Forum:Some article style clarification

Okay so recently I've noticed some inconsistencies between articles that I'd like to iron out here. This is mainly to stop potential edit warring and to make articles have a more consistent style altogether. I'm going to number each point to make it easier to refer to them when deliberating.

1:"Rare" vs "Very rare" clarification

I vaguely remember somewhere that drop rates above 1/512 are considered "Very rare" (may be RS3 Wiki). Recently I changed the drop rate word for Torstol seed for aberrant spectres and their superior variant to Very rare since it was confirmed 1/750, but someone changed it back. Instead of reverting it back, it brings the thought - is this considered Rare or Very rare? I think we should make it clear-cut as to what is considered Very rare and then amend the style guide accordingly.

2: Adding a drop rate - raritynotes or namenotes?

As I was adding the drop rate for mysterious emblem to Wilderness monsters such as Fire giants a few days ago, I noticed some articles already had a drop rate added for looting bag but used the  parameter instead of. As far as I'm aware there isn't a stated one to always use, could we have deliberation on what would be best? Like drop rate, an amendment to the style guide would be the preferable option to clarify things.

3: Further drop rate hierarchy

By this I don't mean the already adopted method of order of rarity from Common to Very rare, this is fine. What I mean by this is for example if a drop is confirmed more common than others (a good example would be mithril dragon chewed bones vs ancient page). As you can see chewed bones are 1/42 and ancient page 1/64, where the more common item is above the less common one. Should this be adopted everywhere if the exact drop rate is confirmed?

Discussion
1 Support for drop rates above 1/512 being considered Very rare. 2 Support for using raritynotes instead of namenotes. This is because the drop rate of an item would be more suited at the rarity section, it makes sense rather than having it at the name section. 3 Support for having specific drop rates in order from common to rare. This is consistent with items without specific drop rates and looks nicer overall IMO. — KnazO 21:05, June 29, 2017 (UTC)