Age Inconsistencies?
On Raynor's biography: "Raynor is also a man with a past. He is a known associate of notorious convict Tychus Findlay, the pair of them having served together in the 321st Colonial Rangers Battalion "Heaven's Devils" during the Confederacy/Kel-Morian Guild Wars almost twenty years ago. Their first meeting was in the brig at Camp McIntyre while serving 30 days apiece for insubordination.
Both men were listed as missing in action for almost nine months after a reconnaissance mission into Kel-Morian territory in the latter stages of the fighting on Mar Sara. Findlay was later turned over to the Confederacy by the Kel-Morians as part of a prisoner exchange after hostilities ceased. He was promptly incarcerated for desertion under fire. Exactly how Raynor managed to avoid Findlay's fate and land a job as marshal is unknown." Wouldn't 20 years ago make almost no sense? At the start of SC Raynor was 29, lets add +1 for BW, and then +4 for SC2, thats 34, now 34-20=14. Could Raynor be 14 years old and be in a "Colonial Rangers Battalion"? You can stretch it and say almost 20 years as being around 17 years, that would make Raynor 17 at that time, which is more reasonable. Correct me if I'm misinformed. Zsionic 01:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Nice point, although StarCraft begins in December 2499, the Brood War ending sometime in 2501 (it's very likely at least, you can see a timeline here {shameless plug :)}. SC2 takes place in 2506, four years having passed since the Brood War. Twenty years ago is 2486, which would place Raynor at 16, the Guild Wars having started in 2485.
16 may not be stretching it that much. Cadet units could easily be maintaind by the Confederacy, given its militaristic nature. Hell, if one applies maths, Duke's been "defending" the Confederacy since the age of 13! Still, good point.--Hawki 08:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Image
That image, said to possibly be an older Jim Raynor, is thought by many to be Arcturus Mengsk. It seems to resemble his picture much more closely. --Doncroft 00:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I did point out that it may be Raynor. I think this one looks more like Mengsk, which is why it's on Mengsk's page: [[Image:MengskII.jpg|thumb|Older Mengsk and Nova?]].
Otherwise I would have included both images on Raynor's page. PsiSeveredHead 01:14, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm just a passerby, but I think it is Jim Raynor. The dragon tattoo on his right arm matches the flash pic from the official site. http://www.starcraft2.com/features/heroes/raynor.xml
On the more recent edit...
I have attempted to separate the 'in-universe' from the 'out-of-universe' in my edit, with the biographical section being totally 'in-universe'. Personally, I think it worked better before the most recent edit by Hawki that corrupted the 'in-universe' biography with text from the 'out-of-universe' "Other Appearances" section (which is written from an 'out-of-universe' perspective.)
For example, the "StarCraft:Ghost" section does not flow at all with the rest of the biography. The "StarCraft II" section was only meant to contain any out-of-universe notes concerning the upcoming game, with the rest going into the "Post-Brood War" section. I mused that the "Post-Brood War" section would be expanded and appropriately retitled (in the fashion of the other biographic sections) as more concrete information on the game became available (perhaps only when the game was released.)
There was also a modification to the whole Dylarian shipyard thing. This sort of thing is a potential problem with the article as a whole, where some things are probably best shuffled over to the Raiders' article or elsewhere and mentioned just briefly in this article. This would be to avoid a bunch of duplication and allow the article to focus as much on Raynor, and only Raynor, as possible.
I apologize if I'm simply being difficult. There doesn't seem to be concrete policies concerning article styles and all of that, so it may very well be that my idea of 'better' doesn't jive at all.
Cheers!
--Meco 22:22, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
There's a lot of biographical changes, too many to analyze. What do you mean by "out-of-universe" (besides Alternity or Ghost)? In any event, I think a brief mention of how he got the Hyperion is in order (and where he got it from). PsiSeveredHead 22:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Damit, I'd just explained myself and psi's edits screws me up, so I have to do it again. Damn you!
Ahem, anyway...
The thing about Blizzard is that it basically considers all its products for a universe to BE in the universe, providing that they have storyline. While this obviously excludes the likes of the StarCraft boardgame, StarCraft Adventures has a plot as far as I can tell. While minor and developed by someone outside Blizzard, the fact remains that it was authorised by Blizzard and, as far as I can tell, has no plot discrepencies. As such, it's really part of the same overall universe.
In hindsight, Raynor's SC: Ghost section could probably go as 'other appearances' as we know next to nothing about Ghost's plot and literally nothing about Raynor's role in it. Still, there's a general format for units and heroes, how they're divided between their portrayals in the game (eg. the Marine has seperate sections for its portrayal in SC1, Ghost and SC2). Perhaps Raynor's Ghost section could go elsewhee but it seems wise to seperate SC2 from SC1 for him.
As for duplication, with similar articles for Raynor and the Raiders, I think it's a good idea, as it makes each article independent, more accessible and means less jumping around. I'll use Halopedia as an example which, as far as I'm concerned, is drowning in irrelevance (seriously, why are there articles for Communism and Western Australia in a FANON wiki?) The planet Reach is an example, which falls to the Covenant. Thing is, there's one article for Reach and another articl for 'The Battle of Reach'. This disjoints the article, meaning more jumping around. I've pretty much been converted but I agree with SC wiki's current policy of having redirects and merging articles. As such, this means that each article should be independent, eg. not having an article for Aiur and another article for the zerg invasion of it.
Anyway, that's just my take.--Hawki 23:00, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
There is at the moment a canon policy. The game trumps the novels (such as the Queen of Blades novel) but as long as there's no contradictions, what goes in the novels still stands. There isn't an article writing policy because I'm not good enough at writing articles to write one. Someone who can write articles much better than I can would have to propose one. PsiSeveredHead 23:02, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
By 'in-universe' I just mean the perspective from which it is written. 'In universe' is as if somebody who exists in the StarCraft world was writing it, as opposed to 'out-of-universe' which is from the perspective of somebody who knows it is fictional.
So for example, right now in the biography there's... "In StarCraft II, four years after the Brood Wars, Raynor...". I would avoid using the term "StarCraft II" because it's a 'real world' term and not one that exists 'in universe'. (That part would probably be better if it was something like this: "Four years after the Brood Wars, Raynor...")
I suppose it becomes apparent that I tried to do something similar with the Marine, Battlecruiser, and Banshee articles.
If the Ghost section can be moved back to the "Other Appearances" section, then my only issue will be with "Jim Raynor will be "the central hero and character of the Terran campaign."" since that's phrased in an 'out-of-universe' perspective. Hopefully if will be superfluous to have since when the game comes out it'll be obvious that this is true.
--Meco 23:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
You make a good point. In-universe for biography stuff. Out-of-universe is okay for gameplay stuff. PsiSeveredHead 23:58, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
At present, there's a very nascent writing policy. PsiSeveredHead 00:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
By the way, Raynor in StarCraft: Adventures should probably go under Other Appearances, as we don't know when it took place. (Whatever happened to his Alternity Protoss followers by the time of StarCraft II?) 00:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Some trivia
I compared the artwork where Raynor is seen smoking with the celebrities using My Heritage page and it shown the 58% similarity to Josh Holloway (he played Sawyer in Lost TV show).Shall we mention this in the trivia section? :P I must say that Jim on this artwork and Holloway look almost the same. --Rethas 20:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Really? I'm watching Lost tonight, so I'll take a closer look.
I say yes, but please don't say it's deliberate (as we have no proof of that) :) Kimera 757 (talk) 01:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
An interesting find
This screenshot from BlizzCon 2008 shows Zerglings attacking New Folsom Prison, only to be massacred by Dominion Hellions.
Look at the two cells on the right. One contains Jim Raynor, and the other contains Zeratul! UPL2229 19:41, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Good and evil?
Blizzard seemed to directly say that Raynor makes choices between good and evil in Wings of Liberty, but says the opposite here. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) 16:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
It's not even good and evil choices. It's just "What do you think is better, Raynor?"
Obviously things "mellowed" during development. (For instance, Kachinsky only acts like a jerk once.) PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) contribs) 21:58, August 2, 2010 (UTC)
Ambig Canon
This may go under the "recent edits" section, but as recent back then was 2008, it seemed wise to create a new section. Basically in regards to the canonity of Biting the Bullet and Operation Claws:
- Biting the Bullet: Is the template really needed? Yes, the mission by itself is ambiguous, but Liberty's Crusade and Queen of Blades establish it as having distinctly occurred. The template only really serves to raise doubts on these sources as well. There's no discrepencies, so I'd say the template is really a piece of misinformation for that section.
- Operation Claws: Well obviously the spirit of the mission is in question, but I'm not sure about its form. To say that Raynor saved Planet Christmas from the Zergrinch is in no way outside the norm of what we know he was doing in that period of time. Think it was Browder who distinctly said the maps were canon, so as long as we don't elaborate on the Christmas aspect, it should be alright to place in.--Hawki 09:15, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
The only connection between Biting the Bullet and the novels was a vague reference to working with Tassadar. I don't know if that's enough. As for Operation Claws, Browder said most maps were canon. OC draws way too much on this wiki to treat it like canon. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) contribs) 12:04, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
Grammatical Error
Under "Great War Begins", the last sentence of the first paragraph:
"with whom he would share a close working relationship with."
is erroneous, as the "with" at the end is redundant. Can someone please edit this out? User:Whisperblade
Damage?
In the SC2 portion, it mentions that Raynor does X amount of damage in Liberation day and Y amount of damage in Belly of the Beast; what about Piercing the Shroud? Someone do research on this please, thanks. Brainwasher5 07:34, December 12, 2010 (UTC)
It's been added...apparently before you queeried...Hawki 11:06, December 12, 2010 (UTC)
Interesting point that might be worth adding
A nice bit of trivia that probably should be added once the page is unlocked for editing: Raynor is the only character to appear in all 6 episodes of Starcraft and Brood War.
Yitzi 03:26, March 22, 2011 (UTC)Yitzi
Assassins
the HEART OF THE SWARM SECTION TYPO:
Sorry but WTF does this mean?
"He witnessed her eliminate her would-be assassins.[107]"
Does that mean that Kerrigan, weak and unarmed, actually kill Findlay herself and not Raynor? LOL!!! PLEASE FIX THIS. kthxbai
- No, it means that she eliminated the assassins Mengsk sent, as seen in the teaser trailer. Also be careful of language and remember to sign your posts properly.--Hawki 02:51, September 12, 2011 (UTC)