FANDOM

A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
  • Hey! My name is Atvelonis, and I'm the Fandom Wiki Manager for the Prince of Persia Wiki as well as an admin on Elder Scrolls. I'm here to help you and the wider community, and act as a liaison between you and Fandom Staff. If you ever have any questions or issues related to the wiki, its features (editing, templates, bots, etc.), or whatever else, feel free to reach out to me on my message wall or on Discord (Atvelonis#9495) and I can help out! —Atvelonis (talk) 16:42, May 6, 2019 (UTC)

      Loading editor
    • Hey, Atvelonis.

      Thanks for introducing yourself. I'll definitely approach you should the need arise.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi, I've noticed couple of bugs. One is the Stub template, which in wide-screen monitors messes with the article. Changing the size of the image to 45px might resolve that, but then it would look weird in the 4:3 monitors.

    The other is the favicon thing, it won't show the correct icon in the bookmarks, or in the bookmarks toolbar (even though it shows the correct icon in the tab). I'm guessing it's more of a Firefox problem since it is working perfectly in the IE and Edge. I don't have an idea how to fix that though, maybe reuploading the icon helps.

      Loading editor
    • Adding the article name fixed the stub template. Thanks.

      Could I trouble you to edit "Template:PoP series" a little. The "Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time" links to the disambiguation page. I also added pages for "Prince of Persia: Time Run" and "Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (GBA)", those could be added to the list.

        Loading editor
    • That's good to hear. And, yes, I can definitely can add those to the series template. And if you're not able to, I'll unlock it so registered users can add things to the template.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Welcome Back!

    I just wanted to take the time to ask about the swords. I placed "Biography" on the Water Sword page because most of the other swords on this wiki has a bio. But I'm assuming by the talk page you just recently created we don't want that due to it sounding like a character article.

    If this is the case, I can tend to some of the pages and use the water sword page as a structured reference, if that's okay with you.

    ~BLK

      Loading editor
    • Yeah, one of the intents with updating the weapon articles and the infoboxes for the weapon articles from "object" to "weapons" was to basically ensure that there was no confusion between language used in them verses character articles where a "Biography" heading would be necessary.

      I managed to correct some of the SOT weapon articles because the number of weapons were fewer, but got distracted straightening up other things around the Wiki and never returned to WW weapon articles even after I got the guide.

      But, yeah, the basic template you want to use with weapon and object articles is:

      • Abilities - When describing what the weapon can do in the game that ties into the narrative.
      • Gameplay - When something connected to the weapon is dependent on collecting items or, gaining a "secret ending" or "secret level" (for example).
      • History - When the narrative use of the weapon is unique enough that it is not repeating information covered in the "Abilities" and "Gameplay" subheadings.
        Loading editor
    • Lily Ford wrote: Yeah, one of the intents with updating the weapon articles and the infoboxes for the weapon articles from "object" to "weapons" was to basically ensure that there was no confusion between language used in them verses character articles where a "Biography" heading would be necessary.

      I managed to correct some of the SOT weapon articles because the number of weapons were fewer, but got distracted straightening up other things around the Wiki and never returned to WW weapon articles even after I got the guide.

      But, yeah, the basic template you want to use with weapon and object articles is:

      • Abilities - When describing what the weapon can do in the game that ties into the narrative.
      • Gameplay - When something connected to the weapon is dependent on collecting items or, gaining a "secret ending" or "secret level" (for example).
      • History - When the narrative use of the weapon is unique enough that it is not repeating information covered in the "Abilities" and "Gameplay" subheadings.

      Okay Got it!

      Also, a trivia heading as well I assume? ~BLK

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, a Trivia heading as well when something "trivial" needs mentioning.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hey me again,

    I just wanted to ask before I do anything, do we steer clear of putting thumbnails in the articles? If so are galleries okay? I was going to add a picture of King Sharaman from TTT dead in the well, but if you don't think it is a good idea just let me know.

    Screenshot sha







    I have not done it yet, just wanted to check with you first.

    ~BlueLobsterKing

      Loading editor
    • View all 9 replies
    • Alright, thank you. Like I said earlier, I'm still getting use to this type of wiki set up. This is the first time I've had to add references as such. I tried to, but it gave me red words.

      I really do appreciate you taking the time to give me examples. I also did not know how to word it because most wikis are walk-through style, but I knew it was a little different on here.

      Well I will try again w/ another location, but if there is not an official screen shot or concept art available, should I just leave the image blank, or should I upload my own screen shot?

      ~BlueLobsterKing

        Loading editor
    • It's not a problem. Walkthrough language is fine, but it's definitely something you only wanna use when you're writing a gameplay segment in an article (like for the enemy pages) or a literal walkthrough article (which is something we're still working on because we'll need a lot of folk for that given the number of POP games.)

      Just upload your own screenshot if there isn't an official one to use. You could also check out a resource like Warrior Within's Steam page (their screenshot community is pretty good at capturing high quality images of locations and characters. Just be mindful not to use images with subtitles on them.). If you have a graphics program (like GIMP or Photoshop), you could also try to brighten the image if it comes out too dark.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi Lily!

    I noticed that you have averted my edits on this page. I know the sword is reused, but is still makes a background appearance in Warrior Within. Just like if a character made a cameo appearance, you would mention them in the game as such.

    ~BlueLobsterKing

      Loading editor
    • I didn't revert the information, I just rearranged the information so that it fell under the trivia section. Warrior Within doesn't acknowledge the weapon as "Sword of the Mighty Warrior" despite the asset from The Sands of Time clearly being reused, so it's appearance really doesn't warrant a mention in under the "game" subheading in the infobox.

      It's also not acknowledged among the disposal weapons the Prince used in the game, so the information is better suited as a trivia reference given that it's not a default weapon like Prince's Sword, which gets replaced. Cameo references or appearances also tend to fall under the trivia section as well. The infobox for this particular article should only contain information pertinent to The Sands of Time, where the weapon is used exclusively as that is the article focus.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • So I just went back to the Kaileena page to look at something and noticed the format. At first, I thought it was a new user but saw that multiple pages had that and instead, it was you. So sorry about abruptly making the changes.

    But why? It's a strange format for summing up a character's capabilities. Consider how we have and a person's abilities and powers are usually continuous so I tell it that way.

      Loading editor
    • EDIT #1: Basically, I've trying to get the article sub-pages to the specific formatting. When I started repairing the subpages, I wanted to start specifying which games were being referenced specifically with a header (not just with citation), largely because the Prince article was default model for how I was organizing the pages, and what a character can do has changed or is more the center of game's attention from game-to-game.

      If there was, for instance, an instance character only appeared in one game and no spinoffs, then the maybe headers would just be "Abilities" and "Powers", but I'm against that because that would just create confusion about the formatting I've been trying to achieve for the last couple months or so.

      Like, I don;t really think we need to specificity with a heading what type of power Kaileena can use. It's given it might be magic, but I fairly certain that the WW and TTT never specifies what type of power she uses or that it's magic at all like it does in the original POP games, which is why I've never used "magic" to describe anything in the SOT trilogy or the POP08 game. So, "arcane magic" isn't a term we need to use unless its specifically in the language of the game's canon.

      EDIT #2: Double-Checked, SOT calls the fountains "Magic Fountains" and at least one enemy page on WW does describe her using "Arcane Magic", so, my bad on that.

      But, all that out of the way, I've been trying to get the sub-pages about powers and abilities more focused on what's used in which game in the their respective series (sans things like DLC, which is just an extension of an original game and not another game itself unless specified), instead of generalizing and using only those two sub-headings on the pages for simplification of paragraphs.

        Loading editor
    • I see what you mean but I disagree on it.

      From what I'm getting, you're trying to have the Powers and Abilities pages in a specific, consistent format. Which is honestly not a bad idea. I tried something like this on the Soul Eater Wikia too myself.

      However, those kind of information can't exactly follow a specific format because every character has different powers and abilities and the best way to address them will vary. Some of them may require a different format. Characters like the Prince, Vizier, Kaileena, and 2008 Prince have achieved various different "forms" if you may with advantageous and disadvantageous.

      Not to mention that you'll risk repeating the same information. In each game, the Prince's skill with a blade is emphasized in the manuals, strategy guide, and within the game to firmly establish him as a master swordsman. I can sum it all up in a "Abilities" section, however long, and be done with it.

      Your format is perfect for characters who only appear a few times but someone like the Prince and Vizier will start having counts of redundancy.

        Loading editor
    • You're definitely making a fair point, and I'll admit I've run into the issue already with trying to specify the difference in Razia's power and Kaileena's power with the each section focusing on what they demonstrated in a specific game, or, in the case of Razia, how differently a spin-off game interpreted it from a mainstream game.

      And I can definitely agree that it might be more justified with characters who only appear in one game, or, in the Vizier's case, have different power sets (because there's the magic he used in SOT, and there's the power he used as "Zurvan" in TTT as a Sand Creature).

      I haven't gotten too far on the effort yet, so, I can basically just go change the format back to how I started it initially.

        Loading editor
    • Concerning Razia and Kaileena, their Sand-related powers (as Razia mentions it is actually an element) are rather related (as in essence, the "Sands of Time" is type of "Sand" element) although I hadn't update the infromation to actually talk about her other abilities (she can appearently have the Prince/herself control the Sand Monsters in the ga,e) so there's some differences. Sand is an element so it would have it's own applications If you try thinking like it's an element like wind, water, etc. like Razia claims it is. Also, Ratash himself uses Sand to create a Sand Army. Perhaps that'll help your distinction.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Why did you rid of the categorization for the "Forgotten Sands (Wii)"?The very reason why I included them was because it's VERY distinct from the other versions (I would say they need it too). And some of them even have the same enemy names. Lumping it under a "Forgotten Sands" is too general and a bit odd just because it bears the same title name.

    My point; just saying Forgotten Sands and not giving it a clear distinction which system just doesn't seem right when the article by all means establishes whatever version it is from. It's not like Forgotten Sands ports even share a similar theme or anything. They all tell very separate stories. And only the consoles and DS actually correlate in terms of story.

    For an off wiki example of my logic, the Splinter Cell Wiki categories separate Double Agent pages of the main consoles to the previous gen of that time (xbox, gamecube, ps2) because they have different stories and is distinct enough to warrant it.

      Loading editor
    • Organization, basically. There simply aren't enough characters in the off-shot games for The Forgotten Sands, antagonist or protagonist alike that really warrant additional categories (all together, every character from every version of TFS barely makes a page and a half), and as they are all from games with a shared title, it only makes sense that there be one "Forgotten Sands Character" category for them in general.

      The Forgotten Sands already has a decent number of categories dedicated to it (Enemies, Weapons, Characters, Location), and it's best to keep it within the same number of categories the SOT, TTT and WW have, because they are enough cover the number of characters and enemies present in each distinct game.

      I think the distinction between the different Forgotten Sands games is evident on the articles themselves, and the addition of their names to their dedicated section of SOT character navigation template situated at the bottom of the page. Nothing else is really needed for the reader for understand that these characters are not present in the mainstream console game.

      The original clean-up for this wiki was originally dedicated to removing the excess number of images and categories that the original admins and users created. The last thing that needs to be done is to create more categories for a few characters from spin-off games. It's just not a feasible thing to do in terms of trying to keep this place organized.

      I get your argument for more categories, but I just don't believe there is a need for them.

        Loading editor
    • I don't mean to offend with any of my words. Just saying so ahead of time

      But your argument is kinda off to me. You're saying because there isn't "enough" characters to justify it, that it should blanket it? Prince of Persia doesn't even have a large cast to begin with in each game. I mean, looking at each of the games individually, they all don't have that many characters to start with. The categories by your line of logic should really apply to even the Sands of Time Triolgy. The saving grace is that some of the characters are reocurring.

      How much is needed to justify it then? I mean, there's at least six characters in Forgotten Sand's Wii version that you see (same as Sands of Time alone without the enemies) and other characters mention that has everything to do with the lore. It's not much more/less then some of these games. Taken your pick on the game and look at it individually. And it's not like anyone paid close attention to the other ports enough to really answer the question. I myself really only know the Wii version because I HAVE it and watched a person's DS walkthrough from start to finish. Expansion is very much needed on the other ports. While the Wii/PSP IMO look decent enough, I can't say I was excited looking into the DS version.

      While you say this argument for the Forgotten Sands ports, what about the Fallen King DS game? By all means, it has an even shorter cast of characters and enemies (pages just haven't been made for 'em) then the Forgotten Sands Wii version and DS version by far.  But the categories on those pages definitely reflect them being Fallen King characters for example. Would we also blanket it under the "POP 2008" category even when the game is distinct in every other way (art wise, different game altogether) just because it in the same universe?

      I don't disagree that excessive categories aren't needed. But they were added to further seperate them by versions for convenience and the simple matter that they aren't the same. If our pages are making it known they're different, then shouldn't the categories do the same? It just goes hand-in-hand to me.

      The reason I'm coming off a bit hard on it is because what you're saying is based of a subjective view point ("There simply aren't enough characters in the off-shot games, The Forgotten Sands, antagonist or protagonist alike that really warrant additional categories (all together, every character from every version of TFS barely makes a page and a half)") then an objective viewpoint because to my knowledge, the guidelines/policies here to do not specify how many character/articles/how much content is needed before categorization is needed for organization sake. And if you wanna claim that the characters from all the TFS ports barely have any content altogether, then why are the Battles of Prince of Persia -related justified? They themsleves barely make a page and there's a limit number of characters too.

      All the TFS ports, by all means, seemingly warrant having different categories and what not if you compare them to each individual game and ignore the fact characters are reocurring (Sharing a title name is a flimsy reason given we already seperate the entire universes. "Sands of Time" is a disney film and game title but we're sure to seperate THAT for obvious reasons). I'm really putting this out here too because I'm secitoning time (when i am here) to focusing on expanding on the ports that most fans don't care about and then you're saying they barely make a page and a half when there's a lot more content to be added. As a person who strives in making edits based on objective guidelines, it's like an elephant in the room to me when something is being done based on a personal viewpoint.

      If organization is the actual concern, we may need to revise how we categorize altogether.

        Loading editor
    • Not to worry, you're not offending me with your words. We've got on well enough that you'd have to something like those weird South Korean or Chinese spam-bots that kept coming back here with new accounts to spam the forums no matter how many times I perma-blocked them a couple months back.

      I had something long and involved written out, but honestly, the long and short of my argument is pretty much the same:

      • Nothing about organizing a Wiki is objective. Most disagreements and decisions on how to run a Wiki are all subjective, and ultimately require admins coming to a middle ground if they're not unanimous agreed on a subject, and if not, one has to step back. Not all Wiki policies or FAQs are going to cover every problem, or non-problem one can think of. If someone else had been doing this, I would've reacted the same.
      • A Single "Forgotten Sands Characters" Category, so far as TFS and I'm concerned, is more economic in terms of organization than having multiple categories with the same name with only parenthesis to differentiate them, and I am only using argument in concern to the categories. The articles are not the concern here.
      • I'm not interested applying this argument to the other games and their categories. They're not the concern here.
      • One "Forgotten Sands Characters" Category doesn't lead to confusion as to which games these characters come from because the articles do enough to create a distinction of which port these characters come from.

      If you want to and create the categories, Category:The Forgotten Sands Characters (DS), Category:The Forgotten Sands Characters (Wii), and Forgotten Sands Characters (PSP), you can. Just remember to finalize the above category pages, and place them in the proper sub categories: Category:Browse, and Category:Sands of Time Canon, Category:Forgotten Sands.

      Again, I don't agree with it, I saw your point and understood where you were coming from, but I don't see it as necessary (largely because I know this is usually how categories start to spiral out of control).

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • So I've have been thinking about this exact question ever since I've first been on the wiki: Why exactly are pages like Zurvan and Vizier seperate? They're the same entity to begin with. While it might make sense for the Prince/Sand Wraith for the fact that it's literally two dopplegangers occupying at the same time (Although considering the Maharajah and Prince used it, there should be two pages explaining their time in using it), the Zurvan and Vizier simply seem....redundant.

    It's not like he became a different character. He just gained power. :/

      Loading editor
    • Honestly, I think the Prince, Sand Wraith and the Dark Prince are exactly the Vizier and Zurvan articles might've been separated. The original mods or whoever the og mods agreed with believed the Vizier and Zurvan were distinct enough that they deserved two different articles, despite there being no distinct difference outside of appearances.

      I think Vizier and Zurvan can be merged without any problems. We can just redirect Zurvan (Sand Creature) to The Two Thrones subheading in the Vizier's article (so that it's longer than a paragraph) and do the necessary rearranging with his subpages.

      As for the Sand Wraith, while it does refer to more than one person (Farah's father and the Prince), I'm not entirely sure that article can justify a separation. I don't think there's enough information on the Maharajah to give him a separate page.

        Loading editor
    • Concerning the Vizier/Zurvan, it's the same entity and characterwise, each of the character pages should reflect that ENTITY. It seems redundant and even confusing to treat them as seperate characters when they're not. Vizier called himself Zurvan because he believed himself to the the "God of Time" figure, Zurvan. But he has his personality intact and all.

      The Dark Prince needs adjusting because there is the transformation we call the "Dark Prince" and then there's the darker aspect of his personality given life and form in it's own way. And it is distinct on it's own cause personalities don't talk to you. xD

      With the Sand Wraith, perhaps some adjusting is needed too. I don't think giving them a seperate page for each is neeeded though. We can blanket it but I want the page itself to empahnsize that it's a doppleganger of the wearer and to account for their individual histories. After all, the "future" Prince Sand Wraith died and the Prince learned from that when he caught up to that point in time. The page itself sets up the Sand Wraith more like a individual character and IMO could use some sprucing up that can provide clarity. Just wanted to se your opinion.

        Loading editor
    • Sorry about the belated reply here.

      JayAaerow wrote:

      Concerning the Vizier/Zurvan, it's the same entity and characterwise, each of the character pages should reflect that ENTITY. It seems redundant and even confusing to treat them as seperate characters when they're not. Vizier called himself Zurvan because he believed himself to the the "God of Time" figure, Zurvan. But he has his personality intact and all.

      I'm in agreement with that much, so I'm not against merging the two articles.

      JayAaerow wrote:

      The Dark Prince needs adjusting because there is the transformation we call the "Dark Prince" and then there's the darker aspect of his personality given life and form in it's own way. And it is distinct on it's own cause personalities don't talk to you. xD

      There is a lot about the article that is maybe skewered a little too much toward "The Prince" as opposed to "The Dark Prince", and I'll admit despite all the tweaking, it's the one of the least worked on pages regarding the TTT characters.

      JayAaerow wrote: With the Sand Wraith, perhaps some adjusting is needed too. I don't think giving them a seperate page for each is neeeded though. We can blanket it but I want the page itself to empahnsize that it's a doppleganger of the wearer and to account for their individual histories. After all, the "future" Prince Sand Wraith died and the Prince learned from that when he caught up to that point in time. The page itself sets up the Sand Wraith more like a individual character and IMO could use some sprucing up that can provide clarity. Just wanted to se your opinion.

      That can definitely be managed, so I'm also not against tweaking this page as well.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hello,

    I'm a bureaucrat for the Sly Cooper Wiki, which this wiki is an affiliate of. I just wanted to let you know that we have changed our logo, and it can be found here. It is for use in your affiliates section on the main page.

    Thank you.

      Loading editor
  • Just leaving an explanation here why I edited the Maharajah's treasure vault red links. Because we have 4 of them at the moment, and I was trying to sync them all up, so when someone creates the page for The Maharajah's Treasure Vaults, the red links would all work, and wouldn't need further edits.

    Also those Zurvan leftovers, I marked them for deletion because they were leftovers. since we have two Zurvans: sand creature and god. It makes sense to delete the leftover since the disambiguation shouldn't redirect into one specific character.

      Loading editor
    • I reverted the Maharajah's treasure vault edits originally because I remembered it being referred to singularly (by the Prince), but I doubled checked in the game just to make sure, and the Vizier makes reference to it in the plural, so it's not just the level name, which is what I thought you were linking to.

      Thank you for the clarification.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
See archived talk page
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message