User talk:Sariel Xilo

If you are taking requests (2025)

If there's an article you think I'd be interested in working on or an article you need help with, please drop the request here. Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:49, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

March

Thanks for the welcome Sariel!

I completely understand and I'll have those citations sorted in a jiffy. Apologies, I tend to follow the pattern. As there were no citations present and the provided information was very different than the source material, I figured I would just follow suit and adjust it to be in line with the actual rules.

I'll go revert/update with appropriate citations and wording close as close to the source material in existing format.

I appreciate you reaching out and please feel free to review my updates and provide feedback! Zanithar (talk) 07:51, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Do you feel that the new changes are adequately sourced?[1] BOZ (talk) 04:21, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

@BOZ and Zanithar: I don't have access to the 3E/3.5 books to verify and stylistically, I think the citations should be on every line and not just at the colon symbol. I also think the lists under 3rd Edition & 5th Edition should be trimmed and summarized because it is drifting into WP:GAMECRUFT (#5 & #7) and we don't need a detailed guide (WP:NOTGUIDE) on a single edition's Code of Conduct. Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:15, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

At the end of the day, I did not put a code of conduct list there. I merely corrected an existing one that was very incorrect.

Although it is slightly annoying from an effort perspective, I have no issue removing it completely.

The actual source is a paragraph not a list. Again, i merely kept the original format. Zanithar (talk) 05:43, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

3rd edition:

https://anyflip.com/jeuoi/pnpx/basic

3.5 edition:

https://archive.org/details/players-handbook-v-3.5 Zanithar (talk) 05:54, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

April

One of the few remaining D&D fictional element articles; do you have any sources for Eilistraee? BOZ (talk) 03:38, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Same for Tharizdun. BOZ (talk) 10:11, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

I checked on Tharizdun yesterday when the AfD hit my watchlist yesterday but I couldn't find anything via the Wikipedia Library. Just went through for Eilistraee, and I only found a dissertation that someone else mentioned. Sariel Xilo (talk)` Sariel Xilo (talk) 21:02, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

https://archive.org/details/tsr09326for2drowoftheunderdark/mode/2up

Page 21 Zanithar (talk) 10:16, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

@Zanithar: Generally when fictional elements are going through the articles for deletion process, the concern is that the article in question doesn't have enough secondary sources to meet the notability requirements for a standalone article. I've often had decent luck in finding sources & updating articles during AfD to meet the WP:HEY standard; however, unfortunately, I'm not finding any academic sources for the two fictional gods BOZ mentioned above. Sariel Xilo (talk) 21:10, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

I figure there is a good chance you might have some interest in Matt Collville. :) BOZ (talk) 02:49, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Just did some cleanup on that one but I couldn't find any non-primary sources for his work before his time at Turtle Rock Studios. Probably could also use something about how his YouTube platform led to MCDM. Sariel Xilo (talk) 17:51, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

May

They are not in any immediate danger at the moment, but just wondering if you've got anything more to improve Moradin or Bahamut? :) BOZ (talk) 05:53, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

I went through some of the academic databases via the Wiki Library & nothing popped unfortunately. Sariel Xilo (talk) 20:26, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

OK, thanks for checking! BOZ (talk) 12:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Do you see anything for Vincent Dutrait? BOZ (talk) 12:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

June

@BOZ: If you have any suggestions tagged with {{Unreferenced}} or {{BLP unsourced}}, let me know since I'm participating in Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced articles/Backlog drives/June 2025. Thanks! Sariel Xilo (talk) 02:37, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

OK, will take a look! Vincent Dutrait above has been sourced better, but it also wasn't June yet. :D I will check the various gaming WikiProject lists and see what there is. If drafts count, you could look at Draft:High & Low - Card Game. BOZ (talk) 02:45, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Turns out... there are many. :o

• https://bambots.brucemyers.com/cwb/bycat/Role-playing_games.html#Cites%20no%20sources
• https://bambots.brucemyers.com/cwb/bycat/Dungeons_%26_Dragons.html#Cites%20no%20sources
• https://bambots.brucemyers.com/cwb/bycat/Board_and_table_games.html#Cites%20no%20sources

You could peruse those lists and/or I could pick out a certain number that you could take a look at BOZ (talk) 03:25, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Did not know about that tool! I'll check them out as a starting point. Thanks again! Sariel Xilo (talk) 03:34, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Sounds good. Like I said about the draft above, if those count I can take a look and see if there are other unsourced drafts. If articles that were redirected due to being unsourced also count, I can look through my enormous deletion lists for those as well. :) BOZ (talk) 03:43, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

I think it is limited to mainspace articles with those two tags (basically a flip of the {{Citation needed}} drive which was limited to that tag). Sariel Xilo (talk) 03:58, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm sure some of those are covered in Designers & Dragons, and I'm confident that Atomic Sock Monkey Press is well-covered there at minimum. BOZ (talk) 04:23, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

I don't know if they count because they have different sourcing tags, but Blades of the Tiger and Ken Frank (see talk page) are unsourced. BOZ (talk) 12:29, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Miscellaneous Messages

Hey!

Can you block those bad guys reverting my edits?

Reason: They keep thinking that the Baby Shark and PJ Masks should stop airing! LukeJolly3 (talk) 15:03, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

@LukeJolly3: I'm not an admin but you could make a report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. I doubt it'll go well for you since you've been told repeatedly to stop your own edit war behavior; you must provide reliable sources & stop including original research. Sariel Xilo (talk) 16:05, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

And resolved at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:38, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Veilguard

It seems like the article has stabilized. I'm recalling the RFC with a lot of different points, and I realize that it meant it was hard to track the feedback. Was there anything outstanding that needs further discussion? Shooterwalker (talk) 15:55, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

@Shooterwalker: Sorry for the delay but wanted to think about this. I think the main feedback that came out of the RfC was broadly summary sentences are acceptable and while not automatically a SYNTH issue, should be reviewed & have sources. The other point that came up but was outside the scope of the RfC was that some editors think the Reception section is a too long. Veilguard's critical reception subsection is just over 1100 words while Inquisition's critical reception subsection is just over 800 words; Inquisition is a good article so maybe that length is a good target? I think what would help is splitting off some of the critical reception into a themes/analysis subsection; the video games MOS doesn't mention this specifically but I think the guidance from other media types could be used (MOS:FILMTHEMES/MOS:TV#Themes and analysis & MOS:NOVELS#Major themes). LGBTQ+ representation could be moved there (which would reduce the CR to just over 950 words) & maybe the paragraph on the game's companions; we would probably need to find sources about how Veilguard continues Dragon Age franchise themes such as including companions & LGBTQ+ representation (basically broader analysis than what is currently in the reception section). Thoughts? Sariel Xilo (talk) 17:54, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

That sounds right to me. I could see discussion stalling about whether summary sentences are appropriate, but they are ordinary practice even at featured articles. There's always room to modify the sentence until it's uncontroversial, and even in some cases they can reference sources that comment on broad opinion. I'm guessing that at least got things unstuck, even if it didn't directly answer every question in the RFC.

The length of the reception section is unrelated and not urgent. Three paragraphs is a good target, using Inquisition as a reference. That can be any order: "most positive", "less positive", "most critical"; or (in the case of Inquisition) "gameplay", "narrative", "world/levels". Those categories aren't prescriptive, and just examples of how to cover the reception of the entire game quickly, with the appropriate level of detail.

Veilguard just often fails to get to the point -- the product of an article that has been expanded one sentence at a time, over the course of weeks and months. Even just the opening paragraph about the critical reception could be two sentences: (1) It was well reviewed on metacritic and opencritic, and (2) it was review bombed but it wasn't representative.

There are four paragraphs about story and character, and somehow I'm still left wondering about the game experience, like graphics, audio, gameplay, and so on. I understand this is a story-driven game, but it's still getting lost in the details. Individual characters can be covered at articles about the individual characters, or even a "list of characters in Veilguard" article. Character lists would be consistent with other games in the series, and the sources absolutely do support that as a separate article. This article needs to be summary style article about the game, and reception should never be too far from talking about the game overall. Individual characters, subplots, and themes lose that context. Shooterwalker (talk) 14:16, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Giving some thought as to a manageable first step. Reading the reception section again, there is clearly enough material for an article about Taash. I'm willing to bet there is enough material for at least a few other characters as well. Is that something you think you'd be willing to take on? Shooterwalker (talk) 22:00, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Shooterwalker: While I enjoy editing character articles sometimes, I've held off because it seems like the space around Veilguard has become a minefield. If you draft anything, I would be happy to contribute (maybe with RefIdeas?) but I don't think I'm the person to take the lead; other editors don't seem to be taking my edits in this space in good faith & I don't want to get your efforts mired simply because I edited. It's unfortunate but I'm not really sure how else to handle it. Sariel Xilo (talk) 18:07, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

I understand how you feel. I have been shellshocked by bad faith editors in the past. The dust does eventually settle, and the bad faith is usually spotted for what it is. Focus on articles that bring you satisfaction in the meantime. Shooterwalker (talk) 18:13, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

@Sariel Xilo @Shooterwalker It looks like the article has become unstable again. I just noticed your discussion here. I’ll leave it at the one revert for now, but the stable version should be discussed and resolved through consensus, or not? Simply removing content that was widely discussed and has remained in the article for months doesn’t seem appropriate to me. Vestigium Leonis (talk) 09:53, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

@Vestigium Leonis: When I did the initial reversion (and the only revert I did), I thought it was simply a new editor getting started with maybe a focus on grammar or condensing without realizing they were removing the main subject in various headings. I have no idea why there was bunch of edit warring subsequently; I added a clearer explanation at Talk:Dragon Age: The Veilguard#Edit warring for my revert (I could have done a better edit summary!) but none of the editors who reverted have explained why they think the changes should stay... However, NutmegCoffeeTea has reported us as being SOCKs which I've called "a bad faith report which is retaliatory in a nature". Sariel Xilo (talk) 17:55, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

And the investigation was closed due to "Insufficient evidence" so I'm glad that didn't take long. I saw you changed your status to semi-retired because of some IP stalking; it totally sucks when things like that happen (I experienced a bit of that in February). I hope you'll consider returning after taking a break. Sariel Xilo (talk) 20:43, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I’ve seen the investigation. Since it was closed so quickly, it’s probably for the best to just let it go and move on. About the rest: I’ve been extremely stressed in real life since April. That’s when I also mishandled the reverts and made some heated comments that don’t reflect how I normally act. Semi-active would probably be a better banner to put on my talk page for now, but I won't leave completely or anything like that. Same goes back to you, though. Don't let whatever is going on right now scare you away from editing things you like.

Anyway, I think it's best to keep the situation in the project discussion for now. The reverts / edit warring probably won’t stop unless this gets clarified. I still don’t understand why details like publisher info are so controversial to others, but I’m confident a solution will be reached on the project board. Vestigium Leonis (talk) 21:38, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to the drive!

Welcome, welcome, welcome Sariel Xilo! I'm glad that you are joining the June 2025 drive! Please, have a cup of WikiTea, and go cite some articles.

Fix a random page lacking sources

Cielquiparle (talk) 04:12, 1 June 2025 (UTC)