Talk:Ex illis

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ex illis article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find video game sources: "Ex illis" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Featured content candidates

Good article nominations

DYK nominations

No did you know nominations

Reviews and reassessments

Articles that need...

Board and table games Low‑importance

	Games portal This article is part of WikiProject Board and table games, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to board games and tabletop games. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Board and table gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Board and table gamesTemplate:WikiProject Board and table gamesboard and table game articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Recovered Dead Link

I found the dead review link in the wayback machine. I was going to read them and add them as references, but someone else seems to be editing the page. https://web.archive.org/web/20101114074228/http://www.tabletopbattlefield.com/ExIllis_Review Slimy asparagus (talk) 17:00, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Slimy asparagus: That was me. Go for it. I'll stay clear. —¿philoserf? (talk) 17:19, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to let you work on it. It's not high on my list.Slimy asparagus (talk) 17:29, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: Okay I have read the reviews. I guess it passes the notability test but not entirely in a good way. Now to adopt a neutral point of view. The archived review has some positive updates though. Slimy asparagus (talk) 17:47, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reception section

Okay I tried sandboxing a new reception section: User:Slimy_asparagus/sandbox#Reception. As I said above the dead link should be easily recoverable. I am not terribly happy with my prose. But still I thought it was a start. And I think those links could be useful. When I tried copying it over to the main article I got a big warning. So if someone could have a look. What I was adding was certainly not "non-controversial" as both sources are very critical of the product. But they do largely agree on the specifics.Slimy asparagus (talk) 19:19, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]