The ASOIAF wiki thread

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

I've added Fire & Blood to the references template of the wiki, so it is ready for use when the moratorium has ended.

The code is {{Ref|fab|Chapter name}} (unlike the ref template for TWOIAF, there's no extra space required )

Please use the full chapter title (eg, Reign of the Dragon — The Wars of King Aegon I, Prince into King — The Ascension of Jaehaerys I, The Dying of the Dragons — Rhaenyra Triumphant, Under the Regents — The Voyage of Alyn Oakenfist, etc.)

[The Wondering Wolf]

Now there is one page for House Broom and another one for House Broome. @Ran I think you mentioned the issue was raised in your notes, so can you clarify what to do with the Brooms and Broomes?

[Abjiklam]

On 12/19/2018 at 10:13 PM, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

The code is {{Ref|fab|Chapter name}} (unlike the ref template for TWOIAF, there's no extra space required )

I fixed this requirement for twoiaf. No space needed any longer

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

7 minutes ago, Abjiklam said:

I fixed this requirement for twoiaf. No space needed any longer

I see that the template correctly displays the reference, regardless of the presence of the space, that's great!

Would it be possible to write the template in a way that it places the references with and without space under the same reference number, instead of two different ones? (see Sandbox)

Edited December 24, 2018 by Rhaenys_Targaryen

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Although it seems very likely that Cowyn Velaryon is the father of Corlys, the Sea Snake, Fire and Blood does not confirm it.

So how can be best place these Velaryons in the family tree? Because at the moment, it displays Corlys as Corwyn's son as if it is confirmed.

[The Wondering Wolf]

Corlys was the son of Daemon's eldest son, and Corwin is listed as Daemon's eldest son, so I think you can consider it confirmed. If you still do not think so, you can create two Velaryon trees, one from Daemon (I) to Corwin and one from Corlys to Daenaera.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

1 minute ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

Corlys was the son of Daemon's eldest son, and Corwin is listed as Daemon's eldest son, so I think you can consider it confirmed. If you still do not think so, you can create two Velaryon trees, one from Daemon (I) to Corwin and one from Corlys to Daenaera.

His name is given first when Daemon's sons are listed, and although that makes it highly likely that Corwin is thus the eldest, can we actually call it confirmed?

Perhaps in the family tree we should put in a note stating that Corwin is assumed to be the eldest because of the order of the names given?

[The Dragon Demands]

Thank you for the added reference templates Rhaenys they are a great help.

[The Dragon Demands]

Going through my notes....

I want to make an article on....the things that killed Aerea Targaryen.

What the heck do I title it?

Were they, in fact, some form or larval stage of "Firewyrms"?

Giving them a name imposes assumptions.

This may be sensitive enough to ask GRRM if it's appropriate.  

Regardless....er….what title does Elio think we should use? 

[Ran]

I'd be hesitant to give any name to it, and because of that I'm not sure it merits its own article. I guess it was parasitic, so in that sense any other parasites mentioned in the course of the series and other texts could be lumped together into a Parasites article (assuming we don't have one already).

[lysmonger]

10 hours ago, Ran said:

I'd be hesitant to give any name to it, and because of that I'm not sure it merits its own article. I guess it was parasitic, so in that sense any other parasites mentioned in the course of the series and other texts could be lumped together into a Parasites article (assuming we don't have one already).

Given we don't even know it was a chimera or if someone specificially put the chimera into her. 

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

@Ran, has there been an update on the wiki's software recently? The familytree templates do not display properly anymore, since some of the familytree codes have been given a new outcome. Currently, all the codes that were supposed to give a line (no matter whether entirely solid, dashed, or a mix of the two) that goes downwards, then makes a turn to the left, has been changed into a line that goes downwards, then splits to both left and right.

[Ran]

43 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

@Ran, has there been an update on the wiki's software recently? The familytree templates do not display properly anymore, since some of the familytree codes have been given a new outcome. Currently, all the codes that were supposed to give a line (no matter whether entirely solid, dashed, or a mix of the two) that goes downwards, then makes a turn to the left, has been changed into a line that goes downwards, then splits to both left and right.

No recent updates. Who created the code? Should ping them and see if they can help.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

1 hour ago, Ran said:

No recent updates. Who created the code? Should ping them and see if they can help.

The code was copied from wikipedia in 2012 and there have been no changes besides one from you changing the protection of the template. I cannot imagine that that change is the cause, however.

The code has remained unchanged, so the code itself _should_ not be the issue.. However, though I noticed the issue today, I don't know how long it has already been present, and what might have possibly caused it.

Has some change been made to the CSS during the past few months?

[Ran]

41 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

The code was copied from wikipedia in 2012 and there have been no changes besides one from you changing the protection of the template. I cannot imagine that that change is the cause, however.

The code has remained unchanged, so the code itself _should_ not be the issue.. However, though I noticed the issue today, I don't know how long it has already been present, and what might have possibly caused it.

Has some change been made to the CSS during the past few months?

Sure, when we upgraded to the new version and skin, some tweaks were made. IIRC, we had @Abjiklam and @Mindset helping with some templates, maybe they have an idea. I'll look at it as well.

 

ETA: Can you give a simple example of this as well?

Edited December 26, 2018 by Ran

[The Dragon Demands]

23 hours ago, Ran said:

I'd be hesitant to give any name to it, and because of that I'm not sure it merits its own article. I guess it was parasitic, so in that sense any other parasites mentioned in the course of the series and other texts could be lumped together into a Parasites article (assuming we don't have one already).

I already made a page on “chimera” as Fire and blood is the first time that term was used.

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Chimera 

....given that the only identification given for them by Barth is essentially to say that they were some KIND of chimera, it may make sense to go with that.  Not that they are named “Chimeras” capital C - but that they are apparently a specific strain of chimera-creature.  And thus list them off as a subsection on that page.  I’ll try a write up.

 

Edited December 26, 2018 by The Dragon Demands

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

20 hours ago, Ran said:

Sure, when we upgraded to the new version and skin, some tweaks were made. IIRC, we had @Abjiklam and @Mindset helping with some templates, maybe they have an idea. I'll look at it as well.

Hasn't CSS been added reasonably recently to allow for the depiction of multiple marriages? Perhaps it is something there that is causing this? @Mindset, perhaps you can take a look?
 

20 hours ago, Ran said:

ETA: Can you give a simple example of this as well?

I've uploaded some screenshots. It can be seen in this family tree (circled red). While the codes ^and ' are supposed to give the following encircled pieces of the family tree (^ is green, ' is red), I've pasted every code into my own sandbox, and you can see that both codes now give the outcome of the ^. The example is only for the solid line variant, but the same applies for the dashed line variant, and the mixed variants (not visible on the image).

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

@Ran, I'm currently working on family trees for the wiki. Would you perhaps know if Corwyn Velaryon, one of the sons of Lord Daemon Velaryon, is indeed the eldest of the three brothers?

[The Wondering Wolf]

@Rhaenys_Targaryen

Some points from the errata page:

Alyssa Velaryon is said to have been forced to watch her daughter Rhaena Targaryen's wedding to King Maegor I Targaryen in 47 AC, which did not happen as Alyssa had fled beyond Maegor's reach by that point.

I think you can also see the statement as a way to say that Alyssa had to suffer the marriage and could not intervene.

The spring at Maidenpool is described as being inside a spa-like structure in Fire & Blood, while it is described as a bare pool in A Feast for Crows. Although apparently a contradiction, the author decided to keep the descriptions as they are.

Cities change, so I would not place it in the errata.

Corwyn Corbray is referred to as "Lord Corbray" (US hardcover, page 634) despite only inheriting his brother's seat after his brother's death at a later moment.

I think Corwyn never inherited his brother's seat, it was his nephew Quenton.

The US version of Fire & Blood states that Prince Daemon Targaryen was twenty years old in 101 AC, which is incorrect as he is known to have been born in 76 AC.

Daemon was born in 81 AC. I remember there was an issue with Daemon's age, but it was not that one.

 

And Martyn's father Mandfryd was the son of Addam.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

5 hours ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

@Rhaenys_Targaryen

Some points from the errata page:

Alyssa Velaryon is said to have been forced to watch her daughter Rhaena Targaryen's wedding to King Maegor I Targaryen in 47 AC, which did not happen as Alyssa had fled beyond Maegor's reach by that point.

I think you can also see the statement as a way to say that Alyssa had to suffer the marriage and could not intervene.

But would that be described as "forced to watch"? The usage of that phrase heavily implies Alyssa's presence, doesn't it? And that would be an error..

 

5 hours ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

The spring at Maidenpool is described as being inside a spa-like structure in Fire & Blood, while it is described as a bare pool in A Feast for Crows. Although apparently a contradiction, the author decided to keep the descriptions as they are.

Cities change, so I would not place it in the errata.

Removed!

 

5 hours ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

Corwyn Corbray is referred to as "Lord Corbray" (US hardcover, page 634) despite only inheriting his brother's seat after his brother's death at a later moment.

I think Corwyn never inherited his brother's seat, it was his nephew Quenton.

The US version of Fire & Blood states that Prince Daemon Targaryen was twenty years old in 101 AC, which is incorrect as he is known to have been born in 76 AC.

Daemon was born in 81 AC. I remember there was an issue with Daemon's age, but it was not that one.

Fixed!

 

5 hours ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

And Martyn's father Mandfryd was the son of Addam.

Thanks! Very useful!

Would you happen to know of any confirmation concerning Corwyn Velaryon and whether or not he was the father of Corlys?