Talk:RuneScape/Archive 11

message: I started a copy edit and have a question the use of (xxxxx) after words is for where the accronym is going to be used in its place.  does that also mean that where other usage the same infrance can be applied. aka this increase their experience (train) in any of the does it mean that train is to use from here when referring to increasing experience.   Gnangarra 16:25, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I been bold with the lead, there was six or so sentences that started with "Players", its down to one.  I reduced the volume of wording used by cutting expanded repetative detail. Gnangarra 17:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  copyedit question 

message: I've noticed that when the article discusses the difference between p2p and f2p areas, activities and benefits that POV creaps in, this needs to addressed. Gnangarra 17:13, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally think that unless the difference is actively being told in the article, it shouldn't be mentioned at all. It's too specific. Hyenaste (tell) 17:28, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello, Gnangarra. Thanks for pointing this issue out. Could you provide some specific examples? Then we could decide how to work on them. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 07:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have already copy edited the two sections where this was a problem. Gnangarra 07:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV p2p vs f2p 

message: In the 'Graphics' part of the main RuneScape article, an update will 'start in February 2005' !!???!!
:It's been fixed, thanks. Hyenaste (tell) 19:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Graphics of 2005 

message: Players appear on the screen as customized avatars, can see and interact with each other. With no linear path to follow players set their own goals and objectives, deciding which of the available activities they wish to pursue. They can increase their experience (train) in any of the available skills. Interaction between players through chatting, trading, and other activities that are also part of the game. Alternatively they can pursue predetermined activites like Quests to obtain new weapons and skills.
Players appear on the screen as customized avatars, and can see and interact with each other. With no linear path to follow, players set their own goals and objectives, deciding which of the available activities to pursue. They may increase their experience (train) in any of the available skills, complete quests, and engage in combat with monsters and other players. Players may interact through chatting, trading and other activities.
:The information in the second paragraph, about the kingdoms RuneScape takes place in, should not go into the lead section. Some information, about how players move around the map, could be merged into the current third paragraph. What do you think? If we remove the second paragraph, we may have to lengthen the current third paragraph (which will become the second) by up to a sentence. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 05:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Movement methods could be move into the gameplay section opening para, actually the whole 2nd para would be better there. -- Gnangarra 08:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested, 3rd para

message: Crossposting here and at Portal talk:RuneScape
After a final polish, and as there are no other objections, I have created this template in Portal:RuneScape/Fancruftguide, and shall be transcluding it onto subpages shortly. I won't be substing it though, so any improvements will be reflected immediately on the subpages. It is producible using: . As Hyenaste suggested, I'll modify it into a user talk message too. CaptainVindaloo t c e 17:49, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: RuneScape editors will find that when they remove the cruft, they'll have several 2-4 paragraph articles. At that point, it can probably be merged into a full gameplay article. — Deckiller 17:56, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I'm hoping too. I'm going to have a go at merging a couple more articles after I finish adding these. Only trouble is, merging the lot will probably take quite a while. CaptainVindaloo t c e 18:08, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

text: That is excellent work, I think the contributors who have spent so much time working on the runescape wiki and in particular those wrestling with the wikipedia entries are going to see the light at the end of the tunnel.  RS articles creeping up the ratings scale and a full wiki guide to RS ahoy! QuagmireDog 14:46, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you! :-) CaptainVindaloo t c e 16:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fancruft guide notice

message: I've modified this template into a version for usertalk messages. As ever, feedback and any improvements are appreciated. CaptainVindaloo t c e 20:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is excellent work, I think the contributors who have spent so much time working on the runescape wiki and in particular those wrestling with the wikipedia entries are going to see the light at the end of the tunnel.  RS articles creeping up the ratings scale and a full wiki guide to RS ahoy! QuagmireDog 14:46, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you! :-) CaptainVindaloo t c e 16:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Usertalk version

message: Change the wording, please. Runescape was released to the public as a beta on 4 Jan 2001. Just add the word beta. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gigei (talk • contribs) .
:Done. Sign your posts! CaptainVindaloo t c e 16:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  first public beta release date 

message: IMO, that's going too far, too detailed and most importantly gamecruft. J.J.Sagnella 08:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it's very relevant to tell about a future update that doesn't seem to be a big change that can effect the gameplay. Banim 17:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's editted out already, but I wanted to say hey, that's all for the good.  The moment that update occurs the statement would be rendered out of date anyway, demons looking less like giant crimson bipedal cows is nice for us, but not a major issue for someone who didn't see them in the first place. QuagmireDog 01:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Why do we have a section for Area Appearance? It's pretty much the same subject matter.--Mr. Sparkle 04:45, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Hyenaste (tell) 09:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about a "Graphical Improvements" section? That would convey the fact that the graphics are always improving. And that may be significant to someone who hasn't seen the monsters before. And how about we also have some pictures of the demons/dragons/giants before and after the change?--Mr. Sparkle 22:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Be careful about going into excessive detail. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 03:13, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monster appearance section necessary? 

message: Is this section necessary? It's uncited and no sources probably exist, and the animations are such a minor part of the game that the article could still be considered complete without it. Hyenaste (tell) 17:34, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally I'd say no.  The first sentence states what (IMHO) even those unfamiliar with games would already know - most modern games involve animations, it'd be more notable if the game did not (IE it was a text-based MUD or a turn-based strategy game with static graphics).  Emotes in general are not widely used in-game (hiding them in a seperate window means players just cycle through them occasionally or repeat the more angry ones instead of typing their displeasure), and they could just be mentioned along with the chat interface, they're another form of communication after all.  The time-limited availability of some emotes is something Jagex likes to 'big up', but discussing individual emotes that are now unavailable anyway doesn't seem relevant in a 'pedia article.  I'd also question the detail level sentence - one's the full Monty and the other's a graphical cut-down without music - not exactly a significant impact on RS players, let alone anyone who doesn't.  That's my tuppence worth anyway.  QuagmireDog 01:45, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character animations 

message: In reference to these two edits:  .  I found a few instances of Gielinor on runescape.com so I reverted it, but I went back and checked quite a few other places on the RuneScape website after my edit and noticed that it is spelled (a tense of the word "spell" misspelt was annoying me~~ Poorleno)   with the two E's in the odd place, but also with one E and one I, mostly recently.  Should we use the recent or original spelling of the name in the article? Agentscott00(talk contribs) 22:29, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: goto knowledgebase in the guides on "gods and areas" the first paragraph opens with "The world's true name is Gielinor, although..." Gnangarra 11:00, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gielinor/Gielenor 

message: As there are no problems, I have gone ahead and made the usertalk version of the fancruft template. It resides in Portal:RuneScape/Fancruftguide-user. Add it to a usertalk with the shortcut . CaptainVindaloo t c e 17:55, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fancruft usertalk template

message: I found plenty of useful imformation here. I don't know if all of this info is already on the article. I just want to make sure. --Ed 14:05, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Advertising supports the F2P world, its part of the sites structure so i'd say it should have some mention either a para or full subsection dependent on the information available Gnangarra 14:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I already added the section. Now I just have to elaborate more.--Ed 15:09, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: More Info

message: Add more fansites such as Runescape Help and Tip.it rather than just having RuneHQ pimping its own traffic. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JadedMaple (talk • contribs) .
:We can only include one fansite link, maximum, no more. This is dictated by Wikipedia:External links. RuneHQ is linked to because it has a higher Alexa rank than any other fansite. The Alexa ranking is derived from the number of visitors to a site in a certain period of time (NOT related in any way to forum usage). Sign your posts! CaptainVindaloo t c e 03:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fan Sites