User talk:Legoless/Arc 2016b

This is an archive of previous comments on my talk page. Please do not post a message here - use this link to go to the active page instead.

POVEdit

I'm an absolute crazy person. I have no idea what I was thinking with that edit (I made another one just now before realizing that I'm a crazy person). I know we use 2nd person, and I've made the changes to 2nd person myself hundreds of times. I'm just crazy and ridiculous! Thanks for fixing my mistake! Jeancey (talk) 06:02, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

No worries haha, I had to double check too! —Legoless (talk) 09:32, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Sun's Death and the War of the First CouncilEdit

You recently wrote the Lore:Sun's Death article, and in the final sentence of the second paragraph, you opened with the statement, "The War of the First Council ended two years later". I take you to mean that the war ended two years after the Sun's Death in 1E 668, which would be 1E 670. However, I can't seem to find anything confirming this in the source supplied for the sentence. Can you explain where you got this? Croaker (talk) 06:05, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

My bad, that should have been 1E 700. —Legoless (talk) 15:55, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up. Unfortunately, I'm back to square one when it comes to trying to narrow down a more exact date for the Battle of Red Mountain. Headache-inducing stuff, full of vagueness and contradiction. Croaker (talk) 20:12, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

DeletedEdit

Are you deleting pages yourself right now, or did you just spot the leftover links to Lore:Madam Firilanya and beat me to tagging them as deleted? If you're actually deleting pages, I'll let you and I'll go for lunch. :) – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 19:11, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

I was just tagging the Firilanya page since I recalled the discussion about it! —Legoless (talk) 19:23, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Split TongueEdit

Can you undo the move I just made on Split-Tongue, I missed a missing hyphen on the goblin Split Tongue. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 00:51, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Done —Legoless (talk) 00:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. No pausing in this game with enemies around. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 01:02, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Help wantedEdit

Hello. I've been having a dispute with The Silencer over an edit on Skyrim: Vigil of Stendarr concerning the way particular pieces of dialogue are presented on the page. I have had a lengthy discussion with this user through edit summaries and in far greater detail on the article's talk page about it. My latest post on the matter suggested we both find a way to do something that the user's posts indicated we actually agreed on, but I have not received any response on the article's talk page or mine. In addition, this user has made multiple unrelated edits on the wiki since then, so it seems to me at least (I may be overreacting, and a discussion is being had with yourself or another admin in private about this issue) that there is little (if any) interest in furthering the discussion and resolving the issue. Another user has since weighed in on this discussion in seeming favor of some of my views on the issue. As it stands, the edits I made are reverted and will stay that way for the moment, as I have zero interest in being edit warred against by what appears to me a valuable contributor to this wiki. I do however, have a major issue with and take exception to the article as is, and have explained this in detail on its talk page. I believe that leaving it as is harms the quality of the article and is potentially misleading and inaccurate.

I apologize if any of this comes off as rash or as having skipped steps in the conflict resolution process, but I raised my original point in January 2015 (which was not responded to until I raised it again in a different manner yesterday), so I do hope you understand that my patience is a little strained concerning it. If I have disregarded any established polices or broken any unwritten rules, I apologize; I'm only human.

With respect, I humbly request an experienced authority figure on this wiki (be it yourself or someone similar) take a look at this and help resolve this conflict one way or the other as soon as possible. Ranyroo (talk) 21:37, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure if any sort of mediation is needed in that discussion, but I'll add my input and hopefully we can reach a consensus. —Legoless (talk) 22:58, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Shadows of Hist dungeon run?Edit

How about running these new dungeons some day with a little guild group? :) Just wondering, as I haven't had time to check them out properly yet. (Or, some collective action around these PvP capturable towns!) Would you be interested, guildmaster? :D — Unsigned comment by Tib (talk • contribs) at 11:57 on 3 August 2016‎ (UTC)

Edit: In case you missed the hidden message - stop slacking and organize some events haha ;) *hides* Tib (talk) 11:57, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

I organised pledge runs for them these last two days but only Vordur showed up! I'll see about organising a group in advance though - maybe Friday or Saturday? Fair warning though, the most recent patch has somehow managed to break group invites... —Legoless (talk) 15:19, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Late Friday (10pm,) could work, but I also have some more time from next week and on :D Well sorry, UESP talk page is probably not a right place to discuss in-game activities, but I just thought it would be nice to do something with the guild or so :) Tib (talk) 20:30, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Just a thank youEdit

For fixing all my misnamed files today. It was not a good day. Echo (talk) 01:43, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

No worries, the Bat.jpg edit summary gave me a laugh! —Legoless (talk) 01:52, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Mede DynatsyEdit

You undid my addition of several {{fact}} templates to the Mede Dynasty article but I'm not sure why. Currently, it's a mass of unsupported statements and I sought only to point that out. 79.71.169.244 22:54, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Ignoring the rude edit summary you left, you added far too many tags on the article. "A Colovian warlord" and "the unpopular battlemage" do not need separate cite tags when they're in the same sentence, since there's unlikely to be very many sources in the first place. If you actually want to meaningfully contribute to the article it'd be a lot more helpful to bring up specific concerns on the talk page rather than labelling every logical statement on the page. If the whole thing really was that atrocious it would probably be much more helpful to use a {{cleanup}} tag. —Legoless (talk) 23:03, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Navigators on LiveEdit

Hey there, have you completed Cadwell's Gold on Live? Someone on the forums suggested that the Navigators that have appeared at the main cities on PTS, which take you between alliance capital cities, already exist on Live if you've completed Gold. Are you able to check this? Thanks! --Enodoc (talk) 13:28, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Nope, they don't appear. Maybe the person from the forum refers to the ships that can ferry players between alliances if they've completed Silver or Gold? --Vordur Steel-Hammer (TINV1K) 16:30, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

I haven't actually seen the Navigators on PTS, but it certainly sounds like they're being confused with the current ship transport which has been in the game since before Update 10. There aren't any NPCs involved, you just activate a ship wheel to go to another starter city. —Legoless (talk) 17:15, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

On the PTS, both the ships and the navigators are available, and both have map icons, which in case of ships also show the travel destination. On live, only the ships are present, and they're unmarked. --Vordur Steel-Hammer (TINV1K) 17:22, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks guys! I didn't think we would have missed them if they were there, but it's always good to check  :) --Enodoc (talk) 18:55, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Crown of LindaiEdit

Do you think it's a good idea to list that note on the quest page since it's already mentioned on the page for the item itself? It seems to me like listing it on both goes against our policy on redundancy. Zul do onikaan^{Laan tinvaak} 22:26, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Reducing redundancy is certainly good practice, but not to the detriment of a walkthrough. I think it's a very important note to include on the quest page, in order to best advise the reader on which quest reward to pick. I never had any idea that you could obtain both crowns plus the broken one, which is a hugely advantageous tip in my opinion. There's gonna be a bit of overlap with the item page, which is indeed where these sorts of oddities usually belong, but I think it easily meets the noteworthiness requirement on the quest page as well.

A quick example of this in practice: on the walkthrough for The Ultimate Heist, we note the location of a skill book that the player will pass during the quest. This is technically redundant in the strictest sense and ought to belong on Oblivion:Imperial Palace, but since it's the only copy in the game it's valuable to note it on the walkthrough too so that the player doesn't miss it. —Legoless (talk) 22:51, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

I may not agree 100%, but I can see where you're coming from. Zul do onikaan^{Laan tinvaak} 22:59, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Skyrim StubsEdit

Hey, thanks for pointing out to me my mistake with removing the stub tag from this page! I'd just like to ask a quick question; you said that stub tags mean the page is incomplete in the Skyrim namespace. With that page on Alva, what is there that should be added to make it fully complete (and therefore eligible to have the stub tag removed)? I'm quite new to this wiki so I'm not extremely knowledgeable :P -AlphaAbsol (talk) 05:44, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

The definition of a "complete" NPC page hasn't been formalised but it should roughly meet these specifications. Here is a recent example of a complete (and featured) page. You might wanna ask another editor who's more involved with those NPC pages if you're interested in helping out; I haven't really done too much with them. —Legoless (talk) 16:18, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for helping me out! I'll use that from now on. -AlphaAbsol (talk) 20:05, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

The Missing Guardian PrereqsEdit

I just wanted to check - are we absolutely positive that The Missing Guardian requires all four Lower Craglorn story quests to be completed before it becomes available? On PTS, only The Warrior's Call and Elemental Army seem to be required.

There are two possibilities: we got it wrong before by coincidence, and it has always only required those two; or, they changed the prereqs for One Tamriel. Thanks! --Enodoc (talk) 14:10, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Afraid I have no idea, I completed those two last. Seems unlikely that only two were required though, considering the demand for groups doing the other two quests at release. Could've just been achievement hunting I suppose, although this and this seem to corroborate our prerequisite assumptions. It could also be that the third Upper Craglorn quest is tied to the Celestial Investigator achievement rather than The Missing Guardian quest but that seems unlikely - might be worth testing on PTS, i.e. attempt to obtain Dawn of the Exalted Viper without completing the remaining Lower Crag quests. If it can be obtained without the achievement, that would be pretty solid proof that the prerequisites were changed. —Legoless (talk) 14:53, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Just found this on the forums:

The “Shattered and the Lost” and “The Corrupted Stone” are no longer required to complete the zone story of Craglorn. They’re still balanced for two to four player groups. [1]

That seems to confirm that these two definitely used to be required, and it is intentional that they no longer are. So that's that one answered  :) --Enodoc (talk) 21:24, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Awesome. Guess that explains why Ruins of Kardala is still a group delve. The other two Lower quests also have new questgivers at the observatory. We should probably mark the 2-4 player quests in some way - I suppose they're not even story quests anymore then? —Legoless (talk) 21:40, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, that depends on the definition of "Story Quests" that we want to use. For Craglorn, as with most other places, story was determined by chaining, where one quest leads you to the next, either by direct quest-giving, or dialogue. These two are still directly referenced by Hara when you finish The Star-Gazers, so the chaining still exists. Beyond that, the Craglorn story quests coincided with the quest achievements, and since these two are still part of Celestial Investigator, and still referenced by Hara, I would say they're still part of the story. Marking group quests can already be done with the group parameter, unless you think we need to adjust that in some way? --Enodoc (talk) 11:20, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

If it's still an achievement prereq I agree with keeping them as story quests. Probably just need to note that those two specific quests weren't converted like the others. —Legoless (talk) 12:10, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Grim HarlequinEdit

Would ON:Crafting Motif 43, Grim Harlequin help with the WIP of ON:Crafting Motif 43, Harlequin Style? - KINMUNE ﴾TALK﴿ 12:07, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

...I suppose it would have. Alas. —Legoless (talk) 12:09, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Flavor text on Daedric GeneralsEdit

I noticed you re-ordered the text on Gedna Relvel so that the Molag Bal quote is now in the text instead of at the top. My intention with these was to do the same as we do with load screen text on the place pages - have a bit of flavor text that appears as an introduction before the article-proper.You quoted it as "non-standard", but I was basically making it standard for at least this set of enemies. I could see doing it for other creatures as well, but not many of them have a good intro text like the Daedric Generals at Dark Anchors do. Hiding the text in the article just reduces the impact of that cool intro. The only reason they don't all have it is I haven't encountered all of them since I started doing those. — TheRealLurlock (talk) 14:20, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

I actually really like how we handle ESO loading screen text, but the difference is that these are dialogue lines. Dialogue belongs in the main text, especially third party dialogue which needs some introduction. Putting those lines in introductory italics looks cool stylistically, but goes against our usual guidelines for NPC pages. If it was a big article and needed to be broken up, some stylistic quotes wouldn't be uncalled for, but for such minor articles the main text needs all the info it can get and the quote hardly bears repeating. —Legoless (talk) 14:33, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Rufous Mudcrab PAX codesEdit

Just gave out the last code yesterday. They all worked now. Thanks a lot for making it happen. <3 MissKokane (talk) 12:47, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Awesome news! It was all Jeancey really, I just passed it along. ^^ —Legoless (talk) 13:11, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Legends ArticlesEdit

Basically, we can either leave it as is, and the namespace will be virtually barren permantely, or we can make easier to navigate articles, which also help highlight where work needs to be done, and provide some actual content to our readers. It's easy to say that Legends doesn't have much content and doesn't need articles, but give it time and treat it like our other namespaces, and it may develop into something that is at least useful to the site in someway. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 01:24, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I was just about to post to your talk page. In Legends, card types are an entirely different concept from races. Races determine card drops and avatars, while Creature types are specifically about cards. It's therefore inappropriate to link to Legends:High Elf when talking about the High Elf card type. If you want separate pages for all those card types, you'll need to create it at Legends:High Elf (cards) or something. Similarly, Legends:Mantikora is not a good location for the Mantikora card type. There seems to be almost nothing to say about most Creature types, so I'm not sure what function those 39 redlinks would serve unless you're planning to turn those articles into list pages with the planned template. —Legoless (talk) 01:30, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Also, the elven race names were correct before. It's "High Elf" in Legends, not "Altmer". I'm gonna propose to move them back and split the card lists from the racial info. —Legoless (talk) 01:41, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It's not inappropriate, those are cards of Altmer, and by playing as an Altmer, you are more likely to get those cards in particular. If you were to create an article just for the cards, there's a fairly high chance a reader would be looking for the card list, but came to that article first. By doing that, we'd be moving content away from where readers are likely to look for it, although I'm not entirely opposed to it (but we would be keeping both a race and now separate cards page). I am making list articles for all of those redlinks as well, thus me making the redlinks, and making templates/getting templates made. I would suggest waiting a while to do anything until we have an actual namespace to look at. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 01:44, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

And secondly, if you would play Skyrim for just a moment and try to create a new character... they also call them High Elf and Dark Elf and Wood Elf there. We stuck with Altmer and Dunmer though for internal consistency and preference, thus I did the same. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 01:49, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

And I apologize for these separate edits, but we can just discuss splitting the cards lists here instead of putting up nine different conversations for it. I'm opposed to the split, as I think it'll just be moving content to a page that would serve basically the exact same purpose the race page does, minus most of the content, but I'd accept them being split, if that is ultimately what we wish. I think it would inconvenience readers to see "For the card list, see X", and then just land on an article that was nothing but the card list, when we could have had it on the previous article with all of the other information to begin with. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 01:55, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It was discussed here that the individual races didn't even warrant separate articles. I'm not opposed to their creation if there's relevant info which can't be summarised on Legends:Races (the dialogue, in particular), but I am opposed to muddying the concepts of race and card type. They're two totally different gameplay mechanics, regardless of whether your race gives you cards of that type. Readers are either gonna want info on their racial bonuses, or a card list. They're unlikely to want both on one page, and use of the {{about}} template should address any navigation concerns.

I don't think Skyrim should be a factor when setting up a new namespace. Ignoring the in-game terms in favour of a rather strange precedent is inaccurate and at least warrants discussion first. We're encountering the same problem with the Online namespace, where the elven races have been misnamed for years and have resulted in our skills info now being rather messy.

I just placed the split tags to hopefully get some feedback on this. If any extra talk page discussions pop up, I guess we can just go to the CP. —Legoless (talk) 02:00, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I saw that conversation, it did not come to the correct conclusion. But it's not just Skyrim, it goes back to the earliest games in the series. All of the character creators choose to call them "X Elf" and not "Xmer". If you really want to argue this, this is an issue with all the recent games which requires more a lot more work to correct. to get it back to the standard we had with Daggerfall. I am still fine with a split between the card list and race pages, if people really want that. It would add more room for a discussion on the cards traits and any similarities between the type, at the least. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 02:08, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Character creators are one thing, but all of those Legends cards are labelled "High Elf". In my view that makes it a game term, so the conversation should start fresh, with no regard to our lore-heavy preferences in the other namespaces where the name arguably matters less. Calling those cards something other than "High Elf" seems unreasonably inaccurate for the simple sake of naming consistency. —Legoless (talk) 02:20, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

(←) After thinking about it for a bit, I believe you are correct in separating the card list and race page. It would be like us detailing specific NPCs name after that race in another namespace on the race page, which would be incorrect over there. So by existing precedent, I support the card lists being moved. I still do not support changing the names back to "X Elf", also due to existing precedent. To standardize that would be a bit of a bigger project across the site, and would require a much more definite consensus that we would want to do so. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 04:47, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm not arguing at all for changing elf names across the site. I don't see any need to standardise something like that. That's the point of having separate namespaces. Calling High Elf cards "Altmer" makes positively zero sense, regardless of what we do with the other games. By that logic, we should therefore have internal consistency in the Legends namespace and name the race "High Elf" as well. That's the term that the game uses, and it's used quite extensively (unlike Skyrim, where the race name appear in like 2 locations).

It seems to me both inaccurate and pedantic to expect every game to follow the exact same terminology. We didn't keep calling Stamina "Fatigue", so I don't see why we ought to insist on -mer when writing about a game that simply doesn't use those terms. A simple redirect will solve any cross-namespace confusion. I feel that in this instance, using our preferred terms actually harms our coverage of the game, unlike with Skyrim where it barely mattered. —Legoless (talk) 14:48, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Some more questions about Endless Stair and Mad ArchitectEdit

Do we know that The Architect began working for Molag Bal due to the Planemeld? Seeing he is a Lich in ESO, he could have been in his service for a long time. The Bretons inside VoM only state that they worked together with Architect in Wayrest. That could have been whenever. The Bretons also state they've been prisoned there for a very long time.
Even if Endless Stair serves as defence line, does it mean that it was built exactly then, or for that purpose? I mean, maybe it was, but if nobody is actually saying that, we don't know that they were created at the same time. I'm just wondering: I know there's a lot of dialogue in these quests and maybe we can record some of it here one day. Also, I really hate the "Events of ESO" reference :< Tib (talk) 21:42, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

I think the wording of that loading screen definitely implies that the Vortex and the Stair were created together, and the defensive nature of the Stair supports that assumption. Is it possible that the Stair existed pre-Vortex, or that the Vortex existed pre-Planemeld? Possibly, but I can't see anything which would suggest that. All the evidence we have suggests that the Vortex was formed by the processes of the Planemeld, and that the Endless Stair was built to protect the portal to the Vortex. That firmly places its creation post-Soulburst. —Legoless (talk) 21:48, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I understand the way you reason, althouhgh I think it might have been ambiguous on purpose (less discrepancies and all that). What I mean is, I fear there's a risk we take an assumption and replicate it, it almost becomes a truth and that's really not so good. But I didn't really want to fight about it or anything, I just really had some thoughts regarding this :P And I spent so much time in Craglorn, maybe I just need some more clarity about e.g. Nedes. Not that it's even there somewhere! Btw, can you look at my sandbox nr 2, I've tried to begin with Hallin's Stand. Anything completely weird there? The ESO quest summary is missing. Maybe the language is weird as well :p Tib (talk) 15:44, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Nothing major. I cleaned up the grammar and layout a bit and added some links to sources you may have missed. Sorry about the delay! —Legoless (talk) 17:45, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Oh, so there were more sources. Well I wouldn't have found them if you hadn't added them, so thank you for helping out! Can't believe they didn't show up in search results (or maybe they did, at the end somewhere!) Again, thanks, I'll try to round up this little lore article soon and create the page. Tib (talk) 13:32, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Meet the CharacterEdit

Many thanks! Phoenix Neko (talk) 17:30, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

All good, great to get it up so quickly! —Legoless (talk) 17:31, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Arena minotaursEdit

I'm not sure I understand why that part is not noteworthy. Do you mean Ad-Hoc as in they there put in there as an after thought? And if so, how would we know that? There is dialogue with the Arena Master that goes: "I've had some people out collecting your new combatants. The wilderness is full of 'em! Let me know when you're ready for a match, and it's showtime!", so that at least implies that its not as ad-hoc or random as it seems.

Also, I'm not aware of the source that says Minotaur fights only started in 433. It entirely possible they were happening prior to Oblivion... but even if they weren't, why would that matter? I strongly believe the fact that Minotaurs fought in arena matches is itself of note. --Jimeee (talk) 00:43, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

There seems to be a big chunk of dialogue missing from Ysabel's wiki page. As you can see from the full quotes, the matches are totally informal:

"Ha ha! There's the new Arena Grand Champion! Now listen, I bet you're wondering what's next huh? Well I've been thinking... Why not spice things up a bit, give the people of Cyrodiil what they really want? We revise the rules of competiton, offer a new kind of match... I'm talking weekly shows, fights pitting you against... are you ready for this? Monsters! And maybe even some wild animals! Sounds great doesn't it? I've had some people out collecting your new combatants. The wilderness is full of 'em! Let me know when you're ready for a match, and it's showtime!"

"Look, these aren't your average Arena matches. They're shows! You fighting some savage beasts! People come to see you kill things. It's simple. We can do them any time of the day. You kidding? The citizens of the Imperial City would love some late-night entertainment! You can wear whatever ever you want, of course. We don't want you getting killed out there!"

The fact that she calls it a "new kind of match" also makes it pretty clear that this wasn't something that was happening prior to the CoC's victory. However, I don't think it's notable in the slightest, regardless of how informal or brief these arena shows were. It's generic stuff. We wouldn't say "the vampires of Bloodlet Throne used wolves in their arena" on Lore:Wolf, because then the page would be inundated with the countless situations involving pit wolves. Sure, maybe the Imperial City Arena is a bigger venue, but it's still totally generic. All sorts of creatures were used, and we have no reason to believe Ysabel's little shows were anything noteworthy or out of the ordinary. "Beasts in an arena" is a pretty common thing in TES and in the real world, and I really don't think it bears mentioning on Lore:Minotaur or any other bestiary page. —Legoless (talk) 01:02, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

I didn't remember that dialogue, so that's fair enough they didn't happen before Oblivion. Your wolf example I agree with, but this is the Imperial City arena. If it was any other beast or animal, I would agree to leave it out, but given the origin of Minotaurs and their relationship to the Imperial City - I felt there was something more there than just a wolf fight in some cave. Almost as if that fact that these guardians of the Empire are reduced to fighting in it's capital like the other animals highlights their complete degeneration and fall from grace. If its worded something like that, I think it would fit with the rest of the narrative. Plus its the only known arena that Minotaurs have ever fought in, which makes it unique in that respect. --Jimeee (talk) 01:23, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

That seems okay to me. Minotaur hunting also seems to be a common bloodsport, considering all the hunting trophies. Rather than a specific "Ysabel Andronicus once used minotaurs in the Imperial City Arena", it might be best to make a more sweeping statement about their status as beasts in the Third Era and give their use in the Arena as an example. That way, if they ever show up in an arena again, it would just confirm the statement rather than render it unnoteworthy. —Legoless (talk) 01:35, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Edit: It seems Henantier has memories of minotaurs in the IC Arena, so it looks like it was done before after all. —Legoless (talk) 01:37, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

"Plus its the only known arena that Minotaurs have ever fought in, which makes it unique in that respect." - I can be wrong but I believe I saw a mention of minotaurs on Kvatch Arena is ESO. UPD: Seems I can't find an actual dialog or note, but the book of Crafting Motif 39: Minotaur seem to imply that minotaur crafting style (even if it is used by humans) is closely related to the arena gladiators, so there should be a link. Anyway, I also don't think that minotaur fights are unique to IC arena or to 3E 433. Phoenix Neko (talk) 10:08, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Change to Brittleshin Pass editEdit

Hello, I noticed that you reverted my change of "Apprentice-locked" to "apprentice-locked". It is a trivial change, but I think it is more consistent with the rest of the wiki and grammatically correct. You stated that the capitalized version is more consistent, but when I search the term, the only other page I found with it capitalized is Arcadia's Cauldron (which should be changed as well). Same for the other lock levels; all are lowercase from what I can tell. Speaking of consistency, the use of a hyphen is much more random. I see no reason to go around changing all of them to one standard, but the hyphen makes more sense to me. If you don't mind, I will revert it back and also fix the Arcadia's Cauldron page (looking for other errors while I am at it). Only after you reply though. —Dillonn241 (talk) 05:24, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

That's very odd, I could've sworn we used to capitalise those - and still should in my opinion, but I guess consistency dictates. —Legoless (talk) 02:24, 29 December 2016 (UTC)