Talk:Spirits of the Wild

From Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

So what exactly happens to whatever a spirit represents when Jormag "eats" it? Are the spirits just NPC dudes like Bear in EOTN or are there going to be huge consequences in nature? Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ аІiсә User Aliceandsven 1.png ѕνәи Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 19:55, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Lol personally I thought he was joking when he said it ate the spirit... spirits of the wild can't be eaten... can they?? :O 75.90.149.4 19:57, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Demons and scarabs can devour spirits, I see no reason why a dragon who is far more powerful can't. And I would assume the same thing would happen to the spirit as when normally devoured - it sits in its belly (until digested?). They are spirits like Bear in EN (which is in fact a Spirit of the Wild), but I think these spirits are more like the Avatars, i.e., like any other living being (or spirit?) with power. -- Konig/talk 23:06, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Does that mean mountain eagles are extinct now? My favorite pet in original Guild Wars. 216.96.9.168 04:57, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
No... how the heck does a single powerful spirit being eaten mean that the race is dead? It's like saying killing a single human spirit will cause the entire human race to go extinct... -- Konig/talk 04:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Well... If Jormag eats spirits how are we guna kill it? It would be intresting if the storyline turned to where u cant kill the dragon and it sends u to the Mists somehow. Like the vortex in the Desolations that takes u to The Relm of Torment in Nightfall. -- Slash, BURN!, Delete... 06:53, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Uh... how does eating spirits prevent killing it? We kill Kehpet Marrowfeast and we kill demons which eat spirits, how does the same fact make Jormag invincible? And no, it wouldn't be that interesting actually... There's no reason to go into the Mists... -- Konig/talk 07:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Except for PvP =3 --Naoroji User Naoroji Golem - Green.jpg 08:25, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
And ectos. --Kyoshi User Kyoshi sig.png (Talk) 12:22, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
I somehow doubt ectos will be limited to UW in GW2, either they won't be needed for anything (i.e., useless), or they will be as they should: dropped from anything made of ectoplasm (e.g., ghosts). -- Konig/talk 20:43, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
I thought that was sort of the point though - it's not just any powerful single spirit, it's like the essence of that species and what it represents in the wild. My guess is that, if these Norn Spirits really are being destroyed by Jormag, the game plot will show it by referencing the food web being messed up, populations falling and so on. What's the source for that information btw? 90.206.126.31 00:03, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Source. And I never got that from what the Spirits of the Wild are. I only got that they are guiding powerful spirits - nothing ever mentions them being the essence of their species. -- Konig/talk 02:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

unfair[edit]

"Followers of Wolf scorn Snow Leopard’s stealth as “cowardice,” and the shamans of Bear have been known to mistrust Raven’s adherents, calling their deceptions dishonorable and weak." That's nice. How about some negative characteristics of Wolf & Bear, please? I really hope they don't make those two out to be perfect.-- Shew 15:17, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

The ravens and leopards know the follies of the wolf and bear. If you didnt guess it then you are not a raven, If you eventually figure it then you may be a wolf. If you never get it then, at most, you are a bear and use your head to bash trees to get at grubs. Back to Shew's comment; for completeness, yes it should be added that the wolf is a coward alone and the bear is a brainless brute. I have no citations for this though. --Lord Braska 16:52, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Because wolf isn't a coward and bear isn't brainless. It's just that wolf see's strength in numbers (this isn't cowardice, it's tactics), and bear teaches that if you can't be strong by yourself then you aren't strong. Got nothing to do with bashing heads to trees. Konig/talk 01:35, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Norn Exodus[edit]

  • During the norn exodus to the south, Bear was one of the four spirits to aid the norn in their time of need. Because of Bear's help, she became a prominent deity of Hoelbrak.
  • During the norn exodus to the south, Raven was one of the four spirits to aid the norn in their time of need. Because of Raven's help, he became a prominent deity of Hoelbrak.
  • During the norn exodus to the south, Snow Leopard was one of the four spirits to aid the norn in their time of need. Because of Snow Leopard's help, she became a prominent deity of Hoelbrak.
  • During the norn exodus to the south, Wolf was one of the four spirits to aid the norn in their time of need. Because of Wolf's help, he became a prominent deity of Hoelbrak.
  • When Jormag awoke, Dolyak was one of the four spirits who stayed behind to give the norn time during the norn exodus to the south by fighting Jormag.
  • When Jormag awoke, Eagle was one of the four spirits who stayed behind to fight the Elder Dragon to give the norn time to flee south.
  • When Jormag awoke, Owl was one of the four spirits who stayed behind to fight the Elder Dragon in order to give the norn time during the norn exodus to the south.
  • When Jormag awoke, Wolverine was one of the four spirits who stayed behind to fight the Elder Dragon in order to give the norn time to travel south.

Do I need to learn how to count again, or are there 8 spirits who helped fight Jormag instead of 4? - Michiel412 17:05, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

From the looks of it, 4 helped the fight and 4 helped the flight. Lysander 17:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
That's indeed a good possibility - Michiel412 17:36, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
4 helped the norn directly. 4 fought the dragon, helping the norn indirectly. The first four are credited to helping the norn due to the directness of their aid and for showing where to establish Hoelbrak. -- Konig/talk 23:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
In new interview Ree Soesbee make an interesting comment: "And so the Spirits, several of them – four of them – Snow Leopard, Raven, Wolf and Bear, said “We will lead them south to a place where they can grow strong again. Where a hero will rise among them and come and lead them against Jormag.” Some of the spirits who had taken the most damage or who was most suited to hold back Jormag, such as Owl, said “We’ll stay behind and we’ll do what we can here.”" The spirits believe as the norn do that one day the norn will produce a hero who will lead them against Jormag. Ramei Arashi 02:56, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Here's a link to the interview Ramei mentioned. What also stood out to me was this: "When those spirits weren’t heard from again, it became pretty clear that they were destroyed or otherwise taken out by the dragon." Redshift 11:10, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
SPOILER Icebrood Saga E1- Based on the contents of A Burden, this page needs to be updated to include the fact that Asgeir was convinced to go south by Jormag. 74.128.79.101 20:12, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Hogwarts[edit]

Anyone else look at the four high spirits and see the Hogwarts houses? We have strength and self-reliance, knowledge and cunning, stealth and laughter in the face of danger, and loyalty and strength in numbers. Sounds remarkably familiar. Lysander 21:02, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

They're fairly generic hero personality archetypes. --ஸ Kyoshi User Kyoshi sig2.png 21:07, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

New screenie[edit]

I forgot how to upload. Shows the four norn forms.

Spirit of Hare[edit]

I have no idea how to add a new Spirit Page to the list, but it was obvious from the Beta that the Hare is a Spirit of the Wild. There is a renown heart related to it and there's also the Jackalope which is one of the most awesome NPCs I have ever seen... Draconik 19:22, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Though if you look carefully at the norn there... they're a tad bit.... looney. Konig/talk 21:48, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
It's still a Spirit...Draconik 10:17, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Terminology[edit]

The terminology we had so far (Animal Spirit) is barely present ingame, if at all. In the other hand, the alternative I'm pushing forward (Spirit of Animal) is consistently presented across multiple sources.

Proposed split pages:

Compiled evidence as for why the "Spirit of Animal" model is the right term for the deities:

Compiled evidence as for why the "Animal Spirit" model is the wrong term for the deities:

These don't look like direct manifestations of the Spirits of the Wild, but some sort of avatars or representations, and thus they should remain separate from the deity's page, further increasing the need for a different terminology.--Lon-ami (talk) 17:42, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

I fail to see why you must make a separate discussion topic for the same thing. But anyways... In those same sources, and more, as I mentioned on your talk page, we see them using "<animal> Spirit" and just "<Animal>" as well, and far, far more frequently.
On top of that, Spirit of Wolf and Veteran Bear Spirit NPCs are not the Spirit of the Wilds but avatars of them, just like the Owl Spirit NPC is - if they're even related, that is. There is only one name provided to the Spirits of the Wild that have NPCs, and it is just "<Animal> Spirit".
And yes, this is just another case of ArenaNet's typically consistent inconsistency in how they go about referring to the Spirits of the Wild, avatars of the Spirits of the Wild, and animal spirits unrelated to them. But ultimately there was nothing incorrect about the old article naming habits, and your actions have merely split four articles about the Spirits of the Wild into two when they're covering the same exact things (namely, Bear Spirit, Wolf Spirit, Snow Leopard Spirit, and Minotaur Spirit). And no, those are not mere avatars - it's pretty explicitly stated they're not, triply so for Minotaur Spirit. Konig (talk) 18:52, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
I'll note, I don't really care what the articles for the Spirits of the WIld that don't have NPCs are called. Whether it's Wurm Spirit, Spirit of Wurm, Wurm (spirit), or Wurm (Spirit of the Wild) makes no difference. They're all equally valid. The issue I had that I brought this up was the false notion that one reason was correct and the others were false; and there being the issue of pointlessly splitting an article on the same topic into two separate things. The latter being the much bigger issue. Konig (talk) 18:55, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Nowhere in the links I provided above does the "Animal Spirit" model appear. Not even once. If you look across the whole wiki (which you clearly didn't) you'll notice it barely appears inside sourced ingame material.
Also, how do you know Bear Spirit and Wolf Spirit are the right ones but Veteran Bear Spirit and [[Spirit of Wolf (NPC)]] aren't?
I would rather keep the religion/deity itself separate from whatever incarnations the spirits might have manifested as.--Lon-ami (talk) 11:24, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, nowhere, except the NPCs themselves.
For the veteran bear spirit - because dialogue. For the Spirit of Wolf, different models (white fur versus grey) and lack of context (tbh, maybe it is the same, and the Spirits of the Wild have multiple appearances, but we have nothing to suggest that it is the Spirit of the Wild itself). We got dev confirmations regarding the three that show up in Romke's Last Voyage when asked why Raven was the only one not shown but instead represented (iirc, it was Matthew Medina who was asked, and he didn't know the answer). When the "manifestation" as you proclaim it to be is the spirit itself, then there's no reason to split. It would be like splitting the article Kormir in two, one for the lore and one for the mechanical NPC. It's silly and does nothing but makes things harder for the reader. Konig (talk) 11:56, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
And nowhere outside those NPC names themselves, which we all know don't follow a reliable naming model, since they always uppercase nouns, adjectives, and adverbs. Or do we have to revisit Druid (group) and Settler (group)?
So, the Veteran Bear Spirit is "a spirit sent by Bear to challenge your might", but how do you actually know the rest aren't exactly the same? We know the human gods are individual entities who manifest themselves through avatars, whom we can distinguish easily from the deities they represent. We can't do that with the Spirits of the Wild in any way whatsoever. For all we know they might not even be entities, but abstract concepts much like the elements.
I think this would be the ideal model: (Wolf as the example)
  • Spirit of Wolf includes background lore, plus a summary of the events surrounding each associated NPC, which are mentioned in the "Appearances" section. In this case, [[Spirit of Wolf (NPC)]] and Wolf Spirit are mentioned.
  • [[Spirit of Wolf (NPC)]] and Wolf Spirit are considered ghost NPCs. Their pages describe the story dealing with those specific incarnations in detail.
  • [[Cult of Wolf]] describes the organization formed by the closest followers of Wolf, including its members and places of worship, as well as a summary of the stories involving the overall organization. In Wolf's case, the death and replacement of Wolf's havroun is mentioned.
As for merging [[Cult of Wolf]] into Spirit of Wolf, I'm not strictly against it, but first we would need to establish a model for all religious organizations, and include [[Category:Human churches]]‏‎ as well.
And please, stop moving things around until the matter is settled.--Lon-ami (talk) 22:12, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
There's no relation between this situation and the Druid and Settler groups. Also I'm not the one who moved things around, so don't blame me on that (next time, check the user name). I've already talked to who did that and convinced them to sit and wait, tried to get them to bring up their views here though.
The issue is that Wolf Spirit and Spirit of Wolf are about the exact same subject. It would be like making an article for Ceara and then an article for Scarlet Briar and then an article of Scarlet Briar (armored) and Scarlet Briar (hooded) or Kormir (human) and Goddess of Truth. It's stupid and pointless and does nothing but hinder the readers and feed them false information. The only time we split pages despite being the same being in lore is heavy spoilers (such as Glint's Egg and Aurene), or because it screws up with vendor templates (Scholar Glenna). This is neither. No split. Konig (talk) 12:02, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
I can hardly blame you when I'm not even addressing you in the first place, or do you happen to be the one suggesting to merge cult and spirit?
You keep ignoring all the arguments of the discussion so far, so let's review them again:
  • Spirit of Animal is mentioned far more than Animal Spirit. Animal Spirit is pretty much nonexistent in lore texts.
  • We have no proof the ghosts we meet ingame are the actual spirit themselves, instead of just minions or servants. One case (Veteran Bear Spirit) is even specifically stated not to be.
Avatar of Balthazar and Champion Avatar of Balthazar are two different entities with two different pages for a reason.--Lon-ami (talk) 17:02, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
"I can hardly blame you when I'm not even addressing you in the first place" I'm the only person besides you in this discussion. Hard to notice in text that you turned to talk to the wall when you don't announce so in said text.
"Spirit of Animal is mentioned far more than Animal Spirit" 1 time versus 1 time per case. "far more" indeed.
"Animal Spirit is pretty much nonexistent in lore texts." Maybe, but that's the NPC's name. You'll note that when there is no NPC, I do not oppose the article being named "Spirit of <Animal>".
"We have no proof the ghosts we meet ingame are the actual spirit themselves," except that the entire context of the story steps tells us that they are. Especially for Minotaur Spirit.
"Avatar of Balthazar and Champion Avatar of Balthazar are two different entities with two different pages for a reason." And Wolf Spirit and [[Spirit of Wolf (NPC)]] are being two entirely different entities with two different pages. However, Spirit of Wolf and Wolf Spirit are the exact same entity, just as Balthazar and [[God of War]] is the exact same entity. Konig (talk) 17:39, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Are you going to keep ignoring proof? It's not 1 vs 1, Animal Spirit is literally nonexistent outside few dialogue lines.
Also, you still haven't answered, which is the true one, [[Spirit of Wolf (NPC)]] or Wolf Spirit?--Lon-ami (talk) 22:51, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping but I have nothing more to add to this terminology discussion other than I look forward to reaching a consensus, perhaps we should create a poll since this is, after all, a community platform.
I do, however, advocate for having one single article that condenses all the information, instead of having several articles scattering all the information around the wiki. I'm talking about the recent changes on pages relating to Spirits of the Wild, which is why I did what I did on my recent edits, prioritising the oldest pages regardless of name.
I most sincerely hope you agree with these consolidating changes, regardless of how the articles end up being named, because I see no reason to have 1 page for the Spirit, 1 for the npc in personal story, 1 for an npc in the open world (wolf only), and 1 for the cult (While we're on it, I advocate for 'followers' since that's the term most frequently used ingame, and not 'cult' regardless of everyone's personal opinion of either word). Warming Hearth (talk) 23:08, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
If we keep NPCs and deity separate, I agree with merging each spirit's page with its cult.--Lon-ami (talk) 09:54, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Here's an example of how it would look like: Spirit of Raven (The cult part would be renamed when the discussion below is over).--Lon-ami (talk) 11:19, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I haven't ignored anything, though I'm not surprised you're singing the same ol' song when people disagree with you. Rule of thumb on the wiki, NPC name takes priority, always. As for "which is the true one", I have answered, several times by now. Your lack of memory or reading comprehension is not the same as me not answering. Wolf Spirit is the real Spirit of the Wild - we have zero context for what the Spirit of Wolf npc is, but it is a different model than the actual Spirit of the Wild. Konig (talk) 23:32, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

You keep ignoring and twisting the proof I provided, yet you have zero proof Wolf Spirit is the true one.--Lon-ami (talk) 09:54, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
I actually stated multiple times a dev confirmed it. I dug it up for you. Not as concrete as I recall, but he accepts that the three are the spirits themselves in traditional "canon until we say otherwise" fashion. Konig (talk) 11:09, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Looks like a personal opinion to me. He's trying to explain why, but he doesn't give a definitive answer. This part "Again, I can't say that was the intent, but that's how I see it." makes it pretty clear.
I say we keep the NPC pages separate, and consolidate the overall lore into the Spirit of Animal pages (bonus point for correct syntax). If you still want to merge them, the correct name should take priority.--Lon-ami (talk) 11:19, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
That's not how the wiki works. NPC and its lore go together: [[1]] [[2]] [[3]] whether you decide to say Pale Mother, Mother Tree, or Avatar of the the Pale Tree, the NPC is called Avatar of the Tree and that's how the article has to be titled Warming Hearth (talk) 11:23, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
So following on this I'll remove the tags I placed suggesting to rename the articles that were already named as the npc Warming Hearth (talk) 11:27, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Lon-ami, you keep proclaiming that "Spirit of Animal" is the 'correct syntax', but if you read throughout the dialogue of Rage of the Minotaurs and A Trap Foiled, which you cited for proof that Minotaur is "Spirit of Minotaur", you will find that the term "Minotaur Spirit" is used 6 and 4 times respectively, while "Spirit of Minotaur" is used 1 and 7 times respectively. And in the first instance we have this: "Vidkun declared the next meal should be the Minotaur Spirit itself." and "their ultimate goal is to capture the Spirit of Minotaur and feed it to their leader's pet dragon minion" - both are stating the same thing (the former is dialogue from a Son of Svanir, the latter is the story journal summary).
In other words, "Spirit of Animal" is equally valid and interchangeable with "Animal Spirit". There is no "correct syntax" between those two, and simply "Animal" (which is the most common).
The dialogue is also full out proof that Minotaur Spirit is the Spirit of the Wild, without any hint of a doubt.
And as has been stressed repeatedly, we do not split pages unless 1) it's a different lore subject, 2) it's about massive spoilers, or 3) wiki gadget complications. And none of those three apply to these.
As for the Romke's Final Voyage being the spirits or not, you're cherrypicking the developer's response and pulling quotes out of context. When he said "I can't say that was the intent", he's talking about the reason why Raven doesn't show, not whether or not the other three are the actual Spirits of the Wild. Konig (talk) 21:23, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, and outside said story mission (where there is a NPC which they would obviously refer to by its ingame reference), the Animal Spirit model is not used anywhere in the whole game, specially in lore texts. Go, look for sources yourself, I'll be waiting. It's fun to disapprove others without providing any research yourself.
If you don't like splits, we can always merge Wolf Spirit into Spirit of Wolf. Correct syntax, and appears earlier in the game, so it should hold precedence over the other one anyway.
I still prefer to treat these NPCs as avatars. If both Avatar of the Tree/Pale Tree and gww:Vision of Glint/gww:Glint can be treated as different entities, then why can't we do the same here? It would solve the issues with Vision of Raven in the first place, and we would no longer need to discuss the nature of these NPCs, whether they are deities or not.--Lon-ami (talk) 16:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
You don't seem to understand. Whether or not it's used often is irrelevant to the fact that it's still used and is thus also "correct". The popularity of one thing does not negate the existence of another. And obviously I'm saying the pages - where applicable - needs to be merged. But where there are actual NPCs, the article must be named the same as the NPC.
And you may prefer to treat the NPCs as avatars, but doing so is simply incorrect. The Avatar of the Tree and Pale Tree are to separate entities; so is the Vision of Glint and Glint in GW1; merging them would be like merging Balthazar with Avatar of Balthazar. But Minotaur Spirit is no mere avatar, it is the Spirit of the Wild itself; the personal story outright states such several times over - no ands, ifs, or buts about it. Proclaiming otherwise is simply false. Minotaur Spirit should be the article everything about the "Spirit of Minotaur" goes onto. And as linked, a dev has agreed that Bear Spirit, Wolf Spirit, and Snow Leopard Spirit are the actual Spirits of the Wild themselves (while being unsure why Vision of Raven was used instead of a "Raven Spirit"), which means until retcon that's canon lore. We cannot simply go "oh, well, I don't like this bit of lore because it's arguably confusing, so we'll document it differently." That's when you enter the realm of fandom, and not canon. We on the wiki document canon as it stands. And it was accurate to canon until you messed things up, Lon-ami. Konig (talk) 17:21, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Your beloved Animal Spirit model does not exist beyond the names of some inconsistent obscure story NPCs (and story missions explicitly referencing the Minotaur Spirit NPC). Still waiting for you to find references to the term in any ingame text. Less talking, more sources. Provide the proof for your arguments; and for every single spirit, not just the ones you happen to like.
That developer didn't confirm anything, he explicitly stated he couldn't tell if that was the intent, and only provided his personal viewpoint. You keep running on circles and going back to settled matters.
Still waiting for sources. I provided mine above, five days ago. Provide yours and stop wasting everyone's time.--Lon-ami (talk) 18:56, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
So I need to quote again? Okay. From Rage of the Minotaurs:
"The tracks were definitely made by the Minotaur Spirit. "
"Not a chance. I won't let anyone harm the Minotaur spirit."
"It doesn't matter if you know. Jormag sent us a champion and we've been feeding it minotaurs. Vidkun declared the next meal should be the Minotaur Spirit itself."
"That would explain the Minotaur spirit's rage."
From A Trap Foiled:
"Protect the Minotaur Spirit from the Sons of Svanir."
"Hey! The Minotaur spirit is under our protection. Lower your weapons and back away."
From Minotaur Rampant:
"Along with Eir, Garm, and the Minotaur Spirit, I defeated Vidkun and his corrupted dragon minion."
From gww:Flames of the Bear Spirit
"We must first commune with the bear spirit and seek counsel."
"The bear spirit is the strength of the mountains."
How much more proof do you need when the personal story, and even GW1, over multiple instances, repeatedly use that naming system? Konig (talk) 21:30, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
You're quoting direct references to the NPC. They aren't talking about the spirit, but the NPC avatar besides them. Once they stop talking about the manifestation itself, they swap to Spirit of Minotaur.
You really love minotaur, but where are the references to Bear Spirit, Owl Spirit, Raven Spirit, Snow Leopard Spirit, and Wolf Spirit? Are they ever called by that name?
Let me guess, no. You had to go back to GW1 to find it even once, and inside the title of a quest (by the way, all quests in GW1 are capitalized).
  • Deity: Animal, Spirit of Animal.
  • Avatar: Spirit Animal, Vision of Animal.
Just keep them separate.--Lon-ami (talk) 13:30, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
That NPC is the Spirit. Proof https://i.imgur.com/9rY1hSm.png from https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Wild_Spirits
Where is your proof for saying the NPC is an avatar? Read the quests, all the time they say the npc is the spirit itself. Warming Hearth (talk) 13:40, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Addendum: And as you can see, https://i.imgur.com/GQBJ2du.png from https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/A_Trap_Foiled, both terms are used interchangeably.This dialogue also proves that your splits for the other spirits are also pointless. In the game, the npc and the spirit are the same thing, the npc IS the spirit. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Warming Hearth (talk).
Lon-ami, they are talking about the spirit in every situation I quoted. Go to the links, read the full dialogue if you don't believe me. For Minotaur, you can even just look to the first quotes I pulled from Rage of the Minotaurs. Your denial is not the same as canon lore. Konig (talk) 15:19, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
The Spirit of Minotaur (deity) radiates through the Minotaur Spirit (avatar), just like Balthazar radiates through the Avatar of Balthazar.
It's not a ghost-spirit of a random mortal minotaur, it's an avatar-spirit of the Spirit of Minotaur.
There is still not a single reference to most of them as Animal Spirit. Still waiting for the sources (which you refuse to provide, because they don't exist), and still waiting for conclusive proof [[Spirit of Wolf (NPC)]] shouldn't hold precedence over Wolf Spirit, just because you happen to like one more than the other.
You're the ones in denial of reality here. Animal Spirit does not exist outside minimal NPC name references, while Spirit of Animal is commonplace across written lore, dialogues, and item descriptions.--Lon-ami (talk) 13:51, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
You don't consume a god-like being by devouring its avatar. Both "Spirit of Minotaur" and "Minotaur Spirit" is used in the exact same context, as I pointed out. Konig (talk) 16:32, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
And as I pointed out, Animal Spirit does not exist outside the NPC context, which means it's specifically distinguishing between both of them.
Why is Wolf Spirit more valid than [[Spirit of Wolf (NPC)]]?--Lon-ami (talk) 16:53, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
(Reset indent) "Animal Spirit does not exist outside the NPC context, which means it's specifically distinguishing between both of them." No, it doesn't.
"Why is Wolf Spirit more valid than Spirit of Wolf (NPC)?" Because one's confirmed the Spirit of the Wild, and the other is speculative. Get a dev to say it's the Wolf Spirit, and we can merge the two. Otherwise, we shouldn't treat it as avatar nor Spirit of the Wild. Get a dev to deny Scott's statement, and we can say the other three are not Spirits of the Wild, but to say they're not is currently against our sole source saying that it does. Konig (talk) 17:01, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
The dev clearly stated he wasn't sure about it, so I wouldn't take his word that seriously.
Anyway, this conversation isn't going anywhere pretty much since it began, so I'm calling a draw until more people join in. I'm leaving the split tag there until there's a firm decision.
Just one last change, if we're including multiple names (also known as), I would live the simple name as the primary one. So, "Animal, also known as Spirit of Animal or Animal Spirit, is one of the major/minor Spirits of the Wild.".--Lon-ami (talk) 20:04, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
New finds: During the Means to an End story instance, Romke's Horn will summon multiple copies of Bear Spirit, Raven Spirit, Snow Leopard Spirit, or Wolf Spirit, depending on your character biography.
I'll say it again if it wasn't obvious: Multiple copies. This reinforces my overall argument in the thread so far, and strengthens the reasons for the split: The "Animal Spirits" ARE NOT the deities, unless the Spirits of the Wild have the magical ability to multiply themselves like mesmers. This proves Bear Spirit, Raven Spirit, Snow Leopard Spirit, and Wolf Spirit are exactly the same as Owl Spirit.--Lon-ami (talk) 15:18, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Those that spawn in that story instance are not the Spirit of the Wild. Those that spawn in Romke's Final Voyage, however, all show to be such. Who know, ArenaNet is consistently inconsistent with what they do. (that's sarcasm, btw; anyone with half a brain working on the wiki for at least a month would learn they're constantly inconsistent to the point it's a fucking joke in the community).
Please refrain from more unnecessary changes that alters the format of articles (that article's sections are now different from the others'). Everybody is focused on getting documentations for Dragon Bash done at the moment, so discussion will stall elsewhere, including here. Konig (talk) 19:13, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
They have the same name, same model, and same game id (with same skills). Here's a screenshot.
Now, how are you gonna add these into the wiki? Make a duplicate page?
You've been grasping at straws this whole discussion, and the evidences keep piling and piling.--Lon-ami (talk) 23:30, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Ignoring the needless and inaccurate direct attack, I question how you know they're the "same game id (with same skills)", esp. the latter given one doesn't attack anything at all. That said, based on youtube videos, the Bear Spirit and Raven Spirit are not spectral at all ([4] and [5] respectively). Granted these videos are dated and might not be optimal graphics, so I'm currently running through that for all four spirit options. But so far, all this tells me is that we have a case of consistent inconsistency; most likely two different devs using the same NPC thinking they were different things. Getting a direct dev confirmation may be the sole solution to getting this cleared up. Konig (talk) 19:42, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
You know well enough where it comes from: the game files. And yeah, those videos are from the beta, some of the visual effects were disabled back then.
As for the "consistent inconsistency", I'd rather take the Ockham's Razor route. They are not the deities, period. This would be the end result:
As for Minotaur, we can't reach a decisive conclusion, and since there isn't a lot of information on him, I agree with keeping it merged, at least for now.--Lon-ami (talk) 14:52, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
No, I don't know it comes from the game files. Because we don't have legit access to them, and every dat-diver I've talked to, including That_Shaman who's no doubt the best of them, says they're a huge pain to sort through without a proper directory. And from personal experience of model hunting, I agree with that. So I'm very much doubtful you've somehow managed to find the id for NPCs from two separate instances in the massive mess that is the core game's id files.
Ignoring that, I have gone through Means to an End three times. The videos are misleading / outdated, and all four cases are indeed spectral, and in three cases are the same model as seen in Romke's Final Voyage. However, based on the dialogue and scope of the story I can firmly state that all four "Animal Spirits" are completely unrelated to the Spirits of the Wild. Basically, they're summoned by the horn itself, which is related to the kodan. So they're utterly different lorewise from the entities that spawn during Romke's Final Voyage, despite being the same model and ability description. Given how little dialogue and detail exists in that story step, and how there's a line by Eir saying that the horn is summoning enemies, I'm guessing that it got changed late in development (or the need to change dialogue got overlooked - like with Bad Blood and the step before having locations apparently swapped around), and some dev thought it'd be cool to use animal spirits, saw three were made, and used them and made a fourth.
Either way, their lore between the two instances is utterly different. Means to an End spirits != Romke's Final Voyage spirits. And all indication thus far indicates that the latter = the Spirits of the Wild. How we go about documenting that on the wiki is... iffy, at best. I'd rather keep them as they are and make a note about the Means to an End npcs.
As for Minotaur, we can reach a decisive conclusion. you're just refusing to accept that every NPC points to Minotaur Spirit and calls it the bloody Spirit of the Wild itself. Ignoring my above cases which use "Spirit of Minotaur" and "Minotaur Spirit" explicitly interchangeably, Wild Spirits has Fergan point out Minotaur Spirit and states "What was that on the cliff? Did you see that? I thought I saw... It was the Minotaur! The Spirit! He's driving them crazy, I tell you.". So either the NPCs are wrong, or you are. And I'm inclined to believe the NPCs over you. Konig (talk) 19:19, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Funny, because the summoned enemies match your biography options. Kodan horn or not, it was a gift to a norn. You keep making silly excuses. Scroll above, to the first comment in this thread. Refute any of the points there. You can't, you've been trying for a few days and the best you get is an offhand comment by a developer (who clearly said he wasn't sure about what he was saying) and a GW1 reference containing inconsistent capitalization. That's all you got.
And by the way, I already gave up on Minotaur. Holding to it won't make your argument towards the other three any stronger. Consistent inconsistency, you called it, but I guess it applies when you want it to.--Lon-ami (talk) 21:42, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
And when a Son of Svanir uses the horn, it summons ice imps and ice elementals, rather than spirit animals. This goes to show that what the horn summons is dependent on the individual, seemingly basing it off of their belief. This only goes to support that it holds no relation to the Spirit of the Wilds. And the "best" I've got is a bit more than a developer's comment (which wasn't off-hand either), but you keep ignoring everything I present except that comment.
I have refuted your points I disagree with or find irrelevant to the discussion. I don't think I need to reiterate for the nth time what they are, since as stated, you keep ignoring it all. I have never once denied that "Spirit of Animal" is a valid alternative. I have also never once denied that sometimes NPCs are given the name "Animal Spirit" despite not being the Spirits of the Wild.
So since this isn't clear to you, let me make this pointblank clear: Just because an NPC is called "Animal Spirit" does not mean it is connected to the Spirits of the Wild; but when Spirits of the Wild are shown in-game, it is as "Animal Spirits".' 95% of the time the Spirits of the Wild are referenced, it is just as "Animal", which is the naming system we had except when the NPCs show up before you began moving the pages.
And to make it clear: How it is now is perfectly fine, and how it was before was perfectly fine. It needs no change. It needs no further discussion. It is correct enough as it is now. It was correct enough before you changed anything. The errors created by splitting articles have been fixed. Konig (talk) 01:08, 2 July 2019 (UTC)


(Reset indent)The following conversation has been transcribed from the Guild Wars 2 Wiki Discord. It concludes this discussion.

Background information: User Konig Des Todes completed Means to an End 4 times on a norn blessed by a different Spirit (biography choice) each time, confirming that the animals summoned by Romke's Horn during that story instance were based on that biography choice.

They seem to be summoned by the horn, just as the horn summoned ice monsters for the Sons of Svanir; it seems the horn creates/summons creatures based on the user's faith.
  • User:Warming Hearth: And what about them sharing name and model with the npc from the lvl80 romke quest? [Editor's note: Romke's Final Voyage]
  • Konig: The NPCs in Means to the End are mechanically the same as in Romke's Final Voyage (raven aside), but I don't think that's worth splitting.
IMO, it's worth a note at the bottom about the lore difference.
Okay, so romke's npc go in each spirit page, no splitting then
That just leaves the nomenclature, I'd like to have consistent naming among all the spirits, major, minor, npc or not
  • Konig: Personally I'd prefer how it was before: "Raven (spirit)" (or "Raven (Spirit of the Wild)"). Despite Lon-ami's constantly citing 1-2 sources per article, the most common terminology for them is the shortest hand. I'd structure the articles' beginning as "[[Ted (Spirit of the Wild)|Ted]], sometimes called '''Ted Spirit''' and '''Spirit of Ted''', is a Great Spirit / minor Spirit of the Wild."
  • Warming Hearth: Absolutely agree
(Spirit of the Wyld) just to avoid confusion with the several owl spirit npc


The following course of action will be taken:

  • NPC of Bear, Snow Leopard, and Wolf, in Romke's Final Voyage are believed to be the Spirits of the Wild themselves in light of current evidence—or lack thereof. They will constitute the articles for those Spirits of the Wild.
  • The NPC summoned in Means to an End are considered to be summoned by Romke's horn and are not considered to be the Spirits of the Wild themselves nor avatars of them, but creatures summoned by the horn based on its last user/owner as evidenced by it previously summoning Ice Imps and alike while being used by Vargg. We could consider them as ghosts. Currently, only the summoned raven have an article: Raven Spirit. Once the articles for the Spirits of the Wild are moved to "Animal (Spirit of the Wild)" and the other "Animal Spirit" pages get emptied, it could be considered to follow the example of Raven Spirit to document those summons, those articles would include an : {{otheruses|the NPC in the [[personal story]]|the [[Spirits of the Wild|Spirit of the Wild]]|Spirit of Animal}} . Nevertheless, the need to document these summons on a separate article is questionable, as they could simply be documented inside the article for Romke's Horn. If the "Animal Spirit" articles do not document these summons then they will remain as redirects to "Animal (Spirit of the Wild)".
  • The NPC atop Wolf's shrine in Wayfarer Foothills is considered to be akin to Wolf the Spirit of the Wild but not Wolf himself. By lack of a better term, we could consider it an avatar of Wolf. It will remain on its own separate article.
  • The Veteran Bear Spirit in Dredgehunt Cliffs is considered to be akin to Bear the Spirit of the Wild but not Bear herself. By lack of a better term, we could consider it an avatar of Bear. It will remain on its own separate article.
  • Raven the Spirit of the Wild does not make a physical appearance in the game.
  • The articles for all the Spirits of the Wild, Great or minor, are encouraged to list the most relevant followers of said Spirit. Other NPC, such as Sacred Wolf or Sacred Raven, are not considered as followers of any Spirit. Categorising all the NPC that follow a Spirit is discouraged because of the little benefit said category would add. Were said categorisation to be done, it will not have a text article in the wiki and would remain only as a category that could be included inside each article for each Spirit of the Wild by means of a "See also: Category: followers of (Spirit)", while the main article would continue to list only the most important followers of said Spirit.
  • All the pages for all the Spirits of the Wild will be titled "Animal (Spirit of the Wild)". The main body will begin as: [[Animal (Spirit of the Wild)|Animal]], also known as '''Spirit of Animal''', and '''Animal Spirit''', is a Great/minor [[Spirit of the Wild]] revered by the [[norn]], who build shrines and lodges to honor him/her". Not all the minor Spirits have a shrine and/or lodge, so this introduction should be modified accordingly.
  • The '''Great Spirits''' are Raven, Wolf, Bear, and Snow Leopard. All the other spirits are considered to be "minor Spirits".
  • The terms "lesser" and "minor" are coined by us and are not official, they will be used interchangeably.

Warming Hearth (talk) 20:10, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Two things: 1) I disagree with naming all Spirit of the Wild articles "Animal (Spirit of the Wild)", and argue we should name them such where there is no NPC of the spirit (e.g., Minotaur, Bear, Wolf, and Snow Leopard). Per discord discussion, for the sake of settling this, until we get a dev confirmation I can settle for just leaving Minotaur at the NPC's name.
2) Owl Spirit is not "the ghost of the deceased Owl the Spirit of the Wild". Two issues with that conclusion: first, the Spirits of the Wild are ghosts, so them dying would leave no ghost just as killing a ghost leaves no ghost; second, Owl was consumed wholly by Jormag, meaning whatever would be left of Owl is inside Jormag's belly. The "object" Owl Spirit is as far as we know no different than the NPCs from the event, which are merely "servants" of Owl; why it's an object is... unclear. Konig (talk) 23:38, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Organizations[edit]

Discussion on [[:Category:Norn cults]] terminology, moved from User talk:Lon-ami#Spirits of the Wild:

Here's my two cents: is that the only time I've seen the word "cult" in game was negatively and referring to the White Mantle or Sons of Svanir. "Followers of X" would be more accurate to in game verbiage, and has a positive connotation instead of a negative one. - Doodleplex 22:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
I don't see the negative connotation at all. It's literally the real world word for "organization of people worshiping a deity". You see it used constantly with examples such as "Cult of Anubis" and "Cult of Odin", and even Christianity, which is often called "the Christian cult". Just because fantasy has twisted the word it doesn't mean it's suddenly evil. It's not like there are that many non-evil deities in Tyria in the first place anyway. You still want examples of fantasy settings using it "positively"? Warhammer has the "Cult of Sigmar", Warcraft has the "Cult of Elune", and The Elder Scrolls has the "Imperial Cult". Followers is a generic name that doesn't imply religion in any way whatsoever.--Lon-ami (talk) 23:03, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
My perspective on this is that we are not writing for the "real world" we are writing for a fantasy setting and I think we should stick to what the game actually uses. I have never heard cult in connection to a norn animal spirit and would appreciate the use of 'follower'. —Kvothe (talk) 23:55, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
"Followers is a generic name that doesn't imply religion in any way whatsoever." Which is pretty accurate for the norn, given that they hold no organized group anywhere ever, and that would mean no cults because cults are organized groups. And you should keep in mind that a word has multiple meanings, and yours is still archaic. Some fantasies use the archaic usage, but most don't. And even then, archaic usage like the Christian cult is referencing small groups of a faith, not a culture-wide faith. Christianity stopped being a cult when Constantine I signed it as an official religion. Don't be so stuck on a singular usage of a word, when most people recognize another usage in the situation. Konig (talk) 11:58, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Until "shamanistic organization which worships a Spirit of the Wild" gets a proper noun, cult is the best we got, and the dictionary is on my side. Tyria might be a fantasy setting, but English, the original language of the game and this wiki, is far from a fantasy language.
As for followers, first, it's not a singular noun, and second, anyone can be one, neglecting the point of the organization in the first place. Should we put every Krytan citizen inside the Church of Dwayna category? It's pretty clear only the clergy and the closest servants should be in there. Being a generic follower, much like being a customer, doesn't make you part of the organization.
And in case you're too lazy to check, sect is still far from appropriate as well.
Anyway, an user proposed merging each spirit with its organization, which could be an interesting solution; as long as we move towards an abstract interpretation of the spirits, that is.--Lon-ami (talk) 17:18, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
"the dictionary is on my side" You may want to read it again:
1. a system of religious belief, esp. one not recognized as an established religion, or the people who worship according to such a system of belief:
The reverence of the Spirits of the Wild is 100% recognized as an established religion, even if not an organization.
"first, it's not a singular noun" Singular noun is irrelevant - see Zephyrites, Aetherblades, Balthazar's Mercenaries, Followers of Ascension, etc.
"Being a generic follower, much like being a customer, doesn't make you part of the organization." Thing is, there is no such organization among the norn.
"as long as we move towards an abstract interpretation of the spirits, that is." Why should we need an abstract interpretation? What good does it serve? The Spirits of the Wild are not abstract, they're very much defined and concrete notions, not abstract at all, as they are a specific individual. Konig (talk) 17:28, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
"shamanistic organization which worships a Spirit of the Wild gets a proper noun, cult is the best we got"...Native Americans would like to inform the misinformed bigots that we are not a cult. - a very annoyed person
Funny how you cherrypick the definition you like the most, instead of the more fitting "a particular set of beliefs or behavior" or "a particular system of religious belief". I'll be waiting for a better name, if you find any.
Also, the anonymous annoyed person should explain how they're actually called if he's so worried about it. Might be good to study a bit and realize shamans are far from exclusive to America as well.--Lon-ami (talk) 22:51, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Funny how you cherrypick the definition you like the most, instead of taking the definition page as a whole. —Kvothe (talk) 02:53, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Well, find a better word then? Unless you want to redefine the organizations to include every single norn who worships each spirit, instead of just the religious leaders (shamans and other servants), since anyone can "follow a spirit". Lot of talking about minor nuances, but no one seems to care about the content of the page itself, and how the change of name would impact it.
NPCs in the current model of cults include terms such as: Shaman, Acolyte, Devotee, Havroun, Apprentice. "Shamans of Animal" could work, if you're all so keen on your bias against religious cults. However, I would wait for the discussion above to be solved first, since there's a suggestion about merging each Spirit of Animal with his cult.--Lon-ami (talk) 09:54, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Found two alternatives that could work:
  • Adherents of Animal - "A person who strongly supports a particular person, principle, or set of ideas." (source)
  • Animal's Children/Pack/Flock
Both have mentions across lore texts and dialogues.--Lon-ami (talk) 11:19, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Our perception of any those terms is irrelevant, whether you think of them as a cult or adherents doesn't matter. The game refers to them as "followers", and the wiki will do the same, just read the dialogue of these npc [[6]] [[7]] [[8]] [[9]] [[10]] [[11]] [[12]]
And the article that has been linked a coupled times already is filled with the word "follow" and its derivatives [[13]] Warming Hearth (talk) 20:52, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Following/Revering/Praying doesn't make you a priest/shaman, which is the goal of these organizations.
Another word that could work aside from Adherents is Servants, a far more familiar word, with a hint of humility that makes it ideal for a religious organization.
So, if no one else contributes with any ideas, I would move Cult of Raven to Servants of Raven instead. If everyone is okay with this, I'll consider the discussion over and move everything to the new destinations.--Lon-ami (talk) 16:53, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Again, that's your personal view of the matter. I may agree with your view, or not, but it doesn't matter. In the game they are followers and in the wiki they will be followers. Followers also allows us to make a list for all the npc that revere the spirit, whether they're shamans, havroun, speaker, or just normal norn. And, again, in the game they are called followers, and the Spirit pages will retain their follower section. If you wish to make a category for shamans of each spirit go for it, but it would be pointless to make an article about it since they would already be accounted for in the Spirit page as followers of that spirit. Follower is a collective noun that allows us to categorise shamans, havroun, speaker, and other norn, under one spirit. You may if you wish rename your cult articles to followers to use the correct terminology, but again, since that information is already inside the Spirit page, it's pointless. Warming Hearth (talk) 17:05, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
And your personal opinion is better because? I find your idea of follower organizations useless, since most norn follow one of the spirits anyway. Again, are you going to include every single human inside every single church of the Six Gods, since they happen to worship said gods? What's that useful for? You want a category including all norn, here's one: Category:Norn.
Religious organizations should only include the direct servants of the deity, not every single guy that just happens to pray to them once in a while..--Lon-ami (talk) 19:02, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your input but this discussion is over. The game references them as followers. NPC say "I follow Animal". Whether you, or I, like the terminology is irrelevant. The term follower is used ingame by the norn to reference what is the main spirit that they choose to revere. Stop distorting the sources I kindly provided to you.Warming Hearth (talk) 19:07, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
You still have to explain the point of your perspective. Should we make a category for norn hunters too? Maybe another for creatures with two legs?
If you want to categorize all thousand followers of a spirit, go on, do as you wish, but make a new page/category and keep it away from the religious organizations I'm trying to documentate. I'm looking for an alternative name for cults, not for a redefinition of who is part of the organization, something which was pretty clear from the very first moment.--Lon-ami (talk) 19:46, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
You seen to have misunderstood me. I, by no means, want to categorise all norn according to what Spirit they revere the most. The follower section on the articles for the Spirits of the Wild is designed for listing npc that show undisputable strong reverence for one Spirit of the Wild. Perfect examples being Bjarni with Hare, named Shamans such as Bear Shaman Marga, Speakers, and the havrouns. NPC it should not include would be generic shamans such as Wolf Shaman, nor random npc somewhere in the Shiverpeaks that say "Bear's teeth, that's inspired" or "Raven sees all. May your spirit soar", nor a norn that happens to walk around the Snow Leopard lodge but doesn't even have dialogue. Besides, the number of named (not generic) norn npc that show strong devotion for 1 spirit is way lower than you think Warming Hearth (talk) 19:58, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

(Reset indent) As has been pointed out above, the flaw in trying to create a named organized religion is the presumption that there is an organized religion to name. Looking at the above, the general consensus is that referring to some norns as "followers" of a certain spirit is adequate, while a fan created name for an indefinite institution is not warranted. Not all things in life and in the game can be categorized; not all things should be categorized either. Thank you all for expressing yourselves, and for the most part focusing on the topic at hand. Greener (talk) 20:50, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Many of the supporters of "followers" have not contributed since a few days ago, and I have suggested some alternatives since then. I would prefer to wait and see their opinions about it, because I still think "followers" is way too generic and not good enough. My original intention was to compile the acolytes and shamans of each spirit, not every single worshiper of the entire race, as the name "followers" would imply.
A pure "follower" category like that would be useless and arbitrary. Would we include every norn who has ever "followed" a spirit inside of there?
Considering we have public representatives, lodges and shrines with attendants who gather offerings, and spiritual leaders with apprentices, I would say yes, there's an organization here. The discussion at hand is how to name it, the technicalities of said nomenclature can be further emphasized by categorizing the resulting pages into Category:Unofficial terms. It would be far from the first time.--Lon-ami (talk) 21:23, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Not that it matters, but I have only 20 minutes free a day, which sucks. I’d rather not spend the entire 20 minutes bickering over a name of a few people that seem to be a follower of something. Also you completely ignored Greener’s comment. - Doodleplex 03:29, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
I didn't ignore anything, I think I addressed it pretty adequately, thank you. Also, if you join a discussion, it would be nice if you stuck around and actually discussed instead of leaving, but hey, that's just me.
Seems like there's enough support for the "Followers of Animal" model, so feel free to replace all the references. I think we agree the organization pages are not really necessary too, and that the information would feel better inside each spirit's page, so I'll place a delete tag on each cult's page once the information has been moved.--Lon-ami (talk) 12:49, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
There you go, ready to clean.--Lon-ami (talk) 13:30, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.guildwars2.com/index.php?title=Talk:Spirits_of_the_Wild&oldid=2003544"