Talk:Darkness

Modern Darkness: Third edition is peculiar as it was written by a denizen. No idea who, exactly. Its highly likely someone who plays Twilight (ID shows up as random numbers to preserve anonymity) . I didn't really want to put the extract in, but when Darkness is constantly being redefined, it's difficult to ACTUALLY define. - Grif 08/06/2022

• A few points: 1) articles about ideals should summarize those ideals. 2) This one lacks a neutral tone which is likely due to 3) it's 90% c/p'd from an IG work. I get that it's illuminating work which may or may not be central to the religion, but if you're just dropping in whole blocks of text then title the article that, like Holy Codex or Shadow Codex and stick it in the documents category. Look at Evil. It's super succinct with its core tenets. It accurately summarizes the IG doctrine's basic principles. Look at Good. Short. No one dropped entire paragraphs from the Apocrypha or Holy Codex. -Halos (talk)
  • It could also be argued that 'Modern Darkness' (which I thought was written by Telaan? I could be wrong) isn't even a core work to Darkness (you could even argue that Darkness, as a system, lacks a 'bible' of any kind). I'm not here to make that argument. But citations are the way to go. Alternatively if Darkness is "difficult to ACTUALLY define", maybe just include that in the wiki article and leave the details as properly FOIG! -Halos (talk)
    • Can I advise that HELP TWILIGHT might be good inspo. -Halos (talk) 02:09, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
      • I've cut the article in half, valid points. It has now the core beliefs. It is difficult to really write on, given that most of the darkness records are outdated and now non-canon works from previous Twilights. Even the 'bible' is rejected. I suppose they really want Darkness to remain thematically ambiguous? -- Grif 09/06/2022