RuneScape:Requests for deletion/Dark Runescape Wiki

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. The result was disassociate, remove links. Skill 18:32, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Dark RuneScape Wiki[edit source]

Not an article this time, but an entire wiki needs to be deleted now. It may CLAIM to prevent scams, but all it really does is give its users ideas for other scams, which are OBVIOUSLY against JaGeX rules. Why have a wiki about RuneScape if all it's about is the ways to break certain rules? Not only that, but some of these scams are not even valid anymore, like armor trimming, because just about everybody (almost) doesn't fall for it anymore. If a person wishes to learn of scams, they can use OUR article here. Also, the skin it uses HURTS MY EYES. All in all, it should have never been made, and whoever made it should have thought of the consequences (other ideas for scams to use for dishonest players) before they made it.7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko)

Support/Delete[edit source]

  1. Deleting a Wiki is perfectly fine.
  2. This may not be the place to set up VFD, but where else?
  3. The Wiki articles have this caption: "From the Dark Runescape wiki - Get Revenge!". That implies that players that got scammed should use the wiki to scam people back. Also, it's called "Dark" RSWiki, implying that it is to be used by people that appreciate the dark side. (Or people that like to scam people in general).

Spiked boots detail.pngDoomedrusher|Talk||Contributions||Edit Count| 12:50, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

  1. Finally, someone has the guts to do this. Stinkowing pretty much said it all. Opposers will probably retaliate by saying that some users have a sincere use for the wiki, but according to a recent poll the vast majority of the users use it to learn how to scam. --Themurasame Hiscores 13:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
But uhhhhh... Is this the right place to vote for the deletion of a wiki? I kind of doubt it, because it's seperate from this wiki. --Mura 13:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  1. Delete, but merge into the scamming article. The content is not the problem, but the total disorganization is, and it dosen't seem to be getting better, so I assume no one cares anymore. Butterman62Ice Barrage icon.png 01:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose/Keep[edit source]

Not all of my reasons are good reasons, but these are reasons I'm opposing.

  1. You can't just delete a wiki.
  2. This isn't the place try to get it deleted.
  3. The objective of the Wiki is/was to prevent scams, not teach people how to scam.
  4. The background can just be fixed (by Gangsterls, not me).
  5. The people who come to the Wiki are there to learn how to scam, but the Wiki discourages scamming, so the Wiki should not be deleted because of it's viewers. The people who go to the Cheats and Scam article are most likely there to learn how to scam. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 20:58, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it is an important wiki, and this isn't the place to ask for it to be deleted anyhow. 100% made by monkeys. talk|editcount21:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

What rhymes with Suppose? Oppose, for all of you are Wiki Greedy people. Nobody cares 'bout ya, mmkay? Beatsta, out. Done whoozy! 21:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Cannot be done[edit source]

A wiki that has been created cannot be deleted, merely abandoned by its editors. The only way to get rid of this is to forget about it and stop bringing attention to it. However, I feel that this should be changed into a vote on whether to totally disassociate ourselves with this wiki, i.e. removing all links from the RS wiki to the Dark RS wiki. There's no reason for us to link the the wiki at all, because RS wiki should stand alone. I do not think there are other wikis that do this (disregarding Halo wiki linking to the Halo fanon wiki) so neither should we. ChristineTalk 21:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree. We have some key people in common, but I really don't think we should link to it. The majority of readers come there to learn how to scam according to a recent poll. For that reason and the above reasons, it shouldn't be linked to on the main page or anywhere else. Dtm142 22:10, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

If the Dark Runescape Wiki should stand alone, then tell me why it's being nominated for deletion on the RuneScape Wiki? Ever heard of Wikia Central? If you want the skin changed, have a vote on its talk page to change it back to the default or something, or make your own skin. The poll is irrelevant, as the articles do not explain how to perform a scam, they explain how to avoid a scam, so those who visit to learn how to scam will find no advice to interest them. Also, it encourages reporting rule-breakers, which should cut down on the number of scammers anyway. Finally, IT'S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!!! RuneScape Wiki users have no right to vote on Dark Runescape Wiki issues, and should be minding their own business and not trying to delete other wikis... I'd oppose if deleting a wiki were possible anyway - the fact that it has survived and attracted its own contributors (over half of whom do not have RuneScape Wiki accounts) is an accomplishment, considerings many wikis are completely inactive and actually should be deleted. Slayer-icon.png Gangsterls Divination-icon.png talk23:04, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

We do have the right to vote on whether we should officially be affiliated with it. And I vote to remove the links. Just because the authors don't intend for the articles to teach scammers how to scam (your founder actually does, but that's another story). However, that's how they're being used. Once again, key people doesn't mean that we should link there. Dtm142 23:13, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Dark RuneScape Wiki does not teach people about how to scam.The articles teach how to prevent scams, and scammers who read the articles teach themselves how to scam. And if "RuneScape wiki stand alone", then why is there links to places like the Gaming Hub? RSW in other languages? All those links at the bottom of the main page? Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 23:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Notice that we link to only the hub, not specific sites like the Super Smash Bros. Wiki. It makes sense to link to the other RuneScape Wikis because they're about the exact same subject. If both were impossibly perfect, then they both would have the same content except in different languages. They're like additive inverses - the absolute value is the same, but in the opposite language. And the articles do give the scammers ideas. For example, I just read this article. I never knew about that scam, but now I'm free to take it and run with it. I'm not going to, but I could. But since I have common sense and know about the guild, I wouldn't have fallen for it even though I don't have the knowledge of people using that scam. Dtm142 23:34, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

However, I feel that this should be changed into a vote on whether to totally disassociate ourselves with this wiki, i.e. removing all links from the RS wiki to the Dark RS wiki.

Gangsterls, this is how it is our business, this is how it is not rs wiki voting on drs wiki's issues. This is about just us now. ChristineTalk 23:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Well it didn't start out that way, and as I am indeed a member of the RSWiki, I'm entitled to participate in discussion and have my own opinions. Slayer-icon.png Gangsterls Divination-icon.png talk01:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Straw poll - should the RuneScape Wiki disassociate itself from Dark RuneScape Wiki?[edit source]

Support: 9

Neutral/Pending: 1

Oppose: 1

Disassociate[edit source]

  1. Support ChristineTalk 23:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  2. Support Bowman hat.pngTarikochi 23:58, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  3. Support, but allow people to link to it at will. This only applies to Userpages. Done whoozy! 00:01, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  4. Support, per above. People should be able to link to it, at least. --Themurasame Hiscores 00:04, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  5. Support, in certain cases. While I don't think we should be linking in our content proper, we don't want to restrict what people can say in discussion. Links should be allowed in:
    1. All talk namespaces.
    2. User space.
    3. Project pages. (Edit: only those with discussions. 02:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC))
    4. Others that I missed that most readers (not editors) wouldn't be interested in much. Skill 00:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  6. Support. Pardon the language, but...what the fuck have I started...7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko)
  7. Support, but don't include it in project pages either. Dtm142 01:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
    1. There are discussions on project pages though, so linking should be allowed in those discussions. Elsewhere in project space, I agree. Skill 02:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
  8. Support I hate linking to ANYTHING except the KB or official RS page. Linking to any other site drives people away from ours Scythe.png Atlandy 03:47, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Didn't you read what I wrote? It isn't linked anywhere besides the bottom of the main page, where other gaming wikis from Wikia's gaming hub are linked. If you want to disassociate and not link to other gaming wikis, you're disassociated from all of Wikia, not just DRSW. As far as the gaming links go, DRSW belongs there as much as any of the others do, as it is a gaming wiki. This entire page is about deleting something which can't be deleted. "Disassociating" from Wikia and removing the DRSW link is simply not possible. Slayer-icon.png Gangsterls Divination-icon.png talk04:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

::{| style="padding:0.5em; margin-top:1em; width:100%; border:2px solid #C6C9DD;" cellspacing="2" cellpadding="5" || | style="text-align:right;" valign="top" | '''Other [[w:Gaming|gaming wikis]] from [[wikia:Wikia|Wikia]]'''<br /> <small>[[w:c:wow|World of Warcraft]] • [[w:c:eq2|EverQuest II]] • [[w:c:warhammeronline|Warhammer Online]] • [[w:c:aoc|Age of Conan]] • [[w:c:starcraft|StarCraft]] • [[w:c:lotro|Lord of the Rings Online]] • [[w:c:fallout|Fallout]] • [[w:Gaming|More...]]</small> |} Does this seem reasonable? And shall I write a bot to figure out how many links there are to DRSW in article space? Skill 05:09, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

  1. support. the way they are doing everything is wrong. they go into to specifics about how the scam is done instead of going into the specifics of how to avoid the scam and not be caught by it. until the creator and editors have began to understand that i vote to disassociate with the dark runecape wiki. 0blivi0n 03:33, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Leave things how they are[edit source]

  1. No good reason why to, and this is a VfD. Not a votes-for-disassociation. This is just one step towards taking away editors' freedom of linking. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 00:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
If you'd READ, then people can still link on userpages. Where do you propose we discuss disassociation then? Hmm? We don't have a "Votes for Disassociation" page because we've never associated with a site mostly used for cheating before. The main page is NOT the place to link to this wiki, so this is what we're voting on. ChristineTalk 00:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
The fact that the ratio of scammers to sincere users is about 4:3 seems like a good reason to me. I know that people go there to protect themselves, but is that really a justification when most people go there to scam? --Mura 00:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Neutral - Well there's no point linking to it if everyone is opposed to visiting it anyway. And users not only have the right to link it on userpages, we can also make a template like the Wikipedia User template and we can also link it in our signatures if we so wish. However, I'd like to point out that:

  • Since the beginning of the summer there has been a sharp decrease in the number of editors who have written articles teaching how to scam, as most of these users have either left after realizing that the wiki was against scamming or been blocked. This also means that the ratio of scammers to sincere users, which Mura estimated at 4:3, has probably decreased to 1 in 5.
  • Hyrule Link is not "my founder", as Dtm said, although he is the founder of DRSW. And, he has also left the wiki, so whether Dtm's inference that he intended to teach scams is true does not matter.
  • The tagline which formally said "From the Dark Runescape Wiki - get revenge!" has been changed to read "From the Dark Runescape Wiki - follow the rules, or else!"

These may seem like small changes, but have decidedly changed the tone of DRSW for the better. I'm sure that many of you will remain unsatisfied and continue to support "disassociation" as you have called it. However, as long as DRSW and RSW are both wikis, and as long as they share the topic of RuneScape, RSW will be indirectly associated to DRSW.

By the way Dtm, I fell for the Ranging Guild Lure the first time I entered the Ranging Guild. Had I read that article, I wouldn't have. There will always be hundreds of players who will attempt the Ranging Guild Lure, but the Dark Runescape Wiki is probably the only website which tries to help players avoid such lures. Think about whether you've ever seen a site about scams or lures that was written with good intentions. Such a rare site is something to be admired, not scorned. Slayer-icon.png Gangsterls Divination-icon.png talk01:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Common sense and a basic knowledge of the Ranging Guild protects most people from such a scam. Jagex has also recently added a warning sign to alert new members of the guild that the tower inexplicably kills people. Again, I'm not saying that the articles are written with bad intentions. I'm saying that the articles give scammers ideas. Although you can block people from editting a wiki, you can't block them from reading it. Dtm142 01:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

New observation - the DRSW link is at the bottom of the main page next to the other wikis in Wikia's Gaming Hub. It's next to the World of Warcraft Wiki. It is paid no additional attention other than being a gaming wiki. It doesn't have a sister site link as RSW does on DRSW. So, there is nothing to remove. If you remove a link from the Gaming Hub, you're disassociating with the entire Gaming Hub and by extension, Wikia, which supports all wikis. There's nothing to remove so this entire vote is pointless. No matter what the vote is, DRSW will still be a gaming wiki. Slayer-icon.png Gangsterls Divination-icon.png talk02:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Comment to Clv309 (although quite late): When I posted my post at the top of this subsection there was nothing saying that users would be able to link a link to DRSW on their userpage. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 02:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, there was. Blanko suggested it before you commented and his idea is perfectly reasonable. ChristineTalk 19:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Suggestions are not final. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 19:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

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