User talk:Dzanter

Welcome!
Hello, Dzanter, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 17:20, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

A Game of Thrones:Second Edition (card game)
Hello! While I admit I am not very familiar with either of these card games, I question whether a separate article for a second edition is warranted, or if both would be better off discussed in a single article (i.e, with A Game of Thrones:Second Edition (card game) merged into a section of A Game of Thrones (card game)). To merit its own article, the second edition must have demonstrated independent Notability (significant coverage from reliable sources that are independent of the game's creators, designers, or sellers), but even still, consensus may establish that the two editions are best discussed in one article. In my opinion, A Game of Thrones (card game) is already overly detailed with in-universe minutiae and game-play, and lacking in reliable, secondary sources: see the Style guide for game articles from the WikiProject Board and table games, as well as Wikipedia is not an instruction manual or game guide and Manual of Style/Writing about fiction. The best encyclopedia articles are written from a neutral point of view, not a fan's point of view. Cheers, and happy New Year! ----Animalparty! (talk) 00:20, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
 * My thought behind having a new page for the second edition is that as the game in the 2nd Edition has different rules, etc. (i.e. the rules etc in the first edition description wouldn't apply to new 2nd edition); (vs it being editions in the way of being the same game.. but re-released, etc.)  Trying to think of a similar sort analogy; possibly Dungeons and Dragons editions would be a similar concept.  Looking at those pages...  looks like some editions do have their pages, but then some others don't (like 3rd edition etc.).  Seems like to be similar to what Dungeons and Dragons has...  maybe to have a "main article" which is edition independent, with separate pages for each editions? Zanter (talk) 22:34, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Policies and guidelines outweigh the state of most any existing article, or their utility as models, although FA and GA-class articles are most likely to be representative; and while Dungeons & Dragons is a Featured article, but that franchise has a much more complex history and coverage record than a GOT card game (especially a second edition released mere months ago). Most articles are works in progress, and an atrocious number are just plain bad, from an encyclopedic perspective. Again, articles should primarily be sourced with reliable, secondary sources: if such sources can't be found, merging may be most appropriate. Lastly, you seem to be using two accounts (Zanter and Dzanter): this may be in conflict with Username policy: see WP:MULTIPLE. All the best, --Animalparty! (talk) 20:21, 2 January 2016 (UTC)