This is an archive of User:Rolandius. Please do not edit this page! If needed, direct any comments to the current talk page.

Contents 1 The rules reiterated 1.1 [[Pagename]] 2 Current comments 2.1 Ships 2.2 Merchant and Merchant ship 2.3 Cartel 2.4 Villages 2.5 Untalented 2.6 Category:Ogre magi 2.7 Baelgun US Players 2.8 Auberdine Village Council 2.9 Knights 2.10 Squires 2.11 Blind Princess 2.12 Zoram 2.13 Great Dark 2.14 Orca 2.15 Ruins 2.16 Settlement 2.17 Page move 2.18 Mine spider 2.19 Merge 2.20 Categories for Scout, Elven ranger, Hellcaller, and Hierophant 2.21 Deathguard 2.22 Lightning Sons 2.23 A place to look for new page ideas 2.24 Grunts 2.25 Frenzyhearts 2.26 Frostwolves 2.27 Magrams Clan Centaur and Gelkis Clan Centaur 2.28 Class categories 2.29 Deathstalker 2.30 Amani'shi, Anu'bar, Ahn'kahar, and Nerub'ar 2.31 Koltharius 2.32 Categories 2.33 Jackrabbit 2.34 Highborne 2.35 Warcraft III units 2.36 Imperial chamber 2.37 eBooks useful 2.38 Real? 2.39 Servants of Illidan 2.40 The Undermarket 2.41 Westbrook 2.42 Spectre 2.43 New categories 2.44 Corrupted 2.45 Tainted orc 2.46 Camps 2.47 Category:NPC titles 3 Pages reviewed, but to stay as user subpage 3.1 Bone spider 3.2 Mine kobold 3.3 Archbishop Benedictus 3.4 Cargo ship 3.5 Inner Hold 3.6 Sentinels 4 Pages in review 4.1 Another page move 4.2 Deathshadow 4.3 Shadowstalkers 4.4 Banks 4.5 Times 2 4.6 Categories 4.7 Pages needed moving 4.8 RTS unit versus RTS class 4.9 Necrolord 4.10 World of Warcraft Battle Chest Guide 4.11 Condor and such 4.12 Azeroth (continent) 4.13 Sects and Matriarchies 4.14 Speculation 4.15 Angel 4.16 Blackpaw clan 4.17 Wraiths 4.18 Naga 4.19 Titan orb 4.20 Silithid flyer 4.21 Void Hound 4.22 Remove category 4.23 Tribes 4.24 Clans 4.25 Matriarchy 4.26 Hives 4.27 More 4.28 Alliance Internment Act 4.29 References 4.30 Please revert race to corpse changes 4.31 Category:Daemons 4.32 "of" and "of the" 4.33 Marshal/Marshal's Expedition 4.34 Smokywood Pastures NPCs 4.35 Murloc territories 4.36 Argent Tournament NPCs 4.37 RPG templates

The rules reiterated Edit

See User_talk:Rolandius/Archive2#Welcome_back. for the original rules.

1. Sky2042 was to be your only admin source of contact (mentor); the other admins were to work with Sky if any problems arise or if Sky requested their help. All admins should be aware of this - if you encountered any problems, you were to talk to Sky about it. This does not mean admins - or others - cannot edit your contributions appropriately; simply that no action should have been taken against you without consulting Sky.
   • A couple months ago, Sky2042 asked me to take over as mentor (see User_talk:Fandyllic#Indeed.), so from here on Sky is replaced by mentor which will be me (Fandyllic) unless someone else wants to do it that the admins agree upon.
2. You will not create a new article under any circumstances, unless its format has already been approved by your mentor.
3. You will discuss all major page edits with your mentor.
4. You will not initiate blanket reformatting across several articles without discussion.
5. Any questions you ask on your mentor page will be given a plain answer.
6. These arrangements will be subject to review at the end of November, or at any time if we see them to not be working quite as intended.
   • There really was no review.

Note: Since these rules have taken effect, at least one admin (who will remain nameless) has violated these rules while at the same time claiming they were violated, so I think some flexibility should be expected. However, these rules are probably due for a review. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:06 AM PST 20 Mar 2009

Older comments moved to:

• User:Rolandius/Mentor/Archive1
• User:Rolandius/Mentor/Archive2

[[Pagename]] Edit

specific line or lines

Why you want to change it

Current comments Edit

Ships Edit

Could I create articles for the ships the Beating Heart, Shattered Dagger, and Sea’s Castle found in Lands of Mystery? Rolandius (talk - contr) 13:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Yup, just make sure to use {{RPG}} at the top, cite the lore correctly, and try not to use verbatim stuff from the book. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:17 PM PST 6 Feb 2009

Okay here goes. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:24, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Merchant and Merchant ship Edit

Is there, or could I make, a page about "Merchants" and "Merchant ships"? Merchants are mentioned all over the RPG and WoW, as it is an occupation or title I believe, yet they do not have their own page. Some ships are called "Merchant ships", but unlike other types of ships on WoWWiki, it doesn't have an article to link to. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:35, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Make some subpages with your ideas and link them here for me to review. My main concern is having the right kind of cites/refs. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:54 AM PST 9 Feb 2009

Cartel Edit

Could I make an article on the Cartel? Adamman the Trader, located in the Circle of Wills, says that he once had the best gladiator's gear. The Cartel then caught him fixing the fights and all he has is rags. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Not to step on your admin's feet... but him referring to the cartel could mean anything, many of the goblin organizations have the word cartel in it... and you have no lore except that one reference (small mention) for an article about "The Cartel". In any case the "cartel" referenced here is made towards blizzard being the cartel. User:Coobra/Sig3 09:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Upon further reading, he's most likely talking about the Steamwheedle Cartel... since they run the arenas. User:Coobra/Sig3 09:42, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh okay. I thought he was talking about some new group called the Cartel. I guess it was just short for the Steamwheedle Cartel. Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:34, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

What Coobra said. ;-) -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:53 AM PST 9 Feb 2009

There are supposedly five goblin cartels. The Bilgewater Cartel got a mention. See Goblin organizations.--SWM2448 21:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

So, maybe it would be good to at least have a disambig page for the various cartels in Warcraft that are known. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 12:28 PM PST 11 Feb 2009

I would caution against it. There is not that much information on them as far as I know, and I doubt people would be looking for Bilgewater when typing in "Cartel".--SWM2448 03:24, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but they may be looking for Steamwheedle Cartel. Most gamers are horrible spellers, but they might have a higher chance of spelling Cartel over Steamwheedle. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:59 AM PST 16 Feb 2009

Villages Edit

Could I make a Category:Villages? Right now we have a Category:Cities and Category:Towns, but there are a multitude of named villages. If "towns" has its own category, I think "villages" should also. Also, if you could read this User:Rolandius/Mentor#Metropolis, Village, Hamlet, etc. as it was never resolved. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, you can make a village page (that is not a redirect) and category. It should function primarily as a disambig and mention that there are no official criteria for a village and that is basically just officially not a city in-game. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 12:33 PM PST 17 Feb 2009

Although there isn't official info saying "A town is...", there are tons of examples in the RPG books of settlements which are designated (metropolis), (city), (town), (village), (encampment), (tower), etc with their population numbers stated. Could I make articles and/or categories of those other terms which are other types of settlements? I could give you a list first of the types of settlements and how many settlements fall under those terms in case you only want those which are used for more than 1, 3, 5, etc settlements. Rolandius (talk - contr) 08:15, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I would only add settlement types if there is specific RPG lore. An example would be an article about an encampment based on some lore like "was a thriving village until the Scourge decimated the settlement leaving only a small encampment of a few tents and a lone ruined town hall..." Just having "encampment" in the title of the place doesn't really justify a WoWWiki article. It would need some substantive lore that tells the reader what an encampment really is.

Please create some subpage like User:Rolandius/Encampment for the kind of pages you want to make and link them here. If they look good, I will move them to the main namespace and make any edits that I think might make them pass muster with the other admins. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:30 PM PST 18 Feb 2009

Well I think most of these settlements are actually on WoWWiki already. I would only have to add one word, the term for what the settlement is called. Okay I will try out the subpage idea if I run into any settlements not on WoWWiki. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Untalented Edit

Could I create an article called Untalented? It is the name given by Blizzard when a character has no points in any of their talent trees. Essentially, it is when you have a talentless spec. (I am not sure how many points you need to finally get out of the Untalented spec.) They use this symbol for it on Wowarmory. Rolandius (talk - contr) 08:16, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 12:14 PM PST 2 Mar 2009

Category:Ogre magi Edit

I think this category should be moved to "Category:Ogre mages" to match other categories like "Category:Mages" and "Category:Archmages". Rolandius (talk - contr) 12:58, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Although it makes sense, there is a precedent for Blizzard using the term "ogre magi": http://classic.battle.net/war2/units/ogre.shtml

"The Ogre-Magi were originally a small band of extremely loyal Ogre enforcers..."

So I would leave it. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 12:41 PM PST 20 Mar 2009

Shouldn't we move "Category:Mages" and "Category:Archmages" to "Category:Magi" and "Category:Archmagi" then to match everything? I believe Warcraft III and the WoW RPG called the plural of archmage, "archmagi".^{WoWRPG 92} Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:51, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Point of note archmages and archmagi are interchangeable and both are proper. "Archmages patrol its perimeter, but the dome is powerfulenough to destroy creatures that venture too close."^{WoWRPG 20} "Yet some of the archmages survived, scarred and worn for their efforts to stop the march of evil and the destruction of the Violet Citadel."^{WoWRPG 92} "The Archmages of Kirin Tor bear a deep hatred for the arts of necromancy and the servants of dark powers."^{WoWRPG 92} "Having learned much from their defeat, the archmages have become even more dangerous to the forces they oppose."^{WoWRPG 92}"In fact, they are lucky to escape the wrath of the archmages alive."^{WOWRPG 92}"Archmages gain no proficiency with any weapon or armor."^{WoWRPG 92}

Infact page 92 usually just says "archmages". I'm not sure it actually says archmagi even once.Baggins (talk) 05:29, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Um, you put both the quote and source on the archmage article saying those exact words. Wow.... Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:35, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Baelgun US Players Edit

Could I create Category:Baelgun US Players? I noticed there was one for a different server. Rolandius (talk - contr) 07:28, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

No, leave that for players on the server who use WoWWiki. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:27 AM PST 23 Mar 2009

I am a player from that server though. I use WoWiki. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Auberdine Village Council Edit

Is this page okay User:Rolandius/Auberdine Village Council? Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:22, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Try to find a citation or some other supporting evidence and I'll look at it again. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 12:44 PM PST 23 Mar 2009

Okay I just added a source. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:51, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Added stub and category. Added a note about posters put up by them and moved to Auberdine Village Council. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:47 AM PST 24 Mar 2009

Knights Edit

Could I create a category for knights? Rolandius (talk - contr) 11:29, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Yup, go ahead. You might want to see the changes I made to squire and make similar changes to knight also if necessary. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:29 AM PST 23 Mar 2009

Squires Edit

Could I create a category for squires? Rolandius (talk - contr) 13:51, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Yup, go ahead. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:30 AM PST 23 Mar 2009

Blind Princess Edit

Is this page okay User:Rolandius/Blind Princess? Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:24, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Add the ref for  [25] Return the Statuette and I will move it over. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:30 PM PST 23 Mar 2009

Okay I just added two sources. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:57, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Moved to main namespace. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:16 PM PST 24 Mar 2009

Zoram Edit

Is this page okay User:Rolandius/Zoram? Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:27, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Add ref for  [19] The Zoram Strand and I will move it over. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 12:49 PM PST 23 Mar 2009

Okay I just added two sources. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Moved to main namespace. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:14 PM PST 24 Mar 2009

Great Dark Edit

I think we should move Great Dark to "Great Dark Beyond"[1] [2] as that is used on the Blizzard website. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:50, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I have no real opposition, though I've heard both used (Great Dark being a shorthand.)--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 13:12, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll add refs. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:09 AM PST 26 Mar 2009

Orca Edit

I think we should move Orca to "Orca whale"^{MGWS 25 WoWRPG 345} as that is the name used in the sources. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:50, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I assume to mean "Orca" to "Orca whale". This is the sort of change that doesn't really matter. They're the same thing. We might as well move the article to Orcinus orca for that matter.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 13:15, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I mean "Orca" to "Orca whale". Well the RPG calls them Cachalot whale, Orca whale, and Baleen whale (aka Sperm whale). Since we don't call them baleens or chachalots on WoWWiki, I thought orca should stay as orca whale. Ah well. Rolandius (talk - contr) 13:26, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

WoW calls them Orcas, so I would stick with that. I created a redirect from orca whale, though. You can create redirects to Orca from the other terms and add info to the Orca article, though. In my mind, WoW takes precedence to the RPG when they conflict, but orca whale seems redundant unless there are orca something_else running around. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 12:56 PM PST 26 Mar 2009

Sounds good. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Ruins Edit

User:Rolandius/Ruins has a bunch of refs that I added, but it would be nice to have a direct source describing what a ruin is. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:57 PM PST 24 Mar 2009

I will look for sources today. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:10, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Same thing as "cargo ship". I couldn't find anything saying "Ruins are ...", just the many locations that are ruins or have "ruin" as part of their name and then some of the creatures that live in ruins. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:58, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I think the article is good enough to move over. I'll do that today. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:07 PM PST 27 Mar 2009

Settlement Edit

User:Rolandius/Settlement need some RPG refs that you appear to have identified. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:57 PM PST 24 Mar 2009

I will do it today, just have to make sure I didn't miss anything. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

WoWWiki was acting crazy for me yesterday so I will do this today. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:08, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay I finished it. I just want to emphasize that the population range for each settlement term was taken by the lowest and highest populations, or just one number if there was only one type of that settlement, that I could find from the examples given by the RPG. Rolandius (talk - contr) 06:17, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Moved to main namespace. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:57 AM PST 28 Mar 2009

Page move Edit

Should Unique-Equipped be moved to "Unique-equipped" since Unique is lower case and so should "unique-equipped"? Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

The {{tooltip}} template is really at fault for this. It might make the wiki work more if all those links were redirected, so I think we can leave it. Just go make a redirect to Unique-Equipped from Unique-equipped. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:32 AM PST 27 Mar 2009

I hope I did this right. I tried to make a redirect from "Unique-equipped" to "Unique-Equipped" but it would not let me create a page called "Unique-equipped". So I had to do a redirect from "Unique-Equipped" to "Unique-equipped" which it actually allowed. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Odd. What you did is fine. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:55 AM PST 28 Mar 2009

Mine spider Edit

Is this page okay User:Rolandius/Mine spider? Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:20, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

See comments about Bone spider above. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:04 PM PST 23 Mar 2009

The game files name of "Mine spider" is just the normal looking spiders through Azeroth (pre-bc). Which... if we were to get technical on the types of spiders throughout the game... I'd think most would be called Venom spider over Mine spider. User:Coobra/Sig3 01:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I saw that a model was called "Mine spider" and then saw that Mine Spiders in the game are found in the mines. I thought it made sense. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:32, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Merge Edit

I think we should merge Explorers' Guild and Explorers' League. The Explorers' League article is pretty short. Also, in the RPG the organization is titled "Explorers' League" and then says aka "Explorers’ Guild". Even before Wrath came out, there were many NPCs related by quest chains in WoW tagged as <Explorers' League>. Rolandius (talk - contr) 12:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't spend time on this. If you look at the Talk:Explorers' Guild, I argued for merging one direction or the other, but we sort of came to an impasse. Even though most book sources mention Explorers' Guild, it is only mentioned once in WoW and called the Explorers' League many, many times. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:35 AM PST 28 Mar 2009

Categories for Scout, Elven ranger, Hellcaller, and Hierophant Edit

Could I make categories on these four subjects? They have many examples from the RPG and/or WoW. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:57, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

You should be awaiting approval before adding these categories to the pages... What if they are denied, then it means we'd have to go through all the pages you added them to and remove them. User:Coobra/Sig3 05:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Well they are classes, except for hierophant, so I think they have a good chance. Rolandius (talk - contr) 06:10, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm fine with creating those categories: Category:Scouts, Category:Elven rangers, Category:Hellcallers, and Category:Hierophants. Sort of an odd selection among all the new categories that could be made, but I guess there are alot of candidates. Don't put them in any class categories unless you have a cite or ref. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:53 AM PST 29 Mar 2009

I sort of run into them as I edit so that is why they look like a crazy selection of categories. Rolandius (talk - contr) 00:15, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Deathguard Edit

Could I make a category on "Deathguard"? Rolandius (talk - contr) 09:42, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

There is already a category on deathguards. --User:Gourra/Sig2 08:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh ya. Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:26, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Lightning Sons Edit

Could I make an article on the "Lightning Sons". 3 NPCs exist with this name and they mention the actual name in the quest Vile Idolatry. Rolandius (talk - contr) 09:56, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

This seems like a good candidate. Make a subpage. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:38 AM PST 31 Mar 2009

Okay here it is at User:Rolandius/Lightning Sons. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:35, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Added some stuff and moved to main namespace. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 8:34 AM PST 2 Apr 2009

A place to look for new page ideas Edit

Rolandius, if you need some ideas to pursue for new pages (which you should make user subpages of and link here), I found a list of a bunch of lore characters that appear in books, but not in-game: http://www.scrollsoflore.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-2056.html

Maybe you will find something good. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:26 PM PST 31 Mar 2009

Cool I will check that out. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:22, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Grunts Edit

Could I make an article and category on "grunts"? In the games it is a unit. In WoW, many NPCs have grunt as part of their name.[3] Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:15, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

It's still a unit- a grunt is an orc infantry soldier, nothing more, nothing less. Yes, I think that cat should be fine. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 03:31, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Frenzyhearts Edit

Is this faction supposed to be at Frenzyheart Tribe or "Frenzyheart tribe"? Rolandius (talk - contr) 07:22, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Look at the external links. "Frenzyheart Tribe" appears in-game. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:53 AM PST 28 Mar 2009

I saw Zandalar tribe so I thought factions were lower case too. I have moved "Zandalar tribe" to "Zandalar Tribe" if that is ok? Rolandius (talk - contr) 09:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

It is very confusing but I think I have them sorted out. There are articles on Zandalar tribe, Zandalar troll, and other variations. I blame Baggins. Rolandius (talk - contr) 09:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess an admin has to do it to keep the history of the page or something. Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:37, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

That's because Zandalar tribe exist in other sources than WoW. --User:Gourra/Sig2 11:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought WoW took precedence. Rolandius (talk - contr) 11:38, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I think we haven't really decided that yet... see below about Explorers' Guild/League. Also, some of the reasons we make an article the primary one and others redirects are to make the tooltip JS do less work or because separate information needs to be presented by the tooltip based on the context. We have separate lore and tactics articles for most instance bosses for this reason. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:39 AM PST 28 Mar 2009

Frostwolves Edit

I had to fix Frostwolf clan also because it is an in-game faction named "Frostwolf Clan". Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:13, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay I guess that was reverted. Could I move Frostwolf clan to "Frostwolf Clan" due to it being an in-game faction? Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:32, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess an admin has to do it to keep the history of the page or something. Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:38, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

That's because Frostwolf clan exist in other sources than WoW. --User:Gourra/Sig2 11:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought WoW took precedence. Rolandius (talk - contr) 11:37, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I think we haven't really decided that yet... see below about Explorers' Guild/League. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:39 AM PST 28 Mar 2009

Magrams Clan Centaur and Gelkis Clan Centaur Edit

I had to fix these two articles because they are in-game factions. Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess an admin has to do it to keep the histories of the pages or something. Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:38, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

That's because the centaur clans exist in other sources than WoW. --User:Gourra/Sig2 11:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought WoW took precedence. Rolandius (talk - contr) 11:38, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I think we haven't really decided that yet... see below about Explorers' Guild/League. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:36 AM PST 28 Mar 2009

Class categories Edit

I asked some questions on the talk pages of some class categories. Pretty much, I think some articles have too many parent categories. You can find articles that have the following categories: RPG classes, Racial iconic classes, Classes, Prestige classes, etc. when they are actually just one or two of those categories. To me, I thought the RPG classes category was a parent category that would have all the classes from the RPG under it. Instead I looked at the category page and it has individual both articles and classes from the RPG. Also, I am not too sure what the category classes is about. Is it a parent category of classes in WoW and the RPG, just WoW, or just the RPG? Rolandius (talk - contr) 11:17, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

The whole class thing is screwed up and got unreasonably dominated by the pro RPG folks. If you look at Category:Classes and want to find WoW class info, you have to either find the individual class categories or look in Category:WoW classes. Category:Classes is the parent of all Warcraft related class categories and some RPG professions (because the RPG is somewhat mixing up classes and professions, which is annoying).

This was basically part of the battle I lost when I tried to make WoWWiki a WoW-precedent wiki. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:33 AM PST 29 Mar 2009

I think it still could be structured a bit more while keeping people who like the RPG happy and WoW people happy. First thing would be to put the specific class category in articles and not parent categories just like we are fixing with the other articles. For instance, if a certain article is a "prestige class" then it should have Category:Prestige classes. Not Category:Classes, Category:RPG classes, Category:Racial classes, Category:Core classes, etc. The way the classes are now though, it is like having an article on, let us say, a blood elf have Category:Blood elf, Category: High elf, Category:Night elf, etc. Rolandius (talk - contr) 00:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Deathstalker Edit

Could I make a category on "Deathstalker"? Rolandius (talk - contr) 07:38, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

This seems like a good candidate. Make a subpage. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:38 AM PST 31 Mar 2009

Amani'shi, Anu'bar, Ahn'kahar, and Nerub'ar Edit

Could I make articles on the Amani'shi, Anu'bar, Ahn'kahar, and Nerub'ar which are found in various NPCs' names? Rolandius (talk - contr) 07:03, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Make subpages with what the lore you can gather. These may not qualify for more than disambig pages, but we'll see. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:38 AM PST 31 Mar 2009

Here they are at User:Rolandius/Amani'shi, User:Rolandius/Anub'ar, User:Rolandius/Ahn'kahar, User:Rolandius/Nerub'ar, and User:Rolandius/Hath'ar. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:58, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

The ones I've looked at so far look good. I'll move them over soon. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:50 PM PST 5 Apr 2009

I moved all of them except User:Rolandius/Amani'shi, since it doesn't really have good sources what it does say is very vague. Will just hold it as a subpage for now. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 8:51 PM PST 6 Apr 2009

It does seem vague. I don't understand why some are Amani, while other are Amani'shi. Ah well. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:05, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Koltharius Edit

Could I make an article on "Koltharius"? He was in the War of the Ancients Trilogy. Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

How much did he do?--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:43, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Well he is the only named person from the War of the Ancients Trilogy not on WoWWiki yet. He was one of Varo'then's soldiers when they were escorting Rhonin as a prisoner. Then the whole forest and forest creatures starting attacking the night elves and Rhonin noticed that Koltharius and these night elves were different then the modern elves he knew of because they did not respect nature. Eventually, his panther mount got tangled up and both Koltharius and his mount were crushed by two living trees. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

We're going to need a "List of Minor War of the Ancients characters" or something, because I really don't think that rates its own article. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 04:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I will start a List of minor War of the Ancients trilogy characters page. Put your info about Koltharius there and have Koltharius redirect to it. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:08 PM PST 1 Apr 2009

Categories Edit

Could I make a category for Priestesses of the Moon and the Sisterhood of Elune/Sisters of Elune? Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:42, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

That should be all right. Both of them should maybe be subcats of a generic "clergy of Elune" or something, given that PotM and SoE have specific definitions. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:42, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay I am going to go with "priests of Elune" for the category and "priest of Elune" for the article since the website [4] [5] seems to use that to encompass the whole order of Elune's priests and says that the highest echelon of this order is known as the Sisters of Elune. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:23, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

That works. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 03:08, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Rolandius, you might want to try a little rewriting of the text for priest of Elune, since it appears to be directly quoted from the encyclopedia entries. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:58 PM PST 1 Apr 2009

Okay, although it looks like they wrote it better than I could. Rolandius (talk - contr) 06:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Jackrabbit Edit

I tried to fit an animal I had found, "jackrabbit", into an existing article, Hare, but an admin keeps removing my citation saying that it is obscure and not connected to hares. I told him that it was the closest existing article that I could fit it in since in the real world they are related to hares. I pointed out that I have seen stuff put on WoWWiki by admins with only one source, and obscurer than mine ("Bobcat" has a one word mention, "Puma" is mentioned as a dirty puma pelt on a floor, "Crag panther" has a one word mention, "Sabertooth cat" has a one word mention, etc.) without any problems. It seems to me that he wants me to make an entire article for it or something. I have put "jackrabbit" into the rabbit article for now, but in case that gets removed, I have made an article at User:Rolandius/Jackrabbit. Rolandius (talk - contr) 11:49, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

1) Bobcat wasn't added by an admin 2) Puma wasn't added by an admin, Baggins gave a source though 2) Crag panther was added by an admin, together with source. Guess which admin it was that I mentioned, and I'll give you a cookie. --User:Gourra/Sig2 12:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Depends what kind of cookie. I know they have sources, but I am just saying their sources are like one word mentions contrasted with my "obscure" sources which are actual sentences. Rolandius (talk - contr) 12:40, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Of course; I also see them as obscure. You might want to tell the person in question about the "citations", because this isn't the first time I've seen this kind of things... --User:Gourra/Sig2 12:43, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh well, they were added awhile ago it looks like. Rolandius (talk - contr) 13:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm trying to get Lands of Conflict to look up your page 91 citation... don't worry I'll look into this. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:01 PM PST 4 Apr 2009

Okay I got Lands of Conflict and found the quote, but it doesn't seem to rise to the level of a good reference:

Once, as I observed the dome from a safe distance away, I startled a jackrabbit. The rabbit streaked toward the dome; when it got within 20 feet of that swirling blue sphere, the rabbit abruptly flashed into bright orange fire. Only a rabbit-shaped smear of ash marked its passing.

--Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:40 PM PST 4 Apr 2009

The thing I have to ask is why you would put a reference to "jack rabbit" within hare (an npc/mob ) article, when it should be noted in the rabbit article, which is the main classification for this type of creature. It certainly doesn't diserve its own article.Baggins (talk) 01:24, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Because "jack rabbits" are related to "hares" more than "rabbits" so it looked like the best place to put it in. Later, it looked like in the Warcraft universe, "jack rabbits" are closer to "rabbits". I didn't want to make an article only on "jack rabbits" unless it was not going to fit into either page. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:06, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Highborne Edit

Since the current Highborne article had some factual errors and a race infobox, I have made a new version fixing some of the errors and using the organization infobox, since it is actually an organization,[6] at User:Rolandius/Highborne. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:14, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

You have some good points, but you mad too many changes all at once. It makes sense to switch from {[t|racebox}} to {{infobox faction}}, but why did you take out alot of the stuff you did. Here's what I suggest you do. Go through the Highborne and {{fact}} tag all the things you think are errors. Then we'll go through them and I'll migrate stuff over as we discuss it.

I will move over your infobox right away and make some changes and then we'll go through the rest point by point. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:07 PM PST 4 Apr 2009

Please add the source of where you got Image:Highborne.jpg to the image info. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:09 PM PST 4 Apr 2009

The things I changed were wrong. A lot of places where it said "Highborne" the source actually said "high elf". Also, some of it was verbatim from the source so I tried rewriting it or there was repetition of info in the article. Other times I just added new info. I will go through it like you said. Rolandius (talk - contr) 09:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Source added. Rolandius (talk - contr) 09:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess it didn't save. I added some fact tags to the article again. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:47, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

The only things you seem to have flagged for a fact check are already cited. Also, I kinda think that Dath'remar's picture looks better in the infobox, but that's just my feeling. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 13:36, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

The citations are wrong that is why I put a Fact tag. Unless you want me to remove the citation and just leave the Fact tags? Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:06, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

You can remove the citations, if you explain why on the talk page specifically (cite appears to be from quote X, but that has nothing to do with cited sentence Y, etc.). I don't like the Dath'Remar picture as a general Highborne picture because it is too specific and Dath'Remar secretly opposed Azshara. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:48 PM PST 10 Apr 2009

I am not sure what we could put in the infobox for a picture except that Highborne image I uploaded. Now it seems that image is used in two different ways though, since in Alliance Player's Guide it is a "Warden" or something. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:10, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Warcraft III units Edit

There are so many units that need to be moved to lower case, that it says "action throttled". So I guess other people will have to fix them or just me very slowly. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

They should only have lower case in the name if the name at Battle.net has lowercase. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:03 AM PST 6 Apr 2009

If I remember correctly... You shouldn't be doing mass moving anyway, without asking first. User:Coobra/Sig4 19:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I asked Ragestorm. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:06, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

To be fair Coobra, he is asking (though in future, formatting a specific question might be helpful). I say it's fine, provided he does as Fandyllic suggests and checks Battle.net.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 02:42, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay so Battle.net it is. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I was under the impression that things appearing in the RTS series were to be in lower case (minus the first word, of course), to avoid conflict with subjects in the MMO. Such as Skeletal mage/Skeletal Mage, or the like. Subjects with one word names would be disambiguated with "Name"/"Name (mob)". This is not written in the Naming policy, but I am sure this was grandfathered somewhere. Eaither way, this decision should not be confined to an obscure talk page (like what I just mentioned may have been).--SWM2448 19:05, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

EDIT:I brought up something sort of like this a one point, but it was about the RPG and not the RTS. WoWWiki talk:Naming policy#NPC_vs._RPG_capitalization--SWM2448 19:17, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

From what I can tell, lore has articles with first letter capital and rest lower case. As the RPG is primarily treated as lore (we haven't developed tooltips or infoboxes for it yet), articles generally have first capital and rest lowercase. Creatures in WoW are named as they appear in game DBs with (mob) or (NPC) following after, if they conflict with lore (as in one word names). For RTS names, there are examples where RTS names conflict with WoW or lore and then then you would just add (RTS_game_name) after the name, as in Draenei (Warcraft III) or Priest (Warcraft III). --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:39 PM PST 7 Apr 2009

So what does that change? Are the RTS units all caps or not?--SWM2448 00:00, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I looked at Battle.net, but they capitalize everything. So if we do follow Battle.net, we have to change buildings like chimaera roost to upper case. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:27, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

If we do... Fandyllic, how much are these pages "lore"? People (Not just me) have been moving them to lower case in the past.--SWM2448 20:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, this isn't policy yet, so we don't have to move/rename them. My guidance was in the spirit of Kirkburn's effort to treat all the games more equally. Since we name WoW article based on how they appear in game and official sources, we should do the same with the RTS games. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 2:25 PM PST 8 Apr 2009

I always thought, and saw, that the RTS articles were spelled like the RPG articles, lower case, while WoW articles were spelled as they are in-game. I think all the RTS articles, except some of the Warcraft III articles, are already lower case by now. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:47, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, it isn't explicit in the naming policy how to name stuff from the RTS games, but it was written before Kirkburn's push to equalize treatment of games, so I guess First letter capital and then lowercase applies. It looks like some folks are calling for a review of policeis, so I'll bring this up and try to make sure there are specific examples and policies for RTS games, etc.

Either way, don't go around move/renaming stuff. It just makes the other admins mad. Make a list here of suggested move/renames and I'll do it (assuming I agree an no one opposes it). --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:55 PM PST 10 Apr 2009

Rolandius was correct in his last comment. Most, if not all of them are already lower case. The list would be huge.--SWM2448 00:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Since the list would be huge, I don't think I should list them all here. Hopefully, the review of policy will come soon so we can fix them either way. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:48, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Has it been decided yet if everything should be first letter capital and then lowercase? A majority already follow the first letter capital and then lowercase way, but now I see that some articles are being made into all upper case with the reason of "Uppercase, like NPCS and mobs in WoW." So now we are going to have something something like 50% spelled one way and 50% spelled another way? Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea to have the RTS units always with upper case (like the WoW mobs), except if they conflict with a WoW unit or if they are put with lowercase in another source (RPG, WoW, etc). Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 20:55, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I just want to know for sure which way we are doing it. I thought there was going to be some review of policies last I heard, but then last night Gourra and Baggins were moving things to upper case and it seemed like it was decided already somewhere to do it that way? Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Imperial chamber Edit

Could I make an article on "Imperial chamber"? It is from the same book as Imperial hall. Rolandius (talk - contr) 12:46, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

If it's referring to the same thing, make it a redirect and rewrite the first sentence. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 13:31, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Rage. It only merits a separate article if it is truly distinct (different location and use) from Imperial hall. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:02 AM PST 6 Apr 2009

Not to my knowledge. It seems to be his personal throne room versus the hall where they sign treaties. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:04, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Wait, so the imperial hall is the treaty room, but the imperial chamber is the personal throne room? Neither of which, apparently, are the main throne room seen in Reign of Chaos? (possible retcon given that the book predates the game)--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 02:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

They could be the same (imperial chamber and throne room). Is the throne room seen in Reign of Chaos called "Throne Room" or in WoW is it a subzone? All I could find was Throne Room. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:07, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

No, I mean the one in Lordaeron's Capital, where Terenas is seen to hold court in the opening and closing cinematics of the human campaign. It's in the ruins of Lordaeron above Undercity. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 03:22, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I haven't played WCIII but I have been there in WoW, so I think I know which one you are talking about. Check out Imperial chamber, and maybe you could see any differences between it and the WCIII version since in WoW the place I have seen is in ruins so I don't know if it had chandeliers, curtains, etc. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Please stop making pages directly in the main namespace without making a subpage first. I'm not going to move Imperial chamber back to a sub-page, but please put some statements about how it differs from Imperial hall. Also add some statements on Imperial hall about how it differs from Imperial chamber. I'm going to look up your citations, but it isn't clear to me they are different. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:11 PM PST 6 Apr 2009

I thought you said "It only merits a separate article if it is truly distinct" and I think it is so that is why I made it. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:17, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

They appear to be truly distinct, but your descriptions of the two don't make it as clear as it could be. Someone who read both might end up flipping back and forth wondering where the two were in relation to each other. I've been reading more from the Day of the Dragon and you could add more detail about the events that took place in the Imperial hall, perhaps about how Prestor tricked the rest of the human Alliance into making him king of Alterac without input from the Kirin Tor. I will see if there are other references to the two places in other books. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:32 PM PST 6 Apr 2009

I added an image to each article which I think, in my opinion, may match them. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

That helps alot. I found some paragraphs in the book Tides of Darkness that may help with chamber in chapter 1:

They stepped through the palace’s outer doors and into a wide courtyard, almost an outdoor hall. Viewing boxes lined the sides, and though empty now Lothar was sure they filled with people during celebrations. At the far end another short flight of steps led up to a second set of doors, and these opened onto the throneroom itself.

It was an imposing chamber, its arched ceiling so high overhead its edges were lost in shadow. The room was round, with arches and columns everywhere. Golden sunlight streamed down from a stained-glass panel set in the ceiling’s center, illuminating the intricate pattern in the floor: a series of nested circles, each one different, with a triangle at their middle overlapping the innermost ring, and the golden seal of Lordaeron within that. It had several high balconies and Lothar guessed these were for nobles but also appreciated their strategic value. A few guards with bows could easily strike anywhere in the room from those vantage points.

Just beyond the pattern stood a wide circular dais, its concentric steps rising up toward a massive throne. The throne itself looked carved from glittering stone, all sharp edges and planes and angles. A man sat there, tall and broad, his blond hair only lightly touched with gray, his armor gleaming, the crown upon his head shaped more like a spiked helmet than a coronet. This was a proper king, Lothar knew at once, a king like his Llane who did not hesitate to fight for his people. His hopes rose at the thought.

There were people here, townsfolk and laborers and even peasants, gathered facing the dais from a respectful distance. Many carried items, scraps of parchment, even food, but they parted before Lothar and Khadgar, falling away from the pair without a sound.

Unfortunately, it's an eBook, so I don't know what pages they are on in the real book. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:44 PM PST 6 Apr 2009

That does sound like the image at least. I also expanded Imperial hall like you suggested. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay I found your quote using Amazon.com's "Search Inside This Book" feature. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:55, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Good. These articles are filling out nicely.

Okay, I don't know if you have access to Of Blood and Honor chapter 5, but I found what might be a description of the imperial hall, although it confusingly uses the term "grandiose chamber":

An hour later, Tirion was seated in a large oaken chair in the middle of the polished courtroom floor. Before him was an immense stage adorned with four throne-like chairs. At the center of the stage, directly in front of him, was a large lectern where the judge would conduct the trial. Above the stage was an enormous white flag bearing a stylized blue letterL, which signified the Alliance of Lordaeron. Lining the vast walls of the chamber were other huge banners representing the seven nations of the Alliance. A large blue banner embroidered with a golden lion signified the kingdom of Stormwind. Another banner, black with a red-gauntleted fist, represented the kingdom of Stromgarde. Tirion was too nervous to look around at the others.

Though he could not bear to turn around and see his comrades’ accusing faces, he could hear a hundred voices whispering and muttering at once throughout the grandiose chamber. Through the din, he discerned that everyone in attendance was shocked to hear that he had betrayed them. Many of the onlookers had served under his command during the war, and many others he considered to be good friends. He could feel their communal confusion and scorn buffet him in waves. His trial would not be an easy one.

Maybe you can make use of this. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:01 PM PST 6 Apr 2009

I have that book. I think that is actually the trial at Stratholme. I made the article Hall of Justice a year ago almost, but I can expand it with your info since I did not write large articles back then. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:10, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

eBooks useful Edit

Having these eBook versions of Warcraft books is pretty useful for finding ref info. Too bad my page numbers are all wrong. I will try to add some more cites and refs to your articles. I'll just put ?? for page numbers until I can find the real page numbers. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:05 PM PST 6 Apr 2009

I have the eBook of Of Blood and Honor, but my version is the one in the book Warcraft Archive. My pages might be off too unless I cite it as Warcraft Archive. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:12, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay I expanded Hall of Justice with your info. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:19, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I have an eBook version of Of Blood and Honor, so I will try to fix any page number issues. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:10 AM PST 15 Apr 2009

Okay thanks. Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Real? Edit

I found this NPC [7] who seems to be part of the "Moro'gai" organization...if it is real. Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Likely only existed in beta. And may I remind you that an NPC's title does not mean that it's an organization it's part of. --User:Gourra/Sig2 10:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, don't spend time pursuing this. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:46 PM PST 7 Apr 2009

Although it is many times. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:23, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Servants of Illidan Edit

Could I make an article on "Servants of Illidan" if there is not one already on WoWWiki? A lot of NPCs have this name in their title.[8] Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:28, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

The title simply means that they are a servant of Illidan... --User:Gourra/Sig2 10:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Not enough to base an article on. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:46 PM PST 7 Apr 2009

The Undermarket Edit

Here is a finished page that you can check out.Rolandius/Undermarket I made it on the main page, but meant to make it a subpage, so I moved it. Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:48, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Looks good to me, but I'll leave it up to Fandyllic to comment on it. --User:Gourra/Sig2 10:50, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay. Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:54, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll move it over. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:46 PM PST 7 Apr 2009

Westbrook Edit

Could I make an article on "Westbrook"?^{LoC 50} It is near Westbrook Garrison. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:21, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Make a subpage. I'll have to think about it. The ref is kinda weak. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:12 PM PST 7 Apr 2009

I have a theory that Westridge is actually "Westbrook", but someone made an edit mistake somewhere. The map in the book has a "Westridge G.", yet in the book and WoW they call it Westbrook Garrison. So, the town "Westridge" was most likely also changed to "Westbrook" to stay connected with the name of the garrison protecting it. I think we have seen this before with Westfall having a different name at one time somewhere. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:40, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Articles based on speculative theories = no-no. There's already a note on Westbrook Garrison, and in my opinion that's really enough. --User:Gourra/Sig2 06:27, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, it would be the same kind of article as Westridge. Rolandius (talk - contr) 06:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Not really, Westridge appears on a map. You can add you speculation to the Westridge article and tag it {{speculation}}, but it doesn't justify a separate article. I'll make a redirect from Westbrook to Westridge, though. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:58 PM PST 10 Apr 2009

On further reflection, the lore could still make sense. "Westbrook" could be just that, a west brook (stream) and Westbrook Garrison is located near the stream called Westbrook. It doesn't have to be a town or anything. The town of "Westridge" is on the west ridge. It doesn't quite explain what the "fall" is in Westfall (are there any waterfalls? maybe the ones going to Starnglethorn or little ones between Wesftall and Elwynn/Duskwood?). Anyway, a Westbrook article still sounds like it has too much speculation to make a separate article. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 5:04 PM PST 10 Apr 2009

"Westridge" does not appear on a map though. On the map it says "Westridge G.", short for "Westridge Garrison", and it is on the exact same spot that "Westbrook Garrison" is in WoW. Hence, my theory above. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:03, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Seems like speculation either way. Westfall (I have no idea what the 'fall' means beyond it may 'fall west' of Stormwind) may have been called Westwood in pre-Alpha.--SWM2448 02:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

That is what I am pointing out. As Westwood was changed to Westfall, I think Westridge and Westridge Garrison became Westbrook and Westbrook Garrison, but the editors didn't do a good job showing the reader. Both garrisons are even on the same exact spot on the same side of the road, on the maps of each of them. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Spectre Edit

I made this article at User:Rolandius/Spectre. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:36, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm putting some work into this an will move it soon. I found out there are conflicting versions of shade describes in Manual of Monsters and the Monster Guide. Currently the WoWWiki article only has a description of the older MoM version. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:41 PM PST 7 Apr 2009

One feature is they look sort of human and float. In the RPG it says to look an the spectre in D&D's MM book. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:04, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

New categories Edit

Could I make "Huntresses", "Sentinels", and "Raiders" categories? Rolandius (talk - contr) 06:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Please list the articles you would put in those categories here. It should be okay. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:03 AM PST 14 Apr 2009

By Sentinels do you mean those who have the class or members of the faction?--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 16:36, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

The articles I would put in those categories would just be whoever has that class really, and the article about that class of course. Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Sentinels would be both the class and members because the article on "Sentinels" is smashed together with both. Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Corrupted Edit

Could I make an article on "Corrupted". It is a template, like Tainted, that is put on creatures.^{MG 19} Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:31, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Make a subpage. I'd have to see it before I can give feedback. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:24 AM PST 15 Apr 2009

Okay it is at User:Rolandius/Corrupted. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Do you want this page deleted? You tagged it {{speedydelete}}. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:14 PM PST 16 Apr 2009

Yes. It seems that a version is already at Corrupted creature. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Tainted orc Edit

Could we move the section in Fel orc called "Tainted orcs" to the Dark Horde article? It looks like by the description that tainted orcs could be the green-skinned orcs from the Orcish Horde more than fel orcs of the Fel Horde. The green-skinned orcs that continued on the "bad" path are still tainted orcs and are those who have created the Dark Horde. The New Horde, although many still are green-skinned, have gone back to the uncorrupted orc path in some ways and so are not "tainted orcs" any longer. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:37, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

The "Tainted orcs" section isn't much of section. Its biggest problem is that it refers to an RPG specific "template" without the proper context, so for non-RPG players it doesn't make any sense and should have a ref.

Also, I'm not sure I agree with your logic. Just because the "tainted orcs" changed allegiance doesn't mean they aren't still counted as tainted. Imagine you got leprosy from a criminal gang whose members were often called "leper gangmembers", but you quit the gang and became a paladin. You still have leprosy or the scars from it, but you're not part of the gang. Same with tainted orcs. They may have good motives, but they still carry the characteristics of their past. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:47 AM PST 15 Apr 2009

That would mean that the "New Horde" of Thrall are still as evil as ever? Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:34, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

To some of the Alliance they are... . Tainted doesn't mean evil. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:21 PM PST 16 Apr 2009

Camps Edit

Could I make a category on "camps". I thought there was one but I guess there is not. They would include all camps, encampments, military encampments, etc. from User:Rolandius/Settlement that are on WoWWiki. Rolandius (talk - contr) 07:22, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I would work on User:Rolandius/Camp with an updated version of Camp that expands on the RPG info about camps and camps as settlements first. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:39 AM PST 15 Apr 2009

Okay I expanded Camp somewhat. I am not sure if there is anything else you want me to add? Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:33, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

That's fine. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:26 PM PST 16 Apr 2009

Category:NPC titles Edit

Are these only for titles of WoW mobs/NPCs? I see that some of these are RPG classes like Pyromancer and Primal. Rolandius (talk - contr) 11:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Well the intention I had when I created the category was only for , but it could work for any Warcraft NPC (RPG, RTS, etc.) I guess. Since Gourra started adding RPG stuff to it, you can continue on. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:28 AM PST 15 Apr 2009

Is there any rule on what an "NPC class" in WoW is, though? --User:Gourra/Sig2 17:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think Blizzard officialy designates NPCs vs. other except maybe critters. In WoWWiki we initially looked at NPCs as more defined by being not-mobs, I think. If the creature is neutral or friendly to either faction it is generally considered an NPC. Some people distinguish between interactive NPCs (brings up gossip window) and non-interactive, but they're still basically NPCs. For infobox template purposes all in-game creatures are NPCs, but for link templates we still distinguish. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:57 PM PST 15 Apr 2009

Okay, I found an official definition of an NPC at http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/info/faq/npcs.html

It basically matches what I said above: "NPCs are either neutral, meaning both factions can interact with them, or they have a faction affiliation to the Horde or Alliance." --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:59 PM PST 15 Apr 2009

"NPC class", not NPC.--SWM2448 23:01, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

This is confusing. So are "titles" and "classes" being treated as the same thing, or it is just a messy category, or they overlap? Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:37, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

In WoW NPCs don't have explicit classes except trainers, that would be speculated from lore. It wasn't me who conflated classes with titles, that was Gourra. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:19 AM PST 16 Apr 2009

Okay so what I am understanding is WoW NPCs may have titles but not classes, except trainers or those who have been said to have a class in previous lore. Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:39, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Pages reviewed, but to stay as user subpage Edit

Bone spider Edit

Is this page okay User:Rolandius/Bone spider? Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:43, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Please add {{stub/Lore}} or the appropriate stub to all your proposed pages, please. Also, you need to explain where you go the term "bone spider" and how you tell which are bone spiders vs. other kinds. This goes for any article were no official source is given. Your explanation for Mine kobold marked as {{speculation}} is a good start. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:04 PM PST 23 Mar 2009

So I was just reading Bane spider... and I'm thinking that these are the "bone spiders". User:Coobra/Sig3 01:22, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Aren't the bone spiders made of like bones or something? Bane spiders look like hairy spiders. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:20, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

/shrug... just seems to be the bane spider's description fits, what we're currently calling the bone spiders, perfectly... right down to the zone... User:Coobra/Sig3 02:26, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

So it is like a retcon? Are the bone spiders connected to the Scourge or anything? Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah there is already a bone spider page. It says that "These creatures are possibly related to the nerubians who are part of the Scourge." which would mean the bane spider is not the bone spider. Bane spiders aren't said to be related to nerubians and bane spiders have no connection to the Scourge. Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I made the bone spiders page, I think just before you put a request to make on this page. That speculation is based on what I have observed... however under bane spiders "Many assume that these arachnids, native to the Azjol-Nerub area of Northrend, are creations of the Scourge. Tales tell of bane spiders from long before, however." And I placed that speculation before even seeing the bane spiders page. Anyway... I believe rather than make a whole new "race" of spiders up based off of a model name, that we should just use what has already been established in lore. User:Coobra/Sig3 22:18, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Mine kobold Edit

Is this page okay User:Rolandius/Mine kobold? Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:21, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Aside from the files, is there any difference between these and normal Kobolds?--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 20:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I screwed up my previous comment, so ignore it. Please confirm that, as Ragestorm notes, there is a "regular" kobold. There are lots of kobolds. According to wowhead, there are kobolds in the following zones that use the same model as your examples, but your article only mentions Elwynn Forest: Alterac Valley, Arathi Highlands, Loch Modan, Stonetalon Mountains, Thousand Needles and Westfall. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:02 PM PST 23 Mar 2009

Ah I see. I found that "Mine kobold" was a model name. So I thought instead of calling them "regular kobolds" that they are really "Mine kobolds". Over in Kobolds, it says there are two types of kobold: kobolds and snobolds. It made sense that "Mine kobold" would be a subrace of "kobold", and not just "kobold" again. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

That's the problem with model names. If we went by them, we'd be calling Wretched "crack elves". I think it's more likely that mine kobold have a different model name for reference purposes than to denote an actual race difference. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 13:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Well we do have mad scientist and Scourge gnome. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:11, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

When no other name exists... one it taken from the model name. Kobolds are officially named as such. User:Coobra/Sig3 03:01, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Archbishop Benedictus Edit

Shouldn't the article Archbishop Benedictus be named "Jarl Benedictus" since we know his whole name? Rolandius (talk - contr) 12:41, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

You miss the point. He changed his name, and the article says that.--SWM2448 21:10, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought he only changed his last name? In the RPG after changing his name, they keep referring him to Jarl still as if his first name stayed the same. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

There is no evidence that his original last name was Benedictus and probably some evidence that it was not. Maybe he was just known as "Jarl", but either way it doesn't justify a Jarl Benedictus article. Thumbs down. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:39 PM PST 23 Mar 2009

Okay. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Cargo ship Edit

User:Rolandius/Cargo ship still needs work (especially a source), but might as well put it in this list. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:53 AM PST 24 Mar 2009

I will look for sources today. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:10, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I can't find anything on "cargo ship", only on "ships carrying cargo", due to the fact that cargo is delivered by so many types of vehicles. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:42, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, let's leave this a subpage for now. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:07 PM PST 27 Mar 2009

Inner Hold Edit

Is this page okay User:Rolandius/Inner Hold? Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Let me think about this one. It really sounds more like just worth of a redirect to Valiance Keep. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:39 PM PST 23 Mar 2009

I'd look myself, but I don't have an active Alliance toon... is this a subzone Rolandius? If so, we may need to go through the zones and recollect the subzone names... I know I've seen at least 4-5 missing ones in Borean Tundra already. User:Coobra/Sig3 01:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I haven't visited Valiance Keep myself in a long time so I cannot remember. It may or may not be something like Throne Room in Stormwind Keep. I got the name while looking at some text from A Deserter. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok, well I snuck in a day or so ago... no subzone named Inner Hold. User:Coobra/Sig4 19:53, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Sentinels Edit

I think Sentinel should be split into the "class" and the "organization". The organization is called Sentinels and is an army organization.[9] Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:18, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Make two subpages with how you would separate the info. It probably makes sense for the class article be Sentinel and the organization article be Sentinels with disambig links to each other. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:38 AM PST 31 Mar 2009

There actually isn't a difference betwen the class and the organization. There is no unique lore behind the sentinel class other than its an alternate name for the same class as elven ranger, and nearly all references to sentinel in the rpg specify that sentinels are members of the sentinel organization.Baggins (talk) 01:28, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Pages in review Edit

Another page move Edit

A page on here is called Sisters of Elune. The Blizzard website calls it "Sisterhood of Elune"[10] and that its aka is "the Sisters of Elune". Rolandius (talk - contr) 14:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

In WotA, from which the article was originally written, they were called the Sisters in most references except for inspiring speeches. So, yes, Sisterhood is probably the more formal term, though there isn't really a difference. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 15:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

It's okay with me if you move this, but it isn't a high priority. I would spend time looking for new pages to add or find references that ones that need them. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:02 PM PST 27 Mar 2009

Deathshadow Edit

Could I make an article on "Deathshadow" and "Twilight Portal"? 8 NPCs exist with this name and the quest Disrupting the Twilight Portal is involved with them and the portal. They seem to be a demon cult in Nagrand trying to stabilize the Twilight Portal for the Burning Legion on the Twilight Ridge. Rolandius (talk - contr) 07:07, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Quest names are not a source, and no where in the quest does it state its called the twilight portal... User:Coobra/Sig3 07:31, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Coobra, there is not enough content to justify these articles. However, as you should, you can make subpages with your example and maybe you will find more stuff and they can be moved over. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:46 AM PST 31 Mar 2009

Okay here they are at User:Rolandius/Deathshadow and User:Rolandius/Twilight Portal. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:09, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

They both look good. I made some small changes to Twilight Portal and moved it to the main namespace. Once you put some refs in User:Rolandius/Deathshadow, I will move it over. I didn't realize the Twilight Portal is an in-game object that shows up in Wowhead. In general, any objects that appear in WoW DBs, you can make new articles for. Remember to add the |noaid=true parameter to {{elinks-object}}, since I don't think Allakhazam will ever add object support to their lame DB. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 8:45 AM PST 2 Apr 2009

Oh, look at Quest:The Soul Cannon of Reth'hedron. It mentions Twilight Portal, so maybe there is some more background you can get from that quest. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 8:48 AM PST 2 Apr 2009

I also found out that the object in Wowhead called Twilight Portal is actually from a power used by  Shadron and not for the one in Nagrand, so I added that info and separated the two bits. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 8:58 AM PST 2 Apr 2009

Oh I didn't know that. So I guess there are two different Twilight Portals. The gateway in Nagrand and the object which Shadron makes that takes you into the Twilight Realm. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:07, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I updated User:Rolandius/Deathshadow somewhat. Rolandius (talk - contr) 06:59, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

ShadowstalkersEdit

Could I make an article and category on "Shadowstalkers"? Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:37, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Make User:Rolandius/Shadowstalker and if it looks good, we can make the category. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:49 PM PST 5 Apr 2009

Finished at User:Rolandius/Shadowstalkers. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:40, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Moved to main namespace and created a redirect to it from Shadowstalker. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:07 AM PST 15 Apr 2009

You should try to add a list of named shadowstalkers and some mention or explanation of the generic shadowstalker mobs who appear to be mostly satyrs. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:20 AM PST 15 Apr 2009

I will add the named shadowstalkers. As for the mobs, I am not sure what we are currently calling them. If I put it one way, someone will just say it is the other way. For instance, right now I don't know if WoWWiki is calling the shadowstalker mobs "NPC classes", "WoW NPC classes", "WoW NPC titles", or something else I haven't heard of yet. Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Banks Edit

Could I make Category:Banks? It looks like we have a lot of banks that can be put into this. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:43, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Sure. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:10 PM PST 7 Apr 2009

Times 2 Edit

I made these articles at User:Rolandius/Stromgarde Defenders and User:Rolandius/Stromgarde Snipers Company. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

These are a start, but I'm leaning toward having them just get integrated as sections of the Stromgarde article and having redirects. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:28 PM PST 7 Apr 2009

Categories Edit

Are categories allowed in subpages or is that only for main articles? Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:58, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Categories can be in subpages, but they have to be relevant. User subpages should only have categories that are user or guild related, in most cases. I'd need some specifics to give a good answer. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 4:42 PM PST 10 Apr 2009

Is there a list of user or guild only categories so I can check them out? Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm... I'm not sure. I'll look into it. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:02 AM PST 15 Apr 2009

Pages needed moving Edit

Could you move World of Warcraft: The Roleplaying Game to World of Warcraft The Roleplaying Game and vice versa? One is the RPG system and the other is the book, but they are switched right now and they should be shown how they are different. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:23, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

These are just my ideas unless there is something better? Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:11, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:Warcraft: The Roleplaying Game and Category:World of Warcraft: The Roleplaying Game should be moved to Category:Warcraft The Roleplaying Game and Category:Warcraft The Roleplaying Game maybe to distinguish the systems from the books of the same name. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:18, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree with this. The books are part of the RPG systems and there really isn't a need for separate articles. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:32 AM PST 14 Apr 2009

That is true. There is one conflict though with "World of Warcraft: The Roleplaying Game". There is the system and book which both share the same name. Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:22, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay, it looks like World of Warcraft: The Roleplaying Game is really only covering the book. Make a User:Rolandius/World of Warcraft: The Roleplaying Game article that covers the game system specifics (some which will eventually have to be pulled out of Warcraft: The Roleplaying Game). Then I'll move the current World of Warcraft: The Roleplaying Game to [World of Warcraft: The Roleplaying Game (core rule book)]] and move your subpage to World of Warcraft: The Roleplaying Game. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:54 AM PST 15 Apr 2009

I will give a try at it. Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:47, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

RTS unit versus RTS class Edit

I am not sure if I asked this before but, how do you tell an "RTS unit" from Warcraft III is a "RTS class" versus just an "RTS unit"? Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:45, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

The idea of an RTS class sounds like more like fan speculation than anything described officially anywhere. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:20 AM PST 16 Apr 2009

I thought so too, but then on WoWWiki we have a "Category:RTS classes" so I am confused. Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:40, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Necrolord Edit

I have a page here at User:Rolandius/Necrolord. I am not sure if we are calling these people WoW NPC classes, WoW NPC titles, both, or neither because some mobs are also necrolords. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Looks like the title awarded to high-ranking necromancers--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 02:24, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

So this would be a title for both the NPCs and mobs? Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

"NPC titles" applies for both mobs and NPCs, but maybe it should be named Mob and NPC titles. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:34 AM PST 16 Apr 2009

I've been looking at the models used for most necrolords and they look just like necromancers. So, most necromancer bosses and named elites like the following could be considered necrolords:  Heigan the Unclean,  Gothik the Harvester,  Salramm the Fleshcrafter,  Dalronn the Controller, and  Overseer Deathgaze. It would be helpful if we had some info about what makes a necrolord. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:43 AM PST 25 Apr 2009

World of Warcraft Battle Chest Guide Edit

Could you move "World of Warcraft Battle Chest Guide" back to its own article? Baggins moved it to World of Warcraft Official Strategy Guide even though they have two different titles and one is more updated. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

World of Warcraft Battle Chest Guide is its own article. I'm confused. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:37 AM PST 16 Apr 2009

When I wrote this, it had been moved. I guess it was moved again so I am not sure what is going on. Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:43, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Condor and such Edit

I made some articles at User:Rolandius/Condor and User:Rolandius/Arctic condor. Rolandius (talk - contr) 13:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Moved to main namespace. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:25 PM PST 16 Apr 2009

Azeroth (continent) Edit

Could you check out the Azeroth (continent) article? I don't mind his previous edits today, although why cited information is put under speculation is beyond me, but suddenly Baggins' last two edits have made the reference section and template disappear and many sentences are spelled wrong. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:35, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I recovered a big chunk of what Baggins removed and put it on the talk page. I've taken a look at this content and a large part of it is just poor interpretation of text as far as I can see. Some of it could be added back, but the whoever (Baggins, I think) wrote the part about "Azeroth = Kalimdor = Lordaeron = Terrestial World (past)?" clearly reads too much into mentions of Azeroth in vague context as meaning a continent and not the world. Here is an example: "Thousands and thousands of years ago, Azeroth was one enormous continent surrounded by the sea. Known as Kalimdor..." The writer apparently reads this as saying Azeroth is a continent, but if I add one parenthetical: "Thousands and thousands of years ago, (the world of) Azeroth was one enormous continent surrounded by the sea. Known as Kalimdor...", the context becomes more clear that the mention of Azeroth is as a world and Kalimdor is the continent. The other quotes are better, but could still be read in the context of all the land that I know of is the world. Then the Azeroth doesn't specifically refer to a continent or a world, but more like just great geographical area around the writer. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:05 PM PST 17 Apr 2009

I agree. I don't think every mention of "Azeroth" means a continent. Azeroth is many times the "world". So when they say Azeroth was one big continent, they mean the planet had one big continent. Also, we know that the name is Kalimdor of said huge continent. Also, like in our real history, a lot of times people think they are on the only piece of land in the whole world. For instance, I am sure that many empires before the Roman Empire thought they lived on the only land in the world when we know in modern times their empires were on just a portion of Earth. This is the same thing as the Arathi. They said "let us name this land Azeroth" when in truth: 1.) There were many more lands than just the land under their feet. 2.) They later found out that there were other races (elves and dwarves) who had their own names for their own lands. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:02, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Another thing is that people could take a name they knew in the past and name something they have just discoverd with the old word. For instance, the word "Azeroth" could have been used by the Arathi for the land they were on at the time like citations say (which to us would be modern southern Lordaeron). Over the years as the Arathor Empire declined and Lordaeron, located north and named Lordaeron after they had met elves and dwarves, rose in power, the people of Lordaeron could have used their influence to include the old Azeroth lands to be called Lordaeron too. Now they would have the whole modern Lordaeron named Lordaeron. The Arathor Empire was just a shell of its former self at Strom so they lacked influence. The group who had ties to ancient Arathi royalty left Strom like the citations say and went south. They named their new kingdom Azeroth. This could have been in honor of their royal ancestors. Meanwhile, the word Azeroth is not being used by anyone any longer so why not use it again? Since there were no other people around, they would also name the land they were on Azeroth in honor and/or because their ancestors called the lands Azeroth. This makes much more sense than the other version. The other version I have been told says something like Lordaeron was founded. The Empire of Arathor was created and they went south. Then they went north to Lordaeron across dwarven lands? The empire fell apart all at once. For some reason, 6 kingdoms are located in Lordaeron but only one in modern Azeroth even though the empire controlled all that vast land? I think it goes something like that I have been told. The first version makes actual sense and has citations and does not have many holes. The second version does not make sense and half the story has holes in it. Why would the Arathi travel north and turn around to go south just to turn around and go north again. How did they find Lordaeron so early, then go south, then go north to discover Lordaeron all over again? How did they even use the word Lordaeron so early when the word is made of three words, one human, one dwarven and one elven. They sort of have to meet the dwarves and elves before using words from people they haven't met yet. How did the kingdom fall apart all at once? Why are there 6 kingdoms in Lordaeron but only one south of Khaz Modan if the Arathor Empire spanned all the way to the south of modern Azeroth? How did the elves meet the humans at Strom and then go north through Khaz Modan if Khaz Modan is south of them? The speculation that was moved to the talk page of that article is not 100% speculation I think. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:29, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Fandy to be clear much of that section was actually created by Rolandius. I personally don't agree that continent of Kalimdor as a whole was known as "Azeroth" even if it is worded that way. The decription just screams as having "accuracy" issues. That was the reason why I decided to move the speculation section into the talk page, and leave it out of the main article. All you did was repeat the same section again, if you look above you'll notice the section already exists in the talk page.Baggins (talk) 03:01, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Sects and Matriarchies Edit

Could I make a Category:Sects for the various satyr sects and a Category:Matriarchies for the various harpy matriarchies? Rolandius (talk - contr) 06:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

A) What are your citations for the harpy governments being called matriarchies and the satyrs being called sects? 2) How many of the names are conjectural and Zed) how long are the articles on each? Because if they're only a paragraph long, we can maybe make a List of Hapry matriarchies article. -_Ragestorm (talk · contr) 16:12, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Heh, A) and 2). --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:07 PM PST 17 Apr 2009

Um, on WoWWiki we call them "matriarchies" so that would be a question to ask yourselves I guess. In addition, I believe that quests and/or the RPG says that they live in matriarchies due to the fact that they have matriarchy leaders. As for sects, the RPG says the satyrs live in sects but you can call them tribes. The RPG though does repeat that they live in sects, and no one besides the satyrs know how the sects differ. In both cases, we do know the names of the sects and matriarchies, and all I want to do is create a category to put them in. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:09, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Your minipedia was the first place I saw the term on WoWWiki, though that could be a trick of memory.

Well, if we're going to bother going to the effort of categorizing, we might as well take a look at whether it's worth it to combine some of them into a master article. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 04:12, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Really? I mean, we don't have an article called "matriarchies", but it is used by users on here in the articles. I thought everyone knew that the harpies had their own matriarchy leaders? As for a master article, I think the Harpy page already has one listing them all so I guess a category wouldn't work with them unless we put named harpies in the category. As for the satyrs, there is a list of the sects on the satyr article and some have their own pages but some don't so a category could work for them if someone makes articles for the rest of the sects. Or like the harpies, we could put named satyrs in the category. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:23, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Make an article User:Rolandius/Sect with info about its general meaning and usage and have an RPG section that talks about how the RPG specifically identifies "sects" as what satyrs form. If that looks good, I'll move it to the main namespace and you can make a Category:Sects. For matriarchies you need to be careful, because harpies aren't the only creatures to have them. Rock flayers appear to have matriarchies, so maybe the category should really be just Category:Matriarchs for now. That seems unique and should have enough members. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 7:01 PM PST 18 Apr 2009

That is true. Rock flayers are not in the "sapient" race template though so I thought they didn't count. Also, dragons, bears, rocs, and other creatures have matriarchs in WoW. I will work on it. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:13, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget Night elves.-_Ragestorm (talk · contr) 02:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Well there is only one race of night elf. There isn't like the "Whisperwind matriarchy", "Feathermoon matriarchy", "Shadowsong matriarchy", etc. The harpies have around a dozen named matriarchies. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:22, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Point of note just because a word is used by users in the wiki doesn't mean that its noteable enough to make an article for it. I'd say the first thing to ask is did Blizzard make a definition for the word? Did Blizzard put that definition specifically within its own article? If not then it may not be noteable. We have had to delete pages of yours in the past like "fowler" because it simply wasn't noteable, and while the word could be used by users in articles in the wiki, that didn't mean that an article was needed to define it.Baggins (talk) 02:53, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

A good rule of thumb is that if a term is being used by Blizzard in a way that is no different from the real world, and there is no extra lore on it, it does not need a page. Speaking of lists of things, there is no reason a page can not have more than one topic on it if the topics are short and directly related (Like Outrunners, which you asked about). If one of these topics gets longer it can be split off, but as a start it is better than a bunch of short pages. Just label diferent things as such.--SWM2448 21:54, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Speculation Edit

If "speculation" has many citations, is it really that speculative? Also, isn't speculation allowable, especially with citations, because we do have the {{speculation}} template for articles? This is in regards to Azeroth (continent) where the whole Speculation section was removed, and although it was a lot of info, I don't think 100% of it should have been erased. Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:23, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

With regards to the first question, yes. Speculation is usually backed up by facts, and those facts need to be cited. As for the second, yes, speculation is allowed, but after a few years of having articles with a gross information:speculation ratio, we've agreed to cut down on speculation-only sections. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 16:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Who is we? --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 2:43 PM PST 17 Apr 2009

At the time, I believe it was me, Kirkburn, Baggins and probably Sky on the admin side, plus some of the regular lore users. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 01:03, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Well I can see how speculation being 75% of an article doesn't look good, but how do we know the speculation, especially with many citations, isn't actual truth? Do we like vote on speculation or do people just say "speculation" and put it under the speculation template or even remove it? Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:11, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Generally, anything someone places in a speculation section is something that they speculate, something that is not addressed or directly spelled out in lore. As for something being moved to speculation, it's usually pretty clear what is and isn't speculation. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 04:15, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Well sometimes I put my edits under "speculation" just so I don't have to argue with someone, like an admin, that comes along and says "you made that up" even though I have like 5 citations on it. Some of my "speculation" I think would belong in the main part of the article but I don't want to argue with someone all day pointing out to them that I have citations right there along with my edits. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:26, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Marking stuff that is based on interpretation of vague text as {{speculation}} is probably still a good idea. If some of these passages turn out to have more concrete backing they can move out of the speculation section. I don't like removing lots of content, though, unless there is a good reason. Usually it can be edited down or moved to the talk page. Alot of what is kept and what is removed is somewhat arbitrary since many of our lore article need much more citation and reference than they currently have. Now that I have more access to novels and RPG books, I may spend some time trying to cite or correct some lore stuff, but that is alot of work. I've been thinking more about cutting back my WoWWiki time, than increasing it. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:49 PM PST 18 Apr 2009

Angel Edit

Could I make an "Angel category" to fit articles about angels, spirit healers, etc. Angels are the opposite of demons and we have that category. Rolandius (talk - contr) 13:15, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd rather not, given that the only evidence for angels in the Warcraft universe comes from an Orcs&Humans reference and an RPG reference. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:44, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Spirit healer than? Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:50, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

How many articles would this category contain? Koiter is the only named one I'm aware of, and the canonicity of that one is debatable--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 02:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Well it would be on the articles Koiter, Spirit healer (which by the way, there are three NPCs on wowhead, but for some reason the page has been cut down to nothing), Spirit of Redemption (what a priest becomes when he gets killed), Spirit of Victory, Released Soul (seen when killing Reanimated Crusaders), Dwarven Spirit Guide, Horde Spirit Guide, Taunka Spirit Guide, Alliance Spirit Guide, etc. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:16, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

While spirit guides share the same funciton as spirit healers, they aren't spirit healers themselves... Spirit healers are specifically the angelic like creature. I certainly wouldn't categorize them as "angels".Baggins (talk) 03:20, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

That is why I said we should have a category of at least "spirit healers". We could get technical about how spirit healers don't look like spirit guides, but both spirit guides and spirit healers show up at graveyards of battlegrounds, they both are seen only when you have been killed, and they both "resurrect" you. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

That spirit of redemption, released souls, spirit of victory, koiter, wouldn't go into a "spirit healer/guide" article because they don't resurrect people at graveyards. Well maybe koiter does?Baggins (talk)

Well with those ones they would fit under the "look like angelic like creatures/spirit healers". It is better than having zero categories on some of those articles, which I have noticed, isn't it? Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:51, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

No categories is bad.Baggins (talk) 03:58, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Lets start with Category:Spirit healers and hold off on angels or angel-likes for now. The angel/demon dichotomy is not really established in Warcraft lore. It may have started in that direction a very long time ago, but it appears to have been quickly dropped. For example,  Val'kyr Battle-maidens have an angelic look, but are pretty much evil in many cases (being servants of the Lich King. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:23 AM PST 20 Apr 2009

 Val'kyr Battle-maidens do have an angelic look, but like you said are evil. Although, there are plague angel daemons in existence which I guess are angelic looking beings who are evil. Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:57, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Blackpaw clan Edit

I finished an article at User:Rolandius/Blackpaw clan. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Moved to main namespace and added categories. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 8:49 AM PST 25 Apr 2009

Wraiths Edit

Here are some articles at User:Rolandius/Blood Wraith, User:Rolandius/Cold Wraith, and User:Rolandius/Cold wraith. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:56, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

We'll need greater disambiguation than capitalization for the latter two. I'd say that the first two are far too short, but mob pages are outside my sphere. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 04:34, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I moved Blood Wraith. Mobs that were removed from the game should be tagged {{Removedfromgame}}, but it seems fine to have them. It would be good for the "Cold wraith" article to have a bit more content. Look in RPG books. I will look too. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:26 AM PST 25 Apr 2009

Okay I will look. So far that short story featured them the most. They even could talk Common since Kel'thuzad understood them. Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Naga Edit

Here are some articles at User:Rolandius/Bloodcursed, User:Rolandius/Bloodcurse, User:Rolandius/Hopeless ones, and User:Rolandius/Lost Hope. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:24, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Moved all except Bloodcursed to main namespace, since Bloodcursed already existed. I integrated your stuff into the existing article. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:09 AM PST 25 Apr 2009

Titan orbEdit

I made a page at User:Rolandius/Titan orb. Rolandius (talk - contr) 13:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Saying that an orb thing that the titans made, and a weird floaty spore-looking thing called "Titan orb" that the titans made are the same seems speculation, as the two things may just be the same shape and made by the same beings.--SWM2448 20:36, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess you missed the Speculation section which explains the name just like other page on WoWWiki. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I did not miss it. That section only explains where you got the name for the mobs, not the WCIII item or its relationship with the others.--SWM2448 20:45, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Silithid flyerEdit

I made a page similiar to silithid wasp at User:Rolandius/Silithid flyer. Rolandius (talk - contr) 13:55, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

What is the difference?--SWM2448 20:37, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Different skins I guess. I put the Named kinds of them so maybe you can find something. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:19, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Not enough difference to constitute another article. User:Coobra/Sig4 03:21, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Well I guess you can move the Named section of my article to silithid flyer. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

For the last time, model names does NOT equal race names. When will you ever learn? --User:Gourra/Sig2 13:00, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

When I stop seeing articles like silithid wasp, nerubian flyer, etc? Rolandius (talk - contr) 13:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Rolandius, you will stop when asked to stop by other users who are not being mentored. For pages like those, the race came first and a name was chosen as a placeholder. Those two pages are not very good examples for your case, as 'wasp' is in the name of most of the types of those mobs ('Stinger' is less common than you would think), and 'nerubian flyer' is listed as such an a piece of art. The mob types you listed can be moved over to the existing page.--SWM2448 20:53, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

That's not in the rules, but best to err on the side of caution. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:18 AM PST 25 Apr 2009

Void Hound Edit

Mob page at User:Rolandius/Void Hound. Rolandius (talk - contr) 05:25, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

If you're going to make specific mob pages like that, you don't need to create a subpage and place it here for requested move. Just make it on the main space, remembering to use the {{npcbox}} template. User:Coobra/Sig4 20:33, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I was just being double careful. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:22, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Remove category Edit

Could we delete Category:RTS classes now that we have Category:NPC titles? Rolandius (talk - contr) 09:30, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll delete RTS classes and move the members to Category:RTS titles which will be in Category:NPC titles. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:49 AM PST 25 Apr 2009

Do we need Category:RTS titles? It looks like all the RTS titles are also found in the RPG or could fit in the Category:NPC titles. Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:58, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Tribes Edit

I made some articles at:

• User:Rolandius/Blackfathom tribe
• User:Rolandius/Blacksilt tribe
• User:Rolandius/Blackwood tribe
• User:Rolandius/Blindlight tribe
• User:Rolandius/Bloodscale tribe
• User:Rolandius/Bloodspore tribe
• User:Rolandius/Bluegill tribe
• User:Rolandius/Bristlelimb tribe
• User:Rolandius/Caverndeep tribe
• User:Rolandius/Chillmere tribe
• User:Rolandius/Coilfang tribe
• User:Rolandius/Coilskar tribe
• User:Rolandius/Daggerspine tribe
• User:Rolandius/Darkcrest tribe
• User:Rolandius/Darkspine tribe
• User:Rolandius/Drywhisker tribe
• User:Rolandius/Foulweald tribe
• User:Rolandius/Frostpaw tribe
• User:Rolandius/Gjalerhorn tribe
• User:Rolandius/Gnarlpine tribe
• User:Rolandius/Gogger tribe
• User:Rolandius/Gravelsnout tribe
• User:Rolandius/Greengill tribe
• User:Rolandius/Greymist tribe
• User:Rolandius/Grimscale tribe
• User:Rolandius/Hatecrest tribe
• User:Rolandius/Irondeep tribe
• User:Rolandius/Magmoth tribe
• User:Rolandius/Marsh tribe
• User:Rolandius/Mirefin tribe
• User:Rolandius/Mosshide tribe
• User:Rolandius/Murkgill tribe
• User:Rolandius/Ragefire tribe
• User:Rolandius/Redfang tribe
• User:Rolandius/Rockjaw tribe
• User:Rolandius/Saltscale tribe
• User:Rolandius/Saltspittle tribe
• User:Rolandius/Savage Hill tribe
• User:Rolandius/Siltfin tribe
• User:Rolandius/Slitherblade tribe
• User:Rolandius/Snowblind tribe
• User:Rolandius/Snowplain tribe
• User:Rolandius/Spitelash tribe
• User:Rolandius/Stonesplinter tribe
• User:Rolandius/Stonevault tribe
• User:Rolandius/Storm Bay tribe
• User:Rolandius/Stormscale tribe
• User:Rolandius/Strashaz tribe
• User:Rolandius/Tidewalker tribe
• User:Rolandius/Torn Fin tribe
• User:Rolandius/Tunnel Rat tribe
• User:Rolandius/Vile Fin tribe
• User:Rolandius/Whitewhisker tribe
• User:Rolandius/Windshear tribe
• User:Rolandius/Wrathfin tribe
• User:Rolandius/Wrathscale tribe
• User:Rolandius/Wrathtail tribe

--Rolandius (talk - contr) 12:29, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

LOL not sure when I'll get to looking at all these. Maybe they should just appear in a list of naga tribes. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:17 AM PST 25 Apr 2009

Oh these are actually different races that is why it is so long. They all are tribes so I put them together. It consists of naga, kobold, murloc, etc. tribes. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:04, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

If we do anything with these, it should be "List of <race> tribes", unless the tribe is particularly important.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 04:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Clans Edit

I made an article at User:Rolandius/Blackpaw clan. Rolandius (talk - contr) 12:30, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Huh? This is a repeat. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 9:11 AM PST 25 Apr 2009

Matriarchy Edit

I made some articles at User:Rolandius/Bloodfeather matriarchy, User:Rolandius/Bloodfury matriarchy, User:Rolandius/Coldwind matriarchy, User:Rolandius/Dustwind matriarchy, User:Rolandius/Frostfeather matriarchy, User:Rolandius/Matriarchy, User:Rolandius/Northspring matriarchy, User:Rolandius/Screeching matriarchy, User:Rolandius/Snowblind matriarchy, User:Rolandius/Windfury matriarchy, and User:Rolandius/Witchwing matriarchy. Rolandius (talk - contr) 12:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Hives Edit

I made some articles at User:Rolandius/Silithid hive, User:Rolandius/Centipaar hive, User:Rolandius/Field of Giants hive, User:Rolandius/Gorishi hive, User:Rolandius/Hazzali hive, User:Rolandius/Hive'Zara, User:Rolandius/Rustmaul Digsite hive, User:Rolandius/Swarming Pillar hive, User:Rolandius/Vekniss hive, and User:Rolandius/Zukk'ash hive. Rolandius (talk - contr) 12:38, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll have to look at this again, but I moved most of the articles to make "hive" lowercase, since appearing as title-case in a mob descriptive doesn't justify it being capitalized. Many of these hives also probably only need to be listed in Silithid hive and not separate articles, but could be redirects to Silithid hive. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:15 AM PST 25 Apr 2009

Okay. I only put it capital "Hive" because the one in Sholazar Basin is called "Sapphire Hive" and the others have Hive in the name already like "Hive'Zora", "Hive'Regal", etc. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh and "Hive'Zara" I think to me might be the correct name because it looks just like "Hive'Zora", "Hive'Regal", etc. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:08, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Those are capped because they are official subzones.User:Coobra/Sig4 09:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

More Edit

I made some articles at:

• User:Rolandius/Arkkoran moved to main namepsace
• User:Rolandius/Cocoon
• User:Rolandius/Distillery
• User:Rolandius/Druid tower
• User:Rolandius/Amorlin
• User:Rolandius/Banner
• User:Rolandius/Blood Wraith moved to main namepsace
• User:Rolandius/Chinese dragon
• User:Rolandius/Eastern Wall
• User:Rolandius/Ent
• User:Rolandius/Farmer Natin
• User:Rolandius/Felbat
• User:Rolandius/Fire spirit
• User:Rolandius/Giant snake
• User:Rolandius/Goldsmith's street
• User:Rolandius/Hamlet
• User:Rolandius/Hara'samid Sector
• User:Rolandius/Heavy veldarite
• User:Rolandius/Heraazi
• User:Rolandius/Inner Hold
• User:Rolandius/Lancer
• User:Rolandius/Lost Hope moved to main namepsace
• User:Rolandius/Lower city
• User:Rolandius/Merchant
• User:Rolandius/Merchant's District Wall
• User:Rolandius/Merchant Marines
• User:Rolandius/Merchant ship
• User:Rolandius/Metropolis
• User:Rolandius/Mur'ghoul
• User:Rolandius/Necrolord already  Necrolord
• User:Rolandius/Pack
• User:Rolandius/Private Doan
• User:Rolandius/Sand vortex "deleted by me"
• User:Rolandius/Sodaarmi
• User:Rolandius/Spiderling
• User:Rolandius/Spirit of Redemption
• User:Rolandius/Storm elemental "changed" User:Rolandius/Geyser elemental
• User:Rolandius/Thief
• User:Rolandius/Unit Darkshire
• User:Rolandius/Unit Goldshire
• User:Rolandius/Unit S
• User:Rolandius/Vortex "deleted by me"
• User:Rolandius/Wailing winds
• User:Rolandius/Water tower
• User:Rolandius/Wetland
• User:Rolandius/Xarodi sector

--Rolandius (talk - contr) 12:54, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I will try to get through most of these before I look at the big list of tribes. BTW, "Necrolord" is already the name of a mob in Howling Fjord. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 11:20 AM PST 25 Apr 2009

Oh the one I made was more of a general "necrolord" page instead of just the one mob. I put the "named" necrolords and where "necrolords" are mentioned in quests. I guess it could just be added to the one mobe page. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:06, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

My thoughts: Mur'ghoul was talked about here, Inner Hold was talked about here, not all priests turn into Spirits of Redemption on death, Druid tower is one sentance with no citation, Felbat needs more citation, Giant snake seems speculation about a doodad, Metropolis seems like a category, Pack needs citation, Sand vortex (One mob?) needs citation, Strom elemental needs citation, and Wetland seems like a category.--SWM2448 01:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Alliance Internment Act Edit

I made a page at User:Rolandius/Alliance Internment Act. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Needs refs. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:56 AM PST 25 Apr 2009

Also has potential for expansion, the term appears in WC3 but retroactively applies to earlier sources. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:00, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I think Fandyllic added some more refs. Rolandius (talk - contr) 23:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I added 1 ref from WC3. I just pointed to BlizzPlanet and the local version. It would be better if there were a non-WC3 source, but I haven't found one yet.--Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 10:15 PM PST 27 Apr 2009

It might be hard to find a non-WC source saying exactly "Alliance Internment Act". Like Ragestorm said, it has potential for expansion though if you retroactively apply it to earlier sources. Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:29, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

ReferencesEdit

What is the difference between "<|references/>" and "{{Reflist}}" ? Rolandius (talk - contr) 07:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

See the talk page for documentation. User:Coobra/Sig4 07:15, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Um, I don't even know where the page for "<|references/>" is at, let alone its talk page. Rolandius (talk - contr) 09:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

The talk page, on the template you linked. User:Coobra/Sig4 09:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh so it isn't a different template thing, it just has to do with font size. Rolandius (talk - contr) 09:53, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Font size and columns, yep. User:Coobra/Sig4 19:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

You can blame me for the many appearances of <references/>. I should have used {{reflist}}, but I did a bunch of copy/pastes using <references/> when I forgot to use {{reflist}}. I didn't realize reflist was part of the standard wikia template set. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:01 PM PST 30 Apr 2009

Please revert race to corpse changes Edit

Rolandius, please undo any changes to npc boxes where you changes the race to corpse, unless the race of the corpse cannot be identified (aka no screenshot, lore or witness). --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:01 PM PST 30 Apr 2009

I already did that the day after he changed them to corpse, and notified him of it. I, however, didn't report it to you cause I didn't find it to be a huge incident... since he only did it to a few articles, but I will do so in the future, if it happens again. User:Coobra/Sig4 22:21, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

See User talk:Rolandius#Violation for my reason on making the corpse race. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

A character who is dead has a corpse and that can be on an NPC article, however the character doesn't transform into the corpse "race"; it's still very much the same race, say human. If the NPC article should have any category it would be "Deceased characters", not "Corpses". And don't take this out of context, despite how much you like to do that. --User:Gourra/Sig2 09:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I will try not to. I still don't see too much of a difference between what I did and the "projection" race. According to wowhead, projections have creature categories so wouldn't they still be their original "race"? I thought "Deceased characters" was used for lore characters since they aren't really "NPCs". Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:05, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Category:DaemonsEdit

Not even going to ask for approval on this one? Only 2 articles in it, this category will most likely be deleted. User:Coobra/Sig4 07:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I only started it off. When we make categories, they have to have a lot of articles at the moment they are created? Also, there are categories on WoWWiki with 2 or less articles in existence. Just delete it, as I did not get approval. Rolandius (talk - contr) 07:17, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

"of" and "of the"Edit

I am seeing a mixture of spellings here on the "something of the something" and "something of something" articles. Is the second word, after "of" or "of the", lower case or capitalized? I thought it was only capitalized if it was also an organization but I see non-organizations too which should be lowercase. Rolandius (talk - contr) 07:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I would say it would only be capitalizaed if it appears that way in Blizzard lore or in-game. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 8:43 AM PST 5 May 2009

Okay. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Marshal/Marshal's Expedition Edit

I don't see Fandyllic's approval on these articles. Please refrain from doing this again. --User:Gourra/Sig2 14:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay. Could I make an article on Marshal's Expedition and Marshal Expeditions? The former is the name of Williden Marshal's "latest and greatest" endeavor which pretty much failed, while the latter is the name of his outfit/company. The articles are written up already with citations, but are just deleted but I guess an admin can still read them. Rolandius (talk - contr) 14:18, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure, you could put it on your user namespace, but don't put it on the main namespace unless you have Fandyllic's approval. Remember the rules. --User:Gourra/Sig2 14:23, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't have a copy of what I wrote though. Couldn't you move it to my subpage? Rolandius (talk - contr) 14:27, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. See User:Rolandius/Marshal Expeditions and User:Rolandius/Marshal's Expedition. --User:Gourra/Sig2 15:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:22, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay could I make an article on User:Rolandius/Marshal Expeditions and User:Rolandius/Marshal's Expedition? Rolandius (talk - contr) 02:55, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I will move User:Rolandius/Marshal's Expedition, but unless I see some specific lore that says "Marshal Expeditions", it sounds more like a speculative title. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 8:50 AM PST 5 May 2009

Nevermind, I found it in the completion text for Quest:Expedition Salvation. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 8:51 AM PST 5 May 2009

Cool. I think I added everything I could find about Marshal Expeditions and Marshal's Expedition. Could be more out there but I think I put in a good amount of citations. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Moved both to the main namespace. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 3:55 PM PST 9 May 2009

I already got written up on my review page because Baggins said I "confused" you too much. Rolandius (talk - contr) 01:55, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Smokywood Pastures NPCsEdit

Could I make a category for the Smokywood Pastures NPCs? Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:10, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 8:34 AM PST 5 May 2009

Murloc territoriesEdit

Could I make a category for Murloc territories? Rolandius (talk - contr) 10:20, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Like Category:Murloc territories? --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 8:39 AM PST 5 May 2009

Yes. There are so many murloc tribes out there that dominate areas it would be a pretty good category. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:52, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Argent Tournament NPCsEdit

Could I make a category for Argent Tournament NPCs? Rolandius (talk - contr) 12:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 8:30 AM PST 5 May 2009

RPG templatesEdit

Could we make a category having something to do with the RPG templates? I am a bit confused on that some RPG templates are "races" on WoWWiki but some are not. Rolandius (talk - contr) 14:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The races/template thing is another issue though. I just think we should have a category to put them all under first. Rolandius (talk - contr) 03:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand the RPG templates, so I can't recommend a course of action. --Beware the sneaky smile! Fandyllic (talk · contr) 1:52 PM PST 14 May 2009