Talk:Lion's Arch Keep

Dialogue

File:User_Thrain_Lazy.png Here's the new dialogue, if anyone wants to transcode it. ThrainFile:User Thrain Sig.pngcontribs 01:02, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Should be noted that you have to have seen the scene in the ICCs to see this scene. Backsword 01:22, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Nothing is happening no dialogue. What am I missing? Ramei Arashi 04:39, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

same here seen all the dialog and popped into the colemancer hideout thingy and no dialogue when i zone in.211.27.67.186 04:56, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I had to go to EoTN and get the dialogue outside there first. Oh and those 3 old men don't always appear. I went out and back in once and they were not there. Went out and came back they were there. Ramei Arashi

Barter with Councilor Vaylor?

Councilor Vaylor's dialogue indicates he may be exchanging items for other items. I've tried talking to him with a selection of various items in my inventory, but there's no dialogue option or anything. I'm guessing it's not enabled yet. - Meagen/talk 01:33, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Those are my thoughts too. Backsword 01:37, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

He has no dialogue. All I get is "..." Ramei Arashi 04:48, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I checked and yes, the dialogue I saw right after the build went up is gone now. Which might point to his dialogue being dynamic. I'll keep an eye on him. - Meagen/talk 11:35, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I saw the dialog suggestive of a trade as well. I suspect that it wasn't supposed to go in just yet. JgzMan 17:53, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Just noticed something. When he had the dialogue he was holding a Water Staff. Now when his dialogue changed to "..." he has an Air Wand and Storm Artifact. - Meagen/talk 11:46, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I note that the change to wand and focus dosn't happen untill the Ebon Vanguard arrive. Before then, you can get the null dialog, and the water staff. JgzMan 18:06, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

He seems to have a different set of Elementalist weapons every time I zone in. - Meagen/talk 13:41, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

How in the world were you able to get in there BEFORE the Ebon Vanguard dialogue? What are the requirements to get in there anyway? --Musha 20:53, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

You should have seem him!

File:User_Thrain_Seem_Him.png He was so cool back then. ThrainFile:User Thrain Sig.pngcontribs 01:40, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

A note on the old men dialogues, I can only get those four to spawn, after that, the fourth one just continues to show. -- Konig/talk 03:02, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Scratch that. I just got the wife one again. -- Konig/talk 03:05, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't know how to link text to outside the wiki, if I did I would link Cowboy Bebop to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowboy_Bebop and the text "three old men" to http://cowboybebop.wikia.com/wiki/Three_Old_Men . One of the first references in the game I laughed at right away. 58.106.43.167 05:36, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Bebop reference FTW. That was the first thing I thought when I read the dialogue LynxRavenRaide 23:21, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I knew that dialogue was reminding me of something! I really should of caught it... -- Konig/talk 23:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Lionguard Dialogue

LOL at 'gorilla' warfare. Should have been guerrilla warfare, I guess. Markus Clouser 02:01, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

No, it's meant to be like that for the humor :)--Malchior Devenholm 04:58, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Requirements

I'm denied entry, anyone now what requirements I have to have met?--Evil guy563 10:42, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Every war in kryta + gwen and thackery dialog, aside from the skillguy in ascalon settlement's--Neil2250 , Render Lord 10:47, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I've been allowed entry but for some reason the dialogue between the Ebon Vanguard and Salma doesn't appear - 80.47.212.130 12:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

i think that implys you have already seen it.--Neil2250 , Render Lord 12:21, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Since I haven't witnessed any of the Eye of the North dialogues, and have been in there after some testing, the requirements for me were:

• Attend Zinn's Trial
• View the first four dialogue scenes on this page [[1]]

You had to attend the trial and then see Dialogue 4 from that page, in order. I saw them in reverse order (attended the trial last, but someone with me triggered the fourth dialogue before I went to see it) and was denied entry. Went back to Talmark and the camp, watched the scene replay, and then I was allowed in. If you want to see the dialogue inside the keep, you need to do the Eye of the North related stuff. Or so I believe, since it didn't trigger for me and I'm not gathering the two different once-per-year drops it demands, as a form of protest against this requirement. I consider it unfair to expect us to do this. I am aware that I can probably buy them from players /but I should not have to/. There should be a way of gathering everything that is demanded, at any time. Kyubiko 12:23, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I was also allowed entry to the Secret Lab when I met these requirements, and not before. Kyubiko 12:25, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

The War in Kryta dialogues page pretty much outlines the requirements for seeing each dialogue scene. DaveBaggins 12:28, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

So just to get clarification, if I don't have eotn, I cannot continue with the Salma storyline beyond a few scenes in Talmark? 'Tis a shame :( 96.48.131.210 19:11, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Well why don't you have EotN? I don't see any good reason why you wouldn't. :) Future 06:08, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Alright, so can't progress with this WiK stuff. My character's done Proph, done the Zinn's Tasks (I'm back in his hide out as I type, again, to make sure), but Chark hasn't been spawning. The only thing I can think of is that NONE of my characters have finished eotn, yet. Could that be part of the req, instead? Perhaps having HM in eotn available? G R E E N E R 00:29, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

How far are you with this? Did you already do the Trial of Zinn? If you have, Chark won't respawn. HM is account based, and all requirements have been character based. Beating EN might be necessary - but again, it depends on where you are at. -- Konig/talk 01:47, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Whoops, how easy it is to think you've typed something that you haven't. No, the problem for me is that I cannot access the Trial of Zinn. I've never had the chance to :(. My main character who is slowly making his way through this stuff has done the Asura side and the Norn side of eotn. He also has done all of the Zinn's Tasks, and finished proph. I'll see if completing eotn gets him the needed req, and update perhaps later this week when I have time to play. G R E E N E R 07:14, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Make sure you wait until the conversations are over before you rezone OR before getting too far away from the dialog. I recommend if you are having trouble, make sure you are staying for the entire conversation. I went back to the camp only to find the Zinn conversation playing again, as if I hadn't seen it before (which I had, but perhaps no the whole thing?) The Alice 14:41, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Move?

I'm against it, mainly because I think (Lion's Arch Keep) sounds better than (War in Kryta). ThrainFile:User Thrain Sig.pngcontribs 16:59, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Im against the move too, for the same reason stated above.--Neil2250 , Render Lord 18:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Ditto. -- Konig/talk 18:43, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Agree. -- Cyan 18:48, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I would prefer to use the {War in Kryta) designation across the board for all WiK content pages for consistency. -- Wyn talk 15:10, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

How about Lions Arch Keep (War In Kryta) ? , lions arch keep was an area within BETA, if you remember :3 --Neil2250 , Render Lord 15:13, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

That doesn't quite work since, technically, there is no Lion's Arch Keep BEFORE the War in Kryta, since you can't access it until you witness the War in Kryta dialogues, which can't be seen until you beat Prophecies or EotN. But, while I agree that the War in Kryta designation is necessary for all WiK content, Lion's Arch (War in Kryta) doesn't quite work either, since that designation still implies the outpost, not the explorable area. Then again, heaven forbid we have to call it Lion's Arch (explorable area) (War in Kryta), that's just terrible. I'll have to admit that I'm at a loss here, except for my opinion that War in Kryta SHOULD be used in the title. --Musha 20:44, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

The area is actually named "Lion's Arch" within the game, and we can just call it "Lion's Arch (War in Kryta)" for consistency with "Talmark Wilderness (War in Kryta))" and to avoid confusion with the other "Lion's Arch (explorable area)". All it needs is a disambig identifier. --Santax (talk · contribs) 22:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, ok, I can hop on board with that. --Musha 22:47, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm against the move. It's just a secondary area named Lion's Arch Keep and we know that because there's a Lion's Arch Keep Gate Guard. We don't need to make another name for it. Even so, it can be easily included in the War In Kryta content pages. Just keep it simple. Markus Clouser 14:28, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Keeping it simple while also keeping it consistent is better. -- Wyn talk 14:54, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

What do you think we should call it, Wyn? --Musha 16:08, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

(personaly.i still say Lions Arch Keep (War In Kryta) ) , its Lions arch keep.and its War in kryta.Simples.--Neil2250 , Render Lord 16:10, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

No, it's Lion's Arch, and while it was introduced in the War in Kryta, that isn't an accurate name for it. Lion's Arch is the name of the explorable, Lion's Arch Keep is the description of the explorable. It matches others well as is anyways. It can still be kept with the War in Kryta stuff without being titled War in Kryta. After all, do we call the SB camp "Shining Blade camp (War in Kryta)"? Nope, we call it "Shining Blade camp." -- Konig/talk 01:03, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Which is a very good argument to rename it "Shining Blade camp (War in Kryta)", considering what both Wyn and Santax mentioned above. Erasculio 01:11, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Seriously Era, why do you change everything that I use as support for my argument? Not only is the Shining Blade camp a landmark, it isn't a duplicate of anything, nor does it share names with anything... I'm seriously thinking you're out to annoy me now, because I don't see you do that to anyone else. -- Konig/talk 02:30, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to shat on your parade, but this area was the starting area in Proth in beta, while it was no named Lions arch Keep, The dude who puts you there is the Keep Gaurd, So, once again, Lions Arch Keep (War In Kryta), much like talmark.so hush up.--Neil2250 , Render Lord 14:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Is this area available outside War In Kryta? It isn't. So the only version of it is in War In Kryta. If you want to add (War In Kryta) for that page, you should add (Normal Version) for every other area on this wiki. There's only one Lion's Arch Keep so we don't need (War In Kryta) after the name to differentiate it from its another version cause there isn't one. Markus Clouser 20:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Erm, the actual in game name for this area is Lion's Arch. And Lion's Arch is available outside the War in Kryta. --Santax (talk · contribs) 20:33, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Because I now found a better reason, I would tend to agree with Lion's Arch (War In Kryta). From the keep we are looking towards the town, a new version of the town (at least because of the banners). I ignore the fact that the character is stuck in the keep. I hope this helps. Markus Clouser 00:11, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Interestingly enough, this is its own instance and not an exact copy of LA's outpost. And I don't mean the flag changes. If you zoom in all the way when you walk up to the Keep gate, there is no keep. Not how we see it in the explorable, at least. As such, it isn't so much a location duplicate as more as a map change. E.g., this is equivalent to Shining Blade camp (as it is a landmark in the LA map which was given a new look) and not Talmark Wilderness (War in Kryta). In other words, this could be split into two pages - the keep landmark, and the keep map. But since the keep map is only allowing access to the keep (and a bridge to its south by southeast), there is no need for said map page. Thus, the map page ([[Lion's Arch (War in Kryta)]]) has no need for existence (or separation), and it would be, in my opinion at least, more clear as is. -- Konig/talk 02:11, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

The way I see it, we have two instances, both called "Lion's Arch", so to distinguish between them we need a disambig identifier, and since it's only accessible as part of the War in Kryta, I think that identifier should be (War in Kryta). --Santax (talk · contribs) 06:46, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Technically, we have three instances - two of which shares the same map, the third (this one) has a brand new map (or greatly altered, at least). I still say that the current name looks better, but should it be changed, it should be Lion's Arch (War in Kryta). -- Konig/talk 06:58, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

The (War in Kryta) pages are much more than simply "map" pages. They provide the information concerning that area that is specific to the content unlocked after completion of Prophecies or EotN. I think Lion's Arch (War in Kryta) is the better choice of identifier, and will keep the page consistent with the rest. As an added note, I would also like to see Divinity Coast (explorable area) renamed to Divinity Coast (War in Kryta) for the same consistency. -- Wyn talk 07:00, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think they should just provide the information specifically added with the War in Kryta, skimming through them could easily cause confusion as one oculd get the impression that the content listed on the page is the only content present in that area - after all, it looks like an explorable area page in all other respects and is even categorised as an explorable area, and yet only lists about half the NPC's in the area. So Lion's Arch is really a different case because (a) unlike most of these other areas, it exists (although you seem to have decided to go and pretend otherwise anyway) and (b) it lists all NPC's in the area rather than just the WiK-specific ones. Not sure why I'm saying any of this as you've completely and utterly ignored everything else I've said, Wyn. Also, I don't think the (War in Kryta) is necessary for Divinity Coast because the War in Kryta explorable area is the only explorable area in Divinity Coast, unlike LA which has other EA's associated with it through quests, or TW which was an explorable area already. --Santax (talk · contribs) 10:13, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

For me it's about consistency, but I am not going to get into a pissing match with you over it. As for ignoring things, I wouldn't go there Santax. You've been ignoring everyone about this for weeks now. -- Wyn talk 11:10, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I can agree, to a degree (hey that rhymed), on the reasons for this to be renamed, but I see no reason to rename Divinity Coast (explorable area) because that has no non-WiK equivalent yet. In a way, this does, and in a way, it doesn't. I lean towards favoring the "it doesn't" side. In terms of what they should have, they should document the explorable as it is in WiK - not just the changes (e.g., all but the SB camp for the Talmark Wilderness (War in Kryta) will be the same as the normal Talmark Wilderness page). If the majority wants to rename this to a WiK version, I'll go with it to make a consensus, and it seems that I'm the only one against it now, so go on. -- Konig/talk 15:21, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguators are there to tell it appart from other versions, tha's all. The NPC who trasportes you in has Lion's Arfch Keep in his name, so I picked this asambig as it seemed intuitive to players, who as far as I am aware, is refering to it as such. Using a diambig that is used to make a different seperaion elsewhere could also be confusing. And we already have all those links pointing here. Those are resons for not moving bu it's not a big deal. Backsword 15:29, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Lions arch keep (War in kryta) still remains the best alternative for everyone despite markus' comments, it is Lions arch Keep,named Lions arch, but lions arch keep, Accesable as a beta area for proth. characters back in the early game history but this isent a training area for level 1's, No. this is sparta in war in kryta, So Once again. Lions Arch Keep (War in kryta) --Neil2250 , Render Lord 15:37, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Neil, it might be the Lion's Arch Keep, but it is called Lion's Arch. Whether it was accessible or not in beta is irrelevant, it is not titled "Lion's Arch Keep" - honestly, I wish it was, then we could just have it as [[Lion's Arch Keep]] without need of a parentheses. Neil, your solution is, in fact, the worse solution. -- Konig/talk 15:55, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Please explain why mine is most certainly the worst?--Neil2250 , Render Lord 15:58, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I already have: The map/zone is not named "Lion's Arch Keep" - however, the Lion's Arch Keep is a landmark, within the various LA maps/zones. As such, this map/zone should not be named "Lion's Arch Keep" because, simply put, that isn't its name. It is like calling Jormag by its old name, Drakkar, despite knowing its real name. -- Konig/talk 16:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit:Mind you, my previous statement doesn't mean that it shouldn't be "Lion's Arch (Lion's Arch Keep)", as what is in the parentheses is a description (or clarification in some cases), not a name, technically. -- Konig/talk 16:11, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Well. all im saying is my idea is a halfway for everyone, so whatever, if you dont like it the way you want it leave now.--Neil2250 , Render Lord 16:13, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I like it the way it is, which is the way I want it. -- Konig/talk 16:26, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Putting under Lion's Arch (War In Kryta) is dumb,nobody looks for that. Everyones calling it Lion's Arch Keeep. Ramei Arashi 03:58, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Ugh. Lion's Arch (War in Kryta) is just horrible. Simply horrible! That in no way describes the new zone I'm standing in now. It only references why and when it was introduced. Ask the question, "Is this the Lion's Arch Keep?" Obviously, yes, it is. What part of "War in Kryta" translates to "Keep"? If you have to tack on the tacky "War in Kryta" to the page title, then call it "Lion's Arch Keep (War in Kryta)". But keep in mind, the only reason the "(War in Kryta)" tag was even started was to create a "Tahlmark Wilderness" page that was separate and distinct from the already existing one (this usage makes sense). However, this isn't a separate instance of Lion's Arch, it's just a new section of it. The KEEP section! Some people have argued we shouldn't call it Lion's Arch Keep because the mission map (u map) simply calls it Lion's Arch. Well, it sure as heck isn't called Lion's Arch (War in Kryta)! Here's an example to illustrate that I believe you are all familiar with. When you want to get to the Boardwalk during the Dragon Festival etc., you talk to an NPC, and you get taken to the boardwalk. The mission map (u map) still says you're in Shing Jea Monastery, rather than Boardwalk, but everybody knows you're in the boardwalk. And, thankfully, it isn't called Shing Jea Monastery (Dragon Festival). Yea, yea... the functionality there is a little different, but the concept is exactly the same. Lion's Arch (explorable area) would almost be just as bad... fortunately, a page with that name already exists. Lastly, some have said to use the War in Kryta tag because it indicates that it is only accessible at a certain point in the storyline. Well, then why don't we call the Shining Blade Camp, Shining Blade Camp (after you beat EoTN), or even sillier, Abaddon's Mouth (only after you beat the Ring of Fire mission). Speaking of the Shining Blade Camp, we don't need to call it Shining Blade Camp (War in Kryta). We just don't need to start adding the War in Kryta tag to page titles just to indicate that it's a part of that plot. That should be explained in the article text. ~Mervil 06:24, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

The problem is, there was a Lion's Arch (Lion's Arch Keep) page, and then someone created a Lion's Arch (War in Kryta) page, and they were virtually identical, and some updates were being put on one, but not the other. This was making a mess. The pages were unified here, this discussion is still going on, and if consensus is reached that it should be named differently it can be MOVED. This at least keeps all the information in one place, keeps the edit histories intact. People need to quit spintering things off until the discussion is over. As for people looking for Lion's Arch Keep, if they put that in the search box, they are brought to this page, so don't say you can't find it. -- Wyn talk 07:57, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

The discussion taking so long is probably causing the splintering in the first place. Because people are holding back on splitting/merging/moving pages, we are unable to do the things we need to do to organise the WiK info into a usable uniform guide that is easy for people to follow. At the moment it's documented but in an incoherent all over the place mess kind of way. 58.106.158.34 08:05, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

It's better now than it was, there are still a few off shoot pages that need to be dealt with, but we have separated out the WiK content in explorable areas now to separate pages, and pretty much everything is linked through War in Kryta. Unfortunately, on a community wiki, where consensus makes the decisions, it does take time, and people just need to deal with it. -- Wyn talk 08:14, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) So, who's currently keeping track of the consensus? I can't tell who is for Lion's Arch Keep and who is for Lion's Arch (War in Kryta), because the page has been moved and pronoun references (eg. this page, that page) are no longer clear. Take a vote? Help speed this along? ~Mervil 16:43, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

All in favor of moving this page to Lion's Arch Keep, say aye! All opposed, say nay! --Musha 17:57, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

I support Musha!, but i want Lions Arch Keep (War in kryta) --Neil2250 , Portal Jumper 18:13, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Lion's Arch Keep would be wrong per Guild Wars Wiki:Formatting/Article names. The way it is now is totally fine. poke | talk 18:34, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

And we don't "vote", we discuss. -- Wyn talk 19:46, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

And... it's been discussed. Aye! ~Mervil 20:36, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

@Poke - Then, we should call it Lion's Arch (Lion's Arch Keep). The way it is now is totally not fine. ~Mervil 20:38, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

I want it to be Lion's Arch (Lion's Arch Keep) - the only viable options is what this page currently is and using Lion's Arch Keep in the parentheses. But I'm loosing steam with these kinds of discussions... -- Konig/talk 02:36, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Fine, i settle on LA (LA Keep) too.--Neil2250 , Portal Jumper 02:39, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

I prefer Lions Arch (Lion's Arch Keep) because I believe that best describes its location. Tenri 07:58, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

That just doesn't make any sense. To use Merv's example above about the Boardwalk, the Boardwalk isn't called Shing Jea Monastery (Boardwalk), it's just called Boardwalk. To name the Lion's Arch Keep Lion's Arch (Lion's Arch Keep) is repetitive and redundant. Just call it the Lion's Arch Keep. The Boardwalk has its own page, the Shining Blade Camp has its own page, let's just call the Lion's Arch Keep the Lion's Arch Keep. There is no need for a WiK tag on it because there is no different non-WiK version of it, just like there is no WiK tag on the SBC because it's not needed. And just like the Boardwalk, which isn't accessible to everybody all the time, the Lion's Arch Keep will be and already is known as only being accessible to WiK characters, and will be noted as such on the page.

The BEST naming option for this page is Lion's Arch (explorable area), because that is actually what it IS called in game. But my petition to get this page's name changed to that and change the name of the current Lion's Arch (explorable area) to something like Lion's Arch (Quest Area) got shot down pretty quick. The next best thing is to simply give this 2nd Lion's Arch (explorable area) an alternate name, one that the NPCs call it. In this case, the Lion's Arch Keep. No disambig tags need to be applied because this is a unique area of the game. --Musha 09:06, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) We can't use (explorable area) because there's another explorable area called Lion's Arch. Hence the disambig identifier. --Santax (talk · contribs) 09:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes,and that is more LA then the keep, with your idea in place it would have to be Lions Arch Keep (Explorable Area) --Neil2250 , Portal Jumper 19:39, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

The reason the boardwalk is just boardwalk is because its not a separate explorable area it's just part of Shing Jea Monastery that you can only reach during certain events, and the shining blade camp is a landmark within an explorable most landmarks have here own page named the same as them. This page is about the new explorable which happens to share its name with another explorable area. Tenri 19:54, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Well despite in-game name i still say we call it LA keep :/ --Neil2250 , Portal Jumper 17:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. We can't really call it anything else. (War in Kryta) disambig tag is unnecessary and useless for this area, (explorable area) disambig tag is already in use, I can't think of another disambig tag to use, and nobody else has proposed one. So how about instead of a disambig tag we disambig it by using a direct approach to naming it. --Musha 15:08, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

No talks, no ebon vanguard?

I've been allowed to enter, but there's no ebon vanguard? Do you have to do anything special or just wait?--Cyberman 17:11, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

It's Thackeray and Langmar talking to Salma, and they only show up on the first visit. ThrainFile:User Thrain Sig.pngcontribs 17:15, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Hm. They didn't appear.--Cyberman 18:29, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

You need to have seen the talk between Evennia and Langmar outside the Eye. To see that, you need to witness all the dialogues in the SB camp (except the one with Zinn), and do Thackeray's Scavenger Hunt. -- Konig/talk 18:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah, so that's it. I didn't complete the scavenger hunt yet. Interesting that I can enter that area, though. Shouldn't that be mentioned in the article?--Cyberman 19:39, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I assume you don't need all the dialogues done to get the area. -- Konig/talk 20:37, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Just added how to access the Keep and the requirements to view Thackeray's dialogue. DaveBaggins 21:04, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Notes

There was a note claiming that the White Mantle banners in LA and Gates of Kryta had been replaced with Royal Gryffin banners. I could not verify this in LA, even after viewing the arrival of the Ebon Vanguard, and so removed the note. Also, I can't find any banners at all in Gates of Kryta. Am I missing something? JgzMan 18:14, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

If you watch LA from the LA Keep the banners are changed.. -- Cyan 18:31, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

<edit conflict>I'm not entirely sure but I think the note refers to the banners seen inside the Keep and possibly inside Lion's Arch as seeb from inside the keep. I think the White Mantle banners remain up in the Lion's Arch capital because it is still stuck in time back before the events of Prophecies concluded. 58.106.43.167 18:33, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

What IP said is exactly correct. --Musha 17:38, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Bug

Isn't that how the daily quests are supposed to work? Only one appears each day and after x days they restart the cycle? Unless I understand the bug note wrong, I think the person who put the bug note there doesn't understand it's an alternating daily quest. 58.106.158.34 17:18, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought the same thing. I'm going to remove the notice for now. --Santax (talk · contribs) 18:46, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

I put back the quests Santax removed - it's better to list them all instead of the one listed for the day until we get a transclusion going. I also noted that the quests cycle with just one per day. -- Konig/talk 19:37, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Quests Available

There are A LOT of White Mantle and Peace Keeper bosses in the War in Kryta. Should we just put a link to the Wanted by the Shining Blade article instead of a massive list of quests on a page which covers lots of other info? This is how it's done on the Great Temple of Balthazar article when dealing with Zaishen Quests. 58.106.158.34 17:19, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea.Tong2 21:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that would be best - or to make a "Shining Blade Wanted Quests" or something to use like Zaishen Challenge Quest, instead of linking to the NPC article. -- Konig/talk 02:35, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Should we Move Content to Better Named Page?

I have been having big problems with the current page name which to me is technically incorrect as it implies that there is a Lion's Arch location that is different during the War in kryta, which is only "sort of" true. In particular:

• This location is really Lion's Arch Keep and is accessed from the regular Lion's Arch location via the gate guard by characters meeting the correct War in Kryta requirements.
• This is unlike having a "Lion's Arch Explorable Area", similar to the Kaineng Center (Sunspears in Cantha) which is only present during the Sunspears in Cantha quest, rather it is an area that is accessed from Lion's Arch!

In updating other pages that link to the current page, I have tried to work around this, but I am still not happy about it. I would like to propose that we have a new page called Lion's Arch Keep (War in Kryta), and move the current content to it, leaving a redirect for people having bookmarked the current page. I would be happy to make those changes and correct all the relevant links, and propose to do so unless someone makes a compelling case not to in the next day.

What do you think? Arrowmaster 12:38, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Just in case anyone thought otherwise, I have studied the discussion under #Move? but thought it best to start again with a reasoned proposal (or article of intent!). I am still persuaded that that Lion's Arch Keep (War in Kryta) is likely to be the best title with a good consensus in the community. Arrowmaster 14:02, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I have just read a comment to the effect that the (War in Kryta) disambig tag is unnecessary. While I tend to agree from the point of view that you are unable to enter the Keep in any other way except under the auspicious of the (War in Kryta) storyline, I still think that it might be best to use the tag to denote it a (War in Kryta) area for clarity - but I could still be persuaded otherwise. Arrowmaster 16:08, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Things don't happen in "a day" here. I stand by my opinion that the current name is the best for consistency. People are able to find this by searching for Lion's Arch Keep, all mentions of Lion's Arch Keep link to this page. The actual naming of the page is for all practical purposes unimportant. -- Wyn talk 17:43, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Wyn, could you or anybody else explain the reasons behind the current name? I just don't understand why a disambig tag was given to a page that doesn't need disambig. --Musha 19:15, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

The name of the area is Lion's Arch (not Lion's Arch Keep), which already exists thus it needed a parentheses title. Before it was Lion's Arch (Lion's Arch Keep), but it was changed to Lion's Arch (War in Kryta) in order to keep with the rest of the WiK pages (excluding Shining Blade camp and Divinity Coast (explorable area) which doesn't have duplicates). -- Konig/talk 00:26, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

But this is Lions Arch Keep in all respects, lore, area, the place you are in, the guard and the throne, is all Lions arch Keep so, aside from the in-game name, most people would call it Lions Arch keep.And also, Lions Arch Keep on its own would be best, since (WiK) is just the condition of the area, this is LA keep, always will be, always was.So.Once Again. Lions Arch Keep.

p.s this is just turning into a shat war, most people are saying LA Keep would be the most sensible, since most players know it by that name. Lions Arch (War in Kryta) sounds like a WiK version of LA itself, not the Keep, which is still where you are.Not LA.--Neil2250 , Portal Jumper 14:50, 26 May 2010 (UTC) (Reset indent)

Well, thank you very much for your comments. I believe that I understand much better how this situation has come about now. I think that it is very unfortunate that "in-game" when entering the Keep part of Lion's Arch, via the Lion's Arch Keep Gate Guard that the area is still called Lion's Arch, without the Keep, which I believe was maybe an oversight on ArenaNet's part, rather than a deliberate intention (and obviously, it follows the Mission Map does not show the word Keep either). What is more important:

• A. Providing information on the Wiki that always follows exactly what ArenaNet implements, or,
• B. Providing the most useful and accurate information to the community, even when that sometimes means that we present it slightly differently?

Although some might always choose A (with valid reason), my person preference is still B, which translates to information on Lion's Arch Keep being on a page with that name (although the other question is should we use (War in Kryta) after the first part of the name?). Well answering my own question, I believe the answer should be yes in this particular case, even if Keep is added and Shining Blade camp does not currently have it. Why do I say this? Well again, the intention is to help users.

I think that many other users are like me, in that they hear about something and want to know more so go to the Wiki to find information by typing the name in the search box (to take them directly to the page). If that page was for Shining Blade Camp or Lion's Arch Keep, with the (War in Kryta) suffix, they would be highly likely to look up War in Kryta (which should be a link at the beginning of the page) to find out what it was about if they did not know (a "fail-safe" for the user?).

As it is, the current Shining Blade Camp page does not have the suffix, or a link to War in Kryta at the top - only an "easily-missable" Note (near the very bottom of the page) that says:

"According to community manager Regina Buenaobra : "To see the Shining Blade Camp in Talmark Wilderness, you must complete either Prophecies or Eye of the North."

I personally think that is very bad! Why? Because they may be a new gw player and go to a lot of trouble trying to find the location of the camp in vain, not realizing that they do not meet the requirements to see it. To me "disambig" is for what it stands for - dis-ambiguous; and it would be useful in both cases, regardless of whether there can be more than one instance of the location or not.

Again, I believe that Lion's Arch Keep (War in Kryta) still wins the day! Does anyone else agree with my reasoning? Arrowmaster - 15:29, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

No, because if we name the page Lion's Arch Keep it doesn't need the disambig quailifier because there is no other Lion's Arch Keep page. But as has been pointed out, in game it is not titled Lion's Arch Keep, simply Lion's Arch, and your argument for being the most useful, well, if someone types Lion's Arch Keep into the search box, they are brought to this page by way of a redirect, as they are if they click on any link to 'Lion's Arch Keep', so I'm not really sure why it would be more useful to move it again, and the way it is now keeps it consistent with the rest of the duplicated WiK content pages (which is a reason to keep it as it is). -- Wyn talk 18:51, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Changing the name again would just create more completely pointless and unnecessary edits to alter all the pages which link here. It's really incredibly unimportant as long as we have good redirects and the current name distinguishing the area clearly (which it does imo). Lets stop obsessing over such trivial matters and return the focus to making the WiK pages more manageable to read and use. 58.106.158.34 18:59, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

How about we all just shutup and keep the redirects to this page? --Neil2250 , Portal Jumper 19:03, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree that changing the name again would be annoying. but Lion's Arch Keep (War in Kryta) is overly redundant. It's like saying

Wikipedia, the comprehensive, internet-based that anyone can edit! (must have an active internet connection to contribute)

ThrainFile:User Thrain Sig.pngcontribs 19:08, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

With the amount of duplicated information all over the WiK pages, redundancy is the secret theme of the wiki's take on WiK. We have made a royal mess of this WiK stuff.58.106.158.34 19:14, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking, rereading these comments, the the addition (War in Kryta) has actually become a means to denote anything's involvement with the WiK, particularly area-wise. On the other hand, Lion's Arch is obviously a different area than Lion's Arch Keep. While I acknowledge that there are methods to get into the rest of LA, it is obviously not intended, as the geographic area clearly has boundaries. Considering these two things, Lion's Arch Keep (War in Kryta) is actually the most consistent name, as it specifies the geographical location as precise as possible, and also is in accordance with the rest of the WiK pages. The argument that it is part of LA does not really apply, imo, as the Ascalon Settlement is part of a separate are too, but has its own page, for example. There's more examples of this, surely.

If the entire (War in Kryta) naming system would get an overhaul, that'd be a different story altogether, but for reason's stated above I support Lions Arch Keep (War in Kryta), to retain the clear first glance differentiation. Twam Valandil 94.209.65.245 14:41, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

This is not a landmark article. I don't think one is needed either, but that is a different dicussion, since this is the page for the zone. The "(War in Kryta) you see at the end is not a special naming system, but what we call a 'diambiguator'. Backsword 15:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Voting

We don't do that. Not even when the vote points in a direction I approve. In fact, just saying 'I like X' is no more than spam; it has no bearing. How it actually works is that one lays out what issues one haves, and actually looks ast what the others have for arguments. Then one tries to work towards a compromise solution that best serves all those. Backsword 14:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

As such; a short list:

1. This zone is called "Lion's Arch" by the game.
2. We are here to document the game, not players wishes. This is even in policy and stuff.
3. We can't name the article just Lion's Arch without trouble, as there are other zones with the same name.
4. In such situations, areticles are disambiguated, and the base name is either a disambi page, or one of the articles.
5. The latter is done when one usage is dominant.
6. The town where people can meet is dominat usage for LA.
7. Hence this page needs a disambguated name.
8. In ingame lore and dialogue, this location is refred to as the Keep.
9. The player community dominantly refers to this location as the LA Keep.
10. Disambiguation strings are picked on two criteria; uniqly identifying and easily recongnisable when only the name is seen.
11. The new zone with the shining blade camp is currently disabiguated by "(War in Kryta)".
12. That zone is disambiguated for different reasons than this one.
13. two articles using the same disabiguator is used to indicate that it is the same difference.
14. Using it when so isn't the case will be misleading for some users.
15. There is a possibility of new zone based on LA being realeased in the future, as part of the WiK.
16. These zones are permanent additions, and will be used for other stuff in the future. Content unrelated to the WiK.

Backsword 14:32, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I Vote Backsword, if this part is not reviewed within 3 days (with no comments) It shal be moved. --Neil2250 , Portal Jumper 14:08, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

No, you don't vote anything here. And you don't put a time limit saying that you are going to move it. It will get moved if and when there is consensus. The current naming fits with policy imo, regardless of what Backsword thinks, this zone is available only as part of the WiK content, thus it has the disambig tag for exactly the same reason as the other WiK content pages do (I don't know why the Shining Blade camp page has a disambig at all and imo it should be removed). It also maintains consistency with other WiK content pages that have required a disambig tag. I don't see why there is a problem with this. -- Wyn talk 10:12, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

I think the vote was a poor attemt at humour, Wyn. As for the reason for split, as I've pointed out, it's clearly not true that it is "exactly" the same. This article is not about an alternative version of the main parts of the city. But I'll give you that it might be what people think when they see it. might not. SO let's count that as just half a point in favour. That still means it's just points in favour anyway. Wouldn't you agree it's time to finish this? Backsword 22:40, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually Backsword, there is little if anything anyone could say that would convince me that the renaming of this page is the correct one, based on consistency. It seems however, that none of my arguments stood, so now we have a page that is totally inconsistent with the rest of the WiK area content. I still disagree with the move. -- Wyn talk 05:18, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

It was moved because the July 8th update changed the name of the zone. 24.197.253.243 05:24, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

It is still consistent as it is called, in game, "Lion's Arch Keep" - it was renamed as the IP above me said. Lion's Arch (War in Kryta) is a completely different area. -- Konig/talk 05:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Krytan?

So under allies why does it say Krytan with a monk symbol next to it but link to a warriors page? Yay Killing Charr talk 14:25, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

If it's a mistake you're more than welcome to be bold and fix it. 58.106.158.34 19:01, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Just makin sure there wasn't two differant kinds of Krytans Yay Killing Charr talk 19:26, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Their dialogue refers to them using healing skills in the War. It's probable that there are two kinds of Krytan, and the warrior profession was listed on that page before the ones in this area were even added. --Santax (talk · contribs) 20:29, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Or their frenzy mending warriors ^^ Yay Killing Charr talk 18:40, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Signs in LA

Does anyone know what the signposts in LA read? They're on top of the hill to the east. It doesn't seem to be Old Ascalonian, or script from any other known langauge. Nom 14:05, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Redirect

Should Lion's Keep redirect here as well... we have lions gate, lions arch, lions keep, lions arch keep, lions arch gate, ect. --Falconeye 04:20, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

If one were to type that into the search box this page does come up under the results. However, a redirect wouldn't hurt, personally i enjoy being able to type any part of what i'm looking for into the search box and having one of the million redirects take me to where i want to be. So i say do it. Siris/talk 06:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Storage in an explorable area? o_O

WTF? Storage, merchants and traders in the Keep? I don't care that you can see these services from the Keep, they are not accessible or usable in any way, they are in Lion's Arch and just happen to be visible from the Keep. When I first saw that there was STORAGE in an explorable area, I seriously went WTF? I say either remove these entirely, or at least sub-section all the LA NPCs with a note that they're NOT ACCESSIBLE, only visible. This is confusing as hell. Rose Of Kali 10:44, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Yep, I agree that the merchants, etc. in Lion's Arch (proper), should not be listed on this page, which (regardless of what it says in-game of it being Lion's Arch (explorable area)) is definitely Lion's Arch Keep and an "extension" of Lion's Arch in the same way that Lion's Gate is, except this is only accessible during the War in Kryta.

After putting my reasoned arguments for a change (above) I had created a new Lion's Arch Keep (War in Kryta) page and had very nearly finished updating all the links to point to it when people started on the reverts with requests that I stop (which I did). My intention was to get everything to be consistent, including the actual NPCs in the Keep (not really minding whether (War in Kryta) was included in the name or not - valid arguments either way, perhaps).

As it is, I have currently given up trying to get anything changed for the moment, unless and until ArenaNet corrects the name in-game to be Lion's Arch Keep (explorable area). I have a lot of sympathy with Danika dealing with the Redemptors, as she spoke about them in The Count's Daughter:

Danika: "Twenty-four days while the Redemptors consider the omens and determine what the gods are trying to tell us? Our ancestors knew what it meant to act. With their help, I intend to act now."

- the same thing appears to be true when trying to get some wiki changes (except 24 days is perhaps over optimistic)! Arrowmaster - 12:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, branching off and doing your thing and then imposing it on others when there's clearly not a consensus yet is not the best way to do things, no matter how well intended it is. That's why I'm asking here first.

I would have named this "Lion's Arch Keep" and that's that, but I'm ok with the current title, as this zone acts like you're in LA, even showing LA NPCs and stuff, so technically it's trying its best to be an extension of LA without conflicting with players who don't qualify for it yet. Your name suggestion was redundant as there is no other version of it, so no need for any parentheses.

If there are no objections by tomorrow, I will remove unreachable LA NPCs and just put in a note stating that Lion's Arch city NPCs are visible and targetable from the Keep, but are not reachable. It would make things much cleaner and show only the NPCs that are actually in the Keep. I mean, you can see hostile enemies outside the city walls of pre-Searing Ascalon, D'Alessio Seaboard and Chahbek Village, fighting with guards and stuff, and even their names are red when you hold CTRL, but they're not listed as being in town, are they? o_O Rose Of Kali 14:27, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Well I am glad that you agree that "Lion's Arch Keep" would have been better and yes, I have been won over on the argument as to whether or not this would have been better without the (War in Kryta) after it. As for branching off and doing your thing and then imposing it on others, I don't agree that there is not a consensus now for the name Lion's Arch Keep, and all I did was what you have done here, give notice that I would change it unless I saw a compelling argument not to. I am perfectly happy with your proposed changes here, but the page title as it is, is still a nonsense (even if some don't care about that)! Arrowmaster - 16:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

"Lion's Arch city NPCs are visible and targetable from the Keep, but are not reachable" <- That! :) Markus Clouser 19:33, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Hear, hear. These NPC's needn't be listed specifically because there's no interaction possible in that area, imo. Only muddles up the page and creates confusion. 94.209.65.245 19:53, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok, my point exactly, so now to sort through who is where... Rose Of Kali 23:40, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

"Lion's Arch city NPCs are visible and targetable from the Keep, but are not reachable" They are reachable, and viewable. Not sure if all are usable though. http://i877.photobucket.com/albums/ab335/midnight3301/gw417.jpg --Wafflepanda 00:35, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, the quote I put in states:

Note: NPCs in Lion's Arch proper are visible and can even be targeted by skills from here. However, they are unreachable and any other interaction with them is impossible.

First of all, the image shows something that would be considered an exploit, it is far from intended gameplay. Second, there's no real use or advantage in doing that, other than just to do it. Third, it looks like it took a very specific deliberate setup to do it, so no players will ever just do it accidentally. (Fourth, I still can't figure out how they got out of the gate.) Rose Of Kali 01:11, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

That's not how it works. The game engine is not even aware of other zones much less acts on any contents in them. This is it's own zone with it's own spawns independent of any spawns anywhere else. Backsword 14:01, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

You completely removed the note with a stupid comment saying it's not true. Can you not see the LA NPCs from there? Can you easily get to them and interact with them? I absolutely believe that a note should be there, and if you can think of a better way to describe the situation, by all means do, but don't remove information with a lame comment that doesn't really mean anything. Rose Of Kali 14:38, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

As I explained above, no, I can't see the Lion's Arch NPCs from it. Nor can anyone else. Backsword 14:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

As I already asked you, offer an alternate note to explain what it is you think we're all seeing. And no, what you call "explanation" above is not fit for the article, it doesn't even make sense.

On a related note, please go into Lakeside County in Pre and look into the Ashford Abbey from the outside, as well as across the portal into Green Hills County. Please, tell me what you see. Rose Of Kali 14:54, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

If it doens't make sense, you have to blame Anet, because that's how the game works. And thanks for the supporting example. Backsword 15:01, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

My question is: "supporting example" of what? Most readers of the wiki have no clue about "how the game works." They know what they see and what matters to them, and information is worthless if you can't understand it. Rose Of Kali 15:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I also tested it, and I can see and heal the Guild Registrar. It's true. --h. moo. 15:27, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

FYI, the storage chests and xunlai are not useable, you can open your chest, but you can only see it, not take anything out or put anything in,either. --Neil2250 , Portal Jumper 14:02, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, well then that's just a bug note. How do you get across, btw? Rose Of Kali 22:54, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

For the example:I assume you've been inside the outpost too. Then you would have seen that what you saw from the outside was not what you found on the inside. Backsword 22:33, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

EotN requirement and Prophecies-only account

I did a little experiment that someone might find useful, or even explore further. Unfortunately, it failed, but here it is:

I have a mule account that's Prophecies-only, and the character has beaten the game. I took her along with a char from my main account that has not explored any WiK content yet, and watched all the SB camp dialogues together. Then I took the main acct. char to see Zinn's trial while the prophecies-only char patiently waited. Then I returned both chars to the SB camp, and both were able to watch the Livia/Zinn dialogue at the camp. However, the Prophecies-only character was still unable to enter the Keep, with a message stating that she has "not witnessed princess Salma rise to power." Furthermore, the prophecies-only char now gets the peacekeeper and SB ally spawns in Kryta, but hasn't encountered the courier yet (I haven't tried too hard to get him, though).

In conclusion, EotN is still required to enter LA Keep, as watching Zinn's Trial seems to be a requirement in itself, not just a pre-requisite to see Livia/Zinn dialogue at the camp. Rose Of Kali 09:32, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Sort of, yes. You need to have triggered the Livia and ZSinn scene, not just watched it as it triggered for someone else. SO the trial is an indirect req. Backsword 13:37, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, here's the thing (sort of related and may be of interest?):

1. Using two accounts running on two machines (both with hm on everything), with one (NF) char that had not finished eotn in party (had completed proph but not gone to sb camp) and leader who had completed both (and watched dialog 1 to 3 in sb camp), went out of gate into Arbor Bay. The npc was there and both could go to watch Zinn's trial (separate request to npc for each char).
2. Both chars then rejoined as party (in Vlox's Falls), mapped to ToA, went to shining blade camp and watched the dialog 4 Livia Recruits Zinn scene.

After this the leader could enter Keep, but other char could not, so I took her back (on her own except heros) to sb camp where she watched dialog 1, then through portal to Tears of the Fallen and back, watched dialog 2, portal and back, watched dialog 4 Livia Recruits Zinn scene (for second time! - skipping dialog 3). This char could then also now enter the Keep and has been doing all the sb quests. So the interesting thing is that it is possible to get to Keep without doing either the M.O.X. book stuff or finishing eotn (and also that dialog scenes can be sometimes skipped or repeated). Arrowmaster - 20:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

That's the same except for Chalk. He's not supposed to let you in if you don't qualify. Have specific dialogue for that. sure you didnä't meet the criteria? Should be somthing Anet considers a bug if not. Backsword 22:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

EoTN Trial Key - Lion's Arch Keep permanent?

I have yet to use the trial key released for Eye of the North but have completed the Prophecies campaign. If I manage to progress through the campaign to unlock this area within the 5 hour timespan, will I still be allowed access to this area after the trial is up? It seems like all WiK areas involve both campaigns, but do both need to be permanent on your account? 174.20.114.1 18:09, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Unlikely anyone has tested this. Haven't heard anything about it. My guess wóuld be yes you can still go there. All EotN material achieved stays on your account when a key expires so any trigger met would stay met. Backsword 23:57, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Code 005 When trying to load Keep

So I have been able to go to the Keep before on 2 different chars on same account but cant now. I was just wonder if anyone else is getting this or knows why its happening.

Rename?

Is called Lion's Arch Keep. Renamed after the last update, or I'm just slow?--Sharkinu 05:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

No you are correct this page should be moved to Lion's Arch Keep no disambig tag, and then a new Lion's Arch (War in Kryta) page will be needed for the explorable you get transported to after The Battle for Lion's Arch I would give more information but I was glad to get through that quest alive at the time and didn't document as much as I should have. -- Tenri 06:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

There are effectively now... 5 versions of Lion's Arch. Woot! Is the Battle for Lion's Arch called "Lion's Arch" or "The Battle for Lion's Arch"? I didn't pay attention when loading. Same goes for the after area (maybe next time). But if the keep was renamed, then this should be moved. -- Konig/talk 08:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes! At long last, anet have corrected the name of the location, and this mess on page names can at last be sorted out, as I previously suggested (and tried unsuccessfully to change previously). There is a lot to sort out, with various pages incorrect, not just this one and right now I a bit annoyed as I finished the The Battle for Lion's Arch with a full inventory, so did not speak to Grahame (Commemorative Weapons) to get one, thinking that he would be in the Keep after (as per current pages for him), which is NOT true (he is only in Lion's Arch (War in Kryta), not the Keep! As I also took the quest reward, I am hoping that I can get my weapon for this char using another one, or I am stuffed. So to be clear, the current page content should be moved to under Lion's Arch Keep, whereas the content of this page, should be revised to show the whole area during the The Battle for Lion's Arch quest, with Grahame (Commemorative Weapons) listed. Arrowmaster - 17:37, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Just typical! Grahame is in the Keep now and I have my weapon (not customized thank goodness, so you can get them for other chars too)! I thought I would just double-check and swear blind that he was not there last time I entered the Keep to get reward for the The Battle for Lion's Arch. I will check this on another char, but think you might have to get reward then leave and re-enter the Keep for him to appear there, even though he was near the normal Firstwatch Sergio position at the end of the battle, where Princess Salma makes her speech from. Arrowmaster - 17:54, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Cowboy Bebop Trivia

Can we link the NPC's names to Cowboy Bebop characters? If not, I don't think this is worth mentioning. Or actually a reference at all. Elderly people talking about their past (exaggerated) glories is pretty much a cliché, not something only done in Cowboy Bebop. --84.26.78.183 14:00, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't know the anime, but compare the names Antwyn, Carden and Jorith to Antonio, Carlos, and Jobim. Coincidence? Tub 14:35, 21 October 2010 (UTC)