Talk:D'hin'ni

This page was proposed for deletion by TTN (talk · contribs) on 27 December 2019.

This redirect 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, or join the discussion, where you can join the project and find out how to help!Dungeons & DragonsWikipedia:WikiProject Dungeons & DragonsTemplate:WikiProject Dungeons & DragonsDungeons & Dragons articles

Low

This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

D&D to-do:

view

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Merge : Various articles
Stubs : Dungeoneer's Survival Guide, Swords & Spells, Variant Dungeons & Dragons games, More...
Update : Rewrite to be out-of-universe: Companions of the Hall, Dark Sun, Elf (Dungeons & Dragons)
Verify : add sources to novels planned for merge to List of Dragonlance novels
Other : Collaboration: Dave Arneson, Drow (Dungeons & Dragons)

Removal of cleanup templates[edit]

I note that certain cleanup templates have been removed without cleanup being effected or any reasonable justification being provided. I would be grateful if they could be restore so that editors who are in a position to carry out cleanup will be alerted to those sections where it is need. --Gavin Collins (talk) 09:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{who}} tags were in multiple places where the sentence either clearly said who was involved or where there wasn't a person in it; such tags make no sense. For example, "Their favorite class is the sorcerer{{Who}})." was a sentence. The "their" refers to the d'hin'ni, as should be obvious from the rest of the paragraph, and "sorcerer" is not a person. Additionally, the sheer number of {{who}} tags made the article difficult to read. I have removed the tags so that it is easier to read and because many of them did not make sense. If you wish, you may restore the {{[tl|weasel}} template, which effectively negates the need for in-line {{who}} tags. -Drilnoth (talk) 13:36, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where a statement is made without attribution, such as "Their favorite class is the sorcerer", it is not clear who is making this statement: is the game authors, or perhaps some fictional observer in the game? I recomend restoring the cleanup templates if you are not going to make any improvements to the article, so that other editors will be aware of these problems. --Gavin Collins (talk) 13:41, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the exact text of the template documentation:
This tag is for placement after descriptions of a group of persons, such as "serious scholars / scientists / researchers," "historians / philosophers / scientists," "some / many people," and the like.

Use it when no specific examples of identifiable individuals from that group are named who could be used to verify the statements or beliefs attributed to the group. Preferably the offending statement should be made more specific by identifying particular individuals and then either cited or tagged for needing citation. Similarly, the statement should be deleted if the claim about the group is sufficiently vague as to be unsupportable.

Now can you see that the tag is inappropriate? According to your definition, millions of those tags would have to be placed; not everything in every article is sourced, and the {{who}} tag has nothing to do with sourcing. -Drilnoth (talk) 13:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly there is no specific examples of identifiable individuals used in the statements I have used the template on. Surely it is not obvoious to you that a claim such as "Their favorite class is the sorcerer" is sufficiently vague as to be unsupportable? --Gavin Collins (talk) 14:07, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently it is not obvious. Also, if you think that it is "sufficiently vague to be unsupportable", then wouldn't the {{vague}} tag make more sense than {{who}}? -Drilnoth (talk) 14:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]