Talk:Farseer trilogy

Plot/setting

It strikes me that the article could use a setting section, which could then absorb some of the information from the plot summary, and also render the latter more comprehensible. There's also a little analytical commentary in the plot, which ought to be moved out. In the spirit of BOLD I'll begin work on this in a bit, but if anyone has objections, happy to discuss. Vanamonde (Talk) 03:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea; the plot had crossed the 700-word MOS limit and needed trimming. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 04:21, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

I think I'm done with this section, feel free to revise further and/or discuss any pieces of it. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:14, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Senior's Chapter in James & Mendlesohn

I got access to this with high hopes of using it substantively, but it's littered with errors (names are wrong, chronology is wrong), and so I'm not going to use it for more than a couple of sentences. Noting this for the record. Vanamonde (Talk) 01:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah it is disappointing. I was just going to cite it for a sentence in Style (the Fisher King reference). Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 01:26, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Hm, looks like I wrote a different version of the same text but didn't save. I'll try to synthesize the two versions shortly. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:31, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Illustrators

The information available is regrettably patchy. I've added some from SFE that is corroborated by ISFDB, but the latter also implies different editions had different illustrators (expected) but it's not considered a reliable source. The illustrator listed in the infobox before, Jackie Morris, has only illustrated the recent editions, according to ISFDB, and likely shouldn't be listed. Vanamonde (Talk) 23:37, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

I think Whelan illustrated the US editions while Howe did the UK ones: I'll see if I can find a source. Morris, I believe, is the artist of the cover shown in the infobox. (I couldn't find a "trilogy cover" for the Howe or Whelan editions; I don't think they were sold as a single work like Amazon does today). Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 23:58, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

That makes sense, but frustratingly, I'm unable to source it. Also, the artist isn't listed on the Amazon page. If you can find a source for that, what I'd do is put the detail in the figure caption (covers of the 2008 editions illustrated by Jackie Morris), or some such. Vanamonde (Talk) 00:02, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

I've mostly filled it in. Also, I believe the SFE is simply listing the earliest published edition of each book. (Per ISFDB there was a gap of a few months between the US and UK releases; book 1 was first released in the US, but for books 2 and 3 the UK edition came out earlier). Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 05:23, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Now fully fleshed out using the locus index. I wish I'd found it earlier... Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 07:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, nice work. I see you opened a PR, a step I'd normally have skipped, but no objections as such; let's see what feedback we get. I'm waiting for one Locus review I think I can get a hold of, and haven't looked through the themes section, but I think I'm otherwise done tinkering. Mike had offered to do a pre-FAC peer review, so I'll ping him to the PR. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good; didn't mean to rush. Given that PRs seem to be slow-moving anyway, I just thought it'd be better to have one open earlier than later... Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 17:23, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

No problems on my end, I tend to skip it because I've rarely found the process useful: I get better feedback at FAC, and if there's particular individuals whose feedback I want, I just ask them. I don't think the body of reviewers is substantively different from those at FAC anyway, so unless you're hung up on dividing them for process reasons, you're not getting anything different. No harm no foul, though. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Themes

Re: "breaking boundaries": I think that sentence made sense when the section was citing Descz-Tryhubszac directly instead of through Prater. D-T says that Fitz's experience as a wolf at the end of book 2 changes him: a piece of the "Other" becomes part of his personality, and permanently stays even after he recovers in book 3. But since we're now relying only on what Prater quotes of her, I guess there's not as clear of a connection. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 04:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, makes sense...you removed her because that was a Cambridge Scholars publication, right? I'll see if I can work some of that meaning back in. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:38, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, per RSN that publisher is to be treated as self-published. I suppose there's an argument to be made that she has prior publications in the field (e.g. she wrote this entry on Hobb), but I wasn't sure if it would fly as a high-quality RS at FAC. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 04:47, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

I think we're not short on material, so we're okay leaving it out: I think someone may reasonably look askance at the publisher, though in this case I think it's fair to say this author's work is likely more reliable than, say, a book review from SFX; or even the error-strewn chapter in James & Mendlesohn. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

While looking for quotes from Hobb, I found a little material for other sections: style [1] and reception [2]. I'm not sure if the first one would fit better in style or themes, but probably style? Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 01:24, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Nice finds...yes, I'd place the first in style, and touch on the second in reception, though the second one doesn't add much that isn't already said. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:10, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Lindholm genres

I've looked into this more: it's slightly difficult to pin down the exact genres Lindholm wrote in before 1995, since many sources focus only on her urban fantasy and SF. But I now think it's now well-covered. I also added some info from [3] about the Lindholm/Hobb transition: I think it's reliable (it's excerpting a chapter from a Hobb book), but feel free to trim/revise. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 09:34, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Title

Continuing discussion from the FAC. Here's how the high-quality reliable sources title the series:

Title	Sources (books and journals)	Count
The Farseer Trilogy	Case 2005, Larsson 2021, Mandala 2010, Prater 2016	4
Farseer Trilogy	Blaschke 2005	1
Farseer trilogy	Elliott 2015, Harris-Fain 1999, Melville 2018, Mendlesohn 2014, Senior 2012	5

Note: Elliot 2006 uses both "Farseer Trilogy" and "Farseer trilogy" at different places in his journal article, so I wasn't sure how to count him.

I have no issues with the third option: with italics, Farseer trilogy. Any opinions? Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 19:19, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

• I just posted a similar analysis at the FAC. I'm honestly torn. I'm fine with "Farseer trilogy" in the prose, but Farseer doesn't strike me as a good title, nor does it have much support. I'd be okay with retitling as Farseer trilogy, and using DISPLAYTITLE to fix the italics, or leaving it as is. I don't like just "Farseer Trilogy". Vanamonde (Talk) 19:23, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

  I'm ok with "Farseer trilogy" as well. Do we wait until after the FAC to change the title? (I know the GA bot gets confused if you do it in the middle of a GAN; dunno about FAC.) Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 19:31, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

  The one previous time I've had a title change suggested at FAC, we did indeed wait for it to end before moving, to avoid confusing the bot. That seems simplest here. 20:13, 9 October 2022 (UTC) Vanamonde (Talk) 20:13, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes please, if you would. "Farseer trilogy" seems most appropriate to me too. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:33, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

In the future, if someone wants to make a title change mid-FAC, just ping me ... I know how to get all the pieces in the right place for the bot. It doesn't make a lot of sense to pass a FAC with a faulty title, when those of us who were around when articlehistory and the bot were designed know how to make it all work ... pls ping me if action is needed, as I am still not caught up from vacation. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:24, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

In that case, I suppose I can just retitle it now – just checking with @Buidhe if the italics issue is resolved? Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 19:15, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Once you move the article to new title, leave the FAC and everything else alone, ping me, and I'll do all the moves and fixes ... have to make two trips to the airport, three hours round trip, so it may take me a bit to respond. For future reference, even if the bot is foiled, I know all the steps ('cuz helped design them), so I can always fix anything that gets messed up ... Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:51, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: I've moved the page. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 21:55, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Will work on it shortly ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:45, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Olivaw-Daneel should all be done; have a careful look and ping me if you see anything I missed. I'll keep the page watchlisted to make sure the bot run is OK after promotion. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:53, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 00:28, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Could the prose be varied here to avoid threaten ... threatened ? Political machinations within the royal family threaten his life, and the kingdom is threatened by naval raids. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:41, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Changed to "beset by naval raids". Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 22:01, 10 October 2022 (UTC)