Talk:Kul Tiras (kingdom)

Veracity
The this entire article is from a website that is not an official Blizzard site and is therefore not reliable. Some facts are basic and have been established in the general continutity of the series but the specific references to the current state of Kul Tiras are questionable at best. -A. Love


 * They may be questionable, but "canon that is somewhat questionable" (read: Metzen worked on and approved all RPG books) is better than nothing. Until we have reason to suspect it is false, I don't see why we should believe that it is. --Pure.Wasted 15:33, 4 October 2006 (EDT)

Destruction of Kul Tiras
In the Orcish campaign of Warcraft II's expansion, the orcs need to get an artifact from Alterac. In order to secure passage over the seas they invade Kul Tiras. Now, this may not have actually happened, because only the Alliance campaign is completely true, but the only artifact they didn't have in the end of the Alliance campaign was the Eye of Dalaran, indicating that they got the artifact from Alterac. So, was Kul Tiras raised to the ground as logic would have us believe? Mannerheim

"the Alliance campaign is completely true"


 * Actually the true history picks and chooses elements from both the Horde and Alliance campaigns. Not everything that happened in Alliance campaign has happened in current history, and vice versa (Though I believe most events from both campaigns have been refrenced in later sources in some way, except the endings). As for the attacks on Kul Tiras? I'll have to look into that.Baggins 22:32, 10 December 2006 (EST)


 * Um, I think everything in the Alliance campaign is true, give me an example. Mannerheim

Well Kul Tiras wasn't completely destroyed, but the collection of the three artifacts is defenitely true. There are refrences to it in other sources. I've gone over the missions for both campaigns and for the most part they both seem to interweave into each other, except for the last level or two of the final chapters of both sides.Baggins 18:00, 5 January 2007 (EST)

Who actually Destryed Tiraguard keep? because I have seen the naga raid a Kul tiras town in warcraft 3, was that tiraguard keep? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by.

Please sign your posts, and no Tiragarde keep was destroyed by Thrall and Rexxar, it was the big kul'tiras castle towards the end of the campaign.--Gurluas (talk) 14:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Shouldnt Kul Tiras be kicking hordes ass...Since Lieutenant Alverold is coming with his fleet. Alterac Parenolde

Kul Tiras in future expansions.
Wasn't sure the appropriate place for this, so I thought i'd put it here and hope for a response. I had a chance to speak with Chris Metzen after the Lore and Quests panel at Blizzcon2007, and I asked about whether any of the missing kingdoms like Kul Tiras or Gilneas would come into play with the WotLK expansions, especially since he said they wanted to get back to the basic "Humans vs. Orcs" concept of Warcraft, and, in my opinion, there's not alot of humans out there that hate orcs more than those from Kul Tiras. He said that there currently weren't any plans to introduce them in the WotLK, but that they do have plans for them, Kul Tiras and, it seemed to me more so, Gilneas. So not this time, but maybe next I guess. Xier 12:59, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

GRAND ANDMIRAL DAILEN PROUDMOORE, not lord admiral dailen proudmoore!

Both are correct. I believe Grand Admiral however refers to his position in the chain of command of the alliance in the second war, while Lord Admiral is a title for the ruler of Kul Tiras. Making the second, Lord Admiral, more prevelent to the character.Warthok 08:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Just saw this has already been discussed on your talk page. I'm reverting the changes.Warthok 08:21, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Can you make A warrior look exactly like a kul tiras marine? can you get all the green-trimed plate? I made the tabard and I have the helm. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by.

Alright this has been explained once already. His title as leader of Kul Tiras is Lord Admiral. Lord Admiral is the equivilent of king for Kul Tiras. Grand Admiral refers to his position in the Alliance of Lordaeron. The specific part of the article is refering to his rule over Kul Tiras thus why Lord is appropriate instead of Grand. Furthermore that section is taken directly from the Warcraft 2 manaual, word for word, in which he is called Lord Admiral.Warthok 07:19, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Why Kul Tiras left the Alliance during Beyond the Dark Portal?
In the narration of the eight mission of Beyond the Dark Portal it is told the following: "We have also learned that Admiral Proudmoore is no longer a member of the Alliance and does not have the support of their armies." But in the Warcraft III manual it is told that Admiral Proudmoore still serves the Alliance, so that means that they left the Alliance and then rejoined after being almost defeated by the Horde?

Militarism
How do they keep putting together such enormous fleets if their population is just 10,000? Perhaps they practice impressment? At any rate, they would have to maintain a fairly militarized society, even for WoW, to support such a massive navy. Lckyluke372 (talk) 14:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Why was Kul Tiras left out of Cataclysm?
I think we all rejoiced when we heard that Blizz not only remembered Gilneas now, but is making it a major factor in this upcoming expansion... but why is Kul Tiras not a part of this? It would seem odd, especially now that we can fly around the areas, that Kul Tiras will not be a part of the world at all. Especially since every part of Azeroth was hit with chasms and crags of lava. It's also in the Tol Barad and Gilneas area. Did it sink for some reason? Did Blizz forget about this area like they did with Gilneas a few years back? Kind of odd, considering Jaina, a major character in WoW lore even to this day, is from there, but there seems to be no news of her old home. Mykael Mourningsun (talk) 05:48, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't be surprised if it did sink, but I'm not inclined to think so. Perhaps its being saved for a patch. Drakolord7 (talk) 05:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It's possible it just is being saved for a future expansion. I am looking at Cataclysm as part 1 of 2 expansions with Azshara being the primary antagonist for levels 85-90 in the next expansion. That would be a perfect time for the remaining areas like Kul Tiras and Kezan to be added. Leviathon (talk) 06:05, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't be shocked at the Part 1 of 2 possibility. And isn't Kezan being added? Last I read, Goblin players start out on Kezan and eventually wind up on the Lost Isles. And also, aren't the Lost Isles the remains of Suramar? If so, then the Tomb of Sargeras should be there. These Isles are the same ones that Illidan visited in WC3, at least they have the same placing geographically. Mykael Mourningsun (talk) 09:39, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * We can't really trust the location of the Broken Isles as they were moved from WC2 to WC3 from Eastern Kingdoms to the Maelstrom. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 16:16, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

As Tol Barad was annexed into Kul Tiras after the second war, we will, in effect, be able to visit Kul Tirian territory, if not the two main islands of the nation. I hope there are references to its status as Kul Tirian in the expansion. Also, did any of the people of that kingdom survive the Orcish invasion? I know that they were already in tough times before the war (what with being conquered by Stromgarde and all) but are there still natives now? gadget (talk) 05:45, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

Lore-wise, I'll hazard a guess here. Barring a major plot hole, if Kul Tiras hasn't been destroyed or walled off, then the only other possibilities I can think of are that:
 * Kul Tiras was left as a ghost town after the migration to Theramore.
 * Lady Jaina & the Dalaran wizards cast an invisibility aura on Kul Tiras, just as pre-WotLK Dalaran had a protective shell over it. Given enough arcane energy, it may not be a far-fetched proposition. Deepred (talk) 04:28, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Kul Tiras
In Warcraft II it's pronounced 'Kool Tihr-ahs', but I've always thought of it as 'Kuhl Tihr-ahs' for some reason. The narrator of the human campaign is known to have mispronounced the name 'Quel'Thalas', but Blizzard felt this sounded better and kept it. But it would perhaps be an oddity amongst Warcraft names that it's pronounced differently than its spelled, especially since it hasn't been said in decades. So... does anyone have any information as to how Blizzard pronounces Kul Tiras these days? Perhaps from a Blizzcon panel? Weasel (talk) 14:08, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Adjective?
Apparantly Gourra thinks "Tirasian" is too much of a stretch (Scavenged Tirasian Plate), but seeing as we have nothing else, and that another bit of Kul Tiras flavour lore was included in Wrath (Kul Tiras Wine) I think it is perfectly acceptable. What else could it refer to? It's not TirIsfal.

I've seen "Kul Tiran" around the forums (even on this article without a reference), and I'm pretty sure this is fan-derived.

Any thoughts?--Weasel (talk) 04:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Why do you think "Tirasian" means it's connected to Kul Tiras? It's not mentioned anywhere in the quest, nor are the objectives related to it. It's very farfetched. -- 10:28, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Well just to add a small bit to this discussion, the word Tirassian (with double "s") has been connected to Kul Tiras. The type of ship known as the Tirassian wind-runner originates from Kul Tiras. - Aedror (talk) 10:52, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


 * What else exactly is it going to refer to? It's possible it wasn't meant to refer to Kul Tiras, but "Tiras" doesn't feature anywhere else yet, so I reckon it's accurate until otherwise contradicted. In other cases, it's not "Quel'Thalassian", but 'Thalassian'. I suppose Tirassian is more authoritive though.--Weasel (talk) 04:57, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Appearance at last?
I think this is worth noting, it was found on General and the credit is who ever found it, -http://i.imgur.com/X7JE9Oe.jpg?1 -Warchaser14
 * That looks pretty badly photoshopped. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 21:02, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Gosh! But yea... probably photoshopped, sadly. However, y u no posted on 1. April? :/ --Mordecay (talk) 21:13, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Aw damn, I didn't even notice it. This is a blow to my hopes for seeing Kul'Tiras in game. I'm very sorry.-Warchaser14

Type of government?
As per this string of tweets by Loreology: link. Daelin wasn't king of Kul Tiras nor does his rule necessarily fall upon his children. Also, the fact that his title as ruler was "Lord Admiral". So it isn't a hereditary monarchy. Would it be a military dictatorship, military junta, stratocracy, or even democracy? -Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 20:36, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * It's impossible to say. We simply don't have enough information about how their leader is selected, or how he rules. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 20:41, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Former affiliation
What should it be? Should the form "|faffiliation" be used? As far as I can see, it's not visible when you look at the page. Please, help.--Adûnâi (talk) 17:44, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
 * No. I thinks the form "|affiliation" should be used, but but a "(formerly)" after "Alliance of Lordaeron", as in Location. Cemotucu (talk contribs) 17:54, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Don't remember the exact wording but when it says: "Kul Tiras was once a member of the Alliance" Which Alliance? Lordaeron Alliance or the current? --Mordecay (talk) 18:29, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd take it as the Alliance of the Second War, including Stormwind refugees.--Adûnâi (talk) 18:30, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't remember either, and it is also unclear when was the Grand Alliance created and when the AoL ceased to be. Given that KY fell silent after Daelin's death, I'd say they didn't have time to join the new Alliance and leave. This seems to lead to KT leaving the AoL, which would eventually cease to exist.
 * They are treated as the same Alliance. The Grand Alliance is referred to as being around since WC2 in the WoW Manual. Wolfheart has Gilneas seeking re-admittance into the current Alliance even though they left before WC3. And Metzen's speech at the opening of BlizzCon 2013 says "you are the Alliance of Lordaeron." --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 19:54, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The UVG says the Grand Alliance is an evolution of the AoL. Maybe that's why sometimes both orgs are so linked in texts. Cemotucu (talk contribs) 22:35, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

From what I know, the confusion of Kul Tiras leaving the Alliance comes from one mission in Warcraft II, Assault on Kul Tiras (WC2 Orc). The orc campaign is mostly non canon however. The human campaign is, and in the last mission The Dark Portal (WC2 Orc) notably lists Azeroth, Kul Tiras, Dalaran, and Lordaeron as enemies. This is consistent with the Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos manual, which lists these four as the last human nations of the Alliance. So even in the likely non-canon scenario where Kul Tiras leaves, it appears they rejoined. And there is no mention in the book Beyond the Dark Portal of them leaving, which pretty much confirms they didn't. I don't know what exactly Copeland's tweet said, but it seemed he didn't know what the devs are planning for the future, not so such as stating Kul Tiras is currently not a member of the Alliance. I think the Alliance insignia should be given in the meantime. --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 02:01, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
 * It was confirmed that Kul Tiras didn't leave the Alliance during the 2nd War. It's more about their post-WC3/current status. Loreology's tweet said KT "was once a member of the Alliance," indicating that they aren't anymore. --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 02:55, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Didn't he also say their current status is a mystery? I think he was just acknowledging it's history and saying it' future is being decided. --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 19:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Madness?
Why both of you undo my edits?? And WORSE: Charging me of fan fiction. Someone have any doubts that Kul Tiras is a nation (and therefore a faction)? If someone wants to describe a place that have never appeared on WoW or Wc3 (as far as I know) create an article called Kul Tiras Isle. 14:37, 23 July 2016 (UTC)


 * If the edits are incorrect, they need to be corrected, is all. Ie you keep adding Boralus but it has already been confirmed that Kul Tiras is a city-state. So not only Boralus is non-canon but it is completely incorrect. --Mordecay (talk) 18:11, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Tabard
Well, images give information. A tabard is like the Coat of arms of a faction and I see no enough reason to limit it to just in-game factions. The articles "Lordaeron" and "Stromgarde" have a tabard and, please, don't remove them without the support from the community. 17:38, 3 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The information is already in the image gallery. The infobox clearly states it's under "Reputation", and it's not a reputation faction. -- 17:43, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * As I tried to express, the tabard is like the Coat of arms of an organization. No need to be categoric; can someone readd the tabard? 01:54, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
 * No need to be categorical. There are articles of non-playable factions on this wiki that uses a tabard on the infobox, likely to illustrate a coat of arms. 19:25, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You do know that the tabard is in the gallery at the end of the article anyway, right? Xporc (talk) 19:32, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * As Gourra said, the infobox tabard is explicitly for the rep tabard, and they're not a rep faction. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 19:38, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * There are many articles in what tabard get inserted even not been reputation factions. I remember now at least three of them now, including the kingdoms I have cited above. It's a way to illustrating information about the faction, been in the game or no. And the parameter "Status" is under "Reputation" as well even having not to it directly. If both of you are so messed about these two parameters just because they are under the word "Reputation", change here the parameters to up of it OR ignore I re-adding it. But I will not readd it now, just waiting the response. 15:50, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I knew it. 15:50, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Kingdom
Hi. Should "Kul Tiras" entry be splitted into two differents articles as Stormwind, Lordaeron or Dalaran? One for the location (Stormwind, Lordaeron, Dalaran) and another one for the human kingdom (Stormwind (kingdom), Lordaeron (kingdom) Dalaran (kingdom)). --Petrovic (talk) 12:45, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I think we had this debate for Gilneas. Ideally I think it should be done, yes. Don't know about the others. Xporc (talk) 12:55, 15 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I also think it would be better to split between the region/zone and the kingdom. And if we could make the same with Gilneas too the better. Ryon21 (talk) 22:48, 15 November 2017 (UTC)


 * It should be done for Quel'Thalas, Theramore and Durotar as well. Also, can anyone confirm that this nation is a kingdom indeed? If no, it should be moved to Kul Tiras (nation). 00:15, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Could happen for Quel'thalas and theramore, for Durotar i'm still waiting for a source about how it's supposed to be a nation. Also, kul tiras is part of the seven kingdoms, so for consistency it'll stay as is. Xporc (talk) 00:57, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * "We've built this kingdom--Durotar--for all our kind." --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 01:06, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * + nation Durotar and (ch 9) CoH's "Even as great a nation as Durotar had towns and settlements and order." --Mordecay (talk) 07:43, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Well you guys feel feel free to help, 'cause I'm tired of that kind of ground work :D Xporc (talk) 15:07, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * In TFT, Orgrimmar is the capital of Durotar and Thunder Bluff is the capital of Mulgore. However, that was really quickly dropped because in WoW the capitals are the faction names and the kingdoms became zones with fixed borders. You are not going to get enough info for a page.-- 18:53, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Must everyone know that when someone says the name of a capital city such way it is not refering to the city government or for the city environment, but to the political body that it represents. This is a frequent pratice on the real world politics: Use the name of the capital to refer the nation that englobes it. If I say that Caracas is going to raise taxes, it means that the venezulean government is going to do so. So we conclude that if you gains reputation with Silvermoon City, you are gaining reputation with the nation that it represents. And so we must conclude that the nation pages and the in-game faction pages talk about the same object, with one telling about the in-mage faction mechanics and other talking about the lore behind it. Merge could be a good option, for the object be the same. It could be on other way like a boss-styled page with one talking about the character and another talking about the in-game encounter, however I consider and believe the object arguing more important and stable and that we should find a way to accommodate the in- and out-game features on just one such page, maybe putting the reputation features at the end of the faction pages and using on-lore names to name the articles properly or at least by rapprochement. I'm going to show the parity:

Stormwind (faction) could be merged with Stormwind (kingdom). Darnassus (faction) could be renamed as Night elves of Kalimdor, as it is the best name I have found to show the link between night elves and their habitat. I'm going to explain: Republic of Darnasuss and Night elves of Darnassus could be options, but as the night elven body is frequently refered as "night elves" and as they have their several claims for several lands on Kalimdor, not just Darnassus, I believe the first be a better option. Exodar (faction) could be remnamed Draenei of Exodar. Just like as Darnassus (republic), the name "Republic of Exodar" would be another inference. Gilneas (faction) and Gilneas (kingdom) there on the same situation than Stormwind. Gnomeregan (faction) is the same of Gnomeregan (kingdom), as is the king of the gnomes. Ironforge (faction) is the same than Kingdom of Khaz Modan that also called as Kingdom of Ironforge and could be renamed as Ironforge (kingdom). I prefer the name "Kingdom of Khaz Modan" indeed. Darkspear Trolls is the same of the Darkspear tribe. Orgrimmar (faction) refers to Durotar (nation). Silvermoon City (faction) refers to Quel'Thalas (kingdom). Thunder Bluff (faction) could be renamed as the Tauren of Mulgore, which I prefer. Chiefdom of Mulgore would be another option. Undercity (faction) refers to a faction that could be unofficially called the Kingdom of Undercity, but as they are usually referred to as "Forsaken", I would prefer name Forsaken of Undercity.

I must note that we can argue, with the possible exception of the allied races, that people does not play with a race, but with a faction, on which the character starts. So someone can argue (and I can agree) that we can/should merge also the playable race pages on the faction pages, since fitted properly/appropriately. 23:02, 4 December 2017 (UTC)


 * No, we won't rename gameplay pages about in-game factions to your fanfictional names. Xporc (talk) 23:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Don't repress me just because I improvised some names, they are NOT fanfictional or made up, they are just my trying to approach the in-game reality with our reality. And rename pages to prox interpretations by induction was not my only suggestion. What about the propouse merging of lore factions with the in-game ones? What about creating the faction pages yet not exist? What about merging playable race pages with the faction ones? You have not yet came to all; don't ignore me. 23:41, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Not that I agree with this, but I must correct u, Forsaken kingdom is called Lordaeron, ofc. --Mordecay (talk) 23:11, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, ok, I would try to name by approach "Forsaken of Lordaeron". But even if people would not like my approachs, just help on creating the lacking pages and answer my suggestions to disscuss properly. 23:41, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Seems like a gargantuan undertaking. I'm not sure I really see the benefit of this proposed change. PeterWind (talk) 08:45, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Let me answer this point by point, first about what I disagree:
 * Pages about in-game reputations shall stay as is. Stormwind (faction) is meant to give a different kind of information than Stormwind (kingdom), and both pages are not meant to be used interchangeably. These pages won't be merged, and that answer applies to most of your proposals (Darkspear Trolls and Darkspear tribe, etc.)
 * For the same reasons, articles about playable races and the lore of their faction won't be merged.
 * Names like "Republic of Darnassus" (one hit on Google), "Chiefdom of Mulgore" (four hits on Google, two of which were written by you) and "Kingdom of Undercity" (five hits on Google, one by you and three which are not Warcraft-related) are absolutely made up and are fanfictionals. Stick to official names used by Blizzard.
 * According to your talk page this kind of back-and-forth has been going on since at least 2014, despite people repeatedly explaining things to you. Don't turn this into a disruptive editing situation, I'd rather have you as a productive member of wowpedia.

Now about what I could agree philosophically but still have a problem with:
 * "What about creating the faction pages yet not exist" --> I see you asking for a lot of things but not doing much by yourself. Splitting the Gilneas, Kul Tiras and Gnomeregan pages in the last weeks was a hard move, even made painful by the server problems gamepedia is currently experiencing. Hundreds of links on wowpedia are still linking to the wrong page post-split. I mean I agree that Quel'Thalas (the land) and Quel'Thalas (kingdom) (the political entity) should be split, but right now we have a manpower shortage and it feels exhausting when you see user telling you to split or move pages without really bothering to give a hand themselves. Why not try to create a Theramore (kingdom) page yourself instead of telling others to do it?
 * Patch 7.3.5 is on the horizon, Battle for Azeroth will release next year, and as PeterWind says some work is more urgent than others. I regret a bit splitting Gilneas like I did since it wasn't really that much needed right now, and other more pressing things are still waiting an update. Xporc (talk) 09:05, 5 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Well, I may stick with official names, but I don't know how you could both you track google searchs (what I barely remember if I actually searched), and what the expression "back-and-forth" means on this sittuation. Also, I'm not playing the boss or the lazy here; I rarely create pages for myself because of many problems on my personal life since I joined this site, but not actually because of it. When I joined this site I actually feel persecuted for bad, as every single move or edit I did trying to get this site better for everyone would be undone with no moderation, resulting in sorrow, anger, and potential discord for all sides. Today I kown that a very bad habit of this community was something that had contribute to this past discord; people undoing all the work instead selecting the edits that should had be left. That is evidenced by Xporc's phase "people don't want to waste their own time sorting the good and the bad when they see your updates". Actually, undo everything including when some of the edits are right and up to make not just everything seem persecution but is like push all the work to just one person with no regret. Where is the cooperation everyone should has? And it was the same for starting an discussion; on my past edit warrings people almost never started discussions when undoing my edits but blamed me for doing the same instead breaking the cycle for themselves. Again, they pulled everything to just one person. Why me and not others have to start a discuss?

For now, I'm rustling the past. One day I will get out once from my personal mud and will so revise everything. 19:37, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

What about Suramar (kingdom) based on this? --Mordecay (talk) 11:58, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't see anything in there suggesting that Suramar is an organization. Xporc (talk) 12:35, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Since were talking about renaming pages etc here... Thanks for taking your time :) (Please stay only inside the confirmed lore so no names that have never been used.) --Ryon21 (talk) 19:40, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Quel'Thalas (kingdom) is done and separeted from Quel'Thalas. Gilneas (kingdom) and Gnomeregan for what I understand there are still links to change. Eye of Azshara also needs to be finished. Can you tell me any urgent pages that also need a link change?
 * About Theramore Isle I propose to wait for Chronicles 3 and see if they refer to it into something else so we can choose to use Theramore, Theramore (kingdom) or City-state of Theramore for example.
 * And last, any other important page that you will want to split in the future or change the name?
 * Also, how the Eredar and the Man'ari page and section are right now, they are good for everyone no? For me it's ok so no need to change it.


 * Eye of Azshara and Eye of Azshara (instance) is already done & validated. There's no page more urgent than any other to change... Also note that before Gilneas (faction) was often used instead of Gilneas (kingdom), link it still happens for other factions. For more pages that need to be merged or split, there are Category:Merge candidates, Category:Move candidates and Category:Split candidates.
 * Man'ari/Eredar is fine to me for now. Xporc (talk) 20:01, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Kul Tiras has monarchs
In the alpha Katherine is referred to as a queen. She is most likely who Captain Denholm is referring to, since he mentions the queen together with Bolarus, so it couldn't be Ashvane talking about Azshara. This seems to disprove what Loreology said about Kul Tiras being a city-state with no king/monarch, as opposed to the other human nations. --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 15:45, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily, it being a city-state with no king/monarch may still hold true but only to a certain point in history. --Mordecay (talk) 15:57, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The human nations were all described as the Seven Kingdoms anyway. Xporc (talk) 16:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Is it possible that's dialogue from the dungeon and they're referring to Azshara? ReignTG (talk) 16:09, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Only if Azshara takes over Bolarus. --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 16:29, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Could they be referring to Lady Ashvane? If she takes Boralus and points herself as queen? --Ryon21 (talk) 17:16, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, maybe you guys should cool it down with the whole "adding datamined content without context" thing :D Xporc (talk) 19:00, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * This very much. IDK if I should laugh or cry at wowhead's datamined broadcast texts being added as a source. --Mordecay (talk) 19:06, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Elite Guard
The Stormwindian one is confirmed to be an organization in a quest. Is there something telling for this one? Looking at the page, it just seems they are units within the Proudmoore Admiralty (and their W3 unit of the Navy group) not of the Elite Guard. --Mordecay (talk) 11:06, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll just create an organization page for them if that's what tickles your fancy. Xporc (talk) 11:09, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * With a source where the name is used to refer to a group / organization. If there's none, then a bettername tag and fact tag... --Mordecay (talk) 11:11, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * What quest? 11:25, 17 April 2018 (UTC)