Talk:AdventureQuest

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on October 18, 2006. The result of the discussion was Keep.

	This article is part of WikiProject Computer and video games, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	CVG Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article is on a subject of low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
CVG To-do: edit  Gaming Collaboration of the week: X-Men vs. Street Fighter Expand: New CVG Articles, List of Nintendo trademarks, Normality, Pac-Man World 2, Operation Flashpoint: Elite, Call of Juarez, Galactic Civilizations II: Dark Avatar, Ford Street Racing, Betrayal at Krondor CVG Peer Review: Super Transformation, Turok: Dinosaur Hunter, Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games, Yoshi, Black Isle's Torn, Rise of Nations, Kirby (Nintendo), PlayStation 3, Mega Man Zero 4, Luigi Cleanup: Shiny Entertainment, Age of Mythology, Serious Sam II, Mario Kart: Double Dash!!, Ted Price, Betrayal at Krondor Merge: Current Events (Update needed!) / Deletions / Essential articles / Workshop / Magazines Assess and Prioritise articles (Log)

The following users are active in maintaining and improving this article. If you have questions regarding verification and sources, they may be able to help: Hildanknight (talk • contribs)

Contents 1 Question 2 Headline text 3 Vandalism? 4 Clean-up 5 Dragonfable, its own page 6 Spelling Correction 7 I'm adding in-game screenshots 8 Innapropriate use of Oppinion and potential Vandalism 9 Runescape is locked, why is this not 10 Avoiding uneeded reverts 11 A little thing few people know about 12 Why is... 13 History of AdventureQuest

[edit] Question

[edit] Headline text

Help please

In the Bishop ( or what hes name is ) Quest where you shall get the items to him . I have all the items except the " Rilithia's shield "

Crous i dont know ho she is and where i can find he so PLEASE help me

This is not the place for spoilers or solutions to in-game puzzles. Please refer to a spoiler site or any other forum where you may ask for help on this matter. SnufStyle420 10:51, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism?

There was an IP user who deleted most of the page. Should someone stop him?

We'redoing that, is it still deleted?

Here's how can you undo the changes for yourself. Click on "history", then click on the date of last previous version, it'll open it with a warning of not being the newst version. Click on "edit", don't change anything, add sumary (rv blanking) and save it. -- (☺drini♫|☎) 00:29, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

I just reverted vandalism to the previous version. Mysticaloctopus 22:25, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clean-up

I cleaned up a few misc grammar problems, etc. and tried to make some other minor organization edits, but it could benefit from a complete makeover still.

This article perhaps needs a complete rewrite. The major problems are lack of citation, incorrect grammar/spelling, and the general lack of polish in the writing. Some of the links seem rather to exist merely for the purpose of advertising, in particular, the fan pages.

I cleaned up a lot of grammar and spelling errors, and added bullets to a couple of sections that needed them. All in all, it does look a bit better, but it needs a more thorough cleanup than what I've done. 24.20.242.101

In general this whole area, including possibly the talk page, needs to be cleaned up. It reeks of fanboyism and lackluster.

I agree that the page needs a clean up still, but maybe not neccessarily the whole page. The part about mini-games doesn't have anything to do with Adventure Quest itself, except that they are made by the same people, and therefore I believe that whole part should be taken off this page. Also, the Dragon Fable part seems unneccessary right now. Noting how the two games tie into eachother and the similarities between them is acceptable, but I don't think we need a whole description of the game on the Adventure Quest page. If Dragon Fable's information could be moved to a page of its own, that would be fine, but its information doesn't belong here. One thing that needs shortening to various extents is the Trivia section. Many of these seem to have a goal of completely explaining several, if not all, of the cultural references in the game, sometimes even going off topic. Probably the biggest error I find here is that there is not a section that basicly describes the gameplay as a whole. Although the page needs clean up, it also needs order and organization. Starting the page off talking about random events featured doesn't provide much information about the game itself. As for those events, I think the Events section could be spread out a bit more to cover Wars and Holidays. All in all, there is a lot of unneccessary information spread throughout the page, a lack of basic information regarding the game, and several organizational points that should be looked into as soon as possible.--SnufStyle420 17:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I've done a brief cleanup, but will probably need some help to rewrite this. Could anyone offer some assistance? --Computafreak 06:02, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I agreed with the mini-games opinion, this should be on the publisher's article, not AQ's. Removed it. --Leuqarte 20:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I have cleaned up quite a bit of the page. It is still in need of clean up, as it seems to drag on a lot. Quite a few sections could be shortened to accomodate the page, such as character classes or NPC's. More is definitly needed describing the game itself, and not the minor points about it such as who every single NPC is individually or what each different class stands for. In-game screenshots could help add to this idea. The entire Z-tokens section could be abbreviated to include all forms of donation, thus not making Z-tokens themselves stick out so much. Perhaps more information can be added about holiday events to make the section a bit more interesting, but not so long that one's attention is lost. Maybe more could be added the the DF part about how it ties into AQ, and less can be editted out that tells you about the game itself. I realize that DF has failed a couple of times to get its own page, but this is the AQ page, and I think information mentioned about DF should have to do with AQ and not solely DF. One thing that might be cleaned up is the elite armors that go with each class. This information does not seem relavent to the class except stating that there is a different armor that can be used with it. Citations also would be a big plus. Maybe links to the AQ Wiki or AQ Forum Encyclopedia for the small things like classes, NPC's, and events could help that out. Overall, there are many small things that could be improved on to make the page better as a whole. SnufStyle420 23:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I have got rid of some swearing about Artix I've found and corrected names such as 'Nightbane' to 'NightBane'. I also found some amusing mistakes such as 'Z-Tokens' being 'T-Zokens'. I'm going to try shorten the article but let it still say the same stuff. Emperor Jackal 17:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

You probably spotted a spot of vandalism. As for shortening the article, the NPC section could use a good chopping. Try helping out in that direction.````

[edit] Dragonfable, its own page

Evildoctorbluetooth 15:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

battleon/adventure quest has its own page, with artix entertainment as the producer, is it not correct to introduce dragonfable its own page, i imagine that it is the game the designers dreamed of making, but due to the limiting nature of AQ were not able to, i can see it becoming a popular game, therefore requiring its own page.

what do you think, do we give it one?? Evildoctorbluetooth 15:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Just so everyone know, DragonFable is being considered for deletion again. Anybody interested should add their view on that page. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 16:35, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes DF is large enough that it needs its own page now.. Lego3400: The Sage of Time 23:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry guys, but Dragonfable isn't really that big compared to other games. Maybe wait another year. Emperor_Jackal

How about now? We have 3 towns (Same as AQ) and had about 5 wars? Lego3400: The Sage of Time 21:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

For its repeated failures, making a DragonFable page has been protected, and you must contact an admin in order to recreate a page for it. With this in mind, I suggest that if you should want to remake the DF page on Wikipedia, then the best way would be to write up an interesting, informative, non-bias, and professional looking article to achieve the best results. An article like that would certainly convince an admin to allow it to be made. However, anything that is spammy, fancrufty, or overall uninformative would only increase an admin's trust in protecting a DF page from being made. SnufStyle420 22:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Writing an article that meets SnufStyle420's criteria is indeed the best course at this point. It is important that notability of the game be established as well as the previous deletions have largely been concerned with the relative non-notability of DragonFable in relation to other Games. It definitely seems to have a good page count on google and Alexa now so if written well and argued correctly can be quite effective. You will then either need to request an administrator unprotect the page or post a deletion review arguing from the presepective of new information, rather then any out of process problems. This tendency of late to indefinitely or infinitely protect pages after multiple recreations seems pretty antithetical to Wikipedia policy to me but it can be worked within. I had to do much this sort of thing a year ago with the article on Leeroy Jenkins. If you require assistance let me know — Falerin^{<talk>,<contrib>} 07:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spelling Correction

I have fixed all the spelling mistakes in the article that have been detected by Google's toolbar. However, the large number of fictional names contained within the article which where recognized as spelling mistakes prevented the mistakes near the bottom of the article from being detected due to the limit of misspellings that may be pointed out by this tool.

--Prometheus4 05:00, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Update: Also spellchecked several passages near the end of the document that where suspected to contain errors.

[edit] I'm adding in-game screenshots

This article is in serious need of a rewrite and cleanup.

As a new member of the Computer and Video Games WikiProject, improving this article will be my first task. Besides helping with the rewrite and cleanup, to ensure information is better organized, I will be adding in-game screenshots. For an example, see an article I wrote, Google Groups. This in-game screenshots will help readers see how the game is played, and will possibly verify some of the information in the article.

However, as a level 58 non-Guardian, I quit AdventureQuest several months ago due to the Guardian Only Login. AdventureQuest recently introduced a survey that, after taking, will allow a non-Guardian unrestricted login access for 24 hours.

Therefore, all I need is someone to give me the "green light". In addition, I would appreciate any advice you have for me, regarding the very major edit that I will make during a weekend (probably tomorrow), that will take several hours for me.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One 15:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm a Guardian of AQ, and can help you with any screenshots you need Computafreak 09:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I, too, am a Guardian (level 51). I can help with screenshots, if you need them. I am Girl 05:54, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Ditto! You probably know who I am too Lego3400: The Sage of Time 21:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I am Lv.60, i can help too. also, when did "half" the page get deleted?

[edit] Innapropriate use of Oppinion and potential Vandalism

There is a highly Innaproprriate statement at the beginning of the article. It directly criticises the game in an oppinion manner. to people who play the game and enjoy it, this is highly offensive. It is the result of a fight betwenn hones patrons of the game and fans of other online games, who notoriously enter forums dedicated for the use of said patrons and proceed to incite arguements by incessently insulting the game. i must request that this comment be removed promptly.

I do not see why you bothered to make this request when you promptly removed it yourself. On another note, this kind of vandalism is present on most game articles on Wikipedia. It is quite common unfortunately, as negative opinions are often expressed through Wikipedia. As you probably figured out allready, there is a better way for this kind of content to be removed other than asking someone else to do it for you. The only reasons I believe that is supported to bring up the topic of others helping edit the article would be that of mass, necessary edits to benefit the page, or uncertain changes that need discussion as to its use for the article. Since you concluded easrlier what kind of change was being called for, I believe it is obvious where this topic falls into. SnufStyle420 12:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

My primary reason for posting the request was in hopes that people would leave the edit be. last time i corrected a page, Namely the C++ page and the sample code in it, the change was deleted within a day, despite being entirely valid and fixing a peice of code that would not have opperated given the syntax that was presented. however, once i posted a request to maintain the change, it endured

[edit] Runescape is locked, why is this not

The Runescape article, now almost devoid of negtive critisism, is locked due to vandelism, while this artcle, which has half of it devoted to putting the game down and is constently being vandelised, is. Wikipedia isn't looking so non-biased from my angle..—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.192.188.142 (talk • contribs).

Quite frankly, this article does have a lot of vandalism, deletions, and complete wipe outs of the whole page at an almost weekly rate. I would be glad if the article was locked to avoid further acts of vandalism. However, semi-protection is regarded as a sort of last resort, in the case that vandalism is too hard to keep up with or blocked/banned users use multiple IP adresses or accounts to continue smearing a page to bypass the inability to edit pages. In my opinion, vandalism here is not to the point that it is difficult to keep up with. Blocking individual vandals and reverting edits is a much better option than restricting edits by anonymous individuals or newly signed up users. Should you truly wish that the page be semi-protected, you may request for it here. Now then, as for the page being not so non-bias, as far as I can tell, everything on this page is fact according to ingame content and information gathered from around the main site and forums. Should more of it come off as fact that shows a darker side, that only means that there are more facts shown here that seem darker than light. Should more facts be presented that put the article on a lighter note by noting lighter sides of the article, than perhaps this page might not come off as so negative to you. However, it remains that this issue is not in need of semi-protection in my opinion, for vandalism or otherwise. SnufStyle420 21:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Avoiding uneeded reverts

Acoording to Reens (AQ staff) Free users (adventuerers) now get 25 logins that bypass the server limit. Just wanted to note this so no one changes my change. Link to fourm post: http://forums2.battleon.com/f/tm.asp?m=6262106&mpage=6&key=&#6313085 Lego3400: The Sage of Time 01:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A little thing few people know about

Though many people don't know about it, there is a survey you can access, by trying to loggin so many times, that allows you, once completed, to access the game for the next 24 hours, regardless of servers being full. I will try to find the link so we can put it on the page for you guys. - Mystic Endevor

Thanks for the information. I am rewriting this article to clean up the fancruft. I have the link, and I will eventually add it at some stage of my rewrite. You may wish to create an account and contribute to Wikipedia; perhaps we could even collaborate on this article! --J.L.W.S. The Special One 13:41, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I also edited a few things, minor things, here and there. Nothing much, just a few corrections.

As for the reconstruction, I can always try to help(after I get my password), but I won't be very useful, having many other things to do. Is there a section on the Battleon Forums?

I see. When you get your password, log into your account and post on this talk page. You could also get another account (but remember the password this time). We will then discuss the reconstruction of this article. While there is no section on the BattleOn Forums, I will consider writing a section about the forums during my rewrite. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

When you write the section about the Batleon Foums, I can definitly help you with that, being a 'forumite' myself.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.121.153.51 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 20 September 2006(UTC).

Recruiting help from the Artix Entertainment forums might be helpful, but please remember to specify that we only want helpful and useful edits. Since one of your goals is to get rid of the fancruft on the page, it would be very disturbing to see this backfire and have more and more people come to try and help by adding in nonsense. As for the reconstruction so far, I am targeting on the NPC section next for clean up. Personally, I don't think it should even be there, but as long as there is "fancruft" and the people who make it, that section will probably stay up, so a little snipping will help trim it down to a size more suitable. SnufStyle420 19:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, i'm here to help a little. Tell me what I need to do. Just a thought: Maybe, instead of putting a section about the forums, we could make a page about the forums and link it to the battleon page so it doesn't slutter it up? What do you guys think?MysticEndevor

Welcome to Wikipedia, MysticEndevor! If you need any help while editing Wikipedia, please feel free to drop me a line or ask at the New contributors' help page. Although we welcome your contributions, as SnuffStyle420 pointed out, please keep your contributions free of fancruft, and learn to write in an encyclopediac manner. Please do not create an article about the forums, because they do not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines and such an article would probably be deleted. I think we should use this talk page to discuss how to improve the article and keep it cruft-free. SnuffStyle420, would you like to collaborate with me and MysticEndevor on this article? --J.L.W.S. The Special One 10:32, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for such a warm welcome. I'm glad to meet you both, J.L.W.S The Special One and SnuffStyle420. You guys can call me Mystic if you wish. Though not completly such what fancruft is, I have a general idea of what it is. As for the forums, I guess a section is all that's needed. A page, most likely, would be too much for such an article. And I assume that an encyclopediac manner would be non-biased informative writing? I think I can accomplish that. In the forums section we must remember to include each main category such as Lagends and Lore, Community, and Game Talk(Adventure Quest, DragonFable, ArchKnight, and Minigames). Though, We don't really need a full discussion on each, right? I think this is a perfect place to discuss editing the page. Maybe we could create something of a 'council' or something of the sort to keep track of who is helping and what they intend to do. *MysticEndevor*

I think a section about the forums would be adequate. Fancruft is information that would be useful only to fans, and not to those who are unfamiliar with AdventureQuest and simply wish to learn more about the game. Encyclopediac writing is difficult to define, and writing in an encyclopediac manner requires practice and a good command of English. I suggest you read some featured articles to get an idea of encyclopediac writing. Some tips for encyclopediac writing: stay fancruft-free, unbiased, formal and concise. I hope you enjoy being a Wikipedian and we can become Wikifriends! --J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:13, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

As do I! I hope we do well with this page! I also made a few edits.MysticEndevor 17:35, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

First things first, it's only one "f". Second things second, I don't see much rush for a section about the forums. The community is filled with a very biased group, whom most of which are in need of a dictionary or spell check system in an obvious manner. As noted in the thread Hildanknight made, the extreme majority of people who play are 13 to 17 years old. Not to discriminate against younger people, but this age average helps to explain the content of a vast portion there. In short, I fail to invision an interesting section written about the forums or the community. Third things third, I don't think there is much need for a link to the forums, as there is one right on the AQ homepage linked from here, until this section about the community is created. The external links should be more so for people to find out more about what they are reading, rather than just link spam like I've had to take out a few times. I don't even think that "LORE" link has barely enough credibility to stay there. Fourth things fourth, I believe the Z-Tokens section needs some attention as well. It crunches out numbers too much, and makes it seem like it was copied straight from the page you pay for them at. Maybe it could be turned into a general section about what people can pay for and what they get, leaving out all the specifics about what you get for how much money on different levels. I believe that is all for now. Contact me should you have any comments or suggestions for me. SnufStyle420 18:46, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what kind of biasedness you mean. Would you elaborate a little more, please? Still, everyone has some biased in them about something. However, wether or not they show it is another story. Most people on the forums do show high biased tendancies, but it should not be a complete relction on the forums itself. If you cannot invision a quality section about the forums, let me handle it and we'll see what I can come up with. If it is disagreeable, I will change it. If it is completely useless, I will discard it. And, you're right, the link was not needed, but if it's because there is a link on the AQ home page, I can show you three links on the same page that link to DragonFable. So should you take that off too? As for the Z-Tokens, I too think it should be general information and not needless details.--MysticEndevor 20:22, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

There, I polished up the Z-Token section a bit. What do you think? I don't think Zorbak needs that much information. He is, afterall, only a minor charactor used mainly for comic relief.--MysticEndevor 20:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Quite frankly, the majority of the people on the AQ forums are Guardians. This, unfortunately, fills most of the place up with bias posts against free players, posts asking and begging for bigger and better stuff no matter what was developed previously, and an overall sense that since they paid that they have every priority over free members in every category, not just matters relating to AQ. Now, not all Guardians are like this, which is a good thing, however more of those people should express their opinions for an open air group to be formed rather than a stereotype that keeps on repeating along each and every post count. As for the DF link, I would rather much remove it, but since there is still a section about DF on this page, it should probably be left. Once a section about the community or forums is made, then I believe it would be helpful to make a link to them. See above. And yes, I saw your edit. It did clean up the section quite a bit. However, I feel that having a section for Z-Tokens puts too much spotlight on it. It's just like making a section about Gold and what players can buy with it or what mosnters drop how much. Perhaps if it was just turned into a more general section about all in game benefits through payment, then it would be a more useful area. SnufStyle420 03:37, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, I have tried to make things more even on the forums and In game (though staff never listens to me) and if you want i'll try and do the same thing here. I have done thing rangeing from suggestions to Posts on the KoO boards. I feel that guardians like myself should be careing and help adventuers as much as possible. i mean we were them once right?Lego3400: The Sage of Time 16:11, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunatly, I won't be helping much, afterall, with this board or any other. I'm sorry, but I have to focus my attention to else things in life. I hope you all do well. MysticEndevor

I do beleive that a section should be put in about lore, because it is the entire concept that AQ revolves around. it is really the history of the AQ world and often decides on future events based on past events,also hinted at by the aq staff are answers to questions frequently brought about on the forums. as for a section on the forums, since it is not entirely about adventure quest, should be put somewhere else, mabey the artix entertainment article. If anyone decides to put in something on lore,(it could possibly be extensive,because of its nature)they should contact falerin, the main ... person on knowledge from/about lore. you could contact him on the forums,throug e-mail or PM. i hope this is taken into consideration.-Relyks

[edit] Why is...

X-Guardianship being put in controversy and criticism? I know it can simply be moved but something is not right here. 211.29.164.148 12:04, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

To put it simply, because it is a very controversial deal. If you read carefully, you will see that there is very little gained from that feature. Also, should you read the beginning paragraph in the section, it states that Guardians still have to pay for it, dispite being told they would have access to everything put in for players. It has been critisized many times by players for its lack of useful features and restriction on paying players without it. Players paying real money for very little and argueably useless features while adding in stuff that paying players cannot access even though they paid for access to everything sounds pretty controversial. You are right though, it could be simply moved, but it is displayed there for the purposes stated above. We are currently working on expanding the Z-Tokens section to cover everything gained from paying AQ, but until then, X-Guardianship will be only mentioned where it is at right now. SnufStyle420 16:22, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

But that's beside's the point. Re-listing the features is redundent and pointless. List the criticism, not the same thing stated a page-view above about the upgrade. --24.239.66.162 04:16, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm currently re-writing the article, and I will eventually add a section about Guardianship. The Guardianship section will have sections about X-Guardianship and Z-Tokens, while information about the controversy surrounding them will remain in the Criticism section. I encourage you to sign up for Wikipedia and help me improve the article (but please don't add more fancruft!). --J.L.W.S. The Special One 09:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I edited some grammer at the end of the article. I did not realize there was so much controversy around this article. I'm still trying to get used to Wiki but I'm glad I was able to find the small error. --Trogam 06:21, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History of AdventureQuest

AdventureQuest has a fairly rich story and history, but I don't see it anywhere on Wikipedia. Remedy? --68.79.164.254 02:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)