RuneScape:Requests for deletion/Abraxas Carnifex and The Empty Throne

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was Allow the article on the comic, but merge the subarticles. --LiquidTalk 21:04, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Abraxas Carnifex and The Empty Throne

Both articles are about a non-canon comic created by one JMod and, as such, I don't think they deserve articles. Although they're interesting, they have the same relevance to RS as any player fanfiction does, with the only difference being that these were created by a JMod. I don't see a purpose for them here as anything other than a trivia item in Mod Jack's article.

There's a lot of non-canon info created by JMods. Until they become recognized as being official lore, I don't think they have a clear fit here.

Delete - As nominator. ɳex undique 18:01, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Question - Could they be listed as trivia on relevant pages? Like how The Forgotten Warrior does it? Nae sure if we've actually got a page for Zaros's betrayal but could probably both go on there Ciphrius Kane (talk) 19:24, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Yeah I think they fit the definition of trivia well enough that they would be fine on relevant pages. ɳex undique 04:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Oppose - Didn't expect to go to all that effort writing those articles only for someone to want to delete them. Well, I have a counterexample. An Eye for an Eye is also an unofficial work, yet it's been allowed to stay. NeutralinoTalk?This is a pale wisp. 03:04, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

I don't mean to seem unappreciative of the edits, I do value the time you put in to making them and all the other work you've done. You're right that An Eye for an Eye has been allowed to stay, but I think it's more appropriate to say that it's just slipped under the radar. Under this proposal, that page would be deleted as well. ɳex undique 04:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
The wiki includes many non-canon articles. Transcript:Military Forces of the Late Third Age is yet another one. There are articles about things exclusively from Armies of Gielinor and Postbag from the Hedge. These have a template at the top stating how the contents of the article aren't fully canon and how in-game lore takes precedent over them. I suggest making a generic non-canon or semi-canon template for articles like these and The Empty Throne. It'd set a useful precedent for articles like them in the future.
One final thing. Deleting An Eye for an Eye would leave a bad taste in my mouth since that'd be similar to deleting the Lores and Histories page, which is the only place they can be found after Jagex deleted them from the website. Eventually, the Eye for an Eye forum thread will be bumped off page 50. That's why I made sure to preserve it on the wiki.NeutralinoTalk?This is a pale wisp. 10:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
The Empty Throne isn’t even semi-canon, it’s entirely non-canon. I think I’d be okay with an exception in the Transcript namespace for archival purposes, but I still don’t think that these works deserve articles in the mainspace devoted to them. ɳex undique 12:48, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Shouldn't we then make a new template at the top for articles which cover content made by JMods about RuneScape that isn't canonical, but still worth presenting and preserving in the Wiki? AquaMage2459 (talk) 06:34, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Comment - I kind of view The Empty Throne as concept art in that it inspired Children of Mah in part. The articles themselves are interesting and I'd be sad to see them deleted. I don't have a problem with them existing as is, but if we agree they should be a standalone page, why not move them to subpages of Mod Jack? cqm talk 13:38, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Oppose - I think it is relevant for the wiki to keep information like this, similar to how we have pages on scrapped content and the like. That said, the Abraxas Carnifex is very short, without much information. It might be worth adding the info as a section on The Empty Throne and making the page a redirect. Seers headband 2 chathead.png Elessar2 (talk) 09:15, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Oppose - Personally, I think it is valuable to document the The Empty Throne on the Wiki, not only because it serves as the predecessor for Children of Mah, but also because it gives us insight on various things, such as the visual appearance of various characters who have not been seen yet in-game (like Abraxas Carnifex, and some of the Chthonian Dukes). Personally, I think the article would benefit from a complete documentation of the comic, with all pages present. AquaMage2459 (talk) 06:34, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

New proposal - It's clear that people are okay with non-canon content here if it's created by a JMod and has a strong relation to canon content. So what about allowing articles for the general story (like keeping The Empty Throne and An Eye for an Eye), but not allowing individual pages for characters that they introduce (like deleting Abraxas Carnifex). This way it doesn't get out of hand with a bunch of very short non-canon articles (and we can redirect them to the story's article), but we still preserve the story for those interested. Though this might be getting more into YG territory. ɳex undique 15:02, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

I'd like to see Abraxas Carnifex merged into The Empty Throne rather than outright deleted, but otherwise it works for me. cqm talk 12:33, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Closed - There is consensus for the articles on the comic to stay. Based on the discussion it seems that people are also okay with the new proposal's essence, even if no one really commented on it. Because of the lack of comments, this discussion should not be used as a precedent unless we have a more robust discussion in the Yew Grove. For those who are spineless poisonous blobs, I mean, lawyers, *cough* Nex *cough*, this closure should be treated as a per curiam decision. --LiquidTalk 21:04, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.