Talk:Shadowmoor

message: Hi Wikipedians, I am a staff member from a Live Action Role Playing game called Shadowmoor, specifically the LARP that Wizards of the Coast was in contact with for the name of this new expansion set. I see that one of our members made a (spam-ish sounding) edit adding the footnote which was removed, for totall understandable reasons. Wikipedia isn't an advertising ground, etc. However, I do think it is worth mentoning that Brady Dommermuth at WOTC did infact contact the owner of our LARP chapter for use of our campaign name, and will be noted as the source for the name "Shadowmoor" in the rules book that will accompany the expansion set.
That said, I am not sure the best way to put such information into the article, and would like to leave the "hows" up to those who frequent Wikipedia and keep it up to date. Thanks. 24.99.96.253 (talk) 18:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shadowmoor LARP 

message: I added this also to the Morningtide talk page and am adding it here as well for discussion. For future releases: Should we also start including Magic Online release information for the sets? Argument: Very recently Wizards has stated that Online makes up for a surprisingly big part of the 'scene' - multiple tens of percents of revenue! Such an important part of the scene should warrant their own release information featured in the articles. Matti Nuortio, Oulu, Finland (talk) 10:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magic Online 

message: I added another reference that Wizards of the Coast posted on their MTG site today; it shows all the different booster pack art for Shadowmoor, as well as some tournament box and display box designs. The art confirms the theme hinted at by both the end of the Morningtide book and the announcement by Mark Rosewater. 216.165.4.211 (talk) 14:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Shadowmoor Booster Pack Art 

message: New keyword revealed: persist. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/arcana/1554  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.8.216.71 (talk) 06:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Keyword Abilities 

message: Untap has been confirmed as a Shadowmoor mechanic: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=magic/shadowmoor/spoiler
72.253.0.57 (talk) 16:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a mechanic, just a new symbol for an old keyword.  I'll put it in.  A better source would be good, but I'm no longer reading the MTG.com articles, so if someone could post it here I'll make sure it gets 'd properly.  --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 22:31, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Mechanic 

message: I see a lot of work has been put into a cycle section for Shadowmoor.  I'm just wondering if a) this is notable and b) why aren't there other cycle sections on other expansions. --Mjrmtg (talk) 15:10, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we should be listing these. It doesn't really add to the article. Any objections before I remove it? --Temporarily Insane (talk) 16:33, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No objection from me. --Mjrmtg (talk) 20:44, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Only objection I'd have is that the set being "cycle-heavy" should be mentioned somewhere, so I merged that part into Set Details and removed the rest.  If the other references from the section where any good they should be recovered from the history.  Cheers.  lifebaka (talk - contribs) 21:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nah, those references were all links to the spoiler saying "see this card" or "see that card". I knew they'd be deleted along with the cycles section which is why I didn't touch them when I went through fixing up the references. --Temporarily Insane (talk) 23:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cycles 

message: A nomination can be found here: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 February 16#Category:Magic: The Gathering blocks to merge Magic categories back to blocks from sets. Feel free to join in on the discussion. Leitmotiv (talk) 18:22, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:   Magic categories to be merged back to block structure discussion