Talk:Adalon

Canonicity (?)
I don't see why it couldn't say how it was canonically in one sentence, implying that it was not so non-cannically. After all, if you say it was Abduh, that means this is no longer true of the game. But there's not much point in a separate non-canon section unless you want to mention things like the possibility of killing her and using her blood for an evil magic item. Ville V. Kokko 10:23, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I tried to edit it so the source material or ambiguous references to that material (such as the protagonist of a game, or options the player can make) are not mentioned within the text of an article that can be considered canon, as thats something of an unwritten rule. The reason the article can be considered canon as it refers to a character that, as far as I know, appears in the novelization of the game, which again AFAIK is considered canon. Personally I think the novelizations are BS, but if theyre canon, then theyre the prefered source material. Johnnyriot999 11:13, 18 March 2007 (UTC)


 * That's how I tried to write it in the first place, but I also wanted to make it so that it applies to the game at the same time. Abdurrr is not "game canon". Ville V. Kokko 11:45, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * (Actually there's also a problem then with saying Adalon did make them look like drow, as it's almost certainly possible to skip that entirely in the game. So maybe then "her plan was to...".) Ville V. Kokko 11:47, 18 March 2007 (UTC)