FANDOM

Welcome!Edit

Well met, Ir'revrykal, and welcome to the Forgotten Realms Wiki! Thank you for your edit to the List of novels in order of publication page. We hope you like the place and decide to stay and explore the Forgotten Realms with us.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful, that explain who we are and what we do and how we do it. You should find these a useful reference, or maybe they could give you some ideas for something to do.

Getting involved
Things to do
Community

It's our goal to be a complete and reliable encyclopaedia of the official Forgotten Realms in all its forms, and a valuable resource for all Realms fans, players, and dungeon masters. As such, we do not accept fan fiction, homebrew lore, and player characters. All information added to this wiki must be attributed to an official source. Information must not be copied from sourcebooks and novels. Please always give a source for your information, and explain what you've done in the "summary" box.

We hope you enjoy editing here. Please sign your messages on Talk and Forum pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, please leave a message on my talk page or ask any of the administrators about things.

Again, welcome! Happy scribing!

Hashimashadoo (talk) 10:04, February 17, 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the Good Work So Far Edit

It's nice to see someone joining in whom I don't have to welcome with a vast list of things to correct. Thanks! ~ Lhynard (talk) 20:40, February 29, 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 06:04, March 1, 2016 (UTC)
Yes, it looks like you'd made a great start on the wiki. Kaeth was a great first article. Welcome aboard and thanks for getting involved. — BadCatMan (talk) 12:09, March 1, 2016 (UTC)
Glad to help out! --Ir'revrykal (talk) 12:56, March 1, 2016 (UTC)
Ir're, excellent work on the wiki so far! - Darkwynters (talk) 23:35, March 4, 2016 (UTC)

Null editsEdit

You don't need to edit a page to update the cache. Appending "?action=purge" to the URL should suffice. —Moviesign (talk) 13:50, March 2, 2016 (UTC)

  • Noted. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 15:15, March 2, 2016 (UTC)

Trading cards requestsEdit

Hello! Might you perhaps take requests for AD&D Trading Cards articles? I have just learned that the generic class of wild mages is supposed to have originated in the Realms. Now I am wondering if the trading cards Nahal the Incorrigible and Hornung the Anarch might feature those heroes who each created several wild magic spells. Either way, thanks for your time. Daranios (talk) 19:47, May 10, 2016 (UTC)

  • Aye, those cards should have brief bios and art of the characters in question. Hornung's is going to be especially rare, but I am fairly certain the art for Hornung was re-used in a Spellfire card (see here). I am currently working on indexing the 1992 series, but if I am lucky enough to find those cards whilst combing through 1993 series booster packs, I will write up all I find. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 18:12, May 18, 2016 (UTC)
Sounds great, thanks! Daranios (talk) 18:35, May 18, 2016 (UTC)

On that note, do you have anything to add for 1993 #26 Balian's Yellow Ioun Stone and 1993 rare #7 Daltim Flamefist? The former is for my ioun stone project (I turned your request into a major project after finding so much lore for it) and the latter because he might mentor a PC in my game at some point. Thanks! — BadCatMan (talk) 09:58, May 19, 2016 (UTC)

I'll do a write-up of Balian's (I happened to find it in an alternate source). The rare is going to take some time due to the nature of rares and the scarcity of 1993 series booster pack boxes. But I'll get it done eventually. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 14:00, May 19, 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, but no rush or worries. Do you have these yourself, or are you working off an online archive? I know some websites present information for these trading cards, and I've found a few in the past by scouring the net. — BadCatMan (talk) 06:20, May 20, 2016 (UTC)
At first, I relied on online sources, but that only got me so far. Thus, I scoured eBay, and now I have a huge amount of unopened cards sitting on my "to-do" shelf. I'm working through the cards, but storing them properly is slow and meticulous work, hence the "eventually". I'm happy to help out with any requests. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 07:48, May 20, 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Edit

Hey, haven't seen you in about a month; I hope all is well. You were doing great work for the short time you were with us. ~ Lhynard (talk) 03:45, June 29, 2016 (UTC)

Computer game categoriesEdit

I see you've been removing categories from many pages related to computer games. Are you replacing them with anything? Did I miss a discussion somewhere? I thought the old categories were at least useful, so I'm curious what your plan is. We can easily use the {{Canon}} template to re-categorize the pages you've been updating, if that is your plan. What is the new categorization scheme? —Moviesign (talk) 13:44, January 26, 2017 (UTC)

There's no way I could find the discussion, but it did come up. I think it was BadCat who was arguing that they are silly cats, since we don't have categories for every other kind of source. I definitely agree. Properly, computer game articles should have indices, just as books do, and articles should have the games listed in the Appearances section, as they do. ~ Lhynard (talk) 13:59, January 26, 2017 (UTC)
Hey. Essentially what Lhynard was saying. The computer game categories are a product of this wiki's early days, when computer game information was considered outright non-canon, so it made sense to have a special set of categories for game-only articles. Now, it seems less necessary, especially if games are the only type of media that is categorized by source. If the wiki wanted to adopt a scheme where everything is organized by source, that would be another matter. As Lhynard mentioned, indices should fill the same role as the "old" categories, although I readily admit they are in a lacking state right now. Aplogogies for jumping the gun on this without going through proper consensus processes. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 15:00, January 26, 2017 (UTC)
No worries, I'm just not used to seeing categories removed wholesale. I don't have a dog in this fight, so carry on. —Moviesign (talk) 20:03, January 26, 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I think it's fine to remove them. I had been removing them as I came across video-game-based articles with them. — BadCatMan (talk) 10:05, January 27, 2017 (UTC)

Class Index Edit

Thanks for the suggestion but its not what i was looking for. WHen I asked for a list to compare which class is a counterpart to what, I meant in terms of characteristics. For example, I found invokers and sorcerers the same because they were born with their magic instead of having to train for it. I didnt mean in terms of video game logic —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zxankou14 (talkcontribs)

Okay. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 05:33, April 27, 2017 (UTC)

Dragon+ citationsEdit

I see you created a citation for a Dragon+ article, so thank you. If there are going to be a lot of these, I'd like to organize them like we have done for Category:Dragon citation templates and create a {{Cite dragon+}} template. Pursuant to this, I have a few questions for you.

  1. How did you find the direct link to the PDF file ([1])? I looked around the dragonmag.com site and did not see any obvious way to get a direct link. Never mind, I found it. Had to disable my script blocker.
  2. Do you think we need wiki articles for issues of Dragon+ like we have for Dragon magazine? The reason I ask is because I'd like to put a link in the citation, if so.
  3. The web site has "page numbers" for articles (Barber of Silverymoon is page 17) so we'd need to distinguish between the web site page and the PDF page somehow. Not all Dragon+ articles are available in PDF form, so I think we're going to need two citations. One for the magazine and one for the PDF, similar to what I have done with the Category:Elminster Speaks citation templates. Any thoughts on this, pro or con?

Moviesign (talk) 14:49, June 17, 2017 (UTC)

Apologies for the rushed implementation. It definitely looks like Wizards is focusing on adding more lore-related content to Dragon+, so there will no doubt be more citations. I've made a few issue articles already (Category:Dragon+ issues), which are roughly as useful as the equivalent articles on Dragon magazine issues.
PDF supplements like The Barber of Silverymoon are not common (I can't recall any other instances at the top off my head), but it's likely there will be more in the future. I think you're quite right in that we should mirror the implementation used for Dragon magazine citations, and keep separate citation templates for instances of PDF/whatever supplements. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 14:58, June 17, 2017 (UTC)
Okay, I'm going to work on this and likely modify/rename your template once I'm done. Thanks for bringing this content to the wiki. —Moviesign (talk) 14:16, June 18, 2017 (UTC)

SlackEdit

Hey, not sure if you're interested, but I'm hoping to set up a bit more of a community feel around the wiki moving forwards, so I've set up a Slack group. Unfortunately it needs email addresses to invite people, so I've set up a form to anonymously collect them. If you are interested, would be great if you can fill out https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfoVCqUNSPCKTp77IxhwMDyIQ4UGVoB1AP0MM15agNUZsU94Q/viewform and leave your email so that I can send an invite!  Fw190a8 (talk · contr) 09:44, July 8, 2017 (UTC)

Joooiiin uusss.... —Moviesign (talk) 00:40, July 11, 2017 (UTC)
Done. :) --Ir'revrykal (talk) 06:56, July 11, 2017 (UTC)
Invite sent. Check your spam folder if you don't see it. —Moviesign (talk) 20:00, July 11, 2017 (UTC)

Deletion tagEdit

Thanks for pointing that out! --Regis87 (talk) 16:18, December 15, 2017 (UTC)

No problem. You're picking things up quickly! --Ir'revrykal (talk) 18:54, December 15, 2017 (UTC)

The Ruins of UndermountainEdit

Hey, Darkwynters. In 2013, you added the year 1358 DR to the infobox of the The Ruins of Undermountain article. I'm looking to develop Undermountain as a topic, and was wondering where you got the date from? --Ir'revrykal (talk) 03:17, January 9, 2018 (UTC)

Ir'revrykal, since there is no citation next to the date I am guessing either I just put that there as a possible date or I copied the infobox from another page and forgot to remove the date... I just looked at all five adventures and the most recent date 1369 DR is in Undermountain: Stardock. Undermountain: Maddgoth's Castle has 1368 DR on page 4. In the sourcebook Undermountain: The Lost Level on page 3, the drow attacked dwarves of Dumathoin and they sealed the door in 211 DR, which was only opened 32 times in 1157 years (1368 DR). Hmmm, Tamsil Dryndilstann is 16 winters in The Ruins of Undermountain. - Darkwynters (talk) 04:03, January 14, 2018 (UTC)
Alright, noted. Seems there is no easy answer to this, and the only recourse is cross-referencing a bunch of hints. Thanks for looking into it. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 14:02, January 14, 2018 (UTC)

Improved Images Edit

Thanks for you great work on the wiki!

A couple things about uploading images:

Keep up the good work.

~ Lhynard (talk) 22:19, February 4, 2018 (UTC)

I can't upload .jpg files over .png files! :) In the case of Tomb of Annihilation, I believe that book is an adventure, not a sourcebook. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 22:28, February 4, 2018 (UTC)
  • I thought that you could upload any file type to replace another image. The page name on wiki doesn't really matter. Maybe I am wrong, but have you tried?
  • All adventures are sourebooks, but not all sourcebooks are adventures.
  • I reverted your changes to File:SwampSorrows.PNG, because the image that you used to replace it was not the same image. There is nothing wrong with the old image. It is a valid map of the Swamp of Sorrows. Feel free to upload the other map to a separate filename and use that in the article, but if you do so, please move the older map to a gallery within the article. (Sorry if my previous note here confused you about this. :) )
~ Lhynard (talk) 20:05, February 5, 2018 (UTC)
  • I get the error message "File extension "foo" does not match the detected MIME type of the file (image/bar)." when attempting to upload across file types. It's been this way since the very start of Wikicities/Wikia, I believe.
  • Noted. I've noticed the usage of "sourcebook" is a bit inconsistent on the wiki. I thought I had it figured out, but I stand corrected.
  • I didn't want to cause additional deletion work, basically.
--Ir'revrykal (talk) 20:20, February 5, 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for checking; I was wrong.
  • You are correct that it is inconsistent. That's how a lot of things are on this wiki, unfortunately. :) For the purposes of image categories, at least, that's how we've been doing it. The categorization updates for images have been going on for over a year, and there is still a lot of work to do.
  • No worries. In this case, there is nothing to delete.
~ Lhynard (talk) 20:36, February 5, 2018 (UTC)

Category RenameEdit

I noticed you spent a half hour moving items from Category:Images from Monster Manual II 1st to Category:Images from Monster Manual II 1st edition. In the future, you might want to try out the Category Rename feature, which will do what you did in much less time. Unfortunately, it only shows up when you are using the Oasis (default) editor, so you'd have to append &useskin=oasis to the URL when viewing the category page in Monobook. The Rename function is an option in the drop-down menu next to the Edit button. The user interface is a little confusing, so please be very careful when using it. If you combine two categories using the tool, there is no easy way to undo it except manually revert each change. Thank you for your diligence and desire to improve the wiki. You fit right in with the rest of us OCD geeks :-D —Moviesign (talk) 14:43, February 11, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I did consider asking for admin/bot assistance, but decided to take the opportunity to fix some other issues on the file pages in question. I will definitely keep the tool in mind in the future. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 15:06, February 11, 2018 (UTC)

Userbox ProblemEdit

I believe the problem you're having with {{User new pages}} is caused by the apostrophe in your user name.

{{BASEPAGENAME}} = Ir'revrykal

But if you execute this on your user profile:

{{#ifeq: {{BASEPAGENAME}} | Ir'revrykal | true | false }}

you get this: false.

Did you create your Wikia account on a Mac, perchance? I'm betting that the apostrophe returned by BASEPAGENAME is not the same one being displayed, or else it's returning ', or maybe Unicode. —Moviesign (talk) 20:29, February 16, 2018 (UTC)

Interesting. This account was made using good old Windows 7, I believe. Have not ever used a Mac. I created a very simple workaround, so the template works as intended now:
{{User new pages|{{#dpl:  namespace= | createdby = Ir'revrykal | mode = userformat | resultsheader = %PAGES% | noresultsheader = 0}}}}
Thanks for taking a look. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 20:51, February 16, 2018 (UTC)
FANDOM reports this is a known quirk of parser functions:
{{#ifeq: {{BASEPAGENAME}} | Ir'revrykal | true | false }}
returns: true. —Moviesign (talk) 22:21, February 16, 2018 (UTC)
PS: Note that there is a maximum number of rows returned by DPL functions, so once you hit the 500 mark, you will have to keep track of your new pages by hand, like I do. :p —Moviesign (talk) 22:24, February 16, 2018 (UTC)
Hah, I think it'll be a few years before I hit that mark. Thanks again for the help. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 08:40, February 17, 2018 (UTC)

Did you know... inclusion? Edit

Hello Ir'revrykal! Is there any chance to be included in the Did you know, in this case with Brassberg? I know there's lot's going on and I only rarely do new articles, but it would just be more fun to be there, too. Either way, thanks for the work of doing that section in the first place. Daranios (talk) 13:05, December 2, 2018 (UTC)

Apologies, I must have missed you. I'll write something up! --Ir'revrykal (talk) 13:06, December 2, 2018 (UTC)
It's sorted. Sorry again. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 14:27, December 2, 2018 (UTC)
No problem, I know that lot's of stuff is flooding in :-). Thanks for including me! Daranios (talk) 17:21, December 2, 2018 (UTC)

Demon lords = Ruler?Edit

Hello Ir'revrykal! I noticed you removed Category:Rulers from Category:Demon lords. As at least one definition for demon lord was that they ruled a part of the Abyss, are there really enough exceptions so that we should not have the rulers category there? Daranios (talk) 20:20, May 16, 2019 (UTC)

I figured since rulership isn't an intrinsic property of being a demon lord (according to the source I was working with, Book of Vile Darkness) it would be incorrect to categorize them as rulers, since "all demon lords are rulers" isn't true. However, if there are sources making that claim, we should probably categorize them as rulers. Apologies if I acted too hastily, and without checking all the relevant sources. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 13:00, May 17, 2019 (UTC)
No harm done. I got this first from the demon lord article, where Dragon magazine 369 seems to say that.
Digging a little I found "The lords rule entire Abyssal layers,..." in On Hallowed Ground, p. 49. The Book of Vile Darkness has "Almost every demon lord rules one layer" and Planes of Chaos says on p.2 of the Monstrous Supplement "Most lords rule an entire layer of the Abyss, though the least among them fight for control of a layer with other lords."
Together with some examples in the back of my mind I would not interpret that as some demon lords don't rule but as some demon lords rule only part of a layer. In short I would be for getting the Rulers category back. :) Daranios (talk) 21:18, May 17, 2019 (UTC)
Alright, well argued. I have added the category back. Thank you for doing the research! --Ir'revrykal (talk) 21:40, May 17, 2019 (UTC)

GrippliEdit

Hello there! It's me again already. You beat me by a few hours: I actually did find several mentions of grippli in Realms sources, so if it is easily possible it would be nice if it could be restored and I would add the sources these days. Not that it's a big deal, as it was only a sentence, so I or someone could also create it from scratch if that was easier. Just let me know what works better. Thanks a lot!
Grippli were members of the Mindulgulph Mercenary Company, mentioned both in Gold & Glory, p. 14 and the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting 2nd edition (revised), Grand Tour, p. 81. Grippli also show up in The Vilhon Reach, p. 48.

Nice! Thanks for taking the time to do more extensive research. The article was in a sorry state, but to redeem myself I will recreate it using these sources. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 20:32, May 20, 2019 (UTC)
Cool thing! You are doing... a lot more than I had planned to do :-). Daranios (talk) 19:51, May 21, 2019 (UTC)

Creature articlesEdit

So I was told to start discussions with fellow editors before I make any changes involving contradictory (or at least distinct) pieces of information. So I'd like to do so, concerning two creatures who caught my eye, whose pages aren't properly developed (I didn't see a post page for this kind of thing so I interpret this as just to ask around.) The creatures in question are the Meenlock and Boggle. In 5e both these creatures are fey born from strong emotions where the feywild touches the material plane. In Meenlocks it's fear and in Boggles it's Loneliness. However in previous edition they are natural 'so to speak' creatures. Meenlocks were people of standard races, halflin, human, elf etc. who were transformed into hideous monsters by a torture ritual. Boggles on the otherhand are these weird mishapen scavenger race. So how would you advise going about writing their entries? Should I create seperate entries for both or try and mend the two stories. If the latter, how so? Thank you. Vegepygmy (talk) 21:07, June 17, 2019 (UTC)

Hey there. We generally try to give primacy to the most recent source (as well as Realms-specific sources), so in this case the 5e information would override earlier editions. Non-conflicting information from earlier editions should be woven into the article. There is some precedent for splitting creature articles in cases like this, for example Deva (aasimar) and Deva. This should probably be reserved for irreconcilable cases, though.
My advice would be to write down all the information you have on each creature (for example on your sandbox page), and see if the information can be reconciled at all. I hope that's helpful. Please let me know if you have more questions, I'm here to help. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 21:33, June 17, 2019 (UTC)

Hey. I assume the sources thing was about the Mongrelmen article. I typically only use sources found in the reference lists provided at this point. Unfortunately I needed to go to sleep and so submitted it planning to add the sources in the morning. It'll be cited soon. But to summarize the sources are a conglomeration of the ones at the bottom. Vegepygmy (talk) 13:00, June 18, 2019 (UTC)

Lugribossk Edit

About Lugribossk. I had his level because it was stated, but a class was not given in the source from what I could tell. Gem Hound (talk) 05:37, July 1, 2019 (UTC)

Hey there. What's unclear is what "psionics level" refers to. "20th level [no class]" makes no sense within the context of 2e, AFAIK. Psionics has a bunch of unique systems so I assume "psionics level" refers to one of these rather than experience level within a class. --Ir'revrykal (talk) 05:44, July 1, 2019 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.