Lore talk:Vivec (god)

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995

[edit] Non-Canon Material - Hogithum Hall

Temple Zero, will you please stop adding non-canon material to the site? Even TIL describes the Hogithum Hall roleplay as non-canon, and there's no reference to it being cut from the PGE for reasons of length. If you have a reference that proves your point, please include it. Otherwise, as I say, stop posting material that is not official. The point about rumours of him going missing in Oblivion, however, is entirely relevant. If you read our Style Guide, especially the section on perspective, you will see that within the Lore (formerly Tamriel) namespace we are supposed to "write from the perspective of a person living within the Elder Scrolls universe", so the existence of rumours on the subject are definitely worth including. –Rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 10:11, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, and the pocket guide to the empire was written by a person with "the perspective of a person living within the Elder Scrolls universe." The definition of canon is pedantry about binary code and copyright law, nothing about lore. If the Census of Daedra Lords had not been cut for length, and the Hogithum Reference was in fact in the PGE, what would you call it then? There is no canon and non-canon in the study of lore, only knowledge. Quibbles and arbitrary rules don't belong. Other admins seem to regard unofficial or offhand statements by devs as sufficient rationale for drawing conclusions.

I say the edit should stay, because I was forthright in describing the validity of the source. I did not cite it as true or make any claims, but added to the pool of knowledge because everything deserves a place on the table. You lose nothing with its inclusion (add any disclaimer you like) but you are more ignorant for its deletion. After all, there is no way that fan interpretations on lore can be given a holy status on the site while an author describing (I can't emphasize this enough) THEIR OWN work is belittled because the media format was html instead of a CS Miscellaneous Item. Perhaps you should reference the statement or convention that claims non-canon material is irrelevant and stigmatized, and that in a lore universe that is based on uncertainty, it cannot be included because its validity is uncertain. The Oblivion rumors are just that- rumors. It is laughable that you are putting hearsay (and that's what rumors are) before history. As I recall, most of the rumors about lore in Oblivion are jokes. Levitation Act, my ass.

And what do you mean there is no reference about it being cut for length? You mean you haven't found one, so I must be hallucinating? Watch your words.Temple-Zero 10:40, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

I think in part this comes down to different definitions of "canon". We've tended to focus on what actually appeared in the game. This is different from TIL's definition, but I don't think that different definitions of "canon" on different sites is a bad thing. TIL and UESP already have clearly different emphases; why not extend that into discussions of the lore and allow readers to get different perspectives from TIL articles versus UESP articles? Since we have two different Elder Scrolls sites, why not allow the articles on the sites to be different instead of aiming for identical content? But in any case, this is a far broader issue than just this one article on Vivec. We probably need to have a community-wide discussion about exactly what we want to do on UESP regarding all of the various pieces of lore and lore-related information that have appeared in sources other than the published version of the game. --Nephele^Talk 10:55, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

I second the call for a clarification and community-wide discussion. There is definitely a need, or else we run into this on almost any Lore page, see Black Wind's article sourcing in Lore:House Dres and its talk page. Zero, could you find the link where it says the PGE was cut short for length, rpeh shouldn't have to hunt for it. I learned the hard way that including a source in the first place saves time defending the edit and a lot of aggravation that is not needed in the flow of things. I'll save my argument for pro/con inclusion of non-game material for the community discussion. --Benould^•T•C 11:39, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

TZ, I said there was no reference on TIL, not that there wasn't one anywhere. But as Benould says - if you have a reference then please post it here so we can take it from there. If the material was indeed cut from the PGE I'd be in favour of it appearing on the site - perhaps as an appendix of the PGE that Benould is adding - and linking from this article. Without that, it seems to be a simple bit of fun from the devs, given that Vivec almost expects death at the hands of the Neraverine come the end of Tribunal - an event that would preclude his appearance at a trial afterwards. –Rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 12:19, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

Well that's a bit more helpful. TIL does indeed say that the Census was cut from the PGE (idiotically, what with the twenty pages they spent on huge birthsign drawings), and I can only assume that the information was passed on from Michael Kirkbride's OP on the forums. He's the most vocal of the devs, and the only reason I don't edit some articles to reflect the mysteries he's revealed is because it feels like 'lore spoilers.' I hesitate to call the Trial a 'bit of fun.' Instead I regard it as the end of an era. I will go so far as to call Vivec MK's character. He is entitled to write the grand finale on the story of his character and some say, alter-ego. He invited all the other devs to celebrate the closing of the 'Videogame Book' that is Morrowind and the completion of the circle of betrayal regarding Almsivi, Nerevar, and Azura. (I need not point out that Vivec is not considered 'dead' any more than the Telvanni councilors you may gave assassinated. If he killed him pre-MQ then he just came back to life. If you killed him post-MQ he may have been sitting in the Tower of the universe and impregnable anyhow. You can only say what your character did, not what the full effects were.)

And now that UESP's articles are split up, it is a perfect time for a conversation on canon, or specifically, how meaningless it is. Lore oppresses and affects no characters in an unwelcome way, because it is at a remove from the videogame itself. In the aptly-renamed Lore section of the site I think we can stray away from the game-centric focus of the Oblivion and Morrowind articles. You can look at them as games, and UESP covers this viewpoint exhaustively, or you can view them as videogame books, specifically art, a set of ideas. I think we should create a prod flag for the lore section, noting where the article shifts to include things that are maybe not 100% verified, but represent the kind of non-empirical understanding crucial to putting it all together.Temple-Zero 18:01, 31 July 2008 (EDT)

So not content with making stuff up on the forums your starting to make stuff up on uesp. TIL only says that the Census was cut from the PGE if you add the words "the Census was cut from the PGE". What it actually says is that the two are contemporary, which means they were around at the same time. You do this all the time. You come up with allsorts of wild theories and then flame anyone who disagrees.

I see your also continueing your habit of saying different things in different places. Here you say you don't like the word "lore" but above, you say this section is "aptly-renamed". Seriosly you annoy enough people on the forums without annoying people here too. ^{—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Antares (talk • contribs) on 1 August 2008.}

Antares, whatever your experiences on the forums, please do not bring them up here. There's enough bad feeling on this site at the moment without old animosities being added. –Rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 07:59, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

Actually, TIL does say that the Census was cut from the PGE :

Descriptions of some of the realms of the Daedric Princes. This document by Michael Kirkbride was originally meant to be included in the Pocket Guide to the Empire, Third Edition included with the Collector's Edition of TES IV: Oblivion but was cut for length.

This is still a mute point though. Since it never made it into the game it is not really canon.

Deciding what is canon and what is not is very difficult. If you want to say that Mk's texts are canon, does that make the other dev's texts also canon? If the Trial of Vivec is canon, does that also mean that Divayth Fyr is an advisor for the Elder Council, that Caius Coscades is in Kragenmoor, or that Boethiah once said: "Divide ye like your enemies, in Houses, and lay your laws in set sequence from the center, again like the enemy Corners of the House of Troubles, and see yourself thence as timber, or mud-slats, or sheets of resin. Then do not divide, for yet is the stride of Sithis quicker than the rush of enemies, and He will sunder the whole for the sake of a shingle."

The matter is further complicated by the fact that the Trial of Vivec was an RP. Does this make certain facts from the RP's where the dev Tedders played a role also canon? Is the fact that Helseth married Dres Vedama also canon?

And what of the various lore articles written by the fans? What should we do with them? Should we label them as useful articles or just simple fan fiction, like Blackwinds Dres Article?

Apophis2412 07:39, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

(outdent) Yes, I finally found it. But MK's original note on the article itself doesn't say that at all. In any case, you sum up my feelings on the subject almost perfectly: it's not official until there's official word from Bethesda. That means books, speeches and other materials from any of the games are fair game; anything that Bethesda have clarified is fine; official posts on their website are fine. Anything beyond that is hearsay. If we start including it, we're just begging to be deluged with fanfiction and opinions rather than facts. –Rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 07:59, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

LOL! Who the heck are you, Antares? Thanks for a laugh, whoever you may be.

It's very simple. When the topic is lore, there is no videogame and there is no real world. In that real world, however: Authors write fiction. The company hires the authors. The company sells the fiction to the fans. The fans do not write fiction. The company does not write fiction. The company does not control fiction. The fans interpret fiction. The fans do no interpret the company. These are the terms I am speaking in.

I will speak in less patronizing terms when we start discussing specifics. For starters, that means to stop using the word canon. Let's say what we really mean. 'What do we regard as the value and status of this writing in the context of lore? What do we have to fear from acknowledging its existence on this site?' I don't know what you want to do with Ted Peterson's RP, but I'm sure we could decide if we tried to make an informed decision using judgment (perish the thought) and stopped using it as some irrelevant hypothetical. When that happens, I'll stop urging on this supposed looming deluge, because the lore section could use it to wash away the prudery and get back on topic. Temple-Zero 22:09, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

Ugh, TL;DR (Too long; didn't read). All I saw was canon, and I know exactly what I will say. If it is canon, keep it OUT of the page. Unless it's officially sourced by Bethesda and/or in the game, keep it out of the article. Think of it as Pokemon, or any other lame anime show. Just because a fan claims that Pikachu evolved into a Bulbasaur in a comic book, doesn't make it canon to the actual series. Just because a fan wrote the things you've inserted into the article, Temple, doesn't make it officially canonical to the game. Let's try to keep the two things separate. Daedryon^{•T•C•E•} 23:36, 1 August 2008 (EDT)

[edit] foul murder

"hinting that he killed Nerevar?" Mightn't we go the explicit route and say that he both denies it and confesses in his writings?Temple-Zero 00:36, 7 August 2008 (EDT)