Forum:Armies of Gielinor

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Armies of Gielinor
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 23 April 2010 by Liquidhelium.

should funorb's AoG be considered canon? a mod confirmed that it was canon, however, it also seems to conflict canon with things such as falador being around in the 3rd age, unrealistic locations, etc. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 01:58, March 27, 2010 (UTC)

Comment As discussed when this game came out, we decided that anything said in AOG does not apply here because of the conflicts and such. They have their own wiki to add their own canon if they wish.--Degenret01 02:12, March 27, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - thats not being followed. right now there are a number of aog articles, most of which are incomplete. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 02:18, March 27, 2010 (UTC)

Tag the for deletion, I'll delete them when I get back on in an hour.--Degenret01 02:30, March 27, 2010 (UTC)
Recent consensus says otherwise. This does not apply to the monsters in that game, however. C.ChiamTalk 02:46, March 27, 2010 (UTC)
errr... i tagged them, what should i do? remove the tags? Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 02:53, March 27, 2010 (UTC)
Yea.....I guess that would be correct until we have a new formal discussion. I am not famailiar enough with all the different elements being listed on this wiki that are actually of not RuneScape origin. So first we need a list of what might already be present here, and a list of sources, then we can discuss each item seperately/as a group. I would say anything that conflicts with known RS lore is out, but we'll save that till we get to the actual proposal. So who knows enough to get this thing going?--Degenret01 03:38, March 27, 2010 (UTC)
perhaps make pages for em, but have a template at the top that says they are likely not canon? Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 15:29, March 27, 2010 (UTC)

Keep with template - I proposed the RFD for that AOG character and through the course of the discussion the consensus was to keep these characters on the wiki since they follow the same storyline as the main RuneScape game. The characters are relevant to the history of the God Wars and people wanted to keep them for the sake of being complete in RS canon. Several of the pages can be found by looking through the Canon article. We could add a template that says something to the effect of This article contains information that is not explicitly mentioned in the RuneScape, but is generally considered canon that is relative to the RuneScape storyline. We could add this tag to articles whose sources are Armies of Glienor and even those from Betrayal at Falador, so that people aren't wondering where these characters are in RuneScape. Air rune.png Tollerach hates SoF Fire rune.png 21:32, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

but they arnt canon, at least not many of them. the white knights didnt exist in the 3rd age for 1, nor did the black knights. it is also unlikely that ourgs could single handedly level a mountain, and theres no evidince for crystaline shapeshifters ever existing. i support keeping these on the wiki, and vastly improving them to a point where the aricle is at the same standards as normal rs articles, but i think something needs to be done to clearly state that it is impossible for it all to be canon. as for BAF, iv read the book and i dont see anything conflicting about it... Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 23:45, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - All units obviously represent a squad, I imagine a squad of ourgs could take out large rocks. Also, knights could simply knights wearing that colour armour, it wouldn't surprise if Zamoraks knights from a variety of orders wore that colour.Dark avorian 23:54, March 30, 2010 (UTC)

not all units are squads. barbarians are squads of 5, however icenes are squads of 3, whilst ourgs are a single creature. Third age robe top.png 3rd age farcaster Third age druidic robe top.png 00:19, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

If we follow this path we will be a RS wiki and AOG lite wiki. I don;t like our trying to cross that much information, it is not what we are.--Degenret01 02:17, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I think the question is, is this really canon? Did this really happen in the RuneScape universe, or is it a parallel universe? If it's the first, I'd want the storyline information here, if it's the second, I'm not so sure. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 07:40, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - The truth is, we can't say for sure whether or not Armies of Gielinor is intended to be canon or not, and Jagex's stance on the subject has been very inconsisent. Originally they mentioned that the game could be interpreted as taking place during the God Wars, which basically means no. With the addition of single-player campaigns, thought, it seems like Jagex wants it to follow the official RuneScape storyline, but on a very (very) basic level. In an interview, a Jagex moderator stated that the game is meant to be canonical. At the same time, thought, the game contradicts the official RuneScape storyline on a hundred different points. I'm strongly for keeping characters and locations from Armies of Gielinor on the RuneScape Wiki, but only so long as they cover information relevent only to the RuneScape storyline (so no stats, strategies, FunOrb-specific sutff). I also support creating a template for these pages stating that the information is from Armies of Gielinor, and as such its canonicty is debateable. Quest.png Morian Smith Saradomin crozier.png 00:12, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

What Morian said - We will just have to keep a fairly close eye on those articles to be sure they don't start getting cluttered with a lot of AOG info. --Degenret01 00:37, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

Notice - Temporarily, I've redirected Armies of Gielinor to RuneScape:No page. If we don't create the article, we should at the very least redirect it somewhere. This is just while we have the discussion here. Chicken7 >talk 11:56, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - According to a Funorb Q&A, It's Canon. --Armadyl symbol.png Nightgunner Talk Illuminated Book of Law.png 18:22, April 1, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - As much as I wish that Q&A cleared the situation up, it leaves us with two conflicting sources, both claimed by Jagex to be canon. Do we trust one mod from the FunOrb team (whose response is very short and unclear), or all of the history found in RuneScape itself? I think information from RuneScape itself should be accepted in a situation like this. Granted, not all information from Armies of Gielinor contradicts RuneScape itself; I just think that, when Armies of Gielinor conflicts with RuneScape, RuneScape should take priority. Now, if the two sources don't conflict, I think we ought to cover information from Armies of Gielinor, but make it very clear that its canonicty is debatable. Let's face it, Armies of Gielinor is very loose in its interpretation of history; common sense has to be used to deal with its coverage on the Wiki. Quest.png Morian Smith Saradomin crozier.png 00:12, April 2, 2010 (UTC)

Morian knows what he is talking about - He does, there is no denying it. Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 02:01, April 2, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - The Guthix Awakens Armies of Gielinor campaign has been released. How should we handle creating and marking new pages on the subject? Quest.png Morian Smith Saradomin crozier.png 21:08, April 4, 2010 (UTC)

I think for the most part we should leave it to the fun orb wiki. HaloTalk 21:10, April 4, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, leave it to the experts(funorb wiki). Username1907 rulez! 01:31, April 6, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Let's base what we know from RuneScape, and just RuneScape. FunOrb wiki is another story, but that isn't our issue. Ajraddatz Talk 02:52, April 6, 2010 (UTC)

We've been basing what we know about RuneScape from many other Jagex-provided sources (Postbags, God Letters, the Betrayal at Falador novel, lores, Jagex messages, etc.) for years. We've even used non-Armies of Gielinor-related information from FunOrb in the past; the symbols of Seren and Tumeken, for instance, were taken from a background found on the website. Why should we handle this any differently, especially when it has been explicitely stated by Jagex as canon? Quest.png Morian Smith Saradomin crozier.png 03:47, April 6, 2010 (UTC)
I agree with that. And I have seen the confirmation. There are some things that appear not to match, but I believe they do. As to the very specific things, I still believe they should be kept on the fun orb wiki, but we can still put stuff on here if we think it fits. HaloTalk 21:15, April 6, 2010 (UTC)

Closed - AoG articles have already been created. A template is to be created for AoG articles. --LiquidTalk 01:37, April 23, 2010 (UTC)