Search results

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...

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. ;)

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

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.

zing!

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

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...

Hey there - if interested, Wizards of the Coast is indeed now up for GA review. :)

Hey all - I want to thank anyone who helped out or at least wished me well (publicly or silently!) - the Gary Gygax Wikipedia article is now a "Good Article". :) My next mission... Wizards of the Coast. assuming I can actually post on Gleemax, I might as well let them know there as well. ;)

umm... YouTube availability? :) That would be super great.

OK, I'll have a look at that too. :)

Skimming what you wrote... I can say that Wikipedia isn't called the encyclopedia that anyone can edit for no reason. :) If you see discrepancies... DIY! :) I'm going to reread through most of the sources and see what I can add/fix/source, and I'll keep your suggestions in mind, but feel free...

I'll have a look through it. Let me know how to cite it properly.

Ah, OK, I was working mostly with a combination of Echohawk's excel spreadsheet, and what (scant) sources were in the articles already. I must have missed that one. PS, lately I have been majorly involved with a major overhaul of the Gary Gygax article; compare where it is now to where it was...

and I can find this where? :) Also, if anyone can help with this particular problem that would be bigtime great: Talk:Gary Gygax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

indeed. ;) Sorry for not being clearer. I think the article has really been coming along, but any additional help would be supercool. :)

of course you know, i totally lost the motivation of my original intent for starting this thread. ;) hopefully one day i'll pick it back up, but I guess getting Mike Mearls to notice it in the first place is probably good enough. :)

that's just bizarre. heh, indeed! but yeah, that's my fervent hope. you'll note that both 2E and 3E started off with the expressed desire of simplying the game and making it easier to play... and eventually scope creep bloated them both out to all hell. :) 4E will be no different - everything...

No, it's not up for deletion... not yet at least. ;) Hey, so, anyone want to help get the Gary Gygax 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 Wizards of the...

good luck with that. :) although i'd say the flumph is more likely, since the xvart will probably be seen as "just another humanoid" and get skipped.