Talk:Ozox
Notability and embellishment
Scarlett tagged this page with {{Unreferenced}} today, and I don't think that the following edit really does anything to fix the issue. At its root, the biggest issue with this page is: this character does not exist beyond its card. The entire Description heading is pure embellishment; it's a mix of plain description of the art and creative fiction based on the card's art and mechanics. How do we know that he has "eternal unlife"? Maybe the magic that binds him in undeath will wane, or is tied to the continued efforts of some necromancer! How do we know that the larger form depicted on the card is his "primary form"? We only know that in gameplay, Ozox and Jumblebones alternate. They might be entirely different consciousnesses. Maybe each time one forms, it has a completely new personality. Why limit ourselves to the one theory described on the page right now, when we could continue inventing infinitely more fanon theories? Why are we spinning game mechanics into lore statements, when we know that the relationship between the two is extremely flexible? The observation of Avacyn's symbol on the token is a fair catch, but before we get there: why does a virtually non-existent character like this warrant an article? Corveroth (talk) 03:06, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
- There's a lot of these, frankly; someone's been making a page for every legend with a card, including artifacts like Mox Jasper. I would hazard a guess that a lot of them are of similar quality. Unless there's a change in policy, I suspect it will continue. Perhaps only legends listed in a planeswalker's guide should be allowed, as then they'll have lore? Shield (talk) 04:09, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
- I agree that not every Legendary should have a page. In fact, I argued that on the discord thread of legendaries without a page. However, I felt this one was warranted because of the Innistrad connection and because I needed a space for the Jumblebones token (which can't be found on Scryfall) --Hunter (talk) 06:02, 3 May 2025 (UTC)