Onion Knight

The ASOIAF wiki thread

1,716 posts in this topic

Do we have a source for Bran the Builder actually having the surname of "Stark". Obviously we know that he's the founder of House Stark, but, for example, the article on Lann the Clever is not titled "Lann Lannister".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, guys, I wanted to ask you all - what do you think about my awoiaf movie-making initiative I wrote a couple of posts before? I would like to know the opinion of the community, of editors especially - is such activity worthy and beneficial for awoiaf? Because, if yes, if such videos can be added to the the actual articles and they will get viewers, this will give me extra motivation to make new cool videos for awoiaf. 

By the way, I created a speacial topic where I post videos, I recently added a movie about R'hllor: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gonzalo said:

Do we have a source for Bran the Builder actually having the surname of "Stark". Obviously we know that he's the founder of House Stark, but, for example, the article on Lann the Clever is not titled "Lann Lannister".

I found this:

The greatest castle of the North is Winterfell, the seat of the Starks since the Dawn Age. Legend says that Brandon the Builder raised Winterfell after the generation-long winter known as the Long Night to become the stronghold of his descendants, the Kings of Winter. As Brandon the Builder is connected with an improbable number of great works (Storm's End and the Wall, to name but two prominent examples) over a span of numerous lifetimes, the tales have likely turned some ancient king, or a number of different kings of House Stark (for there have been many Brandons in the long reign of that family) into something more legendary.

and

“Now as it happened the winter roses had only then come into bloom, and no flower is so rare nor precious. So the Stark sent to his glass gardens and commanded that the most beautiful o’ the winter roses be plucked for the singer’s payment. And so it was done. But when morning come, the singer had vanished... and so had Lord Brandon’s maiden daughter. Her bed they found empty, but for the pale blue rose that Bael had left on the pillow where her head had lain.”
Jon had never heard this tale before. “Which Brandon was this supposed to be? Brandon the Builder lived in the Age of Heroes, thousands of years before Bael. There was Brandon the Burner and his father Brandon the Shipwright, but-”

That Jon, upon hearing one and the same lord being described as "Lord Stark" and "Lord Brandon" wonders whether Ygritte could  be talking about Brandon the Builder, imo heavily implies that Brandon the Builder was indeed named "Stark"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, serojja said:

So, guys, I wanted to ask you all - what do you think about my awoiaf movie-making initiative I wrote a couple of posts before? I would like to know the opinion of the community, of editors especially - is such activity worthy and beneficial for awoiaf? Because, if yes, if such videos can be added to the the actual articles and they will get viewers, this will give me extra motivation to make new cool videos for awoiaf. 

By the way, I created a speacial topic where I post videos, I recently added a movie about R'hllor: 

 

It sounds like an interesting idea, but the issue @RumHam raises concerning the changing info on the pages, is a rather large issue, I think. The info on the wiki is constantly changing, and I don't think it would be possible to keep up with updating all of the videos. Editing text is easy, editing a video not so much, unfortunately..

Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎22‎-‎8‎-‎2016 at 11:39 PM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Also, the Green Ronin RPG offers a table stating how many silver stags a golden dragon is worth, how many pennies a silver stag is worth, etc. They even mention a coin called "silver moon", which I can't even find a mention on in the books.

So, do we use this info? Or do we delete it from the wiki completely, as it is published only by Green Ronin, with no indication given in any of the books?

The Moon is actually a licensed coin at the shire post mint that make the coins you can buy so it is a GRRM approved coin, for now green ronin provides one of the few semi-canon source for what each coin is worth so until we get info in the books i would keep it up.

http://www.shirepost.com/wp/#!/Tommen-II-Lannister-Silver-Moon/p/43448020/category=11090111

In this link you can also read in the description of the official coin that: In Westeros, a moon is a lot of money, equivalent to seven silver stags. 30 moons are equivalent to one gold dragon.

which is the same info as green ronin so i think they info is farley correct.

Edited by direpupy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, direpupy said:

The Moon is actually a licensed coin at the shire post mint that make the coins you can buy so it is a GRRM approved coin, for now green ronin provides one of the few semi-canon source for what each coin is worth so until we get info in the books i would keep it up.

http://www.shirepost.com/wp/#!/Tommen-II-Lannister-Silver-Moon/p/43448020/category=11090111

In this link you can also read in the description of the official coin that: In Westeros, a moon is a lot of money, equivalent to seven silver stags. 30 moons are equivalent to one gold dragon.

which is the same info as green ronin so i think they info is farley correct.

Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the blood magic article I'm looking for the source - or sources - that states that lighting an obsidian candle requires blood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gonzalo said:

For the blood magic article I'm looking for the source - or sources - that states that lighting an obsidian candle requires blood.

 

The last Samwell chapter from Feast (chapter 45):

“What feeds a dragon’s fire?” Marwyn seated himself upon a stool. “All Valyrian sorcery was rooted in blood or fire. The sorcerers of the Freehold could see across mountains, seas, and deserts with one of these glass candles. They could enter a man’s dreams and give him visions, and speak to one another half a world apart, seated before their candles. Do you think that might be useful, Slayer?”

But that doesn't confirm that blood is necessary to light the candle.

This passage (AFFC Prologue) is also interesting:

“What are these glass candles?” asked Roone.
Armen the Acolyte cleared his throat. “The night before an acolyte says his vows, he must stand a vigil in the vault. No lantern is permitted him, no torch, no lamp, no taper... only a candle of obsidian. He must spend the night in darkness, unless he can light that candle. Some will try. The foolish and the stubborn, those who have made a study of these so-called higher mysteries. Often they cut their fingers, for the ridges on the candles are said to be as sharp as razors. Then, with bloody hands, they must wait upon the dawn, brooding on their failure. Wiser men simply go to sleep, or spend their night in prayer, but every year there are always a few who must try.”
“Yes.” Pate had heard the same stories. “But what’s the use of a candle that casts no light?”
“It is a lesson,” Armen said, “the last lesson we must learn before we don our maester’s chains. The glass candle is meant to represent truth and learning, rare and beautiful and fragile things. It is made in the shape of a candle to remind us that a maester must cast light wherever he serves, and it is sharp to remind us that knowledge can be dangerous. Wise men may grow arrogant in their wisdom, but a maester must always remain humble. The glass candle reminds us of that as well. Even after he has said his vow and donned his chain and gone forth to serve, a maester will think back on the darkness of his vigil and remember how nothing that he did could make the candle burn... for even with knowledge, some things are not possible.”

But regardless states nothing about how to light it. 

Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2016 at 4:43 PM, Nittanian said:

Also, "Jon Umber" is currently a disambiguation page which links to "Jon Umber (Greatjon)", "Jon Umber (Smalljon)", and "Jon Umber (husband of Serena)". With the Stark and Targaryen titling system in mind, would it be better to move the Greatjon (the primary Jon Umber for ASOIAF) to "Jon Umber" and move the Smalljon to "Jon Umber (son of Jon)"?

Any thoughts about this? Many articles use the "(son/daughter of X)" system, like the Freys, Starks, and Targaryens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nittanian said:

Any thoughts about this? Many articles use the "(son/daughter of X)" system, like the Freys, Starks, and Targaryens.

I agree.

Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Aegon Targaryen (son of Rhaegar)" has a section titled "Line of succession to the Iron Throne" which goes into detail about Aegon's place in the Targaryen succession. The Daenerys and Viserys articles don't have corresponding section. Is this section necessary for Aegon's article, or would it be more fitting at "House Targaryen" or "Iron Throne" (if the relevant info is not already in those articles)? The Aegon article could instead just mention that Aerys II choose Viserys over Aegon as his new heir after Rhaegar's death.

Share this post


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

"Aegon Targaryen (son of Rhaegar)" has a section titled "Line of succession to the Iron Throne" which goes into detail about Aegon's place in the Targaryen succession. The Daenerys and Viserys articles don't have corresponding section. Is this section necessary for Aegon's article, or would it be more fitting at "House Targaryen" or "Iron Throne" (if the relevant info is not already in those articles)? The Aegon article could instead just mention that Aerys II choose Viserys over Aegon as his new heir after Rhaegar's death.

That would be a good solution

Speaking of the Aegon article, shouldn't Young Griff's description and such be listed under 'appearance and character' instead of the ADWD section?

Share this post


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

Speaking of the Aegon article, shouldn't Young Griff's description and such be listed under 'appearance and character' instead of the ADWD section?

Young Griff isn't introduced until ADWD, five books into the series, so including the youth's description right after the introduction would be a spoiler for people looking for info about baby Aegon (who is mentioned fairly often in the early books). Alternatively, baby Aegon and Young Griff could have separate articles (Aegon's current article is longer than Ned's, Sansa's, and Arya's), similar to Brynden Rivers and the three-eyed crow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Nittanian said:

Young Griff isn't introduced until ADWD, five books into the series, so including the youth's description right after the introduction would be a spoiler for people looking for info about baby Aegon (who is mentioned fairly often in the early books). Alternatively, baby Aegon and Young Griff could have separate articles (Aegon's current article is longer than Ned's, Sansa's, and Arya's), similar to Brynden Rivers and the three-eyed crow.

The info-box already makes it clear that Aegon's death is not 100% certain.

That Aegon's article is longer than Ned's should not be an issue. And, btw, removing the "line of succession" section and moving it elsewhere makes the pages of all four characters relatively similar in length (looking at the # of bytes).  I would suggest not making a separate page for "Young Griff", considering YG is actually only an alias, and Aegon Targaryen is his true name (leaving all theories regarding Aegon out of this, for the moment being). I personally think that, at least until it is proven that Aegon is not who he claims to be, the info from 18-year old Aegon should remain on his page.

Share this post


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

The info-box already makes it clear that Aegon's death is not 100% certain.

That Aegon's article is longer than Ned's should not be an issue. And, btw, removing the "line of succession" section and moving it elsewhere makes the pages of all four characters relatively similar in length (looking at the # of bytes).  I would suggest not making a separate page for "Young Griff", considering YG is actually only an alias, and Aegon Targaryen is his true name (leaving all theories regarding Aegon out of this, for the moment being). I personally think that, at least until it is proven that Aegon is not who he claims to be, the info from 18-year old Aegon should remain on his page.

I agree but i would make it clear on the page that its a claim and he might be an imposter which is not very clear right now from they info.

Share this post


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

Do we need a separate article for the hound? Considering that it is Sandor's nickname, it would seem that the information on that page would be more appropriate for Sandor Clegane's page, I think.

There are multiple Hounds at this point, however (Sandor, Rorge, Lem).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the idea stating that the Hound is a distinct psychological individual. Martin writes about the Hound in a manner that for me makes no doubts. He is a distinct character, I would not be amazed to see that a future chapter would narrate from the POV of the Hound, through whoever eyes that could be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21-9-2016 at 4:39 PM, Nittanian said:

There are multiple Hounds at this point, however (Sandor, Rorge, Lem).

Are they not simply pretending to be Sandor as he was during his days as the Hound? It just seems to weird that the term "Hound" does not redirect Sandor Clegane's page, since it's his nickname.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

Are they not simply pretending to be Sandor as he was during his days as the Hound? It just seems to weird that the term "Hound" does not redirect Sandor Clegane's page, since it's his nickname.

The Elder Brother and Thoros tell Brienne that the Hound (Sandor) is dead. When speaking with the BWB, Brienne recognizes that she killed Rorge, who had taken the helm from Clegane's grave. Lem accepts the Hound designation, and Brienne hears Thoros differentiate between Sandor, Rorge, and Lem. She still thinks of Lem as the Hound even after Jack-Be-Lucky calls him "Lem". While the "Hound" starts off referring solely to Sandor (like Jaime is the only "Kingslayer"), it seems to me that the "Hound" has become an identity or persona rather than a specific person, like the Dread Pirate Roberts.

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