Forum:Achievements extension discussion

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Achievements extension discussion
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 18 April 2011 by Liquidhelium.

This thread is for collecting info on the currently enabled achievements extension.


Put info here in appropriate subsection.


What has changed positively?

  • More activity.


What has changed negatively?

  • User:Wikia creates a user's userpage when they get a badge and there is no way of stopping this.
  • Vandalism counts toward badges.
  • Many useless edits.


What has changed that is neither positive nor negative?

  • Not retroactive.
  • There hasn't been a slight improvement in the amount of new users.


Comment - Discuss. Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 00:13, April 15, 2011 (UTC)

Question - Before discussing this, I would like to ask if it would be okay to mention people's usernames for examples, or should the general extension be discussed without examples? JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 00:15, April 15, 2011 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with usernames (I think I know what you're going for). Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 00:18, April 15, 2011 (UTC)

But it's not over yet. <.< sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 00:19, April 15, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, this is so people have a place to put info while it's enabled. Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 00:21, April 15, 2011 (UTC)
Basing your info off having it for 2 days is not a good idea in my opinion. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 00:22, April 15, 2011 (UTC)
I want this thread to last the entire trial. Not judge it right now. >.< Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 00:26, April 15, 2011 (UTC)

Um - Call me crazy, but I don't think that it has been two weeks yet. Why don't we all let the trial run its course, and then discuss it? At two days in, I don't think that we can get a good idea of anything yet. ajr 00:27, April 15, 2011 (UTC)

This allows people to discuss things as they come across it, not to discuss keeping it or not. --Henneyj 00:29, April 15, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - About User:Wikia, I heard Sannse was working on fixing that. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 00:30, April 15, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I think the achievements are doing both good and bad things to the wiki. I have seen a quite big spike in activity yesterday (no facts, just that I saw RC fill faster) but there were also quite a few useless edits with them. For example, a lot of category adding is happening all of a sudden, while usually that wouldn't be done. That is sometimes good, but sometimes bad. Some users are also achievement boosting by posting on talk pages, for example ([1][2]), or adding useless categories ([3]). The good point is that there are indeed quite a lot more active editors. Yesterday there was a bad balance between good and bad edits. There were a lot more bad edits like useless categories being added, but today it changed a little bit to have more useful edits. We will have to wait for the trial to end before we can decide if this would do any good over a longer timespan. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 00:44, April 15, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I don't know about you, but I'm damn tired of people doing useless edits (mostly categorization) for achievements. If possible I would like it if we could block people for achievement-farming if after multiple warnings they continue to do so. ʞooɔ 06:14, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

How do you prove they were achievement farming? Versus a "real" category? They could easily just have a noob definition of categories.--Degenret01 06:44, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Looking at people who a) Add a random "hi" to someone's talk page, b) Make a useless edit to their userpage, and c) Add completely useless and duplicative categories AFTER being asked not to, you can say with some certainty that they are achievement farming. ʞooɔ 06:48, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
So that means that you, 7I, Ajr, Liquid, and many others are all done with useless spam talk page edits?Lol--Degenret01 07:04, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
I don't think Cook, 7I, Ajr or Liquid add Category:Longswords to Rune scimitar or do any other edits like that... bad_fetustalk 07:18, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
*cough* Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 07:23, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
Fine, but you don't see them doing that five times per day. bad_fetustalk 07:43, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
hai, u mention me???? But seriously, keep in mind that /most/ of the categorization is good. There is nothing wrong with having articles in as many good categories as they should be, that only improves navigation. ajr 14:24, April 16, 2011 (UTC)
No, most of the categorization by newer accounts is not good. People are boosting achievements everywhere. bad_fetustalk 17:36, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - What the heck is this about? User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 10:11, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Are we opposing? This badge garbage needs to go die in a fire. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 19:36, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Comment/Oppose - I'm with Psycho Robot here, the badges are terrible. I haven't seen any real proof that they inspire people to edit, besides a few troll examples pointed out. Also, looking at a few user pages, I noticed that some with custom CSS design got mangled by an overlapping badge box. Bad badges, bad! Hofmic Talk 21:40, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Psy, it's just junk -.- --Cakemix 22:30, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose keeping them - Hell, I want them gone now. They're nothing but a nuisance and are causing editors who really have no idea what they're doing to categorize things incorrectly and just make bad edits. ʞooɔ 23:12, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Strong oppose - Since we've already started opposing, I will join. Achievements don't appear to have boosted good activity all that much, but they've vastly increased bad activity, which not only makes the wiki look worse, but also forces other users to clean up afterwards, wasting their editing time. 222 talk 00:31, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - At least we tried. But from the moment we had them, bad edits started pouring in. Unfortunately, it's really just not worth the trouble, and it would probably be beneficial to remove it. ɳex undique 00:37, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - While I like this proposal, this is stupid. It basically makes Wikia look weird. -- JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 02:51, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

i lold btw ajr 03:59, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Again... WTH is this about? User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 05:31, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

I guess this will be the deciding thread (in no way did I plan that). Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 07:45, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - I told you so. Christine 05:33, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

We should have listened to you all along. I'm so sorry I ever doubted you. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 07:22, April 17, 2011 (UTC)
Oh good, someone here knows their place. :3 Christine 20:51, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Never use achievements to encourage editing again. As others have stated it hasn't brought anything but bad habits to the wiki including making people achievement hunters/boosters/farming whatever you want to call it. Achievements did weird things, such as making Wikia ignore its' MediaWiki messages. Even a block didn't impede this beast. We have other things in the pipeline that should improve user activity. Depending on their development, we may see them before the end of this year. Ryan PM 07:38, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Strong oppose - Gee, and people were arguing with me when I opposed opening this Pandora's box in the first place. I hope you guys have learned your lesson now. --LiquidTalk 13:18, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Gee, could you be a bigger ass right now? Nope, not really :L - [Pharos] 13:26, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - We tried it, it's had a negative effect, lets ditch it after the trial period - [Pharos] 13:26, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Strong oppose - Achievement attainment is an addictive activity which has already created a lot of poorly through, and generally unwanted, changes and additions to RS Wiki which if not cleaned up would lead to RS Wiki's demise Construction.png Storm Roller talk 13:42, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Although there was undeniably a spike in editing over the last few days, a large chunk of that is, unfortunately, unwanted, unnecessary and generally useless. Excessive and useless categorisation has also no doubt skyrocketed. The idea of Achievments could be implemented again into the future, but we would have to invoke rules for achievment farmers, and make sure there are no loopholes so as to make sure the system is used decently and with honest intent. But for now, we should just abandon it after the trial period, as it's causing far more trouble than it's worth. Ronan Talk 14:47, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Strong oppose - Per Christine. bad_fetustalk 16:01, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Would it be possible to select which achievements we offer? That way we could remove the ones that contribute nothing and keep the ones than encourage good editting? If we can't, then get rid of them all.Guthix1110 16:09, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

No, they looked into it and deemed it impossible. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 16:17, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Not something that belongs on a wiki. Remove after the trial. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 17:13, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose/End Early - While it has spawned more edits, much of the additional edits have been useless for the sake of gaining achievements, not contributing to the wiki. We should remove it as soon as we can, since leaving it for the rest of the trial just increases the cleanup. - TehKittyCatTalk Wikian-Book 19:24, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Support ending early - Per TehKittyCat. If we're this against it 4 days in, I don't think we're going to like it. ɳex undique 19:45, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Support ending early - We're only 4-5 days in and this is a disaster. ʞooɔ 19:56, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

waits for an admin to say "Unless anyone supports keeping the achievements within x time I'm going to close this and request the achievements to be removed" JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 20:00, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion - Punish badge huggers by resetting their points after a few (3?) warnings. Clearly state this possiblity at the Badge panel, if kept.Wizard hat (g).pngMugger759 Talk Contribs 20:12, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

...wat ʞooɔ 20:16, April 17, 2011 (UTC)
I don't think that's possible. Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 20:17, April 17, 2011 (UTC)
not possible, unless Wikia makes something to do that, but let's not assume they would make that. We are going to drop the extension anyway, looking at the current votes here. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 20:20, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Notice of intent - The feedback about achievements is obviously extremely negative, and so I will message Wikia tomorrow to remove it - that is, unless anyone has a good reason for me not to do this. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 20:24, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

I told you so - *gloats* Andrew talk 20:48, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

I, too, predicted this - *blows raspberry* Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 20:59, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Keep the random - I have just earned a "Lucky edit" badgeSmile. This kind of badge should be kept, while the other (predictable badges) should be thrown away. A random badge is like a rewarding Random Event in RuneScape: You should not expect it (so you cannot grind/spam for it), but once encountered, it's a nice distraction.Wizard hat (g).pngMugger759 Talk Contribs 21:57, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately we can't choose which badges to keep. It's all or none. ɳex undique 22:04, April 17, 2011 (UTC)
Btw, the lucky edit badge is actually quite predictable. ʞooɔ 22:58, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - This has been discussed 3 times now, and pretty much everyone is now opposing. Add to Previously Rejected proposals? Real Crazy 22:04, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

I'll kindly remind you that one of those times it passed, so no. If someone wants to propose it again in the distant future, there is absolutely no reason why they shouldn't be allowed it. ajr 22:11, April 17, 2011 (UTC)
It passed because it was a test. I can guarantee you that if anyone would see this mess, nobody would ever support adding it again. I honestly supported that thread, just so we would have proof of what a mess the achievements create, just so people would stop proposing it. Also, all threads about having it as feature failed. The previous thread only passed just because it was a trial. And just because we all see how strongly this gets opposed, wouldn't it be quite logical we should never try these things again? This is kinda damaging the wiki, which we should never support. I Strong support blacklisting. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 22:24, April 17, 2011 (UTC)
Nice bolding, italicizing, and underlining :D - Beyond that, there is no reason to blacklist this, because as I said, the community might want to look into it again in the future. Why deny them that chance? The blacklist is for threads that come up over and over again, and that get shot down time and again. This has come up twice, and a trial was supported the second time. No need to blacklist here. If someone were to propose it again next month, and again the month after, then that would be a good time to blacklist it. ajr 22:27, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

I predicted this - </failbrag> JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 22:26, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

NOOBS - I predicted this too ^.^ bad_fetustalk 07:14, April 18, 2011 (UTC)

Support early ending - And I was the fourth person to predict this, so I > Chess = noobs 222 talk 07:31, April 18, 2011 (UTC)

I didn't predict this - Lol Matt (t) 08:40, April 18, 2011 (UTC)

Closed - The achievements extension has already been removed. Since this discussion isn't going anywhere useful and is turning into a battle for bragging rights, I will close this now. If you would like to review the achievements, please start a separate discussion. --LiquidTalk 18:11, April 18, 2011 (UTC)

As an additional note, if achievements are ever enabled again, the points will continue where they left off - they don't reset. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 19:56, April 18, 2011 (UTC)