this page, they'd be in for quite an English lesson...Dave Lopo 17:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Remove all offensive content-As there is a warning, some offensive words could be allowed, but still that is edgy. I say just delete the words and get on with it! --VercoolE=MC2Def Newb For Life! 17:52, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Strong keep. And keep the offensive content. This page is very helpfull for non-native english speakers and non-leet speakers. Learning to understand 'offensive words' does not mean someone has to use them. Apostata 18:20, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Remove all offensive content-There's no point in keeping the offensive language, because if a player does bypass the filter, it would be obvious what the said anyway. I didn't know what some things people said in RuneScape before I read this article. NintendoNerd777 15:00, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep it helps people understand the meanings of these acronyms/art/"13375p34k", ect. I don't exactly see how anyone could be offended by reading this article...however, in-game if someone uses an offensive one to you, it's why we have the ignore list. Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 18:50, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep and modify or DELETE ENTIRELY-I am not offended by language,but I am offended by ignorance.Example look through the article,
it has SO many words that are never used by anyone.Maybe ONE person but thats about it and those of you that go and look at what I am talking about will notice these.So either do something about this or delete the whole thing (I'm kinda leaning towards delete at the moment).
Gamebox77 
KEEP and MODIFYI would vote to keep it but get rid of some of the un important and un used words but it has helped me to understand what some people say
KEEP AND MODIFYAs par as quite a few other users we could get rid off the very offensive language, but keep alot for foreign or new players so they can gain "learning". Santairo talk 
20:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep there is a disclaimer, that is all that is needed. This Wiki is not administerd by Jagex, no need to follow their exceptionaly anal rules here. If readers want a censored version they can use the Jagex slang dictiorary. Icewedge 21:46, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Remove all offensive content. GoldFalcon 23:46, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
KEEP Can leave sexual terms, as that is a good thing in life, but delete violent terms related to maiming and killing, as those are bad for people to practise. =P TomSupergan 01:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
VERY STRONGLY KEEP, OR slight REVAMP I highly agree with InstantWinston and C Teng here, they both make good points andI have to say myself i have looked at the dictionary, used it to learn some good and bad things, YES it does teach people to get past the censor sometimes and has some bad language, but i aree with santa, i like his template. also i think that moving all the bad language and placing it at the bottom of the page with a BIG warning telling about the offensive langage that would come up nd that the wiki would not be responsible for any damage caused to the users. Some previous posts on this discussion said that the wiki is in NO WAY AFFILIATED WITH JAGEX, therefore we at the wiki should have no need to remove the language, if players wish to use it to get around the chat filter then they should know they take the risk of being reported and banned/muted.
hope this made sense to people that red my comment 
Super Afroman 
01:40, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep but change I say delete the obvious profanity filter bypasses, you know ones that people can figure out ingame on their own. Definitely keep the acronyms symbols etc. The page has been helpful to me a few times when someone said an acronym that I didn't know. Bladeofwar8 03:16, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep This page is useful for people to work out what slang is reportable, and what isn't. It also helps people familiarize themselves with basic slang if they are new to MMORPGs. Neoinr 06:38, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep but remove offensive content.
What we hope we can provide to readers is a reliable and concrete guide for the game. Thus, there is reason for keeping items such as "ardy", "bb village" or "dd(p++)" etc . However, other non-game related ones just like simply "wtf" or "lmao" should be removed as they have no or indirect relation to the game. XDRAGONAITE + 10:57, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep but add a warning --Dark Noo Noo 12:26, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep I think it is very informational. It is very easy to bypass the filter anyway, so citing filter bypassing as a reason for removal is, in my opinion, not a valid argument. In addition, if I had never read that guide, there were several terms I was currently using that I had no idea were ban-able. In addition to that, I did not know afking was against the rules until I had read it, and therefore I no longer perform the act. Please keep it, it is much more informational than you seem to think; it has actually saved me from getting banned. Simiswimm 15:31, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep and delete some parts
Keep, but completely delete theunrelated 2 runescape section. This is supposed to be a section of the internet devoted to runescape, not offensive language unrelated to runescape. That job is for the UnRuneScape Wiki. 
Dippy310 02:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep
I think this article should be kept. The warning sign is an excellent idea too. I think that the offensive parts should either be erased or moved to a new page to show players what is reportable, but perhaps it is better for players to use their own judgement.Hire888 23:32, 23 December 2008 (PST)
Revamp As has been pointed out, some users may not know what some acronyms mean. However, this is not a wiki on censor evasion, so you may need to remove those.Shinray1kuo 06:20, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep and revamp
It is a great dictionary, but I believe that it is quiet messy. And why add offensive materials? Sure they are slang, but what if an eight year old browse in the slang dictionary and found out ways to say offensive materials?
Powers38 おはようヾ(´･ω･｀) 08:42, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep and revamp 09: 30, 24 December 2008 (GMT)
Keep & Censor offensive language In what way is this wiki 'teaching' how to avoid chat filters? This is only information. There isn't a guide in here explaining how and why you would do that. I find there are a lot of terms that are used that I don't know the meaning to. Asking someone in-game gets you the 'noob' treatment. Few and far between are the helpful players. Censor with asterisks if needed, but please leave the dictionary for reference. Tdoubleup 11:08, 24 December 2008 (PST)
Keep
I can definetly see how this is useful to someone starting runescape, or just wondering any of the slangs in runescape. Maybe like the people above me, keep it, but revamp.
"There is no reason for this article. This article teaches our users the inappropriate means of bypassing the chat filter issued by Jagex. So what, this wikia is not affiliated with Jagex, but why must we teach its players and users how to break its rules. This page allows for unfiltered/uncensored content that is both discriminating and offensive. It breaks all standards and policies around offensive and sexually explicit language, and because it's "slang" it's considered informational. There is no need for this article whatsoever on this wikia!
If a deletion is not a census we can all agree on, perhaps instead we could come to a mutual census and delete all offensive content and leave the regular slang alone. I'd much rather prefer this as there is some very useful information on this article. Just please remove all the inappropriate ones.
Thanks!
11:50, 18 December 2008 (UTC)"Slang will always be in runescape, thats one of the things that makes it an online game. It wont be taken out of runescape, and will always be used, so why not help new players learn it, or anyone browse the slang to learn/understand new terms. 
Currently at мϊţ¢Ħ 
23:04, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep it: 1. It's useful; 2. Wikia is not China, Jagex or Hitler. However, this page definitely needs cleanup (remove some unnoticeable words that aren't used by anyone except the ppl who added it to the list...). Maybe we could also split the page in 2 parts: one with "clean" words, the second one with offensive words. 
Patheticcockroach
(Talk) 10:39, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep with offensive content moved to subpage with warning - I strongly suggest we keep this article so long as the offensive content is moved to a sub-article page complete with lots of warnings etc. As per Patheticcockroach this is not Soviet Russia where articles delete you.
- REDIRECT User:Kytti khat/sig 18:47, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep it!!!! It contains a vass collection of terms that many people find useful to refer to. Just today, someone used a phrase I was unfamiliar with and turned to the guide. It has a warning on the top of the page about it offensive content, there is no reason to delete it.
Jedi Talk HS Log Tracker 
00:43, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep it - I'm all for keeping it, but add a template for offensive language. Censoring words should also do it.
Necrohol 07:55, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
NeutralInvent a Wiki kids filter or something sheesh that can be turned on or off. Default : On - For anyone under 16 can be turned off by anyone over 10.Jamesernator 11:57, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep This is the language the Runescapers use, but maybe a warning sign should be placed before reading such content. 89mch 16:57, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
KeepIt can help people report reportable sayings. http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b105/darkwave_71/gifs/dancing/xpr6nd.gif 01:54, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
keep it i like necroho idea and its really helpful for newcomersuser:loken
Keep it - put stars instead of the word but dont take away the first letter. For example: You could have f*** instead of the actual thing.--The destroyer866 20:13, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep it This dictionary was useful to me, and would be useful to some of the new players. I only suggest that you take out the offensive language or flag some as offensive so that we would not be responsible for them getting banned. Pilt001 11:28, 28 December 2008 (UTC)"The Pure F2per"
Keep it This dictionary is useful to many people including me. Star Rune7 12:43, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep - First, most people have heard the "coarse" languange used on this page, simply applying a warning to the top (as we have) is more than suficcient to warn people who dont want to be exposed to that type of languange away. Secondly, this page is an important part of the runescape because it adresses the many terms used in runescape. People come to the runescape wiki for info on everything runescape, and by deleting this article, we cannot say that we truly adress every part of the runescape world. --Aburnett001 {Talk} {#} 22:48, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Keeep I used this plenty of times and this has been really helpful. 
Ancient Fofo 
01:58, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Flower bombing
Is it notable enough? CFLM (Talk) 08:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - I dont think it should be deleted. as this is realative infomation, and is part of runescape. therefore being eledgable for rune wiki. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Burnanddie93 (talk).
- This was widly popular ages ago, even in runescape classic, so this is a bit historical. so why delet it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Burnanddie93 (talk).
- Delete - its not notable, its not a unique item. The fletching guild had a better chance and we deleted that.--Degenret01 09:38, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- As much as I dislike the article, and hope it goes away, it really does not seem to fit any of the "good" criteria for speedy delete candidates. I can't seem to make it fit any bad criteria either.RuneScape:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion--Degenret01 05:49, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - it is mildly useful and could come in helpful and it is not fake or anything. Ippy97 (Talk) 09:46, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - I don't think it's sufficiently notable either. Besides, cabbages are more traditional anyway. troacctid 10:07, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - Just like line dancing....Atlandy 14:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - A common occurrence and worth having an article about. --Nequillim 09:51, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - As per Hurston, 10:03, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
- Cabbage - Wait, let me translate, weak keep if moved to an article including
, but shouldn't we covercabbage bombing as well. Cabbage bombing pre-dated flower bombing so far as i know (i believe cabbage was around before mithril seeds). Perhaps merging information relating to cabbage bombings and renaming the article would make it more palatable. Regardless the article/act does add a bit of colour to the Wiki/RuneScape.
- REDIRECT User:Kytti khat/sig 18:39, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
- Merge - Per Kytti Khat --Monkey139 04:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
- well the trouble is that there isn't an article for Cabbage Bombing, so let me better clarify what i'm thinking
- REDIRECT User:Kytti khat/sig
- Move to a generic article entitled "Bombing" at which point cabbage (and possibly other notable forms of bombing) could be properly documented. I would move it now however i don't want to confuse this VfD discussion thread.
- REDIRECT User:Kytti khat/sig 05:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep but redirect to its definition We should add the word to the rs dictionary and simply turn this page into a redirect that leads to its definition. Per down below on Node. Jmo, 08:38, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
- Comment The issue with making a bombing page, it will become more of a vanity page then anything else. We have cabbages, and flowers, but then will come pot bombing, bowls, shears, pats of butter, etc etc. Everyone wants their picture in the wiki, and making a bombing page will allow that.Atlandy 17:09, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Comment The issue with making a bombing page, it will become more of a vanity page then anything else. We have cabbages, and flowers, but then will come pot bombing, bowls, shears, pats of butter, etc etc. Everyone wants their picture in the wiki, and making a bombing page will allow that.
- omg! please let me know when the next butter bombing is, i'm all there, my baked potatoes are way too dry and i can't get enough of that stuff ~
- REDIRECT User:Kytti khat/sig 02:34, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Sticky wicket if kept. Will open up, per above, other forms of bombing. Eternalseed
- Merge per Kytti Khat Supertech1 16:34, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- Keep - It's one of those special events that happen around Runescape, that falls in the same category as pages about riots. The page just needs working on a bit. However, Flower Bombing is the page name, but it also features cabbage bombing, so a new page should be opened called 'Bombing', and the two types can feature. I R Zaros 11:04, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
- Comment - I'm actually starting to like the idea of redirecting it to the dictionary (and also putting an entry in the bomb disambigulation).
- REDIRECT User:Kytti khat/sig 02:39, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Keep - I saw a video on YouTube about bombing and I didn't really understand what it was until I read the article about flower bombing. Comment - can you get reported for flower/cabbage bombing? --~ Sentry Telos Talk
@ Telos - No, you can't get reported for bombing, although players dont like bombing it is perfectly legal to do.
- Keep - I've seen it happen a few times and I've even caused it too, back when black and white flowers were a profitable business. C.ChiamTalk 13:10, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Merge per Kytti Khat Evil Yanks talk 07:10, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Node
This term seems to be virtually non-existent in RuneScape and likely derived from other MMORPGs and similar games. Unless there are any plans to expand this (e.g., to go into further details about game mechanics) I see no need to keep this article.
- REDIRECT User:Kytti khat/sig 05:53, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete and replace with a redirect to Slang dictionary#N – As nominator.
- REDIRECT User:Kytti khat/sig 05:53, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Keep- Although it isn't a commonly used term, is it doing any harm by remaining on this wiki? In my opinion, the more information we have (that abides by our policies of course), the better. Andrew talk 06:28, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
- I've already taken the time to add it as a definition to dictionary, as such it's an article about the definition of a word that is already defined elsewhere, i wouldn't be opposed to seeing it as a redirect to its definition.
- REDIRECT User:Kytti khat/sig 06:49, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
- REDIRECT User:Kytti khat/sig 07:36, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
21:14, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Redirect to Slang dictionary#N per Karlis. User:C Teng/sig 02:56, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Delete - Boring, short technical stuff in programming that no one would be interested in. 
I R Zaros 11:18, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete- This article has nothing to do with the game. I would say about 99.9% of all RuneScapers wouldn't know what a Node is if you said it in a sentence. Babyvegeta93 23:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete - Unnecessary jargon Hurston (T # C) 12:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete - I have never heard a player use the term and i didn't even know what it meant until i read the article. I thought that it was a variation on the word "noob" so i don't think that it can be that mainstream to need an entire page to itself. 
Evil Yanks talk
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
SwiftKit
Previous VfD: RuneScape:Votes for deletion/SwiftKit/Archive1
I strongly believe this article should be deleted. First of all, this article is little more than a brochure for SwiftKit as it is written. The vast majority of content is information about the product, and not about how it relates to RuneScape. Secondly, it is no longer as helpful as it once was. Most of the features which made it useful have been put into the game proper. Third, and most importantly, SwiftKit is not part of RuneScape nor the Runescape Wiki. Its completely independent and should therefore not be covered in such excruciating detail. Is it "the best"? Completely opinion driven, and that argument has no place in an encyclopedia. Is it the most used? That's impossible to prove.
I am not suggesting that all mention of SwiftKit be irradiated from the Wiki. "SwiftKit" should be redirected to Riot, and more specifically (when the Riot article is cleaned up), the "Rule 7 Protest". But what if someone comes here wanting to learn about SwiftKit, you ask? They type "SwiftKit" in the search box and wind up at the Rule 7 Protest section. If that's not enough, they can google it. Its not our duty to make sure that everyone knows about every program made for RuneScape. If we talk about one, we'd have to talk about them all. If you still vote to keep the actual SwiftKit article, please consider whether the information on the article is really suitable for the Wiki, or whether it should be stripped down to cover only the historical context, without all the "advertisment" stuff.
Merge to Riots - As nom. http://i631.photobucket.com/albums/uu33/Psycho_Robot/Sigs%20and%20Avatars/kitty.pngPsycho Robot talk
03:12, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Support merge Many players have been banned for using SK, since there was a miscommunication between Jagex and Players, there was a Riot. -- Monstermas22 
03:15, November 24, 2009 (UTC) (forgot to sign)
Support merge - For reasons Psycho mentioned. Ruud (talk)(Suggest me naems) 03:18, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Keep - It serves as an important memorabilia of Runescape's very own history, therefore, I do not think it would be wise to remove this article, as it serves a purpose other than for third-party promotion. People should know more about "behind-the-scenes" features of and related to Runescape's background. Many people don't even know what SwiftKit is in the first place. Let there be knowledge. --Fruit.Smoothie 03:20, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
- Comment - We are voting for a Merge with Riot, not deleting the article. Ruud (talk)(Suggest me naems) 03:22, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Comment - I see no purpose in merging it with the Riot article. It's an individual article entailing individual needs, it's used by the community at large, and there is no rule whatsoever that states that Runescape Wiki cannot contain non-Runescape affiliated information/articles.
I really do hope that the article is kept in its original state, as it's better off staying that way than being merged to a totally irrelevant article such as Riot. I don't see how a riot would have anything to do with SwiftKit, unless you're talking about the Rule 7 Protest, which is insignificant. Besides, the article has already been rewritten several times to adjust to the neutrality concensus policy of Wikia.--Fruit.Smoothie 03:27, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Merge into Riot (edit conflict 3 times in a row...) I predict a massive riot coming the way of this thread. Evil Yanks talk 03:30, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Keep I would like to redirect SwiftKit, not merge it, to Riot, as this would have both benefits of the doubt. --Fruit.Smoothie 03:31, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
- Redirect means that you want to delete the entire article, replacing it with a redirect to the Riots page. I feel that this is not what you mean. Evil Yanks talk 03:37, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Merge to Riots - For reasons outlined above. Star Find 03:35, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Comment - Redirect would be much better than Merge, seeing as how it would still have relevance to the original article. --Fruit.Smoothie 03:47, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Merge to Riots - Just as RS:PDDA covers players, we should not give programs articles as well. Another factor is that it is written without a RS:NPOV. This client does not deserve an article, nor do any other clients/programs/etc. Per Psycho. Ryan PM 03:55, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Keep it When I say SwiftKit, this includes previous incarnations ie SwiftSwitch. Firstly, there is no reason to delete it, its not advertisement or a brochure. If you can find any part that isn't factual in the article please show me. It is information on an important feature of the RuneScape game. SwiftKit, no matter how much above users may wish it is a part of RuneScape. Many historical evens have happened in result of SwiftKit. Its not a brochure, we have all that information on our site. Psycho Robot says "The vast majority of content is information about the product" what do you expect its a wiki entry about SwiftKit, you don't go to the cooking wiki page and expect information about farming do you? Yes it does have context of how it relates too RuneScape, whatever gives you the idea that it doesn't.
It should NOT be merged into the riot, the riot topic is about something that SwiftKit as an entity was not associated with. It also doesn't make logical sense, merging a topic about a specific client, with something about a rule. They're two different topics, why would you merge them.
"If that's not enough, they can google it." on that premise you could delete the whole wiki, oh, we don't need a farming topic, they can read about it on the skills page and if thats not enough they can google it.
It doesn't matter the opinions on whether which client is better or not, SwiftKit is the most popular and is more commonplace.
There is no "advertisement" stuff, it is an analytical list, advertisement would contain opinions and appealing attention grabbing content. For example if I stated how many downloads to date it has have, or if I say if its so many times faster.
I would like to say again SWIFKIT IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH AND IN GAME 'RIOTING' The 'riots' if you want to call them that were about the rule change, not SwiftKit.
- Swiftkit is also not associated with RuneScape or the RuneScape Wiki. http://i631.photobucket.com/albums/uu33/Psycho_Robot/Sigs%20and%20Avatars/kitty.pngPsycho Robot talk 04:25, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
- It has no official association with RuneScape, but its associated in the sense that you use it to play RuneScape. Thats what an association is; isn't it, a connection between two things... Your argument there, RuneScape has nothing todo with the RuneScape wiki, does that mean everything has to be deleted, because it has no association with the wiki? SwiftKit-Zanith 05:00, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
- SwiftKit being the most "popular" is pure speculation. If I added to the Hill Giants page that they were the most popular free monster, then it would be removed very quickly even though it is probably true.
- The analogy that you use seems to hinder more then help your argument. If you went to the cooking page, you would hope that there is a section showing how farming relates to cooking without advertising what you can do with farming. You would want to hear "you can grow your own baked potatoes, which can then be cooked using cooking", not "you can make spirit trees from spirit tree seeds at level 85. Farming is also a skill requirement for While Guthix Sleeps". Evil Yanks talk 05:02, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
- The analogy that you use seems to hinder more then help your argument. If you went to the cooking page, you would hope that there is a section showing how farming relates to cooking without advertising what you can do with farming. You would want to hear "you can grow your own baked potatoes, which can then be cooked using cooking", not "you can make spirit trees from spirit tree seeds at level 85. Farming is also a skill requirement for While Guthix Sleeps".
- Well then, according to Psycho Robot, then the farming page isn't needed to, you can get all the information from the cooking page, and the rest you can just google it. I thought that what wikia was, for information. SwiftKit being most popular is not speculation, we toggle download counts and provide them, this system isn't don't fraudulently as can be verified by multiple people let alone myself. If more people are downloading it, then doesn't that make it the most popular?
- Ok, so lets put it this way, if somebody was coming looking for information about RuneScape clients, yes clients for the RuneScape game. They came here seeing as its a RuneScape wikia. Now, its not advertisement having the article there, it serves no advertisement purpose. If we wanted to advertise, there is a big square at the side where we could advertise. I implore you, find one part of the article which isn't factual. Please, tell me, what part of the article would you deem as an advertisement, please look up the definition first hand. I'd understand if you wanted to merge it with a 'Third Party Client' article, but to delete information completely, or to merge it to something which has nothing todo with it makes utter nonsense. SwiftKit-Zanith 05:22, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
- I think that you are interpreting Psycho's google comment the wrong way. The wiki should try to include as much information as possible if it directly relating to RuneScape. If you wanted to know about Monty Python, you would only come here to see how Monty Python directly effected RuneScape (ergo, the references in-game), not the storyline of Monty Python and the Holy Grail which would require you to look elsewhere. It is the same as SwiftKit; you would only come here to see how it has effected RuneScape directly (the rule seven riot), not what you can do with SwiftKit.
- While "popular" is pure speculation, most visited is a slightly different. If you want to call it the most visited fansite, then you would have to find a reliable, unbiased source which also had the information of other competing programs which would be cited after you state it. If you don't do this, then the claim would be pure speculation.
- Now what do I consider an ad for swiftkit?? The intro, about and gallery sections are all advertisements since they only talks about the program itself and what it can do, not the effects it had on RuneScape. The "Does SwiftKit Break the Rules" section is a bit dodgy. While It doesn't break any rules, Jagex thoroughly recommend that players don't down load it along with any other 3rd party software. (I heard a J mod say this yesterday on the forums) This would need to be added for it to really be neutral.
- If someone wanted to look for Swiftkit, they would have to look the same place as famous players and clans. By allowing say an article on Zezima, we would in extension allow an article on so many non-noteworthy topics to have pages made about them that it is just best to cord the whole area off and say it is out of bounds. Evil Yanks talk 06:40, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
- If someone wanted to look for Swiftkit, they would have to look the same place as famous players and clans. By allowing say an article on Zezima, we would in extension allow an article on so many non-noteworthy topics to have pages made about them that it is just best to cord the whole area off and say it is out of bounds.
Keep Theres no point in merging it with somthing else.Its great on its own-- User:Dmck2b 08:04, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Keep Remove anything too adertising about it though. --Degenret01 08:48, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Merge with riot if anything remotely advertising is removed otherwise delete, however, if kept perhaps a policy not to make articles about third party software, unless needed specifically, should be added, I mean what's stopping articles about programs being added right now? Nothing; and there should be otherwise what's stopping people making wiki one big advertisement for programs? Even java doesn't have an article. Chaos knight 09:07, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Keep and certainly don't merge with something that has absolutely nothing to do with Riots, protests, or other similar kinds of player protests. Yes, there were players that were upset when Jagex went through a phase of banning all 3rd party software, mention of that software, and became upset about any 3rd party software.... heck became upset at 3rd party websites like even the RS Wiki. Perhaps this is the reason why it is suggested to be merged with riots and protests? BTW, Jagex later apologized and took a softer stance against 3rd party software, and in particular gave explicit guidelines over "legal" 3rd party software that could be used with the Runescape client.
The rationale given for deleting this article, that many of the features of this software has been incorporated into the regular client interface, is IMHO some rationale for keeping this article as well. It is explicitly due to this software that motivated the Jagex developers to incorporate some of its features into the game. If software like this can motivate Jagex on this level, it seems like an excellent point to find out what drove Jagex to make those features. Just like the GEMW pushed Jagex into making the GE Database (there was nothing like the GEMW on any other fan website), there have been other player-driven changes to the game as well. It is unfortunate that Jagex steals ideas from things like Swiftkit and elsewhere and does not give credit to those sources of inspiration. For me, that makes preserving an article about the source of inspiration like this all that much more important, as if we don't keep track of that background, who will? Jagex isn't keeping track of the history of this game, so that falls on our shoulders here on this wiki and for other fan websites. --Robert Horning 17:31, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Keep, rewrite. - Although not part of RuneScape in itself, it is still allowed to be used instead of the RuneScape Client, downloadable on the RuneScape website. When it was named SwiftSwitch, it was banned because it unfairly allowed players to world-hop quickly, which was against Jagex's standards. However, it was renamed SwiftKit and is now kept in compliance with Jagex, aswell as having many of the features players would otherwise not use on the RuneScape website. Alot of players I know use Swiftkit and to me, it's officially become part of RuneScape, albeit unofficially. All of this information pretty much says that this article deserves to be kept. It's a part of RuneScape history. Merging this article with Riot is just absurd, in my opinion. If the context of the article bothers you, re-write it so it becomes less of an advertisement and more of an informational + historical article. 
Zenihdrol 
17:39, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Merge - It doesn't really deserve an article. Oil4 Talk 18:03, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Neutral - But if you're going to merge it, don't merge it with riot. Rioting has extremely little to do with SwiftKit. ~ Sentry Telos Talk 20:47, November 25, 2009 (UTC)
Keep Swiftkit is such a big part of the game for so many players, and goes beyond the comparisons of famous players. It has had an impact on the game and how many other tools/fansites have done that?--Varthlokkur 00:44, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
Keep I don't really see why you want to merge it with riots, they're two entirely different subjects. Swiftswitch is an important part of rs and its history, and it's different from other 3rd party software because it has had an impact on the game, and Jagex cared about it enough to make a newspost about it. Mortyst 15:45, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
Comment The reason I suggested merging it with Riot was because the riot was the only historically significant event related to SwiftKit that was currently documented on the Wiki. If anyone has any other suggestions as to where it should be merged, then say it, but I don't think the current article should stand, as it is nothing more but an extended product description. http://i631.photobucket.com/albums/uu33/Psycho_Robot/Sigs%20and%20Avatars/kitty.pngPsycho Robot talk 21:37, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
Keep - but rewrite it to have it more focus on how it has effected RuneScape. SwiftKit is much too significant to be transformed as a sub-note to an article. --Zpoon 01:16, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
Keep This has cleared up alot of things about this which i have heard, also i agree it is part of runescapes history --Onmjoey245 19:16, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
Total tallies so far...
- Keeps: 10
- Merge into riot: 8
- Neutrality: 2
- Comments: a lot
- We are not a democracy, we don't base decisions on the number of votes, but the strength of arguments. @Gaz#7521 21:28, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
Keep, rewrite - I think it deserves its own article. If we have to merge it, we should create an article for programs like it. Merging it into the riot article doesn't make that much sense. It'd be like, if on wikipedia, people merged George W. Bush with stupidity. A lot of people associate the two, and they received a lot of notoriety for it, but they're not the same things. Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 20:55, December 5, 2009 (UTC)
Not merge with riot - (Ha, there's an interesting vote.) That's like merging Rune scimitar with Player killing. But otherwise, keep. It's notable, and per what others have said. There's no way to go around that. Chiafriend12Loon is best buttlord 22:10, December 5, 2009 (UTC)
Comment - If we are to keep this, then why not add Tip.It's Microhelper or RuneHQ's RuneScape Toolkit? While these you may have never heard of, they also enhance RuneScape gameplay as an addon or as a browser oriented tool. Both of these are legal as well, yet do they deserve an article? No. If we were to allow SK to keep an article, don't all other programs for RuneScape deserve one? As my views go, the most it needs is to be mentioned in the appropriate articles it dealt with (the old rules of RuneScape 1 and 15). The point, only the Windows client needs an article, however small it is. If we are to keep the SK article, would you add the RuneScape Model Viewer as an article do to it being mentioned by a Jagex Moderator and discussed by the Wiki community? (I'm not trying to step on anyone's toes here) Ryan PM 08:02, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
Merge into a new page - Why not merge this into a page that documents all major add-on kits and common add-on features? We could give it a subsection entirely about SK if needed. ~ Sentry Telos Talk 05:24, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
Keep - This has nothing no do with riot. Telos has a good Idea I think how ever. Team6and7 18:11, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
Keep Riots? Honestly... were talking about a program, sure Rule 7 caused a riot, but it was RULE 7, not SwiftKit. If one was to merge it, merging with riots sounds a bit preposterous. I agree with Telos. Bowler225 02:11, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
Keep Bluesonic had the good idea about putting Tip.It, and stuff like that on a page with it. I don't think we should get rid of it
Strong Keep It has somthing to do with runescape and people use it. Also why merge it with riots? The page itself has nothing to do with riots. User:Supawilko/SkillSupawilko
Keep Supawilko is right, II think we should keep it
--
Lilninjabro6Talk 
21:12, December 20, 2009 (UTC)
Keep I found this article very helpful when finding out what SwiftKit was and wether it was against the rules of Runescape or not. I would not like to see it deleted, and I vote keep, as per Bowler225. -- ile:Runecrafter hat.png Helm360 Talkhiscore 
10:45, December 29, 2009 (UTC)
Keep - Merging into the riot article doesn't make much sense to me. SwiftKit is a significant part of RS history and deserves its own article. Any NPOV issues could easily be dealt with by editing the page, that's no reason to delete the entire article. 
Tollerach hates SoF 
4:10 pm, Today (UTC−6)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Trade Limit and Wilderness Riot
[[File:5pm eastern riot2.png|thumb|right|200px|What is that... Fifteen people?]] This riot was just too small to be notable. As quoted from the article: "One person used Protect from Magic.". One person? Come on. At the Pay to PK Riot, several people at any one time were using Retribution.
Also, as seen in the picture on the right, it was only a small group. [[:File:Riot 3.PNG|This]] is a riot. The riot in question was just a group of ticked off players spamming. That happens on a daily basis. Chiafriend12I have 12 friends. 00:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete This isn't a major riot. These kinds of things happen every day. Looking at the picture, I can see that there are not many people there at all. This should not be counted as a major riot, which is what the RuneScape Wiki writes articles about. One little riot like this is not notable. User:C Teng/sig 00:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Merge into Pay to PK riot. They are kind of related, but this isn't enough to stand on its own. Butterman62 (talk) 01:34, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- This one took place in 2009. The Pay to PK Riot took place in 2007. There's a bit of a time difference there. Chiafriend12I have 12 friends. 02:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete I would say this for almost all the riot pages. People complaining is not pageworthy 
Atlandy 15:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete Personally I think we should delete all riot articles, as they encourage vanity articles such as this one. Hurston (T # C) 16:03, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- Comment I agree totally Atlandy 16:03, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete per Atlandy and Hurston. I really think that pages based on individual riots SHOULD be deleted; no, I don't mean completely ignore that fact that they happened, but we could just have a note on the Dec. 10th update page like "Upset players took to Varrock and Falador to voice their disapproval for the updates" or something, instead of having a page for them. Although, I would be fine with keeping the Riot article itself. --Pikaandpi 16:00, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete Supposedly, they are ganged together to make fun. Another way speaking, players cannot catch me taking part in a riot by taking photographs when I'm using Protect from melee. --http://i423.photobucket.com/albums/pp312/rewlf2/rewlf2/sigrune-1.png
17:28, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete per Atlandy, Hurston, and Pikaandpi. If we didn't have these articles, maybe everyone would forget about the riots instead of trying to start new ones so that they can have a vanity page on the RuneScape Wiki. Dtm142 21:16, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete - Per Dtm142 21:31, 31 January 2009 (UTC)- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Fake image (3)
This article is useless. It's just a tutorial on how to make a fake image, yet it has seem to have survived deletion and been here a while. I think it should be deleted because as I said, It's useless. This doesn't belong on this wiki. --— Enigma 01:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete As nominator --— Enigma 01:25, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Keep It has helped me Alot and i go to it for help on making fake images. Dont delete! Liam - Beta Tester (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Keep but rename - While it's potentially informative it would probably be better to be renamed to "Fake images guide" as that's mainly what it is: a guide. Kudos 2 U Talk! Edit count! Contribs! 05:52, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete We are not a how to make fake images wiki. If someone needs information on how to do that, there is a whole internet out there. Atlandy 14:49, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Keep -Per Kudos_2_U --Monkey139 22:24, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete - The RuneScape Wiki is not a guide on how to edit images. Dtm142 23:58, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Keep but rename - while this guide is informative it needs to be called "Fake Image Guide" it could also do with some expansion and cleanup.
:[talk]: xEmptySkies :[cont]: 15:03, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- Comment Are we a fake images site? Isn't there a Fanon site? Atlandy 16:59, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- Comment Are we a fake images site? Isn't there a Fanon site?
Keep - People come to this wiki to use this page, so it should be kept. User:C Teng/sig 14:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- CommentThat is a pretty broad statement. The only person who (on this RFA) said that is RswfanAtlandy 14:46, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete - Nowhere in RuneScape will this ever help players. Babyvegeta93 16:07, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Calculating current scores I am currently Counting the scores now. Liam - Beta Tester (talk) 17:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Closed - No consensus has been reached and it has been well over two weeks. Andrew talk 23:08, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
This template qualified as a Speedy Delete under the guidelines of RuneScape:Criteria for speedy deletion as it was the original author that requested the deletion. --Robert Horning 14:27, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Template:CombatStyle Magic Staff
- Delete. Template's CombatStyle name does not match how the other CombatStyles templates are named,, as it is singular instead of plural. This is potentially confusing for editors adding CombatStyles templates to items. A new template, 'CombatStyles Magical Staff' has been created and used in the wiki. Thus, this old template is no longer used nor needed. Inelcirc 15:22, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. No longer used, and there's a typo in the title. :o WWTDD? 15:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
[[Money Making Guide (nonmember)]]
- This article messed up the Money Making Guide, and after some work I have disintegrated all the sections of it into other parts of the guide. This article is now excessive and should be deleted. --http://i423.photobucket.com/albums/pp312/rewlf2/rewlf2/sigrune-1.png 11:42, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete It is just a copy of the usual guide but for free players so i dont get it why the nonmember was created as it is fine in the normal guide itself. Liam - Beta Tester (talk) 20:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Temporarily Keep - The reason why this "guide" was created is to remove the specific money-making ideas from cluttering the main navigation to a whole series of sub-pages in the money making guide. See Talk:Money making guide#Beginner Skills and Talk:Money_making_guide#Major_cleanup_of_this_page for more details about what is going on here. As long as the information has been moved into the appropriate sub-pages, it would be a speedy-delete candidate. In a quick run-through of some of the topics on this page, they haven't all been integrated into the money making guide yet, but I need to be more through and check it out. If somebody else can verify the information has been moved elsewhere, let us know. --Robert Horning 21:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Temporary Keep - per Robert Horning. Andrew talk 04:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Comment - The full list of pages of which I moved these information are: Miscellaneous(F2P), Crafting, Magic, Crafting, Combat, Merchanting, [[Money making guide/GE|GE]], Collecting, Strongholds, Mining, for reference please check my contributions. (just click on the blurite sword of my signature.) --http://i423.photobucket.com/albums/pp312/rewlf2/rewlf2/sigrune-1.png 09:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete - Since the links of pages this information has been disintegrated to have been shown, then it should be deleted. C.ChiamTalk 13:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Redirect - It's essentially a duplicate page, but it could be useful as a redirect. Chiafriend12I have 12 friends. 01:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Temporary Keep Easier to browse than the skill categorized one. 121.6.0.226 14:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Closed - it has been over two weeks and a consensus has not been reached. Andrew talk 23:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Again, it's a duplicate.
- Delete as nominator. WWTDD? 21:26, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete - per Sir Revan. Andrew talk 21:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- Merge - I agree that this page is more or less useless. However, there is some poison-related information in there that could be useful; I'd merge it into the Adamant dagger article, just so we don't lose potentially valuable knowledge. Legitimate facts are worth keeping.
- REDIRECT User:Supertech1/Signature 21:35, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Closed - Adamant dagger(p) has been merged with Adamant dagger. Andrew talk 23:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
It's a duplicate. No other poisoned daggers have their own pages.
- Delete as nominator. WWTDD? 21:23, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete - per Sir Revan. No reason for this article since other poisoned daggers don't have their own pages as well. It's either all or none. Andrew talk 21:26, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- Redirect - I would not object to the article if it had decent content. Dragon dagger(p++)s are very important to the game, more so than other, similar daggers. Normally, I would suggest merging the p++ article into the normal dagger article; however, in this case, all the information is already in the Dragon dagger article. There's really no point in keeping the information here when we could simply redirect users to a page with more detailed and organised information.
- REDIRECT User:Supertech1/Signature 21:30, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Closed - there is no consensus to delete but the article will be redirected to Dragon dagger per Supertech1's comment. Andrew talk 23:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
House glitches
I move for a vfd on this article for several reasons. It seems more like a guide of how to graphically glitch yourself in a house. It is horribly written, involves many steps, and near perfect timing to be able to perform. How somebody thought to do this combination in the first place is beyond me. It provides no beneficial information to the encyclopaedia, and is more than likely not fixed (as it's bizarre and pointless to waste time fixing.) Karlis (talk) (contribs)
12:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Delete - Perhaps someone should test and see whether the glitch still works? However, since the page was written by an anonymous user, I am inclined to believe that the glitches may be false or they may still exist in-game. C.ChiamTalk 13:07, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Delete per aboveAtlandy 14:57, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Delete - While there still are glitches in player-owned houses, I fail to see what this article provides or even could provide that isn't much better served in the Player-owned house article... even assuming that the quality of the article improves significantly and real problems for player-owned houses are addressed. In this context, it shouldn't be a rant about the game but how to work around problems until Jagex gets them fixed. I don't find this particular "bug" or "glitch" to be notable... nor discussing something like the house glitch that caused the world 66 riot/massacre (covered elsewhere anyway in much better detail as well). While the glitch as described may actually have occurred in the past, it is irrelevant in the long term and this particular glitch didn't really do anything other than be a minor annoyance when looking at the user interface. Much worse problems have happened even in player-owned houses. --Robert Horning 09:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Delete or merge with Glitch. Dave Lopo 00:39, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Delete - per Robert Horning. Andrew talk 18:44, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Closed - House glitches will be deleted. Andrew talk 17:37, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
RuneScape music video
This should be deleted as it doesn't have much to do with runescape, And it's a useless stub. Nobody would have a reason to search it
21:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Keep, rewrite, and possibly rename -
- It has plenty to do with RuneScape. It's a phenomena, really.
- It's not useless. People can learn from it. Thus, it has a use. Not to mention most articles start out as stubs.
- Plenty of people would have plenty of reasons to search it.
- Want to see if we have an article on RSMVs? Search it.
- Want to learn about RSMVs? Search it.
- Want to see if we have any pointers about making a good RSMV? Search it.
As said by the catchphrase below each page's header, "From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape". RuneScape music videos are a very popular thing in RuneScaper culture. Just go to YouTube, enter in the title of just about any song with either "rsmv" or "runescape" also in the search phrase, preform a search, and you'll to find an RSMV.
It's definitely a very legitimate piece of RuneScape culture, and as such gets documented. Though, not all RuneScape videos are music videos. Not only that, but having "RuneScape" at the beginning of an article when the whole site is about RuneScape is redundant (though, that is what they're referred to as). Lastly, the correct word is "Machinima". Chiafriend12Loon is best buttlord 23:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Closed - there is no consensus to delete. Andrew talk 17:41, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Mandatory items
This article should be deleted because I don't see how it can be of help to anyone.
1) No one is going to type "Mandatory items" to look for this (the probability is quite low)
2) All the information here is redundant as they would have already been mentioned in the guides themselves..
3) If we really were to keep this guide, it would be extremely long due to the ever-increasing number of quests and miniquests (and others).
Basically, there is not much use in keeping this article, so I propose that we delete it. C.ChiamTalk 11:06, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
DELETE, DELETE, DELETEEEE - Per Caleb. WWTDD? 13:15, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Strong Delete per Caleb, especially #2. User:C Teng/sig 17:20, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Delete - This list, if complete, would be so long that it wouldn't be viable to use. It seems incredibly pointless, in my opinion. Karlis (talk) (contribs)
17:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Delete - I also fail to see the point of this page. The information is not only redundant, I also think that it is false as well. The Tutorial Island equipment can always be obtained from one of the tutors if you really need it, and you really don't need to scrounge for the stuff. If it were even remotely useful, I would say put this into Tutorial Island or even into a Tutorial quest page, but even that is pointless to do. This page doesn't fit speedy deletion criteria, but it does seem to be one of the strongest candidates for deletion that I've ever seen. --Robert Horning 20:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Delete - per all. I see absolutely no point in this article. Andrew talk 21:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Delete - Per all. Definitely redundant. Hurston (T # C) 21:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Delete - The stuff is "mandatory" for one act, and then you'll never have to use it again. That doesn't deserve an article. That doesn't even deserve mention in the respective articles. Think about it:
Air runes are mandatory items when completing Tutorial Island, though afterward, they are completely unmandatory.
Now is that information useful at all? Chiafriend12Loon is best buttlord 22:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
SUPER DELETE- Why is the page even here?
Closed - There is consensus for this article to be deleted. C.ChiamTalk 08:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
Pronunciation guide
The pronunciations in this guide should be merged into the specific articles they pertain to. Having a whole page devoted to pronunciation is unnecessary.
--Aburnett001 {Talk} {#} 19:14, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Merge: Delete: Position changed: see below --Aburnett001 {Talk} {#} 23:59, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Delete: Why do we need to know how to pronounce things when we hardly talk about RuneScape in real life and everyone knows what you mean even if you say it slightly wrong compared to what this page says? 
Lvl 3 skils3 
Talk~ Holiday Signup ~Hiscores 17:49, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Delete - Per above. Karlis (talk) (contribs)
17:54, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Delete I don't speak runescape except for typing it. Also, how are we to know what exactly the correct pronunciations are? Atlandy 23:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- Comment - "how are we to know what exactly the correct pronunciations are?" - Now that is an excellent point. This article is truly pointless, because no one really knows how to pronounce any of it! --Aburnett001 {Talk} {#} 23:57, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- Comment - Even still, I think that this article is pretty worthless. Maybe a few pronunciation guides could be added to some of the articles that were addressed in that newspost, but besides that, I would still say delete it. --Aburnett001 {Talk} {#} 14:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- Comment - Even still, I think that this article is pretty worthless. Maybe a few pronunciation guides could be added to some of the articles that were addressed in that newspost, but besides that, I would still say delete it. --
Delete and comment - Some of the articles (e.g. Sara, zammy, guthix) already have the accurate pronunciation on them, so I guess this guide is somewhat redundant. However (I may be wrong about this), I think there's a Postbag where a player asks how to pronounce some major cities like Ardougne. C.ChiamTalk 10:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Delete - per Calebchiam. Andrew talk 21:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Delete - The article in question is only true to the person writing it. The article says to pronounce Al Kharid as "al kah-rid". You know what? I pronounce it "al khayr-id". Misthalin is "mis-tha-lin"? I say it as "mist-hawl-in". Varrock is "veh-rock"? I pronounce it as "vair-rawk". Dare I go on with the list?
Also, stuff in this article isn't even spelt in the most basic phonetic pronunciation spelling, let alone official phonetic spelling (for example, "Jagex" is spelled "dʒæɡɛks").
Yeah. Chiafriend12I have 12 friends. 23:03, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Delete/comment- There's no need for it./ How do we know what the pronunciations are anywho?Dave Lopo 06:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Delete per all. Few pronunciations are actually released by Jagex. (I actually pronounce it Ar'doon and All-Khar-eed'.) User:C Teng/sig 19:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- Ardougne is pronounced arr-doyn (see [http://www.runescape.com/kbase/viewarticle.ws?article_id=833 Postbag 35]), and Al Kharid has no hyphen (not that that affects its pronunciation). Leevclarke talk http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb290/leevclarke/RuneScape/Max%20Bulldog/Max_logo_mini.png http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb290/leevclarke/RuneScape/bulldog_puppy.png 00:33, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Delete I think the intention here is a good one, but pronunciation information should be in each article with the source cited, not collected together in a list here. Furthermore, we have very little official information to go on. I added the pronunciation of Jagex to its article because I heard Geoff Iddison say it in a video. If only Jagex would publish a list on their website, using the IPA. Leevclarke talk http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb290/leevclarke/RuneScape/Max%20Bulldog/Max_logo_mini.png http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb290/leevclarke/RuneScape/bulldog_puppy.png 00:33, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.