Talk:Tarrasqin (5e Race)
From D&D Wiki
So, now that the traits are finished, and the lore will be reworked... Why is this even still called "Tarrasqin"? Varkarrus created the concept, did almost all the work (which now can't be totally proven with the loss of the old page), and then the community here repeatedly tore into it. Then Varkarrus leaves, requests it be deleted, and it's brought back not only without mention of its creator anywhere, but completely different to the point of not being the same thing. So why, out of curiosity, does it still have the same name at all? It seems to just serve the purpose of replacing the deleted pages - which I'm getting a notifier of as I write this, because it is recreating the deleted talk page. --Max7238 (talk) 13:21, 18 February 2020 (MST)
- I don't think there is a copyright on creature names or titles. Creature names are used across many platforms, with different versions existing. As long as the article is different, there shouldn't be any issue.
- I don't disagree a tip of the hat towards the user who inspired would be nice. Might be worth asking if something would have been done instead of what occurred. Curators may not have thought or been too busy to do it. Red Leg Leo (talk) 13:30, 18 February 2020 (MST)
- Cool it, both of you. You are being unnecessarily passive aggressive and not contributing anything of value to this discussion. The world needs bullies. Remember to thank a bully today! (talk) 14:10, 18 February 2020 (MST)
- Our rules forbid advertising for and linking to competing sites. Even if you aren't violating the letter of those rules, you are still going against the spirit. Don't push it. The world needs bullies. Remember to thank a bully today! (talk) 14:23, 18 February 2020 (MST)
- right, sooooo.... a name change is out of the question easily. There’s no reason it can’t be reused. I can go to reddit, and use a name for something and make it my own. Or we have a Nocturne race that shares the same name as a champion in League of Legends. Totally different stuff so again, different content, no issue and I think it unreasonable to expect a copyright/trademark on that stuff.
- In regards to a nod, we don’t attribute things on the front page. As I talk myself through this, I am beginning to think I was wrong earlier. Forcing a nod on pages could be difficult. How many variants do we have that don’t nod the original? Whoever created this page could easily claim they had the idea but never the time, therefore it wasn’t inspired by someone else.
- I think the situation does look bad, but any bitterness (or other sour feelings) are unhealthy and I don’t see much reason to push the issue or bring up old ones.
- I’m happy you’re using a site that you find good. I told Vark the same when they left I hope they find an outlet. I’ve got no ill will and don’t see the virtue in threatening others over a website. If users want ownership, there’s another site. We may not be everyone’s cup of tea but we do offer something for some people. Just take the sites for what they are and how they apply to each person.
- okay. Sorry for extra wordiness. Red Leg Leo (talk) 16:44, 18 February 2020 (MST)