User talk:Baggins5154

User talk:Baggins/archive1

Eternals

Are you certain they should go under "occupation"? Perhaps "Race" or "Status"? --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 12:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Status maybe, but not race. I mean demons, dragons, titans ect aren't the same race. Ya, I was mulling over the best spot for them myself last night :p...Baggins 14:57, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Status probably. Perhaps having the word "active" (Already used for Eternals) link to Eternal?--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 00:08, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

active linked to the Eternals? You mean have Eternals redirect to Eternal? That's fair.Baggins 03:21, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

No, I mean have the word in the status box redirect to the eternal page. Active or Killable in the case of C'Thun. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 12:12, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

And how the hell is Medivh an Eternal? --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 12:13, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

The book isn't clear, it had him listed as Eternal in the chapter before it even discusses Eternals :p. Thus my speculation perhaps it was when he had the power of the Eternal Sargeras in him, or when he transcended his own death which both events are discussed IIRC (but neither discusses why he's an Eternal).Baggins 15:50, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

• expletive* --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 23:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Agrees with Ragestorm :p.Baggins 23:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm looking at book, Medivh is listed as "Male Outsider" with the Eternal template. I suppose I could go put up definition of "Outsider" in Racial Terminology page for now... Although as I recall its not exactly a race, but actually a creature type, like say Humanoid, Undead, or Beast. For example humans or elves would fall under creature type Humanoids, where as an Outsider essentially trancends any idea of the concept of race.Baggins 04:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Outsider? (yes, it's a type, not a race, I have played D&D) How is Medivh an Outsider any more than an Eternal (though Outsider makes more sense)? --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 13:14, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Beats me...? But here's the definition of outsider given in Monster Guide;

An outsider is at least partially composed of the essence (but not necessarily the material) of some plane other than Azeroth. Some creatures start out as some other type and become outsiders when they attain a higher (or lower) state of spiritual existence.Template:Cite

I suppose one might say that Medivh attained a higher state of spiritual existence after he was first slewn, and became the Oracle...

Further it looks like each creature types have special "traits", different strengths and weaknesses and special skills, compared to other creature types. So I suppose they probably gave him Outsider type in order to give him those abilities, or weaknesses, for balancing/gameplay reasons.

For example with Outsider;

• darkvision
• does not have a dual nature...
• proficient with all simple and martial weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry.
• proficient in whatever type of armor it is described as wearing...
• Outsiders breath, but do not need to eat or sleep(although they can do so if they wish). Native outsiders breath, eat and sleep.

But I could be wrong.

As said before Eternal is a template that opens up a handful of other skills and abilities for a character. For example Medivh was given "Eternal immunities, Eternal presence, Eternal traits", and "Immortality"(although Imortality is not an Eternal-only trait), he still has "human traits" though.

The Eternal immunities is immunity to pretty much every status ailment. Eternal presence, is the ability to be awe-aspiring at so many feet, altering the minds of others and raising morale of allies, causing neutral characters to stare in fascination, and causing enemies to be frightened. The traits I think refers to bonuses to stats and level adjustments, but not sure.Baggins 14:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Err... if he could awe others, why was Jaina the only one who listened to him? --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

They succeeded on a Will save, :p, as the RPG would put it.Baggins 14:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

*expletive*--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:48, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Beyond that, it has nothing to do with the "mind control" ability, its actually more like "stun" on neutral characters as they stare in fascination and cannot do anything else during the time. Like I said before it acts like, "fear" spell on enemies, causing them to run or fight poorly, for allies its just addition to "Morale" which increases fighting ability. It has nothing to do with "making" characters follow ones commands, LOL.

It also only affects those with fewer HD than the eternal, according to the mechanics.Baggins 14:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Adminy stuff

Now that you've taken official action, you'll need a more admin-worthy sig... --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 15:46, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Heh. I'm no good with markup code, you want to design one for me?Baggins 15:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

What makes you think I'm good at it? I couldn't even add the words "Head Bookkeeper" to a set template. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 16:29, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Ahh... LOL. Well, I'm off to Hawaii tomorrow once I settle into my new apartment there, and if I get some free time between classes, I'll see if I can find out how to do it LOL.Baggins 16:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Try and get Kirkburn to have a go at it; he's good. I'd offer to do it, but mine is quite frankly awful and makes the date appear in one of those scrolling code boxes. :S

Edit: Hawaii... nice. But I'm not complaining - I'm off to San Fran on Thursday w00t! ;P --User:Vorbis/Sig

Heh, I'm leaving from Oakland, pretty close to San Fran.Baggins 16:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, well too bad I wont be there til Thursday I guess. ^^ Have a nice trip.--User:Vorbis/Sig

The hobbit has landed(well I mean the sig, I landed in Hilo about a week ago, after a vacation in Oahu and Maui).Template:Baggins

What in the name of all that is holy is THAT? --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 12:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

LOL, a signature made by Dutempete.Baggins 17:08, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Love the new signature, Master Bilbo (or Frodo?). ^^

PS. I drove through Oakland on the way to my cousin in Danville - it's quite a pleasant city. The Mormon temple certainly has an *interesting* design. ;P --User:Vorbis/Sig

Sapience vs. Sentience

I noticed that you reverted the change of the word "sentient" to "sapient" in the Eredun article - twice. For further discussion about this topic see this page. Ragestorm seems to agree that "sapient" is the right term. --Foogray 18:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I quoted the original source, not "what fans think is the right way". No reason to reword what Blizzard used on that matter. Yes go back to the original website article to see that sentience is used for yourself[1]. On a side note there is a major difference between sentience and sapience. Sapience means having wisdom, sentience means aware or being concious to senses. Not all people that are aware are wise. Baggins 07:49, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I didn't see that Blizzard themselves used "sentient" in that instance. I still think the usage isn't necessarily right here but if it's more or less a direct quote from a text by Blizzard it should probably stay like it is. --Foogray 13:30, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I think Baggins is correct. Also, the word "sapient" is not in common use, and on WoWWiki it is used in a lot of articles where "sentient" is better suited (ie more accurate and understood). I'll be changing them when I see them if no one has objections. --Raze 07:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I have no objections myself. Just as long as doesn't reword where an origianl source used the word "sapient", rare but might exist.Baggins 08:00, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Raze, before you start changing "sentient" to "sapient" you may want to discuss this issue with Vorbis who changed all those "sentient"s in the first place. --Foogray 13:30, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I did change all (well almost all: there were some things I couldn't alter) the uses of the word 'sentience' to 'sapience' because I was the kind of person who cringes when a word is... misunderstood. The two words have distinctly different meanings: sentience is something all living creatures possess; the utilization of sensory organs, the ability to feel or perceive subjectively, not necessarily including the faculty of self-awareness. Sapience is more specific, and the word that I believe is the correct term for what Blizzard (though LucasArts to a greater degree) actually means when they use the word 'sentient': sapience, usually defined as wisdom or discernment, is the ability of an organism or entity to act with judgment; animals do not possess such conciousness, whilst humans do (hence our species name, homo sapiens - 'wise man'). Now, however, I realise I was being a bit too much of a prescriptionist old fart against change I could not stop.

Though where possible I prefer the correct term to be used, I won't be so anal-retentive as to stop you if you want to revert it all. ;P --User:Vorbis/Sig

Ogre females

[2] - fair edit? See Talk:Ogre. User:Kirkburn/Sig3 22:22, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

It most certainly isn't. This image is indeed a female Ogre, even if it's outdated. The carved idol was grotesque and I agree it has to be removed, but the Warcraft I illustration is the only reliable piece of information about Ogre females.--K ) (talk) 22:40, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

If the  [Carved Ogre Idol] icon is used for things other than ogre idol, than I agree it probably had nothing to do with ogres, and is just a generic use of the ingame icon. Although I have to say I think blizzard based the icon on stone age fertility goddess statues (for example [3]).Baggins 03:46, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Quest pages

Why did you move the Silverpine Forest quests page? I discussed the naming in IRC and we decided not to make the quest list pages sub pages. Is there a specific reason you want them to be sub pages? --Jiyambi t || c 18:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

hmm, when we discussed moving quest pages originally in irc, the idea was to make them subpages... I wasn't awhare of any change in that policy?Baggins 18:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

All I know is that I was originally making them sub pages (see Teldrassil/Quest List), then Sky suggested making them normal pages - it makes more sense if someone is navigating by typing in the name in the address bar. We talked about it briefly on IRC last week (I think Sky, me, and Kirkburn were the only ones in on the discussion though). I have been making quest lists since then using this naming convention, and have moved some of my previous lists as well. I don't really mind either way, though I slightly prefer the non-sub page for asthetic reasons. We just need to decide so we don't have to keep moving them after the fact. Is there a particular reason to support the sub page version? --Jiyambi t || c 19:01, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

To be honest if everyone thinks regular pages is better, I have nothing against it. Thanks for the headsup though I won't move things in the future. I'm just glad the quests are being moved to their own page, they were really bloating the articles.Baggins 19:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Ya, the zone pages look a lot better with a brief summary paragraph and a link instead :) Sorry my first note was kinda antagonistic, it wasn't meant to be. I am working to revise the quest sections for all zones and to create easier to read quest lists, so hopefully soon the zone pages will be much tidier. --Jiyambi t || c 19:15, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Misc. Classes

In the infobox? what do you think? shold we be listing all classes according to lore (RPG, RTS, etc), or just those plyable in WoW? --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 20:02, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I prefer all the classes, with "all" or "WoW" being first, and decending order after that. Sometimes for the case of "WoW" classes its just "presumed", but not specific, and RPG is more official rather than fan assumption.Baggins 20:45, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Blue Draks and Whelps

I saw the pages going up for the drakes and whelps of the other four flights. they look great :). hope you don't mind if i take the liberty of adding the info for the blues from Lands of MysteryWarthok 16:48, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh sure, you'll save me the time, I was going to get around to it. Oh remember that part of the blue information is in external LoM Extra pdf files.Baggins 16:50, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

looking through the extras now. only part for blue drakes and whelps is the "blue whelps as player characters" section (think it should be added?). the rest all seems to be for the wyrmkin and scalebanes.Warthok 17:17, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

"blue whelps as player characters", only if you extract any lore bits and reword or ignore the gaming bits, so it doesn't sound like RPG rules.Baggins 17:19, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Gaevel Thunderblast

I've been going through various lore articles, and came across his article. According to my copy of Alliance Player's Guide, his name is Gaeval, not Gaevel. Could you double check that? Austin P 19:27, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Definitely Gaeval, if spelled otherwise its a typo on my part.Baggins 19:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Dragon pics

Just in case you didnt know. the pics i assume your scanning and uploading are available here: http://www.sonsofthestorm.com/gallery_twincruiser.html just to make it a bit easier. Warthok 20:13, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, sweet, I'll just let you convert to those then, a little color is better than B&W.Baggins 20:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

motivation

"Dalaran travels to Northrend to combat the Blue Flight, and the Red Dragonflight - keeping Alexstrasza's promise to Rhonin after the events of Day of the Dragon - has stepped up to defend the mortals from their cousins' crusade against spellcasters."

What's your opinion: is it a case of Alexstrasza upholding her promise to Rhonin, or just her doing her job. I think it's more likely the latter. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 22:04, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Probably a little of both, latter being the strongest reason like you said, imo.Baggins 22:04, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I'm sure Alexstrasza remebers Rhonin and thinks fondly of him and with this she is technicly honoring the promise, but its most likely what she and the reds would have done with or without the pact.Warthok 22:08, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Warcraft IV?

It may interest you to know that Rob Pardo has given a subtle hint as to the possibility of future Warcraft RTS games, as seen here[4]. However, there's no Warcraft IV article on this wiki (somewhat sensibly I guess) and I've been unable to find a rumours page or something similar. Any idea how or if this information should be posted?Hawki 07:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Link doesn't work... But I'd suggest just calling it Warcraft IV? for now.Baggins 07:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=17176

Hopefully that should work.Hawki 07:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Problem is, what do we put on it? We have no idea whether we'll still be stuck in this absurd Alliance vs. Horde dichotomy, so we don't know what races will be playable, we can't even begin to think of the plot, as everything's happening in WoW. The only thing it'll say is that "Blizzard has expressed interest in working on another Warcraft RTS over a console game, following the completion of the Starcraft II project." Then we'll open forum pages for script ideas and rumored races, and then we'll have the same mess as on Future Race Ideas and the Warcraft Movie presumptives. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 13:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Aspects

Wouldn't it be better to incorporate your new info into the body of the article than the longest intros known to wikikind?--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 13:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Horde Player's Guide images

Are the images of Kel Stonebull, Moogul and Balebleakstare from the Horde Player's Guidez and if so could you please tell me if there is an image of the Techslayer and newer image of the spirit walker and could you upload them Zakolj 18:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm working on getting a techslayer uploaded. As for spirit walker, as I said before I tend to avoid images where other examples exist, unless the image is different enough to be interesting. Remember we have to keep things as close to "fair use" as possible. This is what I was pointing out to you in last message I sent to you in your talk page.Template:Baggins18:16, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for uploading the techslayer image.Zakolj 08:26, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Racefactions

I'm with you on Darkspears and WIldhammers, but what's the evidence of the human PCs hailing from Stormwind alone? Also, we should perhaps keep the racelink headers on HUman Dwarf and Troll for newb readability. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 12:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I think we should change the Template:Race links so that instead Ironforge dwarf we should put dwarf (playable) like in Template:Races same for humans and trolls. Do you agree? Zakolj 12:45, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Ragestorm, well first you can read the introduction in Stormwind human which is right out of the World of Warcraft manual or you can also check out Blizzard's page for World of Warcraft humans; [5][6]-Baggins 17:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

We had a bit of a discussion about this last night - all evidence points to Human players all being Stormwind humans - even those who may hail from elswhere are treated as Stormwind subjects. By splitting it, it allows one to expand more on the Stormwind human lore, and the overall lore of the other factions without confusing matters. User:Kirkburn/Sig3 17:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

fair enough. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 13:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

As the forsaken are Undead, I have made my own modification to this template : replaced 'Forsaken' by 'Undead (playable)'--K ) (talk) 08:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Demon Hunters

Baggins, awhile ago, you told me that there are no High Elf demon hunters. Now I understand that there is no High Elf demon hunter and it would be EXTREMELY hard, if not impossible for one to become a Demon Hunter, but if a Night Elf or Blood Elf could set aside their differences and teach him, could the High Elf become one? Mr.X8 22:55, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Most likely if a high elf became a demon hunter, the use of fel magic would turn the high elf into a blood elf. The physical changes would likely occur, skin going pale or ruddy, and eyes starting to glow green, along with whatever changes occur upon becoming a demon hunter.Baggins 00:23, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, but he still could become one is what your saying, even though at the end he'd be a Blood Elf? Mr.X8 02:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes in the end if he was taught by a demon hunter of any race(night elf, human, or even blood elf), he'd probably become a blood elf. Basically in the end there is no such thing as a "high elf" demon hunter, because the change would lead to being a blood elf (more physically blood elf, along with whatever other mutations occur from just being a demon hunter, rather than being blood elf culturally). A similar thing happened to the high elf warlocks as well, their use of fel powers converted and changed them into blood elves.

As a side note, in the RPG, the period when Alliance & Horde companion was set, demon hunters were; "Blood elf, night elf or human". During the period when Alliance Player's Guide is set, demon hunters are "Any (though almost all demon hunters today are night elves, with a minority of blood elves)". This means that that there are rare members of random races.

I'd doubt that a blood elf and a high elf could set aside differences, their cultures and beliefs are at odds at this point.Baggins 06:12, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much Baggins

WRPG source material

Baggins, I saw you including a lot of material from the RPG source books to some pages I was watching. Now I'm not sure how to deal with them, and other sourcebook quotes from other people on the wiki. Are thoses considered quotes, thus not to be edited for style and redundancy if combined with the other texts. That would be my view, but then they should be visually distinct from the rest of the article. For example in Everlook there are now two almost identical parts, the previous paragraph was presumably the same quote, but not marked as such. In Moonglade you included a large part in the history section, of which a large part is a descrption, more vivid and "realistic" than the Moonglade zone in WoW, but obviously different. --Hurax 11:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the double quotes, I missed the previous one because it wasn't properly cited previously. I've removed it. Where I've added in quotes the intent is to remove previous speculaiton/explanations made by people, and instead let the official stuff speak for itself. The quotes shouldn't be edited, or "fixed" and later when I or someone else has the time have the reference template added.Baggins 12:04, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

You might want to try putting those quotes in quotation marks or italics.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 12:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

You definitely should do something with them, because I was moving them about and editing them because I didn't know I wasn't supposed to. I can't say I completely like them, either - you are putting them in the history section, but many of them are mostly about the geography of the current inhabitants of the zone. Also some have grammar/spelling mistakes that seem to be simple typos, am I not allowed to fix those? --Jiyambi t || c 16:05, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Fix the typos by all means :). Also if you feel free to split paragraphs up if you like. Move sections to geography or what not (just remember to add the citation numbers to each section you move).

Also there were cases where I had alter the paragraphs somewhat for tense, since it was discussing history of around the time of TFT rather than history around the time of WoW, and the while the locations might have been that way back then, things have changed due to populations moving around, and Alliance and Horde gaining footholds in the areas since that time. So there is nothing wrong with changing the tense of the paragraphs.

Also nothing wrong with linking the words in the pagraphs of course.

What I meant by not altering, is not adding to the paragraphs, by putting in information that wasn't there originally, or removing parts of the information. Any updates to the information (I.E. references to new civilization-made geography, such Horde or Alliance cities) should be included in seperate paragraphs, denoting the chronological progression of time, and changes to the geography. Baggins 17:04, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh. Well then yay for RPG sources! Sounds like what I was doing was okay (I had moved a paragraph of one to geography already before I saw this discussion), though I may have forgotten to move a citation. Can I assume that if you add two paragraphs at the same time, and only the end one has a citation, that that citation applies to the first one as well? Also, thanks for addressing my concerns and thanks for adding the info :) --Jiyambi t || c 17:13, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Ya I tried to add all the information in one posting, so the ending citation applies to it all. If your confused just looked at my original post in the history.Baggins 17:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Future race ideas

Um, I already said the Pandaren could find kindred spirits amongst the Furbolgs. The Wildhammer Dwarves aren't necessarily in the Alliance, but I guess they are connected in some way. The draenei aren't a good example for shamanism, as there are very few draenei shamans and the draenei tend to follow the Light moreso than the Earthmother, and some draenei go so far as to discourage shamanism.

Nonetheless, your statement has some accuracy in it.Garm 01:35, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Shamanism is still part of the lore for draenei, and is one of their playable units, so it count, and there are Wildhammer allies to the alliance in Outland, and Kalimdor according to Lore. The ones in Hinterlands are not membes of the Alliance however. I tend to think that point is actually stronger than the furbolg connection. As allied furbolgs in-game are fairly rare, or tend to be friendly to boths sides horde and alliance.Baggins 01:38, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm still not so sure as to why you erased the Durnholde Keep portion for the Alliance's against. The blood elves were neglected by the Alliance, and were originally their friends. The Pandaren could find this dishonorable as they consider friendship and honor to be above all other values. Additionally, the Forsaken are hunted as monsters irrationally. Garm 01:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

It contained many flaws, and pure speculation matters.

1. Durnholde keep incident is well known around the world its published in several in-game books scattered around the world, its been told to every side multiple times. Brann has even written about it and his disgust for what happened there many times in the books he put into publication. In other words if the pandaren were going to be influenced by it they already would have.

2. Everyone knows Blackmoore was not truly alliance he was a rogue agent who was trying to set up his own empire, and eliminate the Alliance.

3. Garithos and Dalaren neglected the blood elves. He answered to no one especially not the Stormwind humans who make up the player humans in game. He was alone in the north with no back up or support by any other Alliance kingdoms.

4. Pandarens hate blood elves in general, and we are talking about the ones left back in Azeroth when Illidan left. Why would they care what humans did to them? Its said they joined in helping humans battle them because they didn't like them.

5. Dalaran is a neutral nation, and has remained such to this day, see Wrath of the Lich King. I.E. Dalaran is allowing in both Horde and Alliance into the city, and has not taken sides. If the horde has any problems with Dalaran they shouldn't be associating themselves with it. AGain this point is really outdated in light of current information.

6. The Forsaken issue goes both ways. The Forsaken haven't really given Alliance a chance to make peace. They have been working on plagues to effect Alliance races all over the world in many places. Alliance finds this stuff out and it makes it very hard to trust them at all. There are groups in the Forsaken devoted to wiping out life and the Church of the Holy Light, lightslayer, Royal Apothecary Society, etc. Assassinations do not help relations any. Its also incredibly treacherous behavior.

7. Humans don't seem to have problems with Undead forsaken that have left the Forsaken for example Leonid Bartholomew. They don't try to kill him on sight. He's also explained to the Alliance and Argent Dawn on matters they have to beware the Forsaken for. Call him a traitor or what will you, but if a Forsaken doesn't trust the Forsaken and tells the Alliance to be wary. How is anyone going to ever truly trust them? On a related note the Horde doesn't really trust them either, see more in Horde.

8. Pandarens don't really like the Forsaken why would they care what was going on between them and humans?

9. You seem to have grossly misinterpreted Pandaren mentality. The honor is a personal kind of honor, in that once they choose to give an oath of friendship they never break that friendship no matter what the person may have done. Because the oath is so strong they are careful not to give it out, thus the reason they choose to remain independent, as as whole. The personal honor does not allow them to break it in that they view that they have dishonored the oath, if they ever turn on the person they gave it to.

That's only a few, I'm sure I could find more problems with it if I wanted to take the time.--Baggins 02:14, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Instead let's just wait and see how their Independent opinions have changed over the last 4-5 years in the World towards the other races, in Dark Factions. I'm pretty sure it will have more on Horde Forsaken and Bloodelves at this point as well. Its only a few months, and is better than making wide speculation.Baggins 02:15, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Suramar

In the article Suramar, is this a direct quotation from LoM?

"Ten thousand years ago, Suramar was a great Kaldorei city. Tyrande Whisperwind and the brothers Stormrage once called it home. The ruins are now a sad reminder of ancient Kaldorei folly. In the center of the ruins, the stumps of two great aspen trees stand side by side. In ancient times, a great garden stood at Suramar’s center, and at the center of this garden stood the fabled Boughs of Azshara. Now, these petrified stumps are all that remain.Template:Cite"

If so, it should either be in quotes, or use the blockquote/template. If it's not, it is redundant and needs to be re-written in the context of the text that appears directly above and below it. --Drolfeir 05:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Its paraphrased, removal of brann opinions, first person commentary, and stuff. Its also contains original info about "Boughs of Suramar".Baggins 05:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

The new edit is much better. Thanks for checking back on it. --Drolfeir 06:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Resolving this once and for all.

I ask that you remove the picture from the Horde article and move it the Darkspear controversy. You should make note that it might not be a Darkspear and they have been described by Metzen.

Also of note is that Blood elf picture is probably an Illidari blood elf(some remain in Azeroth) who don't control his addiction and only feed on Demonic energies unlike the Horde's(who at that point had not been revealed)who feed on arcane and holy only going to fel when they are desperate.

Its obvious you are biased toward Alliance but when you put in article it creates trouble Zarnks 06:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I know what's in the book, the picture is from, and you are incorrect. I only only making citations to the source, and listing Metzen's name for the picture. I wouldn't have given it that name, but he chose to... It has nothing to do with my opinions on the picture. I've warned you about threatening people. I've warned you before about accusing people of being "alliance-biased". Because you have done that again I can nothing but ban you yet again, for it.Baggins 06:33, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

What kind of an idiot calls BAGGINS of all people an Alliance-biased person? That is hilarious! (I know you aren't biased. It's fairly obvious you aren't. If you were Alliance-biased, you wouldn't have said that the irrationality of hunting Forsaken as monsters would be double-sided. In fact, you would've laughed and said, "No, the Forsaken are evil, STFU." But ya didn't, since:

1. The Forsaken are not evil. Atbest they're misunderstod. They don't want to harm blood elves, for they want them on their side "just like old times".

2. They're of the Horde and the other members are keeping them in check.

) Garm 14:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

As the Head Bookkeeper, I believe that resolving this once and for all is my domain. The image stays. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Garm, first let me thank you for the support.

But one minor correction to 1., Blizzard has stated that its the other way around, not necessarily the most, but seems to be that a majority of the Forsaken are evil, with one minority that's good, apparently as well as neutrals that don't care either way and don't get involved with the politics. Infact its said that player characters usually make up the good ones, and rarely the bad ones (although there is some cross over, allowing a player to do some bad deeds for members of the Forsaken, the same can be said of several Alliance quests around the world too, that are also morally questionable). Anycase essentially there are four kinds of good forsaken, citizens that just try to "live" their lives not getting involved politically and just trying to exist, those that strive to fight its corruption from the inside, like Roberic Dartfall, those that choose to leave it, like Leonid Barthalomew, and those that strive to leave it, like Trevor.

2. Agreed for the most part. Though its not 100% most of the forces are in Kalimdor and most of Forsaken are stuck in northern Eastern Kingdoms, with very little orc, troll, or tauren presence. Kalimdor only has a few abassadors to Forsaken lands, and "player characters" that go there. So if evil Forsaken decided they were finally going to turn on rest of the Horde, their would be very little to stop them (not going to happen until they wipe out their main threats first according to lore, Scourge then Alliance). They might wipe out the Scourge, but likelihood of the Alliance being wiped out is nil, or there wouldn't be a World of Warcraft MMO, lol. So one might say its help of the Alliance that keeps the Forsaken in check, which from a realistic standpoint is true, Alliance forces have strongest foothold in the eastern kingdoms, and very little in Kalimdor. Its a discussion of numbers really.

On a related note while the MMO seems to be decidely dichotomous its not so in Lore, there is a healthy trade between Alliance and Horde forces, mainly between Orcs, Trolls, Tauren, Humans, Night Elves, Dwarves, Gnomes, etc (very little Forsaken cross over as they are largely distrusted) visiting each others lands selling merchandise, or acting as ambassadors. Sadly the MMO doesn't show that sense of scale, and the game treats things as attack first, and don't ever ask questions. Its that kind of thing that pushes a role-playing mentality in people. If one goes by MMO it looks like a hot war is going on, even though in reality its supposed to be in a cold war.

Secondly about this whole matter, ...GG, I didn't name stupid image... Metzen did, and don't agree with his title for the image either, but it is the name of the image. In the RPG it represents the one of the "new races" added in that book, including Darkspear tribe of jungle trolls, blood elves, and naga.

As for blood elves, what people are forgetting is that the race is the same race, and if you follow the blood elf plot as a level 1 character they believe they are loyal subjects to Kael, its not until they go to outland that you as an individual player discover his madness and insanity, but the rest of people back home aren't awhare of it. From what I hear rumors of the storyline for Sunwell Plateau is its set after he returns everyone is glad to see again and help him go to Sunwell Plateau. Apparently you may be fighting a combination of his outland forces and Silvermoon loyalists.

Anyone that accuses people of being biased is patently biased themselves, and frankly its a form of harrassment... and harrassment is against TOS, let that be a warning.

To be frank I love both sides the horde is awesome, so is the alliance, Thrall is one of my top favorite characters. As for my additions, I try to remain neutral down the middle but all that means is that I don't form my own opinions and speculation let that into articles, rather I only add information presented by Blizzard from their official published works. Now if members of Blizzard "appears" to be biased by others, that is not my fault. People seem to don't understand purpose of wikipedia. Its only as neutral as preventing two sides from spouting opinions or hypothetical possibilities, it doesn't stop verifiable citeable quotes from credible sources. In this case credible means official Blizzard published sources.Baggins 17:42, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Zarnks

I've looked at his edits and behaviors in the discussion page. He doesn't have the "OMGI'mgonnavandal"-type persona to be a vandal, so I put him off as unwise. He does have some intelligence and tries to follow the lore as best as he can. (He uses the Bael Modan situation, theorizing the tauren might not have attacked, but instead protested, which the dwarves could consider an attack, as a crutch to support him. The Bael Modan situation is more double-sided, much like the Forsaken hunting.) While he does act immature, let's just hope he doesn't touch the naga page (He'd change Broken into Lost Ones). Perhaps I should make a page based on him? Garm 13:59, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Seems to me the admins have been very tolerant. He contributes a whole lot of opinion but few facts, though I doubt he even knows the difference. --Raze 14:29, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

WHAT? Of all the unencyclopedic things do possibly do this one takes the cake. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:27, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

How so? I see no problems there. Though the page on him is a very bad idea that is very out of place.--SWM2448 14:29, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

How do our dramas running this wiki have any bearing on WoW? Why do we need an article on a user? And we admins haven't been very tolerant; we've been extremely tolerant. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:32, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Garm, I think any suggestion of this sort - especially coming from you - is entirely insulting and absolutely ridiculous. How you can be so pretentious and haughty to think you can profile members you don't like in such a patronising way mystifies me. If you like, I could create a page based on you. --User:Vorbis/Sig

The intent isn't to be insulting or ridiculous. He's on a vandal list when he himself is not a vandal. Garm 16:15, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Then ask the admins to just remove him from the list if you really want to. As if it's not bad enough being put down as a vandal, labelling him as a special case and creating some perverse misdemeanor page will only serve to humiliate him. --User:Vorbis/Sig

Anyone want to remove Zarnks from the list then? Garm 16:46, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

He is a vandal in that he doesn't follow advice, policy and has been disruptive to the wiki. The Known Vandals page isn't a 'hitlist' or any such, it's just a page to help us manage blocks. User:Kirkburn/Sig3 16:57, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Definition of "vandal" in wiki definition is someone that break the Terms of Service and this wiki's policies, which he has done on many occasions. Harrasment and threats are on that list of "vandalization" reasons to block someone, as is not following rules and policies of wowwiki stands for. Sure its the same as breaking windows, but it is a form of vandalization as defined by wiki standards.Baggins 18:55, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

"He uses the Bael Modan situation, theorizing the tauren might not have attacked, but instead protested, which the dwarves could consider an attack, as a crutch to support him."

Actually he claims in most of those arguments the dwarves chose to attack the peaceful and goodly tauren, that never did anything wrong or did anything to anger the dwarves, and it was a purely evil act by those nefarious dwarves just to kill them because they were Horde, with no grey areas at all... He tries to argue it’s a one sided thing.

However, I was one arguing that that was more to it, and that it wasn't so black and white. I and I gave plenty of references to the fact that the tauren weren't completely diplomatic but were attacking and sabotaging the dig sites previously before they decided to come and parlay. The dwarves didn't trust them and took their attacks out on the nearest tauren village. So yes both sides were at fault, it wasn't some one side thing.

However, Zarnks then tried to discredit the references as being "Alliance-biased" propaganda, or non-canon and not valid because obviously only the Horde can be truly subjective (and he believed the RPG was always an "Alliance-biased source", and he believed it was not official, so could just be ignored, and should be left out of articles). This led to him removing quotes from articles on many occasions, leaving only the tauren's side of the story, and their interpretations. This of course made the articles wholly one-sided, and we had to get onto him for removing valid facts and cited information.

If the final version of an article looks as balanced as possible, as far as quoted and cited sources, its probably because others, including myself, had to rewrite whatever he added to the article.

Does staying to a horde-only explanation (or one sided, if you will), which tried to paint the other side as purely evil, without looking at both sides of the story (and trying to remove parts of the story) to support your view, truly show intelligence?-Baggins 20:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Or just plain ignorance  D ♠ T ♣ C ♦  20:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Question Baggins. At one point on Zarnks talk page, you said that he would be banned for three months due to repeated offenses, but he was back a few weeks later. What happened there? --Austin P 02:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

He was given a second chance. His ban was lowered in order to see if he could mend his ways.Baggins 03:27, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I have had long disagreements with Baggins, but to say he is Alliance-biased is irrational, hes come down on the Alliance many times. The only reason he posts more in the Alliance's favor is because Zarnks posts irrationally Horde-leaning arguments, and I love the Horde, I had a Troll High Warlord, but Baggins is just countering all the stupid stuff Zarnks puts down. Furthermore, Baggins knows more about the lore than pretty much anyone on here, including me, and I know a lot. Zarnks need to stop posting his opinions when they've clearly been proven wrong, and I think a ban is in order. That being said, being put on the Vandals list does seem a bit harsh, I don't think hes editing articles with any malicous intent, its nit like he deleted the whole Alliance article and changed it to say "Alliance are retarded." In my view, hes just voicing what he believes is fact, and i think that banning him is enough.

Oh by the way, I didn't think you were being condescending in the Gul'dan article, I think its obvious you know the lore better than me (and the citation thing can't be helped, I'm at college in Missouri and my books are at home in Georgia, if that means I should stop posting until I get them let me know.) If you want, I will make Burt/Monkeyman11 apologize to you. He's a good guy but he's overzealous when it comes to defending his friends from perceived attack. Just so you know man, I may disagree with you or argue with you, but I respect you more than any other admin. That being said, being put on the Vandals list does seem a bit harsh, I don't think hes editing articles with any malicous intent, its nit like he deleted the whole Alliance article and changed it to say "Alliance are retarded." In my view, hes just voicing what he believes is fact, anf i think that banning him is enough. Lckyluke372

Oh, don't worry there is no bad feelings. Go ahead and continue to post, if you make a good point I'll try to help you out be adding the correct citations, if there is a problem I'll try to clean it up as best as possible. As for average Horde member being able to defeat the average alliance race, that's actually listed on the Horde article and cited.Baggins 01:01, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

BTW, anyone who is banned must be listed on the vandal list in order to point out the reason they were banned. Its used for keeping track of ban, and the justification for bans. If someone is banned and not put on the vandal list then arguebly someone could come along later and question the administrator's motives, as there would be no record as to why the person was banned in the first place. Perhaps vandal is a strong word, but the mage is more of a "ban record", or "suspect record".Baggins 01:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, when does Zarnks bad expire? Warchiefthrall 12:37, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

So I heard you like Murlocs?

What's yer opinion on Murlocs? Do you think they belong in the Alliance? Garm 18:16, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Murlocs are cool, but I don't think they belong on either side. I'd think clothing would be a big issue, clothing would dry out their skin, which would kill them, thus why they tend to remain close to water. It would be unrealistic to move them to places beyond water, and/or into really dry places. Other interesting facts are that they may be minions of a sea based Old God. So I'm thinking they might make for a very cool enemy in a future expansion. I wouldn't mind seeing some neutral murlocs though, perhaps some that would turn on their master, and ask for hero's help?Baggins 18:26, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Is this really the place for this kind of thing?--SWM2448 19:41, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Talk on a Talk page? I'm outraged! WTB: [Wowwiki Admin] Normal 20:34, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Re. Eternals

Moving an article is always allowed for anyone to make. That's what a wiki is about, being bold. If you disagree with the move, that's fine, but don't say that I'm not allowed to do such things. As far as I was concerned, the move to Dieties was generally agreed upon in the talk page. No one moved it yet, so I decided to do it myself. From the talk page everyone supported the move except you. That's not how we do things on this wiki. You may be an admin, but you do not have total control, and I can take this up as abuse of your power if you do not allow pages to be moved when a consensus has been reached. Death Wing 14:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

As it happens, in this case it had been decided to leave it as Eternals. Given the evidence you acted upon your actions are justifiable. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Again as I said before in the discussion even if a "dieties" page exists for some reason (if it could be limited to true dieities), Eternals page would have to exist as well, as it is an official term with citeable references. Essentially you could be bold and create a new dieties page. However, trying to get rid of all references to Eternal, and twisting the information from referenced and cited sources is another thing altogether, when you change the words from what was said in a source you literally alter the meaning, and give a false representation of that information, it no longer is what the source was saying. If you were to alter quotes or twist information on a Wikipedia and other people caught it, they'd revert it every time, and probably let an adminstrator know.

As I mentioned before, the Eternals meaning covers more than just demigods, dieties, etc. Not all Eternals are gods, dieties or demigods.Baggins 17:25, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Question Regarding "The Bitter Taste of Victory"

I'm a little curious, is there any particular reason you moved the page referring to the Battle of Hellfire Peninsula? Last I checked, none of the other battles listed are referred to by their level names... --Joshmaul 07:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

All the battles are all being moved to their level names. Much easier to search for them that way, and it makes things a bit closer to official. Plus policy is to use official names rather than fan names whenever possible.Baggins 07:43, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

By "being moved", he refers to "I'm moving everything because that how I believe the articles should be named, to hell with the opinions of others". So... you've pretty much ruined the Battles section. Check out Wookiepedia... Each battle is named after the place they happen, even though they don't have official names, even though they have someone that decides whats canon and what's not. What you've done is completely un-encyclopedic. Battles are named after a place or date. Period.--Gonzalo84 13:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Star wars is different, pretty much every Star Wars book, rpg, comic, essential guide or movie gave the battles names in within the stories, or timelines like, for example Battle of Endor, Battle of Mon Calamari, etc. Warcraft is not star wars.

Again its not my opinion but is part of the WoWWiki policy to use official names, ones that people are more likely to find if they are searching for something based on knowledge of Warcraft Games. If you use an unofficial name, then the articles are less likely to be read or even edited by anyone else, as they don't show up in searches. Sorry, to say it is very encyclopedic for articles to be named by the title they are officially given, so that they can be searched for easily, and maintain consistency of the original source. Not to mention you pretty much broke every rule of WoWWiki:Citation policy as well, in as much you never once gave one citation for where you were getting your information.Baggins 17:04, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Random heroes

So now you are the one that decides whats lore and whats not, right?. You even removed the fixed characters without consensus. Remember that one of the pillars of Wikis is consensus, otherwise, you're pretty much vandalizing the efforts of others.--Gonzalo84 20:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Are you absolutely sure they were fixed heroes? Obviously we do not keep articles for random heroes. User:Kirkburn/Sig3 20:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I went and made sure if they were random or not. I have the game installed and played the levels 4-5 times to make sure if they were fixed or not. Most of the ones that the pages claimed were one character showed up as various different characters when I played the level each time.Baggins 23:28, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Office Ultimate Steal

As posted on IRC! Students in the US, UK, Canada, France, Italy or Spain - Microsoft is doing an incredibly cheap Office Ultimate 2007 offer for $60 - http://www.istartedsomething.com/20070913/office-ultimate-steal/ User:Kirkburn/Sig3 18:06, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, spamming, perhaps i should add this person to the Known Vandal's list _└^Fisker_┘^┌_t/c^┐  18:09, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Lol, I asked for the link. So I can utilize it later when I have more time.Baggins 18:10, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Nothing about Greek students :( Mr.X8 03:46, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

SIG

Do I have to sign my own signature even on my own talk page and article page. I mean I never have before but I've never been busted so I would like to know your opinion Mr.X8 03:22, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Use your sig, anytime you post a message in a talk page. Not in article pages.Baggins 03:33, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Even on my own talk page? like Mr.X8 Talk Contribs Mr.X8 03:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Yep.Baggins 03:46, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Adventure hooks

What's your policy on putting information on adventure hooks in the articles? Brann describes them as adventures he's heard about, but their main purpose is to give RPG players campaign ideas. While some of them obviously aren't official, such as the reconstruction of the sunwell, I wanted to ask before I remove anything else. --Austin P 13:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Since brann has "heard of them" I don't mind them being put in. Infact some of them link into stuff brann discusses in the chapters. Its obvious that some of them like Alexstrasza's theory on how to reconstruct the Sunwell, would never be fulfilled, as alternative method was used instead. The only one that I can think of that was incredibly crazy was the one that had rumors of Deathwing going to Dragonblight to die. Which seems very unlikely unless it was all part of a ruse for some greater plan, and that he didn't actually die, but ended up leaving when he was done. In anycase since the rumor existed, it exists in speculation section of the whereabouts of Deathwing section of his article.Baggins 16:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Images

I saw you uploaded a great image of a satyr from "Monster Guide". I know the book features "Villains" so can you add their pictures too if you don't mind? It would be great to have artwork of Baron Rivendare, Kazzak or Nefarian(I hope there is a picture of each of them like in S&L and Manual of Monsters).Dakovski 19:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

We have to at least think about copyright laws. We can't just copy everything. User:Kirkburn/Sig3 19:09, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

You're right but having in mind the enormous amount of RPG images throughout the articles I think 4-5 images more wouldn't harm anyone. Moreover, that's the only way you can see art from otherwise unknown artists like Allen Dilling.Dakovski 14:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Knaak verifying process of writing, and Night

Have a watch with this video, if you can DL it: BlizzPlanet: Wow: Night of the Dragon - Richard A. Knaak Video Interview. (also posted on Rage's page) --User:Sky2042/Sig 22:27, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Also added a bunch of stuff from it to Night of the Dragon. --User:Sky2042/Sig 23:10, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Dark Factions

I don't know if you'd know this, but I figure you're as good a person to ask as any. Why hasn't Dark Factions been released yet? Several of the latest RPG books list its release date in the copyright as 2006, and it's directly refered to in the Monster Guide. I don't know how long it takes to complete and release a typical RPG book, but previously they've released 3-4 books per year, but there haven't been any new ones this year. What confuses me most is that even after all this time, the White Wolf website doesn't list it in it's upcoming releases.

Any idea what the hold up might be? --Austin P 16:39, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Waiting for the next expansion, methinks. User:Kirkburn/Sig3 17:04, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

It may have been held back to incorporate new lore about the tuskarrs, and death knights from the expansion. While I'm thinking it will still be set pre-Wrath, they might be tossing in those references to relations between various factions just before wrath begins. Much how Monster Guide, and Horde Player's Guide had 1-2 references to how things were just before The Burning Crusade. Interestingly enough there was at least one references to something from Wrath in Horde Player's Guide as well. The "rumor of Forsaken settlement in Northrend".Baggins 17:45, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

This might be nothing, but Brann also speculates that the Alliance wouldn't be able to send help to their troops up in Northrend until they retook Straholme. Given that they're thinking of moving Naxxramas to Northrend, and that they gave Kel'thuzad a window to come back, they're probably going to make that raid official. --Austin P 18:36, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

ref to hell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=037gP3t_in4&NR=1 Not sure where to put it. About 6:15 in or so. --User:Sky2042/Sig 08:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Edit War?

What edit war? You seem to be confused. Sandwichman was helping with the annihilan portion, not conflicting it. Garm 20:57, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Keep the discussion to one page please, it started on your talk page it will remain there.Baggins 21:07, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Death knight (disambiguation) moed to DK (disambiguation)

Isnt' this move a little confusing. Please explain your reasons.--Gonzalo84 01:31, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Main DK was used more than just Death Knights, someone had "dishonor kill" listed int he disambuagtion, and Death Knight now has in-page disambiguation.Baggins 01:39, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Those redirects are a mess.--SWM2448 01:18, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Kings

I found this,Think we could use some? -User:Airiph/sig 22:25, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

It is all fan art...--SWM2448 23:03, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Is that bad?We have lots of fanart,and some of those we have bad pictures of.-User:Airiph/sig 23:04, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

We have a lot of fan art? That's news to me! User:Kirkburn/Sig3 00:26, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Eyes

Would (or could) a High Elven druid get golden eyes if it was a druid magi or if they were an Elven Ranger heavily practiced druidism? Mr.X8 17:18, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea you know about as much as I do about druids from the website :p...--Baggins 17:30, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Scourge rewriting

Tu es lyrique, Sacquet. You wrote it damn well, Baggins! Nice to see we got more-than-skilled admins here =)--K ) (talk) 21:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't praise me, praise the authors of Lands of Mystery, and Bran Bronzebeard. Also note the citations, it is paraphrase. All I did was try to make it bit more formal than Brann's original style, as much as possible, but maintained the gist and as much of the material as possible.Baggins 22:21, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

What does it mean? Mr.X8 00:57, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Monster images

I'm curious. In all of the Manual of Monster Appendix 3 monster articles I've read, there's either been no images or pictures of fanart. If someone wanted to add images from the original D&D source books, would it be within the site's policy to do so? I don't a scanner, but I was just wondering. --Austin P 23:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, it seems like it might be an interesting idea. As long as artwork is tossed into source section rather than the main article I think. If not maybe in the talk page. Let me see what others think. We'd have to have another citation method for it, since they would neither be official warcraft art or fanart. The same would go for any mythology artwork added to the wiki too, like in Cockatrice (which sets precidence for the idea you suggest).Baggins 01:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

RPG books are great source of images. We have loads of them throughout the articles so I think some more wouldn't harm anyone. Some articles really need images. If you say I can upload the ones from Manual of Monsters. Something else I remembered - some RPG artists upload images they made for WoWRPG books on their personal pages on deviantart.com. One of them wrote that he has permission to upload them after the book is published, so this may mean it's not forbidden to share the images after the book is out. P.S.Baggins, please upload an image from Monster Guide of Kazzak and Baron Rivendare, I saw you've already did for many creatures - satyrs, gnolls, liches, etc.Dakovski 15:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Dakovski in this discussion we are talking about images from non-warcraft rpg books and other sources for creatures that do not have images. We have plenty of scans of images from Warcraft RPG sources, so that isn't the issue we are discussing here.

As for Kazzak and Baron Rivendare, they both are bit of a problem. Kazzak is on two pages, so it maks for a difficult scan, and looks fairly poor due to glare and lighting issues (I've tried in the past). Of course being on two pages leaves a "crease" in the middle of the image, due to it being on two pages, its difficult to try to edit the image to hide that. As for Baron Rivendare, he would be a bit easier as he's only one one page but I would have to clean up and remove the element where his sword overlaps the book title bar along the side.Baggins 18:04, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for my misunderstanding.Dakovski 18:59, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey, Baggins, thanks for uploading the Monster Guide images of Baron Rivendare and Garr. Forgive my insolence, but if you happen to be scanning from it again, I'll be glad to see some other "villains" artwork such as Balnazzar, Nefarian, Sicco Thermaplugg. Thanks again. Dakovski 12:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Zone info

I saw you added a bunch of stats in bullets to the tops of most of the zone pages. I like the stats but I hate the way they appear floating above the introductory text. Would you have any problems with me incorporating them into the zonebox? I can't do it right away because I am very busy these days, but I'm sure I could get others to help out. --Jiyambi t || c 21:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Ya, I was hoping someone would upgrade zone box to include that kind of info. Other possibilities might be a "ruler" section too, but I left those out as it was already getting a bit large for the top of the page.Baggins 22:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I made some updates to the zone box (I didn't update the example yet, I will do that after getting some feedback). Check out Teldrassil and let me know what you think.

Hehe, we left messages at the exact same moment. I will make a rulers section. --Jiyambi t || c 04:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Ruler/Rulers section added - its set up like the race/races section, so if you use the field ruler it will say ruler, and rulers will output the plural.--Jiyambi t || c 04:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Cool thanks. BTW there were some other stuff the rpg breaks down per each nation as well, such as languages, faiths, and resources. While cool I left them out as I thought it might get a bit too detailed. Sometimes the lists can be pretty long. You don't need to add them in but thought you might be interested in knowing how detailed the geography primers actually get.Baggins 05:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

While that info would be too long for the zonebox or a list elsewhere, but if it could be integrated into the article text somehow I think it would be pretty cool. Thanks again for all the new info, the race breakdowns are especially cool. Think I should start updating the zoneboxes for other zones? --Jiyambi t || c 05:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Btw, you might want to move the level information out of the lore information maybe it should go into its own box just below the Title but above the picture? You might want to make MMO affiliation seperate from the lore affiliation, also put above to show its gameplay. That way we could list the various types shown in the mmo, "Horde", "Alliance", "neutral" and "contested", so as to not mix the two up.

Ya if you want to start fixing the rest of the pages go ahead. I'll add official rulers in later, updated with current information if they have changed.Baggins 05:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Kk, I will mess about with the ord of information and see what I can do. I should just get on IRC and chat with you and everyone there :P --Jiyambi t || c 05:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Did you notice the demographic info says nothing about gnolls? For example, I know gnolls are common in both Mulgore and Feralas, but there is no information about their population - but other savage humanoids are included, such as harpies and kobolds. I wonder why this is... --Jiyambi t || c 19:59, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Well first off they are all estimates. As for why they overlook certain populations, one reason is probably because they moved in after the last census in that area was taken. In other cases, Brann mentions that there are certain races living in an area, but because they are such a small a number compared to other groups as far as the "true Azeroth scale" in that area they aren't counted in the population figures. Essentially rather an list ever single creature that may live in an area, Brann usually just lists the races that have the greatest population counts in the order of who has the greast population.

To quote Brann himself;

For each region entry, I give information — as far as I could gather it — on population, rulers, settlements, languages, resources and more.Template:Cite

I provide estimates (which range from wild guesses to accurate statements backed by official records) of the populations in each of the regions within these areas, as well as the region’s resources, rulers, settlements and the like.Template:Cite Baggins 20:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I figured they were only estimates. The only one that really bothers me is Feralas, because (at least on the Horde side) so many quests revolve around holding back the encroaching gnolls, as if they are a huge population. Mulgore is similar, though the sense of scale is smaller. Still, based on in-game mobs, I would say there are at least as many gnolls in Mulgore as Harpies, and harpies are specifically listed. I'm not saying we should contradict official sources - I'm just discussing the oddity with another lore-minded person :) --Jiyambi t || c 01:59, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd say just toss in the listing of gnolls, however we can't actually list numbers for them. However, I'd say they have probably moved in after last known "census" in this case.Baggins 02:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I also discovered that the Hillsbrad Foothills demographics don't include Forsaken at all, when obviously there is a huge forsaken presence there now. Any ideas when Brann got his data? Is the Tarren Mill settlement a fairly recent establishment? Just curious. --Jiyambi t || c 02:34, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Ya he definitely brings up the Forsaken he just doesn't consider them as having as much foothold in the area as the humans do. Note that forsaken have only one town, and they constantly are sent on quests to attack all the human towns and farms (humans definitely control more land in the area). Just look at the history on Tarren Mill. Ya, its fairly recent establishment. Lands of Conflict is set not long before the start of World of Warcraft in general, within the year before the game, year 29 or so on most of the newer timelines. His descriptions of the area in Alliance Player's Guide and Horde Player's Guide seems to imply that humans definitely have the majority control of the area as well, IIRC.

As a side note, Sunwell Trilogy likely takes place concurrently with Lands of Conflict, and Forsaken do not yet have Tarren Mill when the event begins in the manga (but took over it by the time Brann reached it). However, Brann reached Quel Thalas before most of the Blood Elves retook Silvermoon (he saw only a few blood elves, a few high elves, but the areas were mostly deserted). He states later in APG or HPG that he didn't learn until later, but that blood elves retook Silvermoon not long after he left Quel'Thalas.

Basically this means events of the first sunwell book happened before Brann reached Hillsbrad during his journey. However he reached Quel'thalas before events of the third book of the trilogy happened.Baggins 03:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Let me point out that somewhere in Lands of Mystery, Brann says that Murlocs don't let anyone get close enough to them to be able to count them. Consider how gnolls are, this probably applies to them too. Just for the record, he does give the gnoll population for the Badlands.--Austin P 18:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Topographic map of Azeroth

Where did you get that picture from? I need it in higher resolution, for A'dal's sake!--K ) (talk) 14:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

World of Warcraft World MapBaggins 16:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Finishing up

I'm done going through all of the RPG articles, but there are a few things I want your opinion on. See my talk page for details.--Austin P 22:28, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Reply to: Zep crews

I didn't see any; I didn't use the zeppelins, only the boats. The PTR is acting funny for some reason, so I can't validate it. When I get an opportunity, though, I will. --Joshmaul 01:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I was able to check definitively, and it seems someone else figured it out too: Yes, there are crews on the zeppelin. The Tirisfal-Durotar zep is called the Thundercaller, the Durotar-STV zep is called the Iron Eagle, and the STV-Tirisfal zep is called the Purple Princess. I will get screenies up when I can. --Joshmaul 04:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Awesome, its bout time they did this kind of thing. I always thought the ghost ships were too weird. Now all we need is more stuff in Tram ;).Baggins 05:28, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Quotations

I really do not understand this "nitpicking quotation" policy of your's. Wikias should not be built like that; articles should not be written like that - large parts directly copied (as you have done with the Galen Trollbane article and refuse to accept the edits I have done, even though the information still follows general facts), unless that is really (i.e. in cases of in-game history book articles) nessecary. There is nothing wrong with using something as a cituation, borrowing some parts and altering them, yet still following the general facts provided, it is better than direct copying, and that is NOT vandalism, I strongly suggest you take example of Wikipedia ect in this matter. --Theron the Just 09:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I have not said it was "vandalism" however it is a "violation" of WoWWiki policy to alter quotes, or add interprations in that are not stated by the original source. This is not my policy but the one decided on by the beuracrats. Also this is not wikipedia, it doesn't follow wikipedia policies it has its own rules. Especially considering half these articles wouldn't even pass merit for Wikipedia type articles (Wikipedia does not allow "game guide" type material, this site is an entirely different kind of beast).Baggins 09:50, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

That is not the point, I know that this is not Wikipedia. The point is that copying entire lines from sources directly is not good. Wikias should not to be built like that - this is supposed to be a fan community which would still follow facts, regarles of what they might consern, not "copy 'em directly to built articles community". There is nothing wrong with altering sourced text as long as it still follows the general facts. What is glorious about copying entire texts when that is not even remotely nessecary; the point of Wikias is to have the contributors built the articles, not directly copying very large elements of what they write (again, when it is not nessecary). It does not make sense and this cencorship "policy" prevents contributors from editing even if their edits would still follow general facts.

I ask that my thoughts (this has nothing to do with issues with you) will be carried on to higher authorities. --Theron the Just 10:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Your welcome to add thoughts, just not into the middle of quotes. They should be either before the cited paragraph, after the cited paragraph, after the citation, or in its own note section, or another part of the article, as long as its really truly relevent to the section of the article its written into.Baggins 10:14, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Still, I request that my thoughts regarding this policy will be carried on. I trust there are no problems with that (are there?). --Theron the Just 10:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

No, there aren't. Yes, we should avoid copying large sections of inormation, but when something is quoted, especially if in <blockquote> tags then no, do not change it. Kirkburn  talk  contr 14:39, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion

If someone wrote something offensive to me on one of my fan fiction stories, can I delete what they say? Mr.X8 23:27, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

1. Its your fanfiction do what you want to the page. Fanfiction is not my interest btw.

2. Let an admin know that one of your pages has been vandalized, and tell us what they said, so that we can take action.--Baggins 23:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh no, they did nothing wrong, this act is more of a "pride" thing and I don't want to delete what they say if was illegal Mr.X8 23:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

I would like to report a case of 1 peorson vandalizing my talk page. I can get the people's names in a sec. Mr.X8 23:25, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

He is Sky2042 Mr.X8 23:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

X8, Sky Made your/Ariph's icon list into a official WoWWiki page. How is that bad?--SWM2448 23:34, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I'm so sorry. I didn't see anything added, so I assumed he deleted something. I'm REAL sorry Sky Mr.X8 23:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

This is what he did. Tell him that if you wish.--SWM2448 23:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Magic and Technology sections in race pages

I was thinking of putting magic and technology from the Alliance magic, Alliance technology and Horde technology race information in the appropriate race articles.

Do you agree? Zakolj 18:43, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

The race pages are already too bloated, a link to articles would be more appropriate.Baggins 18:45, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean something like "See Also" in the Culture section or if there is a better way could you give me an example Zakolj 19:01, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

See also sections are usually towards the bottom of the pages.Baggins 19:02, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I meant something like

Template:See

at the end of the Culture section. I forgot about See also sections. I do agree with adding them now.

Also could you add Horde magic information from the HPG. Zakolj 19:16, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

To be honest I don't think there is much. We could probably merge it into a Horde & Alliance magic article.Baggins 19:17, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I just loaded a HPG preview there is only orc, tauren, jungle troll and forsaken information as I saw on the Table of Content so I agree with a merge into a Horde & Alliance magic article. Zakolj 19:43, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Consistent reversion

If you're going to revert everything that I write that you apparently come across, please at least do me the courtesy of being consistent. I've noticed that the only places you revert what I write are on pages/sections reverting to lore; material I write on mechanics generally goes untouched. Do you thus only revert my edits on those specific pages that you care about?

I can live with being policed, but if you're going to police me at all, my contributions page means that you can easily go through everything that I have written and audit it individually. If everything that I write is inappropriate, your selective enforcement on those few pages that you apparently actively monitor would surely mean that the wiki's policy will end up being inconsistently applied. Petrus4 02:40, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'm going to explain this to you slowly.

1. If your going to add a new section to a discussion page it goes at the bottom of the last discusison not at the top of the page. That is a minor violation of wowwiki etiquette.
2. I've warned you on your talk page for the reason for reverts but you haven't acknowledged them yet.

a. If you can't add a citation, then it doesn't belong. Especially if the material is contraversial. Do not add negative or overly possitive discriptions of races unless you have an official citation to back it up.

b. Gameplay should not be mixed with lore. Observation of how people play ingame does not belong on lore pages. If it sounds like an observation based on gameplay, and lacks citations it will probably be removed.

c. More often than not a cited paragraph or section is a quoted or closely paraphrased section from an official source, do not add content into the middle of it, unless you have an additional citation to add, and as long as you make sure the material before it keeps the citation it was given. I.E copy the previous citation before and after the split, as well as your citation at the end of your addition. If you have no citation then add it to the end of the section, and it will be judged on the merit if its within standards, or breaking speculation/fan interpretation measures.

d. do not try to tone down a cited source, as it is official comment (thus does not fall under speculation definition), and follows a different policy than the NPOV policies.

3. My strenghth as an admin is with lore based material (notice I am also on the book keeper staff). There are admins that have strengths with game mechanic material. I'll let them judge the merit of your edits in those cases. However gameplay should not be merged into lore sections. If I see it in those sections, I will probably remove it, unless I can figure a better place to move it to.

Baggins 02:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Elven Horse Picture

The picture on the Elven Horse talk page is enormous. I tried to shrink it by adding a thumb nail, but that ruined the page. What is going to happen to me and the page? I didn't mean to break it, I jut wanted to make it smaller. Is there anything you can do? Mr.X8 Talk Contribs

Do you know where it's from? Mr.X8 Talk Contribs

question

Hey, since Mr.X8 dubs you "The Lore King" i got a question: were there high elf spellbreakers? (dont mean to sound like a noob) User:IbbertTheGnome/Sig 01:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know they were originated with the blood elves, as far as lore goes. Actually I'm pretty sure that's what the manual and website said for them.Baggins 07:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

"Lore King"?- planning a hostile takeover, Baggins? -_Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

LoL, you for one know they would never replace Metzen ;). If anyone has a position of "king" it would have to be him, even if he is also the emperor of retcons ;).Baggins 15:52, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

If you have any good ideas about a valuable reorganization of lorekeepers hierarchy, by all means submit them to Ragestorm ='D --K ) (talk) 21:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

While I account for the gaps in my knowledge, I hold to the notion that if I actually played World of Warcraft, I could take the pants off all of you.--Austin P 22:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

<arches an imperious eyebrow>--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 01:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Did I say take? I meant beat. Silly me.--Austin P 01:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

What does any of this have to do with High Elven spellbreakers? Mr.X8 Talk Contribs

It has everything to do with High Elven spellbreakers.--Austin P 02:03, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Not really. You almost meant you'd rape players (I know you meant beat), and someone else was talking Metzen. Mr.X8 Talk Contribs

It is about who is 'The Lore King'.--SWM2448 02:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I called Baggins this because he's knows all lore in Warcraft and judging by his name probably knows something about Lord of the Rings. Mr.X8 Talk Contribs

All joking aside, we're just messing around and your question has already been answered. The spellbreakers originated with the blood elves, and with the blood elves they stay.--Austin P 02:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, you never know, other races could decided to branch in... --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 02:59, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Also I have determined that all administrators are British because of the elequance in which they talk. :o Mr.X8 Talk Contribs

While I appreciate the sentiment ... I'm the only one ;) Kirkburn  talk  contr 03:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

But Baggins you aren't? Mr.X8 Talk Contribs

Kirkburn and I are British and half-breed, respectively. Baggins has a tongue of silver. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 05:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Note that User:Adys is a Frenchie. :O --User:Sky2042/Sig 06:44, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

And Sky is ... something. It's hard to tell. Kirkburn  talk  contr 07:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Young. Nublet. --Sky (talk | con | wh) 07:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Wait, what's meant by British half-breeds? {{User:Mr.X8/Sig}} 21:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

People with a British parent, probably.

Anyway, if titles are being handed out I'd like one too. How about "Lore Viscount". ;P --User:Vorbis/Sig

Can I get in on this tititular action?--SWM2448 22:22, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah if everyone else is getting a title I'll take "fan fic Dictator". {{User:Mr.X8/Sig}} 22:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

-Sigh- It was a... subtle joke. --User:Vorbis/Sig

And you think I wasn't. or sandwichman? {{User:Mr.X8/Sig}} 22:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, nevermind. I feel I've derailed the discussion. --User:Vorbis/Sig

What's so bad about that? {{User:Mr.X8/Sig}} 22:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, being Baggins user talk it wasn't mine to derail was it? That said, I'm not sure how much further the discussion could have gone. --User:Vorbis/Sig

Hyjal map

Where did you get the Hyjal Summit map from? Or did you make it yourself? If so - how? Curious =)) --  Shandris  talk / contribs 17:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

It is from a poster that came with something.--SWM2448 18:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Its a poster that you buy stand alone, actually.Baggins 20:13, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Poster...? Sounds interesting, got any details? An official Blizzard poster or sth? --  Shandris  talk / contribs 20:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Official yes, its listed in the Warcraft universe list. It was released by Brady Games.Baggins 20:42, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Captain

Coming to you because i'm not sure what to do in this situation. In warcraft 3 Arthas' lieutenant is a unnamed captain. He seems to keep the same voice throughout the human campaign so it would appear it's the same captain throughout and not many captians, but it still could be considered speculation. furthermore the captain unit also appears in various other places in the game, including there being two of them in the first undead mission. He plays a minor but still noteworthy role in the human campaign and i'd like to make an entry on him but i'm not exactly sure how to approach the situation. Any advice.Warthok 20:47, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Treat him like "Bennys" from the Thief series, or perhaps the Barneys in half-life? A thematic character, who all share the same voices and mannerisms, but do not necessarily represent the same person. But all can share the same page, perhaps Captain (Warcraft III) or similar (whatever the usual disambig format is). In anycase if you can connect certain appearances of him to be the same character then go ahead. You can always add a speculation section to explain the difficulties.Baggins 20:53, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

you are blind

find jesus, before it is too late

22:49, 13 November 2007 (UTC)