User talk:BOZ

Archives

Happy New Year!

Dear BOZ,
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!! A new year has come! How times flies! 2025 will be a new year, and it is also a chance for you to start afresh! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--2pou (talk) 03:48, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This message promotes WikiLove. Created by Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook). To use this template, leave {{subst:User:Nahnah4/Happy New Year}} on someone else's talk page.

(It’s still the 1st for me) 2pou (talk) 03:48, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly. :) It's still January 1st here for me as well, at least for one more hour. :) BOZ (talk) 05:01, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, BOZ!

Happy New Year!

BOZ,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Salem Ander (talk) 07:14, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year (^_^)

Dear Boz,

Happy New Year and warm holiday wishes ! Thank you for all your hard work this year.

Do not forget to take a well-deserved break and enjoy the season ! :) Higher Further Faster (talk) 17:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How to

Hey BOZ I created a new category page but misspelled the title ("Category:Korean Warboard wargames" should be "Category:Korean War board wargames"), and there is no Move button under Tools to correct this. Suggestions? Guinness323 (talk) 21:40, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Guinness323! :) I'm sure it's easy enough to get the page mover right, which is for categories and images and such, but I haven't gotten around to asking for this or I would help you. To fix Category:Korean Warboard wargames you can find the instructions at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy. BOZ (talk) 23:41, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day! :)

          Ned1a Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 01:20, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks! :) BOZ (talk) 03:22, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome:) Ned1a Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 17:29, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy First Edit Day, BOZ, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 05:12, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks again! :) BOZ (talk) 06:14, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Hey, BOZ. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! JustSomeoneNo (talk) 16:50, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you once again. :) I feel so celebrated! BOZ (talk) 00:23, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

From the better late than never department

Hi Boz, for years now I've been meaning to drop you a note saying thanks for adding the Next Generation reviews to all the video game articles. It has saved me quite a bit of work, and of course made Wikipedia more informative. I hope you aren't bothered that I've been occasionally replacing the quotes you used. In 99% of cases I had no problem with the quote; it's just that I like article prose to flow from one statement to the next within each section, and sometimes there's no obvious way to fit a specific quote into that. I always feel presumptuous when I fiddle with another editor's good work, so I thought I'd better say something about that.

Hope you've been enjoying your editing this year so far. It's always good to see you around. Martin IIIa (talk) 23:16, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's cool by me, I probably overquote anyway so go ahead and do whatever is best for the article. :) Thank you for your kind words, I truly do appreciate it! My next big project was CGW, and I got through about a decade of that before other projects demanded more of my time. :) Eventually though!

Third World (video game) gameplay

Hi BOZ! :) Was wondering can you help add a gameplay section to Third World (video game)? In exchange I can look for sources for any game you want. Timur9008 (talk) 18:35, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I may not have the time for that, but I will see what I can do maybe tomorrow! BOZ (talk) 19:13, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :)

Not sure if possible but can you expand the gameplay section for Mario Teaches Typing? Trying to get it that to FA. Timur9008 (talk) 19:22, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will help with sources again :) Timur9008 (talk) 15:14, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, I am not sure if it is possible to expand that further. What sort of information on gameplay is missing from it now? BOZ (talk) 18:02, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you do Gridiron! then? Timur9008 (talk) 05:57, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That seems reasonable, and it's actually one of mine. ;) I'll try to find some time to add a little there. BOZ (talk) 07:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, finally got around to that. :) BOZ (talk) 19:23, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :) Timur9008 (talk) 12:56, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For Mario Teaches Typing [1] (stuff from there maybe?)

Can you help incorporate? (The page is close to GA) Timur9008 (talk) 10:51, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That looks like a big project that I can't say I have time for. Is there something specific you wanted me to look into? BOZ (talk) 12:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I meant just the gameplay section for Typing. Timur9008 (talk) 12:50, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's a lot of text - I would need to figure out what sources were used for what info before I incorporated anything. I don't know if I have time for that level of work. BOZ (talk) 12:53, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you do Mario Teaches Typing 2 then? I agree that Mario Typing wikfi should have been sourced. Timur9008 (talk) 12:56, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, will see what I can do! :) BOZ (talk) 13:00, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help expand Wayne Gretzky Hockey 2? Timur9008 (talk) 19:25, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look when I get a chance. :) BOZ (talk) 21:54, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You gave me a challenge, most of the sources in that article are not in English. :D I will see what I can do. BOZ (talk) 20:10, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Got a little bit, hope you like it. :) BOZ (talk) 20:24, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you do Road to Moscow (cancelled video game)? Timur9008 (talk) 20:17, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gameplay for a cancelled game? Never tried that before. :) I'll have to look and see what's involved with that. BOZ (talk) 23:05, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Third World and Skip Barber Racing (video game) (which you did) are cancelled games :) Timur9008 (talk) 05:35, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well what do you know. I will see what I can do. It might just be a couple of sentences if anything though. BOZ (talk) 05:39, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you do The Elder Scrolls: Castles? Timur9008 (talk) 19:13, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, let me add a little bit. :) BOZ (talk) 16:23, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about IHRA Drag Racing 2? Timur9008 (talk) 10:54, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a look and see what I can do for you. BOZ (talk) 09:09, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Waterloo Campaign (video game)? Timur9008 (talk) 13:45, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a very busy week, but I will see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 12:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Started that off for you. :) BOZ (talk) 16:46, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :) Timur9008 (talk) 16:49, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Solid Ice? I recall you thanking me for creating this one. Timur9008 (talk) 13:38, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK will see what I can do. :) BOZ (talk) 12:25, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about The 10th Planet? Timur9008 (talk) 02:18, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have a little free time, I'll take a look at that shortly. :) BOZ (talk) 23:27, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about The Elder Scrolls Travels: Shadowkey? Timur9008 (talk) 20:19, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure! :) I've got a lot going on today, but I can take a look at that sometime during the week. BOZ (talk) 20:03, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about ID4 Online? Timur9008 (talk) 01:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I can take a look at that one soon! BOZ (talk) 22:31, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about The Terminator: Future Shock? Timur9008 (talk) 11:56, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That one has a gameplay section already, what were you looking for? BOZ (talk) 12:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you expand PBA Tour Bowling 2 instead then? :) Timur9008 (talk) 15:45, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, will take a look today! BOZ (talk) 12:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you expand Future Shock's one? :) or at least provide sources there. Timur9008 (talk) 16:57, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to get that article to at least B class. Timur9008 (talk) 16:58, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Mother Goose's Farm? Timur9008 (talk) 19:07, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Educational games may be a bit tricky, but let me see what I can do. BOZ (talk) 16:46, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Read, Write & Type? Timur9008 (talk) 05:11, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 03:19, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Tides of War (video game)? Timur9008 (talk) 12:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 10:21, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Millennium Four: The Right? Timur9008 (talk) 05:48, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look soon. :) BOZ (talk) 02:51, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about The Universe According to Virgil Reality? Timur9008 (talk) 07:29, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see! BOZ (talk) 06:09, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about KarmaStar? Timur9008 (talk) 10:58, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 12:09, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about IHRA Professional Drag Racing 2005? Timur9008 (talk) 11:24, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 16:08, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Action Soccer? Timur9008 (talk) 02:03, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look soon. :) BOZ (talk) 02:35, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about The War in Heaven (video game)? Timur9008 (talk) 15:13, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see! BOZ (talk) 12:38, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Wayne Gretzky Hockey 3? Timur9008 (talk) 19:17, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 16:19, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Mary-Kate and Ashley: Get A Clue? Timur9008 (talk) 06:03, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my! Well of course I will take a look. BOZ (talk) 03:09, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Streak: Hoverboard Racing? Timur9008 (talk) 18:03, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 15:05, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Drawing Discoveries? Timur9008 (talk) 18:19, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll work on that right now. :) BOZ (talk) 16:03, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Breeders' Cup World Thoroughbred Championships (video game)? Timur9008 (talk) 19:54, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I'll do that one right now too. :) BOZ (talk) 17:05, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about XCar: Experimental Racing? Timur9008 (talk) 12:28, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I started that one! :D Will take a look at it soon. BOZ (talk) 12:06, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about F-16 Aggressor? One of your's :) Timur9008 (talk) 16:40, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yep! I tend to do very short gameplay sections on my new creations, and one user just removed most of them when they worked on my articles... oh well, I will start that over from scratch. :) BOZ (talk) 19:31, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Dvorak on Typing? Timur9008 (talk) 21:27, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 18:29, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Mickey's Safari in Letterland? Timur9008 (talk) 17:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 14:48, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Wayne Gretzky Hockey? Timur9008 (talk) 18:35, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just one uninformative sentence. :) Let me see what I can do. BOZ (talk) 15:38, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about IHRA Drag Racing: Sportsman Edition? Timur9008 (talk) 12:39, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 11:44, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Gromada (video game)? Timur9008 (talk) 07:50, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 09:10, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Fisher Price Ready for School? Timur9008 (talk) 17:52, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure why not. :) BOZ (talk) 14:55, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Lotus Challenge? Timur9008 (talk) 20:29, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will definitely take a look in the near future. :) BOZ (talk) 17:48, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about IHRA Drag Racing (video game)? Timur9008 (talk) 09:04, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! There are a lot of games in this series. :) BOZ (talk) 11:56, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Mystery of the Mummy (1988 video game)? Timur9008 (talk) 07:37, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a look in the near future. :) BOZ (talk) 05:43, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about IHRA Drag Racing 2004? Timur9008 (talk) 16:56, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to take a look! BOZ (talk) 14:29, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about NIRA Intense Import Drag Racing? Timur9008 (talk) 00:12, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, let me take a look. :) BOZ (talk) 21:13, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Magic & Mayhem: The Art of Magic? Timur9008 (talk) 19:48, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK will take a look! BOZ (talk) 16:50, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Puzznic? Timur9008 (talk) 19:14, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 20:35, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about The Psychotron? Timur9008 (talk) 09:21, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 12:49, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Ducati Extreme? Timur9008 (talk) 12:19, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 10:21, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Sandwarriors? Timur9008 (talk) 20:14, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can definitely take a look in a little bit. :) BOZ (talk) 17:15, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Legend of the Blademasters? Timur9008 (talk) 10:40, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 10:10, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about The Elder Scrolls Travels: Stormhold? Timur9008 (talk) 13:52, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 11:15, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about AYSO Soccer '97? Timur9008 (talk) 13:21, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 14:29, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Ashes to Ashes (video game)? Timur9008 (talk) 10:40, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will work on that one now! BOZ (talk) 08:00, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Pinball Builder? Timur9008 (talk) 06:07, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look soon! :) BOZ (talk) 03:12, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about PBA Bowling (1982 video game)? Timur9008 (talk) 13:19, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 12:22, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Ducati Moto? Timur9008 (talk) 13:50, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 12:39, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Now all the Bethesda published games articles have gameplay sections :D Thank you! Timur9008 (talk) 14:09, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's awesome, glad to hear it! :) BOZ (talk) 14:28, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about AMF Xtreme Bowling 2006? Timur9008 (talk) 05:17, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, will do! BOZ (talk) 02:56, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Vikings: The Strategy of Ultimate Conquest and Anyone for Cards?? Timur9008 (talk) 09:37, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. :) Will see what I can do. BOZ (talk) 13:10, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Menlo the Frog? Timur9008 (talk) 13:55, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 16:57, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Burnout: Championship Drag Racing? Timur9008 (talk) 02:37, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, will do! :) That's one of mine. BOZ (talk) 07:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about The Tone Rebellion? Timur9008 (talk) 19:28, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 16:42, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Monty Python's The Ministry of Silly Walks? Timur9008 (talk) 10:37, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, fun! :) BOZ (talk) 13:46, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Driver's Education '99? Timur9008 (talk) 18:25, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a look right now. :) BOZ (talk) 16:27, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Ares Rising? Timur9008 (talk) 17:26, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, will take a look. :) BOZ (talk) 15:29, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Damage Incorporated? Timur9008 (talk) 15:59, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 13:40, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Majestic Part I: Alien Encounter? Timur9008 (talk) 17:44, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 15:15, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about 9: The Last Resort? Timur9008 (talk) 10:18, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 14:32, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Grand Slam Bridge II? Timur9008 (talk) 09:52, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 14:28, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Picture Perfect Golf and Discovering Endangered Wildlife? Timur9008 (talk) 11:30, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 14:40, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Sierra Pro Pilot? Timur9008 (talk) 18:39, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 16:07, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about The Crystal Skull (video game)? Timur9008 (talk) 17:01, 4 August 2025 (UTC) BOZ (talk) 14:09, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Ski Crazed? Timur9008 (talk) 08:54, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I nearly forgot about this one, will take a look soon. :) BOZ (talk) 22:32, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Timur9008, looks like someone got to that already. :) BOZ (talk) 22:33, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Take Your Best Shot? Timur9008 (talk) 05:48, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 03:28, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Pinball World? Timur9008 (talk) 02:30, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 00:46, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Armored Moon: The Next Eden? Timur9008 (talk) 17:03, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 15:05, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Fallen Age? Timur9008 (talk) 19:14, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 01:59, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Jonny Quest: Curse of the Mayan Warriors? Timur9008 (talk) 17:37, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 16:33, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Fighting Legends Online? Timur9008 (talk) 09:39, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 14:40, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Contraption Zack? Timur9008 (talk) 12:06, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 13:19, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Zen: Intergalactic Ninja (video game)? Timur9008 (talk) 11:06, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 17:00, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Ultimate NFL Coaches Club Football? Timur9008 (talk) 19:08, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 16:13, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Legal Crime? Timur9008 (talk) 18:05, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 15:34, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Jade Cocoon 2? Timur9008 (talk) 18:49, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 16:09, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Man Enough and NCAA Basketball: Final Four 97? Timur9008 (talk) 10:21, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 15:45, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Deer Hunter II: The Hunt Continues? Timur9008 (talk) 06:02, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a look right now. :) BOZ (talk) 05:13, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Take a Break! Crosswords? Timur9008 (talk) 08:02, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you, I would like a break. :) BOZ (talk) 13:33, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about Echelon: Wind Warriors? Timur9008 (talk) 20:20, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look and see what I can do! BOZ (talk) 18:26, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List

I mentioned this in 2 of the AfDs, but the more I think about it, perhaps to start a with a single page might be a good idea List of vehicles in comics, as a companion to List of fictional vehicles/List of fictional cars/List_of_fictional_ships#Comics/List of fictional spacecraft.

I think there are more than we might think, scattered out there in articles. The Avengers Quinjet, the Arrowcar, and so on. What do you think? - jc37 23:19, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I could see that as a possibility. BOZ (talk) 01:14, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Editor's Barnstar
		Thank you for always checking up on / correcting my British/American grammar errors; specifically on Sabra (character). I promise I'm not doing it on purpose! Lol Here's a barnstar as an apology and a thank you for your work!! (I'm sure you're tired of me). Maxwell Smart¹²³³²¹ 09:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well thank you kindly. :) No need to apologize (or apologise!) as I'm sure I do the same thing when editing British topics if I'm not paying attention. BOZ (talk) 16:40, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce Nesmith reference

Not sure if usefull [2] Timur9008 (talk) 06:55, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that probably would be useful if it's officially from Bethesda Software. :) BOZ (talk) 12:39, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is. Bethesda Blog/Beth Blog was an official Bethesda news page. Used in The Elder Scrolls: Arena article (the release date) [3], etc Timur9008 (talk) 12:48, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nice, good work. :) BOZ (talk) 12:49, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Crypt of the Undead

BOZ, in your opinion is Crypt of the Undead a real article now, worthy of being promoted to the main article space? I think it could benefit from some screenshots, but because the licensing on those is a little troublesome, I think for now it's "fair" as it is. Thoughts? — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 16:34, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would say so! You've built it up pretty well, so go ahead and move it. :) BOZ (talk) 16:43, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 17:57, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sending you an email

By mutual interest. Give it some thought. BusterD (talk) 23:23, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will give it a look, thank you. :) BOZ (talk) 23:24, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Overcategorization

I found you added wargames introduced categories to many articles without removing them from boardgames introduced. Wargames is a subcategory of boardgames. Articles don't go in both. Maybe you would like to do some clean up.Lost in Quebec (talk) 22:48, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I can take a look if I get a chance. I'm sure I did that a long time ago. BOZ (talk) 23:28, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Tharizdun for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tharizdun is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tharizdun (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:39, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A semi-random thought

If I am not mistaken, you have added a lot of bibliographical references to gaming articles. For a while now I've wanted to add refs to the games mentioned in the Polish https://www.rebel.pl/rebel-times/147-grudzien-2019.html but in all honesty, I can't seem to find the time and will do it, and I don't know when I can do it. The magazine is available online (it seemed to be down but they restored it). Some games had the titles translated to Polish, others don't. In either case, if you are interested in this type of publication, I wanted to point that out, since it is reliable, online, but obscure to find. It may help establish notability of some board games. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:55, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you would be willing to take the time to identify which games had reviews but did not have articles, I would be more than willing to help you find a way to put as many of them to use as possible. :) For starters, how many of them to you see on User:BOZ/BTG reviews noticeboard? BOZ (talk) 03:53, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

G.I. Joe Articles

Absolutely maddening to see all of those cookie cutter AfDs. Good work there. I hope they are ALL closed as a procedural keep soon. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:16, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you! We will see. BOZ (talk) 16:37, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Drow, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Vae and Carceri.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on White Death (board game)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page White Death (board game), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 17:53, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Oregon Trail (board game)

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Oregon Trail (board game), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:04, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sadowa (game), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sadowa.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:49, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Murder of Melissa Batten for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Murder of Melissa Batten is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murder of Melissa Batten until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Bridget (talk) 02:52, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Phastos

Hello, I see that you reverted my category addition. Per WP:BRD, I would like to discuss this. The character's identity as gay is discussed in the "In other media#Film" section, where it states that he is the first superhero to be depicted as gay in an MCU film. On top of this, the first citation listed is an NPR article describing the character as the MCU's first openly gay superhero. Out of respect, I will avoid restoring my revision until consensus has been established for its inclusion, but I did want to state that my addition of the category is correct, given this information. JeffSpaceman (talk) 10:47, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but the main comics version of the character's sexuality is unknown. The film version is a variant of the main comics character, and variants (other media, or alternate universes alike) can have as many different traits from the main version as are theoretically possible. We would not add all such traits as categories when they only apply to variants and not the main comics version. This character is in the "Fictional LGBTQ characters in film" category, which is appropriate and should not be removed. For other examples, Colossus has a variant in the Ultimate Marvel who is openly gay, but since the main version of Colossus has been consistently depicted as straight we have not added any LGBT categories to that article. You may have some leeway to make an argument that since his MCU film variant is gay then we could use the "Gay male superheroes" category, so it may be beyond me to say that if the medium is not mentioned in the category then because the film variant is gay we should have him in that category, although if there were a "Gay male superheroes in film" category then I would have no argument at all against including that one. I have also removed the category "Marvel Comics LGBTQ superheroes" as I believe my point fully stands about his comics version's sexuality being unknown. I did not check all of the other articles you added the "Gay male superheroes" category to, but the ones I did look at seemed appropriate as they all had been depicted as gay for their main comics version of the character. I just woke up so I hope this is not rambling too much. :D BOZ (talk) 13:28, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The removal of the other category seems fair. I've been going around adding the new category Category:Gay male superheroes that I created to pages under the Category:LGBTQ superheroes category and subcategories, as I felt it would make sense for a more specific subcategory to delineate the sexuality of these characters (cf. Category:Gay singers et al), but I get your point about the difference between comic and film depictions of characters. I probably will create a Category:Bisexual male superheroes category at some point after I take care of all the heroes depicted as gay men, but feel free to remove the categories I add from wherever you may see fit based on the aforementioned difference. Thank you for discussing this with me. JeffSpaceman (talk) 14:10, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! I don't think I'll be removing that category from any other articles, unless I happen to come across one where it doesn't make sense. BOZ (talk) 14:24, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 edition monsters

Hello, BOZ. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 edition monsters, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:08, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you!

I love seeing people pull decades-old original reviews from paper sources, as you did with https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Secret_of_NIMH&curid=558970&diff=1290083600&oldid=1290033381

thanks Bluerasberry (talk) 18:55, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I love being the one to do it. :) BOZ (talk) 19:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Who is Dr. Keith Kincaid?

Hi BOZ, I want to explain who is Dr. Keith Kincaid. Dr. Keith Kincaid was an American doctor who was once the employer of Jane Foster who later became his wife and the mother of their son, Jimmy. He is the man who did research about the Super-Soldier Serum that was in Steve Rogers's blood system by doing his bloodwork and other examinations which caused him to fully explain the Super-Soldier Serum capabilities with Steve Rogers. Courge Marvel (talk) 13:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK thank you. If you wanted to include a mention of him then I think the article should at some point mention some of this information, because if the only time it mentions him with just his title and last name, readers would have no idea who this is unless they decided to do further research. BOZ (talk) 13:36, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Computer Gaming World question

Hi BOZ! :) Is there a list of articles that you created that have one source (Computer Gaming World) that I can look at so I can find more sources? Timur9008 (talk) 05:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is definitely worth looking into! :) I will try to find some time to put that together! I was having another user do that with my Next Generation creations, and he had done a terrific job so far but is currently taking a break. Let me find some time to put a list together. BOZ (talk) 05:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Gerda! :) BOZ (talk) 12:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters

Why do you keep removing the AfC declines from this article? As a former admin, you probably know not to, so I figured there was a better reason. Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 17:09, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, that notice should stay there for the next reviewer. Sorry about that. BOZ (talk) 17:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I'll add them back for you. I know the article is already quite long and the notices aren't helping. GoldRomean (talk) 17:15, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Michael Kirkbride (May 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Zxcvbnm was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

I don't think it passes notability; there is a major lack of significant coverage about him. While he had a major role in the development of Morrowind, it would be a stretch to call him a "creator or co-creator" as guidelines require for notability.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Michael Kirkbride and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:38, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soko-Ban

I see that you reverted my merge of Soko-Ban to Sokoban. Given the gameplay section has overlap with the target article and minimal development information is documented; the merge would actually help supplement the target article with information of its Western release instead of staying a Start or Stub-class article. MimirIsSmart (talk) 22:31, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I suppose that's up to you if you want to undo it. I expanded the article significantly, but if you don't see any value in that then I am unlikely to convince you otherwise. BOZ (talk) 22:38, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with moving the expanded content to target article (I already did with some reviews), maybe even some of the gameplay to improve the lackluster section on the target article. MimirIsSmart (talk) 22:56, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"BRAHMA Force: The Assault on Beltogger 9" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect BRAHMA Force: The Assault on Beltogger 9 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 29 § BRAHMA Force: The Assault on Beltogger 9 until a consensus is reached. FMSky (talk) 06:05, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Links to book titles

Please do no wikilink random book titles as you did in Sefer HaRazim and other pages. The book must have an article. Red link is useless and annoying. --Altenmann >talk 00:37, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your tabletop gaming work!

I saw your name in the edit history for Star Quest, a now-obscure OSG title. Curious, I took a look at your user page and am astonished at the cleanup and recovery efforts you've led. I'm particularly happy with your rescue of poor Rick Loomis, who deserves to have a place in our collective memory. I've been involved in the industry since 1984, so I don't want to risk breaking the neutral POV rule by doing similar edits, and I don't have time anyway. But if I can help you verify citations with my library please let me know. Sofge (talk) 18:54, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thank you Sofge! :) I appreciate the encouragement, I surely needed it today. BOZ (talk) 19:08, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Companion Pieces: Fantasy Furnishing for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Companion Pieces: Fantasy Furnishing is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Companion Pieces: Fantasy Furnishing until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Rorshacma (talk) 22:25, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sidebars — You're right actually,

You're right. I realized there was a separate section for the Marvel Cinematic Universe renditions of the characters, which is where the sidebars would be most appropriate, if anything…albeit, not sure if it's best to stick them on a list entry. But as for the comic book characters, I agree it's best not to hijack the page with them because it's not all about the actor portrayals. So good call for making me aware of that, which prompted me to investigate and discover those list entries! Haha, thanks. --Cinemaniac86^Talk_Stalk 07:46, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. :) BOZ (talk) 14:28, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beholder (Dungeons & Dragons)

Unfortunately I couldn't find a proper source outside of unofficial/wiki sites (like hidden-street.net or the Korean namuwiki, both lists Beholder as part of Dark Knight' skills). TheStriker (talk) 12:29, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, the non-D&D other media section is already quite bloated and really needs a trim rather than expansion. BOZ (talk) 14:31, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Quinjet for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Quinjet is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quinjet until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:20, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Chill Master's Screen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chill Master's Screen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chill Master's Screen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Natg 19 (talk) 18:57, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Castles of Orbaal for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Castles of Orbaal is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Castles of Orbaal until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

JMWt (talk) 19:32, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Adventures in Flesh

The article Adventures in Flesh has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Just two RS is not enough to indicate it passes WP:GNG. Other mentions in RS appear trivial.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:36, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Call of Cthulhu supplements

Hi Boz, I've noticed you add Call of Cthulhu supplements and have some pointers that may help you:

L.N. Isinwyll is an anagram of Lynn Willis. He used it so his name wasn't on every Cthulhu publication. The most obvious evidence is on the L.N. Isinwyll New Aeon Mythos card. Compare that to his picture. Currently I cannot find a reference to support this, but if one appears it could be added to his article and a redirect made.
Here is the third edition of Encyclopedia Cthulhiana now called The Cthulhu Mythos Encyclopedia on archive.org. It contains many Call of Cthulhu references.
I can't really add any of this myself as I have a CoI, but I hope you find this useful.

Sciencefish (talk) 11:58, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just spotted a ref here by Shannon Appelcline, that says there are some game books by "Lynn Willis" and some by "L.N. Isinwyll". The latter is a pseudo-name, but they're the same person. Sciencefish (talk) 12:04, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks, I will have a look and see when I get a chance! :) That might be some useful info. Also pinging Guinness323. BOZ (talk) 12:13, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Secret Li...

Hi BOZ, I've moved your article Secret Liason to Secret Liaison because Liason is wrongly spelled and in the cited article in White Wolf it is also spelled like this. However, after this I detected that in Duel (role-playing game) it is intentionally spelled like this (''Secret {{as written|Liason}}'' in the page's code). Did I made an error? If so, my apologies, I will then try to move it again to the old title. --Cyfal (talk) 07:39, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cyfal, thanks for checking with me. It looks like from the book cover itself, the publisher did spell it incorrectly as "Secret Liason": [4]. So even though it will trigger our spellcheck every time, it looks like that is the correct title. If you do move it back, is there a way to do it so that this misspelling won't trigger anyone else to move it in the future? BOZ (talk) 07:51, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BOZ, thank you for your answer and for finding the picture of the game's cover. I've added now a corresponding footnote and introduced the "proper name" template to avoid further wrong misspelling corrections. --Cyfal (talk) 12:29, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you for your assistance. :) BOZ (talk) 14:09, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hexpressions for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hexpressions is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hexpressions until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

GrinningIodize (talk) 16:52, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Draft:List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 edition monsters

Hello @BOZ! I am an AfC reviewer. I've been looking through the oldest drafts of the Special:NewPagesFeed and came across Draft:List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 edition monsters. I can see this page was originally created 17 years ago. I was wondering if you still intended for this to be reviewed and moved to mainspace if accepted? Thanks! 11WB (talk) 19:55, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:11wallisb, yes if that one is accepted then I would like it moved to mainspace. :) BOZ (talk) 20:10, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a look through the draft. Due to its length it will take longer to review. However I have counted 19 sections such as this one which are currently unfinished. I am familiar with D&D a bit, however I am unaware of how many monsters are in each of those individual sections. I'm concerned that these sections may make the draft extremely long, even though it is a list it may come under WP:TOOBIG. 11WB (talk) 20:20, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:11wallisb, on the one hand, I have access to most or all of those books so I could spend time filling those sections in. On the other hand, if the page is too large already that may be counter-productive. Would it make sense to remove them for now and maybe just make a one-sentence list saying "monsters are also found in these books..."? BOZ (talk) 12:13, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @BOZ! My recommendation would be to first fill in all the sections completely, including the descriptions. After that is completed, it would then be a good idea to split each manual into its own draft list. My current count would put that number at 26 separate draft lists. This would also make reviewing a much simpler process (and likely quicker too as multiple reviewers could then review different drafts). Doing it this way would allow all the information you would like to be on Wikipedia to remain! 11WB (talk) 14:17, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to be splitting this one into 26 separate drafts. :) Many of them would be very short (2-5 monsters? or at least less than 10 in many cases) so that doesn't seem like it would make much sense to me. I am more than willing to find the time to go through the books and add information about the monsters found in them though, and that is more than reasonable to ask. I understand a larger draft will take longer to review, and am sorry for any inconvenience that may cause. :\ BOZ (talk) 14:37, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you for the clarification. I was under the assumption each manual had tens of monsters. If some only have a handful, they can be grouped into a larger split draft list in that case. As for the one draft, that is likely not feasible due to the size already exceeding 11,000 words! 11WB (talk) 14:43, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean. The Monster Manual would be the longest list, having probably a few hundred in it (I did not check, but I assume that one is alreay complete), with Monster Manual III, IV, and V following suit - those last 3 are currently blank, so filling those in will definitely cause the page to balloon significantly. The rest of the books, I would say, most would be between 5 to 20 monsters (it's been a while since I've looked), and you can see the list entries for Draconomicon, Sandstorm, Lords of Madness, Frostburn, and Fiendish Codex I which are already complete to get an idea - some of these remaining books will be less than that, but I'm sure most would not be more than any of those. Still, the only way to see what it would be like is to do the work and see what it would be like. :) I'd like to get a start on that today if I can and see where it takes me, and then we can look realistically on how it might be split up if necessary. We had another list like this which was greatly large, and we reduced the size significantly by removing things like the page number column and other formatting, so we may do that here as well. BOZ (talk) 14:55, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds very reasonable. It would be good to see the total size once all sections are completed and then split off from there if necessary! 11WB (talk) 15:00, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. :) BOZ (talk) 15:06, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did have one other concern regarding this draft. To my knowledge, D&D (especially the Forgotten Realms) is covered extensively not only in those manuals, but also on the fandom wikis. A question I would ask is why it is necessary for all D&D monsters to be listed on the English Wikipedia? 11WB (talk) 15:10, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, this question concerns whether this could be considered as WP:WWIN (under one of the subsection policies there). 11WB (talk) 15:14, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One thing that we try to do here, that I think the fandom wiki does little of, is to include as much as we can find from secondary sources. If you take a look at the sources section, you'll notice that (estimating) at least 100 of the 132 sources cited are non-primary, and I think we can extend that even further. Many of those citations refer to individual monsters, so having them listed out gives an opportunity for information to be added from these sources. We don't want to replicate what fandom does. BOZ (talk) 16:07, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The draft does have a substantial amount of references. This will mean that reviews will take longer, however it is to the benefit of the draft. My main concerns were regarding WP:TOOBIG, WP:WWIN and maybe WP:OR to a certain extent (though the over 100 references mean OR really isn't an issue here). Based on our discussion, I am confident this draft (or eventually, drafts) will be accepted through AfC! 11WB (talk) 16:37, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds great, that is very encouraging. :) BOZ (talk) 16:49, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thankses

Thank you for all the thankses. I am thankful for them. :) Iljhgtn (talk) 23:00, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, and thank you for adding all the cover images! :) BOZ (talk) 23:02, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, maybe you will know the answer to this since you seem to watch a lot of book cover image related pages. So I spend a ton of time updating images at the Category:Books with missing cover, as you know, and recently I was discussing with @PARAKANYAA the parameter for "Exclude book cover" here. I believe the parameter just allows someone invested in cleaning up that category and updating the list to exclude (just from the category) any particular pages that they feel might not best fit there for any number of reasons. This is not to say that the exclusion means that no future book cover can be added, only just that it should (for the moment that the parameter is set to "yes") be momentarily excluded from the category. That is at least my understanding. I find for example a book from the 7th century CE is unlikely to have a book cover that we can find and use, and if after reviewing as best I can, I do not find one, then I might add "yes" to the "exclude book cover" parameter for such an example. There are other examples too, such as the third of 3 books in a series with three deep infoboxes, or in the event where there might be a Doctor Who TV episode that had a short novelization made about it, and that novelization has an infobox deep in the article. In these cases the non-free use rules strictly prohibit the addition of a non-free image in those cases. I think those also should therefore be "excluded" from the category. I have not yet met anyone that spends as much time in that category as I do, but if you know of anyone, I'd be happy to work with them and plan a strategy for how best to cleanup the entire category over time together.

Any insights you might have on this would be helpful, as editor PARANKANYAA and myself seem to have been a tad confused about its use (I have my view, they have theirs). Thank you BOZ for your looking at this if you have a moment. Iljhgtn (talk) 23:12, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I have no idea. That is well outside of my area of expertise. BOZ (talk) 23:23, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for more thankseses. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:24, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, and of course! Thanks for all the book covers. :) BOZ (talk) 04:11, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

3.5E Monsters

Hello BOZ! Thanks for your work on the Draft:List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 edition monsters! In that context I'd like to ask: What's your opinion on the suggestion to trim the MM3.5e section of the list from entries which duplicate those from MM3E? Daranios (talk) 09:57, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did see that. For length purposes, as the article will grow much longer, that may make some sense to remove them. Let me finish building out the page and then we can look into the options for shrinking it down. BOZ (talk) 12:10, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Battle Rage

The article Battle Rage has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable wargame with only one source. It just looks like there's too little sourcing available to justify an article at all. Searching didn't yield much on my end sadly.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 08:12, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thankses #2

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		I'm pleased to got all those thankses although I make only minor contributions to the role-playing games articles. Thank you! Cyfal (talk) 20:20, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey no problem, I appreciate everything you do! Your fixes may be minor but there are plenty of them. :) BOZ (talk) 20:22, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Tazza (comics)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Tazza (comics) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 August 21 § Tazza (comics) until a consensus is reached. Red Shogun412 (talk • contribs) 00:13, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Un-undo edit to Infinity Engine

I did cite a source. Look closely at my edits, and notice I changed the cited page from GemRB's frontpage to its history page, which contains a detailed description of the project's origins, progression, and team composition, with links and dates. I left a link to the GemRB frontpage in the "External Links" section.

I will wait a while for you to reinstate my edits or otherwise respond, before doing so myself. 47.208.130.197 (talk) 07:01, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you did cite a source. I will not revert you if you restore your edit. BOZ (talk) 12:10, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you 47.208.130.197 (talk) 05:22, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hole-In-One Golf (1986 video game) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hole-In-One Golf (1986 video game) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hole-In-One Golf (1986 video game) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Go D. Usopp (talk) 12:45, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

White Rabbit (DC vs Marvel)

Just so you're aware, there's a similar female villain character named White Rabbit in the DC Universe as well. She made a cameo in season two of the show Peacemaker, so you may see another edit related to that.

Luckily there's a hyperlink at the top of the page taking Wiki readers to the correct page, but I don't know if you have any ideas to circumvent the issue outside of that. ParXivalRPT (talk) 00:10, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I think limiting "In other media" discussion of the DC character to List of DC Comics characters: W#White Rabbit is the way to go. BOZ (talk) 00:34, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added a hidden comment to the Marvel page. Edit it as you see fit. ParXivalRPT (talk) 00:45, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for letting me know. BOZ (talk) 00:46, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging articles

Thank you for tagging articles needing covers or screenshots. However, I’ve noticed that some articles have been incorrectly tagged as needing covers despite already having them. This has happened multiple times already. Please be more careful before tagging. Thank you. OceanHok (talk) 04:01, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Draft:List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 edition monsters

Hi @BOZ. We spoke recently. I can see that significant work has been undertaken to your D&D draft. I feel more confident now with accepting your draft, knowing that the list is going to be actively updated. My current thinking is that moving the list to mainspace will allow other editors to contribute, meaning potentially completing the list faster. Alternatively, waiting until it is complete in draftspace is an option. Seeing all of the sourcebooks with their respective lists clears my mind of any doubt about the draft not being ready. I respect that you have chosen AfC rather than moving the list to mainspace yourself in an effort to make sure it meets the right checks. I will leave the decision up to you, I am happy to accept the draft formally through AfC or you're welcome to move the list to mainspace in your own time! The six month deletion timer shouldn't be an issue as you are actively editing the list anyway, so it is basically just a case of how you want to proceed! 11WB (talk) 02:25, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words User:11wallisb! If you are willing to accept it through AFC then I would appreciate that. I agree that moving the list to mainspace will encourage others to contribute. Even if no one else fills the rest in, I will eventually do it myself. :) BOZ (talk) 02:31, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am confident that the list will be filled in eventually. I am also reassured knowing that you have Autopatrolled rights, which tells me that you've been trusted to create new articles without requiring NPP confirmation! 11WB (talk) 02:41, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can see this list has previously ended up at AfD, however it was missing a lot of content back then. I also notice you have been working on this since 2008, which is an incredible commitment. You are likely aware I haven't checked all 140+ sources, instead I assessed the list by each sourcebook provided for each section. The other references used look fine. I still suggest splitting some of the longer lists off into separate pages (per WP:TOOBIG), as the full list currently sits at just over 16,000 words. I understand however that the list needs to be completed first before that task is started on. The list looks good, I am looking forward to seeing it once it's completed! 11WB (talk) 04:13, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! BOZ (talk) 06:31, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @BOZ, I'm sorry the list was nominated for deletion. I am not going to !vote as I was the one who accepted it through AfC, so there is a COI there. However, I can see there is support for keeping it. Hopefully this will result in a satisfactory outcome! 11WB (talk) 17:22, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK, it's the risk we accept when submitting an article to mainspace. :) I hope so as well, and thank you for your support. BOZ (talk) 17:31, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shuma-Gorath/Gargantos

I had forgotten the first time to put which comic they announced the character's new name in, but I put it in the last edition (the comic was vision and scarlet witch 4 {2025}) and you removed it anyway, asking the same thing even though the answer was in the edition, you just had to read it. Are you a troll? 2804:5C:4DC1:F500:2465:6942:CDA9:65CE (talk) 09:51, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do live under a bridge and collect tolls from passersby, but that is a separate issue. I see that in your last edit you mention a comic book title. However, it is very important to note that if Shuma-Gorath and Gargantos are the same character, then we still need a WP:RS to confirm this. If the story itself says "Oh no, it's Gargantos - he used to be called Shuma-Gorath!" then that is enough on its own. Otherwise, we need a source to confirm they are the same character. Looking the same and doing the same things is not enough. And the comic book is very unlikely to mention that there was a licensing issue, so we definitely need a source to include that information as well. Does all of that make sense? BOZ (talk) 12:10, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can see it on Marvel Wiki (Shuma-Gorath's trivia on his page has references) 2804:5C:4DC1:F500:3D19:7C98:A04D:3100 (talk) 15:16, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marvel Wiki, like all other wikis including Wikipedia itself, is not a WP:RS per WP:USERG. BOZ (talk) 15:22, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 edition monsters for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 edition monsters is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 edition monsters (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:35, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of previous AfC declines from draft

Hello @BOZ. I am posting this as a new topic as this is a separate issue to the recent AfD (thought indirectly affects it) and splitting discussions we have had. I have looked through the edit history of List of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 edition monsters and found on two occasions that AfC decline notices were removed: This decline from Pokelego999 on 7 December 2024 was removed 5 months later on 9 May 2025. This decline from Cerebellum on 15 July 2024 at 16:43 was removed 2 days later on 17 July 2024 at 12:56. The second of these is more problematic than the first, however I think both are problematic edit choices. A new AfC reviewer who comes across a draft (me in this case) relies on seeing these previous declines to see if improvements have been made and to understand the previous reviewers reasoning for declining the draft in question. I am unaware of policy on this and I also understand AfC itself is essentially optional, however if the draft was intended to be accepted specifically through AfC, then removing those previous declines is not generally recommended. It should be noted here, I am only a probationary reviewer myself and I am enrolled in NPP/S currently, so I am still only learning myself. I thought it best to flag this, as some editors in the AfD, whilst correct that the draft passed through AfC, may not have been aware of the removal of previous declines. 11WB (talk) 19:33, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fair point. I did not realize at the time that I should have left those there, so that is my error. BOZ (talk) 19:36, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is all good. I didn't know (and still don't know) the exact situation regarding doing that. I will ping @The Bushranger as I am familiar with them and they are an administrator somewhat active at AfC, who may be able to provide an answer to this. 11WB (talk) 19:39, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I gotcha. Another editor a couple of months ago alerted me that I should not remove those responses so I have not done it since. BOZ (talk) 19:40, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that message from GR here. From looking at the edit history, it seems they never added the previous declines back. That explains why I didn't see them when reviewing the draft. 11WB (talk) 19:44, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. I didn't mean to cause any trouble or get you or anyone else into any trouble. BOZ (talk) 20:19, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:11wallisb, I want to apologize sincerely; after reading your last comment here at the AFD, I felt really quite awful. It wasn't my intention to deceive or trick anyone. I mistakenly viewed a resubmit as kind of a reset, but now I realize it is more than that, and new reviewers deserve the opportunity to see what previous reviewers were thinking when/if they declined an AFC previously, and determine if improvements have been made, which is why as I now realize the denial templates should be left in place. As such, I probably won't be using AFC much anymore, as I don't want to do the wrong thing or have anyone think I'm doing the wrong thing. I will have to spend some time away from that and revisit my approach to that process before using it again as I don't want people to feel I am abusing the process. BOZ (talk) 20:55, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is okay, I was only responding to Zxcvbnm's message on the AfD. I am aware this was done mistakenly, which is why I always assume good faith. I am also aware that you are a former admin on Wikipedia, so doing this in an attempt to deceive is definitely not something I would even think of accusing you of. AfC, I would argue, was the correct venue for this article, evidenced by the fact it is now at AfD! This is merely a mistake, please don't worry! 11WB (talk) 21:10, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I accidentally wrote 'was not done', I've corrected this! 11WB (talk) 21:11, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kindness. :) I still feel bad about affecting you in any way with my error in judgement, but thank you for your kind words. BOZ (talk) 21:16, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I actually don't think the removals is that big of a deal in hindsight. Cerebellum had the same reasoning as the current AfD nomination and Pokelego999's reasoning was that the list was incomplete. Looking at one of those revisions ([5]), it appears the AfD decline notices aren't visible anyway, which makes me question whether they ever showed in the first place? 11WB (talk) 21:23, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're not able to view the notices anymore once the draft is moved into mainspace. BOZ (talk) 21:27, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is helpful, thank you. I wasn't aware this also affects edit history revisions. 11WB (talk) 21:33, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BOZ, I have just re-read what Zxcvbmn wrote in the comment I replied to. 'It's likely some inexperienced reviewer will approve it eventually and it will slip through the cracks, even if it is rejected by experienced reviewers. This seems to be what happened here after it was declined by Pokelego999 earlier for quite valid reasons.' I believe they are referring to me as the 'inexperienced reviewer' here. Whilst this is disappointing for me to read, they are right. As a probationary reviewer I should not have accepted the draft before it was ready. I will make sure this is brought up at my eventual AfC review (along with some of the other mistakes I have made). I wish to apologise for this. I have made a number of mistakes this month and I am extremely disappointed with some of the questionable decisions and edits I seem to be continuing to make despite my efforts to learn. 11WB (talk) 22:51, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll wait for The Bushranger to hopefully comment here, but considering this and my recent acceptance of another article before it was ready as pointed out by Sergecross73. I feel I may actually need to voluntarily remove myself as a reviewer from AfC for the time being until I have gained a better understanding of when a draft is actually ready to be accepted as an article. 11WB (talk) 22:56, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfC actually isn't something I'm familiar with, unforutnately. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:59, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks Bushranger. I was going to leave a message on SC73's talk page. However, I feel it is probably easier just to ping them here, that way this can be kept in one place and they can read this discussion for context. @Sergecross73 11WB (talk) 23:01, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

11wallisb, there is nothing for you to apologize for, this was all on me, so I will have to own whatever needs to happen to me as a result. BOZ (talk) 23:14, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am disappointed about the list being nominated to AfD so fast. I don't know whether it should have been or not, but I do know that the nominator in question has a lot of experience in that part of Wikipedia. As for AfC, as the one who accepted the article, I think the onus is definitely on me if it is found (at the AfD page) that the article was accepted too early. This will be the second time SC will now have seen me make this mistake in such close proximity to the last time. I should also say however, that I do have a rather defeatist attitude toward myself, which is a personal issue, however I still believe that I absolutely should be held accountable if it means Wikipedia has been affected negatively in some way. 11WB (talk) 23:20, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think any action is necessary either just as long as Boz doesn't do that any more, which it looks like they've already agreed to. Sergecross73 msg me 23:21, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not going to do it again, I felt every bit of what I said above about how I felt about putting 11wallisb in a potentially bad spot, even though they forgive me, and they have been nothing but nice to me. BOZ (talk) 23:35, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise Sergecross for potentially accepting another article before it was ready. I accepted it, in good faith, under WP:WORKINPROGRESS. This was evidenced by the fact BOZ has been editing the list actively and at a very fast rate. I didn't see the previous AfC declines as BOZ mistakenly removed them, but I still felt confident that my acceptance of the article was valid. Now that an AfD has been opened, it may be the case that actually I did accept it too early. 11WB (talk) 23:25, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't speak for Sergecross, but we all make mistakes - although accepting this draft may or may not have been a mistake on your part. If it does not result in a "delete" at AFD, I can't say approving it was a mistake. BOZ (talk) 23:35, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Recently, another reviewer actually had their AfCH rights taken away, though these were decline related. So it definitely can and does happen. I feel I may be applying what I saw to myself too strongly. I realise this situation is not catastrophic and is relatively minor. Mistakes do happen and speaking for myself, I use every mistake as an opportunity to learn. We have all acted in good faith here, it would be much worse if that were not the case. 11WB (talk) 23:39, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I could be wrong, but I don't think "searching for removed rejections" is a normal AFC reviewer task, because people don't usually do that. I don't mean this as a criticism of BOZ, but rather, just a comment that the crux of this mistake was a more rare situation. Sergecross73 msg me 00:57, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Totally fair. I didn't actually do it as part of my AfC review. I was merely checking the article list edit history today as a result of the AfD discussion and came across those edits from BOZ. I thought it best to flag them on their talk page. I didn't assume anything by those edits, especially not considering BOZ is a former administrator themself. 11WB (talk) 01:01, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify about my inexperienced reviewer statement, it was purely an opinion that I believe it to have been approved wrongly due to its major issues, as well as prior AfD and rejection that should have been noticed. (or perhaps not, but the article's content in general is the larger issue here). If that is part of a pattern of incorrect approvals, it is more of a problem. If it is a single error out of many correct approvals/rejections, it is not that big of a problem. I wasn't trying to make any larger commentary on your editing as a whole, so I wouldn't take it extremely personally. Furthermore, every editor is inexperienced at some point and people do not come into Wikipedia with full veteran knowledge. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:11, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I'll bite my tongue if the article is kept for some reason, but I can't fathom why given its lack of differentiation with the one that was unanimously deleted. Perhaps for a WP:NEXIST reasoning, but that still wouldn't make it a proper approval since significant revisions and improvements could have been requested. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:17, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zxcvbmn. I absolutely did not take it personally, don't worry. It was a completely correct statement, as I only started reviewing at AfC about 3 and a bit weeks ago. Sergecross is aware I have accepted a couple of articles before they were ready. The first one they flagged, Sonic the Hedgehog fandom, I have helped do a complete copy-edit rewrite of, and it is now considered acceptable for mainspace. As for the D&D list, as explained, I didn't see the previous declines, however I believe my acceptance is valid as it stands.

Just as an aside, I want to say that from our encounters this month in the various situations, I have found our conversations to be extremely insightful and helpful Zxcvbmn. Whilst this AfD was quick to come, I fully understand that it is an accepted part of Wikipedia that if an article is deemed questionable, it will likely get nominated to AfD. My choosing not to !vote was to make sure the result is not swung unfairly in one sides favour, as the one who accepted the article through AfC, doing so could have come across as biased. 11WB (talk) 01:23, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't the first AfC article I've seen go quickly to AfD - and they haven't all been ones that I created or AfC nominated. :) It happens! BOZ (talk) 01:26, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Queen of the Spiders

Polygon had this retrospective article on the Queen of the Spiders modules that might be useful in various places. Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:32, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, that's great, thank you Sariel Xilo. :) I will have to find some time to properly go through that! BOZ (talk) 01:21, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you lying?

Why do you claim, against your better knowledge, that an edit is unsourced when the source was provided? 84.140.194.3 (talk) 03:26, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should include some evidence, or at least point to what edit you are referring to before you accuse others of misdeeds. BOZ (talk) 04:06, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You must know yourself which edit you edited with the words unsourced. 84.140.194.3 (talk) 09:22, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]