![]() ![]() Runescape Economy doesnt fit within community and shouldnt be merged, that said they can have an overlap and link to each other. Also its still needs to be a short 1 or 2 para section in the main article with a link to the article. Good suggestions - one point is Community should be about the people who play and their interaction with each other inculding outside of the game in forumns fansites ebay etc. If you don't like the direction I'm going in, then let's see you present the authors of this Wiki with a better solution. If you want to help me, go ahead, the more the merrier. This list is just what I want to accomplish before too long. I'm not too happy that this article has failed Good Article status and Feature Article status - twice, at that! If you want this to recieve the credit it probably deserves, you're going to have to work relentelssly at it. Removal/AFD of all fancruft-ridden subcategories, RuneScape_holiday_items, RuneScape_gods, et al.A possible RuneScape_economy merge with RuneScape_community? Maybe.Merging Wilderness_(RuneScape) and RuneScape_dungeons into RuneScape_locations. ![]() ![]() RuneScape_skills - If possible, merge Combat into this wiki, otherwise delete it.Therefore I'd have no choice but to set them up for AFD. EDIT: I realise now that both Armour and Weaponry are hoplessly fancrufty, as is Combat. RuneScape_combat - Definitely merge the Armour/Weaponry sections into this, and remove as much fancruft as possible.External Links - Removal entirely of this section, since a recent archived debate in WP:EL sparked a lot more controversy than the issue is probably worth fighting. On top of that, adding citations would be a plus there, too. I'm talkin' about genuine, 100% bonafide RANTS about the game. Criticism - I plan to actually add some critique in there! I'm not talking about, "Feature A in RuneScape is good, whereas Feature B isn't.", the kind of stuff you'd get from GameFAQs. Community - Consider ripping it right out of there, since we already have another place for it. Gameplay - Some of it is a bit on the fancrufty side, going to try to polish that up a bit. History and Development - This part cites NOTHING about the first MUD client. RuneScape - This entails the following.Makoto 00:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC) Reply Īdding citations to these would be a huge plus. Remember, they have to pass the rigorous inspection of not being a game guide, being verifiable and representing all sides equally and fairly, so no weasel wording would be allowed. Recent Articles for Deletion - Since we're trying to improve the quality of this Wiki, we must get rid of the fancruft from the sub-categories.Hyenaste (tell) 02:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC) Reply To put it plainly, your edits are more likely to be appreciated there. 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. RuneScape Wiki - Ok, I'm advertising the RuneScape Wiki, but it's probably a good idea.Wikipedia's rules also say no more than one fansite is allowed. Fansites- Wikipedia policy is that the one (1) most popular fansite by site traffic may be included and no others.This rule applies to all articles in the RuneScape Series. Spelling- RuneScape is a British Game and uses British spelling, so British Spelling must be used. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |