Talk:Unification of Ferelden

Unification of Ferelden
There are a lot of problems with this article.For one thing, the information provided here is mostly just a re-hash of the Calenhad and Aldenon articles. I question whether we need 3 articles all saying the same thing. Secondly the wars of Fereldan's unification more than any other conflict are reported with various conflicting in universe accounts. I would argue against creating a conflict article where we have to pre-face each section and sub-section with "according to some accounts". Because that's what we're setting ourselves up for with this article. - 13:29, January 20, 2014 (UTC)


 * This article does seem to be a summary (in some case, the copy) of Calenhad's and Aldenon's pages as mentioned above. No point in copy pasting or rewording other pages if those detail well the unification of Ferelden, an article such as this - if kept - should be better structured with informations not repeated on other articles, and if that's not possible, then this article might be better off deleted. -- 13:56, January 20, 2014 (UTC)


 * Additionally, if the article was improved and kept, it should be renamed to Unification of the Alamarri, as you can't unite Ferelden to form Ferelden. Calenhad united Alamarri so that there would be a Ferelden. Henio0 (talk) 14:34, January 20, 2014 (UTC)
 * WoT says "Calenhad Therein is crowned king in Denerim, uniting the long warring tribes of Ferelden under a single banner." So I think Unification of Ferelden is a more appropriate name, in real life the names we give in cases like this are what is formed from the unification, as the Kingdom of Ferelden was... the unification of Germany/England etc for example. Alexsau1991 http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090121065227/starwars/images/thumb/c/c7/Goddammit.svg/25px-Goddammit.svg.png (talk page) 18:24, January 20, 2014 (UTC)


 * ✅ I also think that this is more appropriate. 18:29, January 20, 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, WoT is notorious for saying Ferelden when they actually mean Fereldan valley, as well as Orlais for Kingdom of Ciriane. It's a conjecture, and I still think used incorrectly. I also don't think we should take all of its contents over information included in the games themselves. Henio0 (talk) 18:53, January 20, 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't think it's a matter of WoT having mistakes or not. It's about the correct phrase to describe this event. Wikipedia for one uses Unification of Germany instead of "Unification of german states". 09:53, January 21, 2014 (UTC)


 * Since this is a conflict page, why not call it "wars of unity", as they are called in Codex entry: The Legend of Calenhad: Chapter 1?Henio0 (talk) 09:56, January 21, 2014 (UTC)


 * The title wouldn't be accurate. Drakon conducted wars to unite Orlais, Nevarra conducted wars to form its kingdom, even the king of Starkhaven once conducted wars in an effort to unite the Free Marches. 10:08, January 21, 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, I don't know. Drakon conquered neighbouring city-states, he didn't just unite warring Ciriane tribes. And if Fyruss suceeded, he woulda annexed Free Marches into the nation of Starkhaven, and that would be called unification of Free Marches, not unification of Starkhaven, for the free states were not Starkhaven. Perhaps we should put the matter to a vote, as I am not convinced we should go with either the current tittle, or the proposed one, as it does seem an inacurate name for a conflict. Henio0 (talk) 10:28, January 21, 2014 (UTC)

Nominations status
I am not sure how the nominations are going but both are currently not going to pass, so I'll just post the current status in case someone wishes to vote the last few days that remain open.
 * Deletion
 * In favor: HD3, Margerard, Kelcat
 * Against: FirstDrellSpectre, Viktoria Landers

19:53, January 25, 2014 (UTC)
 * Rename
 * In favor: Viktoria Landers
 * Against: Henio0
 * I am also against renamingFirstDrellSpectre (talk) 20:00, January 25, 2014 (UTC)

I'm not particularly bothered whether the article is kept or deleted, little of the content is new. If it is kept then it should be renamed the Unification of Ferelden, given that's the closest name we've got in a canon source. (Though whatever the result it shouldn't keep it's current name, as it makes absolutely no sense - it implies that Alamarri is a place not a people, which imo should have been considered before hastily renaming it in the first place.) Alexsau1991 http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090121065227/starwars/images/thumb/c/c7/Goddammit.svg/25px-Goddammit.svg.png (talk page) 19:56, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * Not really, no. The words "unification of" don't have to be followed by a name of the place to make sense. A sentence like "policians united against the issue" makes perfect sense, as woul "the White House unites against the issue". Henio0 (talk) 20:03, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
 * That isn't quite what I mean, I'm saying that the Unification of Alamari is grammatically akin to saying something like the Unification of English. In both cases 'the' would be required for it to make grammatical sense. Alexsau1991 http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090121065227/starwars/images/thumb/c/c7/Goddammit.svg/25px-Goddammit.svg.png (talk page) 20:24, January 26, 2014 (UTC)

But anyway, I myself am oposed to both Unification of Ferelden and Unification of the Alamarri. This is just not a right name for a conflict, is what I think. Was it an article on the general unification of the tribes into Ferelden, I would be fine with "Unification of Ferelden", but the article is heavily on the war side. Henio0 (talk) 20:03, January 26, 2014 (UTC)


 * And I get your point, but given the nature of the times Ferelden was unified through war, as so many nations were. But there's no reason why the sole thrust of this article must be on the war, if it's to be complete it should include every aspect of the unification. Alexsau1991 http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090121065227/starwars/images/thumb/c/c7/Goddammit.svg/25px-Goddammit.svg.png (talk page) 20:24, January 26, 2014 (UTC)


 * If so, the page needs to be expanded quite a bit, as I believe it was Hafter's son or grandson who was the first person to bid for kingship, and that was some 150 years before Calenhad. Henio0 (talk) 20:32, January 26, 2014 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I would support that sort of content being added. Alexsau1991 http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090121065227/starwars/images/thumb/c/c7/Goddammit.svg/25px-Goddammit.svg.png (talk page) 21:16, January 26, 2014 (UTC)

If Unification of Alamarri and Ferelden don't suit the event, then what about naming it Founding Ferelden or Alamarri war? However I still think Unification is the most suitable name.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 13:38, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

Indeed, unification and wars of unity is the term used in codex entries. So I think it should be contained in any way this word in the title.

Might I suggest to use the term "Fereldan unification" as it is used in the wikipedia article Italian unification? 15:18, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

I am changing my vote back to Unification of Ferelden, because of how people who don't know lore may be interested in something that has a "ferelden" in its name. But, I am still not liking this page as a conflict one, because right now it seems to focus on Calenhad only. And sure, he was the one to unite the country in the end, he was only the final push in the struggle as there were many candidates to be the king before him, and I don't see this information being added very well to the infobox. Henio0 (talk) 15:40, January 27, 2014 (UTC)


 * Considering that we don't know much about the previous unity wars I'll suggest the following:
 * Name the article "Unification of Ferelden (Exalted Age)". This will accurately describe that it refers to the unity wars that took place in that Age and not any previous ones.
 * Write in the background a brief description about older wars that happened for the same reason with reference to Hafter and others. 15:54, January 27, 2014 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I see that. We could say that this was the final war in the wars of unity. Henio0 (talk) 16:03, January 27, 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, and keep the "Unification of Ferelden", or perhaps go for something like "Fereldan wars of unity" (that's if including the previous wars in the article). But adding the specific age in the title without there being another article about other age is not where I'd go with this. Henio0 (talk) 16:05, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

✅I'm in favor of deleting this article outright. This looks to me just a copy/paste of two other articles with a bit of filler. I see no need for a duplicate article that doesn't seem to provide any new or missing info. Kelcat (talk) 16:11, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

Ok, we've reached a consensus then, the article will be deleted.- 16:40, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

✅ that's awfully quick of you because I think the article could be kept, expanded.User: Henio0 ([[User talk:Henio0
 * talk]]) 16:44, January 27, 2014 (UTC)