Talk:Exalted

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Role-playing games Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Role-playing games, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to role-playing games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
To-do list for Exalted: edit · history · watch · refresh
  • More cited references.
    • More printed references, particularly peer-review articles like those you find in magazines.
Archive
Archives
  1. Apr 2006 - Dec 2007


Contents

[edit] Every other page gone

Why has all other source information about Exalted vanished? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.240.236.8 (talk) 14:42, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 03:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC): As the author of the vast majority of those other pages, it was "felt" by other users on Wikipedia that those articles were not significant enough to be added to an encyclopedic entry... Or something of that nature.
It is a shame that the good information that wikipedia had about the game is gone. Seems odd that there are pages and pages about different TV shows, but something with as much depth as this Role-Playing Game isn't allowed more then one page. Did they feel that this was some sort of marketing ploy by White Wolf? Or just that it was not very important?--Alabrax (talk) 17:54, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 18:26, 9 January 2008 (UTC): I believe they felt it wasn't important. I had thought about attempting to rewrite the information in a more wikipedia-approved format, but I wasn't sure I wanted to put all the time and effort back into it. Also, since television shows are much more visible, I think there's far less of a challenge to their verifiability than there is to a game that seems to get few reviews (insofar as what I've been able to find online, anyway).
--Alabrax (talk) 19:27, 9 January 2008 (UTC) So if there were more reviews of Exalted we would be more important, or at least more verifiable? Hmm I will have to search for some reviews for Exalted, I know they are out there. Also I think I will check out the D20 page to see how much information they seem to have on that. I am not for or against either system, however I would contest that any one gaming system is more important than another with out some very good reasons. I am fairly new to editing and authoring on this wiki so I am not 100% what they are looking for other then outside views on the material.
Lonesoldier 04:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC) I can't directly link since there's no permalink, but check out the rpg.net reviews page. Click "Power Search" and then under "Product Line" type Exalted. Voilà, dozens of reviews.
Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 03:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC): Thank you for the link and information, Lonesoldier. While I think that rpg.net is a great resource, I'm not sure if it is considered a significant enough source to qualify by the standards of Wikipedia, and I am hopeful to find more peer-review (rather than review by individuals) in reputable publications about table-top gaming. Dragon Magazine would be a good example of such, but it doesn't deal with White Wolf lines if I'm not mistaken. However, something along those lines would be awesome if someone knew where to find it.

[edit] Audochthon did what?

According to the current version of the article, "The Primordials took the unshaped chaos that was later to be called the Wyld, and with a single blow from Authochthon's great hammer, forged the world, called Creation.". Was the origin of Creation retconned, and, if so, can someone provide a source for this? As of 1st edition, Creation was made by the Gaia and Cytherea. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 08:15, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Moreso, Creation is Gaia, and might also have been part-Cytherea before the Primordial War. I went ahead and deleted the reference. Aprogressivist (talk) 14:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Actually according to Exalted Author Michael Goodwin Gaia is not actually Creation, not in the same sense that the Unconquered Sun is actually the sun. --Alabrax (talk) 16:30, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] References and Sources

Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 18:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC): I believe I've done an okay job so far of referencing materials from Exalted without violating any of White-Wolf's copyright. If anyone else wants to assist in this endeavor, please feel free to do so. The more references we can cite, the better for the article.

[edit] Tags

Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 18:30, 9 January 2008 (UTC): It would be useful if anyone putting {{in universe}} or any other tags on the page would be kind enough to be more specific on the talk page so that the problem can be remedied. Any user could go around the wiki and slap tags on every article if they so chose. It doesn't necessarily mean the tag belongs there. If users choose not to clarify reasons for the tags, there should be little to no objection to their removal.

[edit] OK, it's a game, we get it!

Do we really _need_ to have "In this game setting", "within the game", "Within the game’s history" or "According to the authors of the game" in EVERY $%^&ING PARAGRAPH?!?

66.188.98.83 (talk) 20:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 00:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC): To meet the guidelines for writing about a fictional universe in an out-of-universe perspective, yes. Having been the primary writer for this article, I've seen that stupid "in-universe" tag on the article so long that I finally just gave in, put all that crap on it, and they finally took the tag off. So, in essence, I guess I have to say, "I hear you. I agree with you. But... Just deal with it."


Most gaming articles on wikipedia seem to get by with 1 or 2 disclaimers in the whole article, or at most, 1 per section. I'm just saying it's overkill. 66.188.98.83 (talk) 12:44, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 21:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC): True as that may be, we had no less than three disclaimers previously and the stupid in-universe tag kept being slapped on the page. It may be overkill, but now no one can claim it's written in an in-universe style. As wikipedia editors do not list the portions of text that qualify as having been written in an in-universe style, now no portion of text can be questioned. The problem has decisively been dealt with.

[edit] Graduate Your Game 2008

SarimUriel (talk) 08:21, 19 March 2008 (UTC)Seeing as I rather suck at it, I was wondering if someone would like to add some info about Graduate your Game 2008 from White Wolf? I'd think a promotion giving away 2500 free books in return for people turning in their copies of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 Player's Handbook (for destruction) would be worth a mention.

The article announcing it can be found here: http://www.white-wolf.com/exalted/index.php?line=news&articleid=901

And the actual promotion overview can be found here: http://secure1.white-wolf.com/graduateyourgame/default.aspx —Preceding unsigned comment added by SarimUriel (talk • contribs) 08:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)