User talk:Daranios/Archive 2007-2021

Although I typically respond to comments on my own page, I realize it has been a very long time due to my unintended Wikibreak. The citations are not in error, although they are made somewhat in passing in Shair's. When I have the chance to unpack further, I will try to provide page numbers for your perusal. Serpent's Choice 09:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! That would be very nice for me. Daranios 15:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And that's why I changed it. If the section had explicitly discussed the difference between Frankfurt am Main and Frankfurt an der Oder, that would be different, but it didn't. I agree (for Germany) that unambiguous names do not require Laender; but it seems clearer to make that point, and not mix it up with an example of primary usage. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:06, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a look at my question here [1]. Ekki01 16:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I merely transcribed the very brief information about St Otteran that was given in the Irish liturgical calendar (Ordo Missae celebrandae...), which I saw on a visit to Ireland. For another source that gives the same date of death, see this. Lima (talk) 19:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that you want to move your sandbox page to a page with a name like User:Daranios/Sandbox. As is, with it's current name of User:Daranios Sandbox, it appears as if it's referring to a Wikipedia editor with the name "Daranios Sandbox". Hope this helps. Cheers --Craw-daddy | T | 23:33, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! I was not aware of this. Daranios (talk) 16:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your hard work on keeping the list project going!  :) BOZ (talk) 18:36, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, it was quite fun. :-) Maybe I'll add more from my collection some time, but I won't promise anything. I hope we won't end up with a with a notability discussion here, though :-(. Best regards! Daranios (talk) 15:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for keeping this up! I appreciate your hard work. I've been doing a little project of my own. BOZ (talk) 14:12, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great thing, I think these publication histories will be helpful for those interested in details and will be a big advantage for the in-universe-only-discussions. My personal collection of monster books will be finished soon, let's see what happens afterwards. Daranios (talk) 12:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks once again for your contributions!  :) BOZ (talk) 20:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Planescape boxed sets - don't forget Planes of Conflict!  :) BOZ (talk) 23:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I'm at it. :-) Daranios (talk) 15:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Danke!  :) There wasn't any lack of faith; that one's just easier to forget.  ;) BOZ (talk) 16:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support!  :) Here's an idea. To make the page look better (and I'd wait until the AFD closes to work on it again, especially since things are looking up), how about instead of adding more books for now, if we focused on the parts that are lacking, such as the monster descriptions and other appearances. The 2E list will look a lot better if it was more like the 1974-1976, 1E, and 3E lists. BOZ (talk) 16:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sounds like a good idea. Unfortunately, strange as it may sound, I am more motivated to create the lists from the books than to think about the (important!) one-sentence monster descriptions. But we'll see. Daranios (talk) 18:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do as you will - your contributions are valued regardless.  :) Don't waste your time working on it during the AFD all the same, just in case the tide turns against the article and it dies an unseemly death. However, if you can directly fix any of the concerns rasied by those voting delete, then feel free to hit that. BOZ (talk) 22:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there!  :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. For more details, please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 19:00, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the "Described are" to "Includes" for the traditional no-good-reason. "Described are/is" just does not sound right to me; it's stilted and I think it's grammatically incorrect. (Normal sentence structure should be Subject Verb Object, not Object Verb Subject: so The monsters are described - not described are the monsters.) If I were going to describe the page referring to one of the monsters which has multiple variants, I would say the page "includes information and statistics for monster X and it variants A, B and C. I have not propagated this change through the entire page yet (since it'd be a lot of work), and for the moment I intend to stick with just the Mystara compendium and the D&D monsters list (separate page).Vulcan's Forge (talk) 15:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, very often there is no section about the general monster X, only about it's variants A, B and C. But I am no good at judging if it sounds stilted and I see your point with grammar. I just didn't notice it, because you can shift around parts of scentences more readily in German than English. Thanks for replying. Daranios (talk) 19:11, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bitte schoen. ;) Vulcan's Forge (talk) 01:08, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With your excellent recent work on the D&D monster lists, I was wondering if you've ever thought about joining the Dungeons & Dragons WikiProject. Regardless, keep up the good work! -Drilnoth (talk) 15:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! :-) I had thought about joining the project, but I think I will continue work as a "freelancer", as the time I am going to devote here will probably wax and wane a lot. Daranios (talk) 11:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, just thought I'd mention it. -Drilnoth (talk) 13:09, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed. Good catch. I only have the first Ravenloft MC (MC10), secondhand in a binder I hadn't gone all the way through yet. I'll do a descriptive section on it but redirect the reader to the Appendices as already tabled insteads of duplicating the whole thing. I've checked and much of the Outer Places MC (MC11) is already listed in the Planescape Appendix table, so I'll do something similar there as well.Vulcan's Forge (talk) 03:44, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, man, keep up the good work. :) BOZ (talk) 15:55, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there!
On the Al-Qadim page you removed the link to Forgotten Realms Wiki.
You are of course right that the Al-Qadim article there has no additional information compared to the one here. However Forgotten Realms Wiki wants to cover Al-Qadim related subjects that are not deemed noteworthy at Wikipedia, too. There may not yet be to many such articles, but in my opinion too much to be dismissed. I can think of articles on e.g. all Zakharan deities and all Al-Qadim sourcebooks. Do you think that is enough to keep the link (and perhaps get interested editors to get involved there, too)? Daranios (talk) 16:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have much of a preference either way; I just thought it was better to include a link to the local page (which didn't seem to have a link until then). Wikipedia:External links discourages overuse of external links which commonly happens with Wikia sites, so I tend to remove certain ones in passing if the local page for that specific topic has more content. In this case, however, it looks like there's some good content there that Wikipedia doesn't have. Garrett^Talk 19:23, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen this? Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-09-21/WikiProject report BOZ (talk) 15:10, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that's a nice read - both a credo for inclusionism and a balanced description of your/our work. And that Gavin Collins praises the report has to count for something! Daranios (talk) 20:31, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Saint Arsatius.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) 20:05, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you have time for it, but the link was actually removed from quite a few pages as being a dead link, and there are a lot of pages that never had a link to that site in the first place. Thanks for fixing the ones you have fixed so far. 108.69.80.49 (talk) 17:22, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The TSR Archive is too good a page to be forgotten. I plan to change the other existing links (not to add it to other articles, as do not have the overview here), but I don't know yet how soon I can do it. Daranios (talk) 18:37, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As you have been heavily involved with editing this article, I am letting you know that List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters is up for AFD. 129.33.19.254 (talk) 16:09, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I started the DRV yesterday, but I don't know if that will acheive any consensus to overturn. To avoid controversy, I think we may need a new way to display the lists of monsters. It will take a lot of work; would you be interested in helping? BOZ (talk) 20:02, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In general I would like to help, after we sorted out in which way we could present monsters without raising copyright concerns. I fear that the time I can dedicate will be limited, however.

I would like to ask the deletion-voters involved if an alphabetical sorting within an edition would be "tranformative", as it would no longer be a rendition of tabels of contents, then, but I am not optimistic.

And first I want to "rescue" the other lists to Dungeons & Dragons Wiki. Do you happen to know how I could access the deleted list for this? Thanks. Daranios (talk) 15:22, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested in the discussion on the Talk:List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters, since I think you've been the one most actively supporting these lists. BOZ (talk) 17:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! I am at the moment trying to figure out, when a link to an extrnal wiki is ok and when it is not. (I am concerned with Dungeons & Dragons at the moment.) WP:ELNO says not to include links to open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors. Could you perhaps give me a clue roughly when a wiki has reached "a substantial history of stability" and what might count as "a substantial number of editors"? Thanks a lot! Daranios (talk) 15:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that is a fairly vague criteria. I'd be inclined to think they mean a wiki that has been in existence for several years and has hundreds, if not thousands, of editors. But you might try asking on the talk page at WP:ELNO. Regards, RJHall 15:45, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be interested in starting back up the discussion at Talk:List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters? :) BOZ (talk) 21:21, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for telling! However, I cannot think of new arguments at the moment. I have asked Torchiest about his opinion about one specific point, though. Best of luck for the future discussion! Let's see how it turns out. Daranios (talk) 10:05, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You got it - glad to have you involved in whatever way you are willing and able to be. :) BOZ (talk) 00:54, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I never realized before that you are from Germany.  :) Would you be able to share with me the text of the source you found (preferably with a translation)? I want to make sure we are maximizing our utilization of it, and if necessary I may want to rewrite some parts to reflect that. If it's more than a few sentences, would you mind e-mailing it to me? BOZ (talk) 19:52, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would be happy to. The section is just long enough that I would prefer e-mailing. How can I reach you? Daranios (talk) 18:28, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If your e-mail is set up, you can go here: [2] BOZ (talk) 19:29, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid I still get "This user has chosen not to receive e-mail from other users." as an answer to that query. Daranios (talk) 14:21, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully, I just sent you one. BOZ (talk) 15:12, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to finding sources for Goldmoon and Raistlin Majere. If you are inclined to helping further on related articles, I have started a new discussion regarding finding sources for the other important characters in the series. If there is any help you can give, please respond there or here. Thanks! BOZ (talk) 17:55, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Based on Torchiest's comment, Caramon Majere might be a good place to start. BOZ (talk) 05:06, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored Caramon Majere, Tasslehoff Burrfoot, Tanis Half-Elven, Riverwind, and Kitiara uth Matar, as another user has found sources for each of them; if you can, take a look and see if you can find more. BOZ (talk) 20:40, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! I don't know if you have any sources for those articles I listed above, but if you do now would be a good time to add them because I will probably be starting another merge discussion on the list talk page soon. BOZ (talk) 23:44, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas, too! Sorry, no other source from me - I only have said "Lexikon der Zauberwelten", which has no more on Caramon, Tasslehoff and Tanis than we have introduced, I guess, and nothing on Riverwind and Kitiara. Good luck with the merge discussion in any case. Daranios (talk) 12:35, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Got you - thanks for checking. BOZ (talk) 04:58, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is good to have that one at least, thanks for adding it. :) BOZ (talk) 16:47, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also restored Sturm Brightblade and Flint Fireforge; do you know of any sources for those? BOZ (talk) 18:34, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice! For me it is always the same story, though, I am afraid: The only independent source I have is Lexikon der Zauberwelten, and you know now what it has about Dragonlance. Daranios (talk) 10:51, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you do me a favor? On de:Al-Qadim: The Genie's Curse, there is a source listed as “Power Play”, but the link to the article appears to be a copy/paste error which duplicates the one for “Computer Gaming World”. Can you help me track down the actual link so that we can add it to the English article? BOZ (talk) 15:14, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see you fixed the link on the Duetsch version article - thanks.  :) Well, the text from the German article reads as follows when you put it through Google translate: "Editor Michael Hengst of Power Play described the connection of 1001 with the action-packed gameplay of Zelda successful. Both horse and main tester Volker Weitz described the difficulty as low." I'd like to see how a horse writes game reviews. ;) If you could clean up the translation a bit so that the phrases make more sense, I think that should be enough. BOZ (talk) 21:23, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(snooping) Hahahaha... that's because Hengst translates to "stallion", and the translator must've mistaken his last name for a separate word. Most amusing. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 21:50, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

:-) Apart from that glitch, Google translator did a better job than I would have expected. I put my version on the page now. (Possibly it could use some more integration into the whole of the reception section.) Daranios (talk) 20:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heh... yeah, you might be right. Thanks for getting that one! BOZ (talk) 21:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I note that at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Vecna, you wrote: "if this time someone neutral could draw a conclusion instead of User:Folken de Fanel changing the status quo to his liking in spite of a remaining disagreement, as was done with Caramon Majere."

Contrary to what you think, I have never "drawn a conclusion to my liking" by "changing the status quo". In case you didn't notice, the discussion was assessed and closed by an uninvolved administrator, with the conclusion that "this discussion has failed to reach a consensus on whether Caramon should have a separate article [...] Coverage should remain in this article until such a time that reliable, secondary sources establish notability for Caramon independent of this list."

I therefore do not appreciate your insinuation that I would have myself closed the discussion and edited the article to my liking while ignoring the consensus. The decision was validated by an uninvolved administrator. While I understand you might be frustrated to have lost the debate, this is not a reason to propagate unfounded allegations on my person. Whether you did it to spite me intentionally or you didn't read the closure, what you wrote was a personal attack that I ask you politely but firmly to remove from your comment, and to avoid further uncivil behavior against me.Folken de Fanel (talk) 19:32, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for this. I was not aware of the changes in Talk:List of Dragonlance characters#Caramon from 27 May 2013 and was arguing on the basis of the status of the discussion from 1 May 2013. My statement was not meant as a personal attack, and would have been factual, if those changes had not taken place in the meantime. I have changed my comment accordingly. I cannot help noticing, however, that you did change Caramon Majere into a redirect on 27 April 2013, before that closure had taken place with the comment "Redirect per consensus". Daranios (talk) 15:49, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One of the criteria for being an external link is that it provides a unique resource. A simple google provides hundreds of similar pages of content. There is nothing exceptionally valuable about that site as compared to any of the others. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:48, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do mind reintroduction. I do not think that they appropriately qualify given the various issues and premises of WP:EL. "External links in an article can be helpful to the reader, but they should be kept minimal, meritable, and directly relevant to the article." We do not link just to have links. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:32, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :)

It is not just Reorx that is used in Genesis LPMud, it is the entire world of Krynn, including all of the Gods. If Genesis LPMud is going to be referenced, it needs to be in a primary article on Krynn or Dragonlance, not a secondary page such as the List of the Gods, and it definitely shouldn't just be linked to only one individual God. As a long-time MUD player, I wish you luck in your quest to get Genesis LPMud some recognition. :) -- singed_light (talk) 22:47, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I still do not think it fits. The page is specifically meant as a list of the Dragonlance deities and their direct story, not all the places they have been used or extended universe references. The majority of the people who visit the page are not interested in the errata, they want the basics of the Gods. Everything else we add pulls away from that focus.

Think of it this way: If we reference Genesis LPMud there, then we would for completeness need to reference all the other noteworthy places Reorx has been used: ArcticMUD, which was and is based entirely on Krynn. Multiple small video games in the 90s for PC. Multi-universe game systems, such as the incredibly popular Spelljammer setting for D&D. If we reference each of these places, then the article loses focus, and no longer is as effective at its goal: to be a list of the deities and what they stand for.

However, I admit it is possible that I am wrong, that I am being too narrow-minded in my definition of what should be in this type of page. Is there a way to petition for assistance from an administrator or a more experienced editor, to get an opinion on the "right" Wikipedia way to approach things such as this? I could just start posting on random senior people's talk pages, but there's gotta be a better way. :)

singed_light (talk) 03:50, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :) BOZ (talk) 18:54, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :) BOZ (talk) 01:20, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :) BOZ (talk) 00:59, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :) BOZ (talk) 15:32, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ragarra has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable fictional character

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TTN (talk) 17:10, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:D&DCreatList has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 14:53, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:D&DCreatList has been nominated for merging with Template:D&D creature list. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 11:16, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I want to thank you again for putting all this hard work into finding sources for fictional D&D topics. If you find at least two sources for any topic that has been deleted or redirected (for now, let's leave off on anything deleted or redirected due to AFD) let me know and I will restore it for you. Shore up as much as you can on our existing articles, that way when/if they come up for AFD, we can actually put forth realistic arguments that the sources exist. :) BOZ (talk) 15:28, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thumbs up! I will have an eye on that. So far, Medusa (Dungeons & Dragons) would fulfill that, appearing both in Religions in Play and the Ashgate Encyclopedia of Literary and Cinematic Monsters, as well as the Literary Sources of D&D (which already invoked criticism). I am a little skeptical to try restoring exactly that one, however, as all three secondary source concentrate on the creative origin only. Daranios (talk) 09:30, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Save that one at the top of your to-do list for later. :) Meanwhile, I would add that dinosaur source to the D&D dinosaur article before it gets deleted! BOZ (talk) 14:03, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done my part against the extinction of the dinosaur :-). Daranios (talk) 14:56, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your appeal to the closer of the AFD for the List of Dragonlance creatures. Some closers are pretty liberal and helpful, while others are pretty harsh and sticklers and I think you got one of the latter in this case. Since he did comment that "you do have the opportunity to recreate the article as an actual encyclopedia article - taking the perspective of the real world, not the fictional one - based on the sources you proposed in the AfD", I would suggest that the content could be recreated in Draft space, and worked on until it is ready to submit to AFC, that way your effort would not be wasted. If you are interested in that, let me know. This would apply to any article that gets deleted but you believe could be saved or brought back. BOZ (talk) 12:59, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the offer! I'll keep it in mind. But after the way that deletion discussion went, I am not confident enough that a new-and-improved version would satisfy the majority to put much effort into it. But I had learned a bit from past failures, and have saved the code. I plan to merge a few bits and pieces to articles where they fit to preserve some of the effort. Daranios (talk) 17:06, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you got the whole text of the article as it was, then you are good to go, but if you are missing any pieces let me know. BOZ (talk) 17:38, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of articles in Draft space, I'm not sure if I mentioned these to you before, but in case you have anything to add to Draft:Lycanthrope (Dungeons & Dragons) and Draft:Undead (Dungeons & Dragons) it would be awesome to get them back into article space. :) BOZ (talk) 02:13, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I will look at them some time in the future, at the moment I have enough on my plate :-). It looks like reducing the size might be the larger part of the work compared to finding enough sourcing to fulfill WP:GNG. Daranios (talk) 11:27, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely, working on what we still have left is a higher priority than bringing stuff back, but we will eventually come to a place where what is left is no longer seriously threatened. :) BOZ (talk) 14:11, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :) BOZ (talk) 21:43, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! :) Do you have anything that might help address any of the remaining concerns at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Forgotten Realms/1? BOZ (talk) 11:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Sorry, I don't have anything per se. A first search found the papers [3] and [4] with the simple evaluation of the Realms as "high fantasy" and a classic Tolkien-esque fantasy setting. Collaborative Worldbuilding for Writers and Gamers is a strange one: It has a bit about the continents, but as a quote from the (former version) of the Wikipedia site! So it's in a secondary source with regard to notability, but is Wikipedia with regard to reliability (and kind of self-referential); but we also know that it is correct based on primary sources. Sigh. And then there's the fun one: Have a look at the first two hits when searching Google Scholar for "Umberlee" - it seems a sea snail has been named after Umberlee. :-) Anything of that helpful?

It's rather hard to look for the general topic of the Forgotten Realms. Would you have anything more specific in mind to search for secondary source? Daranios (talk) 10:56, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LOL on the sea snail, although that might be a bit of interesting trivia worth including. I don't think we ought to use any source that cites Wikipedia directly, for the reasons you mentioned, unless it cites either sources which we can then use. If the sources don't do much other than skim the surface briefly, then maybe we could include them as reception but that is about it. I would have to look at the GAR page above to see what specific items need better sourcing, so hopefully I can find the time for that in the near future. BOZ (talk) 12:19, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you see any coverage to improve Neverwinter or Waterdeep, or Kara-Tur? BOZ (talk) 20:04, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So far, I have found a number of sources, but sadly all only with short bits, like for Neverwinter this one, and for Kara-Tur Medieval Unmoored and Collaborative Worldbuilding for Writers and Gamers. What do you think of these? I plan to look some more in the next days, but I am not too optimistic. Daranios (talk) 08:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I say do what you can, if any of those can add anything to the article I would say go ahead and add them - it can at least get merged if that is how they go. BOZ (talk) 13:28, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. Feel free to take a "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" if you prefer.  :) BOZ (talk) 05:05, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another user found one of these so I looked up the rest and added them to the articles about the novels:

• https://io9.gizmodo.com/dungeons-dragons-novels-revisiting-the-crystal-sha-1844083723
• https://io9.gizmodo.com/dungeons-dragons-novels-revisiting-azure-bonds-1844460389
• https://io9.gizmodo.com/dungeons-dragons-novels-revisiting-darkwalker-on-m-1844776398
• https://io9.gizmodo.com/dungeon-dragons-novels-revisiting-spellfire-1845158757
• https://io9.gizmodo.com/dungeons-dragons-novels-revisiting-streams-of-silv-1845544031
• https://io9.gizmodo.com/dungeons-dragons-novels-revisiting-vampire-of-the-1845744777

Not only are those useful for reception information on the novels themselves, they also all contain commentary on the characters therein, which is hard to find except in longer reviews like these. :) I'm going to add them to the still-existing character articles (as has already been done with Strahd), and we can always look to recreate articles such as Bruenor Battlehammer if we could find more sources like these! BOZ (talk) 20:36, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thanks for letting me know about the bag of holding revision and about the old page. It's a pity they got rid of a page about the bag of holding, there's lots of cultural references and significance to the bag of holding, or to other bags like it, I can think of several off the top of my head and I'm sure there's loads more besides. I wonder if we could create a new page for objects found in DnD that have lots of similar or directly inspired instances in other media, and not just the bag of holding - there's tons of stuff like that in DnD. Anyway, happy new year! JoePhin (talk) 4:52, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello JoePhin, thanks for stopping by! Yeah, many D&D-related articles (and other fictional topics) have been deleted/redirected in the last year(s), and you can see the reasoning in this specific case here. Those most strongly advocating for deletion would expect a rather long direct treatment (and not focussing on plot-summary) of the topic in question in several secondary sources. As for combination on a level lower than the whole Magic item (Dungeons & Dragons), Hammerspace has been suggested as a possible parent article for the concept on a broader scope than D&D. There also once was an article about the concept of Magic satchel, but at that time was also voted to deletion here. Daranios (talk) 19:43, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Do you have any secondary sources that could be used to improve Faerûn, Abeir-Toril & the Underdark? Thanks! Sariel Xilo (talk) 20:17, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sariel has dug up some good sources for each of those. :) In a related note, thanks to his help I brought back Warforged, and I moved Kalashtar to Draft:Kalashtar since it was merged due to AFD, but when it is well-sourced enough then it can be submitted to AFC for review. :) BOZ (talk) 15:01, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sariel Xilo! I don't have much in the way of secondary sourcing at this point, I can look some more some time in the future.

• The previews for Collaborative Worldbuilding for Writers and Gamers show quite a number of hits for the topics (though Toril also seems to be the name of a person in the book), but I cannot see details.
• Looting the Dungeon: The Quest for the Genre Fantasy Mega-Text: This trusty thesis has something for all topics, a short description of the Underdark, comments on the development of Farûn/Toril, ...
• Faerûn:
  • Undermountain, now redirected to Faerûn, has several secondary sources in its history
  • Waterdeep, now redirected to Faerûn, has several secondary sources in its history
  • Neverwinter, now redirected to Faerûn, has several secondary sources in its history

These academic papers have short but possibly useful content:

• Dungeons for Science: Mapping Belief Places and Spaces: "the default game world" in 5th edition, "well documented and understood location"
• Tolkien's Leaf: "could practically be called forgeries of Middle-earth, they borrow from it so freely" (not very flattering though :-).
• Passé ludique et déviations historiques: Sens et fonction du Moyen Âge dans les jeux de rôle: Something about that there's dangerous wilderness next to civilization, providing opportunity for adventure, unfortunately again in French only
• Secondary Worlds in Pre-Tolkienian Fantasy Fiction: Greenwood created Faerûn in the 70s
• Character play: the use of game characters in multi-player role-playing games across platforms: the very basic definition "the name of one of the continents in the Forgotten Realms game world"
• Religion as a Resource in Digital Games "the most popular D&D world of the time" (p. 187, it's unfortunately not searchable)

• Is Faerun Ready for Its First Orc President? by Something Awful: Perhaps tangential, but discusses that the D&D controversies about racism also apply to Faerûn

• Abeir-Toril:
  • The Fantasy Role-Playing Game: A New Performing Art: Abeir-Toril is the world of the Forgotten Realms, all of Abeir-Toril was affected by the Time of Troubles
  • DUNGEONS & DISCOURSE: INTERSECTIONAL IDENTITIES IN DUNGEONS & DRAGONS: "Highly popular", talks about the kingdoms and races of Toril
  • Dread Trident: Tabletop Role-Playing Games and the Modern Fantastic has quite a bit of FR history and the like, mentioning Abeir-Toril as being the setting inbetween
  • Medieval Afterlives in Contemporary Culture: "vast, high-fantasy, neo-medievalist world"
  • Computer Gaming World: "bustling Toril" as an active destination in Spelljammer
  • "Ah, So Desu Ka?", an article in The Space Gamer magazine, could slightly improve the Kara-Tur (currently in unfulfilled merge to Kara-Tur: The Eastern Realms) section of Abeir-Toril. Update: That's now all merged into Kara-Tur: The Eastern Realms; I have included the found sources for the real-world analogies; possibly other sections may be of interest.
  • Dungeons & Dragons Art & Arcana: A Visual History has something on Zakhara on p. 244, already visible in the preview, and likely more on other subjects.
• Underdark:
  • "There and Back Again: Nostalgia, Art, and Ideology in Old-School Dungeons and Dragons" This paper has a paragraph about the feel/presentation of the Underdark; mostly based on Advanced Adventures, but probably can be worked into the article.
  • Dungeons and Dragons and Philosophy has a bit about the importance of the drow and Menzoberranzan in the Underdark; and a bit more that and cannot preview.
  • This proceeding is very limited, but does tell that the Underdark is home to many monsters, like ropers, and svirfneblin; maybe for the "Inhabitants" section?
  • This paper actually looks quite interesting, as it may connect ideas from Lovecraft as inspirations for the Underdark. But alas, it's in Portuguese, I think, so I am not sure.
  • Baldur’s Gate: L’héritage du jeu de rôle This book has almost a page, plus a few more mentions, about the Underdark under the name Trésfronds Obscurs (will probably be considered plot-summary). But, well, that's in French. I might be able to help with that one in the long run, if you think that's helpful.

Allright Sariel Xilo, that's all I could find in what time I wanted to invest for the time being. If one wanted to find more, I think it would be necessary to search for more specific locations within Faerûn/Toril rather than the subject names. If you are thinking about anything more specific, please let me know. Daranios (talk) 19:49, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

Are this 2 links Book Mimic - A Variation on the Iconic D&D Monster and Splinter Mimic - An Interpretation of the Iconic D&D Monster good for the D&D related articles? Cheers my friend. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.96.48.252 (talk) 08:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thanks for showing me those links. I admire these small D&D-inspired works of art :-). For use at Wikipedia, however, I think they unfortunately not helpful: Youtube is generally not considered a usable, reliable source (as anyone can post almost anything there). As far as I understand these videos are posted by their creator, and self-published information is only usable under very specific circumstances, and the items seem to be one-of-a-kind, so they do not say too much about distribution of the concept of the mimic. Daranios (talk) 12:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! :) Sariel has been hard at work finding sources on Ravenloft, which have been plentiful lately thanks to reviews of the latest "Van Richten" book which just came out today. I have spun back out the old articles on Vistani, Darklord (Ravenloft) and Ravenloft domains due to all the sources he found for each of those. He has also been adding sources to List of Ravenloft characters, and there may be some characters there (especially Rudolph van Richten himself) that I would want to spin out again if enough sources come out, but a lot of those character articles were redirected due to AFD so I would want to be cautious and not restore before there is enough to meet the GNG. BOZ (talk) 21:53, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello BOZ! Cool thing and nice work! Currently I would not want to commit myself to a topic as broad as restoring/improving Ravenloft-related articles, though. If you would like my input on anything specific, please let me know. As you have mentioned Rudolph van Richten, I came up with only one academic source here. It's in Spanish, unfortunately, but says about the good doctor, according to Google translator: "There are also [in the Ravenloft setting] heroes, with their respective tragedies, such as the legendary Dr. Rudolph Van Richten (the tragic version of Abraham Van Helsing from Dracula, obsessed with destroying any kind of monster)". There's more on other Ravenloft characters and darklords there, and the setting more general, and other aspects of D&D, but I guess only a Spanish speaking person could make good use of it. But might be useful as Further reading or in deletion discussions nonetheless. Daranios (talk) 14:52, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet, we will see what we can do with that. :) BOZ (talk) 15:25, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As in, I thought about AfDing it but I am seeing some sources, and I started Saavik#Reception. Anything you can throw in there to make it safe? TIA! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:44, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Thanks for letting me know. I surely will have a look, but it may take a bit of time Daranios (talk) 07:26, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Daranios, No hurry. My problem as often is that while I see some mentions in passing, I worry if SIGCOV is met. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:06, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: I know you are generally sceptical about Top Ten pages. What do you think of WhatCulture and this discussion of Saavik? Daranios (talk) 15:15, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Daranios, Nice find. It is the most in-depth source we have found. I wonder if there is more that's not well digitized, some pre-Internet era newspaper or Trekkie magazines coverage... overall I think this article is probably borderline but on the 'keep' side. Now, the Ferengi I recently mentioned at AfD will need much more help. As I said, the odds are Quark is notable and I'll see about improving it but I doubt we can do much to save Nog - but if you see anything worthwhile. Anyway, I pinged you at Rom, let's see if you can turn this around - good luck! PS. I am done with my expansion of Quark (Star Trek)#Reception, and I could find less than I hoped for. Still probably borderline keep, but anything you can find and throw in there would likely help. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:25, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When you have time, can you take a look? I prodded it, then I added a reception section, but it is really bare-bones. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:08, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Thanks for alerting me. But while this seems to be an interesting character, and I prefer to keep as much content as possible, that's quite far out of my normal area of interest. I have taken a bit of time to add something, that's all I want to dedicate at this point. Given the Google Scholar hit-list I am rather confident that this character is notable (because in my view of that we are three quarters there). I wonder how much is in "Jesus, Boss Hogg and the Farm Girl Blues". Daranios (talk) 14:17, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	If it wasn't for your efforts, some good articles would be gone. We may not always see eye to eye, but that's how consensus is built. Thank you for your efforts, and for proving me wrong on a number of occasions - it usually is for the best :) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:38, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Thank you, that's much appreciated! Daranios (talk) 07:07, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to let you know, I am working on getting Draft:Yuan-ti back to a published article. :) BOZ (talk) 15:30, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello BOZ, sorry, late reply. Cool thing! Good luck, I hope the draft get's through, though I am not too optimistic. The only major secondary sources I could find were the D&D for Dummies which I've added but where the question of independence has been raised in the past, and the usual The Monsters Know What The're Doing. You wouldn't have full access to that one, would you? The blog has a little bit of commentary here and here, and I'd assume that carries over into the book, but I cannot ascertain it. Incidentally, I have that same problem while trying to improve the D&D part of Genies in popular culture. Daranios (talk) 07:22, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see some passing mentions... but not much. What do you think? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:05, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hell Piotrus! Thanks for stopping by, that's indeed a subject of interest to me. I think that actually there is quite a lot for this charater: There's a 13-page chapter "Shepherd Book, Malcolm Reynolds, and the Dao of firefly" in The Philosophy of Joss Whedon, where the character features quite prominently. Firefly–So “pretty” it could not die at least has a sentence on p. 10 + a paragraph on p. 22. There's a short but analytical bit here. I don't have access to Investigating Firefly and Serenity: Science Fiction on the Frontier, but this review is an academic source that tells us that it analyzes Book's example of a "masculine ethical stances available in an inescapably violent universe". And looking at the Google scholar results, I think there's more. That's enough for me. What do you think? Daranios (talk) 11:18, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are probably right, I am glad I asked you. Can you add few sentences to give the article some semblance of notability, over the coming days? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:58, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Yeah, I think I can do these days (postponing earlier projects - just so much to improve, so little time :-). Daranios (talk) 11:13, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Daranios, Thanks. No hurry! I know there's so much to do. Btw, I was expecting this would be a 'to delete' fancruft and I was quite surprised this topic is quite notable... Dumbledore's Army. Still zillion fancrufty-like articles to review... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:43, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article has been redirected a while back, interestingly, I actually voted week keep and found a source or two. What do you think? Can this be rescued and recreated? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:50, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Piotrus! Thanks for pinging me, but I have to decline that one. Still too much on my plate/always too little time on the one hand, and actually I don't want to spoil me too much on this 15-year-old show, which I still plan on viewing some day :-). Daranios (talk) 14:54, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Daranios, No worries, may I suggest adding it to a to-do list? I have wiki to do lists with discussion/articles to check on a year or years from now, as an aid to memory... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:33, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Good idea, I will do this, having recently started just such a to-do list. My mental list already fills years of work though, and I hope (though with one crying eye) that my increased time on Wikipedia due to COVID19 restrictions will soon end. Daranios (talk) 07:17, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged him for notability, but now I've removed this tag based on the reception found (which I've written up in the linked section). I still am a bit concerned there are just a few sentences here and there, and SIGCOV is not fully met. What do you think? Should the tag be restored, or does it look notable to you? Also ping User:Toughpigs and User:BOZ. Maybe you can see something I missed? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:30, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've actually never watched BG, although it's one of many shows on my radar to eventually catch up with. BOZ (talk) 12:16, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Piotrus! I don't want to get involved here too much for the same reasons discussed above. But I think I can help out with a find: The Theology of Battlestar Galactica: American Christianity in the 2004-2009 has, in addition to a number of distributed bits featuring John Cavil, a two-page chapter (pages 86-88) named "Is John Cavil Lucifer?" under the larger heading "Real-World Echoes". Together with what you have already found, that in my view should push the subject clearly beyond the threshold of notability. Daranios (talk) 11:04, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To page 228 of this? https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=SQMQQyIaACYC&pg=PA228&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false ? I am thinking about expanding this but can't access this page (entry on Earth goes from 226 to 228 but I can only see the first two pages). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:03, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Sorry, same here, I can see only page 227. Daranios (talk) 09:29, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: I was now able borrow a paper copy. Are you still interested in p. 228? I fear it is too long to publish it out here for copy-right reasons, though. Related question: That chapter is by Gary Westfahl himself. Should we add him as both author and editor, to make this entirely clear, or would this be overdoing it? Daranios (talk) 10:55, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Daranios Thank you, I did get that entry from another volunteer. I'd love to have the scan of all the entries to complement the other reference works I was able to obtain, since I'd like to continue writing articles on important themes (the next one I'll tackle is hyperspace - which GF has an entry for, page 404+, and I can't access it (link). The one after that will probably be the concept of mainstream, I mean this... I don't see this in the list of topics here). Space war which has an entry in v2 looks "delicious" as a topic too, but there are so many other great ones too (oh, we already have Science fictional space warfare, although the name is weird...). Shrug, this is of course tentative, who knows what may distract me next (right now I am still working on Bronisław Malinowski, and a bunch of his books beg to be DYKed too... just finished off the verandah few ours ago...).

And yes, we should update the reference to mention the author, when possible, good point.

Any chance you can keep the book for the next few years? :) Unless User:Spinningspark has it already? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:17, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't have it, and I'm also only able to get 226 and 227. Not 228. But WP:RX are usually willing to help with books, as long as you don't ask them to copy the whole book. SpinningSpark 13:25, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Keeping the book? Afraid not. I guess I will be able to borrow it again at some intervals, in case it is needed again. Daranios (talk) 10:58, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could you help with a German source that someone brought up recently (in pl wiki deletion discussion for fr:Panoramix, no de or en artcles). The source is Elixir Gaulois. De herschrijving van Asterix en Vercingetorix, of onze vergeten-ideologische blik op het verleden. Wait, this is Dutch not German...? [5] Any idea who could help? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:29, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Piotrus! Yes that is indeed Dutch, so I am afraid neither can I help here nor do I know anyone else who could. I don't know what your discussion is about, but are you aware that the character (like others in Asterix) has a variety of names in different languages, i.e. Miraculix in German and Getafix in English (where you can also find lots of others of the names)? Now neither of the linked list sections seems to have secondary sources, but if it's about notability you might want to expand your WP:BEFORE search to the name variants. E.g. the German book Asterix - die ganze Wahrheit has a chapter about Miraculix from p. 32-35 with some commentary on the historicity of his role as a druid. Daranios (talk) 19:34, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This word certainly doesn't suggest a subset. It is all-inclusive. Tony (talk) 22:34, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tony1: Thanks for the clarification, here I had a skewed notion about that word as a non-native speaker. Please undo my change at German Bundesrat in case you think the previous phrasing was better/more elegant/natural. Thanks! Daranios (talk) 19:38, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! I'm not sure if I showed this to you, but for about 6 weeks I have been building User:BOZ/DnD deletions to catalogue all the former articles about fictional elements for D&D, which have been deleted or redirected. You may not find this super useful as a reference, or you may get a lot of use out of it. I have a feeling I have the majority (75% ish?) of them already, but I will keep going until I am done. :) BOZ (talk) 15:11, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey BOZ! Cool thing, I was aware of your project, and was impressed both by your effort and the amount of stuff that has been removed from Wikipedia. I don't currently have any plans where I see me using it (currently looking at another list, the one of incoming redirects to List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters ,from time to time), but it's good to know it exists! Daranios (talk) 20:01, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you like it, one way it may be useful is seeing what else has been redirected to what articles, and what needs fixing, although that is likely a project for another time. :) BOZ (talk) 20:43, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Daranios:! My interests include Dungeons & Dragons without a doubt. I am a native Portuguese speaker. I will take a look at these articles. Thank you for your contact. Luidje (talk) 06:49, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Luidje, thanks for stopping by! Any input you like to make based on the Portuguese article (I can only vaguely understand with the help of Google translate) is greatly appreciated! Daranios (talk) 11:56, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. Feel free to take a "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" if you prefer.  :) BOZ (talk) 20:18, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the best wishes. We may not always agree, but I appreciate the cordial and civil fashion in which we can discuss our differences. And sometimes, we agree too - and I do appreciate your work too! Btw, I hope to write the article on Christmas in fiction, or Christmas in science fiction, one day... I think there may be sources :) Might be a bit late for this year, I was thinking to do it earlier this weak but I was hit with a major case of trolling that ate a lot of my time and motivation. Which is why I even more appreciate your words of goodwill! _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:53, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas 2021

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:04, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]