Talk:A Game of Thrones

Plot size

@Ajd: Hey, I saw you reverted my changes to the plot. It's way too big. MOS:PLOT says to aim for 400–700 words, and we're currently over 1000. If you are invested in keeping some parts, would you help bringing it down to at least 800 or so words? Plot is by far the part I like working on least so I'm happy this one reads very well but it needs reduced in size – I don't want to do revert-back-and-forth when I can work on the other bits. Thank you — ImaginesTigers (talk) 11:29, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Oh man, I'll see what I can do. It's a long and complicated book, so that might be a tall order. AJD (talk) 13:06, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

@AJD: I'm planning to go pretty hard on the article, so bear in mind that anything important, I can almost definitely include in another section (e.g., Themes). Just drop me a note here on what you think could go but is important to be preserved elsewhere. I'm confident we can get it down to 800 (the Seven Kingdoms section is the best shot, I think). — ImaginesTigers (talk) 13:14, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

@ImaginesTigers, I've got it down to about 850; I might come back for another pass later when I have time. Right now the only thing I can think of that needs to be mentioned elsewhere in the article is that, while Westeros is the name of the continent, the state is called the Seven Kingdoms, since it's necessary to use both terms in the synopsis. AJD (talk) 13:53, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Can definitely cover that – I doubt some writer hasn't mentioned it in relation to, say, the multiple kingdoms of the United Kingdom. Thank you very much for doing that; I appreciate it. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 13:55, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Found one.

• Daenerys appears at the beginning of both series as one of the last known legitimate members of house Targaryen, a noble family from the continent of Essos who had conquered the Seven Kingdoms of the continent of Westeros 300 years earlier.

Kellyann Fitzpatrick, "Game of Thrones: Neomedievalism and the Myths of Inheritance" in Neomedievalism, Popular Culture and the Academy (DS Brewer, 2011), p. 103.

— ImaginesTigers (talk)

Recent edits

Hey User:Shearonink – the refs being visibly unused is helpful to me because I'm working on the content. And swapping Garcia and Antonsson's names is not support by the physical book, where she is listed first. Thanks — ImaginesTigers (talk) 16:44, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

That change is supported by the Wikipedia article's title. - Shearonink (talk) 16:49, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Hey ImaginesTigers – I did not remove any refs or their content, they are still retained within the article's biblio/refs. - Shearonink (talk) 16:54, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Updates

Hey folks. I'm almost finished work on the article and would quite like to nominate it for GA soon. I think I've covered everything major in scholarship, with one main entry left (power and ruling). This is likely to be the most challenging section because most of the academic analysis on that topic is weighted towards later entries (e.g., after the involvement of Stannis/Renly; when Daenerys becomes an actual queen). I'm going to spend some time today working out how to cover it but it's likely to be pretty tough. Open to feedback if anyone has any comments. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 10:26, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

I've reviewed the literature and I don't think it is possible to construct a section on power/rulers that isn't very disjoined. I think that it would be a great heading for the main series article. The primary scholars who consider the nature of power in the series make arguments that span across the entire season. If I tried to include it here, it would escape the article's scope.

• Consider, for example, how Larrington (2020)'s contrast of how the Starks and Lannisters maintain control over their armies. Ned's power relies on historic oaths, renewed by "successive lords". Her analysis about the Lannisters, though, is largely devoted to book 2. Robb's style of control is close to democratic consultation and consensus gathering, but that analysis is from books 2–3.

I'm just not sure it's possible to cover this right now. I've nominated for a GA review and will hopefully get a reviewer who can advise on these. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 11:23, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:A Game of Thrones/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: ImaginesTigers (talk · contribs) 11:19, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: AirshipJungleman29 (talk · contribs) 23:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

As requested; comments to follow in a few days. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Airship. I'll highlight that I'm most anxious about the "Genre" section. It was pretty hard to write and, frankly, I'm still pretty unhappy with it. I can share any of the sources in the article with you at your request. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 09:27, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

As a preliminary comment: User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors shows some citation errors that need fixing. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:03, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

@AirshipJungleman29: My bad; I failed to watchlist the review. Errors have been sorted out now. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 15:20, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, User:AirshipJungleman29. Just wanted to check this is still on your radar — ImaginesTigers (talk) 16:09, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

It is. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:11, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

🫡 — ImaginesTigers (talk) 16:28, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

General comments

You've asked for a pre-FAC review, so I'll do my best to provide one.

Lead

• "representing a return to prose fiction" not sure "representing" is quite the right word, a simple "and" might very well do better.

•  Done Changed to It was Martin's fourth novel and his return to writing prose fiction after a long period working in television.

• "was published in August 1996 ... had the initial idea in 1991 ... took around five years to complete" the maths does fit together, which is good, but this is perhaps a little too obvious for even the first lead paragraph.

•  Done Reworked this

• "In the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros, the powerful House Stark and House Lannister influence the political fate of the Seven Kingdoms." duplicative

•  Done Should be better now

• "the plot depicts the exile of Daenerys Targaryen" it would be better to eliminate explicit references to "the plot", as with the preceding two sentences, and instead just narrate in-universe.

• Yeah, I get this. Some advice on this would be appreciated. I find Daenerys' plot hard to summarise. What about Across the sea in Essos, the last surviving members of Westeros' deposed royal house, House Targaryen, live in exile?

• "A novella comprising Daenerys' chapters from the novel won the 1997 Hugo Award for Best Short Story. It was a minor commercial success for Martin, selling a few thousand copies." Grammatically, "it" refers here to the novella, not the full novel.

• Good catch

• From the point of view of MOS:LEADREL, the proportionality of the lead could use some work. Most egregiously, the "Style" and "Interpretation" sections seem to form half the body, but are discussed in one-and-a-half sentences in the lead. There are also some smaller discrepancies; for instance, that it was thought of as "the major fantasy publishing event of 1996", "the year's Big Fantasy Novel, reviewed everywhere", and a favorite for the World Fantasy Award, and not just as "a minor commercial success". ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:37, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

•  Working I get that. I originally modelled the lead around what I did for Dracula, but the plot was really hard to condense into a single sentence. I've made some changes here but I don't really know how to cover all the scholarship in any real way without it just looking a bit silly. It's pretty close to what I did in Dracula (where there's a lot of scholarship that the lead summarises in one or two sentences). Open to feedback for sure.
  • We'll come back to it once we've covered the relevant sections. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:49, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
• RE: Commercial – these are interesting contradictions, but it's hard to reconcile them. It was widely reviewed, but it didn't sell terrifically. Martin said sales were… well, okay. Solid. But nothing spectacular. No bestseller lists, certainly. A big part of this was that the novel had a big marketing push from Bantam in the US (which the Publishers Weekly review reflects, but not in a way I could defend at FA). Any thoughts are welcome.

• Alright ImaginesTigers, let's finish up. I think "Narration", "Reception", and "Adaptation" are adequately summarised in the lead. That leaves "Genre" (perhaps a sentence on labels, relationship to Tolkien, and fantasy trope subversion) and "Interpretation", which if you look at the {{section sizes}} banner on the talk page is by far the largest section and probably needs around three sentences, not the one it currently has. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:48, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

  @AirshipJungleman29: Thank you. I've redrafted the final paragraph with this feedback. The signposting was helpful, and I didn't know about section sizes! – ImaginesTigers 21:42, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Plot

• Mostly good, would just suggest a gloss for "khaleesi", it being a wholly invented word. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:40, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

•  Working This is the only part of the article I didn't write – I mostly trimmed it, helping another editor. I've added "(wife of the khal). Does that help?
  • I'd probably just replace it all, including the "khaleesi", with "queen"—it's not immediately relevant. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:49, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

   Done — ImaginesTigers 10:46, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Background

• Don't really think we need to go all the way back for Martin's background. Could start with his first published novels in 1977.

• Honestly, I like doing it this way. I think the context – that Martin is a fan of genre fiction, comic books – is important to him. It's the same general approach I used in Dracula.

• The section overall is a little too MOS:OVERSECTION for my taste; could do just as well with no subsections and three total paragraphs.

• Yeah, fair. I've reduced the number of sections to two, and condensed the material into fewer paragraphs. Just personal preference is clear headings rather than a big paragraph covering multiple topics. I think it makes people less likely to ever read it

Style

• "Shannon Wells-Lassagne writes that this keeps the reader's interest and loyalty with the aristocratic houses." how so? this is a little confusing

• Agreed - should be fixed

• "Ned's recurring memories ... gradually reveal more ... as their contexts shift" pedantically speaking, the contexts of the memories themselves remain identical; it is Ned's context that shifts. You'd want to change "their" to "his" and find a better word than "context".

• Simplified I think

• There is significant overlap between "Style" and "Interpretation". I think the distinction between the sections is too small to merit their division; any discussion of stylistic details is by nature a matter of interpretation. I'd merge the sections and eliminate the duplications. The "Narration" and "Genre" subsections can stay; it's just their contents that are too repetitive.

• I don't really agree – Style is a recommended section on MOS:BOOK. I'd rather keep them separate. Grouping genre with "Style" makes logical sense to me as it informs style; I did this on Dracula too

• • Similarly, "and original novel's book jacket described the novel as an heir to Tolkien's work." is repeated in two sections not that far apart.

•  Done Deleted from Genre

Reception

All good here.

Interpretation

• Notes i), j), k) and q) would be better incorporated in the body. Notes b) and h) largely overlap (see above), and would in any case benefit from being in the article body. Note o) is incomprehensible.

•  Done Removed O (see below)

• "Eroeh" is implied, but not defined, to be "a woman" referred to earlier.

• The first source doesn't explicitly say it is Eroeh, although it is. I was erring on the side of caution by only representing what the source says

• "Anne Gjelsvik writes that Mirri Maz Duur represents Daenerys' denial of her role in oppression. She attempts to save Mirri Maz Duur from gang rape but fails. The maegi takes vengeance by causing Daneerys' child to be stillborn. Consequently, Daenerys takes the maegi into Drogo's funeral pyre and symbolically consumes the witch's magic." Thde first sentence seems disconnected from the latter three.

• Her argument has proven really hard for me to summarise. I've sent you the extract off-wiki because it's quite large

• "Hudson says that Cersei dismisses Robert's authority by derisively overruling his writ declaring Ned Stark the regent, taking the role herself. Walton says Ned's function as judge and executioner makes his role as the north's feudal lord effectively equivalent to that of a king—a role his son inherits when Ned goes to King's Landing." These both seem less interpretation and more straightforward description. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:52, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

• They seem related to the idea of power and kingship to me, but I'll delete the sentences if you like? I think it'd be a disservice to any reader looking for sources but don't feel strongly about it. I'm honestly not against deleting this entire subheading – I think it's pretty weak overall

Adaptations

• Could do with eliminating some of the details on the TV show that aren't specific to this book, esp. the title sequence maps and the viewership (which would mostly correspond to the latter seasons).

•  Done

Images

All good in terms of tagging and captioning, but perhaps a couple could be added (maybe using {{multiple image}}?) to illustrate the inspirations in "Historical" or similar? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:37, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Sure! I've added 4 that feel apropos to the Historical section. Three of them concern the Wars of the Roses; the last is Hadrian's Wall. I could in theory replace the beheading with, say, Ghengis Khan, if that is preferred. — ImaginesTigers 21:06, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

I have also considered adding a fair use panel from A Game of Thrones (comics) to the Plot or Gender sections, but that might not be acceptable. I'm not really good with the image side of the site — ImaginesTigers 21:11, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Butting in because ImaginesTigers and I often talk images together-- I don't think there's a very good fair-use case there, since there's no discussion of the comic's art in the article. But you could use a medieval image of a figure like Eleanor of Aquitaine (two wedding images here; I'm in the process of replacing the one with the boats with a better quality version if you like the composition) or Isabella of Valois (like this one)... Isabella of France could also be a relevant figure but I don't think there are good wedding-y images of her. Ditto Blanche of Castile. A great-looking image, Margaret of Anjou (I'm thinking of this image). Personally, I'd pick just one one image, either one I liked the looks of best, or whichever one I've seen mentioned as a point of comparison in the sources. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 20:35, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

@LEvalyn: I'd be very grateful if you swapped in any images that look good to you. – ImaginesTigers 11:36, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

I went with an Eleanor of Acquitaine image because Google snippet view let me confirm that Ed West's Iron, Fire and Ice: The Real History that Inspired Game of Thrones explicitly mentions her & her young marriage. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 23:43, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Certainly a lower quality writer/publisher but can't foresee it causing any problems at GA level. I've added the relevant biblio reference & reverted the gnome who removed it. Thank you! – ImaginesTigers 08:30, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

That sort of fair use image probably wouldn't work. On the ones you've added: Hadrian's Wall is a good illustrator, but the beheading one at bottom left is a bit unclear and not directly connected to anything in the article text. Would suggest removing it. The portraits are fine; LEvalyn's suggestions also look good. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:23, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

Source spotcheck

Sources checked:

• 5 good
• 63 good
• 68 good
• 84 good
• 148 good

• 25

• This source was emailed to me via WP:RSX.
• Padol says: Martin uses the limited omniscient third person narrator, shifting narrative point of view in every chapter so that we see the action through the eyes of eight characters (p. 23).
  • Could I also have the bits that verify the later uses of the citation?
    • Sent Padol's review off site

• 26

• Page 52 is the footnote, but the relevant bit for this is in the text with the footnote. I've updated the reference to include the relevant bit on page 41.
• Source: Likewise, Martin’s narrative style, consisting of chapters focusing on different point of view characters, has only rarely made use of smallfolk focalizers, and, as a result, the reader’s loyalties and interest continue to reside with the royal houses.
  • What is the verification for the bit about Will in the prologue?
    • The footnote: Other than the prologues, that make systematic use of non-noble point-of-views, Will (A Game of Thrones) [...]

• 32

• This quotation technically spans 28 and 29 so I've updated the footnote.
• Source: None of Martin's narrators is particularly reliable, and some even conceal information from the reader by refusing to think about it directly; Jon Snow's true parentage is a major example of this, but there are dozens of smaller instances scattered throughout the series.

• 47

• Source: Tolkien in particular – the author with whom Martin is most compared – reimagines European geographies in his creation of Middle Earth, even going so far as to posit his narrative as a sort of mythology or prehistory for England.
  • Doesn't seem to verify "Literary scholar Shiloh Carroll notes a broad range of influences for Martin's series"
    • A Song of Ice and Fire shows very clear influences from a myriad of genres – medieval romance, history, Victorian medievalist romance, modern medievalist or neomedievalist fantasy, and horror, for example

• 52

• I'll send a copy of this source to you off-site

• 97

• Source: Of course, Winterfell is not Hobbitton, nor is the North menace-free, so any further parallels to Tolkien are, at the least, tentative. Regardless, the feudal world that appears in Martin's first novel bears the most resemblance to a medieval scenario.

• 105

• Source: Yet, while Martin pays homage to the idealism of the medieval form that inspires his own work, he also recognizes its limitations in connecting with a postmodern audience who might read the genre as "elitist, rarefied, distant, obscure" and "moribund" (Gravdal 561). This recognition is evidenced by a shifting tone throughout A Game of Thrones and the approaching Winter of the series as the more hopeful, romance-inspired characters either meet their demise or face disillusionment.

• 124

• Source: Khal Drogo's authority over his khalasar depends crucially on face; he is quick to anger, and brooks no challenge to his orders. Daenerys' influence on him weakens his standing in his men's eyes; although the accede to his boas that they will cross the Narrow Sea.

• 128 & 129

• 128: The contributors to the present volume disagree, as do audiences, about how to see women in GoT. Are they feminist characters, or a perversion of feminism? Is this postfeminist entertainment for a neoliberal age? Is it backlash dressed up in prefeminist medieval clothes? Or is Martin a feminist, as he claims, and these women, then, the role models in a complex and conflicted contemporary world that has abandoned utopian illusions and in which fantasy is transformed from light to dark and from ethically simple to conflicted?
• 129: However, not all feminists have embraced Martin's narratives and characters, with Gina Bellafonte starchily denouncing him in The New York Times by writing, "Game of Thrones is boy faction patronizingly turned out to reach the populations other half". Others, such as Emily Nussbaum in the New Worker, have defended Martin, pointing out that the strength of the series is in "its insight into what it means to be excluded from power: to be a woman, or a bastard, or half a man".

• 140

• In the novels, Daenerys is only thirteen age [...] In the TV series, Daneerys' age has been changed to fifteen. [...] Thus by adding two years to the timeline [...] Bran is ten when pushed from the tower [...] Similarly Sansa Stark is eleven at the beginning of the books, but thirteen in the TV series, and Arya Stark ages from nine to eleven.
  • Not relevant.
    • Think this is it: But it is the very first encounter with a witch which reveals the extent to which traditional witch tropes are integrated into Martin's universe. Indeed, the first encounter with a witch in Martin's universe also reflects fears over female power, monstrous births, and the influence of an evil elderly woman over a younger woman often encountered in early modern with narratives.

Hi ImaginesTigers the citations I requested referred to this version of the article and subsequent changes appear to have confused the matter. Could you please have another look to make sure that the quotes refer to the correct citations? Thanks, ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:09, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Looks like it was only the final source affected, I think. If something is wrong, can you provide the associated claim from the article to make it easier for me to track down? I think I'm missing some instances where a page is cited multiple times – ImaginesTigers 11:37, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Sigh :(

Source review passed. A couple of things remaining to respond to above, then we'll have another look at the lead, then all will be good. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:56, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.