Articles with too much/unnecessary content.

[8dave]

Quite a few times I've come across articles on things that only feature a little in the books, and the article is basically a summation of all mentions/interactions of the subject in the books, going into what I would feel is way too much detail. It's the kind of thing I feel inclined to tidy up and make more specific and concise, but I'm also loath to tread on others' toes.

For example, the article on Whitetree isn't so much a description of Whitetree, as it is a summary of the Night's Watch passing through it. I'd be inclined to trim it down to three or four brief paragraphs on its location, appearance, features, etc, restricting a brief summary of the Night's Watch passing through to the Recent Events heading, rather than a relatively lengthy summation in the body of the article.

But again, I'm fearful of stepping on toes by editing it, and not sure whether I'm on my own in feeling it could do with trimming.

Thoughts?

[Lord Knightmare]

Yeah I agree and if you think they need editing just do it

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

The example you've mentioned here certainly needs some editing. And there will definitely be other pages that would benefit from some editing as well.

When you are not certain of whether or not something on a page needs to be changed, you could also address it in the talk page of that article. That way people can discuss what could be changed and how, article specific

[8dave]

Thanks for your responses. Didn't post it in the talk page because I figured nobody would come across it, being such an obscure article, and also because it was a more general question on structure and toe-stepping.

Anyway, thanks again to you both.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Well, there are always those regulars who check the "recent changes" page, and thus they will see that you've edited a talk page. I am always interested in what happened on a talk page, for instance :)

[8dave]

Aah, I see. My ignorance of wikis is showing. Horizon broadenend. Cheers!

[Scafloc]

Completely agree. An article should describe something. Not a complete retelling with all the conversations.

[Nittanian]

The entry for Viserys Targaryen is another article which, IMO, has excess information.

[La Víbora Roja]

That having been said, the focus of AWoIaF is quite different from that of Wikipedia which definitely stomps down on the minutia, on the basis that fan wikis (such as this one) will fill in the gaps.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

So I've rewritten the Whitetree page that was named as an example. Is it correct this way?

[8dave]

I think that's spot on. I'd been meaning to get around to it, but couldn't have done as good a job anyway. Well done. :)