Wikia

WoWWiki

Race/Creature naming

101,314pages on
this wiki

Forum page

Revision as of 22:43, December 8, 2010 by Raylan13 (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ←Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Forums: Index WoWWiki general Race/Creature naming
(This is a dead topic, Please do not edit this page!)

Clockwork Assistant

This creature

What should we call those robots with similar shapes to the Battle-Bot Ignition Key, Twonky, Clockwork Assistant, XS-013 Scrapbot, Clockwork Rocket Bot? I don't think just calling them Clockwork is enough, their model name is HolidayRobot, but thats due to the first one being introduced was the rocket bot.

I'm thinking 'Clockwork robot' since two of them have the actual clockwork name in it. Opinions? User:Coobra/Sig4 20:04, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

'Clockwork robot' is fine with me. The only possible good alternative might be 'clockwork mechanical'. Maybe we should have a robot article to clarify what it means in the Warcraft context. Is a flying machine or mechanostrider a robot? --Gengar orange 22x22Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:21 PM PST 31 Jul 2009
We should have a robot article. I could start it off? Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 02:38, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
"Clockwork" or "clockwerk" may be the best for now. Looking at the RPG at least, "clockwork robot" and "clockwork mechanical" is like naming it the race and creature type because a clockwork is a robot/mechanical already. Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 02:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Or put the "robot" info into the mechanical article... Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 02:46, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
A mechanostrider is a robot, but I am not sure about a flying machine since it isn't exactly that type of shape. Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 02:48, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Mechanostriders and flying machines are mechanical constructs, not robots. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 16:21, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
A mechanical construct is a robot... Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 06:20, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
No, they're not. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 12:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Regardless of the slightly odd definition given by the RPG on robot, a better real-world definition from Wikipedia: "Robot is a virtual or mechanical artificial agent. In practice, it is usually an electro-mechanical system which, by its appearance or movements, conveys a sense that it has intent or agency of its own.", from wikipedia:Robot. Kirkburn  talk  contr 15:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, I was just going by the source while Pcj was just saying "No, they're not" with no reason. Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 16:12, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Ok, if you want to be difficult, mechanostriders and flying machines are vehicles, not robots. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 16:20, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
I didn't know citing sources was "being difficult". Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 16:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Well, the RPG definition for robot is retarded but that's not your fault. In any case they are not robots, regardless of what they are. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 16:31, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
I agree that flying machines are vehicles, while mechanostriders are "mechanized animals" or something. Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 16:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Ever see one without a rider? User:Coobra/Sig4 02:59, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
A few. Even with a rider though, the RPG says it counts as a mechanical in the same way that WoW has gnomish mechs with pilots who are counted as mechanicals. Rolandius Paladin (talk - contr) 03:05, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki