Can we sort out the trivia sections in articles... The trivia section is for interesting additions to the main article, that might be of relevance. Not merely saying, "this might be a reference to..." when blatantly it isnt.
An article I just read 'monkey nuts' said "This might be a reference to a restaurant in England called 'monkey nuts' "... It almost certainly isnt, monkey nuts are peanuts in their shells, and are a common commodity. It would appear the user has just googled 'monkey nuts' and taken the first link.
Jagex does reference lots of pop cult/real world things, but lets not have this section just for bland, uninteresting observations that are almost certainly pointless...
- We have a policy, Runescape:Trivia policy, it is kinda disgraceful that it has been "under construction" since March 2009. 22:50, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
I've noticed that quite a few of the edits to the Trivia page seem to be just removing and readding the same stuff. Whilst I understand why they are in there - they are interesting to know and don't really fit elsewhere -, I also understand why they keep getting removed - RuneScape is not meant to represent real life and such has little relevence to the game.
Also, it states that it is for trivia that doesn't fit elsewhere. Whole sections of that page could fit elsewhere, such as Chat. Put the bit about Zanik's examine in the Zanik article and remove it. Same goes for the bit about the language used in Forgiveness of a Chaos Dwarf, and all of the music can be put onto the page of the individual music piece and removed.
And if you feel a piece of trivia on an individual page is wrong or irrelevent, then remove it.Ciphrius Kane 22:56, August 5, 2010 (UTC)
If it were up to me, I'd get rid of trivia sections altogether. Micellaneous information can be sorted into the appropriate section somehow. There should especially not be a trivia section if it is the only section in the article; that defeats the purpose of having trivia in a separate section. C Teng talk 00:31, August 6, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I really hate it when that happens. C Teng talk 22:05, August 9, 2010 (UTC)
I might take RuneScape:Trivia policy under my wing and improve it a bit. I've finished expanding some sections but it still requires more information. Is this policy official yet? 222 talk 06:55, August 10, 2010 (UTC)
Comment - The policy can only do so much if nobody takes action. I've recently been trying to be bold and take on the problems in trivia sections, but that hasn't exactly been going to well; those edits usually get reverted. -- 02:30, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
Comment - Reading the previous forum, I believe that most people agreed that 1) "Trivia I guess is just based on what is trivial to you. Where some might find something trivial, another may not." and 2) The trivia section should not be removed. The area where people have dissent is over what should be included.
On one end, there are people that believe the trivia section is a "Did you know?" section for articles to provide information that people might overlook/not think about, and is one of the reasons why people enjoy coming to the site to read.
On the other, there are people that believe that the information is pointless and would be better included in the article.
The definition of a notable trivia is still unclear.02:49, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
Comment - The wiki that I first edited on had a great idea about trivia sections: If the information was relevant, then it was moved into the overview paragraph. If it wasn't, it was removed. No trivia section, in other words. ajr 15:13, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
Comment - regarding Bugs and Glitches "They should have their own Bugs/glitches sub-section. Regarding bugs, anything which was a bug should be put down, no matter how minor" Is it really nessessary to keep track of every time there is a minor graphical glitch, typo, or something that doesn't work quite right? I think we should only be documenting MAJOR glitches that actually effect the game (Falador Massacre, Penguin Point glitch, ect) --20:28, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
Comment - Nope. And it'll be pretty hard to get it to be official if nobody seems to really care, as is the case now. --04:56, August 23, 2010 (UTC)
Comment Huh, I've noticed trivia pieces such as that, but never stopped to question whether it should be there. I'll take a look at the trivia policy, once it's not one in the morning. Sir Punchula 06:26, August 23, 2010 (UTC)
- Trivia Policy isn't official, and I haven't done a perfect job re-writing it. 222 talk 06:28, August 23, 2010 (UTC)
- Comment - is the policy official now, then?
03:04, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
- It always was official, but just wasn't finished. 222 talk 03:16, September 19, 2010 (UTC)
Closed - As the trivia policy was always official, per Forum:Runescape:Trivia policy (I don't know where users thought it wasn't, as it was listed in RS:POLICIES), the discussion here is more or less moot. The specific content of a trivia policy can be proposed in more detail if needed. --LiquidTalk 20:27, September 26, 2010 (UTC)