Talk:Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game

message: All The Lord of the Rings SBG-related articles should be categorised with the following boxes (as a general rule):   
* The Lord of the Rings Strategy Battle Game   
* Games Workshop   
* Middle-earth games   
* Wargames   
* Infobox giving links to other articles   
Images should be categorised with this template
LotR SBG hobbyists can use the following box on their userpage:
* Lord of the Rings SBG Hobbyist Userbox
Grimhelm 22:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Categories

message: : "The game is sometimes mistakenly called "Warhammer Lord of the Rings" - in part because it is the third core game produced by Games Workshop, but possibly also because it combines fantasy-style battle traits from Warhammer Fantasy with the squad flexibility of Warhammer 40,000."
Really? I've never heard this expression before? How common is this phrase (if it is very rarely used then does it deserve a mention??)
Just wondering
Philipwhiuk 19:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It comes up occassionally on the Games Workshop forum by people who are new to the hobby, sometimes also called "LOTR Warhammer". However, since the game is not in any way related to the Warhammer Universe, people who mistakenly use it find out the correct version soon enough. It's not really a common mistake, and perhaps isn't notable enough for the article (maybe move it to "trivia"), but it does come up sometimes. Grimhelm 20:27, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it is common enough to warrant mention, largely because it is the third core game - not many people want to say "Lord of the Rings Strategy Battle Game" every time they discuss the game. Thror 23:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Throughout my time as an SBG-er it has commonly been called LotR Warhammer by people who have asked about it - I would suggest that it is common among people who know of the hobby but have never taken an interest. --LordSarnoc (talk) 21:39, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this actually a common mistake? 

message: Should we add a section for Legions of Middle Earth?
I'm willing to do it if yes.--Cobalt 14:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Separate article maybe. It is a fair expansion, maybe it warrants a header in here, with a link to the main article. Thror 23:23, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Although it is a large expansion, it does not warrant a new article. It can be discussed under Troop Types or Rulesets. Perhaps someone might add a picture of it? Grimhelm 17:16, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  LOME 

message: *Kârna 
*Badharkân
*Dalamyr
*Hidâr
*Nâfarat
*Dhâran-sar
*Abrakân
*Gadîrkarn
...from Tribelands of Haradwaith, which I put up for namespace deletion and info merging. Info about them can probably go here, if they belong here. If these aren't even official, away they go. Uthanc 00:52, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I do seem to recall them. I believe they are GW inventions, and not canonical, and have made comments at the AfD.  --Grimhelm 17:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are some of these names part of the game? 

message: :GA review (see here for criteria)
#It is reasonably well written.
#:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:a (fair representation):  b (all significant views): 
#It is stable.
#:
#It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
#:a (tagged and captioned):  b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales): 
#Overall: 
#:a Pass/Fail: 
After re-reviewing, I've noticed a few article weaknesses, however, not enough to have the article failed. Although not strictly necessary, as you stated, the release dates would be better with a reference and ideally the lead should have more references with inline citations; however, this information is mostly referenced in the text. On the whole, however, this article has improved considerably and I now believe it meets GA standard. Mouse Nightshirt | talk 23:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Once again, thank you for reviewing. :-)  --Grimhelm 09:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good Article nomination re-review

message: Request to either replace the image of the Knights of Minas Tirith boxed set with the new one, or add a mention that these are an older version, as GW will likely discontinue the metals now.86.39.16.12 22:16, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New KoMT

message: Angmar have got one ally- Barad-dur. I think this is in Leigions of Middle Earth. Kai Su?My Talk Page 19:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Angmar Allies 

message: An image used in this article, File:Khamul lotrsbg.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:57, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Khamul lotrsbg.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: This article needs to be updated with the release The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey Strategy Battle Game of December 2012. Games Workshop has rebranded a lot of LoTR SBG products but I think it sufficient to expand the intro and Current licensing sections with a quick note. I am not an expert on the matter so I hope someone else can do this. :) Lonaowna (talk) 11:48, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey Strategy Battle Game'' 

message: This article is preposterously long, and goes into way more detail than necessary. This article should not be a repository of all information within the game itself, simply an overview of the tabletop game itself and its development/expansion. (Most of the "troop types" list should probably be removed.) Furthermore, most of the citations seem to point either to the rule-books (first-party sources) or unreliable forum links. This article needs some major cleanup. --V2Blast (talk) 05:18, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overly long and detailed 

message: Would the War of the Ring miniature wargame deserve its own article? I think it can never be satisfactorily represented by this page because the rules of these two games have very little in common, despite the article telling so.
Sinthoniel (talk) 22:58, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''War of the Ring'' Tabletop 

message: Have requested that this is moved to Middle Earth Strategy Battle Game as this is now what GW is calling the game (https://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Middle-earth). 194.28.124.52 (talk) 04:37, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, this is incorrect: the canonical name as per Middle-earth™ | Games Workshop Webstore is: "Middle-earth Strategy Battle Game", which is also in accord with the Tolkien lexicons. The article should be renamed accordingly. --Hlingler (talk) 00:59, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested page move 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:37, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion