Wizards of the Coast wikipedia article

[BOZ]

Hey, so, anyone want to help get the Wizards of the Coast article up to "Good Article" status? I think we're coming along nicely, but a few more knowledgable hands who know how to write well would really help.

I'm going to hit up Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms next. Trying to get as much D&D representation as possible in the next CD release...

 

[justanobody]

Hey, so, anyone want to help get the Wizards of the Coast article up to Wizards of the Coast status?

You mean you want the article to be full of coding errors and cost money to view, while all the while providing little to no information?

Oh, wait that would be DDI functionality status.

I don't think the link parser quite worked and you may want to edit that to sa good article status.

 

[BOZ]

ROFL! That's what I get for posting so late at night.

 

[BOZ]

matter of fact, now that you mention it, i probably need a good source that talks about the development and introduction of the DDI, since it doesn't look like that'd discussed much in the article at present.

 

[el-remmen]

While mentioned in the intro, I noticed the history section does not mention their purchase by Hasbro, which is significant, I think.

 

[fba827]

If you have not already mined it for info/details, there is WotC's own "about us" section that provides history etc Wizards of the Coast

Mind you, some of it reads like self-advertisment. But it does have some key history dates and "big product" items mentioned.

 

[BOZ]

While mentioned in the intro, I noticed the history section does not mention their purchase by Hasbro, which is significant, I think.

Actually it is, but it's a pretty quick mention so probably needs to be expanded and/or given its own paragraph.

 

[BOZ]

If you have not already mined it for info/details, there is WotC's own "about us" section that provides history etc Wizards of the Coast

Mind you, some of it reads like self-advertisment. But it does have some key history dates and "big product" items mentioned.

Thanks - that's great! I was hoping to have something like that to use. I'm also doing my best to observe the Neutral Point of View policy.

 

[justanobody]

Thanks - that's great! I was hoping to have something like that to use. I'm also doing my best to observe the Neutral Point of View policy.

You must have huge brass cahones, because you don't really like WotC all that much do you?

I would find it hard to be neutral about something I personally disbelieve in. I am curious why there is so little information on the company in the article such as president changes, etc.

There seems to be information in its child articles such as Gleemax, and many others that may want to be centralized a few bits more about to give the WotC article some backbone.

It also seems to lack references and design philosophies that may explain why they are such a big player in the gaming sandbox.

But then I don't like encyclopedias that much and don't know much about them, but that would seem to be usefull information about them if you can find it.

Old Inquest magazines may be helpful with some thing if you can find copies that weren't discarded as outdated CCG price guides....

 

[BOZ]

You must have huge brass cahones, because you don't really like WotC all that much do you?

I would find it hard to be neutral about something I personally disbelieve in.

HEH! well, i really don't dislike the company that much. i definitely don't agree with everything they do, but if it wasn't for WotC, there probably would have been no 3E or 4E, nor a finish of 2E either, as far as I know. or maybe someone else would have bought TSR, and done either a better or worse job, who knows... but since WotC brought the game to where it is today, that makes it a significant part of the game's history, and therefore their story needs to be told, regardless of my personal feelings. makes sense now?