Forum:Atarka

So, I was most of the way through adding NPC Infoboxes to UW2 NPCs before I even realized Atarka was fanon. It seems really odd that Killorn Keep is a subsection of Atarka when, as fanon, it seems like it should be merely a note in Killorn Keep's article. This would require a lot of following cleanup of the UW2 pages as many of them reference Atarka even the Template:BRJewel Worlds has it. -- Fenyx4 17:34, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

Yes. SoL's writing is excellent, it really is, but it's still fanon. If we want to play by our own rules, those references need to go, but we could still make note of it in Trivia sections or whatnot. How should we refer to the world Killorn Keep is in though? --Warder Dragon 20:31, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe simply as Killron Keep's world? It's not that pretty, but I'm not sure a better term may come up...--Sega381 05:14, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

World of Killorn Keep? I think either of those would be fine. -- Fenyx4 08:49, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

In a lot of cases it seems like "Atarka" can simply be replaced with "Killorn Keep". Like on Ultima Underworld II Walkthrough I don't see anywhere that the world of Killorn Keep actually needs to be referred to. They somehow never mentioned the name of the world in game we can probably avoid it fairly well on the wiki. -- Fenyx4 15:25, June 13, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I've been thinking as well. No point in addressing an issue like this when it can actually be avoided altogether. --Terilem 16:28, June 13, 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. --Warder Dragon 17:16, June 13, 2010 (UTC)

Do we have a consensus then? Should we leave this in the oh-so-capable hands of the FenyxBot? We still need to do something about the actual Atarka article though. --Warder Dragon 18:32, June 17, 2010 (UTC)

According to what we haved talked, I woud do the following: try to refer to Atarka as Killron Keep whenever it can be done (which seems to be always), and rename the Atarka article to World of Killorn Keep, adding a trivia note about the fan-name Atarka.--Sega381 19:05, June 17, 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. I don't think this is a job for FenyxBot though. Far too many fiddly bits and making sentences flow properly. :( -- Fenyx4 21:30, June 17, 2010 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be better and simpler to just name the article "Killorn Keep" since that's how we're going to be referring to it anyway? It seems inconsistent, otherwise. --Terilem 02:04, June 18, 2010 (UTC)

That is another option. But that means re-writing the article, as it wouldn't be about the world, but only about Killorn Keep itself. And there would be no article about the world itself, which may lead to cram non-Killorn Keep information into that article. Maybe separating both articles?--Sega381 02:09, June 18, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, done. Renamed Atarka to Killorn Keep, and changed all Atarka references. There wasnt soo much rewriting needed for the Killorn Keep article.--Sega381 02:09, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

I would just like to take this moment to say just how much you rock. Thank you sir! -- Fenyx4 02:44, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! Someone has to do the dirty work :). And sorry if I missed a few references... --Sega381 03:49, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

You might as well remove the Trivia to Atarka then, as people won't know what it refers to anymore! :) I only threw that in there because the page had been named Atarka by someone else, IIRC, probably because Redemption was using it. I have no issues with it being removed altogether to avoid reader confusion. Fan stuff is, after all, fan stuff. --Shadow of Light Dragon 05:22, 27 October 2010 (PDT)

But fan stuff HAS a place in the Codex, too. It should be clearly labeled as such, and separated as to avoid confusion with the official stuff. But as more and more fan projects appear, the Codex should be the place to have detailed information on them. Seeing this in this way, I think we should keep the Atarka mention in trivia, maybe rewording it a little, as it is a fan name that was somehow popular enough to produce this discussion.--Sega381 05:47, 27 October 2010 (PDT)

(reset indent)Agreed. And although it may not seem like it I thought it was pretty awesome that Atarka entered into our collective unconscious to a degree that we were all using it for quite awhile before realizing that it wasn't canon. -- Fenyx4 08:08, 27 October 2010 (PDT)

Hehe, fair enough. :) Rewording looks good too! --Shadow of Light Dragon 00:29, 28 October 2010 (PDT)