Lore talk:Revelry

Number of Realms

What is the source for the assertion that Sanguine controls one hundred thousand realms of Oblivion? None is listed. LID919 (talk) 05:21, 7 October 2014 (GMT)

It's from the Imperial Census of Daedra Lords, an OOG source. Thanks for bringing it up; I've added some references to the page. -- Hargrimm^(T) 13:39, 7 October 2014 (GMT)

Misinterpretation

I disagree that I misinterpreted the source. Plokun says "I have a scheduled stop in Sanguine's realm of Revelry." speaking of one realm, which is contradictory to everything else we hear of Sanguine's plane, that there is no one realm. What this would be implying, with how the page is currently written, is that there is one "hub" realm of which the others are connected, which is original research without a basis. Furthermore, Plokun uses lowercase "realm" and uppercase "Revelry", meaning Revelry is the specific name for one realm. As there is nothing to suggest that the Myriad Realms of Revelry are based in one hub realm called Revelry, I request that the page be reverted to my version where Revelry is one of the Myriad Realms. Mindtrait0r (talk) 15:24, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

"Realms of Revelry" and "realm of Revelry" are not two different concepts and should not be treated as such. It is also far from the only time that Princely realms that should be treated in the plural are instead referred to in the singular: the Colored Rooms, Evergloam, and Spiral Skein are similarly composed of multiple distict realms, but are regularly referred to as a singular realm or domain.

Plokun is simply being inaccurate in his language, and you are extrapolating. The realm of Revelry is the topic of this page. —⁠Legoless (talk) 16:04, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I will add that maybe my wording at the bottom could be improved to disavow ourselves from the idea of a "hub" realm, but it's hard to know what to do when the source refers to it in the singular. —⁠Legoless (talk) 16:09, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I just can't see where the authoritative-ness of this supposed inaccuracy is coming from. What are you referencing when you say that Plokun is wrong? Plokun's dialogue is the only instance of the terminology "realm of Revelry", so where is it that says they are not different concepts, as you claim? Mindtrait0r (talk) 16:12, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Occam's razor applies. It is highly unlikely that the realm of Revelry is a subset of the Realms of Revelry when it is much simpler to suppose they refer to the same place. Assuming otherwise is a logical leap I don't follow, based on this line of dialogue alone. —⁠Legoless (talk) 16:19, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

I object to the use of occam's razor here. It is not the past of least resistance to assume that Plokun is just wrong in what he's saying (or the how the subtitles are written). From how I see it, assuming that the dialogue is incorrect when there is no official objection to it and no reference to similar wording in the Realms of Revelry anywhere else is much more of leap than taking the format of the words at face value: realm is singular and lowercase, meaning it is naming one realm, that being Revelry. From there, placing Revelry in the Myriad Realms of Revelry would use occam's razor, as Sanguine only has one known plane of realms. Mindtrait0r (talk) 16:40, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Again, it's perfectly normal for realms that should be pluralised to be referred to in the singular. It seems we're at an impasse, because I can't see how this information can be noted on the page at all given our conflicting readings of what Plokun is saying. I'd welcome some further input from other editors on this. In the meantime, I might suggest moving this line to the Notes section, because I just can't agree with the assumptions that were being made on the previous version of this page. —⁠Legoless (talk) 16:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

The Realms of Revelry (plural) make up sanguine's Realm (singular). To visit his realm (singular) could mean to visit a specific "instance" such as Misty grove or to tour the whole of his Realm. It's unclear what the exact nature/mechanics of this visit was/were but I don't see this wording as necessarily implying anything about the nature of the realms or needing changing to plural when singular was given as that would suggest that it definitely was a visit to multiple instances.--Jinxmaster1 (talk) 17:48, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

(←) (edit conflict) Without reading the discussion in full, my interpretation would be that Plokun will be visiting Sanguine's realm. The name of Sanguine's realm is Revelry. It doesn't matter how many or which of the 100,000 individual facets of the realm are being visited, or whether or not they are named, because that's not the point.

Besides, if we take Todd's Truth in Sequence, this is the first time Sanguine's realm has been named by a character in-game, and the name that was given is Revelry. That is the First Truth. Second Truth is On the Nature of Oblivion, and that says Realms of Revelry. If we said Realms of the Deadlands, would that suddenly mean that one of Dagon's Deadlands is itself called Deadlands? Incidentally, Loremaster's Archive is the Third Truth, and therefore has to be interpreted from the First and Second. The logical interpretation from all sources taken in order of priority is that the realm is called Revelry, and the Myriad Realms of Revelry is it's full honorific title and style (like the Netherlands vs. Kingdom of the Netherlands). --Enodoc (talk) 18:00, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

seconded--Jinxmaster1 (talk) 12:36, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Personally I would be fine with renaming this page to Lore:Revelry based on the above interpretation, if that's the consensus. —⁠Legoless (talk) 15:06, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

With the above consensus in mind, I second the move. Mindtrait0r (talk) 18:50, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

The article has been renamed. —⁠Legoless (talk) 19:11, 21 February 2024 (UTC)