Talk:Myst canon

message: —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gavin.collins (talk • contribs) 11:14, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

message: Can any of the speculation regarding the trap books be cited to an outside source?  Original Research is not allowed on Wikipedia.  I'm a Myst fan myself, but it isn't appropriate.  If anyone can find a link to a quote from someone in the know, like the Millers or Richard Watson, on the true nature of trap and link books, then that can be used as source material.  Otherwise, a lot of this stuff needs to go.  -Kasreyn 03:56, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: No Original Research

message: I've proposed merging D'ni guilds into this article.  I suggest we use that page's talk (Talk:D'ni Guilds) for discussion. SFT | Talk 06:56, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: The recent edit puts Tomahna on a new age that Atrus wrote. However, as far as I'm aware, Tomahna is in fact on Earth. Can anyone confirm this? --Wolf530 18:11, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
:Tomahna is a place on Earth, in fact near the Cleft, so that puts it in or near Eddy County, New Mexico, USA. Confirmed not only by Uru but also by RAWA. Jordi·✆ 19:01, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tomahna 

message: I note that this article has a good pronunciation section, but I think it's rather odd that the article says Esher's pronunciation should be disregarded.  He is D'ni; doesn't that make his pronunciation the new canon?  There are many examples of fictional franchises reported in Wikipedia articles, and in the great majority of cases, when a later offering from the franchise changes something, the new version is considered to be canon.  Just go look at the talk pages of some of the Star Trek and Star Wars articles.  There are plenty of examples of the franchise doing something that causes embarassment or annoyance for their fans, but that's just the way it works, and the mistake becomes canon.  
For instance, the head ridges added to Klingons in the first Star Trek movie caused years of headaches for Star Trek writers in trying to explain; finally they came up with a really hokey explanation that a virus caused Klingons in the original series to have smooth foreheads.  Lame!!  But that's what has to be done when a franchise's writers don't do their homework.  I suspect that the varied pronunciations of D'ni are due to Cyan failing to decide on a pronunciation and communicate this to everyone involved with their franchise.  Mistake.
While I have a lot of respect for RAWA, if they didn't want D'ni pronounced Duch-nee', they would have instructed David Ogden-Stiers to pronounce it differently as Esher.  I don't even see a source in the article for the RAWA comment, or an explanation of why he is considered a reliable source.  (I don't dispute his reliability, but our readers might not know who RAWA is).  In fact, we don't even explain the acronym!!
In general, unless we have a concrete statement from Cyan on which pronunciation is canon (and a link to corroborate), we need to assume that the latest chronological offering in the franchise is canon, and therefore Esher's pronunciation must be assumed to be canonical.  After all, remember that Atrus and Yeesha were not raised among the D'ni, and their pronunciations, like that of the members of the DRC in Uru, are suspect when compared to an authentic surviving D'ni such as Esher.  Kasreyn 19:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Read this. In the middle of the page RAWA says that Esher had a speech impediment.--Wizard of Frobozz 21:45, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation and RAWA 

message: From what I understand of the article, the d'ni cavern (with the City Proper, the islands, and all of that) has been around for several millenia in what is now New Mexico? If not, the article should be changed to talk more about where the cavern is. Is it its own age? Is it the largest / oldest age to exist? I don't quite understand where the d'ni is located, or about the origins of d'ni (I'm more concerned about the former; I don't know if the series even lets on to the origins of d'ni).  --Eptin (talk) 04:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  D'ni's location 

message: Since the Art, Ages and other formerly information-bearing pages about important Myst elements are now just redirects to this page, how about adding something here that tells the reader what they would have learned on those pages? Otherwise there'll be a lot of puzzled Wikireaders following those links expecting to learn what those terms mean in the game. --Noclevername (talk) 18:57, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would draft the article in userspace first. For a list of Ages to be notable, it would have to have multiple secondary sources talking about the ages. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 12:06, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Also check my userspace. I have some of those "Ages of xxx" articles in there. — OranL (talk) 23:46, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Where's the beef?

message: Since there is no way in hell we can pretty much ever get this article to GA or higher, and because I think it makes more sense there, I'm proposing moving elements of this article to Myst (series)#Common elements. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 19:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you think all the primary points can be condensed then go for it. If you yourself are planning to do the merge I for one would like to see some kind of draft for the new section. Rehevkor ✉ 19:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have checked as thoroughly as you usually do, then I will believe you that it can't stand on its own, and fully support a merge. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: @Rehevkor: Well, the common elements would talk about the art and linking books, et al (as here), and the about the D'ni-that's really just two paragraphs of info, I don't see much more point of getting into the nebulous "linking books did this in X" stuff that this article is currently full of. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 22:51, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

text: I think it makes more sense to be in that article, especially since having a Myst (series) and a Myst canon article always seemed a little redundant to me. It would boost both of these articles' quality if they were merged. This might even give Myst (series) enough information that, once cited and cleaned up, would get the article to FA status. What a great idea! — OranL (talk) 22:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok if no one has an objection within the next couple of days, I'll merge the pertinent info in to the series article. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 00:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger proposal