To the right of the title / banner, would it be wise to put links to the main categories of help pages, such as Skills, Quests, Mini-games, Achievement Diaries, Guilds, Maps / Locations, Monster Killing (boss monsters that is), and perhaps 'Misc' if that's appropriate. Any other thoughts, or ideas for other links? --ACY3 15:15, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
- I think we may need too add an "Area" or "Locations" tag, as people are beginning to write up on various Villages and Cities within the game. We may also need too look into an "NPC" guide, for various characters that seem to have poped up. Either give them their own seperate link, or make a MISC section, too which we should add links for all the MISC guides within the portal thread. --The_Sleeping_Dragon 00:47, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- The 'Maps' link was meant to be a general Maps, Areas and Locations page, since every map will need some text describing it, if only "This dungeon is located in X, Y Z. It is useful for A B C." But it should probably be re-named 'Locations' to be more suitable. I never managed to produce a good list of locations, nor a way to split them up, so any ideas with that would be helpful. --ACY3 09:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
- I think that the NPCs and Calculators links are never going to be made, even though i put the NPCs one on myself, i doubt an item database would ever get done either, but maybe a weapons/ armour database? Only trouble is all the quest items and such would be too much, also there could be a music database: list of names and how to obtain them. Just some thoughts. -- FFXmaddean 19:46 25 January 2009 (GMT)
 RuneScape News
Perhaps RuneScape News should have a dedicated spot somewhere on the Main Page, as in news straight from the main RuneScape website, whatever it may be. It's unlikely that any RuneScape news will appear on GameGrep though, so that section can probably go. --ACY3 15:17, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
- I've removed the GameGrep section and added a RuneScape news section. The RSS feed is one I've written myself which can update from the official RuneScape website, either hourly or manually. Currently it's not displaying correctly because the template doesn't work, so I'll look into this tomorrow. --ACY3 00:09, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
- Template fixed, RS news is displaying correctly. :D --ACY3 11:54, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
News feed has been moved to a new host. The number of news entries displayed is currently set to 5, but this can be changed by me if requested. --ACY3 21:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
For those new to Wikis (like me ;D), you can create templates which make similar-structured pages much easier to produce. For example, the Template:Infobox makes it much easier to add a box of useful details to the top-right of a page. I think one for quests (start point, items required, levels required etc) would be a good idea, as well as for monsters (similar to the infobox) but there is no-doubt need for further templates for other pages. If you have further ideas, put them here. --ACY3 17:56, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
- In the interest of consistency and displaying information clearly, where an FAQ appears in a guide, it may be a good idea to bold the Question (Q) with the bold tags, and italic the Answer (A). Something small, but still seems user freindly. --The_Sleeping_Dragon 21:56, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 Preventing Vandalisim
My suggestion is that when a guide has been writen (quest guide, skill guide)and is fully up to date that it is closed to stop editing but only the staff have the power to do this. If someone views the article and notices something missing they can send it to a member of the staff and ask them to edit the appropriate parts. This will mean that people deleting the guides on purpose won't be able to delete finished guides. --Lucas0 23:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
- Only WikiStaff can delete a page; members are only able to delete its content, and that is easily reversible. I think rather than protecting pages now, we should wait until vandalism starts to occur before we start locking things down. We can always contact WikiAdmins regarding frequent abuses and get them banned. We will however be protecting templates, as the only ones who need to edit those are WikiStaff. --ACY3 23:43, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
- With guest editing disabled, people are far less likely to attempt vandalising a page. Those that do will be banned, with very few exceptions (Templates, possibly the main page) you should not come across any protected pages. Kind of defeats the whole purpose of being a wiki and having users contribute and expand articles. --Ren of Heavens 10:43, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 Image Consistency
If you need to use an image on a page, please [check if it exists] before uploading a new image. If it does not, item images should be 34 × 33 pixels (Width × Height), with the item centered in the middle, and in GIF format with a transparent background.
This will ensure that when placed alongside in a list or table, they all line up correctly. ACY3 has kindly created ~1500 images so far using these guidelines, which I have uploaded to the wiki using a bot. For larger images, such as for quests/maps, PNG is preferred to JPG. --Ren of Heavens 12:37, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- I'd just like to add on to that; if you choose to upload your own item images rather than passing them on to me, please give them appropriate names. Don't call a mithril dagger "mith.gif", as that is not helpful. Where possible, use the exact same name as in RS ( "Mithril_dagger.gif" ) or, for many items of the same name, add a description to it ( "Red_cape.gif", "Blue_cape.gif" ).
- Alternatively, don't upload an image at all; just leave the image tags in your article ( [[Image:Image_name.gif]] ) and I will upload it whenever I can. But it is much preferred that all images have the same dimensions and filetype, as it will look much better than if they're chopped around all over the place. Thanks. --ACY3 20:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
The links to things like Quests, Achievement Diaries, etc. that are listed on the main page should really be categories instead of manually updated pages. I don't want to go ahead and change it myself because maybe there's a reason it's like this, but that's really what the Category: feature is meant to be for. --Kjgmusic 04:58, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Categories are an alphabetical list of whatever pages are in that category. And at that, they're a basic, three-column full screen list. What we have at the moment is a more informative list of everything that is, and SHOULD be there (ie all quests that will need to be made, all skill guides that haven't been made etc). It also allows us to customise how they are listed (F2P and P2P quests seperate, but on same page) and add extra details (difficulty, length). At least for the time being, that is a lot more useful than a basic list.
- However, for the sake of future-proofing those category pages and adding the category links to the bottom of every page, I do recommend that everyone puts each page into a category. To do this, put [[Category:Category_name]] at he very top of the page. So for quests, put [[Category:Quests]] before anything else. I know I am guilty of not doing this, but I'll be going through some guides and adding it in soon.
- What I've done with the category pages so far is re-direct them to the appropriate manual page, so that anyone clicking the category links gets sent to the right page rather than a dull category list. This can easily be changed later on down the line if need be. --ACY3 12:41, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- That is definitely a good point. All we should do, then, is put notes at the top of each category page linking to our regular page, simply stating "go to this page for more information." It'd still be nice to make sure the pages are all part of a category. --Kjgmusic 19:24, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 High-detail Pictures
Now that RuneScape High Detail has been released, I think we should start taking more pictures in HD and less in normal detail mode. In my opinion, screenshots of in-game areas would be better taken in HD mode as to make the Wiki pages look better. Those who don't have membership can certainly take pictures using normal detail mode and upload them, and then a member could re-take the pic in HD mode when they have time. Any thoughts on the different detail modes? --ACY3 17:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, in the interest of making our Wiki look the best it possibly can, I think we should just stick to the new HD pictures. Just as soon as it stops being a laggy little girl though. --coheed 17:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. Since so many people are using HD right now, there's no reason to use normal detail. There needs to be a way to tell when a picture needs to be re-taken in HD though. --MegamanSpy Omega 02:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 Spelling and Grammar
I don't mean to be coming off as an OCD jerk, so try not to take it that way. Some of the pages on the Wiki, while far from awful, contain spelling/grammatical errors. Of course, once or twice by accident is one thing, consistent misuse of a comma or misspelling of a word is another. Once again, not trying to be a jerk.
A few key things to remember that will help you become better writers -- Two(2) spaces after a period before you start the next sentence. One space after a comma before you carry on with the next sentence, like so. Parentheses are to be touching the words immediately to the left of them(like so) with a space after it ends, and before you carry on. Those are pretty much the only grammatical errors I've noticed on any pages, however, where one mistake shows it's ugly face, others are sure to follow. Also, the Check spelling link immediately to the top-right of this box can come in handy if you're confused about a word. Once again, sorry to sound like a writing nazi, but every little bit of improvement helps not only the Wiki itself, but also your writing skills. To any staff -- If this is taboo or if I'm not allowed to start a topic here, sorry. --coheed 07:35, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry about spelling problems that I might have caused. I've noticed that some of the pages I've written on have had some spelling problems. In reference to the grammatical problems you've mentioned, some of them may be regional differences or they have changed in some aspects. Starting a couple years ago, the double space standard became more of a "typewriter standard" while the single space has become a "computer standard". This is at least from all the schools I have attended and from my area. The same goes with the parentheses, as I have always been taught that a space was necessary. I know that a lot of differences have started forming with American standards in recent years. --Doofington 10:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- Putting a double-space after a full-stop is something I've never done, and very rarely seen done by other people, whether it's the standard or not. Regardless, double-space will not display on the page itself, since HTML standards remove excess spacing. All you'd be doing is making the code page have a double space, which some may argue is easier to read, but it makes no difference to me. Similarly, it's rare to see parentheses touching the word before them, and I think it looks worse that way than having a gap. The only time I've seen it is when accounting for the singular and plural form of a word (for example, please work on the Wiki(s)). I do agree with the space after the comma though.
- Normally I'd be all for following standards, but in this case the standards (if indeed they are the standards) are very rarely followed, and in the case of the parentheses I think it looks worse. --ACY3 10:24, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- I mean, ultimately it's what you want goes, it just comes with the territory. I'm just a firm believer in the standards, such as the parentheses(you're kidding me about saying the space looks good, to me it's a glaring mistake that I can't help but fix). I guess writing paper after paper for ridiculous English teachers does that to you. I mean, look at it this way.
- Let's say a normal person looks at any wiki page with the parentheses used the wrong way. To them, it's no big deal because they're just reading through and they don't know any better. Now take someone who can write and knows how to write correctly reading through that same page. To them it's a sign that we're, well, for lack of a better word, incompetent. I know it's really not a big deal, but if you want the wiki to look as good as it possibly can, why stray from the writing standards? It's not like they're the writing things we do because we like to, it's a set of rules that pretty much govern all written articles/books/anything. I'm normally not this OCD about things, but if there's one thing I can't stand, it's improper writing. I dunno. Your call ACY. I just ask to be able to write my way, with noone editing it, and I won't edit anyone else's unless it's a terrible mistake. --coheed 05:45, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
- My point is, the double-space after a full-stop is useless, because web browsers will reduce it to one space. That's not because they're all anti-English; it's because they're following the HTML standards, which strip out any unneeded spaces. Unless you want to get Admin to tinker with the CSS and go against HTML standards in an effort to promote English standards, you're out of luck with that one. I do not know of any sites that have done this, so I don't think NeoWikis will look at all out of place. Those who are extremely picky with their grammar will be used to this website layout by now.
- As for the parentheses, as I said before, I personally think it looks worse to have them without a space, and I have honestly never seen them used like that. In all the sites I've been to, there has always been a space before them. I wouldn't be that fussed if I came across a site which didn't have a space; I'd simply read the text and not worry too much about the space that went walkies, and I would hope that Grammar Masters would reciprocate. I just did a quick Google search on the topic, and of the few pages commenting on it (as opposed to coding issues), every one said that you should put a space before the first parenthesis.
- We're not submitting text to be marked by an old, strict English teacher, so I think it's better to go with what the vast majority of other sites are doing. As long as the text itself is clear to read and contains no spelling mistakes, and general grammar mistakes are corrected, we should be fine. If an English teacher does come barging in screaming about how we lack an education beyond primary school, I will happily usher them out of the door. ;) --ACY3 11:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)