Template:Vital article

	Magic: The Gathering has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result October 19, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted February 2, 2006 Good article nominee Listed December 2, 2008 Good article reassessment Delisted April 28, 2009 Peer review Reviewed August 11, 2009 Good article nominee Listed Current status: Good article

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Magic: The Gathering GA‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magic: The Gathering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Magic: The Gathering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Magic: The GatheringWikipedia:WikiProject Magic: The GatheringTemplate:WikiProject Magic: The GatheringMagic: The Gathering articles GA This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Board and table games GA‑class High‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Board and table games, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to board games and tabletop games. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Board and table gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Board and table gamesTemplate:WikiProject Board and table gamesboard and table game articles GA This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hello all that are part of the Magic project here, and to those that aren't and are reading this; welcome! I think we should consider reducing the content of this section and/or updating the picture for this section. I believe that new players should use the resources provided directly by Wizards of the Coast for this kind of thing. Ender4511 (talk) 14:05, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was until a few days ago much larger. I've already trimmed it back to just briefly touching on the essentials of what the colors typically do. Understanding how the colors are essential to MTG though is a bit more important than the colors themselves. --Masem (t) 14:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Ender4511 (talk) 13:03, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that someone added who leads each color to the color section. As it has no source, and isn't relevant, should it be removed? Waffle Attack11 (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes; the lore of MTG is not very much discussed at any depth outside of Wizards' own publications (that I've seen), and so in describing the game at a high level, it is unnecessary to name them. (I think one or two are named in the section on story development but that's out of necessity). We're sorta already at a point in this article that we're a bit too heavy on reliance on Wizards' material (first party) for details, though I am pretty sure just a bit of effort we can find third-party sources to confirm on gameplay basics. But the leaders of each color mana school is definitely too much. --Masem (t) 18:45, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's also just factually inaccurate. The mentioned planeswalkers are usually used as prime examples of users of the respective colors, but they by no means lead the color. Color is a fundamental quality of mana and the resulting magic. Saying blue is led by Jace is somewhat like saying Uranium is led by Emmanuel Macron. OdinFK (talk) 11:15, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the redirect Regeneration (Magic: The Gathering) should be deleted, kept, or retargeted. It will be discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 25#Regeneration (Magic: The Gathering) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. Steel1943 (talk) 20:39, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the redirect Gerrard Capashen should be deleted, kept, or retargeted. It will be discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 25#Gerrard Capashen until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. Steel1943 (talk) 21:07, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the guilds are misspelled in the diagram on this page. Specifically:

• "Selesmija" should be "Selesnya"
• "Azarius" should be "Azorius"
• "Grimis" should be "Grixis"

I'd recommend that the diagram be changed or removed, particularly since there is no other reference to the guilds, shards, or wedges on the page.

Cosinity (talk) 20:59, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's not misspelled, it's just in German. That said, I agree it's not a useful picture, so removed it. SnowFire (talk) 21:09, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]