Forum:Naming the races of the undead creatures

Forums: Village pump → Naming the races of the undead creatures

There seems to be no official word on this. I'll explain what I mean with a sketch and an example:

• Nathanos Marris
  • Example 1:
    • Race: Undead human
    • Status: Alive
  • Example 2:
    • Race: Human
    • Status: Undead

I see those 2 versions all around the wiki. I prefer the 1st one, but I think we should get a consensus on which one to use.--Lon-ami (talk) 15:03, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

I like the first one also. Using undead as a status doesn't allow for alive undead or dead undead (destroyed undead?). --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:30 PM PST 2 Oct 2009

Yeah, and it also complicates it unnecessarily when you want to add killable instead of alive :S. Let's wait for more people to voice their opinion, but I think we should decide one of the options and write a policy about it to avoid both versions all around the wiki.--Lon-ami (talk) 18:37, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

I also prefer the first one. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 19:32, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

So if we were to create a new policy, what would it be? WoWWiki:Policy/Writing/NPC infobox?

We should also make a list here of articles that use the variety of race/status types, so we can get an idea of how much work it will be updating them. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:07 AM PST 3 Oct 2009

Don't know where, but I thought for the "alive" undead we decided for their status to be Active. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 01:39, October 3, 2009 (UTC)

Id' prefer to have a common rule for everything, and not to put active instead of alive in the undead races.

For the name of the policy, we could use that on suggested by Fandyllic, and now that we are on it, talk about the other folders and see if there's dissension between the community when adding the information.--Lon-ami (talk) 09:53, October 3, 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I favor the second option, that undead is a status rather than a race. Let's take, for example, Sylvanas. Her race is high elf. Her faction is Forsaken. As a result of Arthas' actions during Warcraft 3, her status is now undead. Now, let's assume that Garrosh gets pissy (a huge leap of logic, I know) and lops her head off. At this point, she ceases to be "undead" and becomes simply "dead." By definition, the undead are neither alive nor dead. You can't have a living zombie, nor can you have a dead zombie (that would just be a dead human, who at one point was undead). -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 21:01, October 3, 2009 (UTC)

Your logic has the flaw that you give Sylvanas' race as high elf even after she was raised as undead. As soon as she was raised, she was no longer a high elf, but scourge undead and a banshee. She later changed again to Forsaken, but not her status. Forsaken is not just a faction, it is also a sub-race of the undead. Theoretically, the main difference between the Scourge and the Forsaken is not a matter of choice, but freedom from the Lich King's mind control. Also, there are mindless undead who are not Scourge or Forsaken, but just undead. Also, when an undead is resurrected why aren't they resurrected to alive? Undead isn't just a status, it is part of their nature, similar to a race. When you get resurrected, your race doesn't change, your status does. By your logic, Sylvanas should be listed as Race: High elf, Status: Undead, not-Scourge. It doesn't make much sense to me. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:29 PM PST 3 Oct 2009

The difference between Scourge and Forsaken may not be one of choice, but it certainly isn't a physiological one either. In fact, if you go back to the Frozen Throne, it's made clear that it takes at least a little bit of time for her to realize that the Lich King's voice isn't there anymore. And what about the former undead in Ebon Hold? They're not Scourge, they're not Forsaken, but they are undead and they were raised into undeath in exactly the same manner. The method in which undead are freed from the Lich King's control doesn't change their race, merely their alignment. As for resurrection, if you're referring to the spell then that's purely a matter of gameplay vs. lore. If it was that easy, why not just cast it on every major lore hero whenever they die? And while perhaps my choice in using Sylvanas as an example was a poor one given her unique circumstances, I would say that yes, she should be listed as Race: high elf/banshee, Status: undead, Faction: Forsaken. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 23:09, October 3, 2009 (UTC)

I don't think your factions determines your race. An undead serving the Lich King and an undead free of his will are exactly the same. Giving them different races would be stupid.

Also, for the Sylvanas example, she's no longer a high elf. She became a Banshee. The high elf part should be added like this:

• Race: Banshee (possessing undead high elf body)
• Status: Alive (or Killable, considering Alliance players can kill her)

Or we could simply ignore the race of the body she's possessing, or put it at the status:

• Race: Banshee (possessing undead high elf body)
• Status: Alive, possesing undead high elf body.

After all, she can change the body whenever she wants, so it's not a primordial part of his race.--Lon-ami (talk) 10:16, October 4, 2009 (UTC)

Official word

Blizzard has released a character bio for Sylvanas as part of the Icecrown Citadel patch and it clearly lists her race as "unique undead". So I consider this argument settled. For now I will probably add this little tidbit to WoWWiki:Guidelines#Miscellaneous_guidelines, but maybe I'll start work on WoWWiki:Policy/Writing/NPC infobox. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:21 PM PST 10 Oct 2009

So I guess I've "won" with my 1st example, nope?

Anyway, I don't think Forsaken and Scourge are races. I think we should go for "Undead <race>".

After all, an undead human is an undead human, no matter if someone is mind controlling him.--Lon-ami (talk) 16:37, October 10, 2009 (UTC)