Template talk:Jagex/Archive 1

Archive 1

==Removal of transwiki link to Prayer (Runescape)==I linked to the article that I just transferred from Wikipedia to the Runescape Wiki after Prayer (Runescape) on Wikipedia was blanked and redirected. If we can't have Prayer (Runescape) on Wikipedia, then why can't we link to the article on a wiki where such an article is permissible? John254 20:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

The problem with linking to the RSWiki's prayer article is that this causes irregularity. If we link to prayer, shouldn't we also link to crafting, smithing, and all the other skills. And if we link to skills, why not also link to other articles Wikipedia doesn't allow like locations, spells, or character types? Where would we draw the line? Template:RuneScape should not be a directory of RSWiki articles. Hyenaste ^(tell) 20:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I would "draw the line" at linking only to articles on the RuneScape Wiki that were formerly Wikipedia articles, but had to be transwikified. If we don't link to the articles that are moved to the RuneScape Wiki, we may find that, with RuneScape articles being nominated for deletion every week, Template:RuneScape will slowly be shrinking. John254 21:18, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I have a problem with drawing the line at deleted articles only. What makes deleted articles more special than articles that were never created? Why list seven skills and ignore the other twenty? What about articles that were deleted a long time ago, like fishing (RuneScape) or mining (RuneScape)? And it doesn't matter too much if the template becomes sparser and sparser; if an article is gone it shouldn't be linked in another form in another wiki. Hyenaste ^(tell) 21:36, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

As I explained at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RuneScape armour (2nd nomination), the Wikipedia articles that I transferred to the RuneScape Wiki are quite different from the content that is ordinarily posted there: "The RuneScape articles are not "game guides". Consider the passage about glassblowing in Crafting (RuneScape), in comparison to a passage about the same activity from a genuine "game guide":

Wikipedia:

In order to make items by glassblowing, players must have a glassblowing pipe. They must have seaweed to burn into soda ash and sand, which are heated together in a furnace to make molten glass. The molten glass can then be blown in items such as vials, which are predominantly used in the herblore skill, lantern lenses, which are used to facilitate travel in dark caverns such as the slayer dungeon in Lumbridge Swamp, and orbs, which are used by P2P players in crafting battlestaffs.[1]

RuneScape Wiki:

Glass is a members only part of the crafting skill. You will need

• A glass-blowing pipe, obtained from Entrana.
• Buckets of sand. There are sand-pits in Yanille, on Entrana, and in the Lost City. Just use an empty bucket with a sand-pit to get a bucket of sand. If you complete the Hand in the Sand quest you can get about 60 buckets of sand a day delivered to your bank free of charge if you talk to Bert in Yanille.
• Soda ash, which is made by burning seaweed on a range or fire. There are numerous seaweed spawns on Entrana, on Karamja, or it can be fished using a big net.
• When you have all the ingredients, use a bucket of sand and soda ash in a furnace to create molten glass.
• Use the glass-blowing pipe with the molten glass to blow various items.[2]

The passage from the Wikipedia article is merely descriptive of glassblowing, while the passage from the RuneScape Wiki provides detailed advice and suggestions as to how glassblowing is to be accomplished." John254 22:14, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I recognise these comments from a recent AfD, but I still do not see reason to only link to deleted articles instead of all articles. The skills are a set. If the articles one, two, and four were created and deleted, but three and five were never created, why would we only provide links to 1, 2, and 4 while ignoring 3 and 5? We don't really need advertisement for the RSWiki in the template as links will be provided elsewhere when appropriate. Hyenaste ^(tell) 22:41, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

The RS Wiki is outside the Wikimedia Foundation and thus is an external link so it should only be in the external links section of an article, not a nav template. Greeves ^{(talk • contribs • reviews)} 14:40, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Portal and wikiproject links

This navigation template currently contains a link to the wikiproject RuneScape Task Force. That doesn't seem appropriate in article space, and I propose removing it. The navigation template also contains a link to Portal:RuneScape (hidden as "The Portal"), and the regular Portal template is used in (most) articles anyway. I propose this also be removed, and the standard {{portal}} be used - outside the template - such as:

{{portal|RuneScape}}

Done both. -Amarkov ^blah_edits 18:22, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the portal link should be separate from this template - it provides more flexible layout. Gimmetrow 18:31, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Greeves ^{(talk • contribs • reviews)} 14:40, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Archive 1