Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About LuisDantas

  • Birthday January 9

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Morituri Delendi
  • Gender
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

4,389 profile views

LuisDantas's Achievements

Council Member

Council Member (8/8)

  1. I am still waiting for some source on that policy. Which, really, is difficult to accept, to say the least.
  2. Come to think of it, plot-relevant actions should overrule spoken words anyway. TWOIAF I have yet to read (gimme a couple of weeks). It does seem to be something of a special case, though.
  3. No, that is indeed what I meant. By your understanding, there are no actual characters appearing in TRP, TPATQ, nor TWoIaF. That is of course accurate by a certain perspective, but is more than a bit self-defeating as well. Rhaenyra and others do appear in TPATQ in a meaningful way, even if it can be suspected of inaccuracy. In order not to be much too loose about what constitutes an appearance, I suggest as a starting point that a character must have his words spoken in the first person somewhere in the tale, and it must be during the timeframe of the main story. So, for instance, Prince Daeron Targaryen (who spoke about Tessarion) has an appearance in TPATQ, as do all of Rhaenyra's sons except for Viserys and Visenya, while her father Viserys I (who dies early during the time frame and is mentioned many times) is only mentioned. Another character that is mentioned as opposed to making an appearance is Alyn of Hull. Going by those criteria, though, Addam of Hull would IIRC not be making an appearance despite having unquestionably been an active part of the tale, to the point of being decisive to the overall plot beyond any reasonable controversies. That does at least feel unfair. So what about: "A character's status in a book or tale should be recorded as mentioned if either the narrator or any of the characters with speaking parts mentions him unequivocally, preferably by name. If the character also has speaking parts, even if brief, or is uncontroversially the performer of actions with plot significance during the timeframe of the book, then he qualifies as having made an appearance instead of simply being mentioned, unless there is uncertainty that he was significantly involved." That would mean, for instance, that the "real identity" of the Three-Eyed Crow has not made an appearance in ASOIAF before ADWD, although he has been mentioned before that. We would have to reconsider if he is somehow an impostor, of course. So, for TPATQ, that would make these character qualify as making appearances (among others, of course): Princess Rhaenyra Targaryen, Aegon II Targaryen, Aegon III Targaryen, Lucerys Targaryen, Jacaerys Targaryen, Daemon Targaryen, Alicent Hightower, Aemond Targaryen, Rhaenys Targaryen, Roderick Dustin, the Seasnake, and most of the dragons (including Moondancer, but excluding Morning and the eggs). Mentioned, among others, would be Harwin Strong, Viserys I Targaryen, Borderline cases would include Rhaena Targaryen (I don't think guarding the eggs had plot significance) and Baela Targaryen (qualifies for an appearance IMO, given the events late on the tale). Lord Manderly participated only indirectly by sending his sons, so I count that as an mention for him and appearances of Medrick Manderly and Torrhen Manderly.
  4. Thanks for the clarification. Between the known frequent use of unreliable narrators in ASOIAF and the survival of somewhat conflicting accounts of the Dance, I suppose that is a fair call, but yes, some explicit statements for reference could be a good idea. It is also slightly frustrating, since it basically means that (for instance) only Archmaester Gyldayn appears in TPATQ despite it not even being about him. Maybe we could agree on having a separate status for such characters as Princess Rhaenyra who go well beyond simple glancing mentions? Something like "featured", "narrated", or even "spotlighted", perhaps?
  5. Thanks. It is actually surprising to me that there is even any discussion on this matter. I suppose being used to ebooks has its disadvantages. Where can I check that policy?
  6. I am reading The Princess and the Queen and I edited Roderick Dustin's entry to reflect his appearance in that tale, only to have it reverted into a mention instead. How does that work?
  7. I would agree if the range of page numbers of the whole book (or tale, in the case of Dunk & Egg) were not given. Edited to add: Taking a single page reference with the full page range of the chapter or tale and doing a very simple subtraction, rule of 3 and addition is after all enough to come very close indeed to the exact page even in editions in other languages in pretty much all cases. That is just not worth giving up when the values are already known. When they are, then removing the page references becomes a matter of choosing to throw away a slightly inexact reference (rarely if ever away from the mark by more than a couple of pages, if that much, regardless of edition) in order to have no reference whatsoever. That... just does not make any sense IMO. It is throwing out the baby in order to keep the water. And more than slightly disappointing for one such as me who painstakingly produced what, frankly, was very much an useful piece of information just to see it sumarily and unfairly disregarded with no discernible justification.
  8. I can't say I follow. Having the range of page numbers of the tale or chapter along with the page number itself pretty much removes any disadvantage from edition variation, and not having any page number makes the task of finding the actual reference quite the chore.
  9. Should we refrain from including page numbers in the references? I have several times now included them when I had them available, most recently in the Uthor Underleaf and Leo Longthorn articles. I was consistently careful to include the page range of the specific edition I used. Yet, to my considerable dismay, it seems that pretty much all of those were edited out rather uncerimoniously. I am trying to understand why that would be desirable, but I have failed so far. Any thoughts?
  10. I really disliked the blunt attempt at absolving Stannis of any guilt. It made him seem too much of a fool and too much of a tool to be believable. Stannis has never been quite that naive.
  11. Maybe I am wrong - and if so, please tell me - but it seems to me that any registered wiki user can simply edit Daenerys' article and move any of the images from the gallery to appropriate places inside the main text. I don't think there is any need for explicit permission, either; after all, it is easy enough for others to revert or fix the article if need be. I'm not sure I understood the problem, but it seems to be solvable by adding a bottom line with a copyright notice with the artist's name. Am I wrong? Or is it the matter that the artists want credit, but FFG has the rights for lone copyright credit? I'm not sure I understood this. Are you essentially saying that we should be real careful to make sure to include the appropriate artist category in the images, or is that not enough? http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Category:Images_By_Artist
  12. Sorry for not telling you at the time that it worked, Ran. And thanks! Unfortunately, I must bother you once again. I have been having trouble with the uploading of some character images. Here is a screen capture that may be of use: http://dantas.com/soiaf/erro.png
  13. Anyone else having trouble logging on the wiki? No error message, no nothing. It just fails.
  14. I just did, and it is indeed working fine now. Thanks!
  • Create New...