RuneScape:Requests for deletion/Archive 24

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 No consensus.

Sixth Age conflict

The Sixth Age conflict page is wildly redundant, and has been a source of conflict with an edit war on the name. However, the real core of the issue is that the page itself has no reason to exist as a stand-alone page in the first place. Almost all information on the Sixth Age conflict page can be found on the Sixth Age page, having been outright copied and pasted from there, making this new page completely useless. Making matters even worse, the Sixth Age page is woefully under-updated, with a serious tone, grammar, and information issue as-is. Forking the page elsewhere just means the original page doesn't get the attention it needs. I believe that the Sixth Age conflicts page needs to be entirely deleted, and any work on that topic should be redirected to the Sixth Age page instead. Any "new" writings on the Sixth Age conflicts page, if there are any, should simply be ported over to the Sixth Age page.

'Delete' - As nominator Amascut symbol.svg Amascut Ia Morte 01:31, February 22, 2018 (UTC)

'Keep for now' - I don't completely disagree with Amascul/La Morte. However, other "wars" do have a summary page. I'd like to hold off until we can get a member of the Jmod Lore Council to give us a name for the whole The World Wakes to Sliske's Endgame time period. If Jagex/Lore council refuses to give a name/title, then delete. --Deltaslug (talk) 02:01, February 22, 2018 (UTC)

'Delete' - I have to agree, this page has not been given any attention. If there was battles,then it could have been kept. But due to little information, and the fact that these events don't really need to be here, there are more pages as well that requires to be deleted, like the battle for the stone of Jas. I think this page should be removed. It isn't given enough attention (as the invasion of Falador is missing) and it is an exact copy of the Sixth age page. I agree for it's deletion. If a Jmod does give the event that is happening within the sixth age a name, it can just be added to the Sixth age. Quest.png Adventurerrr Talk Quest.png 02:38, February 22, 2018 (UTC)

Oppose - We've got Gielinorian God Wars and Third Age after all. Rewrite it rather than delete it What I've done Ciphrius Kane Talk 14:31, February 22, 2018 (UTC)

However the Third Age page covers the whole of the age, while the God Wars page covers a bullet pointed list of the events and conflicts of the God Wars, as well as a list of tactics, the various battles, and the end goal. The "Sixth Age conflicts" do not have that same continuity, and are a spread out series of random skirmishes over a variety of things, like anima, power, for fun, at Sliske's prompting, and for the Stone of Jas. Until we have an actual Second Gielinorian God War, there's no reason to group the events of the Sixth Age on a second page, when the events on the Sixth Age conflicts page are the same events as on the Sixth Age page. It's like Wikipedia having a page on all conflicts in the year 1994 as if they were a unified group of battles rather than separate events, when all that information is also covered on a page about the year 1994. Amascut symbol.svg Amascut Ia Morte 23:53, February 22, 2018 (UTC)

Comment - as for the name of the page, here's some Word of God Small recharge gem.png AnselaJonla Slayer-icon.png 15:38, February 22, 2018 (UTC)

Since there seems to be confusion here, this a comment only. I am neutral on this topic, and this is neither a support nor an oppose. Please stop assuming a position that I did not state. Small recharge gem.png AnselaJonla Slayer-icon.png 14:44, March 5, 2018 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Ansela Maximus Gugu of ArmadylQuick chat button.png: Your Friendly Neighborhood Artist. 15:39, February 22, 2018 (UTC)

Oppose - I think per RS:GRAN it should stay. It could be updated definitely but if we delete it and just rely on the Sixth Age page it could get extremely long and tedious. I also believe that some of these other pages should not be deleted. There is a fair amount of lore that people would search for by the name. We could just redirect them, but where do we draw the line of what is necessary as a page? pWkk5s5.pngConstitution.png 17:48, February 22, 2018 (UTC)

Remember though, every one of those events has actually taken place in-game, and thus has their own separate page on the Wiki. If a player wants to know about Nomad's Elegy, they can *go to that page* and learn about it. The Sixth Age page makes sense as a location to discuss all of the Sixth Age events, since almost all of them thus far relate directly to the Gods and their various conflicts, and can direct you to the page about the actual World Event, Quest, Skilling Update, or anything else. Why do we need two pages covering the exact same events, with the exact same writing? Amascut symbol.svg Amascut Ia Morte 23:56, February 22, 2018 (UTC)
It could easily be a stub. That is just my thought. pWkk5s5.pngConstitution.png 17:25, February 23, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - No consensus. --LiquidTalk 18:40, March 9, 2018 (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 No consensus.

Battle for the Stone of Jas

This page is unnecessary, there was no battle for this page to be continue as the only "battle" was within the the final stage, Seren, Zaros, vs Sliske, us vs his wights and him later on This page counts our fight with Nomad in the beginning, but it wasn't a battle, it was a two person fight. This page really doesn't need to be up, as the Sixth Age already gives us a small information about it. It is a waste of space.

Delete - As nominator Quest.png Adventurerrr Talk Quest.png

Comment To respond to most in here, The assassination of Guthix had more than one battle, and it was against several groups. This page, being a summary of the quest actually points out one battle. A two person fight is a battle, but most pages just like this records a big one, and puts in army that supported them in battle. If this is meant to be kept in the end then I suppose we can name change it. But this page only has one major battle, that is us fighting with Two gods, 7 legendary wights, vs Sliske and his army. The beginning was just a fight for point. Even if it is counted as a battle for some people it isn't one that deserves notice as a page. Over all if this page is kept, then it should be name changed to Race for the stone of Jas, Or something like that. Quest.png Adventurerrr Talk Quest.png 22:02, March 5, 2018 (UTC)

Keep, possibly rename - It details a significant event in the Sixth Age. And yer logic can easily be applied to any page regarding a significant battle - the Assassination of Guthix page, fer example, contains the fight between the player and Kree'arra (a 2-person fight, which was part of the larger battle), and can easily be covered by Sixth Age. Is it a waste of space? What I've done Ciphrius Kane Talk 14:27, February 22, 2018 (UTC)

Keep - We need that kind of information spread across multiple pages to keep the readers entertained on various pages. You can rewrite or add information, there's no need to delete, really, as you said, Sixth Age give us a small information, not all of it. Maximus Gugu of ArmadylQuick chat button.png: Your Friendly Neighborhood Artist. 15:34, February 22, 2018 (UTC)

Keep - I agree with Ciph and Maxi. The Sixth Age page gives very little information about it. This expansion on the page makes it not a waste of space. Maybe the page is a stub. But that just means we should work to build the page up and not just delete it. pWkk5s5.pngConstitution.png 15:45, February 22, 2018 (UTC)

Keep - Per others above. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 15:51, February 22, 2018 (UTC)

Keep - A 2 person fight qualifies as a battle in my opinion. Seeing as how the Sixth Age article only gives the reader a small amount of information about the subject; this article should definitely stay as the source for more in-depth information. I also feel that granularity applies here as this event is indeed a notable one. Pernix cowl detail.png MAGE-KIL-R (Talk)Zaros symbol.png 00:39, February 23, 2018 (UTC)

Delete - This page is literally a summary of Sliske's Endgame, made further useless by the branching nature of the quest, making the whole page wildly vague. Not useful in any way, shape, or form, and won't even be easily found by players because anyone looking for the story of Sliske's Endgame will GO to the Sliske's Endgame page. Amascut symbol.svg Amascut Ia Morte 13:09, March 5, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - No consensus. --LiquidTalk 18:44, March 9, 2018 (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.

Free-to-play Mining training/Former methods

This page was created to try and preserve information from the Free-to-play Mining training guide that has since been replaced with information about more effective methods (see here on the guide's talk page for full context). We do not and should not attempt to document information about ineffective/obsolete training methods in the mainspace. It is unnecessary and confusing when presented alongside the up to date training guides. While historical training information is sortof interesting, it is not practical to write about on the wiki. Are we supposed to have subpages for each time a method is changed in the guide? How do we go back and verify what methods were "popular" or efficient in the past?

Delete/move to userspace - Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 12:03, February 26, 2018 (UTC)

Accept verdict as article creator. Speedy delete it, or I can move it to my userspace. I don't mind hosting these nostalgic training methods at all — It'd be my honor in fact to keep this piece of history alive. Especially since some of them might have to be restored anyway once mining changes. (Hoping for a general buff that maybe forgets rune essence or nerfs it to what a level 1 "ore" should be. Air runecrafting in Daemonheim gives ~0.1 xp, comparably.) Note: I mustn't be the only one who considers this bronze pickaxe speed-mining thing a bug and thus refuse to (ab)use it. Clever use of gameplay mechanics though! Other notes: Although we are documenting Level changers now, so the line has been drawn well to the left from my history / archival effort, on the allowed article significance scale. Not exactly the same category of course. Note 3: How do we format these discussions again? I thought it was bullet points with votes in bold. But then bullets were discouraged. If this is even up for a vote. And do the comments go above, below, or in line? Hope this "one long line" is okay. I looked at another RFD for reference and it looked the same. Except shorter. Yes, I'll shut up now. 3ICE (talk) 14:03, February 26, 2018 (UTC) Delete - We can host it in the userspace. pWkk5s5.pngConstitution.png 17:55, March 1, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - Article will be moved to creator's userspace. --LiquidTalk 18:47, March 9, 2018 (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.

Tanning dragonhide MMGs

So, um... I was told to create this page: i.imgur.com/jccFU3n.png

These are the money making guides in question:


It's the fact that they are misleading that I have an issue with. I'm 100% positive many players fell victim to it, and tried to buy hides only to realise they couldn't. Merchers/flippers have a hayday with them, and purposely abuse hide stock because of this. There are many players who have simply scrolled through the mmg list and looked at the gp/h listed within the table. This is what they see:


voX0HGY.png

They don't click on the guide link, and instead take what it says at face value thinking they can just mass-buy hides and make gp. This also helps contribute to the whole "anti-wiki" sentiment a lot of players have; the ones who claim info on the Wiki is questionable. This is something I've personally seen brought up many times, and took the liberty of defending against it.

So, I'm really hoping these could be either deleted, or maybe edited on the table somehow to say "read description", or something. The gp/h it claims to make, is absurd - but possible, given you properly prepare and follow the guide as stated. The majority of other guides listed on the money making guide page can be taken at face value; this plays a part in why these tanning hide ones are misleading.

Comment - I agree on the fact the guides are rather unrealistic at times. Maybe rework the guides into taking account the fact there's a 4 hour limit? If that ends up unpopular, then it would be better to remove for now. --Jlun2 (talk) 20:07, March 4, 2018 (UTC)

Comment - It is a bit unrealistic due to the 4 hour buy limit, so maybe have the money making reflect that? As for GE prices and such, there are warnings saying that GE prices change and the profit can change depending on those prices. These warnings are on all prices and also at the top of the mmg page. --Talk to Kelsey 20:09, March 4, 2018 (UTC)

Comment - Put it into the recurring maybe? pWkk5s5.pngConstitution.png 15:57, March 5, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - valid concerns raised but there's no clear consensus on how to address them. If anyone wants to propose a solution then a discussion can be made again in future. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 18:21, March 23, 2018 (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.

Treasure Trails/Guide/Scans/Former locations

We discussed this [[RuneScape:Requests for deletion/Treasure Trails/Guide/Scans|previously]] when Chaos Tunnels scans were removed and decided to keep their information on a historical subpage. Since White Wolf Mountain and some outlying desert and Khazari Jungle scans have now been removed as well I think that this needs to be reviewed again (in the meantime I moved White Wolf Mountain scans to the former locations page and the outlying images are sitting in Special:Unusedimages).

The main argument for keeping historical information last time was that Chaos Tunnels scans remained in game for people who had already obtained them. This is not the case for White Wolf Mountain scans; as stated in the update post/patch notes the scans were completely removed and replaced by Menaphos scans. Given some time has now passed we can also assume that very few, if any, Chaos Tunnels scans still exist also. Therefore I do not think it is necessary to keep the full information about all possible clue locations; the images will increasingly bear no relation to maps/ingame graphics as the game is updated and will be of little interest to readers. A mention of particular locations being removed and when they were removed in the main page's trivia section is sufficient.

Delete - As nominator. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 13:04, March 5, 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Per Isobel, if it comes to light that they carry enough historical significance we can host it in the userspace. But it seems kinda of silly to keep information on something that no longer exists ingame and will not make a reappearance. pWkk5s5.pngConstitution.png 16:32, March 6, 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Same as Zafryna said. No point keeping an article that doesn't (currently) have any historical value NYX TRYX | E 15:03, March 21, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - the page will be deleted and a mention of the removed locations will be added to the scans page. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 18:37, March 23, 2018 (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:Events Team/Safe event

Legacy page used for transclusion on super old event pages. Pretty much the same as Template:Safe.

Delete - As nominator. jayden 04:29, April 15, 2018 (UTC)

Uh... - Not really sure why this needs to be a discussion to be honest. I'll poke the ET members, if they don't need it we can just speedy delete this. --LiquidTalk 05:18, April 15, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - The Events Team said they don't need their own template. Page will be deleted as soon as it's replaced. --LiquidTalk 05:33, April 15, 2018 (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.

Hangazha

No indication of significance, nor that the subject of this article even appears in game. If it does appear in game, and someone can prove it, I'm happy enough for this rfd to end there.

Delete - As nominator. NYX TRYX | E 15:40, May 20, 2018 (UTC) Edit: I am aware that RS:GRAN is a thing, but as I said, there's no indication that it's even in the game, either currently or in the past. NYX TRYX | E 15:41, May 20, 2018 (UTC)


Oppose - It's mentioned in The End of Gara-Dul. While it's not certain what it is, and that article certainly needs to be reworked to reflect that, I think it should stay based on that. ɳex undique 15:58, May 20, 2018 (UTC)

Oppose - as per this update the page now has an indication of significance, and thanks to Nex Undique, has a reference too :D NYX TRYX | E 16:06, May 20, 2018 (UTC)

Keep - Nominator has withdrawn the nomination. Talk to Kelsey 16:17, May 20, 2018 (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.

User:WittyPleb/120 Calcs/Kayla

No longer need this page

Delete - As nominator. WittyPleb (talk) 17:23, July 1, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - I'll close this in a sec, but you don't need to RfD user pages. Just add {{D}} to the top of them as they fall under speedy delete criterion. jayden 17:24, July 1, 2018 (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.

User:WittyPleb/Prices

No longer need this page

Delete - As nominator. WittyPleb (talk) 17:23, July 1, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - You don't need to RfD user pages. Just add {{D}} to the top of them as they fall under speedy delete criterion. jayden 17:26, July 1, 2018 (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 No consensus.

Mature grotworm/Strategies

Your reason(s). The average RS player does not require a strategy guide for grotworms


the article is just straight up confusing, what is this prayer equipment setup?


Delete - As nominator. Mistydarkness (talk) 23:46, June 13, 2018 (UTC)

Oppose - Anyone can edit it to make the guide better. Doesn't mean it needs to get deleted.--Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger 00:34, June 14, 2018 (UTC) I also want to add that, even if you start up a new account and get to this point, you can still not know what type of equipment/armour you need (true story). That is why guides like this is needed, to help refresh your memory.--Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger 16:41, June 18, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - There is no consensus to delete the page. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 14:59, July 6, 2018 (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 No consensus.

Bloodveld/Strategies

Your reason(s). Not something that deserves a strategy guide

Delete - As nominator. Mistydarkness (talk) 01:28, June 14, 2018 (UTC)

Oppose - These strategy guides aren't hurting anything. --Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger 03:40, June 14, 2018 (UTC)

Delete or Merge into article - I do agree that not everything now requires a strategy page (good Guthix, it's been 6 years now since EOC). Bloodvelds are mid level and no unique mechanics. Basically, it's "range them" or "if you don't range, bring a little bit of food and super set". And this holds true of a LOT of npc's these days. Even Mutated bloodvelds aren't much of an increase in difficulty. A better compromise would just be to move the "strategy" into the rest of the article. It should make the article that much longer. --Deltaslug (talk) 22:09, June 17, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - There is no consensus to delete the page. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 15:10, July 6, 2018 (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.

Realms

Delete page, and add a redirect to Cosmology when searching "Realm" or "Realms", due to the information provided there encompassing everything on this page. "Realm", "Dimension", and "Plane" " do not have currently defined terms in-game. Category:Realms also exists for those who wish to see each abyssal bubble. Currently the page serves no purpose.

Delete - As nominator. Elf of Seren (talk) 16:01, August 9, 2018 (UTC)

Comment - is the term "cosmology" used anywhere in game? Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 06:41, August 10, 2018 (UTC)

Cosmology does not seem like a term that actually comes from the game, while realms does (correct me if I'm wrong). Based on this realms would seem to be a better page name, and I'd argue that cosmology should be the page to be deleted. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 22:08, August 22, 2018 (UTC)
Have you even checked each page and looked at their content, references, and Talk pages? Elf of Seren (talk) 23:59, August 22, 2018 (UTC)
I have and I still am none the wiser about where Cosmology as a term came from, although perhaps that's because the original was apparently unsourced. However, I find the page to be better than realms while essentially tackling the same topic. I would therefore suggest merging the content into Cosmology, deleting Realms and then finding a better name for Cosmology (perhaps Multiverse?). I also have no idea where the image at the top of Cosmology came from - is it official? cqm 12:22, 23 Aug 2018 (UTC) (UTC)
Merging is essentially what I suggested, and I've been considering merging Multiverse as well, but wanted to see how this did first. The image is official, from RuneFest 2017. The video is hidden on YouTube for some unknown reason, according to Mod Raven https://discordapp.com/channels/303835144073248770/474586781803741184/482161201363812357 . There are some references to its content, however: https://old.reddit.com/r/runescape/comments/72v3ex/tldw_350_the_lore_marathon/ Elf of Seren (talk) 12:29, August 23, 2018 (UTC)
None of the sources on the page mention the term "Cosmology". On the talk page of Cosmology there is a link to a TLDW of a RuneFest 2017 lore talk which had section titled "Cosmology of RuneScape". I asked because I thought you might know of a better source for the term than this; but if this is solely where the use has come from then I don't think that it's an acceptable thing to base the page name on.
Realms does not have sources, but the sources of the cosmology page mention the term realm/plane being used in game. As I said this would be the better page name and I think that the good content from Cosmology should be incorporated to the Realms page (i.e. remove the information about what cosmology is as it doesn't appear to be a concept in game) so that that page can be deleted. Looks like clean up is needed to fix some potential inaccuracies/add more sources based off the latest talk page. The lore talk is available on YouTube by the way https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zi3W3IeiJL0&list=PLMjuVhi1Lg6cEXxeMZ3vgcdBqhR6UW1By&index=7 around 35:45. Multiverse existing as a separate page is fine as well, it is an in-game term and there's sufficient information on it to merit a dedicated page. Obviously the pages should explain how these things are linked. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 14:08, August 23, 2018 (UTC)
Cosmology deals with realms, planes, dimensions, the multiverse, the void, the abyss, the periphery runecrafting and divine energies, and the structure of the universe. Plugging it all into the realms page vastly deconstructs everything that it has, and would require the creation of several new pages to hold all of the information. Instead of creating three or more new pages, I'm suggesting merging two or three into one, with redirects, for clarity and ease of access. Le me reiterate a final time. Your solution of merging all of it into Realms would result in new pages having to be created. Either we merge realms into cosmology, or we leave them as is, and I rewrite the entire realms page. Thank you for the lore link. Elf of Seren (talk) 15:11, August 23, 2018 (UTC)

Oppose - I've checked the sources, and the only places where cosmology is actually used is either unverifiable second hand sources or fanmade terminology. Realms, dimensions and planes, on the other hand, are all used ingame What I've done Ciphrius Kane Talk 12:05, August 23, 2018 (UTC)

Source is from RuneFest 2017 Lore Marathon. It is hidden on YouTube for some reason, according to Mod Raven https://discordapp.com/channels/303835144073248770/474586781803741184/482161201363812357. There are some remnants of it on reddit, however. https://old.reddit.com/r/runescape/comments/72v3ex/tldw_350_the_lore_marathon/ None of the terminology on the page is currently fanmade. Elf of Seren (talk) 12:24, August 23, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - There is no consensus to delete the page at this time, and the nominator is blocked indefinitely. jayden 09:13, August 25, 2018 (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 Speedy delete.

User:Merdalhas/Sandbox2

Unnecessary, made it as a move from the wrong namespace. Meeeeerds msg 00:54, September 6, 2018 (UTC)

Hello, you don't need to make a RfD for your own userspace. You can just put {{delete}} instead. I have deleted your page. - Jr Mime (talk) [VSTF] 00:56, September 6, 2018 (UTC)

Closed - Not a RfD. --LiquidTalk 01:32, September 6, 2018 (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 and replace.

Alchemy spells

The term 'Alchemy Spell' isn't something that's defined in Runescape, and the grouping of spells in this article doesn't make sense, nor does it add value to a reader. Given that it's not defined in game, and there is no unique info in this article that's not already on each of the linked pages, I'm proposing deletion. Any specific information thats present here and not elsewhere should be moved to Skilling spells

Currently, the approach towards this grouping looks to be 'I'll know it when I see it', without a systemic evaluation or definition for an 'alchemy' spell. I don't believe its defined in game anywhere.

Some examples of issues when trying to classify it

Examples

Anything that uses a nature rune doesn't fit, since spells like Bind or Entangle are clearly not alchemy.

Anything that is a Skilling spell and uses a nature rune doesnt fit, since you've got spells like Prism of Dowsing, and Remote Farm, which I would argue aren't anything to do with alchemy.

Anything that is a Skilling spell, uses a nature rune, and is in the Standard spellbook (which I think is a flawed defintion), still wouldnt work, since you have spells like Enchant Crossbow Bolt (Emerald).

Superglass Make is classified as a alchemy spell, since it transforms sand into glass but uses no nature runes.

Hunter Kit (spell) is classified as an alchemy spell, but isn't transforming one thing into another.

Crystallise transforms a resource into crystal, but isn't considered alchemy


Delete - As nominator. Aescopalus (talk) 23:33, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Modified support - I agree with the points but think it should be made into a bare-bones disambig for high and low alchemy. Achievements Coelacanth0794 Talk Contribs 23:35, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Support - Would like a disambig also, but only for high/low alchemy spells. Talk to Kelsey 23:39, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Support - Per Coel and Kelse. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 08:43, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Support - For hi/low alc disam per above. SuperiosityQuick chat button.png : I like your item: Ramrod 01:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Support-ish - I agree with Coel's option. ɳex undique 18:49, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Closed - Page will be replaced with a disambiguation page. --LiquidTalk 16:19, 6 November 2018 (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.

Combatants in the God Wars

This page is heavily outdated and full of speculation and irrelevance. What useful information there is would be better suited for individual pages or as a subheading on Gielinorian God Wars. Ironically, the page actually contradicted itself, opening up by stating that EVERY living race participated in the God Wars then going on to say "This species didn't participate in the God Wars."

Support - as nominator Ciphrius Kane (talk) 11:50, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Merge - Merge the relevant and current info onto Gielinorian God Wars. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 12:04, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Delete - merge anything useful to the the God Wars page. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 16:33, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Delete/Merge - Merge anything that's relevant/useful to Gielinorian God Wars and delete the rest. Srylius (talk) 16:51, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Merge and delete - With the point(s) of contention thusly listed by the users before me, I support the motion to hasten the termination of this page and have any remnants of useful information with citable sources moved to their respective pages. hSlQRm5.pngDormog TP SP CS Classic cape.png

Delete - --Iiii I I I 20:21, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Closed - Page will be deleted. --LiquidTalk 16:26, 6 November 2018 (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.

File:2018 Halloween Event Seeker Safe Area.png

This image highlights a tiny area where the player is safe from the seeker explosion. Personally, I think the image is useless as the event area is a safe death and players respawn right next to the event in the case of death. It's also useless because players can run any direction away from the event to be safe from the seeker.

Delete - As nominator. Talk to Kelsey 13:17, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

To anyone that read the picture description: The image desciption above was edited by another person that is not me, so that it appears to have more disadvantages compared to the one I typed before. Richard14110 (talk) 14:27, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

The description is the reason why I think the image should be deleted, as I created this thread. Any other comments, whether agreeing or disagreeing should be made after it. Everyone else here knows that the description was made by me and me alone, you don't need to edit it to say this. Talk to Kelsey 14:32, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
To KelseW: The edited picture description should have been more neutral instead of leaning towards being mostly negative. Since Dormog stated that this process is democratic, you should try to be impartial so that it seems more fair for both sides. Richard14110 (talk) 16:48, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
That's not how a request for deletion works. I created this because I think the image is useless, therefore the description will match what I think of the picture. If someone else had created this request, the description would show what they think of it. Talk to Kelsey 17:18, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
I don't like being the victim of this topic. Richard14110 (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
People are simply disagreeing with your viewpoint, that hardly turns you into a victim. Talk to Kelsey 17:20, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Response - That is not meant to be a description of the picture. Rather, it is the reason for why it was nominated to be deleted. Fishing cape.png Kate the HuntressQuest.png 17:44, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Sure, Jagex may have made an extremely annoying part which is nigh impossible to defeat without dying, but a map highlighting a tiny area is excessive Ciphrius Kane (talk) 13:20, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Although well-intentioned, I feel like it's not needed. I don't think dying really inconveniences people as it is a safe death. Players respawn right back at the event, closer to the rift and quicker than if they were to run to the highlighted area of the image and back. I would not mind an image highlighting all of the squares where the seeker hits/doesn't hit, but just showing a small portion seems unnecessary. - Cuxrie (talk) 17:19, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - If this was a quest, though with safe deaths, there might be more of a reason to know of such a safe zone. But this is just an event, where you don't get stuck at a certain part just thanks to the seeker showing up. Unlike some quests where if you die, you have to redo the whole section... Fishing cape.png Kate the HuntressQuest.png 17:50, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Keep or delete - If you think my image shows only a small portion, I may upload another image with a larger safe zone. When my player first died to the seeker (far away), I thought the particular situation is closer towards rigged. Even the high level players struggled. Since it is designed this way, it eventually lowers the excitement. In the future, I hope to improve the mood of those that have fallen despite this being a safe event. Ciphrius Kane mentioned that a part of the event is annoying, which means I am not the only one that wishes for a better experience. Dying too many times affects the brain. To some it may be stress, to some it might be boredom, etcetera. Why would the developers implement such a mechanic? The Halloween events before this one were fun. Those of you who believe that the other players do not care about the constant deaths, may later find out (because of me) that the victims have to care in order to continue fighting the seeker. If they really didn't care about the seeker, they wouldn't bother to battle the seeker. There are plenty of players that desire to win, not fail. However, even a group of players died to the seeker so trying to assist another player in defeating it could likely result in all of the nearby players dying. The free-to-play players should have followed my advice (to save itself), because of the slayer level restriction. A myriad of players play RuneScape to complete the achievements, not to be shamed by making the same mistakes over again. If you keep failing to accomplish a task, do you seem like a better RuneScape player? There is the possibility of humiliation too. If my image is still not acceptable, perhaps another wiki user should upload its own version of the safe area. Maybe we should vote on who has the best looking and closest safe spot. Richard14110 (talk) 00:18, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Following reasons:
1 - There are many safespots, anywhere WEST of the lodestone is safe, for example;
2 - Seeing it as a safe death, this image is irrelevant.
Meeeeerds msg 00:41, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Comment - Why not just make an image of the Seeker's attack range? Everybody's happy HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 03:02, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

To Haidro: Testing the attack range one square at a time around the seeker could take a long time. The respawn is not instant and the other parts of the event could take place instead of the seeker spawning. If only I could finish before the event is over. I would have been done if my picture is still visible to the wiki readers and accepted by most of the voters. Perhaps it may be possible if a lot of players decided to "help out" by going to the same world and standing in a different tile when it spawns, but there is like no chance of that happening. To edit the image one area at a time as a reminder can take a while too. The other way may be to memorize each square and I hope not to mess up.:Richard14110 (talk) 04:35, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Whitelist, don't blacklist. There's so many safe squares compared to dangerous ones HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 05:27, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - The road to being blasted squarely in the face by a seeker is often paved with good intention(s). That notwithstanding, I do appreciate Kelsey's initiative in this context. hSlQRm5.pngDormog TP SP CS Classic cape.png 05:03, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

To Dormog: If there are the good intentions, maybe this event would have a happy ending instead of being less enjoyable. Before, I asked a question that implied that I think "being blasted squarely in the face" is negative. Richard14110 (talk) 13:44, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Not quite, Richard. I am afraid you have misunderstood my statement.
First, the elephant in the forum. "The road to being blasted squarely in the face by a seeker is often paved with good intention(s)" is simply a bastardization of the quote "The road to hell is often paved with good intention(s)".
Secondly, I appreciate the initiative put through by her as a context of ensuring said blast in the face does not happen (or happen less frequently). However, it is most unfortunate that despite her efforts, people are still dying. Whether its from certain errors in the image, or their less-than-haste response upon being blasted by the seeker because they were checking said image is up to anyone's guess.
Lastly, in response to your final question: Yes and no. Depends on the situation, I suppose. In this context, I didn't enjoy seeing players meet their doom but since its a safe death, there is zilch to worry about. On the other hand, seeing a PKer die because he misclicked a Kal'grion demon when chasing his victim is hilarious, and should be laughed at. hSlQRm5.pngDormog TP SP CS Classic cape.png 05:28, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Would appreciate it greatly if you stopped changing comments from others as well as your own. Its discombobulating to anyone whom is trying to grasp the situation and provide a proper response to it. hSlQRm5.pngDormog TP SP CS Classic cape.png 14:18, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
To Dormog: There should be a log that keeps track of who made the changes because being framed is a huge mess. This system should be reworked in my opinion... Richard14110 (talk) 16:48, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
You can see the History of every page’s edits. Meeeeerds msg 17:41, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Comment - @Richard, please do not change someone else's comments (this includes the intro of this RfD). Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 08:29, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

To Salix of Prifddinas: Someone changed my much better image description to be worse and biased. Also, that being didn't add the apostrophe after "seeker". This system of being able to edit someone else's description seems unfair. Also, another person should not change where my text is located to make it seem as if I modified another user's comment. A new wikipedia editor may not be satisfied with the ironic change(s) caused by another person even if the text and/or the picture(s) do not violate any of the rules. Since I am not allowed to remove the negatives of the description, I feel that my freedom of speech is limited and that this voting system may be rigged... Richard14110 (talk) 13:36, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
The intro is Kelsey's comment, he can word it like he wants. Commenting on that is how you show you disagree with that comment/intro, not by changing that comment to what you want it to be. Anyone can change anything on this page. That doesn't mean that they should. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 14:08, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Instead of having an image of one random safe spot, it would be better to have an image of the area that the seeker can reach which is basically the entire game outside the event area. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 08:29, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - it's not that deep jayden 13:56, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Comment - Richard, to clarify, I found the effort to be one of good intention. I can't speak for the others, but they are under the consensus (as am I), that the image is not as useful as you might think it is, and for reasons that are clearly stated and signed under their names. No one is against you, this is just a common democratic process of discussing whether or not an item is relevant (or appropriate) for public viewing.

As you've stated before, it was upsetting on your end to see people dying (safely) from using your image, so let this spur you to improve the quality of your contributions. hSlQRm5.pngDormog TP SP CS Classic cape.png 14:47, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

To Dormog: I think you have it backwards as my picture shows a safe zone that protects a player from the explosion. If the area caused the player to die, I wouldn't upload the image. Richard14110 (talk) 15:47, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - The image serves not useful purpose imo. Srylius (talk) 14:56, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Comment - As I stated before, the image is not useful the way it is... The safe zone is not strictly the highlight you made, + it serves no real purpose since the death is safe. Meeeeerds msg 16:26, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

As long as this thread is not removed, the situation could become worse. Can someone delete this thread to avoid having multiple people feel hurt? Richard14110 (talk) 17:08, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

There's no trolls here and the thread will stay up. Talk to Kelsey 17:09, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
How is that an answer to my comment? Give me a good reason to keep this image and how does it really help the players when the objective of that event is to be near and click on the seeker (ignoring the fact that the area is incorrect). Meeeeerds msg 17:19, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Please stop changing the content of your comments like that... Meeeeerds msg 19:50, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Comment - Can you continue to lob vials of bile from the location highlighted in this picture? The only reason I can see to want to avoid dying is that the respawn time is time that you cannot gain slayer xp by attacking the seeker. If you can't attack the seeker from that spot either, then it is fairly useless in my opinion. And for what it's worth... I know for a fact that the structure that is the entrance to Death's Hourglass is both outside of the seeker's range, and outside of vial range, while being considerably closer. -- F-Lambda (talk) 17:41, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Kill it - So what if you die, you respawn a whole second later and are right back in the fight. Safe spotting is a giant waste of time and pointless in this event. Degenret01 (talk)

THIS ^ Meeeeerds msg 17:49, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Not accurate or comprehensive, and in my opinion not necessary. Haidro's suggestion seems like the best way to provide the information you want to communicate with this image, while being more accurate and comprehensive. Smithing.pngAescopalus talkCrafting.png 17:52, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Actual Safespot -

Meeeeerds msg 01:40, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Closed - Image will be deleted Talk to Kelsey 00:46, 8 November 2018 (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 music video

Previous discussion RuneScape:Requests for deletion/RuneScape music video

It really is not necessary to have a full page on what an RSMV is. It should be part of Slang dictionary/R, like how noob is (despite previously having it's own article). Apart from the lead, the content on the page pretty much just explains what a YouTube video is, and the information about disclaimers in the "copyright issues" section is not even true - a disclaimer on a video does not prevent copyright strikes or make the video immune from copyright law. It's just a mess of an article with no real substance.

Delete, redirect to Slang dictionary/R - jayden 13:33, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete, redirect to Slang dictionary/R - Fishing cape.png Kate the HuntressQuest.png 13:47, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete, redirect to Slang dictionary/R - Betsan (talk) 08:06, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete, redirect to Slang dictionary/R - How has this existed for all these years... - Ryan PM 08:47, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete and redirect - definitely doesn't deserve an article now now, when the subject is largely a relic from long ago days, if it ever did. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 20:18, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete, redirect to Slang dictionary/R - Press F to pay respects -dDbvitC.pngScuzzy Betahib8CAd.png 22:53, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete, redirect - per nom, above and as nom for RuneScape:Requests for deletion/Noob 2, pretty much all the same reasons apply here. SuperiosityQuick chat button.png : Come at me bro 23:54, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Closed - Page will be deleted jayden 12:53, 28 November 2018 (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 06:46, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Money making guide/Making annihilate scrolls during the Amlodd Voice of Seren

The article in question is frankly unfit as a guide since it revolves around an item (Annihilate scroll) that is more than rarely used. As such this method doesn't work since you can't never sell all the scrolls in a reasonable time frame. It seems that this article was written without any consideration for its realistic usage and just based on number crunching. This article even has a template on it that warns users that this guide might not even work properly or at all, which adds to the reasoning that it is unrealistic in its assumptions.

As per the above mentioned reasons I think that this guide doesn't belong on the MMG page and should be deleted.

Delete - As nominator. Srylius (talk) 16:19, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - I don't see this MMG having any use as it's completely unrealistic and anyone following it will be completely misguided. Talk to Kelsey 16:24, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - As per Kelsey. Fishing cape.png Kate the HuntressQuest.png 16:32, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Icy Glacies Talk page 17:05, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 04:03, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - SuperiosityQuick chat button.png : Yo 06:24, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 20:11, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Keep - Not instant sells, but it worked for me when I did it. Oh well. Good bye fren. Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger 07:10, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Comment - I feel like all money making guides should come with a sustainability rating to better inform readers what they're getting themselves into. For example, making rune 2h swords is (for now) essentially guaranteed profit due to alch prices. Other methods which produce items that must be sold in the GE at low volume are very sensitive to supply and demand. Some of our guides do warn about this in an ad hoc way, but I think it would be better if we added sustainability to the MMG template. Gangsterls (talk) 09:04, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete - It's currently -18m/hr profits, which means it's also very risky. -- F-Lambda (talk)

Closed - MMG will be deleted. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 06:46, 8 December 2018 (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.

Money making guide/Making oak planks

7k/hr, high intensity, not worth it for anyone.

Delete - As nominator. Gangsterls (talk) 23:06, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Soft Keep - This guide clearly hasn't been updated in a while. While it is incredibly poor profit using the Varrock sawmill, it may be much more profitable if using the Taverley or Prifddinas sawmills, or a portable sawmill, due to increased speed. If the numbers for these are decent, then rework the guide; else delete. -- F-Lambda (talk) 00:15, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Keep - As per comment above. I am proposing a different solution here. Raven (blue).png Crowborn (Talk) 19:05, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Keep - Originally it was 7k/hr, but as you can see prices change overtime, in this case, a week. Right now it has 397,700 per hour. Also what F-Lamba said, a rework for this guide can be done if someone is willing. Add a tag that says WIP or something. Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger

The rework's been done already, using figures based on the teak plank MMG Ciphrius Kane (talk) 21:16, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Keep - Rework makes the method a little more doable. RuneMetrics icon.png Tyler JarretTalkLight animica.png 23:24, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Closed - MMG has been reworked and will be kept. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 01:09, 16 December 2018 (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.

Money making guide/Drinking wine

12k/hr, high intensity, not worth it for anyone.

Delete - As nominator. Gangsterls (talk) 23:07, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Comment - I honestly kind of want this to stay just because it's funny that it exists, but that's not really a good reason to keep it. -- F-Lambda (talk) 00:15, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 18:26, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Comment - Proposing different solution here. Raven (blue).png Crowborn (Talk) 19:04, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete - While Memeworthy. Not WikiWorthy™. Delete! RuneMetrics icon.png Tyler JarretTalkLight animica.png 23:26, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Closed - MMG will be deleted. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 01:51, 16 December 2018 (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.

Money making guide/Killing Automaton Tracers

Very high reqs to make 200k/hour, drops are very bad and there are several other combat-based MMGs that are an order of magnitude more profitable with similar or lower reqs and intensity (gargoyles, black dragons, dwogres, rorarii, snakes).

Delete - As nominator. Gangsterls (talk) 09:18, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Agreed. This reqs are very high for the profit margin. I would expect something in the millions for those kinds of levels. Agreed. RuneMetrics icon.png Tyler JarretTalkLight animica.png 23:21, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete - HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 23:21, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Agreed. Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger

Delete - Not very good for the reqs. This comment was made by the "Haidro told me to comment" gang. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 23:30, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Closed - MMG will be deleted. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 01:59, 16 December 2018 (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.

Money making guide/Humidifying jugs

With the release of jug of water packs, the cost of jugs of water crashed from 470 gp to 50 gp. As things currently stand, the price of the astral rune is double the profit made from filling the jug. Given the widespread availability and ease of access of jugs of water now, I doubt this will ever recover.

Delete - As nominator. Ciphrius Kane (talk) 02:24, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Support. Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger 03:00, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete - That's not going to improve any time soon. -Hourglass (2011 Hallowe'en event) detail.png I Am Not You Talk III The Spark.png- 22:21, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Closed - MMG will be deleted. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 23:57, 22 December 2018 (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.

Calculator:Mobilising Armies Investments

Mobilising Armies has been removed from the game. This related calculator was tagged for speedy deletion, but warrants a full RfD for historical reasons. This RfD also applies to Template:InvestmentRow, only used on the calculator.

Delete - It's just a function of the exchange price: floor( {{#invoke:ExchangeLite|load|{{{1}}}|value}} / 5 + 1 ). Note that this formula differs from the one posted on Mobilising Armies/Investments, so one of the two is incorrect. Quest map icon.png Laser Dragon Task map icon.png 23:21, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

They're the same - low alchemy is 0.4 * V. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 03:50, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Its original intention was to help people determine what items would be useful to trade for investments credits. That's gone now, so I think it's safe to delete it because it's all just derivable. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 03:50, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete - ^ See Haidro RuneMetrics icon.png Tyler JarretTalkLight animica.png 23:27, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete - The calculator isn't useful as a calculator, but knowing what items could be traded in might be mildly interesting historical information, it might be nice to keep a list like that somewhere. -Hourglass (2011 Hallowe'en event) detail.png I Am Me Talk III The Spark.png- 00:26, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete - I'm not sure there's value in even keeping the list of items. Not all items or even all tradeable items could have been used for investments. I'm not sure what logic Jagex used to determine what could be invested, if indeed there was any logic. That was true even when the minigame was introduced. (In a post somewhere, Jagex promised to keep the list updated, but that rarely happened, implying to me that the list was a separate data structure somewhere within the MA code, which was virtually never touched.) The list had use then, but the minigame is gone now. Saftzie (talk) 20:14, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Delete - Minigame is removed, I don't see any point in keeping a calculator, even for historical purposes. Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger 20:38, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Closed - Calculators will be deleted. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 00:03, 23 December 2018 (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.

Exchange:Off-hand adamant dagger

Superceeded by Exchange:Adamant off hand dagger, looks like it wasn't moved.

Delete - As nominator. Lego6245 (talk) 21:10, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Closed - Looks like they were already deleted. In future, there's no need to create an RfD for trivial deletions like this. Feel free to reach out to an admin on discord! HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 01:48, 10 January 2019 (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.

Exchange:Off-hand adamant battleaxe

Page is superceeded by Exchange:adamant off hand battleaxe, needs to be cleaned up so we can clean up further downstream.

Delete - As nominator. Lego6245 (talk) 21:08, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Closed - Looks like they were already deleted. In future, there's no need to create an RfD for trivial deletions like this. Feel free to reach out to an admin on discord! HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 01:48, 10 January 2019 (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 speedy delete.

Calculator:Mining New

I made this page to make an updated mining calculator, but it may be a bit much for me at this time and it is currently just clutter.

Delete - As nominator. Kosmiklove

Closed - Since the calculator was only created two days ago and you are the only contributor, I'm happy to speedy delete this. Anyone who wishes to recreate it may do so freely - a request for undeletion is not necessary. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 23:05, 19 January 2019 (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.

Calculator:Prayer/Extended

Pretty much a copy of Calculator:Prayer, with the added bonus of gold value per hour, not sure why this is really needed?

Or a rework could be done. As of now, it does not work, OP was last seen in 2013

Delete/Rework - As nominator. Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger 05:17, 31 December 2018 (UTC)


Only added value is using player's used time in the calculation, seems hardly necessary. Besides that it's just what Calculator:Prayer does, but with less xp-bonus options. At the moment, the code does not work at all, so at least a rework is needed, which fixes the current bugs (Lua operator bug and calculation exceeding time limit).

Delete/Rework - As supporter. Born to code (talk) 18:47, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Keep/Rework - This calculator addresses something that too many players forget to include when deciding what to do, opportunity cost. So, I think we should either fold the added benefits of this calculator into the main calc, or add the benefits of the calc to the main calc and link to the extended version from there. The first would be preferred, as it 1) reduces the number of calculators that need maintaining, and 2) makes the extra functions more obvious to users. The downside is that it results in (slightly?) more complex code to maintain. -- F-Lambda (talk) 04:26, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Keep/Rework - As per F-Lambda Attamaris (talk) 16:11, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Rework - As per F-Lambda. Cost analysis should be included as well. RuneMetrics icon.png Tyler JarretTalkLight animica.png 17:16, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Closed - This broken calculator will be deleted and I will add a note to the talk page of Calculator:Prayer so that someone may add the cost analysis information into that calculator. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 22:30, 31 January 2019 (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.

Template:Infotable Bonuses Header Sortable

This template is the old template that was previously used to display equipment bonuses pre-EoC. It has since been superseded by {{Infotable Bonuses header}}, which was in turn superseded by {{Equipment bonuses infotable}}. Unlike {{Infotable Bonuses header}}, which still has some use cases, {{Infotable Bonuses Header Sortable}} is no longer even functional. Many of the icons necessary for it to function have already been deleted (as seen below), and current equipment no longer has most of the values it tracks. Thus, with two other templates doing quite well the job it once did, it is no longer necessary.

{{Infotable Bonuses Header Sortable}}
| Noxious longbow  || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 ||  0 || 0 ||  0 || 0 ||  0 || 0 || 0 || 0
|-
| Sirenic hauberk   || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 ||  0 ||  0 ||  0 || 0 ||  0 || 0 || 0 || 0
|-
| Pickaxe of earth and song   || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 || 0 ||  0 ||  0 || 0 || 0 ||  0 || 0 || 0 || 0
|-
|}

Delete - As nominator. F-Lambda (talk) 04:54, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Delete - Doesn't seem like anything uses it anymore, and we have other (not broken) templates in place for this.  RS AdvLogMyles Prower  Talk 05:20, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

DELETE - RuneMetrics icon.png Tyler JarretTalkLight animica.png 11:35, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Delete - Meeeeerds msg 02:12, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Comment - Was just thinking about this more, and was wondering why the images are missing in the first place. Presumably they were actual interface images, so they are something that should be documented. If so, I don't know why they weren't just given the {{Historical image}} template and kept. But that's another issue separate from keeping this template.... -- F-Lambda (talk) 23:05, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Closed - The template will be deleted. Meeeeerds msg 00:28, 9 February 2019 (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.

Gilded treasure chest

No other Treasure Hunter chests have their own pages, and this chest isn't particularly special.

Delete - As nominator. Arkevorkhat (talk) 01:23, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Closed - Thanks for bringing this to our attention - we can speedy delete this since it was just a placeholder item for the Bubbling Lamps promotion and the article was made by a bot. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 01:36, 27 March 2019 (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.

File:Total Level.png

This is a duplicate of Statistics.png

Delete - As nominator. Arkevorkhat (talk) 18:08, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Closed - Thanks for bringing it to our attention. Feel free to use Template:D in the future instead of Template:Rfd since this process isn't necessary for duplicates. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 01:12, 28 March 2019 (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 no consensus.

Calculator:Divination/Transmuting onyx dust

Calculator doesn't provide any useful information.

Cursed energy has no GE price, and the profit using Incandescent energy is already displayed on the onyx dust page.

Calculator is used on page Calculator:Divination/Transmuting onyx dust and linked on the onyx dust page as well

Delete - As nominator. Cire04 (talk) 02:43, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Keep/Indifferent - Is no longer confusing and doesn't hurt anyone being here. Evidently it's being used, and maybe someone else my find it useful. Dragon longsword.png Cire04 TalkAttack.png 10:20, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Support - As confused-by-the-calculator passerby ^^ - Rawny (talk) 02:52, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Keep/neutral - The results table is less confusing now (thanks Elven Core ^^), I might add a have added some general comments below on the relevant talk page - Rawny (talk) 20:15, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Delete - Meeeeerds msg 19:14, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Neutral - Has been reworked and looks better now. Meeeeerds msg 09:22, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Oppose - Umm. I don't understand why. The cursed energy no price. You input your own price you paid for too see if you can profit off of it, that is the point. I never intended whatever this "no GE price is". I use it all the time when I am buying cursed to see if I will profit when I convert. So I disagree that it "doesn't provide any useful information." Cursed energy has a static 500 GE price, inputting your own, because they are bought below that will help determine the new profits on it. Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger 15:56, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Don't see too much of a reason why this would need to be a calculator. It's simple enough math and doesn't have different output based on multiple variables. You're unlikely to buy cursed energy one by one anyway, so if you're already going to be doing total purchase price / total count * 167 to use this calculator, you could have just gone straight ahead and calculated the results anyway. As for incandescent, it's a GE tradeable item, can be easily done with a table on the onyx page/onyx dust page, like the table on Arrow shaft#Creation. Otherwise, by that logic, we should have several hundreds of these calculators. I saw your edits to the table though, certainly does fix the confusing part. Dragon longsword.png Cire04 TalkAttack.png 17:31, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Not sure what you mean buying cursed energy one by one? I usually buy from people in larger amounts than that. I mean, sure it is simple math, but for the longest when I tried to do this myself, I was super confused all the time and eventually made myself a calculator for this. Mostly because the cursed energy part is not even, so thus the calculator was born. Would you prefer I remove the incandescent part and just leave cursed energies in the calculator portion? Originally I thought about doing that, but decided to add incans just because they are part of the creation process.Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger 02:25, 15 March 2019 (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 no consensus. Meeeeerds msg 22:10, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Calculator:Divination/Transmuting onyx dust

As per the Rfd for Calculator:Divination/Transmuting onyx dust, calculator provides no benefit

Delete - As nominator. Cire04 (talk) 02:46, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Support - As confused-by-the-calculator passerby ^^ - Rawny (talk) 02:53, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Neutral - I agree that the results are less confusing now - Rawny (talk) 20:01, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Delete - Meeeeerds msg 19:14, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Neutral - Has been reworked and looks better now. Meeeeerds msg 09:22, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Oppose - Updated, I hope it looks better than before and less confusing Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger 17:09, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Delete - I don't feel a calculator is necessary to know that it's better if you can buy cursed energy for under 150% of incandescent energy's price. There's already a template on all three pages (Onyx, Onyx Dust and Incandescent Energy [and probably the Transmutation page as well]) that show transmuting the dust to a gem profits. No need whatsoever for this calculator unless it's expanded upon to have all possible transmutations and becomes a Cursed Energy Value Calculator. MitcheII (talk) 10:51, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

So, about the cursed energy value calc, already exists Calculator:Divination/Cursed_energy_conversion Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger 21:10, 26 March 2019 (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. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 11:26, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

File:All Obstacles.png

All the obstacles have their own images now, so this doesn't feel very useful.

Delete - As nominator. -Hourglass (2011 Hallowe'en event) detail.png I Am Me Talk III The Spark.png- 02:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Closed - effectively you've just updated an outdated image, but also split it up into separate images. I've merged the combined image onto File:Agility pyramid rolling block.png so it's preserved in that image's history. It therefore doesn't exist anymore and the rfd isn't needed :) Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 11:26, 13 April 2019 (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.

Calculator:Farming/Herb prices

Now superseded by Calculator:Farming/Herbs. Not necessary any more.

Delete - As nominator. Choose OptionTalk-to MitcheII Slayer of Imps (skill: 2,695). . . . . . . . . . real life easter egg, :wowee: don't tell anyone though! Talk-to MitcheII Slayer of Imps (skill: 2,695) 07:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Delete - Meeeeerds msg 00:22, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Delete - Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 11:45, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Delete ^^ - Rawny (talk) 18:47, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Deleted - The page has been deleted. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 09:50, 17 April 2019 (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.

Calculator:Farming/Herb profits

Now superseded by Calculator:Farming/Herbs. Not necessary any more.

Delete - As nominator. Choose OptionTalk-to MitcheII Slayer of Imps (skill: 2,695). . . . . . . . . . real life easter egg, :wowee: don't tell anyone though! Talk-to MitcheII Slayer of Imps (skill: 2,695) 07:16, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Delete - Meeeeerds msg 00:22, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Delete - Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 11:45, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Delete ^^ - Rawny (talk) 18:46, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Deleted - The page has been deleted. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 09:52, 17 April 2019 (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 00:59, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Fief

Hello friends, I have something very important to share with you. The Fief article is grade-A garbo. I'm talking next-level, "this is bullshit", 10pm-garbage-alarm Jediadam4 hot trasho.

The entire article is based on two quotes from God letters:

"we where hoping that you would make an update that allows crafters to make gold coins from gold bars" - bite9611111

Forgery is a serious crime, and only those coins minted by the respective Fief are legal tender.

Transcript:The_Return_of_Saradomin
There are numerous different currencies throughout mine realms, with each of the major fiefs holding a different currency, yet all are of similar size, weight, and all made of purest gold, so they are accepted everywhere regardless of the patterning which merely shows from whence they came.
Transcript:Guthix_Maintains

Now the reasonable thing would be to conclude that a "fief" here refers to different kingdoms (e.g. Asgarnia, Misthalin, Kandarin, et cetera). Replace the word "fief" with "kingdom" and everything makes sense. This is consistent with the dictionary definition of the word.

But 2008-era wiki got all twisted up and decided that the "fief" actually is the thing that mints the coins, whether some being or powerful entity, or possibly some specific kingdom. The whole page refers to a singular entity, even though both of the references to it in God Letters refers to multiple fiefs. It's a big ol' mess.

Please support my RfD thank you.

Redirect to Kingdom - Per Jediadam4. ʞooɔ 23:49, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Support (redirect to Kingdom) - Makes sense to me. Perhaps, it would be a good idea to add a point in the trivia on Coins that mentions the things from the God Letters above. I think it makes slightly more sense on Coins than adding trivia to Kingdom saying "These may also be known as fiefs [...]" (though that is an additional option) - Rawny (talk) 00:03, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Comment - Possible trivia point for Coins:
  • In the 13th issue of the God letters, Guthix maintains that all coins are of a similar size, weight, and are made of "purest gold", which is why they are accepted everywhere regardless of the patterning each fief applies to the currency that they mint. [1][2]
References
  1. ^ Jagex. "God Letter 13 - Guthix Maintains, Letter 15" (Archived from the original.) RuneScape God Letters.
  2. ^ Jagex. "God Letter 14 - The Return of Saradomin, Letter 14" (Archived from the original.) RuneScape God Letters.
I've tried to emphasize the involvement of God letters, due to their (seemingly) no-longer-Canonical nature. - Rawny (talk) 01:49, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Support - Gives me shoelacecrusher flashbacks. -Hourglass (2011 Hallowe'en event) detail.png I Am Me Talk III The Spark.png- 00:08, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Support (redirect to Kingdom) - Makes sense. Farming-icon.png Salix of Prifddinas (Talk) Prifddinas lodestone icon.png 07:37, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Support - "Fief" is not the name of a place or entity, it's another word for "province". 5-x Talk 13:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Support - Meeeeerds msg 13:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Support - Fief here definitely didn't mean some individual being or organization, so it'd probably be best to redirect to "Kingdom" and maybe include something about Rawny's trivia points. It's written pretty poorly for current standards too. ɳex undique 14:49, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Closed - Article will be deleted. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 00:59, 3 May 2019 (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 07:14, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

RuneScape:Emoticons

It's no longer 2009 and people don't use smileys anymore.

Delete - As nominator. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 20:14, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Delete - Begone jayden 20:23, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Delete - 😂👌💩👅🍆💦 Meeeeerds msg 20:31, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Delete - {{Rofl}} - Rawny (talk) 21:17, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Comment below - Rawny (talk) 23:06, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Delete - Bronze dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Bronze daggerElven CoreRSDragon dagger.png: RS3 Inventory image of Dragon dagger 21:51, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Question - Is this RfD just for the project page, or does it include all the emoticons as well? --LiquidTalk 21:53, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Comment - My proposal would be removing the emoticons themselves (bot no wiki'ying them or something like that so they still make sense in places where they're used in historical discussions etc) and the actual project page. But I'm open to suggestions :P Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 08:45, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Keep - The Emoticons page itself should stay as it documents all the available emoticons useable on the Wiki, it still has a purpose even if it doesn't see much use. If the emoticon templates themselves are the subject of deletion, those particular ones are out-of-date and mostly superseded by current emoji, but new templates that are unique and serve a purpose not filled by emoji should be added in their stead. i.e. some of the Discord emoji would be a neat meta thing to be able to use in Discussions. Who wouldn't rather do { { cook_yes } } instead of support 😏 Choose OptionTalk-to MitcheII Slayer of Imps (skill: 2,695). . . . . . . . . . real life easter egg, :wowee: don't tell anyone though! Talk-to MitcheII Slayer of Imps (skill: 2,695) 22:44, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Comment: On second thoughts, I'm also not clear whether it's just the page deletion being proposed or more than that (as per Liquid). If folks are wanting to get rid of the emoticon templates too, I think it might make sense to either use a bot to substitute them with emojis (where possible/reasonable equivalents exist), or keep the templates/some of the templates but update them to use emojis instead (again, as far as possible). This is from the perspective of preserving existing discussions where the templates are in-use. As MitcheII mentions, it might be cool to have some of wiki-specific "emoji" added. Whilst this sounds a little beyond the scope here, if there was a consensus to do that, (again, as MitcheII says) it might mean this page should be recycled as a location for those (regardless of the action, if any, taken to deal with the current emoticon templates) - Rawny (talk) 23:09, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Oppose removing emoticons, neutral removing project page - Why? There doesn't seem any benefit in deleting this - a bunch of old talk pages would look super odd with a bunch of {{:P}}. If you want to remove the project page only then I understand, but it might be good to create some template documentation somewhere. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 05:01, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Delt dDbvitC.pngScuzzy Betahib8CAd.png 09:36, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Keep, but soft support for replacing with unicode emoji characters - I agree with Haidro, I would rather keep smileys as is rather than having a bunch of pages with nowiki'd templates. I would support removal of the project page/templates if each instance of a template were replaced with the equivalent unicode emoji character, but that obviously wouldn't work for some like eCopM0F.png... I just don't see the point of making certain pages less readable because the templates aren't being used anymore. Mining cape (t).png Rune14 (talk) Mining cape (t).png 14:19, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Oppose removing templates, unless... - ...existing template usage is replaced with emojis. I've thrown together some rough possibilities here, mostly to give an impression of what replacing them could look like. This would obviously require a bot to to be run over all the pages using the templates, as has been mentioned - Rawny (talk) 22:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Comment - Does any1 really use these templates anyway? Plus the emojis loot outdated, what is this, MSN? Meeeeerds msg 14:13, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Oppose - I wouldn't mind archiving the project page, but I think the emoticons themselves should stay to maintain the fidelity of the archives in which they are used. --LiquidTalk 23:59, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Support - They look pretty out of place imo Talk to Kelsey 00:09, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Oppose - Since there's not really a plan to replace them with anything. I don't think nowiki'ing makes any sense. ʞooɔ 00:12, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Closed - Emoticons will remain. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 07:14, 8 May 2019 (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.

[[:Calculator:Constitution]]

This calculator is obsolete since EoC. It's not clear what it does, it's not useful, and it's just a mess overall. There's no point to maintain it given the uselessness of it since EoC.

Delete - As nominator. Nericat (talk) 19:20, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Delete - HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 07:41, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Delete - Along with [[Calculator:Template/Constitution]] -Hourglass (2011 Hallowe'en event) detail.png I Am Myself Talk III The Spark.png- 11:42, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Delete - Serves no purpose. - Sahima (Talk) 16:46, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Closed - Calculator will be deleted. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 01:01, 8 August 2019 (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.

Money making guide/Making uncooked pizzas

<10k profit per hour.

Delete - As nominator. Magic logs detail.pngIsobelJTalk page 20:47, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Speedy delete? - Garbage money, garbage xp, there's no reason to do this. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 12:31, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Delete - Profit being too low for the effort given and XP gain. Twig Talk 772kZGs.png 01:27, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Delete - per Haidro Nericat (talk) 01:31, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Closed - MMG will be deleted. HaidroH rune.pngEagle feather 3.pngCandle (blood red).png 1XqyDNM.png Crystal triskelion fragment 3.pngHazelmere's signet ring.png 01:06, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


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