Talk:Sarrukh

Proposed deletion
Against the deletion: Please reply to this or I will remove the template in a week.
 * If you delete this page, you would have to delete a lot of similar one. Do you want to?
 * If the problem is about the Creator Races redirect, just use a disambiguation page
 * There are references — two of them, not counting official paper material (Serpent Kingdoms in this case)

Thank you David Latapie (✒ | @) — www 07:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * David,
 * There is no deletion proposal for this page. In answer to your questions:
 * I don't wish to delete any pages, but I would like to see notability established, or this article merged with another topic where notability is in evidence;
 * Please clarify you point about Creator Races;
 * It is not clear if the links in this article are references or not as there are no footnotes linking the content with its sources.


 * Let me know if you require any more information.
 * Regards, Gavin Collins (talk) 11:10, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

David Latapie (✒ | @) — www 15:09, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Back when I created these articles, my goal was to create an article per fictional country (and geographical regions) for Abeir-Toril, so notability was not an issue (please see the “[home page]”). The idea was that new material as well as other people would add content, which was not done. Plus, a Forgotten Realms Wikia had been created since then. As long as proper redirect are done and no meaningful text is deleted, I don't have much problem with this.
 * Something like that: “Creator races may mean: the various ancient astronauts theories in real life or various fictional creator races, such as the sarrukhs, batrachi, aearee, fairy folk and humans in the Forgotten Realms.” Notice that the original Creator races article was much less ambiguous. As often, people deleted information without respect for the ambiguity it would then create.
 * “External links Official Material” looks pretty self-explanatory to me. Footnotes are great when one wants to mention the source of one sentence. But not for a whole article.
 * I hope my replies will help you getting a better picture.

Rewrite needed
This is possibly the worst Dungeons and Dragons article I have ever commented on. If I was to cut out the plot summary, the sections with an in universe perspective, the WP:WEASEL words, this article would be reduced to the first sentence only. It really needs to be rewritten with a real-world perspective, or else merged with a topic which has more substance and notability. --Gavin Collins (talk) 09:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)


 * You are of course welcome to rewrite it! Hobit (talk) 19:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Be careful what you ask for. --Jack Merridew 13:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Do a good job in good faith. 14:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hobit (talk • contribs)

Please nominate for deletion rather than adding meaningless tags
'Nuff said. CSHunt68 9:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * If you want it deleted, that's your right. See WP:AFD. In the meantime, if you want clean-up tags gone, please clean-up the article. --Jack Merridew 14:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

David Latapie (✒ | @) — www 15:09, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * At least, this help finding a common ground begore resorting to drastic solution. I agree there is to much tags, but the intention (talking with the writer before acting) is good.


 * The problem is, these tags are meaningless in context of the article. The tags need to go, or the article does. If you want to nominate it for deletion, please do so. CSHunt68 (talk) 15:59, 20 January 2008 (UTC)CSHunt68


 * Kindly cease removing the tags without addressing the issues in the articles. If you do not understand the issues, the tags offer links to the various policies and guidelines involved and I suggest you read them; indeed, this is one of the purposes of the tags — to educated users about applicable policies and guidelines. --Jack Merridew 07:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Please respond to my above comment - that, in the context of the article, the tags are meaningless. CSHunt68 (talk) 14:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll agree with CSHunt68, in this context the tags that are being removed should be removed. I think the tags at the top are mostly reasonable, but the in-article tags are quite bogus given the topic.  Hobit (talk) 19:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I suppose the tags are meaningless in the context of an article written in a in-universe style . However, in the context of an Encyclopedia they have meaning, namely that this article needs clean-up . This is a message the D&D fans need to learn to understand. --Jack Merridew 13:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Please remove the blinky blinky. The issue is that if people want this cleaned up, they should be sure they are actually asking for the right things (or perhaps helping).  This one I can't really help with (as noted) as it is way out of my area. Hobit (talk) 14:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: Serpent Kingdoms (ISBN 0-7869-3277-5), pp. 54-57 (note: checked against what is visible on Amazon LookInside). Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:23, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * For the record Justlettersandnumbers, it looks like that content was added by User:JarlaxleArtemis, in 2005 shortly after the article was created and more in 2006; this user is well known for not following the rules. 2001:558:6033:DB:4D21:C7F6:3056:8E76 (talk) 23:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC)