Jump to content
Onion Knight

The ASOIAF wiki thread

Recommended Posts

Another idea, would be to reveal in the wiki section of "A Storm of Swords" that Barristan was Whitebeard, and skip the entire "Clash of Kings" section". Same for mentioning Brynden being TEC on his own page.. No mention until the reveal in the books (Dance). For TEC and all other mentions, prior to Dance, can then be placed on a separate TEC page.

Yep, that's how TEC and Brynden Rivers are currently handled. TEC discusses its interactions with Bran through dreams in the early book sections, and then the connection with Brynden Rivers is made in the ADWD section. Brynden Rivers discusses the history and eventual disappearance of Bloodraven beyond the Wall, and then makes the connection with the TEC in the ADWD section (within Recent Events). The exceptions are the character infoboxes...

We have been over the spoiler policy a number of times.

I suggested that we should use show / hide tags to prevent spoilers and that death dates should not be included in the family trees. However the majority held the opinion that there would be no prevent spoiler policy so I guess this applies to this as well.

For what it's worth, I agree with many of your previous suggestions; an orderly presentation of spoilers is ideal rather than assuming a wiki user should have read all the books first. Some of the discussion in that thread seemed to be going past one another; I don't see how you would be censoring information as some suggested. Some of the objections in various threads seem to be that it would have been too great an undertaking, but most articles now have the Recent Events section (as suggested by Evrach years ago), which seems to be working well. Ran expressed support here and here for chronological revealing of spoiler info. I don't think it would be necessary to have collapsible sections (your Sandbox example), since it would be up to the reader to control which book sections s/he reads.

At this point most articles' text has been separated into book-by-book sections. Go teamwork! :) I don't understand the choice to have the templates up to date as of ADWD, however, as you previously stated about general templates. I'm not code savvy, however, and don't know how feasible your template suggestions would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My preference was to have the info in the templates as of the begin in of the books. And as second option to implement a show/hide for the templates.

I think there was also a suggestion to use a setting to indicate which book should be used as base, the Tower of the Hand has this. But I don't think this is possible with the wiki software.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert Baratheon's Appearance and Character needs to be changed. It says



In his youth he was described as very tall (Ned Stark estimates his height at six feet and six inches, with his brothers slightly shorter), broad shouldered and muscled like a maiden's fantasy. He kept himself clean shaven. However, after winning the crown he became overweight from excessive feasting and drinking, eventually gaining over eight stone in weight and growing a beard to hide his multiple chins.


He became overweight after the Greyjoy Rebellion. Not after winning the crown.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert Baratheon's Appearance and Character needs to be changed. It says

He became overweight after the Greyjoy Rebellion. Not after winning the crown.

Could you mention the chapter that is stated in, so the source can be added as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The page for The World of Ice and Fire has been changed to 'The World of Ice and Fire (real-life book)', and the page

'The World of Ice and Fire' now described Yandels work.

Is that the correct title for Yandel's work? The way I understood it, the title of the book was not the title of Yandel's work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The page for The World of Ice and Fire has been changed to 'The World of Ice and Fire (real-life book)', and the page

'The World of Ice and Fire' now described Yandels work.

Is that the correct title for Yandel's work? The way I understood it, the title of the book was not the title of Yandel's work.

I think Ran would need to verify the name of Yandel's work. Regardless, the work by GRRM, Elio, and Linda is the primary topic and should be moved back.

edit: I moved Yandel's book to "The World of Ice and Fire (Yandel)" and then moved the original back to "The World of Ice and Fire". The in-universe book can be moved to a different title upon Ran's recommendation, of course.

Edited by Nittanian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My view is that yes, the book that is presented at court is indeed titled The World of Ice and Fire (no subtitle, or at least a very different one from the real-world book).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any specific reason why some people's year of birth isn't noted at the page 'Years after Aegon's Conquest'? For example, Lyonel Corbray's year of birth is noted, though we don't know if he was born in 259 or 260 AC. In contrast to him Lysa Tully's isn't, but actually it's the same: We don't know if she was born in 266 or 267 AC.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any specific reason why some people's year of birth isn't noted at the page 'Years after Aegon's Conquest'? For example, Lyonel Corbray's year of birth is noted, though we don't know if he was born in 259 or 260 AC. In contrast to him Lysa Tully's isn't, but actually it's the same: We don't know if she was born in 266 or 267 AC.

When I calculated all the years that weren't specified in the books, I started to only list those on the page "Years after Aegon's Conquest" whose birth (or death) year we know for certain.. That means, for who only one option exists.

I have, however, not yet had the time to remove those from the page who were placed there earlier by other users, but whose year of birth we don't have (yet). Lyonel has a "rough" indication, meaning that, while we don't know the exact, this is the most precise way to place him in any timeline. Lysa, however, has two specific options.. we just don't know which one is correct. Which is why she's not on there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The entry of Lyonel at the calculation page is weird anyway. We have an age given (40), but the conclusion is "This indicates that he was born around 260 AC" instead of


"That gives Lyonel the following options:


  • 39 turning 40 in 300AC, placing his birth in 260AC
  • 40 turning 41 in 300AC, placing his birth in 259AC


No further specifications can be given. Lyonel was born in either 259AC or 260 AC."


To be honest, I can see no difference between Lysa and Lyonel at all. In both cases there are two options for their year of birth. So I think we should include both - or none of them.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Catelyn's year of birth can be calculated to a specific, and Lysa is known to be 2 years older. The comparison between Arya and Sansa makes it clear the 2 years are between 2 and 2,5, so Lysa keeps 2 options in the end.



But for Lyonel, there's no specific age given:



A widower of forty-odd years, and childless, Lord Lyonel was to wed the strapping sixteen-year-old daughter of a rich Gulltown merchant.



Forty-odd is not forty, but means that he is around forty, right? Or did I misinterpret that?




On the topic of keeping or tossing them from the list, then I'd vote for removing all "(roughly)"'s from the list on the page of "Years after Aegon's Conquest". Those aren't many. Only 18 characters.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forty-odd is not forty, but means that he is around forty, right? Or did I misinterpret that?

Somehow I read over the 'odd'. :rolleyes: Of course you are right here.

Nonetheless I think my point still stands, since the years of birth for the 'roughly' candidates are even more imprecise than the ones we have two options for.

So I'd vote for removing them as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somehow I read over the 'odd'. :rolleyes: Of course you are right here.

Nonetheless I think my point still stands, since the years of birth for the 'roughly' candidates are even more imprecise than the ones we have two options for.

So I'd vote for removing them as well.

Ok, I'll do so when I have the time :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright. :)



Is there any reason why you haven't included characters like Rhaenys Targaryen (daughter of Aemon) or Lyman Beesbury yet?



Another thing:


The page "Years after Aegon's Conquest" states that the second Vulture King was defeated in 205 AC, while the the page "Vulture King (II)" states, he was defeated in 206 AC.


Edited by The Wondering Wolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright. :)

Is there any reason why you haven't included characters like Rhaenys Targaryen (daughter of Aemon) or Lyman Beesbury yet?

Rhaenys, because I still have to integrate the adjusted page four onto the timeline list, and the R is on page 4.

Lyman is right there at 49 AC ;)

Another thing:

The page "Years after Aegon's Conquest" states that the second Vulture King was defeated in 205 AC, while the the page "Vulture King (II)" states, he was defeated in 206 AC.

What year does the World Book say? Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright. :)

Is there any reason why you haven't included characters like Rhaenys Targaryen (daughter of Aemon) or Lyman Beesbury yet?

Another thing:

The page "Years after Aegon's Conquest" states that the second Vulture King was defeated in 205 AC, while the the page "Vulture King (II)" states, he was defeated in 206 AC.

206 AC is the correct one of the two ;) 'three years past' in 209 AC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Barristan's Early Life section needs to be changed a bit. It currently reads:




Barristan was named to the Kingsguard at the age of twenty-three and swore his vows before Ser Gerold Hightower during the reign of Jaehaerys II Targaryen.[11]




Barristan was named to the KG by Hightower yes.




Named to the Kingsguard in his 23rd year, by Lord Commander Ser Gerold Hightower - ASOS 67




And Hightower heard his vows




Ser Gerold Hightower himself heard my vows - AGOT 57




But Jaehaerys is the one who gave him the cloak




Aegon's son Jaehaerys had bestowed the white cloak on him when he was three-and-twenty, after he slew Maelys the Monstrous during the War of the Ninepenny Kings. - ADWD The Queensguard 48




I'm not sure if it's just currently awkwardly worded but I think it should be noted somewhere in there that Jaehaerys himself gave Barristan the cloak. Because my reading of what's written down currently makes it sound like Hightower did everything and Barristan was only accepted into the KG during Jaehaerys reign, whereas Jaehaerys actually bestowed him the cloak that made him a KG due to him personally having done a service to the realm.


Edited by markg171

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

×