Lore talk:Space Core

Move this to General

This really isn't lore material at all, it's straight-up an example of what a mod could be for Skyrim. It's a crossover thing, and like Zelda, DOOM, etc, we don't include this stuff in lore because it straight up isn't lore. I'm only not saying delete it because it is obvious effort went into the page. Also it straight up mentions "Atmosphere. Black holes. Astronauts. Nebulas. Jupiter. The Big Dipper. The Big Dipper!" Imperialbattlespire (talk) 00:56, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

If we're operating under 'it was published by Bethesda and not explicitly noncanonical' rules, it's no more not-lore than the Mock Turtle was in Battlespire. Both were straight up rips from their respective franchises. Also, come on, this is just a very good lorepage. Would you really want to destroy a lore page this good? Jacksol (talk) 00:59, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I 100% agree with Imperial and was actually creating this talk, and got into an edit conflict because Imperial Battlespire beat me to it. My idea was moving it over to General and calling the section, Portal 2 Cameo. Then having all that info put into the page called that instead of just space core. The reasoning for this is because this is what it actually is. The Dialogue makes it quite clear its not an Elder Scrolls thing or native to Elder Scrolls Multiverse/Universe. For sure it mentions stuff only found in Earth's solar system or Milky Way Galaxy. Like Jupiter and the Bigger Dipper. That is another reason why it should be called Portal 2 Cameo when we move it over. Because its 100% a cameo. Its a special promotion Bethesda did with steam and its best its not part of any lore page for that reason. TheVampKnight (talk) 01:05, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

The space core is explained in universe and has had effort made to allow it to fit into the universe with the lowest levels of suspension of disbelief (See- the very legitimate and super canon Spheriphem race). It spouting nonsense words because it's insane doesn't mean it isn't 'native to the Elder Scrolls Multiverse', not does being a tie in exclude something from being given a lore page. We have a lore page for the Mock Turtle, who is similarly from another IP. He's just also in a main game without requiring an addon. I don't see how this is much different from Bethesda produced CC content, frankly.

Also, again- the page isn't hurting anyone by existing in lorespace. I don't see why we should relegate it to general. Jacksol (talk) 01:23, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Okay, reading the portal wiki on the space sphere, it won't let me link the site dirrectly. What is mentioned about this on that wiki is very important because it mentions this in the brackets (( To celebrate The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim coming to the Steam Workshop, Valve created a mod to have the Space Sphere drop into a nearby home just outside the city of Whiterun. In this mod he is known as the Space Core ))

So what its saying is its a Mod that was created by Valve. Aka Steam, and it likely wasn't created by Bethesda. But the people that run the Portal games. That is a big deal too, because this would mean Bethesda didn't create this mod. Which means this entire page should be deleted. Because its not made by Bethesda or Zenimax and is created by an independent company outside the makers of the TES Series. But yeah this should be put into General, and we should have a section on it called Portal 2 Cameo but it for sure doesn't belong in the lore section of things.TheVampKnight (talk) 01:32, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Vamp, you can just google the quest. The steam page says "To celebrate the opening of the Steam Workshop for Skyrim, Valve and Bethesda have teamed up to bring you the Portal 2 Space Core mod". It's effectively the same amount of work on bethesda's end as most CC content.Jacksol (talk) 01:36, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

It does not matter, because what was stated by a dev promotional stuff is a category of its own. Meaning its outside of the typical canon and this for sure is that a promotional item introduced in a mod that Bethesda endorsed, but Bethesda can endorse any mod it wants does not make it canon. Unless Bethesda outright states this mod is canon. I know you like it I like the concept of the core, but given a lore stand point it just does not fit with any of the actual lore and it is also a mod.TheVampKnight (talk) 02:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

(←) I've reverted the recent changes to this article; this is not a humour page and does not need that information. Let's stick to lore-relevant information and keep this page in lorespace. We already have multiple disclaimers on the page advising readers of its potential non-canonicity, but like it or not this is an officially-approved mod and can exist here per lorespace guidelines. I'm strongly opposed to this suggestion to move it to generalspace provided lore-unfriendly info ("The Big Dipper. The Big Dipper!") is kept off the page. —⁠Legoless (talk) 02:24, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I fully agree with Legoless, the page is completely fine as is, it has numerous disclaimers that are more than enough to warrant its existence The Rim of the Sky (talk) 02:47, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I also agree, but I feel like 'notable spheriphem' does fall under relevant information. The creation is just inherently funny. Jacksol (talk) 02:49, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Belongs in General without a doubt. Once there, the playful verbiage can be restored. -Dcsg (talk) 03:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Even if we do, keep this lore page,it does not belong in the Aetheral fragments page, and should be completely removed there, I know some like having a lore page for it. But its a fact this is both a mod and a promotional thing, and it just doesn't fit TES.TheVampKnight (talk) 03:09, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

The language used in the recent edit is not encyclopaedic; moving it to General doesn't cure it of this. My reasoning for removing the 'notable spheriphem' info is based on Lore:People guidelines on what is lore-relevant. We only have one example of this construct and it's not exactly a historical figure.

TheVampKnight: it is not the purpose of the wiki to decide what "fits with TES". We document all official content, and this is an official publication. —⁠Legoless (talk) 03:17, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

This suggestion is effectively voided by definition – Lorespace covers the lore from all official content, and General covers information that is not directly about the content in the games or books. Fall of the Space Core is official content and therefore not valid for inclusion in General. --Enodoc (talk) 15:35, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Not Lore Worthy

Once again revisiting the topic of having this article either userfied, moved to general, or deleted entirely. The official summary and way this was packaged was always as a mod, with that description of explicitly being a mod, official or not it was always clear this wasn’t supposed to hold any lore or canonical weight. If this official mod made an attempt to properly integrate itself into the Tes setting and canon then I think it wouldn’t necessarily be misguided to host it in lore space, however there are a ton of irl references found in the dialogue of the space core that would never be implemented into a piece of content released that was meant to be taken with any lore or canon value. I think things like mods and such are a case by case basis when it comes to citing them in some fashion in lore and to me it was always very obvious that in the case of space core it shouldn’t be and I believe we should address that now. Dcking20 (talk) 17:20, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Once again opposing the deletion of in-universe information taken from an official release. The banner informing users that this is from a crossover is more than sufficient to address the above concerns. —⁠Legoless (talk) 18:18, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

It's an official mod made between both BGS and Valve. It has lore in it explaining its presence in the setting. Even if it's considered lowbrow or even extremely bad, it's still lore. The ambiguity note on the page is fine enough to clear up confusion. I will admit that I'm biased though as I find this extremely funny. CoolBlast3 (talk) 19:00, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

To be clear I’m not anti "bad lore" or anything like that, if it’s lore it’s lore and should be documented on lore pages. My specific objection here is to the idea that this is actually meant to reflect lore in any way, given that the content is described as a mod, uses canon breaking irl terms, and is described by a BGS dev as "in a category of its own" in regards to canonicity I truly don’t believe it should be given any credence lore wise. We are already making a special concession with the article by giving it its own special disclaimer acknowledging we realize it’s shaky at best, I’m just suggesting we go a step further and just straight up not feature it in lore. Dcking20 (talk) 20:17, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm with Legoless on this, this stuff has been debated before and the Crossover header gives the right amount information as to where this article entails. It is all told from the perspective that the plug-in provides us. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 20:47, 9 August 2023 (UTC)