Talk:Ratonhnhaké:ton

The Wedding
Conner never talk to with Lyle White and Lance O'Donnell after the wedding at all because I look for vidoe of this and find nothing.Tyraj (talk) 17:37, January 12, 2013 (UTC)


 * He did, it was one of the interactive conversations. Nesty  Contact me! 17:37, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Connor Meeting Aveline
How come we can't play as Connor on the 360/PS3 for his New York misson with Aveline? I mean, we can play it from his point of view on the Vita, so shouldn't it be the same for the major consoles?  TranquilTempest Qu'est-ce que c'est? 08:34, January 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * No? It's likely between Sequences 8 and 9, or 9 and 10. 15:53, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, that doesn't happen.  I've played through the game twice now, and she's seen the walkthroughs.  Supreme Master Assassin O Mentoras 15:59, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid that's a mystery I've been trying to solve for the longest time... and well... it has no answer, other than to say "We're Ubisoft. We do things like that."  Supreme Master Assassin O Mentoras 15:59, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I mean that the memory in Liberation is likely between two memory sequences in III, and is therefore irrelevant to the plot...

PS: Please don't move my messages; I was replying to Tranquil, not you. 16:06, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

Well you weren't being specific so I was forced to improvise.  Supreme Master Assassin O Mentoras 16:20, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

Race
Shouldn't Connor's race read Native-american/ European America. After all although he grew up native american he is in fact half of each race.

70.197.165.163 15:15, February 2, 2013 (UTC})

He's Half Mohawk, Half English. Haytham was English and Ziio was Mohawk. Not much else to it to be honest. 15:39, February 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * He and Kaniehtí:io is half Mohawk and Half English, NOT their whole race. Although if his race were half English, there are no sources to confirm it as much as I know. I'll ask Sima. Altaïr Skywalker 47   Pigeon Coop  10:23, June 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * The fact that he is Haytham's son is confirmation enough. Haytham is described as being English, so his son's race is Native-American/English. -- 11:08, June 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * That is what I said. I also said that his mother's ancestors (the race) were not half English. Altaïr Skywalker 47   Pigeon Coop  00:25, June 28, 2013 (UTC)

Romantic life
Could everybody pleasce stop editing out the Romantic life part because we have  Romantic life for all the other charater on here like his father,ezio, and altair and so on as example.Tyraj (talk) 00:00, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

While it is true that the other protagonists have romantic life sections, Connor's is not needed because it would just be a long paragraph basically stating that he doesn't have one. So, no, it will be removed. -- NOSTALGIA TALK 01:59, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * While Connor didn't have a partner during the events of AC3 and TOKW, I think we should still note how he played matchmaker in lieu of having a girlfriend, and that an apprentice and a friend found him attractive. Really, the only reason I want a section because I find "Norris is trying to-- court... a woman. What do-- you-- women, like... in terms of gifts," a really funny quote header. --Alientraveller (talk) 21:45, June 25, 2013 (UTC)

Alternate timeline
Ratonhnhaké:ton's experiences in TOKY should be in the main biography section, not an entirely new one, all of the other characters involved would be because they show no evidence of recalling the events of the main timeline or somehow crossing over the way he did, whereas this is the mainstream Connor in an alternate world in a canon storyline. everything else I've seen with stories like this include it in the main biography unless it's specifically non canon. For example you see it on magneto's page on both his wikipedia and marvel wiki pages, the events of House of M are part of his main biography despite being set in an alternate world.Gboy4 (talk) 14:24, February 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * No. This isn't wikipedia or marvel wiki. We have our own Manual of Style. Abide by it or don't edit at all, else you'll do nothing but be disruptive. --Kainzorus Prime Walkie-talkie  15:02, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * what manual of style?--Gboy4 (talk) 15:10, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Never mind, found it.--Gboy4 (talk) 15:20, February 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia handles no set Manual of Style for this sort of occurence, and more characters than just Magneto are part multiple timelines in the Marvel Comics, it would be too messy to list all alternate realities on them otherwise. Connor retaining his consciousness from the main canon bears no relevance on this being part of his biography or not; none of this actually happened in the main canon, so it does not belong among the other things that he did do in the main canon. Additionally we do not know when exactly Connor and Washington had that encounter with the Apple and ended up in this alternate reality, and where it would fit in the biography. Just making a subsection in the biography immediately jumping into the alternate reality without explaining how Connor got there serves no place among canon info, and that is not comparable to Magneto's involvement in House of M. -- 15:21, February 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * No relevance? he's still personally experiencing it even if no other character is, the story has been stated to be Canon meaning that one way or another it did happen in the main canon as it is still something the mainstream Connor experienced and we know that it happened after the revolution and after Connor killed Charles Lee from what he says. Your point would be true for all of the characters except for Connor.--Gboy4 (talk) 15:37, February 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * Ubisoft stating the story to be canon in no way means that it happened in the main canon in one way or another. The canon aspect of this alternate timeline is that Connor is experiencing it in the real world, not doing it in the real world. You're just repeating what you said in your first message. In further regards to your remark about the House of M, in that story the characters were physically warped to a new reality (if I recall correctly), not just made to experience it in some dream-like sequence. There is no indication that this DLC takes place after Connor killed Charles Lee and after the revolution has ended, though his remark "I know who my father was" implies that Haytham was already dead. As shown at the start of the DLC, Connor had not shaved his hair like he did before he went to confront Charles Lee, and Washington was still wearing his military uniform. Haytham died in late 1781, which is the same year that was put in the Glyph with Washington holding the Apple. The most logical option would be that the encounter between Connor and Washington with the Apple occured in late 1781 or early to mid 1782, in between Sequence 10 and 11. -- 16:03, February 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * There is actually, I can't remember what they're called exactly but there are three memory points in the episode that show an image of connor's past, so far. Have found two of them and one of them is of Connor killing Charles. And can you please explain to me how the story being canon doesn't mean it happened in the main canon? And Connor is doing it, whether that means he's doing it in a dream or in another world.--Gboy4 (talk) 16:29, February 21, 2013 (UTC)


 * Once you get the three lucid memories in the Infamy, you can watch a short clip where Washington is riding to locate Connor. In this scene, Connor is uninjured, but it is not clear as to the exact time. For the time being, seeing we cannot ascertain the exact means of how he comes to be in the alternate timeline, it is much more convenient to keep it seperated until we know. Slate Vesper (talk) 16:36, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok you've convinced me, I'll drop it for now.--Gboy4 (talk) 16:53, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, the DLC is canon. However, it being canon does not mean it happens in the same timeline as the events of ACIII. Therefore, we can hardly just put a section in the midst of all the main timeline information in which an ally is suddenly an enemy. It would be too confusing for the people who come to the wiki for information - it would probably even be too confusing for many of our editors. By having a section named "Alternate Timeline" we don't say that the events didn't actually happen. We only say that they happened in a different timeline - which is undeniably true (otherwise Kaniehtí:io could not possibly be alive). Me, Sima, and several others have conferred over it on the IRC and decided it stays the way it is. Nesty Contact me! 16:38, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

aternate time
If you don't mind me asking but shouldn't the alternate time not be on Ratonhnhake:ton page because this is noncant I mean the plot to the The Tyranny of King Washington epiosdes are on that page well The you know Tyranny of King Washington page mean  if people went to read about it they just go to that page I'm just saying.Tyraj (talk) 08:46, February 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * This has already been discussed right above your message. -- 16:59, February 24, 2013 (UTC)

Birthdate
but when is connor really born? on some sites it's states 1755, on some it's stated 1756 ..?


 * Desmond was still reliving the memories in July 1755, during the Braddock Expedition, indicating that the child was not yet conceived at that point. Connor was conceived soon after, and because pregnancy takes around nine months it is impossible for Connor to have been born in 1755. Kanen'tó:kon's database entry also says that he was of the same age as Connor, and his birth date was listed as 1756. So Connor was born in 1756, not 1755.. -- 16:59, February 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * That being said, I find it very hard to believe that he was only 4 years old when we first see him and 14 when he leaves the village. Based on appearance, I'd guess around 11 and 19 respectively? 83.177.191.12 07:50, April 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Appearances can be misleading. Just consider Claudia, Petruccio and Duccio in ACII... not to even mention IRL. Sadelyrate (siniath) 08:19, April 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * http://www.oxm.co.uk/40304/interviews/assassins-creed-3-the-most-rpg-like-assassins-creed-so-far/  1:00-1:04. Сonnor was born in 1755. Ubisoft have answered.DocToR aka DOC (talk) 08:50, December 6, 2013 (UTC)


 * You do realize this was resolved months ago, and the link you've posted is outdated by over a year anyway. --Kainzorus Prime Walkie-talkie  08:56, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Understand. I just brought fact. Ubisoft revealed date of birth, and you're making about 1756.DocToR aka DOC (talk) 09:04, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * The game itself trumps any "fact" released by Ubisoft before said game's release. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 09:37, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * In any case, those who put the date of birth 1756 wrong. And I proved it. He probably considers himself smarter than Ubisoft.DocToR aka DOC (talk) 11:16, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * You're not though, and I proved it. We are still playing Haytham in June/July of 1755, which means it is physically impossible for his son to have born in any year except 1756. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 12:48, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * About June/July don't invent. It was there simply written 1755, without the month. This is your imagination. About Braddock Expedition I know that it was in July. But in games there are a lot of such discrepancy. For example, Robert de Sable died in 1193, instead of in 1191. DocToR aka DOC (talk) 13:57, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * here still look http://store.ubiworkshop.com/assassins-creed/prints-and-posters/assassins-creed-collector-posters/   even here it is written Ratonhnhaké:ton (1755 - Unknown)DocToR aka DOC (talk) 14:39, December 6, 2013 (UTC)

Ratonhnhaké:ton was born on April 4, 1756 Now shut up about your useless, outdated, completely wrong fact. --Revan&#39;s Exile (talk) 14:52, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed. The did indeed die in 1193; our article isn't about him though, it's about Robert de Sable, who died in 1191. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 15:14, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Also in game Charles Lee biography differs from the real a little. So it is possible, as Brаddok's Expedition in game happens not in July, and earlier. I understand you, but on sites Ubisoft year of birth 1755 everywhere is written.DocToR aka DOC (talk) 15:22, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * No it is not: AC Initiates revealed Connor's date-of-birth to be April 4, 1756. --Alientraveller (talk) 16:00, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * It also doesn't matter what the various Ubisoft website say, what matters is the game. The game clearly indicates that the Braddock Expedition takes place in the middle of 1755, so it's not possible in any way that Raton was born in that year. Please stop trying to argue otherwise, it's getting little more than irritating. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 16:03, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * Boys, you almost convinced me. I am haunted here by it. It is a fragment from a trailer which left for few months to a game exit. Why there it is written 1755, instead of 1756? Developers couldn't confuse.DocToR aka DOC (talk) 16:23, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't need to convince you; you're wrong, end of. And don't call me "boy". --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 16:50, December 6, 2013 (UTC)

Connor vs Ratonhnhaké:ton
When would one use "Connor" vs. "Ratonhnhaké:ton"? I thought that the decision was made to have him as Ratonhnhaké:ton. 2myname1 (talk) 06:40, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

When he adopts the name, he can be referred to Connor from thereon. That point is where Ratonhnhaké:ton and Achilles travel to Boston and Achilles gives him the name Connor to fit in around the town. Slate Vesper (talk) 08:12, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

What about the bottom sections, the ones about his skills and personality? Should that be Connor or Ratonhnhaké:ton? I would personally prefer Ratonhnhaké:ton, but I'm just curious. -- 16:46, March 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * A belated responses, admittedly, but this issue still hasn't been resolved. Like Crimson, I think we should be using his birth name in any BtS or non-biographical sections. Any objections to my making the necessary changes? -- 12:23, August 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * We shouldn't have to use Ratonhnhaké:ton unless we're referring to his life before he was an Assassin or the alternate timeline where he never became Connor, that's the point of his English name. Otherwise you run risk of making one name seem superior or more correct to the other, like if you change it to "Ratonhnhaké:ton was nominated for Best Character at the VGA Awards" because it makes it seem wrong of them to have referred to him as Connor. --Alientraveller (talk) 12:46, August 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * The fact that this article is called Ratonhnhaké:ton renders your point of superiority invalid. I'm not interested in changing the trivia or other OOU info, that can remain as Connor; I'm only concerned with the sections concerning his skills and personality. Ratonhnhaké:ton is his birth name, and who he always was. Connor was merely an adopted name, and shouldn't really be used in these non-biographical sections, in my opinion. -- 13:02, February 1, 2014 (UTC)

Quote
May I change the quote to this...

"We hold these truths to be self-evident: Our right to Freedom, our land, and our way of life. We will die for what we believe in; we cannot be stopped.﻿ We will never back now, because a life without freedom is not a life worth living. Give us liberty or give us death."

Awesomekid120 (talk) 18:16, April 3, 2013 (UTC)Awesomekid1204


 * When does Connor say this? -- 18:27, April 3, 2013 (UTC)


 * It was in a trailer, but I can't remember which one. But it sounds too 'Murican, I prefer the one we have now. -- 18:40, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

I searched for it, and here it is. -- 18:49, April 3, 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, that one... Yeah, I agree with Crimson. -- 20:04, April 3, 2013 (UTC)
 * Plus, the trailer's aren't a part of the canon. We learned that when the Brotherhood trailer came out. (Revelations "trailer" was actually the game's introductory video, before anybody points it out.) -- 17:19, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Is this the End?
Someone knows what's going to happen to Connor? Or Ubisoft's going to stop his story and just focus in Edward? AnimusHack (talk) 20:31, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Such discussion is more relevant to our community forums on the home page than here, but in any event, we'll probably learn who Connor settled with and when he died in future media. --Alientraveller (talk) 20:35, April 25, 2013 (UTC)

we should add the surname Kenway because Ubisoft confirmed that Connor adopted his father surname

Andotrota


 * Do you have a source? And sign your posts, please. -- 16:49, May 18, 2013 (UTC)

Connor's Descendants
Is it ever confirmed in any type of media that William Miles is Connor's descendant and not Desmond's mother? Sometime in the game, Desmond tells his dad that he (William) can look through Connor's memories himself, but Desmond doesn't even know if that's for certain, he just assumes they're related. TranquilTempest Bonjour 02:43, June 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * William is Ratonhnhaké:ton's descendant. AC3 and AC4 confirm (and will confirm) this. -- 08:50, June 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * I do not think so, can you provide a source that ACIII confirms this? I'm not telling that ACIV will not confirm it. Altaïr Skywalker 47   Pigeon Coop  10:17, June 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * To quote Desmond in AC3: "Hey, he was your ancestor too. Why don't you hop in the Animus?!". -- 11:11, June 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * Might've been just a wild guess on Desmond's part. Granted, William doesn't deny it. Still, we might wish to wait for something a bit more definitive than that before we set it in stone. :) Sadelyrate (siniath) 14:02, June 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * I've noticed people here saying we can't be sure because Desmond "might have been guessing". There is nothing to say Desmond doesn't know about his relation to Connor, so we should be assuming it's a "wild guess on [his] part." Basically, Desmond said "he was your ancestor too" so as far as canon is concerned, Desmond is related to Connor through his father. -- 16:12, June 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * While the writers put that line in for a reason, would it be canon too if Desmond said his father was a potato? It is highly likely that William is descended from the Kenways, but there is nothing to imply that Desmond could have known, from an in-universe point of view. Desmond had no prior knowledge of his ancestors. He did not know anything about Haytham and only just expressed his shock at Haytham's reveal as a Templar, and then all of a sudden knows that Haytham is William's ancestor? It does not add up. While we can all know that William is a Kenway descendant, saying it is 100% confirmed would be the same as saying that Desmond's son exists. -- 16:22, June 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't see how any of those comparisons you've made make sense. Firstly, we know William is not a potato because, well, he's human; we see that in-game. If Desmond were to call him such it would clearly be wrong, because it's, well, obvious. With regards to his not knowing of his ancestry, just because he was unaware of his links to the Auditores' or Ibn-La'Ahads' doesn't mean he was unaware of the Kenways' (you're making an assumption). Also, there is a difference between knowing who your ancestors are, and what they do. Desmond could well have known who his ancestor, Connor, was without knowing he was also a member of the Assassins.


 * So my point remains; Desmond clearly said that his father was also an ancestor of the Kenways', and as such we have to take that as canon. (Whether he turns out in future media to be correct or not, is currently besides the point.) Making assumptions that Desmond is ignorant of his lineage, or that his father is somehow related to a potato is ridiculous. -- 09:01, June 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * Similarly, you're making an assumption that what Desmond says, while agitated, is fact. Both stances are currently just as valid. Sadelyrate (siniath) 09:38, June 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * I am making no such assumption, Desmond clearly says ""Hey, he was your ancestor too." Whether he was agitated, annoyed, or whatever else is besides the point. Until a media comes out explicitly contradicting that statement, William is for all intent and purposes a descendant of Connor. Whether I personally think that to be true or not is besides the point. -- 10:15, June 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * You are taking my example out of context, and ignoring the in-universe stance to be completely in favor of the out-of-universe one. Then by all means, make an article on 'Desmond Miles' son', because Subject 16 explicitly mentioned him. His state of mind would be irrelevant as well then. Also, Desmond was unaware of the Kenways, as he relied on Shaun to provide additional information on them. Nothing even remotely implies that Desmond had knowledge of the Kenways. -- 12:28, June 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Except for the fact that we know Desmond does not have a son since he died before he had the chance to produce one, (certainly not one that we are made aware of), and the ramblings of a gibbering computer programme and not to be completely trusted. I don't see how Desmond saying "he is your ancestor too" can be taken as being OOU. It's a simple statement that, without any contradictory evidence, has to be taken as canon. Whether Desmond was, or was not aware of any of his ancestors does not change the fact he said that. You need to stop making excuses for him and accept that William is related to the Kenways. -- 14:18, June 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * Is it so important to note William is a descendant of Connor when there's a 50% chance he's also descended from Aquilus, Altair and Ezio? Or to note that on Desmond's mum's article? We all know it's likely they're ancestors of William because they're all ancestors of Desmond. --Alientraveller (talk) 22:15, June 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * There is nothing to contradict that Desmond does not have a son either. He may have sired one unknowingly before he was captured. That 'gibbering computer programme' conveniently also mentioned the Sun, nothing happened with that, I suppose. Obviously Desmond does not have a son, but my point is that because one character says something it does not make it true. I don't need to 'accept' anything. I will 'accept' it when it is explicitly stated, within a context that makes sense. You 'need' to start reading what I said when I never said that Desmond saying it 'is OOU'.


 * Point is, until it is explicitly stated that William is descended from a Kenway, within a context that makes sense and is not one big plothole, only then will we state it is so on articles. -- 07:42, June 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * It is explicitly stated. You can't get much more explicit than "he is your ancestor too." -- 08:26, June 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * It's also explicitly stated that "The Templars ... got no ambition. No passion! No competitive edge!" But is it a fact? Sadelyrate (siniath) 09:54, June 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * Maybe, Rebecca just said it to make Templars plans to look dull or something...
 * That is Rebecca's opinion, so in her eyes it is true. If it had been someone besides Desmond saying it, I would agree that they could be mistaken/misinformed or whatnot, but since it was his son. You cannot have an opinion on whether someone is related to someone else; you're either correct, or not. -- 11:34, June 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * And nothing but lack of explicit denial even suggests Desmond's sudden outburst might be based on fact. He might just as well be wrong; how many of us can recite our family tree for, what? The last four, five generations? Why would blood relation dictate one's knowledge of the people who've contributed to one's genepool?
 * However, if in your opinion that single heated phrase is all the validation required, why not edit William's article? And while you're at it, the Assassins' article to mention that no Assassin has ever been vegan? Same goes for Desmond's son, and the Templars' lack of 'fire'... since as per your earlier comments, attitude/current emotions are 'irrelevant'. If we accept one phrase as fact, we need to accept them all. Regardless of mitigating factors like being an opinion, or being 'untrustworthy.' Sadelyrate (siniath) 14:41, June 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * "Explicit lack of denial"? He is William's son; if he gets something as fundamentally wrong as knowing who his father's familial relation is then there is something seriously wrong with him. I for one can't accept he might have been mistaken, as then that throws everything else he has ever said into doubt. Not will I accept your assertion that he is untrustworthy (for the same reasons).


 * With regards to editing the page, I would have already, but that will do nothing beyond start an edit war with those who insist Desmond has absolutely no control of his vocal patterns once he gets a little antsy. Also, if Desmond was a vegan then I would see merit for the fact being included in his (and the Assassins) article; if Desmond had a son, we should make an article on that (although recent comments by a member of the development team explaining 16's 'son' comment negate the need for an article to be created); the Templars' "lack[ing] fire" is an opinion and should, if suitable, be included in Rebecca's article's Personality and Traits section. What next? -- 17:32, June 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * It bears repeating: How many can recite their family tree for the last four, five generations? How many can name even their great-grandparents, not to mention their great-great-great-great-grandparents, or further? And that's without even taking into account Desmond's attested character.
 * As for casting doubt on the verity of his words... that bus left a couple of years ago already. For example, in no way can "two dozen couples, some kids" translate into "about 30."


 * Whether something was an opinion, or said in a curious state of mind, or as a 'joke', or whatever else is besides the point if we accept things the way you propose we accept Desmond's comment. Sadelyrate (siniath) 15:39, June 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Erm, 12x2= 24, plus "some kids" (which could easily be six), certainly translates into 30. You can repeat it as much as you like, the fact that someone else may not be able to recite their family history beyond three generations has absolutely no baring whatsoever on whether Desmond is able to, or not. What I'm proposing is that we take Desmond's quoted, unmistakable comment of "he's your ancestor too" and treat it like we do everything else we have on this wiki.


 * "He's you ancestor too" is a pretty definitive comment, leaving no question on whether he was joking, or emotional, or antsy or whatever; he said it as fact. There's no two ways about it. -- 18:02, June 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * "Two dozen couples". It would be at least forty-eight people at the Farm, not including the kids. -- 18:07, June 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Ugh, long day at work. Can't count now :s -- 18:11, June 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * We are treating it like we do everything else on this wiki.
 * And as stated, there's Desmond's attested character to consider. Sadelyrate (siniath) 09:55, June 28, 2013 (UTC)

You lot are really still at it, for two days now? --Kainzorus Prime Walkie-talkie  17:45, June 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * * sigh* Apparently. -- 18:02, June 27, 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, just asking, How come a man like Desmond come and say 'Hey, he's your ancestor too' to William if he just completed some sequences? If, IF, like Sima, it is explicitly stated that Ratonhnhaké:ton had descendants, it might be correct. Otherwise, why argue with something EVEN the writers haven't confirmed? Altaïr Skywalker 47   Pigeon Coop  00:46, June 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Say what? -- 08:23, June 28, 2013 (UTC)


 * Ratonhnhaké:ton clearly had descendants, or else there would be no way to relive his genetic memories. In regards to the Desmond/William thing, I'd say it's better to keep undecided information off the Wiki, so then we're saving us the effort of having to remove it later on because we were proved wrong. Not that I'm saying it isn't a valid or unlikely theory, but that's what it remains as, a theory.
 * That is the source of this discussion; I believe Desmond's statement confirms the relationship between his father and Connor, the others do not. (So in my opinion, it is not "undecided".) Also, please don't forget to sign your posts. -- 09:37, June 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * I have a feeling Black Flag will help to confirm or deny it though. Slate Vesper (talk) 09:33, June 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, without a doubt it will. But since it hasn't yet been released, we only have current media to go off of. -- 09:37, June 28, 2013 (UTC)


 * Even if Rat. had descendants, that doesn't mean that Will and Desmond are in the DIRECT path. There are many branches. Anyway that doesn't mean anything here. I'll wait for BFlag to confirm it. Altaïr Skywalker 47   Pigeon Coop  13:24, June 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * What!? Of course Raton had descendants. The whole premise of the game is that Desmond is replaying the memories of his ancestors. Seriously... -- 16:13, June 28, 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks like I was right, again. -- 11:12, November 1, 2013 (UTC)

Nobody said you were wrong. -- 11:16, November 1, 2013 (UTC)

In Black Flag  it confirms Raton was part of Desmond's paternal line so yes he is an ancestor of William

Awesomekid120 (talk) 11:36, November 17, 2013 (UTC)Awesomekid120

Quote
I propose to change Ratonhnhake:ton's quote to his narration in the trailer. Is anybody with me?

Cheers,

12:01, August 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Unless the quote is in the game or novel, then it is not canon. --Alientraveller (talk) 12:04, August 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * It is already discussed above. And if you insist, then put up a vote. Altaïr Skywalker 47 Agency Laptop 12:06, August 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * It was the trailer for AC III... AgentG231  The Action Center 12:10, August 11, 2013 (UTC)
 * Which never actually happened, so no, we won't be using a quote from the trailer. -- 12:41, August 11, 2013 (UTC)


 * If so, then the quote "On this land, I am torn. Part of me wants to fight and repel all outsiders. The other part of me is the outsider." (which is used in the 'Early life' section) is also non-canon, as it was taken from the 'Gameplay Premiere' trailer, right? -- ILan ( XD &bull; Edits &bull; Home ) 15:38, August 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * If you're going to do all that, you might as well remove all OOU quotes, including the one on Aveline's page, since that comes from a trailer as well.  16:06, August 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we should. -- 17:20, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Possible Entry to Grand Temple
Shortly after the events of "The Tyranny of King Washington", Connor possessed both the Amulet and an Apple of Eden (though he only possessed the latter very briefly). I believe that it should be mentioned in the Trivia section that although he was able to enter the Temple, he was unaware of the fact. 85.72.77.227 07:39, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * He buried the Amulet before he received the Apple. 07:47, September 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * More to the point, why would we mention it? -- 08:48, September 4, 2013 (UTC)

Hugged ?
Who try to hugged him I never seen that?Tyraj (talk) 10:32, September 9, 2013 (UTC)

It Was More Of A Half-Handshake-Half-Shoulder-Bump. The Article Doesn't Actually Mean A Full Hug.2myname1 (talk) 23:10, September 9, 2013 (UTC)

Connor Kenway
And AC4BF now also handles the name 'Connor Kenway', in the Jackdaw appearances upgrade menu. Add to that Connor naming himself Connor Kenway in Forsaken, I think it's pretty safe to say that Connor adopts the surname Kenway after reading his father's journal. -- 12:13, November 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * Given that everything written in-game is coming from an Abstergo employee, who are known to twist events to suit their needs, I wouldn't put much faith in a single off-hand mention for the Aquila figurehead. Also, where in Forsaken does it say he took the name Kenway, as I've just had a quick glance through and could not see it. -- 12:18, November 1, 2013 (UTC)

I am talking in addition to all the times Ubisoft have already called him 'Connor Kenway'. The Ubisoft marketing team continually did it, and the Ubiworkshop website does as well. The actual products even do, take a look here. This is a similar case to William being related to Connor: the writer put that in for a reason. I don't see why Abstergo would 'twist' that to suit any need. And I have taken a look through my copy as well and I cannot find it now. I do recall seeing it in the digital copy, 'Journal of Connor Kenway', but I no longer possess the digital version. I'll look further into it. Regardless of whether it was Corey May's intention to do it or not, all this marketing and now the upgrade menu establish the term as being canon. -- 12:30, November 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * Have you considered this? Also, Abstergo are know to twist the stories to extol the Templars' virtues (as the did with Aveline), so it would make sense that they would try and positively reinforce any familial relationship between Connor and his father. -- 13:14, November 1, 2013 (UTC)

You do realize that it was me who brought it to people's attention here that Kenway was not his surname in the first place, right? So I most definitely have considered that. That does not change how many times he is referred to as Connor Kenway by Ubisoft themselves, and now even in a game. -- 13:33, November 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * Among others. The problem is, you have them using the Kenway name in some places, and denying his usage of it in others. Until we see a database entry for him that uses the name, or it is confirmed by Ubi ComDev, I'm going to be sceptical. Either way, I have tweeted Gabe about it and hope to get a response soon'ish. (P.S. I have just checked Forsaken again, and the name Connor Kenway is never used, nor is the 'Journal of Connor Kenway'.) -- 16:02, November 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * Remember how we had "Edward Teach" in AC3, until they corrected it to Thatch in AC4. This might be a similar case here. Al and Ezio got entries in AC3 database, does Connor get one in AC4?


 * Also, I don't see what we should change in the article, except that trivia bit about the whole 'Kenway' last name being used by Ubi. The opening paragraph still fits, and he never used Kenway surname through the game or in Forsaken. So until there's a new source focused on him in that regard, I don't see what we could change. --Kainzorus Prime Walkie-talkie  16:39, November 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't imagine he will do, considering he was born well after Edward's death and has, as far as I have got in game, had no noticeable impact whatsoever. -- 16:51, November 1, 2013 (UTC)

ComDevs are not writers. I remember Gabe posting on the Ubiforums that Al Mualim was not a Templar at all; obviously this was a little mistake, but ComDevs are not writers or responsible for the series' canon. I'll ask Darby about it over the weekend, to see what he says on it. -- 17:06, November 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * In Initiates, he's called "Connor". --Auditore5 λ 11:06, November 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Abstergo Entertainment's use of the name "Connor Kenway" reeks of POV and bias, as I'm sure was the Ubisoft's intention in creating the company. Unless we have a contemporary source citing the Connor's use of the Kenway name, the most it should get is a Trivia point. -- 09:36, November 4, 2013 (UTC)

Then I guess we best not use anything from the databases whatsoever? Since the Aveline DLC database entries for Aveline and Patience also list him as Connor Kenway. -- 12:28, November 9, 2013 (UTC)


 * We can use the database entries, we'll just stay away from anything contradictory, like the whole Kenway thing. --Kainzorus Prime Walkie-talkie  15:44, November 9, 2013 (UTC)

Here is a new possible surname for Connor. --Revan&#39;s Exile (talk) 01:48, November 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * MFW. --Kainzorus Prime Walkie-talkie  01:53, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeahhhhh, I'll go ahead and say that's probably a mistake. Certainly not a name we'll be using here. -- 09:05, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

"Taboo to touch a stranger amongst the Native American tribes."
Perhaps it's a bit nitpicky, but how to people feel about qualifying this statement from the Triva section:

"It is considered taboo to touch a stranger amongst the Native American tribes. This may explain why Connor reacted with distaste whenever someone hugged him or shook his hand."

There are over 500 Native American tribes in the continental United States alone, and I don't imagine we can verify that this is a practice shared by every single one of them. Could we possibly qualify this to the Mohawk people? Or, if someone has a source showing the veracity of the current statement, could they provide it?

Molotov.cockroach (talk) 02:57, November 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * If it's unsourced it shouldn't be in the article. It's been there long enough that, if it was going to be sourced, it would have been by now. -- 09:15, November 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * Aah, good point. I went looking and wasn't able to find any sources for this information myself, but didn't want to delete it outright since I know that textual resources about the Mohawk people are limited. Still, your right that this statement has been unqualified for a while. Out it goes then, or is there a procedure that should be followed here?
 * Molotov.cockroach (talk) 16:08, November 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well typically, if information is still unsourced after three months, I remove it; that's the same length of time I give for . That's about as far as our procedure tends to go in this matter. -- 16:21, November 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * All right then, sounds good. Out it goes!
 * Molotov.cockroach (talk) 16:34, November 19, 2013 (UTC)

Leader?
I know Connor never took on the title of Mentor, but with Achilles's death, didn't he take over as leader of the Colonial Assassin's? In the Aveline DLC, he seems to have taken charge, giving Aveline an assignment on Goat Island. It would appear he is the only person left to lead the Assassin's with his Mentor dead. Toolen (talk) 18:49, December 19, 2013 (UTC)

Even before Achilles' death he was giving orders to Assassins. He told them to go to the various colonies to fight the Templars, spread word of the Declaration of Independence, protect fishing boats from the British Navy, and menagerie of every tasks. --Revan&#39;s Exile (talk) 23:58, December 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * True, as he was the accomplice of Achilles. Maybe he assumed the position of an Assassin leader sometime after Achilles' death. -- 06:32, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe is the key word here. Maybe he took over, but maybe he didn't. Until we have confirmation either way, any such information being included in the article will be treated as speculation. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 09:09, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Question: I really want to know what happened to connor after AC3 (and please, don't give me a answer like "it's in tublr now, please >:), and if you were the lead writer of that game,  you would change something in the final product?

DARBY: The Aveline content in AC4 gives hints about what Connor is up to, post AC3... he's busy at the Homestead, building a community and rebuilding the Assassin order in the Colonies. I do hope we can fill in his story a little more somehow.

This do show that he is either the de facto mentor of colonial assassins or mentor, but he is some form of leader. We just don't know what kind, just waith for a confirmation. Until then everything is speculation.--ACsenior (talk) 11:58, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * It confirms nothing of the sort; it simply says he is rebuilding. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 13:13, December 20, 2013 (UTC)

Haytham and Birch
"...Connor recovered  Haytham's journal and read of his father's tragic childhood and lifetime of betrayal..."

<span style="color:rgb(255,255,255);">Does this mean that Connor learned of the truth about Birch ordering the mercenary attack in which Edward was killed, and that his path into the templar order was "paved with lies"? Also does this appear in any media at all? I'm sure it is not in the game or forsaken, as far as I can tell from the page. Gr1m r4p3r (talk) 21:47, January 22, 2014 (UTC)


 * It's in Forsaken, and I should assume that Connor was aware of Birch's treachery and Edward's death. -- 21:44, January 22, 2014 (UTC)

Categories
Since i'm just a contributor, could someone add him to the "Hunters" category.--188.180.174.234 19:14, February 16, 2014 (UTC)


 * Done. --<font color="#7575DB" face="OCR A" size="3">Kainzorus Prime <font color="#4C99A6">Walkie-talkie  19:40, February 16, 2014 (UTC)

Le Image Vote
What we have here, is another infobox image vote. This time the fight's between the Initiates render, and one recently made by yours truly. Leaving it open for a week. --<font color="#7575DB" face="OCR A" size="3">Kainzorus Prime <font color="#4C99A6">Walkie-talkie  18:53, April 27, 2014 (UTC)

Current render

 * 1) Looks better than the new render to me, even if the resolution isn't quite as high. 18:59, April 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * 2) -- 19:01, April 27, 2014 (UTC)

New render

 * 1) --<font color="#7575DB" face="OCR A" size="3">Kainzorus Prime <font color="#4C99A6">Walkie-talkie  18:53, April 27, 2014 (UTC)