RuneScape:Administrative requests

Note: Please only make requests on this page that specifically require sysop tools to fulfill.

File:Death.png
I tried to merge File:Harold Death Esquire.png with File:Death.png as a result of the current. Wikia have been contacted about the bug, and the file page has been fully protected in case someone messes with it.

Auto-add Template:Talkheader to new talk pages...
...using a preload "&preload=". Is this possible? 05:57, July 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * Please. 06:26, July 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * Would be great, if possible, but most Talk pages are created using the "Add topic", rather than "Create" option... so wouldn't it load the Talkheader as part of the section that is created? IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 18:23, August 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * This is certainly possible, but a little complicated. For example, a link to a non-existent talk page shows up as your average redlink which has a class that I can use to identify the uncreated talk page. But when you're on the talk page itself, there is no apparent difference between the button to add a new topic when the page does not yet exist and the button when it does. If there's a distinct difference on the page itself, perhaps a class on the placeholder text, then this could be done. I'll see what I can come up with.


 * This has been implemented by adding  to talk page redlinks and the addt topic button on talk pages that contain MediaWiki:Noarticletext. This does not include user talk pages. This is not completely foolproof, the ways to circumvent the preload include removing the preload from the page, editing through the API, using the keyboard shortcuts, e.g. Alt-Shift-+ for add section, which are implemented in both oasis and monobook iirc and editing from the wikiamobile and wikiaapp skins. Hopefully this will take care of most instances of talk page creation though.


 * Are we sure this is working? Just to make sure, I went to http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Superior_sea_singer%27s_hood (it doesn't exist yet), and the "Add topic" link was http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Superior_sea_singer%27s_hood?action=edit&section=new . Clicking it, nothing was pre-loaded... IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 10:02, August 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * I see you've fixed it, though, I still wonder... won't this place the template inside the section created by the user; rather than at the top of the page? (Tho, I figured it was better not to create an empty talk page just to test this...) IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 19:02, August 15, 2013 (UTC)


 * If editing from the add topic button, yes. It shouldn't do if going through a redlink. I can disable the section=new part of the add topic button if it proves to be an issue.

Wanted files
Has anyone been able to figure out why the following files continuously stay on the Wanted files page? IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 16:40, August 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * File:Falador Shield 3.png
 * File:Seers 3.png‏‎
 * File:Fremennik-sea-boots-3.png
 * It's an error somewhere, it happens every now and then. I sent in a bug report for it, I think a couple of others have as well, so there's definitely an open bug ticket for it.
 * This sort of thing isn't a huge priority for Wikia's engineers (there are worse bugs out there), so it may take a while before it gets fixed. It will be fixed eventually.
 * It would seem the Wanted Files page is getting even more glitched; resolved/created files aren't being cleared off of the list... IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 16:36, September 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * That can't be fixed. The pages exist but the files don't. Redirects are not wantedfiles friendly.  16:38, September 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems this second note has been resolved meanwhile. The original, however, hasn't, and is still bugged. IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 16:08, October 9, 2013 (UTC)

GED not updating
Refer to Forum:GED not updating 1 and RS:EXCHANGE.

AFAIK, the Grand Exchange Database has not been updated after the Treevolution update. And the patch note is wrong: Off-hand dragon throwing axes are now worth the same amount as their main-hand counterparts.


 * 1) Could someone do the next steps based on RS:EXCHANGE?
 * 2) We need someone to contact Jagex about these two issues...

Thanks. 08:32, October 9, 2013 (UTC)
 * I believe Jagex no longer reply to the forum thread we previously used, instead they prefer bug reports of some description. I'll update the js, although I'm currently working on merging the two scripts into one that we can alter fairly easily when this happens.
 * Wikia and Jagex have been contacted, and we have another forum about Jagex's bugs. Yay.


 * I just adjusted the price at Exchange:Battlestaff to the current GE med price, but noticed that the script isn't updating Exchange:Battlestaff/Data. Is this intentional? The graph won't update, and the data will be lost after 2 more manual updates of the Exchange page. IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 06:24, October 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * That's probably because the script was never designed/updated to handle the separate Data subpage and epoch time. I'm not sure it would be a good idea to rely on random editors to know about epoch time. Also if someone enters bogus data, that's two pages where changes would need to be backed out. The data itself would still be available in the page history, but, for all items, that could be a lot of work. -- 06:53, October 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, this is a problem I didn't see coming. Unfortunately I won't be able to fix it until tomorrow at the earliest, unless someone else wants to make up a fix for this assuming it's possible.
 * 1. Data won't be lost. AzBot should be able to get the historical data from the history pages and update the Data subpages. 2. the script had the feature to update the Data subpage, but that part of the script was removed some time back for whatever reason. 14:52, October 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * Granted, the history keeps all the data. However, I would not expect a bot that updates the prices itself under normal circumstances, to be programmed to also look at the history of the Exchange page in case it missed something to also update the Data page; as generally it has no need for it. Sure it could be programmed to, but that also requires an effort on our end, and won't magically fix itself. If it is already programmed to do that, great! IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 15:11, October 13, 2013 (UTC)
 * AzBot is already programmed to do it. I just need to switch on the feature.... 07:46, October 14, 2013 (UTC)


 * Updates appear to be happening automatically again. -- 22:25, October 14, 2013 (UTC)

Administrator requests
I really hope this is the right place for this. Can I get an administrator to look at the Golden Chinchompa page to prevent an edit war? Thank you.Matchgirl42 (talk) 14:06, October 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * There is no edit war. You're adding information that isn't pertinent to the article and in the wrong spot if at all. Here is not the place to ask for someone to side with you... If you're really this bent on adding this information, at least add it to the body paragraphs of the article and not the trivia section. 14:08, October 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * I disagree with adding it to the article entirely... This'd be like adding to every single ability page that it can be found through the Powers interface on tab X. This should be stated on a page dedicated to abilities, not the individual abilities. In this case, it might be pertinent in a section dedicated to SGS pets. IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 14:11, October 10, 2013 (UTC)


 * I checked the page for the other solomon's pets, and the info on where to go in-game to get them to show up does not appear there, either.  Is this some kind of super-sekrit-gotta-discover-it-for-yourself-thing?  Or a case where people assume everyone knows it, therefore feel it's not important?  Because I spent a frustrating week figuring it out...and I'm sure I'm not the only one.Matchgirl42 (talk) 14:17, October 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * Then add it there, where it should be. 14:19, October 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer to wait until an administrator weighs in.  And I'm not trying to "get someone to side with me."  I'm looking for an administrator to fairly and impartially settle a dispute over whether this information should be included in the page or not, and where it should appear if not.  If an administrator - and according to the list, you are not one - decides it shouldn't be and gives a good reason why, then I can accept that.Matchgirl42 (talk) 14:23, October 10, 2013 (UTC)
 * An administrator does not need to weigh in. It also does not matter if I am not one. As civil editors, we're meant to solve conflicts on our own without administrators, and if you can agree that this information is best suited on the pets page, then we've solved this disagreement. 14:25, October 10, 2013 (UTC)

Meant to resolve conflicts by yourselves would be nice, but there are plenty of occasions where it is sadly not the case. However, we work on consensus here which means that admins have no more say in how a dispute is resolved than anyone else, we are merely tasked with carrying out the actions agreed upon in those resolutions. I appreciate that admins can be viewed as more important, but in reality we're just regular editors with big, shiny delete buttons

I agree that the information is not obvious, but adding it to every page is possibly overkill. It would ceratinly be a good idea to place it on a hub page of some description, such as Pets or Solomon's General Store. I assume there are links in the navboxes/infoboxes that link to one of those pages on each SGS pet page.

On the other hand it is nicer to have all the non-obvious information you want about an item, a pet, etc. on the associated page. We state that iron sword is wielded in the weapon slot on that page, rather than just on the shortsword page. Many of our viewers arive through google, view a single page and leave after recieving their information. Whilst I'd like for more of them to view a second page, if they aren't finding what then want to know they may end up on another site which is obviously not what we ultimately want.


 * Okay.  Fair enough.  Although in that vein (you hit the nail on the head about obvious information there), the more I look at the (Solomon's) pet page, the more it screams at me (but not in caps, mind, because that's yelling on the internet and is rude) for an overhaul.  Most of the information about these pets (such as naming as well as access and customization) is general among most if not all of these pets, and the information that is unique to each pet is less than a section's worth, so it would make more sense to have all information about these pets in the one page - with each pet having it's own section for it's unique info - rather than spread out over individual pages.  I'm also as fond of tables as the next person, but it seems like overkill/awkward for that page as well.  I'm right in the middle of preparing for finals that I'm taking this weekend, but then I graduate (hurrah!) and will have the free time needed for such an overhaul and would be happy to take it on early next week.  I'm sure that will involve tracking down pages that link to each individual page and redirecting those links to the (Solomon's) pet page when the page edit is done, and deleting the individual pages.  I'd be happy to do it.Matchgirl42 (talk) 07:46, October 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Per RS:GRANULARITY there is no reason to delete the specific pet pages. They are true separate entities, even if they share most of the same qualities. Overhauling the SGS pet page and including a short section on each pet is perfectly fine, of course. IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 07:50, October 11, 2013 (UTC)