Inconsistent with all other Farming patches which are simply mentioned on Farming/Patch locations. The information on the page is already included on the patch location list and additional information is on wild jade vine, the page about the D&D. IsobelJ 14:13, January 3, 2018 (UTC)
Delete - As nominator. IsobelJ 14:13, January 3, 2018 (UTC)
Delete - per redundancy --Deltaslug (talk) 23:39, January 3, 2018 (UTC)
Keep - Star and Salix make a good point perhaps make seperate pages for each patch type? Would allow for more depth with each patch type's quirks or whatever.
Lesicnik1 (talk) 09:37, January 16, 2018 (UTC)
Keep I agree with the statements made by Salix regarding the new pages. If they are well documented enough so to create a new page for each of them then we should do so. It would declutter the other pages as well. 15:20, January 16, 2018 (UTC)
Comment - Something something granularity along with something about no policy (as I'm aware of) of what interactive scenery deserves its own page. I don't see why it can't stay and just be improved. On the same note, other patches could get their own pages too, rather than just linking to farming/patch locations. StarTalk 23:32, January 9, 2018 (UTC)
Keep - As per Star's comment. I always found it odd that the individual patch pages redirected to the Patch locations page instead of having own pages. It's one of the few scenery objects that are well documented, but don't have a page (yet). Salix of Prifddinas(Talk) 09:24, January 16, 2018 (UTC)