Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons/Dragonlance

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

Redirect

This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment 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)

Uploading Some Images[edit]

Hey all! Wow, looks like I'm starting the talk page :). Anyhow, could someone please upload images of the Legends Trilogy covers? I'm planning on creating articles for them and really want the images for them. Thanks! DoomsDay349 22:09, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This image: Image:DL CaramonAndCrysania.jpg I think is a crop of a cover in that trilogy. ddcc 15:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of cover images, we should probably figure out which covers (for multi-edition books) we want to use, to be standard across the project. I beleive that the standard for the Books project is to use the first edition cover, if available. I'd uploaded those covers for the Chronicles trilogy a while ago, but unfortunately they've since been overwritten by the latest cover image instead. So which would be better, originals or latest? My vote is originals, everytime. --Maelwys 15:56, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First write the article, then upload the images. Because of our Fair use criteria, we can upload images if they are used in an article. Uploading them before the article is written may make bots tag is at orphaned, and add an image to a stub may be considered decorative. -- ReyBrujo 17:23, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then, I'll get to work on Time of the Twins soon as I look over it to remember the plot. DoomsDay349 20:30, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Time of the Twins has been created, so feel free to add that image. DoomsDay349 00:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can I also get a cover of War of the Twins? Article has been created. Dooms Day34 9 17:10, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here. D dc c 22:50, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for a novel[edit]

Hey all, I'm trying to find a novel so I can finally get to writing the Dhamon Grimwulf article. I've finished Dragons of a New Age and Dhamon Saga trilogies, working on War of Souls now. I need to know if any of you know wherein

{{spoilers}} Onysablet is slain by Dhamon and he follows.

{{endspoilers}} I've read this on the Nexus, but I can't find the book where it happens. Anyone know? DoomsDay349 21:05, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the spoiler ;-) I believe Dhamon stars Lake of Death, but I do not know what the book is about (I kind of dislike Dhamon and anything surrounding him in two books of distance). -- ReyBrujo 17:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added the spoiler tag, sorry about that. Does anyone know the book in which Sable dies though? DoomsDay349 20:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I looked up Lake of Death on the Nexus product info. Looks to me that that one probably contains those events. I'll make it my top priority after finishing War of Souls and Dark Disciple (maybe a month). Hope I can remember the info on Dhamon after that though. DoomsDay349 20:19, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Limit on New Articles[edit]

Should we start erasing new articles after, say, maybe five are up there? For instance, there are currently five and Ackal Ergot is last. If a new one should come up, should we erase Ackal Ergot? DoomsDay349 21:07, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe we should not limit the amount, but in time. Let's consider an article "new" for a month. -- ReyBrujo 17:35, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. I'll keep track of it. Perhaps we should consider signing your name indicating you are the author of the article on the day it is made, so we can keep track of the times? DoomsDay349 20:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Portal Questions[edit]

To post my third topic in about five minutes, can someone either show me how to change the Dragonlance Portal question to weekly or help me out in doing it? I could come up with about 40 more questions, it wouldn't be too hard. Weekly would be much nicer. DoomsDay349 21:12, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Links[edit]

I went through and fixed a few of the links in the reference areas. For some reason | was in all of them and was warping the link so it wouldn't work. Not sure what it is for, but they are working now.--Kranar drogin 10:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I wasn't aware you didn't need the | in there. My bad, I'll stop. DoomsDay349 20:15, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Dragonlance Userbox[edit]

Hey all, I've created a userbox for us to put proclaiming us to the world as members of WikiProject Dragonlance. The completed thing is posted on my sandbox as well as on my userpage, and I'll post the code and finished result here. Please, feel free to fix it up if you feel the colors don't work or whatever. This is pretty much a prototype for now.

The code: {{Userbox |border-c = #000 |border-s = 1 |id-c = #8B0000 |id-s = 12 |id-fc = #000 |info-c = #006400 |info-s = 8 |info-fc = #000 |id = DL |info = This user is a member of [[WP:WPDL|WikiProject Dragonlance]]. }}

and the result:

DL

This user is a member of WikiProject Dragonlance.

Again, I encourage you to work out the kinks on it. Dooms Day34 9 02:48, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hooray! But...so many colors! o_o It's very hard to read. --Masamage 03:07, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's true. The blue link is too dark to be seen on the dark green, and the red is so dark that it's barely possible to see the black DL. Change the colors a bit, and much better. Also, when you're done fixing it, you should host it at User:DoomsDay349/Template:WPDL. Then if we all agree on it, we can host it officially at this wikiproject page. ddcc 03:19, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK then, I removed the font color. Do you like it now? Dooms Day34 9 03:33, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a version with colors based on the logo...

DL

This user is a member of WikiProject Dragonlance.

It's a little boring, but it's clean, and it's an idea. ^^ --Masamage 03:44, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DL

This user is a member of WikiProject Dragonlance.

I liked yours, but I think the green in the id section livens it up a bit. You like? Dooms Day34 9 03:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so then, how do I go about hosting it? Just put the code on the aforementioned page? Dooms Day34 9 16:20, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe so. ddcc 16:35, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DL

This user is a member of WikiProject Dragonlance.

...With a green outline? :) I'm okay with whatever you guys pick. --Masamage 01:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No offense, but I think the red and beige combo is a little...plain. Not that I'm insulting your contributions, you see. I think we'll go with the 3rd one (green and beige, red outline). Dooms Day34 9 02:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The dragon image is free, so we should have no problems using it in the box if you prefer it instead of the Dl wording. -- ReyBrujo 02:34, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Use the dragon image as a background for the box, maybe dim the dragon a bit, and have text in front! ddcc 02:38, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm...ok then, the box is at User:DoomsDay349/Template:WPDL. You guys can totally do whatever you were just saying, but you totally lost me =P. Dooms Day34 9 02:39, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah so, is anyone gonna post this on their page? :)Dooms Day34 9 21:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user is a member of WikiProject Dragonlance.

How about this? ddcc 15:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm good with that. I'll update the template page now then. Dooms Day34 9 20:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but fair use images can't be used in templates (see 9th Fair use criteria policy). -- ReyBrujo 04:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's cool. I thought about that but I'm not knowledgable about Fair Use. Dooms Day34 9 20:11, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is why we use that dragon in the WikiProject banner instead of the official DL one :-( -- ReyBrujo 20:21, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Well then, we all agree on the current version? Dooms Day34 9 20:44, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose so. ddcc 16:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm down. --Masamage 23:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then, so then I'll put this on the project page to make it official. Dooms Day34 9 05:05, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DL

This user is a member of WikiProject Dragonlance.

I have to say, I'm not the biggest fan of the current userbox.., the red borders are a bit much. It's really not an aesthetically pleasing box.. sorry. The colours need to be a bit lighter and a bit more sublte. :S

Here's a little something I whipped up. - Moe 03:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like that one. I'll agree with it, but we should wait for some more feedback before making it official. Dooms Day34 9 20:07, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. ddcc 01:13, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK then, we'll go with that. I updated it. Dooms Day34 9 02:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Randfan posted this on the main page, I've moved it here to be discussed first. D dc c 03:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

or you can use this:

{{User Dragonlance WikiProject}}, (sorry it's in red...) it looks like this:

This user is a member of the Dragonlance WikiProject.

Rewording[edit]

Hmm... now, I know other WikiProject uses the "member" term, but I don't think it is good to discriminate between those who assist and those who actively edit Dragonlance articles. Maybe a rephrase like "This user collaborates with the WikiProject Dragonlance" or similar is neutral enough so that collaborators could use the infobox as well. What do you think? -- ReyBrujo 18:31, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe "This user participates in WikiProject DragonLance"? --Masamage 18:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Both are good, but I like Rey's better. I'll wait for a consensus before changing. Dooms Day34 9 20:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like his 'the', but the rest of it is pretty fine. I just think "collaborates with" is a little weird, because it makes the WikiProject kind of sound like a sentient being. :) --Masamage 20:32, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...Perhaps change the "with" to "in", making it "This user collaborates in WikiProject Dragonlance". What do you think? Dooms Day34 9 20:55, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem. Have we come up with anything? Dooms Day34 9 01:12, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! That userbox really rocks! I think we should stick with that, and maybe improve its colour,if anyone wants to. I think its fine the way it is. Oh, and I agree with Rey too. Zachary crimsonwolf 13:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Astinus Image[edit]

Is it possible to scan the picture of Astinus located in Dragons of Spring Dawning (Chapter 5, page 54 in paperback edition)? I don't know about copyright or anything, but that might be a decent picture, except for the fact it's black and white...which might count against it, I dunno. Dooms Day34 9 20:55, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have that book, so I can't scan it, unless you have or Rey has a scanner. We could always try to find another picture of Astinus. ddcc 14:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anything in Masters of Dragonlance art? Dooms Day34 9 20:10, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't remember anything about Astinus, and I already returned the book anyway. The Art of the Dragonlance Saga is coming soon though. ddcc 14:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Main Storyline[edit]

The Main Storyline section on the Dragonlance page is incomplete. What should we put there? The sum of info in the core novels? Or more, or less? What do you think? Dooms Day34 9 02:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, properly speaking, that is the main storyline, the origin. One solution could be creating no more than one paragraph per main trilogy (one paragraph for Chronicles, Legends, Summer Flame and War of Souls). The problem is creating that four-paragraph section. As you can imagine, everytime a new trilogy is launched, the section should be expanded, which I don't really like. Maybe focusing the article in the Fourth Age, creating the main storyline about Chronicles, Legends and Summer Flame, and then creating a Fifth Age section, as the original intention was finishing the saga at the end of Summer Flame. -- ReyBrujo 05:07, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note one what the main storyline is. Most fans consider the Dragons of a New Age trilogy part of the main storyline. It seems you are just putting what MW and TH did as the main storyline though, which some fans contest is the main storyline, only what they write. Actively though, DoaNA is promoted as the main storyline and told to new readers to read this trilogy in order after Summer Flame. Just a suggestion. --Kranar drogin 10:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The main storyline and the origin are different though. I like the idea of one paragraph per trilogy (including Dragons of a New Age and possibly Dark Disciple). Begin with Chronicles and War of the Lance, then Legends and Raistlin's attempt at ascension, followed by Dragons of Summer Flame and Chaos War, after that Dragons of a New Age and the info about the Overlords, then War of Souls, and then possibly Dark Disciple and some of the more important Age of Mortals info. I agree with Kranar, Dragons of a New Age is definetly core, as it sets up the Overlords, who are totally essential to the story. We would have to consolidate the book list section into Main Storyline though, as it is essentially the same. Dooms Day34 9 20:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is why I suggest keeping the main storyline only in the fourth age, and adding later the fifth age, to prevent misunderstandings. If we are adding the 5th age to the main storyline, then I would suggest one or two paragraphs per age (thus between 2 and 4 paragraphs), and not one per trilogy. -- ReyBrujo 21:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, I will begin writing soon as I finish Dragons of a Vanished Moon. So basically, we will divide up like so:

==Main Storyline== ... ===Fourth Age=== ... ===Fifth Age=== ... I can't get it to properly seperate, but you get the idea. Correct? Dooms Day34 9 22:53, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome Template[edit]

I created a welcome template to be used for someone who appears interested in working in Dragonlance related articles. Just add {{User:DoomsDay349/Template:Dragonlance Welcome}} to their talk page. Feel free to make some changes, it's a very rough draft for now. Dooms Day34 9 20:45, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... but if the user is a regular user, that template would make no sense. I think it is better to have a separate welcome message, like {{WPSPAM-invite}}, one that you can use with novices and experienced editors. -- ReyBrujo 20:50, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. I'll adjust it. Dooms Day34 9 20:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated. How do you like it? Dooms Day34 9 21:03, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Standards for Writing[edit]

I was looking over some other WikiProjects, and came across the Middle-earth WikiProject. There, they have a standards section. I like that idea and think we should draw up standards for ourselves. It would help alot in writing. Tell me what you think. Dooms Day34 9 21:05, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conundrum[edit]

I'm curious; does anyone have a copy of Conundrum? I tried to get one, but discovered it was out of print (yes, that is the paperback edition), and went online to find one. The best I can find is a $25 Mass Market Paperback from Amazon.com. I could buy this, but I'm trying to save my money and really don't want to spend so much right now. I have every other Age of Mortals book otherwise, though. But anyway, it would help immensely if anyone has Conundrum. I might try to find a copy at my library, but I doubt they have it. Dooms Day34 9 02:30, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I got a copy, but haven't read it yet. -- ReyBrujo 03:57, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Once you read it, please fix up that article. Thanks! Dooms Day34 9 20:06, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fiery mountain/meteorite[edit]

The Cataclysm, as we all know, is described in the novels as a "fiery mountain" striking Istar. However, it is often assumed this is a meteorite. We must remember that within the context of the novels, it may well have been a flaming mountain, as it was cast by almighty beings. Has it ever been stated anywhere that it was, in fact, a meteorite? If not, we cannot use that term. I ask this because the Dragonlance page recently had the term "fiery mountain" changed to meteorite. Thanks. Dooms Day34 9 00:58, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Defined Task List[edit]

Moe and I struck up a conversation about a supplement list to be used in conjunction with the current tasklist. This will give a clear and defined list of current tasks, but we can still use the other one. Anyway, here's the format I think we ought use. What we can do is add in info here, and then once we've got what we want filled in, we post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dragonlance/to do. So let's work.

Collaboration:
To Nominate at WP:FAC:
To Improve to Featured standard: Goldmoon
To Improve to Good Article standard: Riverwind, Sturm Brightblade
To Make Meet Fiction Guidelines: Tanis Half-Elven, Laurana Kanan, Flint Fireforge
To Expand: Tasslehoff Burrfoot, Silvanoshei, Mina
To Clean up:Kith-Kanan, Speaker of the Sun.
To Merge: None for now.
To Destub: See Category:Dragonlance stubs - Some pages are using the {{stub}} tags, rather than the {{Dragonlace-stub}} tags.
To Deorphan: None for now.
To Create: Gerard uth Mondar, Alhana Starbreeze (Alhana is a redirect, try to make into a real article)
Lists to complete: See Category:Dragonlance lists, as most lists are incomplete.
Wanted Pics/Graphics: None for now.
Wanted New Pics: None for now.
Add infobox to all the articles on characters, see Category:Dragonlance characters

Dooms Day34 9 01:52, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's been created, see the project page. Dooms Day34 9 15:46, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice!ddcc 02:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:) Thanks. Dooms Day34 9 16:02, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why's it on a talk page? Shouldn't we move it to the main wikiproject namespace? ddcc 22:02, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I created it using the Star Trek tasklist as a guideline. It has it in the talk namespace, as do others. I assumed that was the norm. We can always move it. Dooms Day34 9 23:52, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at some other WikiProjects. The WikiProject Wisconsin jas their's in the Wikipedia talk namespace, whereas the WikiProject Ohio has it in normal Wikipedia namespace. I'm not sure what the norm is, if there even is one. Dooms Day34 9 23:56, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For Time of the Twins, the actual cover or the cover /wo any of the title and stuff, since I have the original artwork available?

The actual cover. Dooms Day34 9 02:33, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'm gonna move the page to the main Wikipedia name space, that way we can discuss the task list there. Dooms Day34 9 02:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Image:Timeofthetwins.jpg. ddcc 17:43, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Project watchlist[edit]

Wow! How did you guys make this? Was it done by hand, or is there some function that can include everything within a category? --Masamage 04:14, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A special page named Special:Recentchangeslinked allows you to see the recent changes of a set of wikilinks. In example, Special:Recentchangeslinked/Dragon allows you to see the recent changes of any wikilink listed in the Dragon article. Thus, you create a page with all the wikilinks you want to check, and then use the Recentchangeslinked page on it to create a recent changes page, similar to a watchlist. -- ReyBrujo 17:25, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alas, you need to do that manually, as far as I know. -- ReyBrujo 17:26, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alas! Oh well, I can do that. :) Thanks for the good idea! --Masamage 01:00, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although it was done by hand, but what you can do (what I did) was view source, copy links to notepad. Then use find and replace to add the * [[ at the front, but the back ]] needs to be manually done. ddcc 01:14, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly what I did. :D It actually didn't take too long. --Masamage 01:43, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can do it with a category apparently, but categories can only show 200 articles at the same time. -- ReyBrujo 01:33, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Project Directory[edit]

Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:

User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:23, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now put the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 00:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed News Template[edit]

Many other WikiProjects have a news templates, with weekly collaboration and such. I think we could really benefit from this, for if we had all seven (I believe there are seven members, correct me if I'm wrong) of us working on a single article, it would be better, fast. So, I propose we make on at Wikipedia:WikiProject Dragonlance/News. It can include a weekly collaboration as well as any interesting news, such as the status of Riverwind in it's GA nomination. Any new article or article feautured at the DYK section could also be here. Any other news is also welcome. Tell me what you think. Dooms Day34 9 02:19, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. ddcc 15:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, then, so we can get started making it. I propose this week's collaboration as Dragonlance Legends, which I'll post for now, then we can always change it. Dooms Day34 9 20:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then again, I was thinking perhaps we should go for Dragons of Autumn Twilight. We can go with that and discuss. Dooms Day34 9 20:34, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We can put it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Dragonlance/Collaboration of the Week. Dooms Day34 9 20:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We will also need Template:WPDLCN, short for WikiProject Dragonlance Collaboration Notice. Dooms Day34 9 20:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My proposal for the COTW box:

The current WikiProject Dragonlance Collaboration of the Week is Dragons of Autumn Twilight
The next candidate will be selected on: October 31.
Last week's article was: none as of yet.

We'll have to fill in the rest. Like I said, we'll put it at the aforementioned template after we've got the fields filled in. I've put October 31st as the date for next as it's a week from today, but we can always move it up. Dooms Day34 9 20:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I might have said this, I'm a bit nervous about starting this, so we're waiting for ReyBrujo's input. He said sometime this weekend, so hopefull soon! :). Dooms Day34 9 00:19, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No need to wait for me every time, I am away from Dragonlance this month (I usually change what I edit during the month to prevent getting bored). The collaboration of the week is a good idea indeed, and most other WikiProject do have one. But I would be realistic: we are very few still, and so I would not expect a lot of improvement in a week. -- ReyBrujo 16:50, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Collaboration of the Month, perhaps? It's an idea...should the page be a subpage of the WikiProject or a normal page in the Wikipedia namespace? Dooms Day34 9 21:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey DoomsDay...is there a new collaboration of the month? I'm thinking Dragons of the Dwarven Depths. I did some work on it recently but it still needs a lil more. MetsFan76 05:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Related Wikiprojects[edit]

Hi. You may wish to add the following to the main page:

--Robbstrd 22:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I could see adding those. Except maybe WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons should be more of a parent project? Dooms Day 349 Happy Halloween! 22:30, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could be. We can check how Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk are treated. -- ReyBrujo 03:51, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me that D&D should definitely be a parent project, since the Dragonlance series originated on tabletop. --Masamage 06:56, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would be a good idea. Some "inter-project" support sort of a thing. D dc c 15:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Banner for WikiProject[edit]

What happened to the image in the banner? I can't find it's removal in the page history...it's like it never was. What's up with this! Dooms Day34 9 00:07, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused as to which banner you're talking about. D dc c 02:20, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I meant the dragon picture. It wasn't appearing on my browser, I just minorly altered the pix and it was fine. Sorry :) Dooms Day349 16:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Day Awards[edit]

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know[edit]

Just to let everyone know, I know that my editing has been slow as of late in Dragonlance things, but I'm trying to wrap up a trilogy, Minotaur Wars, and will update a bunch of articles with it, and plan to create articles on the books. I'm going to get around to getting articles on all the books up, I just need to figure out how to get the covers. So, soon enough I'll be back...soon enough. Dooms Day349 23:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dragonlance Campaign Setting[edit]

I'm happy to announce to everyone I have received a copy of the Dragonlance Campaign Setting, so we can expect big updates to a lot of sections. I don't have a scanner unfortunately so no pictures, but I can do the best I can. The Ansalon article will be in far better shape soon. The gods might even be bumped back to individual articles, but I'm gonna wait for Holy Orders of the Stars on that one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DoomsDay349 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 6 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Be careful though, there are a lot of errors in the book, especially spelling and dates (look at the timeline section and you will see it doesn't match up when you get into the Age of Mortals). Overall though, this is a great sourcebook to have in your collection, and I encourage you to continue getting Margaret Weis Productions gaming books.--Kranar drogin 18:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've already ordered Holy Orders and Knightly Orders, I want Races of Ansalon but Amazon has absolutely none. Dooms Day349 18:47, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is because it isn't out yet, haha! Races won't be ready until prolly after February. --Kranar drogin 18:53, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh...meh. I need to keep on top of these things :) Now do I feel stupid.... Dooms Day349 18:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plot summaries[edit]

There has been some discussion at the talk pages of WP:WAF and WP:FU, and has been proven that detailed plot summaries can be considered copyright violation if written fully in in-universe perspective. So, when creating articles for novels or movies, try to keep them as simple as possible, not detailing what happens in every chapter. -- ReyBrujo 03:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Berem[edit]

Unless I am mistaken, there is not an article on Berem, the Everman. If not, should one be made? I will volunteer to create it. MetsFan76 16:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BE BOLD!. Just change the old links to Berem to the new article (I think they link to a section about Berem on a War article, D dc c 00:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Berem isn't terribly important. I'm not sure if I would create an article on him. But go for it, we'll so how it goes. Dooms Day349 01:10, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Importance aside, there's just not that much to say about him. I don't think it could ever get past being a stub. Might not be worth the trouble. --Masamage 01:25, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I meant; he wasn't important enough, thus he wouldn't have enough info. I wouldn't write it as an article, but perhaps in the List of Minor Dragonlance characters. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DoomsDay349 (talk • contribs) 01:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Yeah I was thinking more like a stub. In regards to his importance, I think the fact that Takhisis went ape-shit looking for him as he was the key for her to enter Krynn and that he was basically a central character in Dragons of Spring Dawning makes him a very important character. But I definitely agree with you guys. There definitely isn't enough material for it to be an entire article. I will add him to the List of Minor Dragonlance characters today. Any input after I write it would be helpful! Thanks! MetsFan76 13:39, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts exactly. :) Important, but overly mysterious. Good luck! --Masamage 19:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! His character was actually kind of annoying (with all the whining and what not). I rank him up there with Elistan LOL. MetsFan76 19:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccurate name on Dragonlance related article[edit]

Hi, I just found an article for a Dragonlance novel called Darkness and Light. It currently has an inaccurate name that implies that the book is a science fiction book. The name is Darkness and Light (sci-fi novel).

You can read my arguments for this to be altered in the talk pages of the article. Please note that Darkness and Light is already being used as a redirect page, so is available for use by your wikiproject. Big Mac 12:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Already been undid. D dc c 23:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dragons of Autumn Twilight[edit]

Just want to let everyone know that Dragons of Autumn Twilight has been listed as a GA. I believe it's our 3rd Good Article and our first on a novel. Thanks to everyone who helped out! Dooms Day349 23:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome!!!! Congrats! =) MetsFan76 23:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Too Cool ! MP Samhain 16:12, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So does that mean we can put a lil userbox on our page that we contributed to a Good Article? MetsFan76 16:13, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wahoo! Good job, all that contributed! --Maelwys 16:28, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anything important going down?[edit]

As I'm sure you're aware, I've been away for a bit. Has there been anything of any importance going on I need to know about? Sorry for my absence, I just had to chill out for a while. Thanks. Dooms Day349 01:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Rethinking[edit]

I've been thinking. How many of the Dragonlance articles really deserve articles? I mean, novels obviously do, but everything else, you have to wonder. So, I'm going through all the articles on Dragonlance, and presenting my thoughts. This is an effort to clean, reorganize, and delete in an effort to provide a better presentation of Dragonlance. (note I will only be presenting articles I believe something should be done with). Also note if I don't mention a character, it probably still needs cleaning but not inclusion in this project.

If I just summarize a category it's because I believe they all need the same stuff. I can go into detail when we take this further.

In Category:Dragonlance,

Dragonlance (weapon). Do we really need an article on it? Isn't there some other place we could put this? A lot of what's there is game info and redundant in game and in universe info that the Nexus already covers. I propose we trim it and find an applicable place, or delete it.

Dragons of Faith, Dragons of Light, Dragons of Ice. All stubs no one has presented much interest in fixing. We should delete. I have a proposal for sourcebooks; perhaps a Dragonlance Sourcebooks article which would briefly summarize all the sourcebooks? That way, we can trim down on a bunch of external articles, and nearly empty ones (such as these).

Greygem of Gargath. Needs a serious rewrite that only presents useful out of universe (hereafter I will say this as OOU and IU, for simplicity) information. And afterwards, move that info to Dragonlance artifacts.

~~Neidar. Serious trim to present only OOU information and redirect to Dragonlance creatures.~~

Night Sky of Krynn. I suggest a major, major trim for only OOU information and redirect to Krynn.

Speaker of the Stars, ~~Speaker of the Suns. I think these are (and ironically I created both of them) both totally non notable and that we should delete both of them, and not put their info anywhere else.~~

Stormblade (Dragonlance novel). Major, major fix to conform with standards. Obviously.

Dragonlance timeline. This needs heavy fixing with inlines at every sentence for verifiability, and updating.

In Category:Dragonlance characters,

Astinus. By Wikipedia standard, pretty non notable. Trim and redirect to characters.

Tasslehoff Burrfoot. Needs cleaning and adding, but he's notable.

Kaz (Dragonlance). Trim and add info to characters page, redirect. Not that notable for his own article.

The two characters lists we can address at a later date.

All the Dragonlance deities. All of these need trimming and make them totally OOU, then redirect to the list of DL deities. I have some sourcebooks I can use for that.

Dragonlance dragons. All of them need trimming and reduced to OOU, redirect to the list of dragons.

Dalamar. He's pretty notable, had a novel dedicated to him. Just needs cleaning of the article.

Gilthas. Clean but leave as article.

Ariakan, Ariakas. Trim and redirect to characters.

Fistandantilus. Fix and redirect to characters.

Huma Dragonbane. Needs fixing, but he's notable.

List of Ergoth Emperors. I'm sorry I ever wrote this. Delete.

Caramon, Palin, and Raistlin Majere. Clean, but all notable.

Otik. Same as Usha.

Lord Soth. Pretty good, needs some trimming and cleaning, but leave it as an article.

Tanin Majere. Redirect to characters after trimming.

Kitiara uth Matar. Clean and fix, but leave as article.

Dragonlance creatures.

In summary, all of them need cleaning and expansion, make them all OOU, but all of them should stay as articles.

Dragonlance lists. Except for Ergoth Emperors, all them need to stay but need massive revamp and cleaning, with OOU additions.

Dragonlance organizations. All of them should stay, but massive rewrites for accurate and OOU info.

Dragonlance events. Keep and rewrite Cataclysm, delete Creation without redirect. The Wars; I propose a Dragonlance Wars article where we redirect all of these with rewrites for OOU.

Dragonlance locations.

Ansalon. Rewrite for OOU and fix.

Empire of Ergoth. Trim and redirect to Dragonlance locations.

High Clerist's Tower. Same as above.

Kendermore. It's a novel. Kendermore itself, no mention, the novel needs recategorized and cleanup.

Krynn. Major rewrite and trim for OOU information only. But it deserves its own article.

Taladas. Same as Ansalon.

Towers of High Sorcery. Big rewrite for OOU and lots of cleanup. Maybe redirect to locations.

Every Dragonlance writer needs a good rewrite and pictures.

Any novels in this category, expand and clean.

Dragonlance Adventures. Right now, we simply don't have the info on this to write a good article. Delete until we're ready.

Mina. Needs big cleanup and reasonable OOU expansion.

These are my proposals for the initial cleanup of Dragonlance. My basic plan is first we need to clean everything existing. I suggest we systematically organize according to my proposals and of course our ensuing discussion, allotting time for projects and getting them done in a reasonable timespan. After everything is in a good, stable, encyclopedic condition (doesn't have to be GA or anything, just good enough), we focus on creating new articles of good standard. We should organize for one every other day, and if we can write them on our own on our own schedules. That brings me to the final point. In order to ensure future stability, we must present clear concise guidelines of our wikiproject for a standard, verifiable quality. That way, we'll hopefully never face a situation of degraded articles like we have now.

Thank you for reading my proposals. Let me know what you think of them, and I am looking forward to acting on them for the improvement of Dragonlance and Wikipedia in general. Dooms Day349 02:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So now you want to delete everything that's been worked on? I'm not really willing to go through and delete everything that we worked on. I'd rather merge most and cleanup at the same time, rather than straight out delete the content. D dc c 06:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The majority of the proposals don't include deletion. I think about four or five I suggested on grounds of complete non notability. The others are, as you say, merges and cleanups to present an OOU format. Dooms Day349 00:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not against merging articles. Personally, I do not think it is right to delete something just because we can't get information about it, when its notability is obvious. I may come back actively to this WikiProject to expand articles, but right now I am on semi-wikibreak, and helping smaller wikipedias to keep spam and vandalism under control. -- ReyBrujo 03:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that we won't ever recreate. I just want to get the currently useless out of the way. Dooms Day349 20:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is just stupid, wikipedia's goal is to create a "perfect" encyclopedia, why are you deleting decent and really contributing articles? I see no point in this, even after reading your noninformal foreword. I will write some of these deleted articles back, thanks a lot whoever you are, what you did set me and other people back months. Not good, never, ever do this again on your own.

I'm deleting suggestions of deleting good articles. Some of them are good improvements, such as editing the categories but... rest is horrible. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.149.222.85 (talk • contribs).

Timeline[edit]

Oh, while cleaning my user space I found User:ReyBrujo/Temp/Dragonlance timelines: Age of Dreams. I began writing it over a year ago, but never finished it because it became too hard to read. -- ReyBrujo 02:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dragonlance timeline article proposed for deletion[edit]

It's only correct to bring this to the attention of the community. The Dragonlance timeline is proposed for deletion (not AFD'd) and I for one support it wholly on the rationale there. But, it's not right to simply let it pass into the night, so I figured I'd let everyone know. It's only right. Dooms Day349 15:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with the statement about plot summaries. However, I agree that the article is not sourced at all. Maybe we should create a timeline based on the books. -- ReyBrujo 16:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's hard to disagree with the plot summary rationale. It's right in WP:NOT. Dooms Day349 16:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've pulled the deletion template off of the Dragonlance timeline article as there are objections to its removal. Both the categories went, and I only thought the one that would automatically delete it (in 5 days) would go, so if you want to put the other one back feel free to do so.

As the person who proposed deleting the article, didn't put anything on the Dragonlance timeline talk page, I've put the three reasons for the proposed deletion on there with a talk subject heading. I'm objecting to the deletion and have put my reasons for objecting there, however I'd like to say here that I don't think any of the reasons are reasons to delete the article. The first two reasons have nothing to do with Wikipedia policy on the cited page.

As for the third reason - WP:NOT says: A plot summary may be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic. So while I think that the person who proposed this for deletion has the right to bring the issue up, I disagree that it is something that is "right in WP:NOT".

I'd like to counter the deletion proposal with a proposal that this article is merged into the main Dragonlance article. The timeline does have a bearing to the Dragonlance Campaign Setting, but it should be attached to an article that somehow explains its context in real world terms. I think that the main article (or perhaps another existing Dragonlance article) can do that in a way that the existing article can't.

By the way, I've edited the title of this section of the talk page (From Dragonlance Timeline Prod) as I have no idea what the word "Prod" means. I take it is some sort of Wikipedia jargon.Big Mac 01:38, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the Dragonlance Campaign Setting?[edit]

The article about this book has either been deleted or merged into the main Dragonlance article. However, although the main article has a photo of the book it doesn't really explain fully what the book is. Role playing played a key role in the (real world) history of Dragonlance. I think that it started off as an RPG and that the original Dragonlance characters were based partly upon early role playing sessions. Wikipedia's Dragonlance articles currently appear to have a bias towards the novels and away from the many role playing suppliements, especially with the "core rulebook" of Dragonlance (and its previous editions) not having its own article. I think that both forms of Dragonlance content (as well as the film when it comes out) deserve equal representation.

Can we please have an article called Dragonlance Campaign Setting. It doesn't need to explain all of Dragonlance, as there is already an article for that. It just needs to explain what the book is and how Dragonlance is used as a campaign setting for the Dungeons & Dragons game. It should also explain how earlier editions worked with the 1st and 2nd Editions of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons. It should also mention (but probably not explain) the d20 System as the new Dragonlance Campaign Setting carries that compatibility logo.

To avoid confusion between the different forms of Dragonlance I think that we need a Dragonlance (disambiguation) page that can be used to help people tell the difference between Dragonlance (which should focus on the fictional Dragonlance universe) Dragonlance Campaign Setting (which should focus on the role playing game) and Dragonlance: Dragons of Autumn Twilight (which should focus on the new animated film). There is likely to be a lot more interest in Dragonlance after that film is released and I think that a lot of the people visiting Wikipedia are not going to know anything about role playing games. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by David Shepheard (talk • contribs) 15:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

To create an article on Dragonlance for the sole purpose of explaining the fictional world is in violation of in universe and plot summaries. This article is about the Dragonlance setting. The book Dragonlance Campaign Setting, I can make an article on that in due time. The movie won't ever be referred to as simply Dragonlance, so no worries. And don't be to sure about the movie; we don't know yet if it's even going theatrical. A disambiguation page isn't needed. Dooms Day349 18:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Port Balifor[edit]

I'm proposing to merge Port Balifor into List of Dragonlance locations because the article is a stub. D dc c 05:16, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most definetely, please do so. Dooms Day349 18:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This Pig and Whistle Tavern is up for deletion. Merge too? D dc c 06:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, delete, and we have to talk to this user, we can't have these sorts of stubs popping up everywhere. Dooms Day349 20:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since there's basically no new content, then I suppose we just make sure it matches the content on the list of locations, then delete. D dc c 06:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Introducing a ratings system.[edit]

I assume we're all familiar with ratings systems other Wikiprojects use; stub. start, B-Class, and so on and so forth. I think Dragonlance could definitely benefit from the ratings system, and then use that system to bring articles up to snuff. Thoughts? Dooms Day349 20:40, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I thought about setting that up, but never had the time to do so. Wouldn't oppose to having them. -- ReyBrujo 20:51, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well then I'll look into it and figure it out. Let you know when it's up. Dooms Day349 20:52, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, it's done. I'm gonna comb through and place ratings on everything (just as a start). We can discuss the individual ones afterwards, though I expect most of my preliminary judgments to be ok. My one questions; with the new stub class and list class categories, aren't the Dragonlance stub and Dragonlance list categories obsolete? If so, should we delete them? If not, what do we do? Dooms Day349 21:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just chiming in: articles about the main protagonists (Tanis, Flint, Raistlin, etc) and our main article (Dragonlance) should all be top importance, not mid. The rating is related to this WikiProject, not to Wikipedia as a whole. -- ReyBrujo 01:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about that, and yes, I was going on that line of thinking (Wikipedia as a whole), but since you've clarified it, I'll fix it ASAP. Thank Rey. Dooms Day349 02:06, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned Image:Dawningofanewage.jpg[edit]

I've just noticed it's been tagged orphaned on the 10th of May and is scheduled to be deleted on the 17th. Does anyone recall the original usage or know of a new use for this image? D dc c 03:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Three Things[edit]

Firstly, I'm wondering about the naming of lists. For instance, take List of Dragonlance deities. Is this really a list? I'm not so sure, and think maybe a better title is Deities of Dragonlance or Dragonlance deities. The same would go for all the other "lists", which would be renamed as either "subject" of Dragonlance or Dragonlance "subject".

Secondly, we need to figure out what articles need to be created, aside from novels and gaming books (which are all a given). I'm thinking more along the lines of characters here. I feel probably Dhamon Grimwulf should be added, for one. Who else, is what I wonder.

Thirdly, Category:Dragonlance wars. I'm wondering about all the articles in this category. Should they all have their own article, or should they be redirected to a main article?

Thanks for considering all these things. Dooms Day349 00:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the list names, I used to name them as lists, but it is not necessary. As for articles, I think we should create the articles about the novels, from there we create sections with their characters, and if those characters are notable (in example, appearing in several books, having annotations that can be used as references), then split that to a new article. As for the wars, it depends whether those articles can be cleaned or expanded. I don't like the idea of having only "Dragonlance Deities/Wars/Items/Novels/Characters/etc" articles, because those articles become too bloated. As long as there are reliable sources, we can create articles. Wikipedia is not made of paper. -- ReyBrujo 04:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I can agree with everything you say, Rey. I agree that our primary focus for the moment should be cleaning the existing character articles (those that are major, i.e., Tanis Half-Elven) and creating articles on novels, and then creating articles on the characters from them. Obviously novel articles can only be created as fast as I can read, but there are a lot I have read that we can do, and I'll work on them. I am a little more interested in improving character articles personally, since I can more easily make those into GAs, at least I think so. I'll work on this when I can. Thanks for your feedback. Dooms Day349 16:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking of merging some non-major novels into one composite series article[edit]

What I mean by the section heading is taking novels in a smaller set series, such as those in Category:The Age of Mortals series novels, and creating one main article, ie. Age of Mortal series or something thereof. For an example of what I am thinking of doing, see User:Moeron/Sandbox/Dragonlance. I have taken all relevant information on two of the pages, The Lioness (novel) and Conundrum (novel), and added them together. Questions, comments, concerns? -- moe.RON ^{Let's talk | done} 20:07, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability guidelines[edit]

I'm not sure how active this project still is (it's been almost 1 year since the previous discussion on this talk page), but I've noticed that a bunch of the character pages (Laurana Kanan, etc) have had proposed deletion due to notability guideline templates slapped on them. I know that I'm too busy now to do anything about it; is there anyone still active who could take care of the articles? D dc c 07:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Dragonlance: Articles of unclear notability[edit]

Hello,

there are currently 74 articles in the scope of this project which are tagged with notability concerns. I have listed them here. (Note: this listing is based on a database snapshot of 12 March 2008 and may be slightly outdated.)

I would encourage members of this project to have a look at these articles, and see whether independent sources can be added, whether the articles can be merged into an article of larger scope, or possibly be deleted. Any help in cleaning up this backlog is appreciated. For further information, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Notability.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the Notability project page or on my personal talk page. (I'm not watching this page however.) Thanks! --B. Wolterding (talk) 15:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Willis[edit]

Someone is trying to get the Dan Willis article deleted. Since this project has rated it "Mid" importance, I thought someone here might be able to find reviews of his books, as well as interviews of Willis, which aren't already listed in the references. Any assistance is appreciated. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 03:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you are refering to me, I am not attempting to get the article deleted. However, in its current form, it reads like a vanity piece; there are no reliable secondary sources to demonstrate the notability of this writer. The Notability template has been placed there so that other editors will hopefully add sources (other than directories and interviews with the author himself) that will demonstrate that there is sufficient non-trivial content to justify an article on this author.--Gavin Collins (talk) 15:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It does not read like a vanity piece. All of the information there is sourced. While youmay not think the sources are reliable or acceptable for one reason or another, there are enough of them which are reliable enough to meet basic notability. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 19:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BIO suggests not, because directories are admissable as reliable secondary sources.--Gavin Collins (talk) 08:01, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability[edit]

Almost every article in this project has a notability tag on it, why? Isn't this one of the top 3 fantasy novels lines related to D&D? Isn't there a film coming out? Aren't some of the novels in the series New York Times best sellers? Isn't every character who has his own page a major character in the main trilogy as well as the star of a few of their own books. Most seem to have references, which are the books a primary source, no online links but doesn't seem likely for these types of articles, unless Wizard puts up free ebooks.

It's not just Dragonlance, it's all throughout D&D. We have a very concerned editor who feels he's doing his best to help the wiki-community - judge for yourself. BOZ (talk) 07:29, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the articles comprise of a plot summary based on a synthesis of the source material and written with from heavy in universe perspective. These are symptoms of the fact that the articles have not been sourced from reliable secondary sources which cite real-world content and provide evidence of the subject's notability. The cleanup templates have been put there so that editors who have access to reliable secondary sources will address this issues by adding them. --Gavin Collins (talk) 15:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme[edit]

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles flagged for cleanup[edit]

Currently, 153 articles are assigned to this project, of which 82, or 53.6%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place the following template on your project page:

{{User:WolterBot/Cleanup listing subscription|banner=WikiProject Dragonlance}}

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 17:44, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Media franchises[edit]

Dear WikiProject Dragonlance participants...WikiProject Media franchises needs some help from other projects which are similar. Media franchises' scope deals primarily with the coordination of articles within the hundreds if not thousands of media franchises which exist. Sometimes a franchise might just need color coordination of the various templates used; it could mean creating an article for the franchise as a jump off point for the children of it; or the creation of a new templating system for media franchise articles. The project primarily focuses on multimedia franchises. It would be great if some of this project's participants would come over and help the project get back on solid footing. Also, if you know of similar projects which have not received this, let Lady Aleena (talk · contribs) know. Please come and take a look at the project and see if you wish to lend a hand. You can sign up here if you wish. Thank you. LA @ 05:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Franchise naming convention discussion at WikiProject Media franchises[edit]

Dear WikiProject Dragonlance participants...WikiProject Media franchises is currently discussing a naming convention for franchise articles. Since this may affect one or more articles in your project, we would like to get the opinions of all related projects before implimenting any sweeping changes. Please come and help us decide. Thanks! LA (T) @ 22:28, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Dragonlance[edit]

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested template overhaul[edit]

I would like to suggest a change from

to {{Dragonlance2}}

This is more in line with the flow and feel of the main article Dragonlance, and supports the project as a whole (combining the books, the gaming suppliments, and the overall world as a whole). What do you think? - IanCheesman (talk) 06:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My main problem with this is that it appears to be a little too in-universe. It should be written from a more out-of-universe perspective
1. Change "The World of Dragonlance" heading to "General" (or something along those lines)
2. Change link "The Races of Krynn" to "Creatures"
3. Change link "The People of Krynn" to "Characters"
4. Change link "The Gods of Krynn" to "Deities"
5. Remove "The Ages of Krynn" section, it all points to the same page anyway. Link to that page by adding a "Timeline" link to the General section above
6. Change "The Stories of Krynn" heading back to "Novels"
Just my thoughts. --Maelwys (talk) 15:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I made some changes based on your and other people's suggestions. What do people think now? If people like, would you suggest either actually changing the regular template itself, or changing each "Dragonlance" page itself? - IanCheesman (talk) 23:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Made the changes after some comments and suggestions from other people as well. - IanCheesman (talk) 17:17, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox[edit]

Just letting you all know that as I've cut off my involvement in the project, the userbox has been moved to a project page rather than in my userspace. The redirect from my userspace will remain however, for those that do not update the transclusion. Cheers, Dooms Day 18:30, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gavin.collins RFC/U[edit]

Hello. A request for comment on user conduct has recently been filed regarding Gavin.collins. Since this project has been involved in the dispute regarding him, I thought that you would want to know. You can see the RFC/U here. Thank you. -Drilnoth (talk) 22:21, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Work force?[edit]

Since this project has been relatively inactive lately and the Dungeons & Dragons WikiProject has been covering most of its articles, I was wondering if there would be any opposition against making this project into a work/task force of the D&D project. Please add comments at WT:D&D. Thanks! -Drilnoth (talk) 18:53, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds reasonable to me, but if anyone has a problem with it I'm okay with leaving it, too. --Masamage ♫ 23:19, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay; I'm currently redesigning some things with the WP:DND page, so this'll probably be part of that, depending on how the discussion at WT:D&D goes. -Drilnoth (talk) 19:55, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinators' working group[edit]

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:18, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of Dragonlance articles are being nominated for deletion at once[edit]

[1] I thought those interested in the series, might wish to go there, and help save them, either by explaining why they are notable components of the series, or finding references in fantasy reviews for them. I'm not sure if this is the right place to do that or not. Dream Focus 13:02, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where? There's the mass nomination and the one for Cataclysm (Dragonlance)... are there any others? –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 21:42, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops. Here [2] list a group of them. Dream Focus 01:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay; I wasn't sure if you were referring to some other nominations or to that one. Thanks! –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 02:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP 1.0 bot announcement[edit]

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:13, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool[edit]

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]