Lore talk:Pelinal Whitestrake

format

I would appreciate it if a Mentor would put the Song of Pelinal, Before the Ages of Man and the Oblivion: Pelinal links in their proper positions. — Unsigned comment by 24.31.156.165 (talk) at 01:57 on 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Looks alot better now. — Unsigned comment by 24.31.156.165 (talk) at 05:20 on 26 July 2008 (UTC)

predecessors

Before the Ages of Man is old lore from way before kotn. The Song of Pelinal names him as Pelinal the Third because of his relation to those other Shor avatars. He is the third in a line of champions and we have names for the other two. Pelinal never ruled anything, and did not use magicka excepting his cyborg and time-traveling tendencies, yet Ages of Man describes a sorcerer king who created many kingdoms. Remember that this is the story from an elven perspective, and exhibits bias in the line directly above this one. Pelinal is accounted part of a series of champions that can be viewed as equivalents and the same person. So the timeline isn't far wrong. Pelinal is, however, an exception because he is a dual avatar of Lorkhan AND Akatosh, not just the one. Not a retcon so much as an update. It's another case of sources that seem to conflict, but still inform the reader on their respective subjects. For perspective, we're basically talking about Lorkhan recurring, and you know his most recent incarnation as Wulfharth or Ysmir.Temple-Zero 13:58, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

"the legendary immortal hero, warrior, sorceror, and king variously known as Pelinal Whitestrake, Harrald Hairy Breeks, Ysmir, Hans the Fox, etc." (from Before the Ages of Man)

That's pretty explicit that they're all the same person. "Variously known" means that ONE person has several names, not that there are several people. I didn't undo your edit out of spite, I undid it because it's wrong. –Rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 14:19, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

Of course you didn't do it out of spite, you did it because you read one sentence of a single, biased, outdated source on the subject at hand, and chose to believe its vague brevity over all other sources. I believe that you have extensively expounded on the tenuous nature of ES texts. Does this only apply when you during the unofficial lore debate? Pelinal is not a Sorcerer. Pelinal is not a king. The source is wrong. Did you read my post? Respond to it and this doesn't need to be an edit war. This is the Pelinal article, not the Before the Ages of Man article. If you want the line to stay, then perhaps it should be revised so it is no longer misleading.Temple-Zero 16:36, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

First, it was the original source to which you referred (here). Second, BtAoM is an in-game source and is just as valid as anything else: don't presume to decide which in-game sources are valid and which aren't. Third, The Song of Pelinal explicitly says that nobody is sure why he's called "Pelinal the Third". Fourth, it says that if he has been incarnated before it's still the same person. –Rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 00:47, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Hamstringing nuance and ignoring the purpose of conflicting stories in texts is one thing when it leads to simple incompleteness, but listing the names like this is misleading. I get the feeling that you don't care if it's misleading or contrary to the actual story, it's only the paraphrasing that is important. Incidentally, Before the Ages of Man was originally an unofficial lore document written by MK and put on a fan site many years ago. It was dug up and put into Oblivion, though by whose perogative I don't know. If you want the names to stay, they need to be explained, as anyone who cross-references and finds out that the hero of Kotn was actually a fighter mage with a Napoleon complex who bopped in and out of history more than the Knights Templar in crappy fiction is going to be pretty darn confused. So see what I wrote beneath here. It's *not* simple.Temple-Zero 11:20, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

I'd agree that the article isn't very well written at the moment and that listing all the names in one place like that isn't the best idea. However, my purpose thus far has simply been to establish the facts before worrying about style. Now that the facts have indeed been established, we can work on the style part. The rumor about Before the Ages of Man is interesting and goes to show that unofficial lore can indeed make it into the game. If any of the current out-of-game material is added to later games, patches, mods etc then of course it becomes canon. –Rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 08:07, 6 September 2008 (EDT)

Ok, I'm new to this thing so I don't know if this is how you do it but here it goes... How is Whitestrake a part of Ysgremmor's companions when he was an Imperial and not a Nord or Nede. He came back from Atmora with his five hundred companions which apparently Whitestrake was a part of. So can someone explain how that worked out? Every source I look at says he's an Imperial BTW. And don't say "they just said it because he's human" because the Nords or Nedes are humans too. (EDT) — Unsigned comment by 98.169.116.141 (talk) at 15:40 on December 24, 2011

test-run for the line in parenthesis

His moniker 'Pelinal the Third' suggests a relationship with other supernatural champions of mankind- Harrald Harry-Breeks and Hans the Fox. Some sources suggest that he is one and the same, although it is unlikely that this is the whole story, given his more alien characteristics and persona, and the fact that he cannot easily be described as a king or sorcerer. It is also worth noting that Pelinal ultimately suffered a gruesome death (his counterparts are described as immortal), and did not reincarnate at a later date, as did his predecessors.

This could be in a notes section?Temple-Zero 17:04, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

First Issue of Challenge

The Whitestrake cracked the floor with his mace and they withdrew, and he said, "Bring me Umaril that called me out!"- Direct quote from The Song of Pelinal, v 7. (Gadianzero 22:45, 5 January 2009 (EST))

My mistake. The article is much more readable now.Temple-Zero 11:26, 6 January 2009 (EST)

Shezarr Reincarnate

In the Bethesda forums, I've been told that Pelinal is the reincarnation of Shezarr/Shor/Lorkhan. Is there any truth to this?

You've probably been told an evidence-less theory.--Arch-Mage Matt^Talk 03:28, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Many of the diehard fans on the Bethesda forums believe that all the works of the original story writer are considered canon even if they didn't make it into the games. Of course this doesn't really make sense seeing as the games are the only medium for the canon to based off of. I can't find the writer's name for the life of me but he did write a few in game books for Oblivion that never made it in. (Gadianzero 03:50, 2 August 2010 (UTC))

A lot of people on Lore forums have a habit of making stuff up to fit their own theories. Read The Song of Pelinal, v 5, which suggests that he might be Shezarr, then read Shezarr and the Divines, which suggests that he isn't. There isn't enough evidence to judge. rpeh •T•C•E• 09:40, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes he is. It is outlined clearly within The Song of Pelinal "Oh Aka, for our shared madness I do this" implies he is a Shezzarine and or avatar of Aka. Also notice how he smothers those who call him a Shezzarine with moths. Not because he says they are wrong, but because Pelinal doesn't care for "god-logic". Note that moths are embroidered on the banner of Shor's Hall in Sovngarde.

Also, why such a distain for elves and such incredible power and such ambiguous history if he was not a divine incarnation? Yes, the Whitestrake is an incarnation. — Unsigned comment by 50.71.141.251 (talk) at 00:08 on 6 February 2013 (GMT)

(←) Makes sense I guess... whenever something is this obscure, Bethesda is trying to hide something. Ebonarm (talk) 11:00, 8 May 2014 (GMT)

Superman semi reference

It would seem the creator of this character within the game universe might have a fascination with Superman. From whats written on the article page the name "Pelinal" is a corruption of the name "Pelin-El" which means "Star-made Knight" now in the universe of Superman the word "El" means "Star" and is also Supermans kryptonian last name, his kryptonian name translating to "Star child". Just thought this bit of random info was interesting. If not don't blame me, its 4am here and I ain't had much sleep lately--Raleka 14:49, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

His death?

How come he says in Oblivion that his friends built a shrine on the site of his death which was in Vanua , when it says he was killed in White Gold Tower ? JackTurbo95 11:26, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't mention Vanua. The dialogue is "My friends built a shrine upon the site of my death, where the Elves tormented me in a final act of revenge. I can show you where it once stood. Perhaps it is there still." rpeh •T•C•E• 12:01, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

But the place where you go is Vanua. That is where the shrine is , hence for his death must of been there through the dialouge. JackTurbo95 12:44, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

There's a shrine there. Doesn't necessarily mean it's the one he was talking about. rpeh •T•C•E• 13:07, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

But in his dialougue he says that is where he last saw the Helm , in the shrine what his friends built for him on the site of his death. (Not that exactly) but it is something similar. The thing that is there may be that Vanua was once part of White Gold Tower. JackTurbo95 15:33, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Dubious cite

This page backs up the claim that Pelinal Whitestrake is a companion by citing "The Five Hundred Mighty Companions or Thereabouts of Ysgramor the Returned", an Imperial Library article, much of which, as far as I can tell, is gibberish. I've never been able to figure out the criteria for what's acceptable from TIL and what's not, but what category does this fall under? Minor Edits 00:21, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I've just come across this same reference. Not only is it completely uncanonical, but there's also no mention that the Pelinal in question is the actual Pelinal Whitestrake. I suggest we remove it. -- kertaw48 15:06, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

The reference is the work of Kirkbride. I added it as a usual out-of-game reference, but it seems I forgot the relevant tag... The text in question mentions "Hans the Fox" as a Companion, which - putting the Shezarrine problem aside - would suggest that Pelinal is from Atmora. I would suggest making the information less prominent in the text as opposed to outright removing it, if its legitimacy is in question. —Legoless 15:11, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Hans the Fox is another Shezarrine, but not Pelinal himself. The various incarnations of Shor are distinct personalities. No need for that reference.76.179.132.32 17:36, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, as I said, "Shezarrine problem aside". This article assumes that all of the different "incarnations"/names are a single person. Splitting it up is a separate matter entirely. —Legoless 23:32, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Pelinal was not an Imperial.

Since my edit was reverted, I'll guess I'll need to bring this up here. Pelinal Whitestrake is an anomaly in the TES universe and trying to pigeonhole his race comes across as inaccurate and speculative. It's exactly the problem I foresaw when the lore summary template was being developed.

The reasoning for naming him Imperial is because PGE1 calls him a "Nibenay warlord of the Elven Pogrom", and while the Nibenese are related to the Imperials - it doesn't apply to Pelinal for the same reasons why we have listed Tiber Septim's race as "Unknown". Tiber has been called Colovian, Atmoran and Breton - his history is mixed/unknown/disputed.

Pelinel lived for an unknown length of time. as explained by the line: "Also during the Late Merethic Era the legendary immortal hero, warrior, sorceror [sic], and king variously known as Pelinal Whitestrake, Harrald Hairy Breeks, Ysmir, Hans the Fox, etc., wandered Tamriel, gathering armies, conquering lands, ruling, then abandoning his kingdoms to wander again." We don't know why this historian called him Nibeneese, but clearly he was not. It could very well be because the original Cyro-Nordic tribes are referred to as the Nibenese (mentioned later), but that still doesn't make him Imperial. How could he be if he was from the Merethic Era? They didn't exist.

Pelinal is not a regular historical person with a race, birth and death. The Song of Pelinal 5 essentially calls him a god that simply took the appearance of a Cyro-Nordic proto-human. Morihaus said to him: "You are blood-made-glorious, uncle, and will come again, as fox animal or light." - believing he was a divine who became a mortal. The lore talks of him in such vague and abstract terms that he needs to be treated like the Daedra or Gods lore pages are.

To reiterate - my reasoning for leaving his race as "Unknown" is because:

1. During his time, "Imperials" even didn't exist. The people of the time were proto-Cyrods, Nedes etc. Even to call him Cyro-Nordic or even is Nibenese much more accurate (but still wrong). "It was in the rain forests of the Nibenay Valley that the original Cyro-Nordic tribes, the Nibenese, learned a self-reliance that..." Completely inaccurate.
2. In the opening of this article, we have mentioned he came to Tamriel from Atmora as part of Ysgramor's Five Hundred Companions. Yet he is an Imperial? This is just confusing.
3. Game data is never reliable as a source - See Oblivion:Akaviri Commander Mishaxhi.

To simply pigeonhole him an "Imperial" for the sake of convenience does the character no justice and actually harms the article.

--Jimeee (talk) 17:29, 7 May 2013 (GMT)

Given this, might we want to change the article to a God page, rather than a people page? (also, I wasn't basing this off game data at all, I didn't look at any Oblivion pages when making the change). Jeancey (talk) 17:36, 7 May 2013 (GMT)

I'm uncomfortable labeling Ysgramor as a Nord, but that's what Skyrim called him, so it's good enough for me. Any nuances about Pelinal's race can be clarified in the text or in a note. We're not helping anyone by leaving the race parameter unknown. Unlike Tiber Septim, Pelinal's race is not disputed; the reason we have Tiber Septim's race as unknown is because we have contradictory accounts. There are no contradictory accounts here; all in-game sources agree that he came from modern-day Cyrodiil.

Pelinal was a proto-Imperial, as Ysgramor was a proto-Nord. It's not completely inaccurate or unreasonable to just cut out the "proto" for the sake of making the links in the templates work. It's just being pragmatic. Even if we conclude that Pelinal wasn't an "Imperial", he was still a Nede. One way or another, he has a race attributable to him, so what would be really inaccurate is to say his race is "unknown". The OOG should not be in the intro. If it's on the page at all, it should be near bottom or in a note. Confusion solved.

As for classifying him as a god, I don't see any reason to. Some hero-worship and myths from a bunch of freed slaves is understandable, but I don't see any evidence he was ever worshipped as a god. Mannimarco has a stronger claim for being in the Lore:Gods category, and he's still in the People section. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 18:55, 7 May 2013 (GMT)

(←) To go point by point on the OP, we're not speculating by relaying the information we've been given. Again, Tiber Septim is not a comparable case because there we have in-game sources with conflicting accounts of his race. That's not the case here. I've just spelled out more clearly in the intro that Pelinal lived for an unknown length of time, but that doesn't contradict the information we have about his race. We have no contradictory information on this matter. We're not making any assumptions or conjecture by restating the sources we've been given. The in-game notion that he may have been incarnated in different forms at other points in time is not something we have to treat as gospel, not to the point of holding back relevant information on what we know just because it might not be the whole truth. The doubts about it and the beliefs about the nature of Pelinal can be appropriately elucidated in the text. The rest is for the forums.

Bethesda labeled him an Imperial in game data, and a "Nibenay" warrior in the lore. Nede, Nibenese, Imperial; we essentially have it straight from the horse's mouth, both in the game universe and in reality, that they're basically the same things. We would be editorializing if we gave him any other label, not something we should do without a very solid reason. We don't actually have a source that says Pelinal was from the Late Merethic Era, only sources which recount legends saying someone with that name lived in the Late Merethic and early First Eras. And in this extreme situation, that distinction is actually crucial, because Pelinal is also said to have items and knowledge from the future. We know that a coherent Imperial nationality eventually emerged, especially under the unity brought by Reman and his heirs, in the late First Era, 2,500 years after Pelinal fought for the Slave Queen. And yet, he is said to have screamed the name Reman during that rebellion. The premise that Pelinal couldn't have been Imperial because events about him date back to a time before Imperials existed is flawed. The normally immutable barrier of a timeline has been compromised in this case by indications of time travel. In short: yes, Pelinal could have been an Imperial, and since Bethesda says he is, let's just take their word for it. Doing anything else would just be us casting our own opinions on the facts we've been given, and there's no significant reason for our opinions to get in between the readers and the facts. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 07:21, 24 May 2013 (GMT)

"Bethesda labeled him an Imperial in game data, and a "Nibenay" warrior in the lore. Nede, Nibenese, Imperial; we essentially have it straight from the horse's mouth, both in the game universe and in reality, that they're basically the same things. We would be editorializing if we gave him any other label." --- I have already mentioned why I believe game data is not a reliable source and should never be used to back up a lore statement - however even if we ignore that point for now, why is the fact he is Ada being ignored? This not not my opinion, and you know as well as I do that The Songs clearly refer to him as Ada - that is also from the horses mouth. You said that we have no contradictory information on this matter - but how is this fact not contradictory?

My point is, he is a lesser Aedra that took the form of a man. A demi-god much like Morihaus. You mentioned that you don't believe that Pelinel should be classified as a god because there was no evidence he was ever worshiped as one (not counting hero-worship and myths from freed slaves) - however if that is the criteria that we are using for what qualifies as a "god", then Morihaus should not be listed as a god either, because he is exactly in the same boat as Pelinel. There is no evidence Morihaus was worshiped. The only difference is the lore explicitly called Morihaus as "demigod", whereas Pelinel is only referred to as "Ada" by Morihaus himself. Some (like old Temple-Zero at the top on this page) go as far to call him a dual avatar of Lorkhan and Akatosh.

You mentioned it's not completely inaccurate or unreasonable to just cut out the "proto" for the sake of making the links in the templates work. That to me is crazy - especially when Bethesda has given us enough information to make the distinction between Nede and Imperial or Atmoran and Nord. I can't understand why template convenience would ever trump lore accuracy. Even if we ignore the whole semantics of Proto-Imperial and Imperial, we still have the issue that he was Ada. Calling him "Imperial" and hoping readers work out what we actually mean when they read the article is not way to do it.

While "Unknown" is my preference - and I certainly don't think it's editorializing at all given my points about him being Ada - I don't think you will go for that - so I could live with "proto-Nord" (because I don't mind OOG) or "proto-Imperial". The template might not work, but why can't we just fix that with a redirect?--Jimeee (talk) 11:14, 24 May 2013 (GMT)

Do you know how broad the term "Imperial" is? That's Cyrodillics, Nords, and Bretons, among others, all mixed together in different combinations. The race Imperial is really put there for convince. I think that it's okay to leave it that way because it's preferring no race and stays in line with the game.--Br3admax (talk) 11:18, 24 May 2013 (GMT)

I'm not sure how Bretons fit in there - they were from Nordic and Altmer stock. But as I understand it, Imperial were born of Nedic and Nordic mixing. These days it only covers Colovians and Nibeneees. --Jimeee (talk) 11:30, 24 May 2013 (GMT)

I'm not ignoring any fact that he is Ada, I'm simply not taking something he said as fact. I'm not aware of Morihaus calling Pelinal ada, only Pelinal saying to Morihaus that "we are ada". This could be a euphemism, an exaggeration of their power and influence. However, it's still something we can put more emphasis on in the article, maybe by moving it to the intro. Anyways, anyone can call themself a god; what we're concerned with is whether anyone took them up on the offer. Distinguishing between gods and people is often frustrating and can have the appearance of being arbitrary, but there's a method to the madness. The dividing line is whether an entity has been worshipped as a higher form of life. The intro at "Lore:Gods", emphasis added: "The gods of Tamriel are as varied as the many cultures' traditions of worship. Individual gods (used as a general term to indicate any entity worshipped by one of Tamriel's cultures) are listed alphabetically on each of the sub-articles listed above." So the sad fact is that someone like Irarak can find their way into Lore:Gods, and like you said, we have sources calling Morihaus a "demigod". But do we have a source saying the same about Pelinal? That's all I'm interested in doing: sticking to the source material.

As stated as UESPWiki:Lore, "In those rare cases where a character may belong in both [gods] and another category, the practice has been to have a single-topic article in the category where the majority of the information on the subject is focused. This usually means a snippet in the Gods multi-topic articles and a longer article elsewhere (see, e.g., Lore:Tiber Septim and Lore:Gods T#Talos; we know plenty about Tiber Septim the man, but comparatively little about Talos the god)." So the actual article should stay in "Lore:People" even if we end up giving Pelinal a snippet at "Lore:Gods P". Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 20:16, 24 May 2013 (GMT)

(←) I may be completely misunderstanding Breadmax, and I'm not clear where Jeancey stands, but I'm counting 2-1 in favor of changing it back to Imperial. I'm still convinced that it's simply much more helpful to readers, and more faithful to the information we've been given, to include Pelinal's race as Imperial in the summary. If the article's written properly, we should be able to make it clear to readers that attaching a race to him may be a fool's errand. A lot of our information comes with asterisks, that's just the nature of the beast. Unless anyone else has any input, I'll change it back to Imperial in a few days. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 10:38, 10 July 2013 (GMT)

We seem to be at a crossroads due to Lore and In Game Data conflicting with one another and creating a paradox. I understand the argument for both sides but seeing as the DATA in the game and the INFORMATION aka "Lore" provided by the game have the opportunity to be separate, we should keep them separate. The Oblivion page on Pelinal Whitestrake should keep his race as Imperial as provided by the in game data and the Lore page should keep his race as unknown due to above stated references and historical information of the Elder Scrolls universe previously established. Both pages provide links to one another and specify the difference between them. I understand the desire for uniformity of information on pages but I feel as if this if this is one of the few exceptions due to the conflicting information. If anyone can think of a more reasonable solution I believe all parties would like to hear it. (Gadianzero (talk) 16:30, 26 July 2013 (GMT))

The Oblivion page's race parameter was never up for debate here; this is just about the lore page's race parameter (and, frankly, I'm amazed that was up for debate in the first place). It's completely inappropriate to simply assume something is inaccurate when it's possible this isn't the case, and this is what we'd be doing if we leave his race as "unknown". It's simply not true. There's a presumption of accuracy to everything in the games, and I've seen nothing here, absolutely nothing, which makes it unlikely that the Pelinal Whitestrake seen in Oblivion and written about in The Song of Pelinal was an Imperial.

As Yoda said, "Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter". But the crude matter nevertheless takes on a shape. Pelinal's shape was that of an Imperial. The "luminous being" could've appeared in other shapes, but we would only be speculating on that. The speculation is for the forums, not the lore page. I feel I have successfully rebutted each reason Jimee has offered for leaving the race unknown. There's no categorical bar to Pelinal having been an Imperial. The OOG cite has been moved; the only "confusion" readers should get from the OOG is if they actually click on the link and read it (seriously, anyone relying on an assumption derived from The Five Hundred Companions instead of game data should stand back and look at what they're doing). And finally, while the race provided by game data is not infallible, that does not call for assuming it is wrong. I'm all for compromise, and I seek it as much as possible, but sometimes one side is right, and other is wrong. The only viable course of action I see here is having the race parameter as Imperial, and then articulating very clearly in the introduction why this may be in doubt. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 20:23, 26 July 2013 (GMT)

could he be the warrior constellation incarnate?

I just figured it might be a possibility...and Magus - the mage...--213.74.15.163 11:37, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

No. Pelinal is a Shezarrine and Magus is the sun. —Legoless (talk) 15:24, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Was the design of Pelinal’s armor design futuristic?

I read on a Frequently asked questions link here in the UESP (that I simply can’t find so if someone has the link I would appreciate it if you showed it to me) that Pelinal’s armor was futuristic for the time he acted in Tamriel, but everything I found that could be a source to this was part of the content of The Song of Pelinal, Book II that reads “ PELIN-EL [which is] "The Star-Made Knight" [and he] was arrayed in armor [from the future time].” the problem is that Gormlaith Golden-Hilt wore a set of steel plate armor that looks as advanced in terms of design as Pelinal’s armor, and she lived back in the Merethic Era, way before Alessia started her rebellion. This without mentioning that theory of Pelinal being some sort of cyborg from the future, which could be another interpretation for that part. What do y’all say? — Unsigned comment by DovahsaurusPaleoKnight (talk • contribs) at 02:43 on 09 August 2020 (UTC)

Race

The page has stayed on having his race listed as "Unknown" with no notes discussing why we have it that way. From the topic above, I would say that it was leaning towards "Imperial" over "Unknown", but at the minimum a note needs to be added explaining our justification for it, whatever we settle on. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 11:43, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I think that regardless of the decision whether he remains unknown race or any other race it is worth mentioning that Alessia, his contemporary is classified as Nede rather than Imperial.Tyrvarion (talk) 11:47, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Also, the race has been listed as "Unknown" for a while now. Was there new information added to ESO that would have even referenced his race? Or is this changed based solely on the information used in the discussion above (which was pre-ESO info). Jeancey (talk) 17:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

His race should stay unknown seeing as he was around before Imperials were a thing, with a note saying that he is represented as imperial in oblivion's game data. Nede as a race does not exist in oblivion's data, and imperial is likely a placeholder.Zebendal (talk) 14:40, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Pelinal among 500 Companions

According to https://en.uesp.net/wiki/UESPWiki:Lore

"UOL should only be used when it helps to explain in-game content. The UESP need not start documenting every fact mentioned in UOL. Using solely UOL to support definitive statements of fact should be avoided."

The only source for "These latter two names were mentioned among Ysgramor's Companions, and a couple others in their number were said to have "ran once with the Pelinal." is an out of game, UOL text by MK. I'm not saying it should be completely removed from the article, but it should be down in the Notes section like in other articles, rather than in the main body. — Unsigned comment by Vinovin15 (talk • contribs) at 13:09 on 20 April 2022

Agree fully with this. It doesn't add any relevant information to existing lore, and is only there for unrelated exposition dump. Belongs in notes. CoolBlast3 (talk) 19:13, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree that the text primarily focuses on Ysgramor rather than on Pelinal. Although implications indeed are useful for this page, it does seem to fit better inside the notes as the text itself is not relevant to the Pelinal himself directly. As a side note, the reference link could be changed to the internal one since UESP has this UOL text here: (The Five Hundred Mighty Companions or Thereabouts of Ysgramor the Returned). Tyrvarion (talk) 19:24, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

The notion that out-of-game lore is never in the main body that these two editors suggest is untrue. While its commonly found in notes its never ever a requirement that they be relegated there, and sometimes never fits there anyway. I don't see the harm in keeping one sentence from a text by the guy who wrote everything about Pelinal in a higher up paragraph. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 20:43, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Because according to UESP's own lore article, "UOL should only be used when it helps to explain in-game content. The UESP need not start documenting every fact mentioned in UOL. Using solely UOL to support definitive statements of fact should be avoided.". You can't pick and choose when rules apply. In this context, that UOL does nothing to explain anything. It instead adds information that isn't really that relevant either. And so, to notes it should go. CoolBlast3 (talk) 21:34, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Except it does help explain in-game content. You're misinterpreting the policy, its primarily in place to prevent people making articles on stuff that doesn't come up in-game content at all like Landfall, so that we don't end up with stuff like "Lore:Jubal-lun-Sul"; it doesn't apply here. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 21:56, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Elaborate on how random names help explain in-game content. It doesn't, it's just random additional information. It doesn't serve as an answer for anything. CoolBlast3 (talk) 22:01, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Two alter personas of Pelinal somehow being in Atmora and sailing with Ysgramor does not "explain" any in-game content, it just confuses the reader, if anything. The 500 companions text from MK is more of a humorous text filled with "easter eggs" such as this, rather than a serious lore article. It belongs more on the Notes section. Vinovin15 (talk) 22:06, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

It helps explain what time period these figures were contemporary with, rather than a name with blank info, that's all. Kirkbride (creator of Pelinal) explains that they were different individuals that ended up being equated as the same in written history, which is alluded to by the books but not figured out by the average Tamrielian's perspective. We only list the 500 companions bit to help explain what role those names might've had, what they were known for in history. Nothing here violates the policy; if you two are going to keep misunderstanding it there's nothing more I can explain. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 22:19, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

So...according to you, it helps explain another UOL source which is Kirkbride rambling on teslore? Real helpful to the article CoolBlast3 (talk) 22:25, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

As I said, alluded to by in-game books; outright explanation was just stated elsewhere. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 22:30, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

(←) I definitely agree that the content doesn't seem to add anything significant to the in-game content of the page. I don't see why keeping this information as a note doesn't keep everyone happy. It's not explaining unknown in-game information, so it doesn't go in the body, but it also isn't being removed altogether. As a note, it allows the reader to make up their mind on the matter. Jeancey (talk) 22:22, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Rim is correct that UOL can be used in the body of an article if it helps supplement or expand upon an already established piece of lore - particularly when no official source exists. However for this situation I'm 50/50 mainly because yes its notable that Harrald and Hans from Before the Ages of Man might have been one of the 500 and that some of them ran with Pelinal, but at the same time that specific MK text is known to be an easter egg to the Bethesda forum users, so its impossible to establish what parts to take seriously. Honestly, that text is a mess chronologically as it mentions wild inconsistencies like 1E421, Vrage, Hjalmer, Perrif, Potemaic the Wolf-King, etc.

Note that Before the Ages of Man already establishes Pelinal and Ysgramor were possibly Late Merethic contemporaries and that Pelinal was different figures, so that's not in question. --Jimeee (talk) 09:36, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I think having this information as a note is the most appropriate compromise here. It's notable that those two names appear on the list of 500 Companions, particularly when we have in-game sources that state Pelinal may have been "a god guiser, who had incarnated twice before already". If nothing else, seeing these names appear in another historical context throws doubt on the assumption that the many names of Pelinal refer to a single individual. —⁠Legoless (talk) 15:38, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Jimeee, the idea already exists as Hans the Fox and 500 Companions come up in-game, putting them together is the only new info from UOL. Legoless' proposal would work out, but the notes should not mention "from a text by dev Michael Kirkbride", as even UOL info must remain in-universe unless its describing a "behind the scenes" note about development history. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 18:15, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I really have no major opinion on where the information is contained, but my reverts were done due to the fact that the basis used for putting it in the notes was incorrect and would continue to revert similar edits in the future done on that sole misguided basis. I also agree with Rim that the note as it stands could be worded better. Dcking20 (talk) 23:33, 21 April 2022 (UTC)