Talk:Bevin

Do we really need a character role for Bevin, he is a very minor character and only appears once and he is already covered in the A Missing CHild page and Kaitlyn's page. I'm putting this up as suggestion for deletion/merge.

If you want to hold a discussion about what we should or should not give a separate page, please put it up in the wiki forum. As far as I know, there are already separate pages for characters and those are classified as people you can have a discussion with. It is hand so you can link to them, see their location, and you can search for them using the wiki search. Otherwise you could hold a same discussion about the need to create a page for every unique item, location or creature.--Mytharox 23:05, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

It was already state that character pages were based upon judgement, there are no set rules for a character. In my opinion, a character like Tomas is part of the main quest, he introduces you to Redcliffe, but he is not seen afterwards, still he contributes to a major role. Bevin is a minor character, it is optional to find him and I suggest we redirect Bevin to the "A Missing Child" sidequest, which is how it was originally. The Missing Child sidequest is not even linked to this page. Kaitlyn is justified because she is the quest giver and ender. Items, creatures and locations are justified because you encounter them and they play a tangible role. This should be a PART of the A Missing Child sidequest not a separate article. It is a grey area, but look at the page for Irenia, is that really necessary? Can't we just put Irenia's photo on the "Notices of Death" questpage? WHy would we have 4 different pages for 4 minor characters part of an overarching quest? --Galith 23:15, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion it's justified to give characters an own page, as long as there is unique information to them like a screenshot, dialog you can have with them and write about, items (key in Bevin's case) that you can optionally retrieve from him, a location where he can be found now and later. If it is really nessecary you ask, well not really, you can bunch everything you want together, like it was in Redcliffe Village before, almost everything there was described on a single page. (Just check the history) But is that nice to look at? I think not, I prefer to be able to search for things, see their screenshot, look at detailed info and screenshots of a person. Even in the case of Irenia, she is also used in the description of the quest, so if you at that moment wonder what she looks like, you simply click her name and see a screenshot. Maybe later on her page could be a map showing her exact location, I don't know. Ut's a question of what you like then, a single page per person, or not. But having a discussion about every character and determining if they are worthy or not to have an own page. I don't like that. Also people might just add the same persons later, when they play the game and think/find that they are missing. I rather have such a discussion about what should get or not get it's own page on the wiki forum then and establish some rules if needed.--Mytharox 23:31, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Just a second ago I checked some other older wikia's Mass Effect and Witcher and both of those also describe minor characters. It seems to be a thing of wikia's to want to describe the game(s) they are about to their fullest. Just check out the people writing down just about all the dialog of the companions, word for word ;)--Mytharox 23:37, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

I used to edit for Mass Effect and they have been deleting minor characters to merge with larger quests and other characters. Willem is a good example, he has to be found in Mass Effect, but he is not given his own separate page as "brother of Garoth, found dead" he is part of the UNC Missing Privateers. Ish is also right now, up for deletion even though she serves as Miranda's contact and being merged with Tortuga. Perhaps I have been used to the Mass Effect style of editing. I will try and refrain from this, seeing as this seems to be the de facto rules of the dragon age wiki, not the mass effect wiki. sorry--Galith 23:48, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Alright:) About Ish, if the info is so minor that you cannot even talk with the NPC (dialog) and a good close up screenshot, then I don't think it's really worth having a page. But that is just my opinion. I don't really mind coming to other ideas or changing the way I am entering all of the characters as long as it is consistent. I just don't want a discussion about every char if it is worthy or not. That is why the criteria (Can it have a dialog + screenshot? -> yes) is what I work with right now. But like I said, if you want to open a discussion about it on the wiki forum I am fine with that as well as long as we all stay nice and respect the work we all put into this place to make it a better wiki :)--Mytharox 23:58, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

A set guideline is best. We cannot have half the wiki have minor characters linking to quests and the other half redirecting to quests. It seems then natural course is that this wiki this taken on the former and not the latter like Mass Effect. I think we should submit this as a rule to the admins (similar to how PC and the player was changed to The Warden) While, being from Mass Effect wiki, I would prefer the latter. =P I would rather have a clean, uniform, formatted wiki than a messy one. I will fully support you to make this a rule. --Galith 00:03, December 6, 2009 (UTC)