direpupy

Okay so @Mindset found a reference in ACOK where originally in the Cersie artikel on the wiki it only referenced they WOIAF app and Jaime's page had no reference at all, the ACOK reference does mention Jaime wearing Cersie's clothes. Thanks Mindset for finding that and updating the pages. That said, i do still have an issue with the crossdresser category itself, it is part of the larger LGBT+ category on the wiki being a subcategory of it. However Cersie and Jaime did not change clothes out of an LGBT+ driven reason but more as a game that they played, Cersie calls it a Lark which is a activity done out of amusement. So while technically correct that they engaged in crossdressing and thus that they are in the crossdressing category, because on they wiki this category is linked to LGBT+ Jaime is now linked to this, even do he is not LGBT+. For Cersie i think its different because she has engaged in sexual activity with an other women, so the LGBT+ category does fit there. I'm not sure how to deal with this, or if its even a big enough matter to warrant a change or that we should just leave it as a trivial matter and would like to hear from others what they think about it.

I was thinking of that to but its only Cersie wearing jaime's clothing, not them swapping clothes so i think its a mistake.

Why is Jaime Lannister in the category Crossdressers? As far as i know he never did that.

sounds good

The casualties include the people executed in the aftermath, this would be everyone from the fall of Kingslanding to Rhaenyra having to flee. I'm not sure they should be included but i also do not see anywhere to mention them apart from this articel.

I personally don't, i mean no offence but i think its a waste of time. Anything that he put in the show will if important be in the books, and with the real involvement ending after season 4 the show does not really cover any of the books to come, certainly not in regard to any hidden messages from George since he was no longer writhing for the show when they got to that point.

Depends on the medium. Other books beside the main series, yes because they inhabit the same universe. GRRM talking (or writhing) about the books, yes but with caution because he could change his mind on anything not on the pages of a book. The shows, no as an adaptation they inhabit a separate universe, don't get me wrong they are part of the same multiverse and thus very similar, but ultimately to many other people besides GRRM get to tinker with the material and change and mold things to there ideas. As such even the language and symbolism is suspect because we can not be sure it came from George.

I would keep to the order of events in the book even if you are right and they happened simultaneous that is really no reason to change they order.

I agree with The Wondering Wolf on this, it will probably create confusion without it actually solving a problem. I think this is a case of don't try to fix what is not broken.

In the case of Rego Draz its specificaly mentioned that Jaehaerys granted him the title of Lord, this is where my doubt that this is a standard thing comes from, but on they other hand rego being granted this title may have started a tradition of doing so for those who serve on the small council. I just do not want to put anything on the wiki for titleless people who served on the small council without some degree of certanty.

@Ran I am hoping you know they answer to this from your contacts with George, Rego Draz and Varys are both given the courtesy title of Lord because they are on the small council, is this something that was customary? Because if it is then Martyn Tyrell should also have this courtesy title and so should Tyland Lannister among others. But i do not want to put that on there pages without any proof that this was customary. Thanks in advance.

I'm not sure what you where going for, so i don't know which one is correct. But on the house pages of house Manderly and Dayne the infobox is now much bigger while on the page of house Lannister its stil the old size. I have not looked at other house pages yet, and as i said i don't know what you where going for but this is what stood out for me.

No they fled from dragonstone because the garrison was planning on selling them to the Baratheons. them being trown out of the house in braavos is a different event.

Your the first one among three people i talked to about this who could give me a reason for the squire to write to a daughter of his, thank you for that i appreciate this

That is a very good argument you make there and one i had not thought off. I still don't see any reason as to why the squire would write about this to his own daughter so i still think it more likely its Byron's daughter, and was trying to reflect the most likely option in the note. However thinking about all the arguments for and against that would have to go into it to explain it properly, the whole thing is starting to become more of a theories page thing then a note so i understand your change.

And i ansewered those reasons with additional arguments which you did not respond to, i am not against changing the note i just did not feel your arguments where compeling, and i still lacked a reason for the squire to write about the incident to a daughter of his. This last being solved by Ran in the posts below this one. As for your accusation about the spirit of a wiki community i reject your notion, discussing changes which is what i thought we where doing is very much in the spirit of a wiki community and i was certainly not ignoring your objections as my providing additional argumenst against your objections proves.

I think the change is justified, so if you have no adcional arguments to the ones you already gave and which i answered i see no reason to change it. I still believe this is the most likely option with the note making clear there is a option for it to be different. The only thing looking at the entry and note is that the entry should perhaps have the word potential in brackets in it to draw attention to the note, so i will add that.

That last change was the result of a discussion with @Thomaerys Velaryon over on the wiki talk pages, and i think that it does reflect the most likely option while keeping open the possibility of it being otherwise. Why would he go to the trouble of sending a letter to his daughter just because he could not get home immediately? The story can wait until he gets home surely, and sending a letter is not an easy proposition because somebody would have had to deliver it, not something you just do to tell your daughter your day sucked. And what makes you think Lord Swann is not out in the field himself? As a matter of fact Borros his host went into the Red Mountains at the beginning of the war, his Marcher Lords like Lord Swann would be the ones to accompany him seeing as the are 1) the closest Lords to the objective. And 2) the ones who would know the lay of the land. As such a letter to Stonehelm would be to the closest relative that is most likely to be there at the time, this would be Byron's daughter. Yes there can, but are they likely? This is the son of a Lord's squire it would be prestigeus to squire for one such, so the change that the squire was not the son of an other noble of high birth is not very high, and that means that he would likely be under 18. As i said above i think the note reflects the most likely option while keeping open the possibility of being wrong. But if you are so against it what would be your suggestion?

I always read that as the squire writing to Byron's daughter to tell her how her father died, he would have no need to write his own daughter (if he had one) he would presumably be able to tell her in person when he got home. Also a squire of a nobleman of a powerfull house like swann is usually a young man from a other noble family, so apart from possibly being to young to have a child, he would also probably not marry until achieving his knighthood. But i have to admit that this is all assumption on my part, so i will add the disambiguation to the entry.

I misread that as 9 AC, my bad. That does leave the earlier point made about the six high septons so its possible but i do still think it unlikely.

@Thomaerys Velaryon @The Wondering Wolf My main Issue with this is that he would have been 14 (or even younger if he was chosen before 23 AC) when he became High Septon if they are the same person, and while it is possible that they wanted a younger man this would put him 2 years (or more) before a boy is considered to have become a adult man, which in universe you become at 16. As such his VERY young age would have been noteworthy, thus the lake of mention of this makes it unlikely they are the same person in my opinion. As in they example of the Grand Maesters during Aegon V reign the would likely have chosen someone in 30's or 40's if they wanted a younger man.

In order to not make the infobox over sized i would not ad possible lovers so i think placing it in they page text would be beter.

While i have no problem with the speculation i do think the pages should reflect that there is nothing confirmed, i would put it on the respective pages but have the text make it clear that its speculation and that includes the infobox saying something like "alleged lover" or "possible lover" I actually have a bigger problem with the alleged attraction to women of Nymeria Sand, which is based entirely on her friendship with Jeyne and Jennelyn Fowler. There is nothing there to suggest that it is anything more then friendship, apart from her being "abed" white them when she was informed of Oberyn's death. But women in the Middle ages often slept in the same bed and we also see this in the books where Cersie, Daenaerys and Margaery all have bed companions. So while it is tempting to assign here a LGBTQ+ label i think its not supported by the text's in the books. Like wise Jeyne and Jennelyn Fowler are given such a label, but this is based on the same being "abed" text as Nymeria so here too i do not think its supported by the text's in the books.

I know the Steerpike thing is correct, but i do not know about the three castles.

The servants stole the money that was left, but they where not the ones who put them out of the house.