Rhaenys_Targaryen Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 The page listing the characters from The Hedge Knight GN now states the following: A number of the listed characters and/or their arms may be considered to be semi-canon, as they are not named or described in the original novella, or are only seen via their House sigils by Dunk. The details given for several characters in the roll of arms have been confirmed by later inclusion in The World of Ice and Fire and other supplementary sources. The Hedge Knight is canon. Is there any reason that the info from the last few pages of the GN should be considered semi-canon instead of canon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander the Drake Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said: The page listing the characters from The Hedge Knight GN now states the following: A number of the listed characters and/or their arms may be considered to be semi-canon, as they are not named or described in the original novella, or are only seen via their House sigils by Dunk. The details given for several characters in the roll of arms have been confirmed by later inclusion in The World of Ice and Fire and other supplementary sources. The Hedge Knight is canon. Is there any reason that the info from the last few pages of the GN should be considered semi-canon instead of canon? IMHO, the roll of arms isn't at the same level of canonicity as, say, the appendices to the ASOIAF novels for a number of reasons. 1. It wasn't incorporated as part of the supplements to the story from the outset (as, say, extra pages in the the final issue of the comic book), or in text form as an appendix to the original THK novella or its respective reprints. 2. It appears in at least two different variants (with differing versions of some arms for the same character, cf. the details of Walder of Woodmere's entry on the wiki), and only a portion of it is available in the latest reprint version of the THK GN currently in print from JetCity. 3. It includes in-joke arms like GRRM's own and those of the adaptation writer/artist/publisher, who probably weren't actually supposed to be there competing at the Ashford Tourney, as IRL rolls of arms for particular tournament events usually tend to record the people who are entered for the jousting and other activities. (Though a few of the famous ones are basically illustrated lists of the important attendees, but those seem to have been for sieges and negotiations and the like.) YMMV, but until more of the details from it get repeated at another source such as the World Book or further D&E novellas, I'd personally consider it semi-canon with those potentially subject to change, on a more peripheral basis than the World Book, and probably put a note to that effect on any significant-seeming info from it I added to the other entries on the wiki. Edited March 28, 2016 by Alexander the Drake Clarify slightly muddled phrasing, and a little more info about RL usages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaenys_Targaryen Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 6 minutes ago, Alexander the Drake said: IMHO, the roll of arms isn't at the same level of canonicity as, say, the appendices to the ASOIAF novels for a number of reasons. 1. It wasn't incorporated as part of the supplements to the story from the outset (as, say, extra pages in the the final issue of the comic book), or in text form as an appendix to the original THK novella or its respective reprints. 2. It appears in at least two different variants (with differing versions of some arms for the same character, cf. the details of Walder of Woodmere's entry on the wiki), and only a portion of it is available in the latest reprint version of the THK GN currently in print from JetCity. 3. It includes in-joke arms like GRRM's own and those of the adaptation writer/artist/publisher, who probably weren't actually supposed to be there competing at the Ashford Tourney, as IRL roll of arms for particular tournament events usually for the people who are entered for the jousting and other activities. YMMV, but until more of the details from it get repeated at another source such as the World Book or further D&E novellas, I'd personally consider it semi-canon with those potentially subject to change, on a more peripheral basis than the World Book, and probably put a note to that effect on any significant-seeming info from it I added to the other entries on the wiki. Got it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaenys_Targaryen Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 On 26-3-2016 at 5:42 AM, benzar7 said: snp A possible compromis could be to make all of those pages redirects to the page describing the telltale game. But that decision would completely be up to @Ran, and if he still says that the pages should be removed, they should be removed. On pages for the Houses appearing in the game, such characters should not be listed as being members of the house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaenys_Targaryen Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 Perhaps in line with the conversation of deleting pages on the wiki, what about this page on House Harlton? They are not mentioned in any of the books. Do we delete this page as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander the Drake Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 2 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said: Perhaps in line with the conversation of deleting pages on the wiki, what about this page on House Harlton? They are not mentioned in any of the books. Do we delete this page as well? With regards to the video game info being placed on a books-centric wiki, I'd personally vote to consolidate all that info onto a single page or set of pages along the lines of "List of Houses and characters appearing in the Game of Thrones video game" or something similar. That way, the individual entries won't take up extra pages and/or be mistaken for the core stuff, but at the same time people who were wondering where a certain character/House/place came from (books, show, other) would be able to find that information upon doing a standard search. This seems like it would be something that it would be useful for the wiki to have and falls under the scope of its canon-centric mission and would help people determine what's actually part of ASOIAF or not. And if GRRM ever does include mentions of any of the thus-far video game-only stuff in further works as speculated upthread, then the information about those particular additions would be readily available to be copied to an official page for whatever shows up. I'll mention that the French wiki does seem to include all the video game info, on separate pages within their own dedicated categories. They mark them off with an infobox at the top of each page clearly warning that this particular set of information pertains to the GRRM-approved video game only and does not come from the books, and they footnote the on-page references to all the "new" characters and other items by stating the same again. It's all very nicely laid out and easy to understand, with little chance of confusion, IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaenys_Targaryen Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 25 minutes ago, Alexander the Drake said: With regards to the video game info being placed on a books-centric wiki, I'd personally vote to consolidate all that info onto a single page or set of pages along the lines of "List of Houses and characters appearing in the Game of Thrones video game" or something similar. That way, the individual entries won't take up extra pages and/or be mistaken for the core stuff, but at the same time people who were wondering where a certain character/House/place came from (books, show, other) would be able to find that information upon doing a standard search. This seems like it would be something that it would be useful for the wiki to have and falls under the scope of its canon-centric mission and would help people determine what's actually part of ASOIAF or not. And if GRRM ever does include mentions of any of the thus-far video game-only stuff in further works as speculated upthread, then the information about those particular additions would be readily available to be copied to an official page for whatever shows up. I'll mention that the French wiki does seem to include all the video game info, on separate pages within their own dedicated categories. They mark them off with an infobox at the top of each page clearly warning that this particular set of information pertains to the GRRM-approved video game only and does not come from the books, and they footnote the on-page references to all the "new" characters and other items by stating the same again. It's all very nicely laid out and easy to understand, with little chance of confusion, IMHO. Then we could do that for the Telltale game characters/houses as well, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander the Drake Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 (edited) 34 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said: Then we could do that for the Telltale game characters/houses as well, right? Sure, why not? Separate lists for each different game, and an overall category for "Video Games" to mark them off. I know that sometimes when I'm looking at fannish discussions online and somebody mentions an obscure-sounding character or event that I don't immediately recall, I wonder what it is and where it came from. (And whether or not I've missed some new preview chapter or con reading tidbit or the like.) Over here, it usually turns out to be something from the app or a portion of the World Book that I skimmed over, and easy enough to find out more about on the wiki. So it seems like it would be really useful for visitors to be able to punch in "Sarwyck" into the searchbox on the wiki and come up with the standard page saying that there's no specific entry for Sarwyck on the wiki, but your search term was found on the following pages: "List of characters and Houses originating in the Game of Thrones video game" and easily know for sure. And this is the official fandom site and I think it would be nice to have that kind of info about the officially licensed spin-off products somewhere, even if it's not nearly as important as the actual book stuff and shouldn't be given as much prominence on the wiki. Edited March 29, 2016 by Alexander the Drake Minor wording clarification and expansion of rationale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaenys_Targaryen Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Are there any further opinions on that idea? Ran and Werthead, perhaps? 14 hours ago, Alexander the Drake said: Sure, why not? Separate lists for each different game, and an overall category for "Video Games" to mark them off. I know that sometimes when I'm looking at fannish discussions online and somebody mentions an obscure-sounding character or event that I don't immediately recall, I wonder what it is and where it came from. (And whether or not I've missed some new preview chapter or con reading tidbit or the like.) Over here, it usually turns out to be something from the app or a portion of the World Book that I skimmed over, and easy enough to find out more about on the wiki. So it seems like it would be really useful for visitors to be able to punch in "Sarwyck" into the searchbox on the wiki and come up with the standard page saying that there's no specific entry for Sarwyck on the wiki, but your search term was found on the following pages: "List of characters and Houses originating in the Game of Thrones video game" and easily know for sure. And this is the official fandom site and I think it would be nice to have that kind of info about the officially licensed spin-off products somewhere, even if it's not nearly as important as the actual book stuff and shouldn't be given as much prominence on the wiki. Or (continuing with your example) "Sarwyck" could redirect to an overview page ("List of characters originating in the Game of Thrones video game"). That would be another option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nittanian Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 I agree that "Sarwyck" should be a redirect to the list for that game in that case, rather than being a red link bringing up search results. There have only been a few new houses introduced in the games, so we could alternatively keep House pages (Glenmore, Harlton, Sarwyck, Westford) with their in-game history. Instead of numerous stub articles for game characters, they can instead be described on the House page ("Raynald Sarwyck" would redirect to "House Sarwyck" rather than have his own article). Rather than clutter up House Forrester, we could have separate "House Forrester" (with the canon ADWD info) and "House Forrester (Telltale)" (with the extra game content) articles. This wiki has in the past been books focused, but not books exclusive. For many years we have had articles for characters who have only appeared in the show. http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Category:Characters_from_the_TV_show_only Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 (edited) Alexander's suggestion of following the French wiki's approach by using clear categories, as well as very clear disclaimers, seem's reasonable. That said, it feels like only the Telltale game will get that level of detail, or is there anyone interested in approaching the Cyanide game the same way? And then I guess one has to wonder about the Green Ronin RPG adventures and so on... So.... separate categories and clear disclaimers, vs. just consolidating all the info related to those games on the respective articles for each game. What do folks prefer? Personally, I just don't want confusion when people read something on the wiki and assumes it comes from the novels. Nittanian's approach seems like a good way to combine with a clear and separate category, especially in terms of putting all the game characters under their house pages (or, if they can't be fit in that way, under the main game article). Edited March 30, 2016 by Ran Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nittanian Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 32 minutes ago, Ran said: Alexander's suggestion of following the French wiki's approach by using clear categories, as well as very clear disclaimers, seem's reasonable. That said, it feels like only the Telltale game will get that level of detail, or is there anyone interested in approaching the Cyanide game the same way? And then I guess one has to wonder about the Green Ronin RPG adventures and so on... I've been adding some more detail regarding the Cyanide game lately, at least. I'm under the impression that the Green Ronin adventures are inspiration for dungeon masters and players, rather than something intended to be canon. 32 minutes ago, Ran said: Personally, I just don't want confusion when people read something on the wiki and assumes it comes from the novels. We can focus on making it clearer for the reader that the information comes from games or shows, as opposed to canon books. We also need to add the Warning template for all articles relating to the released TWOW samples. Right now it's only on a few pages. "This information has thus far been released in a sample chapter for ''[[The Winds of Winter]]'', and might therefore not be in finalized form. Keep in mind that the content as described below is still subject to change." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander the Drake Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 (edited) Myself, I think it might work best to have a hybrid approach of a small set of separate disclaimered subject listing (but not individual entry) pages under their own category, giving relatively fleshed-out overviews for characters, places/items, and events introduced by the non-canon material, with clear titles like "Events occuring only in the Game of Thrones video games". Or maybe doing something like "House Sarwyck (video game)". That way, the main game articles don't grow too long for people who just want some basic info on what the premise/release/platform availability of them is, but people who'd still like to know more could find everything they need. Personally, I think that if we do it right, it will actually be more helpful, rather than less, for distinguishing what's book-canon or not if we have the game/RPG/other info up. Someone asking in the forums "I heard that Jon Snow sends a ranger out on a mission to do X and Y and they wind up having an awesome fight with the wildlings, what book did that happen in?" could get a reply of "That didn't happen in the books, but the wiki says that it's one of the campaigns for the RPG Night's Watch supplement." and a pointer for more information, in case they end up wanting to play it. Otherwise people might wonder if it comes from a teaser in an interview or unreleased excerpt material or some other source that might be more canonical and perhaps think that the wiki just hasn't gotten around to updating with it yet; especially if it was some sort of plot point that involved one of the book-canon characters to advance the game plot. Rhaenys_Targaryen's suggestion of redirects to overview pages seems like a much better idea than just relying on "thing not found" search results. And Nittanian's suggestion of keeping the pre-existing non-canon House pages but moving the detailed non-canon character info for the members onto them, and splitting House Forrester into canon and game versions is also good. If in the future, some of the House Forrester characters show up by name in TWOW, for canonicity-determining purposes, perhaps it could be handled by adding a footnote to their listing in the House Members stating that X Forrester was pre-existing in the non-canonical video game, so it's unknown how much of their character history from that might apply, but here's a link to read more about it on the video game version of the House page anyway. I'd additionally suggest having the character name or similar redirects go to the top of the page, rather than to an anchor link within them, so that anyone redirected to the page will see the disclaimer first. They can then scroll down to the TOC to navigate to the House or group for the character. For what it's worth, the French wiki does cover both Telltale and Cyanide games, with different disclaimers. Here's a couple of examples of how they do it: The category which separates all the video game-only additions (House Forrester, as they have been mentioned in ADWD are not filed here, but their own page has a disclaimer at the top that part of the information is game-only): http://www.lagardedenuit.com/wiki/index.php?title=Cat%C3%A9gorie:Jeu_vid%C3%A9o http://www.lagardedenuit.com/wiki/index.php?title=Maison_Forestier There's a basic list of character additions incorporated into the main article for each game (no disclaimer, since it's an article about the game itself): http://www.lagardedenuit.com/wiki/index.php?title=Game_of_Thrones_-_A_Telltale_Games_Series#Personnages http://www.lagardedenuit.com/wiki/index.php?title=Game_of_Thrones:_The_Role_Playing_Game#Personnages_jouables And each character/House/other page concerning the game has a very clear disclaimer banner at the top, and then the 1st sentence of the topic carries a footnote reinforcing that whatever it is is not part of the books, but only the video games: http://www.lagardedenuit.com/wiki/index.php?title=Cerenna_Westford http://www.lagardedenuit.com/wiki/index.php?title=Duncan_Tuttle There are separate disclaimer banners for each game. The one for Cyanide adds that the information in the game was approved by GRRM but not written by him, so it may be considered semi-canon with regards to the books. The one for Telltale outright states that their version is a spinoff from the TV show and might possibly be considered semi-canon for that, but has absolutely nothing to do with and are completely non-canonical for the books. Their approach seems like a good and well thought-out balance of giving solid info about about the derivative works, while making it clear what they are in relation to the source books. Edited March 30, 2016 by Alexander the Drake Minor clarification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benzar7 Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 So, Rhaenys_Targaryen Does this mean I can re-upload my pages that were deleted if they are sectioned off? Based on mine and Alexander the Drake's points.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaenys_Targaryen Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 5 hours ago, Nittanian said: I agree that "Sarwyck" should be a redirect to the list for that game in that case, rather than being a red link bringing up search results. There have only been a few new houses introduced in the games, so we could alternatively keep House pages (Glenmore, Harlton, Sarwyck, Westford) with their in-game history. Instead of numerous stub articles for game characters, they can instead be described on the House page ("Raynald Sarwyck" would redirect to "House Sarwyck" rather than have his own article). Rather than clutter up House Forrester, we could have separate "House Forrester" (with the canon ADWD info) and "House Forrester (Telltale)" (with the extra game content) articles. In that case, though, we should link to "House Forrester (Telltale)" on the "House Forrester" page, and vice versa. 57 minutes ago, Alexander the Drake said: Myself, I think it might work best to have a hybrid approach of a small set of separate disclaimered subject listing (but not individual entry) pages under their own category, giving relatively fleshed-out overviews for characters, places/items, and events introduced by the non-canon material, with clear titles like "Events occuring only in the Game of Thrones video games". Or maybe doing something like "House Sarwyck (video game)". [...] Rhaenys_Targaryen's suggestion of redirects to overview pages seems like a much better idea than just relying on "thing not found" search results. And Nittanian's suggestion of keeping the pre-existing non-canon House pages but moving the detailed non-canon character info for the members onto them, and splitting House Forrester into canon and game versions is also good. So we agree to condense the info to a few house pages (like the "House Forrester (Telltale)" page suggested by Nittanian)? I do think that the infobox from houses like House Forrester should not contain the game info (like the House words, seat name, etc.). That kind of info can be mentioned in the specific game-section, but should not be mixed up with the book info. But if we make the separate pages, that issue would resolve itself. 57 minutes ago, Alexander the Drake said: If in the future, some of the House Forrester characters show up by name in TWOW, for canonicity-determining purposes, perhaps it could be handled by adding a footnote to their listing in the House Members stating that X Forrester was pre-existing in the non-canonical video game, so it's unknown how much of their character history from that might apply, but here's a link to read more about it on the video game version of the House page anyway. Sounds like a good idea. 57 minutes ago, Alexander the Drake said: I'd additionally suggest having the character name or similar redirects go to the top of the page, rather than to an anchor link within them, so that anyone redirected to the page will see the disclaimer first. They can then scroll down to the TOC to navigate to the House or group for the character. This sounds like a good idea as well. It would make the disclaimer more than clear. 57 minutes ago, Alexander the Drake said: Their approach seems like a good and well thought-out balance of giving solid info about about the derivative works, while making it clear what they are in relation to the source books. That would require pages for each specific character, containing info, and that might again spread out the info too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaenys_Targaryen Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 53 minutes ago, benzar7 said: So, Rhaenys_Targaryen Does this mean I can re-upload my pages that were deleted if they are sectioned off? Based on mine and Alexander the Drake's points.... As far as I can see in the deletion logs, no pages were deleted, except one where the title contained a typo (and for which a correctly spelled copy had been made). But if we can agree on the approach we are discussing above, the pages can be moved, redirected, condensed and labeled as stated above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander the Drake Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 5 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said: So we agree to condense the info to a few house pages (like the "House Forrester (Telltale)" page suggested by Nittanian)? Yes, that seems like a good approach. House pages to collect the characters and related "new" locations in the game, and maybe a couple of other overview pages for additional items which don't fall under the scope of the Houses, and split off the game version from canon original. Maybe a small page about the usages and appearances of book-canon characters and events mentioned within the game, briefly describing what they do in the plot but noting that it's just a cameo in a derivative work and is not relevant to their canon personality or the actual history. 5 minutes ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said: That would require pages for each specific character, containing info, and that might again spread out the info too much. In certain ways, the French wiki seems a lot more comprehensive, e.g., their absolutely beautiful articles on the homages and references within ASOIAF and the IRL historical and literary inspirations for certain characters and events. But they take a somewhat different (and much more uniform and strictly-enforced) approach to what kinds of info they decide to present and how, and while it's wonderfully organized and marvelously informative, it wouldn't be suitable for this wiki. Which is why I like the idea of consolidated overview pages with redirects, which I think would work better over here. I'd suggest a combination of: 1. Disclaimer warning banner across the top of each page. The wording for this would need to be worked out, but I might be able to make set of preliminary templates this weekend, if someone else doesn't beat me to it. 2. Character and location info consolidated under pages for their Houses or other affiliation groups. Other significant gameplay items like special swords or prophecies to go under a miscellaneous general overview page with a title that makes it clear that it's a list of game-only things. 3. A standard phrase or a footnote for the 1st topic sentence of each House or other dedicated article reinforcing that the topic subject does not appear in the novels, only in the game. And maybe footnote as well for the first mentions of characters from other Houses that appear in a mixed context where an occurrence is being described in a section which also involves a canon character or event like Robert's Rebellion being used as part of the backstory for the Lord of the game House. That way, whatever it is will be easy to distinguish from any book-referential stuff that makes a guest appearance and is mentioned in relation to some plot point in the game. 4. Category for game-only stuff like Nittanian's example upthread of the Category: Characters from the TV show only. Additional nice-to-haves but not at all necessary: 5. Maybe a game-only template at the bottom showing how those Houses are placed, similar to the ones we have for the canon stuff, like: Houses in the Game of Thrones video game Noble Houses of the Riverlands: Harlton Other Houses of the Westerlands: Sarwyck | Westford 6. Maybe appending (video game) to the article titles for stuff, if there might be any chance of confusion for a similarly-named canon item. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 House Forrester's words come from the game only right? They're listed on http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/House_Words with no note about the source. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhaenys_Targaryen Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 1 hour ago, RumHam said: House Forrester's words come from the game only right? They're listed on http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/House_Words with no note about the source. Yes. We could decide to only list canon house-words on that page, and leave out the words from games and other non-canon sources. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nittanian Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 @John Suburbs points out here that "Our Blades are Sharp" is not included for House Bolton in The Citadel's house mottoes page. I don't see mention in either of the RPG books. Did George mention it in an interview at some point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.