Talk:Celts Campaign Sourcebook

Unneeded Article
Why was this article created? It is not FR, and nothing on this wiki links to it. ~ Lhynard (talk) 22:46, January 5, 2016 (UTC)


 * I saw all of the other 2nd ed sourcebooks like Monster Mythology, The Complete Book of Elves, etc and figured these were allowed here. Artemaz (talk) 00:17, January 6, 2016 (UTC)


 * Hmmm, this sourcebook has some interesting 2nd edition kits... But it is a campaign sourcebook... Historical... I have added an unrelated tag... - Darkwynters (talk) 02:01, January 6, 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't have a problem with it being on this wiki, but it might be a wasted effort because it's doubtful it will ever be linked or used as a reference. However, the Moonshae Isles are very Celt-like and you might be able to find a connection between an FR publication and this one. &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 03:35, January 6, 2016 (UTC)


 * I wondered about this myself. We remit is setting-specific lore and general core lore relevant to the settings. If it doesn't have anything relevant to the setting (either to core D&D or lore specific to FR or a related setting), I don't think it belongs here. After all, we don't include Dragon/Dungeon articles with no bearing on the setting or core D&D, and we don't do Dragonlance, Eberron, or Greyhawk sources (Ravenloft and Planescape are a grey-area, and crossovers are fine). I don't think the FRW should be the de facto core D&D wiki, even if many see it as such.


 * Core subjects about monsters like Fomorians might feasibly be valid, but it still probably isn't necessary. — BadCatMan (talk) 03:51, January 6, 2016 (UTC)