Sorry to bother you, but I personally believe Mechemik is abusing his power as an Admin, at least in terms of forcing his opinion on an edit that was made in good faith, with seemingly no justifiable reason. He hasn't used any Admin tools in this per se, but I do feel that his Bureaucrat and Admin title gives his opinion more weight on edits (especially when he's forcing it), even though it's really not supposed to according to the terms of the site. Rather than continuing to engage in petty squabbles over it, I've chosen to refrain from making any further edits to the site, as I wish to avoid this type of madness in the future, and this type of thing usually has a tendency to repeat itself.
I'm not looking for any sort of resolution in this matter, I just want to bring it to your attention in case this does happen with someone else.
My name's Chris and I'm a Fandom Wiki Manager as part of the Movies/TV vertical.
I am currently redeveloping Netflix Wiki to be the go-to place for all things Netflix. We want to feature all the Netflix Original shows and be the place to go for fans of Netflix to find out about the shows they love.
The best bit? We are actively encouraging these users to visit other wikis about that content, including this one. Our detailed The Witcher article links to this wiki extensively in the infobox and main article body, encouraging users to find out more about the show.
What I've been doing is "Gwent cardart [FACTION] cardname" so if it's nilfgaard it's "Gwent nilfgaard cardname". If we don't know the faction for now I use "unknown" as a placeholder until we learn it.
On a separate note, I feel we need to better define who goes into the "criminal" category. If we're going by simply being affiliated with a gang, regardless of what the character actually does (like accounting) it gets into a very gray area as by extension, almost all unscrupulous characters in the books could be labeled a criminal even if all they did was alter the books, paid underhand, etc. rather than outright stealing, killing, etc.
Gwent tags/categories are iffy, especially as they don't really go into detail how/why it happened and they sometimes change them (like how they changed Gaunter's tags) so it's not really reliable without some lore from them to at least give us background information.
@SMiki in regards to a comment on Geralt's page, do you know where the 1230s date came from? As far as I recall we never knew when Geralt was roughly born, and there's no reference on the page for that.
Also, a minor thing I noticed, Gardik/Gardic appears to use the c spelling in the third game (part of a map description) so seems both are acceptable for it now in English.
That's more tricky. The reason we were able to do the Gwent page that way is because we got permission from them to do so and it was the official font. That is a fan made font and borders too much on copyright permission issues (that is, Netflix, not the fan who created it).
They are tired, I suppose :P But I guess they will upload the rest when there will be a time to introduce the 6th leader.
btw, what's the conclusion for pagenames of characters whose first names are unknown, only surnames and titles? (See La Guevre discussion.) IMHO it would be better to include titles in these cases as most other articles about characters without first names use them (Prince Voorhis, Baron of Casadei etc.) The only character aside la Guevre guy who does not follow this pattern is Broinne, who should be imho renamed "Count (of) Broinne" too, as Broinne is also a name of his county and having him named simply "Broinne" is confusing.
Yeah... yeah it can remain with titles in name. That's how it was then agreed, back in the discussion Mechemik refers too (I just kinda forgot about it altogether). However I'd like to avoid it in case where it isn't neccessary, like the case with Stennis when we had him as Prince Stennis for a really long time.
@Bizippo might have a slight problem. While checking on card info, I came across this thread on the forums and while not official per se, it notes there's a few cards that can be cross factions (can be used in 2 different factions). Not sure how you want to input that information now for the mentioned cards.
Nah, I haven't touched Kovir yet. I'll upload vector images after I have them done, but I don't have time to do all at once. As for the changes I think these new versions can stay until I do mine. The new unicorn does not really fit the aesthetical style of the other meubles but in low resolution it is ok.
Also, I'm adding a switch function to the file information template to try and make it easier to link out to an artist's page (usually ArtStation). It only works if it'a s single artist/author, but as long as their name is added, it should link it out. No more manual linking! (for the most part)
The TV series is much closer to canon and is closer to Sapkowski himself (he’s part of the team behind so I’m definitely of the opinion that, whenever possible, we should use primarily images from the series.
Except that throws everything into limbo with the games and how some characters are recognized. You could say at that point it's best to just use the book illustrations instead as those are directly from his books and therefore definitely backed by him.
Nope, because game images look more realistic than book illustrations. And really? Are we going to keep on pushing game portrayals just because majority of the community came her through The Witcher 3 and would not recognize, let’s say, natural-colored dryads or beard-less, chainmail-less Geralt? Sorry but that’s ridiculous. We’re The Witcher Wiki, not The Witcher Games Universe Wiki or smth like it.
Except you're pushing for one concept that generally isn't recognized by the wider audience (not to mention Netflix is a paid service, so only those who buy the subscription would even recognize the images from it). By that regard, we'd be replacing every character's page with Netflix images which really isn't practical considering Netflix only makes up a small portion of the Witcher world. Gwent has more of the pie than Netflix (and goes hand in hand with the main games).
Games aren’t a sorta “paid service”, right? :P As for recognizability — wow, such a surprise that stills from an as-of-yet unreleased show are much less known to wider fanbase than screens from imensely successful and several-years-out game (the one that undoubtedly basically brought fresh live into the franchise).
So this is it, your final standing — even if the show comes out you’ll still be prefering GWENT images and games’ renders and screenshots over canon-based, real photos (well, screens, but you know...) from Netflix’s Witcher?
Except the games are one payment: I pay one set price for the game and it's done, I don't have to keep paying every month just to keep access to it and play everytime like Netflix's model :p (not too familiar with their original series, but I'm fairly certain they don't release them out to buy as a one time deal, would go against their subscription model).
And yes, I far prefer Gwent images over shows. Now if Netflix were to come out with their own set of games that got a lot of hype as well that could be considered.
Am I reading right? Do my eyes see right? “If Netflix makes games that get hyped it could be considered”? This pains my so much, dear Mechemik. I understand your fear of images from Netflix not being as instantly recognizable, but seeing how much you’re supporting that we remain with CDPR’s portrayals (as unfaithul as redhead Triss, green dryads, bearded Geralt, brown-haired Dandelion... and so on and so forth) instead of using what Netflix gives — I no longer even know what to tell you :/
Well I gave you the choice of the book illustrations but you said no to that :p
Plus it's not about game specific, it's more about who makes up the wider audience. As much as you don't want to see it that way, CDPR holds a good portion of that pie, with their 3 main games, Gwent, and the minor games they released. While Netflix has been building up hype, it still only has a small portion of that pie compared to CDPR.
I object to base our choices on "popularity" instead of canonicity. Popularity changes (as even you recognized when agreed to replace TW1 models with cardart in some infoboxes) while the canon remains: I remind you that we have even sorted Timeline page into categories to avoid confusion.
For me, sticking to author's descriptions whenever possible would be ideal. That's why I push WGW or Netflix dryad, that's why I'll strongly object to use Netflix image on Thanedd page.
Ok, here's my proposition. Lore articles, such as races or places, should have (at least primary though I'd prefer sole) images which are most true to books: hence Komarkova's Thanedd and Netflix dryad. For pages where recognizability matters a bit more, the characters, I vote on having an image from both main adaptations. Ideally when sorted by canonicity as well (so Geralt'd have beard-less Netflix image as primary but Fringila Vigo her game variant). It's necessary that we are neutral in this ground, being a sockpuppet for neither CD Projekt or Netflix.
If you're that focused on just having canonity, we do have quite a few images already of a beardless Geralt like: this, or this, or even this (ok that last one was thrown in for fun :p ). Also, players can easily create a beardless Geralt in game so why not an image of that? So you'll have to explain why Netflix should get more priority if you don't want to be a sockpuppet for one particular company. Is it simply because you think Netflix's is "better" and in what regard? Or is is because you just prefer realistic images (I'm actually thrown off by having realistic images as it creates such a juxtaposition).
It's not that, I'm trying to figure out why you want to stick so much with Netflx images when we have other images (not all by CDPR) tha also have a canon Geralt image (like the book covers... although I think it's safe to say nobody likes that one xD ) comics, the other TV series, etc.
In the end though, I think the best compromise is to have it set as a gallery style in the infobox and include from all major areas like "books", "games", and "TV".
You mentioned the popularity hence I proposed to use images from both Netflix and TW3 in Geralt's article - they are the newest high-tier adaptations, so I've assumed you'd prefer them. For me the image from comics or even old Polish TV series would be fine as I don't care on popularity too much, preferring sticking to the canon descriptions whenever possible (that's why I used to object restricting fan-art policies some years ago).
Ok that's fine then, I can agree about going with the newer adaptions. The other issue is we really do need to stick with a standard style of which image comes first. Don't like the idea of it going "games" then "TV" on one page and another going "TV" then "games" or "TV" and "books", etc.
I’ve one big NO towards having multiple images in infoboxes (“gallery” style, as you deem it). It’s totally unecessary and helps nothing with the exception of having a compromise — which is, in this case, not what we need imho. We need solution.
And uhm yea let’s not get ourselves as far as using old TV series images. Just no xD
We already do gallery style anyways in infoboxes with ones like vampires, humans, Vincent, etc. so why not for all major adaptions? Not saying it has to include of say "here's Geralt shirtless" "here's Geralt with armor" "here's Geralt with a shirt" but just one image for each major adaption like books, games, and TV series (and no, not one of each individual book, game, TV, but just them grouped into one section). I feel that's a nice compromise as it can cater to all the usual readers: those who read the books first, those who played one of the games, and those introduced to the series through Netflix.
It’s different with, let’s go with your examples, Vincent and vampires because they do have different forms in which they look widely different and have different abilities/traits. However books, games, comics and now Netflix portray the same Geralt or same Eist Tuirseach or other character/race/army/city... in its intended look. The difference stems from differences in imaginations, see what I mean?
I am actually fine with using two images in character infoboxes (or three in cases where both adaptations suck - I'm looking at you black-haired/elderly Calanthe). However, articles about races and places are less popular so in these cases I vote for picking the most faithful images as there is lesser need to represent popular adaptations (people visit these to learn lore, not to check which character is which).
I think the problem there lies in different adaptions. I'm ok with using Netflix images if needed but I still feel for ones that are portrayed differently in other areas to use those as well. So for example, most of the races wouldn't bother with (I mean, humans are just... human looking? As are unicorns, unless they some reason decide to drastically change that for whatever reason) but for those like dryads, to include both adaptions.
She might still not be green though? I mean, to me it looks like the lightning gives her that feeling but what do I know.
Alright, even if we pretend/go with the “fact” that it’s a warpaint it still doesn’t resolve our infobox thing. Like my idea is to replace TW3 Geralt render with Henry Cavill’s Geralt cut-out. Same for characters like Vizimir, Foltest, Eist etc. when we get them...
Talking about dryads, may I recall that "they are known for their amazing archery skills", so that view in the TV show of all these dryads with a spear in hand is a complete bullshit. If you want to take a picture from the TV show, at least take a picture of a dryad with a BOW !
You could tell the cut-outs weren't cut out well (harsh lines in some areas, background still apearing in others) and when trying to combine with another cutout with entirely dfferent lighting, it doesn't work well. At least the group photos you can see a mix of them all in one photo, same lighting, and not roughly cut edges. I mean, if you're that particular I can try to take an image with not such drastic lighting if that's what's throwing you off xD
I mean, either we use images depicting only figures (like the cuts you've deleted), either decent "natural" images like cardarts or TV shots. These group photos used everywhere are just unnatural, the characters seem like they are posing to photos, the models seem model-ish -- do not fit the universe's climate at all.
If you're going to upload the higher qualify ones make sure to copy over the categories and file information template (you dropped some that had added links to the art being actually uploaded on the artist's site)
@Juraj: my main issue is unless it's done well (like Geralt's or Ciri's) it looks haphazardous and honestly, unless you're willing to spend hours doing a single cutout (hair especially can take forever, and longer if the model's not on a solid background) it's better to just go with cardart/concepts, in-game shots, tv images, etc.
So they should be reworked. But I bet Mechemik would be very angry if I replace current images in Dryad article with the only "population" images of dryads avaible, that is from one of the TV series :P
What’s awesomely amazing is that we actually do! It’s during the aftermath of Bran feast when Lugos’ son lies death and the Madman would probably smash Crach’s head then and there if not for Donar’s elder voice of reason.
Good to hear that + yeah, I feel with you. Been quite busy this past month too but finally getting the free time. By the way, technically speaking, shouldn’t Languages article be moved to Language? For easier linking and consistency (as most articles are singular)
Speeking of languages, I don't really see a reason to have older and newer languages pages - I don't recall such terms from neither books or games, not to mention that it'd be easier to keep it just in the main language article.
Yes but we don't know if that's the actual name for it. Personally doubt it as quite a few locations are referred to informally like that. Though wonder if it was large enough to have a formal name once like the other clans' seats?
It's conjectural in the sense like how we sometimes give directions, especially in rural areas we sometimes go "take a left at the blue house with roses, then go straight until you reach that really ugly tree" etc. you get the idea :) And it happens in the game a lot too, where sometimes a place is simply referred to as "ruins" or such.
@Bizippo wouldn't be more clear to group only provinces in "Nilfgaardian Empire" category, and the towns to go under "Nazair", "Geso" etc? Especially since most of them was only incorporated into the Empire in the 13th century
Btw, seems that there is some uploading problem. Have tried do send new version of File:Skins Unseen Elder front.png but after long waiting there is a white page with "I/O error (send request)" message
Speaking of mistranslations: I'm even more furious towards them after I learned that Calanthe will have dark hair in the show because of the translation xD Fck that, no single adaptation portrayed her right
Well that particular part is debatable as we couldn't tell if that was made up by the villagers or actually had some merit (if we go based on Geralt's comments, it's made up). That said I created a separate redirect "Imp (race)" to go to Griggs.
IMO her half-elven backstory can still work, she’s never stated to be a daughter of two humans. To make her Vengerberg heroism and change into White Rayla work, I advise you to just assume she disagreed with Meve in Mahakam and left her there. That’s the only way to work it into canon.
The other possibilities of her story can be noted in notes. Check out how I did it on Siegfried of Denesle when CDPR revealed his Grand Master path is canon.
@Mechemik Miki and I wanted to do one thing but I see it will probably first have to be discussed with you; moving of berserker to werebear. Here's why:
Werebear is the canon name (appearing in SoS)
Berserker is a term used only on Skellige and, as in TTotS, even there it isn't reserved for therianthropic warriors but can also mean imposing bearded and heavily armored raiders while *Werebear is more recognized in the world as a whole and Skelligers use this name too (in Tw3 random peasents sometimes shout at you and ask about werebears at Kaer Trolde)
Werebear flows better with the rest of therianthropes
Alright, I understand your argument and "Guard (mage)" would be good.
In case of the Operator, well yes "the" is used because it isn’t his name. However TWBA had him as just "Operator", TW2 journal entry and label above him too (Im playing it right now) and so does the GWENT card. We also don’t have Queen of the Night with the in title, even though it appears before her "name" often.
@Mechemik do you believe you could get some nice cut-out of those mermaids from Novigradian Bathhouse fresco? I tried but, eh, it wasn't looking any good. I think it would be a nice picture for merpeople's racebox (as it'd be better to avoid using Sh'eenaz all over the place heheh).
I'd rather not bother with cutouts of it, Sh'eenaz is fine for now. I do prefer color artwork personally though I thik we're running out of that for dryads (as want to stay away from the well known characters, like Morenn).
That's not her model though (the model is in the gallery). That's her journal entry, which we've been consistent about for all characters that only appear in 1 game or are relatively minor (like obviously Shani, Yen, Ciri, Geralt, etc. get higher qualify images than the standard journals, which are put in the appropriate area wher each game's journal entry anyways).
@Mechemik I was thinking about this a little and don't see any reason why we shouldn't (but it's gonna take a few minuts so I understand if you've no time): could you create the link-shortcut templates for comics as well (like RoS for Reason of State, MZ for Mniejsze zło etc.) and then do a bot-moving? THX in advance
Well the main reason we do those is if the 1) we link to that page a lot and 2) is going to be used a lot. I don't really see a reason to create one for every comic because with that theory in mind, it'd be like creating one for every hexer episode. It'd be better off using a switch template at that point but still not sure as again, we rarely link to them :/
Currently not so rarely as Miki and I are adding characters and lore from them. I also believe it'd be much more neat to simply have them like that, maybe even those not used so much. As for episodes comparison, well, not really. Having a template for every comic issue would be like having one for every hexer episode.
Not really, especially when you got ones with one word like "zdrada" or "geralt" xD (no way to create a template simply called "Z" without causing issues and the geralt one is obviously not a good idea as it'd get misused). I combined all the comics into one switch template like the COA/Flags, but you'll still have to write out the name for each comic really so not sure how that'd make it easier :/ Other than keep formatting the same?
Guys, how about implementing a template like this? I saw it on both the Assassin's Creed Wiki and the Wookiepedia and, after undergoing necessary changes to reflect this world of course, I think it could here too. At least better then how we currently list appearances on the articles for comic books, novels, games etc.
I think Juraj wants to have the novel/adaptation pages listing things which appear or are mentioned in them (though it would be quite hard to do as single chapter may contain dozens of mentions of various things)
@SMiki just ignore those comments by the anon user. I have a feeling it's the same person from before who kept trying to vehemently state game was canon no matter what evidence was shown and just get rid of them after I noted in the last argument that there will be no further discussion on it.
Maybe we could do a page named "canon" listing separate continuities and how they corelate to each other? (Books, CD Projekt, tabletops, TV, whatever) Could help maybe (not with the trolls, but I guess some people may indeed wonder how is, let's say, Netflix series related to games)
Yeah it won't help with that guy as he's basing his reasoning on it simply being part of the same series and ignores all comments that the author explicitly states the games are not canon to his books (basically someone who really really wants to believe the games are canon or is just a troll).
@Mechemik could you add the English quote of how Kobus de Ruyter was a ninth generation soldier and considered sounds of battle a symphony due to his genes etc. etc. from The Lady of the Lake to Ruyter family as a quote?
It's a bit worrying. Number of editors here is limited, any new hand to help with editing TV-related articles would be highly welcome. While I'm trying to keep track on the news, my priority are the in-universe articles :/
That's just because I'm a stubborn person though xD (and Queen of the Night only appears in Tw1 unlike the others who are in the books, games, etc.) That said, not sure who's running that wiki to know how they'd react :/
I did a quick search and oddly, both terms are used only once: Old Race is used in The Tower of the Swallow while Elder Race is used in Blood of Elves O.o So it really just comes down to which one we prefer to use I guess? I have no big preference here.
Hmm. In Polish version it is named after a real turtle, "żółw jaszczurowaty" (common snapping turtle). It isn't the same species though, seems to be larger (real one can bite off a finger, SoS one a leg)
Also, what do you want to do about all the Kaer Morhen locations from TW1? I do agree that they should be part of the main page itself, but not sure how to best do that? As it's understandable why they're separate (game treats them as separate sections with loading screens between some, etc). but at the same time might make the Kaer Morhen page rather long.
Hello, I'm Flanqer, and I'm the Wiki Manager for the Witcher Wiki. I introduced myself in Discussions, but wanted to drop you a personal message since you're one of the active admins. I'm here to help you and your community, and to be a liaison to full-time Fandom Staff. If you ever have any questions related to the wiki, whether it's about editing, styling, infoboxes, policy, etc, please contact me on my message wall.
I've recently returned to Gwent and it seems that we can unblock lore by winning and gaining achievements. Do we plan to share the work in some way? Now I'm working on Harald tree, later will probably check Filavandrel's
Speaking on Dol Blathanna - any way to change the size of an image inside infobox? I've tried to add both flag and COA, but it were either way smaller than the COA (horizontal version) or way larger (vertical version)
Speaking on Dol Blathanna - any way to change the size of an image inside infobox? I've tried to add both flag and COA, but it were either way smaller than the COA (horizontal version) or way larger (vertical version)