Forum:Quick Guide for quests

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Quick Guide for quests
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 7 May 2011 by Suppa chuppa.


Marrionette recently created a new kind of guide for quests - Quick Guides. Her idea was that people are turned away from the wiki and head to places like RuneHQ because we have a wall of text, vs their bullet points and easy reading. I firmly support this and I hope that she, along with other users go out and create more of these. Because there are no negative side affects to having more of these guides, other then taking a little more space up. If people have questions or concerns about the new Quick Guides, please post here. Spamnub 23:44, April 27, 2011 (UTC)

Examples

{{quick guide}}

Discussion

Comment - Wait should this be here? --Cakemix 00:36, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Why not? :o --Iiii I I I 00:42, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Support - But only for long quests like One Small Favour. Don't bother with the small quests like Doric's Quest Guthix1110 00:46, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - The steps are already numbered and very well detailed. People sometimes get mixed up if the steps are not fully explained. People will still see "a wall of text" except now it has bullets. User:Exor Solieve 00:47, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

If they get confused they could just refer to the detailed guide. ɳex undique 00:50, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
Its more that they are too detailed for some people and that they just want quick steps to help.  Marrioneetee (Talk) http://img802.imageshack.us/img802/7835/nyancaty.png   00:56, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
Exor, scroll up. This is for questions or concerns, not opposes or supports. No one needs permission to do this. I do recommend a checklist of sorts be made so others can jump in if they wish. Once you begin working on a quest, put your name next to it so others will not work on the same one at first. Like Psycho Robot did with Pets. User:Psycho_Robot/Project_Mypet/Checklist--Degenret01 01:02, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

RS:BB - I don't think the addition of "quick guides" is such a big deal that it requires a discussion. --Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 00:48, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Andorin, I, and probablly others, Don't want to spend a long time making guides for other quests such as One Small Favour or the such, just for it to turn out that all of the community hates it. If people don't have a large amount of concerns (such as we don't need it, etc.) then we might just not work, if people don't have a large amount, we can move on and start working. Spamnub 01:14, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Idea - Why don't we put the quick guides on the main page and separate the detailed one to a subpage? Twig Talk 772kZGs.png 00:55, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

That I think I would oppose. I would prefer having detailed information available on the main quest article, with the option to use an abbreviated version if I want. --Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 01:16, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
Why not just make a portal for them instead? ajr 01:41, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Having to read around 2-3 paragraphs packed full of text on how to defeat a quest boss that for a player like myself can be condensed to "pray x and bring y." would save me a lot of unnecessary reading and searching for the right spot on a page. Also, my browser lags excessively with Runescape running so a quick guide for every quest would be quite appreciated. melonWatermelon slice.png 01:18, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

That's a good point to consider. I created the Distractions and Diversions Locations/Lite page because the standard D&D locations page was too laggy during a period where my Internet connection was extremely slow. Having quick quest guides for people with weaker connections or computers isn't a bad idea. However, not every quest boss is quite as simple as "pray x, bring y." --Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 01:28, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Support - Definitely worth it, and since they would be in addition to the regular, overly detailed and hard to follow guides, no harm done :) ajr 01:24, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Support - It couldn't hurt, and if people want it sure. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 01:36, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

I would like to have a few of these quick guides to start with, and see how the readers react to them, both in terms of traffic and comments. As always, I am dismayed that people do not have attention spans long enough to read a paragraph, but we can't fix stupid and apparently we have to accommodate it. ʞooɔ 02:24, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Im making one for Dragon slayer now :3  Marrioneetee (Talk) http://img802.imageshack.us/img802/7835/nyancaty.png   03:41, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Link to them A major key to their being utilized will lie in making sure that people become aware of them. In addition to the obvious link from the top of the full quest guide page, also add the links on any quest lists. Similar to the "Guide" link next to each potion on this page. Perhaps also on templates with quest series. Just a couple ides to start with.--Degenret01 03:57, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - I like them so far, but I just have one thing to say: If people are going to be using the quick guide, they will obviously not be interested in the storyline, characters, or even the plot. They want to get the quest done quickly. I'm thinking the images and all that good stuff surrounding the pages is just a waste of space unfortunately. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 06:52, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

I don't know. I think a few pics are helpful to keep one oriented as they go along. "Oh yea I see that guy, I am in the right spot". And people already use quick guides, by going to the other fansites.--Degenret01 07:08, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Whatever - If there are people out there who don't care about lore/(hi)story(line)/etc., don't quest for the sake of doing it and just want the bloody rewards; sure, let them have the "go to A, talk to B, kill C, gratz, quest complete"-version. Can't hurt, unless the normal guides lose their popularity (which'd be very sad). User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 14:19, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

If we split things, of course guides would lose some visitors. I don't think this would be huge, but it will be a clear reduction. That's something that always happens when splitting something. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 15:05, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
Stupid careless people. Lol User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 16:33, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Strong Support - Adding a quick guide, without too much detailed information or spoilers, each step has it's own line and is numbered and each part of the quest should have information on what items to bring. If that's done, the guides will become far more useful than they are right now, as you sometimes have to search for the actual information on what to do or what to bring. After talking with some other RuneScape players I know that know of the wiki, they all told me that they generally prefer for example RuneHQ's guides over ours just because they're far less complicated (not all of them are, naturally, and no offence of course as our guides are great as well), so this would be a good idea. Adding a nice box below the quest details template should work. Mark (talk) 14:44, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Support - People might want to find out most of the quest by themselves, but still have some clearer reference guide than the in-game quest guide. These short guides would be perfect for that purpose. For people who are stuck using the short guide should have a link to sections in the full guide, for example ''[[../#section|click here for detailed explanation.]]''. Remember that [[../#section]] should be used, and not a link to the full page, for the rare occasions Jagex renames a quest(links won't have to be moved). Also I think we should discuss using dotted or numbered lists. I think dotted lists are better, because it looks a bit more professional in my opinion.
PS: this could be used for making a short guide of Gunnar's Ground. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 15:05, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

I had a thought that it might be a good idea to revisit the idea proposed here. While I opposed splitting guides off into separate articles there, I think if we decide to move forward with these quick guides it might be a neat idea to do what was suggested in that thread. Specifically, the specific quest page (like While Guthix Sleeps) will have substantive content about the quest, like a prose summary, quest series information and developer info. The long-form guide would be split off, and we'd add a navigation template at the top of each quest page. It would link (as an anchor) to the quest content info as well as to the two guide subpages. Just an idea I wanted to throw out there. (wszx) 03:57, April 29, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - I like the idea and have used other sites guides at times because they were more of a go here and do that style. The big hurdle that I don't think can be overcome is while sites like RuneHQ's guides are developed by an individual or small team, the Wiki guides are editable by anyone. This mean that while the short guide for say WGS may be advantageous when compared to their longer counterparts for max level players, other editors will migrate information from the long guide to the short guide and then your left with two very similar guides to maintain. If there is excess or wrong information in the guides then they need to be edited out. I know I did this for a couple quests as I was getting my quest cape. Oh and leave the Lore trash out of this, if there was a decent story in the game or if Runescape did a good job of delivering said story (both which Jagex get extremely low marks in when compared to other MMOs) there might be a leg to stand on. Quest.png Darrik Ash US serv.svg HS ALDarklight detail.png 13:20, April 29, 2011 (UTC)

Lot of lore in RuneScape, the most relevant example being quest series. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 14:39, April 29, 2011 (UTC)
We can continue this on a diferent forum but 176 quests does not make for lots of lore. Especially when a portion of those quest are nothing more than an introduction to a skill or activity and serveral series are taking years to release (Elemental Workshop series, Myreque series). Quest.png Darrik Ash US serv.svg HS ALDarklight detail.png 15:12, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
Darrik you do raise a valid point but you are missing an easy answer. What is to stop people from adding all the extra storyline and unneeded details to the quest guides? Two easy answers, the second of which is "us". We the common editors. We will see the changes, fix them, and (very important) tell the editor why we undid their edit. The first easy answer is the fast guides can have a small template at the top telling people not to add unneeded steps. See? So easy. Problem solved. We win. Go wiki!--Degenret01 03:29, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
If the answers were that easy then why are we even discussing a second set of quest guides? If we had all the active editors that it would take to maintain two set of quest guides working on the first set then we would have no need for a second set because the first ones would be dang near perfect. No, from where I sit all this will do is spread out even thinner the current active editors we have now and take away from both sets of guides. I do think that people are wanting this though is enough proof that the current guides we have need to have a good cleaning. This wouldn't be an issue if the guides were maintained. Quest.png Darrik Ash US serv.svg HS ALDarklight detail.png 15:12, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
You say the first guides would be dang near perfect. You act like both guides are the same, the ones im creating are short and quick... all the extra info from the first one that people dont want to read has been taken out. Just because the current guides are perfect doesnt mean pepople who want to-the-point information will start reading them.  Marrioneetee (Talk) http://img802.imageshack.us/img802/7835/nyancaty.png   21:44, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
I'm not saying the guides are perfect, I think that is the one thing we can both agree on. What I haven't been convinced of yet is that they are not the same product just redesigned for a different group of players. You say it's not the same, ok convince me. How is it not a quest guide? You say there is information in the original guides that people don't want to read. Well edit it out or move it to trivia if it so warrants it. Please don't take my negativity as hostile, I really want to support this, I'm just not convinced that it's not just duplicating work.
I would also recommend putting a link back from the quick guide to the regular guide in case people need more detail Quest.png Darrik Ash US serv.svg HS ALDarklight detail.png 09:19, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
Again Derrick you raise a good question, Why are we discussing this? Well, a majority of people are the same as you, they fail to realize that this is not for oppose or supports. The quick guides will go forward, regardless. They do NOT require any consensus. The point of this thread was to look for input and to answer questions or concerns. If you, or anyone else, does not wish to participate in helping with the guides, then simply do not do so.--Degenret01 01:52, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
Well, while that may have been the intent of the thread, now that it's been opened, there can be a consensus here to shut them down. (wszx) 02:24, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
You are also completely missing the point. It is not to have a perfect guide. It is too have guides for both type of people. Those who want fast easy instructions, and those who want all the little tiny storyline details. You cannot satisfy both one one guide, they are entirely exclusive from one another.--Degenret01 01:58, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
Is it I that fails to realize that a consensus is not needed or you that fails to realize that a consensus is needed? Is it in your power to create this second set of quest guides? Yes. Is it within the power of all the other editors to petition for there merger or deletion as redundant? Yes. So the question is, what forum do you want to defend this new set of quest guides? Personally I think this is a better place, you already have a number of people on board with the idea.
Please understand oppose does not mean hate. I do like the quick guide version of King of the Dwarves a lot more than the original. If I had my way I'd cut some of the more valued material out of the original guide and stick it in the quick guide and call it done. I do think you can have one guide that can accommodate both those that need detailed instruction and those that just want the quick steps in one section. What about the show/hide button for the Contents box, can that feature be imported to other areas? That way only the steps are shown and if details are needed then the person can click on it to expand the more detailed information? Quest.png Darrik Ash US serv.svg HS ALDarklight detail.png 09:19, May 1, 2011 (UTC)
I removed your duplicate post and fixed the indentation formatting. Anyway, I dislike the idea of incorporating both quick and full guides with use of the show/hide feature because that feature is not for significant amounts of an article. We are an encyclopedia, and encyclopedic information comes first before quick guides and other such conveniences. The default must therefore be that the full guide is shown, with readers who specifically want the quick guides to have to open them themselves. --Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 01:24, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

Supoort - Whatever. --中亚人/中亞人 (Chinasian/Jeffwang16) 跟我谈话 05:07, May 1, 2011 (UTC)

There are so many things I can say in response to that. Matt (t) 07:51, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
Whatever. --Iiii I I I 00:40, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

Support - This will also reduce a lot of lag. Anybody who has used a portable computer for RuneScape help while they play RS will know what I'm talking about. Matt (t) 07:51, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

Closed - Quick guides will continue to be implemented for quests and should be linked to from the quest article to increase ease of access. Suppa chuppa Talk 08:57, May 7, 2011 (UTC)