Help talk:Constructive Editing

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

What If[edit]

What if the page (like the one I just edited) is incomplete. Can we constructively create? especially if the page is up for deletion for being incomplete and could be a great adventure? What then? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) . Please sign your posts.

Definitely go for it. Just notify the author on the talk page. --Aarnott 17:55, 25 June 2009 (MDT)

Grammatical Issue[edit]

In common American English, "human" is not considered a proper noun, "Are you human?" would be valid. But in cases such as Sci-Fi, where races are rife in variety, "Are you a Human?" ("Are you a Dhampir?" etc.) is usually considered the grammatically valid way. I haven't been capitalizing "human", this issue has come up once in my travels, to my notice. Should I be treating "Human" as a proper noun? --SgtLion (talk) 03:30, 5 June 2013 (MDT)

The SRD doesn't capitalize race names, so there's that. But otherwise you are right, race names are not proper nouns if they don't refer to a specific entity. It's elf, dwarf, human; but it's Londoner, Briton, Cockney (sorry, couldn't think of the fantasy equivalents. In sci-fi you would have Earthling.) Marasmusine (talk) 11:53, 5 June 2013 (MDT)


I removed the example race for containing a user attribution template, and for being a poor example, as the base-race it was a reaction to was a SRD page. The outdated example was a legacy, from back when the 3.5e SRD and homebrew projects were tied together, and people were still unclear on authorship. 14:01, 27 September 2016 (MDT)


Under the "spelling and grammar" section, there are two redlinks leading to pages which have been removed without leaving redirects. Can someone fix this please? — Geodude671 (talk | contribs)‎ . . 09:19, 13 July 2017 (MDT)


I appreciate the grand idea of not recognising balance as a binary property. And indeed, I think what we have written here makes good point. However, articles should, to some degree, be balanced with SRD and official material of the given system. DnD is procedural and made to be customisable, there are easy ways to give people more power (Gestalt-ing, free LA, changing CR, etc.) than having a giant variety of different power-level articles. I do recognise there's subjectivity on this matter. But, at the end of the day, I think it doesn't get across the idea that we do actually have general balance requirements. If there are no objections, I'll add in something in a couple days, to clarify that very point, as I fear we're slightly misleading users with the current text. --SgtLion (talk) 03:22, 29 November 2017 (MST)

I think that would probably be beneficial; it's the assumption that I've been operating under. — Geodude671 (talk | contribs | email)‎ . . 08:41, 29 November 2017 (MST)
Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!