This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Amaranthine Conflict (9:31 Dragon) article.
  • General discussions not pertaining to the improvement of the article should be held in Discussions instead.
  • Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
  • Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes! (~~~~)
  • Do not edit another editor's comment.

Naming + conflict template issues Edit

There are significant issues with this page. Even though it narrates correctly the events of Awakening, its title centers around the darkspawn civil war, which is inaccurate considering the large involvement of the Amaranthine in it as well.

Secondly, the conflict template showing the Wardens, the Amaranthine and Vigil's Keep forces allying with the Architect, is also very inaccurate. The only case in which the Architect may work alongside the Warden is at the very end, and that does not involve the forces of the City of Amaranthine or Vigil's Keep. In all other cases, we have 3 sides on this conflict. Something which unfortunately cannot be depicted accurately in the conflict template and causes lots of conflicting information. Viktoria Landers 11:57, October 18, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you. I tried once to make a collum for 3rd side, but there was no result. Besides are in DA any other threesome wars? (talk) 12:04, October 18, 2013 (UTC)StubbornMageSlayer
I just edited again to make it threesome war, but look and see editions failed. (talk) 12:04, October 18, 2013 (UTC)StubbornMageSlayer
That would require to update the conflict template. Right now it does not support a third side.
As for your other question, the Mage-Templar War has a significant third side, the Andrastian Chantry, which up to what we know for now, it did not side with either the templars or the mages. Viktoria Landers 12:15, October 18, 2013 (UTC)
I'll ask the admintrators. Hope they'll listen to me despite I'm a pain in their asses recently. (talk) 12:18, October 18, 2013 (UTC)StubbornMageSlayer

I've updated the template and the infobox on the page. I was initially going to make it into a row below, but realized it might be a bit confusing due to the way the infobox looks. It's a bit squeezed, but I think it's passable. ··· D-day sig d·day! 03:12, October 21, 2013 (UTC)

Renaming Edit

As the conflict has now a third side, I'd like to propose its renaming to the neutral title of "Amaranthine conflict". Viktoria Landers 15:01, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

What about "Darkspawn attack on Amarantine" or "Darkspawn activity in Amarantine"? In Fereldan conflicts is "Werewolf attack". FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 17:59, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
My first thought was "Darkspawn Conflict", but that's kind of ambiguous as to where and when it took place. I think your idea of "Amaranthine Conflict" would be ideal. (btw you have on the main page to rename it to Amaranthine chantry ;D) Kelcat (talk) 18:17, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, you're right. I make stupid mistakes from time to time.. It is fixed now Smiley Viktoria Landers 20:22, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
What about "Darkspawn raid on Amarantine"?FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 18:54, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
Well, for starters, that seems an overly wordy title for an article. I also don't think that "raid" is an appropriate term for this. Looking at this statement in the article:
The Grey Wardens became involved in the war when the Architect sent an emissary to negotiate with the Grey Wardens. Mistrust and misunderstandings led to the massacre of the Orlesian Grey Warden contingent stationed at Vigil's Keep and also the Architect's emissary.
The conflict originated with the Architect wanting to negotiate with the Grey Wardens. That's marked as the beginning of the conflict, and that doesn't fit with "raid". Kelcat (talk) 19:06, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
I simply think word "Darkspawn" not just "Amarantine" should be in the name of that conflict and I think word "conflict" sounds too general.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 19:42, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
Maybe, "Darkspawn in Amaranthine", as everything stems from their presence there? (Edit: My edit conflicted with FirstDrellSpectre's.) -Sophia (talk) 19:44, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
"Darkspawn in Amaranthine" sounds more like a story than a conflict, in my opinion. Viktoria Landers 20:22, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

If "Amaranthine conflict" sounds too general, perhaps we could agree on "Amaranthine conflict (9:31 Dragon)". That way it is specified while we also keep a neutral oriented title. Viktoria Landers 20:22, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Amarantine vs Darkspawn and Amarantine-Darkspawn War also sound like a story, don't they? We can't call it invasion and activity would sound like a statistical report rather than history event. Amaranthine conflict (9:31 Dragon) doesn't sound bad.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 20:35, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
Both of these propositions are inaccurate as the conflict was not only between the forces of Amaranthine and the darkspawn. There was a civil war between the darkspawn as well as the Orlesian Wardens who cannot count as "Amaranthine soldiers". Viktoria Landers 20:47, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
I have another idea, maybe not good but better than none Architect-Mother-Amarantine War or Darkspawn Schism in Amarantine or Darkspawn-Desciple-Amarantine War or Darskpawn Awakening in Amarantine.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 15:14, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

That name can be good enough Three sided war of Amarantine.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 09:30, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

I think we need more opinions before we proceed with the rename. Right now, I have proposed "Amaranthine conflict (9:31 Dragon)" while you've made a number of other suggestions. So it remains to be seen if there are any other suggestions and/or votes on the existing ones. Viktoria Landers 09:35, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
That's brain storming in the 1st stage, giving as many ideas as possible.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 15:41, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
"Amaranthine conflict (9:31 Dragon)" sounds fine to me. Kelcat (talk) 21:37, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
As there were no objections to the suggestion of Amaranthine conflict (9:31 Dragon) and one person in agreement, I have renamed the page to this title. Friendship smallLoleil Talk 01:20, January 3, 2014 (UTC)

New nomination Edit

To stay in line with current conflict and general titling conventions, "Amaranthine conflict (9:31 Dragon)" should be "Amaranthine Conflict (9:31 Dragon)" Ravenfirelight (talk) 14:00, April 11, 2014 (UTC)

Maybe I am personally indifferent about this suggestion, however I think we should give it a week like we do with any other nomination in case someone wishes to reply too. Considering that I am putting the move candidate today, I guess this means the days will start to count from now on. Viktoria Landers 22:45, April 13, 2014 (UTC)

Different pic Edit

In prologue of DAA is a fresco of the Architect and the Mother. I suggest to use them instead of Architect's image. (talk) 12:43, October 25, 2013 (UTC)StubbornMageSlayer

Nice choice. Viktoria Landers 20:22, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Commanders and Leaders Edit

Why are Seranni and Velanna listed under "Commanders and Leaders"? Seranni was more like the Architect's lackey/servant, and I don't recall Velanna leading anyone in the conflicts. Kelcat (talk) 19:08, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

Velanna was leading elves, who followed her, ones slaughtered by darkspawn in Wedding Woods.FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 19:15, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
Oh, right, I forgot that that was the group who split from the Keeper. Kelcat (talk) 19:33, November 22, 2013 (UTC)
Seranni was no simple servant. Implied in her last conversation with Velanna in Drake's Fall, she was the one teaching the concept of good and evil to the Disciples sided with the Architect. That gives her a relevant position in the Architect's forces (and potentially, she may have become the leader of that faction in the world states where the Architect and Utha were killed—well, at least until the Architect body-jumped to other darkspawn, if he have the same abilities of Corypheus). --Zero (talk) 20:14, May 6, 2017 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.