There has been some discussion over what should be placed in the "Requirements" field for Achievement infoboxes. Achievement requirements as of now currently include a mixture of quests/miniquests, skills, and items.
In-game however, the requirements are displayed as:
The in-game achievement does not list the needed item or the actual requirement of 99 Summoning needed to unlock the pet, only the 60 Summoning requirement needed to access the Queen Black Dragon.
Here are a few proposals using the above achievement as an example (feel free to add your own):
1 Strictly follow in-game requirements:
2 Allow achievement, quest/miniquest, and skill requirements that are necessary to complete the achievement:
3 Allow achievement, quest/miniquest, skill, and item requirements that are necessary to complete the achievement:
* Song from the Depths is used as a quest example and is not required for the actual achievement
For future proofing, another question would be what skills to allow in the requirements. For example, some quests require many skills to complete. If a quest is required for an achievement, should all the respective skills needed for the quest be listed on the achievement as well?
Proposal 2- Allowed skill i think should come from post-quest/miniquest or if it requires like playing a minigame or doing d&d then list the requirements of that. --Luis12345lts (talk) 00:56, April 14, 2018 (UTC)
1, but with comments - I think we should follow Jagex on this one. It'll get way too messy if we try and add multiple requirements which are all indirect requirements to the main achievement. The issue does come up with stuff like the QBD pet where you actually need 99 summoning to unlock the pet (unlocking the pet grants the achievement, not obtaining the pet) - we should mention this in the article somewhere, not the navbox. Haidro (talk) 02:40, April 14, 2018 (UTC)
Support 1 - Agree with Haidro, we take things straight from the game such as quest length, so I don't see why this shouldn't be the same. However, things that indirectly are requirements should be noted in the article as to avoid confusion User:KelseW/Signature 02:43, April 14, 2018 (UTC)
Strong oppose 1 - Having incomplete/wrong information just because Jagex also does is ridiculous in my opinion. I honestly don't see why it's "messy" to have correct information in the navbox as opposed to misleading statements. From 2 and 3 I personally favor 3 but in this case I can see why some might find it cluttered compared to 2. Support 2/3 - bad_fetustalk 15:19, April 14, 2018 (UTC)