![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from War of the Ring (board game) was copied or moved into War of the Ring (SPI game) with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Image:Warofthering.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 03:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Is there any real reason why the SPI game is here? The only points of contact between them is the title/license. Other than that, they're very different games, and I don't think the new one borrowed anything from the SPI one.
It also seems ironic that the only reference on the page is for a game that isn't the main subject of the article. T_T -- Rindis ( talk) 21:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
I've been working on a sub page that concerns the SPI version of the game should I upload it? Or should I put it on a seperate article?-- Kangaroo2 ( talk) 22:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
The article for this excellent game has only rules and criticism. I believe the game has been well-received. Perhaps we can include some "critical reception" references to indicate this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Austinmohr ( talk • contribs) 21:43, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Shouldn't this focus on all editions? Currently, the focus on 'new edition' is a bit weird, with a section about 'previous edition'. Also, is this really a second edition, or a new game? Sources are somewhat confused, not sure if we need a slit between FFG and SPI versions or not. @ Guinness323 and BOZ:. FYI, there was a pl edition (both for old and new version), I've added refs to pl wiki article (for the reviews of the old version), but all we have are two and a half low reliability reviews... so notability is still an issue here, and pl sources won't help much. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:47, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from War of the Ring (board game) was copied or moved into War of the Ring (SPI game) with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Image:Warofthering.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 03:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Is there any real reason why the SPI game is here? The only points of contact between them is the title/license. Other than that, they're very different games, and I don't think the new one borrowed anything from the SPI one.
It also seems ironic that the only reference on the page is for a game that isn't the main subject of the article. T_T -- Rindis ( talk) 21:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
I've been working on a sub page that concerns the SPI version of the game should I upload it? Or should I put it on a seperate article?-- Kangaroo2 ( talk) 22:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
The article for this excellent game has only rules and criticism. I believe the game has been well-received. Perhaps we can include some "critical reception" references to indicate this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Austinmohr ( talk • contribs) 21:43, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Shouldn't this focus on all editions? Currently, the focus on 'new edition' is a bit weird, with a section about 'previous edition'. Also, is this really a second edition, or a new game? Sources are somewhat confused, not sure if we need a slit between FFG and SPI versions or not. @ Guinness323 and BOZ:. FYI, there was a pl edition (both for old and new version), I've added refs to pl wiki article (for the reviews of the old version), but all we have are two and a half low reliability reviews... so notability is still an issue here, and pl sources won't help much. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:47, 25 June 2022 (UTC)