Lore talk:Nunex Faleria

Source?

Nunex Faleria was a Nedic lord

I can't find anything that references him as a nedic lord. What is the source? — Unsigned comment by 159.196.162.240 (talk) at 07:03 on 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Its not explicit, but its clear from The Lost Fort Faleria book he was an early 1st Era human in Cyrodiil, post-Alessia - and these peoples are almost always referred to as Nedes. --Jimeee (talk) 09:02, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

I think it is worth noting that Kestic is classified as Nede (with sources) and lived almost 500 years after Nunex Tyrvarion (talk) 09:22, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

I can't find any instances of post-Alessians being referred to as Nedes. When discussed, post-Alessian they're almost always referred to as either Imperials or Cyrods (PGE 3rd Ed., for one good example). The Lost Fort Faleria is set during the "wake of the Alessian Doctrines", where Aylieds are beginning to be persecuted (Nenalata being safely in Ayleid hands at least as late as 1E 361), so during the time of The Alessian Order. Its early, but long after any time where any Cyrod is being referred to as a Nede. They also give no clue that they thought of themselves as Nedic (if was intended to be, there would be clues, explicit mentions of "Nede", obvious Nedic motifs, Nedic naming conventions) to the developers, they were just old Imperials. Now we can look at dates and make guesses that P-A's in Cyrodiil must have been Nedic, but there's just as much reason to believe that Nedic identity was lost, at least in Cyrodiil, at, or shortly after Alessia (no evidence of them referring to themselves as such). Neither notion is explicitly supported by the lore. ZOS may go through in the future and tidy it up, but they could go either way, and all we have until they do is speculation and original research. — Unsigned comment by 159.196.162.240 (talk) on 8:40, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

What you're suggesting is after Alessia's death in 1E 266 but before 1E 361, the Cyrod Nedes suddenly shed their Nedic identity based on the absence of evidence? Actually, you're wrong here anyway, as Tyrvarion mentioned, because "Nedes" was still a term used up until at least the Yokudan invasion of 1E 808 (several hundred years later) as shown in Virmaril's Journal: "And all because I'm not a Nede. He thinks a High Elf isn't...". It's impossible to pinpoint when the Imperial identity overtook the Nedic identity, but there is enough evidence to show its unlikely it was < 100 years after Alessia's death. As a compromise, I suggest adding an nb note next to the mention of his Nedic race that elaborates on this. --Jimeee (talk) 14:40, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

"What you're suggesting is after Alessia's death in 1E 266 but before 1E 361, the Cyrod Nedes suddenly shed their Nedic identity based on the absence of evidence?" No, I'm not. 266 is not the date of the rebellion. That period of time is not "suddenly", even if you ignore the impact on culture due to an extended period of cultural isolation imposed by slavery to the Aylieds. You said that first-era humans in Cyrodiil are almost always referred to as Nedic as a reason to remove my edit, but you have provided proof of neither "almost always", nor "at all". I've shown that they're referred to as Cyrods or Imperials after the rebellion; I don't believe they are referred to otherwise again after the rebellion. I also don't think that reference to contemporary peoples living in other places who are clearly Nedic, referred to as Nedic, wear Nedic clothing and have Nedic names is evidence. In a real world situation, it would be like arguing that emancipated African people in The States are African because Africans also existed at this time. To be clear, I'm not seeking to be nitpicky- it feels like Original Research and its something that UESP should be cautious of. The developers tend to be very clear when they're explicitly intending to refer to Nedes, the statement in question is extrapolating something from what the developers haven't been deliberate on, (oversight or otherwise). I actually propose that in keeping with our stance on Original Research, that we simply don't refer to something as Nedic if its not explicitly stated because we don't know what the developers intentions are. Because they could very conceivably have intended them as Cyrods and Imperials with nothing but Nedic ancestry. — Unsigned comment by 159.196.162.240 (talk) on 9:24, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Jimeee is in the right here. While Faleria isn't outright stated a Nede he's definitely called a human, and considering he was contemporary with Ayleids there's nothing to call him but a Nede. He might have a full name, but some Nedes like Teo Bravilius Tasus (literally fought during the slave Rebellion) had them way back when. The line between Nedes becoming Imperials is blurry but it was largely considered to have happened post-Ra Gada. A note should be fine. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 18:00, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

"While Faleria isn't outright stated a Nede he's definitely called a human, and considering he was contemporary with Ayleids there's nothing to call him but a Nede." The two premises don't follow, unless you're missing something out here. Where does it say that contemporaneity with Ayleids makes humans Nedes? "The line between Nedes becoming Imperials is blurry but it was largely considered to have happened post-Ra Gada." Largely considered by who? If Nedic transition to Imperial has no link to the Ra Gada in any source, and there's no good evidence to believe this must be the case, then what is the actual basis for disagreement here? The most poignant thing here is that the line is blurry, but to highlight the nature of the problem, if ZOS has not committed to outright calling them Nedic, and there's no explicit evidence they actually were, then why are we? — Unsigned comment by 159.196.162.240 (talk) at 12:53 on 22 April 2022 (UTC)

bro i think ur reading too much into this :/ human is as human does The Rim of the Sky (talk) 19:42, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Keep it respectful, please. I've given clear support for the change, do you have anything constructive in regards to those? — Unsigned comment by 159.196.162.240 (talk) at 01:50 on 23 April 2022 (UTC)

(←) Alright, as I've waited for over a week for any more engagement on this, I've gone ahead and removed the edit. The reason for my edit is that the assertion is Original Research, and there are multiple feasible interpretations. We don't know what the developers intended. I've put what I hoped was a reasonable compromise in the note section, I'm interested to see what others think. I've read through the guidelines and etiquette guide- I don't believe I'm being disrespectful and am open to discussion on this. I think we should probably even consider not asserting Imperials are Nedes, period, unless there is direct evidence for it. I do agree there are some reasons to think they might be Nedic, and mentioning it in Notes sections would benefit users by providing an interesting line of thought, but stating it as fact when there is no direct evidence, and only leap-of-logic, indirect evidence goes against the spirit of the Wiki. — Unsigned comment by 159.196.162.240 (talk) at 12:11 on 2 May 2022 (UTC)