67.173.11.90

Welcome to Wikipedia

Welcome

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

You are welcome to continue editing articles without logging in, but you may wish to create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits. If you edit without a username, your IP address (67.173.11.90) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. Again, welcome! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) @ 23:33, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

October 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. One or more of the external links you added in this edit to Tom Wham do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. You may wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. PrinceOfCanada-HG (talk) 08:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. One or more of the external links you added in this edit to D'Gard do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. You may wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Alexius08 (talk) 05:14, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me. I saw myself that there's nothing wrong with the link. You can freely restore it. Alexius08 (talk) 05:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I see. I'll quit using it after a while. Alexius08 (talk) 05:21, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

The recent edit you made to Gene Nation constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Alexius08 (talk) 05:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Aargh... I forgot! Now, go on and restore them. I've change my settings so that I cannot revert your edits. Alexius08 (talk) 05:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Wolverine (comics) has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. miquonranger03 (talk) 04:45, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

RPG Project and D&D Project

Could you please stop adding the {{RPGproject}} banner to pages that already have it on the talk page (such as you did here and here? This only means that someone has to clean up after you to rectify this problem. Also, the {{D&D}} WikiProject is a child of he more general RPGproject, so this means that it's generally undesirable to add both the {{RPGproject}} and {{D&D}} templates to the same talk page. If an article has a D&D focus it's generally appropriate to add the {{D&D}} template to the talk page but not the {{RPGproject}} template. Thanks. --Craw-daddy | T | 02:32, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

In response to your message on my talk page, I don't mind the addition of templates to the pages you're finding. I'm just trying to avoid having to "fix" things like the addition of the RPGproject template to a page that already has it. Also, as I mentioned above, since the D&D project is a child of the RPG project, you generally want to avoid putting both templates onto a talk page, either use one or the other (but if it's a D&D related page, use that one over the more general RPG project). I think that only a few articles should have both the D&D and RPG project templates, namely those that are particularly "significant" in the development/history/culture of RPGs. For example the main Dungeons & Dragons page should have them both, as the development of D&D is obviously one of the most important events in RPGs. A few (but very few) D&D modules might have the RPG project template, one like Tomb of Horrors which is very well-known, as well as being parodied (I think) in other contexts, etc, etc.

As to rating the pages, please feel free to do so yourself if you like.  :) I'm certainly not familiar with all of the ends and outs of the D&D pages, so that's why I haven't taken it upon myself to rate all the pages. For those from which I remove the RPG banner, I try to give some rating for the D&D template, but it may not be the "right" one. For the RPG banner, I generally rate designers as "High" importance, game publishers as "Mid", and use a basic "Low" as a starting point for everything else. If a game has won some award(s) then if could get bumped up to Mid or High, depending upon the number/type of awards, and a game that I (very subjectively) weight as having some "significance" can also merit a Mid or High rating. Very few I'd put at top. <shrug> I've probably babbled on for too long now... :) --Craw-daddy | T | 20:54, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I rated (updated the templates) all seven people you listed on my talk page, although I'm not 100% certain that they all worked on D&D related stuff, e.g. not sure about Robin Laws. Cheers. --Craw-daddy | T | 19:46, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I reiterate my request that you stop adding the {{RPGproject}} banner page to articles that are D&D oriented, as the D&D wikiproject is a child of the RPG wikiproject. Typically an article that has the {{D&D}} template shouldn't have the {{RPGproject}} template on it too (that should only happen for the most significant articles that have had long-lasting influence in the general RPG world). I'm not going to continue assessing D&D related articles. If you wish to add the {{D&D}} banner, please don't add the RPGproject banner too. Thanks. --Craw-daddy | T | 20:56, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Gazelle (Marvel Comics)

The article Gazelle (Marvel Comics) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails GNG

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TTN (talk) 18:09, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

---