RuneScape:Requests for deletion/Archive 20

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current project page or contact an administrator for aid if no talk page exists.


The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was Delete.

Calculator:Cooking/Incomplete pizza making

All information presented by this calculator is included in [[Calculator:Cooking/Pizza]] and this page is no longer necessary.

Delete - As nominator. Law rune.png Samberen Nature rune.png 02:24, December 9, 2013 (UTC)

Support - per nom. cqm 16:45, 10 Dec 2013 (UTC) (UTC)

Closed - Article will be deleted. --LiquidTalk 15:27, December 20, 2013 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was delete.

Easter egg (feature)

Oh boy. This page. This RFD shouldn't be as rough though, because it's going to be pretty much the same as RuneScape:Requests for deletion/Cultural references.

It's almost exactly the same page; the only real difference is that this seems to cover a slightly broader concept. All cultural references were technically easter eggs; the same is not true the other way around, but this page is exactly the same idea as the aforementioned page. So rather than try to come up with an original diatribe, I'll ask you all to read that other RFD. The potential text wall here would be more or less the same as that one.

Delete - Nom nom nom MolMan 15:56, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

wtf - Is this some obsolete, ugly collection of random trivia (SINCE WHEN IS A MINIQUEST A TRIVIUM)? How did it go unnoticed so long... User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 18:02, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Delete - Per my comments on cultural references. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 01:35, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Delete - Per everybody. Matt (t) 01:39, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Delete - What is this, I don't even. — Jr Mime (talk) 00:34, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

Closed - Page will be deleted. Suppa chuppa Talk 22:31, December 28, 2013 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was Delete. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 13:12, January 2, 2014 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Food

This RFD isn't really planned to be geared toward deleting this template, per se. I want to open up discussion about this template's usage more than anything else.

Do we actually want to use this template? Or should we stick with Infobox Item? This template was discussed over 5 years ago and kept on the grounds that it will see use one day. It has never seen any significant use, currently being used on only 4 pages. We oughta decide now and be consistent with what infobox we decide to use. If we decide we don't want to use this template and opt for Infobox Item instead, then yes, of course, this template should be deleted.

??? - I'm more inclined to delete but keeping an open mind MolMan 19:03, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Delete - I see no use for it, just adds more clutter to the item infobox. Information can obviously be found in the body of the article. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 01:38, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Delete - no use for it. Small recharge gem.png AnselaJonla Slayer-icon.png 18:11, December 23, 2013 (UTC)

Delete - No use. — Jr Mime (talk) 00:35, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

Delete - Yeah, it isn't particularly necessary. Matt (t) 01:47, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

Closed - The template will be deleted. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 13:12, January 2, 2014 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was Keep.

File:Scan clue West Ardougne east of ZMI altar entrance.png

I think this may be an incorrect location. Usually scan clues are "within the walls" of a city but this is way outside of Ardougne. I think it should be deleted until someone can confirm it is correct by re-uploading it.

Delete - As nominator. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 19:51, December 17, 2013 (UTC)

Keep - An image is better than nothing. Given how the current TT images are a mess, just keep it for now in hopes that someone would update them in good faith. --Jlun2 (talk) 14:24, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Keep - Search and search until you find it. — Jr Mime (talk) 00:36, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

Delete - If we can't actually verify this spot exists, there is no point in keeping it. Keeping it on the grounds that someone might eventually probably maybe find it is counter-productive. The alleged location is too far outside the two cities that there is absolutely no reason to believe it exists. MolMan 13:42, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

I've come across references to it on other fansites. Temujin 02:05, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
Exactly how old are the references? I have a theory that this may have existed at one point, but because of how little sense it makes with the hint given by the clue, it might have been removed. If someone can verify this location still exists, then we should keep the image, but if we can only say "let's hope we eventually maybe find it", the image should go. MolMan 13:32, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
I think the harm of missing a legitimate clue is much greater than the harm of having an incorrect clue on the guide. ʞooɔ 12:06, December 28, 2013 (UTC)
I do agree with that statement, but this location really makes no sense; it's so far outside of the walls of the cities. MolMan 14:26, December 28, 2013 (UTC)

Closure - The image will be kept. -- Recent uploads SpineTalkGuest book 21:19, January 15, 2014 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was delete. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 00:38, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

Calculator:Other/Bank value

The calculator is pointless as it is hard to use and not very functional

Delete - As nominator. Shoyrukon (talk) 20:46, January 26, 2014 (UTC)

Closed - I've speedy deleted this. If you have 25 items, just price check them. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 00:38, January 27, 2014 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was Keep. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 12:13, February 28, 2014 (UTC)

KING BLACK DRAGOB

Useless redirect and come up in searchbar instead of main page 

Delete as nominator Smartman294 - The blank avatar man (talk) 00:48, February 17, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose - It's a redirect because a lot of people searched for it. — Jr Mime (talk) 00:50, February 17, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - It's the top of the list in the search bar, where the main page should be but can't be because this is in the way. Also, it's in all caps, which doesn't really make sense taking into account the format of the rest of the article titles. Lynterria (talk) 01:09, February 17, 2014 (UTC)

That's because of a Wikia gltich. Redirects shouldn't appear in there, we put a ticket and it should be fixed sometime. — Jr Mime (talk) 01:13, February 17, 2014 (UTC)
Comment - Have fun waiting Jr Mime. --Jlun2 (talk) 13:32, February 18, 2014 (UTC)
Sometime is the key word it could be years from now since it isn't fixed we don't need the page. Smartman294 - The blank avatar man (talk) 01:14, February 17, 2014 (UTC)
The problem is we have a lot more redirects than just this one. Do we delete them all and force someone to spell World-Gorger Shukarahazh or Flesh-Spoiler Haasgenahk correctly to find the page? --LiquidTalk 01:23, February 17, 2014 (UTC)
But dragon isn't a hard name and in search bar if you put in king it should come up or put in kbd Smartman294 - The blank avatar man (talk) 01:27, February 17, 2014 (UTC)
As capitalisation is important in page names (just not as noticed due to redirects for alternate capitalisations existing), much as it for file names, this just means that people WHO USE ALL-CAPS FREQUENTLY were making a misspelled search for the KBD on a regular enough basis for Mol to notice and make a redirect. Small recharge gem.png AnselaJonla Slayer-icon.png 13:38, February 18, 2014 (UTC)

Support – If it is going to be a redirect, it shouldn't be all caps anyway.

~ ChaoticShadow Zaros symbol.png  Talk  Guest book  Sandbox  Contribs   01:22,2/17/2014  
If people are searching for KING BLACK DRAGOB, then that capitalisation is what is needed for the redirect. You won't notice it due to the sheer number of alternate-capitalisation redirects that we have, but these things are just as important in a page name as they are in a file name, where even something as simple as moving PNG to png will cause a previously good link to turn into a redlink. Small recharge gem.png AnselaJonla Slayer-icon.png 13:41, February 18, 2014 (UTC)

Keep - The only difference between "King Black Dragob" and the target page, "King Black Dragon" is the "n" is replaced by a "b". "n" and "b" are right beside each other on a QWERTY keyboard, so this does not seem like an unlikely misspelling. I don't have much of a problem with the fact that the redirect title is in all caps, since searching "king black dragob" in all lowercase, or any combinations of lowercase and uppercase letters, also directs me to the redirect page. Smithing (talk | contribs) 01:34, February 17, 2014 (UTC)

So should dragob redirect page be made and lead to http://runescape.wiki/w/Dragon? Smartman294 - The blank avatar man (talk) 01:43, February 17, 2014 (UTC)

Additionally, should a redirect page for King Black Dragov, Jing Black Dragon, and every other possible misspelling be made? Lynterria (talk) 02:04, February 17, 2014 (UTC)

That's the point of redirects - to compensate for spelling mistakes in searches. We see what uncreated pages people are searching for through Special:SearchDigest and make that redirect if enough people are looking for it. cqm 02:09, 17 Feb 2014 (UTC) (UTC)

Oppose - As noted above this is a bug. It's caused by the redirects object having the keys and values the wrong way around, see here for an example. I can give much more detail on why it's become the problem it has, but I'll end up boring some people. It's been suggested that this should be deleted due to it being upper case which is ridiculous when you consider search is case insensitive. This bug has also existed for well over 2 months - why are we suddenly having this discussion now? I don't like the road deleting this particular redirect could send us down as this bug affects thousands of searches.

Regardless, I'm awaiting a response from Wikia's search team regarding a patch I've made for this bug. I understand the bug is annoying, but assuming my patch gets accepted this bug will exist no more. It will leave us free to make as many obscure redirects as we want and for the page they redirect to to come up in the suggestions. Unfortunately, I don't have a time frame for when this will be fixed, but I'm confident my patch does fix the problem. cqm 02:00, 17 Feb 2014 (UTC) (UTC)

It has just came up because it the first time I have seearch king black dragon and this totally random comes up before the real thing. Smartman294 - The blank avatar man (talk) 02:05, February 17, 2014 (UTC)

This is, does it matter if you go there or to the article? A redirect is just a shortcut, you will get there either way. — Jr Mime (talk) 04:06, February 17, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose - Tavvy. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 04:13, February 17, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose - It's not useless if people have searched it before. Surprisingly, a significant number of people had, otherwise I wouldn't have made it. Perhaps I could have done without creating it, but what's done is done, and deleting this isn't going to solve the actual problem. What if Black king dragon were to show up instead? It's best we just ignore this, and pray on Wikia fixing this bug. MolMan 13:23, February 18, 2014 (UTC)

Comment – I'd oppose if it wasn't all caps, because all caps isn't normal...  ChaoticShadow Zaros symbol.png  Talk  Guest book  Sandbox  Contribs   06:13,2/19/2014  

Oppose - per gaz Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:17, February 20, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose - what harm is in keeping it anyway? It's not a homogeneous redirect anyhow. Ozank Cx 21:55, February 20, 2014 (UTC)

Keep - Redirects are cheap, and this one fills a structural need. Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:34, February 22, 2014 (UTC)

Closed - The redirect will be kept. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 12:14, February 28, 2014 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was Delete.

Fire giant/Strategies

There's no need for this page, as of EoC. The "strategy" for fire giants is basically the same as any other slayer monster; take your best gear appropriate to the monster you're killing/the style you wish to train, go to where the monster is, and kill them.

This entire page could be summed up in a section on the main fire giant page, similar to how it is on the dust devil page. The two paragraphs about healing could even be copied onto the fire giant page almost without change.

Delete - As nominator. Small recharge gem.png AnselaJonla Slayer-icon.png 01:31, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

Note - So with the example of the dust devil page and how it could be summed up, are you suggesting a merge? Achievements Coelacanth0794 Talk Contribs 01:38, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

A merge implies that some semblance of the strategies page would be kept. Small recharge gem.png AnselaJonla Slayer-icon.png 01:40, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

Delete Not sure why it has ever had its own strategy page, tbh. Ozank Cx 23:07, April 22, 2014 (UTC)

Take a wild guess - Nothing special to know. It's just normal combat, and all the unique information fits more appropriately on the base page. MolMan 00:47, April 23, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - Seems awfully useless... User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 07:50, April 23, 2014 (UTC)

Closed - Article will be deleted. cqm 10:03, 3 May 2014 (UTC) (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was Deferred.

Template:Userbox/Item

This annoying thing has been messing with my attempts to correct image names for a while. In fact, this has happened more than once for others:

https://runescape.wiki/wiki/Template:Userbox/Item?action=history

There's no reason to use this if all it does is cause moving images a pain along with most users of this garbage being inactive (which has the side effect of making items they're bragging about not worth it nowadays).

Delete - As nominator. Jlun2 (talk) 03:53, July 7, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - Can we get rid of other userboxes too? Plz. Suppa chuppa Talk 03:57, July 7, 2014 (UTC)

Delete all userboxes - They're dumb. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 04:35, July 7, 2014 (UTC)

Neutral I'm okay with this one, but I love userboxes... --dDbvitC.pngScuzzy Betahib8CAd.png 22:32, July 7, 2014 (UTC)

Delete I know how tedious this userbox can be regarding updating images, having to use AWB to mass update etc.... Ozank Cx 10:25, July 8, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - Per Jlun. Temujin 11:19, July 8, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - Userboxes are fun, but this one inhibits file name maintenance. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 14:26, July 8, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - Per Fswe1. 5-x Talk 18:00, July 8, 2014 (UTC)

Closed - Discussion ongoing at Forum:Proposal to delete certain userboxes. --LiquidTalk 18:45, July 8, 2014 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was delete. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 02:49, September 14, 2014 (UTC)

Yak/Strategies

This particular strategy is unnecessary and has been since November 2012.

Delete - As nominator. Temujin 10:02, September 4, 2014 (UTC)

Support - They don't require a strategy guide lol. Ozank Cx 11:14, September 4, 2014 (UTC)

Support - That guide is dumb anyway. -- Seren symbol.pngHeavyoak Talk Zaros symbol.png 11:48, September 4, 2014 (UTC)

Support - --Deltaslug (talk) 14:34, September 4, 2014 (UTC)

Support - All monsters are jokes, but these have been since February 2007. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 05:43, September 10, 2014 (UTC)

Support - Wow, never knew we actually had a guide for this... What a joke. It Literally offers nothing, might as well add a strategy guide for goblins and imps in the unlikely event that this fails lol.to my talk page! King TALKWer den König nicht ehrt, ist nicht Lebenswert. 05:54, September 10, 2014 (UTC)

Closed - The article will be deleted. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 02:49, September 14, 2014 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was delete. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 23:58, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

TzHaar-Ket/Strategies

This strategy is unnecessary and has been for a while now. Killing TzHaar-Ket is very straightforward.

Delete - As nominator. Temujin 10:28, October 5, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - It's not quantum gravity. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 07:12, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - How do people have trouble with fighting them User talk:ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of User talk:ThePsionic ThePsionic Special:Contributions/ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of Special:Contributions/ThePsionic 16:08, October 8, 2014 (UTC)

Closed - Deleted. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 23:58, October 11, 2014 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was delete.

RuneScape:Signatures/Sign

So, it's a list of signatures. That's all it is. Just signatures. Why, exactly? There's really no reason we need to keep a running total of signatures, and otherwise the page serves absolutely zero purpose whatsoever. It seems like I thought this page deserved to exist 4 years ago, but really it just seems like an unneeded remnant from a time when we actually gave a shit about this kind of thing.

Delete - I googled "om nom gif" and this was the first result and I don't know what's going on but I think I like it. Matt (t) 06:26, September 25, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - Per nom. Temujin 06:26, September 25, 2014 (UTC)

Why not just speedy delete it? It serves no purpose Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 16:50, September 25, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - Hey look, this kitten is pretty cute. User talk:ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of User talk:ThePsionic ThePsionic Special:Contributions/ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of Special:Contributions/ThePsionic 10:30, September 30, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - Don't we have a category for sigs? Also, hey you found something even more useless than userboxes. :D --Jlun2 (talk) 23:25, September 30, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - I don't think this serves much of a purpose aside from creating redlinks when we move files because of all the signatures. Achievements Coelacanth0794 Talk Contribs 23:27, September 30, 2014 (UTC)

This one page is nothing when you have signatures like Ansela's used on 7,000+ pages. MolMan 23:30, September 30, 2014 (UTC)

Closed - The page will be deleted. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 00:02, October 12, 2014 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was Delete.

Manual of Monsters

H.A.M. agent Michael is referencing D&D not a RS item. Therefore this page is basically describing a non-existant object. Sky Spiral 7 (talk) 15:31, November 28, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - Per RS:TRIVIA. Also, whether this is an obvious reference or not should be looked into, based on the quest dialogue. --クールネシトーク 21:59, November 28, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - It's a one-line page of something that's mentioned in passing in a quest. It's never going to be anything greater, so it's not significant. As noted above, it doesn't even exist in-game. --Saftzie (talk) 06:03, December 3, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - Per RS:TRIVIA. sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 19:55, December 4, 2014 (UTC)

Delete - Insignificant, lacks information and pretty much a perpetual stub that can't be fixed. I find it interesting it has survived 5 years in existence. Ozank Cx 19:59, December 4, 2014 (UTC)

Keep - Needs a source, but I don't see why it should be deleted. We have articles for stuff like Histories of Guthix. Per RS:G. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 07:49, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

We do indeed keep articles for various lore-related texts, but the Manual of Monsters is a trivia reference. Also, I don't see anything applicable here from RS:G. --クールネシトーク 19:27, December 6, 2014 (UTC)

Closed - Manual of Monsters will be deleted. --LiquidTalk 07:02, December 25, 2014 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was Keep.

File:Cosmic body equip.gif

This file, along with the following:

All have an animation shared by the other elemental ore gear. What makes cosmic so special that this set deserves a gif and not others? But then that just complicates things since if all of them have gifs, how the heck does anyone expect them to be updated? Case in point the boots equip image has a flaw regarding wearing dlegs for over 3 years, and noone retake because the people who are able don't know it exists, and the people who want to can't because they don't have recording software/1337 computer that isn't a potato.

Delete - As nominator. Jlun2 (talk) 05:23, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

Comment - I don't quite understand the logic here. You want to have them deleted because of a (badly explained) glitch? cqm 10:57, 30 Nov 2014 (UTC) (UTC)

Oppose - Not sure what you mean. We should delete them because they are semi-outdated and other elemental sets don't have these animations? Feel free to update them and make gifs for all of the elemental armours. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 11:10, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

Comment - All of the elemental gear have this animation. It's rather difficult getting gifs for all however. --Jlun2 (talk) 11:37, November 30, 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, with different colours. And not as much difficult as time-consuming. But neither is a reason to delete this bunch, if you ask me. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 14:58, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

Oppose - They have different animations so they are worthy of keeping, in fact, if body gear also has animations then they should have images too. It sucks that they haven't been updated in so long but that doesn't mean we should just get rid of them. ɳex undique 18:55, November 30, 2014 (UTC)

Closed - The file will be kept. --LiquidTalk 07:09, December 25, 2014 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was Redirect to main mmg. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 22:19, December 27, 2014 (UTC)

Obsolete mmgs

So basically the title says it all. These guides are bad. They're bad because they're not updated. They're not updated because we have better ones. We have better ones because we improve over time. These guides will not improve over time, because we have better ones. I say we redirect them all to the main money making guide. All the methods in these are either terrible, or salvaged. I can't think of a reason to keep these.

pls MolMan 15:57, November 21, 2014 (UTC)

Supper - I think they were kept as a temporary measure for people to have the old ones while they got used to the new ones. That's not needed anymore. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 21:54, November 23, 2014 (UTC)

Support - If they're good, we have them covered on the better page. Most of these are probably pretty bad now or ineffective. ɳex undique 03:56, November 28, 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Intent - I doubt we're going to get more comments on this, but I'll give it a chance. If there are no more comments within the next day or so, I'll close this as successful. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 19:18, December 25, 2014 (UTC)

Be Bold? - Surely this comes under Be Bold especially if there is a a direct replacement. --RSDaftVader (talk) 11:56, December 26, 2014 (UTC)

Doesn't work for pages like this. MolMan 14:36, December 27, 2014 (UTC)

Closed - The old guides will redirect to the main guide. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 22:19, December 27, 2014 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was keep.

Scale theory

I would like to request that the Scale theory article be considered for deletion. I believe that the article itself should be removed from the RuneScape Wiki for a number of reasons listed below:

  • The article is a theory: whilst dialogue does exist to 'support' it's existence it is not definitively a part of the RuneScape game. It has no absolute basis which allows it to be a 'factual' part of the RuneScape universe. Although it is in some areas logical, the same is true for various other theories and speculation regarding RuneScape - and as far as I am aware none of these exist within the RuneScape Wiki.
  • The theory page itself presents a single view: as such it is biased. It does not link to or consider other possible theories regarding the 'scale' of the world and it's own inconsistencies. To open up the wiki to include other theories regarding scale would ultimately result in the wiki becoming a forum of discussion as opposed to a knowledge base of the RuneScape universe.
  • Theories of similar nature should not be considered as part of the wiki, but should instead be discussed on forums, etc. The wiki should be a place of fact in relation to the game of RuneScape and it's related content: the theory itself is by nature a theory and exists outside of the RuneScape universe (it is an opinion or belief of certain players of the game which is not established within the game itself). As a consequence I do not believe that it should form part of the RuneScape Wiki.
  • Due to the points mentioned above, the article does not adhere to wiki policy, and should be subject to speedy deletion. This is because it fulfils the criteria (found here) that -
    • "Pages containing original research or a large bias. For example, "According to a poll I conducted among my friends, RuneScape member subscriptions are too expensive." This doesn't help at all and it's personal opinion. These pages will be deleted."

--Italay90 (talk) 21:00, June 3, 2015 (UTC)

Support - I don't agree with the reasoning used to nominate this for deletion, largely hinging on bias, but I feel it's rather out of place. It's like its trying to explain something that doesn't need to be explained and doesn't do a great job even then. cqm 21:10, 3 Jun 2015 (UTC) (UTC)

Support - doesn't really seem useful to the wiki in my opinion - we are best at factual stuff, not opinion. Ozank Cx 21:27, June 3, 2015 (UTC)

Weak Support - you're right in that there is nothing to say that the theory is true. It could be argued that it is implied (RS Novels for example, give time it takes to move between several cities and locations) but Jagex hasn't come out saying anything definitive on just how much distance there are between 2 locations. It takes you a minute to run between 2 cities, which in reality might take hours or days, yet no time passes in game. --Deltaslug (talk) 21:38, June 3, 2015 (UTC)

Support - I read this article years ago and found it interesting but completely irrelevant to the game. This article honestly could be almost the same on any wiki for any game. I agree this article has nothing in particular to do with Runescape and thus should be deleted.  YayEpicYay Talk! Random Fun!!  21:41, June 3, 2015 (UTC) edited to fix italics to bold  YayEpicYay Talk! Random Fun!!  21:42, June 3, 2015 (UTC)

Oppose - I'm a bit of a book geek when it comes to this, but I think the article should stay. While it is not a direct part of the game itself, it definitely is a mechanic that is implied because of the books (Falador to Taverley takes three full days and nights on horse unicorn there) and thus I feel the page should stay. I wouldn't argue it needs a bit of a cleanup, though. User talk:ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of User talk:ThePsionic ThePsionic Special:Contributions/ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of Special:Contributions/ThePsionic 16:16, June 4, 2015 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Psi. I think if any POV is removed from the article, it should be alright. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 20:59, June 4, 2015 (UTC)

Oppose - I don't really see a problem with the article existing. IT makes a clear point that there is a line between logic and lore/gameplay. Cat mask.pngMaceyPantsOvergrown cat (white).png 21:42, June 4, 2015 (UTC)

Oppose - per psi Star Talk ayy lmao ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 21:49, June 4, 2015 (UTC)

Oppose - It needs a cleanup, but it's definitely got value. Besides, plenty of JMods have essentially confirmed it to hold merit by using it themselves as explanations for in-game phenomena (or the absence thereof), so it's not 'made-up'. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 17:46, June 5, 2015 (UTC)

Do you have any citation for this? Italay90 (talk) 12:45, June 6, 2015 (UTC)
No, but I'm not not going to bother looking for one. JMods use the term all the time, that much is certain. User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 20:17, June 6, 2015 (UTC)

Oppose - Potentially could be written a bit better. Also, per Psi. Raglough (talk) 13:55, June 6, 2015 (UTC)

Neutral - Gielinor being bigger in the lore than it actually appears in-game isn't even a theory; it's a fact. But this is true of most video games, so does it actually necessitate an article? If it's to remain, it would need to be heavily rewritten and probably renamed. Adventurer's log Wahisietel (Talk) Quest map icon.png 15:44, June 6, 2015 (UTC)

Support - I'm not convinced this is actually a thing. Does anyone actually refer to it by a name? It's certainly an abuse of the word "theory." It's not a theory. Theories are facts. In any case, delete the page and put it in the Slang dictionary.

Scale theory - a term used to refer to the conjecture that players only perceive a sub-sample of the entire fictional world, both space and time, that makes up RuneScape.

We don't need a whole page for that. --Saftzie (talk) 21:37, June 9, 2015 (UTC)

Weak support - Both sides make excellent points for their thoughts on deleting or keeping the article, but it is so poorly-written that I don't think there's much that can be done to it... 7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko) 01:08, June 10, 2015 (UTC)

Comment - I swear to God, I thought this article would be about fish. MolMan 13:04, June 10, 2015 (UTC)

Closed - No consensus. --Iiii I I I 04:54, June 18, 2015 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was Delete. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 13:40, July 9, 2015 (UTC)

2008 Market Dip & 2009 Market Crash

These 2 articles are just bad. No matter how much anti-deletionist talk bad_fetus has to give me, these are 2 articles that don't have much of a place on the wiki. First of all is their poor writing. The articles are entirely speculative and one of them even manages to cite random blog posts (LOL).

Whoever wrote these articles also seems to fail to understand that market change is natural. Most of what I'm seeing for the price changes in 2008 are actually just prices dropping, not necessarily a crash, and certainly nothing spectacular.

So if this behavior isn't anomolous, why is such a big deal being made? I don't know. There's no denying that prices fell, and that some could be considered to have crashed, but where is the importance of that if this is just a normal thing? Just as importantly, how do these items alone constitute a crash of the entire market? Our Common Trade Index actually shows positive growth in those times.

A few items fell together because they were related, so what? Not only are these articles bad, they are wrong by the other standards we use.

Delete - jkasduyajskdf aszd MolMan 22:51, June 25, 2015 (UTC)

Demolish - Per Mol. Let's immolate them, down to the molecules. 7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko) 23:32, June 25, 2015 (UTC)

Yaaaaaaaassss User talk:ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of User talk:ThePsionic ThePsionic Special:Contributions/ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of Special:Contributions/ThePsionic 23:52, June 25, 2015 (UTC)

Delete Deleter as per Nominator  YayEpicYay Talk! Random Fun!!  23:56, June 25, 2015 (UTC)

Annihilate - User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 17:19, June 26, 2015 (UTC)

Delete - Millions of NPCs lost their jobs and their homes. OCCUPY RUNESCAPE. These articles are not significant. --Saftzie (talk) 02:27, June 27, 2015 (UTC)

Closed - Articles will be deleted. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 13:40, July 9, 2015 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was Redirect. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 13:53, July 9, 2015 (UTC)

SwiftKit

Previous RfD: RuneScape:Requests for deletion/SwiftKit

So I've got nothing against SwiftKit in particular, but the subject somehow seems to be the only one that was ever special enough to get its own article. Personally, I'm in favor of deleting this article, and I think just as RS:PDDA covers players, it should cover player-run/made programs.

There's the ridiculous argument in the previous RfDs that "omg it was so important so many people use [email protected]@@". There's a lot of things many players use. Computers, operating systems, other programs. People use other fansites, but none of them have their own articles. They're all listed on Fansite.

The article has 3 sections:

  1. An advertisement for the program (don't kid yourself; it's just rewording the primary source)
  2. A bologna controversy section
  3. A PR statement after the site got hacked

And none of these 3 things necessarily warrants keeping an article on it. The reason we're able to write about stuff in game is because this stuff is easily verifiable. To have a proper article and keep it NPOV, we'd require secondary sources, something this article lacks. Oh, and they need to be reliable; I don't think that will ever happen.

My suggestion is to redirect this article to Fansite, delete the images, and then step outside of our comfort zones a little and create a new section for a few hand picked programs (Alt1 is one that comes to mind).

Support - As ░#3 MolMan 22:19, June 25, 2015 (UTC)

Sup Nort - bleep bloop User talk:ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of User talk:ThePsionic ThePsionic Special:Contributions/ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of Special:Contributions/ThePsionic 22:22, June 25, 2015 (UTC)

Support - Per nominator reasons and maybe per Mol.  YayEpicYay Talk! Random Fun!!  23:25, June 25, 2015 (UTC)

Support - deletion of the article. I see no need to have an article on a third-party program created for RuneScape. I would, however, not add a section on such programs in another article either; unless at most it is a "See also" type of section with just links and names. IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 03:46, June 26, 2015 (UTC)

Yes, that's pretty much what I envisioned: a list of names. MolMan 12:13, June 27, 2015 (UTC)

Support - Third-party programs definitely don't deserve their own articles. The heydays of Swiftkit are long gone anyway. 5-x Talk 07:35, June 26, 2015 (UTC)

Support - not even official material. Ozank Cx 12:33, June 26, 2015 (UTC)

Support - we should however have more articles on cloths and rags.Raglough (talk) 12:45, June 26, 2015 (UTC)

Support - to my knowledge, people who do use third-party clients use RSBuddy/OSBuddy. It may be a part of RuneScape's history, but it's a bad piece of history when it's not even officially-acknowledged by Jagex. Incinerate. Annihilate. Eradicate. 7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko) 13:19, June 26, 2015 (UTC)

Support - Honestly, what the hell is this? User_talk:Fswe1 Fswe1 Brassica Prime symbol.png 17:13, June 26, 2015 (UTC)

Support - but it might be worth a mention on some other page, like if we had one for legitimate Jagex-approved add-ons, which this was, very unlike RSBuddy, etc. It lives now only in our dreams. --Saftzie (talk) 02:40, June 27, 2015 (UTC)

Closed - Page will be redirected. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 13:53, July 9, 2015 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was Delete.

Armoured zombie/Strategies

Ok, this is seriously an artifact of the old combat system. 160k combat experience is pretty much nothing, when you can get better rates simply killing deadly red spiders in a sewer. And please don't tell me it's still a decent source of money given how things that need even lower requirements make 7x more at the time of posting.

Delete - As nominator. Jlun2 (talk) 23:00, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

Delete - It's ugly and it smells. The zombies aren't nice-looking, either. User talk:ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of User talk:ThePsionic ThePsionic Special:Contributions/ThePsionic.png: RS3 Inventory image of Special:Contributions/ThePsionic 23:01, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

Delete - Just looked at it. It is horrible and even if we brought it up to the standards it still wouldn't be a good page.  YayEpicYay Talk! Random Fun!!  23:08, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

Delete - Because it's outdated badly. 7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko) 23:11, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

Delete - Because eagles are bald, and this article ain't bold. — Jr Mime (talk) [VSTF] 23:12, July 7, 2015 (UTC)

Delete - Per nom. Temujin 10:28, July 10, 2015 (UTC)

Delete - They're kind of odd since they attack with ranged, but have a weakness to magic, but it doesn't take a whole page to talk about that. A single paragraph in the main article would be fine. --Saftzie (talk) 05:17, July 11, 2015 (UTC)

Closed - Page will be deleted. --LiquidTalk 23:00, July 11, 2015 (UTC)


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