Books talk:The Infernal City

Not sure if this has been mentioned elsewhere, but Amazon now has a listing for the sequel to The Infernal City.

The title is Lord of Souls and it is due to be published (in paperback) on September 27, 2011.

320 pages Del Rey Publishing ISBN: 978-0345508027

Only time will tell how much of this pre-publication information proves accurate.71.224.13.163 23:17, 3 January 2011 (UTC)Marcus

Definitely worth mentioning - thanks for the news! I'm annoyed that the email I was supposed to get when the book was announced hasn't arrived... rpeh •T•C•E• 23:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Canon

Does anyone know if this is TES Canon? --Debatra 21:41, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it's official TES lore, according to Bethesda. --GK^talk2me 21:44, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. --Debatra 21:53, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Dealing with the new info

See Water's Edge and Sardavar Leed

Is there a policy on adding stuff from this book to their respective pages? This stuff isnt game-specific, which is what the pages are for. Thoughts?--Catmaniac66 16:56, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Quite simply, the gamespace pages should be for information relevant to the game. Although there's no explicit policy on this, there's a long history of removing irrelevant "real life" notes and other irrelevant information. I am dead against the idea of including TIC information on OB pages - or anywhere else except Lore. rpeh •T•C•E• 18:08, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

So should we wait for other input (like a day) or just go ahead and remove the info?--Catmaniac66 18:14, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I'd like to wait at least a day, especially since at least one editor - Legoless - disagrees. rpeh •T•C•E• 18:25, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm with rpeh here, game related info should be in gamespace and lore related info in lorespace. What is the point of having lorespace if we just ignore it all of the time? --AKB ^Talk 18:32, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

There is the question of what to do with info involving places that only have a gamespace page, and not a lore page. I assume as a wiki we dont like to leave info out just because there isnt a place for it. Do we add a bunch of notes to the Infernal city page, or do we create Lore pages that have very little info, or do we just leave the info in limbo? Also, I invited the one person who appears to believe that the info should go on the pages, although he might just have done it because he saw a similar edit on another page.--Catmaniac66 18:36, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

That's not really an issue. The Lore space already has the stubbiest of stubby pages and creating other short pages for some of the places mentioned is not a problem. As I mentioned elsewhere, Sardavar Leed already has a notable history (Alessia grew up there), and the book contains a good amount of info on Water's Edge that would easily form the basis of a Lore page. rpeh •T•C•E• 18:44, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Works for me. Ill start removing stuff tomorrow if there are no dissenting opinions. I want to give Legoless a chance to make a statement, just in case, although again he probably doesnt agree or disagree, and just added a note for consitency.--Catmaniac66 18:48, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't have any objections to making lore pages for that info, if both the locations merit their own. As Catmaniac suggested, I was under the impression that all Infernal City info was being documented on game-related articles. Feel free to remove the note I made, if it will be documented elsewhere. I just didn't like having it excluded. Legoless 18:53, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

It appears there is enough of a consensus. Ill start removing stuff and in the summary I will direct people to this discussion.--Catmaniac66 18:57, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I used the "What links here" On the infernal city page, and searched for all Oblivion:'s and Morrowind:'s, turns out those were the only 2 that werent a talk page. I didnt check through the lore page as obviously those are good places to put info.--Catmaniac66 19:04, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Referencing in lore

Is the way this book is currently cited on the Solstheim lore page appropriate? I mean, obviously TIF's events are canon, but I'm just wondering:

A. If its general format and lack of link is correct, and

B. Whether it breaks the fourth wall.

I don't have any particular problem with it, I just want to know in case I want to reference TIF on other pages in the future. I have no idea about A, though I imagine there are no problems in regards to B. Minor Edits 01:21, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

There's not any problem with the "fourth wall"; the info is presented just like the rest of it. It should, however, be linked, which I just did. --GK^talk2me 17:58, 9 May 2011 (UTC)