Forum:A call for formal cooperation between this wiki and the D&D WikiProject 'work team' for Forgotten Realms

Sorry for the delay. I've been snowed under with boring work stuff and haven't been on this wiki or Wikipedia for a while.

To answer SkyeNiTessine's questions first:

1: Yes. The D&D WikiProject has been battling against the Notability thing. To be honest some parts of Forgotten Realms are probably not worth having on Wikipedia, but the delitionists have been trying to re-interpret and redefine Notability and have tagged a ton of fiction articles (while making little to no attempt to fix them themselves). I recently had to "rescue" the article for the founder of Dragonlance Nexus from a termination attempt on Notability grounds.

Most importantly, I believe that Forgotten Realms Wiki has high standards and acts as a reliable secondary source of information on FR. I'm sure the deletionists would argue against that view (probably claiming that this website was populated by D&D geeks), but I think the very existance of good pages on this website supports the existance of a level of FR content on Wikipedia.

2: I've never seen the term "work team" before. As far as I can see, it is a term that D&D WikiProject invented when they "took over" all the inactive D&D WikiProjects. Basically Forgotten Realms WikiProject has been subsumed into D&D WikiProject, but they have a separate section that has all the stuff that used to be on FR WikiProject.

3: No. The entire Wikipedia community sets the guidelines for that wiki. What the D&D WikiProject does is help to pull together people with a direct interest in looking after D&D articles.

4: I'm not sure if that would be allowed by the general Wikipedia community. I think what you do over here (between the Living Forgotten Realms namespace and the main namespace is great, but D&D WikiProject is only a tiny minority of Wikipedia users).

I think the best way to handle the cross wiki links is to clean up articles here, sort out any citations, make sure they are not clones of Wikipedia articles and then cite the page here as a source over there (or at least add it as a source of further reading).

There are some pages here that need improvement - after all this is a growing living wiki - but there are also some that are great. I think that it would be good to hunt out the "great" articles and make sure they are the ones that Wikipedia points to.

OK. Moving onto hash's comments. Yes I think that the WikiProject was abandoned. It got absorbed into the D&D WikiProject with no protest and no comment. But it could just as easily be restarted...if some of you want to restart it.

The atmosphere at Wikipedia has not been very friendly. However, there is a user called BOZ who has really been championing the cause of D&D and who has been helping to take action against one of the major delitionists to get him to cooperate with the D&D community. BOZ has also helped to pull some of the articles up in standard, so that they are worthy of being featured articles. I think that sort of thing could be done with FR Wikipedia articles in a tightly targeted way.

At Zerak: I see your point about verifiable sources. It is what Notability is supposed to be all about. However there are many press announcments for novels and similar things that I think could support FR articles (even if they are in much more simplified forms).

At Fw190a8. I think I'll try to get BOZ to come over here. He is really good at working out this sort of thing. Since he has been helping out a number of D&D articles (including some FR ones) have been given "good article" status and the main Forgotten Realms article has been included in Wikipedia 0.7.

I think BOZ could help draw up a list of suggestions for what could be improved over on Wikipedia. David Shepheard 00:34, 14 April 2009 (UTC)