This article is within the scope of the Dungeons & Dragons WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Dungeons & Dragons-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and find out how to help!
In particular, I'm trying to find a reasonably reliable source that discussed the fledgling controversy invoked by BOED's tacit acceptance of homosexuality. It would make for interesting parity with the BOVD article, at the least. Serpent's Choice 08:42, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
No such luck on my end. Coming up bupkus. -Jeske(v^_^v) 23:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
It is cataloged by the LOC(Library of Congress) http://lccn.loc.gov/2005618946. I've seen it at least two local libraries as well. So it does at least meet the minimum threshold standards, but not notability notability. CharlesLupton (talk) 22:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Does a linked article in Wikipedia count? if so what about the D&D Controversies Article. "The more 'extreme' manuals, specifically the Book of Vile Darkness and the Book of Exalted Deeds, bear a "For Mature Audiences Only" label." Which link to this and the Vile Darkness article. CharlesLupton (talk) 22:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Whether D&D itself requires more than a single page on Wikipedia is a matter for the community as a whole, but we shouldn't be tagging things piecemeal for deletion. If each of the manuals is going to get a page, classes get pages, etc, then the entire thing becomes a compact reference and discussion of the details of D&D/AD&D and becomes more useful to anyone looking for knowledge on the topic. If the entire D&D project should really be moved off to another wiki - I don't have a dog in that fight - but we shouldn't be playing Jenga with the articles composing it. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 20:57, 12 March 2008 (UTC)