Talk:Characters of Myst

Characters of Myst was one of the Video games good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Characters of Myst is part of the Myst series series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 20, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
February 12, 2009	Featured topic candidate	Promoted
November 22, 2025	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

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

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 Low-importance).

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Characters

These characters really shouldn't link to the related book. Those articles don't really provide much insight about the characters. New content should be written or the links should be taken out entirely. --Phoenix Hacker 11:04, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where's Dr. Watson? --80.172.14.103 (talk) 23:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:YeeshaYoung.jpg

Image:YeeshaYoung.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:05, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Bahro.jpg

Image:Bahro.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-Removed link to Rudolph Bahro since it's not the bahro we're looking for. Someone please post a bahro pic if they have one. 142.59.58.28 (talk) 13:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The preceding comments no longer apply to this article. The "Bahro" section has been moved to Myst canon #Bahro. — OranL (talk) 18:16, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reformatted picture/text flow

I changed the page from this to this. I like the pictures consistently on the left, especially with the } between the character sections (I just discovered this useful template!). Comments on the overall flow of the article with the picture placement? — OranL (talk) 18:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

STOP RIGHT THERE! Unfortunately, Oran, you're not supposed to do that; the Manual of Style forbids left-aligned images under level three headings as it breaks up the flow of text and disconnects the header. :P Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 12:21, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply] Gah...rules, rules. I changed the picture placement so they're above the headers. I don't know if it's better than the staggered left/right. How does it look now? — OranL (talk) 18:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply] I personally prefer right-align images or staggered layouts myself. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 18:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fatal poisoning

Regarding this edit: I thought that being "fatally poisoned" was saying that he died from it. — OranL (talk) 19:39, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I reverted it. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 21:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Stranger here

Resolved

I think its a good idea, as the article on that character has yet to show anything substantive in the way of reliable sources, and would strengthen the characters of myst article. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:45, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, I thought it already had been. Really, I think you can redirect it straight, as I'm not sure what else in the way of verifiable info we can add about the character (he/she's faceless, after all.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 23:56, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply] Yeah, I think you could be right there. The extent to which this facelessness is a storytelling mechanic is already covered in the Myst article, and as there is literally nothing to the character, there's nothing to say except plot repetition. Redirecting it here would be fine, with a brief mention in the intro that the player character is essentially the player themselves. -- Sabre (talk) 00:47, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to voice my support for the merge to Characters of Myst#Protagonists that was put together by User:Judgesurreal777. Randomran (talk) 01:04, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to say about plot reception? Didn't you notice the rest of the article? I agree, Judge, it would help the Characters of Myst article if it were merged here, but it wasn't. The Stranger doesn't even have a subsection on this article. #We were supposed to merge Stranger, not delete it. C Teng [talk] 01:48, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

giving away too much!

the characters section of this page explains far too much in terms of the other Myst stories. for example, the ending of the first Myst is given away, which for someone who has not yet played myst means that they will know not to free either of the brothers. at least this detail should be deleted, or should be flagged as being a spoiler.

If you don't want the be spoiled.. then why are you reading articles related to the games? Rehevkor ✉ 03:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply] NO. I AGREE! There is no need for spoilers on this page. I was taken unawares, looking for background and trivia. This page should provide general information without giving away the plot points. Ed8r (talk) 21:17, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply] Take a read of WP:SPOILER, you have to include key plot points for an article to be comprehensive. Wikipedia is not the place for trivia, however. Rehevkor ✉ 21:21, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We were supposed to merge Stranger, not delete it.

If you take a look at the old Stranger (Myst) article, it had a ton of information on it, and it was merged because there was nothing to be said about this character? Come on... if you're going to get rid of the article, at least put some of the great information that was on it back on this page. We agreed to merge it, not delete it. Are there any objections to me adding the Stranger to this list, as he is the player character in 4 of the 5 games. C Teng [talk] 01:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is there's nothing verifiable about it. There are no reliable sources that I could find; as such, the paragraph in development will have to suffice. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 02:19, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following text has been transferred here from the Gehn redirect talk page, which is now the talk page of an unrelated geographical article --Bermicourt (talk) 14:18, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

Okay, so what is going on here? We merged this page with Characters of Myst, so why is it getting redirected and undone over and over. The page history is still there and the old version is archived. According to WP:Merge and delete, we're done. Why is this redirect being undone? — OranL (talk) 21:38, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When and where was consensus to merge, and not keep as a separate article, sought? Talk Islander 21:52, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply] As with the other characters merged, there are no secondary sources to make Gehn notable as a seperate topic from the characters of Myst, as per WP:N. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 22:02, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply] Show me where, in WP:N, it says that articles can be deleted without discussion if one editor feels them to be non-notable. On the contrary, I notice this particular section: "Although articles should demonstrate the notability of their topics, and articles on topics that do not meet this criteria are generally deleted, it is important to not just consider whether notability is established by the article, but whether it readily could be. When discussing whether to delete or merge an article due to non-notability, the discussion should focus not only on whether notability is established in the article, but on what the probability is that notability could be established. If it is likely that independent sources could be found for a topic, deletion due to lack of notability is inappropriate unless active effort has been made to find these sources. For articles of unclear notability, deletion should be a last resort." Your interpretation welcome :). Talk Islander 22:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply] The article was not deleted. The relevant encyclopedic content has been merged with Characters of Myst, and the original page was changed to redirect to that page. I don't think there's any reason to still have this article here, because the topic is now covered here. — OranL (talk) 22:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply] "When discussing whether to delete or merge an article due to non-notability, the discussion should focus not only on whether notability is established in the article, but on what the probability is that notability could be established." - i.e. a merge does not omit the need for discussion. Clearly, judging by the things that you're saying, there was a discussion regarding the merging of various Myst characters into one central article - a discussion that must have taken place, as consensus could not possibly have been determined without it - thus all I'm asking is that you point me in the direction of this discussion. That discussion will show clearly the consensus for deleting (or merging) these peripheral articles, thus there will be absolutely no need for my to revert what currently appears to be a merge on one or two editors say-so. Talk Islander 00:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply] FYI, I have now restored Atrus, Katran (Myst) and Sirrus and Achenar, three other articles that were merged without any attempt to discuss proposals or form a consensus. Talk Islander 00:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply] Sorry, being a bit vague - serves me right for editing when tired :P. This is a merge. Right. Is it contraversial? Well, yes, 'cause at least one person disagrees with it. Thus it must be discussed, per WP:MERGE - "If the merger is controversial, however, you may find your merger reverted, and as with all other edits, edit wars should be avoided. If you are uncertain of the merger's appropriateness, or believe it might be controversial, or your merge ends up reverted, you can propose it on either or both of the affected pages.". Talk Islander 00:27, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply] I put up a notice at Talk:Myst (series) before I merged any of the articles directing any comments towards the changes I was proposing here. The fact is that looking through books and newspaper articles, web searches and online catalogs, I have found nothing which could give any of the above characters a meaningful, non-stub article that is in line with WP:PLOT; together, information about development and reception can be added and we can have a GA or FA article. I'm angling for quality over quantity, a sentiment others on the talk page agreed with. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 00:42, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Know what? Ignore me, I'm being an idiot. In fairness, so is policy - WP:MERGE states that it's OK to merge without discussion, whereas WP:N states that it is not. I strongly agree with the latter, but as long as the former exists, I cannot pick you up on it. This clash of two policies needs sorting, but clearly not here or now. I still feel that you should have proposed every merge you were going to make, but there you go. I'll re-redirect the articles myself (though note that you shouldn't have deleted the talk pages, as redirects don't fall under WP:CSD#G8, and there's no need to delete anyway). Appologies for problems caused, and perhaps in the future, potential merges could be discussed on the pages to which they relate? Talk Islander 00:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have no reason to apologize. I admit, I am much more of a loner editor and I tend to be bold and ask questions later. If it turns out by some act of god they can stand on their own, they will be spun back here. :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 01:31, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply] I believe that you are correct, Islander, in saying that there is a problem with merging something that other editors believe should be its own article. When a conflict arises, we just need to stop and talk things over to all get on the same page. I'm glad we could work this out without too much trouble.

— OranL (talk) 21:03, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actual merge

So are we going to formally merge these articles? — OranL (talk) 20:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Currently article is unsoursed and full of redundant plot information that is either trivial or already in the respective articles. All the necessary information has already been merged. Rehevkor ✉ 23:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support as per my statements above: fails WP:N, better served in larger topic. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 17:25, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys, please check out the idea I wrote up on User:David Fuchs/workshop #Goals. Add comments there, please. — OranL (talk) 19:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Characters of Uru?

I know there were no live-action generated characters in Uru, but neither were there in Myst V, and we have a section on that...

What say we give some mention to major characters of Uru, such as Douglas Sharper and the senior members of the DRC? Also some mention of Yeesha's role in Uru's "plot", such as it is.

--logged-out user Kasreyn

Rengin Altay voicing Catherine in Riven

This bit of info is in the article for Riven (and likely a few other articles as well though I have not checked - and no, I did not add it to any others apart from this one) and the fact that she did voice her is a well-known piece of information amongst Myst fans (she's even listed in Riven's credits as Voice-Over Talent for Catherine!).

To see her credit - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsypiWVslF4 view that video and go to playback mark 5:08 and pause the screen. Bloody Wikipedia users. --99.186.110.193 (talk) 19:26, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You need verifiable sources... content on IMDB, where it can be user-contributed, does not count. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 20:24, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] Verifiable source apart from the blasted game credits itself? http://i.imgur.com/XzcDi.jpg Seriously - it's the truth. Why bother going to such a length if it were complete poppycock? --99.186.110.193 (talk) 06:31, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] While I'm at it - it's also listed here - http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/riven-the-sequel-to-myst/credits --99.186.110.193 (talk) 06:40, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] Screenshots are not reliable. Mobygames is the same way. It doesn't matter if it's "true", it matters what can be certified in reliable sources. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 15:02, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] So in your quest to assert you're right, you're deeming the source material - i.e. the game itself - wrong? Completely unbiased pursuit of knowledge there, sir. --99.186.110.193 (talk) 01:32, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The game manual lists Rengin Altay as the "Voiceover Talent" for Catherine, page 18. Rehevkor ✉ 01:50, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I'm sure this will be obliterated as a viable source of info per Wiki-bureaucratic nonsense. I also have an email from Cyan Worlds employee Tony Fryman confirming that Altay did in fact provide the voice of Catherine as it pertains to Riven. Again, I'm sure it too will be blown out of the water. --99.186.110.193 (talk) 17:04, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] Emails aren't usable as sources - it's hard to verify as fact (anyone can write an email saying whatever they want, to or from whomever they want). The manual alone should suffice as far as I can see. Please assume good faith though, it may seem unfair but any editor has rights enough to demand information is verified to the highest degree. Rehevkor ✉ 17:34, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] Well told. Though I'm curious as to the lapse in logic behind the email coming from a known employee (the CFO of Cyan Worlds, last I knew) of the company behind the game (in fact, he was also in the game) being "whomever" or "whatever". It seems ridiculous that an email waiving rights to an image is acceptable concerning copyright but when one is potentially presented concerning purposes of information verification it is somehow deemed useless in contrast. --99.186.110.193 (talk) 18:03, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply] Just how it works, sorry. I have a few emails from RAWA saying this and that but they're just not usable as sources, it's only my word that they're really from him. Rehevkor ✉ 18:11, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Characters of Myst. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add } after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add } to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060515224603/http://www.gamespot.com:80/features/riven/ to http://www.gamespot.com/features/riven/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template } (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:11, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Characters of Myst. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://archive.salon.com/21st/feature/1997/11/cov_06riven.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081216022059/http://www.gamespot.com:80/pc/adventure/mystvendofages/review.html to http://www.gamespot.com/pc/adventure/mystvendofages/review.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at }).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template } (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:22, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Characters of Myst. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081203232320/http://archive.gamespy.com/interviews/june01/dourif/ to http://archive.gamespy.com/interviews/june01/dourif/
Added } tag to http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3144097&did=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template } (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:27, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nelah

No mention of Nelah? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.61.180.106 (talk) 15:57, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 26 September 2025

The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus is clearly against the proposed move at this time. BD2412 T 02:55, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Characters of Myst → List of Myst charactersList of Myst characters – Per WP:DUCK, this is a list: categorized as such and, well, article contents are mostly a list. Let's rename it accordingly Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:25, 26 September 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 15:41, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Per nom. No other WikiProject uses the name format "Characters of X", and, even if used, it would imply the characters are discussed as a whole. That is clearly not what is happening here, as characters are split into sections, making it a straightforward character list. I will note, however, that it must become a Featured List if moved or the Myst Good Topic will be demoted, so one would hope the nominator has some interest in remedying that rather than just leaving it alone afterwards. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:22, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment: Going to notify relevant WikiProjects as the Featured Topic and GA may be affected by this move. veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 15:41, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] Note: WikiProject Video games/Video game characters, WikiProject Fictional characters, and WikiProject Video games have been notified of this discussion. veko. (user | talk | contribs) he/him 15:42, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Given the discussion over at VG Characters, I would look to get a mass support for all these moves, instead of piece-parting RMs like this. Masem (t) 16:58, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Eh, this actually looks quite a bit like an article 🦆 with far more detail than a typical list and multiple sections that aren't part of the list. I agree the current name isn't great, though. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:53, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Myceteae I think your oppose vote is the only one in the recent batch of moves. You may want to check the discussion linked below. Cheers, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:18, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Piotrus Thanks for the ping, I was not aware of these other discussions. These each had very low participation, often the same 1 or 2 editors. I'm not saying those were necessarily the wrong calls but I think they could easily have gone the other way with another participant or two and these do not represent broad consensus. This page (like many of the others) has lengthy lead, Development, and Reception sections. The level of detail and contextual/background information is much more detailed than a typical 'list'. WP doesn't have strict guidelines for the line between a list and an article. You cited WP:DUCK, which is what these determinations typically come down to and this looks very much like an article. I also largely agree with @Masem below. GA review is a more rigorous process than RM, with defined criteria. GA status is not an absolute barrier to title changes or other substantive changes. GA assessment is also not perfect. But if this article walked like a list and quacked like a list at the time of GA assessment it is unlikely to have passed. Thus the GA status is consistent with my assessment that this is appropriately titled and categorized as an article, not a list. I would support an alternative name such as Characters of the Myst series or Characters of the Myst franchise, similar to Characters of the Overwatch franchise (not sure if Myst qualifies as a 'franchise'). I do find the present title awkward. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:02, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per the discussion at WT:VGCHAR.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 14:12, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural oppose As pointed out at VGCHAR, this is a GA (not a FL), so changing the title to indicate its a list would be a problem. It would have to be demoted from a GA first. Masem (t) 14:37, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Masem Procedural question: what's the policy basis for the requirement of demotion from GA or inability of a "list of..." to be a GA? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:42, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] Under WP:GA?, what cannot be a GA: "Stand-alone lists, portals, sounds, and images: these items should be nominated for featured list and featured picture status, if applicable." Masem (t) 14:46, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Masem So why not nominate this for a Featured List at some point? Anyway, based on the policy cited, this may indeed merit a GAR, particularly if the GA status precludes us from fixing the name of this article... @Z1720 - penny for your thoughts (as the first person that comes to my mind as an expert, or at least someone more experienced then me, in GAN/GAR stuff?). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:55, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] At that point, you probably need to ask the editors with significant contributions to the articles if they want to change it. The point I raised at VGCHAR is that while the bulk of our character lists are likely not rated and should be "list of...", we shouldn't be insisting for absolute adhesion to that naming scheme where editors have or want to take the article towards a GA/FA route. Masem (t) 15:13, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Masem and Piotrus: A list article cannot be a GA. However, procedurally, my understanding is a GA does not have to go through a demotion before consensus declares it a list. If the consensus in this discussion states that this article is indeed a list, an editor can open a procedural GAR that states the article should be demoted because consensus states that it is a list article, then link to this discussion. I have not reviewed this article to determine if it's a list or not. Z1720 (talk) 16:13, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] I would not do that without getting the major editors that brought this to GA involved. It would be different if they no longer maintained the article, but if they are against that given the effort they put into to get it to GA, that would be a major problem. Masem (t) 16:42, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] @Masem: I would recommend notifying those major editors now of this discussion. Z1720 (talk) 16:54, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] That appears to be @David Fuchs: based on the GAN process. Masem (t) 17:09, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] I've gone ahead and placed an RM notice on David Fuchs's user talk page, for good measure. The GA review was in 2008. Looking at the last 2 years (as an arbitrary look-back period) David Fuchs is still the top contributor to the article. @Kung Fu Man, another top contributor, has already registered support for the proposed move. Courtesy ping to the other top contributors @Joshmaul @Captain Galaxy @S@bre @Mondoblasto @Rehevkor. I skipped the bots–apologies if I have missed anyone; please feel free to ping or notify others as appropriate. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 19:19, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] For the record I'm down with moving it if it can be left at GA, but if it can't then we're making more work for editors. I think there's a bit of confusion overall on that end.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:26, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] Comment/Oppose: I don't really have much to provide here in terms of a high-quality rationale as I don't know much about Myst; I'm only a top contributor for this article because I did a source archive scan once which had a large byte size. I'm only messaging because I was pinged. That being said by the look of the way the article is formatted, it feels a lot more like prose than an actual list, so in my opinion I would be incline to agree to MYCETEAE above and say I think this specific article should be left as is unless there is a decision to change it to a more list like format.Captain Galaxy 23:24, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is a useful article and far more than a list. Andrewa (talk) 02:15, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. When I skimmed through the page, it looked like more than a list to me. Look at the other sections. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 02:49, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. Until the article is verifiably able to be Featured List quality, it can be listed here just fine. Once it is of Featured List quality, I do believe that titling it like "List of" implies that it is a mere listing of things. "Characters of" and "List of" are often used interchangeably. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 07:55, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really have strong opinions on the list/article divide with characters; I will say that this was an improvement-in-place job from coming up on two decades ago, and I'm not sure once you more thoroughly sourced and condensed it, it couldn't just exist embedded in the main series page. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 18:07, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I'd also be in favor of reverting some of the other "non-controversial" moves proposed. This is imposing a consistency that doesn't exist. Both "List of..." and "Characters of..." forms are fine and the existence of "Characters of" is not a "problem" to be solved. WP:CONSISTENCY applies to apples-to-apples type situations; there's no expectation of consistency when article styles are not in fact the same. SnowFire (talk) 20:53, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Reassessment

Characters of Myst

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review Result: No efforts have been made to address the nominator's concerns. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:47, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged with citations needed for over half a year now; problem persists. In addition, questions have been raised about whether it is a list (lists are not GA-able usually). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:57, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.