Talk:Tri-Stat dX

This article was nominated for deletion on 31 January 2020. The result of the discussion was redirect.

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Role-playing games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of role-playing 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.Role-playing gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Role-playing gamesTemplate:WikiProject Role-playing gamesrole-playing game articles
Mid	This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Need references

We need to get some refs to show how notible this system is. Turlo Lomon 12:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Working on this one now. What sort of things should we do? That is to say, what is a good example. Web Warlock 14:17, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, game reviews on the system itself. Awards won. Secondarily, game reviews on products of the system. Working on the rewards part now. Turlo Lomon 14:39, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews

Here are some reviews on the system itself to get started on.

Working on getting more now. Web Warlock 14:54, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a frigging published game. What's with this wave of "notability" concerns on Wikipedia? Fear that someone, somewhere, might find useful niche information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.129.248.148 (talk) 05:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I'm worried by this too. Niche information is just as valid as common information. Tri-Stat is a good example of a role playing system and deserves mention. Just because it is not as popular as D&D should not relegate it to deletion. SpaceLem 16:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Wikipedia wouldn't be Wikipedia if there would be only articles about topics you can find on 90+ million other sites... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.174.223.10 (talk • contribs)

I also agree that it's completely lame to target niche and obscure things - especially when some schmuck who probably doesn't even what this article is about and never heard of it, can wander in and mark it not notable enough to keep. They operate on the "Well, I never heard of it, so it must be BS". The biggest argument they use is that they don't believe something can reference itself. Meaning you write an article about a book or a CD or movie that is published and the only reference you give for it is that same book, CD or movie. They want "other" references about it like some critic's reviews in magazines or whatever. It's stupid. You want the reference to prove what we're talking about is legit? Then find it and go buy it. They can see there has been a ton of edits to the article and numerous contributions that might say - hey, obviously more than one person has heard of it It must be legit. It must be notable. Cyberia23 (talk) 00:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Tristat.jpg

Image:Tristat.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 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 (talk) 19:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Website References not working

For some reason, the website seems to be down. I don't know whether this is permament or not. Can someone please clarify for me?--67.165.222.123 (talk) 00:02, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Guardians of Order has been out of business since 2006. That their site was up for as long as it was afterwards is pretty amazing, actually. But it won't be back; use Internet Archive to check out what it used to look like. --coldacid (talk|contrib) 02:50, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copying to RPG Talk

I'm giving this article a second home on RPG Talk. http://rpgtalk.wikia.com/wiki/Tri-Stat_dX 70.251.98.34 (talk) 00:54, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tri-Stat dX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080512051548/http://www.white-wolf.com:80/besm/ to http://www.white-wolf.com/besm/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:14, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]