Forum:Burnt food items

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Burnt food items
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 14 September 2010 by Psycho Robot.

According to RS:G every item should have an article. However, I find it unclear whether or not we have established a rule about burnt food, seeing as every burnt food item article currently redirects to a cooked one. Should we make articles on the burnt food items or ignore a rule? ShinyUnown T | C | E 20:32, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

I'd be fine with either as long as we're consistent. RS:G doesn't have an exception for burnt food, so by RS:G I think it'd be fine to have separate articles. However, my only issue with that is that there's about a 99% probability that none of them will be expanded past a stub that basically says "Burnt X is the result of failing to cook Raw X". The only way they'll really be expanded past that is if a quest/activity specifically requires a burnt item. Endasil (Talk) @  20:37, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

I support the idea of having articles on burnt food. In that way we'll have a complete list of foods that can be burnt or made bad. Craappiboy 20:39, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

Instead of making a bunch of little burnt food "stubbed" articles, why don't we make it for one BIG burnt food article. Besides, what would we put: "burnt meat, it is when meat is burnt."?  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Username1907 (talk).

You could list what gets burnt into what, for example there is no such thing as burnt cow meat or burnt rat meat. There's just burnt meat. ⁓ Hello71 01:01, May 3, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Why not just include info on the burnt versions on the article's about the meats? That makes more sense than a whole bunch of one-sentence articles that (honestly) nobody would read. Ajraddatz Talk 01:19, May 3, 2010 (UTC)

[[List of burnt foods]]? Sounds good. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 01:29, May 3, 2010 (UTC)
I was thinking about just putting info on say Burnt Chicken into the Chicken article, although that would work also. Ajraddatz Talk 01:35, May 3, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - RS:G says that we should have separate articles. However, our common sense tells us that separate articles are ridiculous. I like Ajr's idea. --LiquidTalk 01:50, May 3, 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't call it ridiculous. Look at the current burnt meat page (kind of relevant!). Every article has the potential to some day have notable and unique information. Endasil (Talk) @  02:14, May 3, 2010 (UTC)

Actually we do have some articles dedicated to burnt food. Can find them under the category "Useless items". I'm thinking of creating a [[List of burnt food]], but there is also Ruined chompy, and Ruined herb tea. Perhaps the article should be named [[List of edible items prepared wrongly]], or something near. Craappiboy 04:47, May 3, 2010 (UTC)

I think a category should be sufficient. Easier to maintain and better navigation. "Category:Ruined food" or something. Endasil (Talk) @  06:48, May 3, 2010 (UTC)
"Category:What happens when your cooking level isn't high enough" Lol I'm a regular user and I approve this message.  TLUL Talk - Contribs 21:24, May 3, 2010 (UTC) 

I'd be fine with either Endasil's ideas or Username1907's.  Ranged-icon.png Zap0i TalkRune scimitar.png  21:31, May 3, 2010 (UTC)

Support - One large burnt food article. Ajraddatz Talk 14:24, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Endasil, it's obvious that they can have some information, like Burnt meat does. bad_fetustalk 14:27, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - My opinion is that everything deserves an article. Articles don't slow down the wiki, articles don't hurt anybody, so why not have them... Mark (talk) 14:58, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Poisoned arrows/potions with one dose etc. don't really deserve an article Lol bad_fetustalk 16:53, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
In my opinion they do. As I said, such an article attracts more people to the wiki, and it doesn't do any harm at all. Though yeah, articles like games necklace (8) are an exception to that. Mark (talk) 17:08, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
To a point I agree with you, but burnt food articles just don't seem worth it to me. Ajraddatz Talk 18:25, May 26, 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WP:NOHARM: Some of what's stated there is applicable to this wiki. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 22:54, May 26, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Don't you use burnt meat at some point in a quest? I believe we should just have one large article, perhaps with a section about the quest if this is the case. (When you have had a quest cape for years...things blend together lol.) HaloTalk 22:57, May 26, 2010 (UTC)

I can't remember either, but I think it was burnt bread that was used in a quest. Otherwise, I think that there isn't a great need for individual articles about each burnt food item. One comprehensive article should suffice. Suppa chuppa Talk 04:03, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
Witch's Potion. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 16:36, May 27, 2010 (UTC)

Request for comments - Can we close this soon, please? Share your opinion :) ajr 02:30, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

One long list of all the burnt food, with a redirect from each individual burnt item to that page. So at least the list page will not totally be a stub.--Degenret01 08:28, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Ignore a rule - Almost all of these burnt articles would turn into stubs, and a list is rather pointless. Have a section under each food type for the burned/ruined variety of that food. Wires77 18:42, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

A separate article for each, as per RS:G (of which I am a fairly strong proponent). Articles on burnt food items are not stubs, they are just short articles. A stub is an article that is incomplete (in a more significant way than in the sense that all wiki articles can be expanded), and short articles that are "complete" (or at least adequately cover all important information) should not be marked as stubs. Incidentally, there already is a burnt food item that is used in a quest: burnt meat is needed for Witch's Potion. If an item exists in-game, it should have an article on the wiki - that's exactly what RS:G says, and I do not see this as an exception. By choosing to have one long "list" instead of individual articles for each, we're kind of "judging" the worthiness or right of an article to exist on an arbitrary whim, which is ridiculous IMO. If Ardal, Frank and Dermot are entitled to individual articles (being short articles on separate but related NPCs), so should these items. Leevclarke talk Max_logo_mini.png bulldog_puppy.png 17:43, June 17, 2010 (UTC)

I like Red cog as an example. =) Chicken7 >talk 05:54, June 18, 2010 (UTC)

Support: Per C Teng. List of burnt foods does sound good! Sgt Hailfire 16:27, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Support "List of ruined food" does have a ring to it. Anyone heard the one about selling rare black lobsters, 30 mill' each?--Quest point cape.png Yt'Haar-Mej-Joelthefrog1 Prayer cape (t).png 16:33, July 11, 2010 (UTC)


This request for closure was denied A user has requested closure for Burnt food items. Request denied. The reason given was: Discussion has died down, no proper consensus because of many alternate proposals Withdrawn

222 talk 02:21, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Short articles FTW. Why not? If one wants to know if burnt food has any use or even slightly interesting information, they should be provided immediate access to such information on a personalized, seperate article. RS:G. Quest point cape.pngLil Diriz 77 Talk Summoning-icon.png 11:14, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I think there should just be a section in the article with "Ruined variant" or just it burnt name, "Burnt meat". 222 talk 07:36, August 11, 2010 (UTC)


This request for closure is complete A user has requested closure for Burnt food items. Request complete. The reason given was: yes

Matt (t) 07:53, September 7, 2010 (UTC)

Closed - There's no real consensus here, however the opening argument suggested that RS:G mandated each burnt food item have its own article. That's not true, however. The two questions pertaining to RS:G are:

  • Does item A have the same purpose/use as item B? Yes. All burnt food items, with the exception of burnt meat have absolutely no use whatsoever.
  • Can item A be substituted with item B? Yes. Since all burnt items have no use, it doesn't matter which burnt item you... don't use.

That said, if a burnt food article is to be created, which it could, it should be one article. However keep in mind that RS:G also has stipulations for file granularity, and even though a burnt trout and a burnt salmon may look alike, they should have separate images. kitty.pngPsycho Robot talkSilver bar.png 23:45, September 14, 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to modify Psycho's closing statement slightly. Burnt trout and burnt salmon should have the same image because they are the same item: Burnt fish. After they're burnt, they're treated as the same item by the game, and stack in the bank. So, in this case, there is no need to have separate images. --LiquidTalk 19:13, September 24, 2010 (UTC)