Assassin's Creed Wiki
Advertisement
Assassin's Creed Wiki
Aclogo.png

Welcome to the Order, Darman36!

Welcome to the Assassin's Creed Wiki!
We hope you enjoy your stay, and we look forward to working with you!
Have you something to say?
  • You can always ask our beloved administrators!
  • Our local staff members can always lend a hand!
  • You can also visit the wiki's community portal!
  • We also have the Discord if you're ever in the mood for a chat!
  • There is also our forums, where all users can help you out.
  • You can also check out the blogs, where you and other contributors can voice out your opinion.
Knights.png

We seek unity, stability and order.
  • Not sure where to start?
    • You can always help out by sharing what you know on some of our stubs.
    • Got some useful pictures? Share them with us on these articles.
    • Got a useful concept for an article? Why not help out in some articles in need of a revamp?
  • Always remember to sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~) to avoid any confusion between users.
  • You can also refer to the wiki's help pages if you're ever in doubt.
  • Please remember to read our wiki policies to avoid gaining any unnecessary attention.
We wish you safety and peace on your future endeavors.
Happy Editing!


Feel free to contact me on my talkpage if you need anything. DarkFeather (talk) 17:14, December 21, 2015 (UTC)

Contents

Re: Database

Archive 1 (2015 – 2021)
Hey there. All of our Database articles got renamed and re-structed not too long ago, due to which the pages we had previously used to display them became obsolete. Every DB entry now has it's own page (i.e. Database: Evie Frye), instead of piling all of the entries onto a single page. I'm afraid this re-structuring has left the Database article in somewhat of a state of disarray. The revamping of this article will consist of considerably more than a small update. At the moment of writing this, I'm not even quite sure what the page is supposed to become like... So while I'd love to offer advice, I think it might be most prudent to wait a few days. I'm currently in the process of deleting all of the 'old format' pages, which consist of pointless re-directs, and will be tackling the Database article afterwards. Mass-deletion, however, takes a little while if there are over 400 redirects. Amnestyyy (Contact me!)

22:13, December 22, 2015 (UTC)

Helix Research Analyst's personal files

Hey Dar
Just popping in real quick - I was reading through the Helix Research Analyst's personal files (welp what a mouthful) article and noticed that the audio files like "New Orders" don't have the dates these conversations took place. Will those be added along with the videos? Thanks for reading and for all your hard work! :) Crook The Constantine District 14:18, February 24, 2016 (UTC)

Crook,
Pretty sure the dates are there. Using "New Orders" as an example, the code should look like this:
"File:[video]|November 2013, Philadelphia: Laetitia England disbands ..."
Unless I missed something? Darman (talk) 22:44, February 24, 2016 (UTC)
Oh yeah, I see it now in source mode, but it doesn't pop up in visual mode. Is that the way it's supposed to be, or..? Crook The Constantine District 22:49, February 24, 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I have it written out in source, but it'll only appear after I've added the video. I've got a system of write transcript, then add vids. It's not an issue? Darman (talk) 22:52, February 24, 2016 (UTC)
No, no, by all means, continue as planned. I was making something out of nothing, evidently :P Crook The Constantine District 07:57, February 25, 2016 (UTC)

Re: Continual Edits

Alright, thanks for the heads-up. -- ZéACNS (talk) 21:56, April 9, 2016 (UTC)

Alright, thanks again. -- ZéACNS (talk) 10:48, May 5, 2016 (UTC)

Sup

I'm on IRC if you want to talk, though I promise I still plan to go through that video list. DarkFeather Raven's NestRaven's Hunt 23:59, May 2, 2016 (UTC)

Talkpage updates

I've responded to a couple of your messages on my talkpage. Cleaning out the videos is still ongoing, but I'll look through your Sandbox. DarkFeather Raven's NestRaven's Hunt 18:47, May 18, 2016 (UTC)

Signature Response

Thank you for contacting me on the signature thing. Regarding changing the font size, I will be doing this as well as leaving you this message. I am editing as I speak. I am almost done with it.

Screen shot:
Assassins Creed Wikia Big Brother Sig code Evidence of Editing.png

So what do you think?

{{BigBrother99Sig}}

Sadly I don't know what to think, I've never used sig coding. The issue is that you don't have 2 sets of blue-highlighted brackets "]]" indicating end of code for the "User", "User:talk" sections. Since your coding doesn't "end", my font is massive, even though I'm "talking". Other tips: 1) "Thanks for contacting" might be redundant (you've linked your talk pg) 2) Your sig adds the Garter crest to pages like a normal pic; I think there's a coding trick for sig images, but you'll have to ask around. You may want to contact Staff for the coding, I'm afraid I can't do much beyond pointing out errors. --Darman (talk) 00:09, May 30, 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for help

Hey, thanks for fixing that link for me. I could not figure out what I was doing wrong. <theproclamation> (talk) 20:57, May 30, 2016 (UTC)

IRC FYI

Hey, next time you're on IRC, stick around for a bit if you can or type "r.msg I'm here" into #ACWiki so that I know you're there. I'm still working on your analysis category, but I'd like to check in with you on where you are with things and if you need anything -- basically say hi. DarkFeather Raven's NestRaven's Hunt 14:12, June 15, 2016 (UTC)

Noted. Sorry. It's just when I've logged in there lately, it's mostly quiet, & I didn't think you were here (or there) as frequently, as your last edit was 1 month ago. --Darman (talk) 14:15, June 15, 2016 (UTC)

Sir Gunn's Armor

My apologies with regards to the incorrect Style formatting of the Sir Gunn's armor contribution. I think it is a good idea to have the picture there in more of a thumbnail style like you have it now. My only question would be why remove the effective 'bonus' of the armor from the article? If it is located somewhere else on the wiki, I was unable to find it, which is what prompted me to contribute in the beginning. Thanks for cleaning the page up, looks much more cohesive now.Dread Loch (talk) 18:15, June 20, 2016 (UTC)

It's all good, formatting can get messy at times. If I recall correctly, Sir Gunn's armor doesn't have any abilities, only an aesthetic difference. The gas mask you mentioned is only seen on the Assassin Killer outfit from uPlay. --Darman (talk) 00:15, June 21, 2016 (UTC)
You have the gas mask ability with this armor as well, when you're in a situation when it is necessary to have it, you have the ability to press "A to equip Gas Mask" appears on the screen.Dread Loch (talk) 22:29, June 23, 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps we're having a communication error on both ends. Let me try again: Sir Gunn's Armor, like most (not all) of the ACRG outfits, allows Shay to equip the gas mask when needed any time after Sequence 3-1, "The Color of Right". That I know of, the Assassin Killer's gas mask is only a cosmetic change, with the mask appearing always equipped even if the situation does not call for it, though I could be wrong. Does this make more sense? --Darman (talk) 08:10, June 24, 2016 (UTC)
I know that the Assassin Killer's outfit perk is that the gas mask ability is always on, no need for engaging it. I will check later this evening on Sir Gunn's Armor to see if the perk is permenant or not.Dread Loch (talk) 17:58, June 24, 2016 (UTC)

Category Relevance

Hey Darman,
I saw you pop into the IRC, but my attention was elsewhere, so I figured I'd answer your question here. If you want to change the category order for articles like the example you gave, you are free to do so, but it's not as necessary as for character articles because they generally just have a lot more categories and it can look very disorganized without the "order of decreasing relevancy". You can always consult the other admins (best bet would probably be either DarkFeather or Sim), but my stance is basically: the "order of decreasing relevancy" rule for categories doesn't need to be enforced on articles that don't have a lot of categories, but adhering to it certainly does no harm.
Cheers! Crook The Constantine District 00:44, December 14, 2016 (UTC)

Crook,
Sorry for constantly popping in/out of IRC. I know it's frowned upon, but I keep disconnecting from the server or something. Gonna wait it out, see if it's my connection. Anyway, I wasn't thinking about altering character categories. I was thinking more, say, the War of Unification. It's listed as "Spoilers", "Stubs", then "Wars" and "Timeline", when as I said earlier, Wars are subset of a Timeline. To confirm: I'm free to flip the two as needed for consistency's sake? BTW, would the Timeline infobox go above or below the Isu one?
--Darman (talk) 01:01, December 14, 2016 (UTC)
Don't worry, people will understand if your connection isn't stable. And yeah, I don't mind if you want to flip around categories like that. As for the order of those templates, I'm not sure if there's actually a rule for it. You'd have to ask someone else ^^; Crook The Constantine District 01:29, December 14, 2016 (UTC)
Thx. It's just last time I popped in/out constantly, I'd accidentally "slapped" someone, thinking it was like a "poke", then couldn't find the type box & kept flipping back/forth, then quit to prevent further potential issues. Re: Category rearranging – I'll add it to my (growing) project list. I'll ask another Admin later on the infoboxes. Thx again, --Darman (talk) 01:38, December 14, 2016 (UTC)

Black Cross

Hey Darman,

Regarding the changes you've made to the Black Crosses article and the William Stoughton article, where exactly is it stated that Stoughton is a Black Cross? In the 4th issue of the Assassins comic? Or the Templars one?

Additionally, I would like to point out, William Stoughton might not be the character you mean - from what I know of what a Black Cross is (it's not a lot, I have yet to read the Templars comic series), Samuel Parris would fit the description much better. The comics themselves get Stoughton and Parris mixed up though, so I understand the confusion. Can you get back to me on this? Thanks for reading. Crook The Constantine District 18:54, December 14, 2016 (UTC)

Crook,
I thought he was a Cross. Issue 4 for the Titan Assassin comics page says so, at least. Did I jump the gun? I don't have the books, so I went off the wiki, and the issue's noted confusion between the two makes it worse... --Darman (talk) 19:20, December 14, 2016 (UTC)
Just checked the summary for issue 4, yeah, that is definitely wrong. Whoever wrote it went off what the comic said, which I don't blame them for. I'm speeding through the Templars comics right now, cause I don't think the Assassins comic series ever explicitly called Parris a Black Cross, to look for some confirmation on that. Crook The Constantine District 19:35, December 14, 2016 (UTC)
Alright. I'm working on duplicate links/unlinked pgs in the Titan comics. Shall I revert the previous edits & remove the Cross line? --Darman (talk) 19:40, December 14, 2016 (UTC)
You can. I will add Parris if I come across any evidence that he was indeed the Order's Black Cross at the time. Crook The Constantine District 19:45, December 14, 2016 (UTC)

Sourcing Question

Hi Darman. I've responded to your query on my talk page. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 09:19, April 4, 2018 (UTC)

Skill tree

Thanks! You'd have to ask an admin about that - I just named the Odyssey page how I saw the other named and figured that was the standard. Raylan13 (talk) 16:17, June 29, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Mass Edits

Hello, Darman. I apologize for editing sections so quickly, i'd had a lot on my mind during those edits, and just thought those pages would sound better in my mind, disregarding the thoughts of you and others on this wiki. Altair 0147 (talk) 11:24, September 25, 2018 (UTC)Altair 0147

Hey, no problem! Admittedly, there is a learning curve for Wiki writing formatting and style. I'd only meant that as a pointer, not a reprimand, so I apologize if I came off as blunt. You didn't step on anyone's toes, so I think you're good. Happy editing! -- Darman (talk) 23:01, September 25, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Skill trees

Hey Darman, thank you for reaching out to me! I especially appreciate your recognition of our sentence case naming policy as we've had quite a number of users who have been oblivious to it or fail to respect it. However in this case, I'm not entirely sure that tree shouldn't be capitalized. The reason is because conventionally, gameplay terms are capitalized and treated as proper nouns (i.e. in game manuals, game guides, reviews, etc.) so as to distinguish them as gameplay terms. This is normally necessary so as to avoid confusion. Per our in-universe writing policy, we normally make sure that all gameplay terms are translated into "real-life" terms anyways, but with certain articles, like the Skill Tree articles, these are expressly out-of-universe pages.

The question with the Skill Tree pages is that, if the game explicitly names the skill trees by this generic name of "Skill Tree" (i.e. named after what it is), then skill tree can be validly seen as either a gameplay term that should be capitalized or as a general noun not capitalized. If, on the other hand, the skill trees in the games aren't given this name (but given another name, e.g. Runes, formerly Masteries, in League of Legends), then you're absolutely right that the skill trees should not be capitalized. My apologies if I have made this a bit confusing. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 10:45, October 3, 2018 (UTC)

Helix Rift Events

The events cycle through so I'm not sure its necessary to note when the event was active. Additionally with each new iteration of the same event they change which heroes give the synch bonuses. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 07:53, November 27, 2018 (UTC)

Hyphen vs En/Em dash vs colon

Hello Darman, thanks for asking about this since it is indeed a very common mistake among editors. In reality, usage of the hyphen in any context outside of compound words is technically grammatically incorrect, a point that even many professional companies tend to miss. The correct punctuation to be used in the subtitle of a title is always a colon, and with a subsequent subtitle, an en dash. Otherwise, hyphens and colons are not actually supposed to be interchangeable with dashes and have entirely different functions.

En dashes and em dashes actually are interchangeable when used in prose to set off additional information within a sentence, and usage of either is entirely a stylistic choice. The only requirement is that there must be single spaces flanking either side of an en dash when used in such a case. If an em dash is used instead, there should not be any space. However, our wiki prefers em dashes over en dashes for this function. One other usage of an em dash is in attributing quotes, although this is given automatically by the template.

You raise a legitimate concern, but hyphens simply do not belong in titles despite the common, unprofessional error made by even Ubisoft itself. If it is the case that our audience may have trouble finding articles due to being unfamiliar with typing dashes, then we should create pages with the hyphenated titles redirecting to the proper pages.

Finally, it is possible to type the dashes. There are different codes for it that you can find online, but the ones I am familiar with are ALT+0150 and ALT+0151 for en and em dashes respectively where ALT denotes holding down the ALT key while typing the numbers. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 02:10, January 21, 2019 (UTC)

Lines being added

Hey Darman36, saw your edit summary earlier so I would just like to say I did not intend to do it on purpose. I merely added the link into the "Ibis Reborn" text, so I'm not too sure why the lines are moved. It could likely due to a FANDOM bug, similar to the one accompany the {{DISPLAYNAME}} tag. Just wanna let you know and I apologies for the inconvenience caused. XOdeyssusx (talk) 14:56, April 3, 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, my bad. It's just that you were the last edit, so I thought it was you. My apologies for the bad faith. Damn, I hate it when Fandom bugs mess up stuff! -- Darman (talk) 15:08, April 3, 2019 (UTC)

No full sync

I have responded to your question on my talk page. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 15:30, April 4, 2019 (UTC)

Altering image source & licensing

Hello Darman, I've noticed the widespread changes you've made to hundreds of our images today. Can you explain a bit what is the purpose for these changes? I find them to look really messy now, and I can't even put it into words, only that this...
Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0
Looks very disruptive. I have never seen that template before, but if it indicates the same licensing as {{CC-BY-SA}} why not just use {{CC-BY-SA}} in the license field of the information box? Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 20:32, April 21, 2019 (UTC)

Hey Sol,
Sorry for the edit spam on the pics. I'm just going through the achievements page and noticed that we hadn't properly sourced the AC3 achievement icons. We also need larger Brotherhood icons, but when I tried uploading the icons, they look...funny. There's some bars on the bottom of the pngs that aren't there originally, and I've not altered them in any way. As for the licensing: damnit, I see the template code went weird; I've seen the blank spaces in the Cc-by-sa-3.0 before but thought they were just a glitch on my end. Wait, they're the same license?!? *sigh* Guess that's what comes from not reading properly. My sincerest apologies for messing up the aesthetic. I'll fix all instances of that ASAP. -- Darman (talk) 05:10, April 22, 2019 (UTC)

Hello again, sorry for such a late reply. I did indeed forget about your suggestion when I read it while I was busy, so thank you for reminding me. Yes, feel free to make corrections to the two templates. :) Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 22:33, May 15, 2019 (UTC)

Re: Ubisoft articles

Of course it's a given that if a link is broken or outdated, we should fix it with an archived version of the page. It defeats the whole point of sourcing otherwise. :) Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 13:54, April 26, 2019 (UTC)

Various Rebellion stuff

So for the time being, the CM doesn't want her real name on the wikia, at least not while she is still the CM, but she's fine with her forum name which I put. She did not confirm who 3P3EC74R works for, so it could be Erudito or something completely different. Couple other thoughts: Should we create an IU Rebellion page separate to the AC: Reb page similar to Liberation and the AC: Lib pages? And, the messages sent from Player Admin and 3P3EC74R through the Mobile Animus chats aren't really part of the memories. Should they be included on them or should we move them to something like the 21st century conversations? – Lacrossedeamon (talk) 12:29, December 11, 2019 (UTC)

A pity we won't know if a 3P3EC74R/Erudito link exists. It'd have been nice if it was even denied, but maybe it'll show up later? Thanks for asking, though! As for your questions, I don't know if we need another Rebellion page. I'd always thought that users just happened to use an Abstergo Animus in our world, eg. Rogue and Unity, and not that it was an in-universe game. When you describe the memory dialogue like that, I can certainly see a case for moving them to 21st cen. convo's, but I think you're better off asking a Staff for both matters, as they'll have a better idea where things go. – Darman (talk) 20:10, December 12, 2019 (UTC)

Date of Rebellion memories

Hello Darman, a few other editors told me just now that the missions in the first few regions of Rebellion are set a few years prior to 1492. I got the impression that the game begins in 1492 because of our memory pages on them. They told me this is incorrect, and I noticed that you were the one who changed the dates to 1492 in the infoboxes. Can you please give me your reasoning to help us verify the correct date? Thank you! Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 21:38, March 27, 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sol,
I'll gladly explain! But where in the missions does it say they are prior to 1492? Unless my eyes skipped it, I don't see anything. Anyway, I worked off the AC film's intro showing Aguilar's formal initiation in 1492. I felt it had to have happened before Rebellion's Prologue, where he says it's his first mission as a (true) Assassin, in keeping with the Spaniards seeming more orthodox in following the Levantine Order's practices. However, the assumption does not apply for Region 5's last 3 missions leading to Torquemada's death. While he died in 1498, no date is given in-game. The most players get are Aguilar's logs saying Tomás "has not appeared in public for years" since "he has had years to study the Staff". I think we can easily assume there was a time skip from 1492–1498 in the Spanish Order's activities. – Darman (talk) 05:20, March 28, 2020 (UTC)
So there are a number of contradiction that need to parsed for this. The movie state 1492 for the ceremony but Granada capitulated on January 2nd of that year. That most likely means that memory 18 Fall of Granada happens no later than that date. The novelization however moves the ceremony and failed rescue of the prince back a year to 1491. The other historical scenes aren’t labeled but Sophia mentions the 6th as the date for Benedicto's death. The memories War of Attrition and Ammunition Ablaze mention the start and end to the siege of Baza from 1489-1490. This being the case might put memory 18 in November of 1491 which was the end of siege of Granada. Finally Aguilar's bio in the game actually states he joined the Assassins in 1487. The ceremony from the movie and novelization might therefore not actually be an initiation but a promotion. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 08:44, March 29, 2020 (UTC)
Putting aside for a moment that the film suggests (almost certainly erroneously) that every Animus scene is set in 1492, are we absolutely sure that the scene where Muhammad XII is to give the Apple to Torquemada is set during the formal capitulation ceremony and not during the surrender in the Siege of Granada? Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 08:58, March 29, 2020 (UTC)
I for one am not certain. The novelization makes it seem more likely that it's surrender and not the capitulation. I'd say it depends on which we believe overrules the other. Does anyone know if Christie Golden answers fan question? Lacrossedeamon (talk) 09:40, March 29, 2020 (UTC)
But even the film itself doesn't say clearly that it is the formal capitulation and the not the surrender of the city. The year it gives is a different matter than what event it is meant to depict since the year itself is already known to be most likely erroneous in the context of most of the events and therefore unreliable. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 10:08, March 29, 2020 (UTC)

I actually haven't finished the game yet, but the description for this last memory, "The Fall of Granada", pretty much says that it's occurring during, well, the Fall of Granada as "Torquemada and the Army of the Inquisition are entering Alhambra". So this is the exact same scene from the movie then right? Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 01:12, March 30, 2020 (UTC)
(Damn, I step away for 1 day!) Thanks for clearing up the dates, I didn't know there were so many inconsistencies between media and real history. Infuriating, to say the least. I'm sorry for inadvertently causing such confusion with my edits. Lacrossedeamon, I'm near-certain Golden answers fan questions, for ex. via Twitter, though she's been busy with Star Wars of late, so I don't know how good her memory will be for AC. As for ACReb's Torquemada scene, Sol, yes, it's the same: Muhammad XII et al. have just left the room as Tomás reveals the Apple to the Templars, before Aguilar enters absent María and fights Ojeda, whom he kills as Tomás escapes. – Darman (talk) 03:15, March 30, 2020 (UTC)

Response on Cult talk page

Hey just to keep you aware the situation, the person you tried to respond to is a sock puppet and the reason why that page got locked in the first place. We realize it’s inconvenient to have a page locked like this for a indefinite time but the edit warring was starting to get out of hand. Hopefully the guy loses interest and we can unlock it in the near future. For the time being if you have any suggested edit either use the article‘s talk page or one of our own. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 04:03, May 9, 2020 (UTC)

Ahh. I thought they were a sock, given how cocky they were in their Cult/Templar belief for such a new account, but I wasn't sure. Thanks for the tip, but I don't have any suggested edits now. Even if I did, they'd likely be minor, so I'm willing to wait until Staff reach a decision. – Darman (talk) 04:20, May 9, 2020 (UTC)
Hey Darman! I don't know if you are on the discord or not, but I just made a blog post about this guy and his sockpuppets: here. - Soranin (talk) 18:24, May 9, 2020 (UTC)

Merge Proposals

Hey, Darman! I just opened up a discussion on our open merge proposals. It's quite long, but if we discuss it we can close them (especially because there are some from 2014 still unsolved :o)

If you have the time, could you offer some input? Thank you a lot. - Soranin (talk) 22:27, May 21, 2020 (UTC)

Sure! I don't know how much sway I'll have, and I doubt the changes will affect me much as I'll just follow the community decision, but I'll give input where I can. Thanks! – Darman (talk) 23:40, May 21, 2020 (UTC)

Images

I haven't gotten around to sourcing the Buckingham Palace images and I'm working on sourcing not just the Buckingham Palace images, but the rest of the images that needs to be sourced. Andrewh7 (talk) 22:35, June 13, 2020 (UTC)

Never mind. I thought you meant before uploading them to the wiki like using the File summary to do it all at once or something. Maybe, but after uploading the rest of the images, adding the sourcing sounds taxing and prefer to reverse search them at that point. Andrewh7 (talk) 22:52, June 13, 2020 (UTC)
If there are images that are from multiple sources, do I just write each source link to the ArtStation page or the entire template? Either way, would they have to be in order? Andrewh7 (talk) 02:12, June 14, 2020 (UTC)
From what you said before it sounded that way and now you’re saying not to do that? So I have to include the link and the template? What if they are images that are completely different things / places and aren’t all the same? What then? Andrewh7 (talk) 03:16, June 16, 2020 (UTC)
Not just from the same set, but could also be from completely different ones. On an unrelated note, if I wanted / felt like certain characters needed closeups that lacked them, is there anyone in particular that I should ask? Are side characters / NPCs the only ones that can have closeup images or can playable characters have them too? Andrewh7 (talk) 05:00, June 16, 2020 (UTC)

Le Louvre Gallery

By the way, you added the Environment art caption to images of interior images. Thought you should know, so you could think of the right caption to change it since it isn’t an environment image. Andrewh7 (talk) 03:19, June 16, 2020 (UTC) Andrewh7

Yes, thanks. I used it for now, reasoning that they're renders of an enclosed environment instead of The Outside we usually associate with that word. I plan to update them when I find out what building they are within the Louvre, but feel free to do it yourself, too.– Darman (talk) 03:55, June 16, 2020 (UTC)

Suggestions

Had two suggestions I wanted to run by you. I noticed there isn’t a family section in the infobox. Maybe there should be. It would make things easier knowing who is related to who when users don’t know and the information is located on various parts of the page. There are characters that have gameplay alternatives that have different endings depending on the choice made. Perhaps a category can be created to notify users that the character has alternative gameplays and the endings stated on the pages may not necessarily be the case for every player right off the bat. Andrewh7 (talk) 04:23, June 27, 2020 (UTC) Andrewh7

Re: redirects

I have two check boxes, follow this page and leave redirect. I assumed they were available to all editors but maybe it’s a permissions only thing. In that case, oops! I lied to the other guy. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 04:22, June 29, 2020 (UTC)

Purpose of redirects

Hey Darman, I think I've explained this before, but "unused redirect" is not really a valid reason to put redirect pages up for deletion. The two latest examples I was looking at were "Artist (Piagnoni)" and "Mayan stelae". In the latter, you gave the reason that it is an "unused link except for once on talk page".

Redirects serve to link to articles using an alternate term or phrase; ensure that any page which has been redirected doesn't immediately cause the former link to become dead; and finally, so that users who type in a different search term than the exact title can still find the article.

The first function is rendered moot by the fact that we have this convention of always linking using the exact article title anyways, followed by the pipe for the alternate term we wish to use... this is technically speaking not a codified policy, and it's just a convention carried over Wookieepedia who banned using redirects as links for whatever reason. But let's ignore this first function.

The second purpose, you understand, which seems to be your reason why those two redirect pages should be deleted.

But it doesn't seem like you understand the third. Redirects serve to help visitors find the article they're looking for because they auto-fill to the right article if they mistyped or used an alternate name for it. So let's say that a visitor thought to search for "Mayan stelae" instead of "Mayan stele". By keeping the redirect page for "Mayan stelae", they'll still be directed to the right page.

Now in some cases, even without the redirect page, they'll still be auto-filled along the way, as in the case with "Mayan stelae". By the time one hits "Mayan stel-" they should find the page, but this isn't always true since some alternate names may be entirely different. Maybe one can argue that we shouldn't be keeping redirects where the auto-fill leads to the correct title appearing ahead of the mistake, but I am accustomed to maintaining pluralized titles as redirect pages.

As a result, redirect pages which have common misspellings are spelled correctly but lack the appropriate diacritics, or where the title has been inflected do not automatically need to be deleted. That they are "unused", if you mean not linked to anywhere currently, is also not a valid reason for deletion. This also means that "typographical error" is also not always a valid reason for deletion. Make no mistake, this doesn't mean we should arduously create redirect pages solely to account for all kinds of possible misspellings, only that you must be mindful that a misspelling or inexact title isn't always an immediate cause for deletion.

I deleted "Artist (Piagnoni)" with the view that it is probably unlikely someone would accidentally type for that instead given that "Piagnoni" is a disambiguating term, and it is not a commonly known word. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 21:01, July 1, 2020 (UTC)

Ahhh, OK. Thank you for explaining that more. I'm sorry about the mess, then. I'll try to keep this in mind and be less eager in my redirect edits in the future. Thank you. – Darman (talk) 21:20, July 1, 2020 (UTC)

Re: Animus Archetypes

Yes, and I wrote him a sorry message. I now cannot write in my sandbox. It will stay incomplete. Just a thanks for your involvement. But why don't he blocked me? I published something under construction, and that's not right. I have to thank Sol. GodGamer GodConsole 18:10, July 2, 2020 (UTC)

I don't think Lacrosse has the admin rights to block users. As best I understand, his job as a Moderator is page clean-up and ensuring users play nice. The reason why you aren't blocked is because, as Sol said, he "see[s] your edits as being made in earnest faith". The Staff believe the pages you've started are needed, it's just that your writing and sourcing needs work to match the standards set here. I'm sure you'll be able to edit your sandbox in time, but as I'm not Staff, I don't know when. – Darman (talk) 00:00, July 3, 2020 (UTC)

ACSisterhood

You should get the banner made by the Rebellion team as well to commemorate the movement. – Lacrossedeamon (talk) 01:20, September 15, 2020 (UTC)

Great, thx! Now added, and AC's acknowledgement too – Darman (talk) 01:50, September 15, 2020 (UTC)

Bug report

However, this site is not the place to file bug reports. For that, you'd want to contact Ubisoft Support.

Other game wikis have a place for bug reports and various solutions to them if anyone's found them when the developers have not tried to fix them yet. Why is this one different? – ZW2018 (talk) 16:27, September 26, 2020 (UTC)

re: AC Identity arm guards

I really missed it. Thanks. --UJ112013 (talk) 10:40, September 28, 2020 (UTC)

Badge hunting

Sorry my man, I didn't know that Badge Hunting was a ban-able thing. I will not do so again. unsigned comment by DSegno92 (talk · contr)

Extent of real-world info in articles

I've opened up a new thread on the topic of how much information from real-world sources we should allow ourselves to draw. I noted that you briefly broached the topic before in the agenda post, so I was hoping you might be interested in elaborating your position further on this? It hasn't gotten the attention I would like so far, probably due to the recent merger of the forum and Discussions board. If you have the time, could you please offer your input? Thanks! Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 22:34, October 9, 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! Tbh, the 2020 agenda thread dropped off my radar because I had the sense that everyone there had said their piece, but thanks for reminding me. Just commented on it now. I hope I was clearer in my point on IRL vs AC info than before. – Darman (talk) 05:00, October 10, 2020 (UTC)

Soranin's Sandbox

Soranin put out an open request on the ACR discord server for people to help him fill out the table. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 10:27, October 11, 2020 (UTC)

Hey, Darman!

So I wanna start with thanking you for keeping an eye out for us. It's really heartening knowing someone's got our back.

But, yeah, as Lacrosse said I did put out a request on Discord because good God the size of those tables! I knew I'd probably not be able to finish it alone before Valhalla came out, and we're all swamped with that, so I asked my friends for help over on Discord. If I ever do something like this again, I'll be sure to warn you :)

Thank you so much! - Soranin (talk) 12:34, October 11, 2020 (UTC)
Ahh OK. Thanks for clearing that up. I didn't know you had put out an open offer to everyone for help, as I haven't joined the Discord (just too much to keep tabs of), so I thought Blinx347's edit, however well-intentioned, was overstepping. Sorry for the confusion. – Darman (talk) 14:00, October 11, 2020 (UTC)
Aw, shucks. It was nothing, really. Just managed to coincide a lull in my work and the need to make the pages. All the data was already in the wiki, was just a matter of shuffling it around. You helped a lot too! :D – Soranin (talk) 14:37, October 15, 2020 (UTC)

CoD Wiki

Ok delete it I was going to focus on one specific game though and one only I've given up all hope on it anyway. – unsigned comment by Farengaurd (talk · contr) 13:43, October 14, 2020‎ (UTC)

Images

Look, Sabin Lanchette done a same variant. I didn't knew it. Sorry for duplicating the fles, but I sent you a link, at my talkpage. He made the same image too. Sorry. Please delete it. GodGamer GodConsole 15:20, October 19, 2020 (UTC)

Assassins are Hidden Ones, Templars Order of the Ancients

Darman, I noticed you changing the categorization of various characters to specify that they were associated with either the Hidden Ones or the Order of the Ancients rather than the Assassins or Templars respectively. Your edit summary here indicates that you take Hidden Ones to not be Assassins and Templars to not be Order of the Ancients. This is incorrect. We had an extensive community discussion earlier this year righting this misconception though due to the migration to UCP, it might take some time for me to scour for it. Long story short, if the Hidden Ones were not Assassins, this invalidates the entire premise of Assassin's Creed: Origins being a story about the founding of the Assassin Brotherhood. Fan reinterpretation that the Assassins didn't begin until the name came into being pushes the founding of the Assassin Brotherhood even way further forward from Origins, which goes against the canonical interpretation. This is notwithstanding that the presumption seems to be that the name began with Hassan-i-Sabbah which is also not confirmed. The most faithful to the way the lore has been presented is that the Hidden Ones and the Assassins are one and the same organization with clear continuity, only under a different name, not two distinct organizations. In our discussion and voting, we also settled why we will interpret the Order of the Ancients as Templars all the same.

I have not corrected this because our policy on whether we should include a category where a more specific subcategory page has already been included has not been settled. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 19:39, October 19, 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sol,
I'm sorry for the confusion I caused with the categories. I wasn't aware that either early iteration of both secret orders were the same as their modern counterparts because, as you said, I saw it more as a restructuring from one to the other rather than a simple rebranding. I believe the Proto-Assassin vs. Assassin & Proto-Templar vs. Templar thread is what you were referencing, yes? I remember seeing it a few times when someone added new comments, but I admit I only briefly skimmed it. Guess I should fix that. Thank you for alerting me to my mistake, I'll make a note for the future. – Darman (talk) 21:20, October 19, 2020 (UTC)

Redundant edits

Hey, Darman,
I saw some edits that are redundant. I checked differences and found out what you changed. It's not bad, but redundant. For example at A Helot's Dagger page you changed it from [Helot|Helots]. Look, I don't know why you do this, but I want to know before I revert. – GodGamer GodConsole 19:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

No worries, Gamer. It's actually not redundant, but I see why you'd think that. Instead, it's your style that's redundant (through no fault of your own, I will add) due to all wikis' internal codes. Using your example, [[Helot]]s has the same effect as [[Helot|Helots]]. It reduces what we need to write and makes linking plurals of page titles with nouns much easier. – Darman (talk) 23:35, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
I start it first and you write it second. Why? – GodGamer GodConsole 14:35, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Because that's how collaborative editing sites work when anyone with an account can add as they see fit? I've had it happen to me, where someone rewrites something I did which I thought was clear into something more coherent. It's not a slight against your writing, I just thought having less code where possible was cleaner. – Darman (talk) 02:40, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Eivor's Gender

Why does Eivor's page make it sound like Eivor is canonically female even though Darby McDevitt himself confirmed that both were canon, so shouldn't the page be gender-neutral using words like they and their? – Andrewh7 (talk) 07:40, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

It normally should, as that was the policy we'd previously established, and you're right, Darby did say both were canon, so they/them would have worked perfectly fine. But it turns out there's a major spoiler reason later in-game which makes a strong case for Eivor being a woman. – Darman (talk) 13:45, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
Which is what exactly, if I may ask? – Andrewh7 (talk) 20:05, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
The difference is due to "Animus glitches" Odin's Isu DNA affecting the Animus – Darman (talk) 22:55, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
That still doesn't seem like confirmation/proof that Eivor is actually female, just a strong case. Making a “strong case for it”, doesn’t mean that it is proof/enough proof to state it. For all we know Eivor is actually male. We don’t know and we really can’t say for sure. Andrewh7 (talk) 21:29, 12 November 2020 (UTC) Andrewh7
Except we can. The "animus glitch" Darman refers to is the Animus reading the Isu DNA from Odin present in Eivor's DNA, which is explained in the "hidden truth video" which you unlock. Besides that, in the quest where you unmask the the Grand Master of the OoA, you'll get a key to his private study room, where in one of the documents, the name "Eivor Varinsdottir" appears written alongside Sigurd's. - Soranin (talk) 20:43, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, I mentioned DNA under (now-removed) <!-- hidden text --> in my reply in case others felt like reading my page, though I don't know if you saw it. But it's an open secret given the spoiler template on Eivor's page. Thanks for elaborating, Soranin, much appreciated. – Darman (talk) 00:05, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

My mess

Heh. Thanks for clearing up the mess I've left in my wake during my edits. It seems I'm a little rusty on the wikia editing policy and MoS (ironic, since I helped write the dang thing back in the day...). Not to worry, though, I'll get the hang of it again soon enough... I hope :/ Amnestyyy (Contact me!) 21:26, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Welcome back! Hey, no worries. The site has had a completely new wiki engine since you left a while back, so it'll take time for everyone to get used to it on top of you refreshing your old skills. Glad to see you around again. – Darman (talk) 21:55, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

RE:Chinese Templars

Hey again, Darman. My apologies for getting back to you for this question so late. You must have felt bad about asking at a certain point even though there's not reason to be because it is a perfectly valid question, and I actually really appreciate you taking an interest in this topic.

The simple answer is that Mao built up a cult of personality just as Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and the Kim dynasty in North Korea did. You may be familiar with the history, but even after the Great Chinese Famine caused by the Great Leap Forward and his Cultural Revolution which resulted in a combined average estimate of 40 million deaths—equivalent to the total death toll in World War II across the entire world—his glorified cult remained. Even while Deng Xiaoping sought to diminish this cult, Mao has never truly been repudiated in the Mainland. The CCP line is to maintain him as a unifying, national icon, such that despite the undeniable and unprecedented devastation that Mao wrought—he is responsible for a greater death toll than any other historical leader in history and set Mainland China back for decades—countless excuses have been invented to divert his culpability.

Deng even said that Mao was "70% good, 30% bad" despite having his own reservations about his cult of personality, which Guan Yun brought up as evidence that Mao's flaws have been acknowledged and as some sort of correct metric for assessing Mao. In reality, this only demonstrates how the CCP have tried to reduce Mao's guilt as much as they can while recognizing that it's impossible to wipe his record clean. At Mao's death, the Gang of Four were made into exclusive scapegoats for the worst excesses under Mao's reign—not to suggest they weren't also guilty—while many PRC nationalists attribute the Mainland's rapid industrialization from the 1980s onward to socioeconomic foundations lain by Mao's sacrifices (of millions of people) rather than economic reforms under his successors and the opening up to global trade.

In my view, Mao is unequivocally one of the worst leaders in the history of the world, not just by sheer death toll alone, but there was nothing but catastrophe throughout his rule, and only a cult could possibly convince people to not only deny his colossal incompetence but fathom that he could be China's greatest ruler in history. I think maybe an easy contemporary comparison are attitudes about Donald Trump among his most fanatic supporters, where even with over 266,000 deaths in total and counting in the United States, somehow people find ways to excuse his complicity, like the outrageous argument that 266k deaths is the best that Americans could possibly have done to mitigate the damage and that if not for Trump, the death toll would be exponentially greater.

I am not a psychologist and cannot explain phenomenon like this. Perhaps the easiest is to imagine times when we ourselves have had our idols. I have Mongolian friends who have trouble not being apologists for Genghis Khan's crimes even when they are really good people who despise imperialism and strongman rule. Even the way young people stan Kpop stars or other celebrities is a similar mentality. All of us instinctively have a temptation to filter out flaws of people we like and redeemable qualities of people we hate.

I don't think having someone to look up to is all bad, but obviously there is an extreme that can be exploited by governments, and it's frightening to see how absolutely all-consuming it can be. Additional factors to the perpetuation of Mao's cult is that the people ruling China today are largely from what we call the "lost generation" (equivalent to Boomers in the US :P and not to be confused with other lost generations). These were those youths during the Cultural Revolution who were galvanized into fanatical anarchic riots, witch-hunts, and purges in the name of Mao against the country's intellectuals, teachers, scientists, artists, etc. The worst stereotypes of Chinese people today stem primarily from this generation.

While there was a period of gradual liberalization in the 1980s, the PRC took an even darker turn after the Tiananmen Square massacre. This was a crossroads moment, at a time when many other countries around the world were experiencing a wave of democratization, including South Korea, Taiwan, and of course the Soviet bloc, the PRC chose to double down on coercive rule. After the CCP chose violent crackdown, national education was introduced along with the narratives that are a mainstay of PRC psychology today. Anti-Japanese sentiment over World War II and rhetoric like "century of humiliation" and "hurting the feelings of Chinese people" predate this time, but their prevalence in youth education, media, and foreign diplomacy dramatically escalated from the 1990s onward as a political tool.

For example, it is now often forgotten that from the 1950s to 1970s, the PRC policy had been to lay the question of demanding reparations and an apology from Japan for WW2 aside because they valued re-establishing trade ties over justice for the Chinese people. Mao even thanked Japanese diplomats for the invasion because he recognized that the Japanese invasion weakened the KMT and contributed to the CCP victory.

This is not to say that Chinese people do not have legitimate traumas from WW2. They very much do. I know from my own grandparents how real that trauma was, and Japanese war crimes cannot be excused. The Japanese Empire was a fascist regime and a frighteningly evil reflection of what China can become today, but the CCP did not and never truly cared about these traumas. Only in the 1990s when it became politically prudent to exploit that trauma by magnifying it and deepening the wound whenever they could as part of a campaign to encourage xenophobia to consolidate power did they start pretending to care.

Nor do I entirely reject the concept of the "century of humiliation" either, for even as a Hong Konger, whenever I go back and read about the Opium Wars, I loathe the injustice wrought by the British as well, but that narrative is now constantly invoked more than ever to frame any political dissent as fomented by foreign agents, removing all agency (and therefore humanity) from local people. I may feel anguish when I read about Chinese people being victims of European imperialism, as were innumerable other peoples around the world, but other Hong Kongers and I can understand the nuances of this narrative. We do not reject our Chinese ethnic and cultural heritage, but a vast portion of Hong Kongers are either refugees from Mao or descended from those refugees, growing up with front row seats of the gross atrocities which has continued to be committed by the People's Republic of China since the death of Mao.

I want to avoid this cliché because it is so often abused to denigrate those who disagree with us, but the one word that concisely answers your question is brainwashing. We Hong Kongers are also often accused of being brainwashed in turn by PRC nationalists—obviously as do leftists and rightists levy the same charge against one another in the US—but I strictly refuse to use the word for just anyone whose political beliefs are in opposition to mine, even if they are extreme and fanatical. I believe that some individuals certainly can and do become fanatics through their own free exploration and life experiences.

I would identify brainwashing when there is actually the presence of an active, deliberate campaign of rigorous indoctrination by powerful actors, which involves the restriction of exposure to diverse beliefs and suppression of dissenting perspectives. Although every society has an underlying ideology in its culture which forms the default, subconscious lens through which a local would view the world—in America's case it is classical liberalism—being influenced by one's social bubble itself is not brainwashing or indoctrination. Even if we were to argue that this does constitute a minor form of indoctrination, such that we are all indoctrinated to an extent, I don't believe using this as the operative definition for brainwashing is convenient as an analytical tool where there exists the aforementioned deliberate campaign of the figurative "burning books and burying scholars". Such a campaign is a distinct beast altogether in no small part for its production of structural violence, for being a form of structural violence.
So as an example, there are home-grown PRC ultranationalists and then there are "tankies"; Western-born apologists, closet fascists, and fanatics for non-Western totalitarian regimes like the People's Republic of China, the Syrian Arab Republic, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. If you have ever had the misfortune of being attacked by a "tankie", you would most likely see them as brainwashed cultists, but I do not believe most "tankies" are technically speaking brainwashed whereas PRC ultranationalists by and far are very much brainwashed. I make this distinction because I believe it is important to recognize that tankies are often Americans, Canadians, etc. who grew up in the same environment as us where they had free access to diverse resources and opposing perspectives online. They exercised their freedom to choose what sources they consulted, which they believed, and arrived at their conclusions that way.
One of my childhood best friends is a "tankie" who idolizes Mao just as Guan Yun does, and he harbours some of the most sociopathic convictions about the "nastiness of love", about how massacres of innocents are not unethical if committed in the name of self-interest, about how domestic violence is not only okay but should be encouraged. But this former friend of mine, I have never once thought to call him brainwashed because we grew up in the same hometown, went to the same elementary, middle, and high schools. I was his earliest friend, and he grew up with a circle of friends who believed in the complete opposite of these horrifying beliefs he now embraces (we were a group of kids who idolized first the Jedi then the ninja from Naruto and our philosophical beliefs were mostly a fusion of the two). Even if his household were Mao cultists, I don't think we can reduce his environmental upbringing down to that household. This former friend of mine arrived at his extreme conclusions based on his own independent thinking, his exercise in his free will which was not obstructed, with access to diverse sources telling him differently, and based on his underlying temperament and personal values.

PRC ultranationalists and Mao-worshippers who grew up in a society where Mao is at times treated as even a god, where from the earliest age they are taught only the glory—we must pause and ask ourselves if we can be sure we would not be like them if that is the world we were brought up in? If you have ever met a Mainlander who came to disavow the PRC and become a human rights activist reflect on their childhood education, their guilt at what they had believed when they were young because it was all they had known, then you understand what brainwashing truly is. So I come back to my prior answer of the Cultural Revolution's impact on Chinese society, producing the lost generation, and then to the national education campaign that escalated from the 1990s onward.

As for Qin Shi Huang, the simplest way to understand his significance for Chinese people is that he was our cultural equivalent to how Adolf Hitler is globally seen today. Cursory searches online for "greatest Chinese emperor" will inevitably yield Qin Shi Huang as a candidate for the title, but this masks the fact that for the Chinese, Qin Shi Huang was the icon of the pure evil ruler for thousands of years, that one man people would compare their opponents to when political arguments turned sour. I do not know for sure how he is taught nowadays in Mainland China, but I have seen a trend in favour of reassessing his figure as truly one of China's greatest rulers. I encounter this opinion quite commonly among PRC nationalist and "tankie" circles, and Mao himself at the Eight Party Congress in 1958 said this: "What did [Qin Shi Huang] amount to? He only buried alive 460 scholars, while we buried 46,000. In our suppression of the counter-revolutionaries, did we not kill some counter-revolutionary intellectuals? I once debated with the democratic people: You accuse us of acting like Qin Shi Huang, but you are wrong; we surpass him 100 times". The Mainland Chinese government today, while nominally communist, actually draws a lot from the philosophy of Qin Shi Huang as well, which is called Legalism, and its precepts are epitomized by my aforementioned former friend. If you want more information on the fundamentals of this philosophy, feel free to ask.

I am inclined to see a connection between worship of Mao with glorification of Qin Shi Huang, but this, at least, is not ubiquitous among Mao supporters even if common. Guan Yun's specific view is that Assasins are heroes, and Mao was a hero for liberty, so it is offensive for Mao to be a Templar. He does not, however, dispute that Qin Shi Huang is a Templar—though maybe this is because it is clearly substantiated in the sources—so maybe he does not also idolize Qin Shi Huang. Regardless, his was a peculiar perspective for us because the PRC today fits the Templar mould perfectly, down to the exact same rhetoric and political philosophy they churn out regarding national security, re-educating the masses, and violently purging all diversity in thought and beliefs for the sake of supposed peace, unity, and harmony. The errors in their logic are the exact same errors we can identify in Templar logic. Most PRC nationalists are the kind to actually argue that Templars are in the right and Assassins to be foolish terrorists, and one would think that most of them would be happy to be equated with Templars. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 06:40, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Loki

Hey Darman, regarding your recent edit on the Loki page. It still could have been Heimdall, he finished uploading himself before Loki killed him. V i l k a T h e W o l f (talk) 05:26, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

I could've sworn that Isu had only just grabbed the faceplate to upload himself before being killed, but on reviewing the file, it seems you're right. Everyone uploaded themselves simultaneously, but this Isu was just late to remove the faceplate and rise from the chair, giving Loki time to impale him. We still don't know who it was, though. – Darman (talk) 14:20, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Well Rig is definitely Heimdallr and Loki does kill Heimdallr in the Ragnarok myth (well they kill each other in that but close enough). The real question is did either of them turn into a seal? Lacrossedeamon (talk) 14:52, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Rebellion Bios

Want to go halfsies on the work? You do the links on the database pages, I'll add the links to the character pages infoboxes/references? - Soranin (talk) 00:54, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Gladly! And I'll recategorize the entries, too. You have it as "Rebellion database entries", when all other instances on the wiki follow "[Animus/Helix type] database entries" – Darman (talk) 01:00, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, I went with "Rebellion database entries" to follow "Initiates database entries", cause I felt it was closer to that rather than the others, but fair enough. - Soranin (talk) 01:05, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Re: Floating talks

Not sure if you saw my reply on my talk page so I'm copying it to here as well:
Personally I think we are premature in categorizing such activities as full memories. The shift from DNA progression logs of Syndicate to the Quest log of Origins changed a lot of things that I don't think we've ever really discussed as an editing community. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 04:32, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Valhalla Images

Hey Darman, saw you were awake. This is partially a warning and partially a request for help.

I'm gonna start uploading the images for the Valhalla weapons a bit later today so if you could keep an (eagle) eye out to see if I don't get stuff wrong that'd be great! :D - Soranin (talk) 16:45, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I'll try to, but I can't promise everything will be correct, as I don't have the game myself; I mainly rely on other gamers' footage for stats, dialogue, and so forth. But I can still watch for grammar, redirect links, etc. – Darman (talk) 17:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Oh, it was less anout the actual content and more like "oh, they forgot the weapons category with this one" or "forgot to change the name in the link" kinda stuff. - Soranin (talk) 17:25, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
So, the usual small edits. Sure, no prob. – Darman (talk) 17:35, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Since ACV's weapons can be upgraded more than once and have a new look every tier, I used the "Ritualistic Xiphos" page as a template to draft "Varin's Axe", thinking the format could be for future weapon pages. I'd hoped to fit each upgrade pic with their stats, but it seems too crowded. Any thoughts? – Darman (talk) 21:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
I think the gallery is the way to go here and the page is looking really good in my opinion. - Soranin (talk) 21:25, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Soranin, I used your old tables from ACU gear, eg. Arno's Set, as a template for the different tiers of Eivor's armor and updated the Raven Clan set accordingly. How's it look? – Darman (talk) 02:45, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

IN-real-life INfo IN INdia INfobox

Ah yes your question about in-real-life info in "India"'s infobox reminds me that we need to get back to that thread I opened up months back on this topic about standardizing how much real-world info we should be restricting ourselves to. Lol. In other news, I blocked that latest Batalex sockpuppet. Thanks for notifying me, as always. :) Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 01:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Oh to give some more info on this specific case, I did think that listing all those languages was excessive, but I also felt bad about excluding any group's native language from even just a basic list of no importance. A lot of people in my political circle are pretty outspoken about the linguistic imperialism minority groups everywhere have had to suffer, and as a native Cantonese speaker myself who has witnessed how my people's language get politically marginalized by Mandarin even when it is actually the most widely spoken Chinese language across North America, it's something that I can really empathize with. It's a prevasive problem for all other non-Mandarin Chinese languages as well. I couldn't choose which languages were significant enough to include in the Indian list or not. On the other hand, I could have listed only Hindi but then I feared that would be offensive to all the non-Hindi speakers, especially Dravidian peoples. In India, there is no national language for this reason, and people across the country still use English as a lingua franca to avoid the controversy that comes from any one regional language being privileged above others—or so I have been told. Perhaps another solution is to list the language families exist, as I did in the China article? Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 01:36, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Haha, yeah. We keep meaning to get resolve the IRL/AC info issue, but always get sidetracked by personal projects here and/or the latest game. Oh well, in time. I totally get your concern over readers thinking you're intentionally omitting minority languages, it can seem like a minefield at times. I like the language family tree idea, though I still find it long. I assume each dialect listed was the main language at whatever time AC was set in China. Maybe we could have ref tags denoting what language(s) would have occurred in which AC media? Alternately, if we're going for the most minimal IRL info except where needed as supplemental (eg. military commanders who aren't mentioned in AC), what if we just... removed that section from the [[Country Infobox/doc]]? (On a similar topic, we should remove the "actor =" and "voice =" parameters from the Character Infobox/doc since we've decided to put that in Behind the scenes instead. But we'll have to fix a bunch of AC1, AC2, BH character profiles.) – Darman (talk) 16:35, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
The infoboxes for our country articles primarily reflect contemporary data because if it only reflected data from a select periods of time, that would be extremely confusing. How could we specify that the data given is for a different period or another? Using parentheses? I fear that would look disorganized and messy. However, it is important to give data that is more relevant to Assassin's Creed. For that reason, I included older languages from past periods, like Classical Chinese and Middle Chinese, but I did so in such a way so that it makes the list look comprehensive across all time rather than jumping from random periods to another. Still, I am wondering if we would still have to specify in parentheses which time periods each language was spoken...

I don't think removing the whole section would be a good idea simply because it could leave the infobox looking more incomplete. It is odd for an infobox on a country to not list its languages which is usually basic information, but yes, thanks for reminding me that we should remove the "actor" field from the character infoboxes.

Also for future reference, be careful not to mix-up the words dialect and language and to always avoid calling Chinese languages dialects even if you hear a Chinese person do this.

Not finalizing the thread on real-world info is really my fault since I really was supposed to do so within two weeks of opening it, but since it has been so long, then we all have to return to it to review it again. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 17:41, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
OK, those are good points. I admit I was too quick to suggest a fix without considering the impacts. The time periods in parentheses sounds nice; it'd certainly lessen confusion for what IRL/AC eras they appear in for casual readers. I'm sorry for using dialect to mean a full language. I meant no insult and erroneously thought it could apply interchangeably as a synonym. – Darman (talk) 20:45, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
I suppose I will have a look to see if it is too messy if I gloss each language with their corresponding time period. And no worries, I know that you meant no harm treating dialect and language synonymously, and I didn't take it offensively because I knew it was an honest mistake, one that I've even known some Chinese friends make innocuously. It's just good to know for future reference since dialect is often used pejoratively by Mandarin speakers to denigrate the status of all other Chinese languages (when languages like Cantonese, Shanghainese, and Hakka are more different from one another and Mandarin than French, Spanish, and Italian are to one another). Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 06:14, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Voice and actor in infoboxes

Hey Darman, if you want to help (because there is kind of a lot) with removing the empty parts of the infoboxes/moving the parts that have info to the bts section, I have these links I'm using to guide me. So far I've only been deleting the empty ones because that's easier :P - Soranin (talk) 19:05, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, sure I'll help. OOoh, what are these pages? They look real nice. Wait, I think I've seen them when I got lost here once and found SpecialPages. So that's what they do... Also, how are you editing so quickly!? – Darman (talk) 20:50, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
It's either a gift or a curse, with no in between, for sure. - Soranin (talk) 22:43, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Well dammit, I want it! [uses Yggdrasil to reincarnate as you] Anyways, I've a question: some character infoboxes are on profile pages of long-inactive users. It's technically against our policies to edit someone's profile page, but on the other hand, we'd still have floating parameters lying about that would need to be cleared for consistency. Can I still go ahead and remove them, and do any link clean up as needed? – Darman (talk) 23:10, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Damn, when you work fast, it's FAST! I refreshed the Tags page, and looks like you got ~90% of the infoboxes by yourself. I'll clean up the rest, but wait before acting on the User infoboxes. – Darman (talk) 23:35, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
If we are using POE to make a brainwashed army of Jhonnies I want some. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 04:09, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
...I have no clue what that means. Who/what is Jhonnie? I assume it's a bot? All I know is that I don't have it, and have been slowly pecking away at my list manually. – Darman (talk) 04:15, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
It's me, Darman. It's my name on discord. You should join us one of these days :) - Soranin (talk) 13:40, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Noooo! You were supposed to reply with the meme that I was too lazy to create!! >:( Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 17:00, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Uhhh, I mean, "What? Who is Jhonnies? I don't understand... Please, wait! I have so many questions!" - Soranin (talk) 17:14, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Har har, very funny. Sol, do I have clearance to remove these infobox parameters (and possibly do link/file clean up to?) on long-inactive users who are using the template? – Darman (talk) 08:30, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

I could've sworn we've already removed the infobox parameter. I don't understand your latter question. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 22:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
I thought so too, but seems we still have a bunch of "voice" parameters to clear. There's a small handful of "actor" parameters which I'll get to imminently, but its other uses are in infoboxes that now-inactive users had put on their profile page. I'm wondering if I'd have permission to remove them so then the parameters are all gone across the site, as I believe editing another's profile page rather than the talk page is against our policies. – Darman (talk) 23:15, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Single-use citations

Oh by the way, while I'm at it, I noticed that you were removing the "ref name=" part of the citation code (I don't know the technical word for this) in the "Tomás de Torquemada" article whenever a citation only appears once. This is actually strongly discouraged although we never went as far as to make it a strict rule. The reason is because whenever editors don't bother including "ref name=" because they happen to expect that that citation will only be used once, it can come across as "lazy" (though in this case, you were actually doing more work by removing them). Not literally speaking, but one can never know for sure if the citation won't be used again on future edits, and it leaves extra work for other editors if they have to scroll back and then add a ref name. It's simply more efficient to always input a ref name as you're writing a citation rather than forcing later editors to have to jump back and forth along the edit screen to fill that in when it should already have been there. Apart from that, it also comes across as pretty presumptuous because an article usually have room for improvements and updates, meaning just because one editor didn't have more than one use for that citation, it doesn't mean that others also wouldn't. In your case, you were actually removing cases of ref names for citations that only appeared once, so it seems that you actually thought it was part of our standard to do so when it isn't, so I understand it wasn't like you were lazy or presumptuous. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 06:24, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Oh. I didn't know that "ref name=" for everything was an unofficial sourcing policy. Should I refrain from removing it in further edits, then? I've only ever done it when I've seen a single-use reference, because my thinking was almost what you'd described: "Source A" is only used once, so why have what I saw as an "ibid" tag that won't be used, especially if the words it's attached to are likely all the info we'll get from the memory or in-game file anyway? – Darman (talk) 08:30, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes, please refrain from removing them in future edits then. I would even ask if you could add them back to the "Tomás de Torquemada" article if that isn't too much trouble. I couldn't flat out revert the edits without also deleting the rest of your edits that were perfectly valid. I'm not as strict about this if people are neglecting to add a ref name for a citation they've only used once in an edit session, but it was actually jarring when you were removing the ref names that others have gone to the effort of preparing just in case. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 21:37, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
OK, I've put them back, and I'll try to remember for future edits elsewhere. Sorry for the unintentional disorganization. – Darman (talk) 22:05, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Images for deletion

Hey, Darman!
I see you're hard at work marking those old unused images for deletion. If you find any I missed, would you mind adding them to my sandbox? It's so when the cache clears we can see more unused images cause they have a limit of 1000. Thanks :3 - Soranin (talk) 02:59, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Sure! I'll try to remember which ones I've edited now, there's been so many lol. (Why ever did Admin decide to allow fanart/fic? Wookieepedia doesn't) On the topic of deleting old content, I'm trying to remember some long inactive user who posted what I found to be a small network of subpages in a choose-your-own-adventure fanfic. Does this sound familiar? I'm pretty sure they posted a few ACRev maps in their work, but it's been so long and I forgot to add them to my watchlist. – Darman (talk) 03:10, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

AHA! Found them! The offender was User:Animus 1.28. Since I can't filter users by whether they have sub-pages, I decided to look through all the Wiki's users, past and present, knowing that the author's lengthy work (They made 31 pages?!) would have to appear in a block of names at some point, and I struck gold within a few clicks. Turns out, the map wasn't from ACRev, but an AC1 marketplace. – Darman (talk) 14:20, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Re: Glyph sandbox

Hello! Thanks for letting me know. About what I intent to do with the Glyph page, basically is just adding their explanation about the lore. To give a summarised version of the info they are revealing, also giving links to the respective articles that explain these with much more details. But yeah, thanks for letting me know! c:

Eikþyrnir

Thanks for your edits! I must be getting tired or something, totally forgot to update the source and Wikipedia link at the top >.> Thanks again! :) – Kennyannydenny (talk) 21:30, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

No prob! While I'm here, though, I notice you put "dream sequence of Asgard" as the location of the memories in Odin's arc. I think it should just be "Asgard", though, for two reasons. One, it's basically like how Kassandra visited Elysium, the Underworld, and Atlantis in ACOD (even if they were simulations); and two, these memories are Layla reliving Eivor's memories as she relives Odin's life, which is just like how Desmond relived Ezio's life as he in turn relived highlights from Altaïr's life in ACR. Even with the double genetic memory, Altaïr's sequences are still set just in "Masyaf", even though it's Ezio's vision. I admit I'm still trying to figure out whether things go in (irl) "Mythology" or (in-universe) "Biography" sections of various Isu's pages. Any ideas? – Darman (talk) 21:40, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
I'm fine with just saying Asgard. That's just an old habit from back when I was adding a lot of pages from Odyssey's dlcs, and I just used Elysium etc, and was told we should mention it was just a simulation, thus could also not be true. In this case, it seems Eivor relives Odin's memories, things that actually happened, so we could use it as biography instead of just mythology. As long as it's confirmed ingame in Asgard other otherwise. – Kennyannydenny (talk) 21:45, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Ahh, OK. Though, some things get a bit murky, because there's slight overlap with irl myths and Odin's life as depicted in-game, such as the idea of Ragnarök being prophesized, Odin binding Fenrir, and Tyr losing his hand, to name a few. *shrug* We'll figure it out in time, as with the Atlantis DLCs. – Darman (talk) 21:55, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
I currently did Vé like this. Things like Bestla and Borr, and the gift to Ask and Embla are mythology as they're just that. The murdering of Ymir is confirmed ingame by the cairn mission Litamiotvitr, thus I put it under biography. I think that's best when confirmed ingame. That's my two cents. But we'll figure it out indeed, i'm sure of it. Kennyannydenny (talk) 22:00, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, just saw. Still trying to make sense of it and separate the two, tbh, especially since notes in "A Feast to Remember" for example imply that Ask and Embla are alternate names for Adam and Eve from way back in AC2. It's known the Isu made humanity via Project Anthropos, but now it's specified that it was the Æsir who began it out of vanity for worship, while myth seems to say they made humanity "just because" – Darman (talk) 22:10, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Garm

I saw you added a citation needed to the page Garm. The note mentioning Garm can always be found, it's not bound to just one memory. But if you really want a name, I encountered the note during "Extended Family". It lies next to where Loki and Tyr are standing. – Kennyannydenny (talk) 14:18, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Ah, one of those "floating" notes that can be found any time. I'd rather we try to have as many notes as possible connected to as appropriate a memory as possible, so we don't have "loose" papers lying around to write separately here, but I know that won't always be the case the way the games are designed. I'll add it the ref now. – Darman (talk) 14:25, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
No probs. it's kinda the same with that Skadi letter. The letter is found on the opposite side of the map from Njord, near a shipwreck at the bottom right (Njord is at the top left). We could link the note and the quest as the contents are related, but that's about it for the relation between the two.

By the way, I also saw your change to Ivaldi. While you did a great job rewriting the page, I think you made a slight error. The secret was never in exchange for the cord. In exchange for the cord you can only answer "My gratitude" and "your freedom". The secret is actually in exchange for Ivaldi telling Odin what the builder asked him. I can't remember what it was exactly, something about the magic in his runes, that jötnar magic. (oh and I personally told him humanity will survive (the third secret), no idea if all three of them work) – Kennyannydenny (talk) 14:30, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Ahh, that's what it was. OK, sorry, I'd misinterpreted the scene. Thanks for clearing up! Btw, I fixed how the notes appear, as you had them a "Dialogue" subsection when they're more part of the scene itself, like Murder Mystery clues in ACU/ACS, or other ACV papers like Rikiwulf's note in "Honor Bound", Burgred's files in "The Sons of Ragnar", etc. – Darman (talk) 15:50, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for that! I wasn't sure what the layout needed to be with such notes. As for the Ivaldi page, I haven't changed it yet, as I wasn't sure how to rewrite it exactly. Could you do that or do you want me to do it? I need to think about how best to phrase it if I'm going to change that part. – Kennyannydenny (talk) 16:25, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, that's the format we've adopted, because using bullets as in ACU/ACS (still have to clean up sooo many of those missions...) makes it look like someone's speaking instead. Sure, I'll try to work it, no worries. – Darman (talk) 16:35, 5 February 2021 (UTC

On Papyrus Puzzle and Ainigmata Ostraka

Hey Darman!
So I saw you were going to fix the ordering on these and I wanted to say you might want to hold on a bit. I think Lacrosse is going to make a forum discussion soon proposing doing away with the memory pages for them and just putting all the info on them on the respective Papyrus Puzzle and Ainigmata Ostraka pages. - Soranin (talk) 02:23, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

So they'd be all on one page, like with the Stone Circles and ACV's Order of the Ancients confessions? Sure, it's a lot easier. Thanks for notifying me first, otherwise I likely would've moved onto that as my next project after finishing fixing some redirects now. Thanks, will hold off then. – Darman (talk) 02:30, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Alisa in Wunderlandscire

Just a FYI: I've changed your edit on Alisa in Wunderlandscire. I specifically didn't phrase the sentence like that as it would claim something incorrect, it's not just the title of the memory, it's full of references to the book. The story she tells Eivor, the table in the cave, lots and lots of rabbits around it. Kennyannydenny (talk) 09:10, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Cool, no worries. I don't mind you having changed it, because I was going off the assumption that it only applied to the title, since the page is a stub lacking dialogue and I haven't come across the memory myself. It's all good. – Darman (talk) 11:40, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Ok :) Just wanted to explain a bit why I changed it again, to avoid you thinking I just didn't agree with your changes. Kennyannydenny (talk) 13:10, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Þrymr and Isu

So I thought, since the dreams of Jotunheimr and Asgard are actually memories of Odin, that the god being mentioned in those worlds meant that they were Isu. Maybe I'm wrong. Why can't AC games just openly say if gods are Isu or not, sometimes they do, but with a lot of gods they don't... annoying. Kennyannydenny (talk) 21:29, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

True, having things implied rather than concretely stated is a major grievance. I was working off the belief that while the Greek Isu are represented as jötnar, not all jötnar have Isu counterparts. Perhaps I was mistaken, and if so I apologize. – Darman (talk) 23:45, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
No it's not problem, I'm not 100% sure either. I just found the quest item "Thor's Circlet", which says Thor wore it when posing as Freyja at her wedding to Thrym (Þrymr). So it's safe to assume he's an Isu, right? Kennyannydenny (talk) 20:31, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
I don't think so. The way the myths tell it, the jötnar are separate beings from the Æsir. But I think we have an answer on Skaði's page. She's considered an Isu, like Þrymr and Ymir currently are (though Lacrosse raised his doubts on Ymir's talk page), but the caveat seems to be that she is a goddess, while both male entities are "just" jötnar. – Darman (talk) 00:35, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Response to Metadata Security

Hello Darman36,

Thank you for letting me know of the photos. Batfan13 (talk) 09:03, 6 March 2021 (UTC)Batfan13

Valhalla's World Events

Hey, Dar!

I've been transcribing the ACV world events and the DLC missions over on my sandbox, but it turns out a lot of them have ~player choice~ so I'm here to ask for help :)

My proposal is to keep doing the bulk of the transcriptions with you helping out with the choice stuff?

Let me know! - Soranin (talk) 17:42, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hey! As much as I'd like to help, I'm not sure how much use I'd be. I don't have ACV, so I'd have to rely on digging through countless YouTube vids just hoping that the player took any alternate choice(s). I have logged one handful of complete choices and their impacts in just two of Odin's memories, but that still took some doing to find. – Darman (talk) 02:45, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Oooops, 100% thought I had answered you already! Fair enough, it's what I'm having to do too, though I've mostly been noting down the choices made in the video I'm watching and moving to the next memory.

Though I wouldn't be opposed to you keeping up with your checking, hyperlinking, and incorporating the completed ones, wink wink ;D - Soranin (talk) 20:23, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Also, before I forget, we should look into using some images from the German wiki for Valhalla. I noticed Bertha Star adding the language links for German, and checked out their pages. Turns out they've uploaded a bunch of the ones we lack for memories and even the Orlog dice faces. And that's what I managed to see from a quick look. - Soranin (talk) 21:00, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Haha, all good! I took a look at the German wiki and DAMN, that's some good stuff! Those upgrade and cost details on the Ravensthorpe settlement buildings is nice, as example. Way more thorough than I'd expected, since all the (admittedly few) times I've visited another language wiki, what was written on the page usually paled in comparison to what was on ours, eg. not fully updated/stubs or being filled with red links. And makes sense to borrow from others, since the FR wiki has added their own ACReb images to our site. I was wondering if/how we'd get images for that, but put that quandary out of mind for other projects. Uggh, how dare you give me more projects! Curses! – Darman (talk) 22:35, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Mwahahahahaha! My evil plan is working! - Soranin (talk) 22:56, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Wow, I'm a monster making you work so much. (Also, I'm waiting on your first review of the Brigandine Cape for me to do the other pieces of armor of that set and call it a day :P) - Soranin (talk) 18:21, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

I did have a window just full of improperly/unsourced images to fix, but noooo, you just had to have a flurry of armor edits, so I had to read through them all to see if you missed some stuff! Anyway, the Brigandine Cape looks good, but I just want to remind you of redirects that use the Old English/Norse spellings, in this case Shropshire / Sciropescire, or [[Essex]]e from earlier. – Darman (talk) 18:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
I did try and warn y'all! My edit summary for the armor page around 17 hours ago said "Tomorrow I'll do a batch of these". I wasn't lying. Also, on those Old English/Norse spellings? I don't know their names, I just copy you when you fix my stuff xD - Soranin (talk) 19:00, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Locations in Rebellion memories

Hello Darman, I noticed that some of our memory pages for Rebellion indicates precise locations which to my knowledge were not explicitly stated in the game itself. For instance, Tarragona in "The Artifact", Balaguer in "A Lap Dog's Death", and Jaca in "The Monastery of St. Lucia". Unless I'm missing something, I don't recall any point in the memories, map, or Aguilar's journal that states for certain that these are the locations for these memories. There are probably more examples, but these were the first three I noticed. Did you infer these locations by the positioning of each memory point in the map? Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 19:51, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello Sol,
Whoops, I totally forgot that I'd edited those pages, and a number of other ACReb memories. Yes, I did infer those locations by approximating where they were on a map, but I admit that I was using a modern map and at the time had not considered what I know now, that almost all ACReb events occur in the contemporary Kingdom of Castile instead. I think I used a modern map because of my confusion with the Helix Event Horacio's Retribution, which takes place in New/Old Castile, and the fact that the WP maps of Spain roughly align with the Region divisions in the game map. Sorry for the confusion there. – Darman (talk) 01:36, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Okay no worries. I will double-check another time how accurate we can be in aligning the Rebellion map to a real-world map of Spain. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 14:11, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Birna

The Birna in the game and the Birna in the novel are not the same person. unsigned comment by Lacrossedeamon (talk · contr) 18:01, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I just realized that now when searching for an earlier mention of her. In Chapter 14, she's described as having "tangled red hair, green eyes, and a nose that [was] set a bit crooked after a break", features that Birna from Soma's army does not have. Sorry for the confusion, I admit I'd been randomly flipping pages when I found the patronym and thought it was the same woman. – Darman (talk) 18:10, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Spelling standard

Darman, I think this is not the first time that I've brought this up with you before, but please don't go out of the way to change the spelling standard of a page from Canadian or British to American. Our wiki really doesn't have a standard due to past disagreements over it. Just as a matter of principle, it's kind of rude to go out of the way to force one's own spelling standard one way or the other. I think it is fine if you're just making it consistent, which may have been the case initially on "Last war of the Roman Republic", where it slipped my mind until I had just reverted it that you may have just been making it consistent with the spelling of center. So when I thought back on it, I didn't necessarily need to undo your conversion of defence to defense. It is usually a habit of mine to do so if I see someone pushing a spelling standard out of nowhere on principle, so I may have jumped the gun there. But then you deliberately went out of the way to revert both. At that point, then it's definitely rude because you would have considered that I changed it for a reason but decided to force your spelling standard back without asking about it. Just as part of editing etiquette, I usually leave the initial spelling standard as is unless I'm doing a total rewrite of the article. In the same vein, I normally only revert the change to the spelling standard if a user isn't being considerate about that etiquette. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 00:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Sol,
Sorry, I didn't mean to seem rude by changing the spelling. My computer underlined it in red, and I'd forgotten that the Manual of Style says either British or American English is fine, so long as the author is consistent. – Darman (talk) 02:30, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
I apologize if I was too snappy, especially since it seems like such a trivial thing. It's just that I feel like something like this keeps happening. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 10:34, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
I don't think so, I believe this is the first time you've reached out to me on this. I don't recall having this type of convo across edit descriptions, nor can I find an instance of it earlier on this page. Perhaps you've seen I had changed the spelling on a page after another user—maybe even yourself—had edited it a while earlier, as added my own contributions. But I'll try to keep the British / American spell-check to a minimum in any case. – Darman (talk) 12:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

You know what you did :P

I'm watching you add a billion unconfirmed red links to templates - Soranin (talk) 01:37, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Oh, and you missed a weapon! The Natural Aegis was also datamined. Should be in my primary sandbox under Jord's blade. - Soranin (talk) 01:39, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

I'll just leave this here ;) - Soranin (talk) 22:05, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
No, I didn't miss the Aegis, because I didn't see it in that video. And YES THANK YOU THAT'S IT!! (How did you find that??) – Darman (talk) 00:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
For the leaks I tend to watch a few youtubers who tend to show it, usually Legacy Gaming cause they're the ones that tend to show descriptions and more pieces of the armor/more gear. And for the sandbox I figured we had a small pool of suspects and I knew it wasn't Vilka or Odey, so the plan was to look at Sal, Jasca and Lacrosse's sandboxes, but Sal was a sweetie and labeled his stuff on his user page. :D - Soranin (talk) 00:41, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Ahh. I only follow @AccessTheAnimus, but don't search for leaks. So if they report on something leaked, cool; if not, that's just as fine too. Since Sadalyrate hasn't been here in over six months, do you think he'd mind if I moved the page (or copied over instead) to a main space location, like how Lacrosse did with the Target menu? – Darman (talk) 00:50, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Nah, Sal pretty much gave us carte blanche to mess with his sandboxes, I did the same with the Rebellion bios quite some time ago now. - Soranin (talk) 00:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

OK. Still thought I'd ask—even if it's not him—because it's generally seen as bad form to edit another user's profile / subpages unless it's a working page (eg. Kennyannydenny's "Valhalla notes") or they gave open permission.(...says the one editor who changes pages of years-long inactive users, to the other co-conspirator who does the same)Darman (talk) 01:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Sal did give permission considering he named the section of the sandboxes on his user page as "Safekeeping for now" and when we discussed the rebellion stuff he said " I figured they're there just for safekeeping until we figure out connected stuff. That's why I left, for example, all the linkage for later.". Also shhhh, there are no crimes in fixing templates and updating linkage.That's what we'll say if the cops come for us - Soranin (talk) 01:46, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
You know the rules:

If they get the cuffs on us
It's 25 to life
Run, run, your own direction
And I'll lead 'em down a different road
Take the gun, hide the car and the money
I'll meet you in Mexico
[1]

Darman (talk) 02:10, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Inventory menu article

Similar to [Target menu], I've been wanting to make pages for other sections of the animus desktop like the inventory, progress tracker, and possibly even skill trees. For now though I want to focus on inventory. I know you've done some work on both the target menu page and some of the smaller inventory categories like trade objects. I was wondering if you had any ideas on how to do this and make it comprehensive while keeping it concise. I have various subpages for inventories from different games but they are incomplete and I don't know the best way to merge them. If you have any thoughts I'd greatly appreciate them. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 15:19, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hmm. Can't seem to think of anything immediately. What exactly would this page look like? Because almost all the weapons, medicine, etc. are categorized individually, except for trade objects collected by Ezio, Kassandra, and now Eivor (I think Bayek gathers stuff too?) This would be an overarching page for the Animus section, the way Database is divided by what Animus/Helix system is used, right? – Darman (talk) 15:25, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Yeah so while the target menu is broken up by historical subject I think this would need to be divided by animus model and detail how each iteration is broken down and what goes in each section. Like AC2 the inventory covers armor (and capes), weapons, reloads (consumables), and items (collectibles) with subsequent games adding more and more in their inventories. I think this would be a good way to stay in universe and cover all these items in either a single page or link to them easily. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 18:19, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Nobles

Before you go much further, what are your thoughts on using the term Nobility instead, since I think we use Royalty rather than Royals as another category. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 16:03, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Ooh, good catch, thank you! Sure, let's do that instead. – Darman (talk) 16:05, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm actually not sure nobility is preferable to nobles and royalty preferable to royals since usually the demonym should be used when putting characters in categories. A prince is a noble not a nobility, grammatically speaking. But I don't know if we need to be so strict on that because a prince is also part of the nobility. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 20:45, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Oh no wait, I just saw [Pharaoh], and I guess if we want to keep titles of nobility in the same category as nobles, then nobility would be preferable. I'm not sure if we really should put nobles and noble titles/positions in the same category page, but if that is what we want, then we should go with nobility. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 20:50, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Well, when I had started making the changes, my thought process was: nobility is someone of status, and can be subdivided into monarchs, dukes, emirs, pharaohs, doges, etc. (But not UK ministers, and I'm unsure about reeves). So do/can I continue with the changes or does this require a bit more workshopping? – Darman (talk) 00:30, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
I may or may not have already moved all the pages. - Soranin (talk) 00:32, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
I am afraid that later in the future we might have a clearer idea of which one is correct, but that can't be helped. Right now, I really don't have a strong opinion either way, and I think either is fine. Wikipedia for some reason seems to suggest that royals are not nobles because they're a rank higher though, which is not what I grew up understanding. I always thought royals are part of the nobility, that nobility includes royals...Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 00:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed the category was empty after I came back from lunch! Geez, Soranin. Aha, but it seems you've missed some! *cackle* In that case, Sol, I'll continue and clean up the crumbs that ~someone~ left behind. – Darman (talk) 01:05, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

>:o
I admit nothing :P - Soranin (talk) 02:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Sync

I see we made the same page at the same time, but mine was the right one :P - Soranin (talk) 15:59, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Title of works formatting

In response to this edit, I thought you might be interested in an ongoing discussion Zero-ELEC just opened up the other day where we are trying to figure out how we should consistently format the titles of Assassin's Creed works: "Titles, colons and dashes, oh my!". Your revision is a bit tangential because it seemed to me more about whether in the appearances section, we should be narrowing down to volumes or restrain ourselves to just the general title. (In this case, I normally go down to the DLC but owing to how extensive the list was, I thought in this case, we could feel free to be broader and more generalized). However, in merging the three volumes of the 2015 Titan Comics together, you went with Assassin's Creed: Assassins, and Kulurak has brought that up in that thread last night. It's a long read because we're getting pretty technical about it, but it might be a talk you're interested in participating in. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 17:29, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Treasures of Britain

To pile on the list of ongoing and nauseating debates you can jump into, we have also been having a further dispute on how to write the "Treasures of Britain" page. :D I noticed that you made revisions to it after Vilka created the page, so I was wondering if you have a perspective on how the page should be written? If you're unfamiliar with the debate, you don't have to read up all on it. A simple question that you can help by answering is just: do you think that the Treasures of Britain are (a) artifacts, but with corresponding tablets representing them (b) the tablets, not actual artifacts (c) "both". And by this question, I mean from an in-universe perspective, like what the Treasures of Britain actually are within the Assassin's Creed universe, outside of the Animus. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 18:58, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

I think the page is fine as is, with the tablets chart arranged like ship customization tables. What have other users proposed changing? As for your question, I think the Treasures did exist in AC like in actual myth, an unknown someone scrawled images of them on stone, and when the mythical items were lost to memory, the stones informally took their place as the treasures. However, I admit this is muddled by in-game dialogue, such as when Eivor supposedly finds Brân Galed's still-functional drinking horn in the wine cellar, but the game only shows her picking up a stone tablet. – Darman (talk) 19:20, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Being more careful with deletions

Darman, I know we've talked before about how not every redirect page needs to be deleted, and I think that this has continued to present itself as an issue. With examples like [Battle of Megara] and [Talk:Battle of Megara], it might be argued that they are not necessary to be kept after the page moves and can be eliminated to clean-up the system. But I was just telling Jhonnies yesterday that we now have hundreds upon hundreds of page filling up the category for speedy deletion and category for deletion. Because there have been cases in the past where pages were erroneously marked for deletion (and just yesterday reviewing only 20 of them, there were still a sizable fraction that were so erroneously marked), to clear up those categories, I need to carefully verify every single one of those requests and correct them as necessary.

So now the problem is that even though some leftover redirect pages aren't necessary to keep around and can be deleted, it's also not always necessary to remove them. Redirect pages which are just bad typographical errors, sure, but redirect pages that were previous, official titles, not necessarily. Notwithstanding this, I have already told you that one purpose of redirect pages is to maintain viable search options in case people are not aware of the new name. An argument can be made that many people would still search "Battle of Megara" instead of the more specific "Blockade of Megaris" and be confused if the page they're look for does not come up.

But here's another thing: even if that argument in favour of keeping "Battle of Megara" were invalid, I would like you to stop feeling the need to jump at calling pages for deletion because as I said, you are overloading the trash compactors and making it now almost impossible to sift through to delete pages that seriously need to be deleted.

A lot of the pages you call for deletion can be disputed. This includes userpage files, among them a birthday greeting drawing that a former user made for another user. I talked to our former administrator, Sima Yi, about this, and he shared my opinion that it was fine to keep certain userpage files that are relevant to Assassin's Creed and the community. I have also noticed you designating similar images as duplicates when they actually are not. They may be shots of the same scene, but the lightning, different angle, or even the difference in weather and time-of-day (i.e. day vs. night) makes it debatable which image people would prefer to use. Keeping both around gives people options.

I am not saying that in these cases, you were wrong to request them to be deleted (i.e. they can be disputed), but at a certain point, it gets excessive and puts an unnecessary burden on staff because these are so often not pages which are so troubling that they demand immediate deletion. It will take months, maybe even a year, now to clean-up the categories for requested deletions. I am getting the impression that you are getting overzealous about purging pages—with good intentions I'm sure but—you should be more mindful when tagging pages for deletion.

Normally, maintenance work is well-welcomed, but in this case, it's only adding to more maintenance and will divert our time and energy away from content creation. And our wiki desperately needs more content, much more than it needs invisible redirect pages being deleted. If you notice a page that really does need to be deleted, it's fine to go ahead and tag that, but I would much appreciate it if you focused your time and energy on content creation rather than going out of your way to comb for pages to remove. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 02:46, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry for filling up the "To delete" queue in my overzealousness to clean up the wiki. I had not considered that as a consequence of repeatedly using the delete template. Given that this appears to be a problem for me at least twice now, I agree with your statement that it probably would be best for all of us if I were to step back from that and divert my attention elsewhere. Thank you for the message explaining this again. – Darman (talk) 03:45, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Francisco Rizi's painting

I think "Grand Inquisition" is a reference to the time period, eg. Belle Epoch, not the painting's name.

Just reviewed the scene. No mention of anyone in the painting. Added trivia
--Darman36

I would say we are not in the Assassin's Creed universe. The painting's name was the Grand Inquisition said by Ellen Kaye in the movie. There's a close up scene that depicts Torquemada, Ferdinand II of Aragon, and Isabella I of Castile, not King Charles II, Queen Marie Louise d'Orléans, and queen mother Mariana of Austria.

However, in the Novelization, the painting's background was in 1680. Alan Rikkin described the queen was too old in the painting that she couldn't be Isabella I.

Perhaps I was wrong. I didn't catch the point in the beginning. I'm still confused. UJ112013 (talk) 05:11, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Looking at the close-up of the painting, I think you're actually right. I admit I haven't watched the film in a while and was instead working off this scene of Ellen talking to Alan. I apparently forgot that there was a zoom shot of the artwork, so I thought, as my edit description reads, that she was just describing the era, not actually naming the piece. I didn't know the painting is in the book, I haven't read it yet. Thank you for correcting me. – Darman (talk) 14:00, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Germain being responsible for capitalism

I'm not sure if the article on Jacques de Molay is really responsible for the sockpuppet's recent preoccupation with capitalism-related edits. You see, Batalex's attempted edits on this subject aren't actually entirely wrong. Our former head admin Sima Yi himself had explained to me before that one major plot point that flies over most fans' head is that François-Thomas Germain's goal through the French Revolution was to reorient society so that Templars no longer puppet nobles, but corporations (i.e. "the bourgeoisie"). (This insight is actually consistent with the history of the global economy, Marxist theory, etc. and calls attention to the socialist themes Ubisoft tends to insert into the series). In this case, Batalex is actually correct that this information should be included in our articles because it is a very significant point in the lore.

What's more, Soranin is technically in the wrong for outright reverting Batalex's edits on this rather than revising them because the intended contribution is actually correct in this case even if it is badly worded. Just as we should judge an argument based on the content, not the speaker, so too should edits be judged by their content, not the editor—even if that editor is normally a vandal and is trying to circumvent their permaban. I've already mentioned this somewhat to Sora, who continues to revert Batalex's edits on the subject of capitalism because he can't be bothered to spend the time to integrate them correctly. For my part, I have been looking the other way because even though this is technically wrong, I too have my hands tied, and I'm honestly even nervous about how Sora would revise it if pressured to do so since I think economical and political history is outside his field.

Anyway, this is just to give you some better context on the situation around the "capitalism" article. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 01:10, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Huh, I hadn't thought of it like this. Thank you for the clarification. Was my edit fine, then? I tried to paint broadly since, as I said in my summary, capitalism had not been formally codified. Or would a bit more specificity be better? – Darman (talk) 01:30, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Oh no, I thought your edit was perfectly fine. (Otherwise, I would have ruthlessly reverted it. >:D) Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 01:44, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
I will defend myself because I told Sol on Discord my issue was with saying that it became a mantra for the Templars and I do know a lot more about economical history than I do war history. - Soranin (talk) 02:04, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Well I definitely didn't mean to throw shade on you, Sora. If you do think that the edits are incorrect because you disagree that it became a mantra for Templars, though, that just changes how we should be revising the edit. It still would be improper to undo it entirely unless you really think that no part in the idea of the edit is salvageable. I disagree with that because the content actually referred to a major plot point absent from our articles.
My comment about your field wasn't meant to be a condescending remark about your deficiencies, so I apologize if that was how it came across, but please don't take it that way. Rather, I was alluding to the fact that given politics and economics is my field (and I have sources already on hand), it is more my fault for not following up quickly to revise the edit, whereas we cannot entirely blame you for avoiding to do so if it's something you don't feel comfortable explaining.
At the same time, if it is true that you do know a lot more economical history—and of course I'm not going to doubt that—then that does mean that you are in the position to correct those edits rather than remove them. I'm not defending Batalex because obviously he's a vandal and sockpuppet—he'll always continue to be permabanned on sight. It's just that, at the end of the day, the principle is to deal with edits based on their content not on the editor. I understand that it's easy to just instinctively think that every edit made by a resident troll must be more vandalism though. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 03:33, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Miss me

Hey Darman, just wanted to let you know I'll be staying away from the wiki for a while cause of personal stuff. Make sure to not miss me too much ;) -Soranin (talk) 18:34, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the message. I hope the personal issue isn't too serious, but take your time. While you're gone, though, I'll see if I can finally pass you on the Leaderboard, haha! I'll keep any messages here though, jut to keep it in one spot. I'd only inquired about your site for browsing curiosity, as anyone can see it so long as it's not set to private. Take care, – Darman (talk) 18:40, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

"Cigars" deletion proposal

Darman, when you tag an article for a deletion proposal, you should follow-up by opening a discussion on it in the corresponding talk page. Tagging an article in this way in itself is not a request for a member of the staff to review it and delete it at their discretion (unless it's already clear the article violates policies). Instead, it is meant to signal that a proposal for its deletion is being opened up on the talk page. It's technically not required to do this, but without the user making the proposal opening up the topic, it in the right of others who dispute it to simply remove the deletion proposal after like two weeks or longer. It is also possible for the user making the proposal to neglect to do this but anyone else who agree with the proposal can take the initiative to open the topic for them; this is fine too. Personally, I am leaning towards deleting "Cigar" as well, but I'm just letting you know how the procedure works. I understand that we haven't really provided a helpful manual for this, so it's kind of our fault lol. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 05:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Oooh, OK. So, while the template alone can be used to flag a page, it's generally preferred to go through the more formal process on a talk page. Got it. I've initiated a discussion for Cigars, then. Thanks. – Darman (talk) 12:55, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
{{Delete}} is used to flag a page for immediate deletion because it is spam, vandalism, has a typographical error in its title, has no content, or is otherwise in clear violation of policies and/or guidelines in some way. {{Propose delete}} is used to notify users that there is a proposal being made on its talk page for deletion. Properly used, it does not flag the page for deletion by staff at all. Even if an admin agrees with the reasoning given with this template, it is wrong of them to just go through with that deletion without consulting with the wider community on the article's talk page. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 16:20, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Dynasty ending at chapter 19

Hey Darman, I noticed your question "ACD doesn't end at Ch. 19 and will have a twentieth part?" in an edit summary, and I was a bit confused what it meant or what it was referring to. Like what made you think Dynasty might end at chapter 19? Judging by the plot so far, Dynasty is probably barely halfway done. :P Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 23:52, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Oh, no. I didn't think Dynasty would or should end before at Chapter 19. It's just that the {ComicsNav} template didn't have Chapter 20 listed at the time I wrote that summary, so your edit listing more sections beyond 19 was new information to me then. Sorry for the confusion! – Darman (talk) 01:45, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Per official Ubi information Dynasty is gonna be 5 Volumes long, and Volume 3 just started in May. Also i think we should not add future Chapters to {ComicsNav} until they are released as we do not know how many there are, etc. when Volume end and is followed by Special etc. With BoSJ i always added them there only when SundayGX confirmed release of the next chapter for next issue, so in case of Dynasty add it to {ComicsNav}, when chapter release (aka Chapter 20 shoudnt be there yet). --Kulurak (talk) 06:51, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Correct use of stub template

I'm actually pretty surprised to find this happened only a few days ago, but I noticed that you were the one to add an empty section in the article Assassin's Creed: The Ming Storm with the {{Stub}} template. I have already talked with many editors about correct and incorrect use of this template, but the template itself reads "This article..." which indicates that its message always refers to the state of a whole article. It can never be used for individual sections. That aside, creating empty sections has always been strictly prohibited as well. Even if you think a section should be created or you anticipate its creation, it is not allowed. If you create a heading, you have to put content under it. You aren't the only one who has made these mistakes, so there's no need to feel embarrassed. Just please keep this in mind in the future. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 08:33, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Moving category pages for individuals by organization

I have just finished performing the reversion of Category:Assassins Brotherhood members to Category:Assassins, but we obviously still need to take care of Category:Templar Order members and others. I also find the case for Category:Hidden Ones and Category:Hidden Ones members more complicated, since the latter is grammatically incorrect and obviously should just be Category:Hidden Ones, but currently Category:Hidden Ones is being used as a general category for all things related to the Hidden Ones, not just individuals, in the same way that Category:Assassin Brotherhood is used. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 22:05, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Cool! Thanks for the update, and great work, I just checked the Recent Activity feed. I'll be busy midday today with a prior engagement, but I can change at least few of the [Category:Templar Order members] to [Cateogry:Templars] in the morning, and then get more (maybe the rest?) in late afternoon / early evening. If someone doesn't nab them all before I do, of course, which is fair game. – Darman (talk) 05:45, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Image file info

The Attention field is meant to explain any modifications to the original image, even if they are obvious. It is also meant to give proper credits where they are due. Hence, technically speaking, every cropped image should be specified as "cropped" in that field. Actually, the files I uploaded with the guisarme and voulge are good examples of what the Attention and Description fields are actually supposed to say. We aren't strict with this standard because we understand that it can be time-consuming to be that informative for every file. The fact that I took the bident, voulge, and fauchard files directly from the French Wiki means that it would have been extremely improper for me not to credit them—and more specifically Touloir—for that work. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 02:59, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Darman! Hope you're doing well.

It has come to my attention that you removed the description from an image, depicting Arno while wielding a Guisarme, that mentioned me as the photographer. What worried me the most was your justification. I cite: "Sorry, didn't see who had uploaded, thought that was Christophorus' own text. [...]". I understand that you might have done it because it was redundant. When we click the image, the info already shows us who uploaded it. I would have agreed with you in other circumstances. But with pictures, the situation is very different. It's not redundant at all. Allow me to explain.

The image description adds the "author" to indicate who took the pictures because the one who uploaded the picture isn't necessarily the one who took it, yes? Just as it happened with the Guisarme image. Cyfiero uploaded it, but it was me who took and cropped the picture. Now, it's not redundant either if the uploader happens to be the photographer as well. This works as a double assurance of some kind. "Yes, I uploaded the picture. And yes, I am the one who took it". If you think about it, it's not about giving the same information twice. When we click the image, and we read the "added by", this gives us the username of who uploaded it. And the "Author" parameter in the image description gives us the username of the one who took it.

Also, from a moral standpoint, it's unethical to remove credits. It's a bad practice. I advise you to not remove them. :( It could lead us to trouble.

That's it! Feel free to reply or leave a subject on my talkpage!

Take care! – Cristophorus35 (talk) 10:27, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello Cristophorus,
Thank you for contacting me about this. I'm sorry for clearing your name in the credits, I hadn't meant that in the way it appeared to you. I'd like to explain myself, if I can, as we seem to have had conflicting meanings of what author means. The file in question is in portrait, and on my screen at least, I have to scroll a bit to see who uploaded it. I did not do so when I edited it, and so when I saw that you were credited as the creator, I thought it was a witty self-congratulatory reference (e.g., "I'd like to thank a VIP here tonight... me!"), not an authorial credit. You say the Author parameter denotes who took the image, and I had to check the licensing page to confirm, because all the time I've been here, I've uploaded and sourced files in the mistaken belief that Author/Artist applied to the broader work itself, not who uploaded it. By this, I mean that Gabriel Blain (and Ubisoft by extension by hiring him), for example, is the creator of all the art we have on his page, while Ubisoft as a whole is the creator of the digital worlds that we have taken a screenshot of. Thus, I thought I was correcting a line of joke text, not removing a credit. – Darman (talk) 03:00, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Oh, I see. Let me assure you that all my credits are of the authorial kind, so don't worry about that. When I first joined as Wiki-Editor, I was instructed to fill all the necessary parameters (including the "author" parameter, regardless if it was me the one who took the picture). And I did so with every image I uploaded. Glad we could resolve this particular case! My best vibes to you! Take care!Cristophorus35 (talk) 02:12, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Pattern of edits

Also while I'm at it, why did I have to remind you again that the Trivia section should not be separate from the BtS (technically BtS is meant to replace Trivia), or that it is even worse when it is placed before it?

Darman, there is a pattern to your edits across the wiki that concerns me though I don't know exactly how to describe it. It often seems like you presume certain standards that the wiki has then act to monitor and enforce them without consulting staff about them. What would be worse is if you are taking it upon yourself to decide certain standards where there is inconsistency and then enforce them without consultation with staff or opening talks with the community. I do trust that it's not the latter, but as this pattern persists more and more, I begin to fear that it could be something in between the two (like it's an unconscious habit when encountering inconsistent formatting). Past examples include the spelling standard, deciding what kinds of files should be deleted, going out of your way to remove "ref name=" for all citations that appear only once, presuming that it is wrong for links to repeat in references, misusing the header templates for article sections, etc.

And every time, I have to remind you multiple times before you finally listen, which makes me feel like you test whether you can get away with it being let slide eventually. The italicization of quotes in prose is another example, which I hadn't brought up because I'm actually leaning on agreeing that that would improve readability, but because I’ve already told you once that it's not a rule, when you take it upon yourself to enforce it like it is a rule and without acknowledging my remarks about it, that makes me concerned that I would only encourage this pattern by the fact I happen to likely agree with it.

You are not a moderator or administrator. Formatting standards are not your place to decide and enforce. And I understand that many of our staff are not editing actively, but you should still generally see past edits by staff as indicators of what those standards are. Where there is inconsistency, it is a good idea to ask staff about it for clarification rather than deciding on the standard yourself then enforcing it. And sometimes there really isn't a standard, e.g. whether links in references should only appear once, whether it is allowed to be abbreviated or not (which is Francesco's preference). And in those cases, you have either the option of (a) opening up a community discussion asking for it to be standardized (b) accept the inconsistency between articles and use your own preferred standard, but not go out of your way to "correct" the preferred standard that others have chosen in their work—for reasons of etiquette. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 03:11, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Sol,
I do not mean to seem as though I am imposing my order here, nor trying to constantly push boundaries, and I'm sorry for causing you grief lately. I do believe you are right in saying my formatting style is akin to an unconscious habit. The inconsistent styling of some of the things you've listed do bother me for being based more on informal rules at editors' discretion (sometimes yes, other times no) than definite policy I likely have missed.

It is this grey zone that influenced my overzealous categorizing of deletion candidates. I was—and to be honest, still am—of the opinion that the site should be for lore only and not files unrelated to the games/books/etc. I saw that you cleared out the deletion category a while back, and while I may not agree with why some files were kept while others were not, I cannot and will not contest your ruling as Staff.

I had based my decision for italic quotes on the fact that the quotes templates italicize all lines, and I decided to follow suit. I believe you had said that while it was not technically needed, it did sometimes did make reading sections easier, so I took your assent to mean I could continue it going forward thinking that it was better to make quotes in summaries more readable with some errors rather than not at all.

Regarding the Trivia / BTS, I was operating off having seen such formatting with both headings on other pages, and was under the (false?) impression from the forum consensus that Trivia was in-universe, BTS was out-of-universe, and that they were to be kept separate in that order?

I don't know why I am bothered by minutiae here, but I will try to work on slowing everything down and not jumping the gun in the future. – Darman (talk) 03:00, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Darman, I understand that the presence of inconsistent styling in some areas is bothersome, as they would be for any of us, but I wish to be doubly-clear that the issue here is editing etiquette. We all wish for everything to be standardized, but sometimes there is something that just happens to not yet be standardized in policy. The problem is that when you start "correcting" the style others have used which conflicts with your preference, you are actually being the one unilaterally creating and enforcing a standard that has not been discussed and codified, thereby perpetrating the very thing that you say bothers you: "informal rules", which are formally called conventions.

For example:

  1. Suppose that you prefer citations to not repeat links. (presumably because it might look cleaner).
  2. I prefer citations that do repeat links (because I don't think a reader should have to look up to another reference to search for the access to the reference).
  3. One of our editors, Francesco, has also pioneered the style that subsequent citations to the same title abbreviate it, which neither you nor I have done.
  4. There is not yet an established policy (formal rule) or convention (informal rule) on which one is correct. This means that they are all equally valid without said policy or convention, as long as they are consistent within a single article.
  5. You dislike this inconsistency and wants it to be standardized.
  6. Instead of opening up a discussion to create a formal rule about it, you decide to go out of your way to edit all instances of Francesco and my styling to conform with yours.
  7. If you can change all cases that conform with yours, you would have established an informal rule (convention) about it based on your own preferred style, without consulting other users about their opinions to reach a consensus, because your style would be only one that remains.
  8. This essentially amounts to you actually being the one to "fix" styles that don't conform to yours as though your style has been a rule in the first place when it is neither formally nor informally one.

Notice that on the contrary, I use my own styles where standards have not been established, but when I see yours, I don't go out of my way to edit your work for the sole sake of "fixing" your style to my style. To be extra clear, "going out of my way" here means editing an article with the sole purpose of changing a non-rule-breaking style to fit my own style rather than to contribute to that article. This sends a message to other editors that the style you are changing from is somehow "wrong". I do not mind it if one were rewriting an entire article and incidentally changes the style.

So when you say "inconsistent styling of some of the things you've listed do bother me for being based more on informal rules at editors' discretion (sometimes yes, other times no) than definite policy I likely have missed", this is erroneous, and I have to say this because I fear you still might not understand. The things I've listed are inconsistent precisely because they are not based on any rules. Rather, no rules have been made about them yet. But when you go out of your way to systematically "fix" them to your preferred style without discussion with the community, you're actually the one who is in practice creating an informal rule at your own discretion. Every time I have informed you about these things, I'm not telling you about an informal rule that we have. I'm telling you that you're not "fixing" something that is wrong and need to stop acting like there is a rule about it because this gives the wrong message to other users and is also disrespectful to the styling preferences of other users whose styles have not been determined to be wrong.

I am well aware that there is a grey zone, but the polite way to react to it is either a laissez-faire attitude that allows other users to use the style they prefer just as they allow you to use yours or to open up a formal discussion about it to resolve the inconsistency. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 04:05, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Contining on, I appreciate your apology and assurance that this would not happen again, but it's not the first time you have apologized, so I am afraid that you might still not understand what precisely is the overarching issue. It's not about being "concerned with minutiae" or "jumping the gun", it's about editorial etiquette, assuming problems that aren't there, and needing multiple reminders in each case. I'm not concerned about your individual reasoning behind each of them.

Your reason for mistaking Trivia for a section separate from and preceding BtS is valid, but it doesn't explain why after I clearly explained to you that was incorrect, and you even acknowledged it explicitly, you then went back and made the same mistake the very next day. There's also no explanation for why you were on the verge of edit warring the "Yan Jiming" page for the citation styling. If you have seen me edit it a particular way on several pages and on that page twice, why would you revert it without comment twice? My edits should be an indication that the style is not wrong, or if you still suspect it is in error, you could have asked me about it, but you did not do so. (For my part, I would have explained in the edit summary on my first reversion of your change, but I actually mistakenly remembered myself as being the one to experiment with my own styling and didn't realize I was reverting your edit of mine).

Hence, I fear that your explanations are still missing the problem. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 04:30, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

I know I tend to be excessively wordy, so I just thought I'd try to give a tl;dr that hopefully would be very straightforward and clear:
Basically, you are perfectly welcome to continue to use all the formatting styles you prefer when you edit where the standard has not been codified, like italicizing all quotations in prose (just not the quote marks), not repeating links in references, American English spelling, etc. I don't want you to feel like you're walking on thin ice on that. You're also allowed to experiment with new styles if they haven't been disputed before.
Just don't edit a page for the sole purpose of 'fixing' other editors on their styling for cases of unstandardized formatting where neither your way nor theirs are wrong. I won't (and never have) disputed your formatting styles for your own work, only reverting them when I felt you were presumptuously denying mine in my edits w/o discussion. In the same vein, I expect that you treat other editors' styling preferences with the same fairness and courtesy.
(The positioning of the Trivia section is a difference case because we have standardized that though I understand the forum thread wasn't very clear about it.)
I think one of the things compounding the problem was also just that you weren't using edit summaries often enough to communicate your reasoning for preferring a different formatting style from others. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 18:06, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Sorry for my delay here, I was mulling over your responses over the past days to make sure I clearly understood them, comparing different pages that we've worked on and returning to what you wrote here, while trying to figure out how best to reply. After contemplation, I came to the conclusion that in effect you are saying that I can continue with my stylistic choices for my edits, but am not to change others' standards to fit my preferences without consultation, which you just stated above. So, if I wanted to edit Cleopatra's page with new info (which incidentally will be needed given how XOdeyssusx is updating the Discovery Tour segments), there could be different ref styles from multiple editors, but we would both be consistent to our individual standards by not infringing on another's work. – Darman (talk) 19:30, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
That is precisely correct and what I have always been trying to tell you. To be clear, if your styling preference has not been disputed before, you are free to go ahead and try to revise the style on an article right after someone's edit—and it is highly recommended that you explain in an edit summary when you do. But if they dispute it and you guys cannot come to a compromise or agreement about it, then going out of your way to continue to try to get all articles to conform to your style will end up becoming a sort of surreptitious edit warring. Remember that anytime you come to feel that the inconcistency is too bothersome, you can always open a discussion about it. Apart from this, if you see that there is a style that a staff member evidently keeps on using even if we haven't talked about it yet, that should by common sense be an indication of staff's preference, the established standard, or what is permissible. It doesn't make much sense to keep on trying to "correct" the staff on formatting without even asking them about it.
The only other thing to bear in mind is that articles should still be internally consistent. If you see an article that is written 50/50 in American vs. Canadian or British English or that is using different reference styles, it is fine to edit to resolve this inconsistency. But inconsistency between articles on formatting is allowed if a consensus has not been reached on that particular area yet since no one has been determined to be in the wrong. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 16:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Image deletion policy

Regarding the images, our staff has always been very clear that our site is primarily focused on lore and fanon is not allowed. But the reasons for my retention of user files that you marked for deletion hinge on other principles at play.

First, users traditionally were allowed a limited amount of original art for personalizing their own page, provided that it is restricted to their user page and are not inappropriate. This is the case even on other exclusively lore-based wikis, like Wookieepedia. Even some of our recently resigned staff used custom art for their profiles.

Second, there is a typical principle of transparency on wikis where talk page history are preserved for posterity. I took notice that in some cases where I deleted a bad file, it would actually gut an archived discussion. While I am determined to not allow users to upload original files for the sole sake of a talk page conversation again, I was undecided about the historic cases and decided to draw a line and preserve those.

Third, we also value community-building both within and without our own wiki, and we see no reason to remove original files that were used for that purpose, like one birthday greeting drawing pertaining to Asassin's Creed that you marked for deletion. I did ask my predecessor for advice regarding this, and he told me that he thought community-building files do no harm, and IIRC, he basically suggested that it was mean to delete them for the sole sake of being extra tidy.

But userpage files like these only constituted a fraction of the files I thought you marked for deletion in error. There were countless cases of "duplicate files" that were not duplicates at all! Others were admittedly nearly identical, differing only by a few frames, in the lighting, in which way a character was looking, or the angle, but your choice of which was the "duplicate" which should be thrown out and which was the legitimate file worthy of keeping seemed arbitary to me. In some of those cases, it seemed like you were making your own decision on which image you liked better without considering that others may prefer the other one you want to toss. In some cases, I did, in fact, much prefer the one you marked for deletion.

That having been said, there were some files that I was quite glad that you hunted and down and marked, especially the ugly fan and/or rap videos. I would continue to be glad if you found those and labelled them for me. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 05:01, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I did recall seeing special user avatars here, though it's been so long since I had tagged them to delete, I didn't recall much else I'd put in the category, or how few of the user images there were. I do remember tagging [File:ACBH Cesare Apple of Eden.png] as a duplicate of [File:Villified 10.png] thinking that we should keep the file that fit the standard of "[memory name/abbreviation] [numeral].[img type]" instead, but looking at it again, I do see that it is indeed a few frames off, with the latter showing a bit less of de Valois' face. What are we to do, then, with images that have a difference of mere frames, or other files that are unused like some of BearticWiki's renders, or have had their contents transcribed like Lacrossedeamon's "Screenshots and Transcripts from AC: Rebellion" blog which is already in Aguilar's journal?

Regarding videos, I have listed a number of files with some rationales in my sandbox if you would like to sort through them. DarkFeather went through a good number of them under [Category:Videos for Review] a while back, before their current hiatus. I will add, though, that I haven't touched that section in a few years, so some of the files may not actually warrant removal, but I'm pretty sure the +20 walkthroughs listed are no longer the purview of the wiki. – Darman (talk) 19:30, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
One of the examples off the top of my head was when you marked two different images of an Apple of Eden, one from Origins and one from the film, as duplicates. The two depictions had completely different patterns, were in different shades of gold, and one was even glowing while the other was not. They were two different Apples of Eden. In fact, it was curious that you didn't mark other Apples of Eden images as duplicates given this. (-_-)
I'm not saying that where images differ by only a few frames, we always should refrain from deleting them. It really depends on the comparison. With unused files, one problem I also had tried to tell you is that a file being unused is not grounds for deletion. This is because articles can get updated, rewritten, or improved and ideally should regularly be reviewed. It's always possible that someone in revising the article decides that another image would work better with the new version, so that's where having a pool of alternative files to choose from at the ready can come in handy. Just because someting is currently unused doesn't mean they are useless. They may be on stand-by.
But really, it's not going to break the wiki to have some unused or even duplicate files laying around, and I always found it perplexing why you were so attentive to this kind of maintenance work. I had the same concern with Sora about the preoccupation with purging all redlinks. It's not that these can't be helpful or beneficial. It would certainly be nice to have it a bit cleaned-up, but these sapseoi ye don't have to be a priority. By far the most critical defects of our wiki so far is in the outdated articles and in having falling way behind on content. We need more content creation and writing, not rote maintenance or format upkeeping. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 16:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Feeding the Wolf

I already made a note about the Petra/Tarben/Randvi dating influencing the notes. If the note is a "special thanks" note, you're dating that person. If you're not dating the person it's a regular "thanks" note with a different name and different content. And no, you have to choose either of the three batches, you can't skip choosing one, nor can you mix them around. They are divided in these groups and those groups are always the same. It's just that Tarben/Petra/Randvi have a normal note (for just being friends) and a romance note. Kennyannydenny (talk) 15:07, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Ahh, OK. I just thought that there would be options to select other residents' notes and have even more possible different notes. Sorry, I hadn't seen your edit summaries and was just tracking the "New Pages" filter. I'll update the tabs then to reflect options for if Eivor is dating the respective people. – Darman (talk) 15:25, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Absolutely no probs, I really don't mind giving a bit more info. I've reloaded the mission several times to get all combinations (although I can't get the last few letters as I'm dating Randvi and Petra, but not Tarben so can't get the things from the other way around). Thanks for the edits on the page! I'm not that very skilled in making it look correctly, i'm better and just typing out the letters :P Kennyannydenny (talk) 17:18, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Skrofnung

Not actually true though. I mean, you can start the Sigrblod Festival as long as you arrived in England and "completed one of the two major plotlines in the game in the Grantebridgescire or Ledestrescire and increase your settlement’s level to two". So, you can do the festival when you're not even near being a jarlskona, or that Basim took over from Layla, that's why I named her shieldmaiden actually. I know it's a predecessor to Siege of Paris, but that dlc can probably also be started before she's a jarlskrona (but after the Rollo missions). Kennyannydenny (talk) 20:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh right, I forgot that just because the siege is set after the main game, players can still be delayed in actually completing it, just like with some of the Druids gear. Thanks for correcting me. – Darman (talk) 20:35, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

new template

Heads up, we are working on a new template the get the WP-REAL icon back in its old spot, ie. {{Era|Individual|Isu}} {{WP-REAL}}. Currently the code is not merged into the wiki.css but if we could get a head start on switching these over that would be great. (Also join the discord) Lacrossedeamon (talk) 22:09, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. I'm not sure if/how I can help, though, as I don't know css. All the (HTML?) coding I've done through my years here is from watching everyone else's edits and following suit. Also, school will be resuming soon, so I regrettably won't be here as much as I'd like for a while. Although I appreciate the invitation to Discord, with +100 people live at any day, I feel it'll be very "loud" and I'd like to keep my online profiles to a number I can control. But thanks. – Darman (talk) 23:15, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
just if you are working on a page with the WP-REAL template put it on the same line just after the ERA icon template, even if for now it doesn't seem to do anything. But take the time you need for school that is obviously more important. Final plug for discord though is that our server compared to something like 4P, ACSisterhood, r/AC, or the ubi official on is rather small but I understand not wanting a larger social media footprint. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 23:49, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Clan Elgring

Where is that coming from? I'm seeing it on all the news sites but I can't find it mentioned in game, by Ubisoft themselves, or in a historic source. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 19:17, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

The gaming sites are what I'd been going off of ever since I found it mentioned in an article, and I thought they were going off something in-game since they're generally reliable for such information. I haven't actually seen it mentioned yet in dialogue subtitles, so I thought it was from later in the plot. – Darman (talk) 22:35, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
I sorta figured it out. So I still haven't seen the name specifically in the game or from an official Ubisoft source but I found that "elgr" is Norse for "elk" which is the clan's symbol which I thought might be the case. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 23:31, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Ahh, so just as we have Eivor of the Raven Clan and Kjotve of the Wolf Clan, so too do we have Sigfred, Sinric, and Toka of the Elk Clan. Kinda makes me wonder what other animal-themed clans there could be. – Darman (talk) 23:35, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Didn't the Rigsogur mention a Whale Clan and semi-historically there was a Hound Clan. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 22:53, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it did. Entry 2 describes Rig's blood feud with Ergon Blade-Tongue of the Whale Clan, who he kills. It continues through Ergon's son Bolli (entry 3) until his death (entry 6) after taking Solveig hostage and provoking Rig's wrath, and ends with Bolli's alleged and unnamed sister (entry 9). I'm still confused, though, as to where places like IGN got the -ing suffix if elgr alone means elk, because the full name wasn't used here until I started adding it. Have you found anything yet? – Darman (talk) 17:20, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

More Valhalla gear

Hey, Darman!

Just passing by to let you know I managed to get most of the descriptions for the Valhalla gear we were missing (both dlc and microtransaction packs) so you can make the pages without needing to track those down. They are on my main sandbox as always.

On another topic, how you've been? I've been dead busy with my dissertation but things should relax a little bit from next month onwards. - Soranin (talk) 15:45, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hey Soranin,
Great work as always getting the info for the gear! I'll try to get to the pages when I've some time this week, but I can't promise I'll be able to finish them all, since as I told Lacrosse above, school is resuming for me soon. On the topic of school, congrats on working on your dissertation! What field of study is it in, and what are you writing on? Otherwise, I've been pretty swell. Nothing crazy, just work and some AC gaming in my off time when I feel like it. I've earned some new badges here, as I'm sure you can see, and have climbed up the ranking board some since you were last here. – Darman (talk) 01:25, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm a statistician and my dissertation is on snowball sampling and hard-to-reach populations. Though I do add a lot more sociological and historical stuff on my research than most statisticians do...

Oh, so I have some competition huh? That should be fun :D - Soranin (talk) 13:33, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Nice, sounds really interesting! And yes haha, you do have competition. For one, I've earned the Grand Master badge, but you can't see it since UCP removed the "view more" function on badge counters (see my profile infoboxes instead). Luck may be on your side, since I'll be here less with school. But it also applies to you, so maybe the field was instead leveled, lol. Know that if (when?) you do beat me, I'll be right on your tail! Oh, and good luck on your paper! – Darman (talk) 22:10, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
And then there's me like that "We're the Millers" meme. Ya'll're getting badges? Lacrossedeamon (talk) 22:55, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Darcy's audio files

Hey, Darman!

So, I had the audio files in a different section because they can appear at any location, just depending on the order you do them in. Also, where did you get "Unlocking the Past" as the first mission in the crossover? As far as I know, Synchronization is the first. - Soranin (talk) 01:09, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I thought that each message followed from each hack (first hack, first message, etc.). They're independent of location, then? And as for "Unlocking the Past", I think I might have mixed up different YouTube vids when I was editing. I could swear there's more info on Darcy and Lucas elsewhere, unless it's from a side mission I thought was a main campaign one? Oop, sorry. Too much on my mind. – Darman (talk) 01:15, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
No problem! Just warning you before you moved the audio section in Re-Sync as well. Also, as for the type of missions they are all side missions in the great WD scheme of things. See this video for reference. Also that "Assassin contracts" under Synchronization seem to be a subtitle, not a label, cause Enter the Assassins has "Bagley's Request" under it. - Soranin (talk) 01:19, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Gear pages

Sorry :P - Soranin (talk) 19:25, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

*Finally surfaces after having to correct two bloody duplicated words across seventy-five pages*
No, you're not! – Darman (talk) 20:45, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Oh, ooops. Didn't even see it, I swear! - Soranin (talk) 20:56, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey, do you mind if I comment out your AC mobile memories template on your sandbox? I'm gonna attempt to run an experiment later to learn more about our redlinks situation. It's gonna involve me removing them from the templates, but don't worry, it's just until the redlinks list refreshes early tomorrow. - Soranin (talk) 21:25, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Sure, likely excuse! (Haha, kidding!) Ah, good idea. I've already done it, though, so you're clear to continue your madness. – Darman (talk) 23:00, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! - Soranin (talk) 23:03, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Advertisement