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]].
 * 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)

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.


 * 15:07, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I like the favicon, except that it is kind of blurry. [[Image:Wiki favicon list.PNG|How the new favicon shows up on the favorites list.]] 12:48, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Images and animations
One thing has been bothering me recently. I've noticed that images and animations of a single player are appearing all over the wiki at astronomical pace. It deja vu all over again, as this issue was debated in July. See the link below for the thread.
 * RuneScape:Yew Grove/Archive4

Some of the things that clearly bothers me:
 * Replacing perfectly good HD images - with the same animated version of the player
 * Overemphasis of the player in the image - especially since all the images have the same costume. (This is the reason of my deja vu.)
 * Animations are used where images would be perfectly fine - Used for item articles (i.e. players wearing a certain armour/costume.)
 * Creating new images, instead of uploading newer versions of the images. - This creates a lot of "orphaned images".
 * Using a lot of animations clearly slows down the load time. This is because animations are generally larger in terms of size, compared to its still images.  Quest articles are bogged down when there is a lot of animations.

This is what I think should be the case:
 * Replacing old images (i.e. pre-HD) with HD images (not animations).
 * Uploading the image into the same filename (i.e upload a newer version of the image), instead of creating a new one and changing the link within the article.
 * Use of animations only where it is required. (i.e. where action is involved, not when the player is displaying the Worn Equipment, Equipment stats, etc.)
 * For example, animations may be permitted for:
 * Fight sequences.
 * For use in templates.
 * Sequence of actions that explains something, and is important (i.e. casting a Magic spell, a Spinner exploding.)
 * Bad examples:
 * Non-player characters (i.e. Ticket vendor bouncing, Ringmaster bowing, etc.)
 * A player just standing at a location (i.e. in quest-related locations).
 * A player doing nothing important (i.e. juggling).
 * A player "rotating" in the Worn Equipment interface.

I'm assuming good faith here, but if this trend that I'm seeing is not stopped, I won't be amazed if all images within this wiki is replaced with animations of this person. I have nothing against this person, but I like variety and seeing this person in the same costume all over this wiki is definitely not variation, it is repetition. There are positive contributions, but clearly the negative outweighs the positive. 07:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * This depends on which person you are talking about. If it the one in the Fire Cape, then we're replacing her. All of those images are pre-HD. If you're talking about one in the Bomber Gear, he's doing all the replacing. While I agree with your point I think you're being a little harsh. I'm all for banning the "rotating" images, and you don't need a .gif for a location spot (unless it's skill-related or a minigame). But NPCs should have animations, so long as they are doing something besides standing around. 22:26, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The one in the bowman hat is Tarikochi and the one in the bomber outfit is TEbuddy. I like what you're saying that we don't need certain gifs. like a monster just standing in a treasure room, but I don't think there needs to be a wide diversity in the characters in a gif. I think whoever wants to upload a gif. they can, and I don't care if it is the same 4 guys doing all the gifs. There is nothing wrong with repetition. -- 04:00, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Many of our contributors only have dial up internet, and/or older computers. If the pic does not require animation we need to leave it out. Being thoughtful of others is not a crime. And variety adds more color and life to the wiki. Since we could never get a consensus on this, just go ahead and change any pic you don't like. What the hell, its what hes doing anyhow.--Degenret01 05:53, 13 September 2008 (UTC)


 * People getting all up in arms about stupid stuff like this is what made me contribute less to this wiki. A gif image gives more detail than a still image ever can, and the nature of Runescape's graphics allow them to be easily made. Not only that, but whats with all the hate? If you even cared to glance at my user page, you will see a list of every image I have uploaded or replaced. Very few of these images are bad quality, or pointless. I find it pretty disturbing that I am being personally insulted because of a certain users opinion. Dialup users do not make up a majority of this wiki's internet traffic. Making pages more friendly to them is something we should do just as a courtesy, it should not be our priority. Even some of the more complex gifs usually don't use more than 500kb of storage space. On a residential dsl connection which the majority of internet users have, an image of that size would load instantly. There are an excess amount of gif animations, and I agree that having pointless ones like a monster standing in a treasure room are a waste of time and storage space. I'm not a mindless gif replacing zombie whose goal is to spread the revolutionary bomber uniform to everyones monitors. Capturing these images can be very difficult and time consuming, its not something as simple as taking a normal screenshot, and because of that I don't waste my time.

My biggest problem with this is that users are complaining about a useful resource that they themselves are not willing to replace, yet they feel it necessary to place limitations and guidelines on it that drive away new users interested in it, and make it harder for the people who already make the images to get them placed on the wiki. TEbuddy 05:10, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a good example of somewhere to replace some of Tarikochi's images would be on the Skill cape emote page. They are all in low detail mode and none of them even show the hood. I suggest recreating all the skillcape emote to a certain width specification (perhaps keeping the 200px width as they are now) in HD with anti alising and wearing relevant clothing. For example, the fishing emote would look good wearing blue or perhaps wearing pirate clothing. The woodcutting would look good with the user wearing lumberjack clothing (see below for an example I made).
 * http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/420/woodcutskillcape2er8.gif
 * By having unique looks for each skillcape it would give the page a bit more of a fresh look rather than looking so repetetive. I have the following level 99's, str, att, fish, cook, fletch, woodcutting. If noone objects i might start updating the skillcape animations of the ones I have this week. -- 14:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Take a look at the Skillcape (emote) page now I added a few as an example. Will make a fletching and strength animation if people approve. Otherwise revert back to the old animations. -- 18:00, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Nice, I like it. I support the idea of having unique looks for images.  The look must suit the subject of the image (i.e. relevant clothing).  However, the animations are quite slow to load.. is that the smallest size you can manage with animations?  I'm not familiar with animations, educate me.  18:13, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The animations I did are smaller in file size than the old ones. The other ones were fast to load because they were cached probably. When you go to the page now they will load nice and fast. -- 18:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I haven't read this whole thing, so go ahead and kill me if I bring up something someone already brought up, but it seems to me that one of the things you're suggesting is that users should only upload images and animations in HD? 20:20, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Its got nothing to do with the quality or size of the animations, just the sheer number of them. It will happen the same with too many images on one page. We do need new animations, but perhaps with that change we should do as other gaming wikis have done and use a text link to link to the animation, or a single still frame that links to the full animation. I'm on a residential dsl connection and it takes upwards of 20 seconds to load every animation fully on the page. [[Image:Gnomegoggleswithcap.png|25px]]TEbuddy 21:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Ilyas, no. I never stated users should ONLY upload images and animations in HD. I stated that animations be used only where it is required. (Every single image doesn't have to be an animation.) Another thing I mentioned is: HD images should NOT be replaced with another HD image, or with an animation, unnecessarily. Basically, that's the summary of this discussion. 06:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I agree with you about the rotating inventory image. I uploaded the one for the Lumberjack clothing because it replaced one that was already there but there isnt really a need for it to be animated and would probably be better as a static image as more colour detail is preserved. Perhaps in the future we should refrain from creating these kinds of images where a user is just holding one item.


 * I do feel though that all NEW images should be created in HD to reflect RuneScape as Jagex like to show to others. If possible the images should be taken with anti-aliasing ON.


 * As for the skillcape emote page, that will always be slow to load initially but such is the nature of the page, it's meant to showcase all the animations for the emotes. People should expect to wait a little longer for the page to load. I agree with Tebubdy about dialup users being in the minority, all the research suggests that dialup users make up a very small proportion of users on the internet these days. Quest guides however should be relatively free of animations unless neccesary so preserve fast loading times for all users.


 * HD animations should only be replaced by other HD animations if the new image is more optimised or has anti aliasing etc. People should not be replacing HD images just so they can show their own character in the image. I think this is common sense, but it is happening and should be clarified.


 * Where possible the animations should show the character in relevant attire and not have the same look in all animation. I have tried to create a nice unique look in each of the skillcape animations I have made to steer away from the samey look that Taro did that can easily get boring.-- 09:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * To elaborate something i just thought of. Perhaps an animated image might look good for a full set of something such as Lumberjack clothing or Granite equipment or Bandos armour (bad example as there should not be two seperate images with/without boots) but static images should be kept for individual items like is shown on Granite body. Places innapropriate for animated images probably are Bandos boots and Magic secateurs which shows off the persons character more than the item itself. Perhaps single item images should be kept static and only full sets or outfits should be animated? -- 12:13, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * A little dissapointed at the lack of response from people... -- 07:48, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, you're right. I'm kinda new in this wiki, so I hope I'm not offending anyone, but I've noticed that people here do not seem interested in these type of things.  As quoted by Degenret (see above), "just go ahead and change any pic you don't like."  16:01, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I have to confess that I get tired of seeing the same character repeatedly throughout the wiki. Variety, as they say, is the spice of life. Additionally I have to agree that way too many images are needless animations that add virtually nothing to the image at hand. Anyone who has ever played has seen a character just standing there.
 * Would a change of costume be too much to ask? Really now?
 * These images are an utterly worthless waste of bandwidth in my opinion and I'm referring more to mine and other wiki visitors and not just of Wikia. 17:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * "I do feel though that all NEW images should be created in HD to reflect RuneScape as Jagex like to show to others. If possible the images should be taken with anti-aliasing ON." - Only the very newest computers can run HD, and RuneScape is aimed at people with low end computers, so it would be wrong to make it so new images may only be uploaded in HD. 17:50, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with HD, however, have you tried putting transparency on an anti-aliased image? If you're proposing that we forgo transparency, then by all means, yes antialiasing should be part of the image, additionally it could look good with animated images (if the image format supported more than 255 colours at least in concerns to those many coloured images).
 * Note however that your proposal to cease using transparency should be put into a new topic. 08:05, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd forgotten about transparency tbh. Perhaps anti aliasing only for animations and images which do not require transparency. I disagree with needing a top computer to have AA tho because mine is over a year old and isn't that great and runs anti aliasing with no problems at all. -- 16:28, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * A year old computer is a very new computer, and I said that you need a top computer to play HD, not to use AA. 19:18, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I would still disagree. An optimised computer will run HD even if its many years old. My work laptop which is at least 4 years old plays hd (without aa) no problems. -- 22:18, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * My point is RS is aimed at people with low end computers (and btw, I have a four year old computer and it can't run HD, so it has nothing to do with how old the computer is, it's just that only very new computers, with a few exceptions, can handle HD) and it would be wrong to just cut out the image uploading rights of probably one third or even one half of the wiki. 22:46, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It would? If one user can upload images that are of higher quality than another, then we obviously use the higher quality image. There is no need to maintain support for new non-HD images when we have many users who could take HD ones. That said, we don't need to enforce a "delete on sight" policy for new low-detail images, either—it's better to have a low-detail image than none at all. Skill 23:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Going back to the original topic, I do think animations have been somewhat overused as of late. There are some cases in which the extra bandwidth and loading time required for an animation is excessive compared to the additional information conveyed by it, and these animations should probably be replaced by still images. However, in just as many instances the animation shows the user a significantly greater perspective than a still image would, and these animations should be embraced. For this reason, it is generally a bad idea to place sweeping restrictions on animation content.

In the past, it has been suggested by some users that the lack of variety in animation characters is actually a positive rather than something to be avoided. This is almost certainly incorrect in my view. If the animations happen to depict a small number of distinct characters by coincidence and they are the highest quality available, there is no need to make arbitrary restrictions in the name of variety. On the other hand, the idea that we should deliberately attempt to make all animations similar for reasons of "consistency" is flawed. I would much rather see variety in the characters shown than the same character over and over, and it's likely that many other users share this aspect of my opinion. My two cents. Skill 23:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * A non-HD image is surely better than no image at all but people should not worry about overwriting someone elses image and getting shouted at if they are replacing with a higher quality picture. -- 08:38, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't kill me if I say something stupid here, as I didn't really read everything above.
 * I am one of the users that appreciates Tarikochi's and TEbuddy's animations. But I am also a user who at least wishes they would mix it up a little on their outfit. Seeing Tari’s “leaf” (I KNOW it’s a bowman hat, ‘kay?) and her fire cape is getting extremely old…and fast. When Total was here under the name of Daedryon, he suggested a VERY ridiculous outfit for everyone to wear-3rd age melee armor. Not only is this re-presenting the problem at hand by forcing EVERYONE to get it, but it’s also crazy expensive armor; only the richest players would be able to buy the full set, with the dumbest actually using it in their animations, mainly because there’s really nothing specific (animation-wise) to 3rd age.
 * I saw a suggestion that claimed we should try to wear colors and outfits that “match” the animation, and if you HAVE the means to make it better, go for it. Red/orange/yellow clothing would work for the Firemaking capes emote, for example, and if you happen to have an Inferno Adze, then by all means if you think it’ll make the animation look better, try it. I don’t know what else to say, now…
 * Noone is thanking poor old Mercifull for making the new HD skillcape emotes :( lol -- 21:14, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Adressing the issue of non-HD images, I created a template and a :Category:Low detail images|category that I believe well help speed the replacement of older images (just as the transparency and JPEG templates and categories have.)  00:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * for a perfect example of useless replacement of images with animations- seethe Glitch page, under the "Invisibility Glitch" section, you will see that hapi removed a whole gallery of perfectly good images and replaced them with a single animation featuring (you guessed it) himself!!!  This really ticks me off- there was absolutely no reason for this to be done, the images were in high detail, taken from good angles, and frankly, they showed the glitch better than the animation does.  Even the Image/media policy says that "images should not be used in articles", but here it is, hapi replacing images for no reason other than to plaster his character's face on every page of the wiki!!!  whew...  20:53, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Does this make it *cough* illegal *cough* to upload low detail images? If it does you can expect me to break the wiki rules for the first time =P. 21:00, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I just think people think that high detail looks better, i see no reason to "outlaw" standard detail, but i think that people should not be replacing perfectly good images with overkill animation for no reason at all like hapi has repeatedly done! 21:09, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I never said anything about replacing images with animations, I'm just addressing the extreme hatred towards standard detail images. 21:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * To me, i feel that their one in the same. people don't replace the standard detail images because they look bad, they replace them so that they have a shot at getting their characters picture on the wiki, and that's a problem, we need a way to remove that motivation so that if a picture aint broke, then there will be no need to fix it.  21:18, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That's true, but it's a good thing to replace standard with high, just not an image with an animations when not needed. That motivation is a good thing but it's driving people to the point where they put the same character with the same outfit in half of the wiki's images, even when doing something completely unrelated to the subject. 21:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Couldn't have said it better myself! 21:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Ahem... Don't tar us all with the same brush please. With the exception of my pink hair not a single image or animation that I have uploaded showed off my own character in costume. Also I dont think there is a hatred of standard detail images but they should be replaced by high detail images where possible. -- 13:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think they meant Hapi, but I might be wrong. 13:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * your right az, we here talking about hapi, and I don't really mind that he looks the same in every picture, its when he removes perfectly good pictures and replaces them with his animations that I have a problem. 00:08, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I will probably make a few more skillcape animations this week. I will try to make my character a little bigger too like the farming and skillcape animations and re-do the other ones I made -- 07:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


 * About animations displaying a player "rotating" in the Worn Equipment interface, my personal opinion is like Mercifull stated before, it is fine for a whole set of armor, but not for a single piece of equipment. And I think the rotating picture should only be displayed on the set page. Also, I don't think replacing a rotating animation with a static picture of bad gif quality (see Image:Ghostly_and_Shadow_Sword.gif history) is the solution to improve the wiki. A good way to reduce Equipment interface animation file size I think would be to speed up the animations up to 4x, and then adding delay between images (see Ringmaster_costume, the 78 KB file in history is 8x normal speed and a bit too fast). -- 05:52, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed the speed, file size increased.. 07:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I was not really asking for a fix, but was suggesting a downsized prototype with less fluid animation, but still shows all around. Better than replacing animated gifs with low quality non-animated gifs if you ask me. 16:22, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree that the same character being showed over and over again is just plain boring not to mention self-serving. And a big thank you goes to Mercifull for making images that does not just show off his character over and over and over again. Piscesvisionary 15:22, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I totally agree with changing things up. Even better is when the attire matches what is being presented. For example look at the one and three feather chompy hat articles, same style of character picture for each article but with variety. 00:39, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Its kind of funny. The people who want the animations changed aren't the ones making them, so nothing is being changed. [[Image:Gnomegoggleswithcap.png|25px]]TEbuddy 06:57, 30 October 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)

.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)

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)

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)

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)

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?

Another forumadmin
I think it is time that we need another forumadmin, because right now we only have one, and that's not enough because one isn't on 24/7, and people need to check each other (quite a few complaints about that recently).

To do this, I think we should just either make all current bureaucrats forumadmins (my not-so-good idea), or have a Requests for forumadmin page, which could take place either here on the wiki or in the forums (maybe even in its own topic), where candidates would see if they meet the criteria of being active, civil, etc.

So, what do you all think? Butterman62 (talk) 14:03, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Definitely, there needs to be some checks and balances with this sort of power. Perhaps use both of your ideas? Ie, all current 'crats have forum admin status but in the future if any more are needed then they could apply separately. 18:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * The problem is, only staff members can make people forumadmins. 19:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I really don't think this is necessary yet. All forumadmins can do that is greater than the power of a normal sysop is create stickies, announcements, global announcements, and polls.  Since the forums are currently in beta, we shouldn't go about adding more until they are fully developed. Dtm142 22:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I think there should be another forum admin. I like the idea Request for forum admin --Reyna jane 23:36, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I think there should be some sort of balance in power, especially after this (also see this). Dictatorship didn't work for the Nazis, it won't work for us. 16:09, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Why not just make all administrators forum admins?--Richardtalk 18:32, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That would make more sense, but only staff can create forumadmins. I personally think that all normal users should be able to create poll threads as well, if that's possible.  However, the forums are in beta and we do not yet know the full extent of forumadmin power. Dtm142 18:42, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps once the forums are out of beta, however I think we need another user to try and keep the balance on the forums. I've heard many people complain about the forums lately and after we get this sorted out, we're gong to have to at least consider some sort of checks and balances system where one person's decisions can not go unquestioned or unchallenged. 21:36, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * You do realize that any sysop can block and unblock on the forums... There is no power imbalance.  As I said earlier, the only additional things forumadmins can currently do that other sysops cannot do is create stickies, annoucements, global announcements, and polls.  As far as I know, I haven't done anything even remotely controversial related to the forumadmin powers. Dtm142 22:03, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Cough* I think we should keep that discussion for your talk page and off the yew grove, or else you'll just go ahead and immediately block me without warning (that's not a personal attack, you can't sue me, it was actually a joke because I said "lets keep it off the yew grove" and then kept... ok I ruined it... why am I still typing in parentheses?). But yeah that's true, but we should still have another person to help create a poll or sticky or something in case you're not there. 01:20, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Well... Do you have to be a forum admin to lock threads? I thought that anyone can except normal users that have not got any status... Is this true or do you have to be a fourm admin?
 * All sysops can lock threads. Dtm142 18:20, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Butterman this is a splendid idea! but not just another forum admin. I think 2 or 3 more. And when it comes to banning people from the forum the rules should be modified to allow the users to choose if the user is banned or not. Obviuosly if it is spam or Making Threats then they should be banned ASAP... this should be a main issue now. is the idea dead? or what is happenning with it? God Of War 01:21, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I noticed in your post DTM u did not want anymore admins, i cant for the life of me understand why. Beta or not this forum needs to be handled. Last night there was a post ( about dragons ) it so needed to go but no one around to lock it. You cant be here 24/7 i understand that but why not have a couple of people just to watch this forum.--Reyna jane 02:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Which is why there are 44 other sysops. As far as I'm concerned, no polls, stickies, announcements, or global announcements needed to be created or edited. Dtm142 23:03, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

i found a perfect solution to our forum problem! Moderators! They would be able to lock and edit.. not ban... this way dtm and all the administration and crats can be the ones checking that the mods are doing their job. This way it is not the responsibility of the administrators or crats to make sure something in the forum is acceptable or not. The administration would only be able to lock ban and edit in the forum if there is somthing like porno etc... or if a mod has gone in a rampage. I can go more into depth with better details if needed. good idea? bad idea? modify it change it  God Of War 16:34, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Honestly you guys what Dtm has been saying the whole time is that SYSOPS HAVE ALL THE POWERS GoW JUST LISTED! The only extra power admins have is the power to make stickies and such. 21:48, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

the sysops sometimes abuse there power... is it really that funny to see a sysop war over locking and unlocking while no one else can do a thing? What i mention is not to take the sysops powers away but to create a new entity. One which will be chosen in the forum for the purpose of monotiring editing and locking thats it... No banning or explaining rules. Admin is not on 24/7 there needs to be more regulation and checks of power. Admin/sysops have been messing around to much. Dtm has been doing his job but has leaned to include personal opinions ( this is what i think) also he is not on all the time and usually there is no one to monitor the forum at certain times of the day. God Of War 22:50, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It isn't technically possible to do that. If there was consensus to do so, it should be done.  But since I'm not a Wikia developer, I can't just whip out new custom usergroups from my sleeve. Dtm142 23:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree that there should be at least one other forumadmin. There is no reason why there should only be one forumadmin. Piscesvisionary 23:59, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Is there any reason why there should be more than one? Dtm142 01:15, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

yes there are many reasons... One is some of the current sysops like to play around with the privilage they have. Another is your not on the forum all day everyday.... and maybe the moderator thing can be implemented somehow... like the rollback rights on the wikia maybe? if the forum is in php coding or whatever its called... there is ranks.... im not much of an expert on code that isnt html but maybe we can implement something. The forum is in beta so it is never to late to change things. But it is crucial that a new forum admin(s) are implemented ASAP or a way to put in moderators. Dtm would you accept if it were possible to implement the forum moderators? God Of War 02:23, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I do not have access to the coding of the forums. I cannot implement ranks at the moment.  I know that I'm not on the forums all day, but there is little need for anyone else to have the tools that I have.  So far, I feel I have been diligent in creating stickies, announcements, global announcements, and polls (that is all the forumadmin group can do that surpasses the power of a normal sysop).
 * If the issue is sysops "playing around with their powers", I hardly see how giving forum moderator powers to even less qualified users will solve it. Dtm142 23:45, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

we really need some check to power of the admin. if moderators wont be implemented. Admin and sysops should not be allowed to make up random rules. i would also like to add that there should not be any rules that discriminate on certain people be it for grammar race education status etc.... the forums need alot of working on.... God Of War 05:01, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * We are not randomly adding new rules. We are actually having a vote on the grammar rule.  It seems that you're just upset that you're losing the vote.  Stop being such a sore loser. Dtm142 18:25, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Now, now Dtm that's not behaviour I'd expect from a crat... Well actually it is but you don't seem to accept it when I do that so... 23:17, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

having a vote does not mean the vote will become rule... im a sore looser? do you have any idea how much that pissde me off? you should be banned... im offended and i am having a hard time not making a personal attack against you too dtm... we need more admin... just forum admin dtm and stinkowing are banning there counter parts. especially dtm he is banning people he does not agree with... we need admin. Ilyas could and should be one of them... but there should be others chosen in and by the forum users. God Of War 17:49, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Whether or not it becomes a rule, know that the community, both those with and without sysop powers gave input. I'm sorry that offended you, but you really were ignoring the fact that we had a vote and discussion on it.  Instead, you said that "Admin and sysops should not be allowed to make up random rules."  It may also interest you that the grammar rule was not proposed by a sysop.  For the longest time, I was even against a grammar rule.  It was your aggressive posts that caused me to become a strong supporter.  Every post of yours makes me see more and more how desperately we need grammar rules.  I thank you for providing that service to the forums.  I will admit it, I do ban people who I disagree with: I disagree with users breaking forum rules.  If other users were to become admins, a failure to ban a disruptive user is clear indication that they are not qualified for adminship.
 * I'm still awaiting that gramatically correct explaination as to how I'm abusing my powers, as well as why we need more users who can make stickies, announcements, and global announcements. Dtm142 23:37, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Dtm, I kind of disagreed when you said, when you said "If other users were to become admins, a failure to ban a disruptive user is clear indication that they are not qualified for adminship". I don't think that's necessarily true. There are often times when someone considered someone else disruptive and banned them, but assumed bad faith. Sometimes, at least in my opinion, admins (as well as others) can just back off. In fact, sometimes it's necessary. Butterman62 (talk) 01:04, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Dtm, I hate to say this, and I don't mean to offend you (just so you don't go ahead and block me right off the bat), but you are acting quite immature with your "I'm waiting for a grammatically correct..." blah blah blah. Is this another way for you to try to manipulate other users' opinions against your opponent? Also, I'm still waiting for you to unblock me. 17:12, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Ilyas, you've been unblocked. I am sick of weeding through 3000+ byte quipps of his that say "admin is abusing there powr" without any reasoning behind them.  He has said that he's cabable of using proper grammar, and he should if he wants me to take him seriously.  I've requested that, and I'm going to get it if he is to be taken seriously. Dtm142 19:00, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks XD. 19:22, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

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)

Updating Exchange pages
Can someone good with animations come up with a tutorial animation on how to update prices in the Exchange pages? The step-by-step instructions can be found at Template:GEPriceUpdateGuide. It would be nice if an animation shows how the update process is done, one step at a time. The animation would be added at the template page. 14:49, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Just curious as to why is has to be animated, and simply not pictures included in the step-by-step instructions? 16:43, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It's just that the "visual space" within the template is limited, so I thought an animation would be a better option. The template has 7 lines, so the images would have to squeezed to fit into those 7 lines.  In addition to that, pictures would be redundant as it will only repeat what already mentioned in those 7 lines.  I would assume that people don't generally read those lines; which is why we get lots of "bad" price updates, where people forget to update the dates, only the "current price" but not the "last price", etc.  I think that an animation could grasp the attention of the editor faster and more efficiently.   17:13, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well that was annoying, and all I wanted to say was that makes sense. Then we had to go into lockdown. =\ 17:58, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I made one myself using HyperCam 2 (Design 1), but someone with the proper tools can make a better animation. I know it has the annoying "Unregistered HyperCam 2" tag and the animation itself is of poor quality, but basically it captures the essence of the updating process in a single image. 18:21, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I use a gamecam to film raid tutorials for WoW, if it is something like what you made you want, I could do that some time this afternoon. 18:33, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I hope you don't mind i touched it up a little bit and added text to clarify the actions (Design 2). 00:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Well by the time I got around to it, it appears Kytti khat already did some touch-up on yours. I'll post the one I made anyways (Design 3), guess we can decide which is better. 00:27, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I prefer Design 1 or Design 2. And here's why:
 * 1) Size: It is compact.  We have a space constraint in Template:GEPriceUpdateGuide (up to 7 lines).  The additional lines (after the Category) are unnecessary, and can be cropped.
 * 2) Pace: Design 3's pace is too slow, in my opinion.  Is it because of the scrolling in the drop-down menu?  Or that selection process?  I dunno.  We want to capture the attention of the person immediately, and it didn't work for me..
 * 3) Memory: It is smaller in size.  I know the difference in bytes may be small.  But, we need to load the animation pretty quick, well before the user attempts to update the price.

However, the Design 2's font colour should be standardised to RED. Red is, after all, the fastest colour. 14:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It's funny, the animation I made was actually pretty fast when viewing it on my home computer, taking about 20 seconds. Here at work, it seems to be a lot slower. 14:17, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * On a slightly different yet related note, I recorded a simple tutorial on how to add transparency, and after I saved it, my computer decided it was corrupt and deleted it. =( 14:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * LMAO. 14:24, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

What do you mean standardised to red? The actions are colour coded and coordinated based on the actions, the highlight colour is about as standard as you get and no colour is faster than another. The animation could be made even smaller if the fonts were in simple black and white but that's just relatively common font smoothing and doesn't have too much overhead. 00:33, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * A darker green (#009900) would be more preferable. And red is the fastest colour in physics. See these links:
 * Color Wavelength: http://www.usbyte.com/common/approximate_wavelength.htm
 * Organising information using colour: http://www.barefeat.com/research/color_perception.pdf
 * Colour theory: http://student.plattsburgh.edu/baue1017/colortheory.ppt 08:06, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds like fun. 07:00, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * LOL. I'm merely responding to your statement ("no colour is faster than another") that red "is" the fastest colour.  I added the links above to support my argument.  Nobody has to agree with my opinion that red is better in this animation.  The reason I put this up in Yew Grove is to get feedback, opposing views, and alternative designs.  And on another note, I actually liked the one which was edited/clarified by Kytti. (I got the names of Karlis/Kytti mixed up.)   08:06, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Alternative designs
Should we vote? 08:06, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think a vote with mine is necessary. The one made by you and edited by Kytti is better than mine. =D 18:06, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Integrating with Exchange pages
An example of how the image would appear in an Exchange page. 20:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Exchange:Spirit shield | view=price
 * It is a wonderful idea, and we've only got a few people in the community who have been discussing it, with no opposition. When are we going to get this rolling? I'd love to see new users updating the prices correctly. =D 15:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Since they are no objections (and it's been 1 week since), I'll get on the integration process right away. By the way, I'm choosing Design 1 since it has the cleanest look.  15:30, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, I thought it was a good one. Thanks for taking care of it! =) 15:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Idea : Runescape High Court
i was thinking, maybe we can use a court system with juries judges and so on to discuss bans and related things. then we can legally discuss and decide the fates of users. if users have their talks neglected and/or have it linked to their userpage. then we can use this court system to help. and advoid flaming by legally deciding the fates.

i know this belongs to wikiguild, but it hasn't been visited by users.  Btzkillerv has entered the building!   14:41, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The wiki is not a Democracy. There is no legality. We do not need to hold trials or have the community involved in bans. There is already a policy in place if you feel you were wrongfully banned. 14:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Regarding the user he created the high court about: Users who attempt to evade their ban are blocked from editing the wiki. The user, Blankothe3rd has evaded blocks, and is harassing users intentionally. This is what I was refering to in a sense that the community does not need to be involved. 15:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I decided I am going to stay out of the Blanko issue. If somebody has such a petty and pathetic life that they have to jump around on proxies to harass people online, they don't deserve my attention. I still however, oppose the idea of a court. 15:38, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I would just like to add that our policy states that "A user must be banned with community consensus or Wikia staff approval." 14:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm assuming that this page would be located in the <tt>RuneScape:</tt> namespace, which banned users cannot edit. If we are going to hold trials, we will have to unblock some notorious vandals, which I don't agree to. I don't think many vandals on our Wiki would actually appeal their blocks, most of them are come-and-go, and our sysops will always have legitimate cause to issue a block. Most of these discussions are held on user talk pages anyway, and having a court for such a small(ish) Wiki is superfluous, considering we already have the CVU and Request for comment. 15:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I have been involved with setting up an arbitration forum on other wiki projects, and all I can say here is good luck on the attempt. Seriously.  By the time something significant comes up with a user that is generally a pretty good contributor but ruffles the feathers of several major long-time users every once in awhile, you have animosities and hard feelings one way or another that can deadlock the whole process and will more than likely consume nearly all of the attention of the major "players" on the wiki.  A very large wiki like Wikipedia has enough users that fit this sort of description that a formal arbitration board has been established, but for good or ill even that one was imposed from above by Jimbo Wales and wasn't really a user-created board... at least initially.


 * I have a bunch of arrows in my back from trying to get this sort of arbitration to happen in a situation where it was really needed, and frankly it burned me out as I ended up having to fight well over half of the other administrators on the wiki as a result. The other half that backed me up for awhile made the process go forward until some of the younger set that tend to have no patience ended up hijacking the process and essentially kicked me off the wiki for just trying to be an impartial observer.  I still am less than impressed with what finally happened, although I should note that the user who was creating problems is still a contributor on that wiki and seems to have made peace with the admins who were ready to lynch the poor guy.


 * I still think the arbitration process I tried to initiate there was something ultimately useful, as it gave opportunities for the members of the wiki to offer a point/counter-point discussion of the real issues at hand and allowed the overall community and even those from outside of the community to help come to a consensus about both what happened and what the potential remedies ought to be.


 * We are not talking here about how to deal with blatant vandals, but those who may be slightly disruptive and fall into the grey area between good editors and those who aggressively engage in edit wars. Unfortunately there are some people who like to push rules, any rules or guidelines, right to the edge and see just what a community can tolerate.  At best what we can do is try to convince these folks to back off from the edge and be a little more reasonable in what they are doing.  If not, it is necessary for the community to act and try to protect the project itself from further damage.


 * BTW, setting up something like this for a specific user is where you are going to really get yourself into trouble. Avoid doing that if possible.  --Robert Horning 07:24, 30 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)

Camtasia studio 5
Recently i bought Camtasia Studio 5, but when i want to edit my record it says: "No camera stream detected!".

What to do? 17:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That's weird, the program works fine for me. I think that error might be referring to it looking for a webcam or video camera connectd. It sure is a nice program for $300 though, well worth it. =D 17:54, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that would have been better posted on the fora (which I believe is the correct plural of forum) instead of the Yew Grove. :-p   18:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Correctum es Hurston 10:12, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Problem fixed 18:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Welsh?
Some of you may have noticed that the elven names seem to be in a style similar to Welsh names. Do we have any welsh speakers here who could tell us if there are any special meanings to the names? I know that Jagex like to put in the odd hidden meaning in Latin sometimes, so I was wondering if they were doing a similar thing with welsh. Hurston 16:43, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Fantastic observation Hurston! I don't speak Welsh, but people at Wikipedia do! So here goes,

07:31, 1 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Nice one dude, and a good idea to just google the names. I'll do some more research in that area... Hurston 18:22, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Monster Examine Info
Would it be alright if I went ahead and went to town using the Monster Examine spell to post the vital stats of monsters? What do you all figure? 67.193.97.23 19:28, 3 November 2008 (UTC) This was my idea, by the by. The Wiki signed me out without telling me as such.Planeshifted 21:35, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No opposition = I'ma do this thing. Planeshifted 12:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * NOW you have a bit of opposition, because...er, we already do this. How else could we find out the current amount of monsters listed here that have their Hitpoints already listed?
 * So you're opposing me just to oppose me?Planeshifted 11:47, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Page size question
Is there a limit as to how large a page can be? I noticed that "Template:ExchangeItem" is being displayed at the top of the "others" section on Grand_Exchange_Market_Watch/Melee_armour. I can't find any issues with the items and when you "show preview" for that specific section, everything lists ok, but then you save it and the same thing occurs. I tried to rearrange the bottom items and save it to see if there may be an issue with one that prevented the ones after it from displaying, but that didn't help at all. Thanks. 07:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, there is a limit. I remember that "Melee" used to be a single page, and was broken up into "Melee armour" and "Melee weapons". I think this problem occured after the addition of PvP world items (Ancient Warrior Equipment, Corrupt dragon armour, etc.) Looks like now we have to break up Melee armour into 2 separate pages.  Hmm....  09:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The limit isn't for the exchange item templates, but buried into the Mediawiki code itself. Templates for any given page can only hit a hard limit... I think about 2 million characters or so... before the buffer in the MediaWiki code gives up and truncates everything after that.  Because the GEMW pages make heavy use of nested templates, having a large number of items quickly overflow this limit in the MediaWiki code.


 * BTW, I am trying to come up with a solution that would at least double the number of items would could display on a single page, but it is going to require some overhaul of the GEWM template structure, and unfortunately may make updating the template hierarchy even more complicated and involves adding another level to the bunch. --Robert Horning 00:22, 6 November 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)

Poll/Vote
Recently there was a Grammar vote on the forum. It got locked as it really got out of hand.


 * Yes, we need strict grammar rules 8% 5 Votes
 * Yes, there should be some grammar rules. 34% 20 Votes
 * Yes, but it should only forbid the use of 1337 20% 12 Votes
 * No, the forums are fine as it is. 36% 21 Votes

It seems that the "yes" votes were added together to have the majority rule. So now the grammar rule in now in place. I really do not understand this. You cant add votes together to make a majority.

Greywolf1947 22:18, 5 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It sounds as if a cabal has taken over the forums and pushing some "politically correct" attitudes somehow. This certainly doesn't show any sort of consensus but rather is attempting to push a viewpoint.  Don't get me started about polling on forums/wikis, but this isn't a good thing.  21 votes against is a huge group of opposition, BTW.  Certainly something of note in terms of a massive failure of consensus.  --Robert Horning 00:17, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed, as I said in the forums, it seems crazy to me to add votes together to get a result that, quite frankly, is not correct. There is one "No" option, and three "Yes" options of varying degrees -- You cannot combine all three Yes options and then say that more people voted for the rules, because they didn't. It's clear that the option with the most votes is "No", and that's the way it is. That would be like people combining votes in a presidential election: "Oh well this one guy got the most votes, but these other three candidates are really similar, so we'll just combine all of their votes together, and then the one guy out of those three with the most votes will be president." It sounds crazy, but that is just what is happening on the forums. 01:22, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I feel that I need to address a few issues here before this goes much further:
 * * I locked the thread because of heavy flaming. Users who opposed the grammar rules got out of hand.  They started trolling and making personal attacks.  This concluded with an extremely aggessive post by Sernions demanding that the thread be locked.  At the time of locking, most users wanted the grammar rules to be changed.  I simply tried to do what would please the most users.  This is not an election for president.  I don't recall any presidential election with a "no president" option on the ballot.
 * * The discussion is not over yet. I have asked for feedback about the grammar rules here.  I would like to work with users to develop a consensus as to which rules would work for everyone.
 * * I think that the actions of a few users should not punish the entire wiki. I would like to start the thread again in the near future if users can behave maturely.
 * * There is no cabal. I do not want to come across as a dictator, but there are very few administrators who actually moderate the forums.
 * * There are no policies or standards anywhere on the wiki as to what an acceptable consensus is for discussions on the forums. I think that this is the real issue that needs to be fixed before anything else can be done. Dtm142 02:04, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Community decisions are based upon consensus, not polling. This is clearly stated in here, which even leads this to breaking the rules of RsWiki. But then again, adding the votes altogether was not acceptable in the first place. Either way, there is something is definitely wrong in the poll results. [[Image:Summoning.gif]]Sernions 01:46, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Im sorry the question is still not answered. Why was 3 yes's added together?. Also if you have to add votes together surely 1 and 2 yes votes equals 25 votes in total. 3 and 4 which in it self says NO 33 Votes. So how can this be. Why on earth would anyone give feed back to the rules that are now implemented when the outcome of the vote is rigged. Greywolf1947 03:00, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Firstly, Grey, I have to wonder how you get "no" out of option 3, considering it even says yes...
 * Secondly, Rega, yes, they did, in fact, vote for a rule. It was all a matter of the severity of said rule, which also counters the point of not putting all 3 together.


 * However, in order to help curb the contraversialness of this, I'd like to forward a motion:


 * Let's take a second vote, a simple "Yes" and "No" vote. If we gain consensus on a rule, we take another vote to determine the severity. --Pikaandpi 18:33, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I think we do need a second vote with a balanced number of options for both yes and no. But I also think we need a lot more of administrators to moderate the forums. Recently it seems that threads are being locked just because someone disagrees with them. Then they say they locked it due to flaming and personal attacks even when there weren't any. We need more than one administrator on the forums. [[image:Prayer.gif |25px]] Sir Lenehan [[image:smite.PNG|25px]] 19:24, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It's time I spoke my mind here. First off, if we are going to have ANY fourms on this wikia, then we need to set clear policies as to who runs the fourms, the description of each power on the fourms, and what the general rules are.  I am aware that there are fourm rules on here, but who is allowed to set and enforce the rules?  I don't see how there is going to be a succeeding fourm on this wiki without creating the policies as to the chain of command on this fourm, general rules, punishments, power descriptions, and other features.


 * Second, regarding this "grammar rule" policy, honestly, is it really this hard to decide as to implement grammar rules on here? Yes, I know, people are sick and tired of reading fourms that have illegible meanings, but common sense should eliminate most of the problems we have with reading what other people want to say on here!  If you cannot read what the person is saying, either ask for a clarification, ignore it, or, if several attempts to clarify the situation has failed, lock it if you can.  Its just that simple.  If someone on this fourm says something that you cannot understand, ask with respect to the author, and you may know what they are really saying!


 * Besides, none of us have the 'perfect' grammar, and from what I have seen on this fourm, there is really no need to introduce a 'grammar' rule simply because 90% or more of what I see on the fourms can easily be read, even without a clarification. And when I ask for a clarification, I rarely, if ever, have not understood what they were trying to say.


 * Third, as mentioned above, I have recently noticed that people are complaining about being 'banned' because they are making 'personal attacks'. And I have noticed that there are few, if any, pieces of evidence that indicate a personal attack.  Don't take me the wrong way, I know what a personal attack is, but if you ban someone, you better have GOOD evidence to support your claim, because I have NOT found much in the way of evidence that directly links someone to a personal attack.  Heres some advice for those who have fourm powers on this wiki:


 * "Fact before opinion. Use your disipline powers only if you have understandable facts, and state your opinions as if you were a regular user."


 * I am not trying to antagonize the fourms, nor anyone else on this wiki. What I am trying to say is that we must organize ourselves to be a better community, and we must also use our powers with responsibility.  Yeah, I do believe that higher powers in this wiki are misusing their powers, but this topic is focused on the grammar rules, not on how administrators are misusing their powers.  If you want to continue about this subject, either discuss it to me on my talk page, or create a new Yew Grove topic about it.  It would be unwise to continue discussion about my third point on here.


 * Oh, and as for my vote on these 'grammar' rules? I vote no.--Pkthis 20:49, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If I could lock or delete posts/threads that contain incomprehensible grammar after asking the user to improve it several times, that would in essence be a grammar rule... Dtm142 21:16, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Ahhh, I see your point. HOWEVER, by the time the fourm is locked, it COULD be classified as spam, or the author of the fourm is just clueless.  Here, I'll list an example to clarify:

Pkthis: lol that nub jsut died.

Dtm142: Can you clarify please?

Pkthis: lol he was only wearin blk armor

Dtm142: What are you talking about?

Pkthis: I got addy full hlm fro drp.

Dtm142: Ok, I don't know what your talking about, but this is pointless, so its locked.

So as you can see, not only was he using poor grammar, but he was also spamming the screen because he was talking about something that develops little, if any, of a main idea. We can understand what words he is saying, such as:

lol that nub jsut died=Ha ha ha that low-leveled player just died.

But if was something like this:

i wnt cm hom drnk

This would be a good example of poor grammar, because the statement above is illegible, not to mention it is also spam, because it would be a pointless message. If anything, heres what ill say:

"If nobody(and im talking about more than one admin too!) can understand what the person is saying, it is most likily spam, because it is illegible and displays a pointless message, so therefore, the topic should be locked."

Hopfully you understand what im trying to say. If not, ill try giving you another example.--Pkthis 22:51, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It makes you (in the dialogue) look bad. Nothing else really. I can understand what you say clearly. The grammar will take your post (about the pking drop) down in terms of intelligence, but it IS a legitimate post, not exactly SPAM either.  In my year or so on another gaming forum I saw a lot of crap posts coming from users who typed "properly."  A bunch of rants, veiled advertising, veiled flaming, you know the drill; and those posters only avoided any sort of block or punishment with verbose garbage people shouldn't be reading anyway...
 * tl;dr: "i got haxxed, can i haf advice" is much better than "Hey, fellow RuneScape players, what is your favorite adamant weapon?"

'''Pikaandpi Ok I feel that I have to explain why the number 3 vote is a No. I assume no one see's it the same as i do. I will try to explain it'''

''':: Yes, but it should only forbid the use of 1337. Now this is a computor language all on its own. Spelling and Grammar really dose not apply. The way i see it if the 4th vote was not there, they would of voted for that one. Not sure if it make any sense but thats how i read see it''' Greywolf1947 04:02, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * "pure" 1337 can be used, imho, but only sparingly. l-l4l-l_7l-l15_15_@n_3x4mP13. sometimes the language can be used to prove a point, sometimes it's just a garbage message that no one wants to decipher.  if kdMAN22 makes 10 posts in 10 minutes in "pure" 1337, consider warning him.  if PUREpk12 uses 1337 for the sake of irony or proving a point, or just an isolated post altogether, let it slide. just my thoughts. Earthere 04:46, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

A huge part of the problem here is that there is a strong dis-connect between the forum community and the "wiki" community. I encountered that strongly when I first started the GEMW pages and sought to get consensus on the forums, only to discover that the wiki admins hardly even read the forums, much less considered any consensus reached there to be of significance to the operation of the wiki side of things.

I don't know why there are two different communities here, and there certainly are "wiki-only" users and "forum-only" users. A further confession: I have pretty much stopped even looking at the forums for anything and it has been months since I made my last post there. When this whole affair did flair up, I jumped over to the forums to see what was going on, but otherwise I never even bothered to see what topics were even being discussed.

I think this is a huge problem, and something that can and should be fixed, or at least bridged in some fashion. As an administrator, I'm not even sure what I'm allowed to do or not do on the forums, or what role I can do there. I do my best to take care of the wiki side of things, and I've done my battles against wiki-spam and blatant vandals, but I haven't even touched the forum admin tools. I checked recently and I have some administration options on the forums, but I'm not even really sure how to use all of the options.

As for the language purity issue... I don't care nor would I even consider that to be an enforcable rule (or at least something I would bother trying to enforce, even if it were an "official" rule). Achieving consensus on an issue like this seems to be futile at best, but I do understand the problems that those pushing for this sort of moderation guideline are facing and are trying to solve with this rule. Sadly, nothing is so clear-cut in real life when dealing with real people who try to push boundaries... which is exactly what is happening here.

That, BTW, is also the definition of a teen-ager, where they are hard-wired naturally to try and push boundaries to see how much they can get away with. Those of us who are slightly older have been burned enough that we no longer bother trying, but then again we get stuck in our ways and don't have as many original thoughts. This is just human nature. I just hope this issue can be resolved peacefully. --Robert Horning 05:22, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

It now offical rules are in place. Just posted

This is official rules thread - not the official flaming thread.

For those of you who are mathematically impaired enough to still not get it:

For Grammar rules: 64% - WINNER!

Against Grammar rules: 36%

How I got the 64% figure? Well, 100-36 is 64. Also, 8+34+20 = 64.

Why were they added up? If you haven't noticed, The Grammar rules are neither strict, nor just forbidding 1337. They are moderate. That is why the numbers added up so.

The need for the Grammar rules was also shown when people attemted to vandalize the poll with post containing intentionally bad grammar. If you can't have a mature discussion, you get the kindergarden treatment. This is the crap THE FORUM GETS DAILY

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)