RuneScape:Yew Grove

The yew grove is a page where community members can discuss larger changes to the wiki, such as policy proposals. It serves as a way for anyone to get involved without having to find the relevant discussion page. Messages should be left on this page, not on the talk page.

Topics that should be discussed here include policy proposals and changes, discussion of community processes (such as RS:AOTM), and changes to significant wiki features. In general, anything that the community at large would be interested in can go here. This is not a replacement for RS:VFD, RS:RFA, or talk pages, as this page is specifically for discussion that has a wide impact. __NEWSECTIONLINK__

Image pages
I noticed that image pages no longer let you know when pictures have a transparent background : a few days (weeks?) ago, if an image had a transparent background, it would have a tiled background on the image page. Now the background is white, so it's impossible to see quickly if the background is transparent or just really white... Can't this be reverted to what it was before ? 07:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * MediaWiki was upgraded to a new version yesterday, I would suspect something to do with that. If it is because of the upgrade and not a setting that someone changed, then it's hard-coded and might be hard to change. Skill 07:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I noticed too. It would be good if there was like a non-transperant category too. Then people who can make images transparent can go through the images like the Wanted Pages and Category:Needs Image. [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]]  C  hicken  7 [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]] 11:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

If you do a hard refresh now the checkered background should show up, but it's a little off from what it was before. The image used is Image:Checker-16x16.png. It's sysop protected because of the potential for abuse, let me know if there are any changes to be made (there probably are). Skill 22:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Just noticed that. Thanks, it's ok for me :) 16:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Wiki logo
Okay, let's have a vote on which Main Page logo to use in quartz format: Image:wiki.png or Image:wiki_wide.png. If you support, you are voting for Image:wiki.png, and if you don't, you're voting for Image:wiki_wide.png. (Am I doing this right, Chia?) 02:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I use Monobook, so it doesn't affect me one way or the other, however, I'd definatly have to say that Image:wiki.png looks much neater, and more professional. Sorry, webmaster point of view there... 03:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * There is no voting here guys. Monobook uses wiki.png, Quartz skins use wiki_wide.png. End of story, you have no choice. Quartz skins MUST use that logo, it's written into the coding. Christine Talk 03:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Could we not change the wiki_wide.png logo then? I mean, it's not like there's no choice, theres gotta be some changes we can make. Even if we can't use the wiki.png logo, use something else. 03:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * He's got a point, everyone likes Image:wiki.png better, we could change the image. 04:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I much prefer Image:wiki.png76.232.1.32 09:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I have just created an account and switched to the monobook skin, this is what I have been looking for all along. Why is monobook not the default skin as seen to public users? I personally think that smoke looks disorganized and unprofessional.Tebuddy 09:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Smoke? We're talking about quartz skins. 21:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Smoke is the name of a Quartz skin. -.- Christine Talk 22:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You think monobook is better than quartz, Tebuddy? I accually disagree (and apparently a lot of other users). But this is a discussion of which is better, Image:wiki.png or Image:wiki_wide.png. 01:15, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The thing is that the Monobook logo has a diferent size than the Quartz skin one, if it was resized, it would look really ugly or small, also, if we made a new one, it may be even worse than the actual one, let's evade problems and let it as it is. 01:28, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * C Teng, learn to read a discussion before adding in a new comment. -.- There is no voting here guys. Monobook uses wiki.png, Quartz skins use wiki_wide.png. End of story, you have no choice. Quartz skins MUST use that logo, it's written into the coding. It doesn't matter which you think is better, the wide one has to be used for quartz because of its size. Christine Talk 01:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Even thoguh christine has a point, its written into the coding it can't be changed, Christine could lighten up a bit and be a little less,-how do I put this delicately-, rude., 01:40, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * First of all, yes, I agree, and second of all, I was referring to Nq2h's idea, change wiki wide. That is, assuming the vote is won. 01:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Change the image in the smoke (quartz) skin, or change the default skin is what needs to be done. Tebuddy 05:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment For some reason, there's no way to change the default skin to monobook, only to a different quartz theme. There doesn't seem to be an interface page for it either. On the topic of logos, however, someone will probably need to design a new one for Wiki_wide.png (assuming to decide to change it). Wiki.png can't simply be stretched into the size required for the quartz logo without making it look deformed. If I understand correctly, the last time we needed a new logo, several people just submitted their ideas and they were compared; it seems logical to do the same thing here. Skill 08:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think changing the default skin would be a good idea; I'm not sure it can even be done. 12:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes it can. -.- <font color=RoyalBlue>Christine <Font face=Sylfaen><font color=LimeGreen>Talk 19:19, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Skill is right, we can't use the same logo, perhaps we can submit ideas and choose one, but it would be better if we uploaded them to Imageshack or Photobucket, now we have to wait for the decision of the community 17:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Image:New-wiki-wide.png is a logo I made based off the other one in paint.. only took about 10 minutes. Anyone else who wants to make changes or improvements is welcome to, as I have no decent graphics program on this computer. 18:17, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I also made one here, I can add more Runes if you want:http://img509.imageshack.us/img509/3609/runescapewikiaa7.png 18:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ben's is great. I say we use that one. 20:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I like that it's adapted from the old logo. I've uploaded a new version under the same name as Ben's in which I removed lines and misplaced pixels created by cropping through airbrushing and just edited some incorrect shading. That can be reverted if need be, but I don't think he'd mind since he said he didn't spend much time on it. Everyone else should keep submitting logos though and we can put it to a vote. <Font face=Sylfaen><font color=RoyalBlue>Christine <Font face=Sylfaen><font color=LimeGreen>Talk 22:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It looks great. Does this count as the community decision, or should we put a link at the top of the wiki and have a longer one? 01:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I like bens as well.Tebuddy 06:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Christine, do you want to go one step further? I thought it be nice to make the number of runes on each side of the title symmetrical...you could easily do this by having one extra above the title, leaving 4 on either side.  That's my only criticism, that it's not symmetrical.
 * Well Endasil, I only spent a few minutes on it. I knew that it'd have to be repositioned eventually but thankfully Ben did it so I didn't have to XD <Font face=Sylfaen><font color=RoyalBlue>Christine <Font face=Sylfaen><font color=LimeGreen>Talk

Flickr 23:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I've made it a little more symmetrical now. Compare [[Image:new-wiki-wide.png]] with http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/runescape/images/archive/5/5b/20080131231338%21New-wiki-wide.png 23:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * So, are we using it? 17:30, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Unless I see some other comment as to whether we should keep/change it, I'll upload it to the wiki logo on Friday (8 February 2008) 18:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed the "p" cut off at the bottom. Skill 18:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks you Skill, I didn't even notice it was messed up. 18:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I updated the logo earlier today, and haven't gotten a comment yet. I guess everyone likes it enough that they're not ranting. 08:01, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It's awesome! Thanks, Ben. 23:22, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Familiar's Special Moves
Okay, as this seems to be a common discussion between the familiars pages, I'm moving it here. Basically this discussion is: whether or not we should merge the special moves with the familiars page. Here is the comments from Talk:Cheese Feast:

Merge with Albino Rat
I disagree, under the RuneScape:Granularity policy. "All items are worthy of their own article." As this is an item, technically, it does deserve it's own article. However, the title should be changed to include "Scroll" at the end, as that's technically the items title. 02:21, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I also disagree. This page's content should be added to albino rat, but remain an article by itself.

This is not an article about an item, but a move, therefore RuneScape:Granularity doesn't apply. The entirety of the content of this article could be added to albino rat for simplicity. Chocotard 07:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, I see that now, I assumed that it was about the item. If that's the case, maybe all of the move pages should be merged as well? If so, maybe we should move this discussion somewhere more visible to all users? 05:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree, I think they should be merged, if only because they are relatively small in and of themselves. Whether to merge them into the familiar or scroll pages, I don't know... Hurston 00:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Because there are not enough different opinions, here is mine. Considering that the summoning pouch and the familiars' special exist solely for the purpose of the familiar itself, I strongly feel that all 3 should be one page. Before you respond to that statement, please consider that if any one is looking for information on any of the three (familiar, pouch, move), it is much simpler to have all of the info presented on one neat page. None of the three really have a lot of info by themselves. Currently there is just way to much clicking and opening new pages to find all the information. This way would make the most sense. --Degenret01 04:55, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Should we Merge?
With my understanding that this is just a special attack from the familiar, does it deserve it's own page? If so, does every special attack from weapons deserve their own page too? Maybe our best solution is to include the section in the article, and then create a Familiar special attack page to compile the listings of all of them, similar to the Special_attack article? 17:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Idk, personally I think if all spells get their own page, then the special attacks for familiars should too. <Font face=Sylfaen><font color=RoyalBlue>Christine <Font face=Sylfaen><font color=LimeGreen>TalkFlickr 01:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * On the other hand though, there are already a bunch of weapon special attacks that don't have their own pages, and each of the pages would be ridiculously short. I think that perhaps there should be several articles that list special attacks, so as the special attacks page doesn't get too long. For example, maybe there could be a page for low-level familiar special attacks, mid-level, etc. Skill 03:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't mind multiple articles, or maybe even ones grouped by effect. Something like Familiar_Effects/Attacks or Familiar_Effects/General. But take a look at the length of these articles. Cheese_Feast is probably at the length it will get to at a maximum, and it's one sentence. There's not much to expand on either. 03:55, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

What I think is that it should merge as then it would be convenient to people to read! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.21.154.112 (talk).
 * Indeed... the reason why spells have their own pages is because you can't bind one spell to another thing. In the case of special attacks, you can bind one special attack to one weapon, so the special attack is developped on the weapon's page, like a part of it. For Summoning, it's quite the same : you can bind one special to one familiar, so it's logical to have it on the same page, as long as it doesn't make too big a page. The granularity stuff is okay, but when it splits things that go together into tiny little bits that requires you to open 10 pages to get a comprehensive info about one single item/whatevern, it does hurt readibility, particularly when the Wiki is hosted on such a slow server, where loading a new page is so long that I usually make my edits while doing something else at the same time... 05:48, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Result
It seems the result is pretty much consensus to merge. If that's the case, I'm going to start this. 18:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

READ THIS: Skill and I have gotten the layout for merging the Familiar, Special, Pouch, and scroll pages together. Please check out Spirit wolf to see what we've done.
 * 1) Copy pages together, add appropriate headers
 * 2) Update infobox on the scroll, and the pouch to infobar.

The pages should fit together neatly after those changes. 06:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Purpose of Nq2h Bot
Nq2h Bot was designed to help accomplish some of the boring, repetitive edits normally done by wiki users. I have been testing Nq2h Bot all day, and it's currently at a stage where it is running without any problems. Some of the early features will include:


 * Categorizing jpeg images with the template
 * Categorizing the GEMH images with the Category:GEMH Images category.

Here's a list of other features planned for the future:
 * Update infoboxes on all pages when the infobox itself is changed.
 * Automatically welcome new users - Consensus says not a good task.. so lets no do it.
 * Update all items price to the proper template.

If anyone has ideas, or needs something to be done, feel free to ask that it be added to Nq2h Bot.

Why Bot status?

 * Bot status removes bot edits from Recent changes, unless you specifically show them.
 * Bot status allows Nq2h Bot to access links from the API for 5,000 pages at a time, rather than 500 for non-bot accounts.
 * Bot status would allow Nq2h Bot to edit faster, without causing problems. That would reduce the current wait-time from 8 hours (30 edits/hour), to under 40 minutes (6 edits/minute). Imagine how much more work it would get done going at 10 times the speed!

How to start Nq2h Bot
Currently, I am the only user allowed to run Nq2h Bot, however, I am working on a feature to allow sysops on the wiki access to him. He is run entirely from a web browser, with no downloads. The only catch is that the web browser must be left open the entire time he is running. I'll get this set up as soon as I feel Nq2h Bot is secure enough.

Consensus Needed
According to Wikia policy, community consensus is needed to update a user to a bot. That's why I need your help: please vote for support/oppose of Nq2h Bot receiving bot status, and give your reasoning behind it. Thanks! 01:02, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Support

 * 02:28, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * 03:19, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]] <font color=#FF0000> C <font color=#B22222> hicken <font color=#DC143C> 7 [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]] 08:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Chrislee33 09:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * 14:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Support, although I've got a couple of comments:
 * I'd question it auto-welcoming new editors - it's not very personal.
 * Be careful with the thing - not all "Exchange:" article names exactly match the item's article in the main namespace.
 * Avoid sharing the "Nq2h Bot" account and password if/when you release it to other sysops (even if it's just compiled into the executable). Each sysop should really request their own bot account and log on to your code with that id, otherwise you won't have accountability if someone abuses it. Pointy 18:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Skill 18:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Support, but I agree about the new users - that shouldn't be a bot task. <Font face=Sylfaen><font color=RoyalBlue>Christine <Font face=Sylfaen><font color=LimeGreen>TalkFlickr 19:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Pointy's Points

 * Okay, if there's no consensus, I won't run any of the specific bots.
 * - That bot specifically is a difficult one. There are a few checks built in:
 * Reads Exchange: templates and finds the matching title mainspace article.
 * Checks for the item infobox, and only ONE item infobox.
 * Checks that the item name is spelled the same.
 * Checks that the item image is the same.

If any of these checks fail, then the bot will require manual confirmation.
 * For other sysops: The code is based online, on a server, and is run entirely from the browser. The code isn't downloaded, so the username/password is secure on the server. There's going to be an implemented "SHUT OFF" switch, in case of abuse/problem, linked from the user page, and in every Edit summary. That way if it goes haywire, it's easy to fix. Once the link is clicked, Nq2h Bot could only process one more edit before it is forced to shut down. There is no manual override, and it must be changed by me. And, of course, there is no way to send custom commands to the bot, I set up an initialization file, which starts the basic settings (IE, for categorizing the jpeg images, it loads all the .jpg, .jpeg, .JPEG, and .JPG files from the wiki to a list to be processed.), and passes that to the actual bot, who runs that info. The only potential for abuse would be to modify the settings, which, I am rewriting the bot framework to save to a file on the server (rather than using GET paramaters in the url.) As I said, this won't be done until Nq2h Bot is completly secure, to my standards, which is to prevent hacking from experianced users, and not just mistakes by sysops. 18:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * A comment on the shut off switch: there would have to be a mechanism to prevent abuse of that switch, wouldn't there? And if it's restricted to sysops only, then how is it different from blocking? Unless it's just a link to the block page? Skill 18:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I was going to put a simple password on it, so that it wasn't restricted just to sysops, but I could, of course, give the password to trusted editors. And, of course, someone like me who needed to quickly shut off a bot going out of control. Nothing too hard of a password, but something that would prevent ips from forcefully shutting it off. Maybe, like BotNq2h1 or similar. 18:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Nq2h Bot has been Botted!
Nq2h Bot has been botted by Avatar today. Thanks to all who supported this! Nq2hBot3 and Nq2hBot4 will be on their way soon! 07:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Forum archives
Currently, two archived pages from the old Forum: namespace, Tavern/Archive/Abusive Sockpuppetry and Tavern/Archive/Dreadnought's admin rights are in the main namespace, in subpages of a page about a bar. Shouldn't they be moved somewhere else? Maybe a subpage of this page? Skill 15:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd have to say that RuneScape:Yew grove/Forum Archive/Page would be the best place. We just gotta make sure we link to them from this page. Remove them from Orphaned pages, and uncategorized pages too, as I hate those pages. lol 18:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Moved them to subpages of RuneScape:Yew grove/Forum archives. Skill 00:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Item infobox
With the unbalanced trade update, the street price field in the item infobox is probably redundant, given that prices are now unchangeably fixed to those at the Exchange. Does anyone else think it should be removed? Another issue is the inconsistency between articles with regards to whether the GE price is a single value or a price range. There are advantages and disadvantages to each, I think, but either way there should be a consistent standard for all articles. Skill 10:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I certainly agree about the street price, that can go. Am I right in thinking that the bot that produces those GE graphs needs a single price rather than a range? Even if that is the case, we can probably display both a single value, and a range calculated from that single value, for those who prefer that. Hurston 11:54, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Street price is mostly useless. The only exceptions I see is when some items usually traded in bulk are traded in small amounts, like law runes usually traded at 1k for one law rune. But this is quite rare and could be either put only in the article text, or in a special infobox field that would remain hidden unless it's filled (like the current "seller" field), or, probably best put somewhere in an article about prices in general (a few sentences saying basically "sometimes ppl eager to get small, cheap items, are willing to pay 1-10k to get them quickly in a player-to-player trade" - NB : I saw a guy buying game necklace for 10k...). GE price should be a single value, because when using the GEItem template, you are forced to use a single value anyway, so if we want a consistent standard, it has to be a single value. A calculated range won't work, because Jagex are cheating on the ranges. 12:01, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Jagex is cheating the ranges? What? Oh, never mind. I agree that getting rid of street ptice makes sense. And also on using a single value on GE price, most people looking will realize that the price is a variable, so it will be plenty useful the way it is.--Degenret01 06:34, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I just mean that the ranges aren't like average price +/- 5% : the prices often can't go under some low value close to the alch price. For instance, last time I checked, rune javelins had an "average" price which was (almost?) the same as the minimum price. 06:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree, many infoboxes have street prices that are beyond the trading limit range now. 20:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Random Exchange???
I think it get's annoying when you want a random page and it comes up with an Exchange: article. There is an exchange article nearly every item now so there is a high chance of geting one. Is there any way we can remove it from showing up? Or could there be like a category? Cheers, <font color=#FF0000> C <font color=#B22222> hicken <font color=#DC143C> 7  <font colour=#DC143C><Wiki MEETUP> 03:59, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Only way pretty much is to make Exchange: into its own namespace, which would have some other benefits as well. Problem is, that's easier said than done... Skill 04:02, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol I see. Who would be able to do this hard work? Beauracrat, Sysop or a normal user? Chwwrs, [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]] <font color=#FF0000> C <font color=#B22222> hicken <font color=#DC143C> 7 [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]] <font colour=#DC143C><Wiki MEETUP> 05:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Only staff can create the actual namespace, but there's a lot of work for us to do before they'll do that. According to what I've read, we would have to move every page that starts with Exchange: to a different title, including the redirects that would result from the moves. Given that we have 1,350 pages that would have to be moved and then redirects deleted, this is a LOT of work... not to mention that we have to move all the pages back afterwards. We could probably get a bot to move the pages, if that simplifies anything, but there's still almost 3,000 deletions for all of us sysops to do even if we do get one. Skill 05:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow I guess that is a bit too much work. It would be good if there was like a filter that would block all articles with the word 'exchange' or something. Then the exchange articles would be filtered. Probably not possible though. I'm gonna work on my bot now. Cheers, [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]] <font color=#FF0000> C <font color=#B22222> hicken <font color=#DC143C> 7 [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]] <font colour=#DC143C><Wiki MEETUP> 06:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

An Exchange namespace
According to the custom namespaces policy of wikia, every wiki is allowed to have 3 custom namespaces. The RuneScape wiki has used one namespace on "Updates." Because several users have mentioned getting Exchange: pages when clicking random article (and it was also suggested at the start of the project), I propose we use our second custom namespace on creating an "Exchange" namespace. I don't consider this a "waste" as some users may argue, because the Exchange pages aren't really content articles. It will be tons of work moving over 1500 pages once, and then back again once the namespace is created. All redirects created will have to be deleted. Twice. Now, honestly that idea excites me, I love deleting things. :) However I know I'm not the only one on this wiki. This would take a lot of work and a lot of editors. I guess we could just move everything to something like "E:item name", have the namespace created, then move it back to "Exchange:item name" so that all the exchange pages stay together in the Alphabetical List. We need consensus before wikia will make a namespace, so here are my questions: Please discuss! =D <Font face=Sylfaen><font color=RoyalBlue>Christine <Font face=Sylfaen><font color=LimeGreen>TalkFlickr 00:32, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Does everyone like the idea of using one of our custom namespaces?
 * 2) Will there be many users willing to pitch in and help?
 * Yeh It's a good idea. But as stated above somewhere won't it be a hell of a lot of work for admin's? Cheers, [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]] <font color=#FF0000> C <font color=#B22222> hicken <font color=#DC143C> 7 [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]] <font colour=#DC143C><Wiki MEETUP> 07:57, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If several admins are willing to help, it isn't as much work for each of us. I'm sure I could write a simple program to spit out deletion links so that there isn't as much clicking involved, possibly even with deletion summaries already filled in. Same with links to the move page, if no one writes a bot to do all the moves for us. It would also be easier to get this done if it's within the next few days while some of us are still on break... although that probably won't happen. Skill 09:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * OK. Well my bot is nearly finished and I'm looking for ideas. Also, If were gonna do this the bots editing Exchange articles will have to be turned off so they don't get confused when the articles are moved. Cheers, [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]] <font color=#FF0000> C <font color=#B22222> hicken <font color=#DC143C> 7 [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]] <font colour=#DC143C> talk 11:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah it really sucks cuz Skill and I were on vacation all this week, and now it's nearly over. Again, it's a lot of work but I am so looking forward to it. :D Also, I have Monday off too, but like Skill said, I doubt we'll have consensus by then. <Font face=Sylfaen><font color=RoyalBlue>Christine <Font face=Sylfaen><font color=LimeGreen>TalkFlickr 13:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe you could put a message up the tope of pages (That thing up the top that you can dismiss) that says we're trying to reach a consensus on making Exchange: an official namespace. I'll be away this weekend so i won't be able to help but if there is a list of supporters put my name on. [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]] <font color=#FF0000> C <font color=#B22222> hicken <font color=#DC143C> 7 [[Image:Kandarincrest.gif|33px]] <font colour=#DC143C> talk 05:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Added a link to the sitenotice. I doubt that we'll have a consensus by the end of the weekend, though (this is a big change). Skill 06:14, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Bot policy
Thought I'd let everyone know, since this seems to be the place to do this, that I've created a draft bot policy here. Please suggest changes and improvements on the proposal's talk page rather than here. Skill 23:06, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

ChickenBot
According to the new bot policy I've got to get my bot approved before I can start making it. I've already started and It's coming along. It might do things like: This is not a proposal for botting ChickenBot but a proposal to allow it on the wiki. Cheers, <font color=#FF0000> C <font color=#B22222> hicken <font color=#DC143C> 7  <font colour=#DC143C> talk 06:22, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Detect page blanking and vandalism
 * Mark articles that have a low size with Template:Stub but will not add it if it already contains it or if it is a disambig page.
 * Do other temporary things like mentioned above in the Exchange namespace section.
 * Other Stuff (Ideas here!)
 * It might also tag non-transparent pages if I can get it to.