Talk:Chelia - Revision history

Maintenance script: Talk:Chelia Redthorne moved to Talk:Chelia: aand back again!

2007-12-07T05:05:07Z

Talk:Chelia Redthorne moved to Talk:Chelia: aand back again!

← Older revision	Revision as of 00:05, 7 December 2007
(No difference)

Maintenance script: Talk:Chelia moved to Talk:Chelia Redthorne

2007-12-07T01:27:17Z

Talk:Chelia moved to Talk:Chelia Redthorne

← Older revision	Revision as of 20:27, 6 December 2007
(No difference)

NAVAK: Added timestamp, will be off by a few minutes but forgot to readd after changing the format layout

2007-12-02T19:42:46Z

Added timestamp, will be off by a few minutes but forgot to readd after changing the format layout

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:42, 2 December 2007
Line 8:		Line 8:
	:While I wasn't that specific in the other pages in the interests of brevity, I can be if that is your desire. If you would like to add the information yourself, why don't you instead of simply talking about it? It IS a wiki. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:27, 2 December 2007 (CST)		:While I wasn't that specific in the other pages in the interests of brevity, I can be if that is your desire. If you would like to add the information yourself, why don't you instead of simply talking about it? It IS a wiki. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:27, 2 December 2007 (CST)

	:I'd rather not add secondhand information for which I cannot personally observe the validity to the actual page.		:I'd rather not add secondhand information for which I cannot personally observe the validity to the actual page. --[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 04:30, 2 December 2007 (CST)
	--[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 04:30, 2 December 2007 (CST)

	:You've never let that sort of thing stop you before, and I'm pretty sure no one here would mind. I'd be glad to correct any errors you introduce to the article should they exist. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:33, 2 December 2007 (CST)		:You've never let that sort of thing stop you before, and I'm pretty sure no one here would mind. I'd be glad to correct any errors you introduce to the article should they exist. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:33, 2 December 2007 (CST)
Line 17:		Line 16:
	For the sentence "Among her private retinue are her official Steward Magmus and, secretly, Caelumia.", I would like to suggest changing "secretly" to "unofficially" or "tacitly" if those fit the actual situation. Secret sounds a little odd because if the relationship is secret, how did that information get here? --[[User:Basselope\|Basselope]] 12:00, 2 December 2007 (CST)		For the sentence "Among her private retinue are her official Steward Magmus and, secretly, Caelumia.", I would like to suggest changing "secretly" to "unofficially" or "tacitly" if those fit the actual situation. Secret sounds a little odd because if the relationship is secret, how did that information get here? --[[User:Basselope\|Basselope]] 12:00, 2 December 2007 (CST)

	:I think secretly is fine, unless citing sources becomes a huge issue since I doubt most people want to be cited as communicating "secret" information even in a blatantly OOC forum which could lead to issues where there is a lack of certain information. The honor system on verifying and presenting accurate information would seem to be the best bet unless something untoward happens, especially in first-hand accounts like on this page. The only issue I really see with including current information is keeping it up to date.		:I think secretly is fine, unless citing sources becomes a huge issue since I doubt most people want to be cited as communicating "secret" information even in a blatantly OOC forum which could lead to issues where there is a lack of certain information. The honor system on verifying and presenting accurate information would seem to be the best bet unless something untoward happens, especially in first-hand accounts like on this page. The only issue I really see with including current information is keeping it up to date. --[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 13:42, 2 December 2007 (CST)

NAVAK: Changed the formatting of the talk page a bit to account for the two avenues of discussion. One of which may not be productive, so as not to drown out Basselope's point.

2007-12-02T19:41:53Z

Changed the formatting of the talk page a bit to account for the two avenues of discussion. One of which may not be productive, so as not to drown out Basselope's point.

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:41, 2 December 2007
Line 8:		Line 8:
	:While I wasn't that specific in the other pages in the interests of brevity, I can be if that is your desire. If you would like to add the information yourself, why don't you instead of simply talking about it? It IS a wiki. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:27, 2 December 2007 (CST)		:While I wasn't that specific in the other pages in the interests of brevity, I can be if that is your desire. If you would like to add the information yourself, why don't you instead of simply talking about it? It IS a wiki. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:27, 2 December 2007 (CST)

	I'd rather not add secondhand information for which I cannot personally observe the validity to the actual page.		:I'd rather not add secondhand information for which I cannot personally observe the validity to the actual page.
	--[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 04:30, 2 December 2007 (CST)		--[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 04:30, 2 December 2007 (CST)

	:You've never let that sort of thing stop you before, and I'm pretty sure no one here would mind. I'd be glad to correct any errors you introduce to the article should they exist. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:33, 2 December 2007 (CST)		:You've never let that sort of thing stop you before, and I'm pretty sure no one here would mind. I'd be glad to correct any errors you introduce to the article should they exist. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:33, 2 December 2007 (CST)

		⚫	:I think if one wants to truly be viewed as unbiased, they need to include especially the unflattering situations and events. Personally I view the character actively being involved in undermining one or more provincial governments at least deserving of a footnote from the first-hand source. --[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 13:39, 2 December 2007 (CST)

	:For the sentence "Among her private retinue are her official Steward Magmus and, secretly, Caelumia.", I would like to suggest changing "secretly" to "unofficially" or "tacitly" if those fit the actual situation. Secret sounds a little odd because if the relationship is secret, how did that information get here? --[[User:Basselope\|Basselope]] 12:00, 2 December 2007 (CST)		For the sentence "Among her private retinue are her official Steward Magmus and, secretly, Caelumia.", I would like to suggest changing "secretly" to "unofficially" or "tacitly" if those fit the actual situation. Secret sounds a little odd because if the relationship is secret, how did that information get here? --[[User:Basselope\|Basselope]] 12:00, 2 December 2007 (CST)

	:I think secretly is fine, unless citing sources becomes a huge issue since I doubt most people want to be cited as communicating "secret" information even in a blatantly OOC forum which could lead to issues where there is a lack of certain information. The honor system on verifying and presenting accurate information would seem to be the best bet unless something untoward happens, especially in first-hand accounts like on this page. The only issue I really see with including current information is keeping it up to date.		:I think secretly is fine, unless citing sources becomes a huge issue since I doubt most people want to be cited as communicating "secret" information even in a blatantly OOC forum which could lead to issues where there is a lack of certain information. The honor system on verifying and presenting accurate information would seem to be the best bet unless something untoward happens, especially in first-hand accounts like on this page. The only issue I really see with including current information is keeping it up to date.

⚫	~~As for the rest,~~ I think if one wants to truly be viewed as unbiased, they need to include especially the unflattering situations and events. Personally I view the character actively being involved in undermining one or more provincial governments at least deserving of a footnote from the first-hand source. --[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 13:39, 2 December 2007 (CST)

NAVAK at 19:39, 2 December 2007

2007-12-02T19:39:29Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:39, 2 December 2007
Line 15:		Line 15:

	:For the sentence "Among her private retinue are her official Steward Magmus and, secretly, Caelumia.", I would like to suggest changing "secretly" to "unofficially" or "tacitly" if those fit the actual situation. Secret sounds a little odd because if the relationship is secret, how did that information get here? --[[User:Basselope\|Basselope]] 12:00, 2 December 2007 (CST)		:For the sentence "Among her private retinue are her official Steward Magmus and, secretly, Caelumia.", I would like to suggest changing "secretly" to "unofficially" or "tacitly" if those fit the actual situation. Secret sounds a little odd because if the relationship is secret, how did that information get here? --[[User:Basselope\|Basselope]] 12:00, 2 December 2007 (CST)

			:I think secretly is fine, unless citing sources becomes a huge issue since I doubt most people want to be cited as communicating "secret" information even in a blatantly OOC forum which could lead to issues where there is a lack of certain information. The honor system on verifying and presenting accurate information would seem to be the best bet unless something untoward happens, especially in first-hand accounts like on this page. The only issue I really see with including current information is keeping it up to date.

			As for the rest, I think if one wants to truly be viewed as unbiased, they need to include especially the unflattering situations and events. Personally I view the character actively being involved in undermining one or more provincial governments at least deserving of a footnote from the first-hand source. --[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 13:39, 2 December 2007 (CST)

Maintenance script at 18:00, 2 December 2007

2007-12-02T18:00:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:00, 2 December 2007
Line 12:		Line 12:

	:You've never let that sort of thing stop you before, and I'm pretty sure no one here would mind. I'd be glad to correct any errors you introduce to the article should they exist. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:33, 2 December 2007 (CST)		:You've never let that sort of thing stop you before, and I'm pretty sure no one here would mind. I'd be glad to correct any errors you introduce to the article should they exist. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:33, 2 December 2007 (CST)


			:For the sentence "Among her private retinue are her official Steward Magmus and, secretly, Caelumia.", I would like to suggest changing "secretly" to "unofficially" or "tacitly" if those fit the actual situation. Secret sounds a little odd because if the relationship is secret, how did that information get here? --[[User:Basselope\|Basselope]] 12:00, 2 December 2007 (CST)

Maintenance script at 10:33, 2 December 2007

2007-12-02T10:33:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:33, 2 December 2007
Line 10:		Line 10:
	I'd rather not add secondhand information for which I cannot personally observe the validity to the actual page.		I'd rather not add secondhand information for which I cannot personally observe the validity to the actual page.
	--[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 04:30, 2 December 2007 (CST)		--[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 04:30, 2 December 2007 (CST)

			:You've never let that sort of thing stop you before, and I'm pretty sure no one here would mind. I'd be glad to correct any errors you introduce to the article should they exist. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:33, 2 December 2007 (CST)

NAVAK at 10:30, 2 December 2007

2007-12-02T10:30:59Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:30, 2 December 2007
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Obviously the characters directly involved would generally have the most accurate information, but I don't think something like affiliations against provincial governments would be an item to not include in this article if factual completeness and accuracy is the question.		Obviously the characters directly involved would generally have the most accurate information, but I don't think something like affiliations against provincial governments would be an item to not include in this article if factual completeness and accuracy is the question.

			Edited to add in signature, timestamp will be off but meh.
			--[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 04:30, 2 December 2007 (CST)

	:While I wasn't that specific in the other pages in the interests of brevity, I can be if that is your desire. If you would like to add the information yourself, why don't you instead of simply talking about it? It IS a wiki. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:27, 2 December 2007 (CST)		:While I wasn't that specific in the other pages in the interests of brevity, I can be if that is your desire. If you would like to add the information yourself, why don't you instead of simply talking about it? It IS a wiki. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:27, 2 December 2007 (CST)

			I'd rather not add secondhand information for which I cannot personally observe the validity to the actual page.
			--[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 04:30, 2 December 2007 (CST)

Maintenance script at 10:27, 2 December 2007

2007-12-02T10:27:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:27, 2 December 2007
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Obviously the characters directly involved would generally have the most accurate information, but I don't think something like affiliations against provincial governments would be an item to not include in this article if factual completeness and accuracy is the question.		Obviously the characters directly involved would generally have the most accurate information, but I don't think something like affiliations against provincial governments would be an item to not include in this article if factual completeness and accuracy is the question.

			:While I wasn't that specific in the other pages in the interests of brevity, I can be if that is your desire. If you would like to add the information yourself, why don't you instead of simply talking about it? It IS a wiki. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:27, 2 December 2007 (CST)

NAVAK: New page: If we're going to name specific names and events in other pages, it would behoove us to include information such as collecting and transporting arms for dragon priests, which is informatio...

2007-12-02T10:25:25Z

New page: If we're going to name specific names and events in other pages, it would behoove us to include information such as collecting and transporting arms for dragon priests, which is informatio...

New page

If we're going to name specific names and events in other pages, it would behoove us to include information such as collecting and transporting arms for dragon priests, which is information to which Caelumia has access, in these pages as well.

Obviously the characters directly involved would generally have the most accurate information, but I don't think something like affiliations against provincial governments would be an item to not include in this article if factual completeness and accuracy is the question.

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:42, 2 December 2007
Line 8:		Line 8:
	:While I wasn't that specific in the other pages in the interests of brevity, I can be if that is your desire. If you would like to add the information yourself, why don't you instead of simply talking about it? It IS a wiki. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:27, 2 December 2007 (CST)		:While I wasn't that specific in the other pages in the interests of brevity, I can be if that is your desire. If you would like to add the information yourself, why don't you instead of simply talking about it? It IS a wiki. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:27, 2 December 2007 (CST)

	:I'd rather not add secondhand information for which I cannot personally observe the validity to the actual page.		:I'd rather not add secondhand information for which I cannot personally observe the validity to the actual page. --[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 04:30, 2 December 2007 (CST)
	--[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 04:30, 2 December 2007 (CST)

	:You've never let that sort of thing stop you before, and I'm pretty sure no one here would mind. I'd be glad to correct any errors you introduce to the article should they exist. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:33, 2 December 2007 (CST)		:You've never let that sort of thing stop you before, and I'm pretty sure no one here would mind. I'd be glad to correct any errors you introduce to the article should they exist. [[User:Reene\|Reene]] 04:33, 2 December 2007 (CST)
Line 17:		Line 16:
	For the sentence "Among her private retinue are her official Steward Magmus and, secretly, Caelumia.", I would like to suggest changing "secretly" to "unofficially" or "tacitly" if those fit the actual situation. Secret sounds a little odd because if the relationship is secret, how did that information get here? --[[User:Basselope\|Basselope]] 12:00, 2 December 2007 (CST)		For the sentence "Among her private retinue are her official Steward Magmus and, secretly, Caelumia.", I would like to suggest changing "secretly" to "unofficially" or "tacitly" if those fit the actual situation. Secret sounds a little odd because if the relationship is secret, how did that information get here? --[[User:Basselope\|Basselope]] 12:00, 2 December 2007 (CST)

	:I think secretly is fine, unless citing sources becomes a huge issue since I doubt most people want to be cited as communicating "secret" information even in a blatantly OOC forum which could lead to issues where there is a lack of certain information. The honor system on verifying and presenting accurate information would seem to be the best bet unless something untoward happens, especially in first-hand accounts like on this page. The only issue I really see with including current information is keeping it up to date.		:I think secretly is fine, unless citing sources becomes a huge issue since I doubt most people want to be cited as communicating "secret" information even in a blatantly OOC forum which could lead to issues where there is a lack of certain information. The honor system on verifying and presenting accurate information would seem to be the best bet unless something untoward happens, especially in first-hand accounts like on this page. The only issue I really see with including current information is keeping it up to date. --[[User:Navak\|Navak]] 13:42, 2 December 2007 (CST)