Wowpedia

We have moved to Warcraft Wiki. Click here for information and the new URL.

READ MORE

Wowpedia
Register
No edit summary
m (→‎top: clean up, replaced: [[Project:About| → [[Project:About the wiki|)
 
(124 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
  +
'''Welcome to Wowpedia!'''
{| class="navbox toccolors collapsible" style="margin-bottom:0.5em"
 
|-
 
! Welcome to WoWWiki!
 
|- style="text-align:left"
 
|Hello, '''{{BASEPAGENAME}}''', and welcome to '''[[WoWWiki:About|WoWWiki]]''', the Warcraft wiki! Thank you for your contributions, and we heartily [[WoWWiki:Be bold in updating pages|encourage you to continue contributing]]!
 
   
  +
Hello, '''Ashbear160''', and welcome to '''[[Project:About the wiki|Wowpedia]]''', the Warcraft wiki! Thank you for your contributions, and we heartily [[Project:Be bold in updating pages|encourage you to continue contributing]]!
Some useful links:
 
  +
  +
Some links you may find useful:
 
* The [[:Category:Things to do|'''things to do''' category]] has lots of things to keep you busy!
 
* The [[:Category:Things to do|'''things to do''' category]] has lots of things to keep you busy!
* Check out the '''[[WoWWiki:Community portal|Community portal]]''' for some useful editors' links.
+
* Check out the '''[[Project:Community portal|Community portal]]''' for some useful editors' links.
  +
* Many Wowpedians frequent our [[WP:IRC|'''IRC channel''']], on [irc://chat.freenode.net/wowpedia chat.freenode.net, #wowpedia].
* Note that WoWWiki isn't an absolute democracy, but many decisions are [[WoWWiki:Voting policy|voted on]]. See a [[:Category:Votes in progress|list of '''votes in progress''']].
 
  +
* '''Finally, please check out the site [[Project:Guidelines|guidelines]] and [[Project:Policies|policies]]!'''
* Many WoWWikians frequent our [[WoWWiki:IRC|'''IRC Channel''']], on [irc://chat.freenode.net/wowwiki chat.freenode.net, #wowwiki].
 
* '''Finally, please check out the site [[WoWWiki:Guidelines|guidelines]] and [[WoWWiki:Policies|policies]]!'''
 
 
We hope you enjoy editing here and being a [[WoWWiki:WoWWikians|WoWWikian]]!<br/>Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (<code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>) as this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, just ask on the relevant talk page, or visit the [[WoWWiki:Village pump|'''Village pump''']].
 
|}
 
--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 22:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 
 
== Preview ==
 
 
I notice you have a number of small edits{{#if:Template:Hunter pets|&nbsp;on [[Template:Hunter pets]]|}}. If you're editing a lot of things on one page and want to see how it looks, you may wish to use the "Show preview" button before saving the page to see that. Thanks! --{{User:Pcj/sig}} 14:02, December 22, 2009 (UTC)
 
 
== Removing icons ==
 
I shouldn't have to. I did for the giants, but if you do everything in one edit, I'm just going to hit revert (if it involved added many icons). {{User:Coobra/Sig4}} 21:24, April 17, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
:Sighing wrecking what i wasted a few hours is painstakingly since i believe it helps significantly to everybody looking at it, and i don't see clutter anywhere in fact it removes the sense of clutter because it divides races more cleanly but i'll see what i can do--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 21:27, April 17, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
::Personnal advice: for such changes, work it aside on your name space, then show and talk it in the template talk page.
 
::{{User:A'noob/sig}} 21:31, April 17, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
:::I still plan to do a example for the template:races so i can prove it doesn't look cluttered and actually looks less cluttered because it removes focus on words dividing it with images--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 21:34, April 17, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
::::Do you have any complaints then for the creature template icons then A'NOOB?--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 21:35, April 17, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
== SoL ==
 
 
Likely due to their exclusive images from Blizzard HQ. {{User:Coobra/Sig4}} 20:19, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
:I also assumed that, managed to find a email of a admin we'll see what they say--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 20:21, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
::Well that was fast the admin is changing the host :P--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 20:22, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
:::Ah. {{User:Coobra/Sig4}} 20:30, April 24, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
== Brasscannon icon ==
 
 
What do you think [[File:IconSmall CannonBrass.gif]] or [[File:Brasscannon2.gif]] for the alliance gunship cannon icon? {{User:Coobra/Sig4}} 19:21, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
Put the two they are already uploaded, put one has alternate ,i think since we already have alternate for ogres and blood elfs--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 22:58, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
:Hmm... I'd rather there not be an alternative image to this, when only 2 cannons actively use the model. But if you have a preference I'd love to know it, cause one of them will be deleted. {{User:Coobra/Sig4}} 00:17, June 7, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
:The first looks cooler but the second reveals more but it misses a the front part, so it's kinda of a moot point, but i guess the first since it looks cooler and i'am able to associate it with a cannon faster
 
 
== Your Cataclysm page creations ==
 
 
Some of the new articles that you made for creatures from Cataclysm based on [http://www.wowhead.com/blog=159674 this Wowhead blog post] have some problems about them. Storm dragons are not mentioned on page 141 of Shadows & Light. Pygmies are not mentioned on the Wowhead blog. Jungle plants are not mentioned on the Wowhead blog. Barramunda, though concept art of them exists, are not mentioned on the Wowhead blog. Finally, Monkeys are not mentioned on the Wowhead blog. Am I missing a major section of the blog post, or is this an ill disguised attempt at using alpha information to complete your race listing templates?--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 22:30, June 19, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
Ergh no the shadow light was a accident while copying something, i thought i removed it, pygmies where shown in the cataclysm presentation at blizcon with the model of sand gnomes, monkeys, jungle plants, ettins are too mentioned in earlier previews, and barramunda is concept art but many things that are a concept art are also there, you're not missing any anything, what you're doing is dismissing earlier previews, and now i'm not doing any of that race listing template thing i was trying to fill the red links on the cataclysm page, because red links in articles look bad, especially main articles.--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 00:06, June 20, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
If the pages are based on earlier legitimate previews, why not use those previews as citation in the stead of Wowhead?--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 00:20, June 20, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
I just copy pasted most of it so i didn't discern differences sloppy job of me but i disliked the red links--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 01:02, June 20, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
Please do not create sloppy pages just to get rid of a red link. Also, please find the sources you mentioned for the pages you created, and add them to the pages.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 01:21, June 20, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
== Titanic watchers and such ==
 
 
Auraya exists within Ulduar, and is therefore part of ''an'' "Ulduar group," but I am trying to classify the group of six "watchers/keepers" around Ulduar that each have their own temple separately from the others. Auraya seems weaker and less important. I am not sure what her not having her own icon on WoWWiki has to do with anything. As for organization, I want to avoid assumptions, but I also want to classify the "titanic watchers" based on their differences. "Watcher" and "keeper" are used as the label for several titanic things, and I am going to dig through some sources for some context. Some of the things listed on the page just might share models, but may have never been called a "watcher" or "keeper". What purpose does organizing them by location serve?--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 21:00, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
:I think it would be better because then we don't so many without any type of description and some with a description that might apply to others and classifying by location seems to be the most correct at least until we get more on uldum dungeon, and I've checked each entry in there they are either responsible for something I'm pretty sure Ironaya and archaedas are from uldaman and are clearly titan constructs watching something, Myzrael was a corrupted by the old gods, Cretus job seemed to check on the watchers so technically he was watching the watchers, Nablya is a new titan, so she might no be considered a titanic watcher, maiden of grief and Jotun are unknown, but the location might hint that they are watching something, there also Algalon which is a titan construct trough a elemental one and has the job of observing practicably the same as watching, and Auraya is the Ulduar archivist, yes she looks less important but her "temple" was probably the archives inside Ulduar--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 22:37, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
::Well then I will just have to try and add descriptions (with citation). Just because they watch something does not necessarily mean that they are "watchers," but it might... I am not sure. They have to be called watchers (or keepers, which ''seems'' to mean the same thing, or at least greatly overlap). The Uldum ones are called "constructs," so they are not likely titans, which the Ulduar ones still may be. Saying that Auraya's "temple" was probably the archives inside Ulduar is, in my opinion, much more unlikely then saying that the other six watchers are different than her. Why do you think this?--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 23:01, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
I don't think they should be subcategorized at all... no other creature page does it... if anything they could have a "found in <location" statement after their name. {{User:Coobra/Sig4}} 23:03, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
:Are they a single type of creature, or different groups of things given a title?--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 23:11, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
 
::I don't even know anymore... they were said to be titans, but then changed because Metzan said we have yet to meet a titan? Personally, I think he meant one of the top titans, when he made that comment. {{User:Coobra/Sig4}} 23:45, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
 
:::Some of them are minor titans others are just titan constructs responsible for overseeing parts of azeroth, some are for guarding stuff, this is in the main description of the article--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 11:47, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
::::You are citing the article, with the article? I feel it is more important to properly define "watcher" and "keeper" than to heed the attempted definition as the criteria for the page.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 17:49, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
:::To answer the Auraya question because she was the archivist, it would be probable that she should be in the "The Archivium", however she is crazy and have wondered off--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 11:51, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
::::That does not prove anything either way.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 17:49, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
:::I also have a picture of the new quest npcs in uldaman calling ironaya or archaedas a titanic watcher,i'll check and post it later--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 11:57, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
::::I think the phrase "titanic watcher" was created by WoWWiki to differentiate between Maiev's Watchers, the bronze dragonflight's Watchers. It could be moved to "Watcher (titanic/titan)" if need be...--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 17:49, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
:::::Yes but the new Image shows a quest npc in Uldaman using Titanic watcher to reference one or two, the guy that posted the image has a annoying bandwith maximum reached and doesn't let you check older images, but i'll get it--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 23:26, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
::::::So it might have been an official term before after all. Anyway, all that means is that Archaedas and/or Ironaya can stay on the page.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 23:36, September 30, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
:::::::Once i have the image i'll post it here--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 00:20, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
 
:Have the picture:
 
http://i987.photobucket.com/albums/ae359/bumblebee515/Uldaman/WoWScrnShot_092310_224555.jpg
 
 
It's photobucket so i don't know how to make it bigger, there's also another quest that treats archaedas and Ironaya (calling them powerfull constructs left by the creator) as the same so i guess both can be counted as titanic watcher--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 15:48, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
 
:oh this post automaticly the pictures, know a new something everyday
 
http://i987.photobucket.com/albums/ae359/bumblebee515/Uldaman/WoWScrnShot_092310_224614.jpg
 
I'l have to ask if the powercores come from ironaya and archaedas trough--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 15:54, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
==Your opinion is desired==
 
Hey, just wanted to solicit your opinion on [[Forum:Should WoWWiki leave Wikia?|whether WoWWiki should leave Wikia]]. Thanks. --{{User:Pcj/sig}} 22:38, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
 
:I'll leave it to people that know more about the inner workings of wikipedia than me. Thanks--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 22:47, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
 
::OK, just realize the web address may be changing - or rather people may be going to another site rather than keep this one up to date. Just wanted to give you a heads-up. --{{User:Pcj/sig}} 22:48, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
 
:::But what's the problem with wikia?--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 22:50, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
 
::::They're forcing changes on us that are unreasonable, you can see a list of them on the forum page above. Mainly, they're going to be adding more ads and reducing the content page further, in addition to a bunch of other things. You'll be able to turn on the new look for yourself tomorrow (and it becomes mandatory on Wikia in a month), if you need help figuring how to do it so you can see for yourself let me know then. --{{User:Pcj/sig}} 22:54, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::I saw some pictures I agree that some changes are unreasonable, but i'm not a hypocrite as my support for unification of things is very strong, so i do not think dividing would be good, also in my opinion of unification is that you can change some things and influence on the inside rather than dividing itself out, but it's not like my opinion will change much anyway--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 22:59, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::Oh, definitely, not splitting would be best to retain as many people as possible (and we're trying to make sure as many people are aware as we can), but we've been trying to work with Wikia on this and other things before and it's not working out for us. They've budged maybe half an inch when they needed to have budged a mile, while we've given up a lot, of control and other things. --{{User:Pcj/sig}} 23:18, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
 
:Can you complain that the right bar makes me read article painful? it's made in a way it gives me headaches to read--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 20:32, October 6, 2010 (UTC)
 
::Sure, I think it's already been reported though - and you can always switch to another skin for now. --{{User:Pcj/sig}} 20:35, October 6, 2010 (UTC)
 
Yeah i know i just checked the skin and i my head gave a headache turned it off right after--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 20:49, October 6, 2010 (UTC)
 
 
== Hostility ==
 
You have been involved in edit wars on several pages of various kinds now, asserting your views as correct in a hostile manner. If this keeps up, you may be given a temporary ban to cool off. You are welcome to keep contributing, but do so in a better manner.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 01:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 
:Not my fault he can't take a joke.--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 01:32, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 
::I am not only talking about the bias pages, nor am I sure that was the main problem on them.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 01:34, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 
:::What else are you talking about them? the only thing i changed was bias pages and tried added jokes at the end which were constantly removed by him, if these weren't a silly page he would have reason, but since it's only a silly page he's the one that's wrong--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 01:46, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 
::::Nearly every page you edit ends up as an edit war to some extent, with dominance in the stead of consensus being the goal.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 02:54, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::What other pages?--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 12:09, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::[[Template:Species]] comes to mind. As does pages related to it.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 18:55, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 
:::::::PCJ is the one that said that he didn't want us to pull that () crap in that template and to keep it simple--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 19:21, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 
::::::::Just tone it down.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 19:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 
: Fine but can you at least add a joke to the end of both bias articles, it's kinda boring this way--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 20:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 
::I don't care if it's boring, and I am not going to be drawn into any fights.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 20:59, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 
 
==Advice==
 
For the safety of all, please remember the following advice:
 
:''Do not blindly reverse the edits that were undone. Instead, go to the talk page and discuss the changes with calm and choosen words.''
 
   
  +
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a [[Project:Wowpedians|Wowpedian]]! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (<code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>) as this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, or need help, just ask on the relevant talk page, or visit the [[Forum:Index|'''site forums''']]. Again, welcome! --{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 22:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
This may seem "easy to say", but know that I was once like you, and if need be you will learn this rule with a ban juste like I did ;)
 
   
  +
==Sonneillon==
Keep up the good work Ashbear.
 
  +
Post here:--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 18:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
   
  +
:Edited to appease the gods of Spelling, Grammar and Flow since these came from the Europe forums. [[User:Sonneillon|Sonneillon]] ([[User talk:Sonneillon|talk]]) 18:53, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
{{User:A'noob/sig}} 23:47, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:Seriously this is not funny he's ruining everything, for basicly no reason--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 23:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
::Ok i'm currently formatting it to this page [[User:Ashbear160/CDev Questions]]--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 18:59, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
::It seems to me that you enjoy classifying and organizing "races" very much. However, you are getting into several edit wars over details that are largely unnecessary, and then acting erratically. If you want to do some kind of massive overhaul of several things/templates, please discuss your overall plan beforehand in an organized fashion. Like the forums (and work collaboratively, with citation!). Continuing anger and edit wars, especially over trivial minutia, will result in a ban fairly soon if you keep it up.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 00:11, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:::I already did it's in the main sapient races template dicussion and this has been accepted a long time ago, it's not my fault PCJ just named the templates wrong, It's normal that i become a little irrational i spent a long time on those templates and fitting them to every one complaints, so that one admin arrives and ruins it because the Article Names are not correct, I spent over a month listening to every complaint that everyone had--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 00:17, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:Well, on [[Template talk:Species]], a fairly large amount of adjustments are noted. However, there are obviously still some disagreements about your overall vision.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 00:23, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
::I tried my best but you can't please everyone all of the time, and that kinda died after a while so i didn't have chances to explore these problems further, i'm pretty sure i dealt with all that problems till that point, i made a post in the forum anyway like you asked
 
::Check the archives of that discussion Basicly the Template evolved from this
 
   
  +
:::If there are any doubts with a question i will talk to you trough SoL.--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 19:01, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
<onlyinclude>{{navbox
 
|name=Races
 
|title= Sapient [[race]]s and [[species]]
 
|group1=[[Azeroth (world)|Azeroth]]
 
|list1=[[Ancient]]{{·}} [[Cenarius]] ([[Centaur]], [[Dryad]], [[Frost nymph]], [[Keeper of the Grove]],[[Nymph]]){{·}} [[Dwarf]] ([[Bronzebeard clan|Bronzebeard dwarf]], [[Dark Iron clan|Dark Iron dwarf]], [[Earthen]], [[Frostborn]], [[Iron dwarf]], [[Ironforge dwarf]], [[Trogg]], [[Wildhammer clan|Wildhammer dwarf]]){{·}} [[Dragon]] ([[Dragonspawn]], [[Drakonid]], [[Skardyn]]){{·}} [[Elf]]([[Blood Elf]], [[High elf]], [[Night Elf]], [[Wretched]], [[Satyr]]){{·}} [[Furbolg]]([[Corrupted furbolg]]){{·}} [[Gnome]] ([[Leper gnome]], [[Mechagnome]], [[Sand Gnome]]){{·}} [[Giant]] ([[Mountain giant]], [[Storm giant]], [[Sea Giant]]){{·}}[[Gnoll]]{{·}} [[Goblin]] ([[Hobgoblin]]){{·}} [[Grell]]{{·}} [[Harpy]]{{·}} [[Half-elf]]{{·}} [[Half-orc]]{{·}} [[Kobold]] ([[Snobold]]){{·}} [[Magnataur]]{{·}} [[Makrura]]{{·}} [[Murloc]] ([[Gorloc]], [[Mur'gul]], [[Mutant murloc]]){{·}} [[Naga]]{{·}}[[Old God]] ([[Faceless one]]([[Forgotten one]], [[Unbroken (creep)|Unbroken]]),[[Aqir]] ([[Qiraji]], [[Nerubian]], [[Silithid]]), ([[Anubisath]], [[Horusath]], [[Obsidian destroyer]])){{·}} [[Pandaren]]{{·}} [[Quilboar]]{{·}} [[Revenant]]{{·}} [[Tauren]] ([[Taunka]]){{·}} [[Treant]]{{·}} [[Troll]]([[Dark troll]], [[Forest troll]], [[Jungle troll]], [[Ice troll]], [[Sandfury troll|Sand troll]], [[Zandalar troll]]){{·}}
 
[[Tuskarr]]{{·}} [[Undead]] ([[Banshee]], [[Darkfallen]]){{·}} [[Vrykul]] ([[Frost vrykul]], [[Human]], [[Iron vrykul]], [[Kvaldir]]) {{·}}[[Wildkin]]{{·}} [[Wolvar]]
 
}}</onlyinclude>
 
   
  +
== Thrall's Age as orc adulthood standard ==
Into What you see the today(i can't show how it was before the division because the Template:race Dev article was deleted)--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 00:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
Hi, Ashbear! Would you like to participate in the discussion of Life Span, under "Thrall's Age"? Thank you. :)
:SWM can i change the name of the article to fit the purpose of the article?
 
   
  +
--[[User:Cemotucu|Cemotucu]] ([[User talk:Cemotucu|talk]]) 12:06, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
::This confuses me a bit. You largely decided the content of the ever-changing templates, and now you say that the names that Pcj chose do not match your vision. Giving you permission to move the templates might lead to more chaos.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 21:16, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
==Desired opinion recruitment==
:::Is not the names that are the problem but the fact that Gourra takes the article names literally and deletes everything that doesn't correspond to it, for example The icon list a project page had Gourra delete all the mechanical icons because it was called "race list" and not "creature list", i had to undo the delete and ask him to change the name accordingly, also it wasn't i that decided this, i asked many people their opinions and tried to optimise it to best of everyone opinions, took me over a month, now he's changing it because the original names of the templates are not exactly defined.
 
  +
Can you say\do something to help my project [[User:Gabrirt/Illidan%27s forces campaign to the Frozen Throne#Turn_Official]]? Thanks for any contribution![[User:Gabrirt|Gabrirt]] ([[User talk:Gabrirt|talk]]) 18:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
:::Also there is already a demon template(with non-sapient demons), i need to change it to sapient demon template so at least it's not a duplication of articles that is justified.--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 21:29, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
==Empire==
::::Well, it says something about an article if the content can be so changed that the name no longer matches, or if the name itself dictates the content. ''Consensus'' is the key. g0urra is just trying to keep things sane. Hmm... Okay, fine. Where did Pcj forbid you from doing whatever? If he did, keep not doing whatever. I will assume he had a reason, as I was not a participant in the original discussion. If he did not expressly forbid you from doing something, then I will give you my permission. If you do cause chaos, then you will be banned for a while (hopefully you will understand what the problem that caused you to be banned was, if it comes to that), and you will learn a valuable lesson about not causing wiki-strife. I am actually in the process of writing a detailed explanation of why you might aggravate people, for your benefit.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 21:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
  +
Hey Ashbear
:He didn't forbid me, he more kinda didn't let me start the templates because some of these he didn't considered needed, i told him that i couldn't use the templates as a alternative because it had thing like warlocks and non-sentient species, he accepted my argument, and made the templates, except dragonkin which really isn't needed because that template works just fine due to just having one Non-sapient species, i conceded on that, and i still agree with him dragonkin sapient template is still not needed, i'm also not causing chaos i'm just grabbing the name of the articles and substitute it with the name of the templates which are what is the original intent of the article.--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 21:53, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
Can you cite where you found that Hozen had an Empire please? Are you not mistaking with the Jinyu and their last emperor Rassharom?
:Specificly these two, tell me if you have any problem with these two changes:
 
:-Template:Demons to Template:Sapient Demons
 
:-Template:Eternal to Template:Sapient Nature, divine spirits and Eternals or Template:Sapient Other, which of these 2 do you think it's best for a template for those things that don't fit in the other templates?
 
::I'm sorry if i sound aggravating but when i see someone ruining a template i took over a month to design, because the name of the article was done in a spurt of the moment and does not fit the purpose of the thread, it's normal to get a little angry, particularly since i had to heard so many opinions and a lot of brain bending to fit everything perfectly.
 
::Correction i started on September 5 of 2009 and it was divided and ended around December, apparently took over a month is understating...--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 21:53, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
{{User:A'noob/sig}} 21:28, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
:::"Template:Sapient Nature, divine spirits and Eternals" or "Template:Sapient Other"? Those are very odd names. Tell me, in you own clear words, what this template are actually (supposed to be) for? What goes on it? Besides sapience. Also, while you have obviously put a lot of work into these templates, and while the original version was not perfect, your versions are not perfect either.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 22:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
:The Last template, or all of the templates?, and i never believe in the perfection, only in constant improvement, but catering with everyone criticisms has left me with a almost complete templates, and i do not see much room for improvement.--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 22:09, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
+
:The Hozen backstabbed the Jinyu and took their empire and as for source [http://mop.wowhead.com/spell=113976] Emperor Rikktik--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 21:43, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
   
  +
== A short block ==
::The last template that you mentioned. As in, the one(?) that I mentioned. Let us focus on that.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 22:15, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
After lengthy discussion among the administrative staff of Wowpedia, it was agreed that for numerous reasons, we agreed that we should ban a select few people for a month. There are repeated instances in your editing history of aggravating behavior and repetitive disruptive editing. We will admit that our reasoning is subjective, but it is too time consuming to go over your edits and fix the mess that you leave behind. You never learn, and have shown that you do not improve much. This ban is to give you some time to think about whether you want to continue to contribute to the wiki or not. You can address your problems by reviewing past arguments that you have had with other Wowpedia users and editors, and actually conceding once in a while. Start contributing more constructively. This is not a ban of infinite duration, though it may become that if you do not improve immediately. Your contributions are often counterproductive. Though you may be personally disliked by some, this ban is purely for what you have brought to Wowpedia. After a month away, please be more constructive in the future. Thank you for understanding.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 03:17, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
:::Well essentially the original premise is that it's supposed to be about everything else that isn't the other templates, and due to the way the other templates are made, it only leaves Gods, Natures spirits(elementals and plant things) and divine spirits(Angels, guardians, naaru and spirit healers)--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 22:22, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
== Dungeon Journal ==
::::I do not know what a good name would be. Those things seem unrelated (they are not all what would be considered "Eternals" as far as I know), so grouping them is pointless. What I think happened was that you felt the need to list everything, and it got to big, so what would just be smaller sections on a massive template became small sections on a strange template. Maybe you should wait for more feedback about your final product as a whole.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 22:30, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
I noticed you're collecting and storing journal entries in your sandbox, I was also thinking of making some pages for just the journal info at [[Dungeon Journal]], I made the basic layout on how they should appear at [[Adventure Guide Classic dungeons]]. Do you have any thoughts or suggestions about this? If you do please use [[Talk:Adventure Guide|Talk:Dungeon Journal]] since I'm asking a couple of users. Thank you, {{User:Coobra/Sig4}} 22:59, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
:The problem is that i have too much feedback, le sigh, anyway i now have 2 problems as someone criticised the demon template
 
::-Instead of Sapient demons, i need to put that encompasses every fel corrupted race and demons, i though of Sapient Fel Species, or Sapient Fel-Touched Races i prefer the first but i'm going to wait his answer first, but please give me your opinion, on what the best name.
 
::-The template Eternal stemmed from the problem that blizzard official method of classification is flawed in terms of lore where gameplay was more important, this one was evolved from the Uncategorized method of Classification, and now that you mention it, i could remove all the Eternal marks and link them to the religion template which has a more comprehensive list(which i also updated) and Just make it a Sapient Spirits Template
 
::Until i reach a conclusion with these two last templates i'm not changing their names--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 22:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:::Managed to reduced the ancient stuff and put all sub-races
 
[[Ancient]] ([[Ancient of Lore|Lore]]{{·}} [[Ancient of Arcane|Arcane]]{{·}} [[Ancient of War|War]]{{·}} [[Ancient of Wind|Wind]]{{·}} [[Ancient of Wonders|Wonder]]{{·}} [[Ancient protector|Protector]]{{·}} [[Corrupted ancient|Corrupted]]{{·}} [[Treant]]{{·}} [[Tree of Life]])
 
:::What do you think, i need to list them because it's the purpose of the template--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 01:16, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
== Beetle Picture Error ==
::::You have more than two problems. I, personally, do not like either of those names for the demon template. If I HAD to pick something, perhaps something like "Demon(ic) and Fel"? Blaming Blizzard does not solve anything. Those are not ''all'' the (tree) ancient sub-"races" and, on that topic, I dislike the fact that you are mentioning/discussing the same problem on more than one talk page. Why do you ''need'' to list them?--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 01:33, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
I create four wrong picture of beetle and scarab:
:1-It needs to specify that they are sapient at least so Gourra doesn't have a problem, because there's already a template for all demon races including non-sapient and constructs, Do you think "Sapient Demonic and Fel Species" would work? if you think it's too large we could remove the Species, but even if the name was changed it would already redirect if you put<nowiki>{{Demons}}</nowiki> so it's not much of a hassle either
 
  +
http://www.wowpedia.org/File:SilithidScarab.gif?c=1
:2-can you list any that are missing? i mean besides one that aren't variations of the same model with different names
 
  +
http://www.wowpedia.org/File:UldumBeetle.gif?c=1
:3-Well that's because i want a answer from admin, and sincerely i'm not entirely trusting of gourra right now, he already had 3 problems with me on article names vs article purpose.
 
  +
http://www.wowpedia.org/File:SilithidScarab.png?c=1
:4-I need to list them because it was the purpose of the sub-template, to list subraces that couldn't be seen on the main template
 
  +
http://www.wowpedia.org/File:UldumBeetle.png?c=1
:5-Also what do you think of my suggestion to remove eternals from it and link them to the religion template instead and changing the template to sapient spirits or something similiar--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 01:38, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
  +
do you have the rights to erase these picture please ?-Klamuf
   
  +
No but it seems they have already been deleted.--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 01:34, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
::1 - No it does not. Take that up with g0urra. Seriously. Talk to him if you are shaping things around how much you dislike him. Maybe use "races" as that implies sapience to me.
 
::2 - If you are going by model, I don't care.
 
::3 - I '''am''' an admin. And there are other users on Wowpedia who count besides administrators... namely all of them. Seriously. Talk to g0urra if you have such a problem.
 
::4 - If you say so.
 
::5 - I think then you would add the religion template into this sort-of mess. Also, "Eternal" is not a race (I'm not sure if you think that), it is a 'template' (status-type-thing) that makes a creature in the Warcraft RPG a badass demigod (because the word 'demigod' did not feel right).
 
::Yeah. Do you at least understand ''why'' people like g0urra disagree with you?--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 02:28, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:::1 - "Demonic and Fel Races", and not i'm not doing that, i'm trying to keep all the templates consistent with each other
 
:::2 - It's not by model, it's by sub-race, it's just that the Ancient sub-races are already defined in Warcraft 3, the only addition after that was ancient of arcane, the only reason corrupted ancient is considered different it's because fel tends to change things a lot but i wouldn't mind removing it.
 
:::3 - Yes I already posted in the forums like you asked and i'm talking with Erik in the demon template discussion.
 
:::4 - I Don't think a Eternal is a race i think it's more of a title
 
:::5 - I also don't plan to add the template religion to this mess, just separate the deities from sapient races(gods are already supposed to ascend the mind something akin of omniscient race (No i'm not going to do a template about that)would probably more correct)
 
:::6 - Depends on the situation, 3 problems i seem to have:
 
:-Name of Demon Template, It's due to the fact that there are fel corrupted races and the line between Demon and a fel corrupted Race Blurs a lot.
 
:-Name of Eternal Template, Because it was supposed to be designed as the other template it got messy.
 
:-Ancient, Don't get it maybe something to do with bloating the template but i already reduced those to about half the size.
 
:::If you mean the other reason is maybe because i'm assertive, and got a little aggressive due to the destruction of my(and others) hard work over technicalities, i think it's perfectly natural to be angry in that situation, i'll try to talk to Gourra tomorrow--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 02:47, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
::I think "Template:Demonic and Fel races" is the perfect solution, What do you think?--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 13:33, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:::Sure, as far as the name goes, but you seem to be getting more feedback. Heed that first.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 18:01, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
::::I'm waiting for his answer, he doesn't seem to think the template in itself is necessary, however i already dealth with that argument from Pcj and he conceded to the demon template but not the dragonkin template and i agree with pcj in this case--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 18:03, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:::::He told me to go create another template... What do i do now?--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 18:29, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:After this i would like to deal with a problem in the Alliance and Horde Infoboxes, with you if possible--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 19:13, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
::What is the problem that you see with those templates?--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 19:59, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:::It's the leader title thing is it truly necessary?, it makes the infobox look bloated when you can click the link and see the title of character you just clicked, my point is that essentially sorta useless and makes the infobox huge.--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 20:26, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:::I ask you this because there have been several edit wars due to these things(i was not involved) a admin choice/opinion would be clarifying, also what do i do about the demon template.--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 20:31, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
::::I don't know what to tell you. If you do not like the titles in the Horde/Alliance navboxes, then take the titles out or something. Please read [[Wowpedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle]].--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 20:35, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:I actually like them, it's that it occupies a huge amount of space for no reason.--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 20:37, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
::If you like them, then leave them. There are no objective standards in Wowpedia policies of guidelines for "bloating" that I know of.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 20:41, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:::PCJ disagrees then since that was the reason he divided the sapient species template, unless there are wowpedia policies for "bloating" in templates, i don't know much of wowpedia policies, anyway here is what i suggested
 
*[[User:Ashbear160/Template:Demonic and Fel races]]
 
*[[User:Ashbear160/Template:Sapient Spirits]]
 
:::What do you think?--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 20:48, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
::::Also how do you make the article link to parts of the article instead of the beginning of the article?--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 20:52, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:I'll do what you suggest, i'll remove the titles and if someone reverts i'll try to reason with them in the talk page, but could you do me a favour and archive the alliance and horde page, i thinks it's big enough to be archived.--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 21:01, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
== Non-combat icon ==
:::::Becoming way to big, and complaining that something is slightly too big even though you actually like it are two different things. You really should read over [[Wowpedia:Policies]] and [[Wowpedia:Guidelines]] (but remember to keep in mind their '''intent'''). To link to a part of an article, use a link like "<nowiki>[[Main page#section]]</nowiki>". To help yourself, look at the URL of a page after you click something in the table of contents. What do you mean 'archive'?--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 21:06, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
Ok, not sure where you want to place the icon, but you can use {{t|pet}} for it. {{User:Coobra/Sig4}} 01:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
:Hmm ok, and i mean by archives this [[Template talk:Sapient Species/Archive2]] is what they do when a talk page becomes to big.
 
:Can you give em a opinion on the templates that i suggested? any particular flaws?--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 21:10, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
:Well i was thinking of something more simplistic but you always go above my expectations :D.--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 01:20, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
::What do you want me to archive? And let me see... besides your ability to inexplicably make things a hassle... in my, and only my, opinion:
 
::Flaws with your demon template: "Doomlord" is not a "sapient species" or a "race" as far as I know, it is a doomguard with extra bits. Why capitalize some things and not others? You did not link 'dire fel orc' even though you mentioned it. I have no idea where "Fiends" fit. "Man'ari eredar" is redundant, as they are "Eredar" who are called "man'ari" by the draenei.
 
::Flaws with your 'spirits' template: The connection between the three groups still seems rather weak. If "Stone Lords" is a subtype, then mountain giants and colossi probably are too.
 
::Still, stop being so finicky.--{{User:Sandwichman2448/Sig}} 21:35, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
::So sorry
 
:::Doom lord was added by another(and my position is neutral, so meh) and is in both templates, but there's the difference that doomguards are small and doomlords are gigantic wouldn't mind either way, i did not link Dire Fel orc because i can't find the link, probably i should link to the Dire Orc page and let it be, i have no idea and the fact that they might be related to Ered'ruin is speculation so they get stuffed in "other", the Man'ari have evolved more from the original Eredar than the draenei so it's justified to be called from different names, you can read why they are called man'ari in the second paragraph of the [[Eredar]] page.
 
::The different is that one is a powerful earth elemental, the other a giant created by the titan, however i won't argue with you over technicalities since i also added doubts when i added those, if you want i will remove Stone lords, they are not that important anyway, between the connections 3 is that elemental are nature spirits, plants are also largely nature spirits, and the other as spirits and divine spirits, it's kinda hard to link them yes, i could follow other naming suggestions, "Sapient Other" but like you mentioned feel awkwards, and i don't have many ideas, it's just that making templates with 3 entries would feel "meh"
 
:::Sorry again for being(checks free dictionary) fussy, i just don't want the templates to go to waste--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 21:54, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
==Dungeon Journal==
:SWM could you please answer on the Template:Demonic and fel races Thing?--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 16:21, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 
  +
I noticed you [[Adventure Guide Classic dungeons|fixed the images]] that weren't linked up with the paragraph. I'll start doing that, thanks for pointing it out! {{User:Surafbrov/Sig}} 22:27, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
::Lon-ami Suggested Template:Sapient divine races to substitute the eternal template, what do you think.--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 17:40, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 
:::*[[User:Ashbear160/Template:Divine]] This was done according to Lon-Ami suggestions--[[User:Ashbear160|Ashbear160]] ([[User talk:Ashbear160#top|talk]]) 19:16, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 

Latest revision as of 19:42, 2 November 2018

Welcome to Wowpedia!

Hello, Ashbear160, and welcome to Wowpedia, the Warcraft wiki! Thank you for your contributions, and we heartily encourage you to continue contributing!

Some links you may find useful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wowpedian! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) as this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, or need help, just ask on the relevant talk page, or visit the site forums. Again, welcome! --SWM2448 22:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Sonneillon

Post here:--Ashbear160 (talk) 18:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Edited to appease the gods of Spelling, Grammar and Flow since these came from the Europe forums. Sonneillon (talk) 18:53, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
Ok i'm currently formatting it to this page User:Ashbear160/CDev Questions--Ashbear160 (talk) 18:59, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
If there are any doubts with a question i will talk to you trough SoL.--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:01, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Thrall's Age as orc adulthood standard

Hi, Ashbear! Would you like to participate in the discussion of Life Span, under "Thrall's Age"? Thank you. :)

--Cemotucu (talk) 12:06, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Desired opinion recruitment

Can you say\do something to help my project User:Gabrirt/Illidan's forces campaign to the Frozen Throne#Turn_Official? Thanks for any contribution!Gabrirt (talk) 18:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Empire

Hey Ashbear

Can you cite where you found that Hozen had an Empire please? Are you not mistaking with the Jinyu and their last emperor Rassharom?

IconSmall Hamuul Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 21:28, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

The Hozen backstabbed the Jinyu and took their empire and as for source [1] Emperor Rikktik--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:43, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

A short block

After lengthy discussion among the administrative staff of Wowpedia, it was agreed that for numerous reasons, we agreed that we should ban a select few people for a month. There are repeated instances in your editing history of aggravating behavior and repetitive disruptive editing. We will admit that our reasoning is subjective, but it is too time consuming to go over your edits and fix the mess that you leave behind. You never learn, and have shown that you do not improve much. This ban is to give you some time to think about whether you want to continue to contribute to the wiki or not. You can address your problems by reviewing past arguments that you have had with other Wowpedia users and editors, and actually conceding once in a while. Start contributing more constructively. This is not a ban of infinite duration, though it may become that if you do not improve immediately. Your contributions are often counterproductive. Though you may be personally disliked by some, this ban is purely for what you have brought to Wowpedia. After a month away, please be more constructive in the future. Thank you for understanding.--SWM2448 03:17, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Dungeon Journal

I noticed you're collecting and storing journal entries in your sandbox, I was also thinking of making some pages for just the journal info at Dungeon Journal, I made the basic layout on how they should appear at Adventure Guide Classic dungeons. Do you have any thoughts or suggestions about this? If you do please use Talk:Dungeon Journal since I'm asking a couple of users. Thank you, SnakeSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3For Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 22:59, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Beetle Picture Error

I create four wrong picture of beetle and scarab: http://www.wowpedia.org/File:SilithidScarab.gif?c=1 http://www.wowpedia.org/File:UldumBeetle.gif?c=1 http://www.wowpedia.org/File:SilithidScarab.png?c=1 http://www.wowpedia.org/File:UldumBeetle.png?c=1 do you have the rights to erase these picture please ?-Klamuf

No but it seems they have already been deleted.--Ashbear160 (talk) 01:34, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Non-combat icon

Ok, not sure where you want to place the icon, but you can use {{pet}} for it. SnakeSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3For Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 01:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Well i was thinking of something more simplistic but you always go above my expectations :D.--Ashbear160 (talk) 01:20, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Dungeon Journal

I noticed you fixed the images that weren't linked up with the paragraph. I'll start doing that, thanks for pointing it out! — SurafbrovWowpedia administrator T / C 22:27, 8 October 2012 (UTC)