Talk:RuneScape/Archive 2

message: This archive page covers approximately the dates between May 1, 2005 and October 30, 2005.
Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are
replying to if necessary.
Please add new archivals to Talk:RuneScape/Archive03. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.) Thank you. Super Quinn 00:40, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

message: I edited the external links section; I removed some biased descriptions on the clan links (e.g. "An awesome and powerful clan") and moved them apart from the fansite links. I don't find anything wrong about putting clansite links in the section, but descriptions should be strictly objective.
I then removed the notice on the RuneHQ link since last I heard someone else took the site over and it is not closing down.
I also felt that the more popular and trustworthy fansites should be at the top of the list, while less known sites should go at the bottom (especially ones on free hosts). I based my ordering on oldest at the top to newest lower down, but only for the first few links (the very well known fansites).
:The external links section is getting completely out of control so I've commented all but the two official links out.  I think that pretty much all the links should be culled barring a few of the useful RuneScape encylopaedias and specialised portals.  The clan sites should go for sure. --Kevin 18:36, May 15, 2005 (UTC)
::The clan sites need to go but not the good fansites. After all Wikipedia External links section is a collection of resources related to the original article. I'd vote for RuneScape COmmunity, RuneHQ, Tip.it to stay. 
::Gaurav Arora 06:00, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
Yes I completely agree the external links is getting out of control, it's just people trying to advertise their site, or even scam players. I agree just listing the two official links is safer. Runefire 05:43, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Except they're not official sites, and I believe the site I've been collab-ing on is simply 'better' than these sites, what with their donation begging and crude site design. FireballX301 04:33, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links too Biased 

message: Ive gone over the entire RuneScape community of articales on here, and I find that it is lacking a bunch of things. I have the ability to add many all the neccesary information, but as for using wikipedia, im not too good at...
Anyways, what im looking for is someone that will help me perform a major overhaul on this article. There are many redundancies and subarticles that need to be created. I just dont know where to get started. In the meantime, I am going to start researching conventions and things and attempt to do it myself (making sure to know what im doing before touching anything).
For example, since RuneScape and RuneScape 2 is essentially identical, then the RuneScape and RuneScape_2 pages have become quite redundant and are therefor pretty much carbon copies of eachother. There isnt much explanation on RuneScape classic, so perhaps just changing the entire RuneScape 2 page to a RuneScape classic page...
Curran919 03:28, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: * If you're thinking of creating making the large articles into a number of small articles (for combat, interface, etc), fair warning that you should be prepared to get the whole thing deleted again.  Earlier, we had a number of users creating separate articles for each quest, location, etc and a number of those were either deleted or made into redirects.  You can see some of the remnants if you look at the number of redirects in RuneScape quests, RuneScape locations, etc. Also PMC, are you working on just this article or the whole series?  Maybe RuneScape should be more general and the specifics are moved to RuneScape 2, making that a bigger article? --Ricky81682 (talk) 08:06, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
***Ricky, I've been working on just the RuneScape article, with the unlikely goal of getting around to the rest of the series eventually. My personal opinion about the series is that we should have the following: RuneScape (including details of RS Classic and RS2), RuneScape skills, RuneScape locations, RuneScape quests (story descriptions of quests, NOT walkthoughs, and including any quest-related monsters.) RuneScape runes, RuneScape 2, RuneScape cheats and RuneScape economy should be merged + deleted. That makes just enough articles for breadth and depth, without the problem of four thousand tiny little RuneScape articles running around. Curran, I don't have MSN and I'm only online every second day. (Don't ask, long story.) My email is yinyang_oreo@hotmail.com, feel free to drop a line. I'll try to get you my article as soon as I can. It can be difficult, my computer at home (where the article currently resides) is notoriously cranky.  17:36, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Massive Improvements

message: Does anyone know anything about this article or topic? It is currently proposed for deletion. A skeleton of it was speedy deleted a while ago, the entire content on that occasion was Saradomin- Good Guthix- Neutral Zamorak- Evil. Informed comments and/or votes at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/RuneScape gods would be very helpful. TIA. Andrewa 16:36, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[RuneScape gods]] on VfD

message: What is it about this article that seems to attract vandals? --WCFrancis 19:55, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: RuneScape as Target

message: What's THIS supposed to mean^? Appearently, some of us may not like this game, and if you want to say so, labeling the overview section "overview of my asshole" isn't exaclty the best way to do it. This is a warning to whoever did this - people here can and will block you from this site if you do it again. I'm not saying I can or will, I'm just warning you. --Wack'd About Wiki 02:49, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  overview of my asshole 

message: I say we add the RuneScape gods article onto the RuneScape Series, makes enough sense to me.
Redizhot 21:32, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  How about we add the RuneScape gods article... 

message: I wanted to present another side of the community aspect of RuneScape.
I edited the article to include this reference but it was removed later: http://www.RuneScapehaven.com/bhe/viewtopic.php?t=2591
I think people should be aware of the childishness this game seems to propagate.
If Wikipedia finds this entry offensive then please forgive me.
*I'll assure you that you are not alone in your opinion. Myself, along with many of my former clan mates agree that the game's community has declined along with the average age of the players. However, as far as wikipedia goes, that is not the sort of information you put in here. Feel free to add a "As RuneScape costs nothing to play, it often attracts many younger players, which detracts from the experience for older players" or whatever, but i doubt any of the rest of us are going to slander Jagex on here. Its a love-hate relationship.... were just all addicted to this 'crap-tastic' game... Curran919 21:40, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Community has more than 1 face... 

message: I'll have to agree with some users that the RuneScape articles need a lot of work. Unfortunately, not every experienced Wikipedian plays RuneScape, and those who do play it might not be professional writers. So I think that these articles will take quite to improve. --Ixfd64 18:04, 2005 August 16 (UTC)
**The RuneScape demographic consists of younger players (I believe an average age of 14) and therefor the contributors (beneficial or not) to the RuneScape article as compared to one on Zeferino Vaz (yes, i Random Paged that one) will be less mature and... frankly poor writers. Im probably one of the only people who has very in depth knowledge of RS and who can write, but unfortunately, I do not have enough time on my hands. Curran919 07:00, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article quality 

message: OK I've never played RuneScape because it did not appeal to me at the time. However RuneScape has made its mark in the mmorpg world.
In alot of beta's I play, when it goes p2p people complain about having to pay. And they demand a free to play server. And they give all sorts of arguements like oh look at RuneScape, f2p servers = money.
So I came to wikipedia to find more info but this site is somewhat lacking on the whole "how RuneScape is so succesful even tho its f2p"
Just thought it was a section some of you might want to throw in. Either adding on or as a stub
* The free version has less features than the 'Member's version', e.g. a smaller game world, fewer skills, fewer servers (it has more servers then the members section becuase there is more f2p's then p2p's)(put in by thomas). RuneScape makes money because some features are only availible to paying members - so people pay to get them. Having a free taster also encourages people to start playing - and the free version is fully playable and has no time limit. SeventyThree(Talk) 17:44, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  re: member vs free player 

message: Jagex have added about 10 new random events.
I'm kinda new here, and I'm also an admin and head of content at a popular RS Help site. I added a picture of DeviousMUD, the first version of the game. I also updated some pictures that were already there. 
If I had the time I'd go ahead and add them. 
The new randoms are:
Gift-Givers:
Pirate's Combination Lock
Freaky Forester
Frog
Highwayman
Quiz Master
Certers (Miles, Niles and Giles are BACK!!! They note stuff in your inventory if you don't talk to them)
Jekyll and Hyde
Lost Pirate
Evil Bob
Dangerous randoms:
Evil Chicken
Inconveniences:
Lost & Found office
Dr Ford
Farming rake/spade heads flying off
More information can be found at the RuneScape.com > manual > random events page.
*I'll add these in when i get some free time this weekend.Curran919 07:02, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Random events 

message: Does anyone know the duplication cheat? I know it propbably won't work, but I just want to
see what it was.
:There is no such thing. There was a way to duplicate items, but the offendors were banned, and Jagex patched that hole.
:People attempt to Hex edit the client, for some reason I'm not too sure of (but I think it's related to item duplication), but jagex log the IPs of people who hex edit, so you'll be banned either way :p
:::There was one instance where players where able to duplicate items by changing an item tag number on a useless item to a more valuable item. However, this was more than two years ago in RS Classic, and such a feat would be near impossible now. Regardless, this isnt really the place to be asking people how to cheat...Curran919 07:05, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplication cheat 

message: One of the most notable comments is:
An enigmatic Wise Old Man lives in Draynor Village. He has recently broken into the neighbouring bank and, apparently, stolen a lot of money and a valuable party hat. Members may watch a 'security recording' of the attack, which provoked a torrent of laughter on the official discussion forums when it was first released. Certainly it isn't every day that you can watch an elderly gentleman amble into a bank, politely request that everyone stay still, murder two bankers and four players, then perform a kung-fu kick on a watchman (unless you live in North Korea). 
How can we let such biased trash like this article exist on wikipedia? Anouymous 01:59, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  This thread needs cleaning up 

message: Today i deleted two unneccesary sections, the RuneScape Humour, one of the less enyclopedic areas of the article, and the chat effects, something that is such a small form of the game and that can be summed up in a sentence when i do some expansions on the community area later tonight or later this week. Also, i understand that my large Random Events update today mnay contradict what im trying to do, but i am addressing priorites as Jagex lays them forth, and i think that it should have its own article in the series.
And ill say this here since nobody else visits the discussion pages of the subarticles, all the information in the runes article is either unneccesary, or covered in the RuneScape Weapons and RuneScape Skills articles. Curran919 03:10, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slimming Down 

message: In the infobox, Rating was "5/5". I'm pretty sure it's meant to be an ESRB or similar rating, like T or M. Some cursory research didn't turn up a deifnitive rating, but one source said RP, so I went with that for now. If you know better, please fix! --Ashenai 21:55, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rating fixed 

message: I would suggest somebody fixes it, if not done by friday i might just decide to delete it. And before you flame me, read the section, you will agree with me --Super Quinn 14:20, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: lol.  Another editor and I were looking at that and shaking our heads last week, but neither of us knew enough about the game to try and unravel it either directly or from going back down the edit list.  Glad to see it is fixed up. --Syrthiss 21:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The History and development section is incomplete and makes no sense 

message: Why is * now a box, instead of a list? - has the CSS template been vandalized?
 *Ah, I see, a single space indent is a box, not seen that one before, or at least, never remembered it.
And the * was displayed
:Quick guide (ignore the quotes): ':' will indent; ' ' will render that line monospaced with a box 'round it (it won't wrap, either); '*' is a dot point in an unordered list; '#' is a number in an ordered list.  Any questions, don't hesitate to ask here or on my talk page.
:By the way, do you think you could "sign" all your comments with four tildes, like: ~~~~?  It automatically datestamps and signs your comment, so that people replying know who you are and when you wrote it. --fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 19:20, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, used the others, but never had occasion to use that one before Ace of Risk 12:24, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odd wiki formatting