Lore talk:Pankor

MapEdit

I for one had a heck of a time finding Vandor on the map, and I'm still not quite sure that I actually did (is it just to the right of the compass?). Thus, my question is: is it allowable to add doctored images to the wiki? I'm aware that some of the photographers here adjust lighting and other minor details, but is something like adding a red circle for clarification admissible? If so, I'll be happy to upload one such image. --_¿Vulpa^? 20:57, 30 July 2013 (GMT)

Vulpa, does this have to do with the lore of Vandor? Or the in-game aspect? Because this is the Lore page :P Jeancey (talk) 21:07, 30 July 2013 (GMT)

Such an image would be more suited to the gamespace article, if at all. But we do have several doctored images in use on the wiki. I don't think it's encouraged, exactly, but if you see a substantive reason... Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 21:36, 30 July 2013 (GMT)

I don't think Vandor appears in any games, and thus there is no gamespace article to refer to. What I think Vulpa is meaning is adding a circle to the West Tamriel map to show where it is. Where it is being between the ENE and E cardinals of the compass on the map (which I agree). Personally, I think that would be a reasonable thing to do for any page which uses this map as its sole location reference, as the text is too small to read in many instances. --Enodoc (talk) 22:06, 30 July 2013 (GMT)

Yes, exactly! :) What Enodoc said.--_¿Vulpa^? 22:24, 30 July 2013 (GMT)

Facepalm. In that case, I don't have problem with it. Seems like it could help readers, and it's not unprecedented. I added doctored images to the lore articles for regions in Cyrodiil, such as Lore:Nibenay Basin, and nobody has complained (yet). Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 23:49, 30 July 2013 (GMT)

Haha... okay then, I guess I'll try my hand at uploading an image (never done that before so I'll have to spend an hour figuring out how to name it). :) By the way Minor Edits, the example link you gave above of the Nibenay Basin: first of all I'm glad you made it, because I remember looking at that when I first started Oblivion and wasn't a member here-- second, why's there a random purple spot on the right edge, in Morrowind? :P --_¿Vulpa^? 00:11, 31 July 2013 (GMT)

Never noticed that before. Rpeh must've made an error in photoshop. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 00:24, 31 July 2013 (GMT)

 :P Oh, while we're sorta on the topic: is it definitely a "go" for adding other versions of this map to the rest of the pages linking to it (that need it)? --_¿Vulpa^? 00:32, 31 July 2013 (GMT)

For places on the map which are labeled, but where the label is so small it is indecipherable, I don't see a problem. It could be helpful to some to draw their attention to whichever speck on the map the page was created for. Obviously, some might disagree. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 02:55, 31 July 2013 (GMT)

Didn't see this discussion. From Vulpa's talk page: "The islands are already labelled on the map; adding a big red circle around them simply detracts from the image's quality. With certain exceptions, unedited maps are much more preferable." I really think we should try to keep these kind of images out of lorespace. The edited Oblivion maps also seem out of style. Lore articles are supposed to be written from an in-universe perspective, and adding details to a map like that doesn't seem right. If the island's location isn't clear enough from the map, it would be more constructive to describe it in the main text. —Legoless (talk) 03:19, 31 July 2013 (GMT)

I still stand for adding them, and I explained all my reasons here. However, if we decide not to "mess with the maps", then a compromise might be to have one regular and one modified on each side of the page. Or possibly include a link on all affected pages going to a fully modified map that makes everything legible. But again, I'm still for adding them modified. --_¿Vulpa^? 03:24, 31 July 2013 (GMT)

Maybe in a gallery section? —Legoless (talk) 03:30, 31 July 2013 (GMT)

(edit conflict) And this is why I said "yet". I suppose there's an original research argument for keeping certain doctored images out of the lorespace, but otherwise I think our policy up until now has been silent on the matter. I don't think the lore perspective favors either position. We introduce our own words into the lore section by paraphrasing the in-game words. We make the text our own. Adding markings or shadings to an in-game map seems like an analogous practice, in my opinion. So I think this is about "should we", not "can we". This would lead to a hopefully modest proliferation of map images. That and the risk of introducing original research are the only downsides I can see. The upside is that having the doctored images may be helpful for some readers.

Helping readers always seems like a goal worth pursuing to me. Presuming we can agree that some readers' experience may be improved with the images, even if it's just by a marginal amount, then I think the downsides are tolerable. Further, they can be minimized by adopting as a hard rule in the lore guidelines that a talk page discussion must be held, and a favorable consensus reached, before any doctored images may be added to the lorespace. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 03:38, 31 July 2013 (GMT)

(←) I think adding some clarification method to a map in a situation like this is fine. However, I would prefer to see something a bit more professional-looking than a bright red, hand-drawn circle (no offense Vulpa :)). Maybe having the location in question shaded a different color, or adding a pointer. --Xyzzy ^Talk 06:01, 31 July 2013 (GMT)

Heh no I get that. :) Well wait, do you mean the first one I uploaded because I uploaded a new one (okay, a few) that made it a real circle, not my horribly drawn attempt. :P But, I'm not sure that either of your options make much more sense than what I did... a pointer, I assume, means an arrow? :) If so, that seems just as unprofessional as the circle. And shading in would be difficult in some cases; for example Vandor here, if we shaded in the island we'd lose the outline of it because it's so small-- and you still wouldn't see it very well on the map, which defeats the purpose a little. --_¿Vulpa^? 12:01, 31 July 2013 (GMT)

I can understand how unedited maps may be preferable in some instances, but if I'm looking to see where something is, being able to actually see where it is on a map is more beneficial than having a map with no distinguishing features. Taking the Oblivion maps as example, if I wanted to know the geographical extent of the Colovian Highlands, the blank map is no help; the edited map gives all the information I was looking for, is accurate as it was taken from game data (I assume), and is more informative than a text paragraph would be. Improving clarity by marking the location in some way, whether that be circles or otherwise, I still think is a good idea. --Enodoc (talk) 13:39, 31 July 2013 (GMT)

Edit BreakEdit

It's been over two weeks now, so I shall revive this conversation to see if anyone's still interested in it.

I don't know about other maps, but in the case of this one there needs to be clearer versions available for the small and illegible portions of it. By that I mean versions such as the circle I added around Vandor, a while ago now. Shading in items would be far preferable to the circle, but in the case of items this small I don't think it will work; they're just too small, that's why they need highlighting in the first place. Either way, it's simply too difficult to read that map as it stands, and it's the only one we have of the locations displayed. So all I've said above, I still agree with. I guess if nobody objects within the week I shall continue my uploading, since most who've commented seem in some sort of accordance, and as I've downloaded a program that should make my 'highlighting' look less ham-handed. :) --_¿Vulpa^? 21:16, 16 August 2013 (GMT)

I still support some sort of identifying feature as well. There is currently a discussion at UESPWiki talk:Lore#Doctored Images regarding guidelines on how we should handle this topic; some of the guys may be waiting for a conclusion to that before commenting further here. I thought it may be worth mentioning as I'm not sure if you're aware of it (since you haven't commented there).    :)   Enodoc (talk) 21:50, 16 August 2013 (GMT)

 :O when did THAT get there?! No I haven't seen that, thank you! So, guess I'll let this sit again then and head over there instead. Sneaky people, not telling me there was another discussion... :P --_¿Vulpa^? 00:05, 17 August 2013 (GMT)

Wrong nameEdit

The name of this island is nearly impossible to read from the low resolution map of West Tamriel. However, close up views of this map are seen in Redguard's loading screens. This particular island is clearly visible in File:RG-load-Catacombs.jpg and is called "Pankor". I leave this note here for future reference; the edit summary is too short.

As a side note, Tamriel Rebuilt includes a book called A Traditional Sload Tale that references "Vandor". Atrayonis thought it may have been written by Michael Kirkbride, but others said it was fan written. Either way, that name is not found in any canon source. —Dillonn241 (talk) 05:22, 17 October 2017 (UTC)