The RuneScape Wiki has a limited scope. As a community, our goal is to produce and maintain a complete, accurate, and usable RuneScape resource. Naturally, over time it becomes necessary to define which topics belong in this resource and which do not. Some topics are not noteworthy and are thus excluded; others are unfit for the wiki due to the nature of their content. This page is intended to represent the current consensus governing the topics permitted by the wiki community.
To editors: as noted above, this page is still under development, and your input is welcome on the talk page for this policy. Some portions below may not reflect the true community consensus on an issue. When developing this policy, use the standard of what should be allowed, rather than what is allowed for the moment. Since these criteria are meant to cover more than one article, prior deletion debates cannot be used as "precedent" to justify inclusion of criteria in this policy. Feel free to add to these lists, as they are almost certainly incomplete!
Most readers coming here are looking for RuneScape information and advice. Article topics should be limited to information that readers are likely to find useful, for obvious reasons. If something is completely unrelated to the game, or only has an indirect association, it should probably be excluded. Note, however, that the content of such articles can be reworked into something more useful. One example is the cultural references article, which began as Monty Python but was moved to its current title.
Minor elements of the game or community, such as scenery objects that are of no use to players do not need their own articles. Similarly, players, clans, and community events do not receive coverage in articles, because most readers simply do not care. There are exceptions, however, such as when the player is notable somehow due to their achievements (see RuneScape:Players don't deserve articles).
On the other hand, it is worthwhile to create articles for items, monsters, and non-player characters. These are part of the game, and in particular creating articles for them can be useful for readers who come across them. Notice the difference between elements of the community, which are given further coverage in another section, and parts of the game that have been created by Jagex themselves.
Balanced point of view[edit source]
Most RuneScape Wiki articles should focus on facts documenting RuneScape. Sometimes, however, it is necessary to cover the player reaction to an aspect of the game. Editors should ensure that the article maintains a neutral point of view, that is, it does not represent any opinions as being more or less correct than others. Balanced articles are necessary because they make our site as a whole more complete, by providing arguments for both sides.
Following this, articles that are purely commentary or opinion are not accepted. Biased material should not necessarily be deleted or removed on sight, however, since in many cases it can be improved to become useful. Opposing opinions can be added, and arguments for both sides can be made. The tone can also be changed to be more neutral and informative.
See the neutral point of view policy for guidelines on how to maintain a neutral stance in articles.
Speculation and verifiability[edit source]
RuneScape Wiki is not a crystal ball, and it is not the place to speculate about the content of future updates. Future content that has been officially announced by Jagex can be added to articles, but there can be no speculation about it whatsoever. Editors must take care that only officially announced content is noted, and that speculative information regarding hints published by Jagex stays out of articles. This is because as a RuneScape reference we must maintain a content standard as high as possible, and not mislead players into thinking certain statements are true when they in fact may not be.
Statements that might be dubious or inaccurate can be challenged by editors at any time. In order to retain the statement, a consensus must form among editors that it is accurate and does not misrepresent the situation it describes. If no such consensus forms after a period of time, the statement can be removed, and it should not be added again unless the consensus changes. This particularly applies to statements regarding players.
Over time, a large community has built up around RuneScape, and we should attempt to cover it to the extent that it provides a more useful resource overall.
These need to be converted to prose before this can become a policy.
Topics to be included[edit source]
- Guides to parts of the RuneScape game (e.g. Free-to-play Constitution training)
- Locations in the game world
- Non-player characters, including those that have been mentioned but are not seen in-game (e.g. King Vallance)
- Scenery that players can interact with, for example ranges. This includes non-interactive non-player characters as well (e.g. Mountain goat). Stationary scenery objects that do not serve a purpose other than decoration are not worthy of inclusion.
- Myths and legends that are/were widespread (e.g. Sailing)
- Major aspects of the player community surrounding the game, for example fan site or player killing. The article should have a generic context, and not name any sites/players/etc.
- Leaks can be documented, but speculation about leaks does not belong in articles
- Major opinions on controversial topics should be included (e.g. Jagex Moderator quotes), however written from a third-person point of view to avoid promoting one viewpoint.
Topics to be excluded[edit source]
- Topics that are related to the game only indirectly.
- Articles that describe in detail how to scam, hack, macro, etc.
- Articles about things that don't exist, unless they have been announced or they used to exist. If such articles are created, they must clearly indicate that the subject does not in fact currently exist.
- Specific elements of part of the community, for example popular RuneScape tools or fansites. If it is deemed appropriate then these should be covered together in a single generic article and not in a series of individual articles. This will help to ensure a neutral point of view for such things.