Talk:Dragon magazine 122

Citation
This is not a big deal... but I was organizing the rest of the Dragon magazines when I noticed a different way of citation. As per Dragon magazine 128 where each article has its own template, such as Template:Cite dragon/128/Welcome to Waterdeep. Now compare that with Dragon magazine 10 where all references are in the Ref section and there is only one template: Template:Cite dragon/10... I just want to check with the rest of your guys before I go edit-crazy... Does my Dragon 10 article look okay... or do you prefer having the Dragon 128 citation set up... Thanks :) - Darkwynters (talk) 19:11, July 8, 2014 (UTC)


 * Is Timothy J. Kask really the author of all of those articles? It doesn't look like it from the text above. I think the format that gives the article and author is more informative. You wouldn't want to credit something by Ed Greenwood to someone else, right? My two copper. &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 19:38, July 8, 2014 (UTC)

No, Tim is just the editor... okay, check out Dragon magazine 128... How does it look? Does the References look better than a template button next to the information... Thoughts? - Darkwynters (talk) 20:32, July 8, 2014 (UTC)


 * I like those references, they are fully informative and look great. Someone can copy and paste them if they use any of that material in an article. Not a big fan of the template button. &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 00:25, July 9, 2014 (UTC)