Template talk:Cite web/D&D Beyond/Aarakocra

Why do we have this template? Nothing uses it. ~ Lhynard (talk) 21:29, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Agreed, and we shouldn't have it anyway. ~ Possessed Priest (talk) 22:48, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I mentioned in chat that I would be adding citation templates for DDB for articles that are not behind the paywall. I'm hoping to get DDB to link to our wiki in the future. &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 22:56, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, cool, I missed that. Why do we cite D&D Beyond when the information is already available in a sourcebook? If things are available online, we always point back to the primary source. Why not put it in External Links, if we must? ~ Possessed Priest (talk) 23:00, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It's just an additional source. I would cite both the book and DDB and let the reader decide which they want to use. (But I'm not going to actively go back and add these new citations to old pages.) &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 23:46, 7 October 2020 (UTC)


 * If the information is actually simply copied from a primary source, than I am opposed to ever citing it at all. ~ Lhynard (talk) 23:56, 7 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I agree with Lhynard. If D&D Beyond decide to use the wiki as an external link, then we should do the same. However, we shouldn't use them as a citation, as it doesn't make sense to do that when we already link directly to the primary source. In fact, D&D Beyond also points right to the primary source, i.e., in that aarokocra page you linked, it specifically points to Elemental Evil Player's Companion. If we include D&D Beyond, it must be through the External Links section and not citations. The reader can already decide to check out D&D Beyond if it is in the External Links, which is much clearer and provides them with more publicity than them having to dig through the longer passages of smaller text references! ~ Possessed Priest (talk) 00:07, 8 October 2020 (UTC)