Dungeons and Dragons Wiki talk:April Fools

Pages with the April Fools designation are generally not helpful to actually playing DnD, either being an inside joke (such as jokes against Green Dragon or FATAL), or just plain not useful (like references to The Game, which you just lost), or are there to better explain why a particular concept is bad. In the Homebrew section, the majority of users are looking for quality useful homebrew that may be used in their campaigns. As such, should we not display April Fools article in the main navigation sections? (These arguments may or may not express the opinion of its writer.) --Havvy 02:19, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I've always been of the opinion that April Fools things should still be playably useful, even if it is reduculous and nonsensical. Like the Walker of the Way.  Its obvious its a walking chuck norris joke, but you can still play one in game.  Of course I realize not everyone follows that standard, like the aforementioned The Game one.  (If I wrote it, it would be a Power Word The Game, those who fail against it take a morale penalty for X rounds on something for being losers.) -- Eiji-kun 02:23, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm fully in support of this idea. Unlike some designers I won't mention, I don't believe 'haha funnies' have a place in non-comedy games, and thus, I see no reason for them to be in the main nav. - MisterSinister 02:27, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


 * If we do dredge these out of the main navigation pages, should we just give them all the identifier (3.5e April Fools)? For things that work as both, we could allow them to have the proper identifier, and then filter out articles based on the identifier (which I believe is completely doable!) in the navigation section.  In my opinion, this would be the best of both worlds.  --Havvy 01:48, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Splitting into reasonable game additions (like Robot Unicorns!) and non-reasonable game additions is probably the best call. While we could exclude based on identifier, it means changing all of the ask queries and I don't think there's an easy way to automate that. Probably better to change the identifier and remove the equivalent category from the article, so they don't show up in the nav and also have an obvious identifier. - Tarkisflux 19:19, 10 June 2011 (UTC)