Talk:Rahk Lo

Spelling

So in the Tian Xia World Guide Rakh Lo is always spelt Rahk Lo, do we know if this was an intentional name change, an error or conflict? TheUnyielding (talk) 14:44, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

We don't but the Rakh Lo spelling persists into 2E in the Ancestry Guide, so it is not just a 1E->2E change. Only Paizo will know if it's a definitive change or a typo. Maybe ask on the Paizo forum please? Until then, I suggest we keep with the original spelling used in many previous books and I'll add a footnote for now to avoid confusion. Good spot! --Fleanetha (talk) 21:37, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Looking at TXWG, that's not the only change as Rakh Lo is now classed as a nation, which will need adding to the city material. --Fleanetha (talk) 21:45, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

There are now Rakh Lo (city) and Rahk Lo (nation), and both are now listed separately in {{Darklands navbox}}.

Sources since TXWG have not helped matters; Tian Xia Character Guide and Silver Bark, Golden Blades use "Rahk Lo", and Divine Mysteries uses "Rakh Lo".

A more complete survey of each spelling, sorted top to bottom by canon tier, then recency:

Rakh Lo	or	Rahk Lo
Divine Mysteries		Tian Xia Character Guide
Ancestry Guide		Tian Xia World Guide
Inner Sea Races		Silver Bark, Golden Blades
Dragon Empires Gazetteer

They're at least all internally consistent.

A cursory search of the messageboards and 2E Discord suggests it hasn't been clarified by Paizo staff.

Since Paizo haven't settled on a spelling, we need to choose one, merge the two articles, and also merge their category trees. -Oznogon (talk) 21:19, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Asked on the messageboards since this might not be resolvable without an official opinion. -Oznogon (talk) 21:34, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

I'd lean Rahk Lo, overriding the more recent Divine Mysteries, because it's the consistent spelling in TXWG and TXCG, the most recent primary sources for the location. The Divine Mysteries reference is a single minor reference, and Ancestry Guide is the only 2E/Lost Omens high-tier source to consistently use "Rakh Lo" multiple times in the same work. -Oznogon (talk) 21:22, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Seems straightforward and unlikely to be very contentious to me; I also favor Rahk Lo until official clarification. -Ravenstone (talk) 23:42, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

I'll merge the two articles to Rahk Lo for now then, but I'll leave the discussion open for a while longer in case there are stronger opinions before merging categories. It'll be easier either way to rename one article after completing the merge. Nope, that's for admins only. I'll merge the content and leave a redirect, but an admin will have to use Special:MergeHistory to reconcile that. -Oznogon (talk) 04:01, 18 March 2025 (UTC)