Forum:Styling Quest Pages

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Styling Quest Pages
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 1 July 2011 by TyA.

So, I've been talking with some friends who also play RuneScape and found that they were using RuneHQ for all their quest walkthroughs. I asked why, and they said it was because they supply an image of every stop of the quest. I thought, well maybe the wiki should do something like that. I think that maybe quest pages should be split into the description and general information with a link to a walkthrough page (e.g. Dragon Slayer/Walkthrough). I think that also adding more images of where a player should be would also help. It would be a lot of work, and I expect a lot of opposition, but I just wanted to get the idea out there.

Milestone cape (50).pngAmeobea10Talk Contribs #Virtus mask.png 13:30, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

Oppose-ish - No, it would look messy having an image of everything. It is really unnecessary to show a player standing next to Oziach, Klarense and Ned for example during Dragon Slayer. I think quest images should be limited to cutscene images (and other actions), and nice location image, and if it's really blank an npc or talking scene. It's true however that quest articles need more consistency in styling. They should all be regular articles, that tell what to do, but also speak of lore and stuff, and not just steps. That's what quick guides are for. Ex. King of the Dwarves = good. Lunar Diplomacy not. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 14:41, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - I remember having a discussion about our quest pages before, and I think some people said that we had too many unnecessary images. The amount we have now is okay, having an image for every step of the way would make everything really crowded and I think it would deter some people. ɳex undique 14:48, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - The way we have quest articles now is how people have come to expect RS Wiki quest walkthroughs, and that's how we've become one of the most popular, if not the most popular Wink, RuneScape fansites. Different people prefer different methods, and for some that method is how we do it, and for others they find it at other fansites. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 17:29, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Also, it would create to much trouble to get to the quest walkthrough if we implement what you suggest. Most people look for quest walkthroughs because they want to know how to do the quest. If we make them have to first find the quest page, AND THEN tell them to go to a different page it would discourage them from wanting to use us as a quick source of information. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 17:32, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Forum:Changes to quest articles Suppa chuppa Talk 17:33, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Smuff no likey - Pictures are to give a visual representation of the object in question, not so much how to get to said object. You have to remember too many pictures looks horrid. Smuff [The cake is a lie] 18:02, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - Having a cruddy SD image of talking to an NPC doesn't add anything to an article. Our guides are definitely some of the best because we have the most information *and* pictures. Not less information and an influx of pictures or vice versa. They're currently balanced as they are for most quest guides. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 18:06, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - First of all taking all these images would take a long time. Second, if we did this, updating them if a graphics update came out would be a nightmare (The same reason we don't have one image for every single item). Third, we already have quick guides for quests. -Hourglass (2011 Hallowe'en event) detail.png I Am Me Talk III The Spark.png- 20:05, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Support - I did propose this once before, as Suppa links to. The proposal kind of fell apart for all sorts of reasons. Some ideas managed to be implemented regardless; this wasn't. We can put images on the page in a way that would allow the article not to become cluttered. And we can split into detailed and quick walkthroughs, like whatever we've got now or something. I want to come back and actually reorganise another review and improvement of the quest articles later on. But I do support this. Chicken7 >talk 10:13, June 21, 2011 (UTC)

Oppose split - I think it's simply a terrible idea to put the walkthrough on a subpage. I would venture a guess that 95 out of 100 people visit quest pages solely for the walkthrough, without a care about the development history or any of that other information. We appeal to a less-than-thorough demographic, and I imagine many of them would miss the walkthrough entirely. The amount of dilution we would get from moving the walkthrough to a subpage is probably around 20 or 30 percent, which is unacceptable to me and should be to you as well. As for the images, I would like it if we didn't adjust our quest guides to fit the Zybez/RuneHQ model...in fact, I would rather remove the superfluous images from the guides instead of adding more. ʞooɔ 10:50, June 21, 2011 (UTC)

New Proposal

Yeah, I expected a lot of opposition. Let's just say that there's no chance that it's going to get split. Instead, let's just focus on the idea of adding images that outline the steps of the quest process. We could hide them in hideable tables to preserve space, but I really think they could be a good idea. Let's vote for that below. I know some of the above also apply to this, so we can count them as well. Milestone cape (50).pngAmeobea10Talk Contribs #Virtus mask.png 13:31, June 21, 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

Notice of intent - Unless discussion picks up by the end of the week, this will be closed with both proposals not passing. 222 talk 08:26, June 30, 2011 (UTC)

Request Closure - No one seems interested anymore and all previous consent is negative. No point in keeping it up any more. Milestone cape (50).pngAmeobea10Talk Contribs #Virtus mask.png 18:30, June 30, 2011 (UTC)

Closed - Nominator withdrawal. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 05:19, July 1, 2011 (UTC)