Talk:White Walker/Archive 1

On the merge suggestion
I don't think a merge is necessary in this instance. There's enough information on the Others in the books to make an acceptable, if brief, article about them. Thoughts?

Incidentally, I've moved the page from "Others(ASOIAF)" to this location, because (a) the spacing was wrong and (b) the abbreviation may not be as immediately familiar to casual/non fans as the full name. Brendan Moody 21:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree, i added the last articel, and was in a rush, so i put (ASOIAF) instead. I planned to move it shortly. --AeomMai 23:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't think the Others need their own article. There's enough information on them in the Westeros article.Captain Crawdad 17:04, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

We could add a link to here, as a main article. Plus, im about to upload a pic of an other, and it wouldnt work right on that page.--AeomMai 21:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I've just redone the Night's Watch page and with the Other article being rather brief I would suggest a merge into the NW page. The information on the Others so far in the books is too sparse to warrant their own page regardless of their importance in the overall plot line of the series. I will do so in the next few days unless someone has an objection or another suggestion. NeoFreak 17:14, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

No objections, as long as that pic of the other can be brought in here somewhere--AeomMai 21:25, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Where's that picture from? Apart from the blue eyes, it doesn't seem to match up much with the descriptions in the book.Captain Crawdad 08:41, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 * The picture is from Fantasy Flight Games; I assume it was CCG art, and it can definitely be seen in their GRRM-approved ASOIAF art book. However, the reason it doesn't match the descriptions in the books is that (as the caption in the art book says) it's a wight, not an Other.  (If I understand the distinction right, Others are the creatures themselves; wights are the possessed corpses they create.)  Also, it's a copyrighted image, and if there's a fair-use rationale under which we can use it, none has been presented, so the image is eligible for deletion unless some rationale is provided. Brendan Moody 01:40, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

My mistake. I got the pic from ktome.com, and sent an email requesting permission to place it on wikipedia. I assumed it was art made by the author of the website.--AeomMai 15:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Wights: Dragonglass
''Creatures killed by the Others soon reanimate as wights: undead with pallid skin, black hands and similarly glowing blue eyes. Dragonglass and Valyrian steel have no effect on them.''

This is contracticted by the final episode of Season 7 of Game of Thrones, where Jon Snow says and demonstrates that they are vulnerable to dragonglass. Object In Space (talk) 15:53, 22 September 2017 (UTC)


 * I just checked, the books are very clear that dragonglass has no effect. So if we can get a source/review that explains that this plot development from the TV series differs from the books, we can put that statement in the TV adaptation sect. Good catch.— TAnthonyTalk 17:53, 22 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Here's one: On the TV show, dragonglass also has a special power to destroy wights. (This isn’t true in George R.R. Martin’s books, but Game of Thrones writer Dave Hill confirmed in a recent interview that the show has deliberately changed this.) https://www.vox.com/2017/8/20/16171878/game-of-thrones-season-7-dragon-dies-beyond-the-wall Object In Space (talk) 15:02, 15 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I added it to the article!— TAnthonyTalk 16:12, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Why is the article titled White Walkers?
They're called the Others in the book, this is there actual name and original name. Why is this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.100.130.233 (talk) 17:25, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your message. It was discussed that because of the popularity of the TV series, they are better known as White Walkers in the mainstream, and so that is the common name for our purposes. The usage in the books is noted in the lead.— TAnthonyTalk 18:44, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Backstory
Is kinda wrong, T.V. show says Children of the Forest created the white walkers because if a war with men? Should both be mentioned? Darkness Shines (talk) 22:55, 18 January 2018 (UTC)


 * The Backstory section is squarely under Novels, and the TV version of their creation is explained in the TV adaptation section. I'm not sure what your proposed change is. Thanks.— TAnthonyTalk 22:59, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Had not read that part Re the t.v. adaptation so no proposed change at all, cheers Darkness Shines (talk) 23:03, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 19 June 2019

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. No consensus on White Walker vs. White walker, with no prejudice against a future requested move to White walker. (non-admin closure) —  Newslinger  talk   23:46, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

White Walker → White Walkers – The White Walkers are usually referred to in the plural sense on the show. Unreal7 (talk) 22:10, 19 June 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. —  Newslinger  talk   07:56, 27 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose per Naming conventions (plurals). If the term exists in the singular, that is the default encyclopedic usage.— TAnthonyTalk 22:40, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose plural move per WP:NCPLURAL, but its curious that this isn't at white walker (lowercase) as that is what is presented in the books. It seems like only since the show has the term been uppercase'd. -- Netoholic @ 23:09, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Move to White walker: These are individual entities that can be encountered and observed singularly, and the photo at the top of the article shows only one of them. See, for example, Flea, Ant, Termite, Meerkat, and Mouse. However, this is not a proper noun (and is not capitalized in the associated books, as noted by Netoholic), so "walker" should be in lowercase. —BarrelProof (talk) 03:18, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It's lower case in the books, but this topic is more notable as an element of the TV series. Most of the cited sources relate to the TV series, and I'm pretty sure they all consider it a proper noun.— TAnthonyTalk 03:43, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I suggest to look up the definition of a proper noun. This is not a proper noun. —BarrelProof (talk) 04:34, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It looks as though "white walker" is the term for the creature, whereas "The Others" (in the books) or "White Walkers" (in the TV show) are used variably as proper nouns for the faction/army/race made up of white walkers. Being that this article is meant to cover both the book and TV series creatures, I think the lowercase may be the best as it is the term used in common. -- Netoholic @ 04:55, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
 * My argument for title case was that this wouldn't exist as an individual article if it were only based on the books, primarily because of a lack of sources asserting notability. The existing sources are TV series-related and stylize the term as a proper noun. That said, I know I'm splitting hairs so I would not object if this article is moved to white walker by consensus.— TAnthonyTalk 20:58, 28 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment Editors may be interested in the arguments made in a similar RM: Martian → Martians (unfortunately the discussion didn't reach consensus). Colin M (talk) 18:30, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It needs a more descriptive title, some clearer reference to Game of Thrones. My first guess was that this was a Johnnie Walker blend.  And to my mild surprise, it was (1909-1920) and may be again.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:46, 8 July 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.