Jump to content
Onion Knight

The ASOIAF wiki thread

Recommended Posts

Several of Maegor's Kingsguard die at various points, unnamed, and he may have replaced them as he went.  I mean Owen Bush was a Meryn Trant scale guy, but then we've got the Preston Greenfield type guys who are a revolving door.

 

.....I don't think "Errata in the novels" is the best name for that otherwise outstanding new article series.  If the wiki is meant to be used, by the readers....I think "Errata" is a bit higher than their normal vocabulary level (particularly, non-native English speakers, who I doubt have ever had to use "Errata" conversationally).  Maybe we should just use "Errors".

Edited by The Dragon Demands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Elio, I've been listening to your recent Vassals of Kingsgrave podcast:

"The Peace of the Dragon"?

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?title=Fire_and_Blood&diff=204584&oldid=202686

We've never heard of this before.  Is it mostly First Dornish War, or other stuff?  Rough figure, how long is it in wordcount?

Are there other chapter titles you've heard of before that we don't know about?  I *thought* our list on that article was definitive.

Other questions from your comments in the podcast on The Sons of the Dragon:

Did Maegor mourn Visenya or not?

World book says "he took her death in his stride"....podcast said Sons of the Dragon had some unreliable narrator, and actually said it shook Maegor deeply.  I went back and checked, and it says no such thing....but on the other hand, it doesn't really mention Maegor's reaction at all, to his mother's death.  

But this does raise the question:  if it wasn't in The Sons of the Dragon, where did you get that detail about Maegor's reaction to Visenya's death by the time World book came out?

Martin made the off-hand mention that The Sons of the Dragon has "around three novels' worth of material in it" if he ever chose to "narrativize" it in the manner of the main novels, with POV narrators, etc.  I've actually seen Martin say this in separate video interviews (the one with Anne Groell).  Obviously, this has implications if anyone ever gets to make a prequel TV series based on it (as you directly discussed in your prequels video).  I would guess it would be along the lines of Part 1: Aenys, Part 2: Rise of Maegor, Part 3: Fall of Maegor.
 

.....but my question is, did GRRM ever remark in passing to you about how many novels these other historical textbook novellas could sustain if narrativized?  For any of them?  I.e. did he ever say "The Dance of the Dragons could sustain four novels"....or "six novels"? etc.? (probably depends on the length of the novel - a main ASOIAF novel, or "three novellas collected as one monograph" like A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms).  

 

Edited by The Dragon Demands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No comment. ;)

Errata should stay, BTW. It's the right word, it's widely used in literary, academic, and RPG contexts. But if someone wants to make a disambiguation that covers Errors and points to the Errata page, I don't have an objection to this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh it's a perfectly cromulent word.

While we're on the subject, I took some other notes which came under discussion and it would help if you clarify them my quickly re-iterating here (so we can link to the thread instead of hunting down the exact moment in the podcast) :

1 - As I understand it, you said "Rogar" Baratheon is actually used more often, but "Robar" appears by the end, so you went with "Robar" as correct because A - you think he changed his mind by the end of it, B - it "fits the naming scheme" of Baratheons better (which, I presume, is because it's got a "b" in it, like several others?)

2 - This was more difficult to transcribe:  you said....there was some early idea that Alysanne was actually Maegor's daughter, "early on" (when? Clash of Kings? When was it first established she was Jahaerys's sister-wife?)....but then Linda shouted in from the other room, "yeah, because there's that line (from ACOK I think?) in which Daenerys says she has the blood of both Rhaenys AND Visenya, which can't literally be true now".  Or something.

I updated the notes for the Robar and Alysanne pages over this, please take a look.

 

 

Edited by The Dragon Demands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The Dragon Demands said:

- This was more difficult to transcribe:  you said....there was some early idea that Alysanne was actually Maegor's daughter, "early on" (when? Clash of Kings? When was it first established she was Jahaerys's sister-wife?)....but then Linda shouted in from the other room, "yeah, because there's that line (from ACOK I think?) in which Daenerys says she has the blood of both Rhaenys AND Visenya, which can't literally be true now".  Or something.

I've changed this section to a sentence from AGOT, which is the only thing that I could find that might hint towarsd Alysanne having originally been planned to be Maegor's daughter. In Daenerys IX, she states that she is the blood of Aegon the Conqueror and Maegor the Cruel.

The only thing that I could find that sort of matches the description of the sentence you originally wrote is this:

"The three heads were Aegon and his sisters."

"Visenya and Rhaenys," she recalled. "I am descended from Aegon and Rhaenys through their son Aenys and their grandson Jaehaerys."

From Daenerys V ACOK.

I did a google-search to see if this is a sentence which has been changed between versions, but I could not find anything pointing in that direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was entirely mistaken on the Alysanne thing, which I thought I noted in the podcast but editing may have lost it. I was mis-remembering the fact that when we first got the Wordstar Targaryen tree -- this was over a decade ago, and not the same family tree George had sent to us for TWoIaF/AWoIaF -- it was very difficult to figure out family connections because the em-dash lines George had set didn't show up when we translated it to doc. So we guessed things, and one of the guesses was that Alysanne was descended from Maegor, which GRRM corrected us on as we turned the tree into a visual file. So, yeah, there's nothing to that.

 

Re: Dany and Maegor, I was conflating things between the quote in AGoT that Rhaenys points out, and the later quote where Dany is exclusively descended from Aegon and Rhaenys. Podcast chats like this are fun, but sometimes one blathers a bit too much and gets things crossed. :)

Edited by Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ran

Elio, citing that ASOIAF is for all aspects of the franchise, including video games and board games, for a long time I've been wanting to update the "Talisa" article.

Before I get started, I want to get clarification:  why do you, and/or Linda - in your own words - think they changed Jeyne Westerling from the novels to Talisa in the books, altering that entire storyline?
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ran said:

I'll go with GRRM and guess they thought they had better plans.

....for the record, because I cite you as an authority on the TV show wiki, what's your official educated guess at what that "better plan" was exactly?  Why did they do this?   It was the first BIG moment they changed something and outright refused to even explain why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is that what we saw in S2 and S3 was what they thought was better.

Yeah, doesn't make sense to me, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're getting pretty off-topic, don't you think? Noted, of course, but need to keep this thread to wiki editing matter.

Edited by Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ran said:

My guess is that what we saw in S2 and S3 was what they thought was better.

Yeah, doesn't make sense to me, either.

I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm now terrified I've offended. But sometimes you're gone for days hiding from Breeze or something and my past messages have gone unanswered.  

(I think Vassals of Kingsgrave was directly quoting a point I made in my Stannis video in one of the responses he made to you, but you'd have to confirm with him)

To get this back on track for wiki purposes, I've made a major and long-planned update to the Talisa Maegyr page, a "Behind the Scenes" section based on my own cited notes and research:

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Talisa_Maegyr#Behind_the_scenes
 

It is far from perfect.  I humbly beg feedback from everyone.

Er....the lengthy writeup I did is based on a two part analysis video I made, with citations, if anyone wants to see the source:
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do others think? My main concerns about it are length, especially for a character that doesn't exist in the books, and that it feels like a research piece rather than purely an informative one.

In the latter regard, I think the ASoIaF Wiki has very naturally attempted to follow Wikipedia's No original research  editorial rule, and I think it's served us well. Other sites -- blogs, personal websites, forums, other wikis with different approaches -- strike me as more suitable for this content. The exception has been the various theory articles related to the books, but otherwise we keep it pretty straight.

I believe a much briefer article simply citing the most salient statements from the writers and GRRM would be more suitable both in length and to preserve the wiki style. Something along the lines of your typical IMDB "Trivia" entry for a film discussing why a particular detail happened.

Edited by Ran

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts on the current Talisa article are:

1. The introduction paragraph is too long. 

Something like "Talisa Maegyr is a Volantene noble woman working the battlefields of the westerlands as a healer during the War of the Five Kings. She appears only in the TV series, where she is played by Oona Chaplin. Her character replaces Jeyne Westerling as the love interest and later wife of King Robb Stark."

This would limit spoilers, as well as remove the information it holds now that is better suited elsewhere on the page (for example, the "behind the scenes" section)

2. The "Game of Thrones" section has no references. Those should definitely be added. All Game of Thrones episodes have their own reference code. The "Background" section could be placed under "History" (for consistency), while the "Season 2" and "Season 3" sections can remain under the "Game of Thrones" heading.

3. The "Behind the scenes" section reads as an essay. I personally think that it should be trimmed significantly, and that the original research should be removed, as Ran says.

4. Concerning the entire text, the interlinking needs some work. Interlinking is currently limited, and should be increased. Additionally, to link to pages on the regular wikipedia, you need to add "w:", for example: [[w:Bryan Cogman|Bryan Cogman]].

 

That said, the GoT pages are in need of an update, so the fact that the page is being updated is great. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, The Dragon Demands said:

Style aside, what do you think of its conclusions?

Overall, I think there is quite some repetition, and the section could do with some shuffeling of the info. The most important comments that I have are given below, with the quoted parts of your text they apply to.

 
Edited by Rhaenys_Targaryen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Whole thing was too long and involved; it was more that I wanted you guys to read that full ...missive, I didn't think all if it should have stayed in there long-term.  I already made a new edit cutting out the really speculative stuff (no real need to bring up the "Talisa is a spy" theory):
 
First bullet point, about the TIMING of the name change; I worry my wording wasn't concise, yes.  The point itself stands as you listed it - non-controversial, Cogman himself admitted they came up with this idea after they began filming. Rewording might need to be in order but no real issues there.
 
Second, related point...how this explains the mismatch between her ethnicity and the general appearance of Volantenes.  Actually, I agree with your listed reasons fully - they never said ALL Volantene aristocrats need to look Valyrian.  I didn't really mind - can't expect them to be too accurate so long as they're not blatantly wrong - but Linda was quite upset about it.  The answer is simple:  they only came up with the idea to make her from Volantis after they already cast her. 
 
HOWEVER, for the sake of article length, I'm just as open to not commenting on that aspect at all: either succinctly mention "One point of confusion is that she doesn't look Volantene, but the simple answer is they changed that after she was cast, and isn't even too much of a problem"....or...just not bring up the whole thing.  Even I lean towards "don't bother bringing it up because it's muddled anway". 
 
3 - ...GRRM's comments.
I think we're putting words in his mouth to focus purely on Volantis as the reason for the change.
On the otherhand, I fully agree with your points - conversely, he was very vague, only sort of implying it was really the story change he objected to - but he didn't actually say "because of the Romance".
 
I think it would be better to make it neutral, just presenting his full quoted transcript, and state "we're not sure what he meant by that". 
They did change this to pander Madden as a romantic lead, no other major reason.  Setting up Volantis was incidental and trivial, not even followed up.  It's why they ever changed anything in the TV show:  show off the actors.  BUT...but, the Talisa/Robb change isn't the point to make my stand on.  There are a LOT of cited quotes for Stannis, Cersei, Dorne, etc. (multiple interviews stating point blank, "We made Cersei more sympathetic to show off that Lena Headey is capable of giving a motherly performance - and this is why we invented a child with her and Robert in Season 1")
 
Standing on shakey ground, I not only "concede" to all your points, but wholeheartedly "agree" with them. 
I'm really worried I stepped into your territory on this :) - I didn't seriously think what I wrote would stay permanently, it was more trying it out for you to read.  Test.
 
The one difference I disagree on is that we shouldn't draw any conclusion from the GRRM quote, but just present it and say "we're not sure what he meant by that". 

This is the new, more succinct, less speculative (and more humble) revision I've worked up, hopefully more neutral:  

http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?title=Talisa_Maegyr&oldid=204768
 
Edited by The Dragon Demands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the battles of the Faith Militant Uprising:

The Burning of the Sept of Remembrance hasn't been updated to show that 700 Warrior's Sons died.

There were six royalist hosts at the Battle of Stonebridge.

The Battle at the Great Fork needs to be updated to show that the result was a victory for Maegor. Also, those 6800 men from the Westerlands and Riverlands were not all knights so that needs to be changed as well. (And just where exactly is the Great Fork anyway? The Riverlands or the Crownlands?)

Shouldn't there be a page for that ambush at the Wendwater where Ser Horys Hill and his three hundred Poor Fellows died?

Edited by The Grey Wolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Regarding the battles of the Faith Militant Uprising:

The Burning of the Sept of Remembrance hasn't been updated to show that 700 Warrior's Sons died.

There were six royalist hosts at the Battle of Stonebridge.

The Battle at the Great Fork needs to be updated to show that the result was a victory for Maegor. Also, those 6800 men from the Westerlands and Riverlands were not all knights so that needs to be changed as well. (And just where exactly is the Great Fork anyway? The Riverlands or the Crownlands?)

Shouldn't there be a page for that ambush at the Wendwater where Ser Horys Hill and his three hundred Poor Fellows died?

Fixed the first three but as to the page for they ambush i will wait to see what others like @Rhaenys_Targaryen think.

I am also not sure where the great fork is but i will see what i can find out.

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

×