Category talk:White Mantle (1079 AE)

Move

The date is pure speculation. We don't know what year it is, and if we have found a source that isn't the now-removed "D'Alessio Seabed (1079 AE)" then I'd like to ask where said source is. Until then, this page should be (War in Kryta) not (1079 AE). -- Konig/talk 02:01, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Just speculate more. go with the mantlecon dates.--Neil2250 , Portal Jumper 02:04, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Mantlecon is a player event >.> made by players –alistic 02:57, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

"The contents of this page are player-managed and do not represent official Guild Wars lore or canon. " –alistic 02:58, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

How about insted of through ideas out the window, You find some quotes about the year? :/ (i still say 1080ae) --Neil2250 , Portal Jumper 03:02, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Balistic, it still isn't wise to use speculation in a title which could easily have not just non-speculative but more clear titles. This says it is in 1079 AE - what if WiK took place in 1081 AE? What if it took place in multiple years (1079-1082 AE)? What if there are new NPCs - perhaps even WM - which do not deal with the WiK but are in GW:B - will they be added here (if the year is 1079 AE), or will it be added in the area they are for? Do we add Adepte here? If the WiK takes place in 1079 AE, she most likely was hired by the Zaishen in 1079 AE along with the rest. This category is basically WiK WM, but it is titled something else. With it being WiK, we remove pretty much all issues. -- Konig/talk 05:07, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I think the more pressing point here and something that everyone is overlooking even those arguing for the move, is simply that the wiki should be user friendly and as such it should be usable by as many people on the wiki as possible and this includes navigation. One should not be required to know tyrian lore (such as years and date) just to navigate the page. The "War in Kryta" is an official term for the events of the moment and it is what it is commonly known as throughout the gaming populace. Having it termed as the year (which many people have no reference point for) is needlessly obscure and obstructive. In short this needs a move to (war in Kryta), not because the date might be wrong, but just simply because regardless of date, the title can be named in a clearer and more user friendly manner for the general gaming populace. -- Salome 13:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I couldn't have said it better. Using the year is not only horribly elitist, but also plain silly. Almost no GW player or casual Wiki user has the slightest idea (or give a ....) about those dates. I bet most players don't even know what WiK is all about except new quests and cool stuff. What comes next? Starting to file all EotN content under 1078 AE? --Manassas 08:51, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

It has been about 3 weeks and no opposition to the name change to (War in Kryta). So can get get the move and changes going? -- Konig/talk 05:12, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I'd say yes :D Magua 06:11, 9 August 2010 (UTC)