continuing off the last thread, for me, that Etolia section read more of an overview, as it's describing all 3 at once (geography, climate, and touches on it's main function within the Empire, like supplying food). Otherwise, divided out, you'd be back to each section only being one sentence: climate being it has harsh winter, geography just that it's very fertile, etc.
A question about game location pages: why is the journal entry the only thing that is allowed to go under game headers? I think this section should also include other gameplay attributes, perhaps like a description of the location's layout in-game, notable loot, and interactable objects, to name a few. If it's relevant to the game, why not put it under the corresponding game header instead of the notes?
That's more to do with locations that have journal entries, which are usually kingdoms (like Temeria, Redania, etc.) and therefore shouldn't have any gameplay info beyond the journal. Is there a page you have in mind that's like this?
Ah, Kaer Morhen is a special case that I still don't know what to do about. You've probably noticed there are separate article pages for locations within the keep from Tw1. I can't remember how it was in the first game, but I feel those should be combined somehow if possible.
As for others, it should be fine to list gameplay info within its appropriate game header. The original idea was back when Juraj wished to try and switch character bios around to not have "Tw1" or "Film" separation headers but to read more like one flowing story, and that bled over to major kingdoms as they had journal entries on top of all the other lore information. But, for smaller locations (like the Royal Palace) it should be fine to list the appropriate game info in each game header (and of course, if it only appears in one game, doesn't even need a game header). One caution though, especially with Tw3, I'd refrain from listing lootable containers unless it's a location with a possible diagram spawn point.
Maybe wouldn't continue arguing with you but the way text was written by Gra's authors indicates economical description so... plus I think it makes more sense as it talks about where and what the country mainly produces. I planned to expand it with info about fishering ftom TWRPG upon return.
Also, what about the rest of what I wrote in a previous message?
@Juraj: wich part were you referring to? I thought the last message was all about the Etolia bit. And regarding that, economics is more, how do they make they money, importing/exporting, what they manufacture, etc.
@Mechemik: Studying economics + trade so I know that xD Problem's we dunno much more about Etolia so I left it as it was. Recently TWRPG came out. If I added its mentions of sea trade and unique fishing stuff (Etolian white belly fish), could it remain as "Economy"?
And no it wasn't about Etolia, only the sentence in brackets was :)
Think you mean "you" because I really don't have time to go through and fix all locations like that xD
Oh I see what you're referring to now. That one Avenger note I was shortening primarily because it's not the first time stories have used an iron maiden-esque device in such a way. I'm not sure about the journal entries though (never seen the movie so can't confirm it or if it's just another regular English idiom, like the time someone kept trying to say the "From the frying pan into the fire" was from a song when it's actually a very old English idiom).
@1857a: If you read this, there is maybe-a-bit-cheeky question waiting for you up there.
@Mechemik: OK real life took a bit longer but her I am. My main question is; why can't we have sections like Economy, People, Geography as independent as we now History for example. Wikipedia (and many other wikis) do that and it looks really good.
Hmm, guess that depends. When you say "People" what are you trying to put under that? Because I think "Demographics" would work better overall (and make it less confusing with the "Notable people" header). That said, this is what I'm thinking right now:
Yeah, I'd put religion under either culture or demographics. As for clans, those would fit perfectly under demographics (as that's what that header encompasses).
As for race field in kingoms, that's more iffy. On one hand it could get too generic (listing most major races like human, elves, dwarves, etc. making it redundant) and on the other what to do if we don't know? For example, we know Toussaint all but killed the elves off but does that necessarily mean no elves have settled down in the region ever since? (and of course we get into the citation parts again because games and books give different details).
Alright sooo Religion --> Culture, Clans --> Demographics. Good. Will you put it somewhere now as our official layout to let new people know?
Also-also-also, shouldn't geographical locations and cities/keeps etc be somehow divided?
Hmmm, yea you're right. I mainly thought of this idea because the Cianfanellis i.e. dwarves are mentioned on Skellige in The Tower of the Swallow while completely left out in the game, see?
Will try. Speaking of making notes, would you add one on skald page regarding weird translator choice in ToC? Skalds, Hrafnir among them, are said to be with Kaedwenian Army in it but someone recently told me in English translation they're just bards or some such.
What do you mean by it being part of the Kadwenian army? Like, it was meant to originally only be a position within the army itself? Because yeah, English translation just treats it like a bard (but from Skellige).
Umm, what I mean is skalds are not only these warrior-bards on Skellige but in Kaedwen as well. The problem comes with, as you yourself said, Time of Contempt translation by David French in which he mentions Hrafhir and other Kaedwenian Army skalds as bards. See what am trying to tell?
Unfortunately, bots are all down atm except those who use python scripts. The latest Wikia update back in early Aug. changed the code so AWB bots aren't working and don't know when they'll get it fixed.
@Juraj: ok looking over now. Also a few notes I saw on other pages: The Unseen Elder isn't canon :p (the year template), alps are only red hair/eyes (unless you have other references for this, bruxae were always treated in game as black hair/eyes). Also those br tags are there for a reason :p without them it causes dboule break issues in mobile (with physical braks) or no breaks at all and looks like one big word. I also relabeled Alps as creatures because while we seen some individual lesser vampires show intelligence (Vereena, Orianna, etc.) most don't appear to show such (or want to anyways).
Are you against mammoths or pages being not-overly-simplified?
He might not be canon but TW3 says a few times Conjunction happened about 1,5K years ago and since we know from BaW he was already an elder by the time he appeared in the world he must have been born before 230s Before Resurrection, right?
Adding those tags, just have one problem. Sometimes when I publish an edit, stuff like refs or galleries disappears. Ideas? It's really frustrating :/
Alps arent lesser. The book clearly states that alps, bruxae, katakans, nosferats, higher vampires, and mulas are highly intelligent (higher vampires possibly even more than elves, gnomes, and humans). Alps also appear in another Sapko book, Narrenturm, which isn't part of the Witcher but my point is they are a truly distinct and wise race in it. We do include goblins and trolls, why not these vampiric races? Ekimmas and fleders are clearly animals that am not going to argue about but those above...
Yeah, but the idea is to treat the year template by what page it's on. As the games themselves tend to mess up timelines, it's better to put game related years/guesses pointing towards the game timeline, especially when we don't actually known what the game timeline looked like. But honestly I'd rather not put guesses/assumptions in infoboxes.
I don't know why it does that weird tag issue to be honest. I've been trying to figure out a fix myself and it's just... not working >__<
Ah, that's a stickler. May have to keep them under both race and creature then because the game treats them more like creatues. As for why trolls as a race, we already discussed that (while they have the mindset of children, they do show some mild intelligence and can communicate with other races). In the games, bruxae/alps are treated more like stereotypical monsters: attacking without being able to reason with them.
Also, a bit of a conundrum and wanted to see what you thought: I'm trying to add the card icons for all the gwent cards but ran into a problem. The original idea was that by doing so, I'd then replace all the gwent card list pages with DPLs to both cut down on page size and to keep information consistent across all the lists as they'd pull from the same pages. However, I changed to code a bit so one just had to add a word into the infobox for the correct icon to show as there are 6 different deck colors and 9 different cards, making it easier for editors to show the correct one. However, I realized the way DPL is set up, this won't work for mixed deck lists (like close combat). So the way I see it there are two options: we separate out the lists by deck (so some pages could have up to 6 headers/tables but may only have 2 cards in each table) or just force people to put the full file name into the infobox to make the icon appear correctly in mixed tables. Thoughts?
Alright. Got'ya. I'll try to steer clear from any assumptions.
Meh, okay. I could live with "Creatures" and "Races" even though, shouldn't the books take precedence? What CDPR had done with this isn't really good and we should be careful to not enforce its canonicity or whatever. Think the better idea is to go by Sapkowski for who vampiric races (i.e. intelligent ones) are katakans, mulas, nosferats, alps, bruxae and higher vampires while vampiric monsters are fleders and ekimmas. Please?
I'd probably go for the B option. After first reading those sentences it seemed liked the worse choice but come to think of it again, this option is in fact simpler and keeps pages from getting (can't believe to write such words) too complex.
Well, it's not so much about canon with categories here but rather to show what creatures/monsters are in each game (that is, if anyone even looks at those categories. They really need to be cleaned up).
Yeah, I was afraid of that too :/ B would be more work initially but would rather go with that than separate tables on one page.
I'm confused, I thought the idea with the race template/category was to ues information from the books/canon as the games treat most of them as little more than beasts, otherwise it's just repeating information from the games section O.o
Umm yeah true but then you have Hubert Rejk and the Fuck-Off Sewer Katakan who are both pretty much as Sapkowski would probably want katakans -- intelligent vampires who hide as humans. What do you propose?
I consider that too drastic, especially because of the age info which really is on pont. If higher vampires can live up to 6 hundred years and likely more then it makes perfect sense for katakans to live 220 at minimum.
But come on! Considering the longevity of vampires as a whole, this is more than likely true for books. Or something along similar lines. I mean the only thing we maybe are repeating is appearance description AFAICS.
PS: Know this might be a bit stretched but the vampire tongue is in books mentioned as "Vampire language" once and then "Speech of vampires" another time, and not "Vampire Speech" so maybe it should be moved to one of those?
Actually, we don't know the longevity of vampires in the Witcher lore canon wise except from what Regis reveals about himself (as a higher vampire). I know it's rather difficult keeping general supernatural lore out there separate from specific fictional worlds (for one thing, I'm pretty sure Regis doesn't sparkle :p )
As for vampire language, I don't think there was one specific word to describe it. Honestly I prefer "language" in general over "speech" but that's because I'm used to referring to a particular tongue one speaks in as "language" and not "speech" (I don't know speech means for you, but generally here it means more along the lines of sound/pronounciation).
Yup that is canon as hell xD I actually think there was an interview where Sapkowski confirmed all of his vampires are meant to be long-living but I can't seem to find it and my honest word will hardly suffice you heh :P
Same here, speech is the spoken word that comes with the sound or the way someone says something (dialects, accents etc.). We in Slovakia usually use the word equivalent for a tongue ("jazyk") when referring to some language (like for example "Slovenský jazyk" literally means "Slovak tongue" but translates as "Slovak language"). What about "Vampire language" then?
@1857a: btw, I got something working for that empy space issue, though still working out the small parts, but let me know if it works for you. Just need to make sure you list the ingredient, file link, and amount for each one. Header defaults to "Crafting Requirements" but if you want to use it for dismantle you can, just put header as "dismantle". Let me know if you notice any weird issues with it like odd empty spaces (I think I fixed it but only tested it out a few times so far).
So I was on deviantart looking at Witcher stuff when I saw some brilliant face shots of Several Witcher characters I'd like to add them to the character pages but I don't want to violate rules in the process. Thoughts?
Hi Ragnockae: because we're the official wiki and tend to show up first in search results, we decided to only use official artwork for the Witcher series to prevent any confusion over what was official and to not give any preference over particular artists.
The important thing to keep in mind here is that we like to focus on facts and not add speculation. For example, for awhile people were trying (and still trying) to guess which school Coen was part of, but the only evidence in the books is that he was from Poviss, and now witcher schools are mentioned exactly where they are in the books besides the Wolf School, so we purposely don't fill that in. Likewise, even if you 90% believe the Griffin school is in say, Zerrikania, we don't add such to the page because we have no firm information to back it up. You'll also see there's a lot of contradictory information between the books, games, and even later information from the author. When this happens, we typically go by the latest book information (making a note of the discrepancy) and not to treat game info as canon unless it's a game only character.
That's probably a lot I just stated, so if you just need us to verify something, feel free to ask :)
Yeah I get that, you guys said it yourself it's the official wiki, and unless an in game or in-book character implies or states a theory about the let's say the griffin school it's more than likely not going to be shown here. If it does it'd like be in the trivia section
And before I forget, A friend of mine asked me if I knew the name of a certain quest. I searched various key words but found nothing. He explained that he belived a character in the quest was a prostitute, but I have found no evidence of what he described.
His exact words where that Geralt stated the following "Turns out it Really Was his Sister." He then said the women asked Geralt to tell her more "Upstairs"
He couldn't say but said in regards to graphics and a location it was likely witcher 3, simply because it appeared to be in Novigrad. I did a check on his search history and found it likely was novigrad. It was in definitely Witcher 3 because of the Quality. I believe that it was in a tavern. I've been to every brothel in the third trying to find it and it didn’t match any in the rooms I've scene
@mechemik keep reverting my updates to the wikia and replaces with outdates images and descriptions. What is the point of updating wikia if someone just "reverts" changes without actually checking what was written/added?
I took mytime to tripple check everything and after all the work I did someone simply clicks a single button to delete all the work I did without an explanation?
First, if you have a problem with someone, speak with them first. Second, your edits got reverted on the abilities page because 1) it didn't add any info that wasn't already stated and 2) you recently removed not only the only video there but interwiki links.
As for the edits on the mutagens page, unfortunately I did accidentally revert some useful info which I tried to add back into it but shortened down some.
What is the point of talking to someone who uses revert instead of edit? And pictures I added are updated one that are used it game version 1.31 (The ones used before were patched in 1.21 I believe).
And I did message you in comments but you decided to delete my message...
Ah, in that case, please use what we already have on file. Whenever possible, we like to use the actual game icons themselves (most should already be on file here) than posting screenshots (unless of course the screenshot is to show the UI), thanks!
Whoops, didn't see the edited note: in future, please comment on someone's message wall and not in a comment section of an article. I just by chance saw it but otherwise it'd have gone unnoticed for awhile, that's why we have message walls :)
We like to keep the "original" on file just to show people what happened to it and why but they should only be in use now on individual mutagen pages (like if you look at red mutagen, there's a patch 1.08 and the original in the infobox). If you find any other pages using the wrong icon though, feel free to change it.
Indeed. So I was reading The World of the Witcher and realized it mentions the Alba valley realm was originally a small kingdom of Nilfgaard and this is repeated thrice in the book. Sooo sometime long ago Nilfgaard was ruled by kings. Then we also have mentions of the Senate and then finally Emperors.
The Kingdom of Nilfgaard → Nilfgaardian Republic → Nilfgaardian Empire
Hmm, reminds me of the political development of a certain ancient state on Apennine :P
Also, if you're interested, I'd suggest keeping an eye on news going on Fallout/Nukapedia page. I know they've been one of the biggest voices against the videos being added by Wikia since inception and there's serious talk about them forking off to create their own. Depending how their talk goes with the CEO, it might be something to keep an eye on for future direction of all wikia communities.
Sup, everyone. In Chrome (and maybe other browsers), there's a bit of a visual annoyance with Template:Infobox Item3 whereby a bracket of the "Component(s)" field is pushed onto a second line, like this:
However, in Firefox it looks fine.
Also, I was thinking we should maybe have a "Dismantle" section in this infobox where all the components a thing dismantles to can be listed. What do you think?
@Mechemik: Wow the situation really seems dire as far as they are concerned. I mean even Kotaku wrote an article on the situation. Thx for letting me know. I'll be occasionally checking up to see how they are progressing.
@Bizippo: Looked through and through but, unfortunately, nothing. There is, however, one interesting bit in Sapkowski's Genealogies.
@Bizippo: Some Nordling kingdoms had fought against Nilfgaard even before 1239 when the Northern Wars started. Particularly Metinna in around 1180s or 1190s. Crispin fought in that war along with other noble-born mercenaries grouped in their free company side by side with Metinnese.
Well, the idea is to put everything chronologically so that template can be used xD (as right now, everything in the books happens before the games with the exception of that one small scene at the end of SoS).
Well, the idea is to put everything chronologically so that template can be used xD (as right now, everything in the books happens before the games with the exception of that one small scene at the end of SoS).
Yeah but after history section there is society, names and such. So what? All those things would be non canon you know.
Eh, I just don't want the page being cluttered up too much with it, especially if it's jut a few sentences between the notices like "game canon" then war happened in 1272 "end game canon" and then used again a short time later.
You'll be surprised. Back when I was fixing the spoiler banner, the spoiler tag used to look like the canon one and they were everywhere. That, combined with people spoiling things in the comments, lead to just a plain Spoiler banner at the top instead of throughout the page xD
Something like "using the Kingslayers to kill off Demavend and Foltest, Nilfgaard sowed more chaos..." etc. instead of "Letho snuck aboard Demavend's ship and killed X, Y, and Z before decapitating the king. Later on, he disguised himself in the villa and killed Foltest, pinning it on Geralt..".
@Bizippo: Sorry I only just now returned home so those suggestions will have to wait. Once again, sorry.
@Mechemik: Could you get a better screenshot of Novigradian gates? Ones from the Prima Guide are fine but small and the those I took all the way back are really bad in comparison to things you can take with Ansel. PLUS: Regarding you note on the First Northern War article, it started for Nilfgaardians in 1239 because that's when they managed to annex Ebbing and after that progressed by conquering Metinna, Nazair, Maecht and finally Cintra in the 1260s.
That's not what I meant by the years. The books don't actually state what fell when, only that it started in 1239. We don't even know if the war before Emhyr took over had a different name (I'd think that it did though).
Umm it didn't, not for Nilfgaardians at least. Emhyr took over in 1257 so for Nilfgaardian historics the First War was already going on for 18 years. The Usurper annexed Ebbing shortly after his coup d'etat, in 1239 and while we don't know when exactly he conquered Metinna and Nazair, we know he defeated Maecht in the 1250s. What more do you need?
First off, there needs to be references then (especially as we keep citing 1239 as the year Ebbing fell, but I'm not seeing this mentioned anywhere in the books). Also, the books don't actually name the wars like "War I" "War II" etc. from what I can remember, instead grouping them all under "Northern Wars". Combined with them being called "uprisings" as well rather than "wars" with those kingdoms they conquered, I'm inclined to think they were under a different name and grouped in with Northern Wars or something else happened (plus it's very rare for a war to last 30 some years, especially over multiple rulers).
There's a quest item called "Wooden amulet" in TW3 under the ID "q103_talisman" with a unique inventory icon. Has anyone ever seen it in normal gameplay, or is it an unused thing? The item ID suggests it is (or was meant to be) used in Family Matters.
Btw, where do you get inventory icons from? I've only recently started unpacking game files, so I don't know a great deal about this stuff.
I used a lua file that others set up to extract all image files from the game.
And yes, it's likely the wooden amulet was removed from gameplay. If it's a 3-pronged looking thing, I believe it was supposed to be the original talisman (like the mark on Anna's hand) but then later replaced with the circular thing we see in game.
If you're going to add images, keep in mind the developers used (presumably) stand-in images, especially for items that didn't quite make it into the game, so be sure to look over those images on file first before adding anything.
You can calculate 1239 as being the year when Ebbing was annexed from what Vysogota says to Ciri about his life. Also even if you were right and that war had a different name, which is very likely, it still is grouped in the Northern Wars and those begun then, in 1239, when the Usurper reigned.
@Juraj: that's the problem. At least in my book, I can't actually find where Vysogota mentions a year, nevertheless when Ebbing actually fell. To summarize, he merely says he was banished (during the Usurper's time) ended up in Ebbing (then independent) and it later fell and thus back in the Empire again. Nowhere does he actually state the year. For all we know, the war could have started in 1239 but Ebbing may not have fell until a year, 2 years, 5, etc. later by that information.
@Bizippo: nah, all the information we know works just being on The Toad Prince page.
No because that can be changed fairly easily (especially to cut down on a long file name). You need to actually add file information to the image and make sure the right license is added to it to clarify it's copyrighted.
For instance this one. It's showing it's over 1,000 pixels in both height/width and over 1MB in file size, but the artist's page itself it's barely 150 KB and only 500x800 (not to mention a different file format).
@Bizippo: Do you plan to upload the rest of Czech pictures too? IMO most of them look way better than Russian, at least when it comes to faces :D Also please revert the last edit on Witch hunts, I cant right now. Am on mobile and you know how destructively that could end right? xDD
@Mechemik: Fair point, but Ebbing wasn't conquered. The kingdom was included/annexed (specifically these two words are used) by Nilfgaard in more or less peaceful political way so it had to take place in one year, spanning through several days at best.
@Juraj I'd love too, but I don’t have them. Do you know where I can find them? Anyway these Russian ones are awesome in my opinion. I think that Sapko imagined Geralt and Ciri more that way while he was writing rather than game versions.
It conflicts the canon info from The Lady of the Lake. Sheala died during Witch hunts, Phillipa was tortured to death by Willemer, Fringilla surely wasn't only imprisoned since she's called martyr centuries later...
I didn't. Those are albums you have to click on and then you'll see all those images ;)
You're seeing it differently: of course eveyrone has biological sperm/egg donors, but nothing says they're actually around in the people's life (like why Angouleme's page doesn't list a father beause it's indicated he was never in her life, and her own mother only for a short time).
Actually, nowhere in the book does it mention that weapon (horeseman pick) you put down for Andres, that was why it was removed. In fact, the only indicator I found of a one time he used a weapon was a war hammer.
In English, not so much xD Or rather, we keep it simple: just say war hammer, especially since that's what the book uses (and while it's a subset of war hammer, it could mean there are some differences between the weapons).
I told you, I didn't even know what that was and it wasn't mentioned at all in the books xD It's like if someone puts down "mule" when they meant "horse": mule may be in the family of horse but still pretty distinct.
Do we really need to have the Abilities field in the infobox? It maybe does make sense for the witchers but seems silly for mages who usually just have magic in it (and am like "no sh*t, really?") or knights and other kinds of warriors with swordsmanship and horsemanship etc. etc.
Yeah, that mage one with "magic" annoys me so much as well. I keep trying to fix them to just put what's not obvious (like wouldn't guess originally Renfri is skilled at swordsplay having been a princess). Unfortunately I think it's like fighting an uphill battle :/
Like now, am reworking Anseis' and questioning myself if it's even worth it to keep those horsemanship and swordsmanship things there. I mean almost every other Medieval princeling had to be skilled in these matters even if they weren't heirs...
Hard to tell without context. If I had to guess, the first one might be when Cahir, Geralt, and Angouleme visit the first mine and Geralt got tired of the run arounds, but it doesn't really look like him.
Yeah one more thing regarding Anseis (though it concerns Delwyn as well): He is indirectly mentioned in the Blood of Elves (in Delwyn's case, comic) not by name but as Meve's son. Can I put it into box?
@Juraj: I forgot, is he mentioned or are both sons of Meve mentioned in it?
@Bizippo: this is why it's easier just to name it by book and what's going on than character names unless you're sure xD Also, regardless the questionable age of Ciri, you should know girls/women tend to hit their adult height early, around 15, so that is more than likely Ciri's adult height as well.
@Mechemik: Both of them. When kings talk about possible suitors for Ciri, the Princess of Cintra and thus the new king there once they would conquer it. Meve, however, tells they are both stupid and not really suitable.
Actually, from what I've seen trying to look into it extensively, the newer icon is supposed to be that more cartoonish looking one but some reason (like my own game) it still shows the original despite a supposed later fix in 1.22, which is why I made the note that some games still show the original rather than the updated version. (see also this thread). Unfortunately when I try to use time stamps on various videos, I can't tell because of the bug issue that effected some from not seeing the newer icon so I can't tell which one was new/old.
Edit: better idea, can anyone else confirm which one is supposed to be the original and the new? I started after the major patches so :/
Thing is, though, in many let's plays that came out before Patch 1.08, you see the icons that are currently labelled "Patch 1.08", while in my own game and all recent Witcher videos that I've seen (on the newest version of the game) the "Original" icon appears. I have never once seen a case where the mutagen labelling we have on this wiki matches what is displayed in-game.
E.g. on this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzNyVI26H5A) @43:19 the "new" mutagen icon appears, even though the video came out on the day the game was released. However, patch 1.08 came out on August 7th, 2015, almost three months after the video.
See, that's where I was getting confused because I've seen videos made after 1.08 that were still showing the cartoony icons. But now that you mention it, I can't find any that show the realistic ones before 1.08 so they might have been effected by the bug that was fixed in 1.22.
Another Anséis thing: how do you feel about him being in a Category:Knights and as a Profession:Knight? I'd love to remove that too (after all we don't list King Coram II, famed participant of knightly tourneys, as such).
For Anseis I think it's fine. The only time I don't like using it is for those with questionable backgrounds, like the Fallen Knights. They might have "knight" in their title but sure don't act anything like one should.
But we have to be consistent right? Because we don't call Anseis' distant relative, King Coram II of Cintra, a knight despite the fact that he partook in several chivalric tournaments. See what am saying?
That's true. I mean, if you remember that passage from the Blood of Elves, she seems pretty meh about giving the throne to either of them. How was it? That they are both as stupid as their father or smth like that? xD
PS: While searching, I stumbled upon some concepts for the Netflix Series (showed at a private presentation in Poland, someone made photos). One shows Geralt in The Fox Tavern and another as he passes through some Vizima gate. Interesting stuff...
Right? I can't wait to see all these amazing places like Novigrad or Vizima in the show.
As for Gwent talk -- alright, no problem.
My only fear for that show is that it will be a bit too "family friendly" if you know what I mean. There are a lot of "hard themes" in the saga that I'm afraid they will be censored or not shown at all.
@Bizippo: You need not worry, the showrunner confirmed on her Twitter that she won't water it down and that the series will be full on 18+ with all the brutality (and politics and sex ofc) you know from the Saga ;)
@Mechemik: There's one more thing before I get Anseis done. Also, you really have no opinion on those concepts? I don't want to push you but would like to know your opinion as well :)
@Mechemik: Haha yea me too. Coming back to Anséis, I had a quick read through the Genealogy looking for all things Lyrian Royalty and came to one thing. Why isn't there "unknown number of children", "at least one children" or smth like that in Ceran and Impecca infoboxes? The entry about Coram I states directly that their offsprings ruled Lyria after them... And of course, Meve and Calanthe were distant cousins so that's that.
1) you never mentioned that you were adding images from the Russian site and 2) did you actually check to make sure they weren't modified in any way? We've already discussed this before that we need to be careful adding images from them because they tend to modify game files and images (like the COAs they tried to add I knew were darkened from the original game files I have).
Those screens weren't modified as far as I know. The guy who uploaded them here and usually changes his files (Лентяй 200) wasn't the one who originally took them (TreTreTre). As for COAs, I have never seen originals and didn't notice they were changed as well. Could you upload them then? They are slightly different than the family/kingdom versions we use and I think it's intentional...
Also: Please accept my sincere apology. Both for not letting you known and being a little too offensive while starting this debate. Had a bad day today but didn't mean to affect you by the fact. Sorry :/
I've uploaded ones that we don't have creations of yet (the ones that actually look like shields). I'd rather keep COAs consistent across the wiki, so if the ones used in the games are similar to the ones we already have on file, I just use the one on file.
Ummm, yeah, right that does make sense. And what about that infobox picture (now that you know it's not modified)? I mean if you can get a better one, am all for it. You see both me and Bizippo agreed on the box should have him helmet-less. Speaking of Bizippo: what was wrong with an audioquote?