Talk:The Fissure of Woe

Of Names and Computer Games
Ok, so now that I am almost done with the Fissure of Woe, I need to make a note here regarding the names of the areas of the Fissure:

Where I knew that an area had a name I used it, this applies to:
 * Lake of Fire
 * Temple of War
 * Tower of Courage (Location)
 * Tower of Strength (Location)

One area had a name in gaming lore I could not ignore:
 * Spider Cave

The following areas, I completely conjured their names:
 * Burning Forest
 * Fissure Shore
 * Forest of the Wailing Lord
 * Great Battle Field

They could have been named different names, such as Shadow Forest (named after the Shadow Army), the Beach (which is what it's called popularly), The Green Forest and the Dead Battle Field respectively. But I chose the present set of names after much thought (and I could provide my reasoning if the need arises).

In any case, I just wanted to note which names came from me and which came from the game and which came from peers. This is for two reasons: a) It may well be that ArenaNet has different names for these areas. So, I don't want anyone to hate me if it turns out they do. b) To separate what is "non-negotiable" from what is "negotiable." Negotiation over the parts that I named is always open. --Karlos 21:53, 4 November 2005 (EST)

Structure
The current structure of the article differs a lot from other explorable areas. Now, the FoW isn't an explorable area like any other, but I still think we should try to apply the same general format and structure. I don't feel entitled to make the edit myself because I don't feel "at home" in the FoW. --Tetris L 23:23, 4 November 2005 (EST)


 * The Fissure and the UW are unique in that they are not a typical explorable area with unified terrain and monster set. They have sub-areas and each sub-area is more akin to an explorable area. So, let's look at the present template for explorable areas:
 * Description: Exists in article.
 * Exits: Not needed, there are no exits. Explanation of entry is provided.
 * Bestiary: Very diverse.
 * Bosses: Only two and both are available only upon taking quests. (A player would be nuts to go skil capping in the Fissure)
 * NPCs: Lots of quest givers and a few idle NPCs plus one merchant/crafter
 * Now, I have been applying that template in a less formal way (because the articles are short) in the sub-area articles. i.e. You will see that each sub-area article has a description, then a list of monsters then exits and finally quests. Putting the description in paragraphs (as opposed to bulleted lists) is just a matter of taste. I don't reallylike a short article with 4 or 5 sections each having 2 bullet points.
 * So, to summarize, I am against turning the Fissure's page (and the UW's) into the same format as the other areas. I wouldn't mind turning the sub-areas into a more formalized shape. --Karlos 06:46, 5 November 2005 (EST)
 * I don't have a problem with The Fissure of Woe not following the standard location format. As Karlos states it isn't exactly a standard explorable location, its more of a region entry (like Maguuma Jungle or Crystal Desert).  I would however prefer that the sub-locations follow this structure.  Things like the paragraph that tells you the monsters/NPCs doesn't help me at all, give me a bulleted list over that any day.  With a list you can parse the information easily at a glance, a paragraph makes you dig into it to discern the info you need vs. the extraneous stuff.  --Rainith 10:29, 5 November 2005 (EST)