User talk:Debarra

Nalthis

Hi there! Thanks for your hard work on the Nalthis page. It needed improvement, and we appreciate what you put into writing and citing everything. Unfortunately, the history section comes across as too detailed for the page. Generally on a Shardworld page we like to confine the history section to the "big picture" of events that occur on the planet. For instance, Threnody is a good example of the level of detail that's preferred. So all of that is to say, don't be too alarmed when you see it edited down. You could let some of the Keepers go through it, or if you prefer you can go through it yourself and get it to the point of being an overview of the planet's history. A lot of the content can be useful either in a culture section on the page (for the information regarding Returned in different nations, for example) or on other pages that are designed to handle more of the details. For instance, the Five Scholars article could use some of the content, as could Shashara and Hanald. If you'd like to discuss this further, you're welcome to reply here or the Nalthis talk page, or to join our Discord for Coppermind editors.
-- Truthwatch3r (talk) 02:27, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Hey Truthwatch3r, thanks for getting in touch. Apologies if the page was too indepth, may have gotten carried away making it. I can go through it myself but unfortunately I have some exams coming up and those need to take priority right now so it may take a week or two before I can properly dive into revising the section. If this doesn't work though and people want to do it themselves in the mean time that's grand as well.

Apologies again for any mess I made.

-- Debarra (talk)

No need to apologize. Like I said, your work is very appreciated and will be useful in other places! We're happy to let you go through it yourself and totally understand that exams take priority. Good luck with them!

-- Truthwatch3r (talk) 14:24, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Hey Truthwatch3r, went through them again and cut out most of the unneeded references. I've kept some details of the novel in the sections since I feel it would be weird to exclude them as the article felt incomplete without some details. If you want to look through the new version and revise is as needed that would be a help. Thanks again for your patience.

-- Debarra (talk)

Thank you very much! Yes I agree it definitely needs to include some of what goes on in the novel, as those are important parts of the world's history. I'll take a look at it sometime this week or the next. And thank you for taking the suggestion to pare it down gracefully!

-- Truthwatch3r (talk) 14:01, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

TLM Notes

Hey Debarra! Thanks for your work on all the new information from The Lost Metal! Just wanted to reach out to answer some questions/comments in some of your recent edits. The syntax for citing epilogues from the book is {{book ref|mb7|epilogue|#}} where # is the number of the epilogue. Also note that the names of God Metals, including trellium and harmonium/ettmetal, are not capitalized. With regard to trellium and "the final metal," as far as I can tell, it's never confirmed they are necessarily the same (and on a general note, I think it's probably better to double check the references before making a change like that). The only mentions of the final metal I can find are chapter 8, where Marasi thinks about Miles' last words and then touches the trellium spike she pulled from Granks, and chapter 60, where Marasi again thinks about Miles' last words after seeing the men of red and gold. Let me know if I'm missing a source though! Feel free to reach out if you have any other questions and happy editing!
--Stargazer (talk) 01:13, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Hey Stargazer, thanks for reaching out. I fixed the epilogue reference there so it should be to the correct one. In future though may it be worthwhile to consider having a system where they aren't numbered for citations? In the UK at least none of them have numbers ascribed to them, perhaps it is different in the US edition? I'll go on to fix those capitalisations now as well.

As for the 'final metal' I'll have to double check myself in a bit, I could have sworn they explicitly stated it was the final metal at some stage throughout the novel but can't find it at the moment whilst flicking through my copy.--Debarra (talk) 01:23, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, the epilogues have numbers on the table of contents in my copy. Interesting that's not universal. I assume they're just identified by point-of-view character in your copy? Unfortunately, I don't think there's really a way I can get {{book ref}} to handle both "Kelsier epilogue" and "epilogue 4" for example. But I'll definitely keep that in mind for the future; I may need to make bigger changes to that template if unnumbered parts is a thing that keeps happening (please Brandon no).

While I'm here, what did you have in mind from TLM that the Survival Shard page should be updated with? That quote from Marasi certainly seems to describe the fandom's experience with that Shard, but I'm coming up empty trying to think of an in-universe connection to the Shard in the book. I'm also trying to stay on top of a lot of stuff with this release though and am aware there's definitely some stuff I'm missing.

--Stargazer (talk) 01:45, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes in the UK version they are all just given the names of the relevant person with no numbers. It seems an odd difference between them and nothing I've heard of before happening. It seems sticking with the numbers in that case is easiest then.

As for the Survival Shard page I had nothing in particular in mind when adding it, I added the template for info to be added as it seemed it and the spoilers tag where always paired. As well as that I, to my knowledge, don't have any authority to declare pages as complete or incomplete and had simply presumed that since I added TLM info proper procedure would be to tag it so someone with that power could mark it as complete. The reason I added the quote was as you said, it seemed to be, imo, clearly alluding to the Survival Shard and thus I felt it fitting to use, even if not explicitly about the Shard in question.

If you have any other questions or queries please don't feel afraid to ask. :)--Debarra (talk) 01:57, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, the interactions between the various tags we use can be complex. To overview, {{spoilers}} applies whenever a page has information from a new book (though when a new book comes out, we'll generally add it preemptively, because we've decided that's better than someone forgetting to add the tag later); {{update}} applies when a page still needs information from a book to be added. So, once all the new information from a book has been added to a page, {{spoilers}} would stay, but {{update}} would go (e.g., Autonomy's page right now, since one of our staff already went through and updated that). There are separate tags at the bottom of the page for how complete it is—if it's incomplete, it's probably {{partial}}; if you think it's done, you can mark it as {{complete}}; and then one of the staff will (eventually) go through and add their signature to that after checking it over. If a page that had previously been reviewed by staff and then becomes incomplete because of new information, we'll also tag it as {{demoted|mb7}} (or whatever the relevant book code is).

With regard to that quote, what I'm sort of stumbling on is that, while Brandon might have been alluding to the Survival Shard, if he is, he's doing it on more of a meta level, about the "mystique" of the Shard we as fans have known exists for so long, but barely know anything about. Marasi doesn't know about the Survival Shard and we don't know enough about the Shard's motivations to say whether she even happened to accurately describe them. And so between how we write our articles from an in-world perspective and how we try to be strict about speculation, to me it just feels like a stretch to use that quote there. I can run it by the rest of the staff though if you want.

--Stargazer (talk) 03:26, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, I just saw this now after finishing another batch of edits and have to leave for a while to complete some work on my end but will be sure to look through them and edit as needed once I am back.

While I do agree that the quote is quite meta I do think it notable that the entire page itself is meta and thus I would believe it fits the general tone of it. We simply don't have any canon references to the Shard to use. As well as that I would argue that it is a clear analogy to one of the last two Shards to be revealed, of which the survival shard may be one. The conversation later gives two examples that are the known plans of Odium and Ambition so I do not think it a stretch to imagine that someone like Brandon with such virtuosity in foreshadowing would insert similar hints towards the Survival Shards plan into the conversation. A talk page being opened to discuss the quote on the survival shard's page may be useful however.--Debarra (talk) 11:51, 17 November 2022 (UTC)