The ASOIAF wiki thread

[direpupy]

So the Blackwater rush has two mayor forks one in the riverlands and one in the crownlands which one is the great fork is unclear so without further information we can not make a decision on this.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

12 hours ago, The Dragon Demands said:

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". 

I've removed the quote again, as the pieces of important information from it have been incorperated into the text. Giving the entire quote (it's a long one) is not preferable imo. Martin states a few things in his quote:

1) Richard Madden is a great young actor and we want to see him on screen, thus see Robb's storyline (as opposed to following ACOK exactly, where he is entirely off screen). Martin states he agreed with this choice.

2) The second decision is changing the story, giving Robb a new motivation, changing the personality of his wife, her background, etc.,

3) because of point 2, Martin suggested to change her name, because a) Jeyne is not a volantene name, and b ) "if we're gonna have a "different character", we should have a different name for her as well. Otherwise, people are gonna get really confused."

 

These three points contain all the info that is important, as Martin's first sentence ("Literally, in the case of Jeyne Westerling/Talisa, it is a completely different character.  So that's not even, you know, 'two different versions of the same character', it's a DIFFERENT character, and a different storyline there...") contains the same info as the quote under b )., a quote which remains literally quoted in the text as it is now.

So quoting the entire thing is simply not necessary, as the information from it is worked into the text above. 

 

The only part where we don't know what he means by it is "... but also that's not a...well, I don't know I shouldn't say more about that.". In my opinion, this sentence adds nothing to the explanation of why the changes were made, and since that's what the section is explaining, that's what the information should stick too.

 

Perhaps others could weigh in on this?

 

12 hours ago, The Dragon Demands said:

I'm really worried I stepped into your territory on this

Not at all  

Edited November 30, 2017 by Rhaenys_Targaryen

[The Grey Wolf]

6 hours ago, direpupy said:

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.

Np. Glad I could help.

[The Dragon Demands]

yeah

Edited July 27, 2022 by The Dragon Demands

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

On 30-11-2017 at 5:31 AM, 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?

 

On 30-11-2017 at 0:27 PM, direpupy said:

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

 

If there's enough information to create a page on the ambush, I see no reason not to have one

[Ran]

The Great Fork is something we asked George about, but as we’ve noted the Sons of the Dragon is one of the texts where GRRM did not send his own revisions and responses to queries. So the answer is, we don’t know.

Re: Talisa article, I like the shorter length and think Rhaneys’s edits are on point.

[Nittanian]

On 11/25/2017 at 3:37 AM, Ran said:

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.

These are my thoughts as well. 

2 hours ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

If there's enough information to create a page on the ambush, I see no reason not to have one

I created an article for the ambush at the Wendwater.

[The Dragon Demands]

yeah

Edited July 27, 2022 by The Dragon Demands

[The Dragon Demands]

 

yeah

Edited July 27, 2022 by The Dragon Demands

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

22 hours ago, Nittanian said:

I created an article for the ambush at the Wendwater.

Looks good!

[zionius]

Shall inconsistencies in the arts in TWOIAF included in the errata as well? I know they are out-of-universe, but still, some might be misleading...

This post summarized most of them.

[The Wondering Wolf]

So what to do with House Parren?

The corrected version of The World of Ice and Fire states that the house was founded in the Reach, while the Citadel makes them a house of the westerlands. Now there are two possibilities: Either the Parrens were founded in the Reach and are still there, or they were founded in the Reach, but at one point they switched to the westerlands.

[Ran]

TWoIaF trumps the Citadel. GRRM originally envisioned them in the westerlands and seems to have shifted them to the Reach. I doubt this means anything more complicated than a creative decision.

[The Wondering Wolf]

On 4.12.2017 at 8:10 PM, Ran said:

TWoIaF trumps the Citadel. GRRM originally envisioned them in the westerlands and seems to have shifted them to the Reach. I doubt this means anything more complicated than a creative decision.

I guess this is the simplest solution, but then there is that quote:

His followers were largely westermen and river lords; the Lords Tarbeck, Piper, Roote, Vance, Charlton, Frey, Paege, Parren, and Westerling were amongst them, joined by Lord Corbray of the Vale, the Bastard of Barrowton, and the fourth son of the Lord of Griffin’s Roost.

The Parrens are listed among the lords from the westerlands and riverlands. If they actually were a house from the Reach, they should be mentioned in the "joined by" section.

[Ran]

Okay, I looked at it. You did not mention that the Parrens are explicitly said to have been founded in the West in TWoIaF as well! Here is the relevant text:

 

Quote

Many noble houses of the Reach trace their ancestry back to Andal adventurers given lands and wives by Garth IX, Merle I, and Gwayne V, amongst them the Ormes, Parrens, Gracefords, Cuys, Roxtons, Ufferings, Leygoods, and Varners.

and

 

Quote

 Other noble houses were also born in such unions—such as Jast, Lefford, Parren, Droxe, Marbrand, Braxe, Serrett , Sarsfield, and Kyndall.

You can reconcile these. The latter quote makes it explicit that the Parrens were founded in the West -- they were "born". The first quote, OTOH, is more loosely worded. It can mean houses that were created in the Reach, or that were established (i.e. they already existed elsewhere, and a new branch was formed in the Reach). So perhaps what we have is this: House Parren was founded in the west, and then a descedant of the House ended up in the Reach and established a cadet branch there.

That said, it's entirely possible this was an error on GRRM's part. I see from our notes we pointed out the issue but, well, no response on that one that I can find. I'll make a note to bring it up in relation to F&B's reference in "The Sons of the Dragon" and see if we can get a definitive answer as to whether the text is correct  in TWoIaF or if it needs changing.

ETA: Ugh. But I see that I corrected out the Parren reference from the West section for no earthly reason I can understand. What I should have done is drop them from the Reach section.

So, okay, we go back -- I'll ask them to put Parren back into the Westerlands section, and instead drop them from the Reach section.

Edited December 6, 2017 by Ran

[The Wondering Wolf]

That would work very well.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

I've been working on the new List of characters, and at this point I would really appreciate some feedback. (From the parts that are in the preview, only the letter J is not yet complete).

[Gonzalo]

I'm thinking of creating articles for Ned's arrest/Stark purge and for the failed Jaime rescue attempt in Clash but before going ahead with it I'd like to ask you what would be the proper article names.

[The Dragon Demands]

May be some new useful screenshots from the animated Histories & Lore featurettes this year, for stuff we don't have any images for already. I loaded up a screenshot of the Maegor/Alys Harroway marriage - though there's already artwork for things like Alys Harroway or Ellyn Reyne.

(shrug) probably more useful stuff in "Conquest and Rebellion" animated videos about the Targaryen Conquest.

[Nittanian]

A few options for Ned:

 "capture of Eddard Stark"

Quote

That was the one thing they could agree on, Bran and Rickon and Robb the Lord; they all wished Father was here. But Lord Eddard was a thousand leagues away, a captive in some dungeon, a hunted fugitive running for his life, or even dead. No one seemed to know for certain; every traveler told a different tale, each more terrifying than the last. (AGOT Bran VI)

"treason of Eddard Stark"

Quote

"And now the treason moves from words to deeds," Cersei said. "Do you think Ser Barristan stands alone, my lord?" With an ominous rasp of metal on metal, the Hound drew his longsword. The knights of the Kingsguard and twenty Lannister guardsmen in crimson cloaks moved to support him. (AGOT Eddard XIV)

---

When the raven came, bearing a letter marked with Father's own seal and written in Sansa's hand, the cruel truth seemed no less incredible. Bran would never forget the look on Robb's face as he stared at their sister's words. "She says Father conspired at treason with the king's brothers," he read. (AGOT Bran VI)

---

"Your father is a traitor, dear," Lord Varys said.

Grand Maester Pycelle lifted his ancient head. "With my own ears, I heard Lord Eddard swear to our beloved King Robert that he would protect the young princes as if they were his own sons. And yet the moment the king was dead, he called the small council together to steal Prince Joffrey's rightful throne." (AGOT Sansa IV)

"fall of Eddard Stark"

Quote

He rose, clearly uncomfortable with her touch, and walked to the hearth. Grey Wind rubbed his head against his leg. "You know … about Father?"

"Yes." The reports of Robert's sudden death and Ned's fall had frightened Catelyn more than she could say, but she would not let her son see her fear. "Lord Manderly told me when I landed at White Harbor. Have you had any word of your sisters?"

"imprisonment of Eddard Stark"

Quote

Things had gotten interesting while he'd been away, Tyrion reflected. "And what is our fearless monarch doing whilst all this 'butcher's work' is being done?" he wondered. "How has my lovely and persuasive sister gotten Robert to agree to the imprisonment of his dear friend Ned?"

---

"Perhaps I do not understand tactics and strategy … but I understand futility. We went to war when Lannister armies were ravaging the riverlands, and Ned was a prisoner, falsely accused of treason. We fought to defend ourselves, and to win my lord's freedom." (AGOT Catelyn XI)

"Fall" might be best, since it is more neutral than the pro-Lannister "treason".