User talk:Roger/Sandbox01

Opinions please

Before launching this, I would love to know your feedback on the article as it is now. This is my first time working on a bigger project, so any input is valuable to me. That being said, please don't hesitate to criticize it if you feel the article is confusing, lacks information, looks horrid, etc. Also, what I do realize is that I'm a terrible writer, so it will most likely need a lot of tweaking. :-) --Roger (talk) 23:24, 23 February 2013 (GMT)

I also wonder if anyone has an idea which Reman is referred to in "How could they trick me like this? I was one of Reman's court wizards!" (to link to it). --Roger (talk) 20:44, 2 March 2013 (GMT)

Well, I did a quick search and came up with two possibilities. According to the chart here, there were only three Remans. The first is the most famed and commanded large armies, so it is entirely possible that one of the souls who says the line you quoted was present in any number of the battles he fought. The second is directly connected to Morrowind and not much else. The third (and final of the dynasty) is also only connected to Morrowind, in the Four-Score War. The second and third I think can be discarded-- there is nothing to suggest a link between them and the situation in the Soul Cairn. The other possibility I found (the first being Reman I) is Kastav. He was linked to both the Dragonguard and the Winterhold Rebellion, as well as capturing Nords (which could explain why a wizard in his service would be forced to become an eternally wandering soul by the Ideal Masters). However, I personally think that Reman I is the most likely choice. He's well-known, the initial Reman (therefore, less likely to be called anything but, unlike his successors), and was in command of huge armies that irritated a lot of people (and, again, could have resulted in his wizard's imprisonment).

As for the article itself, there's not much that I can think of to say other than it looks good :). The words and grammar could be a little better (clearer, neater) perhaps (if you want, I could give it a quick once-over), and I think the dialogue would be far neater if placed in a table (the way it is split in three is nice, but it's rather uncoordinated). Beyond that, I can't help much. :P

TL;DR? Or did that help? :) --Vulpa 00:04, 16 March 2013 (GMT)

Sure, feel free to edit. As for Reman, I'm thinking about linking to Reman Dynasty, since we can never be 100% sure. --Roger (talk) 00:15, 16 March 2013 (GMT)

Yeah, that's probably best. Especially if you take my advice and then find out later that I was WAY wrong ;) . Alright, I'll take a look now at the wording, make a few nitpicky tweaks... :) --Vulpa 00:22, 16 March 2013 (GMT)

Thanks for the revision of the article. Regarding your suggestion about joining the dialogue in one table, how exactly would that look? Generic and quest-specific dialogue are split into headlines for a reason, and the latter is already written in a form unsuitable for tables. Edit: This is the only thing I could come up with. Alas, it is not looking neat at all, and even leaves out information. --Roger (talk) 08:37, 16 March 2013 (GMT)

(←) Well, I was thinking something like this. This way, the generic is put together in it fairly neatly, and the quest-specific has it's own section, like it deserves. (I was considering putting the quest-specific first, but decided against.) I just don't like having a uncoordinated list of bullets, and I'm not so sure about placing the two types of generic side-by-side because it leaves a huge gap down the side of the page once the few "can be said anytime" are added (this also scrunches the first and far longer/more important column into one side). However, I was also thinking that tables (while preferable in my opinion) may be unnecessary-- consider just putting the quest-specific below the "can be used anytime" section in your sandbox using hiddentables (how you have it already, but so that the quest-specific fills up the empty space). Whaddya think? (That I need to stop using parentheses? ;) )--Vulpa 13:51, 16 March 2013 (GMT)