Talk:RuneScape: Difference between revisions
1ForTheMoney (talk | contribs) m →Redirects from Gielinor geography here: Response |
|||
| Line 128: | Line 128: | ||
Once again, I can be happy with (1) text as reverted and no redirects, (2) redirects and a list of locations in the article with any acceptable source or even without one. The problem is that some editors try to keep the redirects for locations ([[Varrock]] is fully protected), while others don't like any mention of the locations in this article. I can just accept this sad state of affairs and (3) simply remove the pages involved from my watchlist. Since the #3 does not bring me any joy, I have decided to spend an extra 15 minutes of my life trying for some common-sense resolution. Pinging {{ping|Thief-River-Faller}} from the RfD discussion that I have just foolishly closed. Please try to ping other editors that might be interested. [[User:Викидим|Викидим]] ([[User talk:Викидим|talk]]) 21:55, 22 May 2024 (UTC) |
Once again, I can be happy with (1) text as reverted and no redirects, (2) redirects and a list of locations in the article with any acceptable source or even without one. The problem is that some editors try to keep the redirects for locations ([[Varrock]] is fully protected), while others don't like any mention of the locations in this article. I can just accept this sad state of affairs and (3) simply remove the pages involved from my watchlist. Since the #3 does not bring me any joy, I have decided to spend an extra 15 minutes of my life trying for some common-sense resolution. Pinging {{ping|Thief-River-Faller}} from the RfD discussion that I have just foolishly closed. Please try to ping other editors that might be interested. [[User:Викидим|Викидим]] ([[User talk:Викидим|talk]]) 21:55, 22 May 2024 (UTC) |
||
:The redirects you describe are a legacy from many, many years ago - before the existence of the RuneScape Wiki - when a group of editors created lots of non-notable articles about different aspects of RuneScape. I agree that some/many of them are a bit pointless and should go to [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]], although I've not had much luck with this in the past. (Note that I fully support Alyo's decision to remove the Gielinor section. It didn't merit an article in its own right and the sources being used were not good quality.) [[User:1ForTheMoney|1ForTheMoney]] ([[User talk:1ForTheMoney|talk]]) 12:07, 23 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 12:07, 23 May 2024
 | Falador Massacre was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 19 March 2022 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into RuneScape. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the RuneScape article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find video game sources: "RuneScape" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34Auto-archiving period: 40 days  |
 | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting. |
 | This page is not a forum for general discussion about RuneScape. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about RuneScape at the Reference desk. |
|
 | RuneScape was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Wikipedia is not a strategy guide or instruction manual. Wikipedia articles should focus on the games themselves, not on how to play them; they should not contain tips, tricks, or cheat codes. That information is available elsewhere (such as on our sister project, Wikibooks), in printed guides and online, and does not belong in an encyclopedia entry. Please do not add your own hints or opinions of the game. Verifiable content about the history, design, and overall description of the game is welcome. If you have questions about whether specific information should be added, ask here first. |
 | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
 To-do: Updated 2014-04-06
Priority 1 (top)
|
Wiki Education assignment: Linguistics in the Digital Age
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2022 and 7 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Darklordjax (article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Darklordjax (talk) 03:38, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 7 January 2023
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Under Servers subsection add: The player per world limit was reduced from the maximum of 2000 to 1500 on August 3, 2020. [1] Jspoelstra (talk) 19:17, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Not done While I don't doubt this is correct, we need a reliable source to accompany this. The official news post connected to that date doesn't mention a change in the maximum server capacity, and the RuneScape Wiki itself is not a reliable source for our purposes. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 22:00, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
PC Gamer Citation
PC Gamer called the bug "One of the best all-time MMO bugs." [Citation Needed]
https://www.pcgamer.com/old-school-runescape-celebrates-the-falador-massacre-glitch/ UnicornDude47 (talk) 21:16, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 14 July 2023
| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Citation for PC Gamer quote: https://www.pcgamer.com/old-school-runescape-celebrates-the-falador-massacre-glitch/ 146.201.92.80 (talk) 19:37, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
Done ULPS (talk) 02:07, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2024
| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please remove Steam is not a platform 199.119.233.180 (talk) 06:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done Liu1126 (talk) 12:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
Redirects from Gielinor geography here
@Alyo: Current situation is very strange: we have tons of redirects here from all aspects of the RuneScape geography - and not a single mention of their titles in the target. This situation serves a reader (or searcher) very poorly: first, they click, then they are forced to search the text of the page (since there is no section on the geography), when this search yields nothing, they have to leave frustrated by having been had. I do not care much about the RuneScape (practically, not at all - I came here after encountering West Ardougne in the WP:NPP), but we might want to either provide in this article some information for redirects targeted here, or delete the said redirects. In this sense, I do not understand the logic behind your removal of a "Gielinor" section. In particular, the reversal re-introduced {{See also}} for Gielinor (which will add a level of frustration for the abovementioned reader) and removed text based on a thesis of quite reasonable quality (this is not ideal, but then the subject is very much not rocket science or controversial either).
Once again, I can be happy with (1) text as reverted and no redirects, (2) redirects and a list of locations in the article with any acceptable source or even without one. The problem is that some editors try to keep the redirects for locations (Varrock is fully protected), while others don't like any mention of the locations in this article. I can just accept this sad state of affairs and (3) simply remove the pages involved from my watchlist. Since the #3 does not bring me any joy, I have decided to spend an extra 15 minutes of my life trying for some common-sense resolution. Pinging @Thief-River-Faller: from the RfD discussion that I have just foolishly closed. Please try to ping other editors that might be interested. Викидим (talk) 21:55, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- The redirects you describe are a legacy from many, many years ago - before the existence of the RuneScape Wiki - when a group of editors created lots of non-notable articles about different aspects of RuneScape. I agree that some/many of them are a bit pointless and should go to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion, although I've not had much luck with this in the past. (Note that I fully support Alyo's decision to remove the Gielinor section. It didn't merit an article in its own right and the sources being used were not good quality.) 1ForTheMoney (talk) 12:07, 23 May 2024 (UTC)