RuneScape Players Wiki
mNo edit summary
(closed)
Tag: sourceedit
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Forum header|archive=}}
+
{{Forum header|archive=true}}
 
Over the past week, I've thought about alternatives to deleting articles about non-notable subjects. I remembered an old page than an admin of ours, [[User:Rswfan|Rswfan]], created a few years back. Basically, it was a project page where players could tell stories about themselves. With some modifications, I think this would be a good alternative to just straight-out deleting the articles.
 
Over the past week, I've thought about alternatives to deleting articles about non-notable subjects. I remembered an old page than an admin of ours, [[User:Rswfan|Rswfan]], created a few years back. Basically, it was a project page where players could tell stories about themselves. With some modifications, I think this would be a good alternative to just straight-out deleting the articles.
   
Line 5: Line 5:
   
 
This namespace could also give users more freedoms to decrease the likelihood that the page will be vandalized. For example, we could add a template at the top of the page that indicates whether they'd like anyone else to edit the page or not. Of course, this would have to be discussed in another thread. It could be a place where people would not have to worry if claims made in the page are reliably sourced, non-neutral, or do not meet the [[RSP:MOS|manual of style]] for articles. Moving it to another namespace would also allow us to distinguish between articles we expect to meet the criteria and pages for which we do not. [[User:Smithing|Smithing]] ([[User talk:Smithing|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Smithing|contribs]]) 14:29, August 28, 2014 (UTC)
 
This namespace could also give users more freedoms to decrease the likelihood that the page will be vandalized. For example, we could add a template at the top of the page that indicates whether they'd like anyone else to edit the page or not. Of course, this would have to be discussed in another thread. It could be a place where people would not have to worry if claims made in the page are reliably sourced, non-neutral, or do not meet the [[RSP:MOS|manual of style]] for articles. Moving it to another namespace would also allow us to distinguish between articles we expect to meet the criteria and pages for which we do not. [[User:Smithing|Smithing]] ([[User talk:Smithing|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Smithing|contribs]]) 14:29, August 28, 2014 (UTC)
  +
  +
'''Comment''' - This doesn't sound as bad as deleting most of the content off of this wiki. [[User:TyA|<span style="color:#22CC00;">~ty</span>]] 00:30, August 29, 2014 (UTC)
  +
  +
'''Withdrawn''' - I have another idea. [[User:Smithing|Smithing]] ([[User talk:Smithing|talk]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/Smithing|contribs]]) 18:25, February 28, 2015 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:25, 28 February 2015

Forums: Watercooler > Moving non-notable articles into new namespace
Note: This topic is archived. Please do not modify it. If you want to start another debate on this topic, please create a new topic on the Watercooler.


Over the past week, I've thought about alternatives to deleting articles about non-notable subjects. I remembered an old page than an admin of ours, Rswfan, created a few years back. Basically, it was a project page where players could tell stories about themselves. With some modifications, I think this would be a good alternative to just straight-out deleting the articles.

My proposal is this: Move articles about non-notable subjects into a new namespace. In this namespace, players can write stories about themselves and share any past experiences (e.g., their experiences during the Falador Massacre).

This namespace could also give users more freedoms to decrease the likelihood that the page will be vandalized. For example, we could add a template at the top of the page that indicates whether they'd like anyone else to edit the page or not. Of course, this would have to be discussed in another thread. It could be a place where people would not have to worry if claims made in the page are reliably sourced, non-neutral, or do not meet the manual of style for articles. Moving it to another namespace would also allow us to distinguish between articles we expect to meet the criteria and pages for which we do not. Smithing (talk | contribs) 14:29, August 28, 2014 (UTC)

Comment - This doesn't sound as bad as deleting most of the content off of this wiki. ~ty 00:30, August 29, 2014 (UTC)

Withdrawn - I have another idea. Smithing (talk | contribs) 18:25, February 28, 2015 (UTC)