Jump to content
Onion Knight

The ASOIAF wiki thread

Recommended Posts

Ran, I have a question about the App. But yes, this is about the wiki.


You didn’t include the App when you updated the Canon and Referencing page on the wiki in April, but it’s being used quite a bit for wiki referencing, and many are considering it canon.


Even though the App is from 2012 and the WB is from 2014 and you mention the WB as canon in April of 2015, you didn’t even mention the App in semi-canon when you updated the page.


In particular, the statement that Ned found Lyanna inside the tower of joy. That’s not in the books. It was in the wiki based on your old essay over on the FAQ section of the Citadel as early as 2007, then added to the wiki in 2009, but it’s still not in the books and never was.


Only recently has the App been added as the citation for this claim, which seems kind of bassackwards. Because unless GRRM confirmed this without question, it’s an error.


And unless you have specifically stated that the App may be used in the wiki as a canon reference (which you have not), it’s pretty irresponsible to see it cited as a wiki reference.


Can you please confirm that GRRM personally confirmed that Ned found Lyanna inside the tower of joy? Or not? As absolute book-level canon?


According to your wiki entry that…

“The key point in determining canon is that it must be from George R.R. Martin. Any content that cannot be determined as having originated with or been expressly regarded as canon by Martin cannot in itself be considered canon”

…was this statement “Ned found Lyanna inside the tower of joy” expressly regarded as canon by GRRM? Because there is absolutely no source or reference that such a statement originated from GRRM.


Thanks :)


ETA I just read this part of your wiki page: Please note the "verified" qualifier -- origin with Martin must be an established fact, not simply assumed, and must clearly refer to his series as opposed to the canon of any derivative works.

Edited by WeaselPie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is semi-canon. It contains material contributions from GRRM, and its text was reviewed by him. That said, it is not fully canon because GRRM reserves the right to change details noted in the app when he actually sits down to publish the details in the course of the novels. As a notable example,, his vision of the relationship of Bloodraven to what happened in Maekar's reign changed substantially when he sat down and wrote his contributions for the world book, and we'll be getting the app corrected in that regard.



Whether he is likely to change details noted in the app regarding Lyanna when he finally publishes the novels, I couldn't tell you, but I am doubtful.


Edited by Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, forgot to answer the other question.



Back in May 2008, we (that's Linda and I, and George's editor Anne Groell) received from George's assistant family tree files concerning the Targaryens and Starks, for use in the course of working on the world book (remember, at the time the world book contained a Who's Who, which was the basis for the app). Some of the details in those trees changed once George worked on the World of Ice and Fire (the Stark tree expanded, mainly, and the Targaryen tree got some substantial changes as he sorted out things like the Dance of the Dragons). The program used contains stuff like date of death, location of death, etc.



In the case of Lyanna Stark, she's on that Stark tree, and there her death location is given as the tower of joy.



Again, things are always mutable until directly published in the books (and sometimes even after that point, depending). But in mid-2008, that's what George had in place.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since those initial family trees you got from George's assistant in 2008 have changed - I know you had an issue with George leaving the Targ tree until the last minute on the WB - and have obviously not been published in their 2008 form, how does a discarded 7 year old family tree fit into "canon"?



Also, where did you get the info in your pre-2007 Citadel essay on RR that "Entering the tower, Lord Eddard found Lyanna Stark in her "bed of blood", dying" ? Because that's not in the books or SSMs.

Edited by WeaselPie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

George didn't discard that tree. He added onto it and changed some details... about the Starks and Targaryens who existed long before to the novels. The details about those who are more closely connected to the books didn't change at all, OTOH. In fact, we have an even older tree George sent us back in 1999, and everything at the end of it is just the same as the family tree of 2008 and the family tree as published in TWoIaF.



In any case, details in that tree that do not contradict details from the canon (the novels, D&E, the world book) are semi-canon, just as anything else that is sourced from George but not yet published.



The essay is my essay, and drew on everything I knew at the time, and attempted to present a chronology as best as was possible using the best guesses available. The evidence in the very first novel strongly points to Lyanna's presence at the tower of joy, given that Eddard's opening line about the dream connects the encounter with the Kingsguard, the tower, and Lyanna in her bed of blood as being all part of a single incident. Everything else -- her death in the red mountains, as Eddard attests -- also fits that. I'm sure there are arguments otherwise, but there are also arguments for why the earth is really flat, too. ;) And as it happens, George's family tree simply confirmed the fact that her death at the tower of joy is what he intended back in 2008.



I very much doubt he has changed his mind about such a fundamental piece of information, but anything is possible until he actually publishes the book, hence why this information remains semi-canon. If someone asked him today about it and he confirmed that she died at the tower of joy, it would still be semi-canon, as well.


Edited by Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not canon, but semi-canon. Got it. Thanks, Ran, I appreciate all the time and research you took in explaining this!


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ran,



How do you want the info from the app to be reflected on the wiki? Most of the information from the app used on the wiki can be found in infoboxes, so typing (according to semi-canon sources) behind the info (usually places of birth or death) doesn't really seem to be an option.



Should the wiki state specifically for each entry that the source is a semi-canon one? That isn't really consistently done with SSM's either.. The information in now usually simply changed when the info becomes outdated.


Or should the Referencing and Canon page mentioning that the app is a semi-canon source be enough in that regard?


A third option perhaps, is mentioning the "according to semi-canon sources" in text only, but not in regards to the info in the infoboxes..



Any idea's or suggestions for that?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not really happy with the following passage from the entry about the Cannibal:




There were wild rumors among the smallfolk on Dragonstone that the Cannibal was not actually a Targaryen dragon at all, but was already living in the Dragonmont before Aenar Targaryen led his household to settle on the island a century before the Doom of Valyria. If these rumors were true, it was entirely unknown where he came from, simply that he appeared one day - perhaps from a different brood of Valyrian dragons that was left riderless, or a wild strain of dragons that had gone for generations without riders. These rumors might lend some explanation as to why the Cannibal was so hostile to the other dragons that the Targaryens kept on Dragonstone: he wasn't their kin at all. On the other hand, many maesters scoff at these rumors, and say that the smallfolk of Dragonstone must have simply caught glimpses of other Valyrian dragons flying over the Narrow Sea before the Doom, and then over the generations the tales became confused so that some believed the Cannibal had been there before the Targaryens - similar to how Serwyn of the Mirror Shield lived in Westeros before the Andal invasion (if he lived at all), but legends in later centuries claimed that he was not only a knight (an institution the Andals brought to Westeros) but a member of the Kingsguard (which only formed three centuries ago). Whatever the case, no one could definitively say exactly when the Cannibal first appeared on Dragonstone, except that he was older than Sheepstealer.[2]



I think Aenar didn't flee from Valyria to Dragonstone a century before the Doom. It was rather a decade.



Are these speculations based on the assumptions of a maester cited in The World of Ice and Fire or another book? Or just made by editors of the wiki? I think this needs to be clarified.



I just know about two maesters doubting the version of the smallfolk (Munkun and Barth). And they don't give any alternative explanation. So again, what is based on the books and what is just personal speculation?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not really happy with the following passage from the entry about the Cannibal:

I think Aenar didn't flee from Valyria to Dragonstone a century before the Doom. It was rather a decade.

Are these speculations based on the assumptions of a maester cited in The World of Ice and Fire or another book? Or just made by editors of the wiki? I think this needs to be clarified.

I just know about two maesters doubting the version of the smallfolk (Munkun and Barth). And they don't give any alternative explanation. So again, what is based on the books and what is just personal speculation?

Yeah, I agree that needs to be changed. Too much speculation and I don't see the need for including the Serwyn example of how people can sometimes get confused. the ( ) parts also seem off, style wise for the wiki. But maybe that's just me. This is all we get in the worldbook about the Cannibal being on dragonstone before the Targaryens:

the Cannibal, said by the smallfolk to have lurked on Dragonstone even before the Targaryens came (though Munkun and Barth are dubious of this claim);

I'll change it, thanks for the heads up.

Edit: only took me about six tries, but I think I finally got it right now.

Edited by RumHam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wiki editing and login should be fixed. However, if you can't get a password arranged, drop me a message here. Travelling for the next couple of days but shall try to take care of it when I'm back.

We are at present thinking of abandoning the IPB-WIKI bridge to allow people to register going forward, but with the requirement that they register with the same email address as an account on the forum and providing their username in a note attached to the request. This way we'll be able to get new editors in while maintaining the anti-spam effect of requiring forum membership.

Like many others, I can't log in to the wiki. This is my username. I tried the "reset password" option and kept getting an error message.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Truth be told, I don't recall the passwords that westeros.org assigned me

Then I would PM Ran and ask if he can reset your password for you, if the password reset isn't working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ran,

How do you want the info from the app to be reflected on the wiki? Most of the information from the app used on the wiki can be found in infoboxes, so typing (according to semi-canon sources) behind the info (usually places of birth or death) doesn't really seem to be an option.

Should the wiki state specifically for each entry that the source is a semi-canon one? That isn't really consistently done with SSM's either.. The information in now usually simply changed when the info becomes outdated.

Or should the Referencing and Canon page mentioning that the app is a semi-canon source be enough in that regard?

A third option perhaps, is mentioning the "according to semi-canon sources" in text only, but not in regards to the info in the infoboxes..

Any idea's or suggestions for that?

Maybe Template:Ref could be changed. For instance, "{{ref|AWOIAF| Stevron Frey}}" could result in "A World of Ice and Fire (semi-canon), Stevron Frey." showing in the References and Notes section of Stevron's article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Reyne-Tarbeck rebellion article has an excess of detail, IMO. The Prelude section could be trimmed down considerably and the fates of Tarbeck Hall and Castamere could be discussed in separate articles, allowing the main article to be an overview instead of a recounting of TWOIAF.



The Dance of the Dragons article also has a lot of detail. There are numerous quotes from TPATQ included within subsections and parts of the article seem to be written in a storytelling manner (several "and so" and "thus") instead of a general summary.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Dance of the Dragons article also has a lot of detail. There are numerous quotes from TPATQ included within subsections and parts of the article seem to be written in a storytelling manner (several "and so" and "thus") instead of a general summary.

I'll try to trim that one down over the weekend.. ;)

Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A new addition to the SSM that should be of interest for the Night's King article on the wiki.

Interesting. The show made up a king last season too, I think. When Tywin was talking to Tommen after Joffrey died.

Edit: Here he is, though I'm not sure why the GoT wiki is claiming he's a Durrandon. It seems to be based on Orys being the name of the first Baratheon, only that doesn't make any sense.

http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Orys_I_Durrandon

Edited by RumHam

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

×