This article was nominated for deletion on October 4, 2007. The result of the discussion was Snowball Keep. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
I have reviewed this article and found it to be:
I propose nominating this article for deletion to obtain peer review.
In my view the removal of the templates without discussion was an attempt to start an edit war, into which I will not be drawn.
If you diagree with my viewpoint, I am open to discussion. -- Gavin Collins 17:22, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
A general rule of thumb to follow if unsure: if the content only has value to people actually playing the game, it is unsuitable. Keep in mind that RPG articles should be readable and interesting to non-gamers; remember the bigger picture. The key point to remember: Wikipedia is not a game guide. I note that sitting under this category is an array of non-notable articles:
Would it not be better to merge all of these to make a single, well written and referenced article? -- Gavin Collins 02:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello Greyhawk fans. I have spent the better part of my day working on the
Living Greyhawk Gazetteer article. It occurs to me that it might better if it was merged into the
World of Greyhawk Fantasy Game Setting.
I figure while I am at it I will also merge in
Greyhawk Adventures,
From the Ashes (Dungeons & Dragons) and
Greyhawk: The Adventure Begins articles into the
World of Greyhawk Fantasy Game Setting as well.
There is a method to my madness here.
By themselves these articles are lacking in sources that point to their notability, but together they present a much stronger article. Plus each product is in a sense an update of the product before it. So there is the continuity in one article. There is also precedent for this with the Player’s Handbook, all editions are in one article.
Web Warlock (
talk) 19:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I've found the three pages worth of reviews for the original folio edition, and want to expand on what the article currently includes. Feel free to trim it back a bit, but it seems the best way to expand D&D product articles is to include more independent commentary such as reviews. For reference, the column included two product reviews, and an "official" response by Lawrence Schick. 108.69.80.49 ( talk) 02:40, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on October 4, 2007. The result of the discussion was Snowball Keep. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
I have reviewed this article and found it to be:
I propose nominating this article for deletion to obtain peer review.
In my view the removal of the templates without discussion was an attempt to start an edit war, into which I will not be drawn.
If you diagree with my viewpoint, I am open to discussion. -- Gavin Collins 17:22, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
A general rule of thumb to follow if unsure: if the content only has value to people actually playing the game, it is unsuitable. Keep in mind that RPG articles should be readable and interesting to non-gamers; remember the bigger picture. The key point to remember: Wikipedia is not a game guide. I note that sitting under this category is an array of non-notable articles:
Would it not be better to merge all of these to make a single, well written and referenced article? -- Gavin Collins 02:34, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello Greyhawk fans. I have spent the better part of my day working on the
Living Greyhawk Gazetteer article. It occurs to me that it might better if it was merged into the
World of Greyhawk Fantasy Game Setting.
I figure while I am at it I will also merge in
Greyhawk Adventures,
From the Ashes (Dungeons & Dragons) and
Greyhawk: The Adventure Begins articles into the
World of Greyhawk Fantasy Game Setting as well.
There is a method to my madness here.
By themselves these articles are lacking in sources that point to their notability, but together they present a much stronger article. Plus each product is in a sense an update of the product before it. So there is the continuity in one article. There is also precedent for this with the Player’s Handbook, all editions are in one article.
Web Warlock (
talk) 19:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I've found the three pages worth of reviews for the original folio edition, and want to expand on what the article currently includes. Feel free to trim it back a bit, but it seems the best way to expand D&D product articles is to include more independent commentary such as reviews. For reference, the column included two product reviews, and an "official" response by Lawrence Schick. 108.69.80.49 ( talk) 02:40, 14 March 2011 (UTC)