RuneScape:Article of the Month/Fake image (3)

Fake image
This article is awsome and before reading this article I had no idea how people managed to make fakes now not only do I understand but I also want to try and make one or two. This is an awsome article that deserves to be the Article of the Month! --Wisrobe56.


 * STRONG OPPOSE as per its last 3 or so nominations it has nothing that actually has to do with RuneScape. --Whiplash 22:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

SUPPORT WITH ALL THE STRENGTH IN MY HEART!!! Has helpde many (like me) and it shows how to turn everyday RS pics into hilarious pics. 22:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Well I think we just canceled each others votes out. Ah well back to square one. :P --Whiplash 23:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


 * OPPOSE this has nothing to do with playing RuneScape. Additionally, it's a tutorial, not an article.  While the page may be cool, article of the month?  No.  #


 * SUPER HYPER MEGA GIGA ULTRA EXTREME OPPOSE!!!! This is the 3rd time this article has been nominated for featured article and it is not fit there! Not related to RuneScape, can be made from anything, like World of Warcraft, new people are using it to fill this wiki with pages like "User:Newguyhere/Fakesthathavenosense", it's going too far soon. I think this article is more likely ruining this wiki and not being creative. 13:46, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Um... Katshuma? That's going a bit far. Oh well. SUPER HYPER MEGA EXTREME FANCY CRAZY ULTRA MAXIMUM BOOSTED PENDING I can't decide.... Syugecin [[File:Dragon_halberd.png]]talkcontribs
 * What the Hell do you guys mean by it "not being related to rs"? Atleast it says what fakes are, unlike the Buddies article that does not at all mention what it is. I'll go rewrite it so it's not a tutorial.  04:37, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I forgot to say this, but I didn't rewrite the article because it is not a tutorial, but has one in it. 17:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Heh, interesting I always thought a "buddy" was a friend you had on RS. Boy was I wrong.  You're absolutely right, Chia, but the fact is, the Buddies article is not being nominated for AOTM, and Fake is.  Therefore, we can't compare it to another article, it has to hold the highest standards of articles.  In terms of not being relevant, here's my worry:  Joe-schmo finds the Wiki one day while searching for Runescape help.  He goes to the main page, and the first thing he sees is some fan-based article--something that has nothing to do with playing RS.  He then goes away because he sees the wiki as some fan-site dedicated to the fan-world of RS, not RS itself.  What I'm trying to say is, not only does an article have to be very well-written and helpful (which the Fake article is), it really needs to represent the wiki as a whole...and I don't think a page not about RS does a good job of representing the RS wiki.

K, I decided, Very Weak Oppose It's not directly related to RuneScape itself. Syugecin talkcontribs 01:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Support! And to those who say it's not related to Runescape, it is. And DON'T say it isn't JUST because you can do the same for other games! I can cook in WoW, too, but I'm not saying we shouldn't nominate a Cooking article. Making that point is idiotic. Kang227 14:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Oppose It has nothing to do WITH THE GAME ITSELF. It would just be like have "the runescape forums" has an aotm. Tesfan 23:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)