Talk:First Battle of Kirkwall

Name of article

Not to rain on the parade.... But this is not the first battle that Kirkwall has seen considering that the Qunari had occupied the city prior to the battle we see in DA2, and that the slave revolt we hear about that ended Tevinter rule. Balitant (talk) 01:11, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

"First Battle of Kirkwall" is indeed too broad; I'm suggesting to just call it "Second Qunari Invasion of Kirkwall". --D. (talk · contr) 04:05, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

It is an accurate name for the conflict, so yeah sounds good. Balitant (talk) 11:45, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

The article has bee renamed. --D. (talk · contr) 17:56, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

Date of Event

If I recall, this actually happened in 9:34 Dragon, not 9:33. The prologue of DA2 is in 9:30, and Act 1 is during 9:31. Act 2, when the Arishok and his qunari attack, happens three years after Act 1, which makes it 9:34 and not 9:33. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.252.136.193 (talk) 01:01, 17 May 2011

Arishok

Why is there constant mentions of the Arishock dying? In the outcome and casualities it mentions it as through it is impossible to avoid. That is one possible ending, as he could also be allowed to leave with Isabella unharmed. I thought this wiki tried to keep as concious of disrepacies as possible during DA:O, so why have we stopped bothering now.--Ironreaper (talk) 05:37, June 17, 2011 (UTC)

You are welcomed to make the changes yourself, or simply tag the article with {{cleanup}} (with reasons if possible—it helps other contributors to know what needs to be changed). Just because the current revision has canon issues does not mean no one cares about that. A lot of articles need to be rewritten to address different types of issues, but this is normal on wikis. --D. (talk · contr) 06:33, June 17, 2011 (UTC)

Recent grammar tweak in Prelude section

It's a one word tweak that I made to ensure that a sentence had proper grammar; it was reverted and I readded it. You can see the edit I made in the article's history. To put it simply "the ensuring confrontation" makes no sense since ensuring is a verb (therefore not modified by "the") that means "to make sure of". I changed the sentence to "the ensuing confrontation" because ensuing is an adjective that means "resulting". The editor who reverted my change has 1) made some great contributions to the article and 2) included an edit summary that gave me the impression that they were trying for a specific meaning that I'm not catching. So I thought I'd bring the whole thing up here in case further adjustments were needed to bring about the intended meaning for the paragraph. Millahnna (talk) 09:58, July 19, 2011 (UTC)

Apologises. Was really dundoing previous edits to your that did not correctly follow the story. Yours is fine--Ironreaper (talk) 12:36, July 19, 2011 (UTC)

It's all good, homie. I just wanted to make sure I dropped a note here in case I WAS missing something that you were intending there. You cleaned up so much stuff around the same time I wasn't sure that I wasn't missing a point somewhere. Force of habit from too much time spent goofing off on wikipedia. :D Millahnna (talk) 22:31, July 19, 2011 (UTC)