User talk:Sol Pacificus/Archive 2

RE: Gudbrand Blade

Hahaha hello again :D

The "Gudbrand Blade" appears to be based on a dagger of princess Ita daughter of Amenemhat II albeit its in game depiction got the ACO treatment of turning it into a sword, and enlarged one of course (another similar dagger). The Gudbrand name is clearly a reference to one Viking item set, Gudbrand from For Honor, considering that ACO is gonna get a For Honor inspired pack. Nanomat (talk) 21:06, January 13, 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for interrupting the page of Leonidas

It's just that I want to give life to the page, do not block me while I edit the page, have a bit of mercy, I just need to look for the photo.Weapon213 (talk)Weapon123Weapon213 (talk)

RE: Homophobic Troll Post

Hey, I'd just like to show you this post made by a user called Shinyhotdogg. I think this is outrageous- their first comment seems to be a disgusting joke about anal sex (although I can't be sure of that because their writing is near incoherent). The post was clearly made as some sort of sick joke- indeed, another user who took part in the thread began insulting others, claiming they were just having "a bit of fun". I'd also like to add that this user mentioned something about Shinyhotdogg creating off-topic posts (although I myself can't confirm this); to me, it seems that this user is incapable of behaving properly on a Discussions board. However, it is not my job to decide on punishments. Thank you for your time. The Supreme Argonian (talk) 23:49, January 27, 2018 (UTC)

re:source

oh i thoght when somone adds info and source i thoght it was ok plus i did not bother to look at his source when he added that it wont happen again (Lionel Head (talk) 06:13, January 30, 2018 (UTC))

Videos for deletion

Hello Sol,
Thanks for purging those vids. On that topic, do you think you could take a shot at culling Category:Videos for Review if/when you get a chance? I know the category banner says DarkFeather's working on it, but he's currently otherwise occupied. I've explained more here and have made charts/lists with brief notes here. Thanks!
--Darman (talk) 04:26, February 8, 2018 (UTC)

Forgot to leave a source in the original edit of Sibrand's page, but here are the voice clips: http://allsoundsasscreed.tumblr.com/tagged/Sibrand

Sibrand qoutes

Forgot to leave this link in the original edit of his page :/ http://allsoundsasscreed.tumblr.com/tagged/Sibrand —unsigned comment by PlayingGames97 (talk · contr)

Bear

Hi Sol, I saw your comments in the move log on the Bear page. Could you please do the same with the Jaguar (animal) page? Thanks in advance! Kennyannydenny (talk) 09:57, February 20, 2018 (UTC)

Queen Consort

Saw your edit and reasoning on the Empress Zhang page about the Queen Consort category not being technically accurate or applicable. What about changing the name of that category from Queen Consort to Royal Consort? Then it would include multiple titles and genders. And if needed sub categories can later be made. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 17:08, March 20, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the idea Lacross! I've just seen it through! Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 03:54, March 21, 2018 (UTC)

So some royal consorts are regnant of a different holding in their own right. However I assume the term monarch can cover those, but there is also regents which are usually a parent of a child monarch. I’m not sure any have been featured in the franchise yet but it’s something to keep in mind. Finally, we are using the term royal consorts but I’m not sure it’s grammatically correct. When differentiated by gender it’s kings/queens Consort not king/queen consorts, similar to attorneys general. So should it be Royals Consort or left as is since it’s basically a made title for inclusiveness? Lacrossedeamon (talk) 05:44, March 21, 2018 (UTC)

File magic

Hi Sol,
I have 2 questions on some files and am wondering if you could work some magic. First, would the artworks of King Tut, Nefertiti, and Ramesses II (both linked below) go under their personal page as Promo Art, even though their profile images are renders from said pieces, or under concept art for The Curse of the Pharaohs? Both? And second, if possible, could you please work some magic on these files?

• Rename DWvK46kXcAE41zP.jpg to ACO_Nefertiti.jpg, which I know is actually just cropped from the former image, but it looks slightly "squished".
• Rename Assassin’s Creed Rogue Remastered Launch Trailer Ubisoft US to to Assassin's Creed Rogue Remastered Launch etc. (note the difference in apostrophe styles in source code).
• And another apostrophe oddity in Assassin’s Creed Rogue Remastered Announcement Teaser Trailer Ubisoft US. I'm asking because most videos here have the "normal" apostrophe vs "smart quotes". Or at least, the videos I've seen. Besides, it's difficult to type such a character in the search bar.

Thanks, -- Darman (talk) 19:36, April 2, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for working your magic! And oops, seems I didn't link the Ramesses II art. My bad. Here it is, and here is its duplicate. I also see you moved the misnamed files. But do we need the redirect links, though, since nothing will be linking to them... -- Darman (talk) 17:22, April 4, 2018 (UTC)

Hey Darman, I hope I've addressed all your requests here! I'm not sure what the other staff thinks regarding your question of the placement of those artworks, but I personally think that even if those characters' profile images are derived them, the originals should still be included since they should be on this wiki somewhere, and they are relevant to those characters. Whether or not they appear under those characters' articles, I would say they should be included in the The Curse of the Pharaohs page, but as "promo art" not "concept art". I'm confused why when you asked, you referred to it as a promo art if they went under the character pages and concept art if they went under The Curse of the Pharaohs. These images are either promotional art or concept art; the designation shouldn't change between pages. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 20:14, April 4, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks again for the file magic! I think given the sheer volume of ACO art, we'll need a gallery page. Apologies for the confusion between Promo and Concept. I thought the images were of a "mostly-finalized-but-not-fully-finished" type. I'll file under CotP. -- Darman (talk) 20:30, April 4, 2018 (UTC)

My Recent Edits

Hey Sol, sorry if you got all heated up - I've simply been doing what I've always been doing around here, that is, fixing other people's mess. Namely, I was converting all the various Italian Assassins, Turkish Assassins links to their proper Italian Brotherhood of Assassins. That's all I've done, even in the edit which got you all so worked up.

The text simply moved on itself, I didn't touch it.

I'm really sad to know you may think I'm doing that on purpose. I'd suggest you to calm down and assume good faith, it surely was not my intention to do harm and I think you should have known better before arbitrarily assuming otherwise from me.

Bye. --Piero.schiavone1994 (talk) 12:22, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

What I just said is especially evident here. I was simply renaming the erroneous Brotherhoods links. The mess came up on itself. I think I won't do it anymore and someone else will fix all those broken links. Bye. --Piero.schiavone1994 (talk) 12:26, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

Piero, are you per chance making your edits using the Visual Editor? If you are, and you're not deliberately moving the interwiki links onto the previous line then it might be that VE is doing it. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 12:30, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

Nope, I never use the VE beause I know it is prone to create mess. --Piero.schiavone1994 (talk) 12:33, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

As you can all see here, this is now tending to happen to all edits, even those of which I was not responsible. So there surely must be a problem with the editor. --Piero.schiavone1994 (talk) 12:33, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

I appreciate the reply Piero, and I just wanted to clarify that I was not incensed in any way at you, nor did I assume bad faith at any point. You've been around here long enough, longer than I have, for me to know that you're not the kind to vandalize. Unfortunately, tone doesn't translate well over text as I'm sure you know. I think it would've been impossible for me to have thought that the random changes weren't deliberate, but I did consider that you might've had a good reason for doing so. I apologize if the way I asked somehow came across as blunt. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 12:53, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

Hey Sol. I got pretty upset myself only because I was being unjustly reprimanded just when I was helping around to keep the Wiki tidy, and moreover I had no idea my routine edits had caused havoc so your question really came up as completely unexpected to me. Nonetheless, I was perhaps overly offended. --Piero.schiavone1994 (talk) 21:33, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

I was not reprimanding you Piero. I was merely asking you directly to explain those edits. No matter how much I assumed good faith, those questions still needed to be asked, and I would ask that you, in turn, assume my good faith when I asked those questions rather than interpreting them as scolding. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 04:38, April 25, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Edit warring

! Eh, it's well done!

If I did the most realistic editing, maybe that was wrong. —unsigned comment by Batalex 34 (talk · contr)

I'm Spanish

From Spain, and you're just an imbecile tyrant who makes life impossible for other users like me. Leave my edition now, tyrant of shit. Oh I will search the Internet how to block users like you. —unsigned comment by Batalex 34 (talk · contr)

please, give me a reason why you have deleted it

If you tell me, I forgive your life —unsigned comment by Batalex 34 (talk · contr)

Batalex, I have already given you my reasons. In fact, I explained quite clearly these reasons at every point: when I reverted your edits initially and whenever I gave you a warning. I have asked a fellow Spanish-speaking user to help translate because I think it's clear that the language barrier between us is a factor to why you have difficulty understanding me. He should be around soon, probably tomorrow. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 22:34, April 27, 2018 (UTC)

if I just wanted to edit

That information is interesting, it does not have anything bad, it's just information. —unsigned comment by Batalex 34 (talk · contr)

Let's make a deal

You give me directions to make the edition more realistic (the guy I spoke with said he had to be more realistic). It's like Batman and Robin. Please help me. I just want to edit at a realistic level —unsigned comment by Batalex 34 (talk · contr)

For, once

stop deleting information once, I have not done anything —unsigned comment by Batalex 34 (talk · contr)

Cristophorus put in a lot of effort to try to resolve the language barrier—which I assumed was the real issue, but not only have you not replied to him, communicated your perspective, nor addressed the problem, but you have went straight back with the edit warring. The reason why your edit to the Karl Marx article was reverted is because it violates a very critical policy we have here which is a neutral point-of-view. This means not making the claim that Marx's ideas were "quite negative and extremist" because no matter how valid that opinion might be, it's still an opinion. I know that our policies have still not been written out fully which is our fault, but you still must explain your own reasons whenever you insist on reverting reverts like that. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 07:25, April 30, 2018 (UTC)

What's the point of deleting the information just because it's better than another?

Also, your friend deleted Connor's and I have not removed any information I just put it, period. Perhaps that is important. It is only information of another type, it is not harmful Batalex34 23:00, May 2, 2018 (UTC)23:00, May 2, 2018 (UTC) —unsigned comment by Batalex 34 (talk · contr)

Solo quiero la respuesta

Por favor Batalex34 23:01, May 2, 2018 (UTC)Batalex 34 (talk)

Database

Could you please unlock the page? Amnestyyy just vanished. VendettaRev (talk) 00:04, April 28, 2018 (UTC)

Done. :) Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 02:05, April 28, 2018 (UTC)

New Era Icons

Hello, Sol. I'd already incidentally noticed the existance of the new Era Icons (obviously), but I didn't enquire about how they work so I had omitted to apply them. However, since you asked, I will try to figure it out. --Piero.schiavone1994 (talk) 15:47, May 1, 2018 (UTC)

this guy

can this guy

Piero.schiavone1994

be an admin hes doing awessome like you guys i think he deserves it (Lionel Head (talk) 05:25, June 5, 2018 (UTC))

Hey Lionel, many apologies for responding to your recommendation weeks late. I just would like you know that we've taken it into consideration, and we agree that Piero is a long time contributor of this wiki who has been very helpful with maintenance edits across thousands of pages, and this perseverance is something to be recognized. Thanks once again for making the suggestion. :) Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 06:15, June 23, 2018 (UTC)

Misthios sexuality

I categorized the character of Odyssey as LGBT as the developpers said you can choose the romance of your character, so male and female partner equally.Francesco75 (talk) 12:39, June 13, 2018 (UTC)

Hey Francesco, I appreciate you explaining that reversion. As far as I know, Iwould not say that's confirmation that the individual is LGBT, however, because it's not yet clear if certain romance options would be limited depending on the sex you choose to play as. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 12:43, June 13, 2018 (UTC)

Levantine Brotherhood page

I am unsure as to why you reverted my changes there. The grammar of the previous version was atrocious (some of it still is) and many of its passages were....less than specific. DrunkenSquirrel (talk) 04:16, June 23, 2018 (UTC)

DrunkenSquirrel, thank you for consulting me about the reverts. The reason why I could not explain my reasoning is because one can only undo the immediate edit not those before it unless you are an administrator with rollback which is what I used. However, rolling back does not allow an edit summary to provide an explanation.

As for why I reverted it, pardon me for not seeing that the original version was much more atrocious. However, your edit while much better, was still incorrect writing. In particular, you made abundant use of parenthesis as appositives and the like which is very unprofessional. Parentheses for additional clauses in a sentence should only be used in the utmost rarest of occasions, and I cannot even name one off the top of my head at this point. In those examples, a simple comma or an em dash (i.e. —) would've worked perfectly. Aside from this, there were other errors to your edits: 'native' and 'non-native' are vague terms especially in regards to a region whose population has long seen substantial admixing and was a hotspot for migration, and while we may be tempted to assume Altaïr is Arab just because he's Middle Eastern and spoke Arabic, we should be cautious about generalizing all northern Levantine people as Arab. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 06:09, June 23, 2018 (UTC)

I hope I am not being too blunt as I am really grateful that you corrected my reversion since I had indeed missed that your edit was an improvement. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 06:17, June 23, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I used parentheses in my edits because I don't know how to implement a long dash, and I wanted to avoid run on sentences. As for the terms "native" and "non-native", what I really had in mind was "indigenous" and "non-indigenous". For whatever it's worth, I am an ethnic Levantine myself and I specialize in the region's history. The Levant has been colonized many times over by the Assyrians, Babylonians, Romans, Greeks, Arabs (who are still the ruling majority in most Levantine countries), Crusaders, Ottomans, French, and British, and nearly all of the Levantine Assassins shown belong to one or more of those groups. Phoenicians are scarcely mentioned in AC lore, and most of its Jewish characters (sans figures like Jesus, Herod, and Moses, who were either aligned with the Templars or unaffiliated) are shown living in the Diaspora. That's why I feel the need to clarify. Should I put in "indigenous" and "non-indigenous" instead? Let me know, please.DrunkenSquirrel (talk) 08:55, June 23, 2018 (UTC)

It's really cool that you are from the Levant yourself. May I ask which country or what is your heritage? Lebanese? Assyrian? Israeli?

Actually, my point about "native" vs. "non-native" would have applied to "indigenous" and "non-indigenous" as well. The reason is because by the 12th century in the Levant, the population would have seen significant admixture from the Persians moving west, the Arabs moving north, the Hebrews scattered all about, the Phoenicians, the Turks which controlled much of the Middle East, the Byzantine Greeks moving east, and Armenians moving south. The novel Assassin's Creed: The Secret Crusade specifically describes the Saracen army consisting of Armenians, Nubians, Arabs, Assyrians, Turks, etc. which indicates the multi-ethnic nature of the region by this point. Who then is indigenous and who isn't? I do trust that you have a better idea of this.

Side-note, would you consider the Lebanese to be the descendants of the Phoenicians? I have read that genetic tests show that they largely are and that some Lebanese do follow-up on that claim by calling the Phoenicians their ancestors. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 18:19, June 23, 2018 (UTC)

My Levantine ancestry consists of Samaritan, Ashkenazi Jewish, and Assyrian, whereas my non-Levantine ancestors are Mexican and Ojibwe. I'm usually mistaken for Filipino.

Anthropologists define indigenous status as tribal identity in conjunction with a traditional homeland, and recognition by that tribe as a member. Other factors include root culture, language, religion, blood quantum, and so on. Martinez-Cobo is the guideline most scholars and activists use, although there are some problematic clauses within it. Specifically, there are two pieces of criteria that not only require indigenous peoples to remain non-dominant on their ancestral territories, but also maintain a continuous, unbroken presence there. That poses significant problems for indigenous peoples who have undergone genocide or prolonged dispossession, if not both.

Jews, Samaritans, Druze, Cypriots, Lebanese Arabs (especially the Christians), North Africans, and Italians (mostly southern Italians) all have significant quantities of Phoenician blood, but the Phoenicians themselves went extinct by the end of the 1st millennium BCE. The Jews and Samaritans are both Israelite populations, i.e. southern Canaanites who are closely related to the Phoenicians and intermarried with them often. Phoenicians also settled and colonized vast swathes of the Mediterranean, especially Carthage (present day Tunisia) and southern Italy. Arabs absorbed the remaining Phoenicians after they conquered the Levant in the Middle Ages.

I hope that makes sense.DrunkenSquirrel (talk) 06:32, June 24, 2018 (UTC)

Granadins vs Granadans

Wikipedia has the English demonym for Granada as Granadin not Granadan which is why I used the former.Lacrossedeamon (talk) 05:10, June 24, 2018 (UTC)

I cannot find anywhere on Wikipedia that says the English demonym is Granadin. In its infobox, it notes the Spanish demonyms of granadino (masculine) and granadina (feminine). By English nomenclature, the demonym of Granada should be either Granadan or Granadian, and Granadin is completely unprecedented and goes against this standard nomenclature. Wiktionary also gives the demonym of Granada as Granadan. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 05:15, June 24, 2018 (UTC)

Funny enough, the reason why I always avoided making this category before is because I cannot find a strong confirmation of the correct demonym, but it certainly cannot be Grenadin as once again, this is against the rules in English nomenclature. By examples such as Canadian for Canada, Floridian for Florida, Grenadian for Grenada, it should probably be Granadian. However, I have never heard Granadian in my life, and I have very rarely encountered Granadan. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 05:19, June 24, 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Province_of_Granada this one's infobox says Granadin. I specifically did not creat the category until I found this. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 05:24, June 24, 2018 (UTC)

Montenegro also uses Montenegrin, there are other outliers like Britons and such. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 05:29, June 24, 2018 (UTC)

Montenegro ends with an -o, so its rule is different from Granada which ends in -a. Briton is a name for an ethnic group itself (i.e. Celtic peoples of Great Britain prior to the Anglo-Saxon invasions, now called Welsh) not derived from a place name but from the Old French Breton. I am aware that Briton is now very uncommonly used as a demonym for British people, but this has not become widely accepted usage. I understand that you were only referring to the Wikipedia article for the spelling of Granadin, and I would have been tempted to do the same. However, it is against grammatical standards for a place name ending in -a to have its demonym end in -in, and we will need additional sources to verify this rather than a Wikipedia article. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 07:09, June 24, 2018 (UTC)

I looked through other articles on Wikipedia talking about Granada and they seemed split on using Granadin or Granadan as the adjectival form. I couldn’t find the adjectival form in Rebellion or the movie novelization but I’d say if there is AC material that uses the adjectival form whether Granadin or Granadan we shouldn’t use that. Linguistically citing orthographic rules doesn't really work in English. Granadin could have been pulled from the Spanish Granadino or the Arabic endonym Granadi/Granadeen without being Anglicized. Other demonyms ending with -in(e) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonym#-in(e). Lacrossedeamon (talk) 07:27, June 24, 2018 (UTC)

'-ine' is not the same thing as '-in', and incidences of the former should not be treated as indicating the common usage of the latter suffix. The former is extremely common whereas the latter is still utterly unprecedented in English aside from Montenegrin, a true outlier. One can say that citing orthographic rules doesn't always work in English, but to say it simply doesn't really work (at all) is to say that these rules don't exist. And if the demonym was pulled from the Spanish granadino, it won't be Granadin, it would be granadino. Granadin would be grammatically incorrect in Spanish as well, and while I'm struggling to find the Arabic demonym, the Arabic name is Ġarnāṭah. You are right, however, that whatever is used as the demonym in an AC source should be the one that we use. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 08:48, June 24, 2018 (UTC)

You continue to base your argument on absence of evidence and appeal to probability fallacies. If you can find script from AC II: Discovery that might have it. Of note, historian Will Durant uses Granadines in his Story of Civilization. Granadine is also used as adjectival form of Granada in the context of New Granada, such as the Granadine Confederation. So maybe we’ve both been wrong and should be using that instead. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 15:59, June 24, 2018 (UTC)

May I ask what is your English language background? Disproving or proving grammar usage is not the same thing as disproving or proving the validity of a myth (like a deity) or a medical disease where people often make the fallacy of appeal to ignorance. Grammar rules are heavily standardized practices, and in this case, the burden of proof is on you to show that somehow this is an exception to the rule. Asking you to provide clear authoritative proof that overrides the Wiktionary source and English grammar rules should not be a problem.

An -in suffix for the demonymic form of Granada is exceedingly awkward which is why I just asked what your English language background is; as an English speaker, you should be aware of how awkward Granadin sounds as a demonym. We are not at all in disagreement that if an Assassin's Creed source uses a particular spelling variant, then that should be the one used, but in the absence of that, Granadin is incorrect by English grammatical rules, and the burden of proof is on you to give a source otherwise. A search on Google for Granadin yields virtually nothing. Google even auto-corrects it. On the other hand, Granadan does yield some results showing it is in use. From some online searches, it does seem that Granadine can also be correct as an alternative form.

I have played Discovery II hundreds of times, being virtually the sole author of all our articles on that game, and have scoured the script numerous times—even specifically for the demonym of Granada—and there is never any use of a demonym for it. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 00:13, June 25, 2018 (UTC)

My background would be native speaker of English although I am Hispanic and an Arab linguist by training and for me Granadin sounds and feels more natural. The only place I’ve seen that’s explicitly says demonym for Granada is that Providence of Granada wiki page. Although it sounds like Wiktionary supports you. I’ve been trying to look through hard copy dictionaries and encyclopedia but they say “of Granada” instead of giving a demonym of adjectival form. I’d say that Will Durant is the most definitive source put forth and he uses Granadine which is tangentially supported by the Granadine Confederation. I wrote on Master Sima Yi's talk page asking if he wants to weigh in on this. I also brought up the Hellenes and Copts issue as well as my concerns for the Spaniard and Italian category pages. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 02:35, June 25, 2018 (UTC)

See Granadan school of sculpture. I wrote on the Discord about this matter for more instant and direct responses about it, and you could join the server as well. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 02:55, June 25, 2018 (UTC)

Very well Granadans it is. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 03:33, June 25, 2018 (UTC)

Assassin Specializations

Thanks for the clean up and all the Unity info. Curious about Identity though, I thought it was accepted canon since it came out of beta. Also should we include the assassin types from Revelations' Den Defense? Lacrossedeamon (talk) 16:49, June 26, 2018 (UTC)

Great question about Identity. If you purchase the second chapter and play it, you will find that it is grossly non-canonical simply because it contradicts Assassin's Creed II and Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood. The second chapter is set in the Battle of Forlì (1488) even though the first chapter ends c. 1506, but it is treated as having come after the first chapter. Ezio Auditore even wears his robes from Brotherhood in this battle, and the story tells it as though after the events of Rome, Ezio decided to bring the Apple of Eden to Caterina Sforza... Because of this Identity's second chapter is irreconcilable with canon. However, this does not mean that the first chapter is necessarily non-canonical... only that it makes it highly dubious that it would be canonical whereas its sequel is not. If we had to be really technical, the first chapter is ambiguously canon whereas the second is decidedly non-canon. Because we still haven't sorted this out yet, I think it's preferable we leave out information about it on such a major article as "Assassins".

And actually yes! It would be really neat of you to include the Assassin types from Den Defense. I hated that mode so much at the time that I quickly sealed up all the Dens to make sure I never had to play it again, but because of that, I never documented the units you could deploy in it. We might end up having to split this section into its own article though; we'll have to see. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 18:55, June 26, 2018 (UTC)

Weird, I never really noticed the conflicts between the games but it’s been so long since I’ve played the Ezio series. Ubi should really address that. I really liked the Crows. Their backstory brought Sánchez back into the series and prior to Syndicate's release I thought Lucy Thorne might be related somehow because of the similar look. I keep hoping for another Identity update, and Pirates TBH. Whenever I get around to playing through the games again I’ll pay attention to the Den Defense stuff. I’ve also been wanting to make pages for Mediterranean Defense, Kenway's Fleet, etc. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 19:12, June 26, 2018 (UTC)

Damascus reverted

Why did you reverted my modification? There is a new model for the cities' infobox?Francesco75 (talk) 06:44, June 27, 2018 (UTC)

Hey Francesco, I apologize for not explaining it; when undoing multiple edits, I have to use the rollback function which does not allow an edit summary, and I'm beginning to realize that in such scenarios, I should really leave a direct message to the user clarifying the revert.

The reason why I reverted it is because some staff disapprove of the addition of these kinds of information on infobox because it draws too much from real-life sources (especially the dates), are therefore never cited, and also creates a huge mess. Listing regimes in such a manner always seem to rely heavily on original research. Moreover, there isn't an adequate distinction between the "Sovereign state" parameter and the "uling body" parameter. The latter has conventionally been used to simply list the preceding sovereign governments rather than the actual ruling body (i.e. administration) of the location. Hence, the infobox really must be revised, and in the meantime, we should probably refrain from continuing to use the parameter or at least not in this way.

I thank you so much for contacting me about this because I realize that it was my mistake that I didn't bother taking the initiative to explain it to you. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 08:17, June 27, 2018 (UTC)

Odyssey info

Hi, Sol Pacificus!

I was wondering if you had any need - or a place to put - info about gear coming with Assassin's Creed: Odyssey. TheBlueRogue combed through some of the E3 footage we managed to get and tabled out what we could find of the gear on his sandbox. Wanted to know if you were interested ;)

Raylan13<staff/> (talk) 19:23, June 28, 2018 (UTC)

Hey Raylan, I appreciate you contacting me to ask. We normally have charts for weapons in video games based on their type in the corresponding articles, such as Swords, Maces, and Spears. As you can see, in some cases, information in these charts are incomplete, but we do prefer to at least have the names up even if we don't have all the stats yet because it's a convenient way to keep track of which weapons still need to be documented. Unfortunately, our article on armor needs some updating, but the armor chart would go there. So yes, thank you very much for notifying us about this! Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 02:42, June 29, 2018 (UTC)

No problem - always glad to help ;) I hadn't even seen the Armor page. I can swing back by next week and start plugging those items where they should be on the pages you mentioned. There's probably more I can grab from the videos. Raylan13<staff/> (talk) 16:19, June 29, 2018 (UTC)

Suspicious editor

I want to point out the user Altair45678. They behave in a very similar manner as Batalex 34, such as persistent edit warring and ignoring messages from staff in particular. This user seems to have taken over edits the latter has made earlier today in some pages such as adding/re-adding the "Proto-Assassins" category to AC: Odyssey pages, among others. Also, terminology used in this edit made today is very close to the latter user's edits in this page and this page a couple months back. Even though I'm not a regular editor here, I am an admin on another wiki, and I encounter this type of stuff there on occasion, and the similarity in the two user's edit style and defiant screw off we do this my way behaviour make me suspect sockpuppetry. Cheers The Cat Master (talk) 17:05, July 9, 2018 (UTC)

At least you have an admin with check user status. We currently don't anybody on the Elder Scrolls wiki staff who has that right. Usually we have to go stright to Wikia if we suspect somebody of account abuse, but have no concrete proof. As far as the other issues, I know you guys tend to give 3 or so warnings to problem editors before blocking (compared to our more draconian 1 strike you're blocked for a bit attitude at the TES wiki), but those two (or maybe one) have been consistent with their edit warring, showing consistent disregard for the rules, and vandalising another person's user page (at least in the case Altair45678, who did that to me), so they may deserve a block for a time for all of that. Anyway, that is the best advice I can offer for this situation. Cheers The Cat Master (talk) 00:05, July 10, 2018 (UTC)

Sorry to bug you again, but there is another user to watch out for: God5645. I noticed this edit by Altair45678 to the Alan Rikkin page from July 2 and this edit to the same page by God5645 from July 5. The wording is exactly the same. The first edit was reverted by one of your staff on the 2nd, and I just took care of the second one prior to writing this message. I also noticed the exact same wording used on trivia bits in the Cult of Kosmos page by both Altair45678 and God5645. Even though we can only suspect abuse at this time, 3 poeple exhibiting the same patterns is seeming really fishy. However, God5645 hasn't edit warred... at least not yet. Just giving a heads up in case they do. The Cat Master (talk) 02:13, July 10, 2018 (UTC)

I went ahead and sent a report to Wikia about the Sockpuppet. There is a new account, EzioAlextore who came on today making the same edits to the same pages as Altair45678 and God5645. Also Batalax 34 is back making the same edits and they sent me a harassing message after reverting one of the pages. I don't know when or even if Wikia will reply, but I hope they do. This user has gotten way out of hand. Cheers The Cat Master (talk) 18:08, July 10, 2018 (UTC)

You're hard to crack

Listen to me very well, you have no right to touch my things, you are behaving like a selfish and tyrant who dreams of being a guide for users, but the only thing you bring is pain and suffering to others, I do it for the people of Famdon and his liberty. Kenway32 04:15, July 11, 2018 (UTC)Kenway32 (talk)

First of all, none of the articles on this wiki are your property, "your things". No one owns them, and editing, improving them, and maintaining them is the responsibility of the community as a whole. There is nothing tyrannical about reverting and blocking the vandalism that you have continued to commit. I say vandalism because far from being just erroneous edits made in earnest, by now, you have essentially been sabotaging each of these articles by refusing to even accept normal grammar and spelling corrections. Every user here, including myself and the ones who have been tirelessly combating your edit war has had their edits reverted or corrected by others at some point, and each of them understood the principles of compromise, of cooperation, and of self-fallibility. It is selfish of you to endlessly push your edits onto this wiki, all while disregarding and disrespecting all communication, all overtures, all patience, and evading bans with sockpuppets simply because you cannot accept the fact that your edits are in error or that everyone has the right to correct them. It is most egregious that not even grammar fixes in lieu of your poor English are tolerable to you. You can pretend that you're fighting for "liberty" all you want, but you are effectively nothing but a shameless rioter, an anarchist who sows chaos through the collaborative projects of hardworking, responsible users who persevere together to make this wiki a positive community. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 04:56, July 11, 2018 (UTC)

You know what I'm saying

I do not give a shit what you think about my information, and you know why, because you're a twisted selfish person looking for glory, this is my last warning, leave me alone and everything will end well, please, I just want to publish, have a little bit of heart Titanic09 08:36, July 11, 2018 (UTC)Titanic09 (talk) 08:36, July 11, 2018 (UTC)

Calm down, guy, a bit of pity

You prefer that I keep editing those pages eternally or that we reach a peace agreement, is that if you do not decide because you delete the information from those pages I will not stop. Isu567 19:19, July 14, 2018 (UTC)Isu567 (talk) 19:19, July 14, 2018 (UTC)

Species in character info boxes

I noticed some characters have "Human" under a "species" section in the infoboxes. I noticed it mainly in some Origins and Odyssy character pages in particular. I haven't noticed the "species" section in very many characters from older games. Is the "Species" part something that has been recently instituted, and hasn't been added to most characters yet. If so would it be ok to start adding the section to characters that are missing it.

A couple other things i noticed:

1. Character infoboxes have appear been revised to no longer have an "appearances" section listing games the character appears in. I noticed it when I edited the Khaliset page, which had the section, but it didn't appear in the preview. I went ahead and removed the section from that page's infobox.
2. I noticed some characters don't have infoboxes just a picture of the character like the Esiocles page and formerly Khemu. (I added the infobox for him before I noticed other seemingly minor characters didn't have them.)
3. Most voice actors don't have infoboxes either. The only exception I know of so far is the Melissanthi Mahut page, which does have an actor specific infobox. Is it part of your style guidelines to not include info boxes to voice cast and minor characters, or will they need to be added? Cheers The Cat Master (talk) 18:44, July 16, 2018 (UTC)

Hey Cat Master, these are all great questions. Yes, the addition of a "Species" parameter in the infoboxes is a new policy. The removal of the "Appearance" parameter s not quite as recent, but it is another change we have been implementing. Due to the expansion of the franchise, we now find that articles need dedicated "Appearances" sections in the body, and even if not, they should for consistency with those that do. Because of this, the "Appearance" infobox parameter is now redundant. Finally, regarding infoboxes for minor characters and voice cast, in this case, we actually haven't quite reached a consensus on this. I think the editors here lean on only including infoboxes for articles when needed, i.e. when there are more than 2 or 3 parameters that can be filled. I personally prefer that every article have an infobox provided that one parameter can be filled for consistency and a sense of completeness, but I believe I am probably in the minority on this. What is your preference? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 20:31, July 16, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I will go ahead and start adding the Species parameters to some character pages, and removing the Appearance parameters. As far as my own personal opinion on infoboxes, I believe all character and voice actor pages should have infoboxes for the sake consistancy. Cheers The Cat Master (talk) 21:44, July 16, 2018 (UTC)

I'll tell you something

It is true that these titles are still used in modern times, but in the Syndicate more times than other games, is that you do not realize it is obvious, and when the Templars and the Assassins are called Mr between them it is proper to the game, besides not is the same as Warren Vidic call Mr Miles to Desmond for the reason that before he considered him an ally that Isabelle Ardant will play the joke Shaun of Mr Hastings, you understand. In the Victorian Era you can take it in a more serious way that if Pizza654 06:52, July 17, 2018 (UTC)Sauron654 (talk) 06:52, July 17, 2018 (UTC)

Sockpuppet brigade

I finally got a reply back from Wikia about how to deal with our troublesome user. It only took like... a week. Anyway, they sent me this link to where we can report the issue. I already sent a report, but it may also help if they hear from an admin as well IMO. Hopefully this person's spamming/trolling crap will become a thing of the past soon. Cheers The Cat Master (talk) 19:05, July 19, 2018 (UTC)

Revision Age of Enlightenment

Hello, i have questions for this articles. Do we delete the part on the french revolution? The time period of the age of enlightement was between 1620 and 1789. I added some cultural information from the game as the scientific revolution or the french philosophers but i think that the events of Black flag have no link with the enlightenment age if not they occured in the same period. Maybe we can spek of the french revolution in a legacy part of the article.Francesco75 (talk) 08:43, July 22, 2018 (UTC)

Hello

How are you?

Daryurian (The Mighty Turian) 09:00, August 10, 2018 (UTC)

To tell you the truth, I have been very stressed lately trying to get all my schoolwork done in the face of medical problems, but otherwise, I've been content. :) Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 13:18, August 10, 2018 (UTC)

Content sounds good at least it's not bad. Daryurian (The Mighty Turian) 16:43, August 10, 2018 (UTC)

Page renaming

Most of the weapon articles are Singular, but Machetes and Cannons are still plural. Could you please rename it? I can't as the redirect Machete already exists, thus I'm getting an error. Thanks in advance! Kennyannydenny (talk) 15:02, August 27, 2018 (UTC)

Hello Kenny, I just wanted to say thank you for notifying me about the pages Machete and Cannon needing to be renamed properly. I despise those plural titles so much, and it is always good to be alerted when there are rogue pages still lying around. Cheers! Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 21:04, August 27, 2018 (UTC)

No probs :) I've already renamed quite a bunch as you can see in the logs. I encountered another four today I can't rename due to the error: Borgia Towers, Doctors, Rifts and Blacksmiths. Will update if I find more. Kennyannydenny (talk) 07:50, August 28, 2018 (UTC)

Just a friendly reminder to rename the above four :) Kennyannydenny (talk) 15:43, September 7, 2018 (UTC)

Hey sorry for the late reply. As per Wikipedia guidelines, there are actually certain types of pages which should be in the plural because it is more convenient to discuss them in a group. A common example are those concerning political subdivisions such as Provinces of Canada. Wikipedia also has a policy of treating pages on groups of people, such as Arabs or Egyptians in the plural. In the past, people here didn't quite understand when certain pages, such as Sword don't necessarily have to be discussed as a group. Cases like administrative subdivisions or people groups are hard exceptions and should not be the norm.

The reason why I'm explaining this is because the pages you see leftover in the plural are those which I was lenient about and wasn't sure if these exceptions apply in the Assassin's Creed context, especially since formerly, fans knew professions like mercenaries and courtesans always in the collective sense. I also have a hard time determining if Rifts and Borgia Towers should be treated similarly as Provinces of Canada in the sense that we'd almost always discuss them as parts of a whole concept. This is why it took me a while to respond because I have been pondering over the matter.

I think I will at the very least go ahead and change the articles on professions because there are plenty of mercenaries, thieves, doctors, etc. who aren't part of the "factions" employed by the Assassins. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 14:44, September 10, 2018 (UTC)

No probs. Uhm, yeah I see what you mean. I'm used to articles always being singular but I'll follow your lead on what the admin's want on this specific Wiki. I don't think it matters much in the way of editting, as you could do "one of the [[rift]]s can be found next to the building", and you could do "one of the [[rifts]] can be found next to the building". Same as the other way around: "Then Arno entered a [[Rifts|rift]]" or "Then Arno entered a [[rift]]". I think it comes done to, do we want all articles to be singular, or do we want exceptions. I'm fine either way, didn't really give that a thought before reaching out to you earlier. Kennyannydenny (talk) 14:59, September 10, 2018 (UTC)

No, it is fine that if you didn't give too much of a thought about it before because you weren't expected to. I appreciate that you care about consistency since to be quite honest with you, it seems many of the old administrators gave even less thought about. To clarify, it is unprecedented for articles to be in the plural; grammatically, the base form of a word should always be used unless strong reason otherwise, and this form is the singular noun. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 15:09, September 10, 2018 (UTC)

I agree. So that means that rift and borgia tower should also be singular? Or do they fall under "unless strong reason otherwise"? Oh by the way, I had already renamed Assassin Dens in the past, so that may be a very similar case to Borgia Towers. We might need to change some articles back if we want to keep them plural. Kennyannydenny (talk) 15:23, September 10, 2018 (UTC)

Here is Wikipedia's guideline on this matter. Reading this, can you determine if Rifts and Borgia Towers fall under the exceptions listed, such as articles about groups or classes of specific things? I just have a hard time wrapping my head around whether this applies or not with these two. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 15:47, September 10, 2018 (UTC)

It's pretty clear Brass knuckles should stay plural as per: "Articles on items such as scissors or handcuffs are not located at awkward, unnatural titles like scissor or handcuff.". For the Rifts and Borgia Towers it depends if we see every tower as a separate entity, or if we're talking about the network of Towers as a whole. In the second case it would mean they should be plural due to "Articles on groups of distinct entities that are nevertheless often considered together (preceded almost invariably by the word "the"), such as the Florida Keys, the Americas, or the Rivers of New Zealand.". Not sure if we always refer to them like: "here you can find one of the Borgia Towers", or "here you can find a Borgia Tower". In the first case it should stay plural, in the second it seems they should be singular. Kennyannydenny (talk) 16:14, September 10, 2018 (UTC)

Smenkhkare from the Old Kingdom

So, Sol. I found the thing that was wrong in the history of Templars. It says that the pharaoh that founded the Order of the Ancients lived in the Old Kingdom Techno1314 (talk) 20:35, August 28, 2018 (UTC)

Hey Techno, I just wanted to express my gratitude for catching that mistake in that article as it's quite a significant one. If not for you, who knows how long it would've stayed there! I'm so relieved we fixed it! Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 03:43, August 29, 2018 (UTC)

Sorry

Dear Sol Pacificus, I would like to apologise for my misconduct on the wiki and will no longer act in this way. Assassins Creed is probably my favourite thing in the world and I don't know what made me react badly. I just guess I'm too quick to try and defend people and cause arguments but I'll try my absolute best to prevent this from happening again. I hope you will accept my apology and we can be on good terms for now on. Your's sincerely Harveyfoale. Harveyfoale (talk) 21:39, August 28, 2018 (UTC)

Harvey, I am really grateful for your apology and your announcement on the Discussions platform likewise. Rest assured, I do not hold anything personal against you, and we are keen to have you back now that tempers have cooled. :) Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 03:39, August 29, 2018 (UTC)

Game Titles

Hello! I just stated editing here, and I noticed most of the page titles are wrong. For example Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood should be Assassin's Creed Brotherhood, same thing with Origins being Assassin's Creed Origins. If you didn't notice, most of the AC games do not have a colon in the title according to Ubisoft themselves. Some do, granted, but it's mostly the spin-off games. I cannot rename pages, but I did create a redirect. I thought I'd let you know so you could change them to the proper official name. Just some sources if you don't believe me for whatever reason.

• https://www.ubisoft.com/en-us/game/assassins-creed-brotherhood/
• https://www.ubisoft.com/en-us/game/assassins-creed-rogue
• https://www.ubisoft.com/en-us/game/assassins-creed-origins

BlackDragon 05:25, September 9, 2018 (UTC)

Did you happen to miss this comment? BlackDragon 03:49, September 17, 2018 (UTC)

Oh my apologies, I did not miss it, but I did forget to reply after double-checking with the other staff, so thank you for reminding me. We actually found Ubisoft's usage and disusage of colons so unreasonably inconsistent and jarring that we have opted to simply "correct" their inconsistency by always including the colons between the title and subtitle. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 04:12, September 17, 2018 (UTC)

Adding onto this a bit further, while we normally take pains to be as true to the source material as much as possible, in this case, we see this less of a stylistic matter but more of a grammatical issue. For instance, in the name iPhone, the lower-case i, which would otherwise be grammatically incorrect, is intentional for artistic and stylistic reasons. However, in the case of the absence of colons in some Assassin's Creed titles where there should be colons for grammatical consistency, we are not convinced that this is a stylistic choice so much as just a lack of care for proper formatting. It is not normally our place to judge for things like this, but we made an exception for the sake of organization. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 04:19, September 17, 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, that makes sense. I'm glad I got an answer about this. It just seemed weird to me, like maybe no one was aware of this as I've always used them without colons, but yeah they're very inconsistent about this. It does seem like normally there is no colon, but just always using a colon definetly makes sense. Well, I did already change some of the titles in the articles itself, so what is the consensus on having the page titles with a colon, but in the articles featuring the official spelling/grammar? At the very least, I made some redirects for the colon-less titles.

PS, while I'm here, what dating format should be used? I've seen different articles using both American and European-style dates. Wikia is an American company, as evidenced by the ~~~~ leaving an American format date, but Ubisoft is a French company. Just need some clarification on this. BlackDragon 19:35, September 18, 2018 (UTC)

We exclusively use the European dating format in this wiki. Any article which uses the American format is in error and should be corrected. As for the colons, essentially Assassin's Creed titles should always have the colons when a subtitle is present with no exceptions. It is fine to create redirects with colon-less titles. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 00:10, September 19, 2018 (UTC)

Alright, sounds good. Well, like I said I made some of these changes while waiting for a reply, so I'll go through and fix them when I get a chance. I don't know how often I'll be editing here, but I'll do what I can. Thanks for the info. BlackDragon 22:33, September 20, 2018 (UTC)

I realised

That you edit too much. :P

Daryurian (The Mighty Turian) 09:22, September 10, 2018 (UTC)

Not really. I've been editing far too little this past year. :/ I can hardly get an hour's worth of work in each day now, and I'm quite ashamed about it. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 15:44, September 10, 2018 (UTC)

Oh please you are in the top contributors this week you are editing a lot :P. Daryurian (The Mighty Turian) 15:47, September 10, 2018 (UTC)

Home page trailers outdated

Hello, I noticed that the home page has the trailers for Origins and not Odyssey, should this be changed, if so, how is it done. Thank you Techno1314 (talk) 20:08, September 13, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder Techno! We're looking into it right now. :) Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 23:24, September 13, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for fixing where I screw up. Trying to learn, but...eh, you know how it is. :) Sadelyrate (siniath) 07:54, September 14, 2018 (UTC)

Hey it's no problem! To be honest, I'm always worried I come off too harsh or nitpicky. :P You have been doing great these past months, and those fixes I won't even say are huge screw-ups anyways.

Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 08:10, September 14, 2018 (UTC)

Liberation as a main game?

Hello! So I've been browsing, you know, learning lore, when I noticed it puts that Liberation is a main game. I don't know if thats wrong or not, but either way it says that Odyssey is the eleventh main installment in AC, with Liberation as a main game, it doesn't make sense. Just letting you know. Hope your doing awesome! Techno1314 (talk) 12:41, September 20, 2018 (UTC)

Hello Techno, could you direct me to where exactly it says this? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 01:02, September 21, 2018 (UTC)

When you click on the three bars on the corner, it puts all main games, each one in a group, likr Layla Saga, Ezio Trilogy, etc . Edit: Sorry, I moved your signature,and dont know how to put it back :PTechno1314 (talk) 07:27, September 21, 2018 (UTC)

I think in terms of that tab, you shouldn't take it as an absolute statement that Liberation is an official main installment. It is included there more for convenient navigation. And yes, you inserted your message before my signature twice now -_- ... Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 20:33, September 21, 2018 (UTC)

Well okay, I already said sorry, no need to be like that :( Techno1314 (talk) 22:53, September 21, 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for interrupting the page of Leonidas

It's just that I want to give life to the page, do not block me while I edit the page, have a bit of mercy, I just need to look for the photo.Weapon213 (talk)Batalex34Weapon213 (talk)

Batalex, you're not in trouble for that image or the edit to the image. The image itself was in trouble because it was not named properly. :P But you are still technically supposed to be permabanned for your numerous counts of evading permabans, endless edit-warring, and sockpuppeteering :-/ (which means using new accounts to evade bans). Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 07:44, September 24, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Grammatical reversions at "Hidden Blade"

Hello, Sol. I'm writing to admit that i'm not perfect and can make errors just as much as any person. My usage of semicons simply is an indication that there's too many colons and added semicolons to separate the pages i'd edited into lists. I'd also used past tense not knowing that it still applied in the present tense. I thank you for your input, and if there's anything else you'd like to discuss regarding my edits or any grammatical hot-fixes to other pages on this wiki, feel free to message me. Have a good day. Altair 0147 (talk) 11:02, September 25, 2018 (UTC)Altair 0147

Still kinda learning here, but thanks.

I'm still learning how to use this and other wikia pages, you didn't come off as harsh at all, i accept the constructive criticism and will contribute where it's possible and acceptable by either you or other admins here

Altair 0147 (talk) 12:02, September 25, 2018 (UTC)Altair 0147

Reverted soldiers categories

I reverted articles which were already categorized as french army or british army, or any kind of army. If the characters are related to an army, we don't need to add they are soldiers.Francesco75 (talk) 09:22, September 30, 2018 (UTC)

Charlotte's Fate

Well when i checked the comics, there was some dialogue and it was never said who it was from and it mentioned a white hoodie. I'll give you three guesses as to who was wearing the hoodie. —unsigned comment by Heir of Revan (talk · contr)

I meant the screenshot that you posted. Where is it from? Is it from the wiki? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 21:02, September 30, 2018 (UTC)

yes, but i have also read the comics. both in stores and online. go see for yourself —unsigned comment by Heir of Revan (talk · contr)

That you've also read the comics is aside from the question. Your point that the wiki says Charlotte only seemingly died doesn't support anything because we ourselves wrote that and our ongoing dispute is whether or not we should be writing that she died, did not, or seemingly died. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 21:14, September 30, 2018 (UTC)

and yet you guys decided to say she died. see the problem here? Heir of Revan (talk)HeirofRevan

I wasn't the one who reverted your edit. I never finished the comic series, and I have no right to express any opinion on the matter whatsoever, hence why I only asked you questions about your point without stating my own position because I have none. The problem here is that you leapt to the conclusion I was against you just because I asked you a question about your point. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 22:13, September 30, 2018 (UTC)

I said "guys" and i meant you as if more than just you guys. —unsigned comment by Heir of Revan (talk · contr)

I cannot understand what you just wrote, but please remember to sign your messages with four tildes: ~~~~. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 23:30, September 30, 2018 (UTC)

Medjay trivia

Because it was a bit of historical context to the Medjay themselves. A few pages have them when it comes to groups that truly existed or did play a part in society at the time. —unsigned comment by AaronFireBird1 (talk · contr)

This is not necessarily a correct practice or it might be an outdated one. It's not really necessary to provide historical context to the subject of an article if it isn't contradicted by the game's depiction. Sometimes pages provide this historical context because the details differ from that of the game and that makes it significant to mention. However, if there is no change in the details from the history, then there is no need to mention it because the information is the same as in the body and there is also already a Wikipedia link on the upper-right hand corner about the real subject. Also once again, please remember to sign all your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 04:06, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

Skill trees

Hello Sol,
Sorry to bother you when there's so many edits to do with Odyssey's release, but I was wondering if you could please rename without redirect (or move?) all three skill tree pages (ACS, ACO, and ACOD) so that "tree" has a lower case "t". IIRC, we name pages per Wikipedia's policy in sentence case, so "tree" need not be capitalized, yes? Ordinarily, this would require numerous link changes, but the pages in question are only linked once in the whole Wiki via transclusions in the game info-boxes under "Skills". Further, *nowhere is the link for "Skill Tree (Assassin's Creed: Syndicate)" used. The page is linked only through the old redirect "Skill tree", which I've already drafted and am waiting to edit proper as a disambig page for the trees.

I asked Raylan13 about his naming style for ACOD's skill page, seeing as he was Fandom Staff, but he said he was just following Callum Konstantin's renaming of the ACS skill page and suggested I ask a Wiki Admin. I then contacted Jasca, but did not receive a response, so I am trying again. If I'm in the wrong, please tell me. Thank you for reading this, and I appreciate any help you can provide. -- Darman (talk) 04:00, October 3, 2018 (UTC)

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 skill 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. [w:c:leagueoflegends:Runes Reforged|Runes]], formerly [w:c:leagueoflegends:Summoner Mastery|Masteries]], in [w:c:leagueoflegends|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)

Let's see if I have this right: if the game menu uses "Skill Tree" anywhere, e.g. a notification saying "You have points to spend in the Skill Tree!", then we use that term in the Wiki title. But if it makes no mention of a tree, just "Skills", then we do not capitalize the "T"? - Darman (talk) 17:50, October 3, 2018 (UTC)

Misthios category

Heya, Sol ;) I know that Kassandra is the protagonist in the book, but as far as the game goes, players can choose to play as either Kassandra or Alexios. Seems sort of odd, then, to categorize the missions as "Memories of Kassandra" when players can play as Alexios. Hence, why I went with "Memories of Misthios", as it covers either decision players can make at the outset. Some of the flashback memories in particular are specific to that player choice. Raylan13<staff/> (talk) 15:26, October 5, 2018 (UTC)

And this is also why I went with Misthios in the dialogue sections. The flashbacks will be different at times depending on if the player chose Alexios or Kassandra. How, then, should that be reflected in both the dialogue section and the category? Raylan13<staff/> (talk) 15:31, October 5, 2018 (UTC)

The main reason for the removal of that category is because, as I said, the memories are canonically that of Kassandra. Even if Layla selects Alexios, this should only mean that she is using Alexios as a digital representation, as an avatar somehow... of Kassandra's life. Hence logically speaking, the memories should only be labeled as those of Kassandra. Note that this wiki takes an in-universe approach, so most content, including categories should be written as though we are within the Assassin's Creed universe itself and that it is not a game to us.

However, I was not aware that some memories are exclusive to Alexios being the player character nor that there may be significant dialogue variations (beyond name and gender of the pronouns being used) depending on the character. For the latter, even if that is the case, it would be inaccurate to label lines exclusive to Alexios as Misthios because this would mean that Kassandra speaks those lines as well. We would therefore have to use a similar method that we did for Syndicate memories where lines between Evie and Jacob vary, and we should be consistent with those pages.

As for the former, I will discuss this with the other staff, but another reason why I removed the category is because we always thought that there needs to be a definite article (the) before Misthios unless the Greek term is thought to render this unnecessary. I believe that omission of the definite article in the game's dialogue may owe to it being an untranslated word, but if Misthios is instead used as a loanword as it would be in our articles rather than as an untranslated term in Greek dialogue (as is the premise in the game), then a definite article might be grammatically necessary. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 17:18, October 5, 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good! Thanks for the clarification ;) I'll go back through the ones I've done and swap out the instances of (Misthios) I've used in the dialogue, excepting, of course, where the word is actually used. I'm playing as Kassandra anyway, so this makes my job easier, but I have seen video of a bit of "Alexios's" flashbacks; they puzzled me, as Kassandra's flashbacks clearly show him as a baby, while his do not. I'll take a look at the Syndicate format and adjust accordingly. Raylan13<staff/> (talk) 17:24, October 5, 2018 (UTC)

The Athenian Leader quest

For Odyssey, a trio of support missions have to be completed before The Athenian Leader opens up. Because they're so brief in terms of dialogue and page content, I wrapped it all into The Athenian Leader and redirected those pages. I'm not sure if that's the way you guys wanted it handled, so figured I'd point it out to you ;) Raylan13<staff/> (talk) 22:54, October 5, 2018 (UTC)

Hello again Raylan, sorry for forgetting to respond to this earlier. I actually have yet to even start on the game due to some issues with my PS4 at the moment, so I can't really be of much help regarding this, but from what it sounds like, you probably made the right choice, and even if you didn't, it's no worries! To be honest, it depends on if those trio of support missions happen to have their own memory names or are organized separately in the game guide. If not, then for conciseness, we can feel free to merge it with "The Athenian Leader". Thank you for checking in with me. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 22:15, October 10, 2018 (UTC)

Spear of Leonidas or Eden?

Hello, I was browsing when I noticed that the page talking about the Spear of Leonidas was name just like that, and my question is: Shouldn't the name be Spear of Eden since its essentially that? If not, why is it like this? Thank you for your timeTechno1314 (talk) 20:10, October 10, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for asking me about this Techno, but unfortunately, as I have yet played Odyssey, I really can't give a definitive answer about this for you. Currently, I am experiencing difficulties updating my PS4 and also accessing the Internet due to being in a different country, and I still have yet fixed this. However, I can give some speculative answers. For example, is the name Spear of Eden ever used explicitly in the source material? Because if not, then the name should not be used in our articles, much less the title. On the other hand, if it is explicitly called Spear of Eden in the game, and this is much more prominently used than Spear of Leonidas, such that it can even be seen as its true name, then an argument can be made for it to be moved to Spear of Eden. This is the best I can help you with on this issue so far, sorry. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 20:30, October 10, 2018 (UTC)

Oh, I understand. I've played the game, and the name isn't used once, so I guess it should stay how it is. Thank you for helping me as much as you could! :)Techno1314 (talk) 07:00, October 11, 2018 (UTC)

Opinion

Hi, I could use your opinion on this subject :) Not sure what to do now quite frankly. Kennyannydenny (talk) 17:40, October 16, 2018 (UTC)

See also here! Kennyannydenny (talk) 18:42, October 16, 2018 (UTC)

Battle of 300

Heya again, Sol ;)

Sorry to bother you again, but I was wondering if you had an opinion on the discussion about the Battle of 300 page here. I've not personally seen where a decision was made on the matter, at least on the wiki itself, which is sort of odd since the discussion originated on the site. Makes it sort of frustrating if it was continued elsewhere :P

At any rate, you can see the direction of the conversation and the points I and others bring up. For some of us, myself included, it is a worthwhile debate on whether the "introductory" experience for players is a memory; but regardless, it is an in-game experience nonetheless, so it seems like redirecting it to the Battle of Thermopylae and wiping the dialogue is questionable. Raylan13<staff/> (talk) 18:25, October 16, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for contacting me again Raylan as I have largely been avoiding articles about the game for fear of spoilers except in the case of pressing issues; I still have yet to start on it. I must apologize for our moderator's non-constructive reply referring to the matter already having been settled in essentially an informal channel of communication where such deliberations can be easily buried away. We must remember that talk pages remain the primary and formal location of discourse on article issues and to always be open and transparent towards less regular users. Also, it's not true that the matter has been settled; I was part of that informal discussion, and no solution had been concluded. I have just appropriately provided my response to the matter on the talk page. Cheers! :) Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 01:15, October 17, 2018 (UTC)

No worries - thanks very much for taking the time to look at things :) Raylan13<staff/> (talk) 15:29, October 17, 2018 (UTC)

Source for description

A quick question. Why did you add a source for the description on the Prince of Persia quest page? I mean, all the descriptions are the ingame quest descriptions, why only add that to one quest page and not all of them? I don't see the logic behind it, but that may just be me. Anyways, I have at least changed Origins to Odyssey as the quest has nothing to do with AC Origins in the slightest. Kennyannydenny (talk) 17:19, October 27, 2018 (UTC)

Normally for memory articles such as this, it is unnecessary to add a citation for the "Reference" section because the entire page pertains to one game, and it is not a main article. However, in this case, I had to add a citation supporting the statement that Prince of Persia is a spiritual predecessor of Assassin's Creed. This meant that the "Reference" section now became a list of citations where, if I did not also cite the rest of the page to Assassin's Creed: Odyssey, the page would essentially fail to refer to that game as a source. Me citing it to Assassin's Creed: Origins instead is a typographical error, and I thank you for catching that mistake. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 17:24, October 27, 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response! I personally think it's weird we would only give a source for the description on this one quest (even if the page contains another reference) but I'll go with your solution. Maybe it's a language barrier or it's just me thinking that everything comes from the game unless otherwise cited, but i'll leave it at this then :) Yeah I figured Origins was just a typo, I just thought i'd mention it in case I understood that incorrectly too. Cheers! Kennyannydenny (talk) 17:28, October 27, 2018 (UTC)

Paris section title

Hello, yes i know that the Bourbon era began with Henry IV, but I consider that the French Renaissance finish with him, it's why i made this. But it's difficult to qualify the 17th century, in France it's known as the "Grand Siècle" 1589-1715 but it wasn't refered as this in the game. The Absolute Monarchy was also a provisionary tittle as since Louis IX, the Kings were considered as absolute. So it's a little tricky. But your tittle is good.Francesco75 (talk) 08:32, October 29, 2018 (UTC)

RE

See here :) Kennyannydenny (talk) 17:36, October 30, 2018 (UTC)

duplicate pages

Hey Sol, thanks for fixing that Helping a Healer quest. Could you do the same for Death Comes for Us All? That one was made as duplicate the same way. And The Priest of Asklepios needs to be deleted, that one is also a duplicate, but the one with the typo in the name. Kennyannydenny (talk) 15:37, November 2, 2018 (UTC)

Hey Kenny, I deleted the duplicate, but I'm not sure what you would like me to fix with Death Comes for Us All. Did you mean the capitalization? I'm actually not sure if us should be capitalized or not to be quite honest with you haha. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 20:15, November 2, 2018 (UTC)

I ment the same thing as you did with Helping a Healer. As there is no completed quests log I cannot confirm it myself, but I made the page with a capital F Death Comes For Us All a week ago. XOdeyssusx made a page about the same quest today with a small f. If I look at a screenshot here it seems the quest is with a small f. So it should get the same treatment as Helping a Healer. Deleting the redirect and renaming the first/older one. I'll update the template accordingly like I did last time. I've been checking the spelling in the ACODMemories template since this happened and catched several other spelling errors in there. So pages I since have created should all be correct in title :) Anywho, thanks in advance! Kennyannydenny (talk) 21:11, November 2, 2018 (UTC)

Re: "divisions, companies and subsidiaries" on Abstergo page

It's what the Essential Guide uses. ;) Vetinari^{(Appointment)} 23:32, November 3, 2018 (UTC)

Huh, that's interesting. Thank you for informing me of this. I just checked, and it does use that except phrasing, but it's not a section title but a list in one of the paragraphs. I still think "companies and subsidiaries" is redundant, but this is good to know nonetheless. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 23:36, November 3, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Shay Cormac death date

Hello Sol Pacificus about the date of Shay's death I saw in a video of a channel that makes videos of Assassin's Creed and they said that Shay was born in 1731 and died in 1785 before putting it on the page i investigate if that was the correct date and in two different places said that he had died in 1785. Since I had checked the information was when I put the date on the page.I admit that I was wrong on putting (Años) instead of years it was a mistake because I am learning to use the page.
I would like to be your friend, i saw your page it´s awsome all the in information that you have i have a long history
with Assassin´s Creed i have played 7 of the 11 games of course i´m not a expert but i want to learn more things, and now in the page of Aileen Bock i put the date of her accident and the date is correct they said it in Assassin´s Creed IV on the ´´Subject Zero´´-Audio file 5 so if you want to check it.
By the way i´m from México take care Sol Pacificus. Fer —unsigned comment by Fermoncada (talk · contr)

Thanks for getting back to me Fermoncada. Can you provide me with a link of this video so I can verify its reliability? Thank you very much! :) Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 21:02, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

Also, I forgot to add that I would love to be your friend. ^_^ And I'm glad you found my profile page interesting. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 21:18, November 4, 2018 (UTC)

Hey Sol how are you?

Did you see the video? that i send you in the ´´Shay Cormac Date Death´´, i also want to know where can i send you a messege? Take care friend

'S on singular words

And if I pronounce it the way I originally spelled it with the extra s when saying it what then? Also I think Canadian grammar conventions follows the American guideline currently. And since the game decided to go with Pegasos's instead of Pegasos' I think we should follow suit. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 15:59, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

The main reason why I had to change your edit is because we already have an established policy regarding it in the Manual of Style. I am well aware that Canadian standard, based in the Canadian Press Stylebook, tends to follow the only partially standardized American practice of always dropping the extra 's' no matter what. I am also aware that we normally prefer to conform with the spelling used in the game, but in this case, it is more about a formatting style not rendering a name faithfully. I am not sure if Assassin's Creed is consistent about this all throughout anyways.

Do you pronounce the possessive of Hades as /ˈheɪdiːz/ or /ˈheɪdiːzəs/? Two syllables or three? The pronunciation guideline isn't perfect, and in some names, it can vary depending on the editor. In such a scenario, normally, editors should respect whichever choice was made for the name in the article first. However, with certain names, especially Greek ones ending in /iːz/ like Socrates, it is virtually universal that the possessive should be pronounced with only two syllables which is why names with this ending tends to never be in dispute about excluding an extra 's'.

I really hope that this minor matter doesn't actually bother you much because admittedly your opening sentence in this message does come across a bit randomly abrupt. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 16:53, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

I do pronounce it as three syllables as I’ve never found the extra sibilant awkward to say and thus opened this discussion addressing what you put for your edit summary. It does bothers me in a "I think we should be as consistent as possible in all conventions" but not enough for me to dispute it more than once. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 21:08, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

If you do apparently pronounce it in three syllables, then your position isn't invalid. (What is invalid is when people pronounce it in two syllables but insist on adding the extra 's' which properly is meant to add an extra syllable to the pronunciation). Anyway, can you elaborate more on why this bothers you? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 23:12, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

I just don’t like rule exceptions/inconsistency in places where I feel it can be avoided. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 00:32, November 9, 2018 (UTC)

RE:Repeatedly recreating the "Twelve Olympians" article

Sorry for being a bit persistent with recreating the same page.TDalyyyy1998 (talk) 23:26, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

It is no problem so long as it does not happen again. Can you give a reason behind your persistence? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 23:29, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

I just like adding onto pages, and sometimes I get a little bit confused when they get deleted after I create them.TDalyyyy1998 (talk) 23:30, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

Alright, but do you understand why we deleted it now? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 00:36, November 9, 2018 (UTC)

Yes.TDalyyyy1998 (talk) 07:50, November 9, 2018 (UTC)

re: Aimus simulated maps

Alright I'll go undo those. I thought the scale down and distortion due to the fact the character might not have actual visited certain parts of an area or the character might not have developed an impressionable memory of the place so the instead of having missing gaps in the map it distorts it to fill all spaces and the distance is cut down for the same reason the days are and why we never seem to eat, sleep, or use the restroom: the animus hasn't simulated these as the memory isn't important (how it would know, not sure). But I guess this is just my head canon for it. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 06:15, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

Forest Islands

"But they exist in-game right?" Yes, the places counted as 'Forest Islands' exist in-game. But the term doesn't. So keeping the Forest Islands-article while at the same time denying, say, the Twelve Olympians-article appears... off, because the situation's the same. Sadelyrate (siniath) 20:14, November 17, 2018 (UTC)

The two situations are kind of different here, but first, let me explain that if the place exists in-game but the name isn't mentioned, then of course it merits an article, only that it needs a conjectural name. However, the name "Forest Islands" is actually provided in a Ubisoft-licensed source, the website, so it won't be conjectural either. It's properly sourced. The website is a valid source. Going back to the "Twelve Olympians" article, the gods who comprise the group known to us as the Twelve Olympians do exist in the series, but what hasn't been confirmed to exist in the series is the concept of this specific grouping which is what the article would be describing. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 20:18, November 17, 2018 (UTC)

To give an example of this, let's hypothesize that there's a game about you, Odeyssus, and me, and that in real-life, we have formed a group called Sadelodeyiero lol, but this group isn't mentioned in the game. Just because we exist in the game, doesn't mean that our group exists in the game even though we have such a group in real-life. In the same way, just because the gods known to us as a group called the Twelve Olympians exist in the AC series, it doesn't necessarily mean that in the series, this specific group exists even if they do. Now, it is 99% likely that the "Twelve Olympian" grouping does exist in the AC universe, but both because it's not necessary to give it an article when it is never mentioned and because of strict sourcing policies, it doesn't need its own article. I would personally allow it be mentioned as one of those exceptions that allow us to take from external sources though, but it shouldn't have its own article. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 20:26, November 17, 2018 (UTC)

I see your point. When in conflict with other sources, the games' canon tended to be favoured over the others, at least in the past. Is this still true? Sadelyrate (siniath) 20:32, November 17, 2018 (UTC)

Re: Supideo

Hi Sol,
I admit, I don't actually know whether the prophecy can be averted, as I haven't played the mission yet. But I saw a clip of the (an?) end scene making rounds on Tumblr, and it's from this that I made my assumption. It's well-known by now that Kass can romance multiple NPCs, so I extended this action to apply to Kosta the same way it did with Odessa, Xenia, etc. Even if romance isn't an option:

1. There's nothing to say it didn't happened "off-screen", as Kass does admit to it, and
2. Surely you can retrieve the shield through stealth, avoiding any bloodshed on the Bandit Leaders's part?

Or have I jumped a bit too far? - Darman (talk) 02:45, November 20, 2018 (UTC)

South Korea

There's a heap of other founding dates for South Korea, is there no point in adding all these? Boofhead185 (talk) 04:45, November 20, 2018 (UTC)

The reason why the Wikipedia article for South Korea has a lot more founding dates is because the page doesn't precisely distinguish the topic of Korea from the topic of South Korea. For our purposes, however, we do make this distinction. Hence, an article at Korea would concern the actual civilization, and its founding date would be taken from its very first state. On the other hand, our article at South Korea is specifically about the current sovereign state, the Republic of South Korea, and so only the founding dates of this specific state apply. To keep it simple, we will also not be dating from the most current constitution of the Republic of South Korea. You are right though that perhaps we should take into account the date when it first declared independence from Japan not when it won that independence at the end of World War II. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 05:32, November 20, 2018 (UTC)

OoU

How can an in-game description be OoU? Sadelyrate (siniath) 05:45, November 22, 2018 (UTC)

It's actually the attribution that's OOU. If you just write "description", it suggests that it's a description given in a video game (which is what it is). What is the source of the description in-universe? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 15:11, November 22, 2018 (UTC)

For further clarification, "description" by itself isn't a proper attribution and only a little better than attributing a quote to "quote". Of course, it's a description, but described by whom or what? Absent this information, readers will assume that it refers to a description provided in a video game, i.e. a game's description, because that is the only thing it can mean without context, and hence it would be OOU. For comparison, if we provided a quote from database entries in Brotherhood, we can attribute it them to Shaun Hastings (the IU source) or at the very least to "Animus database entry" since that IU, the database exists. But if we just called it "description", it is unclear what the source actually is and implies that it's a description in a video game. The issue is that we don't know who wrote these descriptions for Odyssey in-universe, since it's certainly not Shaun, and we also don't know if IU, these descriptions actually appear for Layla or if the descriptions are just meant to be taken as exclusively OOU gameplay features for players. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 16:48, November 22, 2018 (UTC)

I'd actually argue that yes, we do know the descriptions appear to Layla, and she has access to them, even to edit. The Artifact Fragment-quote? That actually has "-LH" at the end of it, but given attribution, I figured that could be left out. Granted, they don't spell it out that it was her or Bibeau, or Geary in Origins, but there's enough evidence to make that claim. Especially given Odyssey's beginning, the way they literally IU set up the Animus experience. Sadelyrate (siniath) 17:18, November 22, 2018 (UTC)

If it is as you say, then I agree there is enough evidence to go on that Layla wrote all the descriptions. I might still be a bit skeptical if the descriptions are written in a marketing or promotional kind of manner, but otherwise, I suppose it is safe to attribute such descriptions to Layla. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 17:54, November 22, 2018 (UTC)

Re: the setting up the Animus being IU? If you want to look, this is how it goes down, shared by starting it at the relevant point. Sadelyrate (siniath) 18:09, November 22, 2018 (UTC)

God statues in Odyssey

Hey Sol, I made User:Kennyannydenny/God statues|this page to place the images I made of statues of gods in Oddysey. I try to find as many of the gods as possible but I don't know all of them, and sometimes don't recognize the statues. So I made that page so people can help me where possible. Is this an ok way to do this? It would require an admin to rename the images after a god has been identified and we're using the image on the Wiki. Just thought i'd check with you to see if this is ok before I get into trouble :) Kennyannydenny (talk) 21:23, November 23, 2018 (UTC)

Image renaming

Hey Sol, could you please rename some files for me?

File:Statue of an Unknown god 3.png is an statue of Asclepius. File:Statue of an Unknown god.png is a statue of Apollo, File:Statue of Dionysus.png is actually a statue of Herakles and File:Statue of Hera.png is actually a statue of Hygieia. File:Statue of an Unknown god 2.png is a statue of Hera.

Thanks! Kennyannydenny (talk) 10:37, December 2, 2018 (UTC)

Hey Kenny, my apologies for the late reply; I will get around to it shortly. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 00:45, December 5, 2018 (UTC)

Category: entrepreneur

Hello, i have a question about the category entrepreneur. I want to know what exactly we define as an entrepreneur, because in french he could be someone who led an "entreprise" (bussiness, company or firm). But in English did the term entrepreneur has another definition? To be sure to don't categorized characters who aren't entrepreneur.Francesco75 (talk) 17:33, December 10, 2018 (UTC)

Hey Francesco, sorry for the late reply. I've always been quite unsure about the definition of entrepreneur myself, but popularly, an entrepreneur in English is a businessman who deals with high financial risk rather than just anyone who leads an enterprise. Usually, this financial risk arises from the individual independently starting a new business, and so entrepreneur in English bears the connotation of young, adventurous men (often late 20s to early 30s) who rely on their ingenuity and street smarts to establish a new start-up in an unfamiliar environment in protest at the notion of having anyone but themselves as he boss. Because of this we tend to think of entrepreneurs as savvy businessmen who independently climbed to great wealth or those who fell into bankruptcy from their recklessness. If you check the Wikipedia entry or the English dictionary entries, they do seem to suggest that in English, financial risk and/or starting a new business are criteria of the definition. I think in this way, it is more specific in its usage than the original French term. Hope this helps! I know that most of our categories on professions need to be reorganized, renamed, or deleted. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 03:24, December 15, 2018 (UTC)

Hyphen vs En/Em dash vs colon

Hi Sol,
I'm not sure if this convo's been had elsewhere by someone else, but if so, I can't find it. Going around editing, I came to the page for Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag – The Watch, but also Assassin's Creed IV Black Flag: Blackbeard - The Lost Journal, and I'm wondering: What's our policy on punctuation separators? While en/em dashes separate just fine, unlike the far smaller hyphen or colon, there's no single keystroke to type them. To my knowledge, the markers can only be inserted in edit mode or if a user has copy/pasted from elsewhere, rendering any page that has them in the title otherwise inaccessible in the search bar unless a redirect is made. Why not remove the problem by simplifying the titles to type? -- Darman (talk) 00:35, January 21, 2019 (UTC)

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) 02:11, January 21, 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply! Crazy busy on my end. Thanks for clearing that up, much appreciated. I knew those codes existed, but hadn't thought to try them in the search bar. So should we rename/redirect every pg with 2 separators using "colon > en dash" format? - Darman (talk) 01:30, January 26, 2019 (UTC)

Image rename

Can you help rename [:File:Database Rocca di Racaldino.png]] to [:File:Database Rocca di Ravaldino.png]]? I got a mistake for it's name. --UJ112013 (talk) 14:54, February 16, 2019 (UTC)

Hello

How are you? Daryurian (The Mighty Turian) 06:58, March 14, 2019 (UTC)

Konnichiwa

Means hello in Chinese

Daryurian (The Mighty Turian) 17:06, March 25, 2019 (UTC)

Italicization apostrophes

Foreign words are italicized, like polemarch and poleis. But 'mercenary' nor, say, 'courtesan' are foreign words, whereas misthios and hetaera are. Of these two, I've only seen the former linked as ''[[Mercenary|misthios]]'', whereas the latter is linked without a fail as [[Courtesan|''hetaera'']]. My point is: why? What is the reason/rule for this? Sadelyrate (siniath) 09:10, April 14, 2019 (UTC)

The standard is always, without exception, that when italicizing a linked word, the apostrophes go on the outside, around the whole thing unless one is italicizing individual parts of the linked term. Even if you are changing the way the link appears through piping, the apostrophes go on the outside of the link. For example:

• ''[[Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood]]'' for Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood
• [[Venator-class Star Destroyer|''Venator''-class Star Destroyer]] for [w:c:starwars:Venator-class Star Destroyer|Venator-class Star Destroyer]]
• ''[[mercenary|misthios]]'' for misthios
• ''[[courtesan|hetaera]]'' for hetaera

All those instances of [[Courtesan|''hetaera'']] are in error. That 'mercenary' and 'courtesan' should not be italicized is irrelevant because in the final product, they don't appear in the text; essentially, those words aren't even being used in the actual writing, only the coding. Of course, whether you place the apostrophes inside the brackets or outside doesn't affect the outcome—either way the word is italicized. The only reason why putting the apostrophes on the outside matter is because this is the standard convention across all wikis that I know of, at least the biggest ones, and Wikipedia itself. So it's just a matter of consistency and clean formatting for the editors in the editing screen. It's for the same reason that we don't normally use <i></i> unless we have to.Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 16:35, April 14, 2019 (UTC)

U

Maybe announce that reason and intention? Given that this wiki seems to use the American spellings, deciding to add in the British 'u' where it isn't required seems... well, to be frank, random and done at a whim. Sadelyrate (siniath) 21:13, April 17, 2019 (UTC)

We don't actually really have a spelling standard around here. Although I'm aware that years back, the staff seemed to have favoured American English spelling over British English spelling, because Assassin's Creed sources usually (but not always) employ Canadian English spelling and editors subconsciously absorbed or followed by the spelling used by Ubisoft, I have found that by and far the wiki's articles tend to float around Canadian English, neither American nor British. Moreover, since other wikis tend to choose the spelling standard based on the national origin of their franchise (i.e. American English for Star Wars, British English for Harry Potter), I recommended that we standardize to Canadian English. We did not reach a consensus on this, however, because the main opponent of this believed that it would entail massive, exasperating changes across the entire wiki, not realizing that many of our articles are already written in Canadian English incidentally (or rather a mixture of American-Canadian English >.< depending on the word...), and that it might actually take more work to convert every article to American English.

The end result is that we really don't have a spelling standard on this wiki. Depending on who you ask, they might say that it's American English, but perhaps because they aren't aware of the subtle differences between American and Canadian English, sometimes they end up writing Canadian English anyways. Our Manual of Style actually currently states that we defer to the spelling standard used in Assassin's Creed sources, which is Canadian English by default, followed by American when in doubt.

The thing is that when something isn't standardized, then it becomes a bit rude to correct an article solely to change it to one's personal preferred standard, especially if it has just been edited by the other person. I understand that you mistook the spelling standard here to be firmly established as American.

However, at the same time, when it is clear that a certain editing pattern is likely intentional, it is always the obligation of a user undoing that change, especially if their edit is nothing but a revert of it, to explain why they are reverting it in the edit summary. If you thought that it was clearly in the wrong because you believed the spelling standard here is American, then honestly, it would have made sense to at the very least write "isn't the spelling standard American?" or "the spelling standard is American". This is why I also asked if there was a specific reason why you chose to use girl instead of courtesan as I changed it since I thought that choice peculiar enough that there was probably a conscious thought process behind it, and it would have been impolite of me to assume otherwise. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 21:28, April 17, 2019 (UTC)

Move request

Can you do the same with the Borgia Towers and Borgia Tower? Sadelyrate (siniath) 19:12, April 18, 2019 (UTC)

Sure thing! Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 19:13, April 18, 2019 (UTC)

Another: Janissaries and Janissary. Am I correct in assuming that occupations (tailor, doctor, janissary) should be in singular, while people (Moors, Amazons, etc.) should remain in plural? Sadelyrate (siniath) 09:27, April 19, 2019 (UTC)

Yes, you are correct. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 10:15, April 19, 2019 (UTC)

(Sorry, on a roll.)

• Archers to Archer
• Brutes to Brute
• Officers to Officer
• Jägers to Jäger

The gangs are problematic in this regard. But maybe the logic is the same as with the Assassins and the Templars. Sadelyrate (siniath) 12:45, April 19, 2019 (UTC)

RE: Two-handed swords again

Both the Claymore and Bastard Sword in Unity are basically zweihanders.

The Claymore has a typical zweihander grip/crossguard, the interesting part is the ricasso which appears to be simply an extention of the grip. I've never seen this kind of ricasso, they are typically shaped after the blade's design and not the grip's one. The blade also looks like taken from a standard arming sword (maybe should check if they recycled it from some of the game's single handed swords).

The Bastard also has a ricasso based on the grip and its blade looks rather too broad for a zweihander blade. It appears that they slapped a broad bastard sword blade onto a zweihander grip/ricasso.

Even though they lack secondary crossguards, I think the zweihander grips/ricassos are enough to classify them as zweihanders. Nanomat (talk) 21:31, April 19, 2019 (UTC)

Web articles

Reading the Rogue page and looking at the References, I saw we'd referenced some gameplay released directly from Ubisoft. However, clicking the link brought me to a 404 page. Since Ubisoft evidently—and most infuriatingly—does not keep all its past announcements, shouldn't we be using web.archive.org and/or archive.is to try to keep our own records, similar to what Wookipeedia does with content from the now-deleted Hyperspace site? I don't think(??) we have a policy on this, and I know we'll have immense data gaps given how retroactive this is. Do you think you could discuss this with the Admins? Thanks. -- Darman (talk) 03:15, April 26, 2019 (UTC)

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)

Hello again, Sol,
I'm writing a draft of a page section with news/social links, and I'm a bit confused on sourcing social media posts. The usage text for the Twitter template strongly recommends we screenshot tweets, while the Facebook template says to archive posts. Which is preferred? And are tweet screencaps necessary if it's captured in Web Archive? Also, why do both templates categorize pages as "Social media citations without screenshots" even if there are archive links? – Darman (talk) 16:50, February 23, 2020 (UTC)

RE: Labrys

No problem :)

I think labrys specifically refers to the ancient Minoan type of axe. The setting and context of Brotherhood would make Bartolomeo's Axe a generic double axe. Nanomat (talk) 01:34, April 27, 2019 (UTC)

Altair's Birth/Death dates

When you edited Altair's page on April 21st 2019 the lifespan dates in the introduction paragraph (1165 - 1257) switched to (1257 - 1165). I tried to fix it but it is being stubborn and keeps automatically reverting itself in source and visual modes. Just an FYI. --Dyson14444 (talk) 01:41, May 2, 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much for alerting me to that issue Dyson because otherwise, I probably would not have noticed for years! It is a frustrating glitch in the coding, but it appears that the inclusion of the Arabic alphabet automatically reverses any date range that immediately follows. This is because Arabic reads from right to left. What makes even less sense is that I can't even modify the second date at all. It wouldn't even let me touch it. Using <nowiki> would fix it, but I decided that it might be better to just remove the name in Arabic altogether. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 03:12, May 2, 2019 (UTC)

CC-BY-SA vs Cc-by-sa-3.0

I had a thought when rereading your reply on my talk page about image licensing, but figured I'd pass it by an Admin: we have two main licensing templates, one of which is now considerably messier aesthetically than the other. I know they're both ~10yrs old and basically untouched since their creation, but since they're near identical, would it be OK if I edited CC-BY-SA to have the same text as Cc-by-sa-3.0, "changed" licences to the now-cleaner one, and then put the Delete template on the old one? -- Darman (talk) 15:20, May 3, 2019 (UTC)

Hello again, Sol,

I don't know if you missed seeing this when I wrote it or if you meant to reply but forgot/got busy, but I was thinking about it again in light of my recent edits sourcing many ACOD pics and "changing" the licencing template. Would it be OK if I made the proposed edits ^above? -- Darman (talk) 21:00, May 13, 2019 (UTC)

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)

Kassandra as Spartan

She tends to identify herself as one, and not just by accident or somesuch. While talking with Athenian Demosthenes (Swift as Wind) following exchange takes place:

• Demosthenes: You've impressed me, misthios.
• Kassandra: For a Spartan.
• Demosthenes: Yes, as you say.

There are numerous other examples, but this was just the latest I've ran into. If we identify Ezio as Italian, why not identify Kassandra as Spartan? Sadelyrate (siniath) 08:45, May 5, 2019 (UTC)

Can you explain why you are asking? Wasn't I the one asking you about whether or not we should be identifying her as a Spartan before? I brought up issues like ambiguity in which it could refer either to her origin or her affiliation. Odeyssus told me that it's better to avoid it when it's not necessary for context, I think. I said before that we need to find clearer examples of whether or not she openly identifies herself as Spartan since she expressly rejected it at the beginning of the game. It does seem like you have brought some examples. In any case, I should point out that yes, we do most often describe Ezio Auditore as Italian when first mentioning him in an article, but there's no hard and fast rule that this is always an absolute necessity. The guideline is just that context should be given upon mentioning someone for the first time as to who that individual is. Normally, this context involves the individual's background. However, I am thinking that in some cases, if describing Kassandra as Spartan will cause confusion, such as if the context is in her fighting for Athens in battle or against Spartans, then it might be better to avoid it. It's at our discretion. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 09:03, May 5, 2019 (UTC)

I brought this to your page, because I wasn't sure if you'd see it on my talk page. I agree that there are times when the ambiguity is there, and Kassandra clearly struggles with 'how' Spartan she is throughout the game, but there are also these times when she specifically identifies as Spartan. (I really like her confrontations with Lysander and Demosthenes.) I questioned this because in the past, with people like Ezio and Bayek, it seems to have been a given that they are identified by their, well, place of origin. Ezio's introduced as Italian (rarely as a Florentine, though), and Bayek always as 'of Siwa'. Ditto for the Fryes as British, and so forth. Against that, excluding 'Spartan' from Kassandra seems...weird. Sadelyrate (siniath) 09:21, May 5, 2019 (UTC)

What I'm getting at is that this shouldn't even be a question, imo. Granted, Odyssey lived up to what Layla said at the beginning of the game: it truly has changed a lot of stuff. Sadelyrate (siniath) 10:57, May 5, 2019 (UTC)

I think you might be confusing not describing Kassandra as a Spartan with each first mention to mean we are not considering her to be Spartan. That is not the case at all. Our writing guideline is that when a character is first mentioned, context should be povided as to who that is so that it's not just a floating name. (This is a point of frustration for me with a lot of school texts). However, what that context is depends on the situation you're writing about. Normally, the most concise way to add a little context to an individual is with an appositive or qualifier giving their ethnic/national origin and their main profession. This is why it is so common to see the "Italian Assassin Ezio Auditore da Firenze", but there's no absolute rule that this has to be the format to give context to the individual, and certainly, not mentioning an individual's ethnic/national origin should never be taken as a statement that they aren't actually affiliated with the heritage they're popularly associated with. That there are cases where Kassandra is introduced simply as "misthios Kassandra" rather than "Spartan misthios Kassandra" doesn't mean we don't identify her as Spartan. It's up to editors' discretion what context they give to the individual. If they think it's sufficient to only give the profession, that is fine. It's perfectly valid to only write "Assassin Ezio Auditore da Firenze" or change it up to "Mentor Ezio Auditore da Firenze" or "Florentine Assassin Ezio Auditore da Firenze" instead. In fact, in cases where one is describing his time in Constantinople, it would arguably be better to write "Mentor" than "Italian Assassin" since it's more relevant, but it still won't be wrong to use the latter. The point is that the guideline is to give context, but editors have discretion what sort of context that is. Perhaps in a particular scenario, for example, we find that it can be more confusing for the reader to qualify Kassandra as a Spartan (such as if she's fighting in a battle against Spartans for Athens). In this case, we might decide that it's better writing to just call her "misthios Kassandra" without reference to her national/ethnic origin. In any case, not referring to her Spartan in a sentence isn't a statement that she isn't Spartan. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 19:33, May 5, 2019 (UTC)

I probably sparked the confusion by asking about it in the first place 😅 because I just wanted to double-check that it wasn't a mistake to expressly call her Spartan everywhere. I think Odeyssus's reasoning is that avoiding qualifying her as Spartan avoids the issue rather than claiming that she isn't Spartan. Whether the context you give for her is "Spartan misthios", "Spartan mercenary", "misthios", "mercenary", all are valid options. The former two might be poor choices depending on the scenario, as I said, but they're all factually correct (because Spartan can just refer to her origin).Misthios seems to be just our stylistic choice. I think I would personally avoid qualifying her as Spartan as often so as not to make unnecessary presumptions about her degree of self-identification, but it's normally not wrong to qualify her as such. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 20:05, May 5, 2019 (UTC)

Introduction

Hey! My name is Atvelonis, and I'm the Fandom Wiki Manager for the Assassin's Creed Wiki as well as an admin on [w:c:elderscrolls:User:Atvelonis|Elder Scrolls]]. I'm here to act as a liaison between you and Fandom Staff as well as to help you and your community with whatever you need. If you ever have any questions or issues related to the wiki, its features (editing, templates, bots, etc.), or whatever else, feel free to reach out to me on my talk page or on Discord (Atvelonis#9495) and I can help out! —Atvelonis (talk) 15:58, May 12, 2019 (UTC)

Lazy Eye

Hi Sol. Why did you add a Good articles eraicon on Lazy Eye? As far as I can tell, the article has not been nominated for consideration. --Jasca Ducato (talk | contributions) 10:13, May 23, 2019 (UTC)

It's a valid question, and I believe I've mentioned this before, but we essentially don't seem to have a functional process for promoting articles to new featured and good article status anymore due to the massive shortage in manpower. As a result, we haven't had any articles promoted in years now, and it got to the point where there are certain articles of higher quality than current featured and good articles which have become outdated, and I see this as somewhat of a problem. I believe I've mentioned this before in the past, but discussion concerning this didn't receive much interest. As a result I took the initiative to just promote a few old articles that have been updated to much higher quality status than current featured and good articles. Although I dislike the idea of unilaterally deciding on an article to be promoted, in consideration of the outdated quality of some featured and good articles being displayed on the front page, I hoped that this would be fine. Of course, if it is not, we can work together to revive a process of promoting articles. I have mainly done this owing to previous apathy by others on the matter. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 10:40, May 23, 2019 (UTC)

Delete an image

Hi, can you please delete an image I uploaded? I overlooked a similar photo, so mine would be obsolete. It's this one https://assassinscreed.fandom.com/wiki/File:ACOD_Myrrine_talking_about_the_unfinished_temple.png against this https://assassinscreed.fandom.com/wiki/File:ACOd-CatchingUp-EvandrosMyrrine.jpg. The former is mine. The latter is already used in the gallery of the main quest page of Catching Up.

I'm sorry if I just pasted the urls here like this, I don't know how to link an image file - if it's the same as linking pages.

--Kd103 (talk) 02:29, June 3, 2019 (UTC)

Hello Kd103, I'm actually not sure if I want to delete your image because it's not actually identical to the one you're comparing to. Honestly, the angle in both images could be better. The latter one is too far, and I like that yours shows Myrinne's face, but Kassandra is positioned awkwardly behind her. Anyway, I just wanted to double-check if you really wish for it to be removed. If so, I will do so right away without asking again.

By the way, I've been noticing your work on our memory pages, and I am so grateful for it. We need all the help we can get, and our manpower has been short of late, so keep up the great work! :) Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 03:12, June 3, 2019 (UTC)

It's just that I don't want other people's screenshots be made obsolete. I'd like to use the screenshots others have uploaded when I can, and to my mind it fulfills the purpose of showing context, or what happened in the quest. I was just a bit careless, because some sidequests don't have screenshots at all, so I've been uploading a lot. This time I just forgot to look at the gallery.

I wouldn't mind it being deleted at all.

And thanks for the compliment :D --Kd103 (talk) 04:16, June 3, 2019 (UTC)

Tartaros vs. Hades

I've started a discussion on the latest thing I noticed here: Talk:Tartaros. Don't feel obligated but input is appreciated :) Ps. Warning for spoilers for the last DLC. Kennyannydenny (talk) 19:51, June 6, 2019 (UTC)

Shao Jun edits

First of all, I don't mean to sound aggressive but don't patronize me. Also I had nothing to do with the little tidbit about Lin, which I happen to agree with you that it's not significant enough to be in the lead. Next time please check edit history before you start throwing accusations. One last thing which I had made a note of it when I changed it earlier, floruit is not appropriate to use in Shao Jun's case. As I explained, it is only used when both a person's date of birth and date of death is unknown. For reference, floruit is used on the Ilario Auditore page which is correct since we have no idea when he was born or when he died. But for Shao Jun, her date of birth is known, so floruit would not be used. N217062 (talk) 22:26, June 7, 2019 (UTC)

Nick, I did not patronize you at all, and I'm quite perplexed where you got that impression. My words in the edit summary only briefly explain my edits to be helpful as possible, serving as notes. For example, when I explained why I removed the mention of Lin in the lead, that was not directed at you at all but was only me noting why I did so in general as part of the edit summary. I am not sure what accusations you are referring to because I made none, for my only comment to you is to "please refer to the Manual of Style", a friendly reminder, not a charge or personal attack in any way, which I believe is fair since it is the authoritative guide for our formatting style and does not proscribe the use of this notation only in cases where both birth and death dates are unknown. I would also like to remind you to please relax because I do honestly think you are overreacting a bit. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 22:35, June 7, 2019 (UTC)

I apologize if I seemed a bit crazed though in my defense the way you worded your message seemed like you were talking to me directly. I also have a bad history on a different wiki where I had to deal with incompetent admins who banned me because I refused to adhere to their headcanon. But that's a separate issue. Also in regards to the floruit thing, I feel it's counterproductive to use the notation here on this wiki differently than the way it is used everywhere else but I guess that's your call. Hope there's no hard feelings between us. N217062 (talk) 22:50, June 7, 2019 (UTC)

That's interesting, I didn't realize that other wikis use it differently. That should definitely be taken into consideration. Can you direct me to these wikis? And no worries, there are no hard feelings. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 22:56, June 7, 2019 (UTC)

Oh I didn't mean other wikis specifically, I meant the notation's use in the field of genealogy/historical documentation as a whole. I have a friend who is studying for her degree in that field and she said that according to the guidelines set by the International Council on Archives, floruit is used to denote a particular date or period when an individual was active if both birth and death dates cannot be established. N217062 (talk) 23:17, June 7, 2019 (UTC)

I feel ashamed for not knowing that. I will have to do a little more research on it, I suppose. So would your friend say that if only the birth year is known but the subject is known to be deceased, that it is fine to simply write "born [year]"? The issue for us was that we took this to suggest that the subject is still alive. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 23:43, June 7, 2019 (UTC)

In such a case, there are two formats that I know of. The one you mentioned "born [year]" would be fine. The other one is "[birth year] – unknown" and is used when one wants to clarify that the individual is deceased but their date/year of death is unknown. I'd imagine that whichever format is used is simply a matter of preference. These formats would also be applicable if it was the other way around where only the death date/year was known and the birth was unknown. N217062 (talk) 00:24, June 8, 2019 (UTC)

Re: Hyphens

Hey, I got your message about using em dash. First of all, thanks for the positive feedback, and second, sorry if it's become a bad habit by now. When transcribing from the subtitles to the page, the hyphens are just... "there," and it really doesn't process that I need to press Option-Shift-Dash instead of just Dash, while I'm typing everything out. But I'll keep working on it, and I'll go back over the main quests and Cult side quests (mainly what I've focused on) to see if I placed them anywhere else. If there are any further concerns about formatting, please don't hesitate to let me know. RShepard227 (talk) 01:16, June 27, 2019 (UTC)

apology/explanationforpost

OK I KNOW THAT WAS A POINTLESS PLACE/SITE TO POST THAT THREAD YOU REMOVED BUT DONT TAKE IT PERSONALLY I DONT WANT THE COUNTRY TO BECOME TYRANNICAL ANY MORE THAN YOU DO AND I REALIZE NOW THAT THE POST WOULD BE BETTER ON A DEDICATED ACTIVIST SITE cheers Freedom2antityranny4 (talk) 19:53, July 1, 2019 (UTC)that Antifa person who made the anti govt post (Freedom2antityranny4)

Soldiers individual pages

Hello. I see that you are removing the “Factions” part from the “Soldiers” article because what they explain is supposedly in their individual pages. However, there are missing pages for the guard types. There isn’t, for example, a page for the regular soldiers in Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, or for regulars in general. The Brutes appear in Assassin’s Creed 3, 4, Rogue, Unity and Syndicate (Possibly also Origins and Odyssey), but their page doesn’t even mention those appearances, it claims that they were just heavily-armored guards during the Renaissance. Also, their page doesn’t explain the various factions they belong to.

For those reasons, I don’t think removing the “Factions” part from the “Soldiers” page is a good idea, especially for me that had fun reading the various factions. —unsigned comment by Zurre2004 (talk · contr)

Hello Zurre, I just would like to reassure you that the removal of the "Factions" section is only temporary because I am currently working on reworking the article. Part of the reason I thought it was better to remove it first is because the rest of the other sections of the page already discusses the same information: different enemy types, making the "Factions" section redundant. On the other hand, this "Factions" section by and large only discussed what each of these enemies wear and nothing else, which I thought wasn't significant information since we can normally just see what they're wearing and really belongs only to individual pages about them.

Now, I'm aware that we have missing pages on certain enemy types, and that the other sections on "Factions" doesn't cover the enemies in Odyssey. I can assure you that these pages will be created soon enough and information about them also updated to the article accordingly.

The main issue was that the "Factions" section was too confusing because it repeated information which should be found elsewhere but otherwise focused on visual appearances only. Since I am reworking the article, I needed to put it aside to reinspect later because I found it too distracting. If there is any information from it that should be re-added to the article after I'm done fixing it, I will do so.

Thanks for reaching out to me about your concerns by the way! :) Let me know if this addresses it. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 11:34, July 4, 2019 (UTC)

Formatting

They formatting like that because this policy.--UJ112013 (talk) 01:16, August 15, 2019 (UTC)

That is just a draft policy written by the very same individual who just formatted the reference incorrectly. It is not official and is still under discussion. Suffice to say that no edits should be made in accordance with it. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 01:26, August 15, 2019 (UTC)

Are we going to restore the articles that been edited with the non-official format? --UJ112013 (talk) 09:16, August 26, 2019 (UTC)

Did you mean if we should undo all changes made per that draft policy? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 21:21, October 11, 2019 (UTC)

Memory article naming convention

Greetings Sol,

I had a question somewhat related to our recent St. John's gate possible misidentification discussion. In it, I mentioned a related Pickpocket mission, that only seems to occur in the console versions, as it was replaced in the PC version with a Rooftop Race investigation. I started a stub article for this mission (Pickpocketing I (Sibrand)), as there wasn't an article for it, but I noticed that to distinguish it from the other Pickpocket mission article related to that same Memory Block, I'd have to give a it numeral.

For now, I've assumed it would be placed concurrent to the Rooftop Race mission chronologically, and so would occur before the other Pickpocket investigation. However, I've noticed that the current naming convention for these memories seems to label the earliest memory of the same investigation type without using any numeral in the title. Because this title already exists for an existing article, should the title of my new article usurp this name, or is it easier to just rename the other article with numeral "II" and leave the numeral-less title redirect to the "II" to avoid too much upheaval on the Wiki? I was just wondering if this situation had occurred before and if there was an efficient way to do this without causing too much disruption.

In addition, I feel it might be a good idea to create a new category all the console-exclusive investigation missions, and explicitly state their in-game replacement on the Wiki, as I couldn't really ascertain this was the case until I looked elsewhere on other websites.

Wow, this was a long post, so I'm sorry if I seem a bit pedantic, but just didn't want to mess up your system here, given that I'm relatively new to editing here.

Peace and safety be upon you, Altaï— ah, I mean Sol! :-)

--Bluerock (talk) 19:41, August 18, 2019 (UTC)

Had to re-read this a few times to process honestly :P. For the pickpocketing mission article you have just created, it should be renamed to "Pickpocketing (Sibrand)" while the original "Pickpocketing (Sibrand)" should be renamed to "Pickpocketing II". Personally, I don't have a stance on whether the first mission should have a numeral or not, but it should be consistent with the other pages, and if the other first missions of a type in a sequence doesn't have the numeral, then neither should "Pickpocketing (Sibrand)". I will perform the move for you because normally you need an administrator to rename a page to a name that already has an existing article with that name. I appreciate you taking the time to think over this by the way! Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 00:43, August 19, 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry about that, I tried to explain it as best I could. Anyway, thanks for the rename. I went ahead and updated the links onthe relevant nav template and the infoboxes in other articles, so that they direct to the correct pages. I initially thought that the original page was linked to by a ton of other articles, but turns out it was just the inclusion of that nav template rather than actual links (I thought there'd be a way to filter these out, but maybe not). --Bluerock (talk) 16:44, August 19, 2019 (UTC)

Color-blind friendly editing

Hey Sol,

While editing articles, I've noticed that when double-checking changes from the previous version, the colors used for highlighting differences in the previous version (brown text on red background), is very difficult to read for someone who is red-green color blind. Would it be possible to change these to something more discernible for us color blind folks out there? --Bluerock (talk) 00:05, August 25, 2019 (UTC)

Oh no, that is a problem. :( We should definitely be accommodating to that if possible. However, coding isn't really my thing. You should check with DarkFeather. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 02:39, August 25, 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll go do that. --Bluerock (talk) 10:35, August 25, 2019 (UTC)

What should we do with the Modern Day information that removed in ACID?

I have some questions for AC: Identity.

1. Some Modern Day information in AC: Identity has been removed. Like: Database: Montreal 2014, Database: Locations (Montreal), Database: Abstergo Entertainment and the mentioned of Helix. Will they still be canon?
2. Since the Helix is no longer mentioned, will the device for reliving memories be Animus Omega?
3. The dates of the memories were removed, too. Should we revise the Memory Infobox for the memories?

--UJ112013 (talk) 13:47, September 4, 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for the slow reply UJ11. I am actually a little confused what you mean when you say that some of this information has been removed. Did you mean from the game itself? Has Ubisoft updated the game so that all references to the modern day has been removed? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 14:39, September 5, 2019 (UTC)

Yes, it is. I am sorry that I did not make it clear. Also, the memories' dates of Lo Sparviero were removed as well. --UJ112013 (talk) 15:41, September 5, 2019 (UTC)

I added {{non-canon}} templates on those entries, just want you know about this. --UJ112013 (talk) 01:23, September 11, 2019 (UTC)

I will need to double-check the removal of such content myself. As for the {{non-canon}} header for Identity-related articles, technically, all subjects relating to Chapter 1 are ambiguously canon, not non-canon. I think we still haven't created the template for labelling an article's subject as ambiguously canon though. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 23:41, September 12, 2019 (UTC)

OK, I'll change the database entries with ambiguously template. By the way, you can find the entries in this video (upload in 2014) these have been removed from the game. It also the video what I found to create these entries. --UJ112013 (talk) 12:29, September 13, 2019 (UTC)

I found something about this. They rewrote the story in the September 1, 2015 update. --UJ112013 (talk) 09:06, September 26, 2019 (UTC)

Re:Welcome back

Hi there, yeah, it's been a while. I'm trying to catch up to the franchise, it feels good to contribute here again. :) The Wikia Editor (talk) 12:43, October 2, 2019 (UTC)

Assassin as a category

So I feel that assassin is as valid an occupational category as a say spy. A spy can be working for the Brotherhood or for the Order but is still categorized as a spy. Same can be said with an assassin (hired/political/ideological killer). You brought up the fact that due to the concept for the series there are a lot of assassins in the lore but that is only from an OOU perspective. I feel that you are using a similar type of logic as the editors that try to include every protagonist in the Notable Characters sections. On the flip side not every member of the Brotherhood has necessarily taken part in an assassination and thus wouldn't be considered an occupational assassin. Should we go this route though I feel we need to make a strict definition for what constitutes as an assassination. This topic has been brought up before on https://assassinscreed.fandom.com/wiki/Talk:Assassination_target but was never resolved. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 15:32, October 19, 2019 (UTC)

Maybe we could use a synonym like hitmen but that feels off to me. But I feel we should have a category that we can put characters like Lee Harvey Oswald, John Wilkes Booth, etc. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 15:37, October 19, 2019 (UTC)

My issue is that I don't think "spy" is a valid occupational category either. Same thing with "orator". In general occupations which are not strictly professions but something that any character can undertake through a single action are those that I oppose having a category on.

I'm confused what you mean that there are only a lot of assassins in the lore from an OOU-perspective. I don't understand how it would be OOU at all. For "notable characters", people are prone to judging who is notable from an OOU-perspective. However, that even a henchman, if named (I cannot think of one off the top of my head), attempts an assassination on Ezio Auditore, that henchman would still be an assassin from an in-universe perspective. In fact, it would be more OOU to not see minor characters who attempt assassinations as assassins because we are excluding them on the basis that they are not notable enough to be seen as actual assassins from the real-world.

As for how not every member of the Brotherhood has necessarily taken part in an assassination attempt, that is true. On the other hand, every Assassin that has, including Ezio, Altaïr, Connor, Aveline, Bayek, Edward, etc. should also be in the "assassins" category because they certainly have attempted and committed assassinations. I'm not sure if you guys would be content with their presence in the category if your desire is to have a category which sets apart Lee Harvey Oswald, John Wilkes Booth, etc.

Of your points, I think the desire to have a category for Lee Harvey Oswald, John Wilkes Booth, etc. and that "hitmen" would be inadequate is one that makes sense. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 18:07, October 19, 2019 (UTC)

Jasca was for an occupational assassins category to exclude organizational Assassins but I would be against that distinction. I would have Ezio and John Wilkes Booth in the same category if we made it as such.

"But the entire series is filled with assassination attempts after assassination attempts after murder attempts after assassination attempts by all kinds of peoples, all kinds of henchmen, many in side missions, from a wide range of different factions." This is true but only because the series specifically focuses on assassinations. In the wider lore they are just a small element and probably not statistically significant from the number of real world assassins. For every assassin there is in the AC universe there are thousands of non assassins but the games and media focus mainly on assassins. This is what I meant by an OOU perspective.

We would also have to address what is the difference between murder and assassination or assassination and kills of opportunity. This could help filter out some of the riffraff henchmen and what not. However before even that we need to address what counts as an occupation. Part of my argument relies on if someone undertakes a certain action they can be categorized together by occupation. If spy is not valid then assassin would not be either. Maybe we should use something like Individuals by Behavior for some of these which is what Wikipedia uses (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:People_by_behavior). Lacrossedeamon (talk) 18:32, October 19, 2019 (UTC)

"In the wider lore they are just a small element and probably not statistically significant from the number of real world assassins." That's interesting, but in real-life, like in Wikipedia, it won't matter if they were statistically significant or not. If they are known, and they are assassins, they would be included in the category. Hence, from an in-universe perspective where the Assassin's Creed universe is "real-life", whether or not they were statistically significant also has no bearing. If their existence is known to the encyclopedia, and they were assassins, they would qualify in the category. Wikipedia has a different rule regarding notability of individuals in order for them to merit an article in the first place, such that not every random person that is mentioned in a news article would have an article, but that's a different matter. We don't currently have such a notability rule (not sure if we should, Wookieepedia includes articles on even [w:c:starwars:Unidentified_stormtrooper_(Millennium_Falcon_capture)|random]] [w:c:starwars:Unidentified_stormtrooper_(Endor)|background]] stormtroopers [w:c:starwars:Unidentified_head-bumping_stormtrooper|ahahahaha]] xD), but in both Wikipedia's case and ours, if an individual does have an article then it has to be correctly categorized rather than categorized based on if they are notable enough to "qualify" for that category. "Notability" if it is a criteria is settled at the point of deciding whether or not the individual should have an article in the first place. I'm not entirely sure if this addresses your point since I am admittedly still a bit confused on it.

I have always thought that occupational categories should refer strictly to professions or a sort of significant and/orl long-term activity that characterizes that individual's life, not just a one-off action. I would be open to a category based on behaviour though, but if we were to decide on that, I would like to hear the arguments for and against that. I think you're right that we should have a better sense of what we mean by "occupation". Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 22:41, October 19, 2019 (UTC)

Long time no see

Hi there Sol! How are you doing? It's been quite a long time since I've been around here; I've been mainly busy with other matters in real life. How are things on the wikia? I stopped by since I wanted to ask you whether, as far as your knowledge goes, it is allowed to edit one's own sandbox with content not concerning at all the AC series. Like, I've been targeted by someone on Wikipedia and I'd like to be free to test my edits somewhere, before copypasting them all together on Wikipedia through an IP account, otherwise that dude would likely undo my work through arbitrary rollbacking. Also I wouldn't use my Wikipedia sandbox otherwise he'd know the IP would be me. Of course mine are all completely legit and legal edits, but this dude just won't let me in peace. Here's why I'm asking you about this. Piero.schiavone1994 (talk) 21:38, October 21, 2019 (UTC)

There's absolutely no problem with that Piero. :) Use your sandbox as you see fit (of course as long as there's no content promoting violence, hate speech, pornography etc. but that goes without saying). I've been quite busy with real-life as well and have been quite disappointed in myself for how little time I've had to devote to the wiki, especially with unfinished projects. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 23:49, October 21, 2019 (UTC)

Great, thank you! Sorry for the belated response :) --Piero.schiavone1994 (talk) 17:21, November 2, 2019 (UTC)

Request to move a page

For consistency's sake, maps should be map. However, the redirect already exists, and an administrator's rights are required. Sadelyrate (siniath) 08:21, October 28, 2019 (UTC)

Re: Unused redirects

Hi Sol,
Sorry I put the Delete template on the redirect page, I legitimately didn't know "unused link" wasn't a reason for deletion. Where have you explained it? It's not on either of our talk pages. And why not delete it? We don't use the old English convention of capitalizing common nouns, so why would we type "M" when searching for it, much less have it in the page title? I'm just confused by this. -- Darman (talk) 17:40, November 5, 2019 (UTC)

It's no problem. I think I explained it in an edit summary when I removed the deletion tag the first time, or in a similar case. Sorry if I sounded harsh in any way. It wasn't my intention. As for why "unused link" isn't a reason for deleting redirect pages, the reason is because one of the valid purposes for a redirect page is actually for the convenience of visitors should they accidentally misspell a search item. In other word, covering for typos is one of the functions of redirect pages. No one expects contributors to go out of their way to create redirect pages based off of possible typos, but should there be one, it is not required that they be deleted. For "Isu maps" specifically, I was and still am on the fence about it, but we definitely have had a history of users capitalizing titles unnecessarily or incorrectly. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 00:29, November 6, 2019 (UTC)

Ahh, OK. But what determines whether we delete a redirect? I take it the usual Author's Discretion and/or discussing on talk pgs, as we've all different povs. — Darman (talk) 08:05, November 11, 2019 (UTC)

That's a good question. It really does kind of come down to the discretion of authors or the community. As a general guideline at least, any title with diacritics should have a redirect page with the same title without the diacritics for the convenience of anyone searching for the article. Otherwise, it depends on how common the typo'd name is or would be. Let me know if you encounter any examples you think should have been treated differently. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 14:16, November 11, 2019 (UTC)

Hello again. I think I may have found some future redirects to delete? I'm working through AC1 memories, adding links where I can, and I noticed that all Robert de Sablé memories spell his name wrong, without the accent. So, I've two questions:

1. Would it be OK for me to move them to "[title] (Robert de Sablé)"?, and if so;
2. Could the resulting "[title] (Robert de Sable)" redirects be deleted after the move? I don't see why anyone would type "Sable" when typing "[title] (R" will bring the correct page. Unless you think they should stay, of course, in which case I'll abide by your decision.

Thanks – Darman (talk) 16:10, November 29, 2019 (UTC)

Oh my god that is a good catch. I can't believe in all these years no one has ever noticed that before (or whoever made them were silly enough to omit the accent -_-). With that having been said, the redirect pages should be kept because any links which currently use the old spelling which we haven't corrected would instantly become red links otherwise. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 17:37, November 30, 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I can only guess they were written before Staff decided to put the accent in Roberts page title? Idk. But do we still need the redirects? Because I was going to change all old links to the correct spelling so we wouldn't need them...uunnless they're in talk pages/blog posts *exasperated huff* – Darman (talk) 01:30, December 1, 2019 (UTC)

If you can correct all the old links, then honestly it really doesn't matter if the redirects stay or not. I'm not entirely sure that someone somewhere wouldn't fully type out "Assassination (Robert de Sable)" though since I know sometimes I might do that and yet without the accent. But then again, normally the search result should show up before then. I'm kind of hesitant to make a decision regarding whether they should be deleted or not if the links were to be all fixed. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 02:05, December 1, 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to join the advisor program

Hello! I'm Sannse, from Fandom's Editor Experience team. I'm contacting you as the most recently active admin. Hopefully you can pass this on to others as needed.

One project that we're excited about launching is an initiative to pair newly registered users with experienced advisors (which they can choose from). These advisors would be available for answering basic editing questions and guiding appropriate edits, in the hope that these users will become active in the local community.

Why do this, rather than rely on admins and moderators? We've seen from research and experience (both from Wikipedia) that establishing a human bond with a peer "senpai" or mentor can have a better effect on the comfort of the newcomer, especially where the high volume of edits may cause the quick response of rollbacks rather than taking the time to walk new editors through their early work. While some communities do take that time and care among their leaders, we feel an additional level might put new users at ease and help them be more comfortable with editing. Ultimately, we feel like this project will either free up some time for admins and moderators, or designate them as approachable welcomers to talk to and guide new users. We want to see how effective this is on a relatively small number of communities and see if Fandom's results are consistent with those experienced on Wikipedia. If they are, we may pursue expanding the pilot program and perhaps seeking to build it into a core part of the new platform.

Here's what we would wish for your community to agree to:

• At least one volunteer advisor, acting as an advisor and advocate helping newcomers. For the most part, this means responding to questions that newcomers leave the advisor in Discussions. Sometimes this may mean the advisor interacts with admins and moderators to address concerns regarding the newcomer. We have some advisors-at-large (those not tied to the local community, but available as fallbacks) already, but if you have ideas on who you might want to represent you in this role (or if you'd like to do so yourself!), feel free to contact me on my Wall.

• Discussions / Feeds. Your community must have this active for the current solution to work. This is the primary method in which advisors have open communication with the users that choose them. We also recommend a Feeds channel of “Help Desk” where the communications can be placed, if you do not have a similar channel.

• A change to your Welcome Messages to allow a method where a newcomer can choose an advisor. If you are currently participating in the MyDashboard program, there will be a card there to interact with an advisor.

We are testing this for the next two months, and will see what the future of the program is thereafter. Is this a program you would feel comfortable with placing on your community? -- Sannse <staff /> ([w:c:community:Forum:Community_Central_Forum|help forum] | [w:c:community:Blog:Wikia_Staff_Blog |blog]) 00:15, December 15, 2019 (UTC)

Hello Sannse, back in December you invited our community to join the advisor program. It has taken a while, but I have ascertained that our staff is actually quite interested in partaking in this. We actually used to have something similar on our wiki years ago and have thought about reviving it, but we would prefer to do so in line with Fandom if you guys have such a program. I noticed that your message noted that testing would be for two months, and it is now past two months, so I'm assuming that the testing phase is over? If so, please let us know if there is anything we could do to contribute to the future development of this program! :) Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 14:54, April 5, 2020 (UTC)

Weapon infoboxes

Thanks for deleting them. I was trying to last night but could figure out how to do it. Kalb157 (talk) 17:17, January 31, 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I was afraid that you might have actually wanted to keep them, but I was too busy to really explain the reason. They looked to be incomplete and unused to me. Was there any particular infobox you thought was missing from our wiki though? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 18:09, January 31, 2020 (UTC)

No, I was just experimenting. I didn't like how the one I was trying to make was turning out.Kalb157 (talk) 18:35, January 31, 2020 (UTC)

Global Discussions Moderators

Hey, I hope you're doing well. I was recently directed to this thread by a feedback report stating that the Discussions section of the wiki does not have enough moderators. I wanted to ask your opinion on this; Fandom could provide some Global Discussions Moderators to help keep an eye on user behavior if you think that there's a particular need. Is there? Thanks! —Atvelonis (talk) 16:20, February 2, 2020 (UTC)

Hello Atvelonis, a while back you asked me if our wiki would be in need of global discussion moderators, and you also responded to a thread on our Discussions board regarding this. I replied to the Discussion board, but I never gave you a direct reply with a further explanation, which I fear may have been a little discourteous to have neglected to do so. In any case, I appreciate your offer of providing us with global discussion moderators.

I think we could definitely benefit with a few more hands moderating that board, but we have had global discussion mods before, and the recurring pattern has been that whenever there were extended periods of low or peaceful activity, we would all become more relaxed with patrolling. After a while, some argument or other problem would flare up spontaneously, and we would be a bit slow to react to it. When the issue had been resolved, we would usually see another period of relatively tame activity, and the cycle repeated several times. Eventually, the global mods would disappear, probably for boards with greater and more regular issues.

As a result, I'm not really sure that providing us with global discussion mods again would really be the sort of solution we should pursue if the patrolling becomes too much to handle, just because I believe we probably should be promoting someone who is regularly involved with the board, and I feel awkward asking for global mods again from time to time.

I also don't wish to give the impression that I am suggesting that the global discussion moderators that Fandom has provided us with before were inadequate. They were friendly, communicative, and dutiful, and we never had any issues with them. I think the habit of becoming too relaxed over time is a natural one, one that I was just as often at fault with as well.

In recent months, I've been more active in patrolling the board since I've noticed that the number of visitors has steadily increased. I personally don't feel that it has been overwhelming for me in any way, but if any visitor reports this issue again, please feel free to get in touch with me again, and we might revisit the global discussions mod option. Also if you have any suggestions for alternative solution, feel free to provide them as well. :) Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 15:25, April 5, 2020 (UTC)

Hey! No worries, if you think the board would be okay without GDMs then that's perfectly fine. On Elder Scrolls, my home wiki, we have several dedicated Discussions moderators (maybe three are very active, and I will occasionally pop in). So yes, I'm sure that getting a couple people who are involved in the community to become mods would be a good long-term fix. —Atvelonis (talk) 15:45, April 5, 2020 (UTC)

Eraicon

Threw together this. Not the prettiest or anything, but gets the point across, at least until someone cooks up something better. Sadelyrate (siniath) 10:22, March 15, 2020 (UTC)

It's a start. I have to be honest, I do have trouble recognizing it as anything though (perhaps fur or herbs?), so I'm not confident it gets the meaning across. However, it's better than nothing. Thanks for taking the time to make it. One other thing is that I think I recommend "resource" or "material". Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 00:18, March 20, 2020 (UTC)

'Material' and 'Resource' cover a wide variety of different things. So think of that as a bit of a Rorschach test: can be ferns, can be oil splatter, etc.

Meanwhile, I have a suggestion: Let's add Armor to the Era-template. Here's a suggestion for its icon. Sadelyrate (siniath) 12:28, March 24, 2020 (UTC)

Let's have a more discernible silhouette for resources than a "Rorschach test". I think adding an icon for Armor is a great idea. On a side note, I made a typo earlier. I meant to say that I recommend the word "resource" over "material". Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 15:40, March 24, 2020 (UTC)

How about the emblem of Orichalcum? It'd be recognizable as resource. Sadelyrate (siniath) 16:47, March 24, 2020 (UTC)

Almost forgot to reply to this Sadel. I think this is perfect. :) Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 23:47, March 31, 2020 (UTC)

Prophecy Disks

Prophecy Disk already exists, as a redirect to Prophecy Disks. Latter is, save against the rule of naming being singular save in exceptions, also wrong as, afawk, only one Prophecy Disk has ever been attested to exist (Assassin's Creed III: Liberation). Sadelyrate (siniath) 10:20, March 23, 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I really can't understand what you wrote here or what prompted it. Can you double-check your grammar and syntax? :-/ Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 10:56, March 23, 2020 (UTC)

Tl;dr: Can you move Prophecy Disks into Prophecy Disk? Sadelyrate (siniath) 11:35, March 23, 2020 (UTC)

Can you explain your reasoning once again? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 11:56, March 23, 2020 (UTC)

As far as we know, there is only one attested Prophecy Disk, and that's in Assassin's Creed III: Liberation. In addition, the article name being in plural goes against the MoS; that's why, in the past, "Tailors" became "Tailor", and so forth. Exceptions to this exists, but that's what they are, exceptions, like Ezio's Swords. Sadelyrate (siniath) 12:20, March 23, 2020 (UTC)

Noob and Numbskull

Since you decided to rename those pages, I guess we should rename the pages related to them as well, such as personal files and diaries, and change the links to them. I want your opinion. VendettaRev (talk) 12:55, March 30, 2020 (UTC)

I was a little hesitant over this and had to think about it for a few days, but you are right. It makes them a little weird, but renaming them this way wouldn't be wrong, and it makes it a lot less confusing. Good job for taking the initiative! Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 21:30, April 3, 2020 (UTC)

Check something in origins?

Hey, could you check something in Origins as I don't have the game? I need to verify if the Porch of the Caryatids was used in Origins' Alexandria. You have to go to the poor district of Alexandria and find this building shown in the 2nd pic here, just see if the statues shown on the building on the left are the same model used in Odyssey's Porch of the Caryatids. Nanomat (talk) 14:26, April 29, 2020 (UTC)

(Apologies for butting in, but I just revisited Origins and noticed this: yes, the Porch of the Caryatids-model is used in Alexandria.) Sadelyrate (siniath) 15:13, April 29, 2020 (UTC)

Oh well there you go Nanomat. :P Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 16:27, April 29, 2020 (UTC)

Reply from Theassasinmentor2020

I dont understand why are you deleting articles instead of updating them. I see reasons for deletes: unsourced (give a source). Please let me write the category Greek Armed Forces. I will choose you as advisor and I want to learn how can I delete articles.

Some of the pages you created, including the category of Greek Armed Forces and German Army don't meet our criteria for inclusion because they aren't backed by sources. Even though the Athenian and Spartan armies appear in Odyssey, the name "Greek Armed Forces", if I'm not wrong, refers to the modern Greek military of the Hellenic Republic which has not appeared in any work of Assassin's Creed.

Otherwise, there were also some organizational concerns. For example, we have articles on blacksmiths, heralds, and tailors because they have database entries in the games and are also significant features, but we aren't sure if we want to have articles on every occupation which aren't that significant to include. So you made a page for scientists, but "scientist" is very broad, and it also raises the question of whether or not we should also have pages for inventors, engineers, etc. Maybe we should, and maybe you could make a case for it. I opened up a discussion on the talk page, but the feedback from others was that it should be removed. Thinking about it now, I probably should have waited longer in case you were going to reply, but one of the reasons why editors around here instinctively react by wanting your pages removed is because of their low quality. All the pages you've created so far consist of only a few sentences, usually only one, with no other content and without sources, and that's why I initially left a message on your talk page asking if you could put in a bit more effort on them.

When editors see these one line sourceless pages which we aren't sure should have been created and don't have the time to bring them up to standards, we get a bit stressed leaving them around. Some editors could even mistake them for spam. I recognize that this wasn't your intention though, and indeed, some other pages you created were needed and prompted us into action, like Christianity and NKVD, so I am thankful for those. :)

In the future, if you just want to lay down the foundations for some missing pages, I think it would help if you at least provide a source for each of the pages. It would reassure other editors that these are pages which should stay. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 17:18, April 29, 2020 (UTC)

In-game weapon descriptions

Hi Sol,

I was talking with Lacrossedeamon over on the discord about weapon and item descriptions. Given that it's information directly from the game, I think it would be worth recording that information on the wiki. Lacrossedeamon raised the point that we don't necessarily know who the writer would be, but they also suggested recording them in a similar way to character quotes. I think that's a pretty good idea but I was hoping I could get your feedback on that.

Cheers,

UnperfectOne69 (talk) 15:40, April 30, 2020 (UTC)

Hello UnperfectOne, I appreciate you checking in with me about this. :) The actual reason why we haven't been recording exact transcripts of game's description of weapons is because that would technically be plagiarism. We are normally supposed to re-word game descriptions to fit into the context of our articles. Plagiarism can also be avoided by simply putting the in-game descriptions within quotation marks to show that it's not our original wording, and I think that might be okay, but it would also be better if we could attribute the quote to a character, as Lacrosse said. I think this is something we would have to ask other editors for additional opinions. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 21:14, April 30, 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sol,

I agree that having a character to attribute the descriptions to would be ideal, but wouldn't it also just be possible to credit it as "In-Game Description"? After all, it's a direct piece of in-game information in the same way as the stats are.

The plagarism issue is completely fair. I hadn't actually considered that.

Cheers,

UnperfectOne69 (talk) 23:57, April 30, 2020 (UTC)

Ah, I guess we haven't explained to you our policy on writing perspective yet. So our wiki actually approaches the material from an in-universe (IU) perspective as opposed to an out-of-universe (OOU) perspective. What this means is that we document the content as though we are actually living within the Assassin's Creed universe, where Origins as a game doesn't exist. An exception is made for certain pages, like those covering the actors, the developers, the games themselves, or in behind-the-scene sections. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 01:58, May 1, 2020 (UTC)

So jumping in on this. We have examples of gear descriptions being attributed to a specific individual and thus IU ie the Abstergo Elite Set. Maybe this is too much of a stretch but from that I think we can assume that the other descriptions are also IU but attribution unknown. For these and even the former as well I'd say we should default to "- Animus description" as the IU source for the quote. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 11:42, May 1, 2020 (UTC)

Hi all,

That's fair regarding the in-universe perspective, but I was assuming that only applied to the "main-content" of articles, given that things like weapon stats aren't really in-universe info. I think Lacrosse's point from above seems like a nice compromise.

Even if the information isn't necessarily in-universe or canon, it may be of interest to some people, in my opinion.

Cheers,

UnperfectOne69 (talk) 20:41, May 1, 2020 (UTC)

Hello everyone!

I'm butting in to agree with Lacrossedeamon on the compromise of "- Animus description" and with UnperfectOne on the point of the descriptions being of interest to some people. For example there is the description of cape in AC:Syndicate that is the only mention of a 17th century assassin (Lady Cirielle).

Yours in Brotherhood,

Soranin (talk) 21:17, May 1, 2020 (UTC)

I'm actually wary about attributing every and anything that we don't know how to "Animus description". While it would technically be true that the descriptions are encountered on the Animus, there is still an implied claim there that it is original to the Animus when we might not be sure of that. I might be more confident if you can provide the actual text of the Abstergo Elite Set you are referencing Lacrosse. Another matter is that I would assume that the description would be situated as its own section, in which case, we won't be using a quote template with an attribution (if that's the right word for it). We won't have "—Animus description". Instead, we might title the section "Animus description", which in any case, I would feel more alright with.

Unperfectone is right that we've always had weapons stats sections in weapons article which are clearly OOU and never batted an eye. None of us really ever wanted to bother adapting it into IU language, and there was an unspoken rule that that section is just a unique OOU section like a behind the scenes section. (I have considered we should be moving it to being a subsection of the behind the scenes section though). Theoretically, this sets the precedent that we could have more OOU sections, but this really shouldn't be a norm since our wiki is meant to be IU-centric. I was thinking that an alternative to the "Animus description" section above is that we could have a weapon infobox which includes the description just like how our memory infoboxes has a "description" field which gives the actual in-game description without any fuss, with complete ambiguity as to the source.

So I'm suggesting two option an Animus description section or a description field in an infobox. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 23:51, May 1, 2020 (UTC)

When you mention an infobox would it just be a case of the weapon name, image and description, or would it also include that stats?

I personally don't think a subsection is as good as an infobox or quotation, especially since some items have very short descriptions. For example, the Skinning Knife has the following description: "Stab, slice, cut, repeat." I'm not sure something so short really warrants its own subsection.

UnperfectOne69 (talk) 00:23, May 2, 2020 (UTC)

Hm, you have a good point about how some items have extremely short descriptions. However, I had assumed that with a quotation template, we were just having a section for the quote template as well which would look even weirder. We're not supposed to have an entire section just for a quotation template. But now I realize maybe what you had in mind was just to put the quotation at the top of the page? For the infobox, there could be other fields as well. I am open to moving weapon stats to it, but it would take a lot of work, and I'm not sure if it would fit. Users and our readers alike might just prefer it to be kept as a larger chart. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 00:55, May 2, 2020 (UTC)

An infobox sounds like a good idea, it would even help with standardizing the weapons' pages. We could put the image, the animus description, the price, the date/century and maybe the assassin that gets it too? Although, I must agree that moving the stats to an infobox would take a lot of work. - Soranin (talk) 02:49, May 2, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, the reason I asked about what would be in it is because I think moving all of the stats into the infobox would be a bad idea and would make some pages look quite barren. I think your suggestions sound good, Soranin, but my personal opinion is that the simplest and best solution would be to have a quotation at the top of the page like in Lacrossedemon's linked example for the Abstergo Elite Set (assuming that doesn't go against the nature of the wiki's guidelines).

UnperfectOne69 (talk) 03:02, May 2, 2020 (UTC)

I'm glad you brought up memory pages because I was going to reference them. I was going to point out both the memory descriptions as well as the memory name itself as something we treat in universe but has no more support for that than the weapon description.

For the example you asked for the Entry Not Found (Abstergo Combat Boots) has the description "Rugged yet comfy boots for all-season wear. They protec, they attac, but most importantly they look good in blac." ―LH which we have as the top quote for the page. If we were to implement my idea I'd suggest we include the " -LH" as part of the quote with an attribution to the Animus after the whole thing.

I think I have an argument for the ingame pause menu being IU as part of the animus but I can't check until later today. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 10:54, May 2, 2020 (UTC)

Also meant to add I've seen some pages already that have moved the weapon statistics to "Behind the scenes" ie Staff of Hermes Trismegistus. Alternatively like with enemies under the idea of gameplay features being animus functions the stats could be part of how the animus simulates the gear. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 13:28, May 2, 2020 (UTC)

The Abstergo Set quotes have ”-LH” as part of their in game descriptions, same as the Artifact Fragments. So I agree with Lacrosse with adding them into an infobox field. Minthe is another individual who is known only from item description, by the by. Sadelyrate (siniath) 23:23, May 2, 2020 (UTC)

The examples with —LH does hint at the fact these Animus descriptions can be IU although it would not make any sense to include —LH within the quotes then attribute to the Animus in that case... But that would be moot if we were to include it in an infobox field. At the moment, I am working on multiple things, so I would not have time to create a weapon infobox, but you guys have my approval. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 21:35, May 3, 2020 (UTC)

Would a compromise for now be to add the description to the table that has the weapon stats? Lacrossedeamon (talk) 01:06, May 18, 2020 (UTC)

You mean in a new column? I think that is a good idea. We already do this for horses. Interesting we hadn't thought about this before. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 04:16, May 21, 2020 (UTC)

Well y'all're all a bunch of dumdums (sarcasm... or is it) but luckily I’m here to set y'all straight. Now the question is where in the table that column should go; I’d argue second but would settle for after stats (technically "parameters" ingame I think) but I don’t think it should be after "availability". Lacrossedeamon (talk) 05:41, May 21, 2020 (UTC)

Edit for clarity. I think it should be the first one after the name if we are going to add them to pages with lists of weapons otherwise I think the very first column on the specific weapon pages themselves but if not then the column right before availability.

AC: Initiates page

Hi Sol!

So, I wanted to basically revamp the page for AC: Initiates, because I think the page is a bit bloated. My idea was to move the Desmond Files and the Surveillance section to their own pages and leave in the main article a paragraph or two summarizing them along with links to the new pages. As well as adding the other parts of ACI I've been working on my little sandbox. Since it would be a big change I wanted to get your opinion on it before I do anything.

Yours in Brotherhood, Soranin (talk) 15:43, May 3, 2020 (UTC)

I am perfectly fine with your suggestion, but I think you should bring it up on its talk page in case others wanted to weigh in on it and also to leave a record of your suggestion and reasons for altering it on it. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 21:41, May 3, 2020 (UTC)

I will, thanks for the help. :) - Soranin (talk) 00:53, May 4, 2020 (UTC)

Animus weapon models

Piggy backing both off of the flavor text and archetypes discussion I’d like to put forth the suggestion of replacing Weapon statistic sections in general weapon articles like Firearm with Animus weapon models. I think this will bring it more IU (so wouldn’t need to move to Behind the scenes) and resolve the old arguments about including otherwise non-exhaustive lists in pages. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 22:34, May 3, 2020 (UTC)

Did you mean to just change the title of the sections? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 02:44, May 4, 2020 (UTC)

Yeah rename the sections where they appear. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 02:53, May 4, 2020 (UTC)

I would strongly advise against it because whereas we might still treat the weapon stats as entirely OOU, by changing the perspective of the section into in-universe and keeping those stats, we would be declaring that somehow every weapon in those Animus simulations behave based on arbitrary gameplay stats (of only three parameters no less) rather than realistic physics. That would be completely non-sensical. Next thing you know, Desmond can only fight as Ezio through one push of a button and whenever he counters, he has to press R1 + square (or the Xbox or PCC equivalent) on the Animus to perform pre-rendered counter-kill animations. Then how would he develop his ancestors' muscle memory for actually moving his physical body and performing the combat techniques himself? One of the stats for weapons tends to be "combo kill" which refers to this gameplay mechanic.

I understand that the section should be IU, and I probably won't be so comfortable leaving it apart from the BtS if I weren't so already used to just accepting its presence as an OOU section. However, weapon and armor stats absolutely cannot be IU. I don't even know where to begin with how physically unrealistic Odyssey's equipment stats and upgrade mechanics are. If we wish to adjust the section to in-universe somehow, we would have to do away with the stats, but that would defeat the entire point of the section to show the gameplay stats to players. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 00:59, May 7, 2020 (UTC)

Roger roger. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 01:14, May 7, 2020 (UTC)

Mexican History

If you want a short former state history of Mexico, it would be: Aztec Empire 1428-1521, New Spain 1521-1821, First Mexican Empire 1821-1823, Provisional Government of Mexico 1823-1824, First Federal Republic 1824-1835, Centralist Republic of Mexico 1835-1846, Second Federal Republic of Mexico 1846-1863, Second Empire 1863-1867, and the United States of Mexico since 1867. There is also the Mayan civilizations and many cities-states but I don't think it could be written all the different cities.Francesco75 (talk) 10:46, May 7, 2020 (UTC)

Site updates

Hi there, hope you're doing well. I have a couple of changes I'd like to make to the main page, mobile main page, and local navigation. I just wanted to run them by you beforehand to see if you're okay with some/all of them.

1. On the main page:
   1. I'd like to expand the welcome section to talk a little bit more about what the wiki is, and what Assassin's Creed is. Just two fairly short paragraphs. This is useful for search engine optimization, but more importantly it helps readers who aren't familiar with either the series or the wiki to understand what they're looking at.
   2. Content on the main page should also be very up-to-date, because this is the article that many/most readers visit first when they come to the wiki. The poll on the right rail was created in 2019, which is very "stale" content; it should either be updated, or removed. Do you have a preference here? If you want to keep the poll, do you have an idea for a new question?
   3. Similarly, the most recent blog in the "news" section is from 2018, so the best practice would be to remove that section, or to start posting blogs more regularly (ideally once per month or more frequently). On [w:c:elderscrolls|Elder Scrolls]], we have a "news team" whose job it is to write news content like this, so maybe that's something you could look into setting up eventually.
2. On the mobile main page:
   1. The "Featured Content" section is pretty outdated, e.g. Assassin's Creed Chronicles came out in like 2016, and even Assassin's Creed: Origins was from 2017. I'm not super familiar with the release schedule of the series, but do you think you could give me the four most recent semi-big releases that I could use there instead?
   2. In the "Featured Categories" section, instead of only having a section on each game, it might be better to have big categories like "Characters," "Locations," "Weapons," "Factions," "Missions" (not sure if that's the right terminology), etc., and then put all the games under a "Games" category. You'd still be able to access all the subcategories, it would just be faster for people to get to some of the content that they tend to look for most often.
3. In the wiki navigation:
   1. Technically, the "best practice" is not to have a "Community" tab on the local navigation, because editors can get to Special:Community from the sidebar. I understand if you'd rather keep this tab though. Either way, I'd like to add the "Other Games" section as a sub-section of "Main Games" (so it would be Main Games -> Other Games -> Altaïr's Chronicles, Bloodlines, etc.), as the "Other Games" section currently doesn't make much use of third-level links.
   2. Doing that would free up space for me to add a general "Content" tab that gave a few quick links to articles/categories about characters, locations, weapons, factions, missions, etc., similar to the mobile main page.

These are just "best practices" and not strictly necessary, but they would help readers a lot. Quite sorry for the wall of text haha, it's just more efficient for me to handle everything for a particular wiki at once. Let me know what your thoughts are! Thanks. :) —Atvelonis (talk) 18:05, May 16, 2020 (UTC)

All of this sounds great. Coincidentally, we just had one of our editors ask me about updating the main page just an hour ago or so. My main skillset is in writing, and unfortunately, I'm really not experienced with web design and coding, so I actually did need help with this. You may go ahead with the changes. :) In terms of the four most recent-semi big releases, Assassin's Creed: Valhalla is upcoming as you probably already know while Assassin's Creed: Odyssey (2018) and Assassin's Creed: Origins (2017) were the most recent main instalments. Apart from this, Assassin's Creed: Rebellion for the Android and iOS was also released in 2018, but Ubisoft mostly took a break in 2019. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 18:19, May 16, 2020 (UTC)

Lovely, I'll get started now then! I'll let you know if I run into any problems. —Atvelonis (talk) 18:53, May 16, 2020 (UTC)

All done! You may have to clear your cache for the local navigation to update. There are some other organizational/SEO things that the wiki could stand to benefit from eventually, most notably perhaps the fact that database entries have no ledes or other information explaining what they actually are (the contents of the entry should at least be under a ==Contents== header or similar). I could probably have my [w:User:AkulakhanBot|bot]] add a lede and header based on the game or animus the database entry is from, but I think that will have to be a project for another time. Let me know what your thoughts are on that. :) —Atvelonis (talk) 23:04, May 16, 2020 (UTC)

Jack the Ripper

Hello, the secret database entry is written in the files of the games, it was added in the trivia section by Lacrossedeamon. I want to know if we consider this info as canon or not for the chronology. Also, I have a question in his bio, it's written that he killed all people in Lady O's manor to accuse Evie but it is never referred in the game. In the memory Letters of Intent, We only saw a newspaper with a headline Murder at Owers manor, not Murders. I think they only accuse Evie of the death of lady Owers.Francesco75 (talk) 06:55, May 17, 2020 (UTC)

Tainted Ones as Hybrids

I’m actually against the blanket categorization of "Tainted Ones" as hybrids. While he had some backing, I feel Jasca kind of made and pushed the decision one-sidedly. I don’t think there is enough evidence to consider anything beyond a first generation offspring between an Isu and a human as a Hybrid. All we know is 50-50 as I don’t think we can take Aletheia's simulations at face value. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 17:39, May 19, 2020 (UTC)

I actually entirely forgot what we discussed about this before and what Jasca's (or even my) position was lol. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 17:49, May 19, 2020 (UTC)

It’s on the Tainted One's talk page. But I pretty much summed up my points here already. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 18:15, May 19, 2020 (UTC)

I have a hard time understanding the context of the discussion because I'm not far enough into the DLC to understand who Aletheia really is. I just assumed based on where I am at that Tainted One is just a pejorative synonym for hybrid. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 18:56, May 19, 2020 (UTC)

I’d agree that it’s a pejorative used by the Order but not for Hybrids specifically which as I feel can not be sourced beyond first generational offspring, just for individuals with significant Isu DNA content. Otherwise where is the cutoff? Is Desmond a Hybrid? Are Sages? Cain and Abel? If we just go by the presence of Isu DNA, then wouldn’t most humans at this point? If it’s just those with significant amounts then what is the cutoff for that? Lacrossedeamon (talk) 19:11, May 19, 2020 (UTC)

You raise an important issue. I agree that there would be a cut-off and that cut-off isn't clear. However, I think if we know that "Tainted One" also refers to an offspring of interbreeding between Isu and humans, even if it is not the exact same thing as "hybrids", it might not be inappropriate to include it as a subsection for organizational purposes. What do you think? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 04:18, May 21, 2020 (UTC)

Tainted Ones as a subsection of hybrids or hybrids as a subsection of Tainted Ones? And technically we don’t know that Tainted Ones also refers to hybrids since I’m not sure the term would have been used during Adam and Eve's time (although if it was it would most likely mean the opposite, as in Tainted with human blood rather than Isu) but yes the Order would most likely consider them Tainted Ones. However they do exhibit some physiological differences (at least in Aletheia's simulation) so they might’ve been considered something completely different. Either way I think it might be better to keep them separate so as not to accidentally influence canon. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 05:55, May 21, 2020 (UTC)

If we are lucky Ubisoft will introduce a new well defined term like they did with Hyper-Hominids for Sages. Shame though because that term would have been pretty good itself. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 05:58, May 21, 2020 (UTC)

De Fayet

Hey, Cyfiero! How are you? I'm really tired tbh, discovery sites are kicking my ass.

So I wanted to ask about the machete, as you could probably tell. Is it a requirement for the last mission to unlock? I really don't know, as soon as they let free in an AC game I shove the main story in a train to Azeirbaijan and do everything else before returning to it. Also, maybe we should reword it? Cause "used it during his subsequent assassination of Saint-Domingue Governor Pierre de Fayet" sounds like he used it against de Fayet, rather than his guards.

Did you notice the words that usually cause issues for us (double meaning-wise) is assassin and assassination? Ironic, huh?

Anyway, always good to chat with you :3 - Soranin (talk) 23:42, May 20, 2020 (UTC)

Hi Soranin, thank you for checking in on me about this because you ask some good questions which I was already kind of concerned about when I was writing that part. First, the reason why I think it is fine to write about Adéwalé using the machete against De Fayet is because we assume that 100% completion and synchronization is canonical. This includes completing every location and acquiring every special weapon. Random loot weapons like those in Origins and Odyssey can be excluded, but if the weapon or armor is part of completing a room (like in the Auditore villa) or a quest reward, then we are free to assume the protagonist did acquire them. While unlocking the golden machete is not required for playing the final main story mission, my usual interpretation is that if there is a very linear progression in weapons and armor, then the best weapon or armor is used in the final mission. This is an extension of the principle of assuming 100% completion. Maybe I'm going too far with that though. At the very least, it would be encouraged to mention Adéwalé acquiring the weapon as the last weapon he used in the events of Freedom Cry though.

As for my wording, the distinction is more in the use of the word during. "During the assassination" means 'over the course of the assassination taking place' (i.e. as it was being conducted) as opposed to something like "to assassinate de Fayet" which would mean using the weapon to deal the killing blow. And as I said, assassination can refer to the overall event of the assassination, not just the killing blow itself. For example, it would also be valid to say "He used a blunderbuss during the assassination of de Fayet". It doesn't necessarily mean that he used it to kill de Fayet, but he used it while conducting the mission.

Since it has proven confusing after all, I reworded it a little for clarification. Let me know if it's better or if you're still confused or have questions! :)Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 00:05, May 21, 2020 (UTC)

Okay, gotcha. I had a vague memory that Freedom Cry's missions had actual prerequisites but I fulfill them all whenever I do them, because of my play style.

Oh, I see. Maybe it is my baggage of portuguese language that muddled things for me. You see, "Assassinato" is the killing of a single specific person in brazilian portuguese. If you say "O assassinato de De Fayet" (De Fayet's assassination) you refer solely to De Fayet's death and no one else's. I never actually thought that that could involve the getting rid of the guards.

You didn't answer how you were! I'm watching you! >.>

Thanks for the help!. - Soranin (talk) 00:35, May 21, 2020 (UTC)

Jumping in here since I accidentally got dragged into the issue via an unintended conflicting edit. It might be unwieldy to word but would it be possible to mention that while the machete and dragoon were used to storm the manor the actual weapon used for the final assassination act was the branding iron? Or just word it around storming the manor instead of the assassination. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 00:41, May 21, 2020 (UTC)

Buzz Aldrin

Hey Sol, the negative photo in Buzz Aldrin is just the photo, to actually see the Templar/Abstergo logos you need to play the glyph. Templar logo is on flag, abstergo logo is on landing module.V i l k a T h e W o l f (talk) 12:27, May 21, 2020 (UTC)

Sourcing confusion

Hello Sol,
I recently edited the "Power sources" page, and then VilkaTheWolf edited next, correcting the old reference format I had used, but their changes left me confused regarding the Sourcing Policy. I asked them about it, but they suggested I turn to Staff for a better explanation. I'm wondering if you might be able to answer two questions:

1. Why do some pages have double links in the sources? To use "Power sources" as an example, why hyperlink all of "AC3 – The Stadium: MMA Night" if "AC3 – Modern Tower" was referenced earlier? Kassandra's page doesn't constantly link ACOD, and it has a handful of other AC sources.
2. How specific should we get, and how would we write it? I initially referenced some modern day dialogue as "AC3 – 21st century conversations / Before Sequence 9" because it's a long read just for the soundbite in question, but I was told the Sourcing Policy allows only "–" as separators. Similarly, how should I source information if it's deep in tabs like Initiates files, especially when some tabs have more than one entry per date? ex. 27 Oct 2012, which has "Breakdown", "Farewell To Florence", and "Medical Transport". In my view, just saying "ACI – The Desmond Files: [file name]" won't help if there's no date in the ref tag.

If you have any advice, it would be much appreciated. Thank you. – Darman (talk) 15:20, May 22, 2020 (UTC)

Hello again Darman, for your first question we don't really have a rule about whether or not we should be re-hyperlinking sources which have already appeared in a citation, but we normally do so because this is the apparent convention, and we want to be consistent with one another.

For your second question, where did you get the usage of the / in citations from? If you got it from a sourcing policy you saw before, that was only a draft amendment by a former moderator and was never an official change that was implemented. I personally didn't like it because I thought it looks really sloppy. You are right that we should be concerned about whether or not our citations are specific enough, but they also can't be too long, or the organization would completely fall apart. Unless we switch to using full citations, we can only go so far. It's not always clear or standardized how deep we should be citing information from a particular work.

The guideline is to look to other examples and try to be consistent with one another or otherwise use your best judgement. However, what you cite has to be something titled, whether that is a chapter, a file, a database entry, etc. I think "before Sequence 9" is more like information for how one would encounter it rather than citing to a specific source. For citing Initiates files, I followed by the formatting used by a now inactive administrator, Crookandcharlatan, in the article Emmanuel Barraza. This was one of the very first instances where we started narrowing our citations, and I just treated it as a precedent. Concern over our readers finding the exact entry can be mitigated by linking to the specific tab by its number, in this case The Desmond Files#27, rendered as The Desmond Files: "Breakdown", although I often have trouble getting this to work. Hope this helps! Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 18:48, May 22, 2020 (UTC)

By the way, I personally won't mind us switching to using full citations if you guys ever feel like that's actually necessary. It would be extra work though. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 18:52, May 22, 2020 (UTC)

Sol,
I can understand wanting consistency with double links, but isn't it unnecessary? The way I see it, it's like citing an essay with "Smith, John. "Chapter". Book. Publisher. Date. pg.X", only to rewrite "Smith, John. [etc.], pg.Y" when citing another line instead of "Smith, p.Y". We only change the "page", so why relink the main citation all over again? Or am I missing something that's been discussed by Staff elsewhere?

Thank you for the tab sources help! I wasn't aware there was prior mod contention about sourcing, but it explains why I've seen different ref styles in the Wiki. To answer your question, I adopted the use of "–, /, :" as separators after I saw them in refs for "Project Anthropos". Looking at its history now, it was done by your ex-mod. So, I then copied it assuming in good faith that everyone agreed. Would full citations mean what I think it does, doing "Ubisoft. AC Game. [etc.]"? – Darman (talk) 03:55, May 23, 2020 (UTC)

In regards to double links with citation, as I said, there's no rule about it being required or prohibited. It's just a norm that happened to develop without discussion when editors tried to be consistent with one another.

Full citations would be citing the way you would when writing a research paper, using MLA, Chicago, ASA, etc. styles. so yes, that's what I'm referring to.Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 06:44, May 23, 2020 (UTC)

Referencing weapons

Hey Sol, posted this on Discord but no one replied lol.

Is there anyway to reference weapon pages? say if the description of a weapon has sourcable info in it and i wanna use it in another page, could be sourced as Assassin's Creed: Odyssey - Dagger of Kronus for example? or just Dagger of Kronus ?? V i l k a T h e W o l f (talk) 02:42, May 25, 2020 (UTC)

The edit I did for Eivor is NOT vandalism. It's noting how they are using their hidden blade like how Darius used his. Do you want me to prove it to you? Also it's not spoiling anything because we SAW it in the trailer.

Eivor

The edit I did for Eivor is NOT vandalism. It's noting how they are using their hidden blade like how Darius used his. Do you want me to prove it to you? Also it's not spoiling anything because we SAW it in the trailer. Heir of Revan (talk) 19:01, June 6, 2020 (UTC)DarthRevanII

I am aware that your edit wasn't vandalism. I removed it for two other reasons. First, a "Behind the scenes" is meant to be an upgrade of the "Trivia" section. When you see that an article has a Behind the scenes section, this means that you shouldn't be re-adding a "Trivia" section. New out-of-universe points you wish to add should go in the "Behind the scenes" section. Second of all, I am skeptical that Eivor happening to wear his Hidden Blade over his forearm "like Darius" is a significant detail worthy of mention. At the very least, if you wish for this point to be retained, you should provide more context as to why it's significant. I suppose that it is my bad, however, for not leaving a note in the edit summary explaining why your edit was reverted. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 20:06, June 6, 2020 (UTC)

RE:Category changes

The category lists mostly seem way too messy to be organized on some pages especially on pages with a bunch of categories. Why is a males category not allowed? It makes sense to have one, not the other way around. If you're looking for individual(s) of a particular gender like all male or female characters, then they're all on on category rather than look all over the wiki or search for them. Having it makes it a little more easier and efficient. On some pages, the Greeks and Ethnic Greeks category are redundant. If a Greek is native and not ethnic, the Ethnic Greeks category is in fact redundant. It makes sens e to have it for a character descended from a Greek that is not native to Greece, but most Greeks in the category / game are native Greeks. The ethnic part of Ethnic Greeks and others starting with ethnic implies that they're foreign and not native to that country. Perhaps the summary to the Greeks category can be changed so it says nationality and/or ethnicity, and the ethnic is only used on those descended from Greeks? Just spitballing here. If you have where the character is from regionally that is under a nationality category like having Spartans or Athenians category on the same page under the Greeks category then that is redundant seeing as the Spartans/Athenians category is under the Greeks category making the page indirectly the Greeks cat. via the Spartans/Athenians cat. What about the individual categories within the Individuals by nationality/ethnicity? Not all of them are nationalities/ethnicities. A number of them are residents of a particular city categories which are neither a nationality nor an ethnicity. Andrewh7 (talk) 21:15, June 8, 2020 (UTC)

The category pages are still quite messy all things considering, but going ahead to start altering the organization on your own volition only exacerbates the problem rather than remedying it. Everyone has to be on the same page about it, and in any case, you would have to manually move hundreds upon hundreds of pages in your reorganization efforts, and that would take days of work.

I've just opened up a discussion on the talk page of the Greek category regarding how I think the many Greek characters in Odyssey were incorrectly placed there. You should provide your input when you have time. However, distinction between ethnicity and a loose nationality categories are absolutely necessary even where there may be many individuals who can fall under both, as there are also many individuals whose ethnicity is not the same as their nationality.

For the other redundancy you mentioned, when we last reorganized our category pages, one of our admins notified me that he preferred there to be a specific category tier for each broad category type which serves as a general pool for all relevant pages even if those pages are already in a subcategory. So for example, he identified "individuals" as one of these, and that's why every character is also placed into Category:Individuals even when they already fit into subcategories within that category. To be honest, out of all the points you made, this is the one you were right to call out. Which categories serve as "pools" have never been defined nor codified, nor have we had a community discussion on whether there should be categories that serve as "pools".

If you would like, you can open up a discussion on category organization in the forums. Even if you don't, you have prompted us to revisit this topic anyways. There, you can bring up your suggestions. You can also make a case for having categories on male and female if you really think there is a need for it although currently, I don't see why that is necessary or more efficient at all. In the meantime, please refrain from modifying the categories of pages any further because without a discussion on this, that is just going to be disruptive. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 22:38, June 8, 2020 (UTC)

Concept Art images

I found perfect images of Assassin's Creed locations on ArtStation, but can't tell if they're considered Concept Art images or not. How do I know whether the image is a concept art image or just a regular location image? Andrewh7 (talk) 21:04, June 9, 2020 (UTC) Andrewh7

If it's a drawing or painting, it's almost always concept art. If it's evidently a screenshot from the game, then it's not. I think there might be a grey area with officially published art though even if they're not screenshots. Since I don't deal so much in concept art, you might want to check with Odey about this. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 18:57, June 12, 2020 (UTC)

LGBT individuals

XOdeyssusx and I are having a little disagreement over whether the male romanceable characters should be considered LGBT. Yes Kassandra is the canonical protagonist too, but players can choose Alexios and romance them too which would in fact make them LGBT. Andrewh7 (talk) 03:02, June 12, 2020 (UTC) Andrewh7

I willl respond on his talk page. Thank you for letting me know. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 18:57, June 12, 2020 (UTC)

AC: Memories

Hi Sol,
Just a quick question, if you can answer it: where exactly are we getting the infor to cite events from AC: Memories? For example, Marco Polo and Genghis Khan cite it, but the only memories we can play are of either the main game protagonists or other people in the Mongol Empire or Sengoku Period. I can only assume it's from card descriptions, but as the app was pulled, I can't check. – Darman (talk) 02:25, June 22, 2020 (UTC)

I actually never got to play Assassin's Creed: Memories so unfortunately, I can't answer that though I would assume it's from flavor text and the memories where we encounter different individuals. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 22:08, June 26, 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. I was also thinking that maybe the categories for nationalities should be revised to include those of that ethnicity, but are only native to that country. For most individuals, there nationality and ethnicity are the same thing. I noticed that character pages have categories that are redundant and could be removed. Andrewh7 (talk) 00:38, June 29, 2020 (UTC) Andrewh7

Character Outfits

Say I find outfits from Odyssey on ArtStation and down the road a page is created, should I only upload outfit images for Kassandra not Alexios since she's technically the canon protagonist? I was also thinking of creating a page for the outfit/robe options for Jacob and Evie, would they be on separate pages or just one page? Andrewh7 (talk) 00:38, June 29, 2020 (UTC) Andrewh7

Policies vs Gaming info

I just wanted to separate. You redirected that page bceause it was distruptive, but not containing in-game info. MOS or games? GodGamer GodConsole 10:03, June 29, 2020 (UTC)

I didn't redirect any pages. I separated them, but the way you had done this was incorrect. The article for "Privateer (occupation)" should just be named "Privateer" because the word privateer normally refers to the occupation anyways. There's no need to clarify it. On the other hand, "Privateer (Animus avatar)" should properly have that clarifying term in parentheses. This is explained in our MoS on disambiguation. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 20:10, July 1, 2020 (UTC)

Warn/Block User

A user named User:AssassínJM created two pages in Czech about things that aren't even in the series: the Czech Brotherhood and a Czech Assassin. They keep readding the categories back which is really frustrating. They should be warned or blocked and the pages should be deleted since they're fanon. I don't know how well warning would work since I don't think they may not be able to speak English. I tried warning them, but they may not have understood me. Andrewh7 (talk) 23:11, June 30, 2020 (UTC) Andrewh7

Thanks for notifying me. I've deleted the page and sent him a message, though I have refrained from giving him a first stage official warning. I try to be a bit lenient with new editors in case they are simply unfamiliar with the rules although I am not afraid to be firm-handed when needed. If this reoccurs, I will give him his first warning. I have been busy for the past few days and have had to draw my attention away from the wiki, so I have not been able to answer your other earlier questions, but I will try to get to them tomorrow. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 03:25, July 1, 2020 (UTC)

RE: to reply to Policies vs Gaming info

I only just why you redirected the occupation at an Animi Avatar page and why you didn't done you job? The MoS mentions that the articles should have same title with Wikipedia if is for occupation and other things. When I was trying to do the job for the MoS, it was night and I couldn't. You knew what to do, and you redirected it to the Animi Avatar, and you saw what was the mistake. This is why I called the MoS like that. Because you didn't done renaming it when it was the Animi Avatar just because the MoS said a rule about renaming it. GodGamer GodConsole 16:08, July 2, 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your delete

Hey Sol! I don't want to believe Lacrosse is angry. Did he contacted you? Just a thanks for your delete. GodGamer GodConsole 18:11, July 2, 2020 (UTC)

Root category

Hi, I notice that the root-level category on Assassin's Creed is Category:Browse. This has been the default on Wikia for a long time, but it would actually be better for search engine optimization if the top-level category were called "Assassin's Creed Wiki." The ideal structure would look like this:

• Assassin's Creed Wiki
  • Assassin's Creed
  • Policy, Community, etc.

So it would have basically the same structure as now, just some adjusted names. The important part is the root category, since "Browse" is a kind of generic descriptor. Could I go ahead and make some changes here? Thanks. —Atvelonis (talk) 20:17, July 8, 2020 (UTC)

Yes, by all means, please go ahead. Thank you. :) We have difficulties reorganizing categories because we don't have a working bot at the moment. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 20:18, July 8, 2020 (UTC)

Ok, done. On the subject of bots, if you have specific changes to categories that need to be done, I would be happy to go through some of them with my bot, [w:User:AkulakhanBot|AkulakhanBot]]. I can't always prioritize maintenance, but if it's a relatively straightforward task then I'm sure the bot could be of use. —Atvelonis (talk) 21:43, July 8, 2020 (UTC)

Grub edits

hello i would like to be rollbacker please thank you. enjoy. how do i access the blog post of others. i would like to be a rollbacker. —unsigned comment by GrubbyGrubster005 (talk · contr)

In case you've happened to miss it, this user has made a slew of disruptive and nonsensical edits to pages and blogs over the past 2 days in an effort to badge spam. I've undone as much as I can, but they still persist. Thought you should know so you can act accordingly. – Darman (talk) 18:45, July 10, 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for alerting me Darman. Grubhub, only moderators and administrators are entrusted with the power of rollback to prevent abuse. It is also true that your edits have been disruptive. Please let me know if you have any questions about our editing standards or consult the with our manual of style. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 22:41, July 10, 2020 (UTC)

Actually I just noticed your single letter comments across various blogs, which clearly constitute as spam. I would have to ask you not to do that again. We try to be lenient with disruptive edits on our wiki because we understand that often times, users are simply new to the editing process and don't mean any harm, but spam like this would clearly be deliberate. And leniency aside, if this occurs again, we would be forced to swiftly block you to prevent further spam. One of our moderators also suspects you of editing for the sole sake of earning badges. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 23:10, July 10, 2020 (UTC)

Concerns

Greetings, Sol. I am not very active on here, for a few reasons. Not really relevant, but one of those reasons is that it always feels that when I visit the Discussions it is a cluster of nonsense lol. Subjective, I suppose! However, I have seen you exercise good judgement in the past. So perhaps you could provide me with some clarity: This new User has Posted 6 Meme Posts within 10 hours. I'm not one to judge, and I usually wouldn't care about such things but it just seems a bit...excessive to me! Especially considering they could all go in a 'Meme Dump' I've seen on other Fandoms!

Anyway, I just wanted to share my opinion. If it's allowed, then that's fine. Could be I'm overreacting lol. If anything, I was thinking it was possibly against Guidelines 1(e) and 2(b). Though it appears they have been edited by Moderators, so I assume they have been okayed! Anyway, thank you for your time and continued service to this Fandom. You're one of the good ones ^_^ Hexonith (talk) 00:38, July 24, 2020 (UTC)

Hello again Hexonith, as soon as I received your message, I deleted almost all of his memes, but I didn't have time to reply as promptly to you. I have always been on the fence about allowing memes, and the other mods and I have already discussed the possibility of removing the category, which given your feedback, we will certainly do so now. For a lot of those memes, I didn't want to be mean and delete them, but I also thought as you did that they were all so low quality and just plain unfunny. I don't think we ever get any good memes, haha. Thanks again for expressing your concern. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 01:59, July 28, 2020 (UTC)

I want to note that there is a "filter" feature but I don’t know if it saves settings because if not it becomes a hassle do to filtering in what you want to see rather than filtering out what you don’t. I’m not sure if it’s possible to change that. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 03:04, July 28, 2020 (UTC)

On Portuguese Templars

So, I just saw your question of Did the Portuguese Templars actually work hand in hand with the Portuguese government? According to Project Legacy, Revelations, and Initiates, at least King Manuel I was a templar ally/puppet/maybe a templar himself? idk. - Soranin (talk) 15:09, July 29, 2020 (UTC)

Editing

hey, I'm new here....

So today I was editing 3 pages and I was posting a picture in the infobox. And a moment later, someone came and removed it. I again put the picture and then, it was also removed, again.

Am I doing something wrong? Am I not doing it as it is? Isumusnah (talk) 4:49 AM, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I was the one who removed for two reasons, first and main reason of which is that the image is not taken from any AC media. We usually only use images that appears in the media and thus discourage the use of images from Wikipedia or any real world sources. Other reason being that it is not properly named or sourced, but those are minor issues mostly.

Hope you can understand. XOdeyssusx (talk) 05:03, July 31, 2020 (UTC)

Forum migration

Hi, I wanted to give you a heads up that the wiki's forums are going to be migrated to the Discussions relatively soon as part of the overall site's upgrade to the "Unified Community Platform," which includes a much newer version of MediaWiki and more robust and modularized proprietary features like Discussions. If you haven't seen it already, there's a news blog about the migration and some updates to the Discussions platform [w:User blog:MisterWoodhouse/Updates to Discussions and the plan for Forums|here]]. Discussions does not have wikitext support as it's not built in MediaWiki, but content that's transferred over from the Forums will have its formatting preserved as HTML, so it shouldn't look substantially different (except for more advanced content). It also does not allow anonymous contributions. Post-migration, existing links to forum posts will redirect to their respective Discussions posts. You can find a bit more info on the archived FAQ thread [w:Thread:1746468|here]]. Please let me know if you have any questions about this process, and make an announcement about it if you'd like! Thanks. —Atvelonis (talk) 02:19, August 29, 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I think the term "Unified Community Platform" is a little confusing. It makes more sense from the perspective of the engineer. Really there is no need for the name to be publicized, they could say "MediaWiki upgrade and resultant changes" and get the same point across. It is just an update to the software that the site uses, and the switch from Forums to Discussions is one effect of this software upgrade.

Basically, Wikia runs on a forked (proprietary) version of the MediaWiki software, which is the same software that Wikipedia uses. The site has remained on MediaWiki 1.19 for about 8 years now, even as new versions have been released, because of all the additional features that have been introduced, like Special:Forum and old Message Walls/Article Comments. These additional features use MediaWiki just like content articles (mainspace/ns:0) do, but it is very hard to upgrade the software to a new version and also accommodate all of these extra proprietary features. So that is why we have not upgraded to a new MediaWiki version in many years.

But recently the company has decided that it needs to upgrade to MediaWiki 1.33. The "UCP" is basically a codename that refers to both the user-facing and back-end changes that will result from upgrading to this new version of the software. On the back-end, the different areas of the site will become modularized so that they operate independently of one another, in order to allow for individual aspects of the site to be upgraded much more easily in the future. On the user end, this means that all the additional features I mentioned earlier will no longer use MediaWiki. Since the Forums used MediaWiki, they were retired in favor of Discussions, which is "discrete" from MediaWiki. Message Walls and Article Comments are also being "recreated" without a MediaWiki integration. Additionally, the VisualEditor/source editors that you use to edit pages are being replaced with a new, "unified" editor (easier to maintain one than two). There will also be a few visual changes to the layout of the site, like how profiles look. And obviously once we upgrade to the new MediaWiki version, we will be able to get all of the features from that (for example, temporary user rights).

I hope that explains it! Let me know if you have any follow-up questions. —Atvelonis (talk) 15:23, October 5, 2020 (UTC)

Badge hunter

Hi Sol,
I know you've already discussed DSegno92's edit habits with DarkFeather, XOdeyssusx, and Staff, but I recently found some more info I thought may be relevant. For background in case, I first asked XOdeyssusx about this on his talk page. He said that while the actions are badge hunting, he suggested I ask Fandom since DSegno92 wasn't technically breaking rules by continuously editing his own page one line at a time. When I asked Fandom, they said it was up to a community's mods to decide on actions, if any. I replied, thinking this was a jurisdiction loop with the AC mods and Fandom referring to each other for the final ruling, and they pointed me to their FAQ on achievements and the user page policy from Wookieepedia. I feel it is insufficient, as the FAQ assumes the offending user is unintentionally working in good faith when this is not the case, while the Wook page, although useful if this was over there, is not fully applicable since AC tries not to copy everything from them.

As for DSegno92, I believe I have found all of his Fandom profiles, and his activity on these sites are exact matches with his pointless activity of one-line edits here (in Italian??). Besides the 3 sites mentioned on XOdeyssusx's page, DSegno92 is also present on the [w:c:it.Assassinscreed:Utente:DSegno92|Italian AC Wiki]], [w:c:piratesonline:User:DSegno92|Pirates Online]], [w:c:pirates:User:DSegno92|Pirates of the Caribbean]], [w:c:black-sails:User:DSegno92|Black Sails]], [w:c:captaintsubasa:User:DSegno92|Captain Tsubasa]], [w:c:marvel:User:DSegno92|Marvel]], [w:c:avengersalliance:User:DSegno92|Avengers Alliance]], [w:c:dc:User:DSegno92|DC]], [w:c:dcuniverseonline:User:DSegno92|DCUniverse Online]], [w:c:callofjuarez:User:DSegno92|Call of Juarez]], [w:c:overlord:User:DSegno92|Overlord]], [w:c:it.paperpedia:User:DSegno92|Paperpedia]], [w:c:hungry-shark:User:DSegno92|Hungry Shark]], [w:c:disneyinfinity:User:DSegno92|Disney Infinity]], and [w:c:jurassicpark:User:DSegno92|Jurassic Park]] Wikis. None have called him out on his spam.

Excluding Avengers Alliance, Call of Juarez Overlord, and Jurassic Park, which do not have badges, all the other Wikis—including this one—have been spammed at minimum for him to get the "A Wiki Life" badge (200 days), while Marvel, DC, DCUniverseOnline, Paperpedia, and Hungry Shark have been superfluously edited in order to get the "Wiki Hero" badge (365 days), and I know he intends to do the same here very soon. If Fandom will not block his serial abuse of the badge systems, can not something be done here to deny him at least one proverbial notch under the belt of Wikis Spammed? Ordinarily, I would notify the user that their actions are at best frowned upon, but the Red Dead Redemption Wiki shows that DSegno92 understands basic English yet repeatedly ignores such warnings, so I felt I should take it to Staff again. – Darman (talk) 07:05, September 24, 2020 (UTC)

When Darkfeather and I were first notified about this issue, we weren't aware of any specific evidence substantiating the suspicions of badge hunting on DSegno's part, and it sounded like he was being suspected only because he was editing his user page prolifically. I don't really have the time to carefully review his activity across all wikis he has contributed to, but you are right that his daily meaningless edits are highly suspect. As a caveat, Fandom is correct that this matter falls solely under the jurisdiction of individual wikis, and that while Wookieepedia does have a stricter user page policy, we do not. However, we do have a rule against badge hunting. I will give him a warning, and if he persists in this pattern, we will give him a ban. Thank you for taking notice of this issue. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 15:10, September 27, 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for looking into this. I apologize if I was unclear when I raised the issue to XOdeyssusx, who may have relayed murky info to you. I thought Staff would take as deep a dive into his profiles to verify his actions as I have over the past weeks, and forgot they have their own things to keep track of. I'll continue to keep tabs on him and notify you if he persists, but admit I don't have much faith he'll listen if his activity elsewhere is any indicator. I give him a month. – Darman (talk) 16:40, September 27, 2020 (UTC)

An update unrelated to this case, but thought you should know there's another hunter about, User:GaMe^420J. They've created 3 blog posts in 5 minutes of just a title and no content, and commented on them to no significance to the wiki; one reply explicitly reads "I sorta did this just for the achievemennt kthxbai". I've warned them on their talk page, but leave it to you to act if you want. – Darman (talk) 18:30, September 28, 2020 (UTC)

It took two months, past my edited guess of a month, but I'll admit when I'm wrong. I have an update on the original case, though I leave its severity to you. In short, DSegno92 decided to break format to update his list of [nouns] from the games. Sure, he can do it if he wants. However, looking at his edit history, three of his four latest additions to the list were his only edits for the days of October 18, and November 1 and 14. This is highly unusual, since he clearly could find other pages to edit in some way over the last while, and while I cannot verify it since the new wiki engine removed "Wiki:Activity" which let users see what edits happened to earn badges, a circumstantial case could be made that he did them just to have edited something and have it count towards the 200 consecutive days badge. – Darman (talk) 06:55, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Bug Reports

Hey, so heard you're the most active admin on here, got a quick question for ya - where do the bug reports go? ZW2018 (talk) 16:22, September 26, 2020 (UTC)

It seems like Darman has already answered your question, but if you're referring to bugs within Assassin's Creed games themselves, our site would not be the place for them. Our wiki exists only to document the lore of Assassin's Creed and takes no part in the development and maintenance of Assassin's Creed media. For game-related bugs, you would have to contact Ubisoft support. If on the other hand you are referring to bugs of the wiki itself, can you let us know more details about the problem? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 14:50, September 27, 2020 (UTC)

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) 10:40, October 10, 2020 (UTC)

Sorry to bother, but I have to ask a question...

...in the Jackdaw page, why did you change "frigate" with "ship of the line"? I ask in order to be more precise with possible future edits. (DSegno92) 21:41, September 28, 2020 (UTC)

I mistakenly believed that a fifth-rate naval warship would be classified as a ship of the line, ot a frigate. It was my bad for not double-checking. For future reference though, you were also welcome to correct me in the edit summary or provide more information explaining the reason for the change so that I know in advance that it was wrong. :) Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 21:25, October 5, 2020 (UTC)

RE:Blog post

( Yeah rmember when I told you I have a few friends well guess what I have 0 now.) —unsigned comment by Farengaurd (talk · contr)

( I don't no where to egin oh let's see at the Part where I loss all my good friends because they went down a path I could no follow plus I don't have anymore friends just me why! Then I went on other Fandoms to find some friends but ended up felling ostercizied and alone I've just given up.) —unsigned comment by Farengaurd (talk · contr)

Ghost Simon Riley blocked

( Hey Sol why Is Ghost Simion Riley 2 blocked me or something like that?) —unsigned comment by ZW2018 (talk · contr)

Added a message.

Hi, Sol! An artist had copied and/or posted an image from another, and I thought he made it. Darman contacted me so I was informed by my mistake. Please delete the file I uploaded and forgive me from the mistake. I didn't want to make a disruptive edit, but I didn't knew about the other file's existence. Delete the file please:—unsigned comment by NON-STOPPING GAMER2009 (talk · contr)

Male Eivor

Shouldn’t Eivor’s page and any mention of Eivor be their not she or her. Eivor can be male and can be changed to male, so it would stand to reason that it would be their not a specific gender like female. Andrewh7 (talk) 20:59, 9 November 2020 (UTC) Andrewh7

Main page Odyssey slider

• Hello, any chance someone can be politely nudged to update the main page so Valhalla is the current slider? Vetinari^{(Appointment)} 22:38, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Chinese Templars

Hi Sol,
I was watching "Recent Activity" and I'm wondering if, as a Hong Kong resident, you could help me understand something I've noticed here over time. I know you've had...extensive dialogue, shall we say, on this with them, but why are Users:关云 and 诸葛彻 so fixated on whether certain figures in Chinese history are/are not Templars? Case in point, 关云 wrote a "Behind the scenes" point on Mao's page for the Chinese AC Wiki that basically reads "The English Wiki said he was a Templar but did not have credible evidence, so they had to retract their claim." (approximate emphasis on original) They know the games are fiction and that Ubi's interpretations cannot override historical records, yes? Like, I don't get steamed over Uesugi Kenshin or Buzz Aldrin being Templars. So why their hang-up on Mao and Emperor Qin Shi Huang, even going so far as to claim Staff are Ubi script writers abusing powers to cause wiki turmoil? – Darman (talk) 18:00, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Never mind my question. I decided to read 关云's talk page to see if I could find answers there and saw your latest reply. I think I understand it at least a little better now. I'm sorry if I bothered you in this. – Darman (talk) 00:35, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

The translation of terms in manhua

I'm glad to see a Californian is so interested in the manhua created by Chinese, stating the stories of Assassin's Creed Series which happened in the ancient China(or ancient England). But unfortunately, I have noticed that the editors in your Wikia always make misinterpretations on the terms and nouns, which is futile for you to create entries. There are two simple examples, which cause the misunderstanding between two Wikias. The first one is Assassin's Creed: Hall of Valor. I have no idea that if it is the offical name of the manhua in English, or just someone put the Chinese phrase 英灵殿 into the Google Translation. You have to know the phrase 英灵殿 is paraphrased from the word Valhalla, so the name Hall of Valor is totally a mistranslation. the second one is the Yichunkan from the manhua Assassin's Creed: Dynasty. Perhaps for you a Californian, it's hard to understand our polysemy. 移春槛 is not a gang or team or any other group like what you described. The word 槛 could be matched into other phrases, such as 花槛, which means the cart loaded with flowers. Please ascertain the meaning of the original text before translating, so that we Chinese editors can see someone paraphrase the contents correctly.一个赛艇门 (talk) 02:35, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

In regards to the title of Hall of Valor, I assumed that the other editors were using an official English title given by Ubisoft, not an original translation of the Chinese title, something that should be against our practice. Now that you have brought this matter up to me, I will have to verify if those who have been involved in Hall of Valor really did use an original translation against our guidelines. However, I should point out that if turns out that it is an official English title used by Ubisoft that it is common practice in the entertainment industry for titles of works in different languages to not be exact translations.

As for 移春檻, I was well aware that it is not a conventional name for a gang or team, but in fictional works, terms like these can be creatively applied by authors to groups, as we see with 金龜袋. I found the context that the term appeared in the comic to be unclear, as it only appeared in two instances: when the "boss" uses it attributively in quotation marks to refer to his flower procession and when his team is named the victor. As an aside, I must point out that I did not translate 移春檻; I expressly left it untranslated for a reason, but what you are suggesting is that I may have misused the term in the context of the story which we would have to take a closer look into.

Finally, I will not beat around the bush. While I am of Californian background as my profile says, your passive aggressive use of this to imply that I am not Hong Konger or ethnic Chinese has not gone unnoticed, and these remarks will not be tolerated. Any errors or lack of professionalism we have made on our wiki, we will always happily rectify, as we have proven consistently in the past, a gesture that has not been returned by your wiki. Hence, if the usage of 移春檻 is in error, it would be more helpful for you to explain fully 移春檻 how it is used in the context of the story itself.

In regards to your suggestion that it is "futile for [us] to create entries" on Dynasty, we have long taken note that your wiki copies our work verbatim before translating it. This is your wiki's own choice, one that I personally do not begrudge. If you guys like this practice for the sake of interwiki consistency and/or because it is convenient for your workload, I am glad. However, on our end, it is not our practice to ever copy the work of another wiki. We certainly welcome editors from the Chinese Wiki—Kaikai and UJ112013 have especially been appreciated here by some of our editors—to help make corrections to our articles pertaining to Chinese language material. At the same time, if you guys have put up articles on Dynasty, we do not mind checking with them to verify that there are no errors in our version of the articles. Nevertheless, we cannot wait around for Dynasty articles to be written by your wiki first, and even if your wiki has them created before us, we like our work to be our original effort. We believe that any errors we were to make in the act of copying the work of others without proofreading them, and without relying on our own hard work, would be our own responsibility. The vice versa is true as well. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 08:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

I apologize for lacking of etiquette in this Wiki, which I didn't mean to. For your ethnic identity, I haven't notice that, I was just noticed your residence in the identity box(I am not aware of how it called). I didn't know it before, and I have treated you as a Californian, if my words have gotten your self-esteem hurt, I'm sorry. You mentioned our Wiki copies entries verbatim before translating it, that is not my way of work at least. what I have done is just translating, occasionally add or modify content to make it more consistent with the truth or the intention of the game series. For the issue 移春槛, the source of the word we found is in 开元天宝遗事(Anecdotes of the Emperor Xuanzong of Tang or Anecdotes of Kaiyuan&Tianbao era), which is written by Wang renyu, it descrebes the 移春槛 was 杨国忠子弟每春至之时，求名花异木，植于槛中，以板为底，以木为轮，使人牵之自转，所至之处槛在目前，而便即欢赏，目之为移春槛, so it just refer to Yang Guozhong's flower carts, couldn't be a gang. By the way, in the Chinese edition of the hanmua, there is no indication that this word means this gang. Dynasty is free created with classical allusion，which is aim to show the story and era of the prosperous Tang Dynasty. So I believe that Xu Xianzhe wouldn't make such a mistake. 一个赛艇门 (talk) 10:41, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

The 特别篇 that was released for the first seven chapters actually includes an entry on 移春檻 which cites that exact line from 《開元天寶遺事·移春檻》as the source for the term. Other online sources like Baidu also references the same text. My confusion stems from the fact that in Chapter 2, there is this line: 「花卉盛宴夺魁者，『移春檻』! 車主為右相楊國忠」when the victor for the contest is announced, pointing directly at the gang boss. This made me think that the 「移春檻」 is being used metonymically for the team hired by Guozhong to handle his entry for the contest. Based on your input though, I now realize that it may have referred only to the particular design of the flower procession prepared on Guozhong's behalf. Is that the case?

I should also point out that even if the 「移春檻」is not the name of the gang or team, I think that we can safely interpret the men that Li E assassinates as a gang, and so they should have an article about them. The question then becomes, what do we call this gang for the purposes of our article?

By the way, I have an update regarding Hall of Valor. Yes, it turned out one of our editors decided to try his hand at translating the Chinese title for the manhua. He said that the actual title in English is so far known only as Assassin's Creed: Valhalla, identical to the video game, and he wanted to disambiguate between the two articles. I had to remind him that using made-up titles for the sole purpose of disambiguation is against our policies. However, one of our moderators disagrees with him that the English title for the manhua has been officially established as Vahalla, but I would agree that using an original translation for the Chinese title is not good at all. I am actually a bit disappointed that this happened, but it is good that you brought it up with us. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 23:19, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Email

Hello! I recently sent you an email to your registered email address. Please check it out when you have a chance! HeyTots <staff /> (Contact) 18:54, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Email

Hello! I recently sent you an email to your registered email address. Please check it out when you have a chance! HeyTots <staff /> (Contact) 18:55, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Assassin-Templar war

Hello, I made major edits on the Assassin-Templar War. I tried to summarize the conflict by era but I don't know if it is clear enough. As I don't read Dynasty or play Valhalla, someone else could complete this part but I think that we must wait for the launch of the DLC before doing that. For the part I wrote, I think the part which needs more summarizing are: the Alexandrine Civil War, Confrontation in Cyprus, Mongol Empire, Fight for Rome, Clash of Empires and Search of the Observatory. If you had suggestions for other parts, it would be helpful.Francesco75 (talk) 07:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

It is done. I summarized some of the sections too long to be more concise. But I'm only at the Great Purge of 1763, so there is a lot of work to do.Francesco75 (talk) 15:20, 11 December 2020 (UTC)