Talk:Geralt of Rivia

This article was nominated for deletion on 22 March 2012. The result of the discussion was keep.

Novels: Fantasy Low‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Fantasy task force.

Film

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles

Video games: Characters Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Video game characters task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Purple Francis (6 participants)
Gilman Louie (2 participants)
Yoshimitsu (2 participants)
Dr. Wily (6 participants)
First Internet Backgammon Server (3 participants)
Emote (2 participants)
Stardew Valley Guidebook (2 participants)
Train simulator (disambiguation) (8 participants)
Preston Arsement (4 participants)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)
Melee (game terminology) (6 participants; relisted)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (7 participants; relisted)
Godzilla: Monster of Monsters (7 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Geeet16.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

This article needs to clarify its statement about mutation, which it proposes it typically congenital. That is not the case, at least in real life. 76.19.197.84 (talk) 18:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The name of the bard is Marigold only in the Czech version. Ausir (talk) 18:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

88.200.253.133 (talk) 16:05, 20 January 2008 (UTC) The name of the Geralt's "stepdaughter" should actually be spelled "Ziri" (from Old Speech Ziriael, "swallow"). This is mentioned in one of the books.[reply]

Exactly where is it clearly stated in the books that Geralt has lost all body pigmentation? The part in The Last Wish which tells of Geralts mutations and trials leaves the pigmentation issue a bit ambiguous they could be speaking of his hair only or body pigmentation as well but it is not made completely clear in my opinion. "The only one to live out of all those chosen for further trials. My hair's been white ever since. Total loss of pigmentation. A side-effect,as they say." (page 115 of The Last Wish) Ildin (talk) 13:58, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

No, Staszek Lem, you are mistaken in your edit summary. I didn't say he wasn't the main character--I said the article was full of cruft and OR and all that, which I think is a pretty accurate assessment. The longest paragraph in this article isn't even about this character; it's about, ahem, "witchers". Moreover, there is no reason to assume this content can't be covered in the main article or in that list article--the main article is 26k and woefully undersourced, and that list article already has just about everything that's sourced. No, this is just like all those other fantasy articles--Pokemon, Game of Thrones, K-pop, rassling, Star Wars--full of original research and fan stuff. I know non-fans aren't supposed to touch that, and the normal Wikipedia rules for notability and sourcing don't apply, but that is the way it is. Drmies (talk) 19:23, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw your note. The way to handle it is to simply apply policy and then cut/prune/redirect. I mean, you reverted me, so I can get into an edit war but there's no point to that, also because there's plenty of fans that can outdo me in a 3R struggle (I'm not saying you're a fan, necessarily). But look, what applies here first of all is WP:OR, WP:RS, etc. What is being said about this character and how much of it is properly sourced? And that which isn't sourced, how relevant is it? So that whole "witchers" paragraph can be cut as unsourced and irrelevant. Do not get hung up on citing policy: editorial common sense should be enough. Policy doesn't dictate what goes in an article either, only what could go in an article. Drmies (talk) 19:27, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Drmies I am well aware of OR& RS. However a typical counterargument when I try to trim too lengthy plots in articles about novels is that the "Plot summary" section is referenced by the summarized work itself. And when I mention WP:OR, WP:PRIMARY, I am being rebutted by the claim that the section does not do any SYNTH, just faithfully recapitulates the source. That's why I am looking for a specific guideline for fictional worlds. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:44, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well, we have MOS:PLOT, which doesn't give a length for books, but I think typically GA editors stick with the film guidelines, of no more than 700 words. And then there's MOS:TVCAST, for lists, which is pretty clear and pretty damn concise: the example it gives is "Han Solo (portrayed by Harrison Ford): The pilot of the Millennium Falcon". So they'll tell you that "oh this character is so important blah blah blah"--no, no one is more important than Han Solo, and he got six words. But the moment (and this typically happens in lists of characters) that the text says "seems to be" or "appears to be in love" or any of those things, cut. No, those MOS guidelines, like Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction, have some meat to them. Now, in the end much boils down to editorial judgment, which the typical fan doesn't have. Stand your ground. Find a GA or an FA to compare to, and don't allow for comparisons with articles that are not at the least a GA, since those just don't count. And let me know if I can help at some article or other. Drmies (talk) 22:51, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Staszek Lem, have a look at the article now. Drmies (talk) 19:37, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Slit between Sapkowski's and game worlds

After seemingly being killed by a mob during a slaughter of non-humans -- clarify: killed in novels or in game?

In general, The "Plot" section must clearly say how Geralt's story ends in the books, because we have two worlds melding, and readers better clearly know the distinction. Staszek Lem (talk) 22:53, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

W3 SS Geralt.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:08, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

points

Television section.

Gerald still doesn’t have nothing about his biography of the tv show. Gerald is a very popular character, probably the most famous one of the franchise, and now that he have his tv show, he deserves the explanation on his Netflix show because he is one of the main characters but is still empty. So don’t you think we need to expand it. Alvrix3104 (talk) 04:36, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in mind that Geralt's origin and backstory aren't covered extensively in Main Story continuited in the original book series. His origin story and how he became a Witcher is explained in some short stories. Which are more info for the long time fans of the Novel series. I feel like if anything they should have focused on Geralt's origin story. However, Witcher blood orgins does discuss Geralts backstory, but good god it's not that good, if you ask me it is horrible. Historysgrad224 (talk) 01:42, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Add a storyline for the TV adaptation.

First of all, I would like to apologize for the edit. I admit that sometimes I feel very superior on Wikipedia, that I forgot that there are rules. I'm really sorry for the edit war attempt, so now I'm gonna make things in the right way.

I would like to include a TV fictional biography, because I feel that the show doesn't follow the plot of the books. This time it would be shorter, only keeping the essential and what's really important. But this time I won't be doing nothing, until we can finally come to an agreement. Ulises1126 (talk) 15:13, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thing is, the section "Fictional biography" is actually more of a character description. Some relevant plot points from books such be described. Still, description should be pretty general. While Netflix plays fast and loose with events, they still keep general outline intact - section about it could say some about differences - a few sentences tops, I think. Mithoron (talk) 22:21, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]