Talk:RuneScape/Archive 15

message: * Spelling- RuneScape is a British Game and uses British spelling, so British Spelling must be used. This rule applies to all articles in the RuneScape Series.
* Fansites- Wikipedia's external links guideline is that one major fansite may be included as an external link. As fan sites all offer similar information, an effective measurement must be made to decide which is the most appropriate to list. The method that contributors believe is the most effective is by Alexa ranking. RuneHQ.com is the lowest-placed (most often visited) by Alexa rank and is therefore listed. For more information on this, plase click here.
   
* RuneScape Wiki - Ok, I'm advertising the RuneScape Wiki, but it's probably a good idea.For those of you who get your edits reverted with such nonsense explanations like "cruft" or "linkspam" or whatever, you might want to check out the RuneScape Wiki. To put it plainly, your edits are more likely to be appreciated there. Hyenaste (tell) 02:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  General Reminders 

message: I think that this sentence is important to the article, but everything I put in bold above seems like fancruft to me (is a non-player going to care about members being able to do Recipe for Disaster?)
"Membership status allows players to explore their own part of the RuneScape world, which has since become the majority of the map, dozens of new quests to embark on, such as Recipe for Disaster, new skills to tackle, like fletching, new items to be had, like the dragon spear, various mini-games to pass the time, such as Castle Wars, and other minor, yet numerous additions."
I removed the specifics, revert if I shouldn't have--JCGracik talk c 18:46, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  fancruft? 

message: Ok, yet another scammer attempts a mass attack in the article. This time from Runescape cheats (talk • contribs • [ page moves] • block user • [ block log]). Amarkov shot that little plan down in record time, but that won't stop the vandal from doing it again or creating articles for the same purpose. I'll post this situation in WP:ANI tomorrow, but maybe we could file a checkuser and hand the IP address over to Jagex? CaptainVindaloo t c e 04:07, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not entirely sure what handing the IP to Jagex will accomplish. Last I heard, they're still dead against IP bans, although it's possible that it's changed. More of the problem is, I doubt you'll be able to get a checkuser for the purpose of handing over the IP to Jagex. -Amarkov babble 04:12, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't necessarily mean for Jagex to impose an IP ban - just to ban the account operating from that address. If the IP is static, there isn't much chance of a false positive. Thing is, the email address that you are supposed to send your username/password to looks familiar - this latest vandal may be one of several sockpuppets and checkuser will answer this. Whatever the case, using Wikipedia for phishing simply for one's own gain easily qualifies as a form of trolling and bad vandalism and is certainly not good-faith. CaptainVindaloo t c e 18:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, a checkuser for that would probably be good. I just don't think you'll get the IP to hand over to Jagex. -Amarkov babble 18:53, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm...this article is becoming a HUGE target for vandalism.--EdI'm lonely, talk to me contribs 19:47, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, duh. -Amarkov babble 19:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The phisherman has yet to return. I'll file an entry with the checkuser folks and we'll see what comes up. If they are all socks, then an ANI report might get them all banned. CaptainVindaloo t c e 02:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

text: RFCU filed. CaptainVindaloo t c e 03:03, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I've already asked Chad123261 (talk • contribs) to stop, after seeing him add the links three times . We'll see what happens. CaptainVindaloo t c e 15:54, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Scammers in the article

message: Wikipedia:WikiProject_RuneScapeIt was on the Portal talk but I thought I'd post it here too.  So far I've made the basic layout for it, since the one the creator made looked a bit weird.  Just click the "EDIT" button on the top-right of any frame to change it - try not to change the main page unless you know what you're doing. Agentscott00(talk) 04:43, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject RuneScape 

message: Yes... If no one joins it will collapse. Visit Wikipedia:WikiProject RuneScape. Only if you are intrested to making this project triumphant(/perfect... Ok i have bad english).
--Storkian 12:55, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Um... It's a Wikiproject for eleven articles. Maybe I'm biased by being part of the PCP, with 500+ articles, but that seems a TEENY bit low. -Amarkov babble 14:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't know if it's going to stay long or not, I'm doubting it here, but as long as we've got it we should at least try.  Even if it's only eleven articles, but they could use some help. Agentscott00(talk) 17:46, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recruiting member for the WikiProject RuneScape 

message: Generally the title "Runescape" is unencyclopaedic. Should we move the article to "Runescape 2" and make "Runescape"  redirect to "Runescape 2" and put down a disambugation page while we are at it? It should make navigation easier. I know that the mass number of redirects need to be fixed, but it shouldn't matter much.Doomed Rasher 00:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is it unencyclopedic? And WHY should we force a redirect from the title any sane person would try to use? -Amarkov babble 00:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well it is the game currently in use by Jagex. Perhaps we make the redirect from RuneScape 2 to RuneScape--EdI'm lonely, talk to me contribs 01:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: But even Jagex does not officialy call it "RuneScape 2". The official name is "RuneScape", and the older version is "RuneScape Classic". Nothing is officialy called RuneScape 2. The redirect to here makes sense, but not the other way around. -Amarkov babble 01:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: This article contains information on the background of both Runescape Classic and RS2, therefore I feel that it should remain titled "Runescape" -Mamyles 12:15, 01 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move "Runescape" to "Runescape 2"?

message: i created Runescape history and development to reduce the size of Runescape to within the size guidelines of 32 KB, and to accomplish one of the to do list items. i then changed the current section to an overview. this started an edit war. the edit war stopped soon, but a consensus needs to be reached on this.Exarion 00:46, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't call it an edit war, just a request that you propose it first. Seems like a valid split to me, though not completely necessary, quite appropriate. -- zzuuzz (talk) 01:02, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

text: If all edit wars were as smoothly executed as that one, Wikipedia would be a much nicer place. I disagree with the split, as it is just a split. If you tear a page of a book in half, you'll be left with the same information, but provided in a way that neither makes sense on its own. Hyenaste (tell) 01:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The amount of information you removed wasn't really that great, a portion of it should have stayed (eg. Graphics, servers, advertising.  Some of these parts should go, some should stay.  It would have been better to go through them rather than to just move the whole sections.)  32kb isn't a requirement, it's a sylistic guideline. The average user's attention span won't last them much longer than reading through 32kb of information according to the page on it, but that's no reason to strictly enforce this.  Until we can find a way to smoothly create a second article or subpage for the History section, it should stay for now. Agentscott00(talk) 01:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

text: But is the History and development article necessary?--Ed Trick? or   Treat?  02:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: it isnt nessecary, but it would be helpful to reduce the article size. Exarion 05:00, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  history and development- own article? 

message: A peer review comment has been left regarding the criticism section we have. I'm think that we delete the entire portion of the article and rebuild it from scratch. Is this a good idea?--Ed Trick? or   Treat?  02:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It could solve it. People have been trying to fix it for ages and, evidently, its still not good enough - • The Giant Puffin • 11:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I'd just start by removing anything blatantly unusable (IE gamefaqs reader-reviews). The problem is that 'criticism' has been read as 'negative criticism' as opposed to 'critical review'. This has lead to desperately searching for some negative views of RS to put into the article. If nothing concrete can be found from reliable sources so far as negative opinions, then that's all there is to worry about - we're just reproducing reliable sources here, not trying to magic up opinion where there isn't any. 86.139.126.131 18:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

text: It seems like we shouldn't. If we're eliminating POV, we should start completely from scratch, not try to better verify statements that we already had. -Amarkov babble 04:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Like Amarkov says, don't bother. Just leave it to gather dust in the history. Sorry to keep plugging this, but don't forget the PC Gamer article! And what was wrong with this version of the section?  We need professional reviews of the game, not people ranting on GameFAQs about being banned when "all i wuz doin tricking teh nubs to giv me all der gp and st00f!!!1111!!!11one!!" CaptainVindaloo t c e 04:05, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem with that section was that it contained mini-lists. Mini-lists aren't allowed per WP:MOS--Ed Trick? or   Treat?  04:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Why don't you look at the bottom of the Article? ;)  Back on topic, the BBC and PCG articles would probably be our best bets for now, we should use them as main reviews/criticisms, and maybe the GameFAQs as supporting reviews instead?  This was suggested a while back, but I think we should rename the criticisms section header to something that gives a more positive appeal - although there are positive critical reviews, the way it's used seems more like the section is about negative opinions towards the game.  Of course, we can't have all good stuff, but in my opinion the current name should go. Agentscott00(talk) 03:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Switch it back to 'Critical Review'. Gamespot should also has a staff review (ie, not written by a visitor to the site, but by a Gamespot employee), try that. I'm sure Gamespot can be called a reliable source for critical commentary of a game aswell. CaptainVindaloo t c e 11:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Hmm, just checking Gamespot, there doesn't seem to be a staff review. Odd. I could have sworn there was one last time I checked. CaptainVindaloo t c e 17:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: Heads up, folks. RuneScape random events is up for deletion again. CaptainVindaloo t c e 11:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm planning on rewriting a section of RuneScape weaponry if no one objects. (See the topic at the bottom of RuneScape weaponry's talk page.) I'm waiting until this Sunday to give people time if they're opposed to it. Pyrospirit 16:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: You mean RuneScape weaponry and RuneScape armour? They were merged into RuneScape combat. I thought you knew a merge was in the works? CaptainVindaloo t c e 01:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, cool. I heard that there was a merge coming, but I didn't know we had already started merging them. By the way, I saw the new article--it looks great. Also, do you think I did a good job of removing the redundancy between Skills and Combat by moving the combat section in Skills to the Combat article? Pyrospirit 01:17, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: AfD

message: if this doubles srry.
there isnt a good diffrence to call the may update a ottaly new version of rs and shoudl be merged with version 4(rs version 2)
peopel dont assosiate post may update rs as the current version, they call the RS2 update current--Cody6 03:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Isnt it just a series of improvements? Its not a nver version - • The Giant Puffin • 12:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  versions 

message: "Players using certain items can transform themselves into piles of stone, eggs, or monkeys, allowing them to avoid negative effects or gaining them access to otherwise unreachable places. Such "morphs" are temporary, and players cannot perform activities other than chatting while morphed."
As far i know, monkey shaped players can cut trees and bunnys/sheeps in cw can attack barricades.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Aure22 (talk • contribs) 
You need a ring to morph into egg it was the Easter holiday item. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pg908 (talk • contribs).
: I think players can move about in monkey forms as well. The meaning of "perform activities" is indeed sort of ambiguous. GSPbeetle complains Vandalisms 14:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  about morphing 

message: Some proof that ive added here is in bold with footnotes
:
RuneScape takes place in the fantasy-themed realm of Gielinor1, which is divided into the Kingdoms of Misthalin, Asgarnia, and Kandarin, the tropical island of Karamja, the Kharidian Desert, the Wilderness, and various other areas.[4] Players can travel throughout the game world on foot, magical teleportation, gnome gliders, fairy rings, and others. Each region offers different types of monsters, materials, and quests to challenge players.
Players are shown on the screen as customizable avatars. They set their own goals and objectives, deciding which of the available activities to pursue. There is no linear path that must be followed.2 Players can engage in combat with other players or with monsters, complete quests, or increase their experience in any of the available skills. Players can also interact with each other through trading, chatting, or playing combative or cooperative mini-games.
On 27 February 2002, Jagex launched an optional service. In order to gain access to a more extensive variety of features, players could choose to pay a monthly fee of £3.20, $5.00 United States dollars, or €8.40 per month when paid by credit card. Players can also pay through online services such as Pay Pal, by check or money order, or with their telephone number by paying additional fees to the payment provider. While not a new version3, because the game still operated under the same game engine, this service significantly changed the focus of the game.
Random events are short interludes that occur during the game, requiring some form of player input. They were introduced to deter players from using automated programs, known as macros or bots, to play the game with no human interaction. Postings in the RuneScape forums by Andrew Gower suggest that random events were designed not only to hinder macroers but to alleviate the monotony that can occur while leveling skills for long periods of time (referred to as grinding)4
Players can submit questions to any NPC in the game. Selected letters are answered in an update called Postbag from The Hedge at the end of each month. This feature of the site started on 26 September 2005 and has since become one of the most accessed pages of the site. From 24 September 2002 through 9 December 2004, players could submit questions to the RuneScape gods; however, the gods will no longer communicate so directly with mortal beings5.
1. This is the Guthix name for RuneScape; there are other names.
2. Some random players are chosen to do special reasons, such as Dark Prior. (Note- the most recent Dark Prior is Lord Revan57 [me]).
3. There are improvements constantly for just paying members.
4. Many people have never heard this term, including myself.
5. In the Zamorak Temple near the Taverly wilderness entrance, if you take Zamorak's wine, he will pour out his fiery wrath upon you. Is that not communication. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.119.251.105 (talk • contribs) .
:1: Such as?
:2: What does that involve? If it is part of a quest, you are never forced to complete a quest. I had Dragon Slayer sitting yellow in my journal for about half a year because I couldn't be bothered to finish it.
:3: By 'not a new version', it means 'not a different game'. Being a member is the equivalent of unlocking a new feature by completing some task in another game. For example, in Judge Dredd: Dredd Vs. Death, getting Judge Dredd rating on a mission unlocks a bonus mission. Getting Senior Judge or lower doesn't unlock the bonus. But despite the bonus unlocking, the game is still Judge Dredd: Dredd Vs. Death. And despite being a member, the game is still RuneScape. In some ways, you could call free-to-play RS a demo version.
:4: 'Grinding' is a generic MMORPG term, not specific to RuneScape. Remember, we are not writing for RS players, we are writing for the general public.
:5: "The gods will no longer communicate so directly with mortal beings" is a direct quote from a RuneScape.com page. It simply means players cannot send letters to the gods anymore. Instead, Jagex operates the 'Letters from the Postbag' system now.
:Sign your posts! CaptainVindaloo t c e 00:02, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm wondering why this IP took all of the trouble to copy and paste the text and make the commentary and footnotes. Perhaps something IS wrong with the way we worded the article. --Ed ¿Cómo estás? 02:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The alternate names for Gielinor sound like names given by demons and warp monsters. Listing names like that are borderline cruft, and not necessary; just because the Covenant call Master Chief a demon doesn't make him a demon. I'd like a citation or some kind of further reading link to do with this 'Dark Prior' thing, i'm not the only one to have never heard of it and Google finds nothing relevant. CaptainVindaloo t c e 22:41, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I've done every single quest, I can say there is most definitely no such person as "Dark prior". Both Anti Warp and Material Realm refer to qualities that Gielinor has, such as being made of material. -Amarkov babble 22:45, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Checking this on a hunch; look what i've found. CaptainVindaloo t c e 22:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

text: You didn't expect that? Pretty much every name conceivable has been taken, excluding gibberish or numbers. -Amarkov babble 23:11, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Why don't you just say it here? A chat in the game isn't going to provide any proof, there needs to be information which we can properly cite.  If you're going to be difficult, nobody's going to bother keeping the "Dark Prior" in the articles.  Agentscott00(talk) 02:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've contacted him. It turns out that it's a player made cult, that he once heard Jagex liked, and has had a maximum of 117 members. -Amarkov blahedits 05:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RuneScape Wikipedia Page: Biased and/or non factual? 

message: I enjoy Runescape very much and I read that somebody said that this article should be relocated to Runescape 2. I disagree. This is a more popular version, so I believe it deserves the title of Runescape. 
This is a discussion page, not the actual article. So I am allowed to add a comment (I am discussing Runescape) My name is Deathordoom0 on Runescape. And thank you to whomever deleted Chidro7's topic.
Also I started Runescape just a few days after postbag from the hedge was created (just a fun fact).
Runescape4lyfe 01:44, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just a Comment 

message: Please, when editing articles involving RuneScape, don't use relative terms such as "recent" or "new". These become out-of-date very quickly and require someone else to edit them once those updates have become old news. Since this isn't a RuneScape current events article, I'd say write everything as if it was a regular, completely integrated part of the game, rather than a new update. If you must, put the date in which the update was introduced for the most major updates. It's really getting annoying when I have to edit out the words "recent" or "new" a dozen times. Pyrospirit 02:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relative terms 

message: Too many haters are being nit picky about every runescape related page they can get their hands on. We need to do less for the main RS page and split off to the minor pages as there is no way the main page is getting anywhere near the AfD list. If the subpages can be made problemless, the AfD spree will end.  → p00rleno (lvl 77) ←ROCKSCRS 1:37 pm ET November 16 2006  
:Well, most of the subpages are just fancruft. I don't think we need a page to list and describe every single weapon, quest, spell, etc.  If anybody needs to know that, they could just go to a fansite.--JCGracik talk c 22:25, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not possible, really. If all that needed to be said about the game was in one article, it would be very, very large; a problem we've had before and resulted in several sections, RuneScape community for instance, being split out. According to Wikipedia:Article size; articles shouldn't be longer than around 32kB. CaptainVindaloo t c e 17:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Our main focus should be on making all sub-pages as encyclopedia-friendly as possible so prevent them from being unjustly removed - • The Giant Puffin • 23:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Delete Merge Delete Merge Delete 

message: I reverted the edit using popups, and unable to give an explanation with popups, I might as well speak up here. Although the paragraph in question was well written, it was added with no references and questionable information. We could probably use some info, but not all.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 00:30, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism Section Reverted 

message: Finland should be added on the map and list of new servers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.231.12.104 (talk • contribs) ..
:You're completely correct, the map now needs changing. I'll put it on the to-do list. J.J.Sagnella 20:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. CaptainVindaloo t c e 20:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not quite. I'll go find the news source and update the reference.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 01:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New servers 

message: I just wanted to know, which is more popular, RuneScape or Wikipedia? I couldn't find it on the statistics pages. Should the article contain this information? AstroHurricane001 18:40, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia, and no, sorry. CaptainVindaloo t c e 18:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Another fight for the ages. — Deckiller 18:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow lol - • The Giant Puffin • 22:12, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RuneScape vs. Wikipedia 

message: just fyi, runescape fell to 9 on Special:Mostrevisions to the Nintendo Wii We're only back 125 edits or so, so its not a big difference, but it may be a bad or good thing that the place of RS is falling so vandals dont hit it as much.  → p00rleno (lvl 77) ←ROCKSCRS<Font Color= "light blue"> *:05 am Nov 22, 2006  </Font>
:Good to see its not being vandalised as much now - • The Giant Puffin • 22:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's now about 200 edits behind Wii. Semi-protecting it was the best decision we ever made. I just hope it stays that way. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 02:28, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RS vs. Wii 

message: Is it a good idea, or not? It's better now that it's sourced, but is it important enough? -Amarkov blahedits 19:19, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think so. Its a pretty important part of the game, especially as there are three types - • The Giant Puffin • 22:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted it.  Sure, information on mods would be good in the article, but not a section of what's already covered in RuneScape_community.  A condensed copy would be much better.  Agentscott00(talk) 23:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: RuneScape community is likely to be AFDed, so it would be good to have a short section on mods in the main article. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 02:29, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moderator section 

message: The following lines are in the article 3 times, word for word.
Since it takes many hours to develop a character, many players regard playing RuneScape as a lifestyle, not a side activity. Playing RuneScape can be addicting, and some people play RuneScape more than they do anything else.[24] Jagex has included music, sound effects, and ambient noises throughout Gielinor to enhance gameplay. The music, while often a simple tune,[22], is designed to enhance mood and help to define the underlying cultures of the various locations around Gielinor. Sound effects, such as the "sploosh" heard when a lobster trap is submerged in water, are heard as players train their skills. Ambient noises, such as the cry of seagulls flying over the ocean, occur in logical places. Players can turn the music and sounds off if they prefer.
Once in "Gameplay", again directly below that making up the entirety of the "Lifestyle" section, and a 3rd time lower on the page under "Boring Tasks".
:Someone else has removed the repeated sentences. Thanks for pointing that out! --J.L.W.S. The Special One 02:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  repetition 

message: I cordially invite all of you to participate in a discussion about the Criticism section of this article. Stability, NPOV and verifiability are all GA criteria, and in order to reach GA status, we must make a decision and stick to it. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 03:51, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Criticism section - please participate in [[Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#Dispute_-_Verifiability_or_NPOV.3F|discussion]] 

message: Its been proposed for deletion. Are we going to try and save this article? Or is it too specific to keep - • The Giant Puffin • 11:15, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That article was merged into RuneScape locations ages ago, and has been unmerged by Necrobrawler (talk • contribs), who has also put Zezima up for DRV (here; since closed with deletion endorsed) and unmerged RuneScape weaponry in this edit. As weaponry was merged per concerns at its last AfD, I re-redirected that. I say re-redirect Varrock; there is no possible reason to keep it when everything you might want to know is already in locations. CaptainVindaloo t c e 17:44, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Varrock article 

message: It was overdue. Maybe 2nd one will get more discussion. -Amarkov blahedits 05:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RuneScape community]] 

message: #
#
#:Note: User is the originator of the idea. -Amarkov blahedits 15:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Create

message: #
# - Use the RS Wiki, or just go help out with a fansite.
# Your interpretation of WP:IAR makes no sense
#:Note: User does not regularly edit the RuneScape Series.  → p00rleno (lvl 77) ←ROCKSCRS     13:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Do not create

message: The rs would select page now says things like US East 3 as server location. That could make locations a pain if it becomes even more ambiguous. Keep your eyes peeled... p00rleno 00:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The information we have would be true if each country only had 1 server, except the UK. It doesn't really matter to the article. And you know, you can set your signature to something else. Just click "Raw signature" and copy in the signature you normally use, excluding timestamp. -Amarkov blahedits 00:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: i dont know where raw signature is. p00rleno 00:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

text: In Preferences, where you type your signature. -Amarkov blahedits 00:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: TEST → p00rleno (lvl 77) ←ROCKSCRS    00:31, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguous server locations. 

message: In this it says they were created to stop "automated programs"?
It was created to stop java based G.U.I.s that use scripts made by the users, to click on specific locations of the window which has runescape located somewhere within the window , if you want to get technical. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joshua090909 (talk • contribs) .
:A "script" that plays the game/clicks in pre-programmed spots (macros) *is* an automated program.  It doesn't necessarily need to be made from Java, many aren't.  Agentscott00(talk) 04:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It does not literally "play the game". It uses the pixel scale to tell the mouse where to click. Such as "MouseClick(X,Y,Right or Left click)"  Just to mention --Joshua090909 04:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The information can always be added once you find a reliable source for that. Also, signatures are important, so that we may identify who left a comment.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 04:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I myself as a java and pascal programmer  know it is the simplest way. Such as the once popular pascal color clicker S.C.A.R., it used the command i showed above. Java bots simply just use there jar file "runescape.jar" and place it on a java applet the same way jagex would if it was client based.I also know that "bots" can be made in Java,Pascal,VB .net,etc. . Joshua090909 04:34, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I get it. You mean bots that reverse engineer the RuneScape client/applet? You might also be interested in the Captcha article, as this is what random events effectively are. Computer programs don't do randomness. CaptainVindaloo t c e 16:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Random events 

message: It says that the most trafficked fansite is RuneHQ without any proof at all? Do external links need to cite there sources?--Joshua090909 04:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see the messages at the top of this talk page, and see here.  They provide information on why there's one site. Agentscott00(talk) 04:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There have been many questions about this recently. The community decided that RuneHQ was the most trafficked web site, backed up by a ratings system.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 04:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah i see that now, i just didn't see that page before.Joshua090909 04:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: Due to the fact that some servers are taken offline and the number of servers often changes, we are only providing an approximation. Currently, the number of servers should simply say "over 130," and the maximum number of players need not be exact. So, please don't change the number of servers unless Jagex actually adds new servers. For RSC, of course, the number can be exact because there's only 2 servers with 1250 people each maximum. Pyrospirit Talk Contribs 15:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, there is too much arguing over this. Using an exact number of servers is nothing but trouble, and a nightmare to keep correct and up to date. CaptainVindaloo t c e 16:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just got tired of people editing to "correct" the number of servers every day. Pyrospirit Talk Contribs 16:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Totally agree, people are like, Arrgh! Im gonna cut someone's head off if it dosn't say 137.59 servers capable of 2x103 players per server! Now dont rv my edit or fear my wrath mwahahaha!!!! Sorry, felt like being silly... But seriously, more than 130 will suffice for now, till theres over 140, and 150, and 160, 170, 180 190, 200, 210, 220 230... u get the point.  → p00rleno (lvl 77) ←ROCKSCRS     00:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of servers 

message: I'm pretty sure it's 1980, not 2000. It may be splitting hairs, but is there any source for either? -Amarkov blahedits 01:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of players per server