JesseKerkhof

Bran's ADWD vision's in the Wiki

8 posts in this topic

So, in ADWD, when Bran is tripping balls and such, when he gets the vision of his father, he technically appears in the chapter doesn't he? So, my problem is, in the wiki, it states that Eddard only gets mentioned in ADWD, while in this Bran chapter, he clearly appears. I'm not sure if the wiki is wrong or I'm wrong. (Most probably the latter.) Feel free to elaborate/ prove me wrong!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @JesseKerkhof welcome to the forum.  :)

I think it probably means Eddard is seen by only Bran and us readers via a vision, he doesn't actually appear as a living character, it's similar to being mentioned in conversation as a memory.  I reckon that's where the Wiki description is coming from, it would be misleading to claim he 'appeared' in ADWD long after he died, therefore saying he was mentioned is a more accurate take on the text.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe "mentioned" is more technically correct as Eddard does not actually walk among the living in Westeros. Even Bran-o-vision isn't resurrecting the dead person. Just looking at them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ What they said.

But you should know that in general the wiki is filled with both mistakes and opinionated/inaccurate characterizations of events and generally should not be treated as "cannon". It is useful as a quick reference, but like when I personally am working on a big theory I always double check info from the wiki. Similarly, there is a famous vandal-proof timeline created by fans that is also great as a quick reference but filled with mistakes.

Hope that helps! :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

But you should know that in general the wiki is filled with both mistakes and opinionated/inaccurate characterizations of events and generally should not be treated as "cannon".

It works great as a cannon. Anyone can load great big balls into it and use it to shoot down someone else's walls. It's not quite as good as canon.:)

1 hour ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

But you should know that in general the wiki is filled with both mistakes and opinionated/inaccurate characterizations of events and generally should not be treated as "cannon". It is useful as a quick reference, but like when I personally am working on a big theory I always double check info from the wiki.

Yeah, the most important feature of the wiki is that most assertions are sourced to chapters, so you can go read those chapters yourself. Sometimes the assertions themselves are very weird interpretations of what the chapters say, but even then, the chapter usually turns out to have been relevant to what you were thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/25/2017 at 5:35 PM, falcotron said:

It works great as a cannon. Anyone can load great big balls into it and use it to shoot down someone else's walls. It's not quite as good as canon.:)

Yeah, the most important feature of the wiki is that most assertions are sourced to chapters, so you can go read those chapters yourself. Sometimes the assertions themselves are very weird interpretations of what the chapters say, but even then, the chapter usually turns out to have been relevant to what you were thinking.

LOL

Yes, that is a good description

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25-9-2017 at 10:17 PM, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

But you should know that in general the wiki is filled with both mistakes and opinionated/inaccurate characterizations of events and generally should not be treated as "cannon". It is useful as a quick reference, but like when I personally am working on a big theory I always double check info from the wiki. Similarly, there is a famous vandal-proof timeline created by fans that is also great as a quick reference but filled with mistakes.

For both of those, when you spot any mistakes (whether big or small), pointing them out in appropriate threads would be a great help!

The wiki thread for any mistakes spotted on the wiki, and the timeline thread for discussion on the timeline you linked!

On 25-9-2017 at 11:22 AM, JesseKerkhof said:

So, in ADWD, when Bran is tripping balls and such, when he gets the vision of his father, he technically appears in the chapter doesn't he? So, my problem is, in the wiki, it states that Eddard only gets mentioned in ADWD, while in this Bran chapter, he clearly appears. I'm not sure if the wiki is wrong or I'm wrong. (Most probably the latter.) Feel free to elaborate/ prove me wrong!

I've raised the issue on the wiki thread to see whether or not a policy exist on this :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

For both of those, when you spot any mistakes (whether big or small), pointing them out in appropriate threads would be a great help!

The wiki thread for any mistakes spotted on the wiki, and the timeline thread for discussion on the timeline you linked!

I've raised the issue on the wiki thread to see whether or not a policy exist on this :) 

Oh man, I didn't know about those threads. Thank you for linking! :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now