Thread:Uskok/@comment-27295021-20180325125431/@comment-996391-20180415131930

Ninclow wrote: It's not speculation, it's logic. That is - from where I'm standing at least. I fail to see how it is any more speculative for events connected to the character of Jim Hawkins's father to take place than it is for us to conclude that his Captain Hawkins is a man based on the fact that A) He looks like a man. B) He dress like a man. And C) He is a father, meaning he can't be a female in man's clothing/in disguise trying to get ahead in a man's world. Because then he'd be a she, and a mother, not a he/father.

I need you to explain this to me. How can you possibly conclude that it is speculative. How's your thought process? (Sorry, not to be difficult, I just simply can't follow your train of thought. (Or is it "thread" of thought?))

Logic says the Wicked Wench/Black Pearl must have had a shipyard where she was actually built, and yet we do not have an article on that shipyard. Logic says King George II must have had a mother or else he wouldn't exist in the Pirates of the Caribbean universe and yet we do not have an article about his mother. Logic says Angelica's last name should be Teach because her father is Edward Teach but in all the articles she is named Angelica, not Angelica Teach. Logic says the United States already exist in the Pirates of the Caribbean universe and Theodore Roosevelt had already been their president because we have seen Joshamee Gibbs sleeping with a teddy bear, and yet we do not have articles about the US and Roosevelt. Logic says the French revolution must have already happened in the Pirates of the Caribbean universe because the British are using a new invention, the guillotine in DMTNT but we do not have an article about the French revolution. Why do we not include all that logically assumable info in our articles? Never shown in any Pirates of the Caribbean material, never mentioned in any Pirates of the Caribbean material.

Ninclow wrote: Why on Earth would day have to be? Any individual, fictional or otherwise, is, the last time I checked, the sum of their life and experiences. And how can James Hook possibly exist displaying all of the traits indicative of the experiences we know him to have gone through in Peter Pan without him actually having gone through in Peter Pan? How do you explain that?

And then I repeat, one cannot exist without the other because a individual, fictional or otherwise, is Are there anything in canon contradicting the co-existence of those stories within POTC canon?

Maybe to show that the events of Peter Pan have actually happened in Pirates of the Caribbean? How can Hook display those traits? By having in Pirates of the Caribbean a life similar to the one he had in the Peter Pan universe, but still different in some small details. For example, in Peter Pan Hook never left Neverland once he got there but in Pirates of the Caribbean he was in Portugal, apparently immortal, after spending some time sailing off the coast of India. Don Rafael didn't encounter him in some mythical fairy land. You see, his POTC story is already different than his Peter Pan story. What solid proof do you have that his POTC life is exactly the same as his Peter Pan life? And by proof I mean a POTC proof.

As shown with the teddy bear and the guillotine example, the you-can't-have-this-without-that logic doesn't always work.

Ninclow wrote: No, I actually have one for that, which is why I refrain from bringing either storytelling or speculation into this discussion.

The only thing you are bringing into this discussion are your speculations, though you like to call them logic.

Ninclow wrote: And I am not asking you to. I am merely questioning the logic behind how you can reasonably assume two characters from other stories to be part of POTC canon without those stories also existing within the extended universe in some shape or form. Why would they even put those characters in there, even "as a joke", if they weren't? It'd make no sense, because there'd be no events in their life leading up to their appearance in POTC canon, they're just "there". How does that make sense at all?

If Jack bids Will farewell on Port Royal and later encounters him on Tortuga because he was looking for him, it is reasonable to assume Will must have gotten from point A to B, and that there is a reason for him to taking the trouble of journeying that distance. Why would James and Captain Hawkins be any different?

What prevents the stories of Treasure Island and Peter Pan to exist in POTC canon? How do they conflict canon, in what manner are their existence at all impossible in the light that characters, not inspired from, but hailing from them, is not?

One character from other stories, not two. That character, Captain Hook, exists in POTC in some shape and form. But there is no POTC proof that that shape and form are the same shape and form like in Peter Pan. Take the Flying Dutchman for example. Is its POTC story the same as the real-world legend of the Flying Dutchman? No, it's not. Was Davy Jones originally a Dutch sailor in POTC? No! Did Davy Jones curse God and sink with his ship on a voyage from the East Indies to the Netherlands? No! Is there a Dutch merchant captain called Van der Decken in POTC? No! Was the Flying Dutchman originally a Dutch merchant vessel in POTC? No! Is the Flying Dutchman doomed to sail the waters around the Cape of Good Hope for all eternity in POTC? No! The only thing that's actually the same in both the original legend and POTC is the name of the ship, the Flying Dutchman. The original story doesn't exist in POTC. So yes, you can have an element of one story put into another story with that element not having the same background like in the original story.

Now you remind me of Matthew Bowyer Fan. Ever since he joined this Wiki he's been asking me questions like "how did that person get from here to there", "what sort of transport did that person use", "how did this person survive that situation". Unfortunately, 99% of my answers had to be "I don't know. It was never shown nor explained in any POTC material. Some stories were simply never meant to be told." I'm telling you the same thing. Yes, it is reasonable to assume that Will must have gotten from point A to B, but if his journey from point A to B wasn't shown we will not include it in any article. The same works for James Hook.

I repeat the question. Do you have any solid POTC proof that the stories of Treasure Island and Peter Pan have happened in Pirates of the Caribbean?

Ninclow wrote: It don't have to be a "great Disney plan", because by putting a character from one story into another, they're co-existing by default. Otherwise - how did the characters get there? This isn't Once Upon a Time, where fairy tale or otherwise fictional characters can travel "between realms" with magic beans or something like that. They didn't just magically appear from nowhere, from an in-universe perspective, they would have to come from somewhere.

How did the characters get there? Simple. By the will of the writer and the power of his/her pencil. From an in-universe perspective they did not just appear out of thin air, that's true. They did come from somewhere, but we don't know when, how, why, and where they came from. It was never shown in any POTC material. Probably, we will never know the answers to those questions. It's another story that's never meant to be told. This franchise is full of such stories. Get used to it. It's the only way to prevent your brain from exploding.

Ninclow wrote: Also, I would like to clarify my position on the HarryPotterRules1 thing:

I have fallen on a patch of bad luck lately, and I have very poor self-esteem to boot. I feels good, fulfilling almost, to be able to leave the stresses of real life behind and simply talk about something about which I have a passionate interest, even if we don't agree. I asked HarryPotterRules1 on discord to give me feedback on our discussion in order to get an objective, third-party opinion on whether I was somehow lacking something in my arguments or otherwise missing something in yours since neither of us have been able to convince the other. Initially, I was mentally prepared for a response on discord for my own benefit and nothing more.

However, HarryPotterRules1 suddenly told me that he had joined the discussion, and this is where my poor self-esteem comes in. As mentioned above, I really enjoy this discussion, even if we don't agree, and I sort of freaked out, worried that you would hold it against me if HarryPotterRules1 somehow inadvertently came across as someone I had "marshaled to my own cause", as it were. I have joined discussions before, where fact have been determined by what the majority thinks, not necessarily what the piece of information implies, and I didn't want you to feel like I was doing something like that to you.

In short, I overreacted, and I'm not proud of it. HarryPotterRules1 is welcome to join if he wants to. I simply had my plate full of adversity and depression in real life right now and got worked up because I was outright frightened something similar would happen online - being the place to which I escape to catch a break from the above and all.

So - in short, I messed up, and I apologize. :-(

I work for a company that's paying minimum wages. I live in a messed up country where for many people the only option in life is working for minimum wages, moving to a different country, or starving to death. Two weeks ago I was sent to a new workplace in another city because one of my colleagues jokingly said to the boss that I had volunteered to work there (which I didn't). In that new workplace we had to work every day for two, three, and sometimes even four hours longer than in my original workplace. Every day I had access to the internet only for half an hour in a bar during my lunch break. Just half an hour to check the Wiki and see if someone has messed up something. And when I came back to my original workplace I discovered that our working time there was increased by two hours, which means even though I will sleep in my own home I will have less free time to do something on the Wiki or somewhere else. I'm an admin on several Wikias. It's not easy but that's what I chose. Life is hard and I have a lot of reasons to be angry but I'm not complaining. Most importantly, I'm not letting my personal problems affect how I treat other people. What happens outside of the Wiki stays outside of the Wiki. Treat others how you want to be treated. Every Wiki member is free to join this discussion. As for the apology, HarryPotterRules1 is the one you should be apologizing to, not me.