Forum:Charm log namespace

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Charm log namespace
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 28 April 2010 by Liquidhelium.

Charm logs would be easier to manage if they were in their own namespace. Thus, I am proposing that the CharmLog namespace be created for charm logs, similar to the Exchange namespace in effect for GE prices. I was under the impression that this was previously rejected by the community, but I have learned that the original proposal did not mention a separate namespace.

Discuss, and suggest ideas as necessary. TLUL is obviously going to be the expert in this field. --LiquidTalk 23:36, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

Support - Love the idea, but DEAR GODS, what a move that will be! Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 23:38, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

User:TLULbot will take care of it. Lol --LiquidTalk 23:39, April 27, 2010 (UTC)
oh good, cuz thats a lot of pages. Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 23:46, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

Sugesstion - Instead of CharmLog, maybe just Charm, since we don't have a GrandExchange we have Exchange..... tiny time savers FTW!!! Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 23:46, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

Comment + Probable Support - What will be easier with its own namespace? ʞooɔ 23:48, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

Pending/Oppose - A new namespace for charm logs? I really don't see what the problem is with having them in sub pages. We only get one more custom namespace, and I don't want to spend it on something that appears to be potentially working fine otherwise. What advantages do having the charm logs in their own namespace pose? Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 23:51, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

WHAT! We only get one more??? Full Slayer Helmet! Evil1888 Talk A's L Dragon Platebody! 01:28, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - I lovers custom namespaces, but this would cause a few things:

  1. A lot of work moving pages; even assisted by a bot.
  2. Less organized; pages in a namespace and not a subpage.
  3. Charm log: doesn't sound very nice as a namespace D:
  4. Another namespace means more organizational work, especially for bots.

I like the idea, but these points are things that should be addressed. Ajraddatz Talk 23:55, April 27, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - We don't really have that many charm logs... ⁓ Hello71 00:41, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

Retracting - O_o I was not aware of the fact that our namespaces are limited. In that case, Stelercus is right. I'm retracting this proposal. --LiquidTalk 01:31, April 28, 2010 (UTC)