Ghyll talk:Howzingery

I really think it's too confusing to have both a Rancticircheretic and a Rancticirchiretic in the same Ghyll, as a matter of gaming etiquette. Please pick another name. And if you in fact meant the latter, he was born in -76 EC and can't have filed a report two centuries ago. --John Cowan 13:38, 7 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Based on his adding of Ranc back to the Phantoms, it appears he DOES want to use YOUR Ranc, not a new person. He should a) remove the incorrect spelling (including phantom), b) pick a new phantom to meet his official citations requirement, and c) reconcile the "two centuries ago" fact. --Morbus Iff 14:02, 7 Jul 2005 (EDT)

To further make matters confusing, Lord Glosfordshier, a Jcowan entry, includes the incorrectly spelled version AND suggests he was from two centuries ago, probably where Dfaran is getting that little tip from. Jcowan: any opinions on how to fix this one? --Morbus Iff 14:04, 7 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Actually, it's not that bad. The documents of Glosfordshier were "hithertho suppressed", which doesn't place Ranc in that time period, merely that his work, recent or otherwise, is now invalid due to newly available information that originated from that period. So, in my quick five minute checking, we should be just back to fixing the "two centuries ago" fact in Howzingery. --Morbus Iff 14:07, 7 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Dfaran: I've removed the bum phantom and fixed the mispelling of Rancticirchiretic everywhere. Just gotta reconcile the "two centuries ago" fact and pick a replacement phantom. --Morbus Iff 14:10, 7 Jul 2005 (EDT)

I vote that we rename him Rantychattyheretic, since that's what I tend to call him when pronouncing the name--notwithstanding the fact that (my own) Rancticirchiretic article says "rannik", which is even easier. --Sean B. Palmer 19:27, 7 Jul 2005 (EDT)

I vote that we abolish long, hard-to-pronounce names, period. I mean, who comes up with this stuff? Don't they have better things to be doing? <grin> --Trousle Undrhil 20:07, 7 Jul 2005 (EDT)

I thought it a bit odd that a phantom had been left out for so long like that... Oy, back to the editing screen, then. --Dfaran L'Eniarc 20:42, 7 Jul 2005 (EDT)

All good now. The new pre-existing phantom is "Organization", since it was so easy to find a way to relate that to the article. Ran-wossname's papers have been forwarded in time, and everything should be as it should be. --Dfaran L'Eniarc 20:54, 7 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Ranwossname! Yes! Let's go with that! --Sean B. Palmer 20:58, 7 Jul 2005 (EDT)

Um, might I suggest you phantom that whole name, not just Organization? Because there are a lot of articles which have the word Organization in them and I doubt that this organization is related to all of them, unless you are either (a) trying to start a conspiracy or (b) hoping that someone will define Organization... --Trousle Undrhil 23:12, 7 Jul 2005 (EDT)