From Guild Wars 2 Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Every time I see something that says "mysterious circumstances" or the like, I get the feeling we'll find out more about it in game. On another note, who thinks we'll 1v1 the Khan-Ur at some point? :P -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png 22:54, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Except he died like a thousand years ago. Lord Belar 00:01, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
One of them did. -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png 01:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
The Khan-Ur is the ruler, not a specific person. But I wouldn't be suprised if he was a main antagonist if you were human. Calor (t) 02:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
No, the khan-ur was the ruler, there aren't any anymore. After they died out, the charr split to four legions, of which you'll probably have to chose one, if you're a charr. Lord Belar 03:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
If he was, then why does the article say is? — Eloc 17:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Typo? Lord Belar 00:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Or horrible wording. Calor (t) 01:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Added/created {{tl|disputed}} — Eloc 02:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure that anyone is disputing that the contents are wrong. :) Khan-Ur is always referred to as 'the Khan-Ur' and as a hereditary title in the Ecology of the Charr. I'm fixing the article by copying the content from gww. --Aspectacle 03:13, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

theres the wikipedia page that talks about Genghis Khan. Dont know how to make the link Farwind 20:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

We're talking Charr, not Mongols. Lord Belar 20:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Khan was a Mongol title for king. Genghis Khan was the title for Temujin. Calor (t) 21:22, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Its been put under the "trivia" section and seems to have had a huge influence on the history of the char. it just needs a link for the source. Farwind 21:25, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
...I hate mostly unrelated triva. Lord Belar 21:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I do too. It really shouldn't be there. Calor (t) 21:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
It's not really unrelated. read the history of the charr and the history of the mongols. as I said up above, the Charr history seems to have been based off of the mongols. Farwind 01:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
It's a typical scenario. They could've been based off of any of dozens of medieval and pre-medieval societies, The Mongols being one of the better known ones. Take Europe after Charlemagne's death. Suddenly there are hundreds or thousands of nobles with small armies fighting each other for all the power after their leader's death, though none become full rulers, and each believes they are the best. Calor (t) 03:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
The Ghengis Khan connection makes sense, and though I don't agree with that whole big history lesson being on the article, I left it alone. But I did remove the bit about Star Trek: The Rath of Khan in the Trivia section. It makes me picture the assassin who killed the last one yelling "KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!" --Cjad the Nord 07:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN! Cress Arvein User Cress Arvein sig.JPG 04:47, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


there is a relation with the ur-dragon in "Magic: the gathering" and there the "claw of ur-khan"? (and the relative flavor text in the golem of invasion serie.) --Gasp10 15:05, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


This is more relevant to the background of GW2 than it is to the background of OGW - that's why we never heard of the character in OGW, but did with the Ecology of the Charr, because the struggle for dominance between the Legions is a theme of the Charr story. Sohothin is another pre-OGW thing, but we keep a more detailed article here than on GWW. Why? Because it's largely irrelevant (as far as we currently know) to the happenings of OGW. --Santax (talk · contribs) 21:16, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Santax on this one. While I acknowledge that it predates GW1, I don't think that the Khan-Ur has been mentioned in GW1 at all - only in information given to flesh out the story of the Charr for GW2. There is a chance with Beyond that they'll mention it, but I'd say until they do, it is at least as relevant here as there. -- Aspectacle User Aspectacle.png 22:37, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
As far as I know, the Khan-Ur is only mentioned in relation to GW2, so if anything, it belongs on this wiki more. Taros 00:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
The Khan-Ur is mentioned in pre-GW1 lore within the Ecology of the Charr. While the Ecology is on the GW2W, one must remember that just about half of it is GW1 lore. It's a similar case of Sohothin. It exists in the GW1 lore, but it was never mentioned because when Prophecies (and for the Khan-Ur, EN) was released, it didn't have a name. There's no need to document it in two places, and unless we get a new Khan-Ur in GW2 which needs its own page title Khan-Ur (and cannot just simply be linked to the GW1 wiki), then I think it is better off there. Nothing supports it being relevant to GW2 except through mention or of someone taking the title.
The Khan-Ur isn't really mentioned in relation to either game, it's just "there" - mentioned in the Ecology of the Charr that was pre-GW1 (possibly even pre-exodus). But the point is: There's no need for it to be the exact thing in two places, and as this takes place prior to GW1, like with the Exodus of the Gods page, it belongs there more. Until we get it requiring a page and not just referenced in GW2. -- Konig/talk 12:46, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
You have to remember that pre-GW1 lore =/= GW1 lore. In GW1, the culture of the charr is largely irrelevant, because we only see them as enemies. We see them way more in-depth in GW2 because we actually play as them. Sure, right now we have a situation where we're keeping largely identical articles on both wikis, but when GW2 is released, we'll see a lot of questions answered about GW1, and we can document the stuff we find which is relevant to GW1 there (even if it means having a relatively short article, if the subject is to do with things before or during GW1 but has no real impact on GW1), and we can document the stuff we find which is relevant to GW2 here. I mean, it even looks like unifying the charr is a plot point for the charr story, and we don't even have that much information yet. --Santax (talk · contribs) 15:34, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
The most important thing you need to remember when doing this is "Where will people go to look for this information?" After all, if someone is playing Guild Wars 2 and wants to know a little more about their Charr character, they will most likely go to the GW2Wiki to find the answer, because their question is relevant to GW2 specifically. It is because of this that I feel we should have SOMETHING regarding each of these things, regardless of whether or not they existed in GW1, because they will be greatly relevant to GW2. If anything, have a small article with a "more information here" link leading to GW1W; that way, regardless of which wiki people look at for the answer, they will be able to find their way to the full article for more information. 16:13, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Agreeing with the person above on this matter, Making it 5 to 1,Discussion has been cold for 12 days.Deletion note is being removed.--Neil2250 , The Zoologist User Neil2250 sig icon5.png 10:15, 3 May 2010 (UTC)