Talk:Iron Bull

Delete
✅Speculation only. Delete for now. Henio0 (talk) 16:26, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * I saw screenshot of him and it was named "Iron Bull".78.9.151.207 (talk) 16:35, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * It is a piece of concept art titled Iron Bull. Doesn't mean that it is a final name of the character. It may be a describing title of the image, not the man in it. Assuming it is the name is speculation. Henio0 (talk) 03:28, September 2, 2013 (UTC)

✅ Based on the reasons stated in the deletion nomination. 16:48, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

✅ This concept art for the game is titled "Iron Bull" by the artist. BioWare's been vague on the name, but it's gotten out in a few places. We may not have much for an article now, but we will soon. -Mr. Mittens (talk) 16:49, September 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure how this concept art is linked to the Qunari shown in the trailer. Also, even if we suppose "Iron Bull" is his name, the article should still be deleted on the basis of not having enough information. 16:54, September 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * I thought this place was allowed to have stubs (which essentially this article would be for the time being). Not to mention there may be some people who hear about a character called "Iron Bull" and then decide to check this wiki for more info on him. DAWUSS (talk) 17:28, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * There are stubs, and then there are articles of (for now) such little consequence that their existence can't reasonably justified. Consider, for example, that the sum of all we know about this character could be presented in an infobox, and sections would still be left blank. 22:26, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

✅ I agree with DAWUSS- this article would be far better suited as a stub, and deleting an article only to recreate it later would be both inefficient and a waste of time. I do however believe that whatever sources we have at this point should be cited because as the article is it's completely blind speculation. Basically, to summarize my opinion- the article sources should be made clear and then it should be turned into a stub. In the event that no actual sources can be directly linked- I agree with the deletion because then article effectively becomes complete speculation. ---- Isolationistmagi   17:43, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * Creating a page is not a difficult task. Plus, the scant information currently listed here could be quite easily replaced and expanded once we actually know something about the character. 22:26, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

✅ Based on this. The resemblence - in my opinion - is rather obvious, and the picture itself is titled as Iron Bull. Source. --Margerard (talk) 20:39, September 1, 2013 (UTC)


 * And another source, actually provided by Viktoria. :P --Margerard (talk) 21:19, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd agree that the Iron Bull in this article is the same as the one in the concept art, but until we receive official confirmation, as well as some additional information about the character's involvement, he is too inconsequential to warrant an article to himself. 22:26, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

✅ Per my deletion tag. 22:26, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

✅ I agree, not enough info. Kelcat (talk) 00:42, September 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * But there will be enough information soon. Delating this page only to restore it would be pointless in the end.78.8.135.173 (talk) 09:31, September 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * Not if it turns out his name isn't Iron Bull. I think that's just the title of the artwork, not the character name. Kelcat (talk) 09:43, September 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * Changing name of article is no problem just like 1st qunari war was renamed qunari wars.78.8.135.173 (talk) 10:43, September 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * So is recreating an empty article not a problem. Henio0 (talk) 11:07, September 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * This article isn't empty, it's incomplete and fulfilling it takes less time and work than recreating it.78.8.135.173 (talk) 12:10, September 2, 2013 (UTC)

✅ Speculation for now. Just recreate when it's confirmed or there's more information. 17:40, September 4, 2013 (UTC)

The article was recreated without any new information. The character was mentioned in the leaked Game Star article, but we don't know whether it was actually confirmed by developers or the journalists based that on the leaked survey, i.e. they do not actually posses new information, but they put it in the magazine anyway, and it was misinterpreted by the Internet. It isn't even confirmed if that is the Qunari from the trailer, or if Iron Bull isn't a production codename. Henio0 (talk) 17:58, March 23, 2014 (UTC)


 * ✅ As before. Kelcat (talk) 18:53, March 23, 2014 (UTC)

Delete, round 2
✅Again, not really confirmed yet, so delete. Henio0 (talk) 12:58, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅He is mentioned in two different articles (GameStar & OXM), there is a concept art etc. I'd say it is enough already) Asherinka (talk) 13:03, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * I am happy to have him on here once his appearance is actually confirmed. For all we know he is just mentioned in the article. Henio0 (talk) 13:14, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, the first magazine (GameStar) is officially out already and it says there are two new companions: Solas and Iron Bull. What other confirmation do you need? By the way the second one (by OXM) is to be released on 2 Apr. Asherinka (talk) 13:24, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * The article was translated by a user here, and "the thing I found strange about Iron Bull is that there were no screenshots of him in the article, unlike Solas, who got several. Iron Bull is merely mentioned a few times on page 18, and never brought up again." So what I want is something that says "There is a companion whose name is Iron Bull and he is a Qunari warrior". Not rehashed rumours about a character going by Iron Bull, because we've known this for months. I want an actual statement that it was a piece of information released by BioWare, not that it was an educated guess based on leaked information. Henio0 (talk) 13:36, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, and if it comes out on the 2nd of April, we could just wait for it to come out. Because it is really easy for information to be misinterpreted. For example, in GS it says that Morrigan will not be a playable character, like the Warden or Hawke. Which could mean that the Warden and Hawke will ne NPCs like Morrigan, or that Morrigan is not the protaognist. Yet everyone just assumes this means they will be in the game. Henio0 (talk) 13:39, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * But the user you mentioned wrote exactly that he's a companion. Here it is. "Iron Bull is officially confirmed, yes. He is a Qunari soldier whom David Gaider describes as fearing nothing except his own past." And it is not "leaked" information. The magazine was released two days ago and you can buy it and check it yourself if you have any doubts.
 * P.S. This user also wrote the following: "But I think it's pretty safe to create a page for him already, albeit without pictures until BioWare provides some". Asherinka (talk) 13:41, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Again, I do not know if the two are related as I've not seen the original article. It could be that the magazine said, on their own, that he is a companion, and asked Gaider for a comment about the character of Iron Bull, not whether or not he is a companion. The devs made comments on Solas and Vivienne before they were confirmed companions, too. Of course, I may be wrong and it was clearly stated that he is in fact a companion. I that case I will retract my vote, but as it is right now it is still a no. Henio0 (talk) 13:49, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * I absolutely disagree with deletion of the page. he is a confirmed companion. so why the hell would someone vote for deletion of the page??????????? - JH EP  -  Talk  -  Contribs  15:08, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Too few informations.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 16:53, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * overreacting much? I cannot be more clear about my doubts regarding his confirmation status. Solas WAS confirmed directly, Iron Bull was confirmed indirectly at best.Henio0 (talk) 19:17, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * He is mentioned in GameStar & OXM. dont ruin the wiki with your doubts. - JH EP  -  Talk  -  Contribs  19:23, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * being confirmed does not equal being mentioned.Henio0 (talk) 19:40, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * I will risk violating the copyright just to put your mind at ease. Here is word-for-word what the GameStar article says: "Mit dem Qunari-Söldner Iron Bull and dem abtrünnigen Elfenmagier Solace [sic] kommen nun zwei weitere Gefährten hinzu... Iron Bull wiederum beschreibt Gaider folgendermaßen: 'Den schreckt wirklich gar nichts - außer seiner eigener Vergangenheit.'" You can put it into Google translate if you don't like my translated summary. :) --Koveras Alvane (talk) 20:12, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * I didn't say I didn't like it. ;) I did ask you to clarify and you said you had doubt about Iron Bull, hence my doubts, unless I misunderstood. ;) Henio0 (talk) 20:14, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, I did put it into Google and it came out like "With Solas and Iron Bull added as companions, that makes two new ones. David Gaider described Iron Bull as being scared of nothing but his past". If that is the only mention of Iron Bull in the article, you can see my scepticism. It does not say that David Gaider said he is a companion, it merely says what Gaider said about Iron Bull, regardless of whether he is a companion or not. ;) Henio0 (talk) 20:17, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * I did not doubt Iron Bull's presence as the Inquisitor's companion in the game. I merely pointed out that the GS article did not contain any screenshots of him, so I recommended to create a page without images (i.e. avoiding the use of concept art) until some screenshots are provided by BioWare.
 * As for the other thing... Maker, you are stubborn. Do you need a personal letter signed by David Gaider, Mike Laidlaw, and Matthew Bromberg before you believe it? I've posted a small excerpt, but the entire paragraph goes along the lines of: "A hero needs companions. Three companions have already been confirmed: Cassandra, Varric, and Vivienne. Now Iron Bull and Solas are added to the companions. We have also spotted a nameless female archer, who may or not be a companion." How much room for interpretation is there, if the Bull is mentioned in that kind of context? --Koveras Alvane (talk) 20:24, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * No, no, I do believe that he is a companion, and most probably the Qunari we've been seeing. But I am just looking for a confirmation that is defnitely a confirmation (eh :D), and not an interpretation. I am just afraid BioWare may not have told the journalists explicitly that Iron Bull is a companion, but the journalists said he was one anyway, going in for the interview assuming he is already. But then again, I am only one person and this is my opinion. If more people wish the page to be kept, that is completely fine. I however am such a pain in the ass and I'm afraid I will stay such a pain. ;) Henio0 (talk) 20:49, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * We have so far two "interpretations" from two journalists from different countries speaking different languages and they both say the same thing: Iron Bull is a companion. If he turns out not to be a companion after all, it will mean that two professional journalists independently grossly misreported what they saw and heard and the EA PR people decided to let it slide to have a cheap laugh at them later on. Remember that they got the whole "Solace/Solas" thing cleared up before the GS magazine even hit the stores. In my view, this is as official as it gets, and the lack of fresh (and labeled) screenshots is most likely due to the aforementioned EA PR people's veto on it. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 20:39, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * Again, I am just being technical with it. Although you do raise a good point about it not being debunked. Henio0 (talk) 20:49, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * Here is a French article saying the same thing. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 20:51, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't really speak French. :) But again I am going to be anal - we don't know if they actually got the information, or they are rehashing GS and internet gossip, or just post the article for the sake of having one in French. Henio0 (talk) 21:04, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * @Koveras Alvane That makes three "interpretations": German (GameStar), French (your link) and Enligh (OXM). And then there is the art by Matt Rhodes with a description "DA:I - Iron Bull". I'd remove the "delete" tag and be done with it. Asherinka (talk) 21:31, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * ✅ We have confirmation from numerous sources, including Gaider himself. Not for the first time, I get the distinct sense of stubbornness for the sake of stubbornness. Alexsau1991 http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090121065227/starwars/images/thumb/c/c7/Goddammit.svg/25px-Goddammit.svg.png (talk page) 22:17, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * ✅ I think the article should stay at this point. The issue of Gamestar that he's first mentioned in has actually been published and made publicly available, and I feel comfortable going with the translation given by koveras alvane, and using that as a reliable source. If it does stay I do have one concern: I question him being classified as a Warrior as I don’t recall any of the article summaries I’ve read mentioning what his class is. From what I’ve seen, he’s labeled as a “soldier”, which could mean either warrior or rogue. Kelcat (talk) 23:30, March 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * A valid point, but he is shown wielding a greatsword in the concept art, so it is doubtful that he can be anything but a warrior in-game. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 07:12, March 29, 2014 (UTC)


 * technically Arishok was a rogue, and he wielded big-ass swords. ;) Henio0 (talk) 07:23, March 29, 2014 (UTC)


 * Technically Arishok was never a companion. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 08:35, March 29, 2014 (UTC)


 * orly? Didn't know, thanks. Anyway, what my point was that a big qunari with a big sword may be a rogue.Henio0 (talk) 08:45, March 29, 2014 (UTC)


 * I thought your point was that a big qunari with a big sword and a big battleaxe in each hand may be a rogue because the Lycium Engine cannot render a dual-wielding warrior. How relevant that is to a big qunari with a single greatsword who is (to be) rendered by the Frostbite 3 engine is anyone's guess. --Koveras Alvane (talk) 08:57, March 29, 2014 (UTC)


 * it's relevant in such a way that we don't know how the engine handles classes yet. Perhaps this time round rogues can wear shields or big swords. And there is no reason to be snide, please. Henio0 (talk) 19:20, March 29, 2014 (UTC)


 * it's been awhile since I saw that art, and I could have sworn it was just a longsword. Looks like I remembered wrong. It's just strange that they made the effort to call him a mercenary and a soldier but not a warrior. Kelcat (talk) 07:39, March 29, 2014 (UTC)

How long do these discussions usually last? Can we remove the delete tag now or do we wait some more? Henio0 (talk) 18:21, March 30, 2014 (UTC)

I removed it per discussion. Asherinka (talk) 18:40, March 30, 2014 (UTC)

Qunari or Tal-Vashoth
He is not Tal-Vashoth. He is Qunari. Check out the dragonage.com website for his updated information on the Characters section. 05:33, June 9, 2014. 24.183.20.102 (talk) 22:34, June 9, 2014 (UTC) A concerned fan

✅I think he actually is a Tal-Vashoth, but one who still cooparates with the Qunari. He's a Tal-Vashoth who hasn't acknowledged that he is one, just like Tallis. Henio0 (talk) 22:43, June 9, 2014 (UTC)

Rename
Should we rename this page to "The Iron Bull"? That seems to be how he's labeled in all of the official material. --Kelcat (talk) 00:47, June 10, 2014 (UTC)

It does seem like a nickname more than a name, and thus it should have the "the", similarly to the Champion and the Warden. Perhaps they'd reveal his Ben-Hassrath name-title, or his actual name even in the game. One problem with renaming the article now will be that all of the links are to the "theless" version, though. Henio0 (talk) 07:11, June 10, 2014 (UTC)


 * Fixing links are easy enough for me to do, and there aren't that many right now. --Kelcat (talk) 07:21, June 10, 2014 (UTC)

Just heard him say (and I think this would be a great quote to really show his personality at the top of the page, although I am paraphrasing someone should double check the exact wording) "Technically it's 'The' Iron Bull. I like having an article at the beginning of my name. Makes me sound more like a mindless killing machine than a person." Again, someone should double check the actual words. It's the last sentence I'm not sure if he said "machine" or what. But, it also goes to show that by his own words, his name is The Iron Bull. Also, while the name of his codex is just "Iron Bull," throughout it he's referred to as The Iron Bull every time. As for his actual name, he doesn't have one... No Qunari does, something he also says in that same conversation. AbsolutGrndZer0 (talk) 08:25, November 21, 2014 (UTC)

Iron Bull Sexuality/Romance
While I think it is likely at this point that Iron Bull is a bisexual romance option nothing has been officially confirmed yet. I mean does anyone doubt Cole is going to be one of our companions at this point? Still reason and speculation are not fact or confirmation. Non confirmation confirmed here https://twitter.com/PatrickWeekes/status/478304810953752576 Makenzieshepard (talk) 22:43, June 15, 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that link. Perfect example of why people need to stop jumping the gun when adding new Inquisition info without a direct source confirmation. --Kelcat (talk) 23:53, June 15, 2014 (UTC)

So we got more news on the bull we got a tweet from Karin Weekes that says he is 'worth at least one romance playthrough :D' https://twitter.com/KarinWeekes/status/480048442874408960 If we don't get any more news or clarification should we considered this enough of a confirmation for at least some type of romance? Makenzieshepard (talk) 21:13, June 20, 2014 (UTC)


 * Looks like she's refusing to confirm it just yet: "Well, you can certainly TRY to romance him..." Wouldn't hurt to hold off, as I won't be surprised to see it actually confirmed soon. --Kelcat (talk) 00:23, June 21, 2014 (UTC)


 * As per Kelcat. Karin Weekes' was quite ambiguous as to whether he is or isn't a romance option, she says you can "certainly try to romance him", which may not be unlike the option we got with Aveline who we could also try to romance, to no avail. I would remove it until we get a definitive statement one way or another. Alexsau1991 (talk page) 19:59, June 21, 2014 (UTC)

Race/Romance
Why does it specify that Iron Bull can be romanced by any race when none of the other romances are race-specific? Could this mean that they may become race-specific in the future? --Cousharielana (talk) 20:55, July 13, 2014 (UTC)Cousharielana


 * It's been confirmed that two of the characters will be race-limited, but it hasn't been revealed which ones. It looks like they specifically said that Iron Bull isn't one of them, though. --Kelcat (talk) 21:12, July 13, 2014 (UTC)