Talk:List of The Keys to the Kingdom characters

message: I have made a lot of changes to this section. I removed many things, mostly what someone said about servants of Dawns Noons and Dusks, and added some information. There is an obvious problem with the characters, as their names are often used interchangebly. I have moved all things that might be in contention to the "Section Beneath Saturdays Dusk", as described in the aricle. I made some hidden comments. I have checked all of my statements against several major appearences of the two; being the beginning and towards the end of Grim Tuesday,the fight and statements by Suzy in Sir Thursday, and the attack on the Foil Mill of the Guild of Gilding and Illumination and the Scriptorium scene in Lady Friday, if anyone wanted to check me. (I feel this compulsion to explain all of my edits. Bear with me =]) Alcemáe 08:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Saturday's Noon and Dusk 

message: It states in the article that fridays sin is lust, as she lusts for experiences, however could it not be envy, for humans who have experiences, as she states something to leaf that would imply this after experiencing, this would leave lust for sunday which could explain why he left his position.
:I would definitely say that, at best, unequivocably confirming Friday as the embodiment of lust in this article is a bit strong, unless there is some official source I am unaware of. While this would take envy from Saturday, Saturday seems to have very strong parallels with Lucifer, who is associated strongly with the sin of pride.139.102.254.37 (talk) 03:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Friday 

message: Would it be ok to move the article to a new title? I think Characters of the Keys to the Kingdom sounds odd. Maybe Characters in the Keys to the Kingdom Series? If not, I'm going to move it at least to Characters of 'the Keys to the Kingdom, because unless the the is capitalized, it's a red link. Alcemáe T • C 04:28, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title of article 

message: I always assumed that the Architect was #1, then Sunday, Saturday, Friday, Thursday, and Arthur at the beginning of the fourth book, which makes him #6. In other words, he's now #4. Does that make sense?
72.135.18.80 16:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's ambiguous. If the Architect was ranked, then the numbers would make sense. But it's never stated who was #1. If only Nix wrote faster, we would know ;) I  (said) (did) 20:05, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Got it. I guess that makes sense. He does take a long time...72.135.18.80 20:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

text: My assumption would be that the Architect is no longer ranked, as she is gone from the house completely. She may also have never been ranked, being above and beyond any form of precedence. I feel fairly certain that any given Day would outrank any noon, dawn or dusk, except perhaps when dealing with Sunday or Saturday's minions versus Mister Monday. What seems to me the trickiest question is whether Arthur might actually already be first or second in precedence due to his holding of multiple titles versus Saturday and Sunday's one apiece.139.102.254.37 (talk) 03:21, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Precedence in the House 

message: I think that '"characters of the keys to the kingdom"' is not the right title for this page, as it does not just focus on the characters, it has a wide range of info on all the series. 
I thought a better title would be something like '"An insight to the keys to the kingdom series"' 
Apart from that, I thought this page was excellent!!!!!
Bioclaw  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bioclaw (talk • contribs) 03:37, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, this page is about the Characters, and to accurately and comprehensively discuss them, we must discuss the story. So really, it about the characters. In addition, an insight page would be original research. — i said 03:57, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title of the page. 

message: could dame  be the Architect because with each part of the will she gets stronger maybe  any body got any suggestions  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragonfirered94 (talk • contribs) 12:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt it. However, this is not the correct place to discuss this. Sorry. I (talk) 22:55, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dame Primus 

message: I'm curious, but is there a reliable source that claims that Arthur is "Lord of the Middle House" rather than "Master of the Middle House" (based on his title after he claimed the Lower House). Janus8463 (talk) 21:47, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is not. I think for a while we just left it without a specific title, and someone added something and nobody caught it. I don't think there should be any capitalized title in front of Middle House, including Master. I would just leave it out of the title, and make note that there is no specific title for the MH granted. seresin | wasn't he just...? 04:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Arthur's Title after Lady Friday

message: I've noticed that in Sir Thursday her name starts off being Sylvia but then changes to Sylvie. I'm not sure if this was a typo in the book. Therefore I am not sure what to do about her name. She is currently called Sylvie in the article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.0.176.161 (talk) 16:26, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sylvie/Sylvia 

message: Certainly not B there is absolutely no referencing or anything verifiable from 3rd party sources. 09:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Start class

message: Does anyone think that we should put the Overseers with the grotesques? Grim Tuesday mentions that they are his most loyal servants and they seem to have the same basic role as the other servantgs of the Dawns, Noons and Dusks. Perhaps the same should go for Nissers as well.144.135.180.109 (talk) 02:21, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overseers 

message: Having read this article, I'd be interested in the community's thoughts on whether or not it might be worth either going through the page and editing out all the poor grammar and coherence, or tagging it for this to be done at a later stage. I'd rather not act on my own with this, but I do feel that the point needs to be raised.
77.103.209.102 (talk) 19:56, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Need of Cleanup? 

message: I think that in the section about Arthur there needs to be some sort of reference to how the Old One said, in the first book, that the keys would "remake its wielder in the image of its creator" (the Architect). And also, in the section about Arthur, there are a lot of times where it says that he was turning into a denizen, which I think might need to be corrected, because the book says that he was not a denizen. Probably there was some confusion about the meaning of whoever was writing that section; I think they meant that Arthur himself thought that he was turning into a denizen. WingedSkiCap (talk) 15:17, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arthur's Transformation?? 

message: A request for comments has been started that could affect the inclusion 
or exclusion of episode and character, as well as other fiction articles. Please 
visit the discussion at 
Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(fiction)#Final_adoption_as_a_guideline. Ikip (talk) 11:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for comment on articles for individual television episodes and characters

message: There is something in the article about a speculation that  the Will will become the Architect when all seven parts are gathered together. Is this a character speculation (something that a character said) or a fan speculation? I suppose it could have been in Drowned Wednesday or Sir Thursday, which I haven't read in a while, but I've never heard anythig like that. If it's only fan speculation,I think it should be removed. Library Seraph (talk) 17:18, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Will=Architect 

message: Who else has noticed that the first two paragraphs of the Will are not accounted for? The first part of the Will is 'paragraphs three to seven', and the second part of the Will is 'paragraphs eight to thirteen'. This would also imply that the third to seventh parts of the Will are not paragraphs one or two, unless they break the exception of the paragraphs being in ascending order, and are rather shorter than their predecessors.
-warning: Lord Sunday spoiler alert-
If this is true, then the Architect could not have been complete at the end of Lord Sunday. Unless The Old One was the first two paragraphs; but this is never mentioned, and his flesh did not seem to be made of text (and also seems unlikely as he his eyes, and previously liver, were repeatedly removed). So we are still left with two missing paragraphs, and a confusion as to how the Architect completed herself. 94.172.166.63 (talk) 17:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paragraphs of the Will 

message: In Arthur's section, it is said that Suzy claims that she wants to grow up becuase she is nearly 2 million years old. In her section, however, the figure is two thousand. Haven't got the book to check for myself. 90.209.131.145 (talk) 21:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which is it? 

message: This section is in need of a cleanup, since:
* The mentioned guards are explained in the section about the Dawn, Noon and Dusks themselves.
* A large part of the information is speculation anyway, e.g. for Wednesday (never mentioned), Thursday (it says Dawn is in charge of The Regiment, but she is seen wearing a Borderers uniform, and also the other ones are not clear. Also, who would be in charge of the Borderers and Artillery then?), Saturday (not clear in any way) and Sunday (never heard of the Sowers, Growers and Reapers. The high servants themselves are called like this, but no servants/guards are mentioned).
THe section should be removed anyway, I guess. I'm willing to do this. Regards - Typhoner (talk) 16:50, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guards of Dawn, Noon and Dusks of The Days 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of The Keys to the Kingdom characters. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927181611/http://www.allenandunwin.com/_uploads/documents/kidsandteens/Superior_Sat_chapter1.mp3 to http://www.allenandunwin.com/_uploads/documents/kidsandteens/Superior_Sat_chapter1.mp3
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:07, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified