That can't be true, given that "Undyne", "Undyne the Undying", and "Undyne the Undying/in battle" are three seperate pages. Also, do we even have "In Battle" articles on the Deltarune Wiki?
We’re still trying to sort things out on both wikis since we forked.
Okay, that just makes my point clearer
Anyways, Spamton and Spamton NEO, they both got split because of severe article bloat. Spamton had the most trivia of all characters before paid release.
Gerson Boom does not have this issue, but a split would make 3 articles, but it would still look odd because of all the internal naming.
if we do this shouldn’t we also make snowdrake’s mother and the amalgamate that has snowdrake’s mother in it different articles?
Eh, Snowdrake's Mother only appears or is referenced in Undertale as the amalgamate, so I wouldn't call it comparable
I think it makes perfect sense to refer to the darkner version of Gerson as Gerson in his article, and I think a page split between lightner and darkner forms would be entirely unnecessary. Even if the character’s name is deliberately obscured in-game, it becomes increasingly clear who it is the further you progress through chapter 4. I don't think it's helpful to use the less descriptive, purposefully anonymized name (“old man”) instead of the more descriptive name of the character (“Gerson”), and in fact I think it makes the article less readable and harder to understand. And the page already discusses his darkner reincarnation’s origins, so I really don’t think there’s an accuracy issue here either.
I think we shouldn’t do this, or at least, not in isolation.
The existing precedent on the wiki is to document darkners and their light world counterparts as the same character, even when the latter is inanimate. Look at Tenna, Lancer, and Queen to name a few. In all cases their infobox images are tagged “Dark World” and “Light World”, and all of the article’s writing treats them as the same entity:
In the Light World, Queen is a plain black laptop without any distinctive features.
I don’t think we should arbitrarily change how we tackle Gerson vs. the other darkners. I guess you could argue that the Old Man’s light world equivalent is the hammer, not actually Gerson, but you can just as easily make the case that narratively it’s very clear these characters are one and the same through reincarnation.
Going a step further, I think the current precedent is the right way of documenting these characters based off of what we know so far about darkners. When Tenna is hurt in the dark world, the TV in the light world cracks. We have more evidence pointing to the two entities being one and the same than not. Documenting them under that same model is going to be the easiest for readers to interpret and engage with.
I once again would like to reiterate that I believe a lightner Gerson page would be redundant due to all the information about him could easily be put in the Alvin or Lord of the Hammer pages because other than being from Undertale that’s all the relevant information aside from old man
I agree with Gil and OceanBagel. Having an article titled "Gerson Boom" and not consistently using the name "Gerson" does not seem like the best course of action. It becomes increasingly clear as the game goes on that the Old Man and Gerson Boom come from the same source. In fact, the letter to Alvin provides the strongest evidence for this.
In terms of naming, we actually do enforce the Gerson/Old Man name distinction across articles and use each depending on context. Take the Frisk article, as an example. Across all articles on the Undertale Wiki, we refer to Frisk using the term "protagonist" to avoid spoilers on who they actually are. Only on the Frisk article itself, and in context where their name is revealed, do we use the name "Frisk". To continue to use the term "protagonist" or separate "protagonist" and "Frisk" would make no sense given these contexts.
The point here is that Gerson and Frisk have similar situations on the wikis. We use "Frisk" on the Frisk article, so we should continue to use "Gerson" on the Gerson article. In the context of the article name, this is the most appropriate.
Phew, thanks for stating what I originally intended, F-sharp!
I am really that tired to clarify that this whole time… and I apologize to everyone that my posts weren’t as constructive as I’d like them to be. Tired tax hit hard.
Frisk was named at the end of the pacifist route when you beat Asriel in game.
Yeah I know, I was too tired to think straight at the time.
Edit: I just realized the same dated tired reply from me confused two people, dang….
Gerson only appears as The Old Man so I would say it's absolutely comparable.
I think it should be split. OM is a darkner based off the Hammer and dust, and Gerson is the creator of LotH, HoHaM, and father to Alvin
From what we know right now, Gerson is also the dust. That’s the whole point of the Darkner existing, plus we don’t have Light World and Dark World forms split like that.
okay but what does this even stand for
The History of Humans and Monsters. This title is only visible in Chapter 1, that’s it.
OHhhhhh I see
Jovial acronym spotted.