Forum:Fish template

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Fish template
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 2 April 2010 by Calebchiam.

If you guys look at the template for fish at the bottom of any fish page (i.e. Rocktail), you'll see a template split into raw and cooked fish, with a link to their respective pages.

However, if you actually click the page for the raw version of the fish, it redirects to the generic page for the cooked version (i.e. Raw rocktail redirects to Rocktail). If this is the case, then why do we need to take up room and put both the raw and cooked versions? Wouldn't one link be better? I should add that the page on the fish details both the raw and the cooked versions of the fish.

I propose that the template should be edited so that only the cooked version appears (but don't called it cooked, just call it a generic fish).

--Liquidhelium 03:04, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

Support as proposer. --Liquidhelium 03:04, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, we were supposed to split the raw and cooked versions of the fish articles. The links were put in place, but nobody actually worked on splitting the articles. Just be bold, and split these fish articles yourself. I'm sure there are some editors willing to help you out.   az talk   03:31, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Ooh crap. That was me who put those links. I started out and split quite a few (try the first few links), but went on holiday and it must've completely slipped my mind. I'll get to work finishing it off soon, but you are welcome to help of course. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 05:25, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comment RuneScape:Granularity was modified recently (after discussions) to clarify that raw and cooked forms of fish do qualify for separate pages. Those cases that have redirects in place are only temporary, and should be split into two pages. Therefore Template:Fish should have links to both forms. However, I would support a restructure to put (for example) shrimps and raw shrimps together. Compare with Template:Herb, which I think has a better layout. Leevclarke talk Max_logo_mini.png bulldog_puppy.png 19:37, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Yeah I agree Max. The herb template definitely has better fomratting. When I have the time I'll go split some of the fish articles.--Liquidhelium 22:13, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I'll add the proposed changes to Template:Fish now, then I'll get to work on separating some more. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 06:10, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

OK, template done. Chicken7 >talk 06:46, February 3, 2010 (UTC)
Looks excellent, well done.  :-) I suspect that this thread will be closed in due course, but we should probably leave it open for a week or two in case anyone objects to the changes. Leevclarke talk Max_logo_mini.png bulldog_puppy.png 17:08, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I started to separate the pages, starting where Chicken left off. I got a few done, but I'm slow at this X.X --Liquidhelium 16:11, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - It seems pretty easy, but it can take awhile sorting out which info goes in which article. Lol Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 21:55, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

What about burnt fish? And should this be done to all meat articles? White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 02:26, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that burnt meat should necessarily be split, since the difference between them is not really relevant. However, splitting raw and cooked articles for all types of meat could be a good idea. I'm a regular user and I approve this message.  TLUL Talk - Contribs 02:30, February 4, 2010 (UTC) 
If there is not already a similar meat template, this would be a bloody good idea.  :-) Leevclarke talk Max_logo_mini.png bulldog_puppy.png 05:28, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

Closed - Lack of activity, doesn't seem to have any other things to discuss anyway. C.ChiamTalk 13:32, April 2, 2010 (UTC)