User talk:BOZ

Welcome!

Hello, BOZ, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Kukini 06:34, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

D&D articles

I noticed you've been quite busy creating D&D articles--your help is appreciated. You may be interesting in joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Role-playing games Robbstrd 20:43, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey dude, good to see someone working on some D&D articles, so thanks for your help. If you dont mind me saying though, its not necessary to have individual articles (especially stubs) for anything and everything relating to D&D. For example, its better to have one article with many sections (as long as they arent too big) than many stub-like articles with little content.

Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure is one example, we could write stubs for every module out there, but that would be pointless unless we actually have something interesting to say about them all. Just something to think about, I would hate to put you off doing stuff. Happy editing.

-- Lewis 15:34, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I plan on going back and adding to each of those in time (soon, in fact). Right now I'm just adding them, to give others a chance to add info first, which in some cases they have been. BOZ

Cool thats great to hear, sorry for me jumping me gun, but you know what some people are like. Ill attempt to add to these too. Good luck dude. -- Lewis 15:55, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome. Nice to see there are other users working on the D&D articles, I find most of them (especially the monster-related ones) rather rushed. :| Giganthrax "Do you hear me?" 14:23, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This'll be a very stupid question. How do I create a brand new page? I'm unable to find the option to do this on wikipedia. =p Giganthrax —Preceding comment was added at 14:28, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I found out. Sorry for the spam. -Giga —Preceding unsigned comment added by Giganthrax (talk • contribs) 14:30, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greyhawk article targeted for deletion

Baklunish Basin has been proposed for deletion. If possible, please comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baklunish Basin. Thanks. --Robbstrd 17:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

D&D Lich Article

I just had an opportunity to read it, and noticed you did a great job writing AND using sources. Thanks! Beatdown 18:25, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aspis, Nilbog, etc

Since I don't have any of my books at hand, I'm really unable to improve this article. If you could, that'd be great. I'm not sure if it's notable--dunno if it's even made it to 3.0 or 3.5. As for Thoul & Nilbog, I'm not really concerned, as neither of them have made it into 3.0+ to my knowledge (or Greyhawk). The tag's already been removed from the Draeden article.--Robbstrd 21:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Power Pack parents

I just noticed your creation of these two articles. While your effort is appreciated, I'm not sure that either character is prominent enough to justify their own page. There doesn't seem to be a lot of information available that couldn't be presented in the Power Pack article. I almost redirected them but wanted to find out if you had plans/ideas to expand them before doing so. CovenantD 23:26, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

D&D IM

Do you IM? I'm at peregrinefisher@hotmail.com. I say this because you, User:Robbstrd and I seem to be the main D&D editors. It might be good to coordinate. - 08:24, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: MU Sidebar

That was more or less my reason behind putting it together: Give a place where the multiversal characters could have the MU multiverse scheme explained without the jargon showing up in the lead.

That said, I'm hoping it doesn't wind up on "Mainline" Marvel character/team articles where no alternate universe characters or teams are discussed.

- J Greb 07:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re. Spambot

Yep, after reviewing the edits, I believe that it's not a bot alright. Still, the entire spree of edits seems to be damaging many articles as those additions apparently lack context and substance. An editing pattern such as that can often alert recent changes patrollers and be halted with an emergency block until an admin investigates the situation, which I'm doing now. Regards, Húsönd 15:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, please don't continue with these edits which prompted the block. I'm still trying to understand this "The Initiative" flood. Perhaps you could explain it to me. Thank you. Regards, Húsönd 15:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not appropriate. It lacks connection with the rest of the article. Furthermore, I recommend reading WP:CRYSTAL as a reference on also why is this not appropriate. Not to worry though, I've been rollbacking the damage. Keep up the good work but in the future please avoid editing articles in a way that resembles spam. Thank you. Regards, Húsönd 15:24, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

D&D wiki project consensus

A call to all members of the D&D wiki project. We are currently having a major dispute that needs to be settled by all members of the D&D wiki project. The dispute is as follows. 1. Should we put disambiguation tags on D&D articles preemptively or should we wait until there is an article conflict with some other Wikipedia article. Vote on preemptive or wait.

2. What should we label these tags? Example "child's play (module)", or "child's play (adventure)" and at this point we are taking all suggestions.

email me at Dm2ortiz@aol.com or post on the D&D wiki project talk page

User talk:The real melf

He's been making those edits for some time, now. I left a message for "Luke" at User talk:The real melf. Hopefully, he'll catch on.--Robbstrd 07:17, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links

Normally, you'd make a link like so, but that's not really the point. External links are for websites which provide a unique resource beyond what the article could (key word) provide were it brought up to code. Other Wikis generally don't fit this description. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 06:05, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Succubus (Dungeons & Dragons)

Succubus (Dungeons & Dragons), an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Succubus (Dungeons & Dragons) satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Succubus (Dungeons & Dragons) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Succubus (Dungeons & Dragons) during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Eyrian 17:41, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Basilisk (Dungeons & Dragons)

Basilisk (Dungeons & Dragons), an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Basilisk (Dungeons & Dragons) satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Basilisk (Dungeons & Dragons) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Basilisk (Dungeons & Dragons) during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Eyrian 17:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Greyhawk wiki

You may be interested in this: Greyhawk wiki.--Robbstrd 23:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's mainly just for GH, but given that there's a lot of crossover, it'd probably be okay to transfer some monster articles, such as I did with Death knight. However, since non-GH content would be marginalized or not listed at all, you may want to look at something else, such as this wiki. Either way, I welcome your help.--Robbstrd 02:10, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some quick thoughts

You seem to be powering through the minor Marvel characters and filling in the gaps but could I make a couple of suggestions:

When you create an entry drop a note into the "recent creations" section of the Comics Project Notice Board. I've been trying to keep up with your pace but am starting to lag behind ;) Having them posted there can be very handy as it lets other editors know about them and they can cast a quick eye over them and
Watch out for over-ambiguating, e.g. you created Hidden Races (Marvel Comics) but there is no Hidden Races and I noticed you moved Iron Cross (comics) to Iron Cross (Marvel Comics) but general principles are to go for the least disambiguated naming. Obviously, there might other comics/characters of the same name but that isn't clear from the above (which are only a couple of recent examples) so if there are then think about dropping a note in somewhere or even sketching out a disambiguation page as I just did here: Hecate (comics).
If you make non-ambiguous pages then check back for a disambiguation page to add a link to (as it'll help people find it if they are struggling), for example I made this one Hildegarde (Marvel Comics).

Hope that helps. If you need a hand starting disambiguation pages then drop me a line - I've done more than I can count. ;)

Keep up the good work. (Emperor 15:57, 10 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

OK cool. I had assumed that might be the reason but it ends up with odd things happening like the DC Comics team now redirects to the Marvel character or something like that. As I say I have no objections to creating disambiguation pages (as I'll do with Iron Cross now you have pointed it out to me) so if you spot anything like that drop me a note and I'll fix it up. (Emperor 17:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Cool. Well as I say if you want a hand (after all you are doing a lot work - I can help dot the is and cross the ts if need be) just drop me a note. (Emperor 17:56, 10 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Blimey - I should be careful what I ask for ;) That's great stuff - well spotted. This does seem to be a big deal in comics and I suppose if you are working through the Marvel characters alphabetically you are going to spot a lot of them. Anyway plenty to be going on with there (and it looks like they all need sorting out to help people find the right person) and I'll get cracking on it later. Thanks for that. (Emperor 12:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

That's great - thanks for all the hard work. I am working through the list (but ran into a touch of "disambiguating fatigue" yesterday ;) ). Basically what I've been doing is creating disambiguation pages when the potential page is either empty or a redirect. In cases like Apollo (comics) I've just disambiguated (although if other characters of the same name started cropping up then a move might be in order). Scarecrow (comics) is tricky as it is the major character and moving it would lead to a lot of broken links so I'd like to avoid that if possible - I'll return to this one in the future. Others (like Agent (comics) will need moving but I'll get around to that later after I've fixed up the ones that are simplest to address. It'll take a few sweeps through the list to get everything fixed up but when finished it should mean everything is running a lot more smoothly (as this is a big deal for comics where the Big Two, and others, seem to have had similarly named characters ;) ). (Emperor 18:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi, there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot 16:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for backtracking and taking care of the little edits such as spelling for me. When I do rewrites of questionable articles - such as Korvac - I often just keep writing and don't get back to doing the minor touches straight away. It is appreciated.

Asgardian 00:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good Point

I agree completely. You may not be aware that I have actually "redone" many of the Asgardian characters and monsters, including Balder the Brave; Odin; Mangog; World Serpent; Destroyer; Fafnir; Perrikus; Dark Gods; Surtur and Ymir. Yep, will get there, but for every article I help improve, I see five more that need work! If Wikipedia want to pay me six figures to edit full-time, I'll get there that much faster! Once again, thanks for the assists.

Asgardian 08:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eachthighern

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Eachthighern, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Gavin Collins 11:04, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Emmantiensien

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Emmantiensien, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Gavin Collins 11:07, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Emmantiensien

An article that you have been involved in editing, Emmantiensien, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emmantiensien. Thank you. Gavin Collins 18:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Koriel

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Koriel, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Gavin Collins 11:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kuraulyek

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Kuraulyek, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Gavin Collins 11:24, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kanchelsis

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Kanchelsis, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Gavin Collins 11:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Karontor

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Karontor, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Gavin Collins 11:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the heads up, man. I've got a guy at the Greyhawk wiki who is really good at copying stuff over, so I think it'll be okay for now.--Robbstrd —Preceding comment was added at 20:29, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Busy

I'm not 100% sure if you are saying I've been busy recently or if you were saying you have been, but I've not been doing too much on that front other than tidy up after other people (there have been quite a few broken links to chase down and fix - which reminds me there was one on my mental to-do list but it has fallen afoul of my forgetting what it was ;) ). I still haven't finished going through your list yet. (Emperor 01:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for the clarification - I am often easily confused ;) Good work - I'll run my eye over them over the next few days. The two big factors are WP:MOSDAB and making sure the incoming links are re-routed to the correct page (which can be the big job of doing such things). Thanks again. (Emperor 15:46, 25 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for the list. I'll focus on the second one as it does look like quite a few of those are over-ambiguated for no good reason and so I'll do some more digging and set the ball in motion. You can see on some how it came about - Umar (comics) was a redirect to another page so someone clearly made the other page and then the redirect was changed later. Just the way things grow and develop so it is worth flagging these for attention. (Emperor 00:11, 26 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Marvel Comics work group

I thought I'd drop you a line about the Marvel Comics work group as you've been doing sterling work in that area and thought you'd be interested and also be able to make valuable contributions. (Emperor 03:16, 29 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

No problem - you've probably produced more Marvel-based articles than anyone recently and I know you've been through nearly every character entry so you have a good overview of the field. Just the kind of thing the work group needs. (Emperor 15:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I might want to but doesn't your tagging create it already? (Emperor 01:21, 1 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I see - well when you create the red links let me know and I'll try and find what it should be the child of (or find someone who does - Steve Block has been on point on this so should know what is needed). (Emperor 01:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Seems like a minor bug - see Category:Unassessed-Class comics articles by work group. See the categories were sketched out but not as "articles" - I've sketched out the Marvel one but will speak to Steve about which is preferred and it should be quickly fixed. Thanks for flagging the issue. (Emperor 01:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Mouqol

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Mouqol, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 15:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maanzecorian

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Maanzecorian, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 15:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nathair Sgiathach

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Nathair Sgiathach, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 07:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nomog-Geaya

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Nomog-Geaya, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 08:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Brandobaris

Brandobaris, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Brandobaris satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brandobaris and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Brandobaris during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Pilotbob 20:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Llerg

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Llerg, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 13:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alhamazad the Wise

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Alhamazad the Wise, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 13:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Codex of the Infinite Planes

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Codex of the Infinite Planes, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 13:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ralishaz

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Ralishaz, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 15:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Theodain Eriason

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Theodain Eriason, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 15:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trithereon

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Trithereon, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 15:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xan Yae

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Xan Yae, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 15:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wastri

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Wastri, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 15:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ulaa

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Ulaa, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 15:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xerbo

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Xerbo, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. Gavin Collins 15:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merges

If you're going to merge articles, please do so, but don't replace an article with a redirect without merging its content. In a number of cases, for example, you have merged articles into List of Dungeons & Dragons deities without merging their sources as footnotes into the appropriate listing in the target article. I'm reverting those that I find, but please feel free to merge these articles with their content (especially sources). -Harmil 22:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sentry

Which vol of What If is this? It can't be I or II (unless a back-up story). Can you help so it can be sourced?

Asgardian 11:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Got it thanks. I appreciate these little assists.

Asgardian 06:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Rod of Seven Parts

An article that you have been involved in editing, Rod of Seven Parts, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rod of Seven Parts. Thank you. Gavin Collins (talk) 20:15, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whizzer (Robert Frank)

See the Whizzer talk page. I think Tenebrae just gave the perfect starting point, so please comment on that talk page and we'll proceed from there. BOZ (talk) 23:42, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, responded there. - jc37 11:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whizzer (Robert Frank)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Whizzer (Robert Frank), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Whizzer. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Norebo

Norebo, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Norebo satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norebo and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Norebo during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Pilotbob 21:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Phyton

Phyton, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Phyton satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phyton and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Phyton during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Pilotbob 02:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Daragor

I have nominated Daragor, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daragor. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. VivioFateFan ^{(Talk, Sandbox)} 03:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Beltar

I have nominated Beltar, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beltar. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Pilotbob (talk) 06:01, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Rod of Seven Parts

I have nominated Rod of Seven Parts, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rod of Seven Parts (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Pilotbob (talk) 06:09, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

closing

I have commented on FT2's talk page, but I think the time to follow up on this is after Jan 2. when more people will be around. DGG (talk) 16:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Goodwin Pierce

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Alexander Goodwin Pierce, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Alexander Goodwin Pierce. RMHED (talk) 01:12, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing RPG notability/AfD situation

Hi, BOZ. Was wondering if you wouldn't mind reading my take on this situation around here of late, with all the AfD stuff going on in the RPG sector. My user page article is here. Thanks in advance. Compsword01 (talk) 21:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ye Art Cordially Invited to the Annex

Hello, My good Fellow, listen and I shalt telleth Ye a Tale of a Wiki that well comes All Manner of Articles relating to Fiction. What is This wonderful Place of Fantasy, You ask? It is the Annex, Haven to All fiction-related Refugee Articles from Wikipedia.

Before nominating or proposing a fiction-related Article for Deletion, It is My sincerest Hope that Ye import It to the Annex. Why do This, You wonder? Individuals have dedicated an enormous Amount of Time to writing These Articles, and ’twould be a Pity for the Information to Vanish unto the Oblivion where only Administrators could see Them.

Here is a Step-by-Step Process of how to Bringeth Articles into the Annex:

Ye shall need at least three Browser Tabs or Windows open. For the first Tab or Window, go to Special:Export. For the second, go here. (If Ye have not an Account at Wikia, then create One.) Do whatever Ye want for the third.
Next, open the Program known as Notepad. If Ye haveth It not, then open WordPad. Go to “Save as,” and for “Encoding,” select either “Unicode” or “UTF-8.” For “Save as type,” select “All Files.” For “File name,” input “export.xml” and save It. Leave the Window open.
Next, go to the Special:Export Window at Wikipedia, and un-check the two small Boxes near the “Export” Button. Input the Name of the Wikipedia Article which Ye wish to import to the Annex into the large Field, and click “Export.”
Right-click on the Page full of Code which appears, and clicketh on “View Source” or “View Page Source” or any Option with similar Wording. A new Notepad Window called “index[1]” or Something similar should appear. Press Ctrl+A to highlight All the Text then Ctrl+C to copy It. Close yon “index[1]” Window, and go to the Notepad “export.xml” Window. Press Ctrl+V to pasteth the Text There, and then save It by pressing Ctrl+S.
Now go to the Special:Import Window over at the Annex. Clicketh on “Browse…” and select the “export.xml” File. At last, click on “Upload file,” and Thou art done, My Friend! However, if It says 100 Revisions be imported, Ye be not quite finished just yet. Go back to Wikipedia’s Special:Export, and leave only the “Include only the current revision, not the full history” Box checked. Export That, copy the Page Source, close the “index[1]” Window, and go to the “export.xml” Window. Press Ctrl+A to highlight the Code all ready There, press “backspace” to erase It, and press Ctrl+V to pasteth the new Code There. Press Ctrl+S to save It, then upload once more to the Annex. Paste {{Wikipedia|{{PAGENAME}}}} at the Bottom of the imported Article at the Annex, and Ye art now finally done! Keepeth the “export.xml” File for future Use.

Thank Ye for using the Annex, My Friend — the Annex Hath Spoken 01:21, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agamemnon (comics)

It was brought to my attention that Agamemnon (Pantheon) was created. This should be at Agamemnon (comics) in line with naming conventions, so I've moved it and merged teh page histories. In the past I'd redirected Agamemnon (comics) to Pantheon (Marvel Comics), in line with WP:WAF, WP:PLOT and WP:FICT, and the new article mirrors the old one somewhat. What do you think is the best course of action here, let the article stand or reinstate the redirect? I've left the article as an article for the minute, although I feel a merge and redirect is best practise based on guidance and policy. Maybe it could be handled better in the future, perhaps merge all members to one page. That would be the eventual goal, I'm not in a major rush to do it in a hurry. Hiding T 09:27, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey BOZ, thanks for responding. I just wanted to say that I'm not trying to pick on you. I just happened to be looking at the Comics redirect category and spotted Agamemnon there. I was thinking, "Wait a minute, I know we have an article about this same character." Since Hiding had redirected the original article, I thought I ought to bring it to his attention. Cheers, GentlemanGhost (talk) 14:23, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it wasn't my intention to accuse anyone, I just wanted to work out the best way forwards. The consensus seems to be that no-one is in any hurry to merge, so I reckon we can leave the article alone for now and see what happens. Would everyone agree? Hiding T 16:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. :) BOZ (talk) 17:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Do you want rollback? Per Wikipedia:Requests for rollback if you want it, I can give it to you. If you already have it, ignore me. Hiding T 12:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure - is this a new thing? Is it just a tool for easier reverting? (Like, such when someone will make two or three vandalising edits, and another editor will revert only the most recent one because he missed the previous ones; is this a tool to avoid that?) If that's what it is, I could see it being useful, although I may not use it all that often. If I'm not catching what it's all about, please correct me. :) BOZ (talk) 13:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Rollback feature. I've given it to you anyway, using my own judgement I don't think you will abuse it. Remember, only use it to revert instances of actual, indisputable vandalism. Any other edit should be reverted by hand, the old way. Hiding T 19:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. If you check my most recent edits, you'll see that I've already discovered how easy it is to abuse. ;) One-click revert - do not use by mistake! If I find myself getting into trouble clicking it by mistake too often, I may ask for it to be removed, but we'll see how it goes for now. I've noticed that it only applies to the most recent edits, unlike the undo function. I could see it being most useful when a vandal comes on and makes 2 or 3 edits, allowing you to get a clean revert. BOZ (talk) 20:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Creator Races

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Creator Races, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Creator Races. Gavin Collins (talk) 14:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Freedom's Five

An editor has nominated Freedom's Five, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Freedom's Five and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

an anon for you to talk with

or to look at the edits of. User:204.153.84.10 is adding cats and stubs to stuff I think you redirected. I undid some and left him a note, but have to go. Thought I'd pass this along. Cheers, Jack Merridew 15:53, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See {{ER to list entry}} for an example of the sort of categorizing template I was referring to. Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom's Five

Now that I've officially withdrawn my nomination, I'm going to wait for the debate to be officially closed before I redirct the article. Stephen Day (talk) 04:46, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Axe of the Dwarvish Lords

I have nominated Axe of the Dwarvish Lords, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Axe of the Dwarvish Lords. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Jfire (talk) 07:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI. My comment on the AfD page for the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords was not directed at you at all, but rather everyone else. Web Warlock (talk) 18:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Rudd (Greyhawk)

I have nominated Rudd (Greyhawk), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rudd (Greyhawk). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Jfire (talk) 23:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bucky

Hi, BOZ. An edit war is brewing at Bucky, a page on which you've edited, so I'm posting a neutral notice that you may want to comment at Talk:Bucky. See you 'round the Comics Project. --Tenebrae (talk) 00:52, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images help

Sorry that I had to leave. It's not that I don't want to help, it's just that I don't have time to help right now. So I felt it only fair to remove my name so I didn't give false hope that I would be able to continue to help. I still have the page saved so I can visit and help if the time ever arises. Good luck and I'm sure I'll see you around the edit histories on occassion! -Freak104 (talk) 05:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Save an article!

Hey, some guys seem to have something against new articles based on comic book characters. I know you're a good/respectable guy, so could you go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mister Negative to post something to help keep the article alive? There's no reason it should be deleted; there are a lot of comic book articles significantly shorter than his, and with less comic book appearances. -Freak104 (talk) 19:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the friendly advice!! -Freak104 (talk) 22:09, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Axe of the Dwarvish Lords

		The Barnstar of Recovery
		Awarded for best theatrical performance in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Axe of the Dwarvish Lords, an article you created. Gavin Collins (talk) 16:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nathair Sgiathach

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Nathair Sgiathach, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Nathair Sgiathach.

An anon brought this back from your redirect; I would be fine with re-redirecting. Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aranea (Dungeons & Dragons)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Aranea (Dungeons & Dragons), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Aranea (Dungeons & Dragons). Deb (talk) 18:14, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No Problem

There's a spate of B-graders that have only had 2-3 appearances that I plan to work through now, and I started with Arsenal. They only take me about 45 minutes apiece to knock over. I'll do a few lacking images first. Need a break from the big ones - getting Scarlet Witch in order was exhausting, and its' opened doors on work I need to go back and do on Quicksilver and Vision...but not yet!

Regards

Asgardian (talk) 03:16, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the list! Yup...knew about some of these but almost all are just "one panel" cameos and hail that terrible period in comics called the 90's. :(

Asgardian (talk) 03:06, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, well done. Good recovery on the Plunderer. The poster who recommended the article for deletion obviously doesn't know their comics! By the by, I'll do the Enforcer for you soon - he's from Water Wizard's era so no biggie. Just nailed Terraxia so there's another one down...

Asgardian (talk) 07:10, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aoskar

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Aoskar, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Aoskar. Deb (talk) 22:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GHWiki

Yeah, I know. It's currently beyond my control--I'll try to contact Gary Holian & see what he can do.--Robbstrd (talk) 23:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Plunderer

I have nominated Plunderer, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plunderer. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 15:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Neraph

An article that you have been involved in editing, Neraph, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neraph. Thank you. Gavin Collins (talk) 18:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Melter

Yup. Looks like we have a sook on our hands. I gave him a gentle pointer, but he obviously didn't like it. No matter - the article's going nowhere. We will persist.

Asgardian (talk) 01:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More?

OK...I see where this is going. Well, while it won't work I think it is fairly petty. Perhaps this is all the same poster with an axe to grind? I will watch with great interest.

Asgardian (talk) 20:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Two wins. A quick peek ay Edit Histories, however, reveals sour grapes in the form of action on other pages. No matter. We'll get there. After helping to put out that fire and stave off a bot, I can get back to some more construtive editing!

Asgardian (talk) 10:07, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hulk

Yeah I see it now - it is all your fault ;)

It should be fine - the key is persistence. If we can keep the talk page focused on improving the article I'm confident we can renominate (if it gets delisted) and the admin noticeboard can soak up the disagreements. My main worry is that a random passing admin blocks (as there is enough material to justify one) which wouldn't be a proper reflection of the underlying conflicts (more his reaction to them) and his input will be important in improving things.

It needed intervention and as I hadn't edited the entry it made sense. The slow and steady approach will work in the end but is clear we'll have no overnight miracles.

I have asked for more input as it shouldn't be too difficult to get things back on track and we can get a consensus together on the best approach which should avoid the big editing problems (which should have been taken to the talk page when it was clear there was a problem). (Emperor (talk) 02:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Thessalmonster

Just nominated one of yours- see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thessalmonster. J Milburn (talk) 10:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Got another- see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ki-rin (Dungeons & Dragons). J Milburn (talk) 21:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Socks

Hi. I saw your comment on Gavin's page. While I think I'm right in these cases, I don't have proof. In the case of Dalamori, I find it quite odd that the account would appear after 23 months of not editing and start a line of argument about a very current issue; his argument seems very much like a field test of the issue under discussion here. Note that he has not gotten back to me when I raised this concern with him on my talk page (a thread he started). As to the Kiwi, I see a very similar editing pattern to a known sockmaster. Time will tell, in both cases.

Your point about AGF is noted and I do feel that I should be a bit less quick to make an explicit comment. Thanks for the reality check. FYI, I don't have a nytimes login and generally avoid sites that seek to track users that way. Also, I had no idea that Gary Gygax was ill or had died when I made the Spring Cleaning comments. I won't refer to it again. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - it is easy enough to be less than civil on here, or anywhere on the internet, as I myself can attest to. :) BOZ (talk) 12:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Kiwi bowling pin appears about to fall; see [1]. Cheers, Jack Merridew 09:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you feel a sense of validation? :) Now, I'll really be floored if you're right about Dalamori, since as fas as I know that one came out of left field. BOZ (talk) 12:17, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think vindication is the right way to look at it. I comment to the effect that I have a concern because of what I've seen and what I saw in that case was a new account, going right after one of the same articles the others had. He wanted a like-resume tag gone. This guy might be Martin Banwell, or a student of his, who didn't like his teacher. Overall, it's about bad edits; this guy messes with articles and treats this all as a game.

Dalamori, is a different case; he shows up arguing for a loophole and showing an awful lot of knowledge of current debates. The 23 months; seems like someone has a whole lot of sock accounts queued up. Again, I don't make such sock comments lightly. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:23, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose time will tell, indeed. I don't know anything about this user (as you say, he/she has been inactive for awhile), certainly not enough to say whether this user has or has not gone by other names. This in and of itself is not breaking a rule, only if one or more of the "shared" accounts has already been blocked for sockpuppetry - using one or more accounts abusively. I've seen people change accounts/identities to avoid harassment and such - perhaps that is the case here? Or maybe this person abandoned the account for some time and just edited as an IP and then decided to come back to an actual account? Or forgot the password and then found the piece of paper with it written on it? Or got really busy with real life, but kept tabs on what's been going on with wikipedia? I don't know though, but you can always ask the source. BOZ (talk) 12:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did, although it was on my talk page in response to a post by him (or, her, but with D&D interest?). Time will tell. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I find it quite ironic that a person who was so concerned with rooting out sockpuppets turned out himself to be a sockpuppet. BOZ (talk) 21:00, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Ki-rin (Dungeons & Dragons)

An editor has nominated Ki-rin (Dungeons & Dragons), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ki-rin (Dungeons & Dragons) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:More deletions

Oh, alright. I thought the consensus was pretty much that the deletions were the best bet? I was under the impression that we were gonna continue with the deletions, then write the lists? J Milburn (talk) 22:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me for butting in, J, but just whose consensus are you talking about? You're not planning to work as a team to delete articles, I hope? Especially when it's wikipedia policy that merging is a preferred alternative to deletion when possible. DGG (talk) 02:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was kind of going that way for awhile, but we've been discussing alternatives lately. At least, that's what I thought was happening before I saw more new deletion discussions today... BOZ (talk) 02:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: Adminsip (J Greb)

Thanks... - J Greb (talk) 23:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tucker's kobolds

You don't appear to be aware of this discussion;

WP:AN#A case of merge and delete and the GFDL

Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed it yesterday briefly, but am not entirely sure what it's about. Will read in more detail when I get a chance. BOZ (talk) 14:33, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for the kind words. I doubt I'll ever truly depart from Wikipedia, but there are certainly aspects I no longer care for. I will certainly be limiting my time and the areas into which I participate. Take care, and all the best. Hiding T 14:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I thought you were leaving for good, out of frustration. :) (Can't say I would blame you; I can't see myself here in 2009 with the current climate.) Well, in that case, I still meant what I said, and happy editing! BOZ (talk) 14:52, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marvel images

I have lots of images for Marvel characters. I'll be glad to put them up. :)Mfowler11 {talk) 9:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

-I've been adding FUR to every single one so they should be good. I'd like to ask, for the characters whom I've already put an image up for, may I take that off the list? Mfowler11 (talk) 9:57, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

- Thank you :) Mfowler11 (talk) 10:00, March 2008 (UTC)

-My apologies. I forgot to tell you I was on vacation in Florida. I'll get back to the images. Mfowler11 (talk) 8:42, April 11 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Artemis (Marvel Comics)

I have nominated Artemis (Marvel Comics), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artemis (Marvel Comics). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Whitstable 18:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you could add reliable secondary sources to the articles that create, that would be a big improvement going forward and prevent more of your work being nominated for AfD. --Gavin Collins (talk) 10:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marvel Pics

I was just grabbing them off Marvel.com - the search facility gives you links to the character profiles which often have pics. As long as you fill out the rationale we can use them. Exxolon (talk) 00:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Monster chat!

Yeah, I think I'll just get the names and page numbers down, it would be nice if we could get this live as soon as possible. What are the books we are putting in this? You've done the first two, I'm doing third, that means we still need 3.5, 2 and AD&D, right? J Milburn (talk) 18:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, hopefully. I'll maybe slug through the 3.5 MM once I have gone through the 3.0. I think others will be more willing to edit 3.5 content anyway, so if I put down a list of names, they should have descriptions reasonably quickly, especially if we start redirecting. J Milburn (talk) 19:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Too long. On the central page, we only need the monster book for that edition- the others can go on the subpages. J Milburn (talk) 19:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see, you think the central list should have no tables at all, but be limited to links to tables in other articles? Although that would work, I don't think that sits well within Wikipedia guidelines. If there is no 'core' monster book (the MM is the obvious 'main' monster book in 3.X) then perhaps just the first published, with {{main}} used to link off to the articles listing that edition's monsters more thoroughly? J Milburn (talk) 19:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's an absolutely spectacular idea, provided we can find a few sources to cite other than just the monster books themselves. Any ideas? J Milburn (talk) 20:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look around... Perhaps there have been articles about what is changing in terms of monsters in Dragon/Dungeon magazines around the start of the various editions? Also, we could fill space in the main article by listing the monster books by date, which would also allow us to link more specifically to the tables- for instance (with unindent)-

Ye Old Booke of Monsters (June 1066)
Edward the Confessor and Other Undead Beasts (August 1066)
Ye Newe Booke of Monsters (October 1067)

Monster Manual 2 (January 1068)
Races of Scandanavia (September 1068)

etc...

Thoughts? J Milburn (talk) 20:22, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Zuoken

I've restored the entire edit history, so you can now merge whatever you want. Happy editing! east.718 at 02:37, April 1, 2008

Re:Mouqol

Hello – I've restored the article at your request. For the time being, I removed the self-redirect it creates on List of Greyhawk deities#Lesser deities, because Mouqol redirected to List of Greyhawk deities, which had a link to Mouqol that redirected to List of Greyhawk deities, and so forth in a never-ending circle. I leave it in your capable hands to decide what's next. :-) Thanks - KrakatoaKatie 03:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deity Redirects

Yes - I have resurrected these as redirects. Apologies that you didn't receive the warnings - my AfD script usually sends them automatically. Black Kite 12:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Moving along nicely

Be aware that 3.5 has a few monsters 3.0 doesn't (possibly vice versa) and some of the descriptions change slightly. You're the one putting most of the effort into this, and I apologise; I will get it finished, I think I'll be happier writing out a few lists from some of my favourite supplements- Libris Mortis, for instance, a table for which would make a nice addition to the GA I wrote on it. J Milburn (talk) 17:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.--Nman649 (talk) 02:32, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BOZ

Nice name. Are you any relation to this guy? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 23:54, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noted

Yup, this one was just a troublemaker. The other one, User:Blast Ulna, is still lurking around. He was annoyed the votes didn't go his way and claimed there was stacking, which was promptly shot down by User:Doczilla. We seem to have had a rash of belligerence of late, but hopefully they will all drop off with time.

Asgardian (talk) 01:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hang in there. :) I see you are a D & D fan. I used to play back in the 80's with the original Advanced Edition. Used to love the modules (the S series were my favourites). Might try and help out with some of these time allowing. Be good to chat sometime about this stuff.

Regards

Asgardian (talk) 07:12, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the Giant/Drow series! That was fun. I remember the huge fight in the Hill Giant King's Hall; fighting mind flayers in the caverns and confronting Lloth in her spider-ship. You must play the S series...great stuff!

Asgardian (talk) 00:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great stuff. I won't say anything to spoil the surprises (other than I hope you retrieved the ring with 3 limited wishes from the open cavern - just don't use fire to kill the beast!).

Asgardian (talk) 00:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Your last message

Yeah, sorry, I'll copy it across now- I'm sorry, I've shown no committment to this, depsite the fact that it was my mass nominations that instigated it. If I move it across, others will be able to work on it a little more freely, and it'll hopefully actually get done. J Milburn (talk) 15:52, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've wapped it on the 3.0 page- remember to link the diffs (as I did- check my edit summary) when merging if you were not the only contributor to the table you're copy-pasting- the last thing we need is for this to be deleted on a copyright technicality... J Milburn (talk) 16:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yeah, that's fine, but didn't work in my case- copying the table from my sandbox to an already existing page. As for looking through the lists, none are perfect (incomplete, italics, stuff like that) and some referencing and a better lead would be nice for the main page, but I feel getting them live is the priority now we have something down- then, we can start linking to the list all over the place, (get it on some templates, link on all the main D&D articles) and completing/tidying it, then start redirecting the less notable monsters to it. J Milburn (talk) 16:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but you added some stuff, so I had to link to the diff to save you suing me for copyright infringement :) J Milburn (talk) 16:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Energon

I've undeleted it and redirected it to List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters. You'll be able to find the old article back through the history if you want to merge anything. Any questions, please let me know. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletions into redirects

Sure, that makes sense to me. As I recall, that was one of the options raised at the time. I think it's a good one, and have done so. - Philippe 01:42, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. Thanks for your hard work on this. - Philippe 01:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep! formerly deleted articles you've requested to be redirected to List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters have just been completed... and you're welcome--JForget 03:00, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hep hold on just a bit, I can do this too.--JForget 03:12, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done--JForget 03:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		for finding a particularly elegant way to get some articles undeleted and redirected, and for taking the time to enact it. A great example of collaborative editing! - Philippe 01:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One from me too

		The Original Barnstar
		For being the driving force behind the lists of D&D monsters. They still need work, but so does everything, and getting them to where they are now shows impressive planning and work. J Milburn (talk) 16:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah... I'm working on the lists a little now. I'm gonna put them on the monster templates, I've written leads for the two editions I'm properly familiar with, I'm categorising, I'm gonna cite the books just so they don't look unreferenced and the capitalisation and italics are bugging me a little too. I'll also maybe get around to writing some more at some point. Are you gonna make a start on the redirects? J Milburn (talk) 16:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm honest, I don't really know anything about non-3.x. I have played a lot of 3.0 and 3.5, a small amount of AD&D2E, but not any of the others, so I can't really help out there. Speaking of which, I am going to be primarily editing the 3.0 and 3.5 lists, and will probably start on 4ed when that comes out. J Milburn (talk) 17:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. I've already removed the fey links. J Milburn (talk) 17:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gavin.collins RfC

I went and relisted it on the main RfC:User page. Looks like it somehow got taken off the list while still active. Hopefully I don't get my ass bitten off by someone or other for it. McJeff (talk) 17:28, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Said this on my talk page but I'll put it here too. The first thing I think we should do is leave evidence that the dispute is still going, and once that's been done, petition the closing administrator to reopen. One of Gavin's history pages shows pretty much a solid wall of adding templates. However, I read the dispute and checked Gavin's history, and it appears he has at least slowed down a LOT when it comes to prod/AfDing articles, so it's possible the RfC is no longer needed. Still, I'm not exactly sure how "closed due to inactivity" should be happening - isn't an administrator supposed to step into the RfC's, hand out a few decrees and declare it closed, instead of ignoring it and declaring it inactive? of course, considering the way the RfC I started on RobJ1981 is going, I'm currently holding a very low opinion of RfC's. McJeff (talk) 04:02, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Monster Templates

Hey, were we adding templates for players to the lists of monsters or no? I took a quick glance back through the discussion but didn't see anything. I imagine it was mentioned somewhere, I just don't remember. Thanks. Baron (talk) 19:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

I miss working with you and the rest of the gang. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:12, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Athach

Yeah, when I saw Athach up for AfD, I thought I'd just jump in and close it before another admin who didn't know some of the background did. I technically ignored consensus there, which was to "merge", but I think your strategy of "redirect to a list and fill out the list as you have time" is more elegant. I'll keep my eye out for others like that. - Philippe 17:49, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfM thingy

don't know what to do with this, or what to say. where should i put myself in those options as for either geting GC to leave RPG related articles alone, or stop editing them until he gains some knowledge of the subject matter, and in either case is more civil to editors regarding such articles be they casual editors or gamers themsevels, which he sems to dislike. i do not really know these procedures for these thins, but have been wanting something done to get GC to learn to work with the RPG/D&D communities and wikiprojects here, rather than trying to control them. do i belong in involved, or support, and am i just supposed to sign with 4 ~'s, or actually write something like you and Jeske did? thanks for helping the WP policy ignorant figure this out so we can return to making good D&D(and all other) articles without much disruption. shadzar-talk 20:25, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Paladine one is very interesting, and I had before not even seen it. It brings another question to mind I have been having about the RFC supporters of Gavin, but I don't want to add any speculation to this matter. I think you will understand what I am talking about if you read the Paladine talk page. Is it possible some connection between these users other than agreeing on issues? shadzar-talk 05:20, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfM

Hi, since I do not edit D&D articles much (I am not an RPGer, but a chess player), I'm not sure if I could really be called a party to mediation. But I hope you guys and Gavin can work out something, since I don't think his purpose is to cause grief. If mediation will help, then good luck with that. :-) Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

D&D Creatures and redirects

First all, I just wanted to say "good work" again on the many lists for the D&D creatures. I know that several people put in work on these but you spearheaded the result. As you're doing lots of redirects, I thought that I'd suggest that when you do them, you could update the {{D&D}} talk page template as well to indicate that the page has been redirected. (This would involve altering it so it says something like {{D&D|class=redirect}}.) I've done this for the articles that you've redirected so far (I think I hit them all). So for example, you'll see something like this on their talk page.

By updating the template in such a fashion, this would properly indicate the article's status when the bots automatically update the project statistics (which can be found at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/D&D articles by quality statistics but also shows up on the D&D WikiProject main page. Updating the talk template so it's a redirect means that it won't appear on the statistics as a "stub" or "start" article, so the statistics would more accurately affect the status of the articles in the project. These redirected articles could still be found at Category:Redirect-Class D&D articles for future reference.

In any event, keep up the good work! Cheers! --Craw-daddy | T | 21:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to remember that, but please don't kill me if I forget. :) BOZ (talk) 21:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I don't kill people for those kinds of things, I just make them endure long-lasting agony. ;) (But then you've had enough of that lately with all the work you've done on the lists...) --Craw-daddy | T | 09:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And getting an RfM ready. ;) There were a few more monster articles that got redirected yesterday; when I have some time I'll try to go back over them and add the redirects. BOZ (talk) 12:14, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Request for Mediation?

Hello - I am alerting you that we are preparing a Request for Mediation regarding Gavin.collins. BOZ (talk) 04:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you want me to say about Gavin - I wasn't even sure who he was as first, but I remember the only thing I had a problem with him was his marking the Car Wars article as non-notable subject, but I thought that was resolved. Cyberia23 (talk) 03:35, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gavin Collins

BOZ, thanks for the note both about mediation and possibly arbitration. Just wanted to let you know that I really haven't fully kept up with all the recent developments. I'll try to catch up on the happenings, but best case is over the weekend. And I really don't want to give an opinion till I see what's happened since I was last involved in the RFC. Thanks.--Cube lurker (talk) 13:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noted

I read your recent comment and took it to heart. I am sorry if I offended you in earlier days as you are one of the editors I have come to respect. I would like to continue working together to keep upgrading many of the near non-existant articles (when we're not working on stopping the ship from going into the reefs that is!).

Regards

Asgardian (talk) 07:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gah! Another one! More persistent than rust monsters! Well, I've fired a shot across his bow and suggested he read the recent discussion on sources. And yup, it looks like the other serial nuisance has also fallen by the wayside. I don't know what caused that sudden urge for mass deletion, but there it is...

Asgardian (talk) 02:47, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That link took me straight to the Edit Histories, so I didn't see it had closed. I've added a vote to support mediation between said user and yourself, as that snipe on the AfD on Artemis told me all I need to know. Methinks it will not end well for him if he continues in this fashion. That first user who pushed AfD's everywhere has since been banned, and it looks like the second - to judge by your observation - has stormed off as he didn't get his way. He certainly didn't like User:Doczilla shooting down his theory about vote stacking.

Asgardian (talk) 03:21, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party has been accepted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Kender.

For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 23:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Adding to the request for mediation

Hi Boz. I was tossing up whether I should be listed as an involved party or not, but as the dispute is mostly in regard to Kender, and as I was heavily involved in debate and some of the rewriting, I probably should have been added. Do you know if I can add my name at this stage, or would be be easier if I sat it out. :) - Bilby (talk) 07:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that - I'm happy with whatever the decision was. I'd like to see mediation work, and after thinking about it (for too long) it seems that for mediation to work everyone with a significant involvement should be willing to take part. :) - Bilby (talk) 12:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Monster list vandalism

Yeah, this is one weird user. I'm talking to her now; not sure quite what's going on, they seem to be undoing edits at random but acting in good faith. J Milburn (talk) 19:13, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crimson Dawn

Hi Boz. This page has been tagged for cleanup. I've removed all of the unsourced stuff, trimming the article pretty much back to the specifics. I think this is more likely to survive on Wikipedia as part of a list. Do you know the best place to merge it to? Hiding T 12:48, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good work. I wish I knew more about it, but I was getting less enthused by X-Men comics (as opposed to my once-rabid fanboyism of years past) by the time that concept was introduced. I know we have a list of vehicles, and probably some other things, but do we have a list of Marvel comics objects? I know there's a category, but... BOZ (talk) 13:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's way before my time. I stopped buying around 293, but my interest had waned with the Inferno storyline. If there's no list, is it something worth creating? I've had a go at Psylocke, too, but I think the powers section needs work. Ultimately I think the article could make a GA. If I can find some decent secondary sources, I'd have a stab at FA. Hiding T 15:39, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Inferno was one of my favorites. :) There are a ton of stubby "Marvel object" articles (and plenty of cool items that aren't even stub-worthy), if you want to create a list article to merge them into? Good luck with Psylocke, we could always use more comics GAs, and FAs are always great but so elusive to achieve. :) BOZ (talk) 15:59, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do my best. I was a Madelyne Pryor fan, so Inferno sucked. :) Hiding T 14:11, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marvel assessments

You're welcome. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 18:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Myrmyxicus

Done. :-) - Philippe 18:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kruthik

Thanks for your message. Regarding Kruthik, there did not seem to be any real support for keeping it as a redirect (that was mentioned by only one user in the discussion). If it were a redirect, though, it should be a new one, and there is no real reason to resurrect the deleted article and its history, since it would make it possible for someone to accidentally (or purposely) revert it to a revision that had been deleted by AfD. However, in this case I'm confused since Kruthik does not even appear in the article that you referred to (List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.0 edition monsters), so a redirect there would not be appropriate. --MCB (talk) 21:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True, if someone wanted to make a problem out of it they could. But I've had dozens of articles restored in this manner so far, and haven't seen a problem with any of them yet. I've got them on my watchlist as well. True, Kruthik is not in the list yet, but if it helps I'll get to adding the book it came from. When I've done that (might not be soon), I'll let you know. Usually when articles like this come up for AFD, I will vote to redirect, but in March there were many like this nominated for deletion, and I did feel overwhelmed and did not vote on all of them. Anyway, thanks for listening! :) BOZ (talk) 21:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done - Kruthik is restored and redirected. I removed the wikilink in the list article since it just redirects back there. However, this should not be taken as encouragement on anyone's part to resurrect the material in the independent article in the list article or to revert it to its previous status, which would require deletion review. Best, MCB (talk) 18:25, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks kindly - and I agree. In fact, you may want to put a warning on the talk page as has been done at Talk:Draegloth, Talk:Astral dreadnought, or maybe something more like Talk:Nothic. :) BOZ (talk) 18:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Gathra

I would be willing to redirect and possibly restore the edit history it if you can clarify the following two points:

Why do you want the edit history restored?
Gathra isn't listed on the list. Should he be added?

Sorry of there's any misunderstanding. Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 18:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Same answer as for the guy in the above section. :) I'll try to add that one on Monday. Sorry for the brief answer, but I don't have long to talk... BOZ (talk) 19:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll restore and redirect. Cheers! Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 03:07, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks again! That was easier than expected. :) BOZ (talk) 03:11, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gavin.collins

--Fixing to express my viewpoint in a more mature (less crazy) way--

I view "Gavin.collins" and the other "tagbox posters" as being worthless. They add nothing, but think they have the right to fight to removed the work other people have done for the better understanding of all. He doesn't do anything but post a large set of tagboxes hoping that some stick. There seems to be a view that if you run around slapping up tagboxes everywhere, you get invited to be a moderator. I don't feel there is a need to talk with him, I feel there is a need to monitor this changes and then remove them when he just cuts and pastes in a block of tagboxes.

I do wish you all well, perhaps you all can keep him busy expressing his flawed viewpoint so that he doesn't have time to harass those good people who aren't just after a power fix. --Cozret (talk) 18:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just hoping that the dispute resolution process yeilds some positive results... *got my fingers crossed and everything* and I understand where you're coming from. BOZ (talk) 19:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BOZ, I would like to offer up the following post by Gavin as proof of his stalwart view that none of the RPG articles will be of any use ever. Talk:Paladine_(Dragonlance)#Examples.3F he says that the Dragonlance books are not noteworthy (despite four of them being on the NYT bestseller list) and that of the entire LotR series only Gandalf could be construed as notable. These are blatant decrees that he has no intention of ever being content with a Sci-Fi/Fantasy article and I think the comment should be made note of for future reference. I don't know how it would fit in your current RfM but it's too telling to let disappear. Padillah (talk) 14:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input. I'm not sure how, or if, that information will fit into the RfM, but that is interesting to note. He doesn't seem to be claiming that only Gandalf is notable, but rather than the articles on the other characters don't demonstrate the characters' notability apart from the source material. Not sure what to make of that, though. :) BOZ (talk) 15:42, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The next question in the ongoing quiz is: What non-article discussions provide good examples of the issues in dispute? This sounds like an invitation to showcase some of the AfD discussions, especially the ones where nastiness reared its ugly head. I wish I could raise this issue myself, but having been muzzled, my only recourse is to drop hints to game show participants. ;-) Freederick (talk) 20:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh - I'm not sure how to answer, but AFD discussions definitely did come to mind. I'll have to give that one some thought when I have the time. BOZ (talk) 04:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think, for historical perspective, someone might want to mention Gavin's first RPG edits, which were the AFDs to delete everything GURPS related, including the main article, as spam (Articles_for_deletion/List_of_GURPS_books, Articles_for_deletion/GURPS_4e_Basic_Set. I know that he's come a long way since then, backing off of the highly contentious AFDs, but I think that it helps to frame the entire dispute. And truth be told, many of the same fundamental problems that persist today can be found in their nacency there. -Chunky Rice (talk) 16:34, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The deleted D&D monster articles

Hi, if you notice any more similar articles that were deleted and you can't contact the admin responsible, just leave me a note and I'll undelete the history under the redirects. The outcome in all the drvs is going to be the same, and it'll cut up on the bureaucracy. Thanks. - Bobet 18:55, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that would help! Are you an admin? BOZ (talk) 00:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. (Longer answer: you can look that up for anyone with Special:UserRights, or just look through the logs for a user, you'll usually see some deletions, protects, or blocks in the first page for an admin.)- Bobet 21:01, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, cool. I have gotten a few dozen restored, and no one's said no yet, so I figure it must be uncontroversial enough! BOZ (talk) 21:07, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elemental Drake (Dungeons & Dragons)

I've undeleted Elemental Drake (Dungeons & Dragons) and redirected it. If you come across any where the deleting admin seems to be posted missing or is on a long break, there's no need to go to deletion review. Just let me know and I'll happily undelete them. Seems to be entirely uncontroversial. All the best, Angus McLellan (Talk) 08:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two more undeleted. Cheers! Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dolgrim

Hi there. Sure, I am happy to restore and redirect. One minor prob is that there does not appear to be a comment of any kind about Dolgrims on the page you want to redirect to. Should there be? I am slightly pushed for time now, but will do it this evening. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 11:54, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. Sorry about the delay. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 20:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kender/sources

DMA installed and all updates loaded. Just tell me what you need from the 250 issues found within on kender and I will get the best source information I can, as I have time, to help with the RfM. shadzar-talk 16:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Kender#All_about_Kendermore

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Dungeons_&_Dragons#Dragon_Magazine_-_Kenders

These things? What is needed from it exactly? shadzar-talk 17:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Request for mediation on Gavin.collins

Hi BOZ, sorry to be so late to the party, but I appreicate your invitation to the mediation with Gavin. Could you please catch me up on what to do ( and where to go ) to participate in this? Thank you in advance for your help. Dalamori (talk) 21:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Pyrolisk

I've restored the article. - Rjd0060 (talk) 21:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Stellaris

BOZ, I happy to hear you liked my work on Stellaris and Centurius. What other sorts of characters would I be interested in working on? Hmmm, hard to say. I tend to work on whatever strikes my fancy at the moment. I worked on Centurius because I happened across an old comic where Captain America finds Centurius' skeleton in a cave under NYC and I was curious who Centurius was and why he died there. My current interest is in characters with associations to the Celestials, thus the work on Stellaris. If you can find another Celestial related character I would certainly consider working on the article. Mainehaven (talk) 18:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestions. I will browse around and see what inspires me. Mainehaven (talk) 20:36, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I will leave the second Stellaris redirect alone (unless of course I can find an out-of-universe source). ;) If this is the standard that is going to be used, then I would expect a lot more of the existing comic character entries to be redirected in the future. Has this out-of-universe source policy become the accepted Wikiproject Comics standard for comic book character entries or is this policy more of a subjective editing judgement on the part of the Wiki Administrator "Seraphimblade"? Mainehaven (talk) 17:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good work on fixing the Stellaris "problem". I have been busy and I haven't been on Wiki for some time so I just today saw your note. Is there anything that can be done about the fact the old Stellaris page redirects to the Celestials page which doesn't mention Stellaris at all? It would be nice if someone were looking for Stellaris info that they ended up at the new page instead of being redirected to the Celestials page. Just wondering. Mainehaven (talk) 23:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ego

I know! I thought I'd mentioned that. I kind of wish members of more fiction-oriented wikiprojects would participate in the discussion, since they're going to be the ones more painfully affected if anything like these separate fiction guidelines go into effect. Ford MF (talk) 17:44, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Kender-MC4.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Kender-MC4.JPG. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:06, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Forgotten Realms locations

Hi, I created the redirects for all of them, and restored the edit history under Lake of Steam, Sembia, The Vast and Sea of Moving Ice. Of the others, two (Ruathym and Tortured Land) were copyright violations, and the rest of them had nothing but headers and sometimes external links so I didn't undelete them. I think a couple of those places (at least Ruathym) aren't mentioned in the target article, so you might include a mention or they could still get deleted as unhelpful redirects.

Addendum: you might also want to see the note I left at User talk:B. Wolterding#Lost Empires of Faerûn, in case you're interested in fixing the Lost Empires of Faerûn article (it's currently a redirect). - Bobet 07:11, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

General comment

Hey! How's everything by you? Well aside from one somewhat mind boggling ongoing discussion, I think I was really able to do some good work on this fictional character's article. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 08:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Quickling

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Quickling, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Vianello (talk) 02:42, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Independence Day!

As you are a nice Wikipedian, I just wanted to wish you a happy Independence Day! And if you are not an American, then have a happy day and a wonderful weekend anyway! :) Your friend and colleague, --Happy Independence Day! Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 21:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Publication histories

They look really good. They're not going to help with notability though, so be carefull now much time you put into it. They may end up deleted or redirected. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 00:12, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

It's always good to hear from you, B. What with everything going on at Vertigo (DC Comics), I had a little sense of dread when I saw the "new message" banner — so, yeah, you couldn't have been a better ray of sunshine! With my regards, -- Tenebrae (talk) 02:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice!

Hi BOZ, I do like what you've been doing. The one thing you _might_ think about is making those sections all one section and a bulleted list. I think they might take up too much space as they are currently presented (unless you think those sections will get expanded). But very nice job.

Sorry for being so slow, I've been spending my limited wiki time on a deletion review that is annoying me greatly (unrelated to gaming). Hobit (talk) 18:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Killraven supporting cast

As an old fan of the original, 1970s Killraven series, I salute you for Old Skull. M'Shulla and etc. articles. Bravo! --Tenebrae (talk) 02:53, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another kudo

And you are doing a hell of a lot of work adding ComicsProject class/grade boxes and detailed rationales to a lot of articles. I, for one, and I'm sure other regulars would join me on this, want to acknowledge and thank you for doing so much needed and time-consuming work. That's above and beyond, BOZ, and we should give you a round of applause! -- Tenebrae (talk) 03:07, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And the same for games! Hobit (talk) 03:25, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Captain Britain

Yes it was one of the early ones I assessed and with hindsight I realised it would have been borderline and as I am doing an improvement drive in Marvel UK titles and expanding David Thorpe I thought it was a good idea to try and get the complex publication history straight (I have a lot of the originals from around that time but keeping it straight can be tricky, especially as Marvel Superheroes is a renamed Mighty World of Marvel and then it switched to the second volume of MWoM).

Also aiming to more densely reference what happened when (the key events need pinning down to the issue they happened in) will really help with a push on to improve things further. What it really needs is expanding in the area of character development and get some comments from the creators (I'll have a dig through early Alan Moore interviews and see if there is anything there for example). (Emperor (talk) 13:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for the welcome

Thank you for the welcome, but I would like you to read this proposal to see how to save the most important information of the deity articles and maybe keep the anti-cruft people happy. LA @ 14:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing, a list doesn't HAVE to be called a list. LA (If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page.) @ 15:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

That's so far out of my area, I couldn't add anything even if I was at home (I'm on vacation). Sorry... Hobit (talk) 02:17, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Snotling and Characters of Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines

Hello! I know you know a good deal about fantasy articles. By any chance can you help us work to rescue this article? Some sources have been provided in the AfD that perhaps could be incorporated into the article, or if you know of any other sources, and we'd appreciate the help! Thanks! --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:20, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

David Anthony Kraft

Finally added some more material to the DAK entry. Seems to me that to really do Comics Interview justice, it needs its own entry. (Possibly same thing for his imprint Fictioneer Books...) Stoshmaster (talk) 18:51, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters

I have nominated List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --EEMIV (talk) 05:06, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RPG Wiki

Hey, I notice you've written a lot of articles about D&D monsters on Wikipedia, most of which have ended up being deleted or merged. I thought you might be interested in knowing that I'm working on a wiki devoted specifically to role-playing, and if you'd be interested in contributing, articles like those would be welcome there. I haven't announced my wiki anywhere yet or officially opened it up to the public because I wanted to work on it more myself to get it to a more presentable state first, but given your apparent eagerness to write this kind of article I figured I'd let you know about it early, and invite you to contribute if you're interested--the wiki is at www.rpedia.net.

(By the way, this is by no means intended as a slam on Wikipedia or a complaint about its deletion policies--with its broad scope, I think it's understandable that Wikipedia has to hold very high notability standards. That's why I wanted to create a wiki specifically devoted to role-playing, where the threshold for notability would be lower and I could allow articles that wouldn't be considered notable enough for Wikipedia--not because there's anything wrong with Wikipedia's policies, but simply because of what it is.) --Smeazel (talk) 06:09, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I understand, and honestly I was kind of afraid you'd respond like that, but unfortunately in good conscience I couldn't see a reason for keeping that material in Wikipedia, for the reasons I gave in the AfD. I understand you disagree, and seeing something you put so much work into put up for deletion certainly can't be pleasant. I wish I could come up with a justification for keeping those articles--I really like them, and I even saved copies myself in case they do get deleted, but I just couldn't come up with a good reason to keep them under current Wikipedia policy. If that upsets you to the degree that you don't want to contribute to my Wiki, I'm disappointed, but I understand. Hope there are no hard feelings, and keep up the good work. --Smeazel (talk) 14:12, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No, when I said I saved copies of the articles for my own use, I didn't mean I was going to use them in my wiki. I actually wouldn't want these lists as is in my wiki anyway--individual (and categorized) articles on each monster, yes; long lists of monsters like this, no. But that's not the point; even if it was something I wanted in my wiki I wouldn't want to use it without your permission -- I know technically anything contributed to Wikipedia falls under the terms of the GFDL and is open for copying elsewhere, but I still wouldn't feel right about it. As far as voting in AfDs being a choice...you're right, and if I had to do it all over again, I probably would have just kept my silence. For what it's worth, I did abstain on List of Dungeons & Dragons monsters, and even argued against the grounds given by the nominator for its deletion. (And that was before I saw any of your comments on my talk page, so it wasn't in response to your comments.) And...huh, looking over there it looks like that's just been snowball kept. Well, that's enough for me to change my recommendation on List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters. I want to make it clear that I'm not changing my recommendation in order to placate you so you'll contribute to my wiki, though, but because I think it's the right thing to do given the circumstances; it would make no sense to delete that article and keep the list as a whole. If you're still feeling stung enough by my initial delete recommendation that you don't want to contribute to my wiki, I fully understand. Cheers, and congratulations; it looks like your lists are likely staying on Wikipedia after all. ;) --Smeazel (talk) 14:43, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yeah, I didn't know all the details about the history of the articles and the feedback you'd been getting from admins; I can see why you were upset. I'm glad the articles did end up being kept (well, the AfD on List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters hasn't closed yet, but if List of Dungeons & Dragons monsters was kept, I'll be surprised if that one isn't); even though I did initially recommend delete on one of the articles, it was with considerable reluctance. As for my mention of "most" of your articles having been deleted or merged, hope that didn't offend you; that was the impression I got from the few I looked at, but they may not have been a representative sample set. Anyway, glad everything seems to have worked out, and sorry again to have upset you with my initial delete recommendation. Now that it seems the articles are being kept, maybe sometime I'll dig out some of my old books that don't seem to have been covered yet and contribute to the list myself. --Smeazel (talk) 15:05, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Stoshmaster

Is there a problem or something specific I should be looking at? I checked back through their contributions but it all looks fine - very useful. (Emperor (talk) 22:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Ahhhh right - I see. Thanks for the info. I've picked up quite a few new creations that didn't make it to the noticeboard so will update those now. (Emperor (talk) 23:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Suggested move - Loviatar

I've gone ahead and moved the Loviatar article to Loviatar (Forgotten Realms) as there appeared to be no objections. I'm currently waiting on an admin to move Loviatar (mythology) over to Loviatar. :) --Muna (talk) 18:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OHOTMU images

Um... BOZ, you may want to look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/copyright#Images which cannot be "fair use".

- J Greb (talk) 22:42, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Publication History sections

I added some basic publication history sections to Loviatar (Forgotten Realms) and Torm yesterday, though, looking at the way you've done them, I'm not sure if I'm achieving the same objectivity. Here are a some cuts from the two articles:

Loviatar's first appearance is in the 1st Edition Forgotten Realms Campaign Set book, where she is described as a pale maiden in white armour who wields a wand-shaped dagger of ice, and is stated to be the same Loviatar as the one in Finnish legend.

The 4th Edition Forgotten Realms Campign Guide details Torm's promotion to greater status after Tyr's defeat following a demonic invasion of the upper realms.

Could I get your thoughts on the matter? --Muna (talk) 15:19, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Boccob

Hey, someone added a crapload of information to the Boccob article, and unfortunately they added their sources to the list at the bottom instead of using inline references - so I have no idea what came from where. Could you have a look through the sources added and see if you can tell which pieces of information came from those sources? --Muna (talk) 16:30, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All those darn tags

After you pointed me to the section about the tags I had a read through some page histories and that whole malarkey with Gavin.collins. Has it been questioned whether he is a sock account of Jack Merridew/Davenbelle? --Muna (talk) 03:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One thing I don't get is that sets of tags have been added to a lot of stub articles, which I saw which adding the D&D deities template to pages), which seems completely pointless because you know a stub will have a battery of problems. It looks like quite a few of those articles, as well as non-stub pages were removed due to those tags being longstanding, which makes it seem like that is the intent of the tags (and partly why I suspected sock puppetry, since Jack seems to have turned quite a few pages into redirects as a response to Gavin's tagging), and that unquestionably seems like vandalism. Out of curiosity, why hasn't Gavin been blocked? --Muna (talk) 04:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a note on that previous point about Jack turning pages into redirects following Gavin's tags, I may have confused him with someone else, though I do recall that his edits were following a very similar vein to Gavin's. --Muna (talk) 04:55, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for Gavin not being an issue anymore - all those tags scattered across articles look like they're going to be problems for a while, especially since it's evident some of them have been turned into redirects as a result of the tags being there (with summaries like "notability concerns had not been addressed for months"). One problem with removing tags, even if it's justified, is that it's implied that you're supposed to talk with the user who tags them to talk about what needs to be done - and it seems doubtful that Gavin keeps a list of what is wrong, and when specific pages are brought up he seems to avoid stating what in particular needs fixing, instead making vague statements (and adding "vague" inline tags to pages :P). Here's a more constructive question, though: How do you go about addressing power level changes through the additions? Torm, for example, is a demigod in 1st, lesser deity in 2nd and 3rd, and a greater deity in 4th. Would I put "Power level: Demigod (1st edition), lesser (2nd-3.5th edition), greater (4th edition)" in the infobox? Additionally, how do you deal with 4th edition information with regards to the infoboxes? The current infoboxes seem to be pretty focused on the 3rd edition, and changing the infobox would probably cause problems. --Muna (talk) 05:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gods by pantheon: a thought on AfD sniping

One thing we could do to arrange some of the deity articles which probably won't stand up on their own is merge them into pantheon articles, which would preserve these stubs while happy little anons like 67.162.108.96 and 204.153.84.10 find and add content, possibly bringing them back out into their own articles in time with much more stable footing. For example, Skiggaret and Grankhul appear in very few sources, and are stubs anyway - wouldn't it be best to merge these into an article with a name like "Bugbear pantheon"? Blanket publication histories for all of them detailing each in a single section combined with the more likely prospect that a pool of references would provide a more convincing credence of notability, in addition to the likely rise on the notability scale and lesser number of articles to maintain...well, it's got to help keep these pages above water, don't you think? :) --Muna (talk) 08:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've started up Bugbear pantheon, though I haven't done anything to Skiggaret and Grankhul yet. I'm hunting down sources at the moment, can you help at all? :) --Muna (talk) 06:24, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been adding snippets of information to Bugbear pantheon, though I've been trying to focus on context and readability from the standpoint of an outsider to the subject. Since the article itself is only a step in the direction of standing up and saying "you can't delete this" (;)), it may be wise to turn it into something like List of goblinoid deities at some point in the future to give it some added mass, which would give a result akin to List of Pokémon (1-20), which seems acceptable, so long as infoboxes could comfortably be accommodated. I'd only really think that would be necessary if it seems likely that the article would become a candidate for deletion, or actually does. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the matter. --Muna (talk) 15:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I copied over the material from some of the goblinoid deity pages which got turned into redirects, plus that Bhuka deity, to User:Damuna/Sandbox 2 and removed the sections (save for references). It looks like with a handful of short paragraphs the infoboxes don't get pushed through the section bars and get all messed up, so a List of goblinoid deities would be viable. I'll keep those there and maybe rewrite them at some point, in case it ever becomes necessary to make that larger list. :) --Muna (talk) 09:23, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that Planewalker missed a book for Hruggek - I found him in Faiths and Pantheons. Did that submission for the other bugbear deities ever get published by Dragon, by the way? I happened upon the thread about it on ENWorld when hunting for domains. :)

I think the bugbear pantheon article is now coming to a stable stage, including important information regarding the deities plus infoboxes, so I may remove the construction tag soon. I'll probably add some more inline citations to show that the material isn't original research, and hopefully some independent sources to try and establish notability if I can actually find some. If it doesn't look like I'm going to be able to make a case for notability, I may go ahead with the List of goblinoid deities idea. One problem I'm having is writing so as to keep things out-universe - I gave Writing About Fiction a read, but I'm still not sure how well I'm managing. Any advice? --Muna (talk) 15:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ahazu

Hi, I userfied the content to User:BOZ/Ahazu. It'd probably get deleted through afd, but if you think there's something to merge from it, go ahead. Let me know when you won't be needing that page anymore and I'll move it back to where it was. - Bobet 09:02, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I restored the article to its original place. Like I said, it would probably get deleted eventually so redirecting it might be better (but I left it alone for now).

Also, I restored Otiluke and changed it into a redirect. This was the latest version before that. - Bobet 17:58, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frost Salamander

Done, thanks. NawlinWiki (talk) 15:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Baklunish

The article has been restored. - Rjd0060 (talk) 19:33, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dire animal (Dungeons & Dragons)

Hi BOZ. I have restored the article behind a redirect. Bear in mind that the article was deleted for good reason, so - please - only merge across referenced material that is not written in an "in-universe" manner. Thanks. Neıl ☄ 13:01, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE:D&D

Hi, and thanks for the talk page note. I've tried participating in D&D before, but stopped after I got shut out of the mediation with Gavin.collins. I'd be glad to help though - anything in particular you think needs it? McJeff (talk) 04:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can answer here on your talk page, by the way - I'll keep an eye on it. Unless you'd prefer to use mine. McJeff (talk) 04:27, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you only got shut out of the mediation because of timing - a lot of other guys wanted in and they beat you to it. It was nothing personal as far as I could tell, and I always wanted you to be involved. It's pretty much ground to a halt at the moment, but I'm always willing to give it another go if interest revives among the other parties (or if Gavin gets mean on us again). :)

In the meantime, the D&D Wikiproject seems to be just about dead, in the wake of Gavin's "reign of terror". ;) Hardly anyone actively edits D&D articles anymore besides me, so take your pick! What we'd need most is providing creator commentaries, finding useful quotes in interviews and product reviews, providing publication histories (see my user page), rewriting in-universe text to out-of-universe text, and general cleanup here and there.

See the project talk page for more details on the 0.7 release. Four articles (Dungeons & Dragons, Gary Gygax, Dragonlance, and Drow) have been selected, so we need people to work on those. Aside from that, anything on this page (the higher up on the page the better) can be a contender for nomination if we work on it and improve it, or you can just nominate a (small!) number of articles that you feel are really exemplary and well done. BOZ (talk) 04:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've got an idle weekend ahead of me, I'll see if I can do something with Dungeon Master. Head to the library and see what they've got about tabletop games... there should be something to establish that elusive real world notability. McJeff (talk) 02:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for the hard work! :) If you like, please post on the wikiproject talk page to show other people that someone besides me is working on this. ;) BOZ (talk) 03:06, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]