The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it.
The result was keep
.01:21, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Ardal is not an NPC, it is non-interactive scenery, for the following reasons:
- The only thing players can do with it is to examine it
- It does not appear on the minimap at all (NPCs appear as a yellow blip)
- Its name appears in pale blue text at the top-left corner of the screen when you point to it
All of these properties make it a non-interactive scenery item. The only thing that implies it might be considered an NPC is the fact that it is human-shaped - but this is not enough in my opinion. The only notable thing to say about it is that its name is a reference to Father Ted (along with the other two, Frank and Dermot), which is easily covered in The Poison Arrow article. As per RuneScape:Granularity (which says "the only two major exceptions are player articles and non-interactive scenery"), I say none of these three needs its own article. Leevclarke talk 17:34, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Keep - The fact that he is technically non-interactive scenery is irrelevant, because Martina Scorsby is exactly the same in every way to Ardal, but is a yellow dot on the minimap and has a yellow name. If anything, this is proof that the granularity policy need to be updated to allow non-interactive scenery if it is a living thing. This is because it is a recent trend for Jagex to make NPCs that don't say or do anything interesting into non-interactive scenery, such as the Music appreciators, which are themselves non-interactive scenery, but have a tiny "dummy" NPC called "Invisible" inside their heads that makes them show up as a yellow dot on the minimap. Ordinarily I'd be fine with merging an NPC like Ardal into an article on the lack of notability, but this vote is about whether or not to merge it simply because its name is blue, and since that's the case, I vote keep. Psycho Robot talk 19:07, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Keep - Ardal is, in some ways, programmed similarly to scenery. But I don't think how something is coded should be the primary point of decision in labeling it, because although he posesses some traits of scenery, the important thing about him is that he is a character and is presented to the player as such. Players don't look at a person in the same way as a chair or rock, and Jagex didn't put him in to be seen as scenery but as an NPC. This has been brought up many times before, and, as Psycho said, the granularity policy needs to be changed to reflect this. Morian Smith 23:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Keep - As above. Rhys Talk 15:52, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Keep - It's a NPC, even if its very little shown, it still deserves a article and per above. Mo 55 55 Talk|Sign 10:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Keep - I think even though he may be coded like scenery, he seems more like an NPC to me. I say we keep him. Remember we also allow articles for characters that don't even appear in the game. Tollerach hates SoF 21:39, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Keep - It is still sort of an NPC. Oil4 Talk 21:09, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. No further edits should be made to this page.