Talk:The Staff of Karnath

Fair use rationale for Image:Staff-of-karnath-1.jpg

Image:Staff-of-karnath-1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Quoting the plot

You might also want to consider the large chunk of plot quoted from the instructions (I assume) goes beyond what fair use would cover. Perhaps it could be paraphrased or something.--Malcohol 12:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

You're right. I've cut a big chunk out, but perhaps paraphrasing it would have been a better idea? Although my trimming has reduced it down all you need to know to play the game!  ;-) Thanks for flagging this up. Cheers, --Plumbago 13:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Staff-of-karnath-1.jpg

Image:Staff-of-karnath-1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Developed by Ultimate or not?

@Rhain:, you say in your reverting edit summary "That's not what the article says" - where in the article does it say that the game was developed by Ultimate as an entity, not the Thomas brothers? I've read through it fairly carefully, and there is no implication that anybody other then the Thomas brothers - who were not part of Ultimate, but showed them their games on spec - did any development. The article specifically states "The game was programmed by Dave Thomas and the graphics were designed by Bob Thomas" - no mention of any other involvement, in fact is again states "Dave Thomas recalled that every game they produced was met with little interference from Ultimate". Chaheel Riens (talk) 09:07, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

@Chaheel Riens: It says it in the infobox, and has done so since the article's creation, which is enough for me to question any major changes like that. I'm not familiar enough with the topic to make a final judgement, though; I'd say Jaguar is the man for that job. – Rhain ☔ 10:54, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed that. The infobox also goes against the article content and needs to be changed as well then. What makes you think that I'm not familiar enough with the topic to make final judgement? That's why I changed it, because it's wrong - and my change is supported by the article content, rather then as it currently stands which is a contradiction. Chaheel Riens (talk) 11:50, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

You can make the change and I won't revert it further, but the article has undergone a GA review and most of its content was written by Jaguar, so I think it's only fair that I ping him—especially considering the fact that this also appears to impact Entombed, Blackwyche (both also GAs from Jaguar), and Dragon Skulle. – Rhain ☔ 11:57, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Nothing against pinging an editor, but to suggest that they have "final judgement" is a bit dubious, regardless of how much they contributed. Not sure if you noticed, but I'd also made the same changes to Entombed and Blackwyche - but not initially Dragon Skulle, as I'd not realised the error in that article.

One final thing - I notice you put a space between your indents and starting a sentence. Might be an idea not to do that, as it can mess up formatting on occasion: "::: You can make the change" Certainly on a newline without indents it's a bad idea. Chaheel Riens (talk) 15:54, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

I didn't mean to infer that Jaguar had "final judgement", just that he was more familiar with the topic and could therefore contribute more appropriately to this discussion than myself. Yes, I noticed your changes to the other articles too. And I'm aware of how a leading space works, thank you. – Rhain ☔ 10:43, 20 March 2022 (UTC)