Talk:Dragon Lord

This is the talk page for discussing the page, Dragon Lord.
This page is for discussing how to improve the page. For general discussion and comments, use the general discussion forum. To ask about rulings or how cards work, use the ruling queries forum. To get help with building a Deck, use the Deck help forum. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.	Please try to Be polite Assume good faith Be welcoming

Deletion

Whether this page should be deleted or not should be discussed here, so I'm copying this message from my talk page here:

I noticed that you recommended the Dragon Lord Archetype page for deletion because it wasn't stated anywhere that those three Monsters collectively are the Dragon Lords. However, on each of their trivia pages (Besides Felgrand's) they're referred to as Dragon Lords. Take into account that they're the only 3 high leveled Dragons in the Rise of the Dragon Lords Structure Deck, and it seems reasonable, to me at least, that those three cards are the first TCG-exclusive Archetype made of cards in both the OCG and TCG, so I would recommend just modifying the page to be more like other Archetypes, as well as fixing the grammar. --174.39.254.27 (talk) 19:48, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

-- Deltaneos (talk) 21:16, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Whether they're referred to as the Dragon Lords on another part of this site is irrelevant. Someone putting that information on another page is no more proof than them putting it on this page.

I don't think UDE/Konami calling the TCG version of the Deck Rise of the Dragon Lords specifically meant or at least immediately implies that "Dragon Lords" is the name of a series of cards inside it rather than a general term for general term for high Level dragons or something cool to call the Deck. Like we don't assume that "Flashing Light" is a specific group of LIGHT monsters. -- Deltaneos (talk) 21:16, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Actually I've checked the guide that comes with the Structure Deck. There's a box labelled "Bring on the Dragon Lords". Inside it is said three dragons. I guess that's enough to say that they were officially called that. I'll withdraw the deletion nomination unless anyone else feels the page should be deleted. -- Deltaneos (talk) 21:20, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

About the new delete nomination

Hello to the admins and the users of the wikia i,the creator of this page(Angellicantropo or 90.20.164.53, and not 174.39.254.27 who is a defender of the article(some people confuse we both , but we have different grammar as you can see, he is better in that ) well i have the next problem.
Golden Key, noiminates this article (Dragon lords) to deletion without enought reasons, he states:"They monsters barely have anything in common, at least not enough to be considered a series" without reading the talk page(about the text in the set) and/or the strategy that work around them. You can withdraw again the delete nomination?(like 1 year ago).I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks and greetings. PD:Pardon me for the problem with the IP`s confusion, i created the article before than create an account --Angellicantropo (talk • contribs) 16:34, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

Good pardon, but no dime - they don't have "Dragon Lord" in their name, it was just mentioned in the Structure Deck manual book. So it's marked as begone. Thank you anyways. --iFredCat 16:38, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

The last time the deletion notice was removed, the guidelines for what constitutes a series were less defined. Since then we've established that they need to share a quality, such as a similarity in effects or a name. In this instance, the only unifying trait is a description from a manual, which I suspect was more a casual description than an actual designation of a name. --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 16:59, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

You remember the sacred beast of yugioh ? they dont have Sacred beast in their name and they are a series and have an strategy.. The Dragon Lords don´t are well known but there are stated with that group name and also they have focused effects in their special summon from the graveyard , also before the creation of this aricle:In the article of dragon [[1]]states cleary a strategy with them... so well the Dragon Lords is not an archethype is a group with characteristics in common(series).. i reccomend to put differences between Series and Archetype to make the difference --Angellicantropo (talk • contribs) 17:10, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

The Sacred Beasts are considered a series because of the strong anime ties they have. The effects these monsters have regarding the Graveyard are very different; one doubles its ATK, on can only be summoned from there and one needs to tribute a monster to be summoned from there. That's not very strong, compared to the bonds the other series we have listed share. --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 17:20, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

I don`t think so, not all the series have to be strong to be a series ( see Mokey Mokey and others, and the sacred beasts only have techical in common 2 characteristics : Level 10 and 3 cards to be summoned (as you can see Uria , Lord of Searing Flames has 0 atk)... instead the Dragon Lords has

1:- High Level (7-8)

2.-Despite the difference of the effects the similarties are the next one:

a) Felgrand when its SPECIAL SUMMONED FROM THE GRAVEYARD it gains atk

b) Darkblaze WHEN ITS SPECIAL SUMMONED FROM THE GRAVEYARD its attack is doubled

c) Tyrant WHEN ITS SPECIAL SUMMONED FROM THE GRAVEYARD you must tribute one dragon (is useful with felgrand to send him to the graveyard)

In conclusion they are focused in SPECIAL SUMMON FROM THE GRAVEYARD

3.- Also i read the new "series" article (http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Series) and the dragon lords satisfies the requiriments to be a Series--Angellicantropo (talk • contribs) 17:36, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

PD: Also there is an stretegy around them that appers before than i created the article (http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Dragon#Revival_Dragon.2FDragon_Lords_Deck)--Angellicantropo (talk • contribs) 17:43, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

The Mokey Mokeys are a series because they have a strong, obvious thematic tie to each other, both in naming and artwork. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 17:45, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

In response to Dinoguy Felgrand and Darkblaze have artwork similarities, and both with Tyrant have an strategy about them--Angellicantropo (talk • contribs) 17:56, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

The one with "Sacred God" is existence because they are related to Egyptian Gods - Dragon Lords don't. "Mokey Mokey" has their own series because of the names, which don't mean that "Dragon Lords" do have their own series. They had Special Summon from the Graveyards was because they were such to be that way - it don't mean they are Dragon Lords, it's just theme for Structure Deck and Manual to mentioning. I am still declaring this to be destroying and begone!

Again, Darkblaze don't have front arms, let alone double set of wings, all other dragons have their own front limbs, lesser two sets of wings (Tyrant Dragon only have 1 set so far, if I am wrong) Therefore I still calling waste of the article. End of the discussion. --iFredCat 18:23, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

When Golden Key said "strong", he meant the connection between the cards had to be strong, as in major. He didn't mean the cards had to be powerful. I know you've already argued why you think their connection is major. I'm just clarifying a misunderstanding. -- Deltaneos (talk) 19:32, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Deltaneos for your aclaration, btw i recently sent a mail to [email protected] (they answer me my mails, most of times), so they could have the last word in this--Angellicantropo (talk • contribs) 19:45, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

I doubt that, my friend - they will denying it. --iFredCat 20:02, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

What exactly did you ask them? -- Deltaneos (talk) 20:07, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

Base on my guess; ask them that if "Dragon Lord" is true or not. --iFredCat 20:08, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

Fred Cat guessed right. My question was: "Hello Yugioh, i have a problem , Is true that here exists an old group of cards "called" Dragon Lords (Felgrand Dragon, Darkblaze Dragon and Tyrant Dragon) ?That cards appear the Structure Deck: Rise of the Dragon Lords . I states that yes, but some people states that no ,in a forum : http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Dragon_Lord (I am the user angellicantropo), and i am so intrigated with this polemic. I ask you because you have the Last word here. Greetings". PD: If a made a big and dangerous mistake (For the wiki )with send this mail with the link, please ban me.--Angellicantropo (talk • contribs) 20:16, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

It's not mistake to send the link to Konami - it's an evidence they need to know what you were pointing on. And it's PS, not PD... --iFredCat 20:22, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your aclaration FredCat and for the PS ..xD, also thanks(i have an horrible english grammar, i dont speak/write english correctly, i need more practice)--Angellicantropo (talk • contribs) 20:48, July 21, 2012 (UTC)

No problem, it's charity or whatever it was. I am still having my own grammar issues - so far, only Goldy knew what I was talking about. But I am still sorry; this article have to go. --iFredCat 17:12, July 22, 2012 (UTC)

Dont worry i understand too, sadly konami never asked at time(its most like they denied my question) so i think like you this article (Dragon Lord) its gone. thank you Deltaneos for your support when this article starts and thanks Fred Cat and Golden Key for help me to understand the new wiki policy about the articles in this place. Btw if something new happens (thats sounds nearly impossible) i will inform to you, otherwise this article will remain in oblivion. Thanks to you all :D. Greetings --201.220.233.202 (talk) 17:43, July 22, 2012 (UTC)--Angellicantropo (talk • contribs) 01:59, July 23, 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome, fellow. --iFredCat 02:00, July 23, 2012 (UTC)