Forum:Character lists for novels

Forums: Village pump → Character lists for novels
(This topic is archived. Please do not edit this page!)

I'll keep this short and simple: right now, a lot of novels include every single character whose name is mentioned even once in the list of characters. I feel this is poor policy and serves only to confuse those who haven't read the novel and leads them to think that, for example, Aegwynn and Grom Hellscream appear in The Shattering. I feel that the list of characters should only include characters who actually appear, and not, for example, include Gul'dan simply because the author briefly mentions a bit of backstory that happens to give his name. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:21, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. --g0urra[T҂C] 23:22, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

It might help, but that is a lot of work undone.--SWM2448 00:59, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Why not put a (Mentioned only) tag/code next to the people that are only mentioned? StarNeptune (talk) 09:13, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

What's the point with that? --g0urra[T҂C] 09:17, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

I was offering a compromise and thought it would add to the discussion? As Sandwichman pointed out, erasing all those characters is a lot of work undone. Adding a {{mo}} template (or whatever you want to call it) would be a lot less work, it would identify which characters are only mentioned, and as a whole would give the article a more complete feel. StarNeptune (talk) 09:31, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Doesn't matter how much is being undone—if it's not needed then it should be removed (see Burning Legion and Scourge command structures). However I'd also like an example of where a character is just mentioned. --g0urra[T҂C] 11:04, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

In Twilight of the Aspects, someone Nefarian is mentioned to have been raised from the dead to continue his work on the chromatic dragonflight. Other than that, he never appears in the book. Also, as far as "mentioned only," I don't really think it's relevant to list those sorts of things when, in most cases, it's just something like "Garrosh Hellscream, son of Grom Hellscream" or "the Horde has come a long way since Gul'dan's treachery." -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 17:24, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Mentioning someone doesn't make them a characters, a character is someone who takes part in the story line. As for being against removing information being a bad thing. Why keep information in something that would be better and more accurate without it. I have agree with your example on command structures too but that's for another time.  MoneygruberTheGoblinChieftain of the Gentleman Tribe(talk contribs) 20:33, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I never like the list styles anyway, they're awful. Minor characters and Mentioned characters should be 2 different sections, but we shouldn't remove mentioned characters, because sometimes those mentions are important and unique.--Lon-ami (talk) 11:51, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

This! They should really be there as mentioned characters, because hard-lore players would be interest in those characters.--Mordecay (talk) 13:43, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

What interest is there in knowing that the author pointed out that Garrosh is Grom's son? Or mentioning Gul'dan, Doomhammer, or Ner'zhul in a brief history of the Horde? Or in Thrall wondering to himself about where a variety of characters are in the alternate timeline? Occasionally a character will get a mention that's important to the story, but even then just grouping them together in a list of characters whose names appeared in the book is useless for conveying that and only serves to confuse those who haven't read the book and wonder why Uther Menethil appears in a book that doesn't involve time travel and takes place entirely in present-day Kalimdor. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 16:41, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

That's why they should be under mentions, and not under minor characters, so people doesn't mistake them. There's a lot of mentioned characters that are important for the plots, and some exist only as mentions.--Lon-ami (talk) 20:15, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't like to remove them because they are only mentionned, I prefer to have 4 columns (Major, Supporting, Minor and Mentionned)

Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (^talk/_contribz) 07:17, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Those who said two or three sentences should be under Mentioned or Minor characters?--Mordecay (talk) 14:41, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Minor, obviosuly. Mentioned characters are mentioned characters, those who don't appear.--Lon-ami (talk) 16:09, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I support the separation of minor and mentioned into 2 different list, i don't support the total removal of mentioned characters.--Ashbear160 (talk) 20:13, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

If there is going to be a list of Mentioned characters, how do we define a mention? Any time the character's name appears? Because that leads right back to the previous problem of Grom being listed because of "Garrosh Hellscream, son of the heroic Grom Hellscream," or Elune being listed in virtually any night elf story. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 20:41, 20 September 2011 (UTC)