User talk:Sariel Xilo

If you are taking requests (2024)

February 2024

Reminder that BOZ flagged Planescape: Adventures in the Multiverse as a potential article in the fall & I should circle back to that! Sariel Xilo (talk) 18:40, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good. ;) I'm not sure if Indestructoboy is a topic you would want to work on, but I just added a bunch to it. BOZ (talk) 19:29, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

March 2024

Don't know if this one would interest you, but I started Luke Crane (game designer) today. BOZ (talk) 17:55, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

How are you with working on Starfinder/Pathfinder releases? Do you have anything that would help get Draft:Starfinder Pact Worlds into better shape? BOZ (talk) 19:28, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

April 2024

I'm not sure if I asked about these before, but do you see anything that can help improve Draft:Red Wizard or Draft:Harpers (Forgotten Realms)? BOZ (talk) 22:54, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

I built up the Red Wizard draft a bit and moved it back to article space, but for now the Harpers draft is getting there but still needs more sourcing I think. BOZ (talk) 16:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Miscellaneous Messages

Born Again

Hello Sariel, thank you for your contributions to the Daredevil: Born Again article and discussion. I am a bit concerned with this editor in particular for their behavior with this article, as this is the third time they have engaged in repeatedly restoring their preferred edits and accused me of "ownership" and "personal attacks" (which there's is starting to seem to be more akin to) and other acts for upholding the status quo against their mass and repeated changes to word use, which I admittedly didn't think would be much of an issue, though here we are. I already cautioned them of their behavior having a potential personal bias directed towards me and my editing, so I just wanted to make you aware of that as I am weighing my options with how to proceed with this. Thank you again for your work. Trailblazer101 (talk) 17:57, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping! I've minimally interacted with the Born Again article (mostly copying content to other articles such as Deborah Ann Woll) but I put it on my watchlist mostly because of that editor's tenor in the talk discussions (you followed the correct process in addressing vandalism including requesting page protection & they accused you of edit warring). Their sarcastic response to me seems to be on the border of uncivil but at a quick glance, this doesn't appear to be common in their behavior on other talk pages so no idea what's going on. While the MCU articles tend to be more rigid than others because of consensus developed within the MCU project (which can be somewhat opaque to unfamiliar editors), I don't think you edit in such a way that's ownership & you're fairly clear in your edit summaries about your actions (cite policies when reverting, etc). Hopefully everyone assumes good faith moving forward! Sariel Xilo (talk) 18:28, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the reassurance and your perspective! It means a lot to get a fresh take on this all. Trailblazer101 (talk) 19:26, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

This isn't really directed at any single editor but I think the only area of improvement really needed is within the MCU project itself. A much clearer manual of style which cites local consensuses would be incredibly useful; it would be awesome if the project had a table like the one here which shows how consensus has developed. For example, the MCU project has a really strong style preference on citations and when I was working on some of the Ms. Marvel related articles in 2022, editors were annoyed that I wasn't adhering to that. Some editors would say it was local consensus but didn't link to specific discussions (it was mostly, "look at the other articles"). I believe at the time I suggested to some editors that it should be noted on the project page but there's still no guidance on the preferred citation style under the project's section on sources. For the most part, I've limited editing MCU articles because even as an experienced editor I've had trouble figuring out the local consensus. Just food for thought! Sariel Xilo (talk) 20:20, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

That is something worth looking into, so I'll see about bringing it up to the taskforce to better articulate the local consensuses we've developed over time for unfamiliar editors. Trailblazer101 (talk) 21:57, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Article notifications

Invitation to join New pages patrol

Hello Sariel Xilo!

• The New Pages Patrol is currently struggling to keep up with the influx of new articles needing review. We could use a few extra hands to help.
• We think that someone with your activity and experience is very likely to meet the guidelines for granting.
• Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time, but it requires a strong understanding of Wikipedia’s CSD policy and notability guidelines.
• Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision, and feel free to post on the project talk page with questions.
• If patrolling new pages is something you'd be willing to help out with, please consider applying here.

Thank you for your consideration. We hope to see you around!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Wizards of the Coast

Hi Sariel Xilo, I've moved a little text to the article's talk page because it isn't directly relevant there. I'd earlier removed another short passage but found that text is directly relevant so I've note that on the talk. Regarding shortening the history section, I think the content there is relevant to the company, though separating business dealings from publications might be possible; if the section becomes too large, you might consider summarizing and splitting it off to its own article. Also, the lede could be expanded to more-fully summarize the article's content. These suggestions, however, are beyond the scope of the copy-editor. Good luck with the article and cheers, Baffle☿gab 04:22, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Careful

It's important to distinguish between "censured" and "censored", especially in this sort of context. I'd have fixed it myself but I'm not comfortable with editing someone else's posts here. DS (talk) 21:21, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Dyslexia strikes again (reading a sentence on people being censured for censorship probably led to the flip)! While I try to catch typos & fix them before anyone responds, typos happen. Since editors have already responded to my comment, I followed the steps outlined at WP:TALK#REVISE due to your message here. However, I don't particularly think it was necessary especially as the editors who responded seemed to understand the context even with a minor typo. Sariel Xilo (talk) 21:44, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Critical Role campaign two

Hey, just wanted to say I'm sad to see that your FLC didn't pass. If you ever nominate it again or take it to FAC, don't hesitate to drop me a ping and I'll happily support it again. Best of luck! TheDoctorWho (talk) 02:59, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

@TheDoctorWho: Thanks! It's a long article so I think that's why it has struggled with getting reviews. I'll definitely circle back to you when I renominate in a few months; not sure how long to wait when it wasn't declined for content reasons. Sariel Xilo (talk) 03:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)