User talk:Draevan13

Welcome
Hi, welcome to Game of Thrones Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Xaro Xhoan Daxos page.

We welcome all contributions to the Wiki but please be aware of the following simple rules:

1) This wiki is meant for the Game of Thrones TV series and the TV alone. Spoilers from the novels are not permitted at all. Discussion of earlier events in the novels and the use of non-spoiler background material from the novel as regards specific events, characters and places in the TV series are allowed (in the 'In the books' section of an article) but future events cannot be discussed.

2) This wiki has specific permission from HBO's marketing department to use a reasonable number of promotional images and screencaps from the series to illustrate articles. The use of other copyrighted images is not permitted without either specific permission or fair use attributions. For example, this Wiki cannot use Amoka's portrait images or Ted Nasmith's castle pictures as these are copyrighted. In addition, the Wiki is focused on the TV series and TV series alone. Images from other media should be avoided without a very good cause.

Enjoy your editing and please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- QueenBuffy (Talk) 2012-07-04T21:33:38

Pronunciation Guide
The Pronunciation guide page is not a comprehensive guide to pronunciation. It is an archive of an internal correspondence that HBO had in Season 1. That's why it is locked from anonymous editing. "Myr" wasn't on the list in Season 1. I do hope we get a new pronunciation guide for new names in seasons 2 and 3.--The Dragon Demands 23:54, July 4, 2012 (UTC)

Spoiler policy
Several of your recent edits have violated the spoiler policy:

The show has been ambiguous so far about the Sack of Winterfell in particular. Please edit with our audience in mind; this site is about the TV series and information from the books should only be included if the TV series has covered the same part of the story.--Opark 77 06:11, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * He is one of the senior producers and the series third most frequent writer. They have shown the sack from Bran's perspective only with minimal explanation of what happened.--Opark 77 17:52, July 11, 2012 (UTC)

The Tickler
Chiswyck may yet feature later; because he hasn't been established in the show we shouldn't say much about him.--Opark 77 23:32, July 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * Since they are two separate continuities we are not going to rule it out. There is a wiki for the books if you are solely concerned with that continuity.--Opark 77 23:56, July 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * No, the point of our in the books section is to compare events from the television series with events from the books. It is crucial that we do so without spoiling anything that might occur in the television series for viewers who have not read the books. If it hasn't happened at all in the show then we don't write about it.--Opark 77 00:04, July 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * I think the spoiler policy is pretty clear: "This wiki is meant for the Game of Thrones TV series and the TV alone. Spoilers from the novels are not permitted at all. Discussion of earlier events in the novels and the use of non-spoiler background material from the novel as regards specific events, characters and places in the TV series are allowed (in the 'In the books' section of an article) but future events cannot be discussed."--Opark 77 00:13, July 12, 2012 (UTC)

Bullet point lists
When writing a list with bullet points pleased can you use an asterix (*) at the beginning of each entry rather than a hyphen (-), the asterix will then automatically format it into a decent looking list.--Opark 77 20:56, July 13, 2012 (UTC)

Book to show comparisons
Have you watched "Valar Morghulis" yet? If not please refrain from writing further comparisons between it and the books. You are making errors that seem to stem from not having actually experienced both of the things you are comparing for example the episode does not actually show Osha killing Luwin; it is suggested in an almost identical manner to the books.--Opark 77 20:59, July 13, 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, I'm glad you have watched it, please try and be more careful that your writing is factually accurate.--Opark 77 21:05, July 13, 2012 (UTC)

Block
The show is ambiguous about who perpetrated the sack of Winterfell. This is a site for viewers of the television series; even in discussing the books we don't post spoilers explaining something that is left deliberately ambiguous at this point in the show. I have blocked you from editing for 1 week. If you continue to post spoilers when you return I will block you for 1 month. A third violation of our policy will result in a 1 year block.--Opark 77 21:12, July 13, 2012 (UTC)

So, let me see if I get this right: we have a page designed to list the differences between the series and the books, where we can't actually list the differences between the series and the books. Even posting that character X having a different hair color is a spoiler. This is the first wikia I've ever seen with a rule that makes so little sense. And why am I being targeted specifically? Anyone who posts on the differences page is giving away spoilers.Draevan13 21:43, July 13, 2012 (UTC)

No, you still don't seem to grasp our spoiler policy despite our earlier discussions about it.

You are being targeted specifically because you broke the rule. It is fallacious to say that anyone who posts on the differences page is breaking the policy when the policy sets out what information from the books we will accept.

The spoiler policy clearly states that it is permissible to post information that has been covered by the television series. It also clearly states that we will not accept contributions that cover plot points that the television series has not yet reached.

Just think of it as a timeline. Events that are concurrent with, or before, the point that the show has reached are fine. Events that have not been covered in the television show are spoilers. Direct comparison of things that are different to the way they have been established in the television show like the hair color of featured characters is fine.

Explaining who perpetrated the Sack of Winterfell when the show has been ambiguous about it is not allowed. If you find the spoiler policy difficult to understand then I suggest that you stop writing about the books and contribute something about the television show instead.

The coverage of the television show at A Wiki of Ice and Fire is not as thorough as it is here and I am sure they would welcome your contributions comparing the books and the show.

If you are going to keep writing here then you need to start thinking of your target audience as someone who has not read the books and does not want to know plot points that might feature in the adaptation as it progresses. If that is too difficult for you to comprehend then we can't work with you.--Opark 77 21:55, July 13, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, but that means I only gave away one spolier, that Sack of Winterfell. Everything else I posted has already been covered in the series. Draevan13 22:12, July 13, 2012 (UTC)

I just looked at over three dozen pages that all have book spoilers, yet only I get banned. So yes, I am being targeted. Draevan13 22:29, July 13, 2012 (UTC)

I didn't deny that I was targeting you. In fact, I specifically told you that I was targeting you because I saw you breaking the rule. Is that clear enough? I'll say it again just in case. I am targeting you because you have repeatedly broken the spoiler policy just as I would target any editor who repeatedly broke a rule after being warned.

You gave away that "one spoiler" multiple times and after being warned.

We have a volunteer admin team to enforce the rules so we don't catch everything; if you see spoilers then tell one of us and we will deal with it.--Opark 77 (talk) 11:53, July 22, 2012 (UTC)

Jon Connington
The question I ask myself when considering creating any new article is "Has the subject been established in the context of the show?" By that I mean did they appear, or were they mentioned, in an episode? Do they appear in the HBO Viewers Guide? I try not to give any credence to their significance in the books, because the show is a different continuity that may handle things differently.

I think Tyrion may have established, in the show, that the Hand of the King position is particularly dangerous. If he specifically mentions the number of Hands that have been in trouble then that is probably just meeting the minimum requirement to include an article on Connington now. Even if we were to write an article about him we can only include things established in the context of the show in the body of the article, so it would be pretty short. I don't believe that the show has established his part in the Battle of the Bells, so we can't include that, except in the "In the books" section. Of course, the show is still running so the situation may change.

A character being mentioned in the "In the books" section of an article does not affect whether they warrant an article here. I removed mentions of Lewyn Martell, Jon Connington, and Myles Mooton from the infoboxes of the battle articles you mentioned because the infobox is not for content from the "In the books" sections. Mentioning those characters in the "In the books" section is fine, but we should carefully consider if it is meaningful to a reader not familiar with the books. i.e. it might read better to say "sent Barristan Selmy and one of his sworn brothers from the Kingsguard" because the name Jonothor Darry is essentially meaningless to our target audience.

My opinion is not the final word on anything here. If you disagree with me, or think something might be controversial, then I recommend involving the whole community. Usually we discuss things on the forum, but blog posts can work equally well.--Opark 77 (talk) 07:46, July 24, 2012 (UTC)


 * As Opark said. I do not believe Connington has been mentioned in the show or supporting materials so far, and he may not be (and he may not even appear, regardless of his importance in the books), so he does not deserve an entry. However, mentioning him in the 'In the books' sections where appropriate (perhaps in the Hand of the King and Stoney Sept articles) is fine.--Werthead (talk) 17:21, July 27, 2012 (UTC)

Image policy
Thank you for uploading File:War of Conquest.jpg, however, it is not currently used to illustrate an article. Did you intend it to illustrate something?

Please could you take a look at our image policy. For each image that we use we need to ensure that we have the following information on the image page, all of which should be added by the uploader at the point of upload:
 * 1) The source (naming the video clip or episode for screenshots and providing a URL for images from other websites)
 * 2) A description (state what the image shows)
 * 3) A licensing tag ( for screenshots)
 * 4) Appropriate categories (e.g. Category: Image (Valar Morghulis) and Category: Image (Character) for screenshots of characters from "Valar Morghulis", to add categories type )

Please add this information yourself to images that you upload. If you fail to do so I will let you know and nominate the image in question for deletion. I will then review it 1 week later and will be happy if you have added the required information so we can keep it, otherwise I will have to delete it. If you need assistance adding the required information just let me know and I will do my best to help.

We can't accept images that are not used for illustrating our articles so I have nominated File:War of Conquest.jpg for deletion. I will review it in 1 week to see if it meets our minimum requirements for inclusion. Please let me know if you need help fixing it up. I should also point out that it is very similar to our existing image File:Aegon balerion.jpg.

I have also nominated File:Aegon6.jpg and File:AEGON I.jpg for deletion. These are more problematic here. As original art work we need the permission of the artist to use them. Do you know who drew them? Can you contact them?--Opark 77 (talk) 08:01, July 24, 2012 (UTC)

I originally did intend to use it on the War of Conquest article, but I couldn't figure out how to upload it.

As for my two profile pics, I just got those on Google Images, I don't know who made them. I just wanted to embellish my profile page. Draevan13 (talk) 14:18, July 24, 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I have put File:War of Conquest.jpg into the infobox on the War of Conquest article. The first link in the previous sentence will show you exactly what I typed in the article page to achieve that, so might be worth revisiting if you want to add an image to an article in future. The best way to figure out how something is done on a wiki is to look at the code of an existing article in source editing mode; you can then see what code produces each element of the page. I appreciate that it is not straightforward and I am happy to help if there are other things you want to achieve but are not sure how.

I have also added all of the required information to the image page at File:War of Conquest.jpg.

I highly recommend working from a template when uploading images. Personally I always copy and paste this for screenshots:

==Summary==

This image is a screencap from "EPISODE." The image is copyrighted by HBO. This image is used with the permission of HBO but on the understanding that it can be removed at any time. The image shows DESCRIPTION.

==Licensing==

Then I only need to fill in the name of the episode and a brief description. Or for special feature images the name of the special feature, a brief description and the category Category:Image (Special Features) rather than an episode category.

For images from other websites I use this:

==Summary==

This is a promotion image of DESCRIPTION from [URL WEBSITE].

==Licensing==

Then I only need to fill in a description, the source and choose a category e.g. Category:Image (Actor).--Opark 77 (talk) 11:05, July 29, 2012 (UTC)

Aegon6.jpg
File:Aegon6.jpg is going to be difficult because we can't find out who drew it very easily. I have done a brief google images search myself and I think that you probably took it from A Wiki of Ice and Fire's article about the character, their page for the file is. Unfortunately they have no licensing information on their page. I can see that it was uploaded by Skab there, but they are no longer active. I think the first step is to ask them where they found it. Which will mean registering for an account at Westeros.org. Do you want to keep pursuing it?--Opark 77 (talk) 11:19, July 29, 2012 (UTC)

I actually tired registering the the Wiki of Ice and Fire, but I can't log in. It says that I have to enable cookies to log in, but when I do the page simply refreshes but won't log me in. Very confusing. As for Aegon I, that one is by Amoka, I checked, but I'm not going to use that one. Draevan13 (talk) 14:17, July 29, 2012 (UTC)

AEGON I.jpg
File:AEGON I.jpg is not used on any articles now. Do you want to try to keep it? I can tell you that it looks similar in style to the picture User:The Dragon Demands has on their personal profile, which I think is by an artist named Amoka.--Opark 77 (talk) 11:19, July 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * I have amended the licensing details on the Aegon I picture, so it can be used on someone's user page if they so wish. If it is not used as such in the near future, it can be put up for deletion again.--Werthead (talk) 21:33, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
 * I added it again, then put it on my profile pic. Draevan13 (talk) 00:13, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Wiki links
Wiki links are made by adding double brackets around something. You keep making direct URL links - http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Valyrian_steel?diff=54271&amp;oldid=49184 --The Dragon Demands (talk) 22:33, July 26, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I'm in Canada and stuck with a french keyboard, which doesn't have brackets. Draevan13 (talk) 22:48, July 26, 2012 (UTC)


 * I made a direct link to show you the change in versions; don't link that back to my profile it misses the point of linking to the example.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:27, July 26, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Good job weeding out those spoilers on Jaqen H'ghar, thank you.--Opark 77 (talk) 21:41, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

The odd thing is that they were added by an Administrator. Draevan13 (talk) 21:44, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

American English
American English is standard for the A Song of Ice and Fire series. It's written by an American author and produced by HBO. American English is correct by its own standards, and British English is in error for this series and this wiki. American English is self-consciously spelled differently because in the 19th century, trying to assert their linguistic independence and uniqueness, American grammarians intentionally established variant spellings as standard. When in doubt: don't use an unsightly "U" after "O", refrain from bizarre "re" instead of proper "er" spelling, and use "Z" as frequently as possible. God willing, we will prevail, in peace and freedom from fear, and in true health, through the purity and essence of our correct spelling standards.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 03:23, November 12, 2012 (UTC)

I know it's the standard that this wiki uses, and I'll abide by it. Doesn't mean I have to like it, though. I still find it arrogant and lazy, but I'll abide. Draevan13 (talk) 15:33, November 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * Arrogant and cynically applied cultural imperialism? Without question. But how is it "lazy"? I have to spend a lot of time running around correcting things to American English spelling on here.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:43, November 12, 2012 (UTC)
 * By "lazy" I mean when certain words are trimmed down, i.e "doughnut" becoming "donut". Draevan13 (talk) 16:35, November 13, 2012 (UTC)

Shadow
The article format so far doesn't include video game information. At best I could recommend you to move the information you included in the behind the scenes section, and in the shortest way possible.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 20:58, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

I'll do that, thanks. Draevan13 (talk) 21:06, December 2, 2012 (UTC)


 * In general, this wiki is strictly about the TV series continuity, and thus won't have a separate subheading for "in the video games" (unless its explicitly a TV tie-in, with actors voicing their characters; but this hasn't happened yet). However, Gonzalo84's advice to just put the information as a separate paragraph under "in the books" is great. "In the books" is sort by extension a general catch-all for the wider franchise; i.e. the tabletop RPG sourcebooks from the late 1990's and stuff, which even A Wiki of Ice and Fire refers to on occasion if no other information presents itself, as they think GRRM must have supplied the info. So that should work out.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 21:22, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Thank you.Ch&#39;vyalthan (talk) 07:49, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

In the books
We need to proofread a lot of pages to make sure they don't contain information that isn't in the TV series yet, but that doesn't mean you're being targeted or something; yes that information you removed should have been removed.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 17:03, December 29, 2012 (UTC)

It just bugs me how others add those book characters and the Admins leave them, but my edits are picked off within hours of being added, every time. I'm sure I'm not being targeted, but it sure feels like it. Draevan13 (talk) 17:12, December 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * "Those book characters" contain an Speculation Tag that is used on other wikis for the sake of clarity. It has been discussed and approved.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 17:20, December 29, 2012 (UTC)

Keep cool
I really have improved a great deal when it comes to the quality of my edits; even if dragon doesn't see it, I do. The thing that he was complaining about today was something that I wrote about a month ago. Keeping cool is not how I would describe it, I'm the type of person that has always gotten more hurt than angry. Anyway, it just isn't in my nature to be confrontational.Ch&#39;vyalthan (talk) 06:07, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

User page quote
Hey there! I noticed that you have a rather spoiler heavy quote on your user page. I would like ask you to take it down or at least remove the names since a lot of the watchers of the television series don't have any knowledge of the books and don't wish to know who lives or dies before the series reaches the point in books. Thanks in advance! --Martell (talk) 15:15, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Do you mean the Volantene history quote or the "all hail Aegon VI" quote? Draevan13 (talk) 17:20, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

I would be best if you remove all the names. I know it sounds kinda harsh, but the spoiler policy dictates that we do not add book-specific information, including character names, before the TV series has reached the same point in the story. Hope you understand. --Martell (talk) 09:17, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you can leave the quote, just take out the character names so we don't know who is talking.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 15:27, January 25, 2013 (UTC)


 * That's the problem... by "numbering" the character you learn who that is.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 01:46, January 30, 2013 (UTC)

Editing House infoboxes
You don't have to remove entire fields, just add the information in the proper line.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 01:45, January 30, 2013 (UTC)

Aegon VI
Serious question, just out of simple curiosity: why do you like Aegon VI? I mean, not only liking him, but supporting him above all other claimants? I'm surprised just because I haven't encountered anyone else before who was "sworn to Aegon VI". So I figured I should ask you to say why in your own words.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:04, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

Simple. I used to support Daenerys, but the decisions she keeps making in Storm of Swords and Dance with Dragons really irritated me. I don't know if you've read them, but they simply baffled me. Aegon, on the other hand, not only has the best claim, being Rhaegar's heir, but he seems to be much better suited to rule than Daenerys is. He might screw up in the next books, but he seems to make better decisions overall than she does. The ideal solution would be the two of them to marry, but if she's infertile as she seems to think, it wouldn't work out. DRAEVAN13 23:09, February 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * Eh, I thought the choices Dany makes in the later books were understandable in the circumstances. Whatever.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:19, February 14, 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't. Hell, even she thinks they were bad, since at the end of Dance with Dragons she wants to leave Mereen and go back to Westeros. Might be a problem, but at least she's FINALLY going there. DRAEVAN13 Targaryen.JPG 23:27, February 14, 2013 (UTC)

Please... avoid spoilers... this conversations would be better in chat or via e-mail.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 01:10, February 15, 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the "Blackfyre Theory" - I do not mean to taunt, but the Blackfyre Theory remains a possibility. Perhaps not even likely, but...admittedly, a "possibility", as much as any. In which case, what will your reaction be if it turns out to be true?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:10, September 17, 2013 (UTC)

If GRRM says it's true, I'd be highly surprised. I've looked on the Forum of Ice and Fire, read the theories, and find the evidence is circumstantial at best. But the thing is, even if he is, how are the characters going to know? It's not like the "conspirators" are going to say anything, and Blackfyres look identical to Targaryens. But as I said, I'm sure he's a Targaryen. Connington would know if it was his best friend's son, I'd think. DRAEVAN13 23:20, September 17, 2013 (UTC)

There was another theory floating around, about the Jeyne Westerling in Feast for Crows being an impostor due to her appearance being different, but GRRM later said he simply made a mistake in her description. So some of the "evidence" might not even pan out. DRAEVAN13 23:25, September 17, 2013 (UTC)

(Editor just ate a longer response) - I wouldn't think he's actually inferior if he's a Blackfyre, given that they're just a different branch of the Targaryens - bastardy and female succession lines being an entirely subjective concept - Daena Targaryen was daughter of Aegon III and if they hadn't recently altered the succession laws would have actually been ahead of even Aegon IV in line of succession. So it's all subjective - I view it sort of like Rhaenyra vs Aegon II - just different Targaryen branches. In the first generation at least - Daemon Blackfyre's sons trailed off into obscurity.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 23:38, September 17, 2013 (UTC)

Decisions
I understand that you disagree with my decision to bad CestWhat but things were getting out of hand and it had to be done; seeing the arguments he's gotten into on the Downton Abbey wiki I stand by my decision. I don't expect you to like it or anything. But there's a lot of pressure to keep things running smoothly on here, and the Admins are the only thing standing between this wiki and total chaos. You may think my decisions harsh, but you have a pretty good view from behind your desk (joking). It wasn't a decision made lightly, but I had to take the welfare of everyone into consideration. As for that anonymous IP address who was snarking at me, I banned him for being rude, but particularly because it was a random anonymous IP address who had made no contributions (I officially would not have done that if he had a named account). I'm writing you now because I feel your concerns deserved an explanation from me. You've been doing great work. But I'm not "power mad" if I consulted the other Admins publicly for days before ultimately banning CestWhat after he showed no sign of getting better.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 15:04, April 2, 2013 (UTC)

No, it's not because of CestWhat. I agree with banning him, he was arguing with Admins for several days and didn't listen to direct requests to stop arguing. My problem was with that Anonymous User you banned. His very first "Contribution" to the Wiki, which was honestly a lot more polite than some of the comments you make to users, even before you became Admin, got him banned. You didn't give him a warning, or even a polite response, you immediately banned him. Admins are supposed to set the example of how to act on the Wiki, and banning someone for stating their opinion is an abuse of power, in my opinion. How do you know he wouldn't have become an active user on the Wiki? You banned him the second he set foot here. DRAEVAN13 15:34, April 2, 2013 (UTC)


 * Someone who never worked on this wiki before criticized the concept that the Admins do a lot of work. Look, the reason I did it is because he didn't bother to take a username. If he made a username I wouldn't have done that (I don't think we should allow anonymous editing in general). I didn't give a warning because he hadn't even edited anything else; it was just a flyby comment not backed up by a history of other contributions. You can state opinions freely on here because you've earned that due to the history of regular contributions you've made. --The Dragon Demands (talk) 19:59, April 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * He might have been on the wiki before and read some of your other comments. This was just the first time he commented. We'll never know. I've never seen another Admin ban someone without giving them  at least one warning.
 * I was under the impression that to ban someone you had to have more than a single, minor reason, and the agreement of other Admins. You can seriously ban anyone on a whim, without the other Admins approving? That's a recipe for abuse of power if I've ever seen one. DRAEVAN13 Targaryen.JPG 20:14, April 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * Not "anyone"; only anonymous IP addresses.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 20:23, April 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * That's a relief, or else no one would dare point out flaws with Admins. So you're telling me had someone with an account made the same comment, they wouldn't have been banned? DRAEVAN13 Targaryen.JPG 20:41, April 2, 2013 (UTC)
 * Exactly; the audacity of an anonymous IP address with no previous contributions criticizing how much work others have done (I wouldn't even have banned him if it was an IP address with a long history of contributions).--The Dragon Demands (talk) 13:29, April 5, 2013 (UTC)

Qyburn
They are Northern because it's lies in the North. And their lived people in Harrenhal, workers, prisoners, and Qyburn who was Harrenhal's maester. Why the h*** should a maester march in war against the Mountain. I doesn't make any sense. If he was a maester in Robb's army, shouldn't Robb know who he is. A maester going to war is very rare.

--Mesmermann (talk) 23:15, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

​Did you see a Maester's chain around his neck? No, because he's not a Maester. The Citadel took away his chain and status for practicing "the dark arts". In the books, he was a member of the Vargo Hoat's Brave Companions mercenary company. Since Hoat in the show became "Locke", who's a soldier in service of Roose Bolton, it's safe to assume Qyburn is part of the Northern Army. He might not be a combatant, but he is part of it. Just like Talisa is part of the army, but not as a combatant.DRAEVAN13 00:06, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

And no, Harrenhal is in the Riverlands, not the North.

"It is located on the northern shore of the Gods Eye lake at the heart of the Riverlands" - from this wiki. DRAEVAN13 00:09, April 4, 2013 (UTC)


 * Qyburn is among the prisoners. We don't know if he was among the Boltons or from another house. But he was a prisoner, that's for sure. When his TV backstory is revealed we'll fix whatever we have. Just like we did with the Greatjon.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 01:56, April 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * BTW, we do see the link of a maester's chain.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 02:02, April 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * That was my point to Mesmermann, that he was a part of the Northern Army since he was among the slaughtered prisoners. And usually I don't disagree with Admins for fear of getting banned, but I just re-watched the scene with Qyburn and saw only a bare neck, no hint of a chain to be seen.
 * Unless the producers drastically changed a character's backstory for no reason whatsoever.
 * -thinks of Talisa-
 * ​Actually, that might be possible. But I didn't see a Maester's chain on Qyburn. DRAEVAN13 Targaryen.JPG 02:48, April 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * First, we don't ban people for disagreeing with Admins. Second, if you see the picture, you'll see this weird chain-link looking thingie to one of his sides.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 04:24, April 4, 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you mean that "Ω" shape on the left of his photo? If it's that, that's what holds his robe together. If it's not that, then I didn't see it. I saw his neck, his robe, and an under-tunic, but no chain. DRAEVAN13 Targaryen.JPG 04:29, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Qyburn did not "join the army" of "Robb Stark's faction", which is a combined Stark-Tully army of Northmen and Rivermen. He's just a refuge they found. "Joined" implies he's part of that army. Use "accompanies", which means he's just there with them.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 13:34, April 5, 2013 (UTC)

Fine then. A difference between between the book and TV series is that Qyburn didn't accompany the Northern Army. Though I still hope they don't make him a Maester in the show. I didn't see a chain, but we didn't get a good view. DRAEVAN13 15:36, April 5, 2013 (UTC)

​Bio
Wow, I just wanted to say that in your bio thing, you just listed every one of my favorite video games. 70.192.198.135 23:53, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

​They might not be the most recent games, but they sure are classics. DRAEVAN13 00:06, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Blog post
I apologise if I come off too aggressive on "Is TAME lame?" blog. Just trying to emphasize message since revealing character's name and book is a pretty heavy offence in my opinion. But I don't think it's fair to accuse me of being self-righteous when I'm trying to enforce one of the Wiki's fundamental rules. I'm not targeting you in any way since you're certainly not the only one who's broke that rule. But like you said, this is not the first time you have been reminded about the spoiler policy. Just pay little more attention next time, ok? --Martell (talk) 12:37, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

The way you put it was oozing with condescension. Not aggressive, but very condescending. You could have just said "Please don't post spoilers." rather than the "What you need to learn.." line you used. It's not what you said, it's how you said it. DRAEVAN13 14:34, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Concerns
Draevan, I stand by my decision to ban the anonymous IP address that reported a rumor as fact within an article. This was a well-known report, we were talking about it all through August, no decision was made.

I do think that the "punches as he bans him" comment may have been a bit much, but it's a frustrating time: not only am I working on my thesis, I'm prepping to present a paper at a big medieval conference in Ireland next week. So I barked at this guy as I was throwing him off.

Please stop jumping on me over command decisions like this, and/or threatening to complain to Wikia.

That being said, I honestly think you're one of the trusted regulars on here and on the short list to gain Admin-ship yourself. By "shortlist" I do not mean an abstraction, but an actual mental list - I was waiting for you to rank up above 1000 points or something before broaching this. Were you to run for Administrator, I would adamantly support your nomination.

Some would see this as a contradiction, I do not. I don't believe in politeness, I believe in getting results. We don't need Yes Men and sycophants, we need people who are bold enough to disagree (without resorting to petty "I'm right, you're wrong" childish games such as CestWhat did).

Therefore, rather than go through another cycle of "I'll complain about TDD to the Wikia Admins"....why not just run for Adminship early? As a co-Admin, you could openly disagree with and outright revert decisions I make, and in turn, kick them upstairs to the Bureaucrats. I think this would be a far more permanent and productive solution.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 04:10, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

You say "come to me if you have concerns"... why? I've already done so three times before today. You either brush them aside with a McGarnigle quote, ignore me, or say you'll be more considerate in the future then do it anyways.

And no, I don't want to be an Admin, I'm barely on this Wiki at all. I would like if you acted like the other Admins, however. Perma-banning someone for thier first edit, a single non-spam, non-troll and non-vandalism edit is ridiculous. You tell them to not do it, you take 5 goddamn seconds to give them a warning, you don't perma-ban and insult them, for crying out loud. My first edit on the Elder Scrolls Wiki, for example, was posting a rumour. I'm glad their Admins are more considerate than you, now I'm a daily contributor with 2,300+ edits.

So yes, I reported you to Wikia Community Admins and they've e-mailed me saying they're looking into the situation. According to their e-mail, I'm actually not the first person to report you from this site. 05:47, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

​:I'm sure that a few entitled spammers like CestWhat may have tried "reporting" me over time. Part of administering involves banning people who are not helping the overall health of the wiki. It's easy for you to judge this because you're not doing it yourself. And if you are "barely on the Wiki at all" why are you invested in this or in a position to comment? If you shared in the responsibility more (which I hope you will) you'd see just how many inane comments get posted on this wiki. I'm more tolerant towards named users than I am towards random IP address anonymous edits. I banned the person because that rumor circulated a while ago and we'd already settled upon not acting on it.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 14:48, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

Obviously there's nothing wrong with banning spammers, trolls, vandals and people who refuse to follow the guidelines, but perma-banning someone on their first edit for what amounts to little more than a mistake is too far. You who likes to use cops as comparisons, it's like executing someone on their first shoplifting conviction. I'm not here often, so for all I know you could be doing that all the time. Who knows how many people who might have become regular contributors are now perma-banned. Hell, I was blocked when I was a new user for a month on this site for posting spoilers. I'm glad you weren't an active Admin at that time.

​This is how it works with every Admin other than you:

​First time: warning.

​Second time: 1 week ban.

​Third time: 1 or 3 month ban.

​Fourth time: Perma-ban.

And no, it wasn't​ people like C'est What who reported you to Wiki Community, the e-mail I got said it was "an active Admin" who reported you, though it wasn't specified whom. 15:01, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

...curious, but there are active Admins from many sorts of sites. We were in high-alert mode due to the massive influx of users in Season 3, and it was difficult to keep track of the temp bans.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 15:09, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

Alright, given that it was a careless error reporting rumors as fact, I downgraded it to a one week ban (and removed my snarky comments).--The Dragon Demands (talk) 15:12, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

A bigger question occurs: In the rush to protect this wiki I often have to ban spammers and vandals, and from time to time I will end up banning a few anonymous editors making well-intentioned mistakes. This is due to the overall workload of protecting the wiki, and I should have downgraded that last one to a temp ban.

Nonetheless...wikis have a chain of command. I am an Administrator, one of several, but not a Bureaucrat. If you have a problem with a ban I made, why did you never complain about this to the other Administrators? (some of which have been here longer and outrank me). Particularly, why didn't you complain to the Bureaucrat and Founder of this Wiki, Werthead?

Instead, you went over Werthead's head, to complain directly to the Wikia Community Admins? This openly challenged not only my authority, but Werthead's. Moreover, if you felt I was stonewalling you, complaining to the other Admins or Werthead would have led to discussion, from which I would have backed down and relented. Yet you're directly complaining to Wikia itself?

Next, if by your own admission you're not on the wiki that frequently, why are you in a position to judge how well or not I'm enforcing banning policy? (yes, I should be using more temp-bans against careless mistakes). You have openly stated that you're against Administrator action in general as "tyranny". The reason I'm as strict as I am is because....wow, about a full year ago...from October 2012 to Janaury 2013, mega-troll Ch'Vyalthan functionally shut down this entire wiki. He took advantage of our mercy and attempts to "educate" him, and violated every warning. We should have gotten rid of him weeks before. By January, he'd become a menace for three months, everyone was complaining about him....

...and yet, in January 2013, you posted a "Congratulations" message on his talk page: http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Ch%27vyalthan#Congratulations._Seriously.
 * "Whenever I check the Recent Activity page, I usually see edits you make, and usually another by TheDragonDemands undoing it, then usually some snide and/or rude mockery he posts on your Talk Page. Now, I may simply be blind, but I have yet to see a response to his comments where you insult him or argue pointlessly with him. You "keep your cool", when it would be so easy to fly off the handle and plunge into an argument with him. While you do make many mistakes when editing and should work on that, I wish to congratulate you for not being hostile and rude."

This at a point when the wiki was largely turning against him. Yes, you did eventually go along with the vote to ban him, but by that point the vote to remove him was unanimous.

In short, Draevan, you have philosophically been opposed to anyone reining in problematic users as "tyranny", even since the darkest days of the Ch'Valythan incident. You opposed me then, even though all later admitted that it was removing a blight upon the wiki. You weren't on here frequently enough to realize how big of a problem Ch'Valythan actually was, and you don't see the "stresses of command" that I or other Admins have to deal with.

Again, I have made mistakes, given a full ban when a temp ban may have been better - against anonymous IPs which are harder to track than full users. But you should have gone to other Administrators with these concerns, and they'd have overruled me. You should have gone to Bureaucrat and Founder Werthead instead of going over his head - he'd have overruled me.

Going over everyone's heads, and going directly to the Wikia Community Admins, is more of a faux pas, less concerned with addressing the issue and closer to a smear campaign against me.

Yes, I should be using the graduated levels of temp ban and warnings more than I have been. If you have a complaint, go to the other Admins and our Bureaucrat. Stirring things up in the way you have been isn't helping.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 15:38, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

If you'll recall, I DID go to Werthead a few months ago. Nothing was done. And I only went to him after discussing the situation with you 2-3 times and you didn't change anything. So, after exhausting other options, only THEN did I go to the Wikia Community's Admins. It wasn't my first recourse, not at all.

​And when have I ever said I'm against any Admin stopping trolls/vandals/spammers? That's ridiculous. I specifically state I'm against Admins who abuse their power or have a high opinion of themselves. That's it.

​I wasn't endorsing Ch'Valythan at all. I was congratulating him on not being hostile and rude. That was it.

​​By what right am I complaining? I'm a user on this wiki. I might not contribute every day, but that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to speak up when you go around handing out perma-bans to people who don't deserve them and/or insulting them. Perma-bans should be the last course of action, not the first. Again, to use an analogy, that'd be like handing out the death penalty for every crime, from j-walking to shoplifting to speeding. And insulting them on top of that it utterly unecessary. 16:12, November 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * Being consciously ruthless to those breaking the rules shocked other would-be vandals into submission, sending a message that misbehavior will not be tolerated. On the whole, it was necessary.


 * Yes, I should be using temp bans more for new anons making simple mistakes. The last, specific ban you complained about I reverted back to a one-week temp ban (after initially perma-banning out of frustration).--The Dragon Demands (talk) 16:35, November 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * No, being "ruthless" as you call it is not necessary. How is it that every other Wiki I've been to, from Mass Effect to Fallout to Elder Scrolls to Star Trek to Star Wars to Stargate to LOTR to Harry Potter, run nice and smoothly, yet their Admins do NOT act like you. Even this Wiki ran smoothly before you came. There is no excuse for being rude and hostile. Hell, it would be better if all you said to them was "You broke the rules, you are now banned." Being as bad as those you oppose is not necessary. 18:00, November 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * This wiki was inundated with monsters like Ch'Vyalthan before I set things to rights. This is one of the most popular TV shows currently airing and the Admins are often hard-pressed, even today, but vandals trying to wreck everything. You didn't notice later super-vandals because I smothered them in their cribs before letting them grow too big to be a problem. Have you been to the Mass Effect Wiki? Yes, they are just as strict about throwing off people who are causing trouble.
 * In running a wiki, there are many moments for compassion and tender action. There are also many moments for ruthless action. For what is often called "ruthless" may, in many circumstances, be only clarity: seeing clearly what there is to be done and doing it directly, quickly, aware, looking at it.


 * Why should I be polite to people whom I am *permanently* banning in disgrace?...Though that being said, I should just stick to "you keep breaking the rules and now you're banned" in the future. Your complaints that I've perma-banned honest mistakes, when it would have been more prudent to temp-ban them, were entirely valid and I will work towards this in the future.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 18:07, November 26, 2013 (UTC)
 * I never said "Be polite." I said don't insult them. Instead of just banning vandals/spammers or even people who make a single mistake, you take time and effort to go out of your way to mock, threaten, belittle or insult them. THAT is not necessary in any way, and judging by the message the Wiki Community Admins left on your wall a few months ago, I'm not alone in that belief. 18:24, November 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * The Community Admins left me a message not fully understanding just how bad CestWhat had become. Later on, Community Admin central assisted at my request in banning CestWhat's global account from throughout the Wikia network.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 18:29, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

I am legitimately confused, Draevan, at what exactly you want. Complaining that I should use temp bans instead of jumping to a full ban? Yes, I should do that.

Are you asking that I be removed as an Administrator?

Or are you, philosophically, opposed to my methods? I am philosophically opposed to yours: I honestly believe in a strict, firm hand for dealing with vandals and spammers. Pleading with people like that to stop is only seen as a sign of weakness and invites further attacks (the initial advice Community's reps gave over CestWhat was basically just to wait for her to stop, or ask her not to). It is easy for you to make these judgements when you're not an administrator and have no interest in dealing with this responsibility yourself.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 18:29, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

No, I'm not saying you should be removed as Admin. This is what I'm saying:

1) Stop perma-banning people as a first resort.

2) If you can be polite, all the better, but if for some reason you physically can't be polite, then at least stop insulting and mocking the people you ban. We can argue all day long the merits of baning, but there's no excuse for being an ass on top of that. 18:58, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

Oh....in that case:


 * 1) I thought you were actively trying to have me removed as Admin.
 * 2) If you are not, I cheerfully accept your criticisms.
 * 3) I can and will be more careful about using a temp ban first.
 * 4) I will reserve the insults for the outright vandals inserting the word "poop" into articles.
 * 5) I'm sorry I have been completely busy and frustrated with work in real life. You said "I didn't keep my promise not to yell again" - well I'm on here every day and once or twice I might end up posting angry. Thesis work is reaching a bad position, I'm heading to a medieval conference in Ireland on Friday, and I'm just plain up to my eyes in work. This stuff happens, I'm not proud of it, but I'm on here all day.
 * 6) If Werthead didn't get back to you, you should have at least publicly asked QueenBuffy and Gonzalo84 to chime in before going to Wikia itself - they've been here longer than me and can easily boss me around.
 * 7) I am deeply disappointed that you don't want to be an Administrator yourself.
 * 8) I'm sorry I had a momentary outburst after a long string of spammer bannings. From your perspective this was one guy - that's because "recent changes" removes the vandals and spammers I delete; that anon I banned was like the fourth in a string of guys that day.
 * 9) Can we please get back to editing, keeping this in mind.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 19:06, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

Side note: your auto-signature does not appear to be working, do you need help with that?--The Dragon Demands (talk) 19:07, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

My auto-signature always does that if I use it accross the Wikias. I sign often on the Elder Scrolls Wiki, it's easy to fix. 19:36, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

My opinion
Draevan, this wiki wasn't running as smoothly as you think. We had few regular contributors since the beggining and, on top of that, we had to deal with editors that actually damaged the wiki, even before the whole CestWhat fiasco.

Temporary bans exist for a reason: to warn users and quickly prevent them from further damaging articles, specially when these users go on edit rampages.

We are still behind schedule when it comes with updating articles, and since we are in-between seasons the influx of contributions is low. Despite his overzealouness the Dragon has made an thorough job. And we've had some disagreements, its natural and neccessary.

My advise to you Draevan, please drop it and focus on improving the site.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 02:18, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

I have no problem with temporary bans at all. What gave you that idea? I have a problem with Dragon's attitude and his perma-bans right off the bat. DRAEVAN13 02:50, November 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * Actually Draevan and I more or less reached an understanding...right before that poll went up. Then on the poll, Draevan actually spoke out against taking away my Admin rights. If you want me to leave the banning to other people (only blatant vandals) to focus on writing that's fan. If any were worried that I was getting carried away with banning, I have been sufficiently frightened/humbled (and needed to be reminded that temp-banning instead of perma-ban is also an option). We have until February 18th and we're already far behind. If Draevan asked for action, then voted "no" in the demotion poll, do we still need the poll? Should I just go on "wiki-break" until my thesis is finished? (given that I'm left so rushed and aggravated that I've been posting-angry as a result?). At the very least, I think an anonymous poll is unfair. ---Look I don't know, all of this is a distraction, we're running out of time, and I'm sorry that I barked at that guy the other day. There are a bunch of frustrations both on-and-off wiki to deal with.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 03:01, November 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * Again guys, this isn't a ban... If the votes to remove TDD's wins, then it would simply mean you are an editor (who will retain the rights to rollback). All this does is refrain TDD from blocking people. The vote is up and will stay, so please stop debating this matter. The new season is just around the corner and we will have new people stopping in to edit. We can't risk TDD to speak bad or harsh to people, or instantly block them and say off with their heads. This will definitely keep people from returning to edit further, and has been the main cause in the past. Thanks. 19:12, November 27, 2013 (UTC)


 * This is not a minor matter of "all this is doing". Taking away my Administrator rights will hamper my ability to contribute to this wiki.  I see the other side of the coin that "the new season is just around the corner" - a massive new influx of fairweather editors will be appearing, and we need Admins to ensure quality control by banning the vandals and protecting that new influx of users.  I have not routinely been rude or harsh to regular editors....I have been actively banning those who needed to be banned.


 * Yes, this will drastically affect my ability to contribute to this wiki. Simply in terms of high-level Administrator functions.  But moreover, yes, it is imperative that I retain the right to ban and I have not abused the right to ban.  I've used perma-bans a few more times than I should have used temp-bans, but that's about it.  Gonzalo84 and I have been up to our eyes in work attempting to rein in the vandals, MANY of these will require banning problematic users.  We're actually understaffed for such a task.


 * There is no way to downplay how drastic of a step it would be to remove my Administrator privileges. A simple warning that I should step back, let other Admins handle banning more, make sure to use temp-bans first, would have been sufficient.  There is a lot of work to do, and ON THE WHOLE, the large number of bans I have made have been against problematic users and vandals -- it would harm this wiki to remove my ability to ban. --The Dragon Demands (talk) 19:30, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

Greetings
Good to see a fellow TES Wikian here. :)

Nazul Rostello (talk) 02:09, November 29, 2013 (UTC)

We tend to get around. DRAEVAN13 02:09, November 29, 2013 (UTC)