All news articles from RuneScape are currently being copied and put in the wiki under the Update: namespace (example: Update:Christmas Cards and Blog). However, on the RuneScape main page, they are never referred to as updates anymore, but "news" - the only time they are called updates are during system updates. I'm proposing that we change the Update: namespace to a new News: namespace, and have all update articles under the new namespace. C Teng talk 13:35, December 19, 2009 (UTC)
- I assumed that they used to be called updates, but were changed to news. I'm neutral now, but this discussion still has a few supporters. C Teng talk 12:48, December 31, 2009 (UTC)
60% towards support (Hey, it's better than neutral!) - Althought it would be a pain (I think) to change them all there, a news mainspace would make more sense. Although, I do not see many advantages to this (maybe) hard work we would have to do, except making a bit more sense.14:20, December 19, 2009 (UTC)
Slight support - It may be a little confusing to those who know them by the Update namespace. And I don't think we need to do anything, except request it from Wikia. They change it in our files, and that's it. ~MuzTalk 15:24, December 19, 2009 (UTC)
Slight Support - As long as people understand that it is news related to Jagex and not the wiki, I am fine with it. Also, Newbie, a bot can perform the said actions if needed. Everything else has been well put by Muzzy.16:34, December 19, 2009 (UTC)
- If a bot is needed to perform the tasks mentioned above, AzBot already has done page moves and link fixes before, so please let me know if it is required... 05:33, December 21, 2009 (UTC)
Comment This actually would not require much, just contact the wikia staff and have them change LocalSettings.php to say that namespace * 's display name should be changed. Hello71 19:52, December 19, 2009 (UTC)
Comment (and a bit of history) - Actually, they were always called "News" in the website, at least as far back as 2002. Back in October 2006, Update articles used to be stored in the RuneScape: namespace before some of the earlier users decided to create the Update: namespace, and move all of the pages to the new namespace. See the move logs of Megalodon99 and Vimescarrot. I couldn't find where they had discussed the creation of the new namespace and the subsequent moving of the articles, but I know this happened sometime in September or October of 2006.
The reason I think they chose Update: as the name of the namespace was because, essentially, the pages are about... updates. Game updates are updates to the game engine, Website updates are updates to the official website, and Shop updates are updates to the Jagex Store.
Putting them in the News: namespace, IMO, just does not seem right, as all (or at least most) of them are, in one way or another, updates! We also store Patch Notes in the Update namespace, and these are not news, but forum posts. This is also a possibility that Developers' Blogs may be moved into the Update namespace as well (see Forum:Development Diaries’ Namespace). These are blogs written by J-Mods, and the blogs cannot be stored in Update namespace if the name is changed. Maybe some other name would be more appropriate, like Jagex:...? 05:33, December 21, 2009 (UTC)
- I agree. I think we should leave everything as it is, but move the DDs over to the Update: namespace. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chicken7 (talk).
Oppose - I dunno. The "News:" namespace doesn't seem right. I think it should remain the way it is. --
18:37, December 28, 2009 (UTC)
Oppose - I just don't think News: sounds right. I don't think it is too much of a big deal though; a player is not going to leave the wiki because they think we're a bunch of idiots because of the name of our namespace. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 08:50, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
Oppose - I agree with the opposers. Prgmbeta 08:59, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
Request closure - Since we now have diaries, blogs, patch notes, and the news post in the Update namespace, moving them the News namespace (per the original proposal) is not a good option. I believe most are in agreement after I had mentioned this above. In addition, the original proposer has withdrawn his support, so maybe we can close this now.21:30, January 25, 2010 (UTC)
Closed - As requested.21:52, January 25, 2010 (UTC)