Difference between revisions of "Talk:Exeter Book"
ADVERTISEMENT
From Diablo Wiki
m |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Don't you think this shoud be from the game's point of view?--[[User:TheWanderer|TheWanderer]] 02:41, 14 October 2009 (CEST) | Don't you think this shoud be from the game's point of view?--[[User:TheWanderer|TheWanderer]] 02:41, 14 October 2009 (CEST) | ||
| − | It's tricky given that the object itself doesn't exist within the game and merely functioned as an influence for an opening to one of the manuals, the main priority seemed to be getting rid of any false information. The degree to which the article is actually useful for a Diablo wiki after that is questionable, but I suppose it's interesting background information if nothing else. [[User:Bemused|Bemused]] 03:34, 14 October 2009 (CEST) | + | :It's tricky given that the object itself doesn't exist within the game and merely functioned as an influence for an opening to one of the manuals, the main priority seemed to be getting rid of any false information. The degree to which the article is actually useful for a Diablo wiki after that is questionable, but I suppose it's interesting background information if nothing else. [[User:Bemused|Bemused]] 03:34, 14 October 2009 (CEST) |
| + | |||
| + | ::I added it as I assumed someone at Blizzard had felt "Exeter Book" sounded like a cool name of a book to have existing in the game. Also, the fact that tenth century in Diablo isn't too far off the actual events taking place (arounf 13-hundreds). I didn't google, unfortunately. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::Thanks a bunch, Bemused, for doing the homework. I have changed it slightly, and also added the original transcript in a subpage that deliberately don't have a category. I doubt it will get loads of hits, but 800-900 just on the transcript so far is still pretty impressive! | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::You are right: There's no evidence of an "Exeter Book" in the world of Diablo, and there's no trace of an "Exeter" city or town either. The writers of the manual must simply have felt inspired by that work, and mixed in the references with the in-game references they use for other transcipts. Not our fault :) --[[User:Leord|Leord]] 12:50, 14 October 2009 (CEST) | ||
Latest revision as of 10:50, 14 October 2009
Don't you think this shoud be from the game's point of view?--TheWanderer 02:41, 14 October 2009 (CEST)
- It's tricky given that the object itself doesn't exist within the game and merely functioned as an influence for an opening to one of the manuals, the main priority seemed to be getting rid of any false information. The degree to which the article is actually useful for a Diablo wiki after that is questionable, but I suppose it's interesting background information if nothing else. Bemused 03:34, 14 October 2009 (CEST)
- I added it as I assumed someone at Blizzard had felt "Exeter Book" sounded like a cool name of a book to have existing in the game. Also, the fact that tenth century in Diablo isn't too far off the actual events taking place (arounf 13-hundreds). I didn't google, unfortunately.
- Thanks a bunch, Bemused, for doing the homework. I have changed it slightly, and also added the original transcript in a subpage that deliberately don't have a category. I doubt it will get loads of hits, but 800-900 just on the transcript so far is still pretty impressive!
- You are right: There's no evidence of an "Exeter Book" in the world of Diablo, and there's no trace of an "Exeter" city or town either. The writers of the manual must simply have felt inspired by that work, and mixed in the references with the in-game references they use for other transcipts. Not our fault :) --Leord 12:50, 14 October 2009 (CEST)
