RuneScape:Yew Grove

The Yew Grove is a page where community members can discuss larger changes to the wiki, such as policy proposal. As this page is viewed by a diverse number of editors, you can expect a fair and centralized discussion. Broadly construed, if the community would be interested in your topic, start it here.

Other
 * For promoting or beginning a project, use RuneScape:WikiGuild
 * For discussion of RuneScape itself, use the forums.
 * To list an ongoing discussion, use the RuneScape:Requests for comment directory.

__NEWSECTIONLINK__

Updated Logos and Favourite Icon
'''Consensus has been reached upon updating just the two wiki logos. The favicon discussion will still be up for comment'''

Again I am going to put this to the Yew Grove. I am recommending that we update the logos and favourite icon. The version that most people seemed to agree upon before the discussion was archived what seemed a bit prematurely were as follows:

Discussion section

 * Update - I still think that a blue party hat would have been good. http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/runescape/images/6/6e/Blue_phat_favicon.PNG
 * Update - As I'm posting this again I'm going to vote for updating these images. 04:38, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay I'm going to have to agree with people below regarding the favicon. It wasn't intended as fan art but i can't argue with the definition (except that it was intended directly as fan art of the wiki and not directly for roonscape).  20:36, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Update - except the "favicon.ico" image. It's too small for my eyes.  I had to zoom it 400% before being able to figure out that it is a combination of fire + law runes.  I think "Astral rune" is nice, or even "Chaos rune" is much better.  I suggest that you stick to existing runes, rather than combining different runes.  My two cents...  08:32, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Update main page logo but keep fave icon - The Fave icon sucks. It looks worse than the current favicon. In fact, a fire rune fused w/a law rune is soooooooo ugly. 21:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Update the logos but keep the favicon, I agree with Amethyst... except for the ugly wording. Oddlyoko talk 23:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I reckon get the herblore and the mage symbols and put the mage hat ontop of the herby symbol and call it 'mage potion'. I think that would make a great Favicon. I would make one but i'm on the laptop. I'll make one tomorrow and show you. R0KK1 =] ((20:40 20/8))
 * Update both Favicon and Logos. 15:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Update The logos, but not the favicon. I don't really think the new one looks that good (no offense) and I really don't think that we should replace the favicon with fanart (especially since we delete fanart here(mixed signals anyone)) this may confuse new users. 15:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Update both. Am I like the only one who liked the proposed favicon? O_O 15:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Update - I recommend that both are updated. But might I suggest the new Omni-talisman as the Favicon? Ok, so it reminds me of an insect thingy...but it is RS icon and not fan art.--Kashibak 19:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Oddlyoko, Amethyst is Derilith. =Þ 21:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't care about the logo, but I would prefer it if we keep the current favicon. The Fire rune in all of my tabs on this site seems iconic somewhat. 07:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Update the logo. I would like to have the one favicon below this message that is the RuneScape "R". Also, will the new logo be transparent? 22:53, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Idea how about this one? [[Image:RSW_logo_idea.jpg|50px]] Btzkillerv 15:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No. Btz, your logo is too large (minimum 16 x 16 pixels), and the logo is completely 'violating copyright laws, which close down RSW, and eventually close down Wikia themselves. —Derilith (talk • contribs) forgot to sign this comment.
 * Update logos. But even though I like the favicon, I agree with Azliq far above me. I canrt notice what it is. Maybe better if we stick to one rune alone (I dont mind which one). Cheers, 13:17, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Idea How about for the favorites icon, we create sort of a 'smily face rune'? it would be a basic blank pure essense image, with a smily face inside it :D. Gondor2222, 30 august 2008
 * No That is just too silly! [[Image:ExplorerRing3.png]]Btzkillerv has entered the building! [[Image:Cape_blue.png]] 17:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Why not just use a party hat?sirfishalot 15:27, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * A party hat seems good, but not everyone would recognize it (unlike two letters, RW). 02:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Consensus - for just the wiki logos because of all support and no oppose. But favicon consensus still needs to be reached. 23:58, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Compressed versions

 * The original suggested logo was 18.5kb. This is 8kb.  The only noticable difference is the shortened padding and less visible shadow. The 10kb difference could mean something when hundreds of people are visiting this site each day.  13:41, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


 * There is a reason that the original versions were not compressed to maximum and that was to allow for the 8-bit alpha layer, which, as you already noticed, provided a better shadowing effect. The logos compress smaller in indexed PNG format than what is afforded from GIF format. (see Image:Suggested_new_Wiki_logo-low_shadow_quality.png|here and Image:Suggested_new_Wiki_logo-wide-low_shadow_quality.png|here) 14:21, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah ok. 23:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

New favicon
I created an alternative icon. 08:35, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Just an R. Simple and effective. [[Image:Example favicon R.png]]
 * Zoomed to 40 pixels. [[Image:Example favicon R.png|40px]]

Who keeps Deletin' the pic in my signature!?!?!? 09:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I like the 'R' the best. 09:58, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey everyone, just a quick note that the favicons need to be 16 by 16 pixels in size, like this one: which is one I created from the current logo. 22:37, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The RuneScape "R" is 16-by-16 pixels in size. 02:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I like RW the best. Here's my order (from most fave to least fave).
 * 1) [[Image:RW logo.png]]RW logo - Votes: 5
 * 2) [[Image:Example favicon R.png]]RuneScape "R"1 - Votes: 3
 * 3) [[Image:Favicon.png]]Fire rune - Votes: 0
 * 4) [[Image:Example Favicon.png]]Fire-Law Rune - Votes: 0
 * 5) [[Image:Law rune favicon.png]]Law rune - Votes: 1
 * 6) [[Image:D&D icon.png]]Distractions and Diversions - Votes: 1

1Needs to be recreated
 * I don't see the point of recreating this icon. See "Fair use" section below. 02:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

00:07, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't like how the logos and such are mage-oriented. Maybe a non-combat rune, like a law, would be best. 00:43, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I would vote for the RW favicon since it is directly from the logo and as such would clearly stand out. To me the current fire rune is simply too dark in contrast to related icons as seen here: At the least I'd suggest lightening it namely it's background. 09:29, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment -- I'm really not trying to be an a** or anything, but the "R" is copyrighted by Jagex. While that in its own doesn't really matter, using a section of the RuneScape logo as our own favicon definitely does not constitute Fair Use. It implies affiliation with Jagex, and that's not good at all. We could write a disclaimer or something saying that we aren't jagex, but it'd kind of kill the whole point of a favicon. The favicon imho should represent us as a Wiki (again IMHO). 05:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * See "Fair use" section below. 02:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * What if we changed the shape of the R a bit? I don;t know any legal stuff but I think if our R doesn't look like their special R, it's ok.--Degenret01 13:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yup, that's perfect. =) 04:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I think a law rune would work well. Kind of symbolic of RSW in a way. 05:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The RW works for me.--Degenret01 06:09, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment - I think that the "RW" is goodlooking, but still, its deprived from the RuneScape "R" which is still "(c) Jagex under 'Jagex Limited' from 1999-2008". So, like Earthere, I don't really think that the RW will work, but I still support "RW".


 * For those favouring a law rune here's a cleanly rendered version [[Image:Law_rune_favicon.png]] and it's .ico version. (Has anyone else noticed that the detailed law rune image that we have appears to be an older and darker version than what is shown in the official RS GE DB?) 22:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I prefer the RW logo. It is the best imo - 01:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Another favicon: DnD icon added. 02:07, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't really like the DnD one. Per Earthere, the icon should represent us as a wiki. I vote for the RW logo. 20:39, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the RW logo. It's nice and clear. 07:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair use
Taken from Fair use article in Wikipedia.

Additional points:
 * All icons (regardless whether it is taken from the website, or the game itself) are technically copyright of Jagex. The use of "Fire rune" icon is the same as using the "R" or "RW" icons.
 * "The third factor assesses the quantity or percentage of the original copyrighted work that has been imported into the new work. In general, the less that is used in relation to the whole, ... the more likely that the sample will be considered fair use." This may sound counter-intuitive, but the less it looks like the original, the more likely it is considered to be fair use.
 * "Although normally making a 'full' replication of a copyrighted work may appear to violate copyright, ... it was found to be reasonable and necessary in light of the intended use." Since the intended use of the favicon is to promote RSWiki, and that RSWiki is a non-commercial site, I do not think that the use of images/icons violate any copyright laws and thus falls under "Fair use".
 * By using these icons, it doesn't imply that we're affliated with Jagex, and we have clearly stated THAT in the copyright notice at the footer of the Main Page: "RuneScape is copyright 1999 to 2008 Jagex Ltd. The RuneScape Wiki is in no way affiliated with Jagex."
 * A simple way to state that the Favicon is copyright image is to put within the summary page of [[Image:Favicon.ico]].  3:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The Favicon can EASILY imply we are affiliated with Jagex. It looks like something Jagex would use (first letter of their most popular game), as it would "go really well" with the RuneScape official site, and most anons aren't going to notice the fair use info either.
 * I appreciate the effort, but the fair use rationale still isn't sufficient. 04:08, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Az, is the RW icon copyrighted by Jagex even if we don't take the letters from the image on Runescape.com? If so, then I'll add Template:Logo to Image:Favicon.ico. 01:37, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I seriously doubt that the letter "R" in the RW icon and Image:Favicon.ico could be considered copyrighted. The font that is used in it might have something akin to that but it is not Jagex's font. If letters were copyrighted, then we could not legally communicate with each other. Disney does not own the letter "D" but they do have title to their swooshy version of the letter. Same with McDonald's, they do not have rights to the letter "M", but they do to their golden arches version of it. As for licensing on our current favicon it would have to be the same as that for the logo from which it is derived, and as for that so far as i know only the part of the images derived from the rune images would warrant any fair use licensing and those roons are not part of the favicon or RW logo images.  04:58, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No. I'm pretty sure the letters RW is not copyrighted by Jagex. 12:20, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I didn't think so. 18:54, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Wrapping up
I'm not sure if we can all agree that concensus has been achieved here, however the lean seems to be towards the RW favicon, if someone with admin status or higher would be so kind, perhaps a finalization of this discussion can be had? 00:42, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Eugh, the new favicon looks horrible! Why are there four black pixels in the corner, and why is it brown? The typeface chosen is bad too. I liked the old one, but if the community chooses to change it, then select a different letter colour and typeface please. (Such as a blue R and green W. The R&W superimposition isn't witty, nor looks good; it makes it look like P W. I prefer the old rune favicon, since it's RUNEscape. --anon

It may be too late to have a say, but I think that the rw design has potential, but the problem with the favicon is that the anti-aliasing (the blurring effect of the edges) isn't sharp. This is most likely because it was resized instead of resampled in the graphics manipulation program that it was created in. I also don't find the 'Brown n' black' colour scheme to be too appealing. I think it could use a transparency too. May I suggest this perhaps? : It has transparency, and the colours may be more appealing. Alternatively, this too:  It has transparency and a shadow. Thanks for reading, --Nequillim 16:40, 3 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Transparency on a favicon is not always best, most sites do not use transparency unless they are using 8-bit transparency which in itself is limited in backwards compatibility. See these two examples as for why the RW logo was not originally made transparent.

Many browser "themes" will not be kind to a transparent favicon regardless of clarity of lettering. As such I'd recommend doing as Wikipedia (and many other sites) do which is a solid white background. See above for examples. (note: even Amazon has since changed to a white background) 21:04, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If it will fix it, then sure, put on a white background. 12:31, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Should we make a item type subcategory?
i was thinking, it would be easier to find items if they are more categorised, for example, items like swords and schimmys can be put into the blades subcategory, while spears, staffs and hastas can be put into the polearms subcategory, the same can be done for armour and shields.. you name it, but it will certainly be easier. to find them through that way Btzkillerv has entered the building! 17:09, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, I think we can add sub-categories for "Melee weapons", but not for "Armour". Currently we have these categories for armour:
 * Category:Armour
 * Category:Armour types
 * Category:Shields
 * Category:Kiteshields
 * Category:Helmets
 * etc.

And for armour weapons:
 * Category:Melee weapons

The list of possible sub-categories for Melee weapons are as follows:
 * L1: Category:Unique weapons - for all unique weapons (such as TzHaar weapons, quest-obtained weapons, etc.)
 * L1: Category:Two-handed weapons - all 2h weapons
 * L1: Category:One-handed weapons - all 1h weapons
 * L2: Category:Smash weapons - Maces, Warhammers, Mauls
 * L2: Category:Slash weapons - Blades, Battleaxes
 * L3: Category:Polearms - Halberds, Spears, Hastas
 * L3: Category:Blades - Daggers, Swords, Longswords, 2h swords, Scimitars
 * L3: Category:Battleaxes - Battleaxes, Axes, Pickaxes
 * L3: Category:Mauls - Granite maul, Barrelchest anchor, Gadderhammer, etc.

That should cover most (if not all) of the melee weapons. 07:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


 * i don think maces and warhammers belong to the polearms, i think they belong to the warhammer subcategory. also, daggers should be put into the larger category blades along with the category of swords. I would prefer to put the maul category as a smaller one inside the category of smash weapons. along with the warhammers and maces. then the blades can be put into the larger category of slasher weapons. along with the battleaxes subcategory. [[Image:ExplorerRing3.png]]Btzkillerv has entered the building! [[Image:Cape_blue.png]] 10:06, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * NOTE: Updated the list above based on the comments by Btzkillerv. 07:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Wouldn't it be better to sub-categorise armour by combat style, i.e. melee, ranged or magic? Then divide each into body, legs, headwear, shield, etc.   13:22, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. Hmm... but we have some categories for armour already. We should "revise" them: make some changes to the hierarchy of the armour subcategories.  The list above is partial (based on what I found in 5 minutes).  A full list of available armour categories should be compiled, if possible, before making the appropriate changes.  07:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Just doing a revision of some wording:


 * L1: Category:Unique weapons - for all unique weapons (such as TzHaar weapons, quest-obtained weapons, etc.):::
 * L1: Category:Two-handed weapons - all 2h weapons
 * L1: Category:One-handed weapons - all 1h weapons
 * L2: Category:Bludgeoning weapons - Maces, Warhammers, Mauls
 * L2: Category:Slash weapons - Blades, Battleaxes
 * L3: Category:Polearms - Halberds, Spears, Hastas
 * L3: Category:Edged weapons - Daggers, Swords, Longswords, 2h swords, Scimitars


 * L3: Category:Hacking weapons - Battleaxes, Axes, Pickaxes
 * L3: Category:Mauls and Hammers - Granite maul, Barrelchest anchor, Gadderhammer, etc.

Changed 'em for clarity. Would you call a warhammer a "smash" or a "bludgeon" if you were asked how to describe it with one noun? My guess is that you wouldn't say that it can be described as a "smash" (though they certainly are smashing XD).


 * yeah but if u think about it axes and battleaxes and used for cutting as well, edged would have to inbuled the axe group if you think about it, and pickaxe does not have any cutting capable surfaces. blades and edged weapons is a problem because they are both formal names for cutting capable objects, and also, what about knives and jaxelins and they are a kind of cross between the group of plolearms and blades, with ranged throwing weapons. [[Image:ExplorerRing3.png]]Btzkillerv has entered the building! [[Image:Cape_blue.png]] 14:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


 * also, "bludgeon" is too much of a complex word 

Btzkillerv has entered the building!   12:40, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, it's the PERFECT choice for a word that means a blunt object.


 * okay, so lets combine the ideas, and make the subcats 

Btzkillerv has entered the building!   14:20, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

You guys have totally ignored stabbing weapons in all of this business. (Short)swords are stabbing weapons. Daggers, spears, hastae, and (maybe) claws are also stabbing weapons. So that list could use some changes. The Alphy 01:53, 9 November 2008 (UTC)


 * no matter what you say, daggers are still blades that can cut, so it will go the blades, we adjust by weapon type according to the royal armouries guide to the melee weapons, not according you your liking 

Btzkillerv has entered the building!   11:07, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

.OGG readers, and what to do with Adventurers' Tales
As a wiki, we stride strive to become a good one. We already are, but there is one thing that we could defely use. As used by Wikipedia, having the ability to play .OGGs while a reader is reading an article could make the experience on this site better.


 * Having trouble pronouncing something? An .OGG could be played to show the reader how to say it. (I would be willing to do this.)
 * If anyone was willing to do such a thing, we could have narrations of articles.
 * Plus some other stuff, which escapes my ming mind at the moment.

Someone in #Wikia a while back said that to get an .OGG player, all one would have to do is request a staff member to install it, and it should be pretty much as simple as that.

But on another note, do we need RuneScape:Adventurers' Tales anyone anymore? RSFF covers that now. If we deleted it (or whatever a verdict may turn out to be), it wouldn't really do any damage, as the actual content is in the respective users' userpages.

So yeah, discuss and stuff. 05:50, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I should stop trying to type stuff when I'm so tired. :")... 19:18, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

OGG
Support - I like the idea of having .ogg's for articles (definition). And you don't need to worry Chia, I wont let your ideas escape your "ming" (lulz). =) 06:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Support per myself. 19:18, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Support I'd be willing to do it with my *cough* webcam sound recorder. However, this will take up lots of space (just like animations). 19:25, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol I can also use my dad's headphones. 19:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Support - It's a very good idea. Only difficulty is the large amount of articles, and we'd need to recreate oggs every time someone makes an edit. -- 01:54, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Support One good thing about this is Firefox 3.1 will have built-in .ogg support. A lot of words from RS are pronounced a lot of different ways,it would be great to know the proper way. - TehKittyCat 17:57, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Support per Chia. Also, if you want to pronounce RS words correctly, use the Postbags (they sometimes give pronunciations). 02:43, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Adventurers' Tales
Neutral - Adventurers' Tales are fan-fiction, and I feel that they should belong in RSFF. I would like to suggest that a note is given to the authors to move their content to RSFF, and we put a note on the page to say "We have moved to RuneScape Fan Fiction, please list your stories in RSFF." 12:01, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Keep Adventurers' Tales. The RSW and the RSFF Wiki are separate. There is no need for us to remove it. 12:28, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * We may indeed be seperate, but both are run by the same community. 19:18, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Support discontinuation - Per myself. Not really deleting it, but maybe removing most of the content and replacing it with 'yadda yadda, this has been discontinued and stuff, please use the RuneScape Fan Fiction Wiki instead'. 19:18, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Support per Chia. And it's "strive", not "stride".

Same community? How do you know that? Just because you and a few other RS-Wikians go on, doesn't mean everyone does. What would we do with the old ones? Merge them into the other wiki? We're separate wikis! 16:36, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * RSFF is part of the RSW community because nine out of ten users there (Heck, we don't even have ten active users XD) edit here also. And I meant "discontinuation" as in 'accepting no new submissions', or something. For the stuff already in the respective userpages, it would stay there, per RS:DEU. Lastly, I know both are separate wikis, but that definitely hasn't stopped our 'crats (two at least, I'm pretty sure) and others from trying to dump articles into another wiki. Go talk to them on that matter ;). 03:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't understand why we even half to discontinue it. Sure, we can let RSFFWiki have it. That doesn't mean we can't accept submissions. What's wrong with that? And why would we direct other users to a different wiki? 02:03, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

The Yew Grove - Ground rules & censorship on the Wiki Guide to the Yew Grove
OK, from the recent spate of b****ing going on in the Yew Grove about other editors questioning the value of contributions, accusations of sockpuppeting, and polls about blocks, I think we need to lay down some ground rules. These will (if approved) be located at the top of this page under the "What this page should/should not..." section. So here goes...


 * Do not use language which others may find offensive - swearing, [I find B****ing offensive] blonde jokes, racial slurs etc.
 * Follow all behavioural guidelines, especially RS:AEAE, RS:DDD and RS:UTP.
 * Resolve disputes peacefully. That means no cheap shots and no come-backs.
 * Do not use this page to discuss other editor's blocks or bans, accuse others of breaking guidelines or criticising their editing styles. Use their talk page instead.

the list is obviously not complete, feel free to add to it. Thanks, 15:50, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * This can be summed up as be respectful and considerate of others. Keep the same mature, professional attitude you would have at work (or school for those of you who don't work.) This is a community of responsible, knowledgeable people who share the same interest of providing accurate information to those who desire it. While people may have disputes, it does not belong on this page. This page is for discussion of community events, something that affects nearly everyone in the community. However witty and cool somebody may feel by talking back on the internet, it's really not as impressive as the originator may think it is. If it doesn't help better the encyclopedia, don't put it on this page. I understand that there are many younger users on this wiki who might not share the same sense of respect and equality as others, but now is the perfect time to start learning. Being a "badass" in the real world won't get you anywhere, and it won't get you anywhere here either. It takes a lot less effort, time, and energy to just be helpful and do the right thing. If you have a personal issue with somebody, use the wiki's e-mail, keep it off the talk pages. This will keep others from flaming and start even more problems. But please, respect other people, it will help everybody in the end. 16:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * "This will keep others from flaming and start even more problems." - Did you mean "This will keep others from flaming and starting even more problems." or "This will keep others from flaming and stop even more problems."?
 * Heh, thanks stinko. It will keep others from flaming and starting even more problems. Meaning if it is kept personal between two people, nobody else will be tempted to add their two cents. 16:11, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Why do people that have been sysopped get to swear? They act like they have every right in the world to and they own the Wiki. It really bothers me. Just because you have a position of authority in the Wiki community doesn't mean you should get to say offensive things like cuss. [[Image:Prayer.gif]]Jediadam4 [[Image:Abyssal Whip.gif]] 18:39, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm a little confused on this previous statement. The only two sysops who have commented on this are myself and stinko, and I found all of our comments to be clean. I will look again though. 18:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Im not sure I entirely understand your concern Jedi. If the policies are the same as the of the beginning of my hiatus then swearing can be used on the wiki provided it's not being used to direct an attack on another user. Generally most people don't swear every second line as it dosen't look very proffesional. But certainly provided you are keeping your comments neutral and constructive I really don't have a problem with "cuss". --Whiplash 18:51, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see: Do not use language which others may find offensive - swearing. All I have to say to that is that this is NOT kindergarten. We had a debate on this awhile back and I rembember that the consencus of it was that swearing is allowed on the wiki provided it's not being directed at a user. As far as Im concerned the swearing thing should be removed. --Whiplash 18:59, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * And to think this was supposed to solve problems... Anyway, I think RS:AGF should be added to the list. All too often people jump to the conclusion that someone is up to no good. 19:52, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * As a policy or two may inhibit discussion, RS:IAR in particular should be added.
 * Adding on to the rules on "wittiness", what we need to avoid is active moderating. One-line comments like "Xpkerpure, please use proper grammar" and "lolonoob, remember that RS:AEAE" aren't helping anyone and can turn the Yew Grove into a uncomfortable or even hostile environment.  20:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to have to side with Whiplash on this. Swearing is part of daily life, and 99% of the time it is not directed at anybody. This is generally accepted as okay, as it is not intended to offend or upset anybody. If somebody takes offense to every "swear" or "curse/cuss word" thrown around, they're in for a lifetime of disappointment. Certain words carry with them a highly offensive meaning, and should not be used, imo, but for the most part, provided it isn't aimed at anybody, it is fine. 20:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * In response to the unregistered users comment above. Most behavioural policies on the wiki are not seriously enforced, perhaps with the exception of the user treatment policy. --Whiplash 20:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I really think we should keep the "no swearing" rule ONLY on the YG, because I can guarantee that nobody will have legitimate cause to "cuss" about a subject of discussion posted here. (If you wish to debate this, please provide an example where swearing would be acceptable in a communal discussion). 07:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * If you ask me, swearing should be prohibited/limited to talk pages and userpages only. I know of young kids who frequent this Wiki looking for information on RS and whatnot.  Although "99% of swearing" is not directed at anybody, this gives the impression that swearing is cool and okay.  We do not want to instill this perception that swearing is acceptable, especially among younger kids.  I don't think swearing is offensive, but I flinch every time I see a swear word in this wiki, knowing that some kid might see it and start using it at school the next day.  Imagine when the teacher asks "Where did you learn that word?" and the kid replies: "The RuneScape Wiki - the wiki for all things RuneScape."  LOL.  07:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You do have a point az, but at some time people need to come to the realization that we're not living a sheltered life, and the real world exists. I agree that swearing should not be allowed in articles, but on discussion pages such as this one, talk pages and such, certain non-offensive words that are considered "swear words" are acceptable, imo. If the concern is about young children seeing "bad words" and using them the next day, then the Player Dictionary article needs to be deleted. In all honesty, television is far more vulgar than pretty much anything kids will see here. 16:01, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the edit conflict Karlis =P, here was my original message... Azliq: I completely agree with you. How about limiting swearing to user talk pages and the player dictionary, because according to RS:DEU, we're not allowed to have swearing on user pages. Since this discussion is tipping over to a debate about the censorship on the RuneScape Wiki, I've changed the title to observe the views of others concerning the oppression of vulgar language amongst the younger people who may visit our Wiki. Karlis: the player dictionary has a language warning at the top of the page. Now regarding your comparison between the Wiki and TV. Television censorship (where I live) is much harsher than the Wiki's, there are content warnings, ratings and restricted time periods when shows and movies can be shown. Although I do not want our Wiki to end up like this, I do propose some protection. Moving on... "...certain non-offensive words that are considered "swear words" are acceptable..." I think that no swear word is acceptable, but some are tolerated more than others. The word "crap" would be more socially acceptable than "f***", right? 16:28, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Gonna reset this back to the left. I understand the difference in censorship based on countries, but I find some things trivial to censor. And yeah, I know about the language warning on the top of the page, but if a child is going to "learn curse words" from the wiki, a warning is not going to stop them. Now back to my opinions of trivial censorship. Words such as "damn", "hell" and "crap" are generally accepted by younger kids as borderline "bad words" yet are acceptable pretty much everywhere. I agree that certain four letter words are too far, but we need to have a more realistic stand. OK, from the recent spate of b****ing going on in the Yew Grove... ..work has been a pain in the a** this week...  ...I have had a lot of sh** going on this week... These all have "curse" words in them, by traditional standards, yet are not offensive. I want to know why something like this should be censored, when all that these words are doing are simply adding emotion to the sentence. Not that I am arguing that I display anything like this on my page, nor would I put it on anybody elses page, but I don't believe people should be shunned for it, or it should be looked down upon because the user is a little bit more mature than others. 16:58, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Seconded. 01:50, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, so I agree with you on the point that some words should be acceptable. Now going back to what you said, I really don't see that adding emotion to one's opinions stated here in the Yew Grove is a necessity. I proposed these guidelines because I have observed experienced editors drop the "s" bomb in discussions and use it excessively. THAT sort of language is what I want to control in the YG. And BTW, "b****ing" is a verb. 08:38, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure "some" words may be acceptable, but which ones should be accepted? How do we decide which ones are acceptable, and which ones are not? I feel that since this Wiki is about RuneScape, I propose that we follow the censorship based on the RuneScape game itself, i.e. the Chat filter. Jagex had introduced the Chat filter to filter out profanities and swear words from the game because they knew who the game was catered to: for people of all ages; played by people from different origins (countries) and ethnicities. Being a Wiki dedicated to RuneScape, our audience/visitors will be the same people playing RuneScape. I wouldn't mind if swearing is allowed in a Wiki dedicated to "GTA: San Andreas" where the game itself is rated Mature (17+), but on RSWiki...? What I would like to see among editors (especially admins) is self-censorship: in Project pages (like this one), article talkpages, "edit summaries", etc. See this page: So What's Wrong with Cussing?  12:32, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I keep a sense of professionalism on the wiki, so I do whatever I can to keep my language clean and civil. What people type on talk pages and user pages is their own thing. Let me try to summarize... On pages with community discussions or where the general public of the wiki is going to view, I agree that language should be kept clean. On userpages, actually maybe just user pages and subpages, we should be a little bit more lax. I disagree with people posting profanity on others' talk pages, so I guess just your own userpage, really. I stick with my initial post in this discussion, I feel it sums up well how I feel. Where that was more directed at overall attitude, it could apply to language as well. Be respectful and mindful of others. 12:41, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, this discussion has turned into whether or not profanity is okay, and it has been drawn away from guidelines and overall "appropriate attitude" when discussing on the yew grove. Lets recap for those who don't feel like scrolling up, and highlight other areas that need to be discussed...

*Do not use language which others may find offensive - swearing, blonde jokes, racial slurs etc.
 * Follow all behavioural guidelines, especially RS:AEAE, RS:DDD and RS:UTP.
 * Resolve disputes peacefully. That means no cheap shots and no come-backs.
 * Do not use this page to discuss other editor's blocks or bans, accuse others of breaking guidelines or criticising their editing styles. Use their talk page instead.
 * I will finish this when I get to work, time to go! 12:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, let me just provide some background information about the proposed additions. ...blonde jokes, racial slurs etc. This is based on the guidelines which many users of the official RuneScape Forums may be familiar about, this was taken from the Forum Code of Conduct. ...'''Resolve disputes peacefully. That means no cheap shots and no come-backs.''' This is based on Wikipedia's dispute resolution and civility policies and the negotiation essay. Our Wiki is based on consensus, and it will only keep going is if we can make decisions peacefully without contributors getting angry. Sure, a debate is healthy and is what brings up brighter and more efficient ideas, but don't go overboard. Use their talk page instead. OK, the main thinking behind this was the debate over a certain editor's recent indefinite block. I thought that an argument regarding an editor or the status of their account would be better suited to a user talk page, rather than the YG. I agree with Az on the censoring of words according to RuneScape. 13:44, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed with Az. This wiki already is enforced according to most RuneScape rules, I can't really see why, with a few exceptions, this shouldn't be the case here. Now, my question is about euphemisms... For example, crud over crap, for instance. I don't see why these would be any problem, though I'm open to discussion on that. --Pikaandpi 13:51, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * My argument is that language of an offensive nature should be removed because there is no reasonable cause to use it in the first place. When are we going to use the word "crud" when talking about our Wiki? 13:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I'll have to admit I'm not sure how to respond in terms to the first sectence, as it kinda renders what I was going to say obslete <_< Buto for example "I'm sick and tired with all this crap" could easily be replaced with "I'm sick and tired with all this crud." Not so much talking "about" the Wiki, but within the Wiki about, say, RuneScape itself or whats happening in the real world. --Pikaandpi 13:59, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Language of an offensive nature, yes. If you are offended by the word crap, it's time to grow up a little bit. 14:02, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * When you put it that way... obviously the word is not offensive, "You're a piece of crap", "You're full of crap" can rub off as an attack. 14:06, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Nothing personal, Karlis. But, "Crap" by definition is excrement and the act of defecating. See The Free Dictionary's first two definitions. The dictionary also mentions it as a "vulgar slang".  Although I'm not offended by euphemism use of the word, the word itself is disgusting, and similar words may be used instead.
 * Lets just put it this way. RuneScape requires their users to be age 13 or over. We can follow similar guidelines. Children 13 years old are mature enough to deal with some words. From what it seems, there is going to be no way to settle this as non-offensive words can be used in an attack. I think we are going to have to deal with this on a case-by-case basis. If I see something like "All I got form my slayer mission was a bunch of crap" or "I didn't get a damn thing from barrows" I'm not going to take any action, as it would be rediculous. If it is an attack at another player, then obviously the circumstances are different. I really think we need to get off the topic of offensive language and more on the topic of offensive content. There is a huge difference between the two. 14:20, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Guide to the Yew Grove
OK, since the current discussion seems to be going nowhere, I have another proposal. Instead of having the "rules" section as stated above, I think we should have a link to a Yew Grove Guide essay. It would state the rules (remember, ESSAY, which means you don't have to follow them) and much more stuff, like how to make a proposal, giving feedback, etc. I'll start drafting. What do you think? 04:54, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a interesting idea, where would you put it on the wiki to make sure everyone who needs to view it can view it? -- Rune ldr 88  03:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I was thinking probably at the top of this page... 04:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, that sounds good. The essay looks fine so far. 02:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

New Additions to the Main Page
While browsing some other sites, I figured a featured picture and a "Did you know?" section would make the main page more attractive. These would be changed monthly. 03:39, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What are you suggesting we put in that section? Trivia? Updates? What? -- 03:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * A high quality picture showing something in RuneScape and just some info people might find interesting. Perhaps we could tie in all that scattered trivia to become something people will read in an organized section? 05:06, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Great idea.. I suggest using facts from the Trivia section. For example: "Did you know that if a player loses their God book, they can go back to Jossik who will have found it "washed up ashore" and get it back for free, complete with all the pages it had beforehand." (from the God books article)  05:13, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The featured picture should be a high resolution picture of really well done areas of the game. Sounds like a great idea. [[Image:Gnomegoggleswithcap.png|25px]]TEbuddy 02:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * On the note of new content to the Main Page, i was thinking something similar to the RS GE DB's Item of the Week would give a nice touch as small side widget or some such perhaps nestled under the CTI Today:  section. Of course it would have to be relatively brief in size say only the item's name, inventory icon image, and examine text. Considering the sheer quantity of items it could actually be an Item of the Day feature, however I think that would be too much churn for this wiki currently.  19:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I like the idea of adding a small "Did You Know" section. Add some trivia or useful tips in minigames or skills. 02:10, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Registration Revision (take 3)
Read this before you start commenting.

The amount of users blanking their talk page has dramatically increased, and personally, I think that needs attention. I am once again suggesting we change the registration messages to include a nutshell version of the rules because it's getting VERY old leaving a mention of RS:DDD on what seems like every new user's talk page. Personal images? WAY down since the last time I tried this, so I'm not concerned about that issue currently. Still, the amount of talk page blanking is out of hand.

The last time I brought this up, ONE PERSON suggested something, after which the suggestion was never posted in again. Don't leave me hanging, here...


 * I agree 100%. I also think that we still should outline the personal image rule a bit more as well. But as far as this suggestion goes, there have been times I wanted to protect their talk page just so they'd leave it alone. Maybe we could offer a short guide to archiving so if they want a blank talk page, they could simply do that rather than just blanking it all. 12:44, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I have to totally support the archiving tutorial, or perhaps even something more turnkey for those less inclined to follow such (an archive button or widget perhaps, but that might be beyond the scope of current capabilities). Perhaps many of these users are expecting blog like behaviour where older entries just float off the first page. We obviously can't give them that, however anything to ease and educate about archiving would be I believe the most helpful way to alleviate this problem en masse.  17:09, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure if this is possible, but if it was, I'd probably support. There should be something like "Welcome to the RuneScape Wiki! Please read here for the rules or risk being blocked." --Oh crap... it's not ban evasion, is it? 05:19, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

The information needs to be added in the welcome message at least, if not required before registering. And speaking of, I just did two of these things recently, I think, which I didn't know were against the rules - AND I GENERALLY PAY ATTENTION AND READ!

Now, having become aware of the issues, since my stuff got reverted or deleted, I went searching for why. I discovered some vague discussion of not blanking User Talk pages, but I can't find the "Rule" against it. And yes, I've looked.

Clearly this rule needs to be put somewhere where it's findable. I hunted through the links on my welcome note in my talk page, nada. At least I didn't find it. Maybe I'm stupid?

Also, not finding the rule about personal images. I've heard references to it here and there, in discussions, but I haven't seen "The Rule" so I can read it and figure out what's allowed and what isn't.

I'm sorry to be such an idiot, but I do want to point out, if I read, and if I try to follow the rules and be a good citizen here, and I can't figure it out, how are the even more clueless supposed to do it?

Also, there are style guides around. I know, cause I've seen mentions of them when something goes wrong - indignant comments about "doesn't that idiot know X violates the style guide". Speaking as an idiot who would be thrilled to comply with a style guide, if I could find it, where the heck are these beasties? Uh, found them. Warned you before I was an idiot.

I'm sure all these items exist in logical places, and once you already know where they are, it's obvious and logical. But please look at it from the new editor perspective. I've been actively editing for a while now, and I this is one maze I haven't navigated yet. Mamabear47 21:19, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


 * ALSO (wow, I thought had got it all out of my system), also, I can't tell who admins are! When someone says, "You did that wrong", I don't know if they are speaking with an official voice or just some other editor disagreeing. This is another area where people "in the know" know what's going on, and everyone else bumbles around in the dark, likely pissing off those who already know.


 * I don't know who the admins (or whatever) are. I would like to be able to tell instantly by looking at their signature! In the game - and we model ourselves on Jagex, right? - Jagex mods and player mods have a gold or silver crown next to their nick. You know, absolutely, if someone is just spouting their own opinion or if they're speaking with authority.


 * What does this have to do with registration? Um, well, it's tenuous, BUT it's yet another area where newbies need to be encultrated, taught the rules and customs of our group, or they will either anger the "oldtimers" or get frustrated and not contribute. Mamabear47 21:26, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Knowing whom the sysops here are really shouldn't matter too much. Because this wiki follows the principle that RuneScape:All_editors_are_equal, therefore no one speaks "with authority". What SHOULD happen when someone thinks you did something wrong, is they should provide a link to the rule or guide that is relevant so you can read it. And if there is disagreement between two people after reading it, use the policys talk page or the Yew Grove for clarification and comment from others.--Varthlokkur 10:38, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * For your information:
 * A list of admins/sysops can be found at: RuneScape:Administrators.
 * All policies can be found at: Category:Policies
 * Any help regarding editing and such can be found at the sidebar (Monobook version) under the "Help" link. Or here: Help:Contents.
 * Several users, unregistered and registered, have been blanking their talk pages as of late (one of those links is from September, but you get the idea). This needs attention, and SOON. Need I say more?

Distractions and Diversions - Minigame(s) or its own entity or what?
Where should D&D, and its items, be categorized?

Discussion below moved from my talk page. Mamabear47 01:24, 18 October 2008 (UTC)



I've noticed that you had put in some of the items (if not all) of the items in Category:Distractions and Diversions into Category:Minigame items.

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but Distractions and Diversions is NOT a minigame. It is a separate game feature within RuneScape.

See this page: RS Game Guide. Notice that "Distractions and Diversions" has a different section from "Minigames"?

06:56, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Where do you think they fit? Mamabear47 18:03, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Since D&D is a separate feature by itself, they do not fit anywhere else. This is the reason I categorised the items in the Category:Distractions and Diversions.  But adding them into Category:Minigame items was wrong, if you ask me, since they are NOT minigame items.  18:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Now it is a Minigame. Problem solved. :-) Mamabear47 01:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Umm, I don't think so.. The Game Guide still shows the D&D as a separate feature. And, the D&D icon in-game is yellow, while the minigame icon is red. See the Icon page, and the image to the right. 14:00, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

This is not a decision either you or I will make. This decision should be made by the community as a whole, and as such, this discussion should not be on my user talk page. It should be on the D&D page or Minigame items page. I think you must not have clicked my link to Minigame since D&D is listed there now.

I have no idea where it should go ultimately. My vote is for minigame, but I'll go along with whatever gets decided. And I'm not going to discuss it further here. I wish an admin would move this section off my page and to an appropriate venue. Mamabear47 23:25, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * You may move this to the Yew Grove.-- 23:31, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Without giving it to much thought or reading everything about it (just a fast read through) I thought it was one update with three new minigames under one main name. But if Jagex has it separate, we should also since we try to keep things as lined up and orderly as Jagex does.--Degenret01 08:34, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The link in the Minigame article has been removed since it is clearly not a minigame. I think I've provided sufficient proof that they are not minigames, but a separate feature.  Icons are different (yellow instead of the usual red), the Game Guide has it under a different section, and not under the Minigames section.   09:14, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

So are you going to give D&D its own link off main page? That would be cool, it needs it. Every time I wanted to find the list of impact site it took like 6 clicks (starting from recent changes, that's my shortcut link [I finally added it to bookmarks, but I am sure many people haven't]).--Varthlokkur 10:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I've added it under "Popular articles" section.  14:11, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I really think Jagex gave it a different color solely so they could mark the ticket dispenser on the world map and have it distinct from the other minigame icons, and they're really each a minigame - BUT I agree we should be organized the same way as the game, or it becomes impossible to find anything. I do wish Jagex would not make little islands of content that are hard to link in to the rest of the knowledgebase.

And, when does this decision become final and we know to start moving things or reclassifying? Looks like we're not having a vote since it's a "match the game format" thing? How do we know when the decision is official? (Sorry for the noob questions, it's the first yew grove thing I've been involved in.) Mamabear47 20:55, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, the yellow icons are not only for the Ticket vendor, but are also used for Larry (Penguin Hide and Seek) and the Observatory (Shooting Star). 15:43, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

RFA
I think we need to change the title of the RuneScape:Requested featured articles to RuneScape:Articles of the Month just because of it having the same acronym as the RuneScape:Requests for adminship. What do you guys think? -- 17:43, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I highly support this as I personally have already mixed these two up. RS:AOTM and RS:RFA would be much easier to remember acronym wise, and i like acronyms (when i can remember them). My theory is we only have so many keystrokes in our lifetimes and as such i want to get the most out of mine, thus my total approval of acronyms. 19:30, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, interesting philosophy. I agree, but RuneScape:Requested featured users should be renamed as "User of the Month" to be consistent with article of the month. Dtm142 22:46, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with Dtm too. So, have we reached a consensus or not? -- 01:46, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh my, "RS:RFU" sounds like a Request For Undeletion. Yes, that too should be renamed to RS:UOTM otherwise people will keep wanting undelete user pages or somesuch. 03:53, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I support changing the two project pages. I wondered why they were called "requested featured" when they were usually referred to as "___ of the month". 02:22, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, it makes more sense to rename them "___ of the month" rather than "requested featured ___".-- 18:46, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

And done!-- 18:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

F2P Userstats Template
How about this as an example of a f2p users stats. Its a bit cleaner to remove all the p2p skills. At the moment the total level is calculated by adding all the f2p skills together plus 9 for the p2p skills which would be level 1 for free players.

Any ideas on things to add/remove/change etc. or is it a waste of time completely? -- 13:42, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I like it. It looks way cleaner than having tons of 1's on a complete table. CFLM ( Talk ) 15:22, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Nice. By the way, I've added the documentation for it. Rectify it if there's any mistakes.  15:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I just delete all the members-only fields on my userpage, which leaves a lot of s. But this looks better. I don't think we should have a separate number for f2p total level, that might make it look like your total level is lower than it actually is. 02:25, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Favourite and Wiki worlds
Do you think there should be a ptp and ftp world that is sort of the wiki's official world? Not anything set in stone, but it would be nice to have a world where most wikians hang out on. It could be used to promote community‎Atlandy 22:36, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a great idea - it would be nice to bump into wikians out and about. ;-)  Shame we can only nominate two favourite servers.  I am usually on 84 (UK P2P) for day-to-day stuff.   03:33, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, and world 84 happens to be my home world too :-D. Maybe have the home worlds be: World 84 for P2P and World 81 for F2P. - TehKittyCat 04:35, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Why not have the f2p world be 19, I think those two together would be quite memorable and since 19 is a 'us' world it will span that puddle of water. 16:55, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I like it, but let's set some boundries here before we make a final decision. I think these boundaries could easily be agreed on:


 * One F2P and one P2P
 * No QuickChat Worlds
 * No PvP Worlds
 * LootShare Worlds (not really mandatory, but it'd be great for Wiki Events or teaming up in training)
 * Ideally, a "neutral" world, where it has no reccomended activity (less outside intervention for those activities)
 * Ideally, not one of the first 10-20 worlds, as they can be difficult to log into.

Any objections to the above? --Pikaandpi 17:26, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Wish things like this didn't get lost in the huge yew grove page....Any world is fine with me.  Perhaps a poll on the front page to let everyone vote on it? ‎[[Image:Cooked_chicken.PNG‎]]Atlandy 18:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with Pikaandpi's suggestion. Which worlds should we use? 02:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Arrgh! This is getting lost in the Yew Grove for something that is very useful!  I would recommend worlds that are pretty representative, perhaps have lootshare, and an "average" player load (not a world with a whole bunch of players typically like worlds 1 & 2).  A further suggestion would be to make the world something in England, USA, or Canada due to bandwidth needs.  I agree with the quickchat & PvP restrictions mentioned above!  I only suggest America due to a number of Americans who edit on this wiki.  How about World 28 for P2P and World 29 for F2P?  Worlds 84 & 81 are both in England (not really a big deal for me) and world 81 isn't a lootshare world, although 29 is.  Some food for thought. --Robert Horning 05:50, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If we use Worlds 28 and 29, where would we show it? Could we put a link on the Maintop to RuneScape:Wiki world and put something on the Sitenotice? 12:39, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * i strongly recommend world 80 for a F2P world
 * Why? 12:29, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

New Logo Concept
Since we just changed the favicon, and everyone is talking about updating the logo, I made this concept (can be modified if necessary) logo for the Wiki: I think it matches the color scheme of the new favicon pretty accurately. This is only a concept (only took me like 5 minutes to make), but if you guys support the idea of changing the logo to something similar to this, I can always make a new version in a different size, etc. Also, if you don't support, please leave feedback as to why instead of just typing something like "it sucks. you have no talent". If you don't tell me what's wrong with it, I can't change it. 01:20, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you compress it to about 30kb or so without losing much quality? In its current form it does look very nice.  03:40, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not a fan of Text only logos. Looks very plain. Doesnt come across as runescape OR wiki themed. -- 09:18, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You mean, to replace Image:Wiki.png? No. It's very... boring, compared to the current one. I don't think it should match the favicon. Favicons are small, they can't fit much on them. But you can fit a lot onto a big logo. And where has everyone been talking about updating the logo? I only remember people talking about just fixing the logo for HD and transparency, and only changing the favicon. 03:44, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Our current logo is tacky imho. It does nothing to distinguish us from the hundreds of RS sites out there. Earthere 04:47, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes it does. 12:11, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Apparently "plain text" is boring... so I added an abstract style background, and reized the image to be around the same size as the current logo. I kinda liked the plain text one, but this is the most unique runescape fansite logo you will ever see: 03:14, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The first was better imho. Earthere 03:35, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * This one's even worse. It doesn't look RuneScapey or wiki-like at all. Why would we change Image:Wiki.png? The current logo is great. 03:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * In shooping terms. The darkened space behind "Wiki" is a bit ambiguous. Is it a poor gradient? A weird shadow?  It also looks purposely separate from the runes on the side, which makes me suspect the creator didn't add transparency to the individual runes.  There are over 10 runes;  we need to cut that number down as it "might" not qualify for fair use. ... and honestly it looks somewhat tacky.  Also, the "reflection" of RuneScape looks terrible.  All in all Wiki.png isn't bad--it's better than the logos of pretty much every other fan site, so it's tolerable.  But it isn't perfect either. Earthere 03:53, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not quite sure what "shooping" is, but i am quite sure that the current logo was only a slight improvement on the previous logo, the only real differences being the runes were derived from the detail images of the runes and the background was made truly transparent so as to work with skins such as the gaming skin. The idea of course being a minor makeover on the logo so as to be both tried and true and yet polished up a bit (much like HD in the actual game itself). Perhaps you could contact the creator of the prior version and ask them their thoughts on the matter, personally i've had no luck in that department. 04:32, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

How can something look wiki like anyways? I can always make something new... but I really want to try to avoid using the rune images... kinda tacky really... 04:53, 9 November 2008 (UTC
 * I don't see what you mean. The rune images look fine, and how is having ten runes on the logo violating "Fair Use"? And, I kind of also disagree with Earthere on the reflection and shadow... I actually think they make the logo look better. 12:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 99% chance it isn't copyvio, even smaller chance that jagex would actually care. c teng, I'm just giving my two cents, nothing to worry about...  04:27, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Oppose - We just changed the logo like a couple months ago (correct me if I'm wrong). We don't need another one. Seriously. Besides, I like the current one better. -- 23:32, 9 November 2008 (UTC) Postpone - At least for a few months, as per first reason listed by Spencermac (sorry I can't say i like one or the other better). I would however be curious ( like a cat ) to see discussion (not images) of what elements would be desired in a new logo. 04:22, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I like the current logo. It's iconic for us. I think we'd really need a fancy shmancy new logo (and as well as a discussion from the whole registered community) to break away from what we have now. Does anyone remember the last logo change discussion? The whole community (more or less) participated, like 30 posibilities were submitted, but the idea from the Belgian (or perhaps a different country?) guy prevailed, and we have used it ever since. 04:31, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Just wondering, where is the discussion for that logo change? Is it in one of the old Forums? And I also agree with your reasons for not changing the logo. 02:34, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I was actually looking for it the other day in the old forum archives, but I unfortunately could not find it. I couldn't find much of anything, really. 22:01, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Laggy page
This page is too large and is lagging due to the ammount of text/images and wikicode on the page. I think some content needs to me archived off. -- 14:38, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Once upon a time I saw some instructons for archiving. But I haven't the foggiest ATM of where that was. When someone who does know comes along, would it be possible to include a link to Archiving instructions at the top of this page? That would prove most helpful and beneficial. And of course, on the archiving instructions page maybe we should put a NICE BOLD STATEMENT SAYING THAT IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT SHOULD BE ARCHIVED, ASK FOR HELP INSTEAD OF JUST DOING IT.--Degenret01 11:46, 8 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah c'mon Degenret, you know that lag makes you reminisce about the good ole days. you know 300bps dial-up, punchcards, yeah, those were good times... 15:00, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Not only do I remember them, I thought they were the coolest thing ever. Programming instructions on a punch card was just the bomb.:) --Degenret01 10:00, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * D is about 2.5x older than I am. X=] 19:26, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 2 and half......wow thanks, for the reminder lol. I never quite thought of it in those terms--Degenret01 10:00, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Aw kytti, I remember 110 baud on a Bell 103 modem with acoustical couplers to a rotary dial telephone attached to a used Western Union teletype machine (complete with punch tape) that had yellow telegram paper. And you had to remember the old control codes like control-G (for the bell... an actual bell like a doorbell) and control-H for backspace.  This was an "improved" version, however, with a real "enter" key instead of having to manually type control-M.
 * And yet I played some entertaining games on that machine, including an awesome 3-D multi-player space combat game and a multi-player fantasy game with a dungeon roughly similar to the stronghold of security.
 * It was later "upgraded" to a 220 baud dot matrix terminal. Now that was real speed!
 * On a more serious note, sometimes the multimedia resources on this wiki tend to be a little excessive, and if you are using dial-up connections to the internet (they do exist... and I just got DSL about 3 months ago so it isn't ancient history for me) can have problems. Even with my DSL line I still have problems with some of the pages that have a huge number of animated images.  --Robert Horning 00:35, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems to be fine. Loads in less than half a second for me. Admittedly I have 15mbps internet, but still - it doesn't lagg when I scroll or anything, and most of the discussion seems to have taken place within the last 3 months... 03:30, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I too have high speed connectivity, however at peak times wikia's servers can be a bit slow to respond, so it's not entirely the fault of dial-up (shame on me for forgetting speeds below 150bps). 04:15, 9 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I have a pretty fast connection (56 MBPS), and all-around, this wiki, and only this one - not any other wikia-hosted wiki - is very slow. Not to mention this one time last year when my internet broke and all I could do was access Wikipedia and runescape.com (but not the actual Java part). I wonder why I couldn't access this site? 15:01, 9 November 2008 (UTC)


 * My guess is your disconnectivity had something to do with wikitrolls... 04:10, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Summoning Pouches
I'm relatively new here, so I may not know the subtle nuances of this place, but I have noticed one thing. Some summoning familiar articles like the Bronze minotaur HAD respective pages for their pouches and scrolls/special moves. I redirected these to the main familiar page, because most, like Karamthulhu overlord, have the info on their pages. But, I wanted to know. Should they continue to be redirected, or have their own pages? Thanks, Liasly 02:06, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * This sounds like a potential project, the cleanup the summoning pages project. My guess is that with the changes in summoning (a/k/a summoning) the enthusiasm for making that article series consistent got a bit thrown off course. For some reason i remember someone suggesting something akin to a Collaboration of the Week, this would be an excellent such start for such a thing.  04:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * As a user preference i prefer to house pouch and scroll information on the familiar article page. Looks a lot tidier -- 09:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes it was agreed to put everything on one page for each type of familiar. Then the second bunch came out and I know for my part the task seemed daunting. I like khytti khats thought, it would make a great collaborative project. --Degenret01 10:05, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay then, thanks for your input. *eagerly grabs a few cookies* 11:54, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * mmm cookies, FireFox tells me it has a lot of them but i don't know how to get them out of the pc or even what flavour they are... 04:15, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah! I found the COTW suggestion, it was Skill who seems to be on a wiki break. hmmmm what to do now? 04:15, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking that with the scope of the Summoning articles, this could be more than a Week in during, so maybe "CC" would be a better acronym, as in Current Collaboration. 04:17, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * * grumbles* I just realized that in addition to the redirecting, some pages didn't have the pouch/scroll info on them, so project number two: Going back and fixing this... My bad >.< 12:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

RS:IMP
What is the process to move a proposed policy into actual policy? My guess, "Consensus", as such I'm asking for a quick vote on the Image and Media Policy.


 * Support - naturally since I am the one wanting to finalise this. 04:15, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Looks great, though I'm not sure about one item, that is videos not to be used in articles. We have many, many videos in articles, and I'm sure we don't want to be deleting them all. I support apart from that. Hurston 17:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The term 'video' seems unclear as of your posting, so along with other proposed policies these should be reviewed imo. 01:29, 15 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Support - Everything seems to be in order.-- 18:40, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Do project-related images include images used in the Yew Grove or in the Talk namespace (besides in signatures)? For example, if someone uploaded an image to show an example for a talk page, but the image isn't used anywhere else. 12:46, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposed policies
There are other Proposed policies that need to be revisited, and some of them are really, really old.
 * RS:IMP
 * RS:DSA
 * RS:RFAP
 * RS:SCOPE

On another note, I'd like to "nominate" the Quest style guide written by Endasil to be included in our official Style guide. It needs some modifications, but I think it is well written and should be made "official". 03:24, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If Endasil's quest style guide is ready, why not go ahead and move it over to RS:QSG? 01:49, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. I've expanded the RuneScape:Quest style guide to include the layout for a quest page.  Feel free to tinker with it.   17:31, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

RS:DSA
This particular proposed policy seems to be nothing more than a specific instance of the owndership and bias section of the style guide. As such I believe it would be best to redirect RS:DSA to that section of the style guide, and possibly incorporate it into the style guide as opposed to having it as it's own policy. 01:55, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * RS:DSA gives much more information than the small bullet point in the Ownership and bias section in the Style Guide. If we decide to delete the page, I think that we should give it its own subsection in the Style Guide. 13:03, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Why?
Why cant we just have forum admins with limited powers. That in it self leaves all the syops free to edit and not have to worry about the forums. To me the forums are just as important. Reyna Jane 05:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Because the forums are still in beta mode. We can't have a separate "forum admin" position right now. The only way to have forum admin powers is to be a wiki administrator. 03:45, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * We should probably make this a priority in the near future. I agree that we do need seperate forum admins with limited powers. As of now we have only one or two admins who use the forums and we need a lot more. As of now the forums need serious improvement. Plain and simple we need more forum admins. I think Reyna Jane would make an excellent forum admin. Perhaps in the near future. I would also like to add that forum admins are different than normal admins so I don't think their edit count should matter as much as how involved they are in the forums as well as thier behavior and contributions to the forums. [[image:Prayer.gif |25px]] Sir Lenehan [[image:smite.PNG|25px]] 06:06, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Wiki newspaper!
Okay, I think someone already mentioned something like this, but this has really got me thinking while I walk a few miles home from school now and then.

If we had a wiki newspaper, that could be a rather fun and beneficial thing to do. Why would it be fun? I don't need to answer that :P. Why is it beneficial? Just keep reading.

What would be in it? Hmm...
 * Periodicals (newspaper articles)
 * Interviews
 * Trivia questions
 * Answers to the previous issue's questions
 * Statistics ("We gained $$x$$ amount of articles...")
 * Comic strips
 * Made with screenshots
 * Made with drawings (Coolcoder9t's idea, 18:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC))
 * News about the wiki
 * Upcoming events (if any)
 * and other things people may think up.
 * Stuff about the CTI, GE, and money making (God Of War and Zilenserz's idea, 06:40 and 18:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC))
 * Extra polls (Rendova's idea, 21:51, 19 November 2008 (UTC))

Now let's go more in depth, starting with periodicals.

Periodicals: Jagex covers official news and updates, and we store it here for all to read. But what about unofficial news, like Defil3d 'losing' 272M (It turned out to be fake FYI.)? Those things only get spread through gossip from person to person. We could write about the goingson that elsewhere is scarce to accurately learn about.

Interviews: Simple. We either interview members of the site that would supply an interesting interview, or we could interview someone of interest (say, Kiotomi?) that people would enjoy reading about.

Trivia questions: This would be a replacement for crossword puzzles and word searches that we are most likely incapable of doing. The questions would either be relating to the site or relating to the game. Examples include:
 * Historically, who had the highest editcount?
 * How many users with rollback are there?
 * What message do you get when you try to cast combat magic on another player outside of a PvP area?
 * etc.

Statistics: Essientially, it's just information about the wiki's growth in the past month. WikiStats could be very helpful in data collection.

Comic strips: No newspaper is complete without a few comic strips! These would include a few panels (<7) of screenshots all within one image showing continuing plot, drama, comedy, or whatever genre may be chosen by the maker of the comic.

I would be guessing that a lot of people would want to get their comic in the paper, so there would probably have to have a committee to either accept or reject serieses if that became a problem.

News about the wiki: Template:News only covers important things with a single sentence. The newspaper could cover new policies put in place, RfAs/RfBs (both successful and unsuccessful), and anything else of interest with a paragraph or two.

Upcoming events: Upcoming events (e.g.: a person's 99 party, the next WikiFest, etc.) could be advertized and told about with a short explanation, time and location, and all other needed things to list.

I'm guessing issues would either be bi-weekly or monthly to give writers enough time to get enough full periodicals and whatever ready for the viewing of everyone else.

But what would the cover page look like? I thought of something like this:

[insert newspaper name here]

Issue 1, 1 Jan 2009, 1gp


 * Page index


 * this is a news story!
 * and so is this!
 * as well as this...
 * Interview with Zezima
 * Statistics for Dec 08
 * Classifieds and comics

Or something like that. That's just an idea of the cover.

Sooo, what do you peeps think? Constructive criticism and discussion pl0x. 07:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It's been brought up before... and I just don't think it'll get off the ground. We only have about 100 active users here (IIRC from the active user page you started) and of those, I don't know if we could get enough interest to help (especially stuff like the comics).


 * That said, in the event we could arouse some decent support from the community, I could possibilty help... we'd have to see.


 * Also, if this does work, I think monthly would be best to start, at least. If we were to gain some steam/have a really busy, liek Z0MG excited month (like, say, December with Christmas) we could have specials.


 * Anyway, I'd like to see if we can get some support for the community before we make some big plans. --Pikaandpi 16:46, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I support, although you seem to have a pro-Kiotomi anti-Defil3d bias (although so do I). The newspaper should be bias-free, and I don't know if RuneScape and RuneScape-community related "gossip" is a very good idea. 22:52, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment, um i think asking for 1gp might be misunderstood as an attempt at real world trading, and we certainly wouldn't want Jagex taking away PvP worlds now would we 02:01, 15 November 2008 (UTC) lol

Comment - What if we incorporated the newspaper into the Main Page? Rather than creating a separate page for a newspaper, we could "convert" the Main page to give it a newspaper-like theme. Most of the ideas mentioned above can be incorporated into the main page, imo. As for the content creation, I agree with Pikaandpi. We should come up with a list of potential contributors for the relevant sections of the "newspaper". 16:13, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm... I guess that would be nice, but I was thinking (yet I don't think I typed it) that we could put something like " Come read the latest issue of our newspaper! ", and then have the reader follow the link to the cover page for whatever the latest issue may be.

Oh, and another idea. If people wanted to, we could have a "featured video" or something, which would be a selected video created by one of our users. We have many RSMVers (me, Danger, Cash, Syu, and more that I can't remember), so it wouldn't be that hard to find a well made video to feature. 19:37, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * HEY!! This was MY idea! i started an discussion about this first until some damn idiot decided thay want to delete it and put it to some archive!!! 

Btzkillerv has entered the building!   13:30, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Calm down. You should be happy that an idea you once had has been revived, although you might want credit for it yourself. 02:00, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I do agree on one point: There needs to be more news about this wikia and about the community of RuneScape! Although im not certain that a monthly 'newspaper' would be the way to answer this call, something definately needs to be done on this issue, and ill support your cause, so long as it doesn't get out of hand.--Pkthis 02:48, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I am ok with a newspaper but not if it deals with rumors about RS players/ That sounds like it could easily lead to all sorts of trouble. News is good, comics are fine. Under what criteria is it determined whom is interviewed? Another potential trouble spot. --Degenret01 11:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


 * you dont bloody understand instant do you? i started a discussion on this, and then it got deleted, why does the community pay more attention when he brings it out and dosent give any when i do?, im not even a fraction happy about this, god i want to *!£$^ing £$%^& the "£$%^"£$^ing %!"£%$ who deleted my thread <font style="background:cyan">

Btzkillerv has entered the building!  </b> 11:10, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Interviews would probably just be on people of interest. Users of the month could be interviewed, new sysops, 'crats, and then just generally famous players (I already asked Kiotomi and Light Arcana if they were willing to be interviewed, and they said it'd be okay with them.). 23:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't get it. What kind of news are we talking about if Jagex already has news on RuneScape main page? And where do you find out this crap about players losing 200mil? RuneScape isn't supposed to be a community, it's a game. If you're talking about the WIKI, then we still don't really need it. I don't get what kind of stuff you'd put on the "newspaper." 17:15, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Jagex only writes about upcoming stuff, new releases, and an occasional notice (i.e. "plz stop rioting kthnxbai"). There's tons of things that go on besides what Jagex makes updates about. Glitches, riots, players' receptions of an update, and even scandalous things a famous player may have done (such as a certain someone scamming their friend for 40M or whatever (and yes, this was after the trade restriction introduction)) would all be things that could be written about.
 * About the person losing 200M: Defil3d (either #1 or #2 subscribed RuneScaper on YouTube) made a video where she supposedly forgot she was in a PvP world, teleported to Varrock with 272M cash, and got PKed. It later turned out that a friend of her's was the PKer, and that she just edited in the cash to gain attention to herself, as I believe it went.
 * If it wasn't meant to be a community, we wouldn't be able to see other players. :P 23:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Support - this is awesome!! 17:39, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Support + Comment - I beleive this is a vey good Idea. If it comes to be, it needs a cool name and a nice logo. I like the name of the Asgarnian Times. Some other good name examples are NewsScape or RuneScape Wiki Tribune or something along those lines. A nice logo would very depending upon what the name would be. Also a nice logo would be made with a good program like photoshop. There could be a voting for a newspaper logo.. Wikians would enter their logos onto a page and have people vote.. I was told that the last logo voting for the main logo was a huge mess but was worth it. Just some ideas I have. -- 23:25, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I think calling it the "Asgarnian Times" would be out of the question because "All Kingdoms are Equal!" (as per RS:AKAE). Nah, I'm just pulling your leg. There would probably be a big argument over whether it should be named after Asgarnia or Misthalin, though.
 * Personally, the name "RuKartia" (or perhaps "RuCartia") keeps coming to mind, but that name ... makes no sense, to be honest. 23:36, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose:Bluntly and without using a lengthy explaination, this has no place on our wiki. The main page template that shows wiki-related news is good enough. If in-game events about players are entered in, then that TOTALLY violates RS:PDDA. A rubbish idea if I ever saw one.
 * Also put bluntly and directed at Chia: once again you are trying to gain fame within the community by reviving something in possible hopes of being the one who can say "hey, I made this idea work on the RuneScape Wiki!"...No. Just. No.

RuneScape is NOT a community. Just because you can "see" other people doesn't mean it's a community. Is Halo a community just because you can "see" other players? Multiplayer games and communities are not the same. And no offense or anything, but riots and glitches? My butt. No one cares about riots; they're a waste of everyone's time, and Jagex doesn't approve of them anyhow. Glitches are not that amusing, and abusing them is against the rules, and they get fixed anyway. And if there are videos of famous players supposedly getting scammed on Youtube, then go watch it on Youtube. There's a reason people post them on Youtube: so everyone can watch them.

Ah, I forgot. Oppose. 23:55, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Runescape is a community because it involves interaction between people. We talk, and trade, and fight. It's the way a community works. You need to be more open minded about what a word really means befor you go blabbing on about something you don't even have a clue about. I bet that your just a twelve year old kid who wants to act like he's an adult. Face it, you've got a lot to learn. Some people are interested in what has been going on in the week. A big glitch, or maybe a small glitch would be like the celebrity talk on the news nowadays. It's boring to some, and interesting to others. 06:19, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Oppose everything relating to interviews with "famous" players. The RuneScape Wiki is meant to be a professional encyclopedia, not a trashy tabloid. I couldn't care less about some careless drama queen losing 40 mil to their own stupidity (yet conveniently happening to have their hypercam on at the time). However, a project similar to the signpost at Wikipedia documenting wiki news and statistics could be useful. Dtm142 01:36, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Support- A newspaper would be a nice little thing to read everyweek while I'm doing a boring skill such as fletching and cooking, and slayer... and well pretty much everything lol. Put in all sorts of things, but don't include interviews from famous people >_<

Strongly-Support Splendid idea! only instead of putting things about famous or well know users why not stuff about the grand exchange? popular items not in the official runescape GE that can make alot of profit or make you loose alot of gp... it could also include popular and contreversial topics like RFA's and things that non-forum users might want to contribute too. The Editor of the month could be incorporated into the newspaper by giving them their two minutes of fame on the Runescape wikia official newspaper.God Of War 06:40, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Sirshal0t, or whatever your name is, I suggest you don't make assumptions about people just because they disagree with you. RuneScape is not a community. Talking and trading may be part of what a community does, but as you said, it involves PEOPLE. A bunch of pixels are not people. Typing is not talking. Trading pixel items with pixel people is not trading. Fighting other pixels is not fighting. You need to have at least a clue about the people you’re talking to; interacting with people controlling pixels does not mean you’re in a community. You need to fix your attitude and don’t flame people just because you think they’re 12 year olds who "blab." 15:14, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Support- I think that God of War has said it all, I dont like the idea opf Glitches, people getting scammed or any gossip being put in, but the CTI, most traded, most expensive, most profit increase etc from ge would be a great add on. I also like the idea of NON grand exchange items/prices being reviewed. Items such as third age are sold at perhaps 100+mil with junk, usually itemms such as party hats, while the Ge price is only at prices such as 20Mil. We could get these prices from the RS forums. It woukd help users to know the price people will sell items at, when no one ever sells at the Ge, due to the price being too low. If this goes through, and we do have a paper, i'd love to help in every way possible!-- 18:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Strongly_Support+Application-type-thing+Comment I like this idea! I'd contribute, I'd write furiously... I'd do anything within my power to help this along! If no one minds, I'd love to write some articles and/or conduct some interviews! But that's beside the point. This is for discussion and comments, right? I think that anything that would be in a regular newspaper or magazine would definitely qualify for content in the newspaper. Thanks for suggesting this, whoever it was! DJ 1337 Man 19:11, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Btzkillerv thought this up first. I just elaborated on it. :) 23:28, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Strong Support This, Chia, is one beast of an idea. I'd recommend a little section also for updates not mentioned in the runescape newsposts. Updates like the cooking and firemaking animations, and the many others I've noticed but for some reason can't remember :P. Although I don't really like the idea of following recent scams, shams, and runescape "scandals", alI like the idea of interviewing various people. Perhaps it doesn't necessarily need to be any one particular person, but someone who symbolizes a general group of people. I remember a while back on certain forums reading an interview with a Vietnamese gold harvesting sweatshop worker, which was extremely interesting. Or you could interview a level 3 skiller/mod. You could also try interviewing a rare sort of pker, perhaps a mod pker? I'll stop flattering myself :P.

But anyway, Chia, if this works out, I wud gladli volunter mi editin skilz b/c i hav xperienc as n editr. I do actually have a decent bit of editing experience, and I enjoy doing it too, plus with all this time on my hands I'd be able to keep on top of things. Stick something on my talk page if you want to discuss this :].

Lastly, there ought to be a section for polls. I know, I know we already have the poll on the main page and the voting booth section on the forums, but a couple polls (3 or 4) all relating to a similar topic (i.e. pking, scamming, merchanting, ect) would be interesting and would make a good break in the monotony of nonstop reading :P. 21:51, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment - I have no intentions of being a "chief editor", header of this progekt, or anything. I just intend to be a writer/interviewer/comic strip maker who's no better than anyone else. 23:28, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Tienjt0, you said yourself typing isnt talking, so this is not talk at all is it? With what you're saying Wikias arnt communities. And This isnt a professional encyclopedia at all, its a site containing a bunch of info pages that is similar to encyclopedia. You say its all just pixels, which is true, but REAl people are conrtolling those pixels. And why do you not want a newspaper so much? It's not like its going to do anything harmful to the wiki. Everyone gets bored with neutral statments and want to know whats going on around runescape that Jagex doesnt put in the news. -- 02:11, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * See RS:NOT, RS:NOT and RS:NOT. An official newspaper containing this type of content would violate all of these and overall would not be in the spirit of the wiki.  An encyclopedia does not need a tabloid.  We are not Youtube - Youtube stars have their own site for getting attention.  They don't need us and we certainly don't need them if they aren't going to help us write an encyclopedia. Dtm142 00:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * NOT#BLOG - To clarify (though it should be so obvious that I don't even need to say this), this is not a blog in any way. People can go to blog sites if they want to read those. As with the content of the subsection, this is not going to be a newspaper about clans and players. It's about news. "Articles about players or clans are not permitted in article space". This would be in the project namespace (something like "RuneScape:Newspaper" (Oi, it needs a name)), so periodicals wouldn't be in the article space (A.K.A.: mainspace).
 * NOT#TABLOID - First off, a tabloid is essentially a wannabe newspaper that has bogus headliners made to catch peoples' attention. There is no way in Hell (or, Freneskae in this case) that ANYTHING of that nature would be put into this. ("Bigfoot marries Loch Ness Monster!"...)
 * But in response to the subsection itself: "Information about players should always be reliable" would be something easy to abide by. One of the points of this would to be deliver the truthful news. Putting in something that isn't reliable would make it worse. And with where it says, "Additions that make questionable claims about others should be removed if no source is provided", it kinda' goes with what I just said. Things need to be truthful and facticious, so anything questionable would, once again, make it worse.
 * NOT#POV - They need to be written from a neutral point of view? Okay, that's really simple. In correlation with what I said about tabloids, newspaper articles would need to be written about the truth, with the truth, and for the truth (is it just me, or did I just talk like a Founding Father?).
 * See my post with the same datestamp for a continuation. 02:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Dtm, we're on the same page. :p Stuff on Youtube stays there. What's the point of stealing "news" from Youtube and putting it on a newspaper when you can just go to Youtube and watch it?  13:45, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * See Help:Namespace. The scope of the RuneScape namespace is to include information directly related to the wiki.  It is not for content relating to the subject of the wiki.  If you look at Wikipedia's signpost, it consists mainly of statistics, admins/featured content, or board/fiscal issues.  It does not contain articles such as "Britney Spears is pregnant/Paris Hilton is in jail/Dr. Phil cheats on his wife/Nicole Richie is in rehab".  Truthful and neutral or not, that doesn't belong in the project namespace. Dtm142 20:27, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

we could also add a section on popular training methods... or even sports "minigames" which people in the wikia / forum participate in.... what do you think Chia?God Of War 05:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment

i would recommend naming it the runescape wiki signpost <font style="background:cyan"> Btzkillerv has entered the building!  </b> 12:16, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Enigma, RuneScape and this Wiki are considered VIRTUAL communities. Before you say it's the same thing, no, communities and virtual communities are not the same. People in a true community need to be living in the same area and be interacting with each other in real life, face to face, not typing stuff on the Web. Players in RuneScape come from all over the world, interacting with total strangers. And individuals in a community help each other; not everyone in RuneScape or this Wiki help each other. As you may have saw earlier, a certain person flamed me for no good reason whatsoever. Not a very good person to be in a "community," is he?

As with the newspaper, I oppose it just because everything that is planned to be in the newspaper is already in the Wiki in some way. I'm not going to be like, "Gah, this Wiki has a newspaper, I'm gonna kill someone." I just don't think it's necessary for the Wiki to have a newspaper if everything on it can be found in other places. Note that I said "oppose", not "strongly oppose." Of course, lots of people nowadays are lazy and would love to see RuneScape's "current events" all in the same place. >.<

If the Wiki does get a newspaper, I wouldn't mind being an editor. I'm extremely fussy about grammar, and I get slightly irritated when I see grammar errors in my school newspaper. And since everyone seems to support this, I say get on with it! :D 17:06, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'm confused now. Are you opposing or supporting? Usually opposers aren't so open-armed about things they just opposed. :o 02:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Does it matter? Do you count the votes? If so, count me as .075 oppose and .25 support. :p 13:45, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment First off if this gets an ounce more arguing i'll strongly oppose =O. Also I think we should interview Users who aren't well known(like me =P). 19:15, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Changed to oppose. This is not the aim of the wiki. 20:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Clarificational comment - Okay, I'm getting the vibe that bunches of people are misunderstanding me. It will not be about players. It would only mention players where necessary. If Zezima became an honorary Jagex Mod level 9,000 prestieger (and most definitely the first!), then there would be something written about the occasion. The majority of the other pages would be about things that aren't players.

Who remembers the 2007 Fish Dip? The 2008 Market Dip? The introduction of the private forums? The announcement of a Thanksgiving event? The removal of Wilderness PvP, and all the following riots? The new year? A new quest? An update that received a poor response? The addition of the Air guitar? Summoning being released? Any of the Holiday events? Hidden updates? Sudden skyrocketings in price (Ancient mace, anyone?)?

All of those things would be eligable for getting periodicals. There could also be comparisons (of fan sites (Can we say, "RSWvsRHQ"? "RSWvsHalopedia"?), weapons, types of pures, PKing methods, money making methods, other games, and a crudload of other things), news about this site (*gasp*!) and our userbase, and news about Jagex in general.

Hmm. I just listed like twenty things right there. Stuff about playes would be allocated through them all only when necessary and where it would improve the periodical. I intended this to be our own little 5 o'clock news, not Entertainment Tonight. "Britney Spears shaved her head! Let's make her life a nightmare by giving her unrelenting unwanted attention!" 02:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You seem to keep changing your mind. Here you said that players would rarely be mentioned except in exceptional circumstances, but earlier you said that interviews would be a key component of the newspaper.  Which is it? Dtm142 20:27, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe I meant periodicals. Interviews would, yes, contain players all the time. 21:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Sounds interesting, but as many above me have said, following famous players around sounds like a dumb idea... (Having been famous before, I can also say it's obnoxious to have a bunch of noobs you don't know chasing you everywhere.) Might be interested in doing a comic, but limiting it to screenshots seems to be a great way to stifle creativity and to exclude poorer players (because they may not be able to afford the costumes needed.)

Coolcoder9t 02:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Just wanting to clarify, but did you read my comment that's right above your's? Periodicals on players would only make up a [small] fraction of the total news stories.
 * Yeah, I read it right after I was done posting. That's alright then. Coolcoder9t 18:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * About comic strips, how else could they be made (I'm seriously asking; I see no other way.)? It's not like we can use video. Also, I don't understand your comment about some people not being able to afford costumes. It's not like we're going to enforce a rule of what people have to be wearing (though a bunch of people in Party hats with Third Age equipment and Summoning capes would be a nice thought...). 06:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * There are many comics not made from runescape screenshots. I was considering a mix of hand drawn and screenshots or similar. As for not having costumes, suppose the comic artist writes a story that calls for a certain wardrobe but can't get their hands on it. Again by restricting it to screenshots, it would limit the potential for creativity of lower-levelled players. Coolcoder9t 18:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah. Actually drawing. I never thought of that as I definitely would have to stick with screenshots. :P 21:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Strong Support - Why not? It sounds like it would be interesting. People are saying that it's "not the aim of the wiki," but I don't see anything wrong with making at least part of it that way. 19:17, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Support - This sounds like a good idea and then we can have a thing on it where people sign to see if they like it or not. -- 01:56, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

As for the policies the newspaper would break, thats exactly the point! People want something different, something informal to get away to. Yes you can go to YouTube and watch the videos, or go to a blog host and read the blogs, but People want it all in one convinient place. Some are whorried that a ewspaper doesnt belong in a "Professional Encyclopedia" Where the (edited out by writer) did you get the idea that RuneScape Wiki was a professional Encyclopedia?! Obviously there would be some sort of notice saying the Newspaper is techically not even part of the wiki, and if we go without RS:NOT some articles may contain opinions. And the newspaper would not change the actual wiki AT ALL except for a couple things linking to it. And if you don't think the wiki should have a newspaper because you dont care about what would be in it, then just DONT READ IT! Chaged from Support to Strong Support (If it makes a difference) -- 16:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * "If you don't like it, don't read it" only goes so far. Advertisments that support macroing and real world item trading are unacceptable, even if they are only in one small corner of the wiki.  Some users finding it "convenient" also does not mean that it is in the scope of the wiki.  Some users may find it convenient to host pornography on Wika, but that project was rejected.  Why?  Because that's not what Wikia is for.

Anyway, I think that this would be far more useful as a sister project similar to Wiki News than as part of our project namespace. I recognize that current events in RuneScape's community have their place on Wikia. That place just isn't on this site. Dtm142 20:27, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Not only is porn the polar opposite of the point of Wikia, it is also highly inappropriate and even illegal in some cases. A news system (unless it somehow turns racist and contains porn (wtf??)) would only debateably be 'outside the aim of the wiki'. 21:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The scope of this wiki is to create an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. Convenience is not a valid justification for violating several of the wiki's key policies.  Again, I'm not against creating a project of this type.  This just isn't the place to do it. Dtm142 21:35, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Then where? Where else would a Wiki Newspaper go not on the wiki itself? There is no place else for it. You either support it all the way or not support it at all. Make up your mind and stick with it. -- 22:04, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I was thinking on a separate Wikia hosted wiki similar to what Wikinews is to Wikipedia. The articles don't belong in the main namespace and they don't belong in the RuneScape namespace for reasons that I already mentioned.  We already have other sister projects such as Fanon, RuneScape Clans, and UnRuneScape.  The only other place it could really go would be in userspace. Dtm142 22:53, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * i throught this up first so i have an idea, this is taken from my wikipedia talk (thank ral for his ralbot)

see, this is an example of awikipedia newspaper, but we can elaborate on this to create a more intresting news thing for everyone to enjoy <font style="background:cyan"> Btzkillerv has entered the building!  </b> 19:44, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * [ It doesn't work] right because this isn't Wikipedia. Just see Wikipedia:User talk:Btzkillerv 20:54, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I have some ideas... There could be things like a Monthly guide for something odd, a sports section, useful Classifieds, and an Obichuary (lol?). And maybe an opinion section that contains what people think about something (I.e., how players feel about a new minigame) And I like the idea of a featured video and image. Oo we could have a RuneScape related crossword puzzle like in an image format. -- 22:23, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


 * When are we going to count the Supports, Opposes, and Neutrals? The past few days this is gone nowhere and I think its time to tally everything up. I mean, what are we waiting for?-- 23:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Supports: 9.25
 * Opposes: 3.75
 * There are more than twice as many supports as there are opposes. There you go. 00:01, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Support + Comment I really like the idea of a wiki newsleeter, but I fear it may turn into "Gossip Times", which is not what this wiki is about. I agree with the people that suggest it should be informational about new events and activities in the wiki and it should highlight players that have contributed to the wiki but are not as well know. I think the idea of a vote for a logo is a great idea, but I believe it should be referenced on the main page "Look here for this weeks newsletter......" and not a redesign of the front page like someone suggested. I think discussion of clans and other "Runescape Help Sites" should not be a part of the newsletter because we must keep to this wiki. Chiafriend's idea that it should not be a blog, tabloid orand it should be writeen from a neutral point of view is great, and I believe the same. A poll and trivia section like orginally suggested would add some nice flavor to spice up the site a bit through the newsletter. Additionally, I believe this would be a great place to vote on questions and answer them that are submitted by other editors of this wiki about RuneScape or the wiki itself. I believe interviews are a great idea and the newsletter should be written in a fun way! This disscussion is doing great and I like it that there are so many differing views on the subject of a wiki newsletter. I believe this could be a fun thing to look forward to bi-weekly, just like the selecgtion of the article of the month is! :) (By the way, I put Chiafriends's Count at the top, just because it got lost here at the bottom) Invincibility |Talk|  |Edit Count|  02:52, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment- Unfortunately, this project goes beyond the scope of this wiki. I would recommend creating a new wiki in the spirit of Wikinews that would allow you free reign over the creation and content of the paper.-- 15:59, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Creating a wiki for another wiki would be a waste of a wiki. 22:01, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what exactly that is meant to rebut. Interviews with players, comics and other original content such go against the scope and rules of the Runescape Wiki.   It's not a question of the merits of the idea in itself or the support or opposition for it, it is that this is not the correct place to create it.-- 17:11, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The thing is that what you're proposing has little, if anything, to do with the actual wiki itself. Yes it relates to the subject of the wiki, but it doesn't belong in the RuneScape namespace. Dtm142 19:52, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Oppose I really don't care about "famous" players or what they would have to say in an interview. And I've never heard of the 2 you mentioned. Had I heard of them, I still wouldn't care.And any news about Runescape is covered in the updates. Thtas really quite good enough.--Varthlokkur 10:35, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I would. And I'm sure many other people who use this wiki would, too. That's why it's being suggested. 13:10, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Partial Support and comment

Runescape wikia is a daughter(female chauvinism much?) of wikipedia, and(in my opinion) should as such maintain a encylopaedia-ish feel to it. Honestly speaking, I would be scandalized if it began displaying : "extra extra xyz has lost 40 mil because he/she went to the corporeal beast with a p hat and was skulled

Barring that,a news letter is nonetheless and excellent idea. Infact, we could make it monthly, i.e at the end of the month, and allow all users to give their reviews on the updates(in addition to the wiki news and events) along with images of the months, etc

and comics FTW!!!!! a runescape calvin and hobbes?......i gotta see tht.....

FireyfoxTALK 14:21, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment Oh, annother thing, i noticed that u say we should "talk about players in the most exceptional circumstances" but i still dont agree with that either...... this is a wikia about runescape and ingame content 'and anything else strongly connected to it' which is why i guess we spoke about durial...

but thts not the same as talking about zezima becoming a mod with lots of honours, how does that relate to any content in the wikia itself?FireyfoxTALK 14:35, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment I think, that before we try to work out whether it would fit in, as a community there is a need to find an overall project manager. If you want to work to a schedule, you will need someone to ensure it is all published by the target date.

Second you need to ensure that it's suitable for the wiki. A newsletter is a great idea, but how will it work so it is 'released' at a specific points. Seems to me like it's better off on an affiliated site.

Once there you would also have more freedom to do stuff we don't on the wiki. It would still be making use of the talents of current runescape wiki members but be free from #NOT.

Just a few thoughts King Runite1 20:05, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

You have a fair point about the freedom to do as we want in a wiki affiliate king runite, but is it possible to make a wiki jus for a news letter?FireyfoxTALK 07:36, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes it is. We have several sister projects such as RuneScape Fanon and RuneScape Clans.  You can request a wiki through the process outlined on that page.  Wikinews is an example of a well known news site that anyone can edit.  I really think that hosting this on a separate wiki is a far better way to keep everyone happy than creating a far more limited version of it on this wiki. Dtm142 19:52, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Just an Idea, I had fun with this :D, I doubt it will ever be used, just for fun.[[Image:Lunapic-122797083255703.gif|thumb|250px|This week on the RuneScape-Wikipedia-News-Paper.]] --Gertjaars 15:24, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

It's "RuneScape Wiki", not "RuneScape Wikipedia". 15:50, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Here's an example of an issue-to-be. From this example, 5/11 were periodicals that have to do with the wiki itself. 2/11 are interviews (which, in this case, were of wiki members). 3/11 were news relating to the game. 1/11 was a guide (just threw that one in there). Below, under the main periodicals, were the trivia (all about the wiki in this case), statistics, comics and classifieds, review of the market over the previous month, and poll pages.

If there is anything wrong with it that could use changing ("More interviewz pl0x", "More periodicals about teh wiki", etc.,) just say so. 02:01, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 5/11 isn't nearly enough wiki related content to go in a RuneScape namespace project. 10/11 or better would be the only acceptable amount. Dtm142 19:19, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No, that would ruin the purpose of having a RuneScape newspaper. If we wanted it to be all wiki-related, we'd put it all on RuneScape:News. 10/11 is really too many wiki-related articles. 19:57, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The topic for this discussion is "Wiki newspaper!", no? There is a big difference between a "wiki newspaper" and a "RuneScape newspaper". Dtm142 20:05, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

It seems a majority has supported the newspaper... if it is required why not take out the whole section about people? if it is needed really badly there can always be stuff about the mods or creators of runescape if somehow you could interview them. I would rather see some things get taken out now to make this newspaper available then to see it not come alive at all... if the newspaper is accepted someday when people are more tolerate and open minded we could add tons mroe stuff... God Of War 23:09, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * That would be a better idea. Even if there is a consensus to create the newspaper, it seems that many users are against interviews/tabloids.  But my main concern is that it isn't in the scope of the RuneScape Wiki or the RuneScape Wiki namespace and would be better off as its own project than as a limited portion of this one. Dtm142 00:09, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I titled this [now quite long] section as "Wiki newspaper!" because I more or less meant "Let's discuss about possibly having a newspaper on this wiki about the wiki and game!". RuneScape already has a newspaper, but, frankly, it stinks.
 * The general vibe I'm getting is 'make more of it about the site itself'. But as for 91% (or more) of the paper's contents being about the site itself... That's a rather high expectation. I agree that the paper should be informative about the wiki, but another strong point is that 'it would be nice just to kick back and read about things going on in RuneScape from a trustworthy source'. There's more that goes on in-game than what goes on on our humble (Dare we call it such?) fansite/enyclopedia/wiki.
 * I am not, though, saying we should have more periodicals about the game than periodicals about goings-on on this site. Something like 10:1 in a wiki-related:game-related ratio is overkill. Something like 1:1, 2:1 or even 4:1 would be more practical for making it an interesting read.
 * And here's another idea: To make it more "scope-friendly", interviews could be primarily done on community members, as seen in my hypothetical issue. But hey, if someone could somehow get an interview with King Andrew the Great [<-- R0flc0pt3r.], I think we would all not want to miss up such a moment. :D 02:54, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I think there is a fundamental lack of understanding of the rules of this Wikia here. This is an encyclopedia having to do with everything within the game of Runescape, to the exclusion of everything else. This means no original content. More precisely, you can not create articles or have interviews about individual players, regardless of who they are; any comics or stories are personal invented original content which can not be made here and |there is a wiki made expressly for that; any opinion or editorial pieces also can not be included since this is not a blog nor is it a soapbox. Moreover, the one and only way that something can be included within an article is if Jagex itself has spoken of it. Any speculation, regardless of how well founded or logical it may be also goes against the rules. Once again, the rules and scope of this Wikia makes it impossible for you to create a newspaper here. This is precisely the same situation as with Wikipedia and Wikinews. You will have to create your newspaper on a separate wiki or website or you will be violating the scope and breaking the fundamental rules and regulation of the RuneScape Wiki.-- 15:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't really understand this push to limit the scope of this wiki in such a manner. In looking at the "sister wikis" to this website, most of them are not doing very well and are struggling for content development.  I also don't see Wikia limiting the scope of what we are doing here, but rather groups of users who are trying to limit the scope of what this wiki is about.  As long as it is related to Runescape in some way, I hardly see this proposal about a game-specific newspaper developed side by side with the "encyclopedia" as anything but helpful to the wiki as a whole.


 * Comparing this to Wikipedia, one of the things that you need to keep in mind is how utterly huge Wikipedia has become. Creating the specialized sister projects is something useful as it gives a much smaller community the chance to work together without having the "Wikipedia" policies trip you up.  Still, I would assert that the Wikibooks & Wikinews communities are larger than what you find even on this RS Wiki.  The number of active users simply doesn't justify splitting up the community.


 * Some ground rules about this "newspaper" ought to be established including trying to maintain a neutral POV and avoiding editorializing in general, but there certainly is enough information that could be gathered together that a news journal could be started.... both about the wiki itself and "news" about the game.


 * Please don't create separate communities that are essentially "one-man band" projects. If the newspaper group seems to be healthy and could sustain itself independently, by all means let it go off to a separate site.  But I say we should be encouraging innovation in presenting content about Runescape and not restricting ourselves to just building an encyclopedia.  At the very least, let's use this wiki as an incubator for ideas and then let a healthy project be spun off instead of killing the idea while it is still developing.  --Robert Horning 17:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It's not a question of pushing to limit the scope but respecting the pre-existing scope. As I enumerated, nearly every aspect of the newspaper violates the fundamental rules of the wiki.  That is the problem and that is the reason it can not be.  It has nothing to do with the merits of the idea or the quality of the content of a possible newspaper.  It's that the newspaper would have to follow the "ground rules" of the wiki and the ground rules make it nearly impossible for it to exist.  And it's certainly not a question of assigning motives of people here stifling innovation.  As I noted in my support of the current article of the month here, I encourage people to go beyond the basic confines of a simple RuneScape encyclopedia.  But to reiterate once more, this newspaper would be a massive violation of several basic tenants of this wiki and innovative or not, can not exist here.


 * There are obviously several people passionate about this idea and as long as they work together and create a quality product, then there being on a sister site should be wholly irrelevant to the success of the newspaper. Moreover, not having to follow this wikis particular rules would encourage, rather than stifle that innovation that you believe is so important.-- 17:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The problem, at least as I see it, is that some of these policies you are quoting here are very arbitrary and certainly don't seem to have the widespread support that you think they have. To repeat what was mentioned above, this is the Runescape Wiki, not the Runescape Wikipedia.  There is no rational reason to be pushing off legitimate projects that are in support of the Runescape game playing community.


 * I also disagree that the fundamental ground rules of this wiki necessarily prohibit this sort of project, although apparently both you and I disagree on what those fundamental ground rules necessarily might be. I do believe that an objective and neutral "digital newspaper" could be created and co-exist on this wiki.


 * You also haven't addressed the fact that the other "sister wikis" really are quite dismal in terms of their administrative support in terms of blocking known vandals, having a reasonable supply of administrators to safeguard the content, and dealing with basic infrastructure requirements... not to mention a basic community willing to create new content. I am asserting that it is premature to take the core group of individuals who want to create this "newspaper" concept and to push them out into forming their own separate and distinct community... which is exactly what forcing them onto an independent wiki does.  Forcing this concept off this wiki is essentially telling these folks who are trying to get this idea going that they are doomed to failure.


 * I guess what I'm asking here is to "bend" the "rules" slightly to allow this concept to exist. Put some restrictions on the newspaper in terms of objectivity and neutrality that would likely help out the newspaper in the long run anyway.  At least let the project operate under a provisional status and if there appears to be a strong community that will sustain itself independently... at that point encourage them to set up a separate website.  We can certainly debate the finer points of what "policies" and "features" ought to be established in such a "newspaper", but you are apparently dismissing out of hand completely the entire notion without even giving it a chance at all.


 * BTW, from long experience in working with wiki communities, the idea of a provisional status project building up a community and then going off on its own has been incredibly more successful than having start-up concepts immediately pushed off onto their own wikis. Examples of this are far too many for me to go into right now, but I can give examples of both successful projects and failures to back this up.  --Robert Horning 11:12, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

chia why not take out the contreversial topics that some people currently dont want? dtm142 is somewhat agreeing with me that its a much better idea to take them out now and someday in the future when people are tolerant or want it are added. I dont think a whole new wiki is needed for the newspaper. But if the idea does work and becomes popular maybe someday it could be its own wiki. But for the time being it should happen... my suggestion is get the 9/10 instead of nothing... just for the time being... maybe there could be a way to not implement some rules on the newspaper? maybe if it was checked by a few sysops or a crat to see it wasnt offensive or was not neutral it could work... cooperation will be the key to the newspaper coming to "life" God Of War 06:09, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Support: - I think it would be a good change, and add a lot to the Wiki, and give a chance to educate people about the Wiki and RuneScape. Jediadam4 17:11, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Oppose Per DTM. We aren't here to entertain and give e-fame to "famous players" or talk about clans and what dropped on a slayer mission. This might go over better in the RuneScape Clans Wiki. 17:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Solution - Well it looks like there are two diametrically opposed groups in regards to this issue and I doubt that further debate would do anything except lead to further entrenchment. Strictly speaking, this means that there is a lack of consensus and the project should not go ahead. But. I've been thinking of this situation and trying to come up with a practical solution that all sides would find at the very least acceptable and I believe I have found one.

The purpose of the Yew Grove is to discuss policy. Though it's creation does have many policy implications as I myself have enumerated, we are dealing fundamentally with the concept of creating a new project. This means that the correct place to create and discuss the project is in the WikiGuild. Here, a more open and Socratic atmosphere is present to better discuss the envergure of the project. Now, an argument has been made by the supporters of this project that it's existence would transcendentally ameliorate the wiki and would avoid any serious violations of the rules. If there is a good faith declaration by those supporting the project that it could be successful and follow policy, we should give them the opportunity to prove themselves.

Therefore, Chiafriend12, since you are the one that brought forth this idea, create a "Proposal" in the WikiGuild. Those of you who support this idea, sign on, discuss and plan out the paper. Once you have finalized the scope and design of the project, present it to us. If it is fundamentally egregiously constructed or massively violates the rules, there won't be a consensus and it won't be allowed on the site (basically, where we are right now). If there are minor or moderate problems, then there would be discussions as to how to curb, avoid or eliminate them. And if your project does manage to follow policy or only has technical violations who's presence betters the wiki, as you say you believe would be the case, then this site will have a great new project that ameliorates this site and everyone will be happy. So the proverbial ball is in your court, denizen journalists. Once Chia creates the proposal, it's time for you all to get to work and create a project who's ultimate goal will be the betterment of this wiki. Good luck.-- 02:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You don't need to bold my name just so I will notice it. But, you have a point. Letting us actually have time to discuss what it would be like without people trying to kill it off would actually get us somewhere. The WikiGuild tends to not gain attention, though. 03:30, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Support I think this could be a good idea. I could help with the logos, templates and other things using photoshop, illustrator and some others.-- 14:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Template:Navbox
There are many uncategorised templates in Special:UncategorizedTemplates (about 500+ templates; excluding signatures).

As this wiki contains lots of navigation box templates (Navbox templates), I would like to propose the use of Template:Navbox to all existing navbox templates, similar to the way most Userboxes use Template:Userbox.

The purpose of this template is "to standardise certain attributes of all navigation boxes, for example, their colours and other CSS attributes." Certain features, such as Javascript collapsing, will be added in the future. (Javascript collapsing is available in Wikipedia's Navbox templates.) By using this template, these features can be implemented much quicker and easier than editing each template separately. In addition to that, we would be able to add the navbox templates to Category:Navigational templates automatically.

This template project was started by Skill in April 2008, but was never implemented. So, should we proceed with it? I've added some examples of its usage in the documentation page. If this project gets the go-ahead, then users who are familiar with templates may use this template for future navbox templates, and edit the existing templates. 17:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I think this would be cool; I just changed the "toccolours" class to "navbox" and changed the width option.--Richardtalk 18:35, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Shall I proceed with this? It is really frustrating when a user always reverts all the changes I make to a template using the Navbox template.   15:15, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I too have noticed the same and don't really know how to proceed with regards to the recurring uncommented reversions. It's possible that template nesting is just a little more abstract than some might be comfortable with, however I really feel that this is the way to go to get a consistent look and feel across the wiki. 17:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * On a related note, i am biased towards auto widths, however i recognise that that for auto to be the default width there needs to be a way to make multiple navbox templates on a single article size consistently up to the largest ones size (javascript?). 17:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd go for 100% widths as it is in Wikipedia. Auto-widths will make the templates inconsistent (across the wiki) if you ask me. Some templates have 40% and 70%, while others will require close to 100% width. Even if we choose to make the templates follow the largest width for the particular page (i.e. the Prayer article) using JavaScript and whatnot, the template width will be different for other articles. If we're going to standardise the templates, why not standardise the widths as well? Just an opinion. 15:07, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I've added the "collapsible" function to the template. This function adds the "show/hide" link to a template.  The default is currently set to "show".  When you try "hiding" an auto-width template, the template "shrinks" too much. =O  Try it (in the documentation page)... Which is why I think Wikipedia uses 100% width.   16:12, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Well if following Wikipedia's style is so important then we have a lot to change. for instance using pipe characters as separator's (which forces us to use the ! template). But more important would be putting group titles on the side rather than top and centred (which is quite a waste of vertical space. Vertical space as you know is the more scare of any screen's dimensions (regardless if its a 4x3 aspect ratio or 16x9). Additionally the ability for subgroups would be very helpful for larger navigations boxes.  here's an example of the sort of navbox that i think could suit us well:



Even better would be the ability to have multi levels of title nesting. Imagine a nav box that was called "armour" the three main groups are of course melee, range, and magic, and under each of those three would be chest armour, leg armour, head armour, specific to the armour type (e.g., coif). that would look like this:



At the very least i feel that putting titles on the left with the list of links immediately to the right of the title is the way to go for 100% width nav templates. As it is now small templates have slews of white space on both sides, if we at least contain the white space on one side it will give a lot more consistent look and feel if 100% is to be defacto. As for inconsistent sizes with auto i think those would matter little if the text were on the left like wikipedia (which you've mentioned numerous times as the justification for 100% width). 19:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I think auto-widths is better than 100% width, 100% width makes the template look too long. Naikiw 11:46, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Improved version
This is how the navigation template will look if it is left-aligned with 100% width. I haven't looked into sub-grouping yet, but I think this will cover most templates... 19:01, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Sign me up for this version, looks great. 05:18, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I like the navboxes. But why does   have to be put on all the navbox talk pages? I thought we could make the "d" only show up if the talk page existed.  15:15, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for forumadminship
Okay, since, with InstantWinston's RfA, we now seem to be having forumadminship requests, I propose a third category of the "Requests for..." pages: forumadminship. Just like with RfBs, they will still fall under the RfA page, but will have the option to instead have forumadminship. A draft of the proposed page is here. Butterman62 (talk) 21:47, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No, i like it the way it is now, Sysop = sysop. Forum or wiki. Why should we split it..? 10:18, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Because we already have, in InstantWinston's RfA already. We already have those requests; I just propose that we have a seperate category for them. And I mean requests for full forumadminship. If someone is a sysop, it only gives them forum modship. Butterman62 (talk) 11:27, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I would agree that we need to separate it out, if only to avoid the confusion that we saw with InstantWinston's RfA. We also need some way of getting the attention of the people on the forums, since it affects them most. I know admins are also forum admins, but most of them do not do so. Someone who wants to be purely a forum admin will no doubt be active on the forums, so it would be nice that for such a position, there would have to be a standard forum post to let everyone on the forums know. Hurston 13:58, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, how I think it works (and is really why we need a Requests for forumadmin page), is that if a person is sysopped, they get forum modship. Forum adminship, however, does not need sysopping. Forumadmins actually have more abilities than forum mods, so I think InstantWinston will be made a forumadmin. But yeah, I just want to avoid the confusion. Also, we need a really good guide on the forums, which explains all the user groups and stuff. Butterman62 (talk) 21:47, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

This makes a lot of sense. Had Instants RFA been for forums only from the first day, it would have passed a couple weeks ago most likely. And setting a policy now could be a great benefit as other forum users may start thinking of doing the same thing also.--Degenret01 10:59, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Support i support your idea only instead of making a new section why not just do it in the forums? If its something about the forums the decision should be made there. but for this to work the forum would need to be out of beta and have a rank system. Maybe you should be a candidate for one you have a lot of good ideas and strong community support. God Of War 06:38, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I kinda like how only bureaucrats get forumadmin, because if you're a sysop on the wiki, you're automatically a forum moderator. The only extra stuff you get with forum admin is the ability to arrange and add/remove different forums/sections. -- 23:41, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

This has already been discussed here, FYI. 71.246.119.3 22:08, 20 November 2008 (UTC)


 * That topic is not the same thing. The topic you linked was about whether there should be additional forum groups in the first place. Since that's already happened, this topic is just to propose a seperate rfa category for them.

People, this is not a request to put additional forum groups in or whether we should have more forumadmins. Those topics have already been done with. This topic is just to create a seperate category for them. Butterman62 (talk) 23:16, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Support, it would certainly be more efficient and cleaner to simply create a seperate category for this in order to avoid the confusion of Instant's RfA. I disagree with the forums being the place for this to occur; however, is it not only easier to keep track of a page history on the wiki but more honest. I'll elaborate, on on the forums there is no edit history and although there is a deletion history of who deleted what thread, there is currently no way to tell if a post on a thread has been deleted or who deleted it (not that I'm saying anyone would do this, but for the sake of keeping it as honest a process as possible it should remain on the wiki.)-- 19:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Exchange prices
OK I took some time to put together a solution to updating Exchange prices almost automatically:

Question: In an ideal world how often should they be updated? I'm going for daily at the moment.
 * Daily sounds right IMO.--Richardtalk 18:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Bot flag
If someone wants to mark my account as a bot account, please do. All GE price updates are marked as minor as it is.
 * Done!--Richardtalk 18:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Exceptions;help needed
There are some 3-400 items I can't update at the moment. Help is needed fixging these up.

Most need an item ID adding - this can be found by looking the item up on Jagex's GE database and on the page specific to that item the ID number is in the URL.

There is a list Category:Exchange items with no ID and the talk page has the GE names for all GE items with their ID number Category talk:Exchange items with no ID

Items with other problems will also tend to show up at Category:Grand Exchange by date updated I developed this some time ago to assist with manual updates.

Rich Farmbrough, 15:14 21 November 2008 (GMT).


 * Ok, I will try to add some item ids this weekend. - TehKittyCat 22:41, 5 December 2008 (UTC).


 * All finished, the only remaining ones with no item id are ones for speedy deletion. - TehKittyCat 18:08, 6 December 2008 (UTC).


 * All of the pages in there have been deleted or fixed now. - TehKittyCat 20:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC).

Update to updates
I've modified the process to only write changes in the normal course of events. The current run needs to complete, thenceforward all prices will be updated only if they change or on Wednesday or Saturday (this is partly to pick up new/fixed items). Rich Farmbrough, 18:31 21 November 2008 (GMT).
 * Now my kitty curiosity is tingly, where is the base of operations of "the process"? 18:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Where? On my desktop. I suck the data from Jagex, compare with the previous and make a list of things to change, then cycle through the GE items and change them. Rich Farmbrough, 16:05 22 November 2008 (GMT).

Shared help
Does shared help sound beneficial to this wiki? On the surface it seems ideal for nearly any and every wiki. Let's implement this unless there are reasons not to. 17:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah I've seen it on a few wikis; it's pretty sweet. We just need to delete the local help pages.--Richardtalk 17:55, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Or move them temporarily to be edited back into the shared help, right? 18:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Shared help uses the help pages at Wikia Help, so there's not much of a need for local help pages. Though we can still keep them it sounds like, according to Help:Shared Help.--Richardtalk 18:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)



Bureaucrats
It seems we are down to a single active 'crat, Dtm142. Now would be a good time to elect another. As being a 'crat is not for everyone, these SHOULD be self nominations. Whilst I can't speak for anyone else, I'm looking for a long-standing admin who is calm, active on the wiki and active in the community. What do other people look for in a 'crat? Anyone fancy putting a good foot forward? 10:05, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I support of motion of having another 'crat. Several other 'crats have been inactive for a while, and I wouldn't mind seeing another active 'crat for this wiki.   13:04, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * "long-standing admin who is calm, active on the wiki and active in the community"-Unfortunately even that seems to be becoming harder to find (not so much the level-headed part, but the long standing) many of our admins have lapsed into inactivity and the majority of those active, though good at their jobs, are still quite new in retrospect.-- 15:55, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll do it. Yes, please go for it! Looking at RS:ADMIN, our three oldest active admins are Chiafriend12, Amaurice, and Stinkowing. I might have missed some, but I'd support a self-nom for any of them *nudge* . 16:05, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * He he, actually I quite like the sound of either Hurston or Amaurice as 'crats.-- 16:08, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm... I would really want Karlis to be a crat, but, again, he's a bit new. Butterman62 (talk) 16:43, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Whoever is nominated for b'crat must have a deep understanding of policy and most show that he or she is unflappable and even-handed and stays cool, calm and collected in tense situations.-- 17:26, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * While I would normally step forward for something like this, I'm afraid I'm not cut out for the job. I have been learning to stay calm under pressure since Halloween, so maybe this would be a viable chance for me to prove my maturity. But regardless of the circumstances, I personally think that this would make me feel a bit unnerved, since I'm known for my hyperactivity. As for activity on the Wiki, however, I'm actually willing to learn new things that could help the wiki (like some of the terminology I don't currently understand), so that may be a plus.
 * In fact, would it be a good idea for me to try a self-nomination for 'cratship so that I could see what areas of wiki-wisdom I need to hear? (edit: and how do I make a RfB-nomination? The same way as an RfA?)

Go for it, Stinko. Same as RFA, except the box on the main RFA page that links to your RFB has "yes" instead of "no" under "bureaucrat". 22:01, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Does it have to be a self-nomination? -- 20:59, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No, I believe they just would prefer to see a person step up and say their ready, rather than have another do it for them. (Though it really has no bearing on my own judgement).-- 02:25, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It is not necessary for it to be a self-nomination, but the reason that I suggested this is because it shouldn't be taken on lightly, and the person has to want to do it. If you want to nominate someone, I would suggest at the very least talking to them first and making sure that they would accept the nomination. 09:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


 * We will probably need at least 2 or 3 more crats. This wiki really needs more crats. One just isn't cutting it. I think Chia or Amaurice would make great crats. Amaurice especially since I see him as being the most mature and responsible person on this wiki. [[image:Prayer.gif |25px]] Sir Lenehan [[image:smite.PNG|25px]] 05:46, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I would agree with 2 more. A total of 3 active 'crats would be a good number to have. 09:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Category: Images needing to be cropped
I think we need a category of Images needing to be cropped because theres so many uncropped images. I came up with a template that could be used: <div class="boilerplate metadata" id="jpeg" style="margin: 0 5%; padding: 0 7px 7px 7px; background: #EFEFFF; border: 1px solid #9F9FFF; text-align: left; font-size:95%;">

It would be a whole lot easier to find uncropped images. Anyone agree? -- 16:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks nice. You said "many".. roughly, how many are there? 17:22, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Im not sure. I bet there's quite a few, though. Click the random article a few times. My guess is 1 in every 15 images is uncropped. With thousands of images, thats actually quite a lot. Theres no wy to know for sure because we don't have this category -- 22:04, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Image:Glitchinbank.jpg|Here is an example of an uncropped image. It makes you want to puke, doesn't it? -- 22:19, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * There are an incredible number of detail item images (copied from the GE DB) that have lots of unnecessary white space around them causing the text in the articles to flow awkwardly around them. With that being the style (having a detail image in the upper left corner, while the inventory image is in the infobox) I have to agree this template is a good addition to the roster, especially for those that aren't comfortable editing images. 05:05, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

New Wiki theme for 2009
I was just thinking..

The year 2009 is approaching quite fast, and there had been talks about changing the Wiki theme a couple of months back.

Shall we organise a "competition" (for lack of a better term) to design a new theme for this wiki? We have about  days to go till the new year.

p.s. We have 2 main skins which may need to be updated: Monobook and the default skin. 09:05, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I like that idea. The wiki really needs a unique theme, and some people here really have the skills to make a good one. 23:58, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Some are already at RuneScape:Theme.--Richardtalk 22:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Removal of two item disambiguation pages
It's a simple idea and I just wish to see if there is a general consensus in support of it. Basically, we remove those disambiguation pages with two items, redirect it to the most likely item and insert on that articles page "X redirects here. For Y, see Z". It's faster and saves one extra click for most people and for the others, it's the same amount of clicks.-- 17:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Strong Support - Per Diberville. I've always hated two item disambiguation pages. Most of them have one item that would be searched more than the other, so it's annoying having to wait for both pages to load. 21:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Support Better to have a 50% chance of having to click again to find the article you wanted instead of 100%. 02:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Support - That makes sense, I assume you already have a few in mind. 09:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment - Don't go nuts on this concept and make it a life mission to kill every single one of these pages in this wiki, but I don't see anything wrong with eliminating disambiguation pages like is being suggested here. Use common sense here as well. I don't see why a "vote" on this really has to take place either.... just do it! This is something easily reversed and doesn't require any administrative assistance... in other words, any regular contributor to this wiki can perform these actions. --Robert Horning 12:17, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well there is no "vote" since the wiki is not a democracy. However, history has demonstrated such as in the "Tally" fiasco that these types of small changes can lead to considerable trouble by some users so I'm nipping this possible problem in the bud by getting a general consensus before starting.-- 15:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I generally support this idea, however care should be taken to ensure that a disambigulation that has only two items is not lacking a tertiary prior to conversion. 02:22, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

New Category for "Best Armour"
We need to have a new category for "Best Armour", we have 30(out of the 49 pages at the time of this writing) pages that need a category(Special:UncategorizedPages). I can not think of a good name for this category, but it would be a sub-category of "Armour". These pages are included in Armour. - TehKittyCat 02:11, 7 December 2008 (UTC).

The Pages in Question

 * 1) Armour/FTP Magic attack
 * 2) Armour/FTP Magic defence
 * 3) Armour/FTP Melee attack
 * 4) Armour/FTP Melee defence
 * 5) Armour/FTP Prayer
 * 6) Armour/FTP Ranged attack
 * 7) Armour/FTP Ranged defence
 * 8) Armour/FTP Strength
 * 9) Armour/Magic armour
 * 10) Armour/Magic attack
 * 11) Armour/Magic defence
 * 12) Armour/Melee armour
 * 13) Armour/Melee attack
 * 14) Armour/Melee defence
 * 15) Armour/Prayer
 * 16) Armour/Ranged armour
 * 17) Armour/Ranged attack
 * 18) Armour/Ranged defence
 * 19) Armour/Strength
 * 20) Armour/Summoning defence

Possible Names(Suggest them here)

 * 1) Best Armour in the Game - TehKittyCat 02:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC).