Talk:Baldur's Gate

TRADE
I'm not finding a source as of yet to confirm this, but as of 4th edition, Luskan is a cesspool and largely abandoned and is no longer the northern end of the "Trade Way". I can't see trade passing through Baldur's Gate anymore. This is evident as per page 148 of the 4th edition Forgotten Realms - Campaign Guide. -- Vampus 19:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Luskan is indeed a cesspool but, regardless, Baldur's Gate is still a center of trade (which is a bit odd given Luskan and Neverwinter are dead and Calimshan is in the middle of a brutal, endless civil war), as confirmed by the FRCG.

"This sprawling city depends on the trade passing through its ports and gates to support a population far too big for its own good."

- Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide, pg 94

"Baldur's Gate is a prosperous city were just about anything can happen, and often does. It contains an active and organized thieves' guild, powerful merchants with questionable ethics, and influential cults and secret societies both malignant and benign."

- Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide, pg 94

"This policy [neutrality] has created an environment where no nation or city-state bears Baldur's Gate ill will (though "businesspeople" out of Luskan or even merchants in Waterdeep resent the considerable competition from the city's port)."

- Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide, 94


 * As you can see, it appears Baldur's Gate is not only a center of trade - it's the center of trade. Niirfa-sa 19:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not bringing into question Baldur's Gate; if anything it has flourished since the events of the spellplague. I'm simply referring to the Trade section of the page, which lists that the stone they import comes via Luskan, which would no longer be correct given current canon. The changes to Mirabar in this period of time is as yet unknown also.  I think this suggests the source is no longer accurate, given it was published in 1993, and 112 years have passed in game terms.  A lot of water has passed under the bridge...err, if Luskan had any bridges anymore!! ::-p -- Vampus 04:32, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


 * My sugestion is that you have any other issues like this with 4th edition, you review how I altered the Trade section, keep the old stuff by adding year tags and add the new stuff. Hurtzbad 05:07, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Can we even say abandoned? I know I'm being a stickler, but I don't think we have enough info to say that.  All we can say is that if the stone imports are still happening, they're not being routed through Luskan.
 * - Well ",but decades of social unrest and rampant crime have left it largely abandoned"

- Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide, pg 148


 * Also the docks are "useless" so no trade would be going out by sea.Hurtzbad 11:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the point I'm trying to make here is being lost. We know Luskan is gone, we know that Baldur's Gate is thriving, we know that any trade would NOT be going through Luskan.  What we don't know is if Baldur's Gate is still importing stone from Mirabar via a different route. -- Vampus 13:05, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

As of 1479 DR, Luskan is complete anarchy and in ruins, but people still live there. ➳ Quin 09:25, February 18, 2011 (UTC)

Places of Interest
Say, is it worth addressing the fact that some locations, such as the Elfsong tavern which is I think pretty definite canon, is listed alongside others such as the Purple Wyrm Inn which as far as I know is only in Dark Alliance? --Owdar 19:12, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'd say it is definitely worth marking the non-canon areas of the article as such. One possibility is simply to add (non-canon) next to it, while another is to split these into their own "non-canon" section. Fw190a8 01:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

History from the computer games
Under the section The Fall of the Bhaalspawn, the last two paragraphs deals with the plots of Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn and Baldur's Gate II: Throne of Bhaal. These to games/novels has nothing to do with the city of Baldur's Gate. They take place in Amn and Tethyr and none of the antagonists mentioned in the article has any motives against the Baldur's Gate.

Maybe The Fall of the Bhaalspawn or The Bhaalspawn Saga should have an own article, but the content should be removed from this one. //Hildifons 13:03, May 10, 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm sure I remember Baldur's Gate being mentioned a lot in game 2 and expansions. It is relevant as anything that would happen in Amn and Tethyr would affect Baldur's Gate greatly. --Mr. Youtube 22:15, May 10, 2011 (UTC)


 * Do you have any sources that explicitly say that? I have checked with the games and novels and neither Irenicus, Bodhi, the Five or Amelyssan is concerned with the city. I will therefore remove those references and mark the others as "needing citations". //Hildifons 07:01, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

Cleanup
I noticed the main page has a "cleanup" notice at the top; I can't find any more info about what needs to be cleaned up specifically for Baldur's Gate. I'm curious what exactly needs to be cleaned up? Does it entail an overhaul of all the text, or are there specific sections which are considered messy? — Mallmus aka Adam Wintle (talk) 21:50, April 3, 2016 (UTC)
 * The article has a boatload of missing references, (indicating a rewrite could be necessary) and it needs to be edited to comply with the suggested article structure for locations (seen at Template:Location). It also needs an enormous expansion. --Ir&#39;revrykal (talk) 21:55, April 3, 2016 (UTC)


 * Most of all, it needs to be put in past tense. — BadCatMan (talk) 08:09, April 4, 2016 (UTC)

Good Article status

 * Correct : maybe (citations needed)
 * Referenced : no (citations needed)
 * Formatted : yes
 * Clean : no (There are several inconsistencies in formatting and style.)
 * Nearly complete : no (There is an empty section with the stub tag.)
 * Policy-adherent/Demonstrative : yes