Talk:God letters

Untitled
Why was it discontinued? http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc45/C_Teng/White_party_hat.png  C   Teng  18:13, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Old question now, easier to ask. It seems to be quest-related, they are so woven into stories since they stopped it, that make sense? Plus, it was three of them, probably running out of ideas. 21:09, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Non canon content
The change of the letters from canon to non-canon has caused a number of disputes regarding how they are used in articles. This is an opportunity to discuss how they can be applied in articles, with the following options: Please discuss.
 * 1) Remove them entirely.
 * 2) Remove them when they contradict other canonical sources
 * 3) Leave them be

Discussion

 * Support 2. Their announcement as being non-canon does not mean we should eradicate them entirely. Guthix and Saradomin playing RuneLink should obviously not be mentioned, but things that are in line with in-game/postbag/forum/etc. stuff should be kept. 09:14, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * Support 3 . Just document the non-canonical parts. They're an extremely interesting read, far too valuable to remove entirely. Thingummywut (talk) 09:26, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * Remove entirely means that we will not reference them on any articles or use them as source, but we will keep them at God Letters + subpages. And don't you mean "document the canonical parts"? 09:39, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, right. Misread the first post. What I had in mind in documenting the non-canonical parts was making it clear to the reader what is canonical and what is not. In this case, I support option 2 too. Thingummywut (talk) 09:48, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * Support 3. Keep the references to them, but say if the information comes from the God Letters, as it may be considered less reliable. 09:45, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * We could add a notice to the CiteGodLetter template perhaps? 09:46, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * I think we have the letters transcripted onto the wiki somewhere. Would adding a notice to the letter itself be removing the information too far away from the article?
 * Surprise surprise: Support 1: Let me explain, but please correct me where I'm wrong. If something is not canon, it does not belong on wikia (wikia made to understand stuff; non-canon lore, out dated combat tips, old images, etc. do not contribute to the understanding and should therefore be removed), this instantly makes "3" a bad option while it keeps "1" and "2" open for discussion. The problem with "1" is, it might seem too rigorous and too abrupt a cut with the past, also we might lose a lot of content and lore (well, we certainly will do so)... but generally we do this already. Jagex makes decision, e.g.: Demon slayer rework: I liked the old lore, but it got replaced - yes we lost some lore there, but just like the people that like the old look of Bandos: sorry, the game got updated. We should do the same with the God letters - it's out dated and out dated things have no place/should be removed. The problem with point "2" is that, while some things may be considered lore (e.g. the name Saradomin for a character described as the God of Order... wisdom, pleasantry, etc.) while others are not (e.g.: Guthix is gender-neutral). Unfortunately there is a big gray area (e.g.: the Saradomin and Armadyl are "noble brothers"): Lenissa(sp, from the ghostly robes mini quest) said Saradomin would surely give the Elder Staff 'back' to Armadyl, but at the same time... the actual lore is incorrect Saradomin only refers to Armadyl in that way in the God letters. Sure there's plenty other stuff we could point to that are on this grey area, but the point is, the quotes and perspectives that are used are basically not based on lore but on the god letters (which are more close to fan fiction, imo). So if we have to "Remove them when they contradict other canonical sources" then we basically have to remove them all because they are rarely/never quote the canon (e.g.: Saradomin never said Armadyl and him are "noble brothers" within the game - consequently it cannot be seen as lore). And if they do line up (e.g. the name "Saradomin" for a character described as the "God of Order") why not use the REAL lore anyway... why use a lousy substitute if you have the real thing?? I hope this clears it up for people why we should not use non-canon sources for canon, and why the God letters are not canon, and why they should never be used anyway. 10:10, June 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * "So if we have to "Remove them when they contradict other canonical sources" then we basically have to remove them all because they are rarely/never quote the canon (e.g.: Saradomin never said Armadyl and him are "noble brothers" within the game - consequently it cannot be seen as lore)." Noble brothers is metaphorical, Saradomin means their beliefs are similar. Anyway, no, this is not stated to be true in the game. Point is, it's also not stated to be not true (be it explicitly ("Saradomin and Armadyl differ very much in philosophy.") or implicitly ("Saradomin is the god of order, Armadyl is the god of cookies [you get the idea].")) in the game. Thus, it shold be considered canon, as it is the only source at all to mention this particular subject. Not affirmed in no way means contradicted. 10:32, June 8, 2013 (UTC)