User:Chicken7/Quests proposal

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Changes to Quest articles YG proposal

I am proposing multiple changes to quest articles. Right now, they are not even articles really; just walkthroughs. I will propose the various changes in individual sections.

Splitting of the articles[edit | edit source]

The quest articles will be split into one main article and a walkthrough subpage. If you haven't noticed, our current articles are just the walkthrough and sometimes some trivia. An article is not a walkthrough. By splitting, we can have an informative, neutral article, including things such as an infobox, storyline, official description, development team, trivia, etc. Whereas the subpage would contain a walkthrough, reward, details, music unlocked and other things concerned with completing the quest. Other wikis have done this, Wikia Gaming being one of many examples. Other fansites wouldn't do this as they usually only have guides/databases rather than being an encyclopedia. I would also recommend using Template:Title on the subpage, (Cook's Assistant - Walkthrough instead of Cook's Assistant/Walkthrough).

Implementation of the infobox[edit | edit source]

An infobox can be a new way to show the non-guide information from Template:Quest details. I have taken a few fields from the current details template, and also added a few new ones. The fields are: name, image, number (in order of release), release, update, series, (official) difficulty, wdifficulty(wiki advised), (official) length, developer, link (to GG description). Most are self explanatory. image is for just an image from the quest outlining its main idea (for Cook's Assistant, it'd be at the stove). An alternative is using the GG images (image on right). Although I am unsure of the copyrights/fair use in that. We can add the new "Wiki difficulty" when that is decided upon, but for now let's use the blue stars; it can be changed later (please do not start that discussion here). That is pretty much all for that

Modification to Template:Quest details[edit | edit source]

I don't think we should completely get rid of this and make it redundant to the infobox. The informative fields should be removed, and only fields kept that are related to the guide. I propose removing the (official) description, release, update, members. I also think it'd be good to add a "recommended items" field, which would be auto-hidden when the field is not entered into.

Anyway, those are the first changes I think are required and would really benefit the articles. There are more ideas, related to changing the layout and style of walkthroughs, but let's not discuss them yet. Admins, please do not close this discussion after consensus has been found for the above changes, as there is a part 2. Cheers,

Old Conclusion[edit | edit source]

Well, there have been mixed responses from users. I think its time we closed this discussion and finally implemented the changes. As consensus is based on arguments, I think it'd be best if I rephrase all of mine for the proposal, and refute the opposition's in a logical sense. I think we can pass this on a rough consensus. I also will include the final proposal. Please do not make additional proposals or "compromises". All additional ideas can be suggested at the WikiGuild I'm proposing.

Reasons for[edit | edit source]

Yes check.svg
Yes check.svg
Yes check.svg
Yes check.svg
Yes check.svg

Refute[edit | edit source]

Below are some common reasons against the proposal the opposition has brought up, as well as a reply to that argument. It is presented in a table format, so to be easy-to-read and compact.

Reason Refute
  • The walkthrough is more interesting and sought after than the storyline, release info, trivia and other new information.
For most users, maybe so. But that is why a link to the walkthrough is provided in a big box at the top. It's hard to miss. The users who are not doing the quest, and interested in the actual informative information would like to see a neat article, rather than absolutely nothing, which is what we're supplying now. Putting the information on a subpage and walkthrough as the base title is just illogical, inconsistent and confusing.
  • The main information can easily be added and merged with the walkthrough, on one article
It is illogical, unorganised and un-encyclopaedic to put the factual information together with non-neutral walkthrough information. Presenting them together in a neat and organised format would be difficult. Plus, the page sizes would be tremendous. Already, the WGS walkthrough is over 50kb (32kb is the recommended maximum). Adding all the information would cause some users extreme lag. And only merging for some quests would be inconsistent.
  • Every other fansite only has the walkthrough
We're not every other fansite. And every other fansite is not a wiki or encyclopaedia. We strive to be different, and better. By doing this, we will be providing more information than them, giving us an advantage.
  • We're not an encyclopaedia, so we don't need this information.
According to numerous discussions, and the general "sense" of the community, that's incorrect; we are an encyclopaedia. If you think differently, this isn't the place; make a Yew Grove. But we are also a fansite. So we aim to provide an encyclopaedia's factual information and a fansite's helpful guides and tools. Combined, we can be (we are) the best RuneScape database on the internet. Concerning quests, we're only covering the fansite aspect, therefore, you could say ALL quest articles are incomplete and lacking information.
  • There is no need to double the number of quest articles
We have unlimited space. The number of articles we have is irrelevant completely. I don't even think subpages would appear in the article count.
  • The factual articles would be too short.
I would think not. My example, Cook's Assistant, is the shortest quest in the game. It is most likely to be the shortest example too, yet it is a good fair length for an article. If anything, we're going to be getting articles that are too large for quests like WGS.
  • Slashes in the title of the walkthroughs are not good
Slashes are good in that they help keep everything organised. The walkthrough is still considered part of the main "quest article", just not merged together. Plus, Template:Title has been used, so that the title appears as "Quest name Walkthrough".

New examples[edit | edit source]

As users have requested more examples, below are ten I have created. Most were ideas by opposers of the thread, to ensure that they were difficult and variable.

Final proposal[edit | edit source]

und con

Conclusion[edit | edit source]

Well, there have been mixed responses from users. I think its time we closed this discussion and finally implemented appropriate changes. I understand there has been some concerns brought up by users, and while I had modified the proposal in reply to their comment, some were worried. Although I personally think this could have passed as rough consensus, I'm now proposing something different. Not splitting the articles. Simply write up the information and keep it together with the walkthrough on one page. In the future if we find first-hand that the articles do become much too large, we can rediscuss splitting them off or making another compromise. The information would be at the top, followed by the walkthrough. I'll also add INSERTTEMPLATEHERE to the top of articles, offering an instantaneous (less than 0.25 seconds) transition to the Walkthrough header. Quest details has also been slightly modified (MODIFYQUESTDETAILS) so that it is more noticeable for viewers who wish to scroll down manually. It is now curved, has a quest icon and a dark blue tinge.

Finally, I'd like to make a request for a WikiGuild named "". A WikiGuild is extremely beneficial, as it enables users to work together to both create ideas to improve our quest walkthroughs and then collaborate together to actually modify the walkthroughs. It's a large task, and may involve doing quests again with new or additional accounts. Not only will we be updating information and adding images, but implementing new features and ideas, some of which have been brainstormed here (contribute your own ideas!). Once the project is over (although I don't think that will happen in quite a long time), we can still continue keeping the same standard across all articles, develop new ideas, take more suggestions, look for articles that are still lacking, create and improve articles about new quests and similar tasks.

Proposal: Write informative, neutral information about quests and add it to the top of the article. Create a WikiGuild that will deal with the implementation of this, and future projects involving quest articles.

It's disappointing that the original proposal could not be implemented in all its glory, but let's not deprive the wiki of this information altogether. Cheers,