Forum:Changes to RS:G part 2
Per Forum:Changes to RS:G, our granularity policy states: "NPCs with attackable counterparts or confirmed to be the same person should not be split unless there is a significant difference between the two incarnations."
After the switch template forum was closed, everyone went through and combined split articles using the switch template. The switch template has been very successful - articles are neat and tidy and the information isn't spread out across multiple articles.
However, we've run into a lot of trouble in RS:RFM when merging NPC articles. Random examples I can think of off the top of my head:
- Ali the Wise/Wahisietel RFS
- failed, articles are still merged since they are the same person
- Agrith Naar/Denath RFM
- failed, articles are still split despite being the same person
Some people have determined that NPCs should remain split because of what RS:G says, "unless there is a significant difference between the two incarnations". Well okay, that's nice and muddy. I'm very tired of seeing these discussions going both ways - some NPCs remain split while some are merged. It's at the discretion of whoever decides to comment on those discussions.
Some articles that have benefited from being merged despite being multiple NPCs or having attackable counterparts:
So what I am proposing... Change RS:G to merge all articles with multiple characters per NPC or with attackable counterparts using the switch template and strategy subpages. However, UCS in determining if an article will get too messy if it's merged with others (example: Amascut and Sumona/Wanderer). All other cases where this wouldn't be an issue should be merged though. The Amascut case is extreme in that Amascut is a god and she also plays major roles in multiple quests through multiple characters. I don't want to see people bickering over this UCS portion, so they should only remain split in EXTREME cases.
Support - Spoilers are out of the question now, so sure. Let's not follow it blindly, however, and UCS for every case.17:12, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
Support - but what about mols? We're inherently blind? MolMan 18:34, March 21, 2013 (UTC)
Support on merging things like Thorvar Crittersmash and Santa Claus, but Oppose merging things like Koschei the Deathless and Kharshai, because information on how to fight Koschei would look out of place on Kharshai. (But nobody seems to agree with me on that so whatever.) 18:06, April 3, 2013 (UTC)
- Also, putting that stuff on a strategy sub-page kind of defeats the point of merging them in the first place, it just makes the information harder to access.- 18:23, April 3, 2013 (UTC)
Comment - If this thread passes, will things like: Mystery figure <-> Melville Grayzag and Dark Squall <-> Surok Magis and Denath <-> Agrith Naar, etc. be merged immediately? 08:20, April 6, 2013 (UTC)
- I'd be inclined to alter RS:G to reflect consensus here, and then close this forum. Depending on how much time I had, I'd also try to close the 2 RfMs that are dependant on this forum. Merging other relevant pages is possible, but merging 5, 10, 15 articles before closing this forum could hold this up for a couple of days ignoring the lack of content writing sysops. cqm 10:45, 6 Apr 2013 (UTC) (UTC)
- Why does it matter when they're done? 14:08, April 6, 2013 (UTC)
- Support & Re:Comment - I would imagine so. And I would be in favour for that too. But only since spoilers are (apparently) not a problem anymore... and I would like to keep it consistent. -- 15:15, April 10, 2013 (UTC)
Closed - This proposal has been implemented and RS:G has been updated accordingly19:25, April 27, 2013 (UTC)