Talk:Goldmoon

Some work done

I have expanded the information found here, added references with citations, and some more cleaning. I am now trying to find a suitable Goldmoon image like the one from The Silver Stair cover, but not the cover of the book itself. However, I don't have that luck (couldn't even find it in Jeff Easley's site). -- ReyBrujo 23:57, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, I thought this version was fine, but then I discovered about the fiction guidelines :'( So, spent most of the day rewriting the article. Only the Character background section needs to be edited. However, I am not that good with using mixed past and present, so if anyone can check that the article is well written, it would be great! -- ReyBrujo 04:41, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I have added a third image, Goldmoon at an advanced age. The article needs a lot of grammar corrections, but at least it should be trivial to fix. From what I see, it fits the fiction guidelines. -- ReyBrujo 02:54, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Peer review

ReyBrujo asked me to give this article a little peer review and post the comments here. I've finally gotten a chance to read the piece thoroughly, so here are my comments:

• The lead is too short. It also assumes too much knowledge on the part of the reader. Give authors' names, publisher (TSR), brief background on what Dragonlance is, on what Chronicles is. I don't think it's necessary to give the chapter "name", since the names in Chronicles are more like descriptions of the plot. Over all, the lead should summarize what's in the rest of the article, so more should be added here.

• There are many too-short sections. "Creation" is very short. If there's more information to be had, include it here, even if it is already in the Dragonlance article. Explain what "Heroes of the Lance" means. This needs to be much more detailed. "Profile" can be combined with "Creation".

• The "Character background" section assumes too much knowledge on the part of the reader. What is a Que Shu? Who is Riverwind? (He is simply introduced without indicating what or who he is.) In short, assume the reader knows nothing about Dragonlance, and include short descriptions where necessary.

• This section is striding in- and out-of-universe perspective. It's written chronologically from the perspective of the Dragonlance universe when it should be written from the timeframe of our own universe. Use author names. Say that the authors do things, not Goldmoon. Weiss and Hickman introduce the character, So-and-so features the character, this author reveals that Goldmoon has a childhood romance. An alternate approach if you wish to provide a concise in-universe biography is to do just that. Open it with a statement to the effect of "Over X years in the Dragonlance universe, Goldmoon's biography is fairly detailed. She was born in blah blah blah . . . . " Keep it short, but remember that if you clearly mark the section as fictional, you can do some in-universe stuff.

• "Apparition" should be "appearance" throughout.

• The "Development through the series" section is much better. I would do away with the "Character background" section and tie it in with "Development through the series". I don't think it's necessary to break this section up by book/trilogy, though. Perhaps break it up by major roles/secondary roles or by authors or by real-world timeframe? Just a suggestion; again, this section is much better than the "Character background".

• Names of trilogies and Dragonlance should be italicized throughout.

• Short story titles should be in quotation marks throughout.

• Long quotes (like the one from Miranda Horner) should be indented and not italiciezed. You might use the {{cquote}} template.

• There should be no space between a footnote and the preceding text (this will keep the footnote from breaking to a new line should the browser window be too narrow).

• Your citations are good, but they give too much information in some cases. There's no need to say who the cover artist is, for example. Also, remove the direct quotes from citations. They're a potential copyright violation. If you wish to use direct quotations, it's better to do so in the main article.

• I'm not sure what use is served by the "Other books" and "E-mail and forum posts" sections. If these are references, they should be rolled into the "References" section.

• It does not appear that you have used The Annotated Chronicles and The Annotated Legends as sources. These are wonderful sources, as they include tons of behind-the-scenes information from Weiss and Hickman. Try to track down a copy!

• Ditto for the RPG material. Dragonlance is a detailed RPG setting in addition to being a fictional universe for fantasy novels. A large part of Goldmoon's development came about because she is an RPG character. Consider getting your hands on the Dragonlance campaign setting or other books that feature Goldmoon and incorporating information from them.

Over all, the piece is not bad. It needs some work, but it's definitely better than a straight in-universe biography of Goldmoon would have been. Take a look at Jabba the Hutt and consider how that article tackles another fictional character. Try to model more after it if you can. Again, good job on this. I look forward to watching the article evolve over the next few weeks! — BrianSmithson 14:30, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your review. We will try to address all of them. As for gaming material and Annotated books, I realized last week I did not have an extra copy of the Annotated ones, the ones I have are still sealed. And I lost the gaming books several years ago, and haven't bought new copies since we don't play DL anymore. Will see if I can fetch a copy somewhere, though.

The "Other books" section include books that have been mentioned in the article, but haven't been used as proper references. On purpose I created an "E-mail and forum posts" section, since Wikipedia policies state that mails and forum posts should not be used as references. Although the comments have been made by the editor and author, some may consider it goes against the WP:RS policy.

I will implement the smallest changes (typos, italics, quotes, cleaner references, etc) as soon as possible. The others may take some time, but should be done in relatively little time. Thanks again for your views. -- ReyBrujo 16:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome! As for the direct quotes, my main problem is that these were in the footnotes. Consider keeping some of them, but incorporate them into the main text. Not all of them, mind you, but some of the better ones could really add color to the article. — BrianSmithson 18:34, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I have removed and cleaned the quotes (I will later see which ones seem to be the most relevant), fixed the references, italics, quotations and typos you mentioned, formatted the long citations, and merged the old Creation, Profile and lead sections in a single, longer lead. Whenever we get more information about her creation, we can once again split that part from the lead in a new section. As you said, those were too short to be really useful.. I have reworded some of the sections again to give it a more out-universe feeling, however I haven't yet touched the Character background section, and I am not happy with how Chronicles trilogy is currently looking. Seems a bit too long, and thus a bit in-universe. I have also added several clarifications for terms or phrases that are unknown to the casual reader. The Development through the series section is still ordered by series (which incidentally is the same as ordering by real-world timeframe). It still has the same subsections as I am trying to figure a way of renaming them without having to add a spoiler warning in the lead (renaming War of Souls trilogy with Death or something similar seems like a spoiler for me). Other than some more rewording, and maybe one or two more images, I think the article is in good enough shape to set a reference for other Dragonlance character articles.

I own the Dragonlance campaign settings, but the Age of Mortals version. Will try to get the War of the Lance sourcebook and the Annotated trilogies.

Thanks again for your comments, they have been very informative. -- ReyBrujo 05:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Having rewritten the Character background section removing a lot of information that was not needed, dismissing typos and some strange wording, I think the article is now [almost] fully out-universe. I will be doing some minor cleaning and wikification, and hopefully someone will read it all to fix language stuff before sending this for a full peer review. -- ReyBrujo 08:09, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Character template

I have added a template for Dragonlance characters for quick information. -- ReyBrujo 18:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Further information

I am currently reviewing The Annotated Chronicles, The Annotated Legends and the War of the Lance sourcebook. If I find something else to add to the article, I will do so. In any case, I will be sending the article for Peer review after I am done. -- ReyBrujo 00:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I am already in Dragons of Spring Dawning, and there are apparently no more references to Goldmoon. So, I am sending this article to have a peer review, to see what is still lacking, and how to fix that. Thanks for the help! -- ReyBrujo 15:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

GA Passing

I'm gonna pass this, it's very well written and set out and has many citations, one thing prehaps try to cite more stuff in the Controversy section as I seems pretty important. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The Bread (talk • contribs) .

Thanks for reviewing it. For future reference, this is the reviewed version. Hopefully someday the authors will explain in a reliable site about this, and not in a forum or mailing list. -- ReyBrujo 01:04, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

You think there is any chance that this article can ever be featured? DoomsDay349 16:12, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

We could submit it, see comments, fix it up, and do it again until it can be. ddcc 16:37, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... I am pretty happy with its Good Article status. I believe there are a few things missing still to make it featured (small prose stuff, redundance, wording, etc). If anyone wants to submit it to FA, I won't object, but it will be hard. -- ReyBrujo 17:08, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Whoa, I never said like tomorrow or anything! =P. I just meant like in the future. To qoute Gilthas- "I will not cry for the stars when I have been given the sun."DoomsDay349 02:28, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Suspiciously long links in Further Reading section

I investigated the links to "Dragons of Winter Night: Chronicles vol. II", "Dragons of Spring Dawning: Chronicles vol. III" and "Time of the Twins: Dragonlance Legends vol. I" and they were suspiciously long: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0786916095/104-2560026-5466367?v=glance&n=283155 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0786930705/qid=1150044200/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-2560026-5466367?s=books&v=glance&n=283155 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0786931582/qid=1150044359/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-2560026-5466367?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

These three books are availble by a shorter URL that just ends with Amazon's product number: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0786916095/ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0786930705/ http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0786931582/

I'm trimming down the URLs.

I'm not sure if the extra stuff is the result of the editor's search results or if an Amazon affiliate ID has accidentally or deliberately been put into the URLs. I'm putting the old URLs here just in case this turns out to a problem that affects other Dragonlance or novel articles. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by David Shepheard (talk • contribs).

Oops, you are right. The affiliate link is from the Firefox plugin to search Amazon, we must have forgotten it when adding the urls, thanks for noticing. -- ReyBrujo 22:14, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Good article reassessment

Since this article has no reliable secondary sources to demonstrate notability, I have requested a review of its Good Article status at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Goldmoon/1.--Gavin Collins (talk) 11:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

The discussion has been closed and the article delisted. Note that this is only an assertion that the article does not meet the good article criteria, not an assertion that the article is not notable or verifiable. Geometry guy 17:49, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Notability is disputed

At the time of writing, no reliable secondary sources providing evidence of notability for the fictional character Goldmoon are cited in this article. The article has many primary references (citations from the author & publishers), but none that are reliable seconary sources. I request that the notability template be restored to this article.--Gavin Collins (talk) 10:14, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Apparitions versus Appearances

I do not wish to edit in case I am misreading this. There are two references on this page to apparition of Goldmoon:

From the Chronicles section, near the end - "Her goodbye to Laurana Kanan in Kalaman is the last apparition in the Chronicles trilogy."

From the Legends section - "This apparition is also used by the authors to explain the current situation of the couple."

Should this word "apparition" be "appearance", or did she actually appear as an apparition (spirit or ghost)? --WPaulB (talk) 15:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Goldmoon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120926012608/http://www.mania.com/dragonlance-animated-movie-news_article_51609.html to http://www.mania.com/dragonlance-animated-movie-news_article_51609.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:31, 22 March 2017 (UTC)