Talk:RuneScape/Archive 1

message: I might just have missed it but is there a section for the special one off events like the Easter Bunny? If so can you please say so and I will add the easter bunny and the rubber chicken! --80.229.152.246 20:45, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Random events

message: Seems like there are 2 seperate articles, Runescape and RuneScape, with slightly different content
This has been fixed.--63.249.85.209 19:39, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Two articles

message: I'm of the opinion of creating a few pages, like Runescape (Skills), Runescape (Quests), etc. where we take the separate pages that we have and make them into sections and link to the specific sections.  This also help since most of these pages aren't really going to ever be more than the size of stubs. --Ricky81682 06:08, Nov 3, 2004 (UTC)
In the meantime, I've merged the contents of "Cooking (Skill)" and "Prayer (Skill)" into this page. Hoary 02:59, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Branching article

message: For some reason somebody vandalized this page, I've brought it back to its last working condition. bsdlogical 05:06, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism once again

message: Since we're splitting articles anyhow, let's also make RuneScape locations, RuneScape monsters for information of that sort so that we don't have sixty separate substubs for all the RuneScape info. PMC 05:03, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting articles 

message: Recently an anon attempted to clean up this page and in the process removed most of the information on it, reducing it to a stub. While I feel their edits were in good faith, I have, after some deliberation, reverted. If we are going to include a subject in an encyclopedia, we need to have all the information we can get on that subject; the more detailed the better. If anyone objects to my reversion, please leave a note here or on my talk page. (Click the "M") PMC 08:17, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent revert 

message: It was me who shortened the article. I did not have an account when I did it a few days ago, so it would have been listed as "anon". I didn't want to seem like a vandal or anything, so here I am.
The main reason I shortened it so much was because I was thinking diffefrently from you. I didn't quite agree with giving users extensively in-depth information. I tried to make it more of a brief summary of the game rather than go into the economics and outside communities. While the information on there is correct, I think there is far too much, and the notice at the top says that this article needs shortening. I do however object to the list of clan links at the bottom. They seem very out of place. There are hundreds of clans out there and none of them are official in any way, so I don't think they deserve a place on the article. Aside from that, I hope you understand where I'm coming from. :)
-Blodnatt
*I do, and thank you for being so polite about it =) The cleanup notice doesn't say that it should be shortened in any way, just cleaned up to conform with encyclopedic standards. That's what I've been trying to do lately, as you can see by the edit history. (I'm getting there. Slowly but surely.) Me and Aqua have also been working on creating a family of RuneScape articles so that the main article won't be so cluttered. When we're done, we hope to leave RuneScape like a summary of the game, ("This is the game, there's lots of players, you can have skills and do quests, go here and here to check it out in depth.") with the other articles filling it out for anyone who wants to know more. 
*The 'Pedia aims to collect all encyclopedic information, and RuneScape, being such a massive game, is inherently encyclopedic. You may think the information is frivolous, but others (including me) might disagree. It isn't really in the spirit of the Wiki to delete massive blocks of information without even notifying the community. Can you see where I'm coming from? (I do agree about the clan list though, feel free to take that out with severe prejudice) PMC 01:58, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reply to above post 

message: A lot of sections were duplicated.
When I tried reverting to the last correct version, the preview gave even more duplication. I hand edited the sections, and it seems ok now. If the duplicates were different versions of the sections, some changes are probably no longer in the article. Iaen 10:11, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section duplication problem. 

message: not sure if this section is really needed on wikipedia, at the very least it needs to be cleaned up quite a bit and moved to the bottom of the page not the top.bakuzjw (aka 578) 00:06, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "begginer tips'