Talk:Revitalization of Legacy

Clarifying the nature of this event

When did this event take place? --Hunterofsalvation (talk) 06:12, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

calling it an 'event' was a mistranslation (I could not think of a better way to express it at the time).

It is more like an 'art movement'. It wasn't a convention where people gathered in a set date and place to discuss "hey, let's revitaliza Legacy". It is perceivable from the perspective of Legacy veterans/"old timers".

It is something that has been occuring from spontaneous experimentation from players to develop new decks and the best proof there is are the very own decks that I have linked in the page as examples of what has been happening in the Legacy community. And it is a little bit unprecedented in the Legacy format.

Other Legacy players have also noticed how WoTC themselves have moved towards printing Legacy staples (a big difference from today and 8-10 years ago) and this too encouraged new players to engage in experimentation of decks without Reserved List cards.

It is not an unanimous "movement", but it is noticeable how some 'weird' ('simpler') versions of decks are being featured in articles and top-8-ing tourneys.

sorry, I got carried away, but I wanted to be clear because some ideas get lost when I switch languages. Best example I can say, again, are the decklists linked in the article (a big contrast to what they used to - almost unanimously - be)

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:>BEDECK|>BEDECK]] ([[User talk:>BEDECK|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/>BEDECK|contribs]]) 12:24, 6 March 2022.

Propose rewrite or dissolve this page

Just added rewrite tag. It could also be it would be more appropriate to move the observations here to pre-existing relevant articles and delete this one, if there's no other sources available and no way to make this a more neutral POV summary of developments in this era of Legacy.

The current article reads as a personal essay from one editor with only their individual analysis of trends in Legacy decks to support the claim that this is a distinct trend or era in the format. They are obviously enthusiastic about this idea but the bigger the claim, the more neutral it should be and the more it needs verifiability beyond one person's perspective; "revitalization" is a pretty big claim and there are many subjective opinions, hopes and judgements in the current text. The tone should not be as conversational or give the current vibe that is trying to promote an idea; it should document rather than persuade.

My feeling is on a wiki like this one, articles can have some subjective ideas, but they should either be smaller ideas strongly tied to a core of factual information (and unlikely that others in the community would disagree with it); OR be based on official sources, recognized influential figures in the community (with citations), or documented broad widespread community opinion. I don't feel that a series of decklists is sufficiently tied to a statement about the mood of the entire community regarding a format.

It may be the trends here would fit just fine as a new paragraph in the history section of the Legacy article and deck articles as objective observations that certain decks changed or performed with more variation or specific cards compared to previous years. If specific products or actions by WotC were followed by visible changes in the format, those can totally be documented in those products' articles or the format article. But that doesn't necessarily constitute a distinct era or movement; identifying it as such needs to be visible from outside the wiki or a small group of its editors.

Side node, I'm confused by the original editor's username which appears to be >BEDECK? It doesn't appear there is a talk or user page for them. I assume this may be down to a wiki migration issue at some point. It has no bearing on the quality of the article but it does make direct communication impossible.

Jerodast (talk) 17:03, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Correct, BEDECK is a registered user on the previous host and hasn't been active since the around the time they created this page. All of their edits were made in March-April 2022. This article does appear to contain a lot of original research, and there's no source to indicate that any particular spike in Legacy participation or innovation actually happened around the time they were writing. There might be useful information to salvage for other articles, if anyone wants to take the time to dig through and actually source it. They edited several "Legacy X deck" pages, creating several. Old domain: /wiki/Special:Contributions/BEDECK?target=BEDECK&offset=&limit=500. Corveroth (talk) 17:36, 24 July 2025 (UTC)