User talk:Jaycaspian

Welcome!
Hello, Jaycaspian, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Your first article
 * Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
 * Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
 * and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place  on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Sariel Xilo (talk) 03:22, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Jaycaspian! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor&#32;at Jeremy Crawford that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. Sariel Xilo (talk) 03:23, 22 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that! I don't have a lot of experience doing this. I just saw that Jeremy Crawford's page was wildly short and wante to add content and sources Jaycaspian (talk) 03:39, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * hi I see you undid all the work I just did and marked it as an unreliable source. Which source was unreliable? I am working really hard on this and I am new to this and having my work undone without an explanation is a little disheartening Jaycaspian (talk) 03:52, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I've been in the process of typing out a response. I've just reverted your edit for introducing various formatting errors & using non-reliable sources. For example, dndinacastle.com is a page advertising Crawford's services as a professional DM (so they have a self interest in listing what they think is notable about Crawford) & Non-Fiction Gaming doesn't appear to list any editorial standards (versus an outlet like Gizmodo which clearly lists it staff or Rascal which lists the journalistic standards they follow). Please review both Reliable sources & Biographies of living persons as articles for people are held to a higher standard; WikiProject Video games/Sources is another great source since many of the outlets they list also cover TTRPGs & more general gaming. I would also suggest starting smaller to learn how to avoid introducing errors; this is a great guided way to get started: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:The_Wikipedia_Adventure. Sariel Xilo (talk) 03:57, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * So can you leave my other changes in the body paragraphs? I have better sources there. Jaycaspian (talk) 04:03, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Your changes are non-constructive and you didn't add any other sources besides the dndincastle & Non-Fiction Gaming. Sariel Xilo (talk) 04:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I added 3 sources, including one that talks about the growing influence of women in dnd, which is attributed to the game being more inclusive. I provided a source from a digital magazine, Mary Sue That showed that Dungeons and Dragons now has a player base with 40% of it being women. This is directly a result of the prior edit that talks about how Crawford wanted to create a more inclusive game. Why is successful inclusivity non-constructive? Jaycaspian (talk) 04:15, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Apologies as I misread that as a duplication of the previous The Mary Sue source; I'll restore that sentence. But you also did things like expanding sentences (ex: Crawford is lead designer on the upcoming 2024 Revised 5th Edition Player's Handbook, 2024 Dungeon Master's Guide, and the 2025 Monster Manual) which were not covered in the existing sources. You also continuously added back in non-reliable sources after they were flagged. Sariel Xilo (talk) 04:23, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I apologize for the errors. I’ve never really done this before. I am frustrated over the lack of info on his page. He is a lead game designer for a company whose game made over $100 million in 2020 but there’s such slim data on him! I don’t want to get into a “edit war”. I want to learn and do better. Can I find better supporting sources and try again tomorrow? Jaycaspian (talk) 04:26, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I would definitely suggest doing the Help:Introduction and/or the guided adventure path. Another way to learn how to improve articles is to take a look at the ones which have gone through an additional review process & are now listed as Good articles; for example, these designers have good articles: Tim Rogers (writer), Andy Schatz, Alex Seropian, Gary Gygax. You can see how those are structured & the types of sources they use. If you have any questions about sources, you can start a discussion at Talk:Jeremy Crawford or ask at the Teahouse (the Teahouse is a great resource no matter your editing experience). Sariel Xilo (talk) 04:40, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for this! Jaycaspian (talk) 04:44, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

June 2024
Hi Jaycaspian! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Jeremy Crawford several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree&#32;at, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. ''Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert.''. Sariel Xilo (talk) 04:02, 22 June 2024 (UTC)