User talk:Damuna/Archive 2

The Medalion
Heh, no apology needed. Thanks for letting me know! -- Vary | Talk 18:45, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Heh, who knows. They probably just saw your name on my talk page and decided to say 'hello' to you as well. -- Vary | Talk 02:10, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

D&D deities
Wow, my watchlist came alive this morning! :) I have to say, awesome work, keep it up!  It seems like the D&D project has been sleeping for awhile, and it's good to see things waking up lately. I've been trying to do my part as well. BOZ (talk) 15:52, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I had seen those. The way you're doing it seems fine.  Objectivity is something I've definitely been striving for, but at the same time, at least some of the time, I've been trying to work in some notes from the source in question.  For example, "So-and-so appears in this book, where he is described as a really cool dude."  I haven't done a lot of that, mostly because I've been using various indexes and the sources already listed in the article to compile the histories when I don't have the actual sources available.  Oh, and the Loviatar move is fine by me.  :)  If you're having any challenges identifying sources that gods have appeared in, then this will blow your mind: http://www.planewalker.com/planar-basics/gods-list-database/gods-list-database - just type the god's name in to search. BOZ (talk) 15:27, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hah, while Gavin being a sock of Jack/Davenbelle would have been awfully convenient, I never really seriously considered that. Thought about it, yes, but never thought about it enough to pursue the idea. I doubt there's any way to connect them anyway, so I never tried. We began a mediation with Gavin a few months ago, but he has been around here more and more sporadically, and the mediation has slowed to a crawl as he seems to be around less and less. We'll probably pick up working on it again if he is available more in the future.  He has left D&D articles virtually untouched since the mediation began, thank God, because damn near everyone on the project had a beef with him to one degree or another regarding his tags and deletions. Sadly, the D&D project has nearly ground to a halt, and I blame that on the frustrations that people have had with Gavin, Jack, and other deletionists. Gavin and Jack made quite a tag team that really exasperated some people, a number of whom who have left Wikipedia mostly or altogether. BOZ (talk) 04:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, Jack was pretty much following Gavin around for awhile and backing up both his edits and arguments. Don't know why, other than maybe a "deletionists sticking together" thing. :) They were both always keen on making sure every single D&D page they could find was tagged with as many tags as possible, and calling out aggressively anyone who challenged them. I can't tell you how it lifted my spirits when Jack was finally indef blocked. As to why Gavin has never been blocked, that would be mostly because people did a lot more complaining about him than actually doing anything about it. While a lot of people argued that no one could really do anything to him just for tagging articles and for nominating them for deletion, he was often uncivil to anyone who disagreed with him (even in the slightest way it seemed; people who felt 90% the same as he might get dumped on for that 10% difference), and for that he could be blocked. I started the mediation process, and to tell the truth a lot of people wanted to skip that step altogether and just move to get him blocked.  I argued that if we went with mediation first, and it worked, the problem would be eliminated; if it didn't work, and he continued in his same manner, then we would have a stronger arbitration committee case because we at least made an honest attempt to reconcile with him. Like I say, his activity has really dropped off in the last few months and he has almost not touched D&D articles at all, so he really hasn't been an issue since around April. Generally though, your observations seem fairly accurate. BOZ (talk) 05:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Well yes, the tags being stuck on all those articles is a bit of a problem. This is especially true with the notability tag, as you will see a random editor come along, slap an AFD on it stating "has been marked for notability for X months..." and what can you do.  But, if you can provide a valid rationale for removing a tag, you can always be bold and do so.  This doesn't mean that Gavin or someone else won't revert it, but that's a chance you take. True, just because he hasn't been an issue lately does not mean this will not change. He's been active today for example, but as with most of the time in the last few months, he's been focused on the notability guidelines more than anything else.  I suppose if he gets what he wants with the notability guidelines then we'd have to disassemble the majority of projects such as this one.  But I have a lot of faith that this will not happen.  If I'm proven wrong, then eh, oh well, I'll find something else to do with my time.  :)


 * Here is my take on dealing with changes throughout the editions: we should record them all, rather than focus on one. Wikipedia editors had been focusing on 3E for years, and they're likely to do the same with 4E now that it's the current edition.  This is bad, but it can only be curbed and the focus changed rather than completely stopped. As for the infobox, you can either list all or none, but listing it from a 3E perspective (or 4E) should be stopped if possible - maybe a new, more all-edition inclusive, infobox? You can also deal with changing power levels in the Publication History format that I came up with, which is a big part of why I designed it the way I did. "Joe God appeared in the 1E FRCS, where he is described as a demigod of war... Joe God appeared later in the 2E FRCS, where he is described as a lesser god of honor". Rather than comparing the two (which skirts, if not violates WP:OR) just state what each source says and let the reader do the comparisons. BOZ (talk) 14:42, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, there was a recent merge proposal to do a lot of what you suggested, but it never really went anywhere. It was started when Lathander was up for AFD, as a reaction to "all the gods articles that have gone up for AFD" (of which, there really haven't been that many in my memory) and to stave off future AFD attempts. I don't know if we need a merge on the scale that was originally proposed, but yeah one on a smaller scale with the stubby articles might not be a bad idea. BOZ (talk) 14:04, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Looking good so far. I'll see what I can do about looking stuff up, although I might have my plate full working on monster article publication histories today.  :) BOZ (talk) 13:45, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree; a list of goblinoid deities make a lot more sense than a list of bugbear deities. :) Still, since as you say, there's no pressure at the moment, you can stay the course for now.  I know you asked in help for sources, and although I can't get to it at the moment, but on planewalker.com there is a massive gods list with every conceivable source, which I used in constructing the publication histories that I have done so far. BOZ (talk) 16:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Cool yeah, it's a good idea and it looks good enough. The fact those they were redirected was part of my motivation for suggesting the potential of a larger page. :) I've got the day off work today, so Wikipedia look out here I come.  ;)  Here is the gods list I referred to earlier: ; I'll likely be adding a few FR and WoG diety publication histories today, on some of the more major gods, and that will be my primary guide.  :) BOZ (talk) 14:27, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hah, thanks for asking! :)  Actually, I was told that the bugbear gods idea was too esoteric so that was my first submission and rejection.  ;)  I did get about 7 or 8 articles printed before the magazine went to online format, and since then WotC has never written me back about a proposal... And yes, planewalker.com is not perfect (as I have found), but they are a good reference all the same.  I know the guy who put that list together, and he was trying to be as comprehensive as possible. Good luck all the same.  I put a lot of work into the gods yesterday, and I'm a bit worn out on it for now.  ;) BOZ (talk) 13:42, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll take a look when/if I get a chance... notability for individual D&D elements is often (not always) difficult if not impossible to establish, but you are always welcome to try. :) BOZ (talk) 15:30, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Request to move article Loviatar (mythology) incomplete
You recently filed a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move the page Loviatar (mythology) to a different title - however your proposal is either incomplete or has been contested as being controversial. As a result, it has been moved to the incomplete and contested proposals section. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.

Please make sure you have completed all three of the following:


 * 1) Added    at the top of the talk page of the page you want moved, replacing "NewName" with the new name for the article.  This creates the required template for you there.
 * 2) Added  NewName  to the bottom of the talk page of the page you want to be moved, to automatically create a discussion section there.
 * 3) Added  PageName  to the top of today's section here.

If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves or contact me on my talk page. - JPG-GR (talk) 20:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of this Damuna, must've slipped my mind to check back on it =\ Sc00baSteve (talk) 19:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice
Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 23:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

N (disambiguation)
If the item is known as "N", then please reference it on the linked article(s). Otherwise, I will remove it later on tonight. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:13, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What does that have to do with "N"? If you don't have a source for that, it has to go. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:54, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't care about that. All I'm asking for is a reliable source. Do you have it or not? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:02, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7
Hi there! :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. For more details, please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 19:00, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey there :)
If you're coming back around lately... :) Drilnoth has recently been working on D&D and Pathfinder articles, so it's good to see interest picking slowly back up again. :) BOZ (talk) 17:16, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey, take it easy then - there's nothing pressing that needs attention, so work on anything that catches you notice. Or don't, we'll all be here (more or less) when you're more freed up. ;) BOZ (talk) 21:28, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Come check out the project page - it's undergone a lot of changes. :) BOZ (talk) 15:01, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Gavin.collins RFC/U
Hello. A request for comment on user conduct has recently been filed regarding Gavin.collins. Since we have previously discussed the dispute regarding his disruptive edits, I thought that you would want to know. You can see the RFC/U here. Thank you. BOZ (talk) 00:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Welcome back! :) Wow, that feels like ancient history - he's been mostly quiet on the D&D front so far, thankfully. Are you back for a while? Things have really changed - for the better, I think - around the D&D project in the past six months or so. The question is, what would you be interested in working on? :)  We had a "Good Article" drive running that I have been too busy to keep up with (and I'm an administrator now!) and we have 21 "Good Articles" as a result. :) I've been trying to improve content on various game designers, and I've been rewriting monster articles lately, and I'll probably do the same with gods articles sooner or later. BOZ (talk) 03:32, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Check out what I've been doing with the publication history sections on the gods. It's my goal to get those nice and filled out. For an idea of what that might eventually look like, I just finished Mimic (Dungeons & Dragons), and I did Cloaker and Bullywug previously. I'll pick out a god sometime in the not too distant future to see what else I can do with the concept. :) BOZ (talk) 03:58, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Matrilineality article's section
Damuna, you placed a non-"worldwide view" tag on the article section matrilineality more than two days ago, and it has been almost that long since I complied by improving the article and discussing the issue on its Talk page (see page). Now I would like to ask nicely about your plans to remove the tag?

Thanks again for your help with the wording of this section, For7thGen (talk) 18:04, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

DF userbox
Hi. FYI, I have made a nice clean version of the Dwarf Fortress userbox you have,. It also reflects the fact that Dwarf Fortress 0.31.18 changed the elf glyph from E to e. :) —chaos5023 (talk) 22:32, 10 July 2011 (UTC)