Talk:Dragons of Spring Dawning

Renaming?
If this article is to stay, it should be renamed to Dragons of Autumn Twilight Dragons of Spring Dawning. However, I don't really think we should add such extensive information. The article should be shortened and appended to a new Chronicles Trilogy article. -- ReyBrujo 20:40, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * People interested in improving the quality of this article should go to Talk:Dragons_of_Autumn_Twilight to read the discussion going on (and participate, if they have anything to add), about what is wrong with the three articles about the individual books of the Dragonlance Chronicles trilogy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Peter Knutsen (talk • contribs).

Please cease and desist from removing the Notability template without reasonable justification
Please cease and desist from removing the Notability templates from article Dragons of Spring Dawning which does not have any reliable secondary sources as evidence of notability. There is no reasonable justification for removing the cleanup template which was put there to address the problem of lack of secondary sources to demonstrate notability. The reason why I ask you to do this in the strongest possible terms is that you appear to be POV pushing, as the lack of explanation for removing the template are not supported by the notability guideline WP:BK and WP:RS which applies to this topic. Unless you adding reliable secondary sources to the article, I would be grateful if you would refrain from removing the cleanup template, which was place there to alert other editors who may be able to add sources that they are needed. Note that since the depth of coverage is not substantial, multiple independent sources are needed to prove notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability.--Gavin Collins (talk) 06:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


 * This is almost verbatim (except for a couple of words) to the message left on User_talk:McJeff about Elemental (Dungeons & Dragons). It seems you are simply cutting and pasting this from one user to another. This is the first time I have removed the notability tag from this article and a cease and desist template you have added to the user page is not appreciated. If you want to discuss notability however, I am happy to discuss here. The article needs work on plot etc. which is fine to leave those tags but this is a notable book. Stextc (talk) 13:39, 11 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Criteria -
 * 1. Book is subject to 2 reviews which I have added.
 * 5. Margaret Weis is one of the most notable people in the realm of adventure gaming (see below) with multiple NY Times best sellers (some examples attached below). In the realms of fantasy novels Weis is historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable, even in the absence of secondary sources.


 * Other considerations -
 * Has ISBN? Yes and multiple printings (I sourced in article)
 * Self-published? No
 * Online bookstore? It is in online bookstore but have not used sales history to establish notability
 * Not yet published? Already published
 * Non-contemporary?  whether it has been recently reprinted, the fame that the book enjoyed in the past and its place in the history of literature. Recently reprinted and multiple printings.
 * Academic Book? No

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DEFDE143DF931A35757C0A9669C8B63&scp=2&sq=dragons+of+fallen+sun&st=nyt http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9507E3DB1530F93AA15757C0A9679C8B63&scp=2&sq=dragons+of+lost+star&st=nyt http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D04E7DC123EF934A35754C0A9649C8B63&scp=1&sq=dragons+of+vanished+moon&st=nyt


 * From Margaret Weis wikiarticle In 1999 Pyramid magazine named Margaret Weis as one of The Millennium's Most Influential Persons "at least in the realm of adventure gaming." The magazine stated that Tracy Hickman and Margaret Weis are "basically responsible for the entire gaming fiction genre." 
 * Stextc, you may not be aware that sales figures are not evidence of notability; popularity and notabilty are not the same thing. Also, inteviews with the author are not reliable sources; nor can the book cannot inherit notability from its author. Indy comic review is a self published source; even I could submit a review and have it published there, except for the fact it is closing down. The Monsters and Critics "Review" is actually a regurgitation of a press release, which the author of the piece free admits. None of the sources on their own are evidence of notability; what is needed is reliable secondary sources (i.e. independent of the book) which provide non-trivial real-world content, such that they context and/or analysis about the book itself. Please restore the notability template; your POV pushing that this book is notable without evidence of notability is not helping with the improvement of this article. --Gavin Collins (talk) 21:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Stextc, you may not be aware that sales figures are not evidence of notability; popularity and notabilty are not the same thing. Also, inteviews with the author are not reliable sources; nor can the book cannot inherit notability from its author. Indy comic review is a self published source; even I could submit a review and have it published there, except for the fact it is closing down. The Monsters and Critics "Review" is actually a regurgitation of a press release, which the author of the piece free admits. None of the sources on their own are evidence of notability; what is needed is reliable secondary sources (i.e. independent of the book) which provide non-trivial real-world content, such that they context and/or analysis about the book itself. Please restore the notability template; your POV pushing that this book is notable without evidence of notability is not helping with the improvement of this article. --Gavin Collins (talk) 21:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


This article seems like a reprint of the book. The other two Chronicles articles give a plot summary, this one has a PhD dissertation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.185.73.179 (talk) 05:07, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed - it should either be trimmed, or rewritten entirely. 67.175.176.178 (talk) 12:18, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * So fix it! If the plot summary is too long (which it certainly is), then anyone can trim it down about... including you! –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 14:48, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 13:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dragons of Spring Dawning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080307185936/http://books.monstersandcritics.com/comics/news/article_8907.php to http://books.monstersandcritics.com/comics/news/article_8907.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:14, 13 September 2017 (UTC)