Forum:The Great Examination

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > The Great Examination

Examines are in my opinion, one of the best part of RuneScape. We currently NPC and item examines but almost no object examines. I am not saying that we need to add the 113290 examines that are in the game on the wiki. I think we should focus more on instanced quest examines. Usually, quest examines contains tidbit of lore that the player can easily miss. My proposal is that we add quest-only examine on the quest respective transcript page in the form of a table. Here's an example with the quest You Are It:

Object Examine Additional notes
Crate An old crate for storage. -
Mysterious Hole Who knows where this could lead to. Note: Same examine even with the rope.
Rope Good for climbing. -
Support Rudimentary scraffolding to prevent the tomb from becoming a sinkhole. -
Root The tomb may have kept humans out, but it didn't keep out McGrubor's Wood. -
Coffin An unardorned coffin, it gives no hint to who lays here except for a single symbol on the lid. -
Torch How are these torches still burning? And the candles? And wouln't they have burned out all the oxygen? -
Mantle It holds a collection of jade statues. -
Mantle It holds a collection of jade statue and a broken mess. -
Arch If you want to make a room look more dramatic, add arches. Note: After destroying the statue.

I think this would be an ideal solution to preserve this important part of the game. I will personally go ahead and record them as part of the RuneScape Preservation Unit Project (RPU) but a little help wouldn't hurt. It would also give another incentive for One Small Wiki Favor. Thanks for commenting. Manpaint55 (talk) 22:42, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Discussion[edit source]

Oppose table, support scenery pages - I think examine texts are interesting, but I would suggest documenting them via scenery pages, as found in Category:Non-interactive scenery and Category:Interactive scenery (if they're notable). There's also non-interactive scenery, which is apparently intended for collating non-notable scenery/characters (based on RuneScape:Granularity), but seems to contain links (suggesting the listed things are/have become notable...). Possibly relevant older thread - Forum:Non-interactive Scenery pages - Rawny (talk) 23:23, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Support, with alterations to proposal:How about a dedicated page for a table of non-interactive scenery? We could divide such a page by quest, just like the Graphical updates pages divide images alphabetically. Seems better than creating tons of barebones pages that would follow the granularity rule but hurt readability by doing so. Raven (blue).png Crowborn (Talk) 06:13, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

That was pretty much the consensus of Forum:Non-interactive Scenery pages, with non-interactive scenery intended to be(come) something like the page you're describing ^^
To (hopefully) clarify my position above, my main opposition to the proposed table is having it on quest transcript pages. I'm not entirely opposed to having a page for non-interactive scenery (and/or interactive scenery) listing pieces that aren't especially notable (though obviously that's somewhat subjective). Admittedly I lean towards the individual pages because upon reading "Crate" - "An old crate for storage." I'm left wondering what the crate looks like, where I might find it (is it unique to this location/quest/however-this-is-organised-thing or found elsewhere), is it interactive (can it be searched, for example) or non-interactive (besides the examine), do we know when it first appeared, and so on - Rawny (talk) 20:56, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
I think the problem here is that there can be so many variants of such basic items that I imagine it would become not fun to make them all (imo unnecessary) individual pages (when instead they could be collated into one master list, this could still include locations and images) with either switchboxes/bullet point examines/differing page name parentheses Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 01:21, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Comment - I'm not wholly opposed to the table, however I do agree with Rawny in that they should be documented via interactive scenery pages. I think the wiki is largely lacking pages on interactive scenery, and that be the area of focus. Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 19:24, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Support table - in regards to the older thread rawny mentioned above (non-interactive scenery pages), non-interactive scenery should be on one page (in this case, a table) with notable exceptions made as their own pages additionally. Interactive scenery should be listed in the table and linked to its corresponding page. The table should be at the bottom of transcript pages under a header Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 01:16, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Comment - While I wouldn't be opposed to having the table on the transcript page, I do feel it should be somewhere in the mainspace as well, a la non-interactive scenery, if that makes sense. Badassiel 08:39, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Comment - Also not opposed to a table but I agree with Badassiel that it should be in mainspace and not (or not just) on transcript page. Could be a subpage to the quest page maybe. Seers headband 2 chathead.png Elessar2 (talk) 10:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Supporting Elessar's idea - I'd prefer it to be on a separate subpage of the quest instead of lumping it on the transcript. And I'm kinda more leaning towards a master page for all (non-) interactive scenery instead of grouping it per quest as there could be overlap in some cases I think. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 09:20, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Support what salix said - hi, me again, i like the idea of the master page. Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 23:01, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Comment - The only way I see this being added while making sense and staying encyclopedical is to start creating separate articles for scenery objects, which is a huge undertaking (and many of these pages would not consist of more than a couple sentences, which makes me doubt if there's value in this). However, it could also be a good way to centralise information. Imagine a page for "Door" listing all different examines for doors in the game along with a small gallery and mentions of more important doors. Still, can't stress this enough, it's a lot of work (probably at least 10-20 thousand pages?). To summarise, I'm mildly opposed to pages listing "examine by quest", I'd rather see "examine by object name" but making pages for every object is a pedantic, low-priority project that also (likely) violates the current granularity policy. 5-x Talk 18:13, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Comment - I support the idea of non-I pages for things that seem large enough to warrant them (like Ardal), but there's the obvious problem listed just above, so the table seems to work better there. Is it possible to create standards saying yes to Ardal but no to a door? wprMTIq.pngc1CzvWw.png 12:53, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Ardal should also be listed on the table and link to its page imo. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 13:30, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Support on sub-pages - But I'll include a caveat on that. How would we deal with changes of scenery as of the effect of quests or events? Mainly asking this because of the sorry state Edgeville was left in and the restoration effort... Is that still a thing? I'm out of the loop. Twig Talk 772kZGs.png 22:47, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Switch infoboxes? Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 22:54, 13 September 2019 (UTC)