Talk:Jocasta Wiggs - Revision history

Old Dickens: /* But... */

2022-02-14T05:22:42Z

But...

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:22, 14 February 2022
Line 25:		Line 25:
	No way was she going to be carrying a crossbow: she was doing a reconnaissance exercise. Carrying a crossbow would have risked a choice of severe penalties from Lord Vetinari and the Assassins' Guild College. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 05:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)		No way was she going to be carrying a crossbow: she was doing a reconnaissance exercise. Carrying a crossbow would have risked a choice of severe penalties from Lord Vetinari and the Assassins' Guild College. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 05:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
	:Oh... she was "just supposed to get [Vimes] in her sights", guild honor. I always assumed that meant literal sights, like using the crossbow but not loading or firing. But you make a good point. [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 22:26, 9 February 2022 (UTC)		:Oh... she was "just supposed to get [Vimes] in her sights", guild honor. I always assumed that meant literal sights, like using the crossbow but not loading or firing. But you make a good point. [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 22:26, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
			She does say "I don't even have any crossbow bolts". It may be too deep a rabbit hole. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 05:22, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Moishe Rosenbaum: /* But... */ r to OD

2022-02-09T22:27:00Z

But...: r to OD

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:27, 9 February 2022
Line 24:		Line 24:
	::I've stared at it way too long. She doesn't have three legs or 18 toes or anything like that... what is it?!? [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 02:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)		::I've stared at it way too long. She doesn't have three legs or 18 toes or anything like that... what is it?!? [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 02:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
	No way was she going to be carrying a crossbow: she was doing a reconnaissance exercise. Carrying a crossbow would have risked a choice of severe penalties from Lord Vetinari and the Assassins' Guild College. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 05:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)		No way was she going to be carrying a crossbow: she was doing a reconnaissance exercise. Carrying a crossbow would have risked a choice of severe penalties from Lord Vetinari and the Assassins' Guild College. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 05:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
			:Oh... she was "just supposed to get [Vimes] in her sights", guild honor. I always assumed that meant literal sights, like using the crossbow but not loading or firing. But you make a good point. [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 22:26, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Old Dickens at 05:40, 9 February 2022

2022-02-09T05:40:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:40, 9 February 2022
Line 23:		Line 23:
	Well done as the depiction is, there is one thing very wrong. Has no one else noticed? --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 03:35, 8 February 2022 (UTC)		Well done as the depiction is, there is one thing very wrong. Has no one else noticed? --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 03:35, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
	::I've stared at it way too long. She doesn't have three legs or 18 toes or anything like that... what is it?!? [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 02:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)		::I've stared at it way too long. She doesn't have three legs or 18 toes or anything like that... what is it?!? [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 02:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
			No way was she going to be carrying a crossbow: she was doing a reconnaissance exercise. Carrying a crossbow would have risked a choice of severe penalties from Lord Vetinari and the Assassins' Guild College. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 05:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Moishe Rosenbaum: /* But... */ what is it?

2022-02-09T02:10:12Z

But...: what is it?

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:10, 9 February 2022
Line 22:		Line 22:
	==But...==		==But...==
	Well done as the depiction is, there is one thing very wrong. Has no one else noticed? --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 03:35, 8 February 2022 (UTC)		Well done as the depiction is, there is one thing very wrong. Has no one else noticed? --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 03:35, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
			::I've stared at it way too long. She doesn't have three legs or 18 toes or anything like that... what is it?!? [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 02:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Old Dickens: What's wrong with this picture?

2022-02-08T03:35:49Z

What's wrong with this picture?

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:35, 8 February 2022
Line 19:		Line 19:

	Jocasta Wiggs immediately after rescue from the Ramkin dunnikin.		Jocasta Wiggs immediately after rescue from the Ramkin dunnikin.

			==But...==
			Well done as the depiction is, there is one thing very wrong. Has no one else noticed? --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 03:35, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Old Dickens: argh

2022-02-05T03:46:19Z

argh

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:46, 5 February 2022
Line 8:		Line 8:

	== Are we really including details for ''The Watch''? ==		== Are we really including details for ''The Watch''? ==
	''(A discussion of the respect for peripheral creations has been moved to [[Discworld & Pratchett Wiki:Mended Drum]].''		''(A discussion of the respect for peripheral creations has been moved to [[Discworld & Pratchett Wiki:Mended Drum]].'')
	== Art Credits: ==		== Art Credits: ==

Old Dickens: moving discussion

2022-02-05T03:13:21Z

moving discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:13, 5 February 2022
Line 8:		Line 8:

	== Are we really including details for ''The Watch''? ==		== Are we really including details for ''The Watch''? ==
	~~Gee I hate~~ ''~~The Watch''! Does it deserve references here beyond its own page acknowledging its existence? It has almost nothing to do with the works of Terry Pratchett. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]]~~ (~~[[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 00:47, 4 February 2022 (UTC)~~		''(A discussion of the respect for peripheral creations has been moved to [[Discworld & Pratchett Wiki:Mended Drum]].''
	~~:I mean, it's a related work and people are going to want to know more about it; I don't like the idea~~ of ~~trying to put everything relevant on that one page. And if someone wants to know more about~~ the ~~character in the show, who gets a lot more screen time than the book version, this felt like the right place~~ for a little paragraph. But if the consensus is it's not wanted here, fair enough and I'll stop adding info about it. I'll note it's not universally hated, though, despite its faults. -- [[User:Guybrush\|Guybrush]] ([[User talk:Guybrush\|talk]]) 03:59, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
	~~OK, two opinions. Is anyone invoking Terry's name entitled to advertising here? Where's the limit? --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 05:01, 4 February 2022 (UTC)~~

	::I haven't seen the show, and I don't intend to - not after I saw what the young (my age!) Ms. Pratchett had to say about it on twitter a long while ago. But, that said... it's not a pirated fanfic, it's a legit derivative work that, as Guybrush says, people may come to this site for info about. As long as anything about it is clearly marked as from the show, or "non canonical", or something like that - as long as we're not representing ''The Watch'' as an actual Terry Pratchett creation - I'm okay with it getting coverage. Though my heart agrees with Old Dickens. And someone please correct me if I'm wrong about anything here. [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 05:24, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

	~~:::Terry's name appears in the titles, Rob is still credited as a producer and the Narrativia logo appears at the end, which for me is qualification enough; and no other adaptation~~ has been different enough to require additional information like this (except maybe the TV version of {{GO}}). But it's true that the important difference between {{TW}} and other adaptations is that the official Pratchett team are clearly unhappy with the result, and that they didn't have the equivalent of the veto power Terry had on all projects while he was alive. I also understand why people don't like it, even if I did (if with plenty of reservations). I want to document it somewhere - not least for fans who want to know more about it without watching it - but to avoid contention, perhaps we should just confine it to the specific article. I can find somewhere else for the greater detail. (As it happens, [https://guild.pratchatpodcast.com I have a whole separate wiki I've been working on], on which I've already set up interwiki to ~~L-Space.) --~~ [[~~User:Guybrush\|Guybrush]] ([[User talk:Guybrush\|talk]]) 12:11, 4 February 2022 (UTC)~~

	~~You may be right. I started here arguing against content restrictions since we don't take up any weight or shelf space.<BR>~~
	What, then, might be reasonable limits to inclusion or linking in the wiki? So far, I and contemporaries have treated spam pretty ruthlessly because it was obvious. What credit do we give a book/story/movie/tvseries/game/... that has only a nominal connection to Terry Pratchett~~? We already treat [[Discworld Noir]] as if it were canon, so it's muddy. --[[User~~:~~Old Dickens\|Old Dickens~~]] ~~([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 18:33, 4 February 2022 (UTC)~~
	~~:This discussion is getting big enough that we should shift it to the Drum, since it's no longer just about {{TW}}, but what our policy is on inclusion of stuff in general~~. ~~My two cents though is that anything officially licensed should definitely be included, and that unambiguously includes both {{TW}} and~~ ''~~[[Discworld Noir]]'', even though neither was written by Terry himself. -- [[User:Guybrush\|Guybrush]] ([[User talk:Guybrush\|talk]]) 00:39, 5 February 2022 (UTC)~~

	== Art Credits: ==		== Art Credits: ==

Guybrush: /* Are we really including details for The Watch? */

2022-02-05T00:39:19Z

Are we really including details for The Watch?

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:39, 5 February 2022
Line 18:		Line 18:
	You may be right. I started here arguing against content restrictions since we don't take up any weight or shelf space.<BR>		You may be right. I started here arguing against content restrictions since we don't take up any weight or shelf space.<BR>
	What, then, might be reasonable limits to inclusion or linking in the wiki? So far, I and contemporaries have treated spam pretty ruthlessly because it was obvious. What credit do we give a book/story/movie/tvseries/game/... that has only a nominal connection to Terry Pratchett? We already treat [[Discworld Noir]] as if it were canon, so it's muddy. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 18:33, 4 February 2022 (UTC)		What, then, might be reasonable limits to inclusion or linking in the wiki? So far, I and contemporaries have treated spam pretty ruthlessly because it was obvious. What credit do we give a book/story/movie/tvseries/game/... that has only a nominal connection to Terry Pratchett? We already treat [[Discworld Noir]] as if it were canon, so it's muddy. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 18:33, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
			:This discussion is getting big enough that we should shift it to the Drum, since it's no longer just about {{TW}}, but what our policy is on inclusion of stuff in general. My two cents though is that anything officially licensed should definitely be included, and that unambiguously includes both {{TW}} and ''[[Discworld Noir]]'', even though neither was written by Terry himself. -- [[User:Guybrush\|Guybrush]] ([[User talk:Guybrush\|talk]]) 00:39, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

	== Art Credits: ==		== Art Credits: ==

Old Dickens: /* Are we really including details for The Watch? */

2022-02-04T18:33:49Z

Are we really including details for The Watch?

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:33, 4 February 2022
Line 15:		Line 15:

	:::Terry's name appears in the titles, Rob is still credited as a producer and the Narrativia logo appears at the end, which for me is qualification enough; and no other adaptation has been different enough to require additional information like this (except maybe the TV version of {{GO}}). But it's true that the important difference between {{TW}} and other adaptations is that the official Pratchett team are clearly unhappy with the result, and that they didn't have the equivalent of the veto power Terry had on all projects while he was alive. I also understand why people don't like it, even if I did (if with plenty of reservations). I want to document it somewhere - not least for fans who want to know more about it without watching it - but to avoid contention, perhaps we should just confine it to the specific article. I can find somewhere else for the greater detail. (As it happens, [https://guild.pratchatpodcast.com I have a whole separate wiki I've been working on], on which I've already set up interwiki to L-Space.) -- [[User:Guybrush\|Guybrush]] ([[User talk:Guybrush\|talk]]) 12:11, 4 February 2022 (UTC)		:::Terry's name appears in the titles, Rob is still credited as a producer and the Narrativia logo appears at the end, which for me is qualification enough; and no other adaptation has been different enough to require additional information like this (except maybe the TV version of {{GO}}). But it's true that the important difference between {{TW}} and other adaptations is that the official Pratchett team are clearly unhappy with the result, and that they didn't have the equivalent of the veto power Terry had on all projects while he was alive. I also understand why people don't like it, even if I did (if with plenty of reservations). I want to document it somewhere - not least for fans who want to know more about it without watching it - but to avoid contention, perhaps we should just confine it to the specific article. I can find somewhere else for the greater detail. (As it happens, [https://guild.pratchatpodcast.com I have a whole separate wiki I've been working on], on which I've already set up interwiki to L-Space.) -- [[User:Guybrush\|Guybrush]] ([[User talk:Guybrush\|talk]]) 12:11, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

			You may be right. I started here arguing against content restrictions since we don't take up any weight or shelf space.<BR>
			What, then, might be reasonable limits to inclusion or linking in the wiki? So far, I and contemporaries have treated spam pretty ruthlessly because it was obvious. What credit do we give a book/story/movie/tvseries/game/... that has only a nominal connection to Terry Pratchett? We already treat [[Discworld Noir]] as if it were canon, so it's muddy. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 18:33, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

	== Art Credits: ==		== Art Credits: ==

Guybrush: /* */

2022-02-04T12:11:13Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:11, 4 February 2022
Line 7:		Line 7:
	Is it me, or in manner, attitude and experience, does Nourishing come over as a rat version of Jocasta Wiggs? As {{TAM}} was published a few years before {{NW}}, this could be the genesis of Jocasta...[[User:AgProv\|AgProv]] ([[User talk:AgProv\|talk]]) 07:13, 30 December 2012 (PST)		Is it me, or in manner, attitude and experience, does Nourishing come over as a rat version of Jocasta Wiggs? As {{TAM}} was published a few years before {{NW}}, this could be the genesis of Jocasta...[[User:AgProv\|AgProv]] ([[User talk:AgProv\|talk]]) 07:13, 30 December 2012 (PST)

	== ==		== Are we really including details for ''The Watch''? ==
	Gee I hate ''The Watch''! Does it deserve references here beyond its own page acknowledging its existence? It has almost nothing to do with the works of Terry Pratchett. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 00:47, 4 February 2022 (UTC)		Gee I hate ''The Watch''! Does it deserve references here beyond its own page acknowledging its existence? It has almost nothing to do with the works of Terry Pratchett. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 00:47, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
	:I mean, it's a related work and people are going to want to know more about it; I don't like the idea of trying to put everything relevant on that one page. And if someone wants to know more about the character in the show, who gets a lot more screen time than the book version, this felt like the right place for a little paragraph. But if the consensus is it's not wanted here, fair enough and I'll stop adding info about it. I'll note it's not universally hated, though, despite its faults. -- [[User:Guybrush\|Guybrush]] ([[User talk:Guybrush\|talk]]) 03:59, 4 February 2022 (UTC)		:I mean, it's a related work and people are going to want to know more about it; I don't like the idea of trying to put everything relevant on that one page. And if someone wants to know more about the character in the show, who gets a lot more screen time than the book version, this felt like the right place for a little paragraph. But if the consensus is it's not wanted here, fair enough and I'll stop adding info about it. I'll note it's not universally hated, though, despite its faults. -- [[User:Guybrush\|Guybrush]] ([[User talk:Guybrush\|talk]]) 03:59, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Line 13:		Line 13:

	::I haven't seen the show, and I don't intend to - not after I saw what the young (my age!) Ms. Pratchett had to say about it on twitter a long while ago. But, that said... it's not a pirated fanfic, it's a legit derivative work that, as Guybrush says, people may come to this site for info about. As long as anything about it is clearly marked as from the show, or "non canonical", or something like that - as long as we're not representing ''The Watch'' as an actual Terry Pratchett creation - I'm okay with it getting coverage. Though my heart agrees with Old Dickens. And someone please correct me if I'm wrong about anything here. [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 05:24, 4 February 2022 (UTC)		::I haven't seen the show, and I don't intend to - not after I saw what the young (my age!) Ms. Pratchett had to say about it on twitter a long while ago. But, that said... it's not a pirated fanfic, it's a legit derivative work that, as Guybrush says, people may come to this site for info about. As long as anything about it is clearly marked as from the show, or "non canonical", or something like that - as long as we're not representing ''The Watch'' as an actual Terry Pratchett creation - I'm okay with it getting coverage. Though my heart agrees with Old Dickens. And someone please correct me if I'm wrong about anything here. [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 05:24, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

			:::Terry's name appears in the titles, Rob is still credited as a producer and the Narrativia logo appears at the end, which for me is qualification enough; and no other adaptation has been different enough to require additional information like this (except maybe the TV version of {{GO}}). But it's true that the important difference between {{TW}} and other adaptations is that the official Pratchett team are clearly unhappy with the result, and that they didn't have the equivalent of the veto power Terry had on all projects while he was alive. I also understand why people don't like it, even if I did (if with plenty of reservations). I want to document it somewhere - not least for fans who want to know more about it without watching it - but to avoid contention, perhaps we should just confine it to the specific article. I can find somewhere else for the greater detail. (As it happens, [https://guild.pratchatpodcast.com I have a whole separate wiki I've been working on], on which I've already set up interwiki to L-Space.) -- [[User:Guybrush\|Guybrush]] ([[User talk:Guybrush\|talk]]) 12:11, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

	== Art Credits: ==		== Art Credits: ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:22, 14 February 2022
Line 25:		Line 25:
	No way was she going to be carrying a crossbow: she was doing a reconnaissance exercise. Carrying a crossbow would have risked a choice of severe penalties from Lord Vetinari and the Assassins' Guild College. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 05:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)		No way was she going to be carrying a crossbow: she was doing a reconnaissance exercise. Carrying a crossbow would have risked a choice of severe penalties from Lord Vetinari and the Assassins' Guild College. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 05:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
	:Oh... she was "just supposed to get [Vimes] in her sights", guild honor. I always assumed that meant literal sights, like using the crossbow but not loading or firing. But you make a good point. [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 22:26, 9 February 2022 (UTC)		:Oh... she was "just supposed to get [Vimes] in her sights", guild honor. I always assumed that meant literal sights, like using the crossbow but not loading or firing. But you make a good point. [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 22:26, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
			She does say "I don't even have any crossbow bolts". It may be too deep a rabbit hole. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 05:22, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:27, 9 February 2022
Line 24:		Line 24:
	::I've stared at it way too long. She doesn't have three legs or 18 toes or anything like that... what is it?!? [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 02:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)		::I've stared at it way too long. She doesn't have three legs or 18 toes or anything like that... what is it?!? [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 02:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
	No way was she going to be carrying a crossbow: she was doing a reconnaissance exercise. Carrying a crossbow would have risked a choice of severe penalties from Lord Vetinari and the Assassins' Guild College. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 05:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)		No way was she going to be carrying a crossbow: she was doing a reconnaissance exercise. Carrying a crossbow would have risked a choice of severe penalties from Lord Vetinari and the Assassins' Guild College. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 05:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
			:Oh... she was "just supposed to get [Vimes] in her sights", guild honor. I always assumed that meant literal sights, like using the crossbow but not loading or firing. But you make a good point. [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 22:26, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:40, 9 February 2022
Line 23:		Line 23:
	Well done as the depiction is, there is one thing very wrong. Has no one else noticed? --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 03:35, 8 February 2022 (UTC)		Well done as the depiction is, there is one thing very wrong. Has no one else noticed? --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 03:35, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
	::I've stared at it way too long. She doesn't have three legs or 18 toes or anything like that... what is it?!? [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 02:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)		::I've stared at it way too long. She doesn't have three legs or 18 toes or anything like that... what is it?!? [[User:Moishe Rosenbaum\|Moishe Rosenbaum]] ([[User talk:Moishe Rosenbaum\|talk]]) 02:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
			No way was she going to be carrying a crossbow: she was doing a reconnaissance exercise. Carrying a crossbow would have risked a choice of severe penalties from Lord Vetinari and the Assassins' Guild College. --[[User:Old Dickens\|Old Dickens]] ([[User talk:Old Dickens\|talk]]) 05:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC)