Talk:Medjay - Revision history

Soranin: Text replacement - "siniath" to "siniath"

2026-05-10T17:56:55Z

Text replacement - "siniath" to "siniath"

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:56, 10 May 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Talkheader}}		{{Talkheader}}
	==Plural==		==Plural==
	Repeatedly, in the in-game dialogue, the plural Medjay''s'' appears, used by Bayek, too. I'd prefer if the plural was same as the singular, Medjay, but do we ignore in-game dialogue with this? [[User:Sadelyrate\|Sadelyrate]] ([[~~w:c:assassinscreed:~~User talk:Sadelyrate\|siniath]]) 12:44, September 27, 2018 (UTC)		Repeatedly, in the in-game dialogue, the plural Medjay''s'' appears, used by Bayek, too. I'd prefer if the plural was same as the singular, Medjay, but do we ignore in-game dialogue with this? [[User:Sadelyrate\|Sadelyrate]] ([[User talk:Sadelyrate\|siniath]]) 12:44, September 27, 2018 (UTC)

	==Aya==		==Aya==
	What is Aya's tenure as a Medjay (until 49 BCE) based on? [[User:Sadelyrate\|Sadelyrate]] ([[~~w:c:assassinscreed:~~User talk:Sadelyrate\|siniath]]) 12:45, September 27, 2018 (UTC)		What is Aya's tenure as a Medjay (until 49 BCE) based on? [[User:Sadelyrate\|Sadelyrate]] ([[User talk:Sadelyrate\|siniath]]) 12:45, September 27, 2018 (UTC)
	:Probably just an assumption that after Khemu's death she was no longer one. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:14, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		:Probably just an assumption that after Khemu's death she was no longer one. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:14, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

imported>RebeccaAWB: Adding {{Talkheader}}

2019-07-02T14:45:55Z

Adding {{Talkheader}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:45, 2 July 2019
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Talkheader}}
	==Plural==		==Plural==
	Repeatedly, in the in-game dialogue, the plural Medjay''s'' appears, used by Bayek, too. I'd prefer if the plural was same as the singular, Medjay, but do we ignore in-game dialogue with this? [[User:Sadelyrate\|Sadelyrate]] ([[w:c:assassinscreed:User talk:Sadelyrate\|siniath]]) 12:44, September 27, 2018 (UTC)		Repeatedly, in the in-game dialogue, the plural Medjay''s'' appears, used by Bayek, too. I'd prefer if the plural was same as the singular, Medjay, but do we ignore in-game dialogue with this? [[User:Sadelyrate\|Sadelyrate]] ([[w:c:assassinscreed:User talk:Sadelyrate\|siniath]]) 12:44, September 27, 2018 (UTC)

imported>AaronFireBird1 at 13:32, 1 October 2018

2018-10-01T13:32:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:32, 1 October 2018
Line 20:		Line 20:
	:That's perfectly valid. You can do the honors Lacrosse :). Also, I always prefer the name Cyfiero or its diminutive nicknames. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 05:07, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		:That's perfectly valid. You can do the honors Lacrosse :). Also, I always prefer the name Cyfiero or its diminutive nicknames. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 05:07, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
	:		:
	:Thats fits perfectly actually, cause I was using the wikipedia sources to find said information. And I was ~~kinda offended as~~ I was wondering ~~the reason behind~~ it. As it was just a bit of trivia like a sidenote. If it means that much to you I also added a bit of historical context for the Peloponnesian War page you can look over and decide if you wish. [[User:AaronFireBird1\|AaronFireBird1]] ([[User talk:AaronFireBird1\|talk]]) 13:28, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		:
			:Thats fits perfectly actually, cause I was using the wikipedia sources to find said information. And I was not really offended more like I was wondering why you were deleting it. If you had a problem with it or felt like it wasn't enough I would have gladly removed or editted it myself till you found it suitable. As it was just a bit of trivia like a sidenote. If it means that much to you I also added a bit of historical context for the Peloponnesian War page you can look over and decide if you wish. [[User:AaronFireBird1\|AaronFireBird1]] ([[User talk:AaronFireBird1\|talk]]) 13:28, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

imported>AaronFireBird1 at 13:28, 1 October 2018

2018-10-01T13:28:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:28, 1 October 2018
Line 20:		Line 20:
	:That's perfectly valid. You can do the honors Lacrosse :). Also, I always prefer the name Cyfiero or its diminutive nicknames. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 05:07, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		:That's perfectly valid. You can do the honors Lacrosse :). Also, I always prefer the name Cyfiero or its diminutive nicknames. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 05:07, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
	:		:
	:Thats fits perfectly actually, cause I was using the wikipedia sources to find said information. [[User:AaronFireBird1\|AaronFireBird1]] ([[User talk:AaronFireBird1\|talk]]) 13:26, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		:Thats fits perfectly actually, cause I was using the wikipedia sources to find said information. And I was kinda offended as I was wondering the reason behind it. As it was just a bit of trivia like a sidenote. If it means that much to you I also added a bit of historical context for the Peloponnesian War page you can look over and decide if you wish. [[User:AaronFireBird1\|AaronFireBird1]] ([[User talk:AaronFireBird1\|talk]]) 13:28, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

imported>AaronFireBird1 at 13:26, 1 October 2018

2018-10-01T13:26:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:26, 1 October 2018
Line 11:		Line 11:

	::I’d say the trivia point was valid but poorly worded and focusing on the wrong thing. It should start with the Medjay having not been historically active at the time and then could go on to mention that they were depicted true to form compared to when they were actually active. Also Cyf I think it’s supposed to be two equal signs which make a heading while three make a sub header. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:13, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		::I’d say the trivia point was valid but poorly worded and focusing on the wrong thing. It should start with the Medjay having not been historically active at the time and then could go on to mention that they were depicted true to form compared to when they were actually active. Also Cyf I think it’s supposed to be two equal signs which make a heading while three make a sub header. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:13, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
	:::That is true, and that is why I noted in the edit summary I was confused as to his meaning. If he had said ''inappropriate'', I would have revised the wording, but since he wrote ''appropriate'', then I didn't understand what was the purpose of the information he added because he wasn't talking about an anachronism. Now, the Medjay being anachronistic is a noteworthy Trivia point (but it is not what Aaron meant with his), and I could have sworn other users had added this before. I don't remember why it is no longer in the article, but it might be because it was unsourced. If it is true the Medjay historically were no longer active in this time period, we should expect that a real, academic source be cited supporting this claim. As it is, with there being only one Medjay in the game's story, in real-life, scholars could simply have failed to take note of one last remaining Medjay in this time period because history is always written in summary, and therefore, Bayek's status as a Medjay would not really be a true anachronism.		:::That is true, and that is why I noted in the edit summary I was confused as to his meaning. If he had said ''inappropriate'', I would have revised the wording, but since he wrote ''appropriate'', then I didn't understand what was the purpose of the information he added because he wasn't talking about an anachronism. Now, the Medjay being anachronistic is a noteworthy Trivia point (but it is not what Aaron meant with his), and I could have sworn other users had added this before. I don't remember why it is no longer in the article, but it might be because it was unsourced. If it is true the Medjay historically were no longer active in this time period, we should expect that a real, academic source be cited supporting this claim. As it is, with there being only one Medjay in the game's story, in real-life, scholars could simply have failed to take note of one last remaining Medjay in this time period because history is always written in summary, and therefore, Bayek's status as a Medjay would not really be a true anachronism.
	:::Also thank you for correcting me about the number of equal signs for the title. I should know that...haha. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 04:39, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		:::Also thank you for correcting me about the number of equal signs for the title. I should know that...haha. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 04:39, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

Line 19:		Line 19:
	::Instead of using the term anachronism because of the reasons you stated Cyf (also do you prefer Cyf or Sol?) I think it should be worded as there is no historical attestation of the Medjay past the 20th dynasty. Wikipedia cites Toby Wilkinson's Dictionary of Ancient Egypt as its source for that claim. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:58, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		::Instead of using the term anachronism because of the reasons you stated Cyf (also do you prefer Cyf or Sol?) I think it should be worded as there is no historical attestation of the Medjay past the 20th dynasty. Wikipedia cites Toby Wilkinson's Dictionary of Ancient Egypt as its source for that claim. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:58, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
	:That's perfectly valid. You can do the honors Lacrosse :). Also, I always prefer the name Cyfiero or its diminutive nicknames. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 05:07, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		:That's perfectly valid. You can do the honors Lacrosse :). Also, I always prefer the name Cyfiero or its diminutive nicknames. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 05:07, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
			:
			:Thats fits perfectly actually, cause I was using the wikipedia sources to find said information. [[User:AaronFireBird1\|AaronFireBird1]] ([[User talk:AaronFireBird1\|talk]]) 13:26, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

imported>Sol Pacificus: /* The Medjay Trivia */

2018-10-01T05:07:26Z

The Medjay Trivia

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:07, 1 October 2018
Line 18:		Line 18:
	:In any case, I hope you didn't feel too offended. The proper steps were taken. You undid my revert when you disagreed, then asked me about it, so everything was done right. I undid your second edit again because I thought it counted as a separate thing and was erroneous for a different reason (the information was really mostly already covered in the article body). [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 04:39, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		:In any case, I hope you didn't feel too offended. The proper steps were taken. You undid my revert when you disagreed, then asked me about it, so everything was done right. I undid your second edit again because I thought it counted as a separate thing and was erroneous for a different reason (the information was really mostly already covered in the article body). [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 04:39, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
	::Instead of using the term anachronism because of the reasons you stated Cyf (also do you prefer Cyf or Sol?) I think it should be worded as there is no historical attestation of the Medjay past the 20th dynasty. Wikipedia cites Toby Wilkinson's Dictionary of Ancient Egypt as its source for that claim. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:58, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		::Instead of using the term anachronism because of the reasons you stated Cyf (also do you prefer Cyf or Sol?) I think it should be worded as there is no historical attestation of the Medjay past the 20th dynasty. Wikipedia cites Toby Wilkinson's Dictionary of Ancient Egypt as its source for that claim. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:58, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
			:That's perfectly valid. You can do the honors Lacrosse :). Also, I always prefer the name Cyfiero or its diminutive nicknames. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 05:07, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

imported>Lacrossedeamon: /* The Medjay Trivia */

2018-10-01T04:58:50Z

The Medjay Trivia

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:58, 1 October 2018
Line 17:		Line 17:
	:I'm not sure if you read the edit summary as I reverted it because that's normally where explanations for reverts are given. Or perhaps you did read the edit summary and felt that it was insufficient. If so, I would ask that you pardon me, and I will explain that the reason is because for efficiency, it is common practice for a disputed minor edit (or a clearly major error) to just be undone with an edit summary explaining the reason rather than asking about it first and waiting for a reply. It's quicker this way. The original user (in this case yourself) could then immediately revert again and explain why, and then we know that we do actually have to talk about it. If on the other hand, you agree with a revert, then you would just leave it be, and that will save us the time and effort we would have spent talking about whether we agree or not. This is only for minor edits or major and clear errors or spam though. Major changes should be discussed first, of course. Hence, the quick revert with a small edit summary is just for efficiency.		:I'm not sure if you read the edit summary as I reverted it because that's normally where explanations for reverts are given. Or perhaps you did read the edit summary and felt that it was insufficient. If so, I would ask that you pardon me, and I will explain that the reason is because for efficiency, it is common practice for a disputed minor edit (or a clearly major error) to just be undone with an edit summary explaining the reason rather than asking about it first and waiting for a reply. It's quicker this way. The original user (in this case yourself) could then immediately revert again and explain why, and then we know that we do actually have to talk about it. If on the other hand, you agree with a revert, then you would just leave it be, and that will save us the time and effort we would have spent talking about whether we agree or not. This is only for minor edits or major and clear errors or spam though. Major changes should be discussed first, of course. Hence, the quick revert with a small edit summary is just for efficiency.
	:In any case, I hope you didn't feel too offended. The proper steps were taken. You undid my revert when you disagreed, then asked me about it, so everything was done right. I undid your second edit again because I thought it counted as a separate thing and was erroneous for a different reason (the information was really mostly already covered in the article body). [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 04:39, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		:In any case, I hope you didn't feel too offended. The proper steps were taken. You undid my revert when you disagreed, then asked me about it, so everything was done right. I undid your second edit again because I thought it counted as a separate thing and was erroneous for a different reason (the information was really mostly already covered in the article body). [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 04:39, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
			::Instead of using the term anachronism because of the reasons you stated Cyf (also do you prefer Cyf or Sol?) I think it should be worded as there is no historical attestation of the Medjay past the 20th dynasty. Wikipedia cites Toby Wilkinson's Dictionary of Ancient Egypt as its source for that claim. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:58, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

imported>Sol Pacificus at 04:39, 1 October 2018

2018-10-01T04:39:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:39, 1 October 2018
Line 11:		Line 11:

	::I’d say the trivia point was valid but poorly worded and focusing on the wrong thing. It should start with the Medjay having not been historically active at the time and then could go on to mention that they were depicted true to form compared to when they were actually active. Also Cyf I think it’s supposed to be two equal signs which make a heading while three make a sub header. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:13, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		::I’d say the trivia point was valid but poorly worded and focusing on the wrong thing. It should start with the Medjay having not been historically active at the time and then could go on to mention that they were depicted true to form compared to when they were actually active. Also Cyf I think it’s supposed to be two equal signs which make a heading while three make a sub header. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:13, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
			:::That is true, and that is why I noted in the edit summary I was confused as to his meaning. If he had said ''inappropriate'', I would have revised the wording, but since he wrote ''appropriate'', then I didn't understand what was the purpose of the information he added because he wasn't talking about an anachronism. Now, the Medjay being anachronistic is a noteworthy Trivia point (but it is not what Aaron meant with his), and I could have sworn other users had added this before. I don't remember why it is no longer in the article, but it might be because it was unsourced. If it is true the Medjay historically were no longer active in this time period, we should expect that a real, academic source be cited supporting this claim. As it is, with there being only one Medjay in the game's story, in real-life, scholars could simply have failed to take note of one last remaining Medjay in this time period because history is always written in summary, and therefore, Bayek's status as a Medjay would not really be a true anachronism.
			:::Also thank you for correcting me about the number of equal signs for the title. I should know that...haha. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 04:39, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

			I'm willing to admit I was mistaken, but no one gave me a valid reason till now for the reason for the deleting. I apologize, but no one messaged me or informed me of the reason behind it, thus I posted it again. The first trivia I wrote was as good as it was going to get till I found more reliable sources with concrete evidence listing what I needed, which got deleted. [[User:AaronFireBird1\|AaronFireBird1]] ([[User talk:AaronFireBird1\|talk]]) 04:20, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
			:I'm not sure if you read the edit summary as I reverted it because that's normally where explanations for reverts are given. Or perhaps you did read the edit summary and felt that it was insufficient. If so, I would ask that you pardon me, and I will explain that the reason is because for efficiency, it is common practice for a disputed minor edit (or a clearly major error) to just be undone with an edit summary explaining the reason rather than asking about it first and waiting for a reply. It's quicker this way. The original user (in this case yourself) could then immediately revert again and explain why, and then we know that we do actually have to talk about it. If on the other hand, you agree with a revert, then you would just leave it be, and that will save us the time and effort we would have spent talking about whether we agree or not. This is only for minor edits or major and clear errors or spam though. Major changes should be discussed first, of course. Hence, the quick revert with a small edit summary is just for efficiency.
			:In any case, I hope you didn't feel too offended. The proper steps were taken. You undid my revert when you disagreed, then asked me about it, so everything was done right. I undid your second edit again because I thought it counted as a separate thing and was erroneous for a different reason (the information was really mostly already covered in the article body). [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 04:39, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

	I'm willing to admit I was mistaken, but ~~no one~~ gave me a valid reason till now for the reason for the deleting. I apologize, but no one messaged me or informed me of the reason behind it, thus I posted it again. The first trivia I wrote was as good as it was going to get till I found more reliable sources with concrete evidence listing what I needed, which got deleted. ~~Plus~~ if ~~your reading~~ it ~~from~~ the ~~page itself~~, I~~'d think someone~~ would ~~see~~ that ~~as in~~ the ~~in game context of~~ a ~~Medjay~~ rather then ~~historically what they were~~.~~Thus adding in~~ the ~~trivia~~ that ~~this~~ is ~~what they~~ were ~~historically~~ as ~~well as listing other~~ information ~~about~~ the ~~Medjay since Origins lacked the Database like earlier AC games~~. [[User:~~AaronFireBird1~~\|~~AaronFireBird1~~]] ([[User talk:~~AaronFireBird1~~\|~~talk~~]]) 04:20, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

imported>AaronFireBird1 at 04:36, 1 October 2018

2018-10-01T04:36:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:36, 1 October 2018
Line 16:		Line 16:


	I'm willing to admit I was mistaken, but no one gave me a valid reason till now for the reason for the deleting. I apologize, but no one messaged me or informed me of the reason behind it, thus I posted it again. The first trivia I wrote was as good as it was going to get till I found more reliable sources with concrete evidence listing what I needed, which got deleted. Plus if your reading it from the page itself, I'd think someone would see that as in the in game context of a Medjay rather then historically what they were. [[User:AaronFireBird1\|AaronFireBird1]] ([[User talk:AaronFireBird1\|talk]]) 04:20, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		I'm willing to admit I was mistaken, but no one gave me a valid reason till now for the reason for the deleting. I apologize, but no one messaged me or informed me of the reason behind it, thus I posted it again. The first trivia I wrote was as good as it was going to get till I found more reliable sources with concrete evidence listing what I needed, which got deleted. Plus if your reading it from the page itself, I'd think someone would see that as in the in game context of a Medjay rather then historically what they were.Thus adding in the trivia that this is what they were historically as well as listing other information about the Medjay since Origins lacked the Database like earlier AC games. [[User:AaronFireBird1\|AaronFireBird1]] ([[User talk:AaronFireBird1\|talk]]) 04:20, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

imported>AaronFireBird1 at 04:34, 1 October 2018

2018-10-01T04:34:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:34, 1 October 2018
Line 16:		Line 16:


	I'm willing to admit I was mistaken, but no one gave me a valid reason till now for the reason for the deleting. I apologize, but no one messaged me or informed me of the reason behind it, thus I posted it again. The first trivia I wrote was as good as it was going to get till I found more reliable sources with concrete evidence listing what I needed, which got deleted. [[User:AaronFireBird1\|AaronFireBird1]] ([[User talk:AaronFireBird1\|talk]]) 04:20, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		I'm willing to admit I was mistaken, but no one gave me a valid reason till now for the reason for the deleting. I apologize, but no one messaged me or informed me of the reason behind it, thus I posted it again. The first trivia I wrote was as good as it was going to get till I found more reliable sources with concrete evidence listing what I needed, which got deleted. Plus if your reading it from the page itself, I'd think someone would see that as in the in game context of a Medjay rather then historically what they were. [[User:AaronFireBird1\|AaronFireBird1]] ([[User talk:AaronFireBird1\|talk]]) 04:20, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:26, 1 October 2018
Line 11:		Line 11:

	::I’d say the trivia point was valid but poorly worded and focusing on the wrong thing. It should start with the Medjay having not been historically active at the time and then could go on to mention that they were depicted true to form compared to when they were actually active. Also Cyf I think it’s supposed to be two equal signs which make a heading while three make a sub header. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:13, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		::I’d say the trivia point was valid but poorly worded and focusing on the wrong thing. It should start with the Medjay having not been historically active at the time and then could go on to mention that they were depicted true to form compared to when they were actually active. Also Cyf I think it’s supposed to be two equal signs which make a heading while three make a sub header. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:13, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
	:::That is true, and that is why I noted in the edit summary I was confused as to his meaning. If he had said ''inappropriate'', I would have revised the wording, but since he wrote ''appropriate'', then I didn't understand what was the purpose of the information he added because he wasn't talking about an anachronism. Now, the Medjay being anachronistic is a noteworthy Trivia point (but it is not what Aaron meant with his), and I could have sworn other users had added this before. I don't remember why it is no longer in the article, but it might be because it was unsourced. If it is true the Medjay historically were no longer active in this time period, we should expect that a real, academic source be cited supporting this claim. As it is, with there being only one Medjay in the game's story, in real-life, scholars could simply have failed to take note of one last remaining Medjay in this time period because history is always written in summary, and therefore, Bayek's status as a Medjay would not really be a true anachronism.		:::That is true, and that is why I noted in the edit summary I was confused as to his meaning. If he had said ''inappropriate'', I would have revised the wording, but since he wrote ''appropriate'', then I didn't understand what was the purpose of the information he added because he wasn't talking about an anachronism. Now, the Medjay being anachronistic is a noteworthy Trivia point (but it is not what Aaron meant with his), and I could have sworn other users had added this before. I don't remember why it is no longer in the article, but it might be because it was unsourced. If it is true the Medjay historically were no longer active in this time period, we should expect that a real, academic source be cited supporting this claim. As it is, with there being only one Medjay in the game's story, in real-life, scholars could simply have failed to take note of one last remaining Medjay in this time period because history is always written in summary, and therefore, Bayek's status as a Medjay would not really be a true anachronism.
	:::Also thank you for correcting me about the number of equal signs for the title. I should know that...haha. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 04:39, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		:::Also thank you for correcting me about the number of equal signs for the title. I should know that...haha. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 04:39, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

Line 19:		Line 19:
	::Instead of using the term anachronism because of the reasons you stated Cyf (also do you prefer Cyf or Sol?) I think it should be worded as there is no historical attestation of the Medjay past the 20th dynasty. Wikipedia cites Toby Wilkinson's Dictionary of Ancient Egypt as its source for that claim. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:58, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		::Instead of using the term anachronism because of the reasons you stated Cyf (also do you prefer Cyf or Sol?) I think it should be worded as there is no historical attestation of the Medjay past the 20th dynasty. Wikipedia cites Toby Wilkinson's Dictionary of Ancient Egypt as its source for that claim. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:58, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
	:That's perfectly valid. You can do the honors Lacrosse :). Also, I always prefer the name Cyfiero or its diminutive nicknames. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 05:07, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		:That's perfectly valid. You can do the honors Lacrosse :). Also, I always prefer the name Cyfiero or its diminutive nicknames. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 05:07, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
			:
			:Thats fits perfectly actually, cause I was using the wikipedia sources to find said information. [[User:AaronFireBird1\|AaronFireBird1]] ([[User talk:AaronFireBird1\|talk]]) 13:26, October 1, 2018 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:07, 1 October 2018
Line 18:		Line 18:
	:In any case, I hope you didn't feel too offended. The proper steps were taken. You undid my revert when you disagreed, then asked me about it, so everything was done right. I undid your second edit again because I thought it counted as a separate thing and was erroneous for a different reason (the information was really mostly already covered in the article body). [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 04:39, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		:In any case, I hope you didn't feel too offended. The proper steps were taken. You undid my revert when you disagreed, then asked me about it, so everything was done right. I undid your second edit again because I thought it counted as a separate thing and was erroneous for a different reason (the information was really mostly already covered in the article body). [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 04:39, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
	::Instead of using the term anachronism because of the reasons you stated Cyf (also do you prefer Cyf or Sol?) I think it should be worded as there is no historical attestation of the Medjay past the 20th dynasty. Wikipedia cites Toby Wilkinson's Dictionary of Ancient Egypt as its source for that claim. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:58, October 1, 2018 (UTC)		::Instead of using the term anachronism because of the reasons you stated Cyf (also do you prefer Cyf or Sol?) I think it should be worded as there is no historical attestation of the Medjay past the 20th dynasty. Wikipedia cites Toby Wilkinson's Dictionary of Ancient Egypt as its source for that claim. [[User:Lacrossedeamon\|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon\|talk]]) 04:58, October 1, 2018 (UTC)
			:That's perfectly valid. You can do the honors Lacrosse :). Also, I always prefer the name Cyfiero or its diminutive nicknames. [[User:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus\|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 05:07, October 1, 2018 (UTC)