Talk:House Ordos

Quick question about Emperor: Alliances

What exactly is this "Emperor: Alliances" that is referred to in this article? Googling it and looking through lists of published games returned no results (I'm assuming it's a game since it has House Ordos in it).

(Now that I've finally finished the Dune series I had to look this page up to see where Westwood got House Ordos from)

Thank you -CrimsonKaiser 00:45, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

The article make mention of "Emperor: Alliances." Will somebody please tell me what that is? Jason Palpatine 05:50, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

http://wiki.dune2k.com/wiki/Emperor_Alliances --Jesse Mulkey 23:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

If ıt was cancelled and no further info was given, Im not sure if it counts as canon. And in its current stage, the parts about the Emperor: Alliances look as if they are a fan fiction. Also, are you sure if that wiki page is correct? I followed Westwood very closely during the years of TS, RA2, Renegade, Emperor and (To an extent) Generals. Never even saw an indication or decleration of an expansion pack, let alone the news of its cancellation. Therefore I feel those parts about Alliances need deletion. Any comments?

House Ordos

Right, it's a rough job I know, but it's a start. That being said there are two things I think we should avoid in the future with this incarnation of the article: 1. Don't go overboard with the Ordos story. It's a minor house, and doesn't deserve more than a paragraph or two. 2. No game only information. If the only information about the article is from the games, don't include it!

Thank you -Robgea

but, the ordos only really exist in the games, and a lot of people i know dont even know that the dune universe started in books. this article as it stands is one of the best written i have seen on wikepedia, encompassing all the information in an eloquently constructed manner. congrats to whoever did this. 29/7/05

Killing this bloat

This page is way too long, and I'm excising it. Why oh why is this page bigger than House Atreides, House Harkonnen, and House Corrino? And the game units? They're going out. They can be reinstated at a page about the game. --Staecker 13:53, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

     Thank you...--Robgea 21:16, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Jesse Mulkey reinstated the page, and I'm going to cut it again. This is not "one of the most detailed articles on Wikipedia," nor should it be. The Ordos are just not that important in the Dune universe. Jesse- I know you personally like them. But having such a huge article on them in contrast to the comparatively miniscule ones on Atreides, Harkonnen, and Corrino is not right. I don't mean to start a revert war here, but I think that a much thinner Ordos page has always had support throughout the lifetime of this article. Please register your opinions, anyone who's watching.--Staecker 23:58, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Why House Ordos should not be cut.

House Ordos was never an official part of the Dune universe, just the RTS games. They deserve more information since the official sources (the games) are out of print and because they are unique, etc. While for the other houses anyone could just look in the novels or encyclopedia for info. Would you feel better about the longer House Ordos article if the other three house also had as much info? House Ordos needs to be recognized, and such a short page with such little info does not do them justice.

Actually, that's a good point - that the games are out of print. In that case, I feel like the games' articles would need to be expanded in order to justify a big Ordos page. We can't have a huge Ordos article, when Ordos is just an aspect of a game series that is not-well represented on Wikipedia. The single Ordos article (at its longest) was about as big as all the material on all 5 Dune games (at Dune (computer game) and Dune II) comibned. That's like having a huge article on Short Round, while having only a few paragraphs on Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

But you are actually beginning to make me feel like Ordos has some importance... Staecker 01:16, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Staecker, you're a retard. Quit making up retarded, anal, out-of-nowhere on-the-spot "rules" like keeping articles for spin-offs shorter than the originals, just to make others feel like you have some importance, mmkay? Idiots. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.63.199.2 (talk • contribs)

The Ordos have no canonical importance, but they were a unique and interesting House nontheless; and they have a small but devoted fanbase. According to Westwood Studios, Emperor: Battle for Dune takes place around 200 years before the original movie "Dune". -Jesse Mulkey

This page does not do House Ordos justice. There is so much more about them. -Jesse Mulkey

Who cares if it's bigger? A bigger article means more detail, let's say for someone who is interested in the house as it appears in the games. Just let it grow and encompass all of the unit information, and if it bugs you so much, add onto the Atreides, Corrino and Harkonnen pages, too.

Oh, I think I wrote most of this article. I can't remember. I know I wrote most of the bit about the home-world and the.... Well, I'm pretty sure I wrote most of it, as I remember writing specific bits that I may read throughout, and it sort of bears my "Official Wikipedian" writing-style, which I put on to make things look quasi-professional to readers here, but I also know that other people have touched it up a lot, as well. I am sorry if I made it too long, but they are my favourite House in the games and I tend monopolise subjects I am interested in. I can see where some of you are coming from with their being a nearly non-existent faction in the Duneverse, but as I believe this article makes clear, pretty much all of the info here refers to the game series, but I also feel that it sufficiently clarifies where the Ordos originate from (The Dune Encyclopedia), and what the magnitude of the role they play there is like, which I feel to also be important. I would've written the article on the Atreides and the Harkonnen Houses as well, but frankly, in terms of the games I don't care so much for them, and in terms of the books, anybody who strays upon the Dune universe article (which I believe is linked to in each and every Duneverse-relevant article on Wikipedia) will basically be pointed in the right direction. After all, Atreides and Harkonnen are Duneverse-imperative material, and Dune books may be purchased at any half-decent bookstore. Dune computer games are off the market now until, at least, another one is produced; This may very well be the only "compendium" (Ha!) of Ordos info any non-gamer might have, even if they're fans of the Dune saga itself. I really do not see the point of having a section for units, though; if you own the games, then you know what they are, and if you don't own any, then it is immaterial whether or not they utilise Cobra battle-tanks.

In summary; shorten the article if you will, but do try to keep in mind that most people won't have the chance to access this information elsewhere, and whether or not that has significance is up to whom it may concern. -jove

Also, come to think of it, do I believe I touched up on an already extant article, and that most of the perhaps overly-verbose explication was introduced by myself as a way to add the informational equivalent of seasoning and spice. I feel that information itself is all but worthless if it is communicated in a manner nobody wishes to experience. -jove

I really don't think the arguments being made here are particularly credible. For example, the claim that Ordos deserve more space because unlike Atreides or Harkonnen, there isn't a non-game source that interested persons can refer to. I would argue that is a reason to have less information on Ordos, not more. Everything which is known about them is known from the games or the dune encyclopedia. It is extremely unlikely that people who have not played the games are going to be interested in Ordos, as their representation in the games is obviously non-canon in Herbert's universe. On the other hand someone who has read the books will be much more interested in reading about the in-game depiction of canon material. An example: A local band that I am a fan of deserves more space than Franz Ferdinand because it is a lot more difficult to find information about this local band than Franz Ferdinand. Would this be a satisfactory argument? No.

The issue here isn't whether Ordos deserve a long article or not, the issue is notability - Ordos are simply not as noteworthy as Atreides or Harkonnen. Let's keep our personal feelings about Ordos to one side. 121.45.172.33 06:11, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Personally I think its a poor excuse to cut an artical because of notability or because the atreides/harkonnen articals are shorter. If someone is interested, or wants to read about house ordos then the information should be here for them to do so. Cutting for the sake of making cuts is counter productive, the artical is not lengthy by any means. Maybe it could do with a clean-up. Rominik (talk) 16:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

this is a fantastic article

as someone who just stumbled upon this, I have to say this is one of the most ridiculous things I have read on this site to date. I especially loved the completely superfluous words inserted into the headings "Infamous ... Insidious ..", and the way at some point the article just drifts off into some sort of a bizarre poetic analysis of the symbolism of freezing to death on some ice world no-one has ever seen, just briefly mentioned in some videogame no-one has ever played. It's like a fantastic fractal of irrelevance within more irrelevance. If this ever gets deleted someone should preserve it for posterity just because it is such an awesomely silly thing to read.

- Shok Teenik —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.113.57.173 (talk) 20:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

The games are certainly not unknown things "no-one has ever played", they are some of the most important RTS games ever made, since they shaped the genre for at least the first 10 years. But I do agree there is a lot of non-encyclopedic stuff in this article, almost nothing is sourced and the dramatic description of the home planet would fit better in a novel than in an encyclopedia. I think the House of Ordos is very notable, since they were created outside of the "official" dune universe, but still feature a lot of background history and such. But any such things mentioned in the article needs references to sources, preferably the game manuals or in-game cinematics. A lot described in the current article 'feels' like original research, obviously written by someone who likes the house of Ordos, and too much based on what the writer thinks of the race than what is actually known about them, and too much written in some kind of "in-universe" perspective rather than descriptions of a fictional group.

Ordos are notable and the article should absolutely NOT be deleted, but it does require a lot of cleaning up and checking against sources. 213.89.251.44 (talk) 02:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Invented in the encyclopaedia?

The article currently:

The House is listed in the non-canon Dune Encyclopedia (1984) by Willis E. McNelly[1] but has never been mentioned in any of the novels.

If you read the article about the encyclopaedia it says:

The Dune Encyclopedia is written in the form of an encyclopedia within the fictional Dune universe, often citing non-existent fictional written works. No reference is made to which information is taken directly from the works of Frank Herbert himself, and which has been invented.

Taken together, this suggests it may have been invented in the encyclopaedia. I see some earlier discussion suggesting this. However if true, IMO the article it self doesn't make this sufficiently clear. For starters, it could have first appeared outside the novels and encyclopaedia (e.g. TV or other places) which our article fails to mention (this may not have existed, but we can't expect our readers to be aware of this). Also, even if the encyclopaedia is non-canon, the normal assumption would be it intends to represent stuff that has already appeared elsewhere rather then making stuff up itself and the reader is unlikely to know it did this without checking out the article. (At least we give the date so readers don't think it first appeared in the game which caused it to appear in the encyclopaedia.) In other words, if it can be reliably sourced we should clearly say it was invented or first appeared in the encyclopaedia, rather then forcing the reader to guess. Nil Einne (talk) 09:17, 5 February 2012 (UTC)