Online talk:Elven Ruins

Auridon

The ruins on Auridon are obviously not Ayleid. I've went though and changed their description to "elven". My first instinct would be to classify them as Aldmer, although apparently they were built by the Altmer: "There are obvious similarities between Altmer architecture and that of their cousins the Ayleids, but there are clear differences as well. High Elven architecture is cleaner and more direct, with less baroque ornamentation than that of the Wild Elves." Anyway, since this distinction exists, it might be worth noting on this page under the Auridon section. It might even be better to move this to Online:Elven Ruins, since we don't know what the Library of Dusk is. —Legoless (talk) 19:50, 9 September 2014 (GMT)

Are the differences at all noticeable in-game? Would it be possible to work out just by looking at it whether the Library of Dusk is Ayleid or Altmer? I think a note under the Auridon section will probably suffice; we don't need to reclassify 43 definitely-Ayleid ruins just because the other 5 (or maybe 6) in the list are not actually Ayleid. We can always re-evaluate at a later time if they introduce any of Summerset in a future update. --Enodoc (talk) 08:53, 11 September 2014 (GMT)

Nope, no difference. In fact, upon further investigation it seems even the developers weren't entirely sure what the ruins and who "the Ancients" were meant to be. Auridon Explored says that the ruins were built by Ayleids fleeing Cyrodiil, which is completely contradictory for places like Tanzelwil and Castle Rilis. The Eye of the Ancients at Greenwater Cove is repeatedly called Aldmeri, even though it uses welkynd stones. This Ayleid/Altmer/Aldmer mess could probably be best explained in lorespace, so on second thoughts maybe leaving this page alone would be fine. —Legoless (talk) 14:32, 11 September 2014 (GMT)

My theory on the Ancients is that they were Aldmer (not at the time either Altmer or Ayleid). That makes Errinorne, Buraniim, Hightide Keep and Greenwater Cove's defenses all Aldmeri, Castle Rilis we know is Altmeri (and doesn't use the Ayleid Ruin icon), then you may consider Quendeluun and Torinaan as Ayleid (as I don't think they are specifically referenced anywhere else, and that's what their icon is), which leaves Ezduiin and Tanzelwil as the odd-ones-out, using an Ayleid Ruin icon like the others, but being Ald/tmeri like Castle Rilis, however being older than that. --Enodoc (talk) 14:52, 11 September 2014 (GMT)

The Auridon Explored chapter that mentions the "fleeing Ayleids" arriving on the northern tip of the island is actually found at Castle Rilis. Also, Naarcaano calls Ezduiin an Ayleid ruin in dialogue despite the contradictory evidence. I find it hard to reconcile the Ayleids being on the Summerset Isles at all, especially since the devs took the liberty of renaming all the Ayleid Wells to "Aetherial Wells". The lore just seems terribly sloppy to me, so I don't think there's any way around simply outlining the confusion and letting the reader decide. —Legoless (talk) 15:08, 11 September 2014 (GMT)

Fair enough. Seems they forgot some of their own lore again... :P Enodoc (talk) 17:09, 11 September 2014 (GMT)

To close on the Library of Dusk: it's Ayleid, as that's what the journal entry for the related quests says (I just started it). --Enodoc (talk) 18:23, 11 September 2014 (GMT)

Good catch. —Legoless (talk) 18:28, 11 September 2014 (GMT)

I remember that in one of the Ask Us Anything events there was a direct statement: "The Ayleid ruins can be found in all of Tamriel except Skyrim, Morrowind and Summerset". -Vordur Steel-Hammer2 (talk) 02:20, 12 September 2014 (GMT)

Do you happen to remember which one it was? I couldn't find it on our list. —Legoless (talk) 12:41, 12 September 2014 (GMT)

Never mind, found it. I wonder if we should host this info somewhere. —Legoless (talk) 12:43, 12 September 2014 (GMT)

It would belong to the lore article on Ayleid Ruins, but there isn't any yet. Optionally, it could also be an appropriate place for that map I made. -Vordur Steel-Hammer2 (talk) 15:06, 12 September 2014 (GMT)

Edit Break 1

(←) Greetings. I apologize for my English. Resurrecting this discussion. As Ayleid theory is now proved untrue, how should Auridon (Aldmer) ruins be categorized now? They all still have page trail - Ayleid Ruins, but aren't listed on the page "Ayleid Ruins". They also can't be found on the page "Online:Places" (nor on the page "Online:Ruins"). Something related - there is Labyrinth in Greenshade, which is marked as Ayleid, but it's obviously Altmer in origin as we can see on the screenshot. I propose that trail should be updated so it would contain Ayleid Ruins and both Aldmer and Altmer Ruins as well. Or, at least, renamed as "Elven Ruins" (and "Online:Places" updated). Phoenix Neko (talk) 16:21, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Yeah this should probably be changed to Elven Ruins, although it's less urgent since the Aldmer and Altmer ruins are listed on pages like ON:Quest Hubs now. Alternatively, we could keep a page specifically for Ayleids, since this page currently lists more than just those places which use the arch icon. —Legoless (talk) 16:26, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

"the Aldmer and Altmer ruins are listed on pages like ON:Quest Hubs" - wow, that's unexpected. I would never think of searching them there instead of "Online:Places#Places by style". The problem with "Elven Ruins" is that Dwemer Ruins are Elven too. Still, the trail on Aldmer ruins is "Online: Places: Auridon / Quest Hubs / Ayleid Ruins" which is misleading. Phoenix Neko (talk) 16:47, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Now that this page is a Style type list, and since the Auridon ruins are of the same style, the best thing to do would probably be to bring them back here. The page is still primarily defined by the Ayleid Ruin icon, so we shouldn't go splitting off other places which use that icon and are of that style. Just like Forts aren't actually all forts (some of them are towers), and Gates certainly aren't all gates (Driladan Pass doesn't even have any gates), this article would be the list of everything that has the Ayleid ruin style, which would include Aldmeri ruins. This would be detailed at the top of the page like we do on Forts, eg: "This is a list of all the Ayleid Ruins (including Aldmeri and other ancient Elven sites) in Elder Scrolls Online." As we discussed before with regards to Quest Hubs, gamespace is for useful gameplay information, and that utility supersedes lore accuracy. --Enodoc (talk) 17:34, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

So would we keep listing places like Online:Pelda Tarn here, despite them not using that icon? —Legoless (talk) 17:50, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

@Enodoc. Gameplay and lore aren't mutually exclusive. There should be a way to show useful in gameplay terms information and make categorization lore-friendly. Phoenix Neko (talk) 18:03, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

@Legoless: Indeed we would, since that was how we defined inclusion in a Style type; something that is visually an Ayleid ruin, regardless of its icon. But the Style types themselves were defined by the icons; the only style types that were not icon-defined were ones that had no icon to start with, or whose icon was directly a Class type.

All of the ruins in Auridon are visually Ayleid ruins, and use the Ayleid ruin icon. It's solely a lore-based technicality that they're not actually Ayleid in construction. What gameplay utility would be gained by listing these non-Ayleid "Ayleid Ruins" somewhere else? Someone who is searching for that type of location isn't going to think about looking on a separate list because of technicalities that you are required to read into to understand. However, I would not be opposed to renaming the entire category as "Elven Ruins" per the original proposal; what I am opposed to is splitting the list into "Ayleid" and "Otherwise". --Enodoc (talk) 18:28, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Renaming to Elven Ruins might be a good idea, I'd support that. Tib (talk) 19:00, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Edit Break 2

The general consensus so far then seems to be to recategorise all of these to Elven Ruins. I've got something else to bring up on CP about Lighthouses, so I'll mention this at the same time to broaden the audience. --Enodoc (talk) 11:04, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Accuracy versus Iconography

I was of the understanding that this page was supposed to be listing specifically those places that we define as Ayleid Ruins under the summary type parameter based on the in-game icon (or discretionary for unmarked locations), not for any and all locations which could conceivably be Ayleid Ruins. Those have a different type, and are already listed elsewhere by that type. --Enodoc (talk) 15:43, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

I think the confusion here stems from Online:Dwemer Ruins, which has listed different types since November. These type pages already have limited use, so confusing the matter more by adding lore-based locations isn't really helpful. That said, listing Auridon ruins as Ayleid or excluding obvious Dwemer ruins from the list page is equally as confusing... Personally I'd like to see us disregard icons and lump all "quest objective" locations together, separated from the more clearly defined dungeons, world bosses, points of interest, etc. As we've seen, a dolmen is not always a dolmen and a city is not always a city. —Legoless (talk) 16:22, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

So you think about one big list of quest objective locations? Because I agree, the types of icons for these don't make any sense at all in ESO. --Vordur Steel-Hammer (TINV1K) 16:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Actually, I'll just write up a proposal for the CP to clarify, rather than taking over this discussion. —Legoless (talk) 16:42, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

I'll wait for this to drop in on CP, but I maintain that type should be the distinguishing factor here. We already mentioned above how we could do the Auridon ones on this page (but never actually did it). --Enodoc (talk) 17:15, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Proposed. —Legoless (talk) 17:39, 29 June 2015 (UTC)